My understanding is that the FITC can be taken on the NET amount after any state or local incentives are deducted from the full retail cost of installation.
Tom,
That depends on your installer’s willingness to float any state or local rebate for you – thereby reducing your total out of pocket expense to the installer by the stated rebate amount.
If the installer doesn’t float any state or local rebate for you, you qualify for 30% off the cost of the system for the FITC.
what do you mean by float
Hi John,
By “float”, I mean the installer takes the amount of the expected rebate off of your invoice. They do not get paid that amount until the Energy Trust approves the installation. The rebate comes back to the installer instead of you, but your upfront cost is reduced by the amount of the rebate.
Let’s pretend you’re about to buy a TV from me for $699. However, after a rebate, you can get it for $499. As the store, I would say, listen John, I’ll float that $200 for you, so just pay $499 now and I’ll do all the necessary paperwork to get the rebate, you don’t worry about anything.
Most TV manufacturers wouldn’t like this very much because there’s a good chance the store will fill out all that paperwork, whereas consumers aren’t as likely to.
When I had my PV system installed, I called the Energy Trust of Oregon (ETO) and told them I did not like the way their incentive worked. Yes, they were paying thousands of dollars toward my PV system and I was complaining.
The Energy Trust pays the contractor (rather than the home owner). This reduces the price I (the home owner) pays, but it also means that it reduces the amount of the federal incentive, since that incentive is 30% of my upfront cost.
Why have a state incentive that reduces the amount of the federal incentive?
The example above says that the federal incentive is 30% of $27000 = $8100. It really is 30% of YOUR COST $(27000 – 6750) or 30% of $20250 = $6070.
If the ETO payed the home owner (rather than the installer) then the home owner would get the full federal incentive. In this example, the federal incentive was reduced by over $2000.
The ETO’s justification was that they want to ensure that the contractors address issues that the ETO finds in their inspections and withholding that check makes the contractors listen. Maybe they should find another way to do that without increasing the system’s cost.
One other thing, the installer does not have the option on the “float”. If you qualify and apply for the ETO incentive, they cannot (by OR law) charge you for the portion of the system that is being paid for by the ETO. So your contract automatically becomes a 3-way contract. The ETO agrees to pay their portion, the contractor agrees to pass the ETO inspection, and you agree that the ETO gets all the rights to your PV system’s RECs (green tags) after the first 5 years. That last bit is another can of worms for another day.
Sorry to report but the rules being drafted by the IRS will instruct you to subtract state and local rebates and credits before computing your federal tax credit. To not do this is what the IRS refers to as “Double Dipping” and the draft of the regulations which I saw were drafted to prevent this, so your comment is without merit. Enjoy the benefits of your Solar system as ETO actions will have no impact upon your final Federal Tax Credit.
Murray,
Would you agree that the math in the original blog entry is “Double Dipping” and should be corrected?
Please note, we will not approve your comment if it is spammy or you are blatantly trying to tout your own business. If you've got a reputable solar business and want to connect with us, please send us an email instead. We only connect our readers to trusted installers.