FID for battery storage: The AgNes deadline for net charging fee exemption

As of October 22, 2026: New battery storage systems will only receive the 20-year net tariff exemption under § 118(6) of the EnWG according to the AgNes regulatory draft of the Federal Network Agency if the final investment decision (FID) is made before the determination is announced. The announcement is scheduled for January 1, 2027; it can also be made earlier. A FID is considered binding orders for at least 50% of the investment volume. Proof must be provided to the connection network operator by March 31, 2027, and commissioning must be completed by August 4, 2029. We will update this page as soon as the determination is announced.

Brief overview

• The Federal Network Agency will link the 20-year exemption from network charges for battery storage (Section 118(6) of the EnWG) in the context of the AgNes reform to a verifiable Final Investment Decision (FID).
• Anyone who wants to secure the exemption must obtain the FID before the final decision is announced meeting. The announcement of the decision is planned to be made at January 1, 2027; it can also occur earlier.
• Two core criteria apply according to the draft regulation of August 6, 2026:
  • There must be binding orders placed via at least 50 % of the investment volume that had been made by then. 
  • A contract withdrawal is only possible with a significant property damage (Target: around 25% of the investment volume) is connected.
• The FID test must be done by March 31, 2027 are available to the connection network operator, the commissioning no later than August 4, 2029 to be done.
• Several interpretation issues are still open in the final draft – among others, whether framework contracts with a call-back model are sufficient and what constitutes actual consequential damage. Whether and when the Federal Network Agency will further clarify these points after the consultation ends is unknown (as of October 22, 2026).

Background: The AgNes reform and the net charging exemption

According to current law, battery storage systems benefit from a 20-year exemption from network charges (§ 118, paragraph 6, EnWG). As part of the AgNes reform (General Net Charging System for Electricity), the Federal Network Agency plans to grant this protection only to projects that can demonstrate a reliable investment decision by a fixed deadline. The basis is the draft regulation of August 6, 2026, the consultation of which ended on September 18, 2026.

More about this in the report „AgNes regulation draft 2026: An overview of the network tariff reform from 2029 onwards“.

What does FID mean in the AgNes context?

The Final Investment Decision is proof that a storage project represents a genuine, economically binding investment decision – and not just an optional planning option. The Federal Network Agency examines this based on two cumulative criteria:

1. Bestel quantity: Binding, enforceable orders for at least 50 % of the total investment volume
2. Binding effect: Withdrawal from these orders is only possible against substantial property damage (benchmark: contractual penalty or demonstrable consequential damage ≥ approximately 25 % of the investment volume)

One binding network connection commitment is in the final draft – unlike the interim report from May 2026 – none additional prerequisite more for the FID.

Open questions regarding interpretation

Despite the clarification in the final draft, practical-relevant questions remain unanswered:

Framework contracts with a call-out model

It is unclear whether contracts with sequential delivery of individual instalments count as “binding order” within the meaning of the 50% threshold, or whether only fully fixed individual orders are recognized.

Range of the concept of consequential damage

It is unclear which cost items are considered verifiable consequential damage – for example, internal development costs or planning costs before the actual order is placed.

Lost net tariff exemption as a collateral damage?

Could the future network charges calculated over 20 years – which would be incurred in the event of a missed exemption – be counted as consequential damage in the 25% threshold? According to the current state of the discussion, two arguments are against:

• Causality: The resulting damage must result directly from the withdrawal from the purchase contract (contract penalties, cancellation costs, claims for damages by the supplier). The net fee obligation, on the other hand, arises regardless of the purchase contract – it is a consequence of the generally missed deadline, not of the withdrawal from the contract.
• Circularity: The loss of the privilege, the prerequisites of which are currently being demonstrated, cannot serve as proof of its fulfillment at the same time. This interpretation would automatically meet the criterion for practically every project and thus devalue it.

An explicit clarification of this point by the Federal Network Agency has not yet been provided. Therefore, the contractual proof path remains valid: contractual penalties, special arrangements without any other utilizability, and pre-rendered services already provided.

Overview of the deadline chain

The exact date of the announcement of the decision will only be determined with the decision-making process. This could be as early as December 2026. Companies should therefore not wait until the new year, but reach FID in good time with sufficient buffer time.

What does the FID deadline mean for industrial companies?

The deadline applies to new battery storage systems that are intended to take advantage of the 20-year net tariff exemption under § 118(6) of the EnWG. The draft treats storage systems that are linked to a consumption or generation facility as a unit with that facility. For grid-connected storage systems without reserve capacity protection, the draft provides for a capacity fee starting in 2029; the Federal Network Agency lists a scale of 4 to 7 € per kW and year.

There are only a few weeks left until the planned announcement for load analysis, economic feasibility study and binding orders. Battery storage Contracting without investment CUBE CONCEPTS finances the storage; at Buying a battery storage system the company itself invests. The overview shows how the exemption under § 19 StromNEV and the new network tariff system interact. Network charges are reduced with § 19, § 118 and AgNes.

Regardless of § 118, a storage facility reduces the network charges by Peak Shaving with battery storage: Today, regarding the performance fee, according to the AgNes design, starting in 2029 there will be a lower order capacity. Those who have free capacity on the grid connection can use it with the CUBE Profit Flex Solution® to use for a large-scale storage facility that generates revenue on the electricity market.

Action recommendations for battery storage projects

1. Determine the investable volume – as a reference point for the 50% threshold.
2. Componets must be ordered in advance – at least 50 % of the investment volume, binding for delivery.
3. Making contractual obligations demonstrable – Contractual penalties or consequential damages starting at around 25 % of the investment volume, causally linked to the order contract.
4. Build in risk protection – Right of withdrawal or adjustment for points beyond one’s control (e.g., network connection, permits), without undermining the binding nature of the order.
5. Achieve FID with a time buffer – preferably already documented by November/December 2026.
6. Submit proof in a timely manner – until 31.03.2027 with the connection network operator.
7. Calculate the commissioning schedule backwards – with regard to the deadline of 04.08.2029.
8. Calculating a business case with a fallback scenario – even in the event that the exemption is not secured in time.

FAQ

Conclusion

The AgNes reform turns the current net-charge exemption into a time-limited privilege with specific proof obligations. Whether and when the Federal Network Agency will clarify the remaining interpretation questions after the consultation is currently unknown. Therefore, companies are well advised to already set up their contractual arrangements based on the current draft now – robustly and with sufficient risk mitigation – regardless of whether and when further clarifications follow.