taxes for solar power generation in spain - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Morgoroth
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 12:36:22 am
content: after watch David last video (solar panels) come to my mind this notice:http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2015/10/spain-approves-sun-tax-discriminates-against-solar-pv.htmlhttp://www.cms-lawnow.com/ealerts/2016/02/solar-investors-lose-out-in-spanish-energy-charter-treaty-decisionI just can't understand, I mean, how can possible think in taxes for solar energy generation.I smell political corruption there.

author: HAL-42b
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 01:21:29 am
content: It is a touchy subject.On one hands there are governments that think "We tax grid power therefore why don't we tax solar power"On the other hand we have people saying "What next? Air tax? Tax for the veggies you grow in your garden?"I'm curious what the forum members think.

author: Morgoroth
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 01:40:21 am
content: I can understand taxes in matters that involve a disbursement from the state, but when one person invest all the materials and do not require from the state anything, that tax become an abuse.in time, technology advance allow individuals like us will able to build devices that allow us to be more and more independent from big companies, nowadays we have machines that extract water from air, power from solar panels, and others that grow their own food from hydroponics systems on home, healthy food (I work in a project for that). That means new taxes ?... get a better life for us and our families involve taxes ?...modern life paradigms are changing.

author: HAL-42b
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 01:50:46 am
content: Quote from: Morgoroth on February 14, 2016, 01:40:21 amTrue, but states might argue that the sole reason for the existence for citizens is to pay taxes.Oil companies realize that taxing solar power might delay its widespread adoption. They are certain to lobby for more taxation on solar power.Sorry if my outlooks seems too dark, I think this is realistic.

author: retrolefty
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 01:58:16 am
content: Quote from: HAL-42b on February 14, 2016, 01:50:46 amIt is too Dark. Need to find a different scary monster. Oil companies are in the large volume markets of gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel. They are not the major energy supplier to the electrical grid.

author: HAL-42b
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 02:15:39 am
content: Quote from: retrolefty on February 14, 2016, 01:58:16 amEnergy market is energy market, extractables are a big part of it but not the whole market. It is one of the few markets with long-term inflexible demand, therefore one of the most profitable in the world.Energy companies are the biggest spenders in lobbying, they are also the best customers of PR companies besides the governments themselves.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 02:31:47 am
content: QuoteIt has been going on for more than a couple years now. and the 2nd article is reasonably fair. Essentially, the original deal was too generous and rate payers were essentially footing the bill for solar investors. So the government retroactively rescinded the original law - that was the most controversial element of the shift.In the end, the new law is fairer in my view - it is less crony capitalism.QuoteMore so in the original law.

author: retrolefty
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 12:04:20 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on February 14, 2016, 02:31:47 am" If you drive a car, I'll tax the streetIf you try to sit, I'll tax your seatIf you get too cold I'll tax the heatIf you take a walk, I'll tax your feetTaxman!Cos I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman "

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 12:52:26 pm
content: The way they go on about having to have mechanisms to deal with drops in power output and the articles focus on those running big commercial installations to me sounds like it applies to those selling the solar power to others and not people generating their own power for personal consumption. Please correct me if I'm wrong but if that's the case what's wrong with expecting tax from units supplied to the grid just as they do from any other form of energy production? Whether the tax is fair to start with is another issue but not taxing solar produced units the same as nuclear, coal, oil, gas, hydro, wind etc produced units isn't fair either.

author: Morgoroth
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 02:13:05 pm
content: I could understand that, but when you rise taxes enough to make the project nonviable is a big problem, as government you want to have a diversified matrix of energy, that is more important than the tax value, believe me, in my country have a lot of problems with that, small country, small economy and just few players on almost all services, that end in political corruption, collusion and problems to get new players.Just last year was a huge scandals about collusion, more than 10 years rising prices in food companies, pharmacy complete colluded (not an appreciation, a proved fact), huge overprices (we are talking more than 500% sometimes), etc etc...

