Green Energy Provisions In The One Big Beautiful Bill Act: Unfortunately, A Mixed Bag

On July 4 President Trump signed what everyone is now calling the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” (Doesn’t it cease being a “Bill” when it becomes an “Act”? Not this one, apparently.). The Act is a compendium of dozens of provisions relating to all aspects of the federal budget and taxation. As a result, many summaries that you may have read focus on things like income tax rates and deductions, and other such matters directly relevant to individuals. That leaves some other important subjects of the Act getting short shrift, particularly the provisions dealing with various aspects of the ongoing green energy scam. So I will try to hit the highlights on that subject here.

I previously had a post on May 24 covering the provisions on this subject in the version of the Bill that had just been passed by the House. That post was highly optimistic that the House’s language, if it could survive wrestling with the Senate, could essentially put an end to almost all of the green energy subsidies. Unfortunately, as you might expect from the swamp of Washington, the final language will likely let some of the scam continue.

But let’s start with the positive news. For your reference, in case you want to read the actual provisions of the Act, here is a link to the Table of Contents, with ongoing links to each section.

Rescission and repeal of green energy handouts from the Inflation Reduction Act

The fraudulently-named Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 contained more than twenty open-ended handouts to various sorts of programs supposedly related to decarbonization of the economy and saving the planet. Most this was to be administered by the EPA, representing a vast expansion of its prior mission. These grant programs were generally structured like open-ended entitlements, so that nobody could know the total amounts that would actually get spent in the end. These were essentially unlimited slush funds for left-wing activist groups. Estimates of the ultimate spend under these programs ranged into the trillions.

Title VI of the OBBBA goes through these things one by one and rescinds or repeals them. There are some twenty-four sections, from 60001 to 60024, providing for the rescissions. To give you just a smattering: Section 60001 rescinds funding for “clean heavy-duty vehicles”; section 60002 rescinds a “greenhouse gas reduction fund”; in section 60003 it’s funding for “diesel emissions reductions”; in 60005, it’s “air pollution in schools”; 60006 rescinds funding for the “low emissions electricity program”; in 60010 it’s “greenhouse gas corporate reporting”; etc., etc., etc.

In each case, the language of the OBBBA limits the rescission to “unobligated balances.” E.g., “The unobligated balances of amounts made available to carry out section 132 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7432) are rescinded.” (That’s the one that relates to heavy-duty trucks.). In other words, the statute unfortunately does not touch the “gold bars off the Titanic” extravaganza that took place in the closing weeks of the Biden administration. However, current EPA Administrator Zeldin and the Department of Justice may well have remedies available for some of the most abusive spending, even if supposedly already “obligated.”

Title VII of the OBBBA is where we find the tax provisions. Chapter 5 of that is headed “Ending Green New Deal spending, promoting America-first energy, and other reforms.” Subchapter A is then headed “Termination of Green New Deal subsidies.” And there then follows a long list of tax credits and benefits getting terminated. Unfortunately, none of them gets terminated immediately; but many get terminated expeditiously.

For example, there’s Section 70502, “Termination of clean vehicle credit.” That amends another statute making the “clean” (electric) vehicle tax credit available until December 31, 2032, and replaces that date with September 30, 2025. That’s less than three months from now. You can see why Elon Musk is so upset.

There are varying dates for different credits getting terminated. For “residential clean energy credits” (e.g., putting solar panels on your roof), the date moves up from December 31, 2034 to December 31, 2025 — less than six months away. The new termination date for the “energy efficient home credit” moves up from 2032 to December 31, 2026 — now we’re talking a year and a half. The new termination date for the “new energy efficient home credit” is June 30, 2026.

But now let’s get to the big money — the tax credits that subsidize wind and solar electricity generation facilities. Here, unfortunately, the OBBBA falls short. As discussed in my May 24 post, the House version of the Bill provided for an effective ending of the massive tax subsidies to these projects by leaving only a 60-day window to commence construction, and a required “in service” date of 2028. The 60 day window to commence construction was particularly significant, because the program would be effectively ended before any more legislation to extend the deadlines could be making its way through Congress.

Well, now the period to commence construction on a qualifying wind or solar project has been extended until a year after enactment of the legislation. The “placed in service” date has supposedly been accelerated to December 31, 2027 (Sections 70511 and 70512), but energy analyst Alex Epstein points out that this is likely illusory:

[U]nder [a] last-minute carveout [inserted into the Bill], Big Green has 12 months to initiate as many subsidized projects as it wants using the insanely-easy-to-meet "construction" threshold. (All you need to do is commit 5% of expected project cost to buying re-sellable assets like solar panels.) Once they declare "construction"—e.g., in July 2026—they'll have 4 years (e.g., July 2030) to "place in service." And then some of those projects, e.g., most wind projects, will get 10 years of subsidies.

