Eskom’s Tariff Changes Could Hit Lower-Consumption Households Hardest

As ActionSA Caucus Leader in the Gauteng Provincial Legislature, I have made a formal submission to the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) on Eskom’s proposed electricity tariffs for 2027/28.

I have also submitted a motion in the Gauteng Provincial Legislature calling on the Legislature and the Gauteng Provincial Government to make their own submissions before public comments close on 2 October 2026.

The concern here is not only the headline increase. It is how Eskom proposes to recover that money, and who ends up carrying more of the burden.

Eskom is proposing an average increase of 8.83% from 1 April 2027 for customers it supplies directly. Municipal bulk purchases would go up by 8.84% from 1 July 2027. The amount Eskom is allowed to recover has already been decided by NERSA. This process cannot reopen that decision.

But the way Eskom proposes to recover that money is still open for public comment. And when you look at Eskom’s own numbers, the impact is not the same for everyone.

Under the proposal, the fixed monthly charges on Homepower and Homeflex move to the full level planned under Eskom’s Retail Tariff Plan. At the same time, the price of the electricity itself is reduced to balance things out.

The problem is that this works better for people who use more electricity.

A household using a lot of electricity gets more benefit from the lower unit price. A household using less still pays the higher fixed charge every month but gets much less benefit from the cheaper units.

Eskom’s own figures show this quite clearly.

A Homepower 4 household using 350 kWh a month faces an effective increase of 11.02%. On the same tariff, a household using 1,500 kWh a month faces an increase of 7.32%.

The break-even point is around 700 kWh.

So, while we are talking about an average increase of 8.83%, some lower-consumption households could actually pay considerably more than that.

There is another number that should concern us.

Under Eskom’s proposed schedule, a Homepower 1 customer would pay roughly R841 every month in fixed charges before using a single unit of electricity.

We must be clear that this does not currently apply to Homelight customers. Homelight tariffs, which are used by many Eskom-supplied township households, currently have no fixed or service charge.

We want that protection kept in place. We have therefore asked NERSA not to allow a fixed, service, administration or capacity charge to be introduced on Homelight under this tariff schedule. Any future proposal to change that should first be backed by a proper affordability assessment.

There is also an R8.569 billion question that Eskom needs to answer.

Eskom’s own revenue-recovery calculation shows proposed Standard tariff revenue of R428.007 billion, against approved allowable revenue of R419.438 billion.

That leaves a difference of R8.569 billion, or about 2% of the proposed Standard tariff revenue.

We are not saying that this automatically means Eskom is unlawfully over-recovering R8.569 billion. The information before us does not establish that.

What we are saying is that these are Eskom’s own numbers, and the difference has not been properly explained in the information put before the public.

Eskom proposes dealing with it through a future Regulatory Clearing Account process. Before consumers are asked to pay these tariffs, they deserve to know where that R8.569 billion difference comes from, why it appears in the proposed revenue recovery, and how it will eventually be dealt with.

There is also information missing from this consultation.

The public has not been given the full cost-of-supply study behind the proposed tariff structure, the number of customers in the different consumption bands, or the revenue-recovery model needed to properly test Eskom’s calculations.

Even Eskom’s customer-impact analysis stops at 350 kWh a month. That leaves out the very low-consumption households whose affordability we should be most concerned about.

We have therefore asked NERSA to do five things:

1. Hold back the next increase in fixed charges on Homepower and Homeflex until Eskom publishes a proper affordability assessment showing what happens at different levels of consumption, including below 350 kWh a month.
2. Keep Homelight free of fixed charges under this tariff schedule.
3. Require Eskom to explain and reconcile the R8.569 billion difference in its revenue-recovery calculations.
4. Put the missing information before the public, including the cost-of-supply study, customer numbers by consumption band and the revenue-recovery model.
5. Look properly at the Generation Capacity Charge and other fixed charges and whether they make it harder for households and businesses to invest in alternatives such as rooftop solar.

This matters particularly in Gauteng.

Many households in Soweto, Sedibeng, the West Rand and parts of Tshwane get their electricity directly from Eskom. For them, the increase kicks in on 1 April 2027.

Municipal customers will feel it too. Municipalities face an 8.84% increase in their bulk electricity purchases from 1 July 2027, before their own retail tariffs and applicable surcharges are reflected in what residents eventually pay.

So, the debate is no longer about whether Eskom can recover the revenue NERSA has already approved.

It is about how Eskom collects it and who ends up paying what.

If a household using 350 units faces an 11.02% increase while a household on the same tariff using 1,500 units faces 7.32%, we should be asking why. If Eskom’s calculations contain an unexplained R8.569 billion difference, we should be asking for the numbers to be reconciled.

And if we are being asked to comment on affordability, the public should have the information needed to actually test it.

ActionSA Gauteng has requested an opportunity to make oral representations at NERSA’s public hearing on 8 October 2026. We will make the same case there: the average increase does not tell the whole story. What matters is what people actually end up paying.

ActionSA Logo: Features a stylized “A” in green, white, and black.