Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Litigation The Company is from time to time subject to legal proceedings and claims, which arise in the normal course of its business. In the opinion of management and legal counsel, except as disclosed below, the amount of losses or gains that may be sustained, if any, would not have a material effect on the financial position, results of operations or cash flows of the Company. The Company records legal costs associated with loss contingencies, including fees and costs associated with preservation of evidence in connection with the wire insulation shrinkback litigation, as incurred. Intellectual Property Litigation The 2023 IP Litigations. On May 4, 2023, the Company filed a patent infringement complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) against Hikam America, Inc., a corporation based in Chula Vista, California, and its related foreign entities (together, “Hikam”), and Voltage LLC, a limited liability company based in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, and a related foreign entity (together, “Voltage”). The complaint primarily requests that the ITC (i) investigate unlawful imports of certain photovoltaic connectors and components that the Company alleges infringe on two valid and enforceable patents owned by the Company related to improved connectors for solar panel arrays and (ii) issue a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order against the Hikam respondents and the Voltage respondents to bar them from importing, marketing, distributing, selling, offering for sale, licensing, advertising, transferring, or otherwise using the infringing photovoltaic connectors and components in and into the United States. Also on May 4, 2023, the Company filed complaints against Hikam in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, and against Voltage in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina on the same subject matter. The District Court actions seek injunctive relief and monetary damages. The District Court actions have been stayed pending the final disposition of the ITC investigation. On August 30, 2024, the Administrative Law Judge issued a Final Initial Determination finding that Voltage violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, by importing infringing LYNX trunk bus products into the United States. However, on January 14, 2025, the ITC reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s Final Initial Determination and issued a Notice of a Commission Final Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337. The Company appealed the ITC’s decision to the Federal Circuit on February 11, 2025. The appeal is pending. On February 11, 2026, the Company and Hikam filed a voluntary, joint-dismissal that will end the legal proceedings as they pertain to Hikam. The Company’s case against Voltage remains stayed pending a ruling in the appeal. The 2025 IP Litigations. On January 9, 2025, the Company filed a patent infringement complaint at the ITC against Voltage. This complaint cites two new patents (the ‘375 and ‘376 Patents) that cover the Company’s BLA solutions. Also on January 9, 2025, the Company filed a complaint against Voltage in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina (the “District Court case”) on the same subject matter. These complaints seek injunctive relief and, in the District Court case, damages for reasonable royalty and lost profits. On February 6, 2026, an Administrative Law Judge at the ITC issued an Initial Determination finding that Voltage’s products infringed on the Company’s ‘375 and ‘376 patents. On June 25, 2026, the ITC issued its Final Determination, finding that Voltage violated Section 337 by importing products that infringe Shoals’ ‘375 and ‘376 patents. Accordingly, the ITC issued a Limited Exclusion Order (“LEO”) against Voltage. The LEO prohibits Voltage from importing into the U.S. infringing photovoltaic trunk bus cable and related components. In the District Court case, a bench trial on certain equitable defenses raised by Voltage was held February 25 - March 5, 2026. On June 5, 2026, the District Court issued its opinion on the equitable defenses that Voltage raised in this bench trial. The court ruled that Voltage did not present sufficient evidence to support a ruling of inequitable conduct or unclean hands. Accordingly, the court denied Voltage’s request to deem Shoals’ ‘375, ‘376, and ‘295 patents unenforceable. On February 17, 2026, the Company filed a motion for preliminary injunction seeking additional, immediate relief to prevent the alleged infringing activities from continuing while the case is pending. That motion is still pending in front of the court. The District Court case is set for a jury trial, which is expected to begin on August 13, 2026 and conclude on August 28, 2026. The Company is vigorously litigating these cases. However, at this stage, the Company is unable to predict the outcome or impact on its business and financial results. The Company is accounting for these matters as a gain contingency, and will record any such gain in future periods if and when the contingency is resolved, in accordance with ASC 450, Contingencies. Wire Insulation Shrinkback Litigation On October 31, 2023, the Company filed a complaint against Prysmian in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division. The Company filed an amended complaint on December 4, 2024. The amended complaint alleges that the Company suffered damages caused by defective wire Prysmian sold to the Company from approximately 2019 through approximately 2022. The amended complaint alleges that the wire at issue in the litigation has presented unacceptable levels of wire insulation shrinkback. The amended complaint includes, among other causes of action, product liability, breach of contract, breach of warranty, indemnity, and negligence claims. Mediation in this case is ongoing. The Company seeks compensatory and punitive damages, recovery of all costs and expenses incurred by the Company in connection with the identification, repair and replacement of the Prysmian wire alleged to be defective, and other legal and equitable relief. The Company is vigorously pursuing its amended complaint, and as the Company continues to assess this matter, it may, from time to time, amend, update or supplement the amended complaint to, among other things, increase the damages sought for various purposes, including in accordance with increases to the Company’s estimated warranty liability and related expenses related to this matter. At this stage, the Company is unable to predict the outcome of this litigation or the impact on its business and financial results. The Company is accounting for this matter as a gain contingency, and will record any such gain in future periods if and when the contingency is resolved, in accordance with ASC 450, Contingencies. Securities Litigation On March 21, 2024, a purported stockholder filed a putative securities class action against the Company and certain of its current and former executive officers in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, captioned Westchester Putnam Counties Heavy & Highway Laborers Local 60 Benefits Fund v. Shoals Technologies Group, Inc., et al. The complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, based on allegedly false and misleading statements and omissions relating to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. On May 8, 2024 and May 15, 2024, respectively, similar class action complaints were filed in the same court against the Company and certain current and former officers, but these complaints also named as defendants the Company’s Board of Directors, and the selling stockholders and underwriters of the Company’s secondary public offering. While the allegations are largely similar to the first complaint, these new complaints also alleged violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933. These cases were captioned Oklahoma Police Pension and Retirement System v. Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. and Kissimmee Utility Authority Employees Retirement Plan v. Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. On May 24, 2024, all of these cases were consolidated into one action captioned In re Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. Securities Litigation. Plaintiff Erste Asset Management GmbH has been appointed Lead Plaintiff. On December 9, 2024, Lead Plaintiff and plaintiff Kissimmee Utility Authority Employees’ Retirement Plan filed a consolidated complaint, and on February 4, 2025, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on February 18, 2025. Plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss on April 21, 2025. On September 30, 2025, the court issued its ruling on the motion to dismiss, granting it in part and denying it in part. On January 21, 2025, Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification, appointment of class representatives, and approval of class counsel. Defendants’ opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion is due April 6, 2026. Plaintiffs’ reply brief in support of their motion is due May 21, 2026. In December 2025 and January 2026, the Company and the Plaintiffs engaged in court-ordered mediation. On April 28, 2026, the Company and the Plaintiffs submitted a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division. On May 4, 2026, the District Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. A settlement hearing for final approval is scheduled for September 2026. The preliminary settlement amount is $70.0 million, of which $64.8 million is fully covered by the Company’s insurance. The Company and its insurers made an initial payment of $65.5 million in June 2026. There is a remaining settlement litigation liability on the Consolidated Balance Sheet of $4.5 million. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2026, the Company recorded zero and $5.3 million of settlement expense on the Consolidated Statement of Operations. Derivative Litigation On May 16, 2024, a derivative stockholder action was filed against certain current and former officers and directors of the Company in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, captioned Corwin v. Forth, et al. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty relating to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, restitution, the adoption of certain governance reforms, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. The Company is named as a nominal defendant only. On July 24, 2024, another derivative stockholder action was filed against certain current and former officers and directors of the Company in the same court, captioned Ouellet v. Whitaker et al. The complaint asserts, among others, claims for breach of fiduciary duty, gross mismanagement, abuse of control, waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment, and violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, and insider trading, all of which relate to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, restitution, the adoption of certain governance reforms, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. The Company is named as a nominal defendant only. On August 21, 2024, these derivative stockholder actions were consolidated into a single action captioned In re Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. Derivative Litigation (the “Tennessee Derivative Action”). On March 26, 2025, another derivative stockholder action was filed against certain current and former officers and directors of the Company in the same court as the consolidated action, captioned Norman v. Whitaker, et al. The complaint asserts, among others, claims for violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, breach of fiduciary duty, insider trading, and unjust enrichment, all of which relate to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, restitution, the adoption of certain governance reforms, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. The Company is named as a nominal defendant only. On April 11, 2025, the Norman action was consolidated with the Tennessee Derivative Action. On January 19, 2026, the parties in the Tennessee Derivative Action filed a stipulation to stay the Tennessee Derivative Action until 60 days following the conclusion of the January 2026 mediation in the Securities Litigation. On December 2, 2025, another derivative stockholder action was filed against certain current and former officers and directors of the Company in the Delaware Court of Chancery, captioned Gipsman v. Whitaker, et al. (the “Delaware Derivative Action”). The Delaware Derivative Action asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, insider trading, unjust enrichment, and corporate waste, all of which relate to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, restitution, the adoption of certain governance reforms, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. The Company is named as a nominal defendant only. Although the Company intends to continue to vigorously defend against these claims, there is no guarantee that the Company will prevail. Accordingly, the Company is unable to determine the ultimate outcome of the derivative litigation or determine the amount or range of potential losses associated with the lawsuit. Guarantees and Surety Bonds The Company has provided financial guarantees to support payment obligations of a vendor. The Company has not recorded any liabilities for these financial guarantees in its consolidated balance sheets, because the Company has calculated the estimated fair value of the guarantee and determined it to be immaterial based upon the current facts and circumstances that would trigger a payment obligation. The Company provides surety bonds to various parties as required for certain transactions initiated during the ordinary course of business to guarantee the Company’s performance in accordance with contractual or legal obligations. As of June 30, 2026, the maximum potential payment obligation with regard to surety bonds was $47.7 million.

