The best solar proposal software in the Netherlands is the tool that can tell the truth about two different futures in one document. Every offerte a Dutch installer sends in 2026 covers a system that will spend part of its life under the salderingsregeling and the rest of it without. Saldering nets exported kWh against imported kWh across the year and refunds the energy tax on every netted unit, and it stops on 1 January 2027 in a single step rather than a taper. A proposal that quotes today’s savings as a flat annual figure across twenty five years is not optimistic, it is wrong, and the customer will find that out from a newspaper. Across the ten platforms ranked below, the one that models the pre-2027 and post-2027 cash flows separately without an add-on is SurgePV at roughly EUR 1,180 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan.
Direct answer. The best solar proposal software in the Netherlands for 2026 is SurgePV, at about EUR 1,180 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan (EUR 5,900 for five seats). It splits the cash flow at 1 January 2027, carries terugleverkosten as a monthly charge tied to export volume, handles the residential BTW reclaim as a proposal line, models SDE++ for systems from 15 kWp and flags netcongestie against the delivery date. Solar Monkey from Delft remains the fastest route from a Dutch address to a sendable residential offerte.
This ranking is written for Dutch installateurs, EPCs and sales teams sending five or more offertes a month, from a 4 kWp rijtjeshuis quote to a 600 kWp logistics roof waiting on transport capacity. Every platform is scored on Dutch regulatory and tariff realism, document quality against what a Dutch buyer expects to see, the honesty of the timeline it lets you promise, and cost per finished proposal in euros. Where a competitor genuinely wins, including against the tool that places first, we say so.
Why a Dutch Offerte Is Harder to Write Than a Dutch Design
The design side of Dutch solar is comparatively settled. Irradiance data is good, roofs are either flat and commercial or steep and tiled, and the standards are stable. The commercial document is where the difficulty sits, and five obligations decide whether your offerte closes or comes back as a question list.
The saldering cliff on 1 January 2027. Until 31 December 2026 a household’s exported kWh are netted against imported kWh over the year, and the energy tax and BTW on every netted unit come back. From 1 January 2027 that stops. Export is then paid at a redelivery rate set by the energy supplier, with a legal floor of 50 percent of the net supply rate until 2030 according to the Rijksoverheid, and the energy tax refund is gone. A self-consumed kWh becomes worth roughly twice an exported one overnight. The document therefore has to carry two savings figures, not one, and the second one is the number the customer will live with for twenty four of the twenty five years.
Terugleverkosten now sit between export and money. Energy suppliers have introduced feed-in charges for handling exported electricity, typically a fixed monthly amount that scales with how much the household actually exports. For a household with an oversized south-facing array these charges already erode a meaningful slice of the saldering benefit before the cliff arrives. A proposal that shows gross export value without the supplier’s charge against it overstates the saving, and because the charge scales with export volume it changes the ranking between a 4 kWp and an 8 kWp system for the same roof.
BTW reclaim is a standard residential line. A Dutch homeowner installing panels can register as a VAT entrepreneur for the supply and recover the BTW on the system, normally under the small business scheme so that the obligation does not continue indefinitely. It is routine, it is worth real money on a 6 kWp job, and a Dutch buyer expects to see it named in the offerte with a statement of who files it. Guidance sits with the Belastingdienst. Imported proposal tools with one global tax field cannot express the gross figure, the reclaim and the net figure as three separate lines, so installers rebuild that block by hand every time.
Netcongestie decides what you may promise on timing. Large parts of the Dutch network are full at peak. Roughly 15,000 large consumers are already queued for a new or heavier connection, waits in the worst regions run into years, and from 1 July 2026 small consumers join the same queue under an ACM prioritisation framework, as Netbeheer Nederland sets out. On a commercial offerte this is not a footnote. Export capacity, not roof area, sets the system size, and the switch-on date is owned by the netbeheerder rather than by your planner. A commercial proposal that names a firm commissioning month without a capacity confirmation is writing a cheque somebody else has to cash.
Subsidy splits by size and a residential quote must not overclaim. SDE++ is a production subsidy paid per kWh over fifteen years, applying to Zon-PV from 15 kWp and only behind a large consumer connection above 3x80A, with the round administered by RVO. Because the payment falls when market prices rise, it belongs in a proposal as a range with a stated assumption, not as a fixed income line. ISDE covers heat pumps, solar water heating and insulation, not PV modules, so a residential offerte promising an ISDE grant for the panels is simply incorrect. Business systems too small or too late for SDE++ use EIA, the energie-investeringsaftrek, as an extra deduction against taxable profit.
