ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Certain statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are “forward-looking” statements within the meaning of and in reliance on the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, which provides a “safe harbor” for forward-looking statements. Actual events and results may differ materially from those expressed or forecasted in forward-looking statements due to a number of factors, including those factors discussed below.
Risks Related to the Company’s Common Stock
Our shares will be subject to potential delisting if we do not maintain the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market; new and additional proposed Nasdaq listing rules create more stringent listing compliance and risk for more delistings.
Our shares of common stock are listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market, or Nasdaq. Nasdaq has rules for continued listing, including, without limitation, minimum market capitalization and other requirements. Failure to maintain our listing, or de-listing from Nasdaq, would make it more difficult for shareholders to dispose of our common stock and more difficult to obtain accurate price quotations on our common stock. This could have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Our ability to issue additional securities for financing or other purposes, or otherwise to arrange for any financing we may need in the future, may also be materially and adversely affected if our common stock is not traded on a national securities exchange. In the past, from time to time, we have received certain notices from Nasdaq of non-compliance items.
For example, as previously reported, the Company had received respective Nasdaq non-compliance letters regarding: (i) a Minimum Bid Price Deficiency notice from the Listing Qualifications Department (the “Staff”) of The Nasdaq Stock Market notifying the Company that, for the 30 consecutive business day period immediately preceding April 11, 2025 deficiency letter, the Company’s common stock had not maintained a minimum closing bid price of $1.00 per share (the “Minimum Bid Price Requirement”) and, as a result, did not comply with Listing Rule 5550(a)(2); and (ii) the Staff’s additional delisting notice pursuant to its discretionary authority under Listing Rule 5101 based on public interest concerns related to the Company’s securities offering announced on February 27, 2025.
Following receipt of the April 2025 deficiency notice, the Company timely requested a hearing before the Nasdaq Hearing Panel. The hearing request automatically stayed any suspension or delisting action pending the outcome of the hearing. The Company appeared before the Nasdaq Hearing Panel on May 27, 2025 to address the above-noted compliance matters. As of the hearing date, the Company had been in Compliance with the Minimum Bid Price for not less than twenty-five (25) consecutive trading days, and has since maintained Minimum Bid Price compliance to date.
On June 10, 2025, the Company received the Nasdaq Hearing Panel’s decision in which it notified the Company that it did not find the Company to be in violation of Listing Rules 5100 and 5550(a)(2), the “Public Interest Concern” and “Bid Price Rule”, respectively. Accordingly, the June 10, 2025 letter further provided that the Company is deemed to be in full compliance with the applicable Nasdaq Listing Rules, and that the above-referenced matter was closed. While we are currently in compliance with Nasdaq’s listing rules, there is no guarantee that we may not become subject to future non-compliance or delisting notices, any of which could have a serious negative effect on our stock price, volatility, ability to remain listed, liquidity, among other similar adverse effects on our stock and shareholders.
Despite the Company’s current compliance with Nasdaq’s existing listing standards, the Nasdaq Stock Market has implemented and proposed additional new rules that require existing Nasdaq listed companies to comply with more stringent continued listing rules. For example, proposed Nasdaq rule changes significantly increase delisting risks by removing grace periods for compliance, targeting low-priced stocks, and raising market value requirements. Key changes include immediate suspension for falling below a $5 million market value of listed securities (MVLS) and for stocks trading at or below $0.10. Key risks include the elimination of cure periods: previously, companies had an initial automatic 180-day grace period to regain compliance with certain listing standards. The proposed changes allow for immediate suspension and delisting, particularly when a company's MVLS falls below $5 million for 10 consecutive trading days. Nasdaq is implementing accelerated delisting for stocks trading at or below $0.10 per share for ten consecutive trading days, ultimately targeting companies in severe financial distress. Additionally, Nasdaq has proposed limited appeal rights, including the ability to stay a delisting during an appeal process is being restricted, leaving companies with little to no time to fix deficiencies. Should we fall subject to any of these or other non-compliance matters, we could be delisted, resulting in a variety of serious negative consequences, including, but not limited to the loss of liquidity, and a significant decrease or total loss in shareholder value.
Shareholders may be diluted if additional capital stock is issued to raise capital, including to finance acquisitions, repay debt or in connection with strategic transactions.
We intend to seek to raise additional funds for our operations, to finance acquisitions, repay existing debt or to develop strategic relationships by issuing equity or convertible debt securities, which would reduce the percentage ownership of our existing stockholders. Our board of directors has the authority, without action or vote of the stockholders, to issue all or any part of our authorized but unissued shares of common or preferred stock. Following our recent shareholder approval, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation authorizes us to issue up to 1,000,000,000 shares of common stock and 3,000,000 shares of preferred stock. Future issuances of common or preferred stock would reduce your influence over matters on which stockholders vote and would be dilutive to earnings per share. In addition, any newly issued preferred stock could have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of the common stock. Those rights, preferences and privileges could include, among other things, the establishment of dividends that must be paid prior to declaring or paying dividends or other distributions to holders of our common stock or providing for preferential liquidation rights. These rights, preferences and privileges could negatively affect the rights of holders of our common stock, and the right to convert such preferred stock into shares of our common stock at a rate or price that would have a dilutive effect on the outstanding shares of our common stock.
Future sales of Company shares or securities exercisable for shares could cause the Company’s stock price to decline.
If shareholders of the Company, sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of the Company’s common stock in the public market, the trading price of the common stock of the Company could decline. Dilution and potential dilution, the availability of a large number of shares for sale, and the possibility of additional issuances and sales of the Company’s common stock may negatively affect both the trading price and liquidity of the Company’s common stock.
Our management concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting were not effective as of December 31, 2025 and 2024 due to material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting. If we are unable to remediate these material weaknesses and maintain an effective system of disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results in a timely manner, which may adversely affect investor confidence in us and materially and adversely affect our business and financial results.
The process of designing and implementing and maintaining effective internal controls for newly acquired businesses has required and is expected to continue to require significant resources of the Company. We have concluded that we have material weaknesses in our internal controls due to our limited accounting and finance resources which resulted in inappropriate preparation, review and maintenance of documentation critical to the design and consistent execution of internal controls. Due to limited staffing,it can be challenging to properly prepare, review and maintain appropriate documentation critical to the process.
If the Company continues to have material weaknesses in our internal controls or is unable to establish or maintain appropriate internal financial controls and procedures, it could cause the Company to fail to meet its reporting obligations on a timely basis, result in material misstatements in its consolidated financial statements, and harm its operating results. In addition, the process for designing and implementing and maintaining an effective internal control environment for the Company may divert management’s attention from revenue generating or other important business activities.
If the Company fails to design and implement and maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting for newly acquired businesses in the required timeframe, it may be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities, including the SEC and Nasdaq. Furthermore, if the Company is unable to conclude that its internal controls over financial reporting are effective, it could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of its financial reports, the market price of the Company’s securities could decline, and it could be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities. Failure to implement or maintain effective internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures required of public companies could also restrict the Company’s future access to the capital markets.
The price of the Company’s common stock and trading volume may be volatile and may negatively impact shareholders’ value of their investment.
The market price for the Company’s common stock has been highly volatile, and the market from time to time has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that are unrelated to the operating performance of public companies. The trading volume and prices of the common stock have been volatile and may continue to be volatile and could fluctuate widely due to factors both within and beyond the Company’s control. During 2025 through March 1, 2026, the sale price of common stock ranged from $0.68 to $539 per share, and our daily trading volume ranged from 79 to approximately 69.6 million shares. This volatility may, in part, be the result of broad market and industry factors. Future fluctuations in the trading price or liquidity of the Company’s common stock may harm the value of the investment of the Company’s shareholders in the Company’s common stock.
Factors that may have a significant impact on the market price and marketability of the Company’s common stock include, among others:
public reaction to the Company’s press releases, announcements and filings with the SEC;
the Company’s operating and financial performance;
fluctuations in broader securities market prices and volumes, particularly among securities of technology and solar companies;
changes in market valuations of similar companies;
departures of key personnel;
commencement of or involvement in material litigation;
variations in the Company’s quarterly results of operations or those of other technology and solar companies;
changes in general economic conditions, financial markets or the technology and solar industries;
announcements by the Company or its competitors of significant acquisitions or other transactions;
changes in accounting standards, policies, guidance, interpretations or principles;
speculation in the press or investment community;
actions by the Company’s shareholders, particularly relating to the Company’s common stock;
the failure of securities analysts to cover the Company’s common stock or changes in their recommendations and estimates of its financial performance;
future sales of the Company’s common stock;
the delisting of the Company’s common stock or halting or suspension of trading in its common stock by the Nasdaq Stock Market;
economic and other external factors such as global conflicts, trade wars and the impacts of domestic and foreign tariffs on supplies, parts and other solar related materials and components; and
general market conditions.
The Company may issue additional common stock resulting in stock ownership dilution.
