• Oklahoma Taxes Solar Cell Owners For Returning Excess Energy Back To The Grid
    57 replies, posted
[QUOTE=cqbcat;44590851]So people finally come up with an off the grid, sustainable system that just sits there with no outside influence other than the first time purchase of the solar panel (which includes a sales tax) and the state just has to tax them. That's fucked. Seems like big government to me. Shit, I could build a perpetual motion machine and generate free electricity for ALL OF MANKIND TO SHARE IN A WARM LIGHT and the government would still tax me.[/QUOTE] Except that is not what is happening. They're selling excess energy back to the power companies who run the grid (So.. not off the grid). What is happening is that income is now being taxed, because before it wasn't.
This is a normal thing... If they weren't getting taxed they would be like "Rich get Richer: Rich people have untaxable source of income from solar panels" and you'd be getting your panties in a bunch about that. There's no problem here.
[QUOTE=bord2tears;44588593]As long it is just regular income tax and not some special fee this makes sense to me.[/QUOTE] This is why I'm having a hard time seeing how this is such an issue? You're selling powe, of course its going to be taxed. Its a source of income.
[QUOTE=cqbcat;44590851]So people finally come up with an off the grid, sustainable system that just sits there with no outside influence other than the first time purchase of the solar panel (which includes a sales tax) and the state just has to tax them. That's fucked. Seems like big government to me. Shit, I could build a perpetual motion machine and generate free electricity for ALL OF MANKIND TO SHARE IN A WARM LIGHT and the government would still tax me.[/QUOTE] lmao. "big government". Nothing wrong at all with what they're doing here, it's income tax, but thanks to it being applied to renewable energy people think they should be exempt from it. Sure they could offer some kind of tax break on the tax applied to the energy, but they don't have to.
Yeah honestly I see nothing wrong with it. When you do your tax returns here you need to report all earnings from self-employment, and if you're selling off an excess of what you produce it should qualify as such. Just closing a loophole. But maybe individuals should receive a limited degree of tax breaks to encourage the transition to renewable resources.
[QUOTE=dbk21894;44588333]I don't understand what the problem is This is income, and should be taxed Those who do not sell it back to the grid aren't being taxed, those who do are I am perfectly fine with this[/QUOTE] Can you imagine how boring Sensationalist Headlines would be if we didn't have slanted titles? "Oklahoma adds income tax to people who sell solar power" And like, all of the ratings would be informative, and people probably wouldn't read it as much, which would be a shame since posting here is fun.
Uh, this bill isn't about including gains from selling energy back to the grid in income tax, [URL="http://newsok.com/oklahoma-house-passes-solar-surcharge-bill/article/3955378"]it lets utility companies charge people for supplying energy to the grid[/URL].
You have to claim this as income. But in addition to having to claim it as income on your taxes, you are ALSO CHARGED A FEE. [quote]the new class of customers will now be charged a monthly fee[/quote] That fee goes to the power company, not the government. They get it because when you sell power back to the grid, you get money back at the same price as if you were buying it from the grid. This pisses off the power company because obviously they produce power for less money than they sell it for, so being forced to take their own medicine and pay their own prices for power generation hurts their bottom line. This fee is intended to offset that because OH NOES LOST PROFITS.
[QUOTE=GunFox;44594107]You have to claim this as income. But in addition to having to claim it as income on your taxes, you are ALSO CHARGED A FEE. That fee goes to the power company, not the government. They get it because when you sell power back to the grid, you get money back at the same price as if you were buying it from the grid. This pisses off the power company because obviously they produce power for less money than they sell it for, so being forced to take their own medicine and pay their own prices for power generation hurts their bottom line. This fee is intended to offset that because OH NOES LOST PROFITS.[/QUOTE] That's when you get together with the other power-positive homes in your area and start an energy co-op to sell directly to the state, bypassing the power company completely. Of course you will have to work out a deal to use the power companies transmission lines, and something tells me it will cost exactly the same amount if not more.
[QUOTE=frozensoda;44594115]That's when you get together with the other power-positive homes in your area and start an energy co-op to sell directly to the state, bypassing the power company completely. Of course you will have to work out a deal to use the power companies transmission lines, and something tells me it will cost exactly the same amount if not more.[/QUOTE] I'd be okay with them charging a fee if they produce their power from renewable sources. They should be financially punished as much as possible to promote the expansion of renewable sources.
Wow so basically this bill makes the rich richer and tips the scales in the balance of the power companies instead of making it equal? Terrible.
