Navigating December Rush and Three-Year Carryback - The Complex World of Transferability
Tax equity, the December 31st deadline, and the "game changer" that is transferability.
Anyone who has developed solar projects knows about the “December rush” – all hands on deck to get projects built and interconnected, hounding utilities for inspections and PTO letters, coordinating last minute signature pages up until COB on New Year’s Eve – all because tax equity investors generally allocate tax capacity on an annual, tax year basis. If tax equity commits to fund a project in a certain year, it wants to make sure it gets the expected tax benefits from that project in that tax year. Accordingly, there is significant pressure for developers not to miss the 12/31 deadline, and often there are significant financial penalties if they do – hence, the December rush that many developers and financiers know well. (For years, my peers and I never took vacation until January 1st.)
Transferability is appropriately labeled a “game changer.” Having worked in project finance and tax equity for nearly 20 years, I knew that the ability for clean energy tax credits to be freely bought and sold would be transformative and disruptive. So much so, that soon after the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, I dropped everything and launched Reunion with my longtime colleague and renewable energy veteran, Andy Moon.
Lately, I’ve heard some people mention that transferability gives developers the “gift of time” and will alleviate the massive pressure to place projects in service by the end of year. Unfortunately, transferability, while transformative, is not a panacea for all challenges.
What is the gift of time?
In a typical tax equity partnership transaction, a tax equity partner must fund 20% of its investment by mechanical completion. Time is not a developer’s friend; as a project approaches COD, the need to close tax equity becomes more and more urgent (and a developer’s leverage in tax equity negotiations diminishes). With the IRA, this urgency becomes less pronounced, because the developer always has a fall back option to sell tax credits.
With transferable tax credits, Section 6418 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) indicates that the seller of the credit has until the filing date of its tax returns (as extended) to sell the credits. Therefore, the owner of a project that is being placed in service on 12/31/2023 can sell the associated 2023 tax credits up until 9/15/2024 (the extended filing date for partnerships). If the project is placed in service on 1/1/24, it generates a 2024 credit but that credit can be sold up until 9/15/2025.
This certainly gives developers more flexibility on when to sell the credit. However, what hasn’t changed is that tax credits (specifically, the IRC §48 investment tax credit which applies to solar, storage and other technologies) are generated when the project is placed in service. So a project placed in service on 12/31/2023 will generate a 2023 tax credit, whereas a project placed in service on 1/1/2024 will generate a 2024 credit. This is true whether or not the tax credit is transferred or allocated to a partner in a traditional tax equity partnership.
So a tax credit buyer who has agreed to buy a 2023 credit from a project developer to reduce its 2023 tax liability will not be obligated to close the purchase if the project slips to 2024 (unless of course, this has been contemplated in the deal documents and priced accordingly).
The IRA does include a three-year carryback provision, but it’s not straightforward to utilize
At first blush, the three-year carryback seems like an incredible tool to unlock significant tax liability and add flexibility. However, actually utilizing the carryback is cumbersome in practice; it is not as simple as just carrying the credit back to the prior year.
In the example above, a developer misses the year end deadline and places a project in service on 1/1/2024. It sells the 2024 credits to a buyer who wishes to apply those credits against 2023 liability. Unfortunately, the buyer must first apply those credits against its 2024 liability. Only to the extent that there are unused credits after application against 2024 liability can the buyer carryback the credits. But it must first carryback the credits to the earliest possible date applicable, or 2021; any unused credits would then be applied to 2022; then finally to 2023. Buyers do not have the discretion to pick and choose which years to apply carryback credits.1
Practically speaking, carrying back credits would require a buyer to amend one or more of its prior year returns, which has its own complexities (Joint Committee review, increased audit risk, etc.). The juice may not be worth the squeeze.2
Reunion is committed to sharing transparently both the benefits and risks of transferable tax credits, based on our years of experience structuring renewable energy finance transactions. Transferability will unlock billions of dollars in additional renewable energy financing, by attracting new investors to the space with a simplified and low-risk investment process. However, tax credit buyers will continue to need to ensure that the developers they work with are able to deliver tax credits within the desired tax year. Reunion can help both tax credit buyers and sellers navigate this challenge.