These tax credits are something that a taxpayer can qualify for by meeting the tests of the statute, without need to apply for some grant from an executive agency. In other words, there may be little or nothing that Trump can do to stop this.

So unfortunately, the bottom line is that the OBBBA is a mixed bag in terms of getting rid of outrageous subsidies for useless wind and solar generation. Big wind and big solar have lived to fight another day. It remains to be seen whether there will be another chance to try to get rid of these tax breaks during Trump’s term.

I’d like someone on Congress or staff to name names as to who slipped these last-minute changes into the Act.

If there is anything that really aggravates me, it is this idea that green energy will accomplish much more than increased cost for less reliability. How stupid can we be relying on this type of unreliable energy while paying more? Then there’s also the credits for purchase of a new EV. Why should there be a credit for a new vehicle that is simply overpriced & overrated? Sure, with certain other considerations(like having a charging station) an EV would meet my driving requirements. It would also deplete my limited bank account & this doesn’t even include increased taxes & insurance on the thing. The older vehicle I drive more than meets my needs & I daresay it’s at least as reliable or even more so than a new EV. The older car also makes it much more feasible for being able to accomplish long trips with as few stops as I might consider. If we are going to have new technology at the very least it needs to be better than what we had.

I also like to know who slipped in the last minute carveout for Big Green Energy.

Agreed. And I hate all tax credits / subsidies for the "green" energy stuff. But if I had to pick my battles, I'd rather get rid of the big ones (the subsidizing energy farms) than the small ones at the individual level (income tax credit if you buy solar panels for your home). If this article is correct, it looks like they kept in the crony version of the green money but not the little guy solar tax credit.

It doesn't matter much to the individual solar buyer anyway. All the solar tax credit does is artificially inflate the price you pay upfront anyway, only for the govt to give you that extra back (when you file your taxes). So the individual solar tax credit didn't help anyway -- it was just a tax payer give away to the "green" companies, using the solar buyer as a kind of pass-through agent.

But the solar farm subsidy is way worse and way more dangerous. It's bigger money (crony capitalism to whoever gets the contract) and it makes the grid less stable because that version of solar is meant to power the grid, not power an individual's home. The grid should be based on nothing but dependable sources (hydrocarbons and maybe some hydro electric generation).

If there is anything that really aggravates me, it is this idea that green energy will accomplish much more than increased cost for less reliability.

How so? Ever since I went off the grid with solar,I don't have power outages. I can't say the same for my neighbor, who had at least a dozen so far this year. And, when you live out in a rural area, you are the last customer the power company will get around to.

Then there’s also the credits for purchase of a new EV.

I like the idea of being able to recover some of the hard-earned money that the govt stole from me over the past decades.

It would also deplete my limited bank account & this doesn’t even include increased taxes & insurance on the thing.

Even without the tax credit, you can get into the best brand EV made (Tesla) for not much over 30k. My wife paid more than that for the gas powered vehicle she drives, and my neighbor paid twice that much for his new diesel pickup.

The older vehicle I drive more than meets my needs & I daresay it’s at least as reliable or even more so than a new EV.

You sound like my uncle and his 1960 model tractors that I constantly have to work on for him. "They don't make 'em like they used to.." is his battle cry. You bet they don't. They make them way better. That's why he often borrows one of my newer late model tractors. I would wager that the new EVs have fewer moving parts than even the older cars you drive.

The older car also makes it much more feasible for being able to accomplish long trips with as few stops as I might consider. If we are going to have new technology at the very least it needs to be better than what we had.

They are way better. Charging stations are popping up everywhere. Most of those EVs will go 400 to 600 miles on a charge. And, if you do the math, they are cheaper to drive than a gasoline vehicle. And, you can "gas it up" at your house overnight while you sleep.

There is something else you need to consider. If you are getting up in age, the day may come when you can't safely drive. All the new Teslas can literally drive themselves. I'm not talking about the "steering assist" features found in the new gasoline powered cars, I'm talking about literally driving itself. It can drop you off at the door and go park itself, back itself out of the garage, come around the front of the house and pick you up, and you don't have to be in it. Tesla has taken that technology way beyond the other car makers, and until you have actually tried it out, you won't believe it. This is going to keep grandma and grandpa safely going to the store, going to the doctor, and going to visit family and friends for a long time after they would otherwise be a burden to other family members.

At this time I would agree with you that solar doesn't work well on a big scale with energy providers. But, for the individual who lives out in a rural area with enough real estate, and power that goes out often, it's a Godsend.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.