Tbh the article isn't clear enough to pass judgement. Do yo get paid the same amount as the utility charges for electricity? If yes it hardly seems fair as you don't have the added cost of maintaing the grid. Do homeowners pay full cost of hooking their power generation systems to the grid? I expect this requires additional equipment for the utilities. What exactly are the taxes and how do they effect the feasibility of home solar/wind systems? It makes sense to pay income taxes on income from power generation. Additionally if the utilities must buy/maintain equipment needed to transfer the extra power- it makes sense they would want to recoup those costs as well.
[QUOTE=Im Crimson;44589352]All income is taxed, so this makes perfect sense. However, nice job ruining a good incentive for use of renewable energy.[/QUOTE] Why does [I]all[/I] forms of income have to be taxed? I doubt Oklahoma is going to make a vast income off of this. And I'm sure it'll deter future buyers when they hear, "Oh yeah, you'll get taxed if you buy this and put energy into the grid instead of taking". It's not as if these people are making a livable income off this, either. It's just gouging anything for a buck.
This wasn't a tax loophole. There were no rich people in Oklahoma using some vague power generation method to make money tax-free. The power company probably just told them, "hey, if you do us a solid and let us charge people for not using our services, we'll kick back some of that money to you". Why do you think it passed unanimously with no debate?
All income, regardless if you actually make money off of it or not, is taxable. Welcome to the real world. Also, the "fee" the company is charging is for their grid equipment/upkeep that feeding backwards into the grid requires. The fee makes it so those costs aren't being subsidized by people who aren't pushing power back through the lines, which seems fair to me.
Free market my ass. This is blatant protectionism for power companies that bankroll Republicans.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;44597465]Free market my ass. This is blatant protectionism for power companies that bankroll Republicans.[/QUOTE] If it's so blatent I'm sure you can answer a few odd questions... Does sending energy back into the grid require additional equipment that the utilities must buy/ maintain? Is the fee excessive- essentially negating any cost savings a homeowner with a solar/wind system would otherwise have? Is the price paid (by utilities)for electric put back into the grid the same as the cost consumers pay?
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;44597111]All income, regardless if you actually make money off of it or not, is taxable. Welcome to the real world. [/QUOTE] Are you saying "how things are" = "it is right"?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;44597599]Are you saying "how things are" = "it is right"?[/QUOTE] I'm saying according to the tax laws, this is income, and therefore taxable regardless if it nets you a profit or not.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;44589092]In reality unless they're making money in excess of their electricity bill it should just be deducted from the final bill rather than considered a separate profit[/QUOTE] They very well may be. The current efficiency of solar panels means that you could have your whole roof covered and probably meet or exceed the power requirements of your home.
[QUOTE=Telepethi;44598019]They very well may be. The current efficiency of solar panels means that you could have your whole roof covered and probably meet or exceed the power requirements of your home.[/QUOTE] Or down here in New Mexico, where wind-power is a very attractive option (both commercially and for DIY-ers), one could easily do the same. Hell, I think it's even ENCOURAGED by our local power co-op because it puts less strain on their grid.
This isn't anything about taxes This new bill is about a surcharge fee to the relevant Energy Company to cover infrastructure costs (Note though that the full article gives a current example - Arizona's fee is $5 p/m) Until they announce how much the charge will be it's too early to say whether it will be unreasonable. (Note the article says nothing about taxing individuals anywhere, it's a misleading thread title)
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;44598260]Or down here in New Mexico, where wind-power is a very attractive option (both commercially and for DIY-ers), one could easily do the same. Hell, I think it's even ENCOURAGED by our local power co-op because it puts less strain on their grid.[/QUOTE] Makes sense with all those AC's going on in the summer.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;44599445]Makes sense with all those AC's going on in the summer.[/QUOTE] You'd be surprised how many people use evaporative coolers over refrigerated air out here. They don't take nearly as much power to operate, though they do leave the house feeling muggy. Cool, but muggy.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;44596291]Why does [I]all[/I] forms of income have to be taxed? I doubt Oklahoma is going to make a vast income off of this. And I'm sure it'll deter future buyers when they hear, "Oh yeah, you'll get taxed if you buy this and put energy into the grid instead of taking". It's not as if these people are making a livable income off this, either. It's just gouging anything for a buck.[/QUOTE] Because income tax is obviously a tax on consolidated income? It doesn't matter how you earned the money, it's still a return that you receive. Plus, if this were to be recognised as income tax, it creates the opportunity to implement a tax credit system with regard to some excess energy that is sent back to the grid. [editline]21st April 2014[/editline] But I'm not even sure how this system works anyways. People who already supply back to the grid don't have to pay for it.
Sorry guys.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.