The “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” and the implications for corporate taxpayers and the clean energy industry

Reunion’s breadth of experience includes working with both new and seasoned tax credit market participants. Since the ability to transfer tax credits was only enacted through the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, some buyers are still getting introduced to the advantages of transferable tax credits as it is written in the Internal Revenue Code §6418 (the Code). Therefore, it is essential for buyers to be aware of the negotiable terms in the transaction, as no two tax credit transfers are the same. Each party (and the underlying asset) involved in the transaction may require bespoke terms and conditions to make the deal close, as is exemplified in this case study of a $200m PTC transfer that met the “audit-ready” diligence requirements of the buyer. 

Below are 10 terms that Reunion helps buyers consider when negotiating a tax credit transfer agreement (TCTA). These are not ordered by importance since each buyer’s priorities are particular to them, however, each of the following should be considered when negotiating a transaction:

Payment Terms

The payment terms are primarily composed of the purchase price and payment timing. 

• Purchase Price: The purchase price is calculated as a dollar value for every $1.00 tax credit transferred – for instance, $0.935. Buyers and sellers negotiate this term based on the economics of the transaction and key risk factors, such as whether the counterparty is investment grade, what kinds of tax credits are involved, and the total expected volume of the transaction. Read more about the buyer’s perspective for these transactions and how to set the appropriate price. 
• Payment Timing: When a transaction closes can significantly influence the negotiated purchase price. Transactions with earlier payments, such as a simultaneous sign and close, are often favored by the seller due to the time value of money. Therefore, the seller may be more open to a lower purchase price. Sometimes the buyer is inelastic on this term and requires that transfer payments align with their quarterly estimated tax payment dates to minimize out-of-pocket spend.

Transaction Cost Reimbursement

Most buyers opt to include a transaction cost reimbursement provision in their tax credit bids. It is common for buyers to ask sellers to reimburse some or all of the transaction costs they incur. This request is often driven by accounting considerations, as most buyers do not want to incur an “above the line” expense to generate a “below the line” tax benefit.

Buyers should first identify the expenses they will incur, such as legal fees for outside counsel or costs for accounting firms providing third-party diligence support. For transfers with subsequent funding milestones (e.g. multiple closing dates), buyers should consider the timing of expenses as well as the amount needed to support subsequent fundings.Buyers must weigh what other impacts this provision could have on the transaction. A reimbursement provision will ultimately decrease the amount of proceeds to the seller, so it could impact the overall economics of the transaction (e.g., smaller tax credit transfers may not support large transaction cost reimbursements) or make the bid less competitive when a seller considers their net proceeds.

Exclusivity

Most of Reunion’s tax credit transfers move from term sheet execution to TCTA signing in under 45 calendar days. During the exclusivity period, both parties are generally incurring costs related to definitive documentation and due diligence. To protect their investment of time, effort, and money, buyers typically request an exclusive right to purchase the credits. 

Buyers can negotiate for a fixed exclusivity period when drafting the term sheet and will typically request an extension if the exclusivity period has expired and all parties are working in good faith to close the transaction. Reunion has seen exclusivity periods range from zero to 60 days following execution of the term sheet. A period beyond 60 days is not typical and could signal to the seller that the buyer is not able to close the transaction in a timely manner.

Indemnity Scope

In every tax credit transfer agreement, a buyer will require the seller to indemnify them for the disallowance or recapture of tax credits. Indemnities can be structured in two ways:

• Breach-Based Indemnity: Indemnification for a loss is triggered by a specific breach of a representation, warranty, or covenant.
• No-Fault Indemnity: Indemnification for a loss occurs regardless of whether a contractual breach has happened. 

Most indemnities will cover any tax gross-up, interest, penalties, and fees incurred in connection with the loss. For ITC transactions, as further described in the Section 48 ITC Due Diligence Guide, buyers negotiate for indemnity in the case of a recapture event.

Indemnity Seller Cap

Sellers may negotiate for a cap to the amount recoverable through the indemnity clause. Stipulated limitations of liability are often required by larger, institutional sellers. If the seller makes this request, buyers should analyze whether the indemnity limit is sufficient enough to recoup any losses incurred on an after-tax basis (including anticipated damages such as interest, penalties, taxes, and additional expenses needed to enforce the claim). 