If you'd like to learn more about how Reunion can help you buy or sell the highest quality clean energy tax credits, please reach out to info@reunioninfra.com.
___________________________________________________________
Footnotes:
[1] IRC §39 is the code section that governs carrybacks.
[2] Anecdotally, many people don’t realize that the pre-IRA §48 credit had a one-year carryback feature, and not surprisingly, was rarely employed in prior tax equity deals.
Related Articles
Reunion is excited to host quarterly “office hours” for clean energy developers who would like to learn more about our marketplace and get a pulse on the overall transferability market.
We'll hold office hours on a quarterly basis
We will generally hold office hours on a quarterly basis and open registration one or two months in advance. Each session will be limited to 50 developers on a first-come, first-served basis.
Designed for clean energy developers and manufacturers
Our office hours are designed for clean energy developers and manufacturers who have transferred, or are planning to transfer, IRA tax credits over the next 12 months. Developers need not have projects in Reunion's marketplace to participate.
Co-hosted by Reunion's founders
Reunion's founders, Billy Lee and Andy Moon, will co-host the hour-long sessions.
Billy and Andy pioneered solar financing structures with tax equity and private equity investors, leading some of the first solar transactions with institutions such as US Bank, JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Key Bank, PNC, Nord/LB, D.E. Shaw, and First Reserve.
Questions welcome!
We want our office hours to be interactive, so please bring any questions you have, whether related to current market conditions, pricing, or commercial terms.
You're welcome to ask questions beforehand.
Treasury’s June 2023 guidance made clear that corporate taxpayers can offset their quarterly estimated tax payments using tax credits they “intend to purchase,” opening the door for tax credit buyers to realize most or all of the benefit of a tax credit prior to paying the tax credit seller.
An increasing number of corporate tax directors and treasurers are focused on these types of opportunities, which do not require the buyers to go “out of pocket” to invest in a tax credit. Instead, the buyer pays a clean energy company a discounted amount compared to what they would have paid the IRS; the payment is concurrent with, or in some cases even after their scheduled tax payment date.
In this article, we outline four scenarios where buyers can realize tax benefits prior to cash outlay. We assume the buyer is a corporation that pays $200M each year in federal tax, and is looking to purchase $50 to $100M in tax credits.
Structures that enable buyers to realize full tax benefit prior to cash outlay
Structure 1: §45 PTCs, paid quarterly in arrears
The buyer commits to purchasing $100M in tax credits in Q1, which allows the buyer to offset $25M in tax payments each quarter. Note that if the buyer commits to purchase $100M in Q2 instead of Q1, there is a similarly strong benefit; the buyer can offset $50M in tax payments in Q2, and $25M in both Q3 and Q4.
§45 PTC transactions are typically paid quarterly in arrears. Often, the payment schedule is organized such that the buyer pays concurrently or shortly after each quarterly estimated tax payment date, based on actual tax credits generated during the preceding period. In this example, the buyer pays a clean energy developer $23.75M on each estimated tax payment date, instead of paying the IRS $25M. This results in a $1.25M net benefit each quarter, without any out-of-pocket investment.
Both §45 PTCs, from electricity generated by qualified renewable energy resources such as solar or wind, and §45X AMPCs from advanced manufacturing facilities, can be structured in this way.
Structure 2: §48 ITC portfolio, paid quarterly in arrears
A portfolio of ITCs can be structured similarly to the previous example, where the buyer pays quarterly in arrears (and is therefore able to utilize the full tax benefit prior to cash outlay).
In this example, the seller has a portfolio of rooftop solar projects that will be placed in service throughout the year, generating a total of $100M in tax credits. The seller is offering an 8% discount for the credits. The buyer commits to the tax credit purchase in Q1, and reduces their estimated tax payments by $25M each quarter.
