Syrians have been grappling with a severe electricity crisis for years, marked by daily power outages that last for long hours. Under the former regime, rationing reached six hours of blackout for every half hour of supply. After the regime’s fall, some areas began to see a gradual improvement, with power available for two hours, followed by four hours off, or three hours on and three hours off.
Syria faces a major shortfall in electricity generation after years of conflict and infrastructure destruction, alongside widespread grid failures, cable theft, and rising technical and non-technical losses.
Before the war, Syria produced about 9.5 gigawatts (9,500 megawatts). The war, however, led to a steep decline, bringing output down to about 1.5 to 1.6 gigawatts in recent years. This falls well below actual demand, estimated at about 6.5 gigawatts or more. Output has recently risen to 3 gigawatts following the Syrian-Jordanian gas deal.
The increase in production has coincided with higher tariffs, prompting protests and objections from citizens over costly electricity bills.
Enab Baladi directed a series of questions about public protests over rising electricity prices to the Ministry of Energy and the General Establishment for Electricity Transmission and Distribution, and made repeated attempts to reach the media directors at both institutions.
There was no official response. According to Enab Baladi, the Ministry of Energy issued instructions to all affiliated bodies to refrain from making any statements and to refuse to answer any inquiries, including questions about the value of government subsidies for electricity (as described by the government), the cost of fuel oil and gas used in generation, the volume of supplies drawn from oil and gas fields for power plants, the value of electricity losses, the extent of damage to the power grid, the number of generating stations and their fuel and gas needs, and their production levels.
Citizens torn between bills and alternatives
Electricity eats into income
Over the past week, Enab Baladi surveyed opinions from residents in Damascus, Hama, and Aleppo. Their responses pointed to widespread anxiety and frustration over the sharp rise in electricity bills. Many testimonies showed a clear gap between billed amounts and actual consumption, amid limited electricity supply hours and declining purchasing power.
These accounts also reflected broader, mounting living pressures, along with repeated questions about how consumption is calculated and whether the adopted tariff is fair, as more people turn to cheaper alternative sources of electricity.
Based on Enab Baladi’s monitoring, bill amounts ranged between 600,000 Syrian pounds (about $50) and more than two million (over $167). With the exchange rate averaging about 12,000 Syrian pounds per U.S. dollar, these costs were reported even in households that only use essential appliances, rely partly on solar power, or were closed for long periods.
. This left residents puzzled, particularly given that daily electricity supply does not exceed six hours in a number of areas.
Participants said electricity supply hours had not improved despite higher bill amounts, 29 January 2026 (Enab Baladi, Ahmad Maslamani).
Regarding nonpayment, several people interviewed by Enab Baladi said they would not pay these amounts, arguing that it has become impossible to keep up. They said they were unconcerned about potential steps such as removing electricity meters and returning to more basic alternatives. In their view, relying on solar power,“ampere” subscriptions, private neighborhood generator lines billed by amperage (a common pay-by-amp arrangement), or even batteries and limited lighting has become less costly than bills they described as “unreasonable.”
Residents also said that the cost of an “ampere” subscription, despite being high, is still lower than paying monthly electricity bills exceeding one million to 1.5 million Syrian pounds. They noted that ampere lines provide a more stable supply, allowing households to run only the bare minimum of essentials for amounts they consider more manageable.
Many residents, especially low income earners and retirees, say they cannot afford these bills. Salaries, even at their best, do not exceed 1.5 million Syrian pounds for workers and about one million for retirees, meaning electricity bills are draining a large share of monthly income.
Poll: 75% of readers dissatisfied
In a poll published by Enab Baladi on its website, with 2,000 users participating, 75% said they were dissatisfied with the new electricity bills, while the remaining respondents said they approved of them.
“We want to live”
On 29 and 30 January, Syrian citizens held two protests, the first outside the Syrian Ministry of Energy and the second starting near the Children’s Hospital and heading toward the People’s Palace.
