Photovoltaic Contracting 2026: Models, Market, and Accounting for B2B Decision-Makers
Excerpt
Photovoltaic contracting shifts the investment in and operation of a solar system to an external service provider—you simply purchase the electricity generated directly from the roof. In 2026, the market will shift significantly: While corporate PPAs for large-scale systems are declining, the on-site business in the commercial rooftop segment is growing. This guide outlines the four model variants, the regulatory drivers, and the accounting logic for small and medium-sized businesses, industry, and property owners.
-
Photovoltaic contracting is a long-term energy service model in which a contractor installs, finances, and operates a PV system on your property—you pay for the electricity supplied rather than for the system itself. Four model variants dominate the German B2B market: energy supply contracting (on-site PPA), system contracting (lease), operations management contracting, and savings contracting. Industry-standard electricity prices range from 8–14 ct/kWh net, which is below the average industrial electricity price for small and medium-sized businesses of around 16 ct/kWh (BDEW, January 2026). Three regulatory packages—the Solar Peak Act, CBAM, and CSRD—will make self-consumption strategically more valuable than pure full feed-in by 2026. A specific Logic Energy contract structure, fixed prices, and process flow can be found in the accompanying service guide for PV contracts without equity.
This guide is intended for B2B decision-makers in small and medium-sized businesses, the industrial sector, and the real estate industry who are evaluating whether photovoltaic contracting is a viable alternative to the traditional approach of investing in a PV system themselves. Three topics are at the forefront in 2026: the long-term reduction of electricity costs below the average industrial electricity price for small and medium-sized enterprises, the regulatory requirements under the Solar Peak Act, CBAM, and CSRD, and the accounting treatment under the German Commercial Code (HGB) and IFRS 16. This article explains the four dominant model variants, current market dynamics, the provider landscape, and typical contract clauses—in a concise manner and without a sales pitch.
What is photovoltaic contracting?
Photovoltaic contracting is an energy service model in which a contractor installs, finances, operates, and insures a solar power system on a company’s property. The customer purchases the electricity generated directly on-site through a long-term supply contract—rather than making the investment themselves. Contract terms typically range from 10 to 20 years.
In a photovoltaic contracting arrangement, the contractor plans, builds, operates, and maintains the photovoltaic system, while the building owner provides the space and benefits from low-cost solar power. This division of roles is at the heart of the model and structurally distinguishes it from the traditional self-investment model.
For beginners, the basics can be summarized in four points:
Full cost coverage by the contractor: The contractor fully finances and is responsible for the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the PV system. The customer bears no CAPEX.
No upfront investment for the building owner: Equity remains available for the core business, liquidity is preserved, and credit lines are not drawn upon.
Contract terms ranging from 10 to 20 years: A term of 20 years with an option to extend is standard—a period that largely covers the economic useful life of a PV system. In some cases, large industrial systems may have contract terms of up to 25 years.
Planning certainty through stable energy costs: The agreed-upon price per kWh can be factored into calculations for the entire term and—as is standard in the industry—is significantly lower than the grid purchase price. This reduces electricity costs over the long term while also shielding customers from electricity price fluctuations.
Photovoltaic contracting shifts the traditional investment question—“Should our business purchase a PV system?”—to a procurement question: “At what price and under what conditions will an external partner supply us with solar power directly from our own roof?” The contractor handles planning, installation, financing, maintenance, repairs, insurance, and commercial administration. The company provides the roof space or property and purchases the solar power generated over the term of the contract. Any power needed beyond that—known as “residual power”—is drawn from the grid as before.
In terms of content, the model overlaps significantly with the concept of a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA), but is not identical to it. In the strictest sense, a PPA refers to a bilateral electricity supply contract—the electricity can be supplied on-site (directly on-site behind the meter) or off-site (via the public power grid with net metering). Photovoltaic contracting—also known as PV contracting for short—additionally encompasses the full service layer (construction, operation, maintenance) and almost always takes place on-site. An on-site PPA is thus effectively a variant of energy supply contracting.
In the German market, the term “Solar Contracting Deutschland” has become established as a general term for situations where electricity is supplied directly at the point of consumption and the service provider offers more than just electricity supply. Those looking for a pure energy supply contract without responsibility for construction or operation tend to refer to an electricity supply contract or a traditional PPA. Those expecting a complete turnkey package—an all-inclusive, worry-free package covering installation, maintenance, and insurance—are looking for contracting.
