What a Residential Solar Permit Involves: Building, Electrical, and the Fee

A solar quote lists the equipment, the install date and a number for “permits and fees.” It rarely says which permit, and that varies by jurisdiction more than almost anything else on this site. We reviewed 137 solar permit rows across 27 states. Most require a permit outright; a real minority exempt ordinary residential rooftop solar under specific conditions, covered below. Where a permit is required, it can be a building permit, an electrical permit, or both, and the fee itself is set by any of several different methods depending on where you live.

One permit, or two

Our row for Phoenix records that both a building and an electrical permit are required for every residential solar PV installation there, and that the city separately requires a fire permit for PV and battery energy storage systems alike. Our Boston row records the same building-plus-electrical requirement for every residential solar panel installation in the city.

Other rows record only one filing. Our Nashville row names only an electrical photovoltaic permit, with no separate building permit mentioned. Our Henrico County, Virginia row is explicit about the choice: it records that residential solar needs only an electrical permit, with no separate building permit, citing the county’s own solar pathway memo as its source.

A few jurisdictions fold both into one instrument instead. Our Los Angeles County row records that a combined solar energy permit may be issued for photovoltaic systems, covering the building and electrical work together rather than as two filings.

None of this is the default, because there is not one. Ask your own building department which filing a rooftop array needs before a contractor starts paperwork in your name, and check the exemption pattern below first.

When there is no permit at all

A few jurisdictions in our data exempt ordinary residential rooftop solar outright. Our Gilbert, Arizona row records a licensed-contractor exemption dating to a 2009 town ordinance: no town permit fee applies when a licensed Arizona contractor installs equipment that is listed and labeled by a recognized testing agency.

Some Washington counties exempt the building permit under specific conditions. Our Thurston County row records that the county requires no county permit for a residential rooftop solar PV system, while every solar project there still needs a state electrical permit. Our King County row separately exempts roof-mounted panels under a specific weight threshold from the building permit; heavier installations still need one. Other Washington jurisdictions in our data run the opposite way: our Pierce County row records that a building permit is always required there regardless of size, and our Tacoma row records the same.

In Thurston County, the building-permit exemption is not an exemption from the electrical permit; see “Before you sign” below.

How the fee is set

The fee is as local as the permit. Rather than one “typical cost,” jurisdictions set it by several different methods, each illustrated below by rows whose own text plainly fits it.

Some charge one flat, named dollar figure regardless of system size. Our Scottsdale, Arizona row records a flat residential solar permit fee of $168. Our Manatee County, Florida row records a flat Solar Permit fee of $127.

Some compute the fee from the value of the job, typically a base amount plus a rate per $1,000 of value. Our Brevard County, Florida row records a Building Code Review fee of $75 for the first $1,000 of job value plus $3.25 per $1,000 after that, plus a separate application processing fee and state surcharges on top.

Some publish no dedicated solar line at all: solar is billed under a general category shared with unrelated work, or the row says outright there is no separate line for it. Our Cobb County, Georgia row records that no separate solar fee line exists there at all; solar is priced from the county’s general small-construction cost table instead.

Some price by counting a physical unit, or by a named size tier, rather than one number or a continuous rate. Our City of Los Angeles row records a per-component electrical schedule, itemized down to a dollar amount for each combiner box and each PV module. Our Milwaukee, Wisconsin row records distinct electrical fees by kilowatt band, from $70 for systems up to 20 kW to $300 for systems over 100 kW.

Some carry a genuine per-kilowatt, per-kva or per-watt rate for the fee itself, not merely for computing a valuation. Our Contra Costa County, California row records a per-kilowatt add-on above a 15 kW threshold. Our Grand Rapids, Michigan row records a per-kilowatt add-on starting above 10 kW.