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 02:34:05 pm
content: Quote from: Morgoroth on February 14, 2016, 02:13:05 pmSolar has worked well in Spain, the solar specific tax subsidies/cuts have done their job, it's truly commercially viable and has been for a long time so doesn't need them to keep going or even expand. Most of it is even exported to Germany.QuoteSpain isn't Chile, it's more comparable to England in terms of population, market diversity, GDP per capita etc...

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 03:27:11 pm
content: QuoteMost, if not all, of the "green energy" projects are not sufficiently green -> they are not viable without subsidies. So the question all the people, particularly the rate payers, have to ask is how much they are willing to subsidize such an energy source and for how long. The people of spain basically said "no".QuoteYeah, but at what cost? You are willing to support solar energy at an incremental cost of 1c/kwh. Would you still want to support it at 10c/kwh? how about 100usd/kwh? And the answer is likely quite different at different increment cost levels.

author: Morgoroth
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 04:28:01 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on February 14, 2016, 03:27:11 pmthat depends how much cost your kw/h before green generation, here since the first project of green energy production ($104.3 megawatt-hour, at an auction of electricity supply contracts), costs of energy have down 40% ($65 and $68 per megawatt-hour), Spanish companies are not happy with that (they are owners of conventional energy sources here), but they abuse for a long long time given the monopolistic position they had (decades), and if because of this they lose market position or whatever, I give a sh*t.http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-28/green-energy-boom-helps-chile-contain-surging-power-pricesand without fiscal subsidies.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 05:27:42 pm
content: QuoteThat's just basic supply and demand: any incremental supply, however inefficient and un-economical, will push down the clearing price.The most direct example of that in the energy market right now is 1) fracking in the US; and 2) turmoil in the mid east. So if you think low energy prices are king, you should support fracking and violence.

author: vodka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 05:57:35 pm
content: QuoteThe articles are inaccurate:Exclude to pay SUN TAXES:All self-consumers that don't connect the panel solar to the grid . Therefore the solar panel insulated of the gridBut they must to pay by Cost Grid System,Electrical Deficit Acumulative Bill, the renewable subsidies,and paid by capacityInclude to pay SUN TAXES(2 OPTIONS):1 OPTION:All self-consumers connected to grid and with a installtion of the solar panel <100 kW , they can pour the leftovers but they can't sell it2 OPTION:All self-consumers connected to grid and with a installtion of the solar panel >100 kW , they can pour the leftovers and they can sell it but they must to sign on the Industrial Register of the electrical producter

author: vodka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 06:14:29 pm
content: QuoteThis is only a theory but the reallity is that demand and supply are fully manipulated.Example : The electricity demand in Spain is dowing ,but its cost is up every year.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 06:30:32 pm
content: I think there are two issues here:1. If grid consumption is generally taxed and self generation is not than it creates a distortion. My preference is to tax neither.2. A guarantee of power delivered to your house on demand cost money, even if you don't use it. This applies only if you are connected to the grid.A family member that worked on designing technology for solar farms used to tell me years ago about generous subsidies by the Spanish government. Looks like the pendulum swung in the other direction now.

author: vodka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 07:35:46 pm
content: QuoteIf you don't make fine the insolation between panel solar and the grid, at some smartmeter the energy injected to grid ,the meter measure as consumed and the electrical corporation charge you in the bill.Beside the corporation can to you denounce by evade sun taxes.QuoteAs the grandmother, if you don't want a lentil bowl,so bowl and half. If you don't want more taxes, the country's lord put you more taxes.QuoteThis happened before the world crysis during the goverment of the president by accident(Zapatero) , and as good socialist waste the money of the spanish in foolishness.The first cutout to renewables was during the crisis 2010-2011; when Obama , Merkel and chinese president called to Zapatero for cutting spending.Then Zapatero had to insert into arse all his ideology socialist. Finally , in 2011 Zapatero resigned and he convoked election, leaving a Debt PIB of 70%.When the ostrich of the Moncloa(Rajoy) arrived , he had to cut the subsidies to renewable for trying to reduce the deficit marked by Europe

