taxes for solar power generation in spain

[Morgoroth]

after watch David last video (solar panels) come to my mind this notice:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2015/10/spain-approves-sun-tax-discriminates-against-solar-pv.html
http://www.cms-lawnow.com/ealerts/2016/02/solar-investors-lose-out-in-spanish-energy-charter-treaty-decision

I just can't understand, I mean, how can possible think in taxes for solar energy generation.

I smell political corruption there.

[HAL-42b]

It is a touchy subject.

On one hands there are governments that think "We tax grid power therefore why don't we tax solar power"

On the other hand we have people saying "What next? Air tax? Tax for the veggies you grow in your garden?"

I'm curious what the forum members think.

[Morgoroth]

I can understand taxes in matters that involve a disbursement from the state, but when one person invest all the materials and do not require from the state anything, that tax become an abuse.

in time, technology advance allow individuals like us will able to build devices that allow us to be more and more independent from big companies, nowadays we have machines that extract water from air, power from solar panels, and others that grow their own food from hydroponics systems on home, healthy food (I work in a project for that). That means new taxes ?... get a better life for us and our families involve taxes ?...

modern life paradigms are changing.

[HAL-42b]

I can understand taxes in matters that involve a disbursement from the state, but when one person invest all the materials and do not require from the state anything, that tax become an abuse.

True, but states might argue that the sole reason for the existence for citizens is to pay taxes.

Oil companies realize that taxing solar power might delay its widespread adoption. They are certain to lobby for more taxation on solar power.

Sorry if my outlooks seems too dark, I think this is realistic.

[retrolefty]

I can understand taxes in matters that involve a disbursement from the state, but when one person invest all the materials and do not require from the state anything, that tax become an abuse.

True, but states might argue that the sole reason for the existence for citizens is to pay taxes.

Oil companies realize that taxing solar power might delay its widespread adoption. They are certain to lobby for more taxation on solar power.

 
Sorry if my outlooks seems too dark, I think this is realistic.

 It is too Dark. Need to find a different scary monster. Oil companies are in the large volume markets of gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel. They are not the major energy supplier to the electrical grid.

[HAL-42b]

It is too Dark. Need to find a different scary monster. Oil companies are in the large volume markets of gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel. They are not the major energy supplier to the electrical grid.

Energy market is energy market, extractables are a big part of it but not the whole market. It is one of the few markets with long-term inflexible demand, therefore one of the most profitable in the world.

Energy companies are the biggest spenders in lobbying, they are also the best customers of PR companies besides the governments themselves.

[dannyf]

I just can't understand, I mean, how can possible think in taxes for solar energy generation.

It has been going on for more than a couple years now. and the 2nd article is reasonably fair. Essentially, the original deal was too generous and rate payers were essentially footing the bill for solar investors. So the government retroactively rescinded the original law - that was the most controversial element of the shift.

In the end, the new law is fairer in my view - it is less crony capitalism.

I smell political corruption there.

More so in the original law.

[retrolefty]

I just can't understand, I mean, how can possible think in taxes for solar energy generation.

It has been going on for more than a couple years now. and the 2nd article is reasonably fair. Essentially, the original deal was too generous and rate payers were essentially footing the bill for solar investors. So the government retroactively rescinded the original law - that was the most controversial element of the shift.

In the end, the new law is fairer in my view - it is less crony capitalism.

I smell political corruption there.

More so in the original law.

" If you drive a car, I'll tax the street
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat
If you get too cold I'll tax the heat
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet
Taxman!
Cos I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman "

[Mechanical Menace]

The way they go on about having to have mechanisms to deal with drops in power output and the articles focus on those running big commercial installations to me sounds like it applies to those selling the solar power to others and not people generating their own power for personal consumption. Please correct me if I'm wrong but if that's the case what's wrong with expecting tax from units supplied to the grid just as they do from any other form of energy production? Whether the tax is fair to start with is another issue but not taxing solar produced units the same as nuclear, coal, oil, gas, hydro, wind etc produced units isn't fair either.