During the first protest, organizers read a statement declaring their outright rejection of the Ministry of Energy (formerly the Ministry of Electricity) Decision No. 666, which raised electricity prices. They described the decision as unfair and said it ignored Syria’s deteriorating economic reality.
The statement said electricity is not a luxury, but a human right and a basic necessity no less important than food and medicine. It also condemned remarks by the energy minister suggesting citizens are able to pay, describing such comments as disconnected from everyday reality.
The statement included several demands, most notably:
- Restructuring the consumption bracket system and increasing the subsidized tier from 300 to 600 kilowatt hours per billing cycle.
- Expanding the number of tiers to four or six progressive brackets to prevent sharp jumps in bills.
- Linking prices to income levels in both the public and private sectors.
- Encouraging energy efficient appliances through tax and customs exemptions.
- Not passing the cost of repairing the grid onto citizens, and shifting it to large industrial and commercial sectors.
The statement stressed that the protests “stem from a desire to support the new state,” while rejecting any attempt to exploit the demonstrations against the state’s institutions.
An illegal decision?
At the second protest, participants again rejected the price hike, saying the decision is unjust and out of touch with the living conditions of most Syrians, especially retirees and low income families. They chanted slogans calling for the dismissal of the energy minister.
Lawyer Bassel Saeed Manea, the organizer of the second protest, said the Ministry of Energy’s decision to raise electricity tariffs is illegitimate and unlawful, citing several legal and constitutional reasons.
Manea said the first issue is the absence of a legislative authority. There is no elected People’s Assembly exercising its constitutional role in legislation and oversight. He added that any sovereign or public financial decision, such as tariffs, taxes, or fees, requires a law issued by a legislative authority or a decree issued under full constitutional powers, which the current decision lacks.
He also pointed to the nature of the current government, saying it is effectively a transitional or caretaker authority. Under established constitutional principles, such governments do not have the right to issue long term strategic decisions, such as imposing a new electricity tariff.
Manea added that the decision explicitly violates the constitution and the principle of legality, which states that no tax, fee, or financial obligation can be imposed without a law. He argued that the previous justification for raising tariffs no longer holds after the state regained control of oil and gas fields in Syria’s Jazira region (northeastern Syria), undermining the claim of a resource shortage.
He told protesters that demonstrations would continue if their demands are not met, noting that future gatherings would move into Damascus on Fridays after the Maghrib prayer, starting from al-Iman Mosque, to ensure broader participation.
Consumer Protection calls on government to reconsider
Abdul Razzaq Habza, secretary of the Consumer Protection Association, told Enab Baladi that the electricity issue has become the top concern for both citizens and the government. He said the irony is that demands that once focused on increasing supply hours and easing rationing have now been turned on their head, as citizens today no longer ask for more electricity and instead prefer rationing to remain as it is under current conditions.
He said electricity services have not seen any meaningful improvement. Comparing the prices imposed on citizens with the level of service provided reveals a wide gap, he added, meaning people are being asked to pay for a basic service that, in practice, is barely delivered.
Habza criticized statements by some officials, describing them as provocative, especially calls to rationalize consumption, avoid using electricity, or switch to other alternatives. He questioned what these alternatives are, saying they effectively mean relying on gasoline powered generators at prices people cannot afford. He stressed there are no real alternatives available to most citizens.
He added that if genuine alternatives existed, people would have turned to them long ago. The bills citizens are receiving, he said, are unreasonable and completely disproportionate to income levels. He argued that what is happening amounts to clear exploitation of citizens in exchange for a basic service. He also said the government has not distinguished between citizens and traders in its approach, amid widespread criticism.
The Consumer Protection Association wrote to the Ministry of Energy about complaints, especially those related to the inability to pay bills. Habza said the current reality allows only about 10% of citizens to pay their electricity bill, while 90% cannot.
