In today’s U.S. commercial solar market, many buyers are private companies, owner-operators or municipal users financing systems directly. For these decision-makers, a “bankable” project isn’t just one that passes a financier’s risk checklist, but actually performs.
In this context, bankability means a system that reliably delivers ROI, resists technical or financial failure, protects against policy shifts or incentive rollbacks, and is designed for long-term serviceability. It includes built-in O&M, clear performance accountability and protection against stranded assets caused by low-bid contractors or unvetted equipment.
The traditional focus on the lowest price-per-watt is no longer sufficient for evaluating commercial solar bids. Recent policy shifts, including significant tariffs on imported solar components, have introduced new complexities that demand a more comprehensive approach to assessing solar proposals.
And now, with a federal proposal to eliminate the 30% ITC at the end of 2025, years ahead of schedule, the urgency to design resilient, incentive-ready projects is greater than ever. This is no longer about timing, but survival for many mid-sized solar buyers.
Tariff shock: Why cost certainty no longer exists
In 2025, the U.S. Trade Representative imposed new tariffs on solar panels imported from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, some exceeding 3,500%. Intended to strengthen domestic manufacturing and shift supply chains, the policy has instead triggered immediate price increases, delivery disruptions, and widespread uncertainty across the industry.
The long-term vision may support reshoring and vertical integration, but the lack of a stable policy horizon creates a double bind. On one hand, developers face rising costs due to the volatility being priced into today’s bids. On the other hand, the absence of long-term clarity around tariff enforcement discourages investment in U.S.-based semiconductor and cell manufacturing, the very outcome the policy is meant to support.
EPCs and clients contend with project repricing, delayed procurement and shifting equipment specifications. Commercial buyers are finding that price certainty is no longer a given, but a strategic variable that must be actively managed from the start.
At PPM Solar, we’ve already received notice from several suppliers that pricing will increase between 15 to 50% within the quarter, while others have paused quoting altogether. For EPCs attempting to lock in project cost certainty and for clients still working from 2024 benchmarks, this is an operational challenge.
In most commercial projects, equipment is ordered only after engineering is finalized, often requiring site-specific evaluations, mounting certifications or utility interconnection approval. If pricing shifts significantly during that window, developers are forced to re-evaluate assumptions mid-stream. In extreme cases, cost increases can undermine the entire financial model, turning a previously viable project into one that no longer meets ROI thresholds or financing requirements.
To avoid these outcomes, risk mitigation must begin early. That means designing with modularity, stress-testing assumptions under various rate and cost scenarios, and — when possible — building in contractual flexibility. Buyers also require third-party reinsurance on component warranties and auditing manufacturers before finalizing procurement decisions.
Evaluating bids beyond initial costs
In today’s market, a solar bid that appears attractive on paper can quickly fall short when it comes to long-term value, reliability or even regulatory compliance. Tariffs and supply chain volatility have only amplified the risks of evaluating proposals based solely on upfront price. To build a truly bankable project, stakeholders must look beyond cost-per-watt and carefully assess component quality, sourcing strategy, and expected system performance over time.
Equally important is the financial strength of the EPC partner. An experienced, well-capitalized EPC can secure equipment early, shield the project from sudden price increases and manage procurement risk. In this environment, an EPC’s financial and operational stability becomes an extension of the project’s own risk profile — and should be weighed as part of the bid evaluation itself.
Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) offers a more meaningful benchmark than upfront cost-per-watt, as it captures the total cost of producing electricity over the system’s life. In many cases, a higher initial investment yields lower LCOE due to better equipment performance, lower degradation rates and fewer maintenance interruptions, resulting in more energy delivered and greater financial return over time. In some instances, the addition of energy storage can drive down the LCOE by positively affecting the demand profile and adding the protected circuit value, improving both the solar and business operational ROI.
As third-party ownership models like PPAs and leases become more and more common, especially in projects with tighter budgets or tax appetite limitations, the legal structure behind the deal matters just as much as the technology. Contracts must include bankable default clauses that protect the host facility if the system owner, financier or lessee fails to meet their obligations. Without these protections, an otherwise sound project could become stranded or underutilized if the energy buyer or investor defaults.