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 07:46:35 pm
content: Looks like there is a die-hard conservative inside of every die-hard liberal.Paying a little taxes is an effective way of converting a liberal to a conservative,

author: vodka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 08:46:00 pm
content: QuoteIf you considered that you paid few taxes , you can donate the 90% of the salary to goverment. They will be very glad

author: Morgoroth
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 08:53:20 pm
content: if we put as example extreme situations we could justify everything.point is that taxes are needed, but with some equilibrium point.governments should give a good excuse at least, not the first brainstorming.

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 08:55:08 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on February 14, 2016, 07:46:35 pmWhat exactly is you're definition of a liberal and a conservative? I can't find any relevant ones in dictionaries that are mutually exclusive.

author: Morgoroth
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 09:10:07 pm
content: I come just with common sense, or I want to think that.I don't feel I have to embrace one side or another.As I said before, paradigms of the society are changing, and maybe, distinction of liberal or conservative do no apply as always, probably we are on a slow change process, slow enough to not get a clear notice about it, and even now society is an human experiment and we are still learning.

author: Seekonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 09:56:59 pm
content: If the people of Spain want to change the law, they can. It's not like they have a king.In the US money interests like Warren Buffet and Walton family are pushing to end subsidies on individual solar and switch it to corporate solar. And end grid tie payments.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 10:18:57 pm
content: Quote from: Seekonk on February 14, 2016, 09:56:59 pmWell, discussing the law here may be the seed for the repeal process. Ideas snowball in expected ways.Quote from: Morgoroth on February 14, 2016, 09:10:07 pmIn Australia, the term 'liberals' would be at the top or right hand of the diagram, not not the left, as in 'classical liberals'. I like that interpretation more, liberal as in personal liberty.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2016, 11:00:51 pm
content: "Point is that taxes are needed, but with some equilibrium point"Whose "equilibrium point" though? You thought the original equilibrium point is just. The legislators today thought the revised equilibrium point just, and you think otherwise.You cannot insist others to conform to your equilibrium point in a democracy where clearly your equilibrium point failed to prevail.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 12:19:28 am
content: If people do not connect their DC solar panels to the grid, to sell electricity back to the AC-oriented utility, they definitely should never have to pay any taxes for the system they don't use.They really shouldnt have to ever pay taxes for doing this, because it is good for society to use sustainable solar energy and less non-renewable electricity.This likely would not happen if Spain had a public utility, (but I guess that was likely banned by GATS, 20 years ago.)This also can be thought of one of the most idiotic examples of the unexpected consequences of giving special rights to corporations to continuation of certain levels of profits. The people of Spain are being asked to indemnify the utility from the normal risks of business.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 12:31:00 am
content: >QuoteNo, this increasingly isn't true any more if the company is a multinational, it would only be true if the company was wholly domestic and no trade deals applied and I think thats already extremely unlikely in the Europe of today.Its likely what happened is Spain created a situation where they caused the company to have a reduction in profits bydoing something, by regulating or changing a policy, then the question becomes:1.) Did they legislate some change, or change a policyafterorbeforethe relevant investment treaty wassigned?2.) If answer is after, then3.) Did the profits decrease or increase?4.) If they decreased, how much is the most that could be deemed to have been the corporate investor's loss inexpected lost profits?5.) Pay them that amountforever.All other questions are deemedirrelevant.There does not seem to be any right to regulate.Elections, whatever people vote for is irrelevant as to the question of how much the taxpayers owe, if they are willing to pay it or not does not matter, they must, or stick to the original policy, i.e. not change anything..The country/state/municipality can only change laws that make the investor's business more profitable, never less. Otherwise they have to negotiate compensation to the utility in advance, or face a suit for"indirect expropriation"of their "property". Welcome toISDS, my friends.QuoteRight, since its the US, where all of this ISDS madness is being hidden by the politicians of both parties with the cooperation of the media, there has to be a cover story to explain everything FTA related, and blame it on something or someone else, so the media is never forced to tell the people the awful truth, God forbid.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 12:37:39 pm
content: QuoteThe important question is "whose equilibrium". the election of those legislators by the spanish public is a new equilibrium that repudiates your equilibrium.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 12:38:48 pm
content: QuoteI support ending any and all subsidies - they are nothing but distortion to the real economy.

