Business
‘PUCSL electricity tariff revision is discriminatory’
Electricity tariff design must meet two main objectives: firstly, raising the money needed to pay for the costs of provision, and secondly, sending the right economic signals to each customer to favour the optimal socio-economic use of electricity.
To achieve the above objectives the principles that must be followed when designing tariffs are;
Economic sustainability or revenue sufficiency,
Equity or non-discrimination among users,
Economic efficiency in resource allocation, and
Transparency, simplicity, and stability of the methodology.
A well-defined and appropriate tariff structure must balance the financial sustainability of the sector on the one hand and the well-being of various segments of society on the other. The CEB’s tariff revisions seem to be mainly focused on the aspect of revenue sufficiency, ignoring the other aspects. As electricity is a commodity, there should be no difference in the prices charged to different users, except when reflecting any differences in the cost of providing services to different classes of users.
A differential tariff implies that some categories are subsidised leading to the question of who pays these subsidies. The current structure is such that households consuming an excess of 60 Kwh, and general purpose bulk supply users subsidise the industrial, hotel and charitable sectors.
Households that consume over 90 Kwh and general purpose bulk customers are charged a tariff that is double that of industries and hotels. With regards to hotels, in effect, domestic consumers subsidise foreign tourists. However, the differential tariff between general bulk supply and industrial/hotel users is meaningless. For example, a hall that hosts weddings and celebrations would be treated as a general bulk customer and be charged double the tariff that a hotel would be charged, even though both host similar events. A restaurant in a shopping mall would be charged as a general customer, but the same restaurant located within a hotel would enjoy a tariff half of that which a hotel incurs. While this differential existed under the previous tariff, it is made worse under the new structure; hotels faced a 10% increase in tariff while general users faced a 20% increase.
If the idea behind a lower tariff for hotels is to make the sector more competitive, then the solution is to address the causes of uncompetitiveness directly. One area is construction costs which raises the level of investment and the cost of maintenance. Protectionism for the domestic construction materials industry raises the costs of steel bars and rods, sanitary ware, aluminium extrusions, granite, electrical fittings, and carpets resulting in high overall construction cost. The effective protection granted on these items can exceed 200%; the savings in finance cost from a lower capital outlay would probably exceed the savings from a lower electricity tariff.
Economic value creation can take place in many different ways in an economy and the service sector is no less important than other sectors. The cross subsidisation between customers violates the equity or non-discrimination principle of a good tariff and discourages use by the overcharged and promotes overconsumption by the subsidised.
For example, the higher domestic tariff may serve as a disincentive for remote work. Remote or flexible work arrangements can reduce transport costs, congestion, energy use and for some, enable a better work/life balance. The government should be facilitating flexible work but the higher rates applicable to some domestic consumers may be a disincentive.
Economic activity is increasingly complex and a value chain can involve many different sectors. For example, the tea industry involves agriculture, processing in factories, transport, warehousing, blending, financing, marketing and exports. Moreover, products are now more knowledge intensive, so a greater part of the value addition arises in non-production-oriented components of the value chain. With differential tariffs, parts of the same value chain may pay different prices for use of the same commodity.
Further, a lower tariff to “industry” penalises new economy enterprises while promoting highly energy intensive users. This distorts resource allocation by encouraging excessive energy consumption, artificially promoting capital-intensive industries where the country may not have a clear comparative advantage. A subsidised tariff also blunts the incentive to economise.
The cost of supplying electricity fluctuates throughout the day, depending on the power generation mix, cost of fuels used, transmission costs and energy losses but as electricity storage is not economically viable, it has to be consumed whenever it is produced. Households with rooftop solar thus enjoy a subsidy. Domestic solar generation takes place in day time where the cost of generation is low but the import of electricity to the house takes place at night when the cost of generation is high. Offsetting units generated against units imported results in a subsidy because of the difference in costs between the two. Time of use metres should be mandated for all domestic users on net metering with the import/export being accounted for on the respective time of use tariff. Indeed all users who consume above 60 Kwh should move to the time of use tariff.
Should the government decide to subsidise the capital or operating costs to serve certain customer classes, it should do so directly from the budget and while a lifeline tariff for the poor is justified the high domestic users pay a tariff 7.4x that of the lowest. Not all households are the same size and an extended family living in a single house may face a much higher tariff although their income level may not differ greatly from the average.
