The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) says that the two energy bills passed by the Massachusetts House and Senate, S.3166 and H.5175, include reforms that could support grid reliability and lower electricity costs. But in an opinion article, the association warns that separate proposals to impose new fixed charges on electricity bills could undermine these goals before the final version is sent to Governor Maura Healey.
The two chambers passed versions of the legislation during 2026, while a conference committee is working to reconcile them before sending a final bill to Healey. The reforms highlighted in the article include adopting a more flexible mechanism for connecting energy projects to the grid, creating a retail electricity storage program, and updating permitting procedures for residential solar systems. SEIA believes these steps could reduce bureaucratic procedures for residents and businesses seeking to install rooftop solar and other distributed energy resources.
What Do Fixed Charges Mean?
One path under discussion would shift part of the costs of utility services from charges based on the amount of electricity consumed to fixed charges imposed regardless of consumption levels. In SEIA’s view, this shift could redistribute burdens from high-use consumers to households and businesses that consume smaller amounts.
The association relies on a review of data from Eversource, which serves more than 1.4 million Massachusetts residents. According to its estimates, bills for the bottom quartile of residential electricity users, who are often low-income households, could rise by more than 10%, equivalent to approximately $13.4 million in additional annual costs. By contrast, bills for the top quartile of users could decline by about 2.5%, with savings of approximately $25 million annually. The article indicates that the average consumption of this group is more than ten times that of the lowest-use quartile.
In the small-business sector, the review says that bills for lower-use customers could nearly double, while bills for the largest users would decline. SEIA presents similar findings from data provided by National Grid, the state’s second-largest utility, which serves 1.3 million residential and commercial customers; residential bills for lower-use customers could rise by 13.8%, while high-use customers would benefit from reductions.
Why Does This Matter?
The debate concerns not only the amount of the charge but also how the rate is designed. As the share of fixed charges in a bill increases, reducing electricity consumption has less effect on the total amount paid by the customer. As a result, the financial savings associated with installing solar panels or batteries or improving energy efficiency could decline, according to SEIA’s analysis.
This creates a practical paradox for the proposed reforms: the state seeks to facilitate distributed energy resources and give residents and businesses greater means of controlling their costs, while fixed charges could make reducing consumption less financially worthwhile. The effects would be particularly significant for low-consumption households and small businesses that have little room to absorb fixed increases in their bills.
The Dispute Remains Unresolved
In late 2025, the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) opened a comprehensive review of all electricity and gas delivery charges on utility bills. According to the article, a coalition comprising consumer-protection groups, organizations representing low-income people, business groups, environmental organizations, and clean-energy companies submitted public comments opposing or expressing reservations about the possibility of increasing fixed charges.
The DPU says it will carefully evaluate the matter before deciding whether current charges should become entirely or partially fixed and how that should be implemented. SEIA therefore urges the conference committee and the Healey administration to leave the assessment of rate design to the regulatory agency rather than requiring a predetermined outcome, while preserving the reforms related to grid reliability, storage, and solar energy.
The facts available here do not establish that fixed charges have been finally approved or that the estimated increases will actually occur; they are figures presented in SEIA’s review of data from the two utility companies, within an article that clearly takes a position against this option. The open question concerns the final form of the legislation and the DPU’s decision on rate design, which will determine the actual impact on the bills of different customer groups.