A bipartisan group of lawmakers asked federal regulators to reject the $33.4 billion acquisition of AES, arguing on September 29 that the private-equity-backed transaction could raise electricity costs and favor data-center investments over utility customers. The request puts new political pressure on one of the largest recent power-sector takeovers just as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission weighs whether the deal is consistent with the public interest.

The proposed buyers are Global Infrastructure Partners, a BlackRock subsidiary, and the EQT Infrastructure VI fund, with the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and Qatar Investment Authority participating as co-investors. AES shareholders would receive $15 a share in cash, while the buyers would assume debt that brings the transaction’s enterprise value to approximately $33.4 billion, according to the original SEC filing.

AES says the transaction will not affect rates at its regulated utilities in Indiana and Ohio and will provide greater access to capital for grid investment. The lawmakers contend that private ownership could create pressure for higher returns and increase the risk that households and ordinary businesses bear infrastructure costs tied to large data centers. Those are competing forecasts, not established outcomes, and FERC’s review is the principal federal test still ahead.

A New Challenge to a Pending Takeover

Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representatives André Carson, Victoria Spartz, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley urged FERC Chair Laura Swett to deny the application. The signers span both parties, including Carson, an Indiana Democrat, and Spartz, an Indiana Republican. Their Senate letter argues that AES Ohio and AES Indiana have sought rate increases in recent years and that private-equity ownership could intensify pressure to generate returns.

The lawmakers also raised a conflict concern created by BlackRock’s interests across both energy infrastructure and data centers. Their argument is that a common owner could support utility investments that primarily serve affiliated data-center projects while shifting some financial risk to other customers. Reuters reported that BlackRock declined to comment and EQT did not immediately respond to its request.

AES Disputes the Ratepayer Risk

AES said no acquisition premium or transaction expense would be borne by utility customers. Its public materials state that AES Indiana and AES Ohio will remain locally managed, regulated utilities after the parent company becomes private. The company’s position is that the buyers’ capital and infrastructure experience will strengthen its ability to finance power generation, transmission and other projects at a time of rising electricity demand.

The corporate rationale reflects a genuine financing constraint. AES told investors in March that without the acquisition it could need to reduce or eliminate its dividend or issue substantial new equity to finance growth beyond 2027. The company’s deal presentation also said the consortium would fund the purchase price with equity and did not plan to add debt because of the transaction. Those commitments address the takeover’s financing structure, but they do not by themselves determine how future utility investments will be allocated among customer classes.

The Deal Has Cleared Important Hurdles

AES investors approved the merger in June, with about 97.9% of votes cast supporting the transaction. Those votes represented roughly 67.2% of all outstanding shares, according to a company vote filing. The company expects the acquisition to close in late 2026 or early 2027 if the remaining federal, state and foreign approvals are obtained.

Ohio regulators approved the change in control of AES Ohio on September 17. AES disclosed that decision in a subsequent Form 8-K, while emphasizing that the merger still depends on additional regulatory approvals. The Ohio action therefore removed one condition but did not settle the broader federal questions now highlighted by the lawmakers.

FERC Must Apply the Public-Interest Test

The transaction is pending in FERC docket EC26-99-000. A federal docket notice shows that Horizon Merger Sub, AES, EQT and Qatar Investment Authority supplemented their application in August. Under federal law, FERC reviews transfers of jurisdictional utility assets and must determine whether a transaction is consistent with the public interest, including its effects on competition, rates and regulation.

The lawmakers’ intervention does not compel FERC to reject the deal, and their estimate of private-equity return targets does not prove that customer rates would rise. State utility commissions would continue to review rate requests from AES Indiana and AES Ohio. The federal concern is narrower but still consequential: whether the ownership structure could weaken regulatory safeguards, create cross-subsidies or otherwise shift costs and risks in ways that are difficult to detect.

Data-Center Growth Raises the Stakes

The dispute arrives as data centers push U.S. electricity demand higher and utilities prepare large investments in generation and grid capacity. That growth can improve demand for power companies, but it also raises a central allocation question: how much of the required infrastructure should be paid by the data-center customer and how much should be recovered from the broader rate base?

FERC’s decision will not resolve that national debate, but the AES transaction has become a prominent test of how regulators evaluate private capital moving into essential infrastructure. The evidence currently establishes the purchase price, ownership structure and remaining approval process. Whether the takeover would increase bills or improve access to investment remains disputed, making the conditions attached to any FERC approval as important as the decision itself.