The PUCSL should review tariffs to prevent the distortions highlighted above. Instead of cross-subsidies, the regulator should be working to reduce overall cost of the provision of electricity through better procurement and greater efficiency.
Treating all costs as a pass-through in computing the tariff is a mistake. The PUCSL needs to set efficiency targets in order to set fair and reasonable tariffs. The CEB should be incentivised to control its costs by specifying and enforcing performance requirements. Benchmarking CEB performance against regional and international peers to assess relative efficiency is necessary, as is consulting stakeholders on achievable efficiency targets.
Advocata is an independent policy think tank based in Colombo, Sri Lanka. We conduct research, provide commentary and hold events to promote sound policy ideas compatible with a free society in Sri Lanka. Visit advocata.org for more information.
Advocata spokespersons are available for live and pre-recorded broadcast interviews via 0774858401
CONTACT:
Subashini Kaneshwaren,
Senior Communications Executive, Advocata Institute
Email: subashini@advocata.org
Business
SL confronting ‘decisive test of fiscal discipline’
Sri Lanka enters the new year confronting a familiar but deepening economic strain, with falling foreign reserves, a weakening rupee, rising public debt and mounting disaster-related losses posing what analysts describe as a decisive test of fiscal discipline and policy coherence.
Sri Lanka Human Rights Centre Executive Director and former Provincial Governor Ranjith Keerthi Tennakoon has warned that the country urgently requires a coordinated economic response to prevent further deterioration, particularly as the cost of post-disaster reconstruction threatens to exert fresh pressure on already strained public finances.
“While the government has succeeded in revenue augmentation through heavy taxation and repeated increases in electricity and gas tariffs, its performance in maintaining fiscal discipline remains weak,” Tennakoon said in an economic indicators statement issued on January 5.
According to figures cited by Tennakoon, Sri Lanka’s domestic debt stood at Rs. 17,595.05 billion when President Anura Kumara Dissanayake assumed office. By the end of September 2025, that figure had climbed to Rs. 18,701.46 billion, reflecting an increase of Rs. 1,106.41 billion within a year.
External debt has also trended upward. From Rs. 10,429.04 billion at the end of 2024, foreign debt rose to Rs. 10,974.34 billion by September 2025. As a result, Sri Lanka’s total public debt stock now stands at Rs. 29,675.81 billion, underscoring the scale of the country’s fiscal exposure.
“This trajectory raises serious concerns about long-term debt sustainability,” Tennakoon warned, noting that debt servicing costs will intensify further if currency depreciation continues.
Foreign reserves under pressure
The steady decline in foreign reserves remains one of the most critical challenges facing the economy. Gross official reserves fell from USD 6,531 million in March 2025 to USD 6,033 million by the end of November, a contraction of nearly USD 500 million.
Tennakoon cautioned that upcoming reconstruction needs following widespread floods and landslides will necessitate substantial imports of construction materials, machinery and industrial inputs, inevitably drawing down scarce foreign exchange reserves.
Although Sri Lanka managed to maintain a current account surplus in 2024, the balance slipped back into deficit during September and October 2025, before returning to surplus in November. While a surplus is not required at all times, Tennakoon said the November turnaround offered a “cautious but positive signal” regarding the economy’s direction.
The rupee’s depreciation continues to amplify macroeconomic risks. The exchange rate has weakened from Rs. 293.25 per US dollar last year to around Rs. 309.45, increasing the rupee cost of foreign debt servicing while driving up import and production costs.
More troubling, Tennakoon noted, is the widening gap between commercial bank exchange rates and the informal undiyal (black market) rate, reflecting growing uncertainty and eroding confidence.
“This was precisely how the 2021–2022 economic crisis began — with a widening divergence between official and informal exchange rates,” he warned.
The economic fallout from recent floods and landslides adds another layer of urgency. Tennakoon criticised the government for failing, thus far, to prepare a comprehensive estimate of financial losses and reconstruction costs.
Preliminary assessments by the World Bank estimate disaster-related losses at USD 4 billion, while the International Labour Organization (ILO) places the figure as high as USD 16 billion, equivalent to 16 percent of GDP.
“Massive tax resources will be required for relief payments, while reconstruction will demand substantial foreign exchange for imports,” Tennakoon said, stressing that the government must urgently prepare credible financial assessments to mobilise both domestic and international support.
He also warned that delays in providing adequate relief have already become a serious concern for displaced communities struggling to rebuild their lives.