He said recent measures came as a shock, both because of the timing, especially with winter underway and electricity needs rising, and because of the added burdens placed on households. Citizens are already under daily pressure, from bread to transport and communications, sectors that all suffer from accumulated crises. The electricity issue, he said, was the final blow.
Habza urged citizens to continue submitting complaints and contacting the relevant authorities, and to try to keep attention on the issue. He noted that installing solar power has become limited to major traders, some officials, or those paid in U.S. dollars, while ordinary citizens cannot, after more than 14 years of hardship, adapt to this reality.
He concluded that citizens can no longer bear additional burdens in the absence of real solutions, calling on the authorities to seriously reconsider electricity policies as a basic right, not a luxury.
Protesters said the new bills do not match average salaries in Damascus, January 29, 2026 (Enab Baladi, Ahmad Maslamani)
Economic reading of the tiered pricing
The issue of electricity pricing has sparked broad debate in social and economic circles, given its direct impact on citizens’ daily lives and on productive activity.
Dividing the tariff into consumption tiers has stirred public controversy. Many citizens argue that the tiers do not match prevailing income levels and fail to account for worsening poverty among a large segment of Syrians. They say the pricing mechanism does not reflect living conditions and does not meet even the minimum of basic needs.
On October 30, 2025, Syria’s Ministry of Energy issued details of a decision to raise electricity prices according to four tiers, saying it “takes into account social groups and varying consumption levels.” The ministry said the move is part of a government plan to reform the power sector and improve service, at a time when the sector is suffering losses estimated at $1 billion annually, amid financing and infrastructure challenges across most areas.
Tier structure and prices, as published by the ministry on Facebook
-
-
First tier: 600 Syrian pounds per kWh (about $0.055), up to 300 kWh over a two month billing cycle, with government support covering 60% of the cost price.
-
Second tier: 1,400 Syrian pounds per kWh (about $0.127), covering middle and higher income households and small projects consuming more than 300 kWh over a two month billing cycle.
-
Third tier: 1,700 Syrian pounds per kWh (about $0.155), covering those exempt from rationing, such as government institutions, companies, and factories that require electricity around the clock.
-
Fourth tier: 1,800 Syrian pounds per kWh (about $0.164), covering plants, factories, and high consumption users, such as smelting facilities and similar operations.
-
A contradiction between justifications and outcomes
Economist and university lecturer at Hama University Abd al-Rahman Muhammad said an economic reading of the new tiers reveals a fundamental contradiction between their theoretical justifications and their immediate practical results:
First, the logic of the claimed reform:
In theory, a progressive tier system is meant to rationalize consumption and protect low income households through a subsidized first tier, while higher consumption users or commercial sectors bear the real cost. Theoretically, this reduces the state’s financial burden (which, he said, loses $0.14 for every kWh it produces) and directs support to those who deserve it.
Second, the shock of social reality:
This logic clashes sharply with Syria’s reality for several reasons:
- Collapsed purchasing power: Comparative analysis shows that today’s minimum wage in Syria can buy only about 707 kWh per month under the new prices, a catastrophic decline of more than 60% compared to its purchasing power in the 1970s. Even “subsidized” consumption within the first tier has become a heavy burden.
- Unbearable bills: Some bills exceeded four to five million Syrian pounds (about $333 to $417), residents said, due to meter reading errors or technical problems.
A typical bill of 500,000 pounds for two months equals half the salary of an employee earning one million pounds. This, he said, explains a slogan circulating on the street: “Let them come and remove the electricity meter.” - No alternatives and no improved service: Anger has grown because this steep increase, which reached 800% in some cases, was not accompanied by a tangible improvement in service quality, which remains defined by rationing.
What the government should do today is not cling rigidly to the decision, but take urgent steps to contain the social and economic crisis it has produced:
-
Immediate clarification and transparency: Provide the public with a clear, comprehensive explanation of real cost calculations, the alleged contracts with foreign companies, and the rates of technical loss and waste in the grid, which reach 40% to 50%.