📘 Regulation note
The offerte is the commercial artefact, but the installation still has to be wired to NEN 1010 including part 712, mounted to NEN 7250 for wind loading and building physics, connected through the local netbeheerder and registered on energieleveren.nl. Naming who registers the system, and by when, removes the single most common post-handover argument in the Dutch residential market.
Bring one of your own sites to a free SurgePV demo. We will build the 3D roof from a satellite address, run the 8,760-hour shading simulation, and hand you the SLD, BOQ and branded proposal on the call.
Book a free SurgePV demo → Compare pricingThe 5-Point Netherlands Proposal Bench
This is our scoring frame, and you can run it during any trial with one real job. Each axis scores 1 to 10, for a maximum of 50.
- Two-phase cash flow. Full saldering to 31 December 2026 and a separate lower export value from 1 January 2027 inside the same document, with the energy tax component split out so the customer sees exactly what disappears.
- Dutch money handling. Terugleverkosten as a monthly charge driven by export volume, BTW reclaim shown as gross, reclaim and net, SDE++ presented as a range, EIA for business systems, and no ISDE promise on PV modules.
- Document craft. Dutch-language output that reads as Dutch, a materiaallijst rather than a lump sum, component datasheets attached, stated yield assumption and simulation method, warranty terms per component.
- Timeline honesty. A delivery date that separates what you control from what the netbeheerder controls, with a stated capacity assumption on any commercial job.
- Cost per finished proposal. Annual licence plus add-ons divided by realistic monthly volume, in euros.
Axis one is the separator. Most tools in this category can be talked into producing a Dutch-looking PDF. Very few will carry two tariff regimes in one cash flow without a spreadsheet doing the real work behind the scenes.
Top 10 Solar Proposal Software Platforms in the Netherlands
Pricing is 2026 published or reseller-quoted, converted to euros where the vendor prices in dollars. Treat it as a planning figure rather than a contract.
| # | Platform | Indicative Dutch price | Key capability | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | SurgePV | EUR 1,180/user/yr (5-user team) | Two-phase 2027 cash flow, terugleverkosten, BTW reclaim, export cap | Installateurs sending 5+ offertes a month |
| 2 | Solar Monkey | EUR 525/month package including 50 projects, not per seat; API +EUR 95/month | Fastest Dutch address to sendable residential offerte | Dutch residential installers at volume |
| 3 | Dutch installateur ERP and offerte suites | ~EUR 60 to EUR 150/user/mo | Native materiaallijst, wholesaler pricing, Dutch admin | Firms whose pain is paperwork, not design |
| 4 | OpenSolar | Free core platform; API Access and Connectors chargeable from 16 Apr 2026, rates not published | Broad template library at zero entry cost | Solo installers under 3 jobs a month |
| 5 | Zonneplan-style vertically integrated players | Internal, not licensable | Monthly-payment framing at national scale | Nobody outside them, everybody competes with them |
| 6 | Otovo partner tooling | Marketplace commission | Demand plus a standardised customer quote | Installers buying leads rather than software |
| 7 | Aurora Solar | USD $135/user/mo Basic, $220 Premium, billed annually (~EUR 123 to EUR 200) | Best presentation polish in the category | Groups arriving with Aurora already in place |
| 8 | Solargraf | USD $2,799/yr Starter (2 users, 240 projects) up to $12,999 Enterprise (~EUR 2,547 to EUR 11,829) | Fast residential quoting with e-signature | High-volume residential sales teams |
| 9 | PV*SOL premium | EUR 845 per named user per year plus VAT | Technical opbrengstprognose as a proposal appendix | Adviesbureaus attaching a yield report |
| 10 | Sunbase | From USD $59/user/mo (~EUR 54); higher tiers not published | CRM-first pipeline with basic quoting | Sales-led firms designing elsewhere |
Two honest observations before the detail. First, rows five and six are not software you buy. Zonneplan-style integrated players run internal tooling and Otovo is a marketplace, but both set what a Dutch homeowner expects a quote to look like, so an honest ranking of what you compete against has to include them. Second, no platform here handles every Dutch obligation cleanly, and the real difference is how much manual patching each one leaves on every job.
