If this GOP bill passes, your electric bills will rise
Electricity prices are soaring, and if Senate Republicans gut the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) this summer, they're about to start rising even faster.
On Thursday, House Republicans passed a budget bill that would eliminate several key clean energy incentives from the IRA—including valuable tax credits, such as the federal solar tax credit, for homeowners and businesses.. The bill will likely be voted on in June.
If these incentives are cut, industry analysts predict residential electricity costs will rise by about 7%—that's roughly $143 more per year in electricity expenses for the average household, according to EnergySage data.
Despite 21 House Republicans writing a letter to the committee chairman this March warning that repealing the tax credits would lead to 'drastically higher power bills for American families,' with the increase starting 'the very next day,' the House GOP still kept the cuts in this version of their budget bill.
Stay informed on the latest industry news—delivered to your inbox each month. Sign up for EnergySage's newsletter.
Several studies have confirmed the Republican letter's statement: Eliminating clean energy incentives—specifically the 48E investment and 45Y production tax credits—would increase electric costs for the average American.
A report from the Clean Energy Buyers Association (CEBA) estimates a family's electric bill could increase by $110 per year on average without these incentives. Another study by The Brattle Group and ConservAmerica says the additional cost would likely be between $83 and $152 in added expenses each year, with families in America's heartland most likely to pay in the higher end of that range because of their high reliance on wind.
The GOP bill would terminate the 48E and 45Y tax credits, which incentivize businesses to create clean energy facilities like solar and wind farms (excluding nuclear energy). These incentives were scheduled to start phasing out in 2032, but under the new bill, any project that isn't in service before January 1, 2029, won't qualify. These are huge projects that take extended periods oftime to get up and running, so the bill also specifies that the projects must begin construction within 60 days of the bill's enactment to qualify for the credit, putting companies in a difficult time crunch.
Without these incentives, developers will be less keen to build clean-energy facilities, which would lead to a heavier reliance on other energy sources and therefore spike prices, according to a new report from the Rhodium Group. The report says increasing demand for natural gas would increase wholesale natural gas prices by 2-7%.
Clean energy—especially solar and onshore wind—is much cheaper than fossil fuels. And, unlike fossil fuels, it isn't vulnerable to market fluctuations, either. It provides much-needed power to fuel our growing energy demand while providing greater energy independence and long-term affordability for American households.
There are other factors at play, too. Todd Brickhouse, CEO and general manager of Basin Electric Power Cooperative, told the House Energy and Commerce Committee in March that 'immediate removal of [tax credits] will not allow utilities to plan for and avoid increased costs, and this will also immediately harm rate payers.'
It also comes at a time when America's energy demand is nearing 'unprecedented levels,' according to economist and fellow Jesse Buchsbaum from Resources for the Future (RFF). He said a big driver are all the new AI data centers—which are are reportedly already putting a strain on household electricity.
'The projected energy demand is enormous, and I think meeting the projected demand is going to be really difficult,' Buschbaum told EnergySage. 'It's going to be a big challenge figuring out what tools are needed, what infrastructure investments are needed, and how to pay for them.'
De-incentivizing the creation of new energy facilities will make it harder for America's energy supply to meet demand, which could cause even more volatility with electricity pricing.
Not only will the proposed House bill increase energy costs, it will also reduce valuable energy savings for American families.
The bill would also eliminate the Residential Clean Energy Tax Credit (Section 25D) and Energy Efficient Home Improvement Tax Credit (25C). Currently, the average homeowner who qualifies for these tax credits saves roughly 70% on their energy bills annually, or $2,240 per year, according to a recent analysis from Rewiring America.
Once you factor in estimated increases in electricity prices, the report suggests that the average family's savings from 25C and 25D would be $2,590 by 2026.
House Speaker Mike Johnson said he intends to pass the entire package through the House by Memorial Day and have it on the President's desk by the Fourth of July. Right now, there still appears to be some bipartisan support for clean energy tax credits in the Senate, so the current bill may still face some pushback.
In addition to mitigating rises in electricity costs, these tax credits have helped create hundreds of thousands of jobs, increased domestic manufacturing, and given everyday Americans a chance to take control of their household's energy independence. Terminating IRA tax credits jeopardizes all of this progress towards a clean energy future.
Republican proponents of this bill are pushing for its swift approval in the Senate. We encourage you to take action now by contacting your representatives directly to share how eliminating the clean energy tax credits would impact you and your community.
Your voice can make a difference.