As of March 1, 2026, we had 3,406,616 shares of common stock outstanding. There are an additional 60 shares reserved for issuance upon the settlement of outstanding restricted stock units, 3 shares available for grant under the 2022 Equity Incentive Plan, and 2 shares available for issuance under the 2022 Employee Stock Purchase Plan.
Anti-Takeover Effects of Delaware Law, the Certificate of Incorporation and the Bylaws may discourage or prevent a change in control, even if beneficial to our shareholders and could cause our stock price to decline.
Certain provisions of Delaware law, our certificate of incorporation and our bylaws could make the acquisition of our company more difficult and could delay, defer or prevent a tender offer or other takeover attempt that a stockholder might consider to be in its best interest, including takeover attempts that might result in the payment of a premium to stockholders over the market price for their shares. These provisions also may promote the continuity of our management by making it more difficult for a person to remove or change the incumbent members of our board of directors.
The Company’s board of directors is authorized to issue and designate shares of preferred stock without shareholder approval.
The Company’s articles of incorporation authorize the board of directors, without the approval of the Company shareholders, to issue up to 3,000,000 shares of preferred stock, subject to limitations prescribed by applicable law, rules and regulations and the provisions of the articles of incorporation, as shares of preferred stock in series, to establish from time to time the number of shares to be included in each such series and to fix the designation, powers, preferences and rights of the shares of each such series and the qualifications, limitations or restrictions thereof. The powers, preferences and rights of these series of preferred stock may be senior to or on parity with our common stock, which may reduce its value.
Risks Relating to the Company’s Business
The Company’s continued success and viability depends on the continued origination of solar installation agreements.
The Company’s success and viability depends on the continued origination of solar installation agreements. The Company may be unable to originate additional solar installation agreements and related solar energy systems in the numbers or at the pace the Company currently expects for a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to, the following:
demand for solar energy systems failing to develop sufficiently or taking longer than expected to develop;
residential solar energy technology being unavailable at economically attractive prices as a result of factors outside of the Company’s control, including utility prices not rising as quickly as anticipated;
issues related to financing, construction, permitting, the environment, governmental approvals and the negotiation of solar installation agreements;
a reduction in government incentives or adverse changes in policy and laws for the development or use of solar energy, including net metering, SRECs and tax credits;
other government or regulatory actions that could adversely affect the Company’s business model;
supply chain issues considering most residential solar panels are manufactured outside the U.S.;
negative developments in public perception of the solar energy industry; and
competition from other solar companies following a business plan similar to the Company’s and other energy technologies, including the emergence of alternative renewable energy technologies.
If the challenges of originating solar installation agreements increase, the Company’s pool of available opportunities may be limited, which could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations.
If the Company fails to manage its operations and growth effectively, it may be unable to execute its business plan, maintain high levels of customer service or adequately address competitive challenges.
The Company continues to be focused on growing revenue in the future and it intends to continue its efforts to expand its business within existing and new markets. This growth may place a strain on the Company’s management, operational and financial infrastructure. The Company’s growth requires management to devote a significant amount of time and effort to maintain and expand its relationships with customers and third parties, attract new customers, arrange financing for its growth and manage its expansion into additional markets.
In addition, the Company’s current and planned operations, personnel, information technology and other systems and procedures might be inadequate to support future growth and may require it to make additional unanticipated investments in its infrastructure. The
Company’s success and ability to further scale its business will depend, in part, on its ability to manage these changes in a cost-effective and efficient manner.
If the Company cannot manage its operations and growth, it may be unable to meet its or others’ expectations regarding growth, opportunity and financial targets, take advantage of market opportunities, execute its business strategies or respond to competitive pressures. This could also result in declines in quality or customer satisfaction, increased costs, difficulties in introducing new offerings or other operational difficulties. Any failure to effectively manage the Company’s operations and growth could adversely impact its reputation, business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations.
The Company needs to raise additional capital to fund its operations and repay its obligations, which funding may not be available on favorable terms or at all and may lead to substantial dilution to the Company’s existing shareholders. Further, there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, which conditions may adversely affect the Company’s stock price and its ability to raise capital.
Based on the Company’s current financial position and the Company’s forecasted future cash flows for twelve months beyond the date of issuance of these financial statements, substantial doubt exists around the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time. As noted in Note 11, Equity, and Note 8, Commitments and Contingencies, the Company raised capital and satisfied certain outstanding debt obligations during 2025, however there remains uncertainty related to our future cash flows as it relies on the ability to generate enough cash flow from its operating segments to cover the Company’s corporate overhead costs. As a result, the Company requires a dditional funding and seeks to raise capital through sources that may include public or private equity offerings, debt financings and/or strategic alliances. However, additional funding may not be available on terms acceptable to the Company, or at all. If the Company is unable to raise additional funds, it would have a negative impact on the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.
Our ability to operate as a going concern is contingent upon successfully obtaining additional financing. Raising additional capital may be costly or difficult to obtain and could significantly dilute the Company’s shareholders’ ownership interests or inhibit the Company’s ability to achieve its business objectives. If the Company raises additional funds through public or private equity offerings or convertible debt or other exchangeable securities, the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of the Company’s common shareholders. To the extent that the Company raises additional capital through the sale of common stock or securities convertible or exchangeable into common stock, the Company’s existing shareholders will be diluted. In addition, any debt financing may subject the Company to fixed payment obligations and covenants limiting or restricting its ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt or making capital expenditures.
In addition, the fact that there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern and that the Company is operating under these conditions may adversely affect the Company’s stock price and its ability to raise capital.
The Company depends on a limited number of suppliers of solar energy system components and technologies to adequately meet demand for its solar energy systems.
The Company purchases solar panels, inverters, energy storage systems and other system components and instruments from a limited number of suppliers, making it susceptible to quality issues, shortages and price changes. If one or more of the suppliers the Company relies upon to meet anticipated demand ceases or reduces production due to its financial condition, acquisition by a competitor or otherwise, is unable to increase production as industry demand increases or is otherwise unable to allocate sufficient production to it, it may be difficult to quickly identify alternative suppliers or to qualify alternative products on commercially reasonable terms and the Company’s ability to satisfy this demand may be adversely affected. There are a limited number of suppliers of solar energy system components, instruments and technologies. Any need to transition to a new supplier may result in additional costs and delays in originating solar installation agreements and deploying its related solar energy systems, which in turn may result in additional costs and delays in its acquisition of such solar installation agreements and related solar energy systems. These issues could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.
There have also been periods of industry-wide shortages of key components and instruments, including batteries and inverters, in times of rapid industry growth. The manufacturing infrastructure for some of these components has a long lead-time, requires significant capital investment and relies on the continued availability of key commodity materials, which could potentially result in an inability to meet demand for these components. The solar industry is currently experiencing rapid growth and, as a result, shortages of key components or instruments, including solar panels, may be more likely to occur, which in turn may result in price increases for such components. Even if industry-wide shortages do not occur, manufacturers and suppliers experiencing high demand or insufficient production capacity for key components may allocate these key components to customers other than the Company or its suppliers. The Company’s ability to originate solar installation agreements and related solar energy systems would be reduced as a result of the allocation of key components by manufacturers and suppliers.
The Company’s supply chain and operations could be subject to natural disasters and other events beyond its control, such as earthquakes, wildfires, flooding, hurricanes, tsunamis, typhoons, volcanic eruptions, droughts, tornadoes, power outages or other
natural disasters, the effects of climate change and related extreme weather, public health issues and pandemics, war, terrorism, government restrictions or limitations on trade, and geo-political unrest and uncertainties.
Increases in the cost of the Company’s solar energy systems due to tariffs and other trade restrictions imposed by the U.S. and foreign governments could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.
U.S. trade and tariff policy regarding solar energy equipment has experienced a high level of activity in recent years, under both the current and previous Administrations. Most recently, on July 1, 2025, the U.S. Commerce Department launched an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 into imported polysilicon, a key component in solar panels. A decision is expected in 2026. If the investigation finds that imported polysilicon poses a national security threat to the United States, the Administration could impose new tariffs on those imports, potentially increasing the price of some of the equipment we procure.
In addition, on April 21, 2025, the U.S. Commerce Department issued final anti-dumping (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) rates on crystalline solar cells and modules imported from Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand and Cambodia. These countries have supplied the majority of imported solar cells and modules to the United States in recent years, and now face new country-wide final AD or CVD tariff rates ranging from 1.92% to 534.67%. The Commerce Department also imposed new tariffs on individual cell and module manufacturers in those countries. The imposition of tariffs generally has an inflationary effect on module prices for solar energy equipment installers, including us.
In addition, U.S. laws and regulations intended to prevent the importation of goods manufactured with forced labor have and could continue to affect our business operations and supply chain, including ongoing enforcement of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (“UFLPA”) and the withhold release order (“WRO”) that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) issued on June 24, 2021, applicable to certain silica-based products manufactured in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China. Intensive examinations, withhold release orders, and related governmental procedures have resulted in supply chain and operational delays throughout the industry, and we have implemented policies and procedures to maintain compliance and minimize delays. These and similar trade restrictions that may be imposed in the future could cause delivery and installation delays, and restrict the global supply of polysilicon and solar products. This could result in near-term demand for available energy systems despite higher costs, increased costs of polysilicon and the overall cost of energy systems, and equipment shortages, potentially reducing overall demand for and limiting the supply of our products and services.