Reunion has supported transactions with no caps, as well as transactions with caps expressed as a percentage of the face value of the credits or the purchase price of the credits. The former is more common.

IRS Contest Process

In the case of an IRS contest, Reunion sees most transactions include language in the TCTA that dictates which party will be responsible for working through, and leading, the process with the IRS and what rights each party will hold. Buyers should consider how they want this to be managed while reviewing the TCTA. In most cases, the party that is directly involved in the contest with the IRS controls the process at that party’s expense and notifies the other party as needed. 

Buyers and sellers may also be required to adhere to any requirements under the insurance policy (where applicable) to preserve and pursue a claim to minimize the amount of tax credits lost. 

Change in Law

Due to the uncertain political climate, most buyers have asked for provisions to be included in the TCTA that protect them from any future changes in the Code, or regulations that could impact their ability to utilize any purchased tax credits. A recent focus for buyers has been on language that specifically indemnifies the buyer against changes in law that are retroactive in effect (e.g., tax credits for projects placed in service on or before a retroactive change in law). Buyers may also seek the ability to terminate an agreement if there are changes in law that have a material adverse effect between signing and closing.

Credit Enhancements

When the seller is not investment grade or there are other unique risks in the transaction, the buyer can negotiate for further credit support. 

• Guarantor: The primary option is a guarantee from the seller's parent company or another affiliated party. Securing protection from an investment-grade guarantor may result in a higher net credit price if the seller does not have to obtain tax credit insurance.‍
• Tax Credit Insurance: If the seller cannot provide a suitable guarantor, tax credit insurance is an alternative. The policy limit of liability is typically based on a negotiated percentage of the tax credits' face value. However, all policies have specific exclusions to coverage, including material misrepresentations, inaccuracies or omissions, breaches of transaction documents, recapture that is caused by the seller, fraudulent or criminal conduct, any position taken in tax returns that is materially inconsistent with the covered tax position, and change in law. Additional exclusions may also apply depending on specific circumstances relating to the underwriting of the tax credit.

Step-up Limit

For investment tax credit transactions, project developers commonly sell a project into a partnership where the purchase price is “stepped up” to a fair market value (FMV) that exceeds the developer’s total capital expenditure. These FMVs should be supported by underlying documentation and assessed by a third-party appraiser. Some buyers and insurers have requested a limit to the step-up percentage as a higher step-up may have additional risk in the event of an IRS contest if the step-up is partially or fully disallowed. Recent transactions have allowed for at least a 20% step-up when supported by the facts and circumstances of the applicable transaction.

Diligence Requirements

After the buyer and seller have executed a term sheet, they work alongside their respective counsel and any other third-party assistance, to mitigate concerns around the transaction and underlying tax credits. Most transactions require a standard set of diligence items, which typically extends beyond the minimum documentation requirements under Treas. Reg. Section 1.6418-2(b)(5)(iv). Diligence may include, but is not limited to, third party reports, legal memoranda, and original project documents. 

Standard diligence items include:

• Third Party Consultant Reports: Examples include a cost segregation report, fair market value appraisal, independent engineer report, 80/20 analysis, and tax memo, depending on the type of tax credit.
• Legal Memoranda: In some instances, a third-party legal analysis may be required to address specific risks in a transaction, including qualification as eligible technology or qualification for credit adders.
• Original Project Documents: Sellers should anticipate requests to substantiate the tax credits and analyze any potential for recapture. For §48 ITCs and §45 PTCs, this may include executed site control and interconnection documents, as well as offtake, EPC, asset management, and O&M agreements. Photographs or satellite imagery is often used in diligence as well. In instances where a portfolio of distributed generation assets is involved, buyers can request a sampling size that is reasonable given the terms of the transaction. For §45X AMPCs, the documentation involves proof of sales contracts and underlying costs for the eligible technology. 

Buyers should consider which diligence items are non-negotiable given the details of the transaction and parties involved. We have seen in recent transactions, buyers and sellers collaborating on mandatory diligence requests and finding a path to resolution. On items that are not imperative, flexibility from buyers has helped transactions be executed within the exclusivity period. 

More details can be found in the Transferable Tax Credit Handbook.

