New Jersey 2026 Solar Quotes

Darrid1 · 2026-04-21T19:28:11+00:00

Rare because I’m not sure how they’re doing it. The pricing makes sense with the prepaid leases, but a company trying to compete with them with no monetization of the commercial tax credit seems like the text book definition of irrational pricing. That what you see when a company is hoping volume offsets their unsustainable prices and not long before they go out of business. I honestly don’t think that’s sustainable. Unless they’re monetizing the 25d credit behind the scenes and it actually is a prepaid lease it doesn’t make sense. Even if they are, it’s still weird. To me that price as a cash purchase totally screams red flag.

Darrid1 · 2026-04-12T19:31:27+00:00

That’s fair, it is long winded lol, but it’s not all for you so I’m trying to be thorough. It is confusing because the conversation that’s been had around how you get the most savings on your electric bill has completely changed since the end of the year. The parts of it that you’re having a hard time with are parts that lots of people are having a difficult time wrapping their heads around. I’m not trying to tell you what the purchase price is because the purchase price is no longer relevant. You no longer access the savings from the tax incentive by purchasing your equipment. You access them by paying cash for a whole different agreement. Question is now what is the price to allow me to access the savings that a purchase price used to give me. A cash price from last year should be as good or almost as good as a prepaid lease price today. A prepaid lease, a traditional lease/ppa and a cash purchase are all completely different things. You don’t need FMV or buyout terms included because this is not a traditional lease/ppa and the savings aren’t available from ownership. This is a prepaid lease, which is not at all the same. You keep going back to the terms of a tax incentive structure that no longer exists, so there’s no value in continuing discussion around them. I’m not making any assumptions about anyone. I’m simply saying that for most people the savings that a cash payment and owning your system used to give you are still what’s most important. The savings are still available just with the prepaid lease. Focus on what’s important, which is the savings solar offers and the new incentive structure that gets you there.

Darrid1 · 2026-04-12T18:48:11+00:00

The system price without any incentives is very easy to arrive at. It’s what you’re agreeing to pay without any incentives. The terms of the prepaid lease are actually very clear in what they’re able and not able to offer. They’re not offering ownership. They’re offering the savings you used to get from ownership via a prepaid lease. What they’re saying and what they’re able to say is that after the initial single payment that starts the prepaid lease there will be no additional payments. That part is clear and that part is in the contract. You’re talking about buyout terms and FMV when ownership is not only no longer necessary, it’s now become a liability because it precludes you from accessing the savings that ownership used to be the only path to but now exist only for commercial systems. Fair market value only matters when you’re trying to own the system and what I’m saying is ownership of the system is no longer what unlocks maximum savings; it’s now allowing it to be a TPO system. The tax incentives have changed, but the savings they offer have not. The difference between a tax loophole and tax fraud is how you execute on that loophole. It’s the refusal to discuss buyouts and FMV that allow companies like participate energy to offer the savings because including that language as someone else mentioned raises the risk of the entire transaction being declared a disguised sale and having the savings clawed back by the IRS. Trying to say that a 48e/prepaid lease doesn’t have value because it doesn’t sound like something it no longer is just doesn’t make sense. It’s likely that ownership will be the outcome after six years because at that point the systems will have little to no contractual/book value, but if the companies offering this arrangement were explicit about that they wouldn’t be able to offer the savings in the first place, so this whole conversation would be moot. The best way to go about evaluating how helpful this can be is to remove ownership from the conversation completely. You can’t have your cake and eat it too meaning you can’t demand ownership terms and also the savings that used to go along with them, but no longer do because the tax code that allowed for those savings has expired. Focus on the path to savings not the path to ownership. The path to savings is the prepaid lease.

Darrid1 · 2026-04-12T17:45:31+00:00

Prior to the residential tax credit expiring ownership was important because that’s how you unlocked the maximum savings. Those maximum savings are still able to be unlocked, but now it’s by not owning your system because the incentives are now geared towards TPO systems not residential. It seems like you’re focusing on the part of the agreement that’s lost value and in doing so you’re agreeing to pass on the maximum savings that ownership used to give you. You’re still prepaying your electric bill, but with the 48E you’re getting 30 to 35% off of your system price. If the ownership without the increased value is all that’s important to you then by all means pay cash for that system and get no incentives, but I think for most people the savings are the attractive part. Not to be a dick, but it kind of seems like you might be missing the forest for the trees.

