How Much Does Solar Actually Save on Your Bill? The ACCC Numbers Nobody Is Talking About

Every solar company in Australia will tell you that solar “saves you money.” But how much? And compared to what? The claims range from “cut your bill in half” to “pay nothing” to vague gestures at “thousands per year.” Most of these are marketing estimates based on ideal conditions and best-case scenarios.

So when the ACCC released hard data in August 2025 showing exactly what Australian households are paying for electricity, broken down by whether they have solar, a battery, or a VPP, it was worth paying attention. This is not a solar company projection. It is the national competition regulator looking at actual bills.

The numbers tell a clear story. But the more interesting question is the one that comes after: if solar owners are saving this much on average, why are some saving far more and others barely noticing a difference? That is where your energy plan matters more than most people realise.

The ACCC tracks median annual electricity costs for Australian residential customers. Here is what the data shows:

Read that column on the right. Each step on the staircase roughly doubles the savings of the previous one. Solar alone saves $286 per year. Add a battery and you are saving $629. Join a VPP and you are keeping nearly $1,000 per year in your pocket compared to a household with no solar at all.

The VPP figure is particularly striking. At $580 per year for electricity, these households are paying less than $50 per month. That is approaching free electricity for a typical Australian home.

ABS data adds a wider lens to this: Australian households collectively saved approximately $3 billion on electricity in 2024-25 thanks to rooftop solar. That is $125 per person across the entire population, including the 65% of households that do not have panels.

That $3 billion figure matters because it includes the indirect benefit. Rooftop solar suppresses wholesale electricity prices during the day, which reduces what retailers pay for power, which (in theory) flows through to everyone's bill. Whether retailers actually pass that on is a different question, and one we will come back to.

But the core point is this: solar is not just saving money for the households that have it. It is putting downward pressure on the entire electricity market. If you do not have solar, you are still benefiting from your neighbour's panels. If you do have solar, you are capturing a disproportionately large share of that benefit. And if you have solar plus a battery, you are doing very well.

The ACCC figures are medians, which means half of all solar households are saving more than $286 per year and half are saving less. The spread is significant, and the biggest factor driving that variation is not your panels, your location, or even your consumption. It is your energy plan.

Two solar owners on the same street with identical 6.6kW systems can have wildly different bills. One might save $800 per year, the other might save $200. The difference often comes down to three things:

• Their feed-in tariff rate (what they get paid for exported solar)
• Their usage rate (what they pay for grid electricity they import)
• Their daily supply charge (the fixed cost just for being connected)

And here is the problem: some retailers structure their plans so that a higher feed-in tariff is offset by a higher usage rate or supply charge. The FiT looks attractive on paper, but the total bill tells a different story.

We pulled plan data from the AER's Consumer Data Right portal, which covers every residential electricity plan offered by major retailers across NSW, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, and the ACT. Here is what we found.

Some retailers offer feed-in tariffs of 10-12c/kWh, which sounds generous in a market where 3-5c is becoming normal. But when you look at the same retailer's usage rates, they are often 5-8c/kWh higher than competitors. For a household that imports more power than it exports (which is most households after 4pm), the higher usage rate wipes out the FiT benefit and then some.

Think of it this way: if your 6.6kW system exports 8 kWh per day and you import 12 kWh per day from the grid, then:

The plan with the lower feed-in tariff costs $0.40 less per day, which adds up to roughly $146 per year. Over a decade, that is nearly $1,500 in savings that the “better FiT” plan quietly costs you.

This is not hypothetical. We see this pattern across real AER plan data. The retailers with the highest advertised feed-in tariffs are not consistently the cheapest for solar households. In some cases, they are the most expensive.

Based on our analysis of AER plan data across six states and territories, the plans that deliver the best outcomes for solar households tend to share a few characteristics:

Low usage rates come first. For most solar households, the usage rate matters more than the feed-in tariff. You will always import some grid power (evenings, cloudy days, winter). The cheaper that power is, the less your solar needs to offset. A plan charging 28-30c/kWh for usage with a 5c FiT will almost always beat a plan charging 36-40c with a 12c FiT, unless you are a massive net exporter.

Daily supply charges vary more than you think. Some plans charge 80c/day, others charge $1.40/day. That is a $219 difference per year before you have used a single kilowatt-hour. Solar does not reduce your supply charge.

Time-of-use tariffs reward discipline. If you can shift your heavy usage into daytime (when your panels are producing), a time-of-use plan with cheap daytime rates and higher evening rates can work in your favour. But if your household uses most of its power between 4pm and 9pm, a flat rate is usually safer. Our guide on maximising self-consumption covers how to shift your usage patterns.

Check the total bill, not the headline rate. The AER's Energy Made Easy comparison tool lets you estimate your annual cost for different plans based on your postcode and usage. Use it. A 15-minute comparison could save you more per year than a panel upgrade.