The Company is from time to time subject to legal proceedings and claims, which arise in the normal course of its business. In the opinion of management and legal counsel, except as disclosed below, the amount of losses or gains that may be sustained, if any, would not have a material effect on the financial position, results of operations or cash flows of the Company. The Company records legal costs associated with loss contingencies, including fees and costs associated with preservation of evidence in connection with the wire insulation shrinkback litigation, as incurred.

The 2023 IP Litigations. On May 4, 2023, the Company filed a patent infringement complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) against Hikam America, Inc., a corporation based in Chula Vista, California, and its related foreign entities (together, “Hikam”), and Voltage LLC, a limited liability company based in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, and a related foreign entity (together, “Voltage”). The complaint primarily requests that the ITC (i) investigate unlawful imports of certain photovoltaic connectors and components that the Company alleges infringe on two valid and enforceable patents owned by the Company related to improved connectors for solar panel arrays and (ii) issue a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order against the Hikam respondents and the Voltage respondents to bar them from importing, marketing, distributing, selling, offering for sale, licensing, advertising, transferring, or otherwise using the infringing photovoltaic connectors and components in and into the United States. Also on May 4, 2023, the Company filed complaints against Hikam in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, and against Voltage in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina on the same subject matter. The District Court actions seek injunctive relief and monetary damages. The District Court actions have been stayed pending the final disposition of the ITC investigation. On August 30, 2024, the Administrative Law Judge issued a Final Initial Determination finding that Voltage violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, by importing infringing LYNX trunk bus products into the United States. However, on January 14, 2025, the ITC reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s Final Initial Determination and issued a Notice of a Commission Final Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337. The Company appealed the ITC’s decision to the Federal Circuit on February 11, 2025. The appeal is pending. On February 11, 2026, the Company and Hikam filed a voluntary, joint-dismissal that will end the legal proceedings as they pertain to Hikam. The Company’s case against Voltage remains stayed pending a ruling in the appeal.

The 2025 IP Litigations. On January 9, 2025, the Company filed a patent infringement complaint at the ITC against Voltage. This complaint cites two new patents (the ‘375 and ‘376 Patents) that cover the Company’s BLA solutions. Also on January 9, 2025, the Company filed a complaint against Voltage in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina (the “District Court case”) on the same subject matter. These complaints seek injunctive relief and, in the District Court case, damages for reasonable royalty and lost profits.

In the District Court case, a bench trial on certain equitable defenses raised by Voltage was held February 25 - March 5, 2026. On June 5, 2026, the District Court issued its opinion on the equitable defenses that Voltage raised in this bench trial. The court ruled that Voltage did not present sufficient evidence to support a ruling of inequitable conduct or unclean hands. Accordingly, the court denied Voltage’s request to deem Shoals’ ‘375, ‘376, and ‘295 patents unenforceable.

On October 31, 2023, the Company filed a complaint against Prysmian in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division. The Company filed an amended complaint on December 4, 2024. The amended complaint alleges that the Company suffered damages caused by defective wire Prysmian sold to the Company from approximately 2019 through approximately 2022. The amended complaint alleges that the wire at issue in the litigation has presented unacceptable levels of wire insulation shrinkback. The amended complaint includes, among other causes of action, product liability, breach of contract, breach of warranty, indemnity, and negligence claims. Mediation in this case is ongoing.