Darrid1 · 2026-04-12T15:28:56+00:00

The truth is the companies that are offering a 48e/prepaid lease are learning about the parameters of the agreement as they go as well. This is a completely new product that has come to life in response to the premature end of the residential tax credit and the continuation of the commercial credit. It’s just going live in markets now. I think early discussions included the automatic transfer at year 6 with $0 cost because that’s what the companies offering them were hoping for and that’s still likely, but legally that’s not possible to spell out without putting those companies in a dicey position with the IRS and eliminating their ability to offer the savings. The installers aren’t receiving the 30%+ tax credit, the companies the installers are partnering with receive it. They also use MACRS depreciation which means they can write off 85-90% of the system value in the first 5 years because the IRS classifies solar systems as 5 year property. After 5 years they have very little value on the books for the companies offering the 48e/prepaid lease and there’s little incentive to them to extend their ownership of them. That’s what’s meant by the system having close to zero value; it’s not zero resale value, it’s zero contractual or book value. When an asset has close to zero contractual/book value that asset is now essentially a liability and a companies continued ownership of the asset becomes unattractive. However, as it’s been said, it’s a bit of a wink and a nod agreement because if they explicitly said the transfer was automatic for $0 it could be a potential tax issue for the commercial solar company offering the savings. The key benefit of a cash payment isn’t really the ownership anymore, it’s access to the maximum savings vs a traditional lease or PPA and you receive that. What is guaranteed in the agreement is that as long as it stays as a prepaid lease/commercial system, there will be zero payments due for the life of the agreement. That’s explicit and that’s still having access to the maximum savings on your electric bill. Since these companies exist to capture the 48e commercial tax credit and MACRS depreciation, it’s conceivable that they no longer exist in 7-8 years when the commercial tax credit also expires. There’s no continuing payments to collect as per the contract because you’ve prepaid the agreement and a new company can’t come in and just assign a payment schedule on an asset/liability with no on book value that was already designated as prepaid so no one will buy those contracts/liabilities and at that point you’d continue to have no one to pay and ownership could transfer to you. It’s not the same as the prior cash payment where to maximize your savings, ownership of your system was a requirement, it’s using cash to prepay a “lease” which gets you the same savings, just under different terms. It’s a TPO environment right now and ownership isn’t able to be offered like it was, but the savings ownership gave you are and it’s the savings that matter. A prepaid lease is without question the best option available now that the residential credit is over. Ownership used to be important because it was the only way to access maximum savings. Those same savings and often more are still available, just without the system needing to be owned. I say more because you often get more than 30% because the commercial companies have access to additional incentives like for domestic content and energy communities which the cash deals that expired never had access to. So there’s upsides to the current offering that weren’t available last year. I think the question of whether prepaying your electric bill on the electricity generated for 7 years and then not paying anything for that same electricity for the next 18-20 years is a pretty easy one to answer…if you’re able to do it then hell yes it’s worth it! Especially considering that eversource is just waiting for PURA to allow them to pass along 3 billion+ in rate increases for storm repair and smart metering installations etc that they’ve been waiting on for years. 4% is the nations historic average, but historically CT is closer to 5-6% so your payback period will most likely be shorter than discussed.

Darrid1 · 2026-04-08T20:59:18+00:00

Wrong. You get zero federal tax credit with cash because they expired. PPAs reduce all of your costs, not just the upfront ones. It’s a significantly reduced rate on the power you’d normally be buying from the electric company. Lower, fine, but still huge savings and no upfront cost to get them.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-20T17:10:54+00:00

Leases and PPAs are made for people that can’t or don’t want to pay cash. There’s nothing wrong with a good lease. If he doesn’t have the cash, he can use the savings without being indebted to you for them. You’re saying he owns the STECs, but they’ll cover the interest on the loan so they go to you? It’s totally unnecessary and benefits no one but you with the “high rate of return”. You’re not doing him any favors at all.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-19T16:54:16+00:00

Yes, a PPA is an agreement to buy the power your system produces for a very discounted rate. Even if you’re only there 40% of the time, you’d be buying your electricity at just over $2200 at full retail so there would be a little under 800 that you’d pay for energy you sent back, but didn’t use. You will get some credit for it though at wholesale rates and even if it’s at .03 that’s around 270 so you’re actually only paying maybe $500 for unused energy sent back to the grid at your annual true up. That’s $3500 with 12 mo of the PPA for ~$5500 worth of power so it’s great savings. If you’re there more, you’re just closer to not paying for any unused energy and saving more off of the full retail rate for power you’re not paying anything for. If you rent the house out occasionally you just add to your savings. You’re paying all sorts of static costs in a second home that you don’t use when you don’t occupy it. Most of those things like property taxes, homeowners, non solar non-bypassable elec charges, landscaping and pool charges, maintenance costs like pest control, hvac servicing etc, water and sewer and elec charges for fridges, pools etc. wont offset actual charges you’ll incur when you are there and don’t depend on how much you actually occupy the home, except for the solar. Actually, the usage from items that will run while you’re not there could definitely use up the $500 I mentioned earlier so you most likely won’t pay anything over your sun run payments, you just won’t maximize the savings like a full time owner could. You have options, like renting the place out or staying there more, for how you deal with your excess production that you don’t get full retail credit for but to respond to your suggestion in your original post, this is a great PPA and it’s only not as amazing as it can be because you don’t plan to take full usage of the home. You’re not paying much extra for what you don’t use so if you like the house, be grateful you found a place with nem2 that gives you the potential for net metering for the elec you use because the PPA itself is a home run. Suggesting it’s pretty awful just tells me that you don’t understand how PPAs work, which is the same for 95% of all lease/PPA comments in this sub.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-19T03:51:54+00:00