The four model variants in the B2B market
Four contracting models dominate the B2B market: energy supply contracting (on-site PPA, where the contractor sells kWh at a fixed price), plant contracting (a lease model in which the customer becomes the legal operator of the plant), operations management contracting (maintenance only of a plant owned by the customer), and savings-based contracting (remuneration based on realized savings). In addition, there is the pure roof lease model for owners who do not have their own electricity needs.
The four model variants differ primarily in three areas: who owns the facility, who bears the financial risk, and how the contract is treated on the balance sheet. The choice of model depends on the company’s tax situation, the ownership-to-lease ratio for the property, and the company’s accounting objectives.
| Model | Property Investment | Economic Risk | Treatment under the German Commercial Code (HGB) | Typical Applications |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy Supply Contracting On-Site Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) |
Contractor | Contractor | Off-balance | Industry and logistics with high daily consumption |
| Facility Contracting Lease Model |
Contractor leases the property; the customer becomes the operator | Shared | Mostly On-Balance | Companies that want to maximize their self-generated electricity privilege and electricity tax exemption |
| Operational Management Contracting | Customer | Customer | Existing facility remains active | Companies with their own facilities that only want to outsource operations |
| Energy-Saving Contracting Performance Contracting |
Contractor | Contractor (based on savings) | Off-balance | Companies with High Efficiency Potential in the Energy Mix |
| Roof Lease | Contractor | Contractor | Off-Balance (for Owners) | Owners without their own electricity needs (logistics, multi-tenant) |
| Source: VfW – Association for Heat Supply; Logic Energy’s own analysis based on industry contract practices for 2026. | ||||
Energy supply contracting is the most common form among small and medium-sized enterprises. The contractor builds and operates the plant, and the company purchases the electricity generated at a contractually fixed price per kWh. This is the simplest arrangement from both an accounting and tax perspective, as it can be structured as a pure service contract.
Plant contracting (lease model) is the best option if the company wishes to take full advantage of the tax benefits for self-generated electricity and the electricity tax exemption under Section 9(1)(3) of the Electricity Tax Act (StromStG). The company becomes the legal operator of the plant—with all the associated obligations, including registration in the market master data registry, direct marketing of electricity in excess of the mandatory threshold, and ensuring operational safety.
Operational management contracting is a purely service-based model. The facility belongs to the company; the service provider is responsible only for maintenance, monitoring, insurance, and administrative tasks. This model is typically used by companies that have made their own investments in the past and do not wish to operate the facility themselves from a technical standpoint.
Energy-saving contracting originated in the field of energy efficiency consulting and, in the context of photovoltaics, is usually combined with energy efficiency measures (lighting, ventilation, heat pumps). The contractor’s compensation is tied to verifiable energy savings—a model that is more complex but offers strong incentive compatibility.
In addition, there is the pure rooftop lease model for owners without significant electricity needs of their own—typical for multi-tenant logistics properties or leased business parks. The owner leases only the rooftop space and receives a fixed lease payment, while the contractor uses the electricity for other purposes (direct sales, supply to third parties via the grid).
Market Dynamics 2026: Why On-Site Solar Is Growing While Large-Scale PPA Projects Are Shrinking
The German corporate PPA market for large-scale plants will have plummeted by 56 percent by 2025 (SolarPower Europe, March 2026), while onsite contracting in the commercial rooftop segment is growing. Three factors are driving this decoupling: 573 hours of negative grid prices in 2025, a 24.1 percent share of solar generation during those very hours, and the regulatory prioritization of self-consumption over full feed-in.
Market dynamics in 2026 are characterized by a sharp dichotomy that often goes unnoticed in many market reports. While the headline “German Solar PPA Market Collapses” is based solely on utility-scale off-site PPAs for ground-mounted systems over 5 MW, the commercial rooftop on-site segment is growing in exactly the opposite direction. The reason lies in the revenue structure: Anyone who enters into a fixed-price PPA for a large-scale plant assumes the risk that the plant will generate power during hours with negative market prices but will not generate any revenue. In 2025, there were 573 hours with negative market prices —and 24.1 percent of solar generation occurred during precisely those hours (dena PPA Market Analysis 2025, published May 4, 2026), compared to 14.6 percent in the previous year.
Onsite contracting structurally mitigates this risk. The electricity generated is first used for on-site consumption—that is, at a saved industrial electricity price of approximately 16 ct/kWh (BDEW, January 2026). Only the surplus is sold or fed into the grid. With a self-consumption rate of 60–85 percent—typical for small and medium-sized businesses and the logistics sector—the revenue base is largely protected against the risk of negative prices.