In recent years, we have faced substantial trade policy volatility, marked by escalating tariffs and trade investigations that create substantial uncertainty in our supply chain and cost structure. In April 2025, the Administration implemented broad "reciprocal" tariffs, including a 10% baseline tariff on most imports. Following a 90-day pause to allow for bilateral negotiations, country-specific reciprocal tariffs took effect on August 7, 2025, with rates now ranging from 10% to 50% depending on the country of origin. Existing tariffs on steel, copper and aluminum were notably already increased to 50% for most countries, with specific exemptions for the UK. On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the President to impose tariffs, invalidating some but not all of the recently imposed tariffs. The Trump Administration responded by announcing new tariffs pursuant to another statute, but significant uncertainty remains regarding the legality and effect of such tariffs. In response to such U.S. tariffs, some foreign governments have threatened or instituted retaliatory tariffs on certain U.S. goods and have indicated a willingness to impose additional tariffs on U.S. products, which could increase tensions and create greater uncertainty and instability in our business dealings and negatively affect our business operations. The legal standing of some reciprocal tariffs is currently under federal court review, though these rulings are stayed pending appeal, meaning the announced tariffs remain in effect.
The trade relationship with China has seen particularly aggressive and fluctuating tariff escalations. While final tariff rates have yet to be determined, other pre-existing U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods generally persist, can change more frequently than previously, and are additive. For example, the current U.S. presidential administration has announced a formal investigation process to consider new national security-based tariffs on imports of semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment, which are necessary components of our solar panels. The highly fluid situation with China is potentially subject to further changes as this 90-day pause period concludes and with the ongoing sector-specific investigations into polysilicon and semiconductors.
These developments compound existing trade measures, including the previously discussed AD/CVD tariffs on solar cells and modules and the 50% Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum. The cumulative effect impacts both our direct equipment procurement costs and the expenses faced by our U.S.-based component suppliers, whose manufacturing inputs are subject to these tariffs.
The unpredictable nature of these policy changes, including their scale, scope, and implementation timeline, creates significant challenges for cost forecasting and supply chain management. While we are actively collaborating with suppliers to establish alternative, less impacted supply chains, these transitions require substantial time for development and scaling. We cannot guarantee that these mitigation efforts will fully offset the adverse effects of these tariff increases on our business operations, financial condition, and results of operations
We cannot predict what actions may ultimately be taken with respect to tariffs or trade relations between the United States and other countries, which products may be subject to such actions, or what actions may be taken by other countries in retaliation. The tariffs described above, the adoption and expansion of trade restrictions, the occurrence of a trade war, or other governmental action related to tariffs, trade agreements or related policies have the potential to adversely impact our supply chain and access to equipment, and our costs and ability to economically serve certain markets. Any such cost increases or decreases in availability could slow our growth and cause our financial results and operational metrics to suffer. We cannot predict whether, and to what extent, U.S. trade policies will change in the future and cannot ensure that additional tariffs or other restrictive measures will not continue or increase.
The Company’s operating results and its ability to grow or viability continue may fluctuate from quarter to quarter and year to year, which could make its future performance difficult to predict and could cause its operating results for a particular period to fall below expectations.
The Company’s quarterly and annual operating results are difficult to predict and may fluctuate significantly in the future. In addition to the other risks described in this section, the following factors could cause the Company’s operating results to fluctuate:
expiration or initiation of any governmental rebates or incentives;
significant fluctuations in customer demand for the Company’s solar energy systems;
our ability to continue or to expand the Company’s operations and the amount and timing of expenditures related to this expansion;
announcements by the Company or its competitors of significant acquisitions;
strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital-raising activities or commitments;
price of materials and supplies;
availability and cost of labor;
changes in the Company’s pricing policies or terms or those of its competitors, including centralized electric utilities;
actual or anticipated developments in the Company’s competitors’ businesses;
technology or the competitive landscape; and
natural disasters or other weather or meteorological conditions.
For these or other reasons, past performance should not be relied upon as indications of the Company’s future performance.
The Company may be required to record an impairment charge on our goodwill in the future.
We are required under generally accepted accounting principles to test goodwill for impairment at least annually or when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may be impaired. Factors that can lead to impairment of goodwill include significant adverse changes in the business climate and actual or projected operating results, declines in the financial condition of our business and sustained decrease in our stock price. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024, we performed an interim quantitative assessment as of December 31, 2024 related to the recoverability of our goodwill for our two reporting units as a result of a material decline in our stock price and forecasted revenues and operating results. We concluded that the fair value of our HEC reporting unit did not exceed its carrying value as of December 31, 2024 and recorded an impairment of $3.1 million in our consolidated statements of operations, reducing our HEC goodwill balance to $6.7 million and our total goodwill balance to $17.4 million. We performed a quantitative analysis as of September 30, 2025 and October 1, 2025 and concluded that the fair values of the SUNation NY and HEC reporting units exceeded its carrying value and no impairment charge was necessary. We may be required to record additional impairment expense on our goodwill in the future.
For further information regarding the assessment please see Note 7, Goodwill and Intangible Assets , in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We may not realize the anticipated benefits of past or future investments, strategic transactions, or acquisitions, and integration of these acquisitions may disrupt our business and our management.
We have in the past and may in the future, acquire companies, projects, products, or technologies or enter into joint ventures or other strategic transactions.
We may not realize the anticipated benefits of past or future investments, strategic transactions, or acquisitions, and these transactions involve numerous risks that are not within our control. These risks include the following, among others:
Failure to satisfy the required conditions and otherwise complete a planned acquisition, joint venture or other strategic transaction on a timely basis or at all;
Legal or regulatory proceedings, if any, relating to a planned acquisition, joint venture or other strategic transaction and the outcome of such legal proceedings;
Difficulty in assimilating the operations, systems, and personnel of the acquired company;
Difficulty in effectively integrating the acquired technologies or products with our current products and technologies;
Difficulty in maintaining controls, procedures and policies during the transition and integration;
Disruption of our ongoing business and distraction of our management and employees from other opportunities and challenges due to integration issues;
Difficulty integrating the acquired company’s accounting, management information and other administrative systems;
Inability to retain key technical and managerial personnel of the acquired business;
Inability to retain key customers, vendors and other business partners of the acquired business;
Inability to achieve the financial and strategic goals for the acquired and combined businesses;
Incurring acquisition-related costs or amortization costs for acquired intangible assets that could impact our results of operations;
Significant post-acquisition investments which may lower the actual benefits realized through the acquisition;
Potential failure of the due diligence processes to identify significant issues with product quality, legal, and financial liabilities, among other things;
Moderating and anticipating the impacts of inherent or emerging seasonality in acquired customer agreements;
Potential inability to assert that internal controls over financial reporting are effective; and
Potential inability to obtain, or obtain in a timely manner, approvals from governmental authorities, which could delay or prevent such acquisitions.
Our failure to address these risks, or other problems encountered in connection with our past or future investments, strategic transactions, or acquisitions, could cause us to fail to realize the anticipated benefits of these acquisitions or investments, cause us to incur unanticipated liabilities, and harm our business generally. Future acquisitions could also result in dilutive issuances of our equity securities, the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities, amortization expenses, incremental expenses or the write-off of goodwill, any of which could harm our financial condition or results of operations, and the trading price of our common stock could decline.
We periodically receive proposals to consider expansion, diversification and other forms of strategic transactions, and any such transactions that we may consider or consummate in the future could have negative consequences.
We have in the past and continue to receive inquiries related to a range of strategic transactions and strategic alternatives, ranging from offers to acquire assets to grow our existing business to expansions to diversify our business and more. Strategic alternatives, if consummated, could take the form of mergers, acquisitions, partnerships, joint ventures, licensing arrangements or other strategic transactions.
We expect to continue to devote time and resources to exploring legitimate strategic options that we believe will increase shareholder value. There can be no assurance that any of these proposals will result in a successful consummation, if pursued, or that they will be completed on attractive terms or at all. Additionally, there can be no assurances that any particular course of action, business arrangement or transaction, or series of transactions, will lead to increased shareholder value or that it will ultimately result in a successful expansion or diversified business.
The process of evaluating these strategic options may be very costly, including such as legal and accounting fees, expenses and other related charges that would otherwise be committed to operations. In addition, any strategic business combination or other transactions that we may consummate in the future could have a variety of negative consequences and we may implement a course of action or consummate a transaction that yields unexpected results that adversely affect our business and decreases the remaining cash available for use in our business.
Additionally, a number of the foregoing and other significant factors may be beyond our control, including, among other things, market conditions, industry trends, the interest of third parties in a potential transaction with us, obtaining shareholder approval and the availability of financing to third parties in a potential transaction with us on reasonable terms. Any failure of such potential transaction to achieve the anticipated results could significantly impair our ability to enter into any future strategic transactions and may significantly diminish or delay any future distributions to our shareholders.