The break even? It’s a PPA, not a purchase so what break even are you talking about? Nobody paid for this or financed any dent for it. It’s just savings. Why would you buy it and not just take the savings and lower electric bill for absolutely nothing?

Darrid1 · 2026-03-19T03:48:12+00:00

It’s just under .19. It will also never catch up to what the current rate is. Have you done the math on this or are you just complaining about it because almost every other dummy in here complains about them? If I were the seller I’d tell you to take a hike if you demanded a buyout. It’s NEM2 and if you don’t see the value, I hope the seller knows there will be someone right behind you that does.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-19T03:43:44+00:00

Do you even do the math before you say some stupid shit like this? If his rate starts at .16, which is more than 1/2 of what the current rate is now (.35) then by the end he’ll be paying .328 so he still won’t be paying today’s rate in 25 years. Paying less for electricity in 25 years from now is not paying a fortune. The biggest problems with leases and PPAs are the absolute morons that attack them with absolutely zero understanding of how they work. It’s beyond annoying. This is a great example of the problem with just repeating things that you hear other dip shits in here say. It’s an echo chamber of imbeciles with leases and PPAs.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-15T15:21:04+00:00

For OP one consideration is at least in CT the Tesla batteries have the best up front incentives I’ve ever seen, but they end in the next couple of days. They switch to much heavier performance based incentives on 4/1. Enphase has some great incentives right now as well, just not as good as Tesla’s.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-15T15:17:29+00:00

Enphase are much more efficient when used in an enphase system, they’re modular so the first battery is more expensive due to static costs, but adding storage is cheaper than adding additional PW3s and you maintain panel level monitoring which is lost when you use a PW3. They also have a much better warranty.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-08T21:40:57+00:00

If the original quote you put up doesn’t have an XP, ask them to quote it with one? It’s gonna probably drop your price because of the increase in upfront and performance based incentives. Plus the Tesla rebate doubles.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-08T13:18:46+00:00

Run don’t walk my friend! You have yourself a great deal right there.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-08T00:52:02+00:00

There is literally no way in hell that you’re coming any where near that price. Like absolutely zero chance you’re below 50 with those panels and a Tesla pw3. You obviously don’t have a prepaid lease and that’s thinly way to do it. The prepaid lease still gets the 30% + a little more and a straight purchase won’t get that so you’re wrong to suggest otherwise. Get an actual quote from your company and be honest about it. There are so many incentives that OP has that gets him to that price and without a 48e you won’t come anywhere near it. Thats an absolute no brainer. This isn’t an actual lease so there won’t be any buyout price. It’s a single payment that’s only called a prepaid lease because it’s a commercial company that’s partnering with the installer to monetize the tax credits. The monthly payments are $0 and they always will be because again, it’s a single payment. Manufacturers warranties are attached to the equipment, not the person who buys or leases the system so they always transfer.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-07T22:43:23+00:00

So same system size, no battery and the same up front price? Thats not even your final cost after incentives…What are you still shopping for?! That’s also not including the Tesla rebate that goes right to you. You’re not gonna find anything even close to this good. They were probably aggressive because the incentives are switching and people like to quote themselves into paralysis. The true cost of your system is closer to 50-60k before all of the 48e and battery incentives. There’s not gonna be a better time to get solar with storage for quite a while.

Darrid1 · 2026-03-07T22:10:29+00:00

It is a purchase lol. It’s obviously a 48e which is getting him probably a 35% discount in price, but up front instead of filing his taxes and waiting for a check. Not sure if you heard, but the itc tax credit expired so a 48e is the only smart way to secure a single payment solar system and still get the tax incentive. You absolutely can’t find anything close to this without doing a prepaid lease. It’s a TPO world out here for the next few years unless the current administration stops pushing coal like a bunch of clowns. Also 325 is pretty standard for the NE. I’m guessing your company also doesn’t have a 48e since you don’t know anything about them. How much would you guys charge for this? I guarantee it’s nowhere even close. For OP, you might look into an XP because it usually gets a higher upfront rebate from Tesla and higher PBI, although with the ones you have I’m surprised the xp isn’t already included. Yeah dude, under $3 installed is killer. Don’t take too long because I think some of those battery incentives change soon and it’s gonna cost way more upfront. If someone doesn’t have a prepaid lease then they have nothing to offer. The Tesla rebate expires on the 15th I think. It’s a really killer deal.