The Company seeks compensatory and punitive damages, recovery of all costs and expenses incurred by the Company in connection with the identification, repair and replacement of the Prysmian wire alleged to be defective, and other legal and equitable relief. The Company is vigorously pursuing its amended complaint, and as the Company continues to assess this matter, it may, from time to time, amend, update or supplement the amended complaint to, among other things, increase the damages sought for various purposes, including in accordance with increases to the Company’s estimated warranty liability and related expenses related to this matter. At this stage, the Company is unable to predict the outcome of this litigation or the impact on its business and financial results. The Company is accounting for this matter as a gain contingency, and will record any such gain in future periods if and when the contingency is resolved, in accordance with ASC 450, Contingencies.

On March 21, 2024, a purported stockholder filed a putative securities class action against the Company and certain of its current and former executive officers in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, captioned Westchester Putnam Counties Heavy & Highway Laborers Local 60 Benefits Fund v. Shoals Technologies Group, Inc., et al. The complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, based on allegedly false and misleading statements and omissions relating to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. On May 8, 2024 and May 15, 2024, respectively, similar class action complaints were filed in the same court against the Company and certain current and former officers, but these complaints also named as defendants the Company’s Board of Directors, and the selling stockholders and underwriters of the Company’s

On May 24, 2024, all of these cases were consolidated into one action captioned In re Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. Securities Litigation. Plaintiff Erste Asset Management GmbH has been appointed Lead Plaintiff. On December 9, 2024, Lead Plaintiff and plaintiff Kissimmee Utility Authority Employees’ Retirement Plan filed a consolidated complaint, and on February 4, 2025, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on February 18, 2025. Plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss on April 21, 2025. On September 30, 2025, the court issued its ruling on the motion to dismiss, granting it in part and denying it in part. On January 21, 2025, Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification, appointment of class representatives, and approval of class counsel. Defendants’ opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion is due April 6, 2026. Plaintiffs’ reply brief in support of their motion is due May 21, 2026. In December 2025 and January 2026, the Company and the Plaintiffs engaged in court-ordered mediation. On April 28, 2026, the Company and the Plaintiffs submitted a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division. On May 4, 2026, the District Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. A settlement hearing for final approval is scheduled for September 2026. The preliminary settlement amount is $70.0 million, of which $64.8 million is fully covered by the Company’s insurance. The Company and its insurers made an initial payment of $65.5 million in June 2026. There is a remaining settlement litigation liability on the Consolidated Balance Sheet of $4.5 million. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2026, the Company recorded zero and $5.3 million of settlement expense on the Consolidated Statement of Operations.

On May 16, 2024, a derivative stockholder action was filed against certain current and former officers and directors of the Company in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, captioned Corwin v. Forth, et al. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty relating to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, restitution, the adoption of certain governance reforms, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. The Company is named as a nominal defendant only. On July 24, 2024, another derivative stockholder action was filed against certain current and former officers and directors of the Company in the same court, captioned Ouellet v. Whitaker et al. The complaint asserts, among others, claims for breach of fiduciary duty, gross mismanagement, abuse of control, waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment, and violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, and insider trading, all of which relate to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, restitution, the adoption of certain governance reforms, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. The Company is named as a nominal defendant only. On August 21, 2024, these derivative stockholder actions were consolidated into a single action captioned In re Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. Derivative Litigation (the “Tennessee Derivative Action”).

On March 26, 2025, another derivative stockholder action was filed against certain current and former officers and directors of the Company in the same court as the consolidated action, captioned Norman v. Whitaker, et al. The complaint asserts, among others, claims for violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, breach of fiduciary duty, insider trading, and unjust enrichment, all of which relate to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, restitution, the adoption of certain governance reforms, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. The Company is named as a nominal defendant only. On April 11, 2025, the Norman action was consolidated

On December 2, 2025, another derivative stockholder action was filed against certain current and former officers and directors of the Company in the Delaware Court of Chancery, captioned Gipsman v. Whitaker, et al. (the “Delaware Derivative Action”). The Delaware Derivative Action asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, insider trading, unjust enrichment, and corporate waste, all of which relate to the wire insulation shrinkback matter. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, restitution, the adoption of certain governance reforms, recovery of fees and costs, and other relief that the court may find appropriate. The Company is named as a nominal defendant only.