jump to last post 1-13 of 13 discussions (13 posts)

Should we give tax breaks to start-up companies developing wind, water, or solar

  1. Billrrrr profile image81
    Billrrrrposted 6 years ago

    Should we give tax breaks to start-up companies developing wind, water, or solar power?

    Should we increase tax advantages to homeowners who install  wind, water or solar power?

  2. Randy Godwin profile image94
    Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago

    Of course!  Energy created by oil, coal and nuclear means will only get more expensive in the future. Imagine how much gas we'll need when every Chinese gets a car!

  3. nightwork4 profile image60
    nightwork4posted 6 years ago

    definetly. that is where the government should be pushing new businesses to go.

  4. jdavis88 profile image95
    jdavis88posted 6 years ago

    I thinks so, but focus the tax break on rewarding innovation once the business is established.  Simply subsidizing the business should not be an option, it makes innovation slow and clumsy.

  5. lime light power profile image61
    lime light powerposted 6 years ago

    You've asked two different questions - tax breaks to start up companies and increase tax advantages to homeowners. However, in the case of renewable energy investment I think that it's probably best that we give an across the board approval for both. Investment in start-ups should be left to the VCs, but tax breaks in the form of loan guarantees, deferred RE taxes etc, etc are all very helpful. For consumers it helps to "lessen the sticker shock", and ultimately the cost.

    I wrote a hub on virtually the exact same topic earlier that might be worth a read - http://hubpages.com/hub/Retaining-Tax-B … gy-Systems

  6. Alternative Prime profile image73
    Alternative Primeposted 6 years ago

    Yes & Yes,

    More importantly we need to ramp up the incentives to large Domestic & International "Earth Healing Solar & Wind" Companies which are developing highly efficient Clean & Safe production facilities as we speak in perfectly suited regions such as the Mohave Desert.

    Last figure I read was in the neighborhood of $6 Billion in subsidies which is certainly not enough considering how far we need to go in order to minimize or even phase out our usage of dangerous toxic energy sources like oil , coal, nuke etc....

    Just think, if we don't encourage clean energy sources like Solar & Wind, we will inevitably need to build several more unhealthy carbon emmiting coal plants and radioactive nuclear "Godzillas".....I'm first in line for either to be built right on top of my house if necessary........But Seriously, look on the bright side if that happens...When your skin starts turning an attractive shade of glowing fluorescent lime green, you can always just step outside and shower yourself with a soothing layer of coal soot and smut raining down from the refinery up the street.....A free and easy way to cover up and disguise that inconvenient fallout before that important date........

    But Seriously again, subsidies for job re-training for those currently employed in the oil and coal industry is also an essential element to the ongoing conversion...

  7. Wayne Brown profile image83
    Wayne Brownposted 6 years ago

    I think you have to be extremely selective otherwise it becomes a business built on tax breaks and never really evolves beyond that step.  Take for example the development of ethanol. Early on the government subsidized it and still does.  It is a proven process but the expense involved with getting the ethanol to the pump makes it too expensive for the average consumer.  As of late, the popularity of it is driven more by the fact that gasolines prices have come up to a  point wher ethanol is starting to be competitive in terms of price. In terms of what it accomplishes, it is a a bit of a failure in that the fuel economy is not as good as gasoline thus even at the same price it is more expensive to use. It also produces and emits more carbons into the atmosphere yet our government continues to subsidize it as a product...for what viable reason after all these years?  WB

  8. mortgage-news profile image61
    mortgage-newsposted 6 years ago

    Yes, we need to motivate people and companies to go green and nothing motivates more than the all pwoerful dollar.

  9. independentwriter profile image60
    independentwriterposted 6 years ago

    I would have to say yes.  However, I believe the tax credit already exists though.  I would have to check.

    Business that develop the means of wind, water, and solar energy should receive a tax break for a maximum of five years.  This should be plenty of time to get off of the ground.  After that it is sink or swim time, no more governmental bailouts.

  10. cat on a soapbox profile image97
    cat on a soapboxposted 6 years ago

    Yes!  We need entrepeneurs in alternative energy, but we also need to investigate these companies thoroughly to weed-out fraud and scammers.

  11. skeeter747 profile image63
    skeeter747posted 6 years ago

    No They are not goning to give us a tax break on the bills.. You give them a inch and they take a mile..

  12. AJ76 profile image56
    AJ76posted 6 years ago

    Yes, Also give them the oil subsidy money!

  13. EltMrx profile image56
    EltMrxposted 6 years ago

    There should not only be tax breaks on companies developing these Green Technologies, but tax breaks for people marketing and selling them. And incentives for people buying them.

    Otherwise you will have a company developing Green Technologies that no one will ever be able to actually use.