PERC Capacity Is Under Pressure, but There Is No Universal Phase-Out Date

A market transition is not a ban

The 2026 seventeenth edition of the International Technology Roadmap for Photovoltaic (ITRPV) gives a dated market signal, not a regulatory phase-out order. VDMA’s published summary says 2025 module shipments were at a similar level to 2024, TOPCon continued to dominate market share, and LECO and Passivated Edge production technologies gained importance. The summary does not provide a PERC market-share denominator or announce a final date for operating PERC lines.

That distinction matters because “PERC phase-out” is often used loosely to describe several different developments: fewer new investments, lower utilization at particular factories, product replacement in a customer’s portfolio, or an actual legal restriction. The cited roadmap statement supports a technology-mix transition; it does not establish all four meanings.

What the 2026 roadmap does—and does not—say

The VDMA page identifies the ITRPV as a roadmap for crystalline-silicon photovoltaic value-chain trends and makes the seventeenth edition available for 2026. Its public summary identifies TOPCon as continuing to dominate and notes greater importance for certain production technologies. It does not quantify PERC’s share in the short summary, define a global inventory of PERC factories, or say that every PERC module becomes unsaleable on a single date.

For that reason, this update deliberately omits a percentage for PERC capacity or module share. A share figure is meaningful only when its denominator and date are clear—for example, nameplate capacity versus actual output, cell versus module capacity, and a particular region versus the world. No such directly verified denominator is attached to the claim being assessed here.

Why individual PERC lines can still face pressure

A factory’s commercial outlook depends on more than a technology label. Installed equipment condition, conversion cost, yield, product efficiency, customer qualification, electricity and labor costs, local policy, financing and the ability to retrofit all affect whether a line remains competitive. A move toward newer architectures can make some assets harder to justify, but that is a plant-level investment decision—not evidence that every PERC production line has the same residual value.

Likewise, a low-utilization plant or a public capacity adjustment does not automatically mean that all PERC output has disappeared from the market. Announcements may concern planned capacity, a site, a company portfolio or a specific period. Any report of an “exit” should be tied to the named facility, action and date before it is generalized.

Do not turn an efficiency standard into a PERC prohibition

China’s GB 47834-2026 is an energy-efficiency limits and grades standard for crystalline-silicon modules and inverters, published on June 27, 2026 and scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2027. Its title and official record do not say that PERC as a technology is banned. A compliance judgment must be based on the standard’s applicable model scope and measured evidence, not a shorthand architecture name.

The same principle applies to LECO, 0BB or other process choices. The ITRPV summary notes that LECO and Passivated Edge are gaining importance; it does not say that either is necessary or sufficient to achieve a particular grade. Buyers should evaluate the finished product’s documented performance rather than treating a process acronym as a conformity certificate.

How buyers should assess supply continuity

Procurement teams can replace a broad “PERC or TOPCon?” question with a dated evidence request. Ask for the exact model and revision, current datasheet, applicable test reports, warranty terms, manufacturing site, available production window, delivery commitment and any evidence required by the project’s governing standard. For a long-term project, also ask how the supplier will handle replacement modules if the model is discontinued.

Where a supplier describes a model as “last generation” or “phase-out,” ask whether that means a product launch is ending, a particular production line is being converted, or a regulatory requirement applies. These are different commercial facts with different consequences for spare parts, warranties and project acceptance.

A measured conclusion

The evidence supports a continued shift in the manufacturing mix and competitive pressure on older lines. It does not support a universal PERC shutdown date, a PERC market-share statistic without a defined denominator, or a blanket legal ban. Treat each retirement claim as a company- and facility-specific event unless a dated primary source establishes a broader rule.