Experts from the Higher School of Economics and the Institute of Urban Economics have proposed an alternative framework for setting tariffs in the housing and communal services sector. Their recommended approach centers on measuring how affordable public utilities are for households, aiming to align tariff policy with actual living costs. This perspective was reported by RBC.
The analysts observe that the sector has faced chronic underfunding in recent years. As a result, infrastructure has fallen into a state of considerable wear, and a number of incidents tied to aging networks have occurred, impacting reliability and safety for residents.
They identify one key factor behind the funding gap: tariff increases for housing and communal services have not kept pace with true inflation. To address this, they propose tying tariff adjustments to the share of households receiving housing and utility benefits. In practice, this would create a linkage between poverty relief measures and tariff dynamics, making price changes more responsive to the financial burden on families.
Under the proposed rule, a region where more than 15% of households qualify for benefits would not see tariff increases. Conversely, if the share falls below 15%, tariffs could rise by up to 30%. This approach would require a clear, nationwide standard for how subsidies are allocated, replacing the current regional variation across the federation. Proponents argue that uniform federal standards would improve transparency and consistency in how subsidies support utility payments.
Implementing the plan would likely generate additional revenue for utilities, enabling more robust maintenance and modernization programs. At the same time, it would place a greater share of costs on higher-income households, creating a more progressive tariff framework. The authors acknowledge that adopting such a policy would entail politically tough decisions and careful administrative design to ensure fairness and prevent unintended consequences.
Before presenting this framework, experts highlighted the idea of limiting preferential energy consumption within the country, suggesting that consumption controls could complement tariff reforms by reducing overall demand and supporting affordability in the long run. The discussion also touched on practical steps households can take to reduce energy bills during the winter season, emphasizing efficiency and prudent energy use as part of a broader cost-savings strategy.
In summary, the proposed tariff policy model seeks to anchor price adjustments to the real financial burden faced by residents, backed by a standardized subsidy system. If implemented, it could strengthen the financial sustainability of utilities while promoting more equitable energy pricing across regions, balancing the needs of shared infrastructure with the ability of households to pay.