The government's 'energy voucher' program, which supports the energy expenses of vulnerable groups, appears to be underutilized, particularly among the lowest-income households. This is the first analysis of energy voucher usage categorized by benefit type. The National Assembly pointed out the low information accessibility and complex procedural requirements for vulnerable groups as causes and called for tailored measures.
The energy voucher system is designed to alleviate the burden of heating and cooling expenses for low-income households by providing vouchers based on the number of household members. Vouchers can be used to purchase electricity, city gas, district heating, kerosene, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), and coal.
According to the '2024 fiscal year settlement of account and supplementary expenditure review report' from the National Assembly's Trade, Industry, Energy, SMEs, and Startups Committee, last year, the number of households receiving living benefits (below 32% of median income) amounted to 867,625, accounting for approximately 69% of the total beneficiaries (1,257,936 households).
Following that, 314,234 households (25%) received housing benefits (below 48% of median income), 54,820 households (4%) received medical benefits (below 40% of median income), and 21,257 households (2%) received education benefits (below 50% of median income).
However, the usage rate of energy vouchers among living benefits households, which account for the largest proportion, was 78.1%, the lowest among benefit types. The proportion of those who used the entire amount of the energy voucher was also only 40.7%.
In contrast, households receiving education benefits, which are relatively higher in income selection, had the highest energy voucher usage rate at 95.5%. The full usage rate for these households was 56.1%.
The voucher usage rate and full usage rate for households receiving medical and housing benefits were recorded at 81.1% and 42.3%, and 85.2% and 45.8%, respectively. A 'under-expenditure' phenomenon indicates that lower-income groups are not sufficiently utilizing the vouchers.
Park Hee-seok, the chief expert of the committee, noted, "Due to multiple structural factors such as limited information accessibility, complex application procedures, and restricted usage channels, the actual usage can be seen as low," and added, "If the phenomenon of substantial benefits not reaching the groups that need them most continues, there is a concern that the energy welfare blind spot may become entrenched."
After receiving these criticisms, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy sought advice from experts. However, the experts reportedly conveyed to the ministry that "it is difficult to conclude the issues of the system based solely on a simple comparison of usage rates."
Households receiving education benefits, which include a significant proportion of multi-member families with children, naturally have higher energy usage compared to single-member households receiving living benefits, which explains the higher voucher usage rate. It was also pointed out that living benefits households receive approximately 70,000 won in electricity bill discounts annually from Korea Electric Power Corporation.
A Ministry official explained, "For living benefits recipients, if additional electricity charges occur after the discount, we support them with vouchers," adding, "If the household has fewer members and thus lower electricity usage, they may not need the vouchers."
However, the ministry decided to expand the 'Mobile Energy Welfare Service' to address the issues surrounding voucher usage rates among low-income groups. Last year, as part of a pilot program, they conducted services for 30,000 households that had received vouchers but had not used them in more than two years, resulting in positive effects, such as increased usage records among 18,000 households.
A ministry official said, "Next year, we plan to more than double the number of beneficiaries from this year (47,000 households) to strengthen tailored support."