In reality, this project should generate for its investors about $2.46 billion over 20 years through the sale of power and Texas renewable energy credits, which are paid by Texas ratepayers. An additional $333 million in federal production tax credits will be added to the revenue stream, along with an anticipated county and school tax abatement (tax forgiveness) generally demanded by all wind project developers of between $125 million and $265 million, depending on the project cost. With the project taking advantage of almost half a billion in tax abatements and credits (some directly out of school district funds and state school funds), lease royalties of only $34 million to $112 million to benefit the state education fund hardly add up to "a good deal." Simply put, Texas public school children, and all Texas residents, will be harmed from a revenue standpoint if the Superior project is built.
Articles filed under Taxes & Subsidies from Texas
he honeymoon is over -- for now -- for Xcel Energy customers who enjoyed a price advantage by using the Windsource voluntary green-power program.
West Texas doesn't have the chance to bring in new industry every day.
County Commissioners approved a reinvestment zone and tax abatement for AES Seawest, Inc., following a public hearing on the matter held Wednesday morning.
The hearing to discuss a tax abatement sought by the developers drew more than 100 people, roughly a quarter of the county's population.
Morris expressed to commissioners that she did not agree with giving a company a tax break. "Give the people of the county a tax break," Morris said.
In June, Austin-based Green Mountain Energy Company – self-described as "one of the nation's largest retail providers of cleaner electricity products," generated from sources such as wind, solar, water, biomass, and natural gas – announced the crosstown relocation of its headquarters from aquifer-sensitive west Austin to an award-winning green office tower downtown, in anticipation of growth and expansion. By the time the move was complete, however, the energy provider had discontinued servicing about 480,000 customers in Ohio and Pennsylvania, laid off 15% of its workforce, and found itself facing suit in federal court. Green Mountain blames regulatory and market obstacles for its woes, but its critics cite an over-reliance on natural gas and a lack of investment in the very clean energy sources the company has made its trademark.