Summary

Reunion has seen many recent transactions accommodate the pain points of both the buyer and the seller - especially when backed with well-reasoned requirements. Ultimately, both parties benefit from these transactions moving forward de-risked and well positioned in the market. 

If you are interested in buying credits, thinking through which of these terms is important to you will help get ahead of negotiations in your tax credit transfer deal. Then as an informed and prepared buyer, you can move quickly and take advantage of quality tax credits as they become available in the market.

Andy Moon, CEO of Reunion, offers S&P Global his perspective on the proposed Republican-led budget bill. He states that while there's a current window for activity as buyers proceed with eligible projects started in 2025, the window will close after the bill's 2028/2029 expiration dates. He noted that Reunion will need to diversify its offerings to serve its extensive network of 300 developers and 150 buyers with adapted financing solutions. With power demand exponentially increasing, alongside bipartisan support for the tax credits and their benefits for Republican-led states, "in some ways maybe we were too comfortable that things would work themselves out," Moon said. The article highlights $40 billion of tax credits were monetized in 2024 through the transfer market. If the cutting of technology-neutral tax credits by 2029 alongside the 2028 phaseout of 45X manufacturing credits is enacted, then "participation by third-party corporations in clean energy project finance would effectively end."

Read the full article here.

Andy Moon, CEO of Reunion, commented on the proposed repeal of transferability for clean energy tax credits.

He stated that despite the House bill significantly shortening the availability window for these credits, market participants are confident that tax credit transfers will be respected in 2025. Moon believes this assurance, particularly assuaging fears of retroactive repeal, will likely accelerate credit transfers through the end of the year. He expects "to see a wave of buyers looking for tax credits in the second half of the year, which will drive prices up similar to what we saw in 2024." Moon also noted that for projects meeting safe harbor requirements, transfers could still occur for the next couple of years, even if the House bill passes as is.

Read the full article here.

Andy Moon, CEO of Reunion, provided comments to Tax Notes on the rapid materialization and evolution of the IRA credit transfer market.  He noted that 2024 began with few buyers, but by midyear, comfort with the process grew, leading to a surge in transactions where credits would sell within days or weeks by year-end.  Moon observed that while purchasers are committing to production tax credits for multiple years, there's reluctance for long-term commitments to ITCs expected in 2026 and beyond, with only a few large buyers engaging in extensive negotiations for such deals.  He mentioned that buyers who acted early in 2024 generally secured lower prices, and while the learning curve of 2024 won't repeat, early movers in 2025 might still benefit by committing despite legislative uncertainty (see Andy’s breakdown of The One, Big, Beautiful Bill).  Moon also highlighted that purchase agreements are now heavily negotiating change-in-law provisions, and the time to close deals has significantly reduced, indicating a maturing market.

Read the full article here.

NOTE TO READERS: This content is current as of Friday, June 20, 2025. Given current discussions in the Senate, we will post updates here as they become available.

On June 16, the Senate Finance Committee released its much-anticipated draft of the budget reconciliation bill. The proposed Senate bill extends tax cuts from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, while rolling back parts of the Inflation Reduction Act to help cover the cost. This comes on the heels of the House’s version of the bill that passed the floor on May 22, 2025, by a vote of 215-214. After the Senate votes, it will return to the House, which may lead to further changes.

The proposed Senate bill provides short-term stability, which will result in a meaningful uptick in clean energy transactions throughout the rest of the 2025 and for the next several years

Since the House bill was passed, we have observed a significant uptick in interest from tax credit buyers. We expect increased activity through the rest of 2025 and for the next 3-5 years, given the proposed Senate bill provides clear guidance that near-term tax credits eligible under the IRA (and associated transfers) will be respected. Most notably:

• Tax credits will not be retroactively repealed for the 2025 tax year.
• Transferability is preserved for all credit types, with the caveat that tax credits cannot be sold to Specified Foreign Entities (SFEs).
• Legacy §45 Production Tax Credits (PTCs) and §48 Investment Tax Credits (ITCs), which began construction before 2025, are not changed.
• Many technology-neutral credits (§45Y or §48E), including energy storage, geothermal, hydropower, and nuclear, remain eligible for the full credit value, as long as construction begins by 2033.
  
