It is that time of year again—heat waves, beach trips, and not only rising temperatures, but also rising energy costs. In this heat, it is tempting to turn on the air conditioners and set them to the lowest temperature, make frozen treats, and turn on every fan in the house. But the thing that keeps consumers most hesitant about doing these things is the price to pay—and we are being robbed blind by the unjust “pass-through charges” beside the already high summer rate energy costs.
Many consumers of the electricity concessionnaire Meralco faced a “bill shock” after seeing the high jump of their energy bills that included Universal Charges, System Losses, Lifeline, Renewable Generation Tariffs, Senior Citizen Subsidies, and of course, the Value Added Tax taking 12% on top of all of those surcharges. Charges that exist to pay for damages you did not cause, discounts you do not benefit from, and renewable reforms you are not obligated to sponsor for.
It is ironic how all of these charges are passed on to us consumers when we ourselves live a very different reality. A reality where businesses absorb the cost of damages, how restaurants get tax rebates for senior citizen discounts, and how our taxes are used for public subsidies—including those on energy bills. Should a large utility distributor such as Meralco not operate under a similar principle of accountability and burden-sharing?
Legality does not always translate to fairness in the eyes of consumers.
These charges are not just invented by Meralco—they came from the backdoors mandated by laws and regulations embedded in our country’s energy system. There are laws and regulations that make these legal but unfair to the consumers who patronize the already monopolized energy industry. Republic Act 11552, the “Act Extending and Enhancing the Implementation of the Lifeline Rate” was implemented in 2021 to help marginalized consumers pay their energy bill which the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) set the rate of which we pay—and it should not be our courtesy to do so.
These charges help the marginalized sectors, the elderly, and support sustainable energy goals—but the cost is absorbed by the broader base of consumers who may not directly benefit from it. It all leads back to accountability. Transparency and fairness in how these cost should be equally distributed—or better not that the companies actually take accountability and not burden the consumers. Companies should take care of their consumers and not create backdoors to cheat them for the illusion of better “service.”
In the end, these charges must be well justified and communicated to the consumers. While these charges are legal and even well-intentioned, their burden falls to the lawful consumers. If the system is designed to serve the people, then it must also be transparent, accountable, and fair in practice—not just in principle. Otherwise, what is lawful will continue to feel unjust to those who are expected to pay for it.
Written by Rey Krister S. Tanwangco
Rey Krister S. Tanwangco is a dedicated campus journalist and contributor. Their insightful writing sparks meaningful conversations and keeps the community informed.
