New York City officials are reportedly opposing new measures that would increase transparency in utility bills by itemizing property taxes levied on Con Edison, the region’s primary electricity provider. The move comes amid ongoing concerns over rising energy costs and the allocation of property taxes hidden within consumer utility charges.
The state Public Service Commission (PSC) recently approved regulations requiring Con Edison to separately disclose various components of its customer bills, including local property taxes. Until now, these taxes—constituting roughly 20% of a typical Con Edison bill—were embedded within base residential delivery rates, obscuring their full impact on consumers. When combined with state taxes, approximately one-third of an average utility bill reflects governmental levies.
New York’s property taxes on Con Edison have surged significantly in recent years, increasing by about 45% from 2019 to 2024. Local officials have been raising assessed property values on the utility’s holdings, a strategy that ultimately passes costs to consumers through higher utility rates. Nationally, property taxes on utility bills average about 12%, highlighting New York’s comparatively higher levies.
Mayor Mamdani’s administration is reportedly seeking to halt the PSC’s new billing transparency rules, in part due to campaign commitments to reduce living costs and utility expenses. City Hall officials suggest that revealing the extent of city taxes embedded in utility bills could undermine these affordability pledges.
In addition to property taxes, other charges remain less transparent. These include the substantial investments utilities must make to meet New York’s state-mandated green energy objectives. This infrastructure, often cited as justification for higher property assessments, contributes to escalating rates.
Governor Hochul has previously criticized Con Edison for raising rates amid high executive compensation, ordering an audit last year. While emphasizing accountability, she has also underscored the need for reliable and affordable service. Critics note, however, that the administration’s own green energy policies significantly contribute to increased costs, complicating efforts to address affordability.
Recently introduced utility rebates of $100 to $200 and targeted state energy credits aim to alleviate some financial pressure for eligible households, but debates persist over their sufficiency.
The intersection of local taxation, state policy, and utility regulation continues to fuel public concern over the transparency and fairness of electricity pricing in New York. As city and state leaders navigate these challenges, questions remain about how best to balance revenue needs with consumer affordability.