151 comments on Clinton's New Energy and Climate Policy
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
The contents below are paid advertisements. Their appearance does not imply an endorsement by The Oil Drum.
“Pessimism of the Intellect; Optimism of the Will.”
—Antonio Gramsci
Search The Oil Drum with Google
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Prof. Goose, Heading Out, Stuart Staniford, Nate Hagens
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Gail the Actuary, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Khebab, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Local: Glenn
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Technician: Super G
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Local
- Summer Streets a Success!
- Plan for Hydro-Fracture Drilling for Unconventional Natural Gas in Upstate New York
- Enjoying Life Close to Home: Fun Streets
TOD:Europe
- UK Energy Flow Chart 2007
- Brown pretends to be tough on Russia
- Russian gas and European energy security - a reprise
TOD:Canada
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
- Oil Megaproject Update (July 2008)
- Weekend Energy Listening: Wind Power with Paul Gipe
TOD:ANZ
Peak Oil Primers
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- Ecological Economics
- David Strahan
- Econbrowser
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- Environmental Economics
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- jeffvail.net
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Organizations
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
End the 741 exemption for PV.
What's a 741 exemption? You can't expect me to read that article. I'm at work.
RobertInTucson
I haven't escaped from reality. I have a daypass.
I mistyped. 179.
http://www.moneysourceinc.com/irs-section-179.html
Eric Blair,
are you saying that the 179 exemption should go, and you have to amortize/depreciate all equipment purchased for business use. From 3 years on very few items, usually 5 -7 years.
I doubt you have every run or owned a business Eric. Especially in these times when something goes out of date like, computers, hard drives, software, and equipment that just will not flat out last 5 years when used regularly. Eric I have to purchase new software and other cards on a regular basis from one to two years, and the old ones are shelf material. The switch from Standard Def TV to HD, is a real headache right now, with lots of new equipment that needs to be purchased. My industry and many others have the exact same demands from customers for the newest and best, or they go elsewhere.
If 179 were to go, the corporations would run all, because the little guy could not compete,
but I think you like that idea Eric.
The depreciation schedule for business? If someone made me dictator, I'd make businesses use cash accounting. You get to write off a piece of equipment when you actually pay for it.
RobertInTucson
I haven't escaped from reality. I have a daypass.
Presumably PV means personal vehicles.
The great majority of strip mall stores that aren't money laundromats are tax dodges. Like the lawyers or whatever that set their kids or wives up in a cookie business that makes $3 a month in profit from the one non english speaking minimum wage employee but is good enough to write off the 60K monster SUV.
There is a reason many of these vehicles are so huge and have a 6201# GVWR. The tax code.
It would take a forensic accountant 10 minutes to prove this if regulators would do their job. Hard to see from ivory towers.
I thought PV stood for photovoltaics. We wouldn't wanted businesses generating their own clean electricity.
RobertInTucson
I haven't escaped from reality. I have a daypass.
My line of thought was that if it were photovoltaics and the business were legit, then it would be viewed as a good thing and it wouldn't make sense to repeal the tax credit.
I know for a fact that people use these tax dodges in vast quantities and it is one of the reasons why the super heavy vehicles are so popular. They can be depreciated much quicker then lighter vehicles. If this tax credit is repealed the number of oversized vehicles would fall like a rock. The tax code drives a lot of what appears irrational.
If you add the millions of one person LLC's that write all these vehicles off, you could get rid of them in very short order.
I guess we need to wait for clarification.
http://www.irs.gov/publications/p946/ch02.html#d0e2211
you cannot elect the section 179 deduction for the following property.
Equipment that uses solar energy to generate electricity, to heat or cool a structure, to provide hot water for use in a structure, or to provide solar process heat, except for equipment used to generate energy to heat a swimming pool.
Thus you can not write down PV in one year, unlike other items.
Do you have a point you'd like to make? I do not understand your complaint about software costs. Why would anyone buy software?
Buying support on software, I can understand. But pay for software that is defective by design?
Because not all valuable software is free.
Because not all non-free software is defective by design.
And, sometimes, defective software is the best there is, and is better than nothing.
You sound like you're parroting the standard anti-Microsoft line; there's a world of non-free software outside of Windows and Office.
Because not all valuable software is free.
Huh? What are you trying to say?
And, sometimes, defective software is the best there is, and is better than nothing.
Having nothing or having something that is broken and defective, and you are claiming that it is better to use a broken tool?
Interesting view - that one should pay for crap.
You sound like you're parroting the standard anti-Microsoft line;
You just keep taking a swing and missing in this thread. 1st on small business, now this.
I'm answering your question.
People buy software because they find pieces of software which (a) have value to them, and (b) are for sale. Not all pieces of software are both (i.e., software might not have value and/or might be free rather than for sale), but for many people software exists which is indeed both.
Sometimes, yes.
A few years ago, used OpenOffice's spreadsheet to do some statistical analysis. It had some bugs in it that were irritating, but did not invalidate the result, and hence using it was better than doing the calculations by hand.
Or, for a more visceral example, consider a hammer with a broken handle. It's cleaerly a broken tool, but I'd certainly rather use that to try driving in a nail than use my hand. Broken tools are often better than no tools at all.
Interesting view, but not my view, suggesting you've misunderstood what I'm saying.
All I'm saying here is that if a piece of software's value is greater to a person than its (total) cost, it makes sense for them to use it. If that's not true - if, for example, it's so buggy as to be practically useless and is quite expensive, then my logic is that they should not use the software.
I suggest you re-read the thread, then. I haven't said anything about small business in this thread, so you appear to be somewhat confused.
Solar power equipment, including PV, gets accelerated depreciation. With the cost curve of solar PV, you might be hard pressed to get much for five year old equipment if you liquidated so this rule seems pretty realistic. I notice Walmart is putting in skylights. They get to depreciate these over 5 years as well.
Chris
But, don't you think you'd sell more if PV was not exempted under 179?
It is a difference of one or five years for businesses. You might see staggering if you had to do it all in one. I think what is holding solar back right now is manufacturing capacity. Most silicon production is presold by a number of years. Thin film is trying to fill in, and that works for businesses, but the residential market does best with silicon still. I think programs like those in NJ and CA are getting things going and there are prospects for faster build up of silicon production but right now it remains a seller's market. In five years we should see much lower costs and in another five years again, so I think the 5 year schedule makes sense.
Chris