Solar panel feed-in costs 2026: current overview per supplier and smart solutions

Last updated: April 9, 2026

Feed-in tariffs (terugleverkosten) are one of the biggest frustrations for households with solar panels in 2026. Not because solar panels have suddenly become worthless, but because more and more energy suppliers are charging fees for electricity you feed back into the grid during the day. As a result, consumers are no longer just looking at yield, but primarily at self-consumption, contract terms, and smart solutions.

In this overview, you'll find what many other pages miss: a clear comparison framework per supplier, an explanation of the calculation behind feed-in tariffs, what will change in 2027 when net metering ends, and which practical solutions have the most impact. From simple behavioral adjustments to dynamic contracts and home storage.

What are solar panel feed-in tariffs in 2026?

Solar panel feed-in tariffs are costs charged by some energy suppliers for the electricity you feed back into the grid with your solar panels. This is different from a feed-in remuneration. A feed-in remuneration is the amount you receive for electricity you don't use immediately yourself. Feed-in tariffs, on the other hand, are an additional cost item on your energy bill.

For many households, this feels contradictory. You generate sustainable electricity, yet you pay extra if you feed a lot back. In practice, it's about timing and system costs. Especially around sunny midday hours, many households simultaneously feed power back, while market prices can then be low or sometimes even negative.

The ACM states that solar power feed-in tariffs are not automatically unreasonable, but that contracts remain difficult for consumers to compare. Therefore, always check via Consuwijzer whether your supplier charges these costs and how the calculation works.

Anyone who wants to assess their situation must therefore look beyond the annual yield alone. It's about the combination of generation, consumption, contract type, and feed-in profile.

Why are energy suppliers increasingly charging feed-in tariffs in 2026?

More and more suppliers are charging feed-in tariffs because large quantities of solar power are fed into the grid at the same time. This incurs additional costs for suppliers for balancing, handling, and the risk of hours with low or negative prices. The market has therefore changed: generating a lot is still valuable, but feeding a lot back at peak times has become less attractive.

For consumers, this means that comparing is more difficult than before. One supplier works with tiers, another with an amount per kWh, and some parties use different calculation methods. That's why comparing feed-in tariffs in 2026 is more important than ever.

This development does not mean that solar panels have become unprofitable. It does mean that smart energy use plays a larger role in the overall business case. Also read our guide on how to avoid solar panel feed-in tariffs if you want to know more about shifting to self-consumption.

Comparing feed-in tariffs: complete overview per supplier

The table below uses one clear reference situation: approximately 2,200 kWh gross feed-in per year. For tiered models, the relevant tier amount is included. For suppliers who charge a rate per kWh, an annual indication has been calculated based on 2,200 kWh feed-in.

Use this table as a comparison aid, not as an absolute final outcome. The actual annual impact always depends on your net consumption, gross feed-in, contract duration, fixed supply costs, and any promotions or bonuses.

Please note: a high feed-in remuneration alone says little. It's the combination of feed-in remuneration, feed-in tariffs, and fixed costs that determines your actual annual impact. Therefore, it pays to assess your supplier not just on price, but on the complete calculation.

How are feed-in tariffs calculated?

In practice, there are roughly three models. Some suppliers work with tiers: the more you feed back, the higher your monthly amount. Others charge a fixed amount per kWh fed back. And there are suppliers with a different contract logic, which means you can't simply compare apples with apples.

This makes comparison difficult. A contract with attractive monthly costs can still turn out to be more expensive with high feed-in than a contract with a higher fixed price but milder feed-in tariffs.

Calculation Example A: many solar panels, low daily consumption

Suppose you have a relatively large solar roof, but almost no one is home during the day. Your consumption is mainly in the evening. Then you feed a lot of power back precisely during the hours when many other households do the same. In such a situation, feed-in tariffs can become a noticeable cost item, even if your total generation is high.

The problem then lies not in your solar panels themselves, but in the combination of high midday surplus and low direct self-consumption.

Calculation Example B: higher self-consumption, lower pressure

If you do consume during the day, for example due to working from home, a boiler, air conditioning, heat pump, or smart appliances, you use more of your solar power directly yourself. As a result, you feed less back and the chance of ending up in an unfavorable tier or high kWh charge decreases.

If you want to understand why this will become even more important towards 2027, you can read more in our guide on net metering in 2027 and the importance of self-consumption.

Solar panels in 2027: what changes when net metering stops?

Until December 31, 2026, net metering still plays a major role in the value of solar panels. From January 1, 2027, that scheme will end. This means that electricity you feed back can no longer be offset in the same way against electricity you later draw from the grid.

That's why the logic of solar panels is shifting. For many households, it becomes less interesting to primarily feed a lot back, and more interesting to use a larger portion of their own solar power directly themselves. For a basic explanation of this transition, also refer to Consuwijzer's explanation of net metering.