-
Immediate reform of the billing system: Address serious errors in readings from old meters, establish a fast and transparent complaints mechanism, and freeze collection of bills whose accuracy is in doubt until complaints are resolved.
-
Launch a serious public dialogue: As some intellectuals have called for, officials should “slow down,” study the file more carefully, and listen to proposals from experts and citizens to restructure the system in a fair manner.
Abd al-Rahman Muhammad, economist and university lecturer
An administrative mindset at odds with managing the file
In his comments to Enab Baladi, economist and university lecturer at Damascus University Majdi al-Jamous criticized the proposed electricity pricing mechanism, saying it reflects an administrative mindset that does not align with Syrian society or with sound principles for managing the sector, socially or economically.
Al-Jamous said treating electricity as a commercial commodity to increase revenues would produce the opposite result. The government would face public protests and refusal to pay, pushing citizens to reduce consumption or seek alternatives, which would lower revenues rather than increase them.
He stressed that in all countries electricity is considered a basic right, and supporting it is a state obligation. He noted that street lighting, roads, and public facilities are not billed in most countries, reinforcing the idea that electricity is a public right that should not be approached with a profit driven mindset.
Economically, al-Jamous warned that higher electricity prices would expand the shadow economy and increase electricity theft. He noted that economies emerging from crises rely primarily on small and micro enterprises, which, he said, make up about 37% of businesses worldwide. Raising electricity costs on these businesses would make them unprofitable, potentially pushing owners to shut them down, emigrate, or resort to informal methods to secure income, weakening a pillar of economic recovery.
Government support, “cosmetic”
On government support, al-Jamous said claims of 60% support for low income households are unrealistic, especially since the subsidized consumption bracket does not exceed 300 kWh per billing cycle, a quantity he said is insufficient to secure minimum living needs.
He stressed that low income groups, who make up a large share of society as poverty rates exceed 80%, are the state’s responsibility and should receive full support. He warned that such policies undermine feelings of national belonging and harm social cohesion.
Meanwhile, Abd al-Rahman Muhammad told Enab Baladi that assessing the current support requires looking at it from two angles: relative adequacy and effectiveness.
Formally, he said, support exists but is insufficient. The government announces 60% support for the first tier (300 kWh at 600 pounds), but the subsidized ceiling, 300 kWh over two months, is unrealistic. The basic needs of an average family (a refrigerator, lighting, a television, and charging devices) in a country facing recurrent crises easily exceed that limit, pushing households automatically into the higher priced tier (1,400 pounds). In that case, he said, support becomes a public relations gesture, because the family pays most of its consumption at a near full cost price.
He said the current support is not targeted in the correct economic sense. It is a general consumption subsidy, on the first 300 kWh, regardless of household income. Wealthier households that consume below the ceiling benefit from it, while large families, or those that rely on electricity for heating or running water pumps due to collapsing infrastructure, pay a heavy price.
Real support, he said, should target vulnerable groups specifically, based on clear income criteria, not on consumption levels that even poor households cannot fully control.
He also pointed to a regional comparison showing the scale of the gap. While minimum wage earners in Iraq or Turkey can buy thousands of kWh, the Syrian equivalent can barely buy 771 kWh, a level similar to Lebanon during its crisis. This, he said, shows the problem is not the nominal price per kilowatt, but the relationship between price and wages, making claims that “electricity in Syria is still among the cheapest” a misleading narrative that ignores basic economic realities.
A group of citizens gathers in Damascus to protest the recent increase in electricity bills, January 29, 2026 (Enab Baladi, Ahmad Maslamani)
Starting with restructuring the tiers
Proposals and alternatives
Real reform, according to experts interviewed by Enab Baladi, requires moving beyond temporary patchwork toward an integrated policy that addresses the root causes.