If we are not successful in identifying a successful strategic alternative, expansion or diversification or if our plans are not executed in a timely fashion, this may cause reputational harm with our shareholders and the value of our common stock shares may be materially adversely impacted. In addition, speculation regarding any developments related to the review of strategic alternatives and/or perceived uncertainties related to the future of our business could cause our share price to fluctuate significantly or result in the total loss of your investment.
Even if we successfully consummate a strategic transaction, we may fail to realize all of the anticipated benefits of the transaction, those benefits may take longer to realize than expected, or we may encounter integration difficulties.
Our ability to realize the anticipated benefits of any potential expansion, diversification or business combination or any other result in this regard are highly uncertain. Any anticipated benefits will depend on a number of factors, including our ability to realize what is
believed to be higher value of targeted assets due to the ability to integrate with any future business partner and our ability to generate future shareholder value. Such process may also be disruptive to our business, and the expected benefits may not be achieved within the anticipated time frame, or at all. The failure to meet the challenges involved and to realize the anticipated benefits of any potential transaction could adversely affect our business and financial condition.
Any executed strategic transaction may not maximize or even enhance stockholder value, could result in total costs and expenses that are greater than expected, and could make it more difficult to attract and retain qualified personnel, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, a potential strategic alternative may require stockholder approval and stockholder approval may not be obtained (including if any significant or activist shareholder may not vote for such transaction or it/they may attempt to actively work against the approval of such strategic or other transaction) and, therefore, we may not successfully consummate the strategic alternative.
In addition, the market price of our common stock may reflect a market assumption that a strategic alternative will occur, and a failure to complete a strategic alternative could result in negative investor perceptions and could cause a decline in the market price of our common stock, which could adversely affect our ability to access the equity and financial markets, as well as our ability to explore and enter into different strategic alternatives.
If the Company is unable to make net profitable acquisitions, successful joint ventures, mergers, or other diversification strategies on economically acceptable terms, its future growth would be limited, and any acquisitions it may make could reduce, rather than increase, its cash flows.
The consummation and timing of any future acquisitions will depend upon, among other things, whether the Company is able to:
identify attractive acquisition candidates that are accretive and net profitable;
negotiate economically acceptable purchase agreements;
obtain any required governmental or third-party consents;
obtain financing for these acquisitions on economically acceptable terms which may be more difficult at times when the capital markets are less accessible; and
outbid any competing bidders.
Additionally, any acquisition, joint venture, or merger involves potential risks, including, among other things:
mistaken assumptions about assets, revenues and expenses of the acquired company, including synergies and potential growth;
an inability to successfully integrate the assets or businesses the Company acquires;
coordinating geographically disparate organizations, systems and facilities;
the assumption of unknown liabilities for which the Company is not indemnified or for which its indemnity is inadequate;
mistaken assumptions about the acquired company’s suppliers or other vendors;
the diversion of management’s and employees’ attention from other business concerns;
unforeseen difficulties operating in new geographic areas and business lines;
customer or key employee losses at the acquired business; and
poor quality assets or installation.
If the Company consummates future acquisitions, its capitalization, results of operations and future growth may change significantly and its shareholders may not have the opportunity to evaluate the economic, financial and other relevant information considered in deciding to engage in these future acquisitions.
Product liability and property damage claims against the Company or accidents could result in adverse publicity and potentially significant monetary damages.
It is possible that the Company’s solar energy systems could injure its customers or other third parties or its solar energy systems could cause property damage as a result of product malfunctions, defects, improper installation, fire or other causes. Any product liability claim that the Company faces could be expensive to defend and may divert management’s attention. The successful assertion of product liability claims against the Company could result in potentially significant monetary damages, potential increases in insurance expenses, penalties or fines, subject it to adverse publicity, damage its reputation and competitive position and adversely affect sales of solar energy systems. In addition, product liability claims, injuries, defects or other problems experienced by other companies in the residential solar industry could lead to unfavorable market conditions to the industry as a whole and may have an adverse effect on the Company’s ability to expand its portfolio of solar installation agreements, thus affecting its business, financial condition and results of operations.
Changes in our business strategy or restructuring of our businesses may increase our costs or otherwise affect our businesses.
We continually review our operations with a view toward reducing our cost structure, including, but not limited to, reducing our labor cost-to-revenue ratio, improving process and system efficiencies and increasing our revenues and operating margins. Despite these efforts, we have needed and may continue to need to adjust our business strategies to meet these changes, or we may otherwise find it necessary to restructure our operations or particular businesses or assets. When these changes or events occur, we may incur costs to change our business strategy and may need to write down the value of assets or sell certain assets. Additionally, we may seek to strategically roll up entities that we believe will be revenue accretive, and/or consider strategic transactions that may significantly alter our principal business focus or expand or diversify our business, in each case, such strategic transaction may result in a need to execute a financing, including potentially significant dilutive financings. Any of these events our costs may increase, and we may have significant charges or losses associated with the write-down or divestiture of assets and our business may be materially and adversely affected.
We may not fully realize the anticipated benefits from our restructuring or diversification efforts.
In regard to our realigned strategy and continued exploration of strategic alternatives, we may not achieve the expected benefits of such activities. Our ability to achieve the anticipated cost savings and other benefits from our restructuring, or other strategic diversification or expansion efforts within expected time frames is subject to many estimates and assumptions, and may vary materially based on factors such as market conditions and the effect of our efforts on our work force. These estimates and assumptions are subject to significant economic, competitive, capital structure and other uncertainties, some of which are beyond our control. There can be no assurance that we will fully realize the anticipated positive impacts to our operations, liquidity or future financial results from our current or future cost saving, or the potential benefits of any such expansions or business diversification efforts. If our estimates and assumptions are incorrect or if other unforeseen events occur, we may not achieve the cost savings, increased margins, diversification or expected revenues from such strategic alternative efforts, and our business and results of operations could be adversely affected.
We need to obtain substantial additional financing arrangements to provide working capital, expansion and growth capital. If financing is not available to us on acceptable terms when needed, our ability to continue to fund our operations and grow our business would be materially adversely impacted.
Distributed solar power is a capital-intensive business that relies heavily on the availability of debt and equity financing sources to fund solar energy system purchase, design, engineering and other capital and operational expenditures. Our future success depends in part on our ability to raise capital from third-party investors and commercial sources, such as banks and other lenders, on competitive terms to help finance the deployment of our solar energy systems. We seek to minimize our cost of capital in order to improve profitability and maintain the price competitiveness of the electricity produced by the payments for and the cost of our solar energy systems; however, as a result of the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which was passed in congress and signed into law in July 2025, we will be required to seek new sources of revenue, funding and financing, the affects and results of which are too early to fully ascertain, adding additional complexity to our operating and finance costs, in addition to the loss of certain tax credits to our residential customers, the latter of which is not yet in effect, and therefore, not fully determinable, adding further uncertainty to certain of our operational costs. These changes could materially impact our finance costs, timing and ultimately our revenues and operations. We rely on access to capital, including through equity financing, convertible notes, revenue loans and other forms of debt facilities, asset-backed securities and loan-backed securities, to cover the costs related to bringing our solar energy systems in service.
To meet the capital and liquidity needs of our business, as well as any potential strategic acquisitions, expansions or business diversifications, we will need to obtain additional debt or equity financing from current and new investors. We have limited cash resources with which to operate our business and we may have difficulty in accessing financing on a timely basis or at all. The contract terms in certain of our existing investment and securities documents contain various conditions, penalty and liquidated damages clauses. If we are not able to satisfy such conditions due to events related to our business, a specific investment fund, developments in our industry, including tax or regulatory changes, or otherwise, and as a result, we are unable to draw on existing funding commitments or raise capital through equity, equity derivative or debt instruments, we could experience a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Any delays in accessing financing could have an adverse effect on our ability to pay our operational expenses, make capital expenditures, repay loans and fund other general corporate purposes. Further, our flexibility in planning for and reacting to changes in our business may be limited and our vulnerability to adverse changes in general economic, industry, regulatory and competitive conditions may be increased.
If any of our previous or current debt or equity investors decide not to invest in us in the future for any reason or decide to invest at levels inadequate to support our anticipated needs or materially change the terms under which they are willing to provide future financing, we will need to identify new investors and financial institutions to provide financing and negotiate new financing terms. In addition, our ability to obtain additional financing through the asset-backed securities market, loan-backed securities market or other secured debt markets is subject to our having sufficient assets eligible for securitization as well as our ability to obtain appropriate
credit ratings. If we are unable to raise additional capital in a timely manner, our ability to meet our capital needs and fund future growth and profitability may be limited.
