FAQs: Proposals to address up-front connection charges and distributor obligations
This page captures our responses to questions we receive about the proposals to rein in high up-front connection charges and introduce obligations on distributors for offering and maintaining connections. The proposals are detailed in the consultation paper Reducing barriers for new connections.
Submissions on the proposals in this consultation paper are due 5pm, Friday 19 December 2025.
If you would like to be notified when new Q&As are added, and other related updates, email connection.feedback@ea.govt.nz with ‘connection pricing’ in the subject line.
1. The fundamental problem that residential property developer connection applicants face is absence of contestability and recourse to a cheap and efficient tribunal, in the context of them having a very vulnerable commercial position. The EDB can do whatever they want given the above. This can include poor or unusual scoping of the job, unfair contract terms processes and pricing. Your proposals don't address all of these problems.
We recognise that contestability and dispute resolution provisions are important to some stakeholders. These two areas are part of the Authority’s ongoing work programme to reform network connection processes and pricing, but are outside the scope of this current consultation.
We introduced four measures to reform connection pricing earlier this year. These new connection pricing requirements are supported by access to a dispute resolution procedure in the Code that enables complaints to be made to the Authority where parties consider these requirements have not been met.
2. There are other EA workstreams relating to distributors and pricing where changes may be introduced, namely Distributed Generation Pricing Principles (Issues Paper released earlier this year). Will any changes from that be coordinated with potential changes from this consultation? Is there a relationship?
We take a whole-of-system view when carrying out our work, which is underpinned by our drive to deliver an efficient and competitive electricity system that works for the long-term benefits of consumers.
We are currently undertaking work on the next stage of our work to improve the Distributed Generation Pricing Principles. This work is being carried out alongside our work to improve distribution connection pricing methodologies. We will seek a coordinated response if and where proposals share common issues, coordination adds value, and it is practical to achieve.
3. What is the cooperation between the EA and the Commerce Commission with regards to reopening price paths for those EDBs that will have significantly higher capital expenditure as a result of a possible cap on policy intervention?
The Electricity Authority and Commerce Commission engage regularly on distribution connection pricing and other matters. The Authority’s regulatory framework provides for statutory interaction with regulation under Part 4 of the Commerce Act 1986.
Under section 54V of the Commerce Act, the Authority is required to consult with the Commission before amending the Code in a way that is likely to affect the Commission’s exercise of its functions and powers in relation to distributors. We have formally consulted with the Commission on the Code amendments for connection pricing methodologies and will continue to engage as this work continues.
Under section 54V (5) of the Commerce Act, the Authority can ask the Commission to reconsider a distributor’s price path, and the Commission may do so if it thinks it necessary or desirable, to account for the impact on a distributor of the Authority amending the Code. The Authority has been engaging with the Commission on what this process would entail.
4. Will the EA be having a Q&A session after people have had a chance to read the consultation?
In the first instance, we invite people to read the paper and contact us directly if they have any questions.
We will regularly publish new Q&As on this webpage and let people know through our email distribution list when new information is available.
We will consider Q&A sessions where there is a need identified.
To receive email updates when new information is added to the webpage, and other related updates, please email connection.feedback@ea.govt.nz with ‘subscribe’ in the subject line.
5. Why not allow for a case-by-case objection process eg, checking the balance between renewal and growth and maintenance?
The four fast-track measures introduced earlier this year allow for a case-by-case objection process as they are supported by access to a dispute resolution procedure in the Code. These provisions enable complaints to be made to the Authority where parties consider these fast-track requirements have not been met. In some instances, this may result in a change that is satisfactory to the parties.
However, the proposed targeted intervention mechanism potentially goes further than the fast-track measures. The proposal aims to limit increases in connection charges and reduce the level of up-front charges so the allocations of broader networks costs are consistent across groups of network consumers. As proposed, the dispute resolution provision would apply to the applications made under a distributor’s amended pricing approach.
The proposed targeted intervention mechanism enables case-by-case screening and deeper examination of, for example, a distributor’s reliance level and trend, the network- and region-specific circumstances, atypical activity, and forecast network capex programmes.
7. How does Vector's capital contributions as a percentage of total growth capex compare to Wellington networks and Powerco?
Based on the most recent information disclosure data submitted by distributors to the Commerce Commission (2025 disclosure year):
- Vector’s reliance level was 79%, forecast to reach 142% by 2030
- Powerco’s reliance level was 27%, forecast to remain below 40% out to 2030
- Wellington Electricity’s reliance level was 36%, forecast to remain below 40% out to 2030.
8. Why not open it to a degree of competition? That would be a fairly simple up-front remedy.
We recognise contestability is an important issue for some stakeholders. This is part of the Authority’s ongoing work programme to reform network connection processes and pricing.