Accordingly, Dr. Abd al-Rahman Muhammad presented a set of proposals to restructure the tier system and government support:
First: A fair restructuring of tiers and prices (short to medium term)
- Raise the subsidized ceiling to a realistic level: Increase the cap of the first subsidized tier substantially, for example to 500 kWh over a two month billing cycle, while keeping a low price range (150 to 300 Syrian pounds) to ensure households can meet basic needs.
- Make tiers more detailed and gradually progressive: Adopt a more gradual three or four tier household system so jumps between tiers are not shocking, for example, a first tier up to 250 kWh per month at 150 pounds, a second tier up to 500 kWh at 500 pounds, and a third tier above that at 700 pounds. This would be fairer and encourage conservation without punitive effects.
- Link pricing to wages and freeze further hikes: Freeze any future increases, including a projected 15% increase in mid 2026, until purchasing power is restored through real wage increases, not only nominal ones. Electricity is a basic commodity and its price cannot be separated from income levels.
Second: Structural reform directions (long term)
- Improve sector efficiency before shifting the burden to citizens: The top priority is reducing massive technical losses in the grid, estimated at 40% to 50%, through maintenance and rehabilitation. Every pound spent here would save multiples in subsidies and improve service.
- Accelerate the transition to renewables and targeted support: Encourage household solar installations through soft loans or partial support, easing pressure on the grid and reducing bills over the longer term.
- Smart meters and transparency: Infrastructure upgrades should be a priority, but installing smart meters should be covered by the state or the utility as an investment in reform, not by consumers as proposed (at a cost of $60 to $70 per meter). Smart meters would reduce errors and corruption in readings.
- Support the productive sector: Electricity support for industry and agriculture should follow a different policy, since power is an input for production, not only consumption. Targeted support for productive sectors is an investment in recovery and job creation, not waste.
Gradual doubling
Dr. Majdi al-Jamous offered a proposal based on expanding subsidized household tiers up to 600 kWh at a low price, then gradually doubling the price as consumption rises. He also called for a higher but reasonable commercial tariff that takes into account the conditions of small and industrial businesses and does not exceed levels that would harm their economic viability.
He said this model would balance a sense of fairness for citizens, their contribution to covering service costs, and the need to maintain an attractive investment environment that supports national production.
Al-Jamous concluded by stressing the need for the government to fully reconsider how it manages this file, starting from the principle that electricity is a basic right and a core component of infrastructure, not a revenue collection tool, given its direct impact on economic recovery and building a productive national economy.
Purchasing power should be the benchmark
Economist Mohammad Bakr told Enab Baladi that “the rate of increase is unjustified, unrealistic, and not based on an actual study.” He said it is a mistaken measure aimed at absorbing and clawing back the wage increase that was paid based on government promises, noting that only 50% of the promised raise was actually delivered. He added that several standards exist, such as cost, sustainability, development, and improving network efficiency, but under current economic conditions these standards cannot be applied. The only core benchmark for determining any increase, he said, should be Syrian citizens’ purchasing power.
He pointed out that the most expensive energy carrier for electricity generation is diesel, while gas is cheaper and better. As for solar power, under current global costs it is not necessarily cheaper once the opportunity cost of the land required for panels is included, along with equipment costs (panels, inverters, cables, mounting structures), cleaning, replacing damaged panels, and other expenses.
Expert: The IMF may be behind the price hike
Mohammad Bakr said the price increase may have been requested by a funding party, most likely the International Monetary Fund. “These prescriptions are well known,” he said, adding that the rise was not, as some claim, set by companies expected to invest in electricity generation and distribution.
He added that production costs are also a factor, especially as global oil derivative prices rise daily, alongside higher shipping costs and the maintenance costs of Syria’s worn out, heavily depleted power plants. Still, he said, none of this justifies an increase he described as unfair to 90% of Syrians living below the poverty line.
Participants warned that keeping the decision in place will push more families in Damascus into inability to pay, January 29, 2026 (Enab Baladi, Ahmad Maslamani)
Pay or your money and property will be seized
What does the law say?
