In September, the State of Hawaii Department of Taxation issued a letter ruling (Hawaii Letter Ruling No. 2018-01) that clarified the “placed in service” requirement in the application of the Renewable Energy Technologies Income Tax Credit (“RETITC”) in Hawaii. A project was denied RETITC in the year when testing was conducted because the project had
Jeffrey G. Davis is a partner in the Tax Transactions & Consulting group in Mayer Brown’s Washington DC office and is a co-head of the firm’s Renewable Energy group. Jeff represents major corporations, financial institutions and private equity funds on a wide range of US federal income tax matters. His practice focuses on partnership tax, tax credits and other incentives, and project finance and development.
Below are answers to questions we received during our tax equity webinar of October 23. These questions were submitted online during the webinar. The presentation from the webinar is available here.
Question: Commercial and industrial (C&I) has higher returns but how many projects raise tax equity versus other segments of the solar market? What …
In 2017, Maryland, with Governor Larry Hogan’s (R) support, became the first state in the country to launch a tax credit program for energy storage systems. In September, 2018, Maryland Energy Administration adopted new regulations that clarified certain qualifications of eligible systems and established procedures for individuals and businesses to apply for tax credits.
We were pleased to participate in Power Finance & Risk’s (PFR) Tax Equity Roundtable. We were joined in the roundtable discussion by Rich Dovere of C2 Energy Capital, Marshal Salant of Citi, Kathyrn Rasmussen of Capital Dynamics Clean Energy and Infrastructure, Pedro Almeida of EDP Renewables North America and as moderator PFR’s editor, Richard Metcalf. …
Mayer Brown’s David K. Burton and Jeffrey G. Davis both Tax Transactions & Consulting partners and part of the firm’s Renewable Energy group co-hosted a heavily attended webinar on how tax reform is impacting the tax equity market and certain renewable energy structures with Vadim Ovchinnikov, CFA, CPA and Gintaras Sadauskas of Alfa Energy Advisors.…
Please join Mayer Brown and Alfa Energy Advisors for a webinar. The webinar will address how tax reform is impacting the tax equity market and certain structures in particular. Additional topics include:
- The latest industry trends
- New bonus depreciation rules and their impact on tax equity transactions and modeling
- Compressed financing margins for wind and
We have published our Legal Update on the Federal Circuit’s opinion in the Alta Wind case involving the calculation of eligible basis for 1603 Treasury cash grant purposes. The 1603 Treasury cash grant rules “mimic” the investment tax credit (ITC) rules, so the case has implications for ITC transactions being structured and end executed today. …
On June 22, 2018, the IRS released Notice 2018-59 (the “Guidance”). The Guidance provides rules to determine when construction begins with respect to investment tax credit (“ITC”) eligible property, such as solar projects. The Guidance was much awaited by the solar industry because the date upon which construction begins governs the determination of the percentage level of the ITC, which is ratcheted down for projects that begin construction after 2019.
In addition to applying to solar and (fiber-optic solar), the Guidance applies to the following energy generation technologies: geothermal, fuel cell, microturbine, combined heat and power and small wind.
Overview of Beginning of Construction
The ITC percentage for a solar project is determined based on the year in which construction of the project begins, provided the solar project is also placed in service before January 1, 2024, as follows: (i) before January 1, 2020, 30%, (ii) in 2020, 26%, (iii) in 2021, 22% and (iv) any time thereafter (regardless of the year in which the solar project is placed in service), 10%.
The Guidance is quite similar to existing guidance for utility scale wind projects. The utility scale wind guidance is discussed in our 2016 Update. As expected and consistent with the wind guidance, the Guidance provides two means for establishing the beginning of construction of a solar project (and other ITC technology projects): (i) engaging in significant physical work either directly or by contract the “Physical Work Method”) or (ii) paying or incurring (depending on the taxpayer’s method of accounting) five percent of the ultimate tax basis of the project (the “Five Percent Method”). As is the case with wind, the Guidance provides that the IRS will apply strict scrutiny of the facts and circumstances to determine if the project was continuously constructed from the deemed beginning of construction date through the date the project is placed in service.
Four Year Placed-in-Service Window
The wind guidance provides a four year window for the project to be completed and to avoid the scrutiny as to whether the construction was continuous. There had been speculation that the window for solar (or at least some classes of solar) would be shorter because the time to construct solar projects (especially rooftop solar) is generally shorter than the time to construct a wind project. In what is a relief to the solar industry, the Guidance provides solar, and the other ITC technologies, a four year window as well. …
In a recent case, the Tax Court ruled in the taxpayer’s favor as to three California distributed generation solar projects’ eligibility for the energy credit under Section 48 and bonus depreciation under Section 168. However, the Tax Court did reduce the taxpayer’s basis in the projects, and the taxpayer in the case enjoyed significant procedural advantages due to mistakes by the IRS.
In Golan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2018-76 (June 5, 2018), in late 2010 a solar contractor installed solar equipment on the roofs of three host properties and entered into power purchase agreements (“PPAs”) with the property owners. The PPAs provided that the hosts would purchase electricity generated by the solar equipment at a discount to utility rates, while the solar contractor would retain the ownership of the equipment, including the right to any tax or other financial benefits, and would service and repair the equipment.
Mr. Golan, the taxpayer, in 2011 purchased the solar equipment, subject to the PPAs, from the solar contractor for a purported purchase price of $300,000, which was the sum of a purported $90,000 down payment, a $57,750 credit for certain rebates, and a $152,250 promissory note (which the taxpayer was the obligor under but the taxpayer also provided a personal guarantee thereof). The solar projects were not connected to the grid until after the taxpayer acquired them in 2011. The IRS unsuccessfully sought to disallow the taxpayer from taking energy credit and depreciation deduction with respect to the solar equipment.…
Pratt’s Energy Law Report has published our article 2018 and Onward: The Impact of Tax Reform on the Renewable Energy Market. We are pleased to be able to make a PDF version of the article available. (The article starts on page 6 of the PDF).