1. SurgePV
What it does best. SurgePV treats the Dutch market as a first-class case rather than a translation. The financial engine models saldering as a rule with an end date, applying full netting through 31 December 2026 and a supplier redelivery rate from 1 January 2027, with the 50 percent floor available as a default and the energy tax component broken out so the customer can see precisely which part of their current saving evaporates. Terugleverkosten are their own monthly line driven by export volume rather than a fudge inside operations and maintenance, which means the tool can show a household that a 5 kWp system may beat an 8 kWp system on net benefit after 2027. That comparison is a sales asset, not a concession.
The residential BTW reclaim appears as a structured block with gross, reclaim and net figures and a named responsibility for filing, which is the format Dutch buyers recognise. On commercial jobs the export capacity can be capped so the yield model clips against a non-firm transport contract and shows the lost kWh, which is the honest way to introduce a battery rather than pretending the constraint does not exist. The delivery section separates your own installation window from the netbeheerder’s capacity confirmation, so a signed offerte does not promise a switch-on date the grid operator has not agreed to. SDE++ is presented as a banded income range with the correction mechanism stated. Behind the numbers sits an 8,760-hour module-level simulation with P50 and P90 outputs, and roof geometry generates from satellite imagery in about a minute on a typical Dutch rijtjeshuis with a dakkapel. Proposals export as white-label Dutch PDF and as an interactive link with e-signature, and Clara AI accepts Dutch instructions.
Pricing. About EUR 1,180 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan, so roughly EUR 5,900 for five seats, with an individual tier near EUR 1,730 per user per year. Free trial, no card.
Who it suits. Installateurs and EPCs sending five or more offertes a month, especially those mixing residential work with flat-roof C&I where a transport constraint is in play.
Honest limitations. Four real ones, stated because a roundup where the sponsor wins everywhere is an advertisement. First, Solar Monkey is genuinely faster from a Dutch address to a sendable residential quote, and its Dutch-language template needs less editing than ours out of the box, so on pure residential throughput it beats us. Second, SurgePV is not a CRM and does not do lead routing, follow-up sequencing or the Dutch installer’s back-office admin, so a firm whose bottleneck is pipeline discipline still buys a second system. Third, it prepares netbeheerder and energieleveren.nl data rather than filing on your behalf, and there is no SDE++ application workflow, so the subsidy application itself happens outside the tool. Fourth, brand recognition on financed commercial work is thin because SurgePV launched in 2025, and a bank’s technical adviser reading a Dutch commercial proposal has never seen its report format where a PVsyst output needs no introduction.
Book a SurgePV demo with a real Dutch job and check the 2027 split on your own customer’s consumption profile rather than on a showcase file.
2. Solar Monkey
What it does best. Solar Monkey was built in Delft for Dutch installers, and the defaults show it. It pulls Dutch address and building data, generates a layout from aerial imagery, runs shading against the neighbours and the trees that actually exist, and produces a Dutch-language proposal that customers here already recognise from their neighbour’s kitchen table. It continues into monitoring after handover with a yield guarantee product attached, which is a commercial argument no imported tool matches in this market. For a residential installer running volume, the time from address to sendable quote is the shortest on this list, and that is not a small thing when your close rate depends on answering within the day.
Pricing. Solar Monkey does not sell seats. Its published package price is EUR 525 a month including 50 projects, with API integration a further EUR 95 a month, a 5 percent uplift for quarterly billing and 10 percent for annual, and a 14-day trial. The per-project overage rate is not published. That works out at EUR 6,300 a year for the whole team, against EUR 5,900 for five SurgePV seats, so on any headcount above five Solar Monkey is the cheaper licence and we would say so on a call. Note also that its merger with Eturnity was announced on 25 March 2026, so ask where the roadmap is going before you commit.
Who it suits. Dutch residential installers at volume, and firms who want the proposal and the post-installation monitoring relationship from one vendor.
Honest limitations. It is residential-first by design. On a 500 kWp logistics roof with a capped export connection and a battery, its financial and engineering depth is thinner than the tools built for C&I, and lenders do not treat its output as a bankable yield report. Its market is essentially the Benelux, so a firm expanding into Germany will need a second tool. The package includes 50 projects a month, and the overage rate above that is not published, so a high-volume shop should get that number in writing before signing.