Amid protesters’ calls against high electricity prices urging people not to pay their bills, Enab Baladi asked legal expert and lawyer Ammar Nasser about the penalties related to non payment of electricity bills. He said that collecting electricity bills in Syria is governed by Electricity Law No. 32 of 2010, particularly the articles related to the subscriber’s obligations, in addition to the administrative contract concluded between the subscriber and the Public Establishment for Electricity Distribution, as a public entity.
Nasser explained that failure to pay an electricity bill is not, in itself, a criminal offense. Rather, it is legally classified as an administrative and financial violation, as long as it is not accompanied by another criminal act. This is based on the general rules of obligations and contracts and the provisions of the Electricity Law. He noted that an electricity bill is described as similar to an adhesion contract (standard form contract), meaning the subscriber must pay the bill without negotiating its details, value, or what it contains.
Lawyer Nasser distinguished between refusing to pay and stealing electricity. He said that non payment is merely a breach of a financial obligation, while electricity theft, meter tampering, or breaking seals are criminalized acts under the Syrian Penal Code and the Electricity Law, which also criminalizes illegal connections.
As for penalties, Nasser said the primary legal measure resulting from non payment is cutting off the electricity supply, while obliging the subscriber to settle outstanding dues and the administrative fines stipulated in the executive regulations. He stressed that the power cannot be cut immediately without issuing a proper warning and granting a legal grace period for payment, in line with applicable instructions.
He added that the imposed fines and reconnection fees are based on Ministry of Energy decisions issued to implement the law, and are not criminal penalties. He noted that the public electricity institution can, if refusal to pay continues, resort to the judiciary to collect the dues as payable financial debts under the procedures for collecting public debts.
In this case, if the electricity company sues the subscriber to pay the resulting financial obligations, then the legal consequences in cases of repeated failure to comply, under applicable Syrian laws, are as follows:
If a court ruling is issued and the subscriber does not comply with enforcement:
- No imprisonment penalty
The subscriber is not punished with imprisonment simply for refusing or abstaining from paying the amount ruled by the court, because:
- There is no provision in the Syrian Penal Code that criminalizes refusal to pay an electricity debt.
- Non payment is considered a breach of a civil obligation, not a criminal offense.
- Moving to compulsory enforcement
If a final ruling is issued and becomes legally final, and the subscriber refuses to comply, compulsory enforcement measures are applied under the Code of Civil Procedure and the Enforcement Law, including:
- Enforcement seizure of movable assets (cash, cars, goods).
- Seizure of bank accounts, if any.
- Seizure of real estate and selling it at public auction when necessary.
- A travel ban by judicial decision in some enforcement cases.
- Continuing the electricity cut off
According to Nasser, the institution has the right to:
- Keep the power disconnected.
- Not restore service unless the dues and reconnection fees are paid.
Regarding inability to pay, the Syrian lawyer said that if the subscriber’s inability to meet the obligation is proven:
- There is no imprisonment.
- The claim remains in place as a civil debt.
- The subscriber may request installment payments or rescheduling if the creditor agrees.
With regard to subscribers’ rights, Nasser said citizens have the right to be notified and warned, to review the bill, and to know the reason for disconnection. They also have the right to file an administrative objection under Consumer Protection Law No. 14 of 2015. In addition, they may request a re inspection of the meter if there is an error in the bill.
On exceptional circumstances, Nasser said there is no explicit legal text exempting people from payment due to living conditions. However, the administration can take exceptional decisions to defer payment or allow installments. Vital facilities such as hospitals, bakeries, and water institutions are handled through special procedures based on administrative decisions, not criminal provisions.
Participants called for raising the subsidized tier for low income families, January 29, 2026 (Enab Baladi, Ahmad Maslamani)
The post Soaring Electricity Bills: Power Costs Squeeze Syrians and Test the New Government appeared first on Enab Baladi.