This blog post is the second part of a series on incentives available to Missouri solar developers in the wake of Johnson v. Springfield Solar 1, LLC, 648 S.W.3d 101 (Mo. 2022). For part one on Missouri Chapter 100 bond abatements and the Springfield Solar 1, LLC decision, click here.
Enhanced Enterprise Zones
As nations continue developing renewable energy infrastructure to meet sustainability targets, some are creating unique approaches to ensure they meet their stated goals. In what is expected to be a first for any nation (developed or otherwise), the Energy Ministry of Israel is enacting new country-wide regulations requiring all new non-residential buildings to have rooftop solar panels.
When President Jimmy Carter installed rooftop solar panels on the White House, public support for adoption of renewable energy was at a then all-time high and many imagined the possibility of rooftop solar on their own homes and in their own communities. Yet, barriers such as the high up-front installation cost of panels, and of
Over the past decade, Missouri has experienced steady growth in utility-scale solar projects[1] and developers have benefited from a property tax exemption under Section 137.100(10) of the state’s tax code. Since the statutory property tax exemption was passed in 2013, solar facilities have leveraged the tax exemption to offset development and operations costs. Until recently, the solar facility tax exemption had flown largely under the radar, as even the largest solar facilities to come online in Missouri have been smaller than 15 megawatts[2]. Over the last few years, however, Missouri counties have started to see the kind of interest from large utility-scale solar developers that states in the south have been experiencing. But in August of 2022, the Missouri Supreme Court bucked the state’s solar-friendly trend in Johnson v. Springfield Solar 1, LLC, 648 S.W.3d 101 (Mo. 2022), unanimously finding the exemption for “solar energy systems not held for resale” under Section 137.100(10) unconstitutional. The case involved a small solar facility that supplied energy to Springfield, Missouri. The Missouri Supreme Court’s decision means that Springfield Solar 1, LLC could owe Greene County, Missouri more than $400,000 in back property taxes, and more generally, that developers who installed solar equipment in Missouri since 2013 will not be able to rely on the property tax exemption as they had anticipated under the tax code.
Confirming landowners’ signatory authority is crucial when preparing renewable energy leases or conducting due diligence in a renewable energy financing transaction. It is not enough to rely on a landowner’s word that he or she owns a proposed project area and has the right to encumber it with a renewable energy lease. While some leases include language certifying that the landowner executing the agreement has signatory authority, failing to properly confirm that authority can result in title issues, potentially requiring lease amendments or resulting in the denial of title insurance.
In the wake of increasing inflation and as a means of codifying several of the Biden administration’s legislative priorities, the Senate passed the $750 billion Inflation Reduction Act on August 7, 2022 (the “Act”), by a 51-50 party-line vote. The Act, which is comprised of sweeping healthcare, energy, and tax measures, was approved by the House of Representatives on August 12, 2022, and signed into law by President Biden on August 16, 2022, creating a significant number of renewable energy sector benefits.
On June 6, 2022, President Biden declared a national emergency (the “Declaration”) in relation to energy resources and temporarily extended the time of duty-free importation of solar panels and parts from Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, and Vietnam. This declaration comes in response to industry concerns over the implications, for ongoing solar energy projects, of the anti-circumvention inquiry by the U.S. Department of Commerce that was initiated on April 1, 2022. The Declaration permits the Secretary of Commerce to waive the collection of duties and other estimated duties on imported solar cells and modules from Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia for the next twenty-four months, regardless of the outcome of the anti-circumvention inquiry.
Husch Blackwell international trade attorney, Jeffrey Neeley, and energy attorney, John Crossley, hosted a teleconference in which they discussed the implications of and next steps in the US International Trade Commission’s (ITC) ongoing case that imported crystalline silicon photovoltaic (CSPV) cells and modules have caused “serious injury” to domestic manufacturers. A detailed summary
Suniva, Inc., a bankrupt U.S. producer of crystalline silicon photovoltaic (CSPV) cells, filed a petition with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) seeking relief from the effects of importation of foreign manufactured CSPV cells and modules. Suniva requests relief in the form of a minimum price for solar modules imported into the United States and imposition of an additional four-year tariff on all imported CSPV cells and modules that would establish a price-per-watt for inbound foreign competitors double that of current levels.
The requested relief calls for
Husch Blackwell and the Texas Renewable Energies Industries Alliance have teamed up to produce a webinar series focused on the Texas solar industry, titled “On the Horizon”. Register here for the final webinar in the series, in which Husch Blackwell’s Chauncey Lane and Jason Reschly will focus on solar development finance and the investor tax credit. They’ll give advice on tax requirements to qualify for solar tax credits, discuss tax issues for structuring transactions, identify trends in