3. Dutch installateur ERP and offerte suites
What it does best. A cluster of Dutch-built quoting, ERP and offerte products exists specifically to produce documents and admin the way Dutch installers work: a materiaallijst priced against the wholesaler you actually order from, correct BTW handling, Dutch warranty language, planning and invoicing attached. For an installateur whose pain is paperwork rather than design, these remove more admin per euro than anything else on this list.
Pricing. Broadly EUR 60 to EUR 150 per user per month depending on vendor and modules taken.
Who it suits. Dutch residential and small commercial firms who value document correctness, wholesaler pricing and back-office flow over design sophistication.
Honest limitations. Shading and yield depth is generally light, the 2027 two-phase cash flow is rarely modelled properly, and the vendor field is fragmented enough that support quality varies a lot between products. Verify the wholesaler integrations you depend on before committing, and ask directly how the tool handles a proposal spanning the saldering cliff.
Get an engineering second opinion. If a proposal depends on a marginal roof, a capped transport connection or an unusual metering arrangement, get the design reviewed before you quote. Our team checks European-format work alongside the Heaven Designs net metering resource centre. Talk to our engineers →
4. OpenSolar
What it does best. A free core design and proposal product funded by hardware referral margin, with a large template library, broad integrations and a community that has answered most questions already. For a small Dutch residential team the cost of entry is zero and time to a usable quote is short.
Pricing. The core platform is free, for any number of users. OpenSolar has said that API Access, charged per project on creation, and Connectors, charged as a flat monthly fee, become chargeable from 16 April 2026, but it has not published those rates and they vary by geography. So a five-seat Dutch team pays nothing today and cannot yet be quoted a 2026 add-on figure. Nothing else on this list is cheaper.
Who it suits. Solo installers and new entrants whose volume does not justify a licence.
Honest limitations. The Dutch layer is shallow. Saldering as a dated rule, terugleverkosten and the BTW reclaim block are not first-class concepts, so the parts of the document that matter most in this market are the parts you build yourself. The economics also steer you toward hardware partners. See our OpenSolar alternative comparison for where that trade sits.
5. Zonneplan-style vertically integrated players
What it does best. Vertically integrated Dutch energy players build internal tooling around a bundled proposition of panels, battery, dynamic energy contract and app, and present the customer with a monthly story rather than a capital sum. That coupling between the software and the financing product is the entire point, and it converts extremely well on a kitchen table.
Pricing. Internal. These platforms are not licensable to third parties.
Who it suits. Nobody outside those organisations, which is exactly why the row matters: they define the offerte your document is compared against in the Dutch residential market.
Honest limitations. As a buying option this row is empty. The practical lesson for an independent installateur is that a capital-sum quote loses to a monthly-payment story on framing before it loses on price, so whatever you buy needs a financing view and a post-2027 self-consumption argument you can put on one page.
6. Otovo partner tooling
What it does best. Otovo is a marketplace rather than a software vendor. It acquires the homeowner, standardises the quote and routes the job to a local installer. If your constraint is lead flow rather than document quality, that answers the actual problem, and the standardised customer-facing quote removes the proposal question entirely.
Pricing. Commission on delivered jobs rather than a licence.
Who it suits. Installers with spare crew capacity who would rather buy demand than build a sales function.
Honest limitations. You are renting the customer relationship. Pricing power sits with the marketplace, the document is not yours to differentiate, and margin per job is thinner than direct work. It does nothing for commercial rooftop, for a project waiting on transport capacity, or for any job outside the standardised residential product.
7. Aurora Solar
What it does best. Aurora produces one of the most polished sales documents in the category, with strong automated design, good storage modelling and a workflow refined against enormous US residential volume. If you compete on presentation quality alone it is hard to beat.
Pricing. Aurora publishes US dollar prices: Basic US$135 per user per month billed annually and Premium US$220, about EUR 123 and EUR 200 at EUR 0.91 per dollar. Five Premium seats come to US$13,200 a year, roughly EUR 12,012, and five Basic seats to US$8,100, roughly EUR 7,371. Plan sets are a separately priced service rather than a plan inclusion, and LIDAR modelling, bankable shade reports and battery modelling sit on Premium. Worth stating plainly: Aurora Basic at US$1,620 a year per user is cheaper than a single SurgePV Individual seat at US$1,899.
Who it suits. International groups extending into the Netherlands with Aurora templates and training already in place.
