Green energy credits phaseout divides Senate Republicans

How to phase out Biden-era green energy tax credits is emerging as a key flashpoint among Senate Republicans as they seek to advance their version of the 'big, beautiful bill.'
The Senate is taking an approach to the credits for climate-friendly energy that is less aggressive than the House but still represents a major rollback of these incentives.
Members who have opposed a full repeal of the credits have signaled that the upper chamber's approach still goes too far. But Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has emerged as a leading voice calling for the subsidies to be phased out more quickly.
Hawley told reporters this week that solar tax credits cost 'a gob of money.'
'Funding the Green New Deal is like the least conservative thing I could think of to do,' he said.
The dynamic sets up a difficult task for leadership, as President Trump has said he hopes to sign the legislation by July 4. The discord also comes amid similar policy differences on Medicaid and federal tax deductions in areas with high state and local taxes.
While Hawley, who opposes Medicaid cuts pressed by the right, says the green subsidies should be reduced, lawmakers who have called for leniency said they generally approve of the current approach — but they'd like to see further changes.
'I think that Senator [Mike] Crapo did a really good job, but there's more work to be done,' Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah) told The Hill, referring to the Idaho Republican chair of the Senate Finance Committee. Curtis declined to elaborate.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who, like Curtis, has called for a 'targeted, pragmatic approach' toward the tax credits and not a 'full repeal,' told reporters he was generally pleased with what Senate leaders came up with.
'They've moved substantially in the right direction,' Tillis, who faces a closely watched reelection race next year, said on Wednesday.
He added that he expected to see 'a few more adjustments,' particularly in terms of restrictions on energy projects' reliance on China.
Meanwhile, West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R) said she's pushing for more flexibility for tax credits for hydrogen energy.
Capito, whose state is home to one of several 'hydrogen hubs' set up under the Biden administration, told The Hill Wednesday that she's wants to 'push the dates back' since the bill would require projects to be under construction by the end of this year to qualify for the credit.
'That's a pretty tight timeline,' she said. 'I'm trying to get the date pushed back. I don't know if I'll be successful.'
However, she also said that she's not willing to torpedo the entire bill over the issue.
'It's not a hard line for me, but I'm not the only one who has an interest in this,' she said.
The disagreements emerging within the Senate GOP come on top of an impending clash with the House, where the conservative Freedom Caucus says it will not accept changes that water down the House-passed cuts to the tax credits.
The House version included provisions that were expected to knee-cap access to some credits, particularly for wind and solar, such as language saying projects could only be eligible if they began construction within 60 days of the bill's enactment.
The Senate version removed this provision and some others passed by the House, generating pushback among some hardline conservatives.
'They either fix it or they don't have my vote,' Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) told reporters this week. 'The president rightly campaigned on terminating the Green New Scam subsidies. It's destroying our grid. It's subsidizing China.'
In the House, a contingent of moderate members were also pushing for leniency on the tax credits, but most of them still lined up to vote for the bill's more dramatic cuts. It's not clear which faction will win out in the Senate.
The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act passed by Democrats included hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of tax incentives for climate friendly energy sources including wind, solar and nuclear energy, as well as emerging technologies such as hydrogen and carbon capture.
Republicans have set out the goal to repeal these credits — partly as a pay-for for tax cuts and partly due to ideological opposition to them.
Democrats have warned that axing the credits would undermine the fight against climate change, contributing more greenhouse gases to a dangerously warming planet. And they argue that fewer renewables on the grid means higher energy prices.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Chicago Tribune

10 minutes ago

• Chicago Tribune

Appeals court lets President Donald Trump keep control of National Guard troops deployed to Los Angeles