Added to this is the fact that, in 2025, solar power rose for the first time to become the second-largest source of electricity, ahead of lignite (BSW-Solar Annual Report, January 5, 2026), with new capacity additions of 16.5–17.5 GW and a cumulative capacity of approximately 119.55 GW (Federal Network Agency, January 2026). The market potential in the commercial rooftop segment remains largely untapped: German industrial and logistics rooftops with an area of more than 5,000 m² hold a theoretical potential of 36.6 GW (Garbe Industrial Real Estate, January 10, 2024)—less than ten percent of which has been equipped with PV systems to date.
For B2B decision-makers, the question is thus shifting from “Is PV generally worth it?” to “Which model most reliably maximizes self-consumption?”—and that is precisely what structurally favors onsite contracting in 2026. For businesses that want to permanently reduce their energy costs while making a tangible contribution to the energy transition, this opens up an economically viable option without tying up their own capital.
Profitability: Electricity Price Spread and Key Performance Indicators
On-site contracting electricity prices typically range from 8 to 14 ct/kWh net, which is significantly lower than the average industrial electricity price for small and medium-sized businesses of approximately 16.0 ct/kWh (BDEW, January 2026). The spread of 2–8 ct/kWh translates to annual savings of 12,000 to 20,000 euros for a 500-kWp logistics warehouse system with an annual yield of 950 kWh/kWp and a self-consumption rate of 65%—without any upfront investment.
The profitability of a contracting agreement depends on three key factors: the contractually fixed electricity price, the achievable self-consumption rate, and the contract term. Industry standards for onsite contracting prices for commercial rooftop systems ranging from 200 kWp to 1 MWp are between 8 and 14 ct/kWh net, depending on the system size, the customer’s creditworthiness, and the contract term. According to Fraunhofer ISE, the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for a rooftop photovoltaic system ranges from 6 to 14 ct/kWh—the difference between this and the contracting price represents the provider’s margin, which covers investment costs, financing, maintenance, insurance, and a risk premium. For the contractor, these are the revenues used to refinance the system business; for the customer, it is a predictable electricity price component that is lower than the grid purchase price. The expected yield per kWp varies depending on location, orientation, and shading—for photovoltaic systems in southern Germany, 950 to 1,050 kWh per kWp per year is a realistic range, while in northern Germany it tends to be 850 to 950.
| Position | Value | Note |
|---|---|---|
| System size | 500 kWp | Typical warehouse roof size in the logistics sector |
| Annual Electricity Production | ~475,000 kWh | 950 kWh/kWp in southern Germany |
| Self-consumption rate | 60–70% | Day Shift Logistics with Sorting/Refrigeration |
| Absolute self-consumption | ~285,000 kWh/year | Consumed immediately after the meter |
| Contracting Electricity Price (Example) | 10 ct/kWh | Industry range: 8–14 ct/kWh |
| Industrial Electricity Price Comparison | 16.0 ct/kWh | BDEW Electricity Price Analysis, January 2026 |
| Annual Savings Spread | ~17.000 € | 6 ct/kWh × 285,000 kWh of self-consumption |
| Impact on liquidity | ~500.000 € | Stay focused on the core business instead of CAPEX |
| CAPEX Expenditures for Companies | 0 € | Investment Supports Contractor |
| Sample Calculation: Logic Energy. Sources: BDEW Electricity Price Analysis, January 2026; Fraunhofer ISE, “Current Facts on Photovoltaics in Germany”; Logic Energy’s own presentation. Return figures are based on historical industry data and do not guarantee future results. Specific Logic Energy contract prices are calculated on a case-by-case basis. | ||
The sample calculation shows a conservative estimate of the spread. For a medium-sized industrial facility with a higher self-consumption rate of 75–85 percent and a system size of 1 MWp, the annual savings quickly range from 40,000 to 60,000 euros —over a 20-year lifespan, this results in cumulative electricity cost savings of between 800,000 and 1.2 million euros without any upfront investment. The real economic driver is not the selling price per kWh, but the fact that a portion of grid-purchased electricity is permanently replaced by predictable, low-cost solar power generated on the property’s own roof.
Important for the economic evaluation: Over the full contract term, contracting is generally more expensive than in-house investment when using a pure full-cost accounting approach, because the contractor’s margin is factored into the electricity price. The switch is worthwhile if the equity capital in the core business yields a higher return than the contractor’s margin factored into the price, or if special tax depreciation benefits (up to 55% in the year of acquisition under the 2025/26 Immediate Investment Program) cannot be fully utilized anyway.