[Morgoroth]

I could understand that, but when you rise taxes enough to make the project nonviable is a big problem, as government you want to have a diversified matrix of energy, that is more important than the tax value, believe me, in my country have a lot of problems with that, small country, small economy and just few players on almost all services, that end in political corruption, collusion and problems to get new players.

Just last year was a huge scandals about collusion, more than 10 years rising prices in food companies, pharmacy complete colluded (not an appreciation, a proved fact), huge overprices (we are talking more than 500% sometimes), etc etc...

[Mechanical Menace]

I could understand that, but when you rise taxes enough to make the project nonviable is a big problem, as government you want to have a diversified matrix of energy,

Solar has worked well in Spain, the solar specific tax subsidies/cuts have done their job, it's truly commercially viable and has been for a long time so doesn't need them to keep going or even expand. Most of it is even exported to Germany.

that is more important than the tax value, believe me, in my country have a lot of problems with that, small country, small economy and just few players on almost all services, that end in political corruption, collusion and problems to get new players.

Spain isn't Chile, it's more comparable to England in terms of population, market diversity, GDP per capita etc...

[dannyf]

when you rise taxes enough to make the project nonviable is a big problem,

Most, if not all, of the "green energy" projects are not sufficiently green -> they are not viable without subsidies. So the question all the people, particularly the rate payers, have to ask is how much they are willing to subsidize such an energy source and for how long. The people of spain basically said "no".

as government you want to have a diversified matrix of energy,

Yeah, but at what cost? You are willing to support solar energy at an incremental cost of 1c/kwh. Would you still want to support it at 10c/kwh? how about 100usd/kwh? And the answer is likely quite different at different increment cost levels.

[Morgoroth]

when you rise taxes enough to make the project nonviable is a big problem,

Most, if not all, of the "green energy" projects are not sufficiently green -> they are not viable without subsidies. So the question all the people, particularly the rate payers, have to ask is how much they are willing to subsidize such an energy source and for how long. The people of spain basically said "no".

as government you want to have a diversified matrix of energy,

Yeah, but at what cost? You are willing to support solar energy at an incremental cost of 1c/kwh. Would you still want to support it at 10c/kwh? how about 100usd/kwh? And the answer is likely quite different at different increment cost levels.

that depends how much cost your kw/h before green generation, here since the first project of green energy production ($104.3 megawatt-hour, at an auction of electricity supply contracts), costs of energy have down 40% ($65 and $68 per megawatt-hour), Spanish companies are not happy with that (they are owners of conventional energy sources here), but they abuse for a long long time given the monopolistic position they had (decades), and if because of this they lose market position or whatever, I give a sh*t.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-28/green-energy-boom-helps-chile-contain-surging-power-prices

and without fiscal subsidies.

[dannyf]

green-energy-boom-helps-chile-contain-surging-power-prices

That's just basic supply and demand: any incremental supply, however inefficient and un-economical, will push down the clearing price.

The most direct example of that in the energy market right now is 1) fracking in the US; and 2) turmoil in the mid east. So if you think low energy prices are king, you should support fracking and violence.

[vodka]

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2015/10/spain-approves-sun-tax-discriminates-against-solar-pv.html
http://www.cms-lawnow.com/ealerts/2016/02/solar-investors-lose-out-in-spanish-energy-charter-treaty-decision

The articles are inaccurate:

Exclude to pay  SUN TAXES:

All self-consumers that don't connect the panel solar to the grid . Therefore the solar panel insulated of the grid

But they must to pay by Cost  Grid  System,Electrical Deficit Acumulative Bill, the renewable subsidies,and paid by capacity

Include to pay SUN TAXES(2 OPTIONS):

1 OPTION:

    All self-consumers connected to grid  and with a installtion of the  solar panel  <100 kW , they can pour the leftovers but they can't sell it 

2 OPTION:

   All self-consumers connected to grid  and with a installtion of the  solar panel  >100 kW , they can pour the leftovers  and  they can sell it but they must to sign on the Industrial Register of the electrical producter

[vodka]

That's just basic supply and demand: any incremental supply, however inefficient and un-economical, will push down the clearing price.