Additionally, early decision-making has become critical. Delays in selecting equipment or ownership structure can create ripple effects, pushing projects out of ITC eligibility, triggering re-permitting or leading to unavailable materials.
Domestic vs. non-domestic content: What is worth paying for?
The 10% ITC Domestic Content bonus introduced by the Inflation Reduction Act has reframed procurement, not just from a cost angle but also from a supply chain and incentive optimization perspective.
Domestic systems using U.S.-made panels and racking carry a premium but often qualify for the full 40% ITC (30% base + 10% domestic). If your EPC understands how to structure the system for compliance, the net cost after credits can be lower.
Non-domestic systems with high-quality modules and racking can save upfront dollars, but carry exposure to:
If your project is pursuing the 10% domestic content ITC bonus, ensure your EPC provides documented proof of compliance, including equipment origin certifications and bill-of-material documentation. This not only safeguards your incentive eligibility but also provides a paper trail for audits.
Designing for long-term yield in high-demand environments
In many commercial bids, one truth is still overlooked: not every panel belongs on every roof. In high-demand, power-sensitive applications — like cold storage, logistics and manufacturing — component selection and system architecture and integration are mission-critical.
Panels with poor temperature coefficients can lose 7 to 10% of their output on hot days, precisely when facilities are consuming the most energy. Modules with higher annual degradation may lose 15% of their capacity by Year 20. Over time, these performance gaps translate into hundreds of thousands of dollars in missed savings and unmet demand.
That’s why performance should carry as much weight as cost. In heat-intensive markets, the difference in lifetime energy yield is not marginal — it’s material. What looks economical in Year 1 often proves expensive by Year 10.
Buyers should also assess productivity during the system’s “second half-life” — years 15 to 30. Panels with superior warranties and degradation guarantees will continue delivering measurable value long after the ROI is technically achieved.
It’s also important to consider how behind-the-meter systems add value. Unlike front-of-meter projects that sell power at wholesale rates, BTM systems offset retail utility costs — costs that typically rise with inflation. When a system consistently performs over decades, those avoided costs grow more valuable over time.
O&M is a new performance strategy
In 2025, the conversation around O&M should begin in the design phase, not after commissioning. The most bankable projects in 2025 are those that embed performance management into the lifecycle of the asset. O&M is the mechanism by which the project delivers what it promises, year after year.
A solar system is only as valuable as the energy it consistently delivers. Without a clearly defined O&M framework, even a technically sound system can suffer silent underperformance, avoidable degradation and prolonged downtime.
It’s not just about cleaning panels or responding to failures — it’s a strategic function tied to asset longevity, financial modeling and system bankability.
Modern commercial solar projects demand:
- Defined response times to outages or production issues
- Real-time monitoring with alert thresholds and accountability
- Scheduled preventative maintenance
- Panel-level analytics to spot degradation trends before they become losses
A professionally engineered system should also ensure that key components like inverters, string combiner boxes and switchgear are not only code-compliant but built with long-term serviceability in mind.
Systems with modular architecture that minimize single points of failure and enable safe, isolated servicing outperform monolithic designs over time.
Proposals should also include a plan for measuring system performance against projected output. This technical evaluation — comparing modeled production with real-world data — helps detect underperformance early and ensures the system delivers on its financial assumptions. Without this step, issues like faulty wiring, shading errors or mismatched components can go undetected for years, silently eroding returns.
Installer reliability is an often-underestimated factor in project bankability too. If an EPC or installer ceases operations, warranty enforcement and service continuity may become costly or unavailable. Selecting a financially stable, well-established installation partner significantly reduces the risk of stranded assets and ensures long-term support for system performance and maintenance.
Final word
A bankable project today is one that delivers reliable energy output, weathers supply and policy shifts and holds its value over time. It’s not just financeable, but resilient, serviceable and aligned with the client’s operational priorities. To arrive to such project, prior planning and engineering expertise have become paramount. Just adding solar panels at the lowest cost is no longer sufficient.
With looming changes to the federal ITC and ongoing tariff volatility, acting early and designing for stability is vital. The most valuable systems are those built for real-world performance.
Solar is no longer just a capital investment. It’s infrastructure. And in today’s environment, the best bids are the ones that prove they’ll still be delivering — technically, financially, and operationally — long after installation day.
Tell Us What You Think!