Accounting Under the German Commercial Code (HGB) vs. IFRS 16 for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises and Corporate Groups
Under the German Commercial Code (HGB), genuine energy supply contracting agreements can generally be accounted for off-balance sheet—the asset and liability do not appear on the customer’s balance sheet. Under IFRS 16, however, every usage arrangement must generally be capitalized as a right-of-use asset as soon as the contract has the characteristics of a lease. Capital market-oriented corporations should therefore explicitly structure contracting agreements as service contracts to avoid capitalization.
The accounting treatment of photovoltaic contracting will be one of the most common blind spots in B2B decision-making in 2026. Medium-sized GmbHs prepare their financial statements in accordance with the German Commercial Code (HGB) and treat genuine energy supply contracts as pure service contracts: The system belongs to the contractor and does not appear on the customer’s balance sheet; the electricity bill is recognized as an operating expense on the income statement. This protects the balance sheet total, equity ratio, and debt ratios—an effect that, for credit-sensitive SMEs, can make the difference between a “green” and a “red” credit rating.
Under IFRS accounting, a significantly stricter rule has been in effect since the implementation of IFRS 16 (2019). The traditional operating lease as an off-balance-sheet instrument no longer exists. If a contract has the characteristics of a lease—that is, if it grants the customer the right to use an identifiable asset over the term of the contract—the lessee must capitalize a right-of-use asset and recognize a corresponding lease liability.
Three key criteria are decisive in determining whether a contracting agreement is classified as a lease or as a service:
Identification of the asset: Is the system specifically identified and cannot be replaced by the contractor during the term of the contract? A PV system permanently installed on the roof is clearly identifiable.
Control: Who makes the operational decisions regarding the plant’s use? If the contractor retains significant control rights (direct marketing, maintenance planning, generation strategy), this argues against leasing.
Substantial substitution rights: Does the contractor have the right to replace the equipment with a comparable unit without the customer’s consent?
In practice, auditors make decisions on a case-by-case basis, and the classification depends heavily on the specific terms of the contract. Plant contracting (lease model) is almost always classified as a lease because the customer becomes the legal operator. Energy supply contracting (on-site PPA), on the other hand, has a good chance of being classified as a service contract—provided that the contractor retains substantial control over the facility and the contract is clearly worded as an electricity supply agreement, not as a transfer of the facility.
Medium-sized GmbHs that are not required to follow IFRS have greater flexibility. Companies that are consolidated into a capital-market-oriented group or plan to bring on an investor with IFRS requirements in the medium term should coordinate their accounting classifications with their auditors and tax advisors early on—ideally before signing a contract, because making changes afterward is time-consuming.
Regulatory Drivers for 2026: Solar Peak Act, CBAM, CSRD
Three regulatory packages will drive the shift toward onsite contracting in 2026: The Solar Peak Act (February 2025) eliminates EEG feed-in tariffs during hours of negative market prices; CBAM will be fully implemented as of January 1, 2026; and CSRD expands reporting requirements to approximately 15,000 German companies. All three packages turn locally generated, documented self-generated electricity into a measurable competitive advantage.
The Solar Peak Act (effective February 25, 2025) has structurally altered the economic logic of PV investment. New systems will no longer receive EEG feed-in tariffs during hours when market prices are negative; the subsidy period will ultimately be extended by the number of hours lost. For commercial systems over 25 kWp, this already applies on a quarter-hourly basis—direct marketers adjust system output in real time when prices turn negative. The result: self-consumption has become significantly more advantageous compared to full feed-in. Those who generate electricity on their own roofs and consume it directly are structurally decoupled from the risk of negative prices.
The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) will take effect on January 1, 2026, during its full implementation phase. Starting in February 2027, importers of iron and steel, aluminum, cement, electricity, fertilizers, and hydrogen must purchase allowances for their 2026 imports, the price of which is linked to the EU ETS (currently around 70–90 €/t CO₂). For German processors of these materials, the documented CO₂ footprint of their own production will become a key factor in procurement and pricing. Suppliers to steel, aluminum, or chemical processors who can document green electricity with a guarantee of origin and local production will gain a measurable advantage over imported goods subject to the CBAM. The expansion of the CBAM’s scope to include additional product groups is planned for 2028.