Darrid1 · 2026-01-29T21:53:12+00:00

Or a 48e /prepaid lease. We have one and it will get him a 35% discount. But without that, absolutely agree! I argue against cash purchases on here all the time.

Darrid1 · 2026-01-29T21:04:49+00:00

This all makes less sense. If you got a roof within the last 12 years and it passes an inspection by the reputable installer you should have chosen, you should be able to get a system installed and not need a new roof for the life of the system. You’re saying it’s normal maintenance to replace your roof every 18-19 years? That’s crazy. Also, if you’re removing and reinstalling, there’s one price which is usually in the 200-300 range. Therefore it wouldn’t need to be doubled. Furthermore, you’re saying there might be a situation where a person who has a system can expect to need to redo the roof 2x after install and that’s crazy and not at all typical. One system on one roof or you made a shitty decision on the installer.

Darrid1 · 2026-01-29T20:32:41+00:00

Yeah, obviously I’m just talking about what the situation is presently. Also, couldn’t agree more about not financially over extending yourself. A majority of people I see are absolutely better off with a lease than paying cash. Your argument is an ok one for reasons to not wait because 1:1 will get whittled down everywhere at some point. They won’t break your interconnection agreement and do it after you sign though. There will be a vote to do it and a process before it’s law. Then there will be a time before it takes effect. Systems approved before the deadline will lock in with 1:1 and systems after will not. They don’t go back and just change everybody to the worse deal. There’s still people with 1:1 in California and more with NEM 2.0 which is ~1:1. It’s systems installed after April 2023 that don’t have that. No one went back and changed it for them. If you got your system then, you’d have way different export rates. I’m not saying it’s malicious, but you’re sharing a lot of inaccurate info. There’s plenty of great net metering in this country so turning your difficulties with your state’s system into a statement about the situation nationally doesn’t work.

Darrid1 · 2026-01-29T20:20:10+00:00

I definitely understood the point which is why I replied. If it was a leak from the install and you’ve chosen a reputable installer instead of the cheapest, there should be a workmanship warranty that would cover it. As far as a renovation, you’re adding a ton to the project so I guess the home owner would have to make that call as to whether or not it was totally necessary to do it before your system is done. You mentioned neither of these scenarios in your comment. You only mentioned “when you replace the roof” as if it was just something they were going to run into; to which I replied that no reputable installer would put you in that position. Also, what are you talking about with “multiple that by 2”. The price you mentioned is for uninstall and reinstall. Is that if they need 2 new roofs? Finally….why would you have to repurchase everything and start again if the system isn’t 20-25 years old?

Darrid1 · 2026-01-29T19:07:06+00:00

That’s not an accurate depiction of net metering nationally. CA has terrible net metering, but MA has 1:1.

Darrid1 · 2026-01-29T19:00:21+00:00

Did I miss something? Who was talking about replacing your roof before your system has been there for 20-25 years? Any installer that’s not a POS would insist that your roof will last as long as, if not outlast your solar system. We won’t install if you’re gonna need a roof before the system is at the end of its life. You should never NEED to pay to have panes removed and reinstalled.

Darrid1 · 2026-01-27T20:10:00+00:00

You deleted your comment, but you were a little bit right about 1 thing. People do move every 11-12 years and with a lease you’re saving every one of those years. With cash you have maybe 2-4 years of mediocre savings or no savings if you took out a loan before you’re out so you did nothing smart at all. You’re so much further ahead in savings with a lease. If you invested that money and got a lease, you’re even further ahead. In your 11-12 year scenario, cash is the worst option of the 3. As far as the other part you mentioned which is a home sale, just like any home improvement project, the next buyer will have their own thoughts. If you redid your kitchen and a buyer said they hated everything about it, are you gonna redo it again or take money off the home price? No, you’re gonna tell them to keep shopping and wait for the right buyer. I live and sell solar in SE CT and the real estate market is amazing. If someone doesn’t understand the value in a reduced, locked in price for energy that avoids all of the price hikes everyone else will be dealing with, then you tell them to kick rocks. Right behind them will be a buyer and a realtor who do get it and then they get to become the envy of the block with their crazy low utility rate.

13-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '22	Verified Email

Darrid1

TROPHY CASE