Chairman Makes His Move on Energy Tax Overhaul

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus(D-MT) speaks during a hearing on health insurance exchanges on November 6, 2013 in the Dirksen Senate Office on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Ben Geman
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Ben Geman
Dec. 18, 2013, 8:24 a.m.

Sen­ate Fin­ance Com­mit­tee Chair­man Max Baucus is pitch­ing an over­haul of en­ergy tax policy that he’s call­ing a money-sav­ing, cli­mate-friendly way to sim­pli­fy today’s “con­fus­ing and costly” maze of in­cent­ives.

The Montana Demo­crat is mak­ing a big polit­ic­al bet with the sweep­ing pro­pos­al un­veiled Wed­nes­day that would cre­ate a wholly new sys­tem of in­cent­ives for pro­du­cing low-car­bon elec­tri­city and fuels.

His plan would jet­tis­on in­cent­ives that have vo­cal polit­ic­al con­stitu­en­cies, such as oil com­pan­ies and elec­tric vehicle and ef­fi­ciency ad­voc­ates. But his of­fice hopes to at­tract sup­port be­cause the pro­pos­al saves money com­pared to ex­tend­ing the cur­rent patch­work of en­ergy in­cent­ives, and the plan is part of wider tax code over­haul ef­forts that would lower cor­por­ate rates.

“Our cur­rent set of en­ergy tax in­cent­ives is overly com­plex and picks win­ners and losers with no clear policy ra­tionale,” Baucus said in a state­ment Wed­nes­day. “We need a sys­tem of en­ergy in­cent­ives that is more pre­dict­able, ra­tion­al, and tech­no­logy neut­ral to in­crease our en­ergy se­cur­ity and en­sure a clean and healthy en­vir­on­ment for fu­ture gen­er­a­tions.”

Baucus is not run­ning for reelec­tion next year and has made it his top pri­or­ity to try to re­form the na­tion’s com­plex tax code. The plan un­veiled Wed­nes­day is a piece of that ef­fort.

But at­tempts to push through the first ma­jor tax-code re­form since 1986 face gi­gant­ic hurdles on Cap­it­ol Hill, where even nuts-and-bolts meas­ures draw par­tis­an dis­putes.

Ac­cord­ing to a sum­mary of the en­ergy plan, more than three-dozen cur­rent in­cent­ives—in­clud­ing 25 tem­por­ary meas­ures that ex­pire every year or two — would largely be re­placed with two primary in­cent­ive pro­grams for elec­tri­city and mo­tor fuels.

For new elec­tri­city pro­jects, the plan cre­ates a “tech­no­logy neut­ral” slid­ing cred­it for pro­du­cing power that’s at least 25 per­cent less car­bon-in­tens­ive than the na­tion­al av­er­age. The 10-year cred­it would be avail­able for pro­jects that use any type of fuel — re­new­able, nuc­le­ar or fossil en­ergy — as long as they’re clean enough.

“The clean­li­ness of the gen­er­a­tion tech­no­logy de­term­ines the size of the cred­it,” a staff sum­mary states.

The biggest cred­it avail­able is 2.3 cents per kilo­watt hour of power pro­duc­tion or, if claimed as an in­vest­ment cred­it, up to 20 per­cent of a pro­ject’s cost.

For trans­port­a­tion fuels such as next-wave bio­fuels, the draft plan sim­il­arly cre­ates a “tech­no­logy-neut­ral” cred­it for pro­duc­tion and build­ing new pro­jects that would be avail­able to vari­ous types of green­er fuels. The less car­bon-emit­ting the fuel, the more luc­rat­ive the in­cent­ive.

Both tax cred­it pro­grams would be­gin in 2017.

The avail­ab­il­ity of the pro­grams would phase out once the U.S. power and fuel mix hits cer­tain car­bon bench­marks. The power cred­it would phase out over four years once the car­bon “in­tens­ity” of U.S. power gen­er­a­tion — that is, the amount of emis­sions per amount of en­ergy pro­duced — is 25 per­cent clean­er than it is in 2013.

For mo­tor fuels, it would start phas­ing out once the green­house gas in­tens­ity of all U.S. fuels over­all has be­come 25 per­cent lower than con­ven­tion­al gas­ol­ine.

Un­til the pro­grams launch in 2017, the plan would ex­tend some ex­pir­ing pro­vi­sions for sev­er­al years, in­clud­ing the soon-to-ex­pire pro­duc­tion tax cred­it for wind power pro­du­cers that the in­dustry calls vi­tal.

The new draft fol­lows a pro­pos­al Baucus re­leased in Novem­ber that would end some oil in­dustry tax breaks. Taken to­geth­er, the en­ergy tax plans would save tens of bil­lions of dol­lars, his of­fice said.

Con­tinu­ing to ex­tend cur­rent in­cent­ives would cost al­most $150 bil­lion over 10 years, while the new pro­pos­als would at least trim that in half, ac­cord­ing to Demo­crat­ic staff on the fin­ance com­mit­tee.

In ad­di­tion to the cred­its for new green elec­tri­city pro­jects, the plan would cre­ate an in­vest­ment tax cred­it for ret­ro­fit­ting in­dus­tri­al fa­cil­it­ies with car­bon cap­ture and stor­age tech­no­logy.

While he’s pitch­ing the broad over­haul, Baucus may also push for­ward with a sep­ar­ate and more lim­ited pack­age of tax “ex­tenders” that would in­clude pro­vi­sions to pre­vent the wind cred­it from ex­pir­ing at the end of 2013.

What We're Following See More »
WWE WRESTLING OWNER
Trump to Nominate Linda McMahon to Head SBA
7 hours ago
THE LATEST
$6.3 BILLION FOR RESEARCH AND OPIOIDS
Senate Sends Medical Cures Bill to Obama’s Desk
12 hours ago
THE LATEST
HAD CONSIDERED RUNNING FOR GUV IN 2018
Oklahoma AG Pruitt to Get the Nod for EPA Chief
13 hours ago
THE DETAILS
TO BE ANNOUNCED IN COMING DAYS
Trump To Nominate Gen. John Kelly For Homeland Security
16 hours ago
THE LATEST

Donald Trump has chosen Gen. James Kelly to be his secretary of homeland security, making Kelly the third general tapped by Trump to serve in his administration. The official announcement is likely to come in the next couple of days. Kelly, who did not endorse Trump during the campaign, "was the commander of U.S. Southern Command until earlier this year."

Source:
EFFORT LIKELY TO DIE IN COMMITTEE
Jordan Can’t Force a Floor Vote on Impeaching Koskinen
1 days ago
THE LATEST
House Freedom Caucus Chairman Jim Jordan attempted to force a floor vote on impeaching IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, but "the House voted overwhelmingly to refer it to the Judiciary Committee. ... The committee will not be required to take up the resolution." Earlier, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi "made a motion to table the resolution, which the House voted against by a 180-235 margin, mostly along party lines."
Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login