NEPRA decision on KE tariff alarms Power Division
The Power Division has expressed serious concerns over the seven-year Multi-Year Tariff (MYT) decision recently issued by the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA) for K-Electric, warning it could have far-reaching financial and policy implications.
Federal Minister for Power Awais Leghari has warned that such determinations could negatively impact investment confidence in future MYT periods.
In a statement issued on the social media platform 'X' on Wednesday, the minister said the ministry has observed some serious concerns regarding NEPRA's multiple decisions about K-Electric's licenses for generation, transmission, distribution and supply, adding that these decisions also touch upon the investment plan for the upcoming multi-year tariff period.
"These rulings have significant long-term effects on consumer tariffs and the federal government's subsidies within a uniform tariff regime." He revealed that the ministry was planning to review the recently issued determinations related to transmission, distribution, and supply. Meanwhile, a reconsideration of the earlier generation tariff decision was awaiting NEPRA's attention, despite being submitted back in December 2024. "This delay poses serious financial implications for the power sector and its subsidies."
Additionally, he cautioned that if certain areas were not addressed, they could negatively impact consumers and the regulatory environment, potentially hindering Pakistan's efforts to encourage private participation in the distribution sector.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
9 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Nepra's MYT decision: a step in the right direction
EDITORIAL: After a prolonged delay, the regulator — National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (Nepra) — has finally approved the Multi-Year Tariff (MYT) for the only private entity operating in the power utility sector. There has been a considerable outcry in the media following the Power Minister's criticism of Nepra's decision to allow KE (Karachi Electric) to incorporate recovery losses. But before delving into the controversy, it must be emphasised that this is a step in the right direction, as it will unlock KE's valuation for its shareholders. It will help resolve disputes among existing shareholders and incentivize much-needed investment in the fully integrated energy-utility company. This, in turn, will bode well for the sustainability of the power supply to Karachi, the country's economic hub and a city of teeming millions. Moreover, the move sets the stage for the privatisation of other distribution companies (Discos) — a long-awaited reform in the power sector's transmission and distribution segments. Until now, reform efforts have largely focused on the generation side. Unfortunately, the debate primarily concerns KE receiving compensation for recovery losses. On paper, KE's recovery losses appear higher than those of a few other Discos. Ironically, in the so-called 'better-performing' Discos, recovery during 8MFY25 exceeds 100 percent for consumers using 0–200 units but drops to the 80s for higher-slab consumers. The pattern for KE is similar. However, its overall recovery rates are lower — mid-80s for the 0 — 200-unit slab and mid-70s for higher slabs. These figures point to overbilling by other Discos and lower collection efficiency by KE. Nepra has allowed KE to pass on these costs to different consumers. However, shifting the burden to others is unfair to honest consumers. Yet, other Discos have been doing the same — without any transparency. The PHL surcharge (Rs3.23/unit), paid by all electricity consumers nationwide, including KE's, represents a legacy cost linked to historical losses by state-owned Discos. These public entities are not held financially accountable for their losses; the costs are absorbed into the infamous circular debt. In contrast, KE's shareholders bear the losses and are justified in seeking cost coverage. The way forward should focus on reducing KE's losses and ending overbilling by others. Media scrutiny should push KE to improve its recovery rates. Nonetheless, KE's AT&C (Aggregate Technical and Commercial) losses, as allowed by Nepra, have declined from 43.2 percent in 2009 to 20.3 percent today, with a target of 15.3 percent by 2030. The power division's criticism is a grievance against KE's current management. Nepra's determination came after consultations with all stakeholders, including the power division. If there were objections, they should have been raised during that process. It is important to note that Karachi is a complex city, and the private operator has halved its losses over the past 15 years. Had other Discos achieved similar results, the savings would have been substantial. Nepra's allowance for losses is set to decline over the next seven years — and the same standard should be applied to other Discos as well. Achieving this, however, requires investment and competent management. Such outcomes are unlikely without corporatisation and privatisation. To move forward, Discos must be held accountable for their losses and rewarded for improved performance. They need their MYTs and access to private investment — both of which would benefit Pakistan's broader, evolving power sector. KE's MYT approval is a step in this direction. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
9 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Tariff comfort, consumer cost, Nepra's gamble