The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) has expanded the pool of companies subject to reporting requirements in Germany from 500 to approximately 15,000. Thousands of additional small and medium-sized enterprises are indirectly affected through their customers’ supplier reporting requirements. The key metric is the Scope 2 reduction—that is, the reduction of indirect emissions from purchased electricity. Self-consumed solar power with a clear certificate of origin is the simplest and most verifiable measure here, because the emissions reduction is documented directly at the point of consumption. A 500-kWp rooftop system saves approximately 200 metric tons of CO₂ per year—based on the German electricity mix of about 0.4 metric tons of CO₂ per MWh (as of 2025).
Together, these three regulatory packages are shifting the strategic value of self-consumption. What was primarily a business optimization measure just a few years ago will become, by 2026, a quantifiable ESG asset with implications for creditworthiness, supplier ratings, and competitive positioning. For many companies, self-consumption of solar power is thus also the most concrete lever available on the path to achieving their own climate neutrality. The upcoming CfD requirement, set to take effect in 2027, also points in the same direction: New systems that feed all their electricity into the grid will be transitioned to a different revenue model, while on-site models will retain their existing grandfathering provisions.
Contract Clauses and Common Pitfalls
Eight contract clauses determine the financial outcome of a contracting agreement: price adjustments, minimum purchase requirements, revenue variance risk, residual value and buyout options, insurance, insolvency protection, the contractor’s creditworthiness, and roof renovation provisions. If these points are not clarified before the contract is signed, they cannot be renegotiated later.
A photovoltaic contracting agreement typically binds both parties for ten to twenty years. It is therefore crucial to carefully review the terms before signing. The list below summarizes the eight most common points of dispute that can prove costly down the line if they are left unaddressed in the contract or are worded in favor of the provider.
Price Adjustment Clause: Fixed price for the entire term; indexation to the consumer price index, wholesale price, or an industry-standard index; or a tiered escalation clause. A fixed price offers maximum certainty in cost calculations but precludes windfall gains when electricity prices rise.
Minimum Purchase / Take-or-Pay: Some contracts specify minimum annual purchase volumes. In the event of a relocation of production, a shutdown, or a change in ownership, this can prove costly because the customer is required to purchase electricity that it cannot consume.
Risk of Yield Shortfall: Who bears the risk of yield shortfalls due to weather, shading, or technical defects? Typically, the contractor—but the exact definition determines when yield shortfalls are considered “force majeure” and the customer is still required to pay.
Residual Value and Takeover Options: At the end of the contract term, there are typically three options: taking over the facility at a defined residual value (often a symbolic 1 euro or 10–20 percent of the remaining investment), extending the contract for five years, or having the contractor dismantle the facility at no cost. Which option is specified in the contract has a significant economic impact.
Insurance and Liability: Operator liability insurance, all-risk insurance, loss of earnings insurance—typically covered by the contractor, but the exact coverage amounts and deductibles should be reviewed.
Insolvency Protection: What happens if the contractor becomes insolvent? Transfer of ownership of the plant as security, registered land charge, third-party subrogation rights—the market insolvencies of Eigensonne and DZ-4 in 2024/2025 show that this is not just a theoretical risk.
Contractor’s Creditworthiness: Anyone who enters into a 20-year contract is bound by the contractor’s creditworthiness. Affiliation with a corporate group, equity capital, and legal form (a GmbH with 25,000 euros in share capital vs. a registered sole proprietor with personal liability) are not equivalent indicators.
Roof Renovation Provision: If the roof needs to be renovated during the contract term, who bears the costs for dismantling, temporary storage, and reassembly of the system? Without a clear provision in the contract, the risk lies with the owner. If renovation is foreseeable, it is worth negotiating to include roof renovation as part of the contracting package—some providers will renovate the roof in exchange for a longer lease term.
A complete checklist of contract clauses is available through the Logic Energy contact form.
The Provider Landscape in Germany in 2026
The German market for commercial photovoltaic contracting is fragmented. Large corporations such as EnBW, BayWa r.e., and ENGIE primarily serve the large-scale segment starting at 1 MWp, while specialized mid-sized providers such as Enpal Business Solutions, MaxSolar/Energy Partners, and Logic Energy focus on projects ranging from approximately 100–135 kWp. Minimum project size, service level, and creditworthiness are the three most important selection criteria.