  • Wind and solar projects specifically are subject to an accelerated phasedown schedule for projects that begin construction starting in 2026. Credits will be eliminated for projects that begin construction in 2028 and beyond.
  • The phasedown is based on the beginning of construction date. Wind and solar developers are rushing to start construction on projects in 2025, which should create a steady pipeline of projects for the next several years (projects have four years from beginning of construction to be placed into service for tax purposes).
• The §45X Advanced Manufacturing Production Credits (AMPCs) phase-down schedule is largely unchanged from the IRA. Components produced and sold through 2029 are eligible for the full credit, with a phase-down starting in 2030. Components produced and sold after 2032 are not eligible for credits. There are several meaningful exceptions:
  
  • The provision relating to the sale of integrated components that are produced and sold after 2026 is repealed, which may impact certain solar component manufacturers.
  • Wind components are not eligible for credits if produced and sold after 2027. Critical minerals have a longer eligibility period, with a phasedown in credits starting in 2031.
  • Critical minerals produced and sold after 2033 are not eligible.
• There are no changes in the phasedown schedule for the §45Q Credit for Carbon Oxide Sequestration and the §45U Zero-Emission Nuclear Power Production Credit.
• Complex Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC) restrictions were introduced, which will add significant risks and compliance burdens. However, there are short-term exemptions (e.g., at the project level, FEOC restrictions are intended to apply to projects that begin construction after December 31, 2025).

Assume that the bill becomes law in September 2025, and a project begins construction by December 2025. A project that generates a tech-neutral credit (§45Y or §48E) will qualify for the full credit value, which can be transferred to a third party. We are already seeing a wave of projects rushing to establish start of construction before the end of 2025.

Unrelated to the adjustments in tax credit eligibility, many corporate taxpayers have held off on purchasing 2025 credits due to a lack of certainty regarding their 2025 tax liability. In particular, three outstanding tax policies have disrupted tax planning. The Senate bill proposes the following changes:

• §174 R&D Expenses: Reinstate immediate expensing of R&D costs for tax years from 2025 to 2029
• Bonus depreciation: Reinstate 100% bonus depreciation for property acquired after January 19, 2025, and before January 1, 2029 (a shift from the proposed House bill, which applied to property acquired through January 1, 2030)
• §163(j): Reinstate the more favorable calculation of the limit on the interest deduction under §163(j) for tax years beginning after December 31, 2024, and before January 1, 2030

The proposed changes will lower corporate tax liabilities, which will reduce the volume of credits that certain buyers can purchase. However, increased certainty on tax liabilities will have the overall impact of giving buyers confidence to move forward on tax credit purchases. In 2024, we saw a wave of buyers enter the market in the 3rd quarter of the year when they had clarity on their tax liabilities. We anticipate a similar dynamic this year, with many buyers coming into the market later in the year and competing for a dwindling number of tax credit opportunities.

However, the Senate bill creates medium to long-term uncertainty for the clean energy market, due to proposals such as FEOC restrictions and accelerated tax credit phasedowns

Major changes in the proposed bill include:

• Accelerated phasedown or reduced eligibility of clean energy tax credits, particularly tech-neutral credits (§45Y or §48E) for solar and wind
• Elimination of the credit for wind and solar leased property that would otherwise qualify for the residential credit under §25D
• The clean hydrogen production credit (§45V) is not available for facilities that begin construction after December 31, 2025
• FEOC restrictions, which will be difficult to comply with as currently written and may slow project development due to increased risk.

Summary of proposed tax credit phasedown

Solar and wind-related credits are subject to an accelerated phasedown, which will impact upcoming project development

Tech-neutral credits (§45Y and §48E) generally phase down in 2034 and are eliminated by 2036 based on when the project begins construction. However, the proposed Senate bill phases down tax credits for solar and wind on a significantly shorter timeline:

• Projects that begin construction in 2025 receive 100% of credit value
• Projects that begin construction in 2026 receive 60% of credit value
• Projects that begin construction in 2027 receive 20% of credit value
• Projects that begin construction in 2028 or later receive 0% of credit value

As a result, wind and solar developers are rushing to begin construction this year. Projects can establish start of construction through two well-established methods: the physical work test or the 5% safe harbor, after which they have four years to be placed in service. If developers don't start construction by the end of 2025, they will receive a significantly lower (or no) tax credits, which will have the impact of slowing new development from 2026 onward. Segue Sustainable Infrastructure forecasts 122 GW of project cancellations, resulting in $211 billion less investment in the grid as a result of the proposed bill.