In a move that will raise eyebrows among those advocating for performance-based regulation, Nepra has sided with K-Electric in allowing a recovery shortfall allowance based on a 92 percent recovery ratio — a decision that flies in the face of the Ministry of Energy's more disciplined proposal. KE had argued that, unlike state-owned discos whose losses are quietly absorbed into the circular debt, its commercial shortfall should be treated as a legitimate pass-through cost. But instead of asking why a privatized utility with over 100 years of history and significant capital investment still needs regulatory shelter for basic operational efficiency, the regulator has chosen to codify KE's weakest performance year (FY24: 92.8 percent) into its future tariff framework. Worse still, the benchmark recovery percentage even by the end of the MYT in FY30 period does not reach the levels seen in FY22. The Ministry's stance — rooted in logic, precedent, and consumer interest — was brushed aside. The MoE had argued for using a 'high watermark' recovery ratio from FY22 or FY23 (96.6 percent and 96.7 percent, respectively) to prevent one off-year from becoming the baseline for tariff calculations. That approach would have halved the burden on consumers, reducing KE's claimed recovery loss allowance from Rs2.88/kWh to Rs1.41/kWh. Instead, with Nepra's green light, KE has now locked in a structural inefficiency at a time when the rest of the sector is — at least on paper — moving toward performance benchmarking and fiscal discipline. Nepra's ruling signals a worrying precedent: if a private utility can socialize its commercial inefficiencies while retaining operational autonomy, then the case for privatization or performance-linked regulation becomes weaker. What message does it send when a regulator backs comfort over competition? If the regulator's decision to validate KE's recovery allowance set a risky precedent, its approval of actualization of units sent-out could also be problematic. In theory, adjusting tariff revenue to reflect real demand variations — much like what is allowed for discos — sounds reasonable. But in practice, it opens up a perverse incentive: KE's revenue is now insulated from shortfalls in demand, even if those shortfalls are partially self-inflicted. Given the regulator's own acknowledgment that this framework could encourage increased load shedding in high-loss areas, the decision feels like an open invitation for KE to game the system — maximizing revenue protection while shifting risk onto the consumer. The regulator has held on to usual warnings: KE is 'directed to ensure uninterrupted supply' and its performance will be monitored on benchmarks like SAIFI, SAIDI, and load-shed adherence. But let's be honest — the track record doesn't inspire confidence. KE has flouted load-shedding rules in the past, often citing commercial losses, and faced penalties so negligible they barely qualify as deterrents. If the regulator is serious about disincentivizing this behaviour, it needs to do more than issue legalese-laden warnings. It must link revenue protections directly with performance metrics, impose penalties that bite. Otherwise, what Nepra has created is a regulatory shelter — one that could make blackouts not just a coping mechanism, but a profit-maximizing strategy. This also comes at a time when KE's future demand growth is under serious question. With overall electricity consumption falling by 7.2 percent in FY23 — and 7.9 percent in residential and 1.5 percent in industrial segments — and with net metering and competitive CTBCM dynamics gaining traction, KE's captive market is eroding. The Ministry of Energy had flagged this, rightly recommending a downward revision in demand projections and capital spending. But KE continues to push ahead with an ambitious investment plan, and now has the regulatory cushioning to shift the consequences of demand shortfalls onto consumers. In such an environment, the risk isn't just of rising tariffs — it's of deepening the disconnect between consumer experience and utility accountability. Nepra's accommodation — from recovery shortfall allowances to actualization of sent-out units — may seem like one-off technical approvals, but they carry deeper structural implications as Pakistan inches toward privatizing other discos under the IMF's watch. By allowing revenue protection mechanisms that decouple financial performance from operational efficiency, Nepra risks embedding regulatory moral hazard into the very model it aims to scale. If a legacy private utility is allowed to socialize commercial inefficiencies and manage demand risk without tight performance-linked conditions, what incentive remains for future investors to run leaner, consumer-centric utilities? Worse, it sets a precedent where privatization becomes a risk-free return model underwritten by public consumers, undermining the very fiscal discipline that the IMF reforms seek to instill.
Express Tribune
12 hours ago
- Express Tribune
JUI-F blasts PTI over Kohistan scandal
Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam Fazl (JUI-F) provincial spokesperson Haji Abdul Jalil Jan has accused Barrister Saif of misleading the nation by blaming 12 years of corruption on the caretaker government. Responding to recent statements by the K-P Adviser on Information, Jalil Jan challenged Barrister Saif to present the cheques issued during Taimur Jhagra's tenure as finance minister in connection with the Kohistan scandal. He said that those who constantly label others as thieves have now been caught red-handed. The same political party that promised one million jobs, five million homes, and rivers of milk and honey in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa is itself mired in corruption scandals. Jalil Jan further stated that following the BRT project, Malam Jabba land case, Billion Tree Tsunami, wheat scandal, and misuse of the Sehat Card program, the Kohistan scandal has further exposed the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). Even ministers and MPAs from the ruling party have come forward with revelations, shedding light on the extent of corruption within Barrister Saif's party.