The provider landscape in the German solar contracting market is broadly divided into three segments: corporate providers focused on large-scale systems, mid-sized specialists, and regional municipal utilities/cooperatives. Which provider is best suited for a specific project depends primarily on the size of the system—most contractors have strict minimum size requirements below which they will not provide a quote.
| Provider | Minimum size | Focus | Characteristics |
|---|---|---|---|
| EnBW | 1,000 kWp and up | Industrial Contracting, PPA | Group creditworthiness, 200+ projects completed |
| Enpal Business Solutions | 100 kWp and up | Complete Solution: PV + Storage + Wallbox | B2B Market Entry 04/2024, Scaling Player |
| MaxSolar / Energy Partners | 135 kWp and up / 1,500 m² and up | On-site/Off-site PPAs, Energy-as-a-Service | AI-EMS, Storage Co-location |
| Mainova | 600 m² and up / 150,000 kWh/a | On-site PPA Full Service | Frankfurt/Rhine-Main Region |
| BayWa r.e. | MW range | On-site PPA, VPPA, Leasing | Global player, >850 MW in PPA volume |
| ENGIE Germany | 50,000–100,000 kWh/year supply volume | On-site PPA | Experience in international corporate groups |
| LichtBlick, Polarstern, Naturstrom, Vattenfall | depending on the project | Contracting + Direct Delivery | Established consumer brands with a B2B division |
| Logic Energy | starting at approximately 100 kWp | A complete solution, all from a single source | Personal liability of the owner of mediplan Helm e.K., roof bridging system for non-load-bearing roofs |
| EWS Schönau | depending on the project | Cooperative PPAs | Regional Energy Solutions, First PPA in 2020 |
| Sources: Provider websites, Solarserver (April 29, 2024, regarding Enpal Business Solutions), pv magazine, BSW-Solar Industry Communications 2026. As of May 2026. | |||
The selection criteria can be boiled down to three key questions. First: Does the planned project meet the provider’s minimum size requirement? Anyone planning a 150-kWp system won’t even be considered by EnBW—but they also won’t have to pay a corporation that factors in overhead costs for significantly larger projects. Second: What is the contractor’s creditworthiness, and what safeguards are built into the contract? The bankruptcies of Eigensonne (2024) and the discontinuation of DZ-4 service operations at the end of 2024 serve as reminders that affiliation with a corporate group or sufficient capitalization are not optional. Third: What scope of service is included? Some providers supply only the electricity and outsource maintenance, insurance, and administrative processing to subcontractors—others offer the full “one-stop shop” package.
Suitability Check: When Is Contracting a Good Fit for Your Business?
Photovoltaic contracting is typically suitable for businesses with a roof area of 600–1,500 m² or more, annual electricity consumption of at least 100,000–150,000 kWh, high daily consumption between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m., sufficient creditworthiness for a 10- to 20-year contract, and a roof with a remaining service life of at least 15 years. For rental properties, the owner’s written consent is required.
The suitability of a contracting model can be assessed using a simple list of six criteria. If at least four of these criteria are met, a contracting model makes structural sense—the ultimate economic viability then depends on the contract offer and how the system is specifically tailored to the operation’s needs.
Equity is used more profitably in the core business (return on equity of over about 10 percent)—every euro of investment capital tied up would have alternative uses offering a better return, and the available funds remain where they generate an operating return.
Balance sheet ratios are critical for creditworthiness —the equity ratio, debt-to-equity ratio, and total assets must not be negatively impacted by CAPEX, because the next loan review is coming up.
The maintenance and operation of a technical facility fall outside the company’s core business —the company does not intend to develop its own expertise in energy technology and explicitly intends to continue relying on external providers.
A lease agreement rather than ownership of the property —the contract is tied to the property, not to the tenant; if the tenant moves out, the contract can be continued with the new tenant, provided the owner agrees.
Special tax depreciation cannot be fully utilized —in cases of a low tax burden, carryforward losses, nonprofit status, or a tax-optimized holding structure, the self-investment leverage does not have a sufficient effect.
Rapid CO₂ reduction without project complexity is a priority —ESG or CBAM compliance has a clear deadline, and implementing it in-house would take too long.
Conversely, self-financing is typically the better option when the special tax depreciation of up to 55 percent in the first year (2025/26 Immediate Investment Program) can be fully utilized, the investment deduction under Section 7g of the Income Tax Act (EStG) applies, there is a long-term commitment to the property, and the goal is to maximize self-generated income. For more details on the tax incentives, see the accompanying guide on photovoltaic taxes and the IAB guide.
Photovoltaic Contracting with Logic Energy
Logic Energy designs and builds photovoltaic contracting solutions starting at approximately 100 kWp throughout Germany. Three key differentiators define the company’s offering: the personal liability of the owners of mediplan Helm e.K. as the contracting partner under Sections 1, 17, and 19 of the German Commercial Code (HGB); the in-house developed roof bridging system for non-load-bearing industrial roofs; and end-to-end project management—from site analysis to operations management—all under one roof.