Feed-in tariffs and usage rates vary significantly by state, driven by different network charges, retailer competition, and state government policies. Here is a snapshot from current AER data:

The state that stands out is South Australia. Usage rates there are the highest in the country, which means the value of self-consumption is also the highest. Every kWh you use from your own panels instead of buying from the grid saves you 30-42c. That is why SA consistently has some of the shortest solar payback periods in Australia despite having middle-of-the-road feed-in tariffs.

For a detailed breakdown of what each retailer offers in your state, check our feed-in tariff comparison pages. We pull this data directly from the AER, so it reflects actual available plans, not advertised rates that may have conditions attached.

The jump from solar-only ($1,279/yr) to solar-plus-battery ($936/yr) is $343 per year. That is not just the battery storing daytime solar for evening use. It reflects a fundamental shift in how the household interacts with the grid.

Battery owners import dramatically less from the grid during expensive evening peak hours. Instead of buying 35-45c/kWh power between 4pm and 9pm, they are running on stored solar. The bigger your evening consumption and the higher your peak rate, the more a battery saves. This is why the evening peak trap is such an important concept for solar owners to understand.

At $343 per year in additional savings, a $10,000 battery (installed) has a standalone payback of roughly 29 years on bill savings alone. That does not stack up on maths alone. But layer in battery arbitrage on time-of-use plans, state battery rebates that can knock $2,000-$4,000 off the price, falling battery costs, and the blackout protection value, and the equation shifts considerably.

And then there is the VPP option.

The stand-out figure in the ACCC data is VPP participants paying a median of just $580 per year. That is 63% less than a household with no solar, and 55% less than a household with solar-only. It is under $50 per month.

VPPs earn money in two ways: they pay battery owners for energy discharged to the grid during peak demand events (typically 12-25c/kWh, but sometimes much more during extreme events), and many VPP plans come with discounted usage rates because the retailer values having access to your battery for grid services.

The combined effect of lower bills from self-consumption, reduced peak imports, and VPP export credits pushes the total electricity cost down to levels that would have been unimaginable five years ago. We covered the detailed comparison in our VPP vs feed-in tariff breakdown.

The $580 figure is a median, which means some VPP households are paying even less. The ones with larger batteries, more aggressive export schedules, and well-matched VPP programs are approaching net-zero electricity costs, or even coming out ahead.

This is the investigative question that matters most. The ACCC data shows solar saves the average household $286 per year. But if you are on the wrong plan, you might be capturing $100 of that potential while a better plan would capture $500.

Looking across the AER plan data, a few patterns emerge:

The big three (AGL, Origin, EnergyAustralia) are middle-of-the-road. Their plans are not the cheapest or the most expensive for solar owners. They offer moderate FiTs (4-7c depending on state) with competitive but not market-leading usage rates. For most customers, they are fine but not optimal. The advantage is simplicity and a single brand handling everything. The cost is leaving a few hundred dollars per year on the table.

Smaller retailers often have the best total-cost outcomes. Companies like Energy Locals, Amber Electric, and Nectr tend to offer lower usage rates, sometimes combined with wholesale pass-through pricing. For solar households that can shift usage into daytime hours, these plans can deliver significantly lower annual bills. The trade-off is that wholesale plans come with price volatility and require more engagement.

Some plans are genuinely worse for solar owners. We found plans where the combination of a high daily supply charge and a high usage rate meant that even with a generous FiT, a solar household would pay more annually than on a competitor's plan with a lower FiT. This is not always obvious from advertising, which tends to lead with the FiT number.

The lesson: always calculate the total annual cost, not just the feed-in tariff. The AER's Energy Made Easy tool (energymadeeasy.gov.au) is the most reliable way to compare plans for your specific circumstances. You can also check your state's plans on our feed-in tariff comparison pages, where we break down FiT rates alongside usage rates so you can see the full picture.

The ACCC data gives us four clear levels. Here is what it takes to move between them:

No solar to solar ($1,565 to $1,279): A 6.6kW system costs $5,000-$8,500 after rebates. At $286/year median savings, that is a 17-30 year payback on the ACCC median. But many households save considerably more than the median by optimising self-consumption. Realistic payback for an engaged household is 3-5 years.

Solar to solar + battery ($1,279 to $936): Batteries cost $8,000-$16,000 installed, but state rebates reduce this significantly. The $343/year additional saving is the floor, not the ceiling. Households on time-of-use tariffs with high evening usage will save more. Our battery decision guide walks through the calculations.

Solar + battery to VPP ($936 to $580): Joining a VPP is usually free if you already have a compatible battery. The extra $356/year comes from VPP export credits and often from better plan pricing. This is the highest-leverage step because it costs nothing extra to take. See our VPP comparison for which programs work with your battery brand.

And across every level, switching to a plan that actually rewards solar owners rather than clawing back value through high usage rates can be worth $200-$400 per year on its own, without changing anything about your hardware.

• ACCC Inquiry into the National Electricity Market, August 2025
• Australian Bureau of Statistics, Household Expenditure Survey 2024-25
• AER Consumer Data Right portal (retailer plan data accessed February 2026)
• Energy Made Easy (AER plan comparison tool)