to clarify, i wasn't saying you were mistaken on your particular situation...i'm just saying it wasn't the case for me (and my install that was just finished a few months ago). the ITC wasn't mentioned a single time throughout the entire process. perhaps something changed in the time from your install to mine?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
New Powerwall Advanced Options [Toggles for charging from and discharging to grid from powerwalls]
- Thread starter dailo
- Start date
to clarify, i wasn't saying you were mistaken on your particular situation...i'm just saying it wasn't the case for me (and my install that was just finished a few months ago). the ITC wasn't mentioned a single time throughout the entire process. perhaps something changed in the time from your install to mine?
I just looked up and posted exactly where PGE's SGIP process asked me about ITC. But I agree with your conclusion here.
Please don't make me find it in the Handbook... ;-)
SW
You know bureaucrats, they do love to change things. (Or was that engineers...?). But I did just look up the 2020 SGIP Handbook, and section
3.2.6 makes clear, in fine bureaucrat-language, that tax incentives reduce the rebate, and must be disclosed.
If you got both ITC and full rebate, then your net out of pocket was like negative 26% of the cost? How cool is that!
Right, the handbook says, section 3.1.2, that large systems which claimed ITC got 72% of the non-ITC rebate, pretty close the the reduction small residential systems would see.
SW
The energy.gov website i linked to earlier says otherwise, depending on where it comes from.
RKCRLR
Active Member
I think there is an interpretation problem there.
My SGIP incentive covered the full cost of the installation of 2 Powerwalls. If the ITC isn't based on net cost It means the IRS would be paying me 30% of the total cost to take the free Powerwalls off PG&E's hands. I don't think it works that way...
Perhaps you are thinking of the income tax exemption, which means that the rebate is not treated as income.
The solar ITC is a separate issue, and is tax credit based on the amount you paid, not the total cost of the system. To prevent double dipping, the rebate is reduced if one choses to take the ITC tax credit.
On this distinction, and to miimura's point, the energy.gov page you linked to shows how the tax credit would be reduced by a rebate:
In the case of SGIP program rebates, if you do take the ITC tax credit, the maximum rebate is reduced. So, either way, under SGIP you are not allowed to get a full cost rebate plus an income tax credit on the full cost. Such double dipping is, of course, prohibited.
I have not looked it up, but I'm sure the federal tax code and instructions for the solar ITC made this clear as well (Clear as mud probably, these being IRS documentation)
SW
SW
no. that's not it. i linked to the page from energy.gov specifically about the ITC.
this is probably correct, but i'm saying the documentation for it doesn't clearly state that.
i literally quoted that exact bullet point earlier, so you're not telling me anything i didn't already know here. i'm saying that it's not clear this is a utility rebate, rather it could be argued that since SGIP is a state program it's a state rebate (which, based on that site and the other excerpt i quoted earlier, indicates it would *NOT* reduce the ITC).
i would assume you're all correct (and your quote from the handbook earlier backs that up), all i'm saying is that it's not clear from either source (SGIP nor the federal government) that this is the case. SGIP is a state run program (yes, the utilities themselves all have their part in it, but it is still run by the state). as you said, clear as mud. that's really my point.
it would be nice if there were some clarity from SGIP directly about it, easy to find on the website...not buried in the handbook and still in rather unclear language. it would take them ten seconds to just say "any SGIP funds decrease the federal ITC tax credit available to you," and then there would be no ambiguity.
It’s not the State’s place to weigh in on a Federal tax credit. Calculating your tax credit based on an amount any higher than your net expenditure just doesn’t pass the smell test.
i would agree with this had @swedge not already mentioned that they asked him how much of the ITC he planned to take before the SGIP funds were approved.
haha... I meant "smell test". That's what I get for posting from my phone.
SGIP is not a state-run program. It's a state mandated program run by the utilities. PG&E's SGIP division is separate from SCE's, etc. Those of us who applied directly, we got checks from the utility.
If it were a state-run program, and not a utility program or tax credit, then the SGIP rebate would not be exempt from taxable income. So you could claim the ITC on the full amount of the PWs, but the SGIP rebate would increase your income. That could be good or bad, depending on whether your marginal income tax rate is more or less than the ITC rate.
Cheers, Wayne
yes, you've said this before in this thread and i already answered you. i'm not saying you're wrong (i'm not saying any of you are), i'm just saying it's not at all clear from either end.
It may not be clear from the publicly available resources you've checked, but it's clear to those of us who have gone through the process and gotten a check from PG&E, not from the State of California.
It's probably to your advantage that it's a utility-run rebate, as most likely your Federal income tax rate plus your State income tax rate is greater than the ITC rate.
Cheers, Wayne
thank you for reiterating exactly what my point has been this whole time. nothing more, nothing less.
Right, but the reason to come here to ask questions is to gather further information. Once you have that further information, the answer is no longer unclear.
Cheers, Wayne
that doesn't change the fact that they should make their own official channels more clear, so that people who don't know this forum exists could have all the information they need.
NathanielHrnblwr
Member
I'm in SDG&E territory and have the option to grid charge. I haven't thought or planned on using it, but was curious where I would find if it was permissible by the utility? There may be occasional times we know the next day's solar generation will be low due to rain and/or storms and want to charge up the PW super off peak to have power in the event of an outage. Stormwatch doesn't always trigger for such events.
I'm sure Tesla has logs going back to installation of everyone's PW's stats, including charging source. The question is will the IRS request Tesla provide logs of PW's that charged from the grid outside of storm watch. Then what? Pay back the credit with a penalty? I wonder if they'd bother for occasional use scenarios. Doesn't stormwatch technically violate the ITC anyway?
I'm sure Tesla has logs going back to installation of everyone's PW's stats, including charging source. The question is will the IRS request Tesla provide logs of PW's that charged from the grid outside of storm watch. Then what? Pay back the credit with a penalty? I wonder if they'd bother for occasional use scenarios. Doesn't stormwatch technically violate the ITC anyway?
Now that the Inflation Reduction Act has been signed, is it safe to turn on Grid Charging without any tax implications claiming the ITC? PowerWalls installed from 1/1/2022 through 2032 will now be eligible for the 30% ITC regardless of whether they are installed with solar panels or standalone storage. I would think that removes the requirement that PowerWalls paired with solar panels be exclusively charged from solar. My solar panels and two PowerWalls went into service in February this year. I've left Grid Charging turned off up until now just to be on the safe side. I would like to turn on grid charging on cloudy or stormy days when my PowerWalls might not get up to 100% by the start of TOU peak hours in the afternoon.
Common sense would say yes, but tax laws don't always follow common sense. In any case, I think the likelihood that an IRS auditor is likely to check whether a battery was charged from the grid is probably low, so it is a risk I might consider taking. I'm close to the mythical five year cutoff (which is also not documented for residential solar credits), so I might wait until then before grid charging.