Honest limitations. The Dutch layer is close to empty. No dated saldering rule, no terugleverkosten field, no BTW reclaim block, no SDE++ handling, so your team builds all of it inside the template and then maintains it every time a supplier changes a charge. Premium per-seat pricing is the highest cloud figure here, though Basic at US$1,620 a year undercuts a SurgePV Individual seat. See our Aurora Solar alternative breakdown.
8. Solargraf
What it does best. Speed. Solargraf is built for residential sales teams that need a decent quote out the same day, with e-signature and a short learning curve. New salespeople become productive in days rather than weeks, which matters if you hire seasonally.
Pricing. Solargraf prices by plan rather than by seat, in US dollars: Starter US$2,799 a year covering 240 projects and 2 users, rising to Enterprise US$12,999 for 1,500 projects. API access is US$4,000 a year on every plan except Enterprise. At EUR 0.91 per dollar that is roughly EUR 2,547 to EUR 11,829.
Who it suits. High-volume residential sales operations where turnaround beats depth.
Honest limitations. Shading and yield modelling are lighter than the engineering-led tools, Dutch tariff handling is generic, and there is no meaningful commercial capability. Our Solargraf alternative note covers where it stops.
9. PV*SOL premium
What it does best. Valentin Software’s PV*SOL is the technical reference many Dutch adviesbureaus already own, and its 3D shading walkthrough is the most persuasive shading explanation you can put in front of a sceptical customer. As an appendix to a commercial offerte, an opbrengstprognose carries recognition a cloud tool cannot claim.
Pricing. PVSOL premium is a subscription rather than a perpetual licence: EUR 845 per named user per year plus VAT, with standard PVSOL at EUR 585. Five named users therefore cost EUR 4,225 a year, which is meaningfully less than five SurgePV seats. Licences bought before 19 November 2024 remain usable indefinitely, but maintenance renewals on them ended on 1 October 2024.
Who it suits. Adviesbureaus and established installateurs whose commercial proposals ship with a technical yield report attached.
Honest limitations. It is simulation software, not proposal software. No white-label offerte, no e-signature, no CRM handoff, no BTW logic and no saldering phase-out modelling, so the Dutch financial reality gets rebuilt in a spreadsheet next to it. Windows desktop only, so no live collaboration. Our PV*SOL alternative guide sets out the pairing.
10. Sunbase
What it does best. Sunbase leads with CRM: pipeline, lead routing, follow-up and reporting, with proposal generation attached. If your bottleneck is sales process rather than document quality, that ordering is defensible.
Pricing. Sunbase publishes an entry point of US$59 per user per month, about EUR 54, and does not publish its higher tiers.
Who it suits. Sales-led firms that already have a design tool and need pipeline discipline.
Honest limitations. As a proposal engine it is the weakest here on engineering depth and Dutch compliance, and it assumes the design comes from somewhere else entirely. The same pairing logic applies to the sister-brand CRM QuickEstimate, which handles quoting and follow-up but not Dutch tariff modelling.
The 2027 Two-Phase Test: Five Checks Before You Buy
We call this the 2027 Two-Phase Test. Run any platform you are evaluating through all five with one real customer’s annual consumption and one real supplier contract. A tool that fails more than one of these is not a Dutch proposal tool, whatever the sales page says.
- Does the cash flow break at a date, or is saldering a checkbox? The model must apply full netting through 31 December 2026 and a different lower export value from 1 January 2027 inside the same twenty five year table. A single toggle applying one regime for the whole term fails immediately.
- Is the energy tax component visible? Under saldering the refunded energy tax and BTW are a large share of the benefit, and that share disappears entirely after the cliff. A tool that nets at one blended tariff will understate the 2027 drop and the customer will feel the difference in their first post-cliff jaarafrekening.
- Are terugleverkosten an input tied to export volume? Not a flat annual cost, not a line inside maintenance. If there is no field, ask the vendor for a date, and in the meantime do not let a salesperson quote gross export value.
- Does the document argue self-consumption? After 2027 a self-consumed kWh is worth roughly twice an exported one, so the proposal should show what a battery, a warmtepomp, an EV charger or an east-west layout does to the self-consumption fraction, and should size the array against consumption rather than against roof area.
- Can the delivery date separate your work from the netbeheerder’s? On any commercial job the proposal must state the transport capacity assumption and make the switch-on date conditional on it. A tool that only prints a single installation date invites a dispute you will lose.
