It would bring great relief to end-users and consumers to have a government able to step on the brakes rather than step on the gas in the matter of electricity costs. In other words, can the State cut power rates in a manner that would mean more disposable income for residential customers and cost savings for industrial and commercial users?

Pray that it can do so as there are now at least two known approaches that may be able to lower power rates. One rests on the initiative taken by the Energy Regulatory Commission under its outgoing chair Monalisa Dimalanta who believes there’s “ample room to bring rates down.”

The other is a campaign promise by a now senator of the 20th Congress, presumably with safe and secure anchorage on policy options if not legislative oversight.

On the first, it necessitates a “fuel audit of electric cooperatives and distribution utilities” on the strength of a show-cause order against 37 generation firms as done last May. Its rationale is to check on the fairness of charges being passed on to consumers, to be refunded if warranted. Can this modality effectively lower electric bills, or is it simply a theoretical assumption?

On the second, we heard that the removal of the “value-added tax” and the “systems loss” could be the lowering mechanism to cut-rate electricity. This certainly presupposes government’s willingness to forego the VAT on a giant public utility like Meralco that caters to 7.75-million customers (as of 2024), representing the total number of households and businesses within its franchise area. In short, its customer base is a quarter of a million shy of eight million, all told.

One example given by the ERC chair is the declining generation charges in the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market in most regions of the country, “between January 2023 and May 2025.” The slash of P2.40 per kilowatt hour should significantly bring rates down. Apparently, aside from lowering generation rates, a companion modality is the implementation and expansion of the Retail Aggregation Program (RAP).

As a policy window, RAP allows customers a choice of electricity providers where multiple consumers sharing a common area can pool their demand to hit the 500-kilowatt threshold. But would it be practical for RAP to reach the residential market like subdivisions and housing communities?

Per Chair Dimalanta, the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA) mandates the realization of this consumer choice beyond being a mere option. No matter how the regulator may issue policy options or directions, understanding the mechanics and dynamics that would lead to the reduction in power bills could only be alien to the gut issue of consumers forced to pay electric bills than be immediately deprived of electricity by disconnection.

It would even appear now that Dimalanta’s irrevocable resignation, come 8 August, is proving scary to business groups that warn of a “regulatory paralysis” since her resignation coincides with the end of term of two ERC commissioners.

As we can see, Malacañang has formally announced her replacement by Atty. Francis Saturnino Juan along with two new commissioners, Atty. Amante Liberato and Atty. Paris Real.

The cause for worry of business groups is not unfounded, stressing how it can create a “leadership vacuum” affecting ERC’s immediate regulatory role, decision-making on power tariffs, and other relevant energy policies that weigh upon domestic and industrial consumers.

This looks like the tail end of the courtesy resignation order of the President but it may have a disturbing effect on the regulator as, ironically, the outgoing chair enjoys a reputation of being a champion for consumer interests.

With this untimely “reset” at ERC, how will that not stop the momentum already gained in “modernizing the regulatory process” that marked Dimalanta’s leadership at the commission?

It bears watching how the reforms already gaining headway will play out under the new regime — if everything will go back to square one, and self-destruct.