Some cap the fee instead of computing one outright, or cap a fee that is computed elsewhere. Our Los Angeles County row caps at $500 a fee it says is computed under specific building, electrical and plumbing code sections. Our Culpeper County, Virginia and Jefferson County, Colorado rows record a flat $500 ceiling with no formula given at all.

At least one row in our data gives only a stated minimum and nothing else: our Nashville row’s entire fee note is a $75 minimum permit fee, with no other detail recorded.

And some rows record no usable dollar figure for the residential solar PANEL permit, each for its own reason. Our Fairfax County, Virginia row points to a fee schedule without transcribing a number. Our Fort Worth and Jacksonville rows each give a real dollar figure that turns out to price solar water heating or a thermal collector, not the panels this guide covers, so the panel fee stays unrecorded.

Ask what a solar permit costs, and the honest answer is which of these methods your jurisdiction runs, not a figure any dataset can responsibly average across them.

California’s rule is conjunctive

Government Code Section 65850.5 required that, on or before September 30, 2015, “every city, county, or city and county… shall adopt an ordinance… that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for small residential rooftop solar energy systems,” with “a checklist of all requirements with which small rooftop solar energy systems shall comply to be eligible for expedited review.”

What qualifies as “small” is four conditions, all required, not the size limit alone. Subdivision (j)(3) defines it as a system “no larger than 10 kilowatts alternating current nameplate rating or 30 kilowatts thermal” that also “conforms to all applicable state fire, structural, electrical, and other building codes,” is “installed on a single or duplex family dwelling,” and “does not exceed the maximum legal building height.” Passing the size test alone does not qualify a system for the expedited path.

Our Fresno County, Los Angeles County and Santa Clara County rows each record both figures from the statute, the 10 kW AC size cap and the 30 kW thermal alternative. Others record only part of that: our City of Los Angeles row records a 10 kW cap for its express permit path with no thermal figure; our San Diego County row records a 10 kW AC rating for its checklist, also with none. Some run their own, different number for a locally chosen fast-track program instead of the statutory one: our Riverside County row records a 15 kW threshold for its automated review path; our San Diego city row records a separate, self-issued no-plan-review path up to 38.4 kW AC that is not the state’s SolarAPP+ program.

The statute also limits the inspection: subdivision (h) allows only one, done in a timely manner, that “may include a consolidated inspection.”

Our Los Angeles County row records a matching practice: a single combination inspection covering the structural, electrical and plumbing components together.

California is not the only state legislating a faster path. Our Mesa and Scottsdale, Arizona rows each record Arizona’s HB2301, effective January 1, 2026, requiring instant permitting for qualifying residential solar systems, and our Chandler row records a separate state statute, A.R.S. Section 9-468, setting statewide processing standards for municipal solar permits. California’s is simply the one law in this piece we opened and read in full ourselves.

Before you sign

A solar contract will not settle the permit question for you, and the office that issues the electrical permit is not always the building department, or even the jurisdiction at all. Our Clark, Snohomish and Thurston county rows in Washington each record that the electrical permit there comes from the state Department of Labor and Industries, not the county. Our Minneapolis row records the same for Minnesota: the required electrical permit and its fee come from the state labor department, not the city. Our Cincinnati row records that the electrical permit is issued by a private third party, Inspection Bureau, Inc., rather than by the city.

Start with your own locality’s building department anyway, since that office and its phone number are what each jurisdiction page here carries, and ask: which permit or permits does a residential rooftop system need, who issues each one if not this office, what does the fee actually total, and does an expedited path apply to a system this size.

Find your jurisdiction

The solar permit hub lists every jurisdiction we cover, each with its own page; not every row carries a fee-schedule link, so treat the hub as a starting index, not a promise that every column is filled in. The jurisdictions named above have their own pages too: Phoenix, Boston, Nashville, Henrico County, Los Angeles County and Cobb County.

What a Residential Solar Permit Involves: Building, Electrical, and the Fee: figures as of 28 Sep 2026, 137 jurisdictions. Now 148.