⚠️ Watch out
Check every subsidy line in an inherited offerte template. ISDE covers heat pumps, solar water heating and insulation, not PV modules, so a residential quote promising an ISDE grant for the panels is wrong on its face. Business systems from 15 kWp behind a large consumer connection use SDE++, smaller business systems use EIA, and the two cannot be claimed on the same installation.
Cost Per Finished Proposal, in Euros
Licence price is the wrong unit. What matters is the cost per proposal a customer actually signs, and that changes the ranking substantially by volume.
Read those against your own close rate. At fifty offertes a month a bundled licence costs about ten euros per proposal, less than the fuel for one wasted site visit to Zwolle. At ten a month the figure is nearer fifty euros, which still works if the tool removes a second licence or an hour of manual document assembly per job. At three a month it does not, and the honest recommendation is OpenSolar’s free core until volume or a capped-export commercial job forces the issue. The International Energy Agency country data shows Dutch rooftop volumes still among the highest per capita in the world, so most growing firms cross that line rather than never reaching it.
Check the numbers before you quote. Run a customer’s consumption profile through our free solar calculator for an independent sanity check on system size and payback, or talk to our engineering team about a marginal roof.
Proposal Mistakes That Cost Dutch Installers Money
-
1
Quoting twenty five years of saldering. The rule ends on 1 January 2027. A payback figure built on lifetime netting is not conservative, it is wrong, and it is the version of the story the customer will read in the newspaper before they read it from you.
-
2
Showing export value gross of terugleverkosten. The supplier charge scales with export volume, so it changes which system size is actually better for the household. Leave it out and you will oversize, then defend the oversizing on a phone call a year later.
-
3
Promising a commercial switch-on date before the netbeheerder confirms capacity. With roughly 15,000 large consumers queued, transport capacity is the first question and the layout is the second. Make the date conditional in writing.
-
4
Hiding the BTW reclaim inside one net figure. Dutch buyers expect gross, reclaim and net as three lines with a named party responsible for filing. One blended number reads as something being concealed.
-
5
Selling a battery on emotion instead of on clipped kWh. After 2027 the storage argument is arithmetic: self-consumed kWh versus exported kWh, plus the export the transport cap throws away. Show the lost kWh and the battery sells itself.
The pattern across all five is the same: the document promised something the tariff, the grid or the tax treatment could not support. Battery sizing in particular is worth checking against the hybrid battery sizing guide before the number goes into a customer-facing offerte.
Should You Standardise on One Platform?
- ✓ You send more than 10 offertes a month
- ✓ You mix residential with flat-roof C&I
- ✓ Your saldering and terugleverkosten logic lives in a spreadsheet
- ✓ More than two people touch a quote before it goes out
- ✗ You are residential-only and closing in Solar Monkey today
- ✗ You send fewer than 5 quotes a month
- ✗ Your deliverable is an opbrengstprognose (PV*SOL)
- ✗ Your bottleneck is lead flow, not document quality
Verdict. SurgePV is the right default for a growing Dutch installateur because the two-phase 2027 cash flow, terugleverkosten and the BTW block are bundled and the engineering under the yield number is real. Solar Monkey is the right answer for a residential-only firm already closing deals in it with monitoring attached, and we would say that on a sales call rather than pretend otherwise.
How Heaven Green Energy and SurgePV Help Dutch Teams
Heaven Green Energy has delivered more than 10,000 solar installations, and our engineering group builds the software we use ourselves. SurgePV came out of that: a proposal and design suite written by people who had to defend a savings figure to a customer eighteen months after signing. For Dutch teams the useful entry points are:
- Solar proposals in SurgePV for the document side, including e-signature and the two-phase financial view.
- Solar design software for the Netherlands covers the same tool set from the design and NEN 1010 angle rather than the sales angle.
- Solar proposal software is the global version of this ranking without the Dutch tariff layer.
- Best solar proposal software in Germany shows how the same problem looks under EEG and Marktstammdatenregister rules.
- Best solar proposal software in the UK covers the MCS and SEG version of the same document.
- Solar design software pillar guide and best solar design software put the design engines in context.
- Commercial solar and solar EPC services show how we use these outputs on live projects.
Compliance references worth bookmarking: the Rijksoverheid saldering page for the 2027 change, Netbeheer Nederland for netcongestie, RVO for SDE++, EIA and ISDE, and IRENA country statistics for benchmarking Dutch deployment. Choosing the best solar proposal software in the Netherlands comes down to one question: does the document tell the customer the truth about the years after 1 January 2027, or does it quote a number that stops being true in month thirteen. You can compare SurgePV pricing against whatever you run today before starting a trial.
