As a general principle, there is nothing wrong in taking payment for teaching Quran. The payment is for the fixed time of the teacher in which he contractually agreed to teach on a daily basis. Please refer to the following response of Ghamidi Sahab:

Discussion 45355 • Reply 45356

___

There are a lot of differences among scholars as to how this Hadith should be interpreted. Shuaib al-Arnaut has summarized all the opinions in his commentary of Sunan Abi Daud.

قال الخطابي: اختلف الناس في معنى هذا الحديث وتأويله، فذهب قوم من العلماء إلى ظاهره، فرأوا أن أخذ الأجرة والعوض على تعليم القرآن غير مباح، وإليه ذهب الزهري وأبو حنيفة وإسحاق بن راهويه.

وقالت طائفة: لا بأس به ما لم يشترط، وهو قول الحسن البصري وابن سيرين والشعبي. وأباح ذلك آخرون، وهو مذهب عطاء ومالك والشافعي وأبي ثور، واحتجوا بحديث سهْل بن سعد: أن النبي – صلَّى الله عليه وسلم – قال للرجل الذي خطب المرأة فلم يجد لها مهراً: “زوجتكها على ما معك من القرآن” [سلف عند المصنف برقم (٢١١١)]، وتأولوا حديث عبادة على أنه أمران تبرع به، ونوى الاحتساب فيه، ولم يكن قصده وقت التعليم إلى طلب عوض ونفع، فحذره النبي – صلَّى الله عليه وسلم – إبطالَ أجره وتوعده عليه، وكان سبيلُ عبادة في هذا سبيلَ من رد ضالة الرجل أو استخرج له متاعاً قد غرق في بحر تبرعاً وحسبة، فليس له أن يأخذ عليه عوضا ولو أنه طلب لذلك أجرة قبل أن يفعله حسبة كان ذلك جائزاً.

وأهل الصفة: قوم فقراء، كانوا يعيشون بصدقة الناس، فأخذُ الرجلِ المالَ منهم مكروه، ودفعه إليهم مستحب.

وقال بعض العلماء: أخذ الأجرة على تعليم القرآن له حالات:

فإن كان في المسلمين غيره ممن يقوم به حلَّ له أخذ الأجرة عليه، لأن فرض ذلك لا يتعين عليه. وإذا كان في حال أو موضع لا يقوم به غيره لم يحل له أخذ الأجرة.

وعلى هذا تأول اختلاف الأخبار فيه.

Al-Khattabi said: People differed in the meaning of this hadith and its interpretation, so a group of scholars went to its apparent meaning, and they saw that taking payment and compensation for teaching the Quran is not permissible; and this is the view of Al-Zuhri, Abu Hanifa and Ishaq bin Rahwayh.

A group said: There is nothing wrong with it as long as it is not stipulated, and this is the saying of Al-Hasan Al-Basri, Ibn Sirin and Al-Shabi. Others permitted this, and it is the view of Ataa, Malik, al-Shafii and Abu Thawr, and they cited the hadith of Sahl bin Saad: that the Prophet – may God’s prayers and peace be upon him – said to the man who proposed to the woman and did not find her a dowry “You married her for the part of the Quran which you know” (Sunan Abi Daud Number 2111: https://sunnah.com/abudawud:2111), and they interpreted the hadith of Ubadah as two things that he had initially done the deed of teaching Quran as a form of charity, and later he intended to be rewarded for it but his intention was not at the time of teaching to seek compensation and benefit, so the Prophet – may God’s prayers and peace be upon him – asked him to invalidate his reward and warned him, in the same way which is adopted when returning the lost man or extracting for him goods He has drowned in a sea as a voluntary act, so he does not have the right to take compensation from that person afterward, but If he asks for a fee for that before he does it, it is considered a reward for that, then that is permissible.

And the people of Suffa: were poor people, who used to live on people’s charity, so a man took money from them was disliked, and he gave it back to them was desirable.

Some scholars said: Taking a fee for teaching the Quran depends on circumstances:

If it is just another Muslim among a group of many who are doing it, it is permissible for him to take the fee for him because he is not obligated to do so in these circumstances. But if he is in a state or place where no one else does that, then it is not permissible for him to take the fee.

There are different reports on this interpretation.

(Source: Kitab Sunan Abi Daud with Shuaib Al-Arnaut Commentary-5/291 (narration 3416))