[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Get weekly updates

when your community is targeted


RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Paypal

Donate via Stripe

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

News Watch Home

Taking back renewable energy’s taxpayer-funded honeypot 

Credit:  By Merrill Matthews, Special to the Independent | White Mountain Independent | www.wmicentral.com ~~

The renewable energy industry exists because of government mandates and taxpayer subsidies.

Mega-investor Warren Buffet echoed this statement in his explanation of why his company, Berkshire Hathaway, invests in wind energy: For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.

Notice Buffet didn’t say the taxpayer subsidies are a good reason for investing in wind farms, but the only reason.

The Financial Times notes, Berkshire’s Energy unit also receives tax credits for renewable power generation reporting $258 [million] of wind energy tax credits in 2014, and $913 [million] of investment tax credits in 2012 and 2013 for opening new solar power plants

U.S. taxpayers shelled out at least $1.17 billion in tax breaks for billionaire Buffet in just three years.

The House Republican tax reform plan begins clawing back some of those subsidies, including the one receiving the most attention the per-vehicle tax credit of up to $7,500 for electric cars.

Defenders of the credit warn that eliminating it will likely mean the end of U.S. plug-in electric vehicle sales. They also note that eliminating the credit makes it harder for some states to follow a mandate requiring electric vehicles to comprise a certain percentage of car sales.

But the tax credit was supposed to be temporary, to offset high R&D and start-up costs and promote early sales, until the electric vehicle market got on its feet. Besides, the primary users of that credit are high earners who can afford electric vehicles, most of which are significantly more expensive than cars and trucks with fossil fuel-burning engines. That means that middle-class workers are subsidizing high-income workers’ driving preferences.

The wind industry also takes a hit in the House tax bill by reducing the Production Tax Credit from 2.4 cents per-kilowatt hour to 1.5 cents for new projects. And solar energy loses a 30 percent Investment Tax Credit which under current law is scheduled to drop to 10 percent for large solar projects beginning construction after 2027.

News reports also assert that the House Republicans’ tax reform proposal maintains tax breaks for the oil and gas industry. And the Congressional Budget Office does claim that the U.S. provided about $18.4 billion in subsidies and tax breaks to the fossil fuel and renewable energy industries in 2016, with 75 percent going to renewable fuels and 25 percent to fossil fuels. But that claim is misleading.

The International Energy Agency does not include the U.S. among countries that subsidize fossil fuels. Neither does the Financial Times energy subsidy assessment, though the Financial Times does claim the U.S. is the second largest subsidizer of renewable energy after Germany. So what gives?

Tax breaks for fossil fuels are generally applied to standard operating expenses such as exploration and depletion costs. Those are costs of doing business in the oil and gas industry and should be normal business write-offs.

Scaling back or ending renewable energy and electric vehicle tax breaks, as the House Republican plan does, would come closer to putting renewable energy on a level playing field with fossil fuels, while saving the government money.

Washington has been picking winners and losers all too often. Companies need to compete without taxpayer subsidies, letting consumers determine which companies and industries thrive and which don’t survive.

Source:  By Merrill Matthews, Special to the Independent | White Mountain Independent | www.wmicentral.com

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
   Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)
Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)


e-mail X FB LI TG TG Share

News Watch Home

Get the Facts
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook

Wind Watch on Linked In Wind Watch on Mastodon