Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies	Sep. 30, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Commitments Solar Development. On October 30, 2024, OTP entered into an agreement to acquire the assets of a solar facility currently under development. The assets to be acquired include real property rights and interests, interconnection agreements, state and local permits, and other development assets. Per the agreement, the purchase price is equal to $23.6 million, plus the reimbursement of certain interconnection costs and costs to purchase and store the main power transformer. Closing of the transaction is expected to occur in late 2025, and remains subject to certain conditions to close, including regulatory and other approvals. Under certain conditions, OTP would be subject to a termination fee of up to $5.0 million if the seller has satisfied all required conditions to close but the transaction is not consummated. Contingencies Self-Funding of Transmission Upgrades for Generator Interconnections. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has granted transmission owners within Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) and other regional transmission organizations (RTOs) the unilateral authority to determine the funding mechanism for interconnection transmission upgrades that are necessary to accommodate new generation facilities connecting to the electrical grid. Under existing FERC orders, transmission owners can unilaterally determine whether the generator pays the transmission owner in advance for the transmission upgrade or, alternatively, the transmission owner can elect to fund the upgrade and recover over time from the generator the cost of and a return on the upgrade investment (a self-funding). FERC’s orders granting transmission owners this unilateral funding authority have been judicially contested on the basis that transmission owners may be motivated to discriminate among generators in making funding determinations. In the most recent judicial proceedings, the petitioners argued to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that FERC did not comply with a previous judicial order to fully develop a record regarding the risk of discrimination and the financial risk absorbed by transmission owners for generator-funded upgrades. In December 2022, the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the petitioners remanding the matter to FERC, instructing the agency to adequately explain the basis of its orders. The Court of Appeals decision did not vacate transmission owners’ unilateral funding authority. In June 2024, FERC issued an Order to Show Cause proceeding against four RTOs, including MISO. Within its order, FERC indicates that the transmission tariffs of the RTOs appear to be unjust, unreasonable, and unduly discriminatory or preferential because they allow transmission owners to unilaterally elect transmission owner self-funding, which may increase costs, impose barriers to transmission interconnection and result in undue discrimination among interconnection customers. The order required each RTO to submit filings to either 1) show cause as to why the transmission tariff remains just and reasonable and not duly discriminatory or preferential, or 2) explain what changes to the tariff it believes would remedy the identified concerns. FERC has received a number of responses to its Order to Show Cause. In September 2024, in separate filings, MISO and transmission owners within MISO, including OTP, filed responses outlining the reasons why the self-funding option remains just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory or preferential. Other responses have been provided by other RTOs, individual transmission owners, developers of renewable generation facilities and other interested parties. OTP, as a transmission owner in MISO, has exercised its authority and elected to self-fund transmission upgrades necessary to accommodate new system generation. Under such an election, OTP is recovering the cost of the transmission upgrade and a return on that investment from the generator over a contractual period of time. Should the resolution of this matter eliminate transmission owners’ unilateral funding authority on either a prospective or retrospective basis, our financial results would be impacted. We cannot at this time reasonably predict the outcome of this matter given the uncertainty as to how FERC may ultimately decide on the matter Class Action Lawsuits and Related Matters. Beginning in August of 2024, a series of putative federal class action lawsuits consolidated under the caption In re: PVC Pipe Antitrust Litigation (Case No. 1:24-cv-07639) were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Northern Pipe Products, Vinyltech Corporation, Otter Tail Corporation and more than twenty other PVC pipe manufacturers, as well as Oil Price Information Systems, LLC (OPIS), a reporting service that provides pricing and market intelligence in various industries, including the PVC pipe industry, during the relevant period. The Court has allowed three putative classes to file complaints: a Direct Purchaser Class, a Non-Converter Seller Purchaser Class and an End-User Class. In July 2025, the Court preliminarily approved a settlement agreement among the Direct Purchaser Class, the Non-Converter Seller Purchaser Class and OPIS. The settlement agreement resolved claims against OPIS and provides for its cooperation with the plaintiffs. In August of 2025, the three putative classes each filed a first or an amended complaint alleging, among other things, that beginning in January 2017 or January 2020, depending on the class, the defendants and alleged co-conspirators conspired to fix, raise, maintain and stabilize the price of PVC municipal pipe, PVC plumping pipe, PVC electrical pipe and PVC pipe fittings in violation of U.S. federal and state antitrust laws. The complaints allege that PVC pipe manufacturers improperly exchanged confidential information through OPIS and engaged in other indirect and direct communications with each other. Plaintiffs are seeking treble damages, injunctive relief, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs and attorneys' fees on behalf of the putative classes. On October 30, 2025, the defendants filed motions to dismiss. In August 2024, the Company received a grand jury subpoena issued by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division. The subpoena calls for production of documents regarding the manufacturing, selling and pricing of PVC pipe. The Company has responded to the subpoena and intends to comply with its obligations thereunder. On October 7, 2025, the DOJ filed a motion to intervene and for a partial stay of document discovery for a period of six months in In Re: PVC Pipe Antitrust Litigation, which the Court granted on October 10, 2025. On September 26, 2025, a putative nation-wide class action complaint (Case No. S-257310) was filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada against Northern Pipe, Vinyltech Corporation, Otter Tail Corporation and several other PVC pipe manufacturers, as well as OPIS. The complaint alleges that the defendants, beginning in 2021, conspired to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the price of PVC pipe through an information exchange, OPIS, breaching Canada's Competition Act, and creating tortious liability. The plaintiffs seek general damages, injunctive relief, pre- and post-judgment interest, punitive damages, cost, and attorneys' fees on behalf of the putative class. The Company believes there are factual and legal defenses to the allegations in the complaints and is defending itself accordingly. There remains considerable uncertainty regarding the timing or ultimate resolution of these matters. At this time, we are unable to determine the likelihood of an outcome or estimate a range of reasonably possible losses, if any, arising from the class action complaints in the United States and Canada or the DOJ investigation. The resolution of these matters could have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, operating results and liquidity, and it is reasonably possible that our estimate of a loss arising from these matters could change in the near term. On May 20, 2025, the Otter Tail Corporation Board of Directors received a letter from counsel submitted on behalf of a shareholder, demanding the Board investigate and take legal action against certain current and former directors and officers of the Company. The derivative demand letter includes alleged securities law violations and breach of fiduciary duties and unjust enrichment against certain current and former officers and directors of the company in connection with the matters at issue in the pending civil antitrust cases. At this time, we are unable to determine the likelihood of any outcome related to this matter. Other Contingencies. We are involved in claims, legal proceedings, investigations and regulatory matters arising in the normal course of business. We regularly analyze relevant information and, as necessary, estimate and record accrued liabilities for legal, regulatory enforcement and other matters in which a loss or range of loss is probable of occurring and can be reasonably estimated. We believe the effect on our consolidated operating results, financial position and cash flows, if any, for the disposition of all matters pending as of September 30, 2025, other than those discussed above, will not be material.