Delays in obtaining financing could cause delays in expansion in existing markets or entering into new markets and hiring additional personnel, as well as with respect to any such potential business expansions, diversifications or acquisitions. Such financings could also result in significant dilution to our existing shareholders Any future delays in capital raising could similarly cause us to delay deployment of a substantial number of solar energy systems for which we have signed solar service agreements with customers, or to execute upon any potential acquisitions, expansions or business diversification efforts. Our future ability to obtain additional financing depends on banks’ and other financing sources’ continued confidence in our business model and the renewable energy industry as a whole. It could also be impacted by the liquidity needs of such financing sources themselves. We face intense competition from a variety of other companies, technologies and financing structures for such limited investment capital. If we are unable to continue to offer a competitive investment profile, we may lose access to these funds or they may only be available to us on terms less favorable than those received by our competitors. Any inability to secure financing could lead us to cancel planned installations, potential business diversification, expansions, impair our ability to accept new customers or increase our borrowing costs, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Federal tax policy impacts the competitiveness of our service offerings to customers and our market.
At the federal level, tax policy and associated regulations have a direct impact on our business. The most notable recent tax legislation affecting our business is the OBBBA that President Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025. The new law adjusts federal energy tax policies that we rely upon, including the Section 48E Clean Electricity Investment Credit and its associated “bonus” credits. For example, the law maintains the Section 48E credit for energy storage through 2033, it shortens the availability of the 48E credit for solar facilities to the end of 2027. The law also applies new “Foreign Entity of Concern” restrictions to the Section 48E credit, which could potentially deny tax credits to projects that use certain components or receive “material assistance” from FEOC entities, thereby potentially increasing costs and potentially reducing demand. The law ends the customer-claimed Section 25D Residential Clean Energy Credit starting in 2026. Changes in the law to the Section 45X Advanced Manufacturing Production Credit could also affect us indirectly, through our suppliers. The implementation of the law through the federal regulatory process could also directly and materially affect our business, revenues, residential installation viability, profitability, margins, among other negative serious implications. If our revenues decline significantly, we may be required to pause, suspend or significantly reduce our operations, lay-off employees and may become no longer be a viable going concern business. While it is too soon to definitively determine the long-term effects of the OBBBA on the solar industry, there are potential significant negative effects that may result therefrom to our business operations.
The customer value proposition for home solar, storage, and home electrification products is influenced by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the retail price of electricity, the valuation of electricity not consumed on site and exported to the grid, the rate design mechanisms of customers’ utility bills, various policies related to the permitting and interconnection costs of our products to homes and the grid, the availability of incentives for solar, batteries, and other electrification products, and other policies which allow aggregations of our systems to provide the grid value. Significant changes to any of these factors may impact the competitiveness of our service offerings to customers.
The value proposition of our solar and storage offering, as well as our other related home electrification offerings, such as the electric vehicle charging station, is impacted by several factors outside of our control including, but are not limited to, the retail price of electricity, the valuation of electricity not consumed on site but exported to the grid, the rate design mechanisms of customers’ utility bills, various policies related to the permitting and interconnection costs of our products to homes and the grid, the availability of incentives for solar, batteries, and other electrification products, and other policies which allow aggregations of our systems to provide the grid value. For over two decades across the United States, utilities, their trade associations, fossil fuel interests, and some other stakeholders not aligned with a decentralized grid have been challenging many legislative and regulatory policies that enhance the customer value proposition of residential solar and storage. In connection with the value attributed to exported electricity, net metering (“NEM”) had traditionally been a main policy mechanism to measure and value exported electricity sent back to the grid in the markets within which we do business. That value has always varied depending on the retail price of power in a certain market, substantial differences in rate design per market, and NEM market specific differences, including billing details around how to carry over NEM credits, whether or not to cap the amount of net metered solar in a specific market, or how a specific market values the exported electricity. A substantial majority of the markets in which we operate have implemented various styles of NEM policies, allowing end customers to receive credits for the electricity not consumed on site and exported to the grid. Some states have moved away from the traditional retail NEM credit structure of paying the full retail rate for exported electricity, and instead, such states have chosen to value excess generation by customers’ solar systems in different ways. Hawaii transitioned from retail NEM in 2016 and developed programs that utilize values from rooftop solar paired with batteries to support grid needs. Additionally, some states like New Jersey and Maryland have established caps or thresholds that will trigger regulatory review of net metering policies in the coming years.
The Company will not be able to insure against all potential risks and it may become subject to higher insurance premiums.
The Company’s insurance policies do not cover all potential losses and coverage is not always available in the insurance market on commercially reasonable terms. Furthermore, the receipt of insurance proceeds may be delayed, requiring the Company to use cash or incur financing costs in the interim. To the extent the Company experiences covered losses under its insurance policies, the limit of its coverage for potential losses may be decreased or the insurance rates it has to pay increased. Furthermore, the losses insured through commercial insurance are subject to the credit risk of those insurance companies.
The Company may not be able to maintain or obtain insurance of the type and amount it desires at reasonable rates. The insurance coverage the Company does obtain may contain large deductibles or fail to cover certain risks or all potential losses. In addition, the Company’s insurance policies will be subject to annual review by its insurers and may not be renewed on similar or favorable terms, including coverage, deductibles or premiums, or at all. If a significant accident or event occurs for which the Company is not fully insured or it suffers losses due to one or more of its insurance carriers defaulting on their obligations or contesting their coverage obligations, it could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.
Damage to the Company’s brand and reputation or change or loss of use of its brand could harm its business and results of operations.
The Company depends significantly on its reputation for excellent customer service and brand name to attract new customers and grow its business. If the Company fails to continue to deliver within the planned timelines, if its offerings do not perform as anticipated or if it damages any of its customers’ properties or delays or cancels projects, its brand and reputation could be significantly impaired. Future technological improvements may allow the Company to offer lower prices or offer new technology to new customers; however, technical limitations in its current solar energy systems may prevent it from offering such lower prices or new technology to the Company’s existing customers. The inability of the Company’s current customers to benefit from technological improvements could cause its existing customers to lower the value they perceive the Company’s existing products offer and impair its brand and reputation.
In addition, given the sheer number of interactions the Company’s personnel has with customers and potential customers, it is inevitable that some customers’ and potential customers’ interactions with it will be perceived as less than satisfactory. If the Company cannot manage its hiring and training processes to avoid or minimize these issues to the extent possible, its reputation may be harmed and its ability to attract new customers would suffer.
The loss of one or more members of the Company’s senior management or key employees may adversely affect its ability to implement its strategy.
The Company depends on its experienced management team and the loss of one or more key executives could have a negative impact on its business. The Company may be unable to replace key members of its management team and key employees if it loses their services. Integrating new employees into the Company’s team could prove disruptive to the Company’s operations, require substantial resources and management attention and ultimately prove unsuccessful. An inability to attract and retain sufficient managerial personnel who have critical industry experience and relationships could limit or delay the Company’s strategic efforts, which could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.
The Company’s inability to protect its intellectual property could adversely affect its business. The Company may also be subject to intellectual property rights claims by third parties, which are extremely costly to defend, could require it to pay significant damages and could limit its ability to use certain technologies.
The Company’s success depends, at least in part, on its ability to protect its core technology and intellectual property. The Company relies on intellectual property laws, primarily a combination of copyright and trade secret laws in the U.S., as well as license agreements and other contractual provisions, to protect its proprietary technology and brand. The Company cannot be certain its agreements and other contractual provisions will not be breached, including a breach involving the use or disclosure of its trade secrets or know-how, or that adequate remedies will be available in the event of any breach. In addition, the Company’s trade secrets may otherwise become known or lose trade secret protection.
The Company cannot be certain its products and its business do not or will not violate the intellectual property rights of a third party. Third parties, including the Company’s competitors, may own patents or other intellectual property rights that cover aspects of the Company’s technology or business methods. These parties may claim the Company has misappropriated, misused, violated or infringed third-party intellectual property rights. Any claim that the Company has violated a third party’s intellectual property rights, whether with or without merit, could be time-consuming, expensive to settle or litigate and could divert its management’s attention and other resources, all of which could adversely affect its business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. If the Company does not successfully settle or defend an intellectual property claim, it could be liable for significant monetary damages and could be prohibited from continuing to use certain technology, business methods, content or brands. To avoid a prohibition, the Company could seek a license from third parties, which could require it to pay significant royalties, increasing its operating expenses.
If a license is not available at all or not available on commercially reasonable terms, the Company may be required to develop or license a non-violating alternative, either of which could adversely affect its business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The Company may be subject to interruptions or failures in its information technology systems.
The Company relies on information technology systems and infrastructure to support its business. Any of these systems may be susceptible to damage or interruption due to fire, floods, power loss, telecommunication failures, usage errors by employees, computer viruses, cyberattacks or other security breaches or similar events. A compromise of the Company’s information technology systems or those with which it interacts could harm its reputation and expose it to regulatory actions and claims from customers and other persons, any of which could adversely affect its business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations. If the Company’s information systems are damaged, fail to work properly or otherwise become unavailable, it may incur substantial costs to repair or replace them and it may experience a loss of critical information, customer disruption and interruptions or delays in its ability to perform essential functions.
The Company’s information technology systems may be exposed to various cybersecurity risks and other disruptions that could impair its ability to operate, adversely affect its business, and damage its brand and reputation.
The Company relies extensively on its information technology systems and on third parties for services including its enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system, banking, payroll, shipping, and e-mail systems to conduct business. The Company also collects, stores and transmits sensitive data, including proprietary business information and personally identifiable information of its customers, suppliers and employees.
