The way electricity costs for home charging are reimbursed has changed significantly in recent years. Many companies have become used to simple approaches—flat rates, Excel spreadsheets, pragmatic workarounds.
As of 2026, this approach is no longer sufficient.New guidelines issued by the German Federal Ministry of Finance now require much greater accuracy in how charging costs are calculated. At the same time, a new level of uncertainty is emerging in practice.
Many fleet managers feel they are “doing everything right,” yet still have a lingering sense of unease. This concern is justified. Today, the tax risk no longer arises only when amounts are incorrect, but when the underlying basis for the calculation is not reliable.
Note: The content of this article is for general informational purposes and reflects practical experience. For binding tax assessments, we recommend consulting a tax advisor.
In brief: When is the reimbursement of charging electricity tax-free?
If employees charge their company car at home and the employer reimburses the electricity costs, this reimbursement can be tax-free.
However, this only applies under clear conditions:
It must be a company car
The amount of electricity charged must be clearly traceable
The reimbursed amount must correspond to actual costs (or approved simplified rules such as a fixed electricity rate per kWh)
In this case, the reimbursement is not considered additional salary, but a pure reimbursement of expenses.
Download our charge@home Guide now!
Our guide highlights the requirements for a home charging solution and explains what is needed to use it for legally compliant billing of company cars. Learn more about the installation of wallboxes, legal frameworks, and efficient billing solutions for home charging.
REQUEST GUIDE
Companies can choose between two models:
Billing based on the individual electricity price
Or using a fixed electricity rate per kWh
We have summarized the details in our article on the new rules for charging cost reimbursement from 2026 .
Where it becomes critical in practice
In many companies, the process still looks like this today:Employees report their charged kWh once a month, often via Excel or a screenshot from an app. A fixed electricity price is applied, and the reimbursement is calculated accordingly. At first glance, this seems logical and has often worked in the past.
However, this approach is no longer sufficient. As soon as it is not clearly traceable how the electricity amount was determined, how it is assigned to a specific vehicle, or how the data is documented, the reimbursement becomes vulnerable from a tax perspective.
1. Electricity consumption is not properly recorded
This is the most common and at the same time the most critical issue.Many companies rely on:
Estimates
Average values
Or manually reported figures
The problem is that kWh consumption must be recorded in a traceable manner. The available methods (wallbox, meter, vehicle data) are explained in more detail here: Charging cost reimbursement – new requirements from 2026 . In Germany, the method of measurement is governed by the Working Group on Measurement and Verification (AGME ). If this proof is missing, the reimbursement can quickly be treated as a taxable benefit.
2. The fixed electricity rate is misunderstood
The fixed electricity rate is often seen as a simplified solution. This is only partly true. The fixed rate replaces the price, not the measurement.This means:
The price may be standardized
The charged kWh must still be measured precisely
If companies start estimating or generalizing the consumption, it becomes problematic. Without a reliable measurement of quantities, there is no valid basis for tax-free reimbursement.This becomes particularly relevant in special cases such as photovoltaic systems or dynamic electricity tariffs. More on this here: PV surplus charging and dynamic tariffs from 2026
3. Private and business usage are not clearly separated
A very common real-world scenario is that one wallbox is used for:
The company car
A private electric vehicle
Potentially additional vehicles
If there is no clear separation in these cases, it is no longer possible to determine which electricity was used for business purposes. This is where tax exemption breaks down. Only electricity actually used for the company car qualifies for tax relief.
4. Billing is based on “grown” processes
Many companies have developed their processes over time:
Excel sheets
Manual reporting
Individual workflows
In the event of an audit, what matters is:
Traceability
Consistency
Documentation
The reimbursement of individual charging sessions is often where processes become inconsistent. If clear procedures or a verifiable audit trail are missing, the billing will quickly be questioned.
5. Technology and billing do not match
Not every wallbox or installation is automatically suitable for reliable billing.Especially in existing setups, it is often unclear:
Whether the measurement is accurate
Whether the data is complete
Whether proper assignment is possible
A typical decision point is whether to retrofit existing systems or install new ones .
Another topic currently adding to the uncertainty is how tax regulations interact with metrology law.
Context: The role of metrology law
In recent months, conversations with fleet managers have shown a recurring pattern: there is widespread confusion about what actually applies.
Metrology law remains relevant. Whenever electricity is billed, the measurement must be traceable and reliable—which has also been confirmed by various calibration authorities. Depending on the use case, different technical solutions may be permissible. However, the recorded values must always be plausible, consistent, and auditable.
In other words, even though tax regulations have introduced some flexibility, the quality of measurement remains a key factor.
What has really changed since 2026
What has truly changed since 2026 is the nature of the risk. In the past, the main risk was reimbursing too much. Today, the risk lies in not being able to substantiate the calculation.
Simply put, it is no longer the amount itself that makes reimbursement risky, but how it is derived.
What companies should do now
Many companies currently find themselves at a point where the general rules are known, but practical implementation remains unclear. A useful first step is an honest review of the current setup based on the following questions:
How is electricity consumption recorded?
How is it assigned to a vehicle?
How is the price determined?
How is everything documented?
Retrofitting with MID Meter, Legally Compliant Wallbox, or Charge Repay Service?
Discover your options for legally compliant billing of company car charging at home: When is retrofitting with an MID meter sufficient, when is a legally compliant wallbox required—and how does the Charge Repay Service bridge the gap without needing to replace your wallbox?
REQUEST WHITEPAPER
Conclusion
Charging cost reimbursement has not become more complicated since 2026, but it has become more precise. For companies, this means that solutions that worked in the past are not automatically safe going forward.
The biggest risks currently arise where processes appear formally correct but are not robust in practice. That is exactly why it is worth taking a closer look at your own billing setup.
