This story is from the Couriermail but other states would have similar charges.
Power providers have come up with a bright idea: `Let's send the bill for the marketing and advertising of our company to our customers'. Source: News Limited QUEENSLAND families are paying power companies more than $150 a year just to compete with each other.
The fees are charged to help cover the cost of marketing and to encourage retailers into the market by providing a cushion for them to discount.
Even Ergon Energy customers in regional Queensland have to fork out the fees - despite the fact there is no competition in their area.
Consumer advocates say the charges are unjustified and should be scrapped or slashed by the State Government to help ease the pressure on people's hip pockets.
The Queensland Competition Authority this week rejected the calls in its report recommending a 13.6 per cent regulated electricity price rise for 2014-15, which will push up the average annual bill by about $270.
ARE YOU HAPPY TO PAY THE $150 POWER COMPANY MARKETING AND ADVERTISING SLUG? HAVE YOUR SAY BELOW
Energy Minister Mark McArdle last night said that he would consider the report.
If the government accepts the QCA draft determination, every household will be charged $45.35 next year for "customer acquisition and retention costs'' - related to marketing and advertising.
The Queensland Consumer Association and Queensland Council of Social Service both argued the CARC fee should be dumped as it unnecessarily increased power bills.
Consumer Association spokesman Ian Jarratt said if it was kept, it should be cut because most companies had stopped the most expensive form of marketing - door-to-door sales - which was strongly disliked by customers.
A further five per cent - $111 a year - is added to the bill for "headroom".
This is designed as an incentive to attract retailers into the market by enabling them to offer a discount without harming profit levels. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Competition Authority determines a minimum % of return on their investments. To me, that's not market forces determining the financial outcome of these companies.