The Company’s information technology systems and communication systems are vulnerable to cybersecurity risks such as computer viruses, hacking, malware, denial of service attacks, cyber terrorism, circumvention of security systems, malfeasance, breaches due to employee error, natural disasters, telecommunications failure, at its facilities or at third-party locations.
Complying with the varying cybersecurity and data privacy regulatory requirements could cause the Company to incur substantial costs or require it to change its business practices in a manner adverse to its business. Any failure, or perceived failure, by the Company to comply with any regulatory requirements or international privacy or consumer protection-related laws and regulations could result in proceedings or actions against it by governmental entities or others, subject it to significant penalties and negative publicity and adversely affect us. In addition, as noted above, the Company is subject to the possibility of security breaches, which themselves may result in a violation of these laws.
Any failure, breach or unauthorized access to the Company’s or third-party systems could result in the loss of confidential, sensitive or proprietary information, interruptions in its service or production or otherwise its ability to conduct business operations, and could result in potential reductions in revenue and profits, damage to its reputation or liability. Given that the Company receives, stores and uses personal information of its customers, including names, addresses, e-mail addresses, credit information, credit card and financial account information and other housing and energy use information, this risk is amplified. There can be no assurance that the Company’s protective measures will prevent or timely detect security breaches that could have a significant impact on its business, reputation, operating results and financial condition.
If a cyberattack or other security incident were to allow unauthorized access to or modification of the Company’s customers’ data or its own data, whether due to a failure with its systems or related systems operated by third parties, it could suffer damage to its brand and reputation. The costs the Company would incur to address and fix these incidents would increase its expenses. These types of security incidents could also lead to lawsuits, regulatory investigations and increased legal liability, including in some cases contractual costs related to customer notification and fraud monitoring. Further, as regulatory focus on privacy and data security issues continues to increase and worldwide laws and regulations concerning the protection of information become more complex, the potential risks and costs of compliance to the Company’s business will intensify.
A failure to hire and retain a sufficient number of key employees, such as installers and electricians, would constrain our growth and our ability to timely complete projects.
To support our growth, we need to hire, train, deploy, manage, and retain a substantial number of skilled employees, including but not limited to engineers, installers, and electricians. Competition for these roles is increasing. Shortages of skilled labor could significantly delay a project or otherwise increase our costs.
Our business is concentrated in certain markets, putting us at risk of region-specific disruptions.
The Company currently operates primarily in Hawaii and the New York (Long Island) region, and most of the Company’s revenue comes from these regions. Any disruptions to these specific states or regional areas may impact the Company’s operations and financial results.
Litigation brought by third parties claiming breach of contract, contractual defaults or other claims for may be costly and time consuming.
We may, from time to time, be involved in litigation and government proceedings, as well as contractual financial claims arising in the course of business, which may a material adverse impact on our financial position, results of operations or liquidity. These claims have in the past, and may in the future, arise from a wide variety of business practices and initiatives, including current or new product releases, third party products that we may be asked to install and which may prove defective or faulty, significant business transactions, securities offerings, convertible notes, warrants, loans, warranty or product claims, employment practices, real estate contracts and regulation, among other matters. Adverse outcomes in some or all of these claims may result in significant monetary damages or injunctive relief that could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business. Litigation, threatened litigation and other material claims are subject to inherent uncertainties and management’s view of these matters may change in the future. A material adverse impact in our consolidated financial statements could occur for the period in which the effect of an unfavorable outcome becomes probable and reasonably estimable.
If we become involved in material litigation or a significant number of litigations, we may incur substantial expense defending these claims and the proceedings may divert the attention of management, even if we prevail. An adverse outcome could have a material adverse impact on our business, including causing us to seek protection under the bankruptcy laws, forcing us to reduce or discontinue our operations entirely, subject us to significant liabilities, allow our competitors to market competitive products without a license from us, prohibit us from marketing our products or require us to seek licenses from third parties that may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. If a judgment is entered against us, and we are unable to satisfy the judgment, a plaintiff may attempt to levy on our assets. We may be forced to sell material assets to satisfy such judgment, which may, in turn, force us to reduce or discontinue our operations.
Risks Related to the Solar Industry
Changes in current laws or regulations or the imposition of new laws or regulations, or new interpretations thereof, in the solar energy sector, by federal or state agencies in the United States could impair our ability to compete and could materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.
There has been, and will continue to be, regulatory uncertainty in the clean energy sector generally and the solar energy sector in particular. Changes in current laws or regulations, or the imposition of new laws and regulations in the United States and around the world, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, any changes to the laws and implementing regulations affecting the clean energy sector may create delays in the introduction of new products, prevent our customers from deploying our products or, in some cases, require us to redesign our products.
On July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act became law, which accelerates the phase-outs and terminations of various eligible tax credits enacted as part of the Inflation Reduction Act and places restrictions on continued receipt of tax credits by specified foreign entities and foreign influenced entities. The reduction, elimination or expiration of government incentives for, or regulations mandating the use of, as well as corporate commitments to the use of renewable energy and solar energy specifically could reduce demand for solar energy systems and harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If sufficient additional demand for residential solar energy systems does not develop or takes longer to develop than the Company anticipates, its ability to originate solar installation agreements may decrease.
The distributed residential solar energy market is at a relatively early stage of development in comparison to fossil fuel-based electricity generation. If additional demand for distributed residential solar energy systems fails to develop sufficiently, fails to maintain or grow from current levels (including as a result of the loss of federal tax credits in 2026) or takes longer to develop than the Company anticipates, it may materially negatively impact the Company’s business.
Many factors may affect the demand for solar energy systems, including, but not limited to, the following:
availability, substance and magnitude of solar support programs, including government targets;
subsidies, incentives, renewable portfolio standards and residential net metering rules;
the relative pricing of other conventional and non-renewable energy sources, such as natural gas, coal, oil and other fossil fuels, wind, utility-scale solar, nuclear, geothermal and biomass;
performance, reliability and availability of energy generated by solar energy systems compared to conventional and other non-solar renewable energy sources;
availability and performance of energy storage technology, the ability to implement this technology for use in conjunction with solar energy systems and the cost competitiveness this technology provides to customers as compared to costs for those customers that rely solely on the conventional electrical grid; and
general economic conditions, supply chain conditions and the level of interest rates.
The residential solar energy industry is constantly evolving, which makes it difficult to evaluate the Company’s prospects. The Company cannot be certain if historical growth rates reflect future opportunities or whether it will achieve the growth it anticipates. The failure of distributed residential solar energy to achieve, or its being significantly delayed in achieving, widespread adoption could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.
The Company’s business prospects are dependent in part on a continuing decline in the cost of solar energy system components and the Company’s business may be adversely affected to the extent the cost of these components stabilize or increase in the future, whether through international supply disruptions, conflicts, trade wars, new tariffs or otherwise.
The market for residential solar energy systems has benefitted from the declining cost of solar energy system components and to the extent these costs stabilize, decline at a slower rate or increase, the Company’s future growth rate may be negatively affected. The declining cost of solar energy system components and the raw materials necessary to manufacture them has been a key driver in the price of solar energy systems, the prices charged for electricity and customer adoption of solar energy. Solar energy system component and raw material prices may not continue to decline at the same rate as they have over the past several years or at all. In addition, growth in the solar industry and the resulting increase in demand for solar energy system components and the raw materials necessary to manufacture them may also put upward pressure on prices. An increase of solar energy system components and raw materials prices could slow the Company’s growth and cause its business and results of operations to suffer. Further, the cost of solar energy system components and raw materials has increased and could increase in the future due to tariff penalties, duties, the loss of or changes in economic governmental incentives or other factors.
The Company faces competition from centralized electric utilities, retail electric providers, independent power producers and renewable energy companies.
The solar energy and renewable energy industries are both highly competitive and continually evolving as participants strive to distinguish themselves within their markets and compete with large centralized electric utilities. The Company competes with these centralized electric utilities primarily based on price (cents per kWh). The Company may also compete based on other value-added benefits, such as reliability and carbon-friendly power. If the Company cannot offer compelling value to its customers based on these factors, its business may not grow.
Centralized electric utilities generally have substantially greater financial, technical, operational and other resources than the Company does. As a result, these competitors may be able to devote more resources to the promotion and sale of their products or services or respond more quickly to evolving industry standards and changes in market conditions than the Company can.
The Company also competes with retail electric providers and independent power producers that are not regulated like centralized electric utilities but that have access to the centralized utilities’ electricity transmission and distribution infrastructure pursuant to state, territorial and local pro-competition and consumer choice policies. These retail electric providers and independent power producers are able to offer customers electricity supply-only solutions that are competitive with the Company’s installation options on both price and usage of renewable energy technology while avoiding the physical installations that the Company’s business model requires. This may limit the Company’s ability to acquire new customers, particularly those who have an objection to putting solar panels on their roofs.
