RESA Report Finds Electricity Prices Rising Faster in Monopoly States
Electricity prices in U.S. states operating under monopoly electricity markets have increased more than twice as fast as prices in states with competitive retail energy markets since 2008, according to the Retail Energy Supply Association (RESA). The findings, published in the association’s newly released 2025 Energy Trend Report, highlight significant differences in long-term electricity price trends and their potential financial impact on residential, commercial and industrial customers.
Based on data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the report found that average electricity prices for residential, commercial and industrial customers in monopoly states increased by 51.7% between 2008 and 2025. In comparison, average electricity prices in states with competitive retail energy markets rose by 23% over the same period.
The findings arrive as electricity affordability remains a major concern for households, businesses and industrial operators across the United States. Higher electricity costs can place additional pressure on household budgets, increase operating expenses for commercial enterprises and affect the overall cost competitiveness of energy-intensive industries.
Electricity Price Differences Across Markets
The report examines electricity pricing trends in states with traditional monopoly utility structures and jurisdictions that allow consumers to purchase electricity from competitive retail suppliers. The two market models provide different approaches to electricity supply, with retail choice allowing eligible customers to select an electricity supplier instead of relying exclusively on their utility’s default supply service.
According to RESA, the difference in price growth between the two market structures is an important consideration for policymakers evaluating energy affordability and consumer protection. Although electricity prices have increased across the country, the association’s analysis indicates that the cumulative increase has been considerably smaller in competitive retail markets.
Kristina Montgomery, president of RESA, said electricity prices have risen in both market structures, but the increases have been substantially greater in monopoly states than in states with restructured electricity markets.
Montgomery emphasized that this difference has practical consequences for households attempting to manage monthly bills and businesses monitoring operating expenses. She encouraged policymakers to examine the EIA data and consider measures that expand consumer options rather than restrict access to competitive electricity suppliers.
The report positions retail competition as one potential mechanism for giving customers greater control over their electricity purchasing decisions. By allowing customers to evaluate competing supply offers, competitive markets can provide alternatives in pricing, contract structures and energy-related products.
Estimated Financial Impact on Consumers
RESA also assessed the potential financial implications of the price differences observed between monopoly and competitive electricity markets. Using historical EIA data, the association estimated the electricity costs that customers in monopoly states might have avoided if their prices had followed the same trajectory as those in competitive markets between 2008 and 2025.
The analysis estimated potential savings of $267 billion for residential electricity customers, $352 billion for commercial customers and $206 billion for industrial customers over the 17-year period.
These figures represent estimated differences based on historical price trends rather than guaranteed savings available to individual customers. Actual electricity costs vary according to location, consumption levels, customer classification, supply arrangements and other market factors.
Nevertheless, the estimates illustrate the potential financial significance of differences in electricity price growth over an extended period. For households, lower electricity cost growth could help ease pressure on monthly expenses. For commercial organizations, electricity expenditures can influence operating budgets, service costs and business planning.
Industrial customers may also be affected because electricity is an important input for manufacturing facilities, processing operations, data centers and other energy-intensive businesses. Changes in electricity prices can influence production costs and long-term investment decisions.
The report’s estimates therefore place electricity market structure within the broader discussion about energy affordability and the operating costs faced by different categories of U.S. electricity consumers.
Savings in States With Retail Energy Choice
In addition to examining potential savings in monopoly states, RESA calculated the estimated financial benefits experienced by customers in jurisdictions that permit retail electricity choice.
According to the association, consumers across the 14 states and jurisdictions with retail energy choice saved an estimated $579 billion between 2008 and 2025 compared with the amount they would have paid if electricity prices had followed the trends observed in monopoly states.
The estimate reflects the difference between historical electricity price trajectories in the two market structures. It does not mean that every customer achieved the same level of savings or that competitive suppliers consistently offered lower prices in every location and period.
The findings nevertheless underscore the importance of examining long-term price performance when evaluating electricity market policies. RESA argues that preserving competitive retail markets can give consumers additional opportunities to assess their available supply options and select arrangements that suit their requirements.
For businesses, the ability to compare electricity supply offers may also support budgeting and procurement decisions. Contract terms, pricing structures and available products can differ among suppliers, making supplier evaluation an important consideration for eligible customers.
Competitive Suppliers Serve Millions of Customers
The report also documented the participation of competitive electricity suppliers in markets where retail choice is available.
In 2025, more than 16.28 million residential customers obtained electricity through competitive retail suppliers. These customers accounted for 46.1% of residential electricity consumption across states and jurisdictions offering retail choice.
Participation was even higher among commercial and industrial customers. Competitive suppliers accounted for 86.5% of electricity consumed by these customer groups in the relevant markets.
The figures demonstrate the role competitive suppliers play in serving electricity demand beyond the residential sector. Commercial and industrial organizations frequently have distinct energy purchasing requirements related to consumption volumes, operational schedules, contract duration and budget planning.
Access to multiple suppliers can allow eligible customers to compare available offers and consider different contractual arrangements. However, the value of a particular offer depends on its terms, pricing structure and suitability for the customer’s circumstances.
Tracy McCormick, executive director of RESA, said consumers want choices when managing electricity expenses, similar to the options available for other household costs.
McCormick explained that retail competition enables customers to compare prices, contract terms and products rather than having all supply decisions determined by a single default provider. She said policymakers should focus on protecting consumers’ ability to choose their electricity supplier.
RESA Calls for Policies Supporting Consumer Choice
RESA represents the interests of competitive retail energy suppliers and advocates for policies that maintain open markets while protecting consumers’ ability to select their electricity provider.
In jurisdictions with retail energy choice, eligible customers can evaluate supply offers from participating providers rather than relying solely on their utility’s default electricity supply option. Depending on the market, available offers may differ in price, contract duration and other terms.
The association maintains that policies supporting competitive supplier participation can help preserve these options for residential, commercial and industrial customers. Its position is that policymakers should consider the relationship between market structure, electricity price trends and consumer access to alternative supply arrangements when developing energy policy.
The 2025 Energy Trend Report forms part of RESA’s ongoing analysis of the U.S. retail electricity sector. Its annual review uses EIA data to examine electricity prices, competitive supplier participation and longer-term trends across monopoly and competitive markets.
Overall, the report identifies a substantial difference in electricity price growth between the two market structures from 2008 through 2025. With average prices rising 51.7% in monopoly states compared with 23% in competitive markets, RESA argues that retail choice deserves continued consideration in discussions about electricity affordability.
The findings provide policymakers, businesses and consumers with historical data for evaluating the financial implications of electricity market structures. As energy costs remain an important consideration for households and organizations, the report highlights the continuing debate over competition, supplier choice and policies designed to support affordable electricity.
Source Link: https://www.businesswire.com/