By Ifham Nizam
Business
Driving Growth: SEC and CSE collaborate to expedite listings
The Securities and Exchange Commission of Sri Lanka (SEC) in collaboration with the Colombo Stock Exchange (CSE) conducted an awareness session for Corporate Finance Advisors focusing on enhancing regulatory compliance and streamlining the listing process.
The forum brought together Corporate Finance Advisors and senior officials from the SEC and CSE to enhance the listing process by addressing regulatory expectations, identifying prevalent shortcomings in applications, and establishing best practices to strengthen investor confidence and market integrity.
Addressing the participants, Senior Prof. D.B.P.H. Dissabandara, Chairman, SEC highlighted the vital role Corporate Finance Advisors play in building market confidence beyond their traditional functions in facilitating listings, mergers, and acquisitions.
“Your screening process, your due diligence supports market confidence directly in addition to your key major roles,” the Chairman stated. “As a regulator, our main job is to look at investor confidence plus investor protection. And indirectly your job facilitates that as well.”
The Chairman emphasized that the overall reputation of the Sri Lankan capital market depends on the professional judgment and performance of Corporate Finance Advisors, as investors make decisions based on their assessments and recommendations.

Senior Prof. D.B.P.H. Dissabandara
Reinforcing this message, Mr. Rajeeva Bandaranaike, Chief Executive Officer, CSE emphasized the importance of collaboration in improving market efficiency. “The objective is to completely revamp and improve the overall listing experience for companies and issuers,” he stated. “This is a journey that we need to go together with the community. We cannot do this alone.”
He also noted the complexity of public listings compared to bank financing, explaining that heightened scrutiny is necessary when dealing with public money. “At the end of the day, if the prospectus is not clean and accurate, we’re going to face problems. We don’t want companies going into the watchlist after one or two months of listing.”
Building on this framework, Ms. Kanishka Munasinghe, Vice President, Listing, CSE highlighted critical gaps in recent listing applications, particularly regarding litigation disclosure and legal due diligence. The CSE has expanded its disclosure requirements to cover not just financial impact but also operational continuity and licensing implications.
Business
nVentures leads US $200K seed round into Flash Health to scale cashless outpatient care in Sri Lanka
Flash Health, a Sri Lankan healthtech startup building cashless, on-demand outpatient care, has raised a US $200,000 seed round led by nVentures, with participation from angel investors across Sri Lanka, Singapore, and the United States.
The funding comes as Flash Health expands its footprint across insurers, large employers, and healthcare providers, positioning itself as one of the country’s most widely adopted digital outpatient platforms addressing everyday healthcare needs.
At the core of Flash Health’s offering is Cashless OPD, which allows employees and policyholders to access doctor consultations, medicines, diagnostics, and telemedicine services without paying out of pocket, removing upfront payments and simplifying access to address a long-standing friction point in everyday healthcare across emerging markets. The platform’s approach has also received global recognition, with Cashless OPD winning at the World Summit Awards, an UN-backed platform recognising startups advancing the Sustainable Development Goals, selected from over 900 applications across 143 countries. Commenting on the investment, Chalinda Abeykoon, Managing Partner at nVentures, said, “We first met Arshad and the Flash Health team in late 2023 and were immediately struck by their ethos, attention to detail, and culture of excellence. As we worked with the team to fine-tune their product roadmap and execution, we saw a team that listens, iterates, and delivers. Flash Health is now operating at real scale, which made this a clear investment decision for us.”
Flash Health’s growth has been driven by partnerships with leading insurance providers, including AIA, HNB Assurance, Janashakthi Insurance, and Union Assurance, enabling policyholders to access services such as medicine delivery, home lab testing, telemedicine consultations, and wellness incentives through integrated digital workflows.
-
News1 day agoBroad support emerges for Faiszer’s sweeping proposals on long- delayed divorce and personal law reforms
-
News2 days agoPrivate airline crew member nabbed with contraband gold
-
News1 day agoInterception of SL fishing craft by Seychelles: Trawler owners demand international investigation
-
News4 days agoHealth Minister sends letter of demand for one billion rupees in damages
-
Opinion6 days agoRemembering Douglas Devananda on New Year’s Day 2026
-
Features2 days agoPharmaceuticals, deaths, and work ethics
-
News1 day agoUS raid on Venezuela violation of UN Charter and intl. law: Govt.
-
Features1 day agoEducational reforms under the NPP government