author: wkb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 06:40:14 pm
content: Quote from: Seekonk on February 14, 2016, 09:56:59 pmActually they do.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_SpainThat said, Spain is a parlementary democracy.

author: vodka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 07:05:05 pm
content: Spanish nighmareBleeding Renewable: 20.000 millons of déficit and a ethernal debt (2012-02-25)http://www.libremercado.com/2012-02-25/la-sangria-renovable-21000-millones-de-deficit-y-una-deuda-eterna-1276451172/The bonus system to green energy triggers the cost of electricity in Spain while the debt accumulates to the companies.Blow up renewable bubble that the government of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero inflated based at bonus will cost dearly Spanish taxpayers. Everyone will have to pay: users, electrical corporations, even many of those who they trusted the executive and undertook significant investments trusting that could then recover the capital promised bonuses.Thursday, Ignacio Sanchez Galan, chairman of Iberdrola, has used the press conference to present the results of his company to attack harshly a system that has generated a very expensive electricity and tariff deficit that remains shackled to power, which they have to finance the debt that the state requires them to take every month. It has done so full of shocking evidence that force ask what has happened in recent years in Spain, who has made of gold with this and how in a time when the deficit and debt drown government we can afford this outlay.The originThe problem stems from the different rules that the government of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero was approved between 2004 and 2008. The aim was to promote green energy, mixing the supposed benefits that would bring the "climate change", with the possibility of creating Spain "sustainable" industrial model an example sector of economic modernity. The cost did not matter too: we were in the years of economic boom and the state seemed perfectly able to pay a small annual bill for something that also was very good image.The method devised for this green energy Made in Spain were the production bonuses. In this way, who put a mill wind power, solar park or a hybrid system would be guaranteed access to the electricity system as a priority. In addition, although the cost of generation was higher than for coal or hydro, the State would bear the difference between the two quantities.This meant that Spain is filled with fields of windmills and solar farms. The return on investment seemed guaranteed. In fact, the Government assured the payment of these premiums for lengthy periods of time, up to 20-25 years. It was a round, very safe business. Furthermore,several frauds,such as solar panels on at night used gas-oil with the aim of taking some more money for production subsidies were uncovered. The green bubble, especially in what refers to solar energy, was already underwayThe dataThe first breath of wind that threatened to throw this house of cards came with the economic crisis, which reduced electrical demand levels of 2006. Last year ended with a consumption of 255,179 GWh, similar to that of five years earlier. As the Spanish park was oversized, is not only that production bonuses were high, it was being paid for keeping stops some facilities.According to data from Iberdrola, conventional production of electricity in Spain is cheaper than in neighboring countries. The company claims that both the pool prices (so called the fixed cost at an auction among the producers of ordinary regime) as compensation networks are about 10% below the EU average.What it is substantially more expensive renewable retribution. Spain is the EU country with the highest percentage of its electricity production subsidized (between 30 and 35%) and with higher premiums. This is so for two reasons: first, the green bubble has led to a huge expansion of facilities eligible for premium. Secondly, the Spanish renewable mix gives much weight to the more expensive renewable energy.Renewables are not all equal. For now, all are more expensive than traditional media, but in some cases the costs are approaching the average pool price (61 € / MWh): for example, a wind farm produce at a price of 70 € / MWh; a photovoltaic plant and shooting a little, to 121 € / MWh; but the hybrid costs € 332 / MWh !, six times.Thus, the joint hydro and nuclear generation was 85,300 GWh in 2011, compared with 9,500 GWh of photovoltaic and hybrid. However, the cost was about the same: 4,400 million euros compared to 3900.Tariff deficitSpanish consumers do not pay the true cost of electricity. On the one hand, in the case of renewables, the government pays a bonus as the difference between their cost and the price of