The report estimates the decade-long increase added nearly $200 to a typical annual household bill. It updates a prior 2015 analysis using the same consumption assumptions to enable direct comparisons across systems and time.
How bills changed across systems and states
While drinking water bills climbed 62% over the decade, consumer prices rose an estimated 39% and grocery prices 30%. Median household income increased 52% between 2014 and 2024, the latest period available for the income comparison. The gap between rates and income growth was particularly pronounced in some states, including New Hampshire, where bills rose nearly five times as fast as state median household income, and in Louisiana, Maryland, and West Virginia, where bills grew about twice as fast.
Other states showed different patterns. In South Dakota, for example, median household income rose 51% while typical bills increased 18%. Among state averages, New Hampshire recorded the largest increase at 177%, followed by Oregon at 114% and West Virginia at 95%. Looking at individual systems, changes ranged from a 308% increase in Daly City, California, to a 26% decrease at a system in Orange County, Florida; overall, nine systems reduced typical bills over the decade.
Annual charges in 2025 ranged widely—from $133 at a public system in Hempstead, New York, to $1,416 at a corporate system in San Jose, California. Idaho had the lowest state average among the systems studied at $286, while West Virginia had the highest at $1,383. The 25 most expensive systems charged typical households more than $1,000 a year; more than half of these were in California, and nearly all relied on surface water supplies. The report notes that purchases from California’s State Water Project and investment in alternative supplies such as desalination may contribute to higher costs in that state. By contrast, the 25 least expensive systems—all publicly owned—charged less than $260 a year; many were in the South and included fast-growing service areas such as Dallas, Orlando, and Phoenix.
Ownership and treatment cost patterns
Ownership was a key differentiator in 2025: for-profit systems charged typical households an average of $823 versus $494 at publicly owned systems—a difference of $329, or 67%. Although privately owned utilities represented about 11% of the sample, they made up 44% of the 25 most expensive systems and seven of the 10 most expensive. The price gap widened over the decade as well, with corporate systems increasing annual bills by an average of $157 more than public systems. The average publicly owned system’s 2025 bill remained below the $501 charged by the average corporate system in 2015.
State-level comparisons underscored the pattern: in Illinois, corporate systems averaged $1,109 a year compared with $529 at public systems, while in Indiana the averages were $900 and $444, respectively. A prior study using the report’s 2015 dataset identified private ownership as the factor most strongly associated with higher bills, ahead of infrastructure age and drought conditions.
Affordability impacts and burden on low-income households
The analysis assessed affordability by comparing typical bills to income levels for the lowest-income quintile in each state, identifying bills exceeding 1.5% of income as unaffordable. Using this measure, the report found water bills were unaffordable for low-income households in 93% of the systems studied. Only in Idaho and Utah did the average system’s bill fall within the threshold.
Estimated burdens were highest in Puerto Rico and West Virginia. In Puerto Rico, typical bills at the largest systems exceeded 3.5% of median household income and equated to around 20% of income for low-income households. In West Virginia, the corresponding shares were approximately 2.3% and 11%. These are standardized bill-to-income comparisons, not actual household spending, but they point to significant affordability challenges.
Addressing infrastructure needs compounds the pressure. A study prepared for the Appalachian Regional Commission estimated that repairing West Virginia’s drinking water infrastructure would cost about $1.73 billion.
Capital needs and funding outlook
The report cites multiple estimates of national investment requirements to meet standards and resilience needs. These include:
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimate of $625 billion over 20 years to meet existing drinking water standards
- American Water Works Association infrastructure needs estimate of $960 billion
- Additional climate-related needs of up to $617 billion over 25 years
Utilities also face operating pressures from aging pipes, PFAS contamination, and drought, alongside growing demands from water-intensive industries such as data centers and intensive livestock operations. As one example, Manchester Water Works, the largest system in New Hampshire, saw debt service rise 75% and treatment chemical costs increase 143% between 2015 and 2023.
The report raises concerns about future external support, noting that the five-year funding program authorized under the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law concluded in fiscal year 2026. Recent federal budget proposals for 2025 and 2026 included eliminating the main federal funding source for local drinking water and wastewater projects, a reduction of about $2.46 billion that would leave $305 million for states. The report recommends guarding against further affordability strain by supporting municipal ownership, preventing privatization of water systems, and holding polluters financially responsible. It also points to potential federal measures, including proposals to create a dedicated water infrastructure trust fund, warning that without additional investment, the cost of maintaining and upgrading systems will continue to push bills beyond households’ ability to pay.