The most direct example of that in the energy market right now is 1) fracking in the US; and 2) turmoil in the mid east. So if you think low energy prices are king, you should support fracking and violence.

This is only a theory but the reallity is that demand and supply are fully manipulated.

Example : The electricity demand in Spain is dowing ,but its cost is up every year.

[zapta]

I think there are two issues here:

1. If grid consumption is generally taxed and self generation is not than it creates a distortion. My preference is to tax neither.

2. A guarantee of power delivered to your house on demand cost money, even if you don't use it. This applies only if you are connected to the grid.

A family member that worked on designing technology for solar farms used to tell me years ago about generous subsidies by the Spanish government. Looks like the pendulum swung in the other direction now.

[vodka]

1. If grid consumption is generally taxed and self generation is not than it creates a distortion.

If you don't make fine the insolation between panel solar and the grid, at some smartmeter the energy injected to grid ,the meter measure as consumed and the electrical corporation charge you in the bill.
Beside the corporation can to you denounce  by evade  sun taxes.

My preference is to tax neither.

As the grandmother, if you don't want a lentil bowl,so bowl and half. If you don't want more taxes, the country's lord put you more taxes.

A family member that worked on designing technology for solar farms used to tell me years ago about generous subsidies by the Spanish government. Looks like the pendulum swung in the other direction now.

This happened before the  world crysis during the goverment of the president by accident(Zapatero) , and as good socialist waste the money of the spanish in foolishness.

The first cutout to renewables was during the crisis 2010-2011; when Obama , Merkel  and chinese president called to Zapatero for  cutting  spending.

Then Zapatero had to insert into arse all his  ideology socialist. Finally , in 2011 Zapatero resigned and he convoked election, leaving a Debt PIB of 70%.

When the ostrich of the Moncloa(Rajoy) arrived , he had to cut the subsidies to renewable for trying to reduce the deficit marked by Europe

[dannyf]

Looks like there is a die-hard conservative inside of every die-hard liberal.

Paying a little taxes is an effective way of converting a liberal to a conservative,

[vodka]

Paying a little taxes is an effective way of converting a liberal to a conservative,

If you considered that you paid few taxes , you can donate the 90% of the salary to goverment. They will be very glad

[Morgoroth]

if we put as example extreme situations we could justify everything.

point is that taxes are needed, but with some equilibrium point.

governments should give a good excuse at least, not the first brainstorming.

[Mechanical Menace]

Looks like there is a die-hard conservative inside of every die-hard liberal.

Paying a little taxes is an effective way of converting a liberal to a conservative,

What exactly is you're definition of a liberal and a conservative? I can't find any relevant ones in dictionaries that are mutually exclusive.

[Morgoroth]

I come just with common sense, or I want to think that.

I don't feel I have to embrace one side or another.



As I said before, paradigms of the society are changing, and maybe, distinction of liberal or conservative do no apply as always, probably we are on a slow change process, slow enough to not get a clear notice about it, and even now society is an human experiment and we are still learning.

[Seekonk]

If the people of Spain want to change the law, they can.  It's not like they have a king.

In the US money interests like Warren Buffet and Walton family are pushing to end subsidies on individual solar and switch it to corporate solar.  And end grid tie payments. 

[zapta]

If the people of Spain want to change the law, they can.  It's not like they have a king.

Well, discussing the law here may be the seed for the repeal process. Ideas snowball in expected ways.

In Australia, the term 'liberals' would be at the top or right hand of the diagram, not not the left, as in 'classical liberals'. I like that interpretation more, liberal as in personal liberty.