other sources. But there's the strange concept of the tariff deficit. Even without bonuses, the electricity bill would be very expensive in Spain because of taxes and other indirect costs imposed on companies (which also have their weight aid for renewable). To avoid the cost to the public in a sharp rise in electricity bills, for years it was decreed that power would charge somewhat less to consumers the real cost of the service. The theory was that would gradually closing the gap and the debt would be paid with the companies.The reality is that the hole is getting bigger. According to the accounts of companies this debt in 2011 amounted to 20,000 million euros. Companies have had to finance this amount, which, according to the president of Iberdrola, has cost more than 1,000 million. Last year, some of this deficit was securitized (debt was issued and, what is raised is paid to power). But there are still 7,000 million in the balance sheets of companies.Growing debtAll this is generating a growing debt that will have to pay Spanish taxpayers through taxes. On the one hand, there will be companies that pay the tariff deficit: in fact, the titularizarlo, they are already paid, but only in exchange for acquiring a new debt to investors who purchase the corresponding vouchers. On the other hand, will have to pay premiums for renewables. And this amount will not be lower: in fact, will continue to increase.Although the PP party has eliminated bonus for renewable. Plants already built and registered and continue to accrue bonuses for several decades. For the sake of legal certainty, the Ministry of Industry has not wanted to play as approved by the previous government. And that will make the bill paid each year Spanish is higher. Friday, from free market we estimated that this cost will be around 9,000 million each year (remember that the tax increase decreed by the government last December 30 wants to raise 6,200 million).The president of Iberdrola, Ignacio Sanchez Galan yesterday called this "bubble" stops, especially in regard to solar power plants, even if are already registered (requested reasonable compensation to those who have made investments, but not raise new deficit plants).As we said a little above, the cost of producing electricity in the hybrid plants is more than five times higher than the pool. Each kWh produced in these facilities is a stream of money out of pocket Spanish taxpayer. And premiums, increased by CPI, will last at least 25 years. And these plants emit half the CO2 combined cycle and consume lots of water! Come on, who are not even particularly ecological.According to the accounts of Galan, the discounted cost of bonus and accrued exceeds the sum of the market capitalization of the Spanish electricity companies (more than 100,000 million euros). This is what it costs policy renewable Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero and the Spanish will have to continue paying the bill the next three decades.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 08:07:45 pm
content: QuoteLike one of my heros would say: election has consequences.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 08:26:03 pm
content: Quote from: vodka on February 15, 2016, 07:05:05 pmCatastrophic man made global warming and government driven job creation are two common excuses that environmental and lefty activists use to push their political agendas.I predict that within 20-30 years, the catastrophic man made global warming movement will be on the wrong side of history and will be remembered as one more example of politics corrupting science, similar to Lysenkoism.

author: vodka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 09:01:41 pm
content: QuoteMore fine a putsch PSOE with 192 deaths and manipulating vilely to the people on more tragic day in Spain(11/3/2004)Furthermore, Rajoy(ostrich of Moncloa) was Minister of Security in this year, and the Black OPs put him the bombs forward his nose , beside the idiots of the PP party let them manipulating the evidences and destroy the trains(fully)

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2016, 09:59:25 pm
content: Quote from: Morgoroth on February 14, 2016, 12:36:22 amThere is nothing to understand. Every tax is theft, and they tax tax what the "can", especially economically ruined countries like spain.Words like "Fair" are used to deceive, and prevent riots.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2016, 01:36:04 am
content: Quote"sun tax"?I actually said years ago that it is likely that governments / environmentalists will start to tax our farts, on the notion that they contribute to global warming. Each of us would be walking around with "fart-o-meter" on our rear ends, as a form of "use tax".I never envisioned to see something as creative as "sun tax", at least not this soon.