LOS ANGELES — An appeals court on Thursday allowed President Donald Trump to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids. The decision halts a ruling from a lower court judge who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The deployment was the first by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since 1965. In its decision, a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously concluded it was likely Trump lawfully exercised his authority in federalizing control of the guard. It said that while presidents don't have unfettered power to seize control of a state's guard, the Trump administration had presented enough evidence to show it had a defensible rationale for doing so, citing violent acts by protesters. 'The undisputed facts demonstrate that before the deployment of the National Guard, protesters 'pinned down' several federal officers and threw 'concrete chunks, bottles of liquid, and other objects' at the officers. Protesters also damaged federal buildings and caused the closure of at least one federal building. And a federal van was attacked by protesters who smashed in the van's windows,' the court wrote. 'The federal government's interest in preventing incidents like these is significant.' It also found that even if the federal government failed to notify the governor of California before federalizing the National Guard as required by law, Newsom had no power to veto the president's order. Trump celebrated the decision on his Truth Social platform, calling it a 'BIG WIN.' He wrote that 'all over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done.' Newsom issued a statement that expressed disappointment that the court is allowing Trump to retain control of the Guard. But he also welcomed one aspect of the decision. 'The court rightly rejected Trump's claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court,' Newsom said. 'The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens.' The court case could have wider implications on the president's power to deploy soldiers within the United States after Trump directed immigration officials to prioritize deportations from other Democratic-run cities. Trump, a Republican, argued that the troops were necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said the move inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The protests have since appeared to be winding down. Two judges on the appeals panel were appointed by Trump during his first term. During oral arguments Tuesday, all three judges suggested that presidents have wide latitude under the federal law at issue and that courts should be reluctant to step in. The case started when Newsom sued to block Trump's command, and he won an early victory from U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco. Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he said only allows presidents can take control during times of 'rebellion or danger of a rebellion.' 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' wrote Breyer, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton and is brother to retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The Trump administration, though, argued that courts can't second guess the president's decisions and quickly secured a temporary halt from the appeals court. The ruling means control of the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit continues to unfold.

CNBC

20 minutes ago

• CNBC

Circle shares extend their rally after Senate passes landmark stablecoin bill

Shares of Circle continued to climb on Friday as investors cheered the Senate approval of its proposed stablecoin legislation, the GENIUS Act. The stock was up 14% in premarket trading as excitement continued to build. The bill passed the Senate on Tuesday, and shares rose 33% on Wednesday. The market was closed Thursday for the Juneteenth holiday. Circle is on pace to end the week higher by almost 50%. It has rocketed more than 500% since its initial public offering on June 5. Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies whose values are pegged to that of another asset, usually the U.S. dollar. Traditionally used as bridge currencies for crypto traders, stablecoins today are benefiting from increased interest by banks and payment firms as the Trump administration rolls back Biden-era crypto policies. Stablecoins have attracted a groundswell of investor interest in anticipation of regulatory clarity from Congress, as they have the potential to make payments faster and cheaper. Amazon and Walmart are reportedly exploring the possibility of using or issuing their own stablecoins. Uber, Apple and Airbnb are among other big companies reported to be exploring stablecoins in recent weeks. The GENIUS (short for Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins) Act seeks to establish clear regulatory guidelines for the use of stablecoins regarding issuance, reserves and compliance. The bill now heads to the house, which has its own stablecoin legislation in the works, called the STABLE Act.

Yahoo

21 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Coinbase (COIN) Jumps 16% After Senate Passes Stablecoin Bill; Chart Signals More Upside

Coinbase (COIN, Financials) shares surged 16% to $295 on Wednesday after the Senate passed the bipartisan GENIUS Act, a landmark bill that establishes a regulatory framework for stablecoins. The bill marks the first major federal legislation aimed at legitimizing digital currency infrastructure, a move investors see as a major tailwind for Coinbase's business model. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 7 Warning Signs with COIN. The stock is now up 19% year to date, far outpacing the S&P 500's 2% gain over the same period. Technical analysts highlighted a breakout from a bullish flag pattern on heavy volume, with momentum confirmed by a rising relative strength index and a looming golden cross as the 50-day moving average converges with the 200-day line. The company also unveiled Coinbase Payments this week, a stablecoin-based solution for digital transactions across e-commerce platforms, reinforcing its product expansion strategy as regulatory clarity improves. Investors are now watching overhead resistance levels near $330 and $450, with the latter representing a projected upside target if momentum continues through August. Support levels sit near $265 and, more significantly, $212 a region marked by long-term consolidation. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data