La Nación, Domingo 03 de febrero de 2013 - Por Diane Cardwell; The New York Times
Nuevas formas de financiación para las energías renovables
Se busca atraer inversores, de la mano de algunas exenciones impositivas.
Durante años sectores de energía verde, como la eólica y la solar, han estado diciendo al Congreso que aún no pueden competir con los combustibles fósiles sin importantes exenciones impositivas.
Pero dado que entre muchos republicanos hay fuerte antipatía por los subsidios a las energías renovables, estos sectores ahora están llevando un nuevo pedido a Washington: que se permita a compañías eólicas y solares contar con algunas de las ventajas impositivas que benefician al sector petrolero y del gas y el inmobiliario, para obtener fondos de inversores.
"Hemos hecho grandes progresos en cuando a reducir el costo de tecnologías de energía renovable como las turbinas de viento y los panales solares", dijo Dan Reicher, que es director ejecutivo del Centro Steyer-Taylor para Política Energética y Finanzas de Stanford, que ha estado en campaña para lograr cambios. "En lo que no hemos tenido los avances necesarios es en la reducción del costo de financiar los proyectos que usan esos equipos, por lo que el costo de la energía renovable es más alto de lo que debería ser."
Los sectores piensan en dos estructuras de inversión -las asociaciones limitadas que cotizan en Bolsa y los fondos de inversión inmobiliarios- para ayudar a facilitar la financiación y hacerla más barata. Reicher estimó que autorizar estas alternativas para las compañías de energía renovable reduciría el costo de sus proyectos en un tercio.
Hay muchas trabas para modificar el código tributario, pero las propuestas han sido recibidas con interés. El Servicio de Recaudación Interna (IRS es la sigla en inglés) está considerando permitir al menos a una compañía formar un fondo de inversión inmobiliario, conocido por la sigla REIT, para un grupo de proyectos de energía renovable, y se espera una decisión pronto.
Y el mes pasado, 31 legisladores enviaron una carta al presidente Obama para pedirle que apoye los cambios. El senador Chris Coons, demócrata de Delaware que apoyó un proyecto de ley en favor de las asociaciones limitadas que cotizan en bolsa (MLP es la sigla en inglés) en el último período legislativo, anunció que piensa volver a presentar el proyecto este año. Permitir que firmas solares y eólicas aprovechen exenciones impositivas que se ofrecen a las compañías petroleras y de gas encaja en la visión de "una estrategia en favor de todas las variantes de energía", comentó y "no de decidir quién gana y quién pierde en tecnología".
Pero el esfuerzo puede fracasar en el marco de la reforma impositiva general que buscan el Congreso y el presidente Obama.
Si bien los funcionarios de la Casa Blanca dicen que expandir los REIT y las MLP está en concordancia con sus metas generales de energía limpia, están más concentrados en eliminar subsidios directos y exenciones para combustibles fósiles y establecer un crédito impositivo permanente a la producción para las energías renovables.
Tal como sucede con las plantas de energía convencionales, el costo de construir granjas eólicas y solares puede alcanzar los miles de millones de dólares, involucrando planificación, construcción y equipo complejo.
Bajo el derecho actual, el gobierno federal ofrece a las compañías de energía renovable una generosa exención impositiva sobre sus ganancias. Pero dado que son pocas las que obtienen suficientes ganancias como para aprovechar las exenciones impositivas, tienen que encontrar inversores -comúnmente compañías que buscan proteger ganancias que no provienen de sectores energéticos del pago de impuestos- para poder valerse de éstas. Debido a que tales recursos son escasos, los inversores que sí deciden invertir en el sector, como Google, han podido obtener altas tasas de ganancias.
Utilizando un REIT o MLP para proyectos de energía renovable, las compañías podrían llegar a más inversores. Los MLP y REIT son similares en cuanto a que no pagan impuesto a las ganancias corporativas, traspasando la mayor parte de los ingresos a los inversores, que pagan los impuestos de acuerdo a sus tasas personales. Ambos a menudo cotizan en bolsa como acciones, dando a las compañías acceso a un número de inversores mucho mayor dispuestos a aceptar una tasa de ganancia más baja, según abogados y expertos en impuestos.
No está claro cuánto costarían a los contribuyentes los cambios propuestos. Pero las MLP para los sectores de energía convencional, incluyendo petróleo, gas y la construcción gasoductos y oleoductos, tienen una capitalización de mercado de alrededor de US$ 300.000 millones y se prevé que le costarán al Tesoro aproximadamente US$ 1200 millones en cinco años, desde el año fiscal 2011 hasta el 2015. Recientes pronósticos estimaron que los sectores de energía renovable podrían reunir fondos por US$ 6000 millones desde el año fiscal 2013 hasta el 2020, por lo que la exención impositiva probablemente sería mucho menor, menos de US$ 1000 millones en un período de diez años.
En contraste, se prevé que los programas de exenciones impositivas sobre inversión y producción para proyectos de energía renovable vigentes actualmente le costarán al gobierno federal US$ 11600 millones entre los años fiscales 2011 y 2015.
The New York Times, January 30, 2013 - By DIANE CARDWELL
Renewable Energy Industries Push for New Financing Options
Solar companies say they need new ways to attract investors.
For years, green energy industries like wind and solar have been telling Congress that they cannot yet compete with fossil fuels without hefty tax breaks intended especially for them.
But with antipathy for renewable energy subsidies running high among many Republicans, the industries are bringing a new plea to Washington: allow wind and solar companies to qualify for some of the tax advantages that are used by the oil, gas and real estate industries to raise money from investors.