At Sunpura, we further explain this in our articles on self-consumption after 2027 and the impact of net metering ending on home batteries.

Anyone searching for solar panels 2027 is therefore usually not just looking for policy, but for a practical question: how do I ensure that my system continues to operate smartly even without net metering?

The 5 most effective ways to reduce feed-in tariffs

1. Shift consumption to sunny hours

Run the dishwasher, washing machine, dryer, or boiler during the day when your panels are generating a lot. This is often the cheapest first step and directly increases your self-consumption.

2. Use heating and cooling smartly

A heat pump, electric boiler, or air conditioning can absorb useful extra consumption during the day. You don't literally store the energy then, but you do use your solar power at a time when you would otherwise feed it back.

3. Critically evaluate dynamic energy prices

Dynamic energy prices make timing more important. For some households, a dynamic contract can help to charge and consume more smartly, but it is only interesting if you actively manage your hourly profile. If you want to delve deeper into this, also read our explanation of dynamic energy prices and smart home batteries.

4. Limit peak feed-in with storage

A home battery can store part of your midday surplus for later use in the evening. This can be particularly interesting if you consistently feed a lot back and have little daily consumption. At the same time, it is advisable to also consider Milieu Centraal's sober explanation of home batteries in your decision.

5. For new systems, also consider profile instead of maximum peak

For new solar installations, a production profile that is more spread out over the day can in some cases be more favorable than a system that primarily produces one large midday peak. This better suits a market where feeding back is less inherently beneficial.

Is a home battery worth the investment in 2026?

A home battery is not automatically the best choice for everyone. For households with low feed-in or already high direct self-consumption, adapting behavior is often the more logical first step. But for households with high midday generation, low daily consumption, and a clear desire to use more of their own electricity later in the day, storage can indeed become interesting.

Sunpura S2400 AC

€ 799.00 € 999.00

View Product

• • Retrofit Solution: Works directly with your existing solar panels.
• • Capacity: 2.4kWh base module (Stackable up to 9.6kWh).
• • Smart Meter Connection: Real-time P1-port control for maximum efficiency.
• • Plug & Play Installation: No complex inverter replacement required.
• • Savings: Less unnecessary feed-in and smarter handling of dynamic tariffs.
• • Safety: LiFePO4 cells with built-in fire protection.

The Sunpura S2400 is particularly suitable for a retrofit scenario: you already have solar panels, don't want a major renovation, and are looking for a way to use self-generated electricity later in the day. Based on the product specifications, this is a solution for households that want more control over feed-in, without pretending that a battery is automatically the right step for everyone.

If you want to understand the broader context, also read our articles on solar panels with a home battery as the new standard and 1-phase or 3-phase connection if you want to make more technical comparisons.

The correct order therefore remains: first insight, then behaviour, then contract choice, and only then storage if your profile truly demands it.

Class action and rulings on feed-in tariffs: what does this mean for you?

Search queries surrounding class action feed-in tariffs solar panels show that many consumers hope that feed-in tariffs will automatically disappear once enough complaints or legal procedures are underway. In practice, the situation is more nuanced. Not every complaint succeeds. It often depends on whether your supplier clearly explained the costs, whether the calculation method was in the contract, and whether communication was correct.

On the website of De Geschillencommissie, you can see that rulings can go both ways. Sometimes a consumer is right if feed-in costs were not contractually agreed upon or were insufficiently clear. In other cases, complaints are rejected if the conditions were clear enough.

This means two things. Firstly: do not assume that every feed-in cost item is automatically unlawful. Secondly: do not blindly accept every invoice without checking how your supplier constructed the calculation.

If in doubt, it is advisable to compare contract terms, amendment emails, and annual statements. This is often where the difference lies between a promising complaint and one that yields little.

Conclusion: what is the smartest route in 2026?

The smartest route depends not only on your supplier, but primarily on your profile. Those who feed in little usually don't need to look at a home battery right away. Those who have a large midday surplus and use little directly will notice sooner that timing, contract choice, and storage together become important.

Therefore, the correct order in 2026 is clear: first compare feed-in tariffs, then analyse your own consumption, then take inexpensive measures, and only then assess whether a home battery for solar panels makes sense.

This way, you keep solar panels financially smart in 2026 and towards 2027, without falling for quick sales pitches.

Disclaimer: This page is for informational purposes only and does not constitute personal financial or legal advice. Feed-in tariffs, feed-in compensation, and contract terms may vary per supplier and per contract. Always check the current terms and conditions of your own energy supplier and seek independent advice if in doubt.

Written by Jason

Jason is Director of Product and Service Support at Sunpura Energy and writes about home batteries, P1 control, feed-in tariffs, and the impact of changing energy regulations on Dutch households. Thanks to his broad experience in the sustainable energy sector, he translates technical and market-related information into practical choices for consumers.