"We are a wholesaler of solar PV equipment and have therefore been working hard to get through this difficult time. We are very closely associated with a German importer who has, obviously, gone through the period of recalibration following the German cut to their FiTS equivalent some time ago. We actually support the FiTS cut and believe that the industry will emerge stronger, more flexible and significantly more knowledgeable, and that the industry will remain profitable, albeit a little smaller. This is exactly what happened in Germany and those who remained after the FiTS were companies offering a far better level of client-side service.
However, we would like to suggest that the problem in the UK with overly high ROI figures in the 8-12% range has been greatly exacerbated by the EIS funds out of the City and, in particular, by those investing in the “rent a roof” programmes. Unfortunately, the DECC proposed reduction in FiTS is carte blanche and therefore does not discriminate between householders and ‘non-householders’. We strongly believe that the programme should have been set up originally to discriminate between the two, giving a higher tariff to those installing on their own property and those installing on a 3rd party property. This would have been, and still would be, a very simple legislative definition to include in the revised FiTS, rightly rewarding those who should have been rewarded in the first place. The “rent a roof” contingent would still be able to enjoy 4-6% ROI (a fairly ‘safe bet’ in investment terms).
We believe that a discriminatory approach would significantly reduce the negative impact that the current FiTS revision will have, whilst at the same time significantly reducing the national cost of the programme and realigning it with the intentions from which it was born."