Send a note to your elected officials.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Planning to vote in New Jersey's June 10 primary? This is what you need to know
The New Jersey primary election is under way. Voters should know their options before heading to the polls. This year's gubernatorial primary will be held June 10, and it is a packed field for the top spot on both sides of the aisle. There are 11 candidates in all — six Democrats and five Republicans. They are vying to represent their respective party in the race for governor this November. There are also contested local primary elections and some contested races for seats in the New Jersey Assembly, the lower house of the Legislature. It's also the first primary to be held without the county line ballot design, so voters will be able to familiarize themselves with the new design with the sample ballots they're set to receive by mail in the coming days. The block ballot design, which is used in all 49 other states, will replace the county line which traditionally gave candidates endorsed by the county party preferred ballot placement, and an edge in their efforts. It was dismantled by a federal judge last year. New Jersey has what's considered a semi-closed primary because all voters have to declare a party affiliation to participate, but unaffiliated voters can do so at the polls. Unaffiliated voters can register while voting in personon Election Day for either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. After an unaffiliated voter casts an in-person vote in the Democratic or Republican Party primary election, the voter will be affiliated with that political party going forward. The voter can change affiliation by completing, signing and returning a change of party affiliation form to the municipal clerk or county commissioner of registration. The deadline to apply for a mail-in ballot has passed and early in-person voting has concluded. Election Day for this year's primary will be June 10. Polls are open June 10 from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. That is the deadline to postmark a mail-in ballot for it to be eligible. Mail-in ballots can also be delivered to County Boards of Election and authorized ballot drop boxes by 8 p.m. on June 10. Katie Sobko covers the New Jersey Statehouse. Email: sobko@ This article originally appeared on NJ primary election 2025: How to vote on June 10 date
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Israel attacks Yemeni port city, Houthi rebels say
Late Monday, Israel issued online warnings to Yemenis to evacuate from Ras Isa, Hodeida and al-Salif ports over what it alleged was 'the Houthi regime's use of seaports for its terrorist activities.' Hodeida also is the main entry point for food and other humanitarian aid for millions of Yemenis since the war began when the Houthis seized Yemen's capital, Sanaa, in 2014. The Houthis have been launching persistent missile and drone attacks against commercial and military ships in the region in what the group's leadership has described as an effort to end Israel's offensive in Gaza. Advertisement From November 2023 until January 2025, the Houthis targeted more than 100 merchant vessels with missiles and drones, sinking two of them and killing four sailors. That has greatly reduced the flow of trade through the Red Sea corridor, which typically sees $1 trillion of goods move through it annually. The Houthis paused attacks in a self-imposed ceasefire until the U.S. launched a broad assault against the rebels in mid-March. Trump paused those attacks just before his trip to the Mideast, saying the rebels had 'capitulated' to American demands. Advertisement Early Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth wrote on the social platform X that U.S. Navy ships had traveled through the Red Sea and its Bab el-Mandeb Strait 'multiple times in recent days' without facing Houthi attacks. 'These transits occurred without challenge and demonstrate the success of both Operation ROUGH RIDER and the President's Peace Through Strength agenda,' Hegseth wrote ahead of facing Congress for the first time since sharing sensitive military details of America's military campaign against the Houthis in a Signal chat. Meanwhile, a wider, decadelong war in Yemen between the Houthis and the country's exiled government, backed by a Saudi-led coalition, remains in a stalemate.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Canada commits billions in military spending to meet NATO target
But even if Canada is able to finally hit the 2 percent threshold, that is not likely to be enough to satisfy the United States or other NATO allies. Mark Rutte, NATO's secretary general, speaking in London on Monday, called on the alliance's members to make a 'quantum leap in our collective defense' by committing to significantly higher spending targets. Rutte wants members to commit to spending 5 percent of their gross domestic products on military and defense-related activities. Trump has called for a similar spending target. Advertisement Proposals for increased spending are likely to dominate the NATO summit meeting in The Hague this month, though Rutte has not set a timeline for his increased spending plan. Carney, speaking in Toronto, said that new geopolitical threats, advances in technology, and the fraying of Canada's alliance with the United States demanded an accelerated spending schedule. 'We stood shoulder to shoulder with the Americans throughout the Cold War and in the decades that followed, as the United States played a dominant role on the world stage,' he said. 'Today, that dominance is a thing of the past.' Advertisement 'It is time for Canada to chart its own path,' he added, 'and to assert itself on the international stage.' While Carney promised to increase spending by billions of Canadian dollars, he did not specify where the funds would come from. Government officials spoke mostly in broad terms about how the money would be used. Canada's economy is heavily dependent on exports to the United States, and Trump's tariffs have targeted key industries, including autos and steel. Some economists have warned that Canada could face a recession if the tariffs persist. Carney also said the country would no longer rely as extensively on American defense contractors to supply its armed forces, underscoring Canada's strained relations with the United States and focus on shifting away from its neighbor. The Canadian government said it would immediately add 9.3 billion Canadian dollars (about $6.8 billion) to its defense budget. That will raise total defense-related spending this year to CA$62.7 billion, slightly higher than the 2 percent NATO target. To get there, the government included CA$2.5 billion in spending related to 'defense and security' for other departments, including the Canadian coast guard, an unarmed civilian agency which is under the department of fisheries. Carney's spending pledge was welcomed by defense analysts. 'This is a long-overdue announcement,' said Margaret McCuaig-Johnston, a senior fellow at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa. 'This significant commitment is remarkable given how quickly they're going to have to move to make 2 percent by the end of the fiscal year.' But, she added, Carney will have to add further budget increases to fund all of the programs he is promising. Advertisement Carney laid out a long shopping list for the military, including 'new submarines, aircraft, ships, armed vehicles, and artillery.' He also said the military would add drones and sensors to monitor the seafloor in the Arctic, a vast region of the country that is becoming a source of competition among global powers such as Russia and China. But Canadian officials said that this year most of the spending would go toward things like increasing the pay and the benefits of armed forces members to help ease a severe recruitment crisis, and repairing broken equipment. Carney also said that money would be directed toward much-needed improvements, noting that three of the Royal Canadian Navy's four diesel submarines were not seaworthy. 'We will repair and maintain our ships, our aircraft, and infrastructure that for too long we allowed to rust and deteriorate,' the prime minister said. Other spending will focus on artificial intelligence and computer systems, as well as ammunition production within the country. Carney also said that Canada would look to buy more goods domestically or from allies other than the United States to equip its military. 'We should no longer send three-quarters of our defense capital spending to America,' he said. Carney said Monday that details about how the country's military needs would be financed would be revealed when a budget was released in the fall. 'Our fundamental goal in all of this is to protect Canadians,' he told reporters, 'not to satisfy NATO accountants.' This article originally appeared in
