Photovoltaic fraud: the example of 'Voltaiko' and how to protect yourself from risks

Photovoltaic fraud: the “Voltaiko” case and how to defend yourself from risks in green investments

In recent days, the name 'Voltaiko' has appeared on many judicial news, becoming one of the most discussed cases in the renewable energy sector. The investigation, conducted as part of the “Caglistro” operation, revealed an alleged pyramid scheme that would have involved almost 6000 users, with a total turnover of about 80 million euros.

According to what emerged from the first reconstructions, the alleged photovoltaic scam was based on the promise of digital investments in solar plants located abroad, exploiting a model similar to the Ponzi scheme. The investigations are still ongoing and aim to clarify the responsibilities, as well as to assess whether it will be possible to recover part of the sums paid.

However, the case offers a useful opportunity to reflect on how to protect yourself from similar risks and what criteria to adopt to evaluate investment instruments in photovoltaic energy.

How did Voltaiko's supposed scheme work

The mechanism revolved around the 'voltaiko.com' portal, presented as a platform for 'digitized remote self-consumption'. Through the site, users could theoretically rent photovoltaic systems installed in countries with high solar productivity, overcoming technical and regulatory constraints on energy sharing.

The process described to the users involved four steps:

1. Registration on the portal
2. Choice of plant between different options, with variable monthly payments
3. 'Energy Point' accreditation in the digital wallet, proportionate to the performance of the selected system
4. Withdrawal of the presumed profit, convertible into euros or cryptocurrency

The sums invested remained blocked for three years, a period sufficient to increase the number of members. The platform's story focused heavily on the concepts of energy transition and participation in sustainability, elements capable of generating trust and social legitimation.

Ongoing investigations: what has emerged so far

The checks by the Guardia di Finanza showed that the photovoltaic systems presented to users did not appear to exist and that the sums paid would have been directly available to the corporate group under investigation.

In addition to the blocking of the portal, 95 current accounts were seized. The investigators are trying to reconstruct responsibilities also through a corporate structure defined as “Chinese boxes”: a group of companies with offices in several countries, which makes it difficult to follow financial flows and verify the real operations of the entities involved.

The evidentiary framework will now have to be examined by the judicial authority, but the case already represents a significant precedent in the photovoltaic sector.

Photovoltaic scams: why it's easy to fall into deception

The Voltaiko case is the first, on a large scale, to involve the solar sector in Italy. But it won't necessarily be the last.

In domestic investments, where the user directly deals with quotes, installers and technical documentation, the risks of fraud are limited. The case of “remote” investments is different, often presented online and in ways that may appear transparent, but which in reality exploit the difficulty of the average user in verifying authenticity, supply chain and performance.

The ease with which websites and digital content are created today, even through artificial intelligence tools, makes it easy to build a credible appearance: videos, photorealistic renderings, false witnesses, manipulated technical documents. In this context, enthusiasm for the green transition can become a psychological lever that promotes trust, making users more vulnerable.

How to protect yourself: the criteria to check before investing

To avoid risks and invest in photovoltaic energy with greater security, it is useful to follow some basic rules.

1. Be wary of returns that are too high

“Guaranteed”, very high or promised returns in a short time are a first wake-up call. In the real energy sector, revenues depend on production, market prices and operating costs: no serious operator promises off-scale percentages.

2. Check who is the person proposing the investment

It is crucial to know whom manages the initiative:

• Are there verifiable physical locations?
• Is the company registered in official registers or registers?
• Can the administration be traced back to identifiable people?
• Does the company operate in Italy or through opaque foreign vehicles?

The absence of information, or contradictory information, should be considered an element of risk.

3. Check certifications and authorizations

Collective investment projects must be authorized. If we talk about equity crowdfunding, it is necessary that the platform be supervised by CONSOB. If it is the sale of energy or the rental of plants, there must be contracts, authorizations and verifiable technical documentation.

4. Ask for complete and verifiable documentation

A serious operator provides:

• floor plans
• detailed business plans
• updated reports
• information on technical partners
• authorizations issued by competent bodies

The lack of even one of these elements should invite caution.

GridShare: what distinguishes a transparent operator from an unverifiable one

The Voltaiko case shows how important it is to choose transparent and structured interlocutors. A useful example is represented by operators that adopt regulated models such as equity crowdfunding to finance shared solar parks.

GridShare, active in the design and construction of photovoltaic parks in Italy, operates through CrowdFundMe, a platform of Equity crowdfunding authorized and supervised by CONSOB. This means that every project must comply with strict documentary standards and provide investors with clear information on:

• technical characteristics of the plant
• subjects involved
• Timing and state of work
• expected returns and associated risks
• any tax benefits provided for by the legislation

Investors receive periodic updates on the progress of projects, also accompanied by visual materials such as Time-lapse of the operas. This allows concrete control, without having to physically go to the plant site.

Similarly, the proposed returns are not the result of abstract promises, but derive from verifiable technical and regulatory analyses, such as access to incentive tariffs or energy sales contracts. In some cases, projects also make it possible to benefit from the concessions provided for investments in innovative startups.

These elements do not eliminate the risk inherent in any investment, but they drastically reduce the possibility of being faced with opaque or unverifiable patterns.

Conclusion: investing in photovoltaic is possible, but awareness is needed

The Voltaiko case has turned the spotlight on a new phenomenon for the renewable energy sector, but not unprecedented in the world of online investments. The growth in demand for clean energy makes photovoltaic an increasingly attractive area even for unqualified individuals, and this increases the risk of intransparent initiatives.

For this reason, it is essential to choose operators that offer complete documentation, a regulated perimeter and guarantees of external control.

Investing in solar energy can be a real opportunity, but it requires the same precautionary criteria that apply to any financial investment: verification, transparency and clear information. Only in this way is it possible to reap the advantages of photovoltaic energy, avoiding the pitfalls of unverifiable schemes.