“We’ve made great progress in bringing down the cost of renewable energy technologies like wind turbines and solar panels,” said Dan Reicher, who is executive director of the Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance at Stanford and who has been pushing for the changes. “Where we haven’t made the necessary progress is on bringing down the cost of financing the projects that use that equipment, so the cost of renewable energy is higher than it needs to be.”
The industries are looking to two investment structures — the master limited partnership and the real estate investment trust — to help make financing easier and cheaper. Mr. Reicher estimated that opening them up to renewable companies could cut the cost of their energy by a third.
There are many challenges to changing the tax code — particularly in an era when many in Washington are trying to raise revenue, not reduce it. But the proposals are receiving serious attention.
The Internal Revenue Service is considering allowing at least one company to form a real estate investment trust, or REIT, for a group of renewable energy projects, with a decision expected soon.
Wind and other green energy technologies have become cheaper, but the cost of investing has stayed relatively high.And last month, 31 lawmakers, including Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Jerry Moran of Kansas and Representative Ted Poe of Texas, sent a letter to President Obama urging him to support the changes. All three are Republicans supported by gas and oil interests, according to OpenSecrets.org.
Senator Chris Coons, a Democrat from Delaware who was a sponsor of a bill on master limited partnerships, or M.L.P.’s, during the last session, said he plans to reintroduce it this year. He said he had been meeting with Obama administration officials and lawmakers and building support for the measure, including among Republicans.
Allowing solar and wind firms to use a tax break offered to oil and gas companies fits into the worldview of “an all-of-the-above energy strategy,” he said, “not picking winners and losers in technology.”
But the effort may run aground in the larger tax overhaul that Congress and President Obama are pursuing.
Although White House officials say they see expanding REITs and M.L.P.’s as keeping with their larger clean energy goals, they are more focused on eliminating direct subsidies and loopholes for fossil fuels and establishing a permanent production tax credit for renewables.
Clark W. Stevens, a White House spokesman, declined to comment on particular programs, saying, “The administration continues to support a number of provisions that provide needed support to the development of cutting-edge technologies and clean energy projects here in the United States, expanding renewable energy production and ensuring the jobs of the 21st century are created here at home.”
As with conventional power plants, the cost of building wind and solar farms can run into the billions of dollars, involving elaborate planning, construction and equipment.
Under current law, the federal government offers renewable energy companies a generous tax credit against their income. But since few of them make enough profit to use the credits, they need to find investors — typically companies seeking to shield nonenergy profit from taxes — to take advantage of the breaks. Because the pool of such prospects is small, the investors that do jump in, like Google, have been able to command high rates of return.
By using a REIT or M.L.P. for renewable energy projects, the companies could reach a broader range of investors. M.L.P.’s and REITs are similar in that they do not pay corporate income taxes, passing most of their income to their investors, who then pay taxes on it at their own personal rates. Both are also often traded publicly like stock, giving companies access to a much larger pool of investors who are willing to take a lower rate of return, according to tax lawyers and experts.
It is unclear how much the proposed financing changes would cost taxpayers. But M.L.P.’s for conventional energy industries like oil, gas and pipelines have a market capitalization of about $300 billion and are expected to cost the Treasury roughly $1.2 billion over five years, from fiscal 2011 through 2015.
Recent forecasts estimated that the renewable energy industries could raise as much as $6 billion from fiscal 2013 through 2020, so the tax break would probably run much lower, less than $1 billion over a 10-year period, according to a rough estimate from Senator Coons.
By contrast, the investment and production tax credit programs now in effect for renewable energy projects are expected to cost the federal government $11.6 billion from fiscal 2011 through 2015.
“If we can get access to these long-term capital-formation strategies, that will lessen the burden on public finance, on tax credits, on subsidies,” said Dan Adler, managing director of the California Clean Energy Fund. “As these technologies continue to mature, and their costs drop — and the cost of capital drops at the same time — it becomes more purely competitive with the fossil energy industry.”
There are differences in the ways the two investment vehicles work. REITs, which are typically used to bundle groups of apartments or office buildings into tradable investments, cannot take advantage of tax credits. So a solar REIT would not be able to use the 30 percent investment tax credit still available to such projects through 2016.
M.L.P.’s can use tax credits, but the partnerships are more complicated, tax lawyers said, which might keep investors away.
The I.R.S. could effectively open up the use of REITs on its own. Mr. Adler’s group has invested in a company, Renewable Energy Trust Capital, that has petitioned the I.R.S. for a private letter ruling allowing it to use a REIT structure.
If the request is granted, others pursuing similar projects would be likely to copy the approach. (Similar rulings have allowed cellphone towers and electrical transmission systems to be bundled into REITs.) The Treasury Department could also push through a more formal regulation change.
It would take an act of Congress to change M.L.P.’s, which have helped drive development of conventional energy infrastructure, particularly pipelines. The partnerships are required to derive 90 percent of their income from certain sources, including only depletable natural resources like oil and coal.
Whether the clean-tech industries’ efforts to gain access to either mechanism will bear fruit is uncertain, but policy advocates and some lawmakers say they are optimistic because there is something in the plan to appeal to both Democrats and Republicans. For Democrats, “if the idea of investing in these companies is opened up to a broader array of the American public, then people have more of a stake in renewables besides just buying electricity from wind or solar,” said Kelly Kogan, a lawyer at Chadbourne & Parke in Washington who advises clients on the tax consequences of renewable energy investments.
At the same time, she added, Republicans might respond to the idea that “the government’s going to get out of the direct subsidy through credits: they’re going to make renewables equivalent to hotels and office buildings and pipelines and what-have-you, and the free market can play more of a role.”