The Company also competes with solar companies with business models similar to its own, that market to similar potential customers. Some of these competitors specialize in the distributed residential solar energy market. Some of the Company’s competitors offer or may offer similar offerings and products as the Company. Many of the Company’s competitors also have significant brand name recognition and have extensive knowledge of its target markets.
The Company also competes with solar companies that offer community solar products and utility companies that provide renewable power purchase programs. Some customers might choose to subscribe to a community solar project or renewable subscriber programs instead of installing a solar energy system on their home, which could affect the Company’s sales. Additionally, some utility companies (and some utility-like entities, such as community choice aggregators in California) have generation portfolios that are increasingly renewable in nature. In California, for example, due to recent legislation, utility companies and community choice aggregators in that state are required to have generation portfolios comprised of 60% renewable energy by 2030 and state regulators are planning for utility companies and community choice aggregators to sell 100% greenhouse gas free electricity to retail customers by 2045. As utility companies offer increasingly renewable portfolios to retail customers, those customers might be less inclined to install a solar energy system at their home, which could adversely affect the Company’s growth.
The Company competes with companies that sell solar energy systems and services in the commercial, industrial and government markets, in addition to the residential market, in the U.S. and foreign markets. There is intense competition in the residential solar energy sector in the markets in which the Company operates. As new entrants continue to enter into these markets, the Company may be unable to grow or maintain its operations and it may be unable to compete with companies that earn revenue in both the residential market and non-residential markets. Further, because the Company provides services primarily to residential customers, the Company has a less diverse market presence and is more exposed to potential adverse changes in the residential market than its competitors that sell solar energy systems and services in the commercial, industrial, government and utility markets.
As the solar industry grows and evolves, the Company will also face new competitors and technologies who are not currently in the market. The Company’s industry is characterized by low technological barriers to entry and well-capitalized companies, including utilities and integrated energy companies, could choose to enter the market and compete with us. The Company’s failure to adapt to changing market conditions and to compete successfully with existing or new competitors will limit its growth and will have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.
Developments in technology or improvements in distributed solar energy generation and related technologies or components may have a material adverse effect on demand for the Company’s offerings.
Significant developments in technology, such as advances in distributed solar power generation, energy storage solutions such as batteries, energy storage management systems, the widespread use or adoption of fuel cells for residential or commercial properties or improvements in other forms of distributed or centralized power production may materially and adversely affect demand for the Company’s offerings and otherwise affect its business. Future technological advancements may result in reduced prices to consumers or more efficient solar energy systems than those available today, either of which may result in current customer dissatisfaction. The Company may not be able to adopt these new technologies as quickly as its competitors or on a cost-effective basis.
A material reduction in the retail price of electricity charged by electric utilities or other retail electricity providers could harm the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.
Decreases in the retail price of electricity from electric utilities or from other retail electric providers, including other renewable energy sources such as larger-scale solar energy systems, could make the Company’s offerings less economically attractive. The price of electricity from utilities could decrease for any one or more reasons, including but not limited to:
the construction of a significant number of new power generation plants, whether generated by natural gas, nuclear power, coal or renewable energy;
the construction of additional electric transmission and distribution lines;
a reduction in the price of natural gas or other natural resources as a result of increased supply due to new drilling techniques or other technological developments;
a relaxation of associated regulatory standards or broader economic or policy developments;
less demand for electricity due to energy conservation technologies and public initiatives to reduce electricity consumption or to recessionary economic conditions; and
development of competing energy technologies that provide less expensive energy.
A reduction in electric utilities’ rates or changes to peak hour pricing policies or rate design (such as the adoption of a fixed or flat rate or adding fees to homeowners that have residential solar systems) could also make the Company’s offerings less competitive with the price of electricity from the electrical grid. If the cost of energy available from electric utilities or other providers were to decrease relative to solar energy generated from residential solar energy systems or if similar events affecting the economics of the Company’s offerings were to occur, it may have difficulty attracting new customers or existing customers may default or seek to terminate, cancel or otherwise avoid the obligations under their solar installation agreements. For example, large utilities in California have started transitioning customers to time-of-use rates and also have adopted a shift in the peak period for time-of-use rates to later in the day. Unless grandfathered under a different rate, residential customers with solar energy systems may be required to take service under time-of-use rates with the later peak period. Moving utility customers to time-of-use rates or the shift in the timing of peak rates for utility-generated electricity to include times of day when solar energy generation is less efficient or non-operable could also make the Company’s offerings less competitive. Time-of-use rates could also result in higher costs for the owners of solar energy systems whose electricity requirements are not fully met during peak periods.
Terrorist or cyberattacks against centralized utilities could adversely affect the Company’s business.
Assets owned by utilities such as substations and related infrastructure have been physically attacked in the past and will likely be attacked in the future. These facilities are often protected by limited security measures, such as perimeter fencing. Any such attacks may result in interruption to electricity flowing on the grid. Furthermore, cyberattacks, whether by individuals or nation states, against utility companies could severely disrupt their business operations and result in loss of service to customers, which would adversely affect the Company’s operations. For example, the May 2021 ransomware attack on the owners of the Colonial Pipeline system forced
a shutdown of its operations for multiple days, requiring significant capital outlays and concerns by customers and regulators of the reliability of the electricity provision. In the event the Company was plagued by similar cyberattacks, customers could choose other sources for electricity, which would adversely affect the Company’s operations. Increased cyberattacks generally may also materially increase the Company’s defense costs, which would adversely affect its profitability.
Climate change may have long-term impacts on the Company’s business, industry, and the global economy.
Climate change poses a systematic threat to the global economy. While the Company’s core business model seeks to mitigate climate change by accelerating the transition to renewable energy, there are also inherent climate-related risks to the Company’s business operations. For example, climate change is likely to increase the frequency and severity of weather events; climate change may make it more challenging to predict weather outcomes, impacting operational schedules; and climate change could lead to extreme events which disrupt relevant energy infrastructure assets such as transmission grids. These types of risks could harm the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.
Risks Related to Regulations
Increases in the cost of the Company’s solar energy systems due to tariffs imposed by the U.S. and foreign government could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.
China is a major producer of solar cells and other solar products. Certain solar cells, modules, laminates and panels from China are subject to various U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty rates, depending on the exporter supplying the product, imposed by the U.S. government as a result of determinations that the U.S. was materially injured as a result of such imports being sold at less than fair value and subsidized by the Chinese government. For example, then President Biden’s administration increased Section 301 tariffs on imports of wafers, polysilicon and certain tungsten products from China. As a result, solar wafers and polysilicon imports, critical components for solar energy development, now face a 50% tariff rate. Tungsten products, such as bars and sheets, will be subject to a 25% tariff rate. The tariff increases took effect on January 1, 2025. If alternative sources are not available on competitive terms in the future, the Company may seek to purchase these products from manufacturers in China. In addition, tariffs on solar cells, modules and inverters in China may put upward pressure on prices of these products in other jurisdictions from which the Company currently purchases equipment, which could reduce its ability to offer competitive pricing to potential customers.
The Company cannot predict what, if any, additional actions the U.S. may adopt with respect to tariffs or other trade regulations or what actions may be taken by other countries in retaliation for such measures. If additional measures are imposed or other negotiated outcomes occur, the Company’s ability to purchase these products on competitive terms or to access specialized technologies from other countries could be further limited, which could adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations.
The Company is not currently regulated as an electric public utility under applicable law, but may be subject to regulation as an electric utility in the future.
The Company currently is not regulated as an electric public utility in the U.S. under applicable national, state or other local regulatory regimes where it conducts business, and is not currently subject to the various federal, state and local standards, restrictions and regulatory requirements applicable to centralized public utilities. Any federal, state or local law or regulations that cause the Company to be treated as an electric utility or to otherwise be subject to a similar regulatory regime of commission-approved operating tariffs, rate limitations and related mandatory provisions, could place significant restrictions on its ability to operate its business and execute its business plan by prohibiting, restricting or otherwise regulating its sale of electricity. If the Company were subject to the same state or federal regulatory authorities as centralized electric utilities in the U.S. and its territories or if new regulatory bodies were established to oversee its business in the U.S. and its territories or in foreign markets it enters, its operating costs would materially increase or it might have to change its business in ways that could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.
Electric utility policies and regulations, including those affecting electric rates, may present regulatory and economic barriers to the purchase and use of solar energy systems that may significantly reduce demand for the Company’s solar energy systems and adversely impact its ability to originate new solar installation agreements.
Federal, state and local government regulations and policies concerning the electric utility industry, utility rates and rate structures and internal policies and regulations promulgated by electric utilities, heavily influence the market for electricity generation products and services. These regulations and policies often relate to electricity pricing. Policies and regulations that promote renewable energy and distributed energy generation have been challenged by centralized electric utilities and questioned by those in government and others arguing for less governmental spending and involvement in the energy market. To the extent these views are reflected in government policies and regulations, the changes in such policies and regulations could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, any effort to overturn federal and state laws, regulations or policies that support solar energy generation or that remove costs or other limitations on other types of energy generation that compete with solar energy projects could materially and adversely affect the Company’s business.
