Philippine power bills beat Singapore’s — and debate over EPIRA is back

Manila: It's a title no government wants. The Philippines has now overtaken Singapore as the country with the highest average residential electricity rate among the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

The data is still being debated.

However, Department of Energy (DOE) figures showed that the Philippines’ average residential electricity rate reached ₱12.43 per kilowatt-hour in June 2026, narrowly exceeding Singapore’s ₱12.34 per kWh.

The difference was only 9.3 centavos per kWh.

But it marked a significant shift for a country long burdened by some of Asia’s highest power costs, Business World reported.

The ranking reflects the June 2026 comparison and should not be interpreted as a permanent measure of power costs.

Electricity prices vary monthly, and country rankings differ depending on exchange rates, consumer class, taxes, subsidies, fuel prices and the methodology used.

The Philippines’ higher average rate was linked to power-supply shortages, plant outages and heavier reliance on more expensive generating facilities, particularly in the Visayas, according to the DOE.

For Filipino households, the issue is not merely about beating Singapore in a regional comparison. It is about the monthly bill.

A household using 200 kWh per month saw its electricity cost rise from about ₱2,350 in January 2025 to roughly ₱2,970 by July 2026 — an increase of around ₱620, even though consumption did not change, according to estimates by the Manila Times.

Generation charges, which reflect the cost of producing electricity, make up about 60% of a typical electricity bill.

Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian has called for closer scrutiny of fuel "pass-through" costs after noting that fuel-related expenses made up more than 86% of Meralco’s generation charge in July.

Source: Department of Energy

The figures, show, show why claims about “Asia’s most expensive electricity” need careful wording.

The DOE’s June 2026 survey put the Philippines at the top of ASEAN. But an earlier GlobalPetrolPrices comparison for the first quarter still placed Singapore ahead, according to the Asian Business Review.

Both findings can be true because they rely on different dates, currencies, markets and price methodologies.

The passage of the EPIRA law (Republic Act No. 9136) in 2001 shifted how electricity rates are calculated and approved in the Philippines.

Deregulated generation rates: The cost of generating electricity was removed from government control and left to "market competition". Power generation companies now set their prices based on supply, demand, and competitive bidding.

Regulated monopolies: Transmission and distribution sectors remain regulated monopolies. The Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) strictly reviews and approves the "wheeling" charges (the cost to move power through lines) to protect consumers.

Unbundled billing: Before EPIRA, electricity bills showed a single, lump-sum charge. The law required power companies to separate and clearly itemise every cost on your bill (e.g., generation charge, transmission charge, distribution charge, and universal taxes).

Cross-subsidy removal: The law phased out cross-subsidies (where industrial users subsidised residential users, or urban areas subsidised rural areas) to ensure consumers only pay for the actual cost of the electricity they use.

Criticisms against the EPIRA (RA9136) centre on its failure to lower electricity rates, promote genuine market competition, and protect public welfare over private corporate profits.

While the 2001 law privatised and deregulated the Philippine power sector, the law faces multifaceted opposition from consumer groups, lawmakers, and policy think-tanks.

Some of the criticisms include:

Unabated price increases: Critics point out that Philippine electricity prices remain among the highest in the region, contradicting the law's promise of affordable power through open competition.

Pass-on charges: EPIRA law allows distribution utilities and power generators to shift financial burdens — such as transmission and distribution inefficiencies — directly onto end-consumers.

System loss and taxes: Consumers bear the cost of technical and non-technical system losses, alongside added value-added taxes (VAT) on those unconsumed or lost components, a practice that has faced high-level political and public calls for elimination.

Private oligopolies: Rather than creating a free market, critics argue the EPIRA simply transferred state monopoly privileges into private corporate hands, enabling a small group of conglomerates to dominate generation and distribution.

Weak cross-ownership restrictions: Loopholes and lenient lobbying during the law’s drafting failed to establish strict cross-ownership boundaries, allowing dominant distribution utilities (Meralco, Visayan Electric Co, Davao Light and Power Co., MORE Power, CEPALCO and others) to maintain strong ties or interests in generation companies (i.e. Aboitiz Group, First Gen Corp, ACEN Corp, and MGEN / Meralco.

Inefficient oversight: The Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) has been criticised by consumer advocates for allegedly failing to act as a proactive shield for the public, frequently approving rate adjustments and cost-recovery petitions without stringent public accountability.

Burdensome universal charges: The imposition of universal charges forces residential and commercial consumers to subsidise missionary electrification for remote areas, watershed rehabilitation, and stranded contract costs, serving as an extra layer of taxation hidden within monthly utility bills.

The surge in power costs has returned attention to the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant, the 620-megawatt facility built during the Marcos Sr. administration but never commissioned.

The plant was constructed in the 1970s and 1980s, but was mothballed after the 1986 People Power Revolution amid concerns over cost, alleged corruption, safety standards and its location near geologic hazards.

It has now remained unused for roughly four decades.

Supporters of reviving BNPP argue that nuclear energy could provide stable, large-scale and low-carbon electricity, reducing the country’s dependence on imported coal, liquefied natural gas and volatile fuel markets.

Critics say restarting a plant designed more than 40 years ago would require extensive safety reviews, modernisation, regulatory approvals, financing and a credible plan for radioactive-waste management.

They argue that the country should compare BNPP rehabilitation with newer nuclear technologies, pumped-storage hydroelectric, geothermal power, wind, battery storage, transmission upgrades and energy-efficiency measures.

The June ranking does not prove that restarting BNPP is the cheapest or quickest answer to high power bills.

But it has sharpened the debate over a deeper problem: the Philippines needs more reliable generation, stronger transmission, cheaper fuel options and a power market that protects consumers from repeated price shocks.

The country has now surpassed Singapore — at least in the DOE’s latest monthly comparison — for a title no government wants: ASEAN’s highest household electricity rate.

The question is whether that will finally force a durable energy solution, or simply restart another chapter in the Philippines’ 40-year nuclear argument.

June 8, 2001: The EPIRA law (Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001, Republic Act No. 9136) was passed.

July 27, 2026: President Marcos formally demanded the policy shift and legal amendments during his SONA address at the Batasang Pambansa.

July 28, 2026: Lawmakers in both the Senate and House—such as Senator Erwin Tulfo—responded by filing legislative measures to statutory ban or phase out the recovery of system losses from end-users.

September 14–15, 2026: The Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) issued Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 097-2026, officially stripping the 12-percent Value-Added Tax (VAT) off allowable system loss charges on power bills as an immediate step to lower electricity costs.