There are several other important ways that wind and solar developer manufacturers are impacted by the proposed Senate bill:

• The credit for wind and solar leased property that would otherwise qualify for the residential credit under §25D is eliminated, which will cause developers to shift away from leases
• For §45X credits, wind components are not eligible for credits if produced and sold after 2027. Certain solar component manufacturers will also be impacted by the repeal of the provision regarding integrated components that are produced and sold after 2026, which potentially will limit the ability for manufacturers to stack credits from components that are integrated into larger products

Transferability is preserved, so long as the transferee is not a Specified Foreign Entity

There was no mention of transferability in the proposed Senate bill, meaning that tax credit transfers will be available for the same duration as tax credits. However, tax credits cannot be sold to Specified Foreign Entities (SFE), which is defined below:

• Meets any of the criteria outlined in Section 9901(6) of the William Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2021:
  
  • Is designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. Secretary of State under Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. § 1189)
  • Appears on the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons
  • Has been linked to criminal activity resulting in a conviction, as alleged by the U.S. Attorney General
• Is identified as a Chinese military company
• Is listed due to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act
• Is named under Section 154(b) of the NDAA for FY 2024 (specifically, paragraphs 1–7 on page 47 of Public Law 118-31)
• Is a foreign-controlled entity, meaning it is owned or influenced (directly or indirectly) by:
  
  • The government of a covered nation (specifically China, Iran, Russia, or North Korea)
  • Its agencies or instrumentalities
  • Citizens or nationals of a covered nation
  • Entities organized or headquartered in a covered nation
  • Or any entity controlled by the above (with “control” defined as owning 50% or more of voting shares, capital, or beneficial interest)

The bill includes complex restrictions to avoid benefiting Foreign Entities of Concern. The current draft will be difficult to comply with, potentially causing a slowdown in future clean energy projects. However, we don’t expect significant market disruption in 2025

Complex Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC) restrictions will apply to §48E, §45Y, §45Q, §45U, §45X, and §45Z credits to ensure that the benefit of tax credits does not accrue to China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea. 

We do not expect significant disruption to the market in 2025. Most PTCs and ITCs currently in the transfer market began construction before 2025 and therefore qualify for the legacy §45 and §48 credits, which are not subject to FEOC rules.

For the newer §45Y and §48E credits, there is a transition period for complying with FEOC rules (e.g., projects that begin construction by the end of 2025 are not subject to FEOC at the project level. Rules to ensure FEOC compliance at the taxpayer level begin in 2026 and become stricter in 2028).

Most concerning for clean energy developers is the annual compliance requirement to ensure that “specified foreign entities” do not benefit from tax credits. There are also payment restrictions to ensure that prohibited foreign entities do not earn a certain amount of dividends, interest, compensation for services, rents, royalties, or similar payments. For §48E credits, these compliance requirements must be tested for 10 years, and any breach results in a full recapture of the §48E credits. A recapture period this long and this challenging to comply with will make it harder to raise financing or sell tax credits from projects that require FEOC compliance. As a result, we expect the clean energy industry to lobby for clarifications and adjustments to the FEOC restrictions.

Conclusion

We expect a strong, continued mobilization from developers, banks, utilities, and corporations to advocate against the early phasedown of tax credits, particularly related to solar and wind, and to create a workable and simplified version of FEOC regulations.

‍

Key takeaways from the session: 

• Short-term clarity on the ability to transfer tax credits: Repeals were not retroactive, and will give the market stability to move forward on near-term transactions. We expect an uptick in buyer activity for 2025.
• The Senate historically moderates changes proposed by the House: However, four House Republicans declined to support the bill on May 16, and have demanded additional IRA rollbacks.
• The clean energy industry will be focused on clarifying FEOC (Foreign Entity of Concern) restrictions, and extending transferability:
  • The proposed FEOC restrictions will be almost impossible to administer, and their complexity will slow clean energy deployment. The Senate is expected to simplify the rules.
  • Clean energy developers will rush to start construction to secure FEOC exemption, and preserve ability to transfer credits.