Logic Energy is a Bavarian full-service provider for commercial photovoltaics—with two clearly defined target groups: companies that want to generate solar power on-site, and investors looking to invest in PV systems. For the first target group, Logic Energy offers turnkey contracting solutions for systems starting at around 100 kWp—regardless of whether the space is available on an industrial roof, a warehouse, a carport, or as an open-air site.
Three structural features distinguish this offering from those of corporate and large-scale providers. First, the legal form of the contracting party: Contracts are entered into with mediplan Helm e.K., a registered merchant with unlimited personal liability of the owner pursuant to Sections 1, 17, and 19 of the German Commercial Code (HGB). While most competitors operate as a GmbH or GmbH & Co. KG with a share capital of 25,000 euros, here the owner is personally liable for the fulfillment of the contract with his or her private assets. In the 20-year context of a contracting agreement, this is a significant indicator of financial reliability—both for tenants with the right to use the roof and for building owners who wish to lease out their space or use it themselves.
Second, the in-house developed roof bridging system for industrial roofs that have only localized load-bearing capacity. Many industrial building roofs cannot support loads across their entire surface—only the areas above the supports can bear loads, while the spaces in between cannot. Other providers typically reject such roofs. Logic Energy has developed a trapezoidal profile system that rests on the load-bearing supports and bridges the spaces in between—making the entire roof usable.
Third, the “one-stop shop” principle: active site acquisition, structural engineering reports, permitting procedures, financing, installation, commissioning, and long-term operations management are all the responsibility of the Helm Group. The division of responsibilities is clearly defined: mediplan Helm e.K. handles site selection and investment; Logic Energy GmbH manages construction and engineering; and the Helm Group handles operations and maintenance. The customer has a single point of contact throughout the entire contract term—no revolving door of subcontractors, no coordination issues—a comprehensive, worry-free package from the site assessment to the monthly electricity bill.
The specific contract structure, fixed prices, term options, and the process from the initial inquiry to commissioning are detailed in the PV Contracting Guide for Projects Without Equity.
In 2026, photovoltaic contracting will be the most pragmatic model for German SMEs and industrial companies to utilize solar power without tying up CAPEX. Market dynamics confirm the strategic logic: While large-scale PPA projects are affected by the risk of negative prices, on-site contracting secures the self-consumption leverage. The regulatory landscape—the Solar Peak Act, CBAM, and CSRD—makes locally generated self-consumed electricity a documentable competitive asset. Under the German Commercial Code (HGB), accounting principles generally allow SME GmbHs to treat this off-balance-sheet; capital-market-oriented corporations, however, must carefully structure the contract classification in accordance with IFRS 16. Choosing the right model and provider will determine the company’s creditworthiness, balance sheet, and revenue structure for the next two decades. A thorough review of contract clauses before signing is not optional—it is mandatory. Those who consistently follow this path will turn the sun shining on their own roof into a measurable, predictable contribution to the company’s energy and financial strategy.
Learn more about Logic Energy’s photovoltaic investment opportunity → – if you’d like to invest in a PV system as an investor rather than as a customer.
This article is intended solely for general informational purposes and does not constitute investment, tax, or legal advice. Return figures are based on historical data and are not a guarantee of future results. The accounting and tax treatment of contracting agreements must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by a tax advisor and auditor. The contracting party for photovoltaic contracting agreements with Logic Energy is mediplan Helm e.K. (a registered business entity with personal liability of the owner pursuant to Sections 1, 17, and 19 of the German Commercial Code (HGB)). As of May 2026.
Ready to start your own contracting project?
When evaluating whether a photovoltaic contracting model is economically viable for your location, a reliable assessment begins with three key data points: roof area, annual electricity consumption (ideally as a 15-minute load profile), and the condition of the roof. Logic Energy analyzes your site data free of charge and provides an initial feasibility assessment—including an active area analysis, a firm financing commitment before construction begins, and end-to-end project management from the initial site inspection through commissioning. The contracting partner is mediplan Helm e.K., with personal liability on the part of the owner—a structural indicator of creditworthiness within the 20-year context of a contracting agreement.
Request a non-binding quote → View the PV contracting offer →
FAQ
-
A Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) is, in the strictest sense, a purely bilateral electricity supply contract—the supply can take place onsite (directly at the point of consumption) or offsite (via the public grid with net metering). Photovoltaic contracting additionally encompasses the full service package of construction, operation, maintenance, and insurance, and almost always takes place onsite. An on-site PPA is thus a type of energy supply contracting.