Compare Other Markets and Tool Categories
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the best solar proposal software in the Netherlands in 2026?
SurgePV ranks first for Dutch installers sending five or more offertes a month, at roughly EUR 1,180 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan. It splits the twenty five year cash flow at 1 January 2027 when the salderingsregeling ends, carries terugleverkosten as a monthly charge tied to export volume, presents the residential BTW reclaim as gross, reclaim and net, and makes commercial delivery dates conditional on the netbeheerder confirming transport capacity. Solar Monkey from Delft remains faster for pure residential throughput.
How should a Dutch proposal handle the end of saldering in 2027?
With two cash flow phases in one document. Full netting applies through 31 December 2026, including the energy tax and BTW refunded on netted units. From 1 January 2027 export is paid at a supplier redelivery rate with a legal floor of 50 percent of the net supply rate until 2030, and the energy tax refund disappears. Show both phases, split out the energy tax component, and size the array against consumption rather than roof area because self-consumption becomes worth roughly twice export.
What are terugleverkosten and why do they matter in a quote?
Terugleverkosten are feed-in charges energy suppliers levy for handling exported electricity, usually a monthly amount that scales with how much a household exports. They sit between the exported kWh and the customer’s wallet, so a proposal showing gross export value overstates the benefit. Because the charge grows with export volume, it can make a smaller system the better financial choice for the same roof. Proposal software needs a dedicated field rather than a line buried in maintenance costs.
Can a homeowner reclaim BTW on solar panels in the Netherlands?
Yes, and it is a standard line in a Dutch residential offerte. A homeowner installing panels can register for VAT on the supply and recover the BTW on the system, normally using the small business scheme so the obligation does not continue indefinitely. Current guidance sits with the Belastingdienst. The proposal should present gross price, the reclaim amount and the net cost as three separate lines, and name who files the paperwork, because that is the format Dutch buyers expect to see.
How does netcongestie affect what a commercial proposal can promise?
It moves control of the switch-on date away from your planner. Roughly 15,000 large consumers are already queued for a new or heavier connection, waits run into years in the worst regions, and from 1 July 2026 small consumers join the same queue under an ACM prioritisation framework. Export capacity rather than roof area sets the system size, and the offerte should state the transport capacity assumption and make commissioning conditional on it rather than naming a firm month.
Is Solar Monkey better than international proposal tools for Dutch residential work?
For pure residential throughput, often yes. Solar Monkey was built in Delft against Dutch address data, Dutch roofs and Dutch tariffs, its proposal reads as a document Dutch homeowners already recognise, and monitoring with a yield guarantee attaches after handover. Where it gives ground is commercial work: on a large roof with a capped export connection and a battery, its financial and engineering depth is thinner, its output is not treated as a bankable yield report, and its coverage is essentially Benelux only.
Which subsidies belong in a Dutch solar proposal?
SDE++ for systems from 15 kWp behind a large consumer connection above 3x80A, presented as a range because the per-kWh payment falls when market prices rise. EIA, the energie-investeringsaftrek, for business systems too small or too late for SDE++, as an extra deduction against taxable profit. ISDE does not cover PV modules, only heat pumps, solar water heating and insulation, so a residential quote promising ISDE for panels is incorrect. SDE++ cannot be combined with EIA on the same installation.
What is SurgePV’s biggest weakness for Dutch installers?
Speed on plain residential work. Solar Monkey gets from a Dutch address to a sendable quote faster and its Dutch-language template needs less editing out of the box. SurgePV is also not a CRM, so lead routing and follow-up need a second system, it prepares netbeheerder and energieleveren.nl data rather than filing on your behalf and has no SDE++ application workflow, and its brand carries no recognition yet with a bank’s technical adviser reviewing a financed commercial project.
Stop paying for four tools. Design it all in one.
SurgePV replaces Aurora + HelioScope + PVsyst + a separate proposal tool in a single license. AI 3D roof in under 60 seconds, bankable 8,760-hour simulation, auto-SLD, BOQ, DXF/DWG export and branded proposals.
Free trial, no credit card · $1,299 per user per year on the 5-User Team planDisclaimer: SurgePV is our own product. It is built by the Heaven Group, the same company as Heaven Green Energy, so treat this as a recommendation from its maker.