NextEra’s Bid To Create the World’s Largest Utility Company Raises Serious Concerns

NextEra Energy, the country’s largest electric power company, has proposed a deal to acquire Dominion Energy for $67 billion. The acquisition would make NextEra the third-largest energy company in the United States, trailing only Chevron and Exxon Mobil. NextEra Energy already owns Florida Power & Light, and the addition of Dominion’s electric utilities in Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina would make it the owner of the largest regulated electric utility business in the world. NextEra also owns an extensive portfolio of generation and other energy infrastructure assets through another subsidiary, NextEra Energy Resources; after this acquisition, it would be the country’s leader in total generation capacity.

Given NextEra’s footprint, regulators should take a close look at this deal’s potential implications for electricity prices, market power, political influence, and job impacts. If approval is to be granted, strong safeguards must be in place to serve the public interest and support a reliable and affordable electric grid.

The companies argue that the acquisition would improve operational and financing efficiencies to help build more energy infrastructure that can meet the growing demand driven by a projected 130 gigawatts (GWs) of large-load data centers. However, mergers and acquisitions in the utility industry have historically resulted in little to no benefits for customers and, in some cases, higher prices. Furthermore, they are typically followed by layoffs and lower earnings for workers.

NextEra requires approvals from the state regulatory agencies in Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, as well as approvals from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and Nuclear Regulatory Commission and antitrust review under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, which is overseen by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC). While NextEra and Dominion have yet to file formal applications, there are multiple concerns with the proposed acquisition—all related to potential consumer cost implications.

Concern #1: Regulatory capture

At the state level, the respective utility commissions are tasked with regulating their business, including decisions around how to recover the costs associated with their investments and, most importantly, the amount of profit that they can collect from their customers. The allowable profit of a utility, or return on equity, is typically determined by the state regulators during rate cases, when the utility and other stakeholders go through a lengthy process deciding how to recover costs associated with the utility’s capital expenditures. In states such as Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, the regulators who make these decisions are either elected or confirmed by state legislators, who can potentially be influenced by the utility through political lobbying and contributions. As a result, these regulators could potentially continue to allow utilities to recover high levels of profit.

NextEra, through its subsidiary Florida Power & Light, has historically exercised a concerning amount of power in influencing the politics of its regulation. Florida Power & Light has contributed significantly to the legislators who have influence over the appointment of the commissioners of the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC); and between 2010 and 2025, it also spent more than $60 million on campaign contributions to politicians in the state. NextEra recently paid a settlement of $150 million following a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida alleging that the company engaged in “acts, practices, and a course of business which operated as a fraud and deceit,” among other allegations. Customers of Florida Power & Light have seen their electric bills go up by 33 percent between May 2021 and May 2026, including the largest rate hike in U.S. history at the end of 2025. Additionally, 27 percent of a Florida Power & Light customer’s bill goes toward the utility’s profit, the second-highest share across utilities nationwide.

NextEra’s proposal includes high forecasted levels of capital expenditure and rate base growth. Capital investments are necessary to maintain and upgrade the electric grid, especially during a period of growing demand. However, the utility and its shareholders would be the primary beneficiaries of this deal. NextEra is reportedly overvaluing Dominion’s shares by 23 percent; experts have testified during other utility mergers and acquisitions that this upfront excess payment is made with the expectation of future excess profits arising from a high authorized return on equity. Notably, NextEra is projecting a 1 percent increase in earnings per share.

Concern #2: Market power

The acquisition must undergo review from the FERC to determine whether it is consistent with the public interest, evaluating its effects on competition and rates. Additionally, the acquisition would be reviewed for antitrust purposes under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, which is conducted by either the DOJ or FTC. In the wholesale market of PJM, where Dominion has a large utility footprint and NextEra has recently started investing in generating capacity, there are concerns that the acquisition could give NextEra undue wholesale market power. Furthermore, given the projected large-load pipeline of 130 GWs, the acquisition means that the megautility would be an influential market participant as one of the few companies in PJM that would be capable of providing both transmission and generation to serve data center customers. Finally, in New England, the combined generation assets owned by NextEra and Dominion would account for roughly one-fourth of the region’s energy supply and half of all its carbon-free power, resulting in potential leverage to influence electricity prices in the region.

Concern #3: Government interference

Under the current Trump administration, both the DOJ and FTC have been more heavily influenced by the president in their decisions. In February 2026, the head of the DOJ’s Antitrust Division was forced out of the administration after disagreements with then-Attorney General Pam Bondi and Trump lobbyists on a proposed merger between Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networks. There are growing concerns that the DOJ’s independence and internal checks and balances have been compromised. In June, the DOJ approved a merger between Paramount and Warner Bros. despite concerns surrounding foreign ownership by three Middle Eastern regimes—all of whom have close ties to the president and his family—and a major corporation linked to the Chinese military.

With the current administration’s priorities on data centers, coupled with NextEra’s $1 million donation to the inauguration and an undisclosed contribution to the construction of the White House ballroom, there could be concerns that any antitrust review may be rubber-stamped without the appropriate amount of scrutiny.

Important questions must be answered if the acquisition is to be approved

Given these concerns, review of the acquisition should include careful scrutiny to prevent a monopoly held by a megautility and avoid setting potentially harmful precedent for future utility consolidations amid growing competition to serve data center demand growth. Regulators and stakeholders should evaluate the following questions to evaluate how and whether the acquisition should be approved:

1. Is it in the public interest?
2. What are the benefits to customers? Are they temporary or permanent? How are they guaranteed? What are the penalties if the benefits are not fulfilled?
3. How will shareholders benefit and where is that value coming from?
4. What will be the impact on the utilities’ workforce and job quality? How will Dominion’s workforce be affected?
5. Will artificial intelligence (AI) data centers be required to pay for all of the costs they impose on the grid, or will their indirect or direct costs to the grid spill over to other ratepayers?
6. What protections are in place, or will be established, to prevent political influence and corruption both for the approval of the acquisition itself and for subsequent lobbying and proceedings before state legislatures and commissions?

Conclusion

While more details will emerge when the company files its formal application with the respective agencies, state and federal review of the acquisition must consider the precedent that would be set if it is approved. The political, competitive, and corruption-related concerns could all result in a detrimental outcome if sufficient protections for customers and workers—and against political influence—are not put in place.