-
Under the German Commercial Code (HGB), true energy supply contracting arrangements are generally treated as service contracts and remain off-balance sheet—the facility does not appear on the customer’s balance sheet, and the electricity bill is recognized as an operating expense on the income statement. Under IFRS 16, however, any arrangement with leasing characteristics must be capitalized as a right-of-use asset. The specific classification depends on the terms of the contract—specifically, whether the contractor retains substantial control over the asset. The auditor must assess the specific applicability of these rules.
-
Contract terms typically range from 10 to 20 years in the industry, with a clear trend toward 20 years for larger systems of 200 kWp or more. The contract term correlates with the agreed-upon electricity price: Longer terms allow the contractor to offer lower prices per kWh because the system financing is amortized over more years. Options to extend the contract by 5 years and to purchase the system at its residual value are common.
-
For businesses with approximately 600 m² or more of suitable roof space, annual electricity consumption of at least 100,000 kWh, and high daily consumption between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m., energy contracting is structurally viable. The industry range of 8–14 ct/kWh net is below the average industrial electricity price for small and medium-sized enterprises of around 16 ct/kWh (BDEW, January 2026). Individual cost-effectiveness depends on the specific load profile, the achievable self-consumption rate, and the contract terms.
-
The Solar Peak Act (effective February 25, 2025) eliminates EEG feed-in tariffs for new installations during hours when the market price is negative. Since there were approximately 573 hours of negative prices in 2025 and 24.1 percent of solar generation occurred during precisely those hours (dena PPA Market Analysis 2025), self-consumption becomes significantly more advantageous than full feed-in. Onsite contracting benefits structurally because the electricity generated first goes toward self-consumption behind the meter and is decoupled from the risk of negative prices.
-
Three mechanisms can be incorporated into the contract: transfer of ownership of the plant as security (the buyer acquires ownership in the event of insolvency), a registered land charge on the plant’s property, and third-party subrogation rights (a new contractor can continue the contract). The market insolvencies of Eigensonne (2024) and the discontinuation of DZ-4 service operations at the end of 2024 demonstrate the relevance of these clauses. Affiliation with a corporate group or personal liability of the provider are additional indicators of creditworthiness.
-
Three options are typically included in the contract: taking over the system at its residual value (often a symbolic 1 euro or 10–20 percent of the remaining investment), extending the contract for 5 years under adjusted terms, or having the contractor dismantle the system at no cost. Which option is agreed upon has a significant economic impact—modern PV systems have a technical remaining service life of 10–15 years beyond the contract term.
References
BDEW Electricity Price Analysis for October 2025 and January 2026 — Industrial electricity prices for small and medium-sized businesses: 17.8 ct/kWh (10/2025) and 16.0 ct/kWh (01/2026)
BSW-Solar 2025 Annual Report — Solar Becomes Second-Largest Source of Electricity for the First Time, Ahead of Lignite; 17.5 GW of New Capacity, 117 GW Cumulative
Federal Network Agency Market Master Data Register — 119.55 GW cumulative PV capacity as of the end of January 2026
Fraunhofer ISE “Current Facts on Photovoltaics in Germany” — Levelized Cost of Electricity for Rooftop Systems: 6–14 ct/kWh, as of January 15, 2026
dena PPA Market Analysis Germany 2025 — 1.3 GW PPA market, 610 MW solar PPAs, 24.1% of solar generation during hours with negative prices; published May 4, 2026
SolarPower Europe “Auctions and Corporate PPAs – Market Review 2025” — 56% decline in solar corporate PPA volume in Germany; published March 11, 2026
CHP Information Center: Negative Price Statistics for 2025 — 573 hours of negative market prices in 2025
Garbe Industrial Real Estate / pv magazine — 36.6 GW of theoretical PV potential on 362.8 million m² of industrial and logistics rooftops; January 10, 2024
node.energy Electricity Price PPA Analysis — On-site PPA Negotiation Range: 7.55–10.8 ct/kWh; June 4, 2025
Federal Law Gazette 2025 I No. 51 — Solar Peak Act, effective February 25, 2025
Federal Ministry of Finance — 2025 Budget Act, Reduction of the Electricity Tax to 0.50 €/MWh for the Manufacturing Sector Effective January 1, 2026
EU Commission CBAM — Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism: Full Implementation Phase Beginning January 1, 2026
European Commission CSRD — Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, expanded to cover approximately 15,000 German companies
Helm Group — Portfolio Data and Practical Experience with Contracting Projects 2024
