ACM study: four energy suppliers’ feed-in costs for solar-panels owners not prohibited

On the basis of existing regulations, energy suppliers are free to set their own rates so long as these are not unreasonable, taking into consideration the underlying costs. Households with solar panels generate higher costs for energy suppliers than do households without solar panels. That is why suppliers are allowed to differentiate between households with and without solar panels. The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) has carried out a follow-up study among four energy suppliers into the level of their feed-in costs and the ways in which these are charged. The conclusion of this study is that their feed-in costs are consistent with the law.

ACM has looked at the level of the feed-in costs of energy suppliers Budget Energie, Vattenfall, Eneco, and Engie, which, combined, supply electricity to over half of Dutch households. In addition, these suppliers were included in the study, because, at the time thereof, which was March 2024, each of them differentiated between households with and without solar panels in their rates in different ways. The extra costs that these suppliers incurred in connection with households with solar panels are higher purchasing costs, higher imbalance costs, and costs that are associated with the net metering scheme. ACM has concluded that the suppliers included in the study had based the rates that they charged households with solar panels on these extra costs. The ways in which they did so, which were examined in the study, are not prohibited either.

ACM has also established that, by differentiating between households with and without solar panels, the suppliers do not achieve higher margins. On the one hand, they charge households with solar panels higher rates, but, on the other hand, they charge households without solar panels lower rates.

ACM has established that it has become more complex for consumers with solar panels to compare contracts properly because of the different ways in which suppliers differentiate between households with and without solar panels. That is why ACM is calling on suppliers and energy-comparison companies to make it easier to compare contracts.

In its Monitor on the consumer energy market, ACM will keep a close watch on how the feed-in costs evolve as well as on the different ways in which suppliers differentiate between households with and without solar panels, and will carry out more follow-up studies, if needed.

More households with fixed contracts

Equipped with new information that was added this month, ACM’s monthly Monitor on the consumer energy market has revealed that the number of households with fixed contracts continues to go up, but less steeply than in the previous period. In April, 55 percent of consumers had a fixed contract and 42 percent had a variable contract. The rest had a dynamic contract. The number of Dutch households with such dynamic contracts continues to grow steadily. In March, the number of switchers was again low, and was just under 1 percent.