The Company relies on net metering and related policies to sell solar systems to its customers in most of its current markets, and changes to policies governing net metering may significantly reduce demand for electricity from residential solar energy systems and thus for the Company’s installation services.
Net metering is one of several key policies that have enabled the growth of distributed generation solar energy systems in the U.S., providing significant value to customers for electricity generated by their residential solar energy systems, but not directly consumed on-site. Net metering allows a homeowner to pay his or her local electric utility for power usage net of production from the solar energy system or other distributed generation source. Homeowners receive a credit for the energy an interconnected solar energy system generates in excess of that needed by the home to offset energy purchases from the centralized utility made at times when the solar energy system is not generating sufficient energy to meet the customer’s demand. In many markets, this credit is equal to the residential retail rate for electricity and in other markets, such as Hawaii, where the rate is less than the retail rate and may be set, for example, as a percentage of the retail rate or based upon a valuation of the excess electricity. In some states and utility territories, customers are also reimbursed by the centralized electric utility for net excess generation on a periodic basis.
Net metering programs have been subject to legislative and regulatory scrutiny in certain states and territories. These jurisdictions, by statute, regulation, administrative order or a combination thereof, have recently adopted or are considering new restrictions and additional changes to net metering programs either on a state-wide basis or within specific utility territories. Many of these measures were introduced and supported by centralized electric utilities. These measures vary by jurisdiction and may include a reduction in the rates or value of the credits customers are paid or receive for the power they deliver back to the electrical grid, caps or limits on the aggregate installed capacity of generation in a state or utility territory eligible for net metering, expiration dates for and phasing out of net metering programs, replacement of net metering programs with alternative programs that may provide less compensation and limits on the capacity size of individual distributed generation systems that can qualify for net metering. Net metering and related policies concerning distributed generation also received attention from federal legislators and regulators.
If net metering caps in certain jurisdictions are met, if the value of the credit that customers receive for net metering is significantly reduced, if net metering is discontinued or replaced by a different regime that values solar energy at a lower rate or if other limits or restrictions on net metering are imposed, the Company’s current and future customers may be unable to recognize the same level of cost savings associated with net metering. The absence of favorable net metering policies or of net metering entirely, or the imposition of new charges that only or disproportionately impact customers that use net metering would likely significantly limit customer demand for distributed residential solar energy systems and thus for the Company’s installation services.
A customer’s decision to procure installation services from the Company depends in part on the availability of rebates, tax credits and other financial incentives. The expiration, elimination or reduction of these rebates, credits or incentives or its ability to monetize them could adversely impact its business.
The Company’s business depends in part on current government policies that promote and support solar energy and enhance the economic viability of distributed residential solar. U.S. federal, state and local governments established various incentives and financial mechanisms to reduce the cost of solar energy and to accelerate the adoption of solar energy. These incentives come in various forms, including rebates, tax credits and other financial incentives such as payments for renewable energy credits associated with renewable energy generation, exclusion of solar energy systems from property tax assessments or other taxes and system performance payments. However, these programs may expire on a particular date, end when the allocated funding is exhausted or be reduced or terminated as solar energy adoption rates increase.
A loss or reduction in such incentives could decrease the attractiveness of new solar energy systems to customers, which could adversely impact the Company’s business.
Applicable authorities may adjust or decrease incentives from time to time or include provisions for minimum domestic content requirements or other requirements to qualify for these incentives. Reductions in, eliminations or expirations of or additional application requirements for governmental incentives could adversely impact results of operations and ability to compete in the Company’s industry by increasing the cost of solar energy systems.
Technical and regulatory limitations regarding the interconnection of solar energy systems to the electrical grid may significantly delay interconnections and customer in-service dates, harming the Company’s growth rate and customer satisfaction.
Technical and regulatory limitations regarding the interconnection of solar energy systems to the electrical grid may curb or slow the Company’s growth in key markets. Utilities throughout the country follow different rules and regulations regarding interconnection and regulators or utilities have or could cap or limit the amount of solar energy that can be interconnected to the grid. The Company’s solar energy systems generally do not provide power to homeowners until they are interconnected to the grid.
With regard to interconnection limits, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, (“FERC”), in promulgating the first form of small generator interconnection procedures, recommended limiting customer-sited intermittent generation resources, such as the Company’s solar energy systems, to a certain percentage of peak load on a given electrical feeder circuit. Similar limits have been adopted by many states as a de facto standard and could constrain the Company’s ability to market to customers in certain geographic areas where the concentration of solar installations exceeds this limit.
Furthermore, in certain areas, the Company benefits from policies that allow for expedited or simplified procedures related to connecting solar energy systems to the electrical grid. The Company also is required to obtain interconnection permission for each solar energy system from the local utility. In many states and territories, by statute, regulations or administrative order, there are standardized procedures for interconnecting distributed residential solar energy systems to the electric utility’s local distribution system. However, approval from the local utility could be delayed as a result of a backlog of requests for interconnection or the local utility could seek to limit the number of customer interconnections or the amount of solar energy on the grid. In some states, certain utilities such as municipal utilities or electric cooperatives are exempt from certain interconnection requirements. If expedited or simplified interconnection procedures are changed or cease to be available, if interconnection approvals from the local utility are delayed or if the local utility seeks to limit interconnections, this could decrease the attractiveness of new solar energy systems to distributed residential solar power companies, including the Company, and the attractiveness of solar energy systems to customers. Delays in interconnections could also harm the Company’s growth rate and customer satisfaction scores.
As adoption of solar distributed generation rises, along with the increased operation of utility-scale solar generation (such as in key markets including California), the amount of solar energy being contributed to the electrical grid may surpass the capacity anticipated to be needed to meet aggregate demand. Some centralized public utilities claim in less than five years, solar generation resources may reach a level capable of producing an over-generation situation, which may require some existing solar generation resources to be curtailed to maintain operation of the electrical grid. In the event such an over-generation situation were to occur, it could also result in a prohibition on the addition of new solar generation resources. The adverse effects of such a curtailment or prohibition without compensation could adversely impact the Company’s business, results of operations, and future growth.
Compliance with occupational safety and health requirements and best practices can be costly, and noncompliance with such requirements may result in potentially significant monetary penalties, operational delays and adverse publicity.
The installation of solar energy systems requires individuals hired by the Company or third-party contractors, potentially including the Company’s employees, to work at heights with complicated and potentially dangerous electrical systems. The evaluation and modification of buildings as part of the installation process requires these individuals to work in locations that may contain potentially dangerous levels of asbestos, lead, mold or other materials known or believed to be hazardous to human health. There is substantial risk of serious injury or death if proper safety procedures are not followed. The Company’s operations are subject to regulation under OSHA, DOT regulations and equivalent state and local laws. Changes to OSHA or DOT requirements, or stricter interpretation or enforcement of existing laws or regulations, could result in increased costs. If the Company fails to comply with applicable OSHA or DOT regulations, even if no work-related serious injury or death occurs, it may be subject to civil or criminal enforcement and be required to pay substantial penalties, incur significant capital expenditures or suspend or limit operations. Individuals hired by or on behalf of the Company may have workplace accidents and receive citations from OSHA regulators for alleged safety violations, resulting in fines. Any such accidents, citations, violations, injuries or failure to comply with industry best practices may subject the Company to adverse publicity, damage its reputation and competitive position and adversely affect its business.
Our business is subject to consumer protection laws. Such laws and regulatory enforcement policies and priorities are subject to change, which may negatively impact our business.
We must comply with various international, federal, state, and local regulatory regimes, including those applicable to consumer credit transactions, leases, and marketing activities. These laws and regulations are subject to change and modification by statute, administrative rules and orders, and judicial interpretation. As a result of infrequent or sparse interpretations, ambiguities in these laws and regulations may create uncertainty with respect to what type of conduct is permitted or restricted under such laws and regulations. Regulators, such as the Federal Trade Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Board, as well as state attorney generals and agencies, also can initiate inquiries into market participants, which can lead to investigations and, ultimately, enforcement actions. As a result, we are subject to a constantly evolving consumer protection and consumer finance regulatory environment that is difficult to predict and may affect our business.
The laws to which we may be subject to include federal and state laws that prohibit unfair, deceptive or abusive business acts or practices (such as the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Dodd-Frank Act), regulate lease and loan disclosures and terms and conditions (such as the Truth-in-Lending Act and the Consumer Leasing Act), and provide additional protections for certain customers in the military (such as the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act). Our business is or may also be subject to federal and state laws that regulate consumer credit report information, data privacy, debt collection, electronic fund transfers, service contracts, home improvement contracting and marketing activities (such as telemarketing, door-to-door sales, and e-mails).
While we have developed policies and procedures designed to assist in compliance with these laws and regulations, no assurance is given that our compliance policies and procedures will be effective. Failure to comply with these laws and with regulatory requirements applicable to our business could subject us to damages, revocation of licenses, class action lawsuits, administrative enforcement actions, civil and criminal liability, settlements, limits on offering certain products and services, changes in business practices, increased compliance costs, indemnification obligations to our capital providers, loan repurchase obligations and reputational damage that may harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.