The buyer will pay for the actual credits generated at the end of each preceding quarter. In this example, we assume that $20M in credits are generated in Q1 and Q2, while $30M is generated in Q3 and Q4. As a result, a relatively lower volume of credits need to be paid for in Q1 and Q2 (while the reduction in estimated tax payments remains fixed at $25M each quarter), resulting in a strong net benefit in Q1 and Q2. Overall, the buyer saves $8M in taxes over the course of the year, without any out of pocket investment.
There is a risk that the seller does not generate as many credits as anticipated in a given tax year; if so, a make-whole provision can be negotiated, which obligates the seller to make the buyer whole for any difference between what they agreed to pay for the credits and what they would have to reasonably pay for any replacement credits. In the event of a shortfall of credits, Reunion will also work with the buyer to source replacement credits.
Structure 3: Commit to ITC early in the year, but pay late in the year
In this scenario, a buyer commits to purchasing ITCs that a developer will generate later in the year. While the IRS was clear that buyers can offset quarterly tax payments with tax credits they intend to purchase, it is up to buyers and their legal and tax advisors to decide what documentation is needed to establish intent.
Assume that the buyer and seller execute a tax credit transfer agreement in Q1, and the buyer uses this as a basis to start offsetting quarterly estimated tax payments. If the project is placed in service around or after the Q3 estimated tax payment date, the buyer will be able to offset taxes in Q1, Q2, and Q3 before having to pay the seller for the credits (see example below). This will free up $25M of additional cash each quarter for other corporate purposes, with the understanding that a lump sum will need to be paid to the tax credit seller at a later date.
Sellers typically prefer to receive payment as soon as the credits are generated, but it is possible to negotiate a delayed payment date. For example, if the payment date can be delayed to on or after the Q4 estimated payment date, the buyer will be able to take the full benefit of the tax credit before any cash outlay.
This strategy also applies if the buyer commits to the ITC in Q2 or Q3, and does not have to pay for the credit until later in the year.
Scenario 3 carries the risk that the project is not placed in service in 2024 tax year, which would require the buyer to source replacement credits. It is possible for the buyers to negotiate a make-whole provision, in the event that credits are not delivered as promised.
Structure 4: Buy tax credits to top up at the end of the year, resulting in a lower Q4 or final tax payment
The final scenario is a variation of Scenario 3. A company purchases tax credits at the end of the year, once they have a more concrete understanding of their total annual tax liability, and delays payment until their Q4 or final tax payment date.
Assume the buyer has paid $150M in taxes through the first 3 quarters, and has $50M due in taxes in Q4. The buyer can fully offset their remaining taxes due by committing to purchase $50M in credits in Q4. In this example, the buyer receives an 8% discount, paying $46M for the credits and achieving tax savings of $4M. The buyer can achieve the full benefit of the credit prior to cash outlay by arranging to pay the seller of the tax credit on or after the Q4 estimated tax payment date.
The same logic applies for credits purchased in time for the final tax filing (e.g., on April 15 for the prior tax year, for a calendar year filer). If a buyer has $20M in remaining payments due at final tax filing, they could offset the entire tax payment through purchase of a tax credit. Assuming they could identify and purchase a tax credit with an 8% discount, they would pay $18.4M to a tax credit seller, achieving $1.6M in tax savings. It is worth noting that if the buyer procures more than they end up owing in their final tax payment, the overpayment can be applied to the first estimated tax payment of the following year.
How Reunion works with corporate finance teams to purchase tax credits
Reunion partners with corporate tax and treasury teams to identify and purchase tax credits in a five-step process.
Download an Excel model with the four structures
To download the Excel model featured in this article, please visit our resources page.
Customize these scenarios to your company
Tax credit buyers have a variety of objectives when choosing to purchase a tax credit. Some are focused on maximizing the amount they can save on taxes by looking for the largest discount, while others want to minimize complexity and risk.
We have observed an increasing number of corporate tax and treasury professionals who are focused on transactions that preserve the timing of existing tax-related cashflows, or even improve corporate cash availability relative to the status quo.
Please reach out to the Reunion team if you’d like to examine the cash flow impact of tax credit purchases in further detail, and hear about specific project opportunities that can be structured to maximize economic benefits prior to cash payment.
.png)
