Congress ties energy grants to banning utility junk fees—protecting consumers from hidden charges
H.R. 10081 — No Utility Junk Fees Act · Filed by Eugene Vindman (D-VA) · Introduced Aug 10, 2026 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill conditions 10% of federal energy-efficiency grants to states on their adoption of rules banning 'junk fees' by electric utilities—specifically payment convenience fees and other charges that exceed 150% of the utility's actual processing cost or $3, whichever is greater. States must also require utilities to disclose fees clearly, offer at least one free payment channel, ban fees on automatic payments, and enforce these rules. The Department of Energy administers compliance and can withhold funds from non-compliant states.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative mechanism is a spending condition—withholding 10% of state energy grants unless states adopt utility fee regulations. This is a classic conditional-spending enforcement tool, not a direct ban or tax measure. The character reflects that it uses federal leverage to achieve consumer protection at the state level.
What the text implies
- States with weak utility regulators or political resistance to utility oversight may lose 10% of energy-efficiency funding, potentially slowing renewable-energy and efficiency programs in those states—a secondary cost to climate/energy goals if compliance is slow.
- Utilities may respond by shifting fee structures (e.g., embedding payment costs into base rates or time-of-use pricing) rather than eliminating them, potentially obscuring rather than eliminating the cost transfer to consumers.
The full analysis lists 4 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
residential electricity consumers (direct savings from eliminated/capped fees)