Washington, D.C.—At a U.S.
Senate Finance Committee executive session to consider “The
Clean Energy for America Act,” Ranking Member Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), said he is
willing to work on modifying energy tax provisions in the tax code, but not at
the expense of millions of good-paying American jobs.
Key
Excerpts:
“There is bipartisan agreement
that Congress should not continue to pick energy tax winners and losers through
the annual tax extenders process. . . [but] most, if not all, of the members on
my side of the dais cannot support a bill that eliminates all provisions
related to fossil fuels and essentially prevents bipartisan technologies, like
carbon capture, from qualifying.”
“I am
willing to work on constructive proposals to modernize and innovate our
nation’s energy production, but not at
the expense of millions of good-paying American jobs.”
“Furthermore, I cannot
support attaching labor requirements to energy tax policy. Linking labor policy to energy-related tax
credits is unprecedented, and I have concerns not only about the policy, but
also about the dangerous precedent it sets for amending the tax code.”
“I expect a robust
debate today about how this proposal could result in job losses and negatively
impact states for members on both sides of the aisle; the likely effect on gas
prices at the pump for consumers; concerns about adding Davis Bacon labor and
prevailing wage requirements to the tax code; and the need to assess whether
certain energy tax credits continue to be necessary, or whether they have
served their intended purpose of incentivizing growth and investment.
To view Senator Crapo’s remarks, click here.
The full
text of Ranking Member Crapo’s remarks is below:
“Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this markup on
something we can all agree needs reform–our energy tax laws.
“Senator
Wyden and I agree, and I think there is bipartisan support for modifying energy
tax provisions in the Code.
“Senator
Wyden and I also agree, and there is broad bipartisan support, for the concept
of a technology-neutral approach for investments in our clean energy sectors.
“There
is also bipartisan agreement that Congress should not continue to pick energy
tax winners and losers through the annual tax extenders process.
“When
considering both my Energy Sector Innovation Credit Act (or ESIC) and Senator
Wyden’s Clean Energy for America Act, there at least appears to be consensus
that energy tax credits should be market-based.
“ESIC
proposes a credit phasedown system based on market penetration, systematically
reducing credits as technologies increase their market share.
“My
proposal is tech-neutral, not prohibiting any technology from qualifying, so
long as it is not over a certain level of market penetration.
“Most,
if not all, of the members on my side of the dais cannot support a bill that
eliminates all provisions related to fossil fuels and essentially prevents
bipartisan technologies, like carbon capture, from qualifying.
“Energy
incentives have the potential to spur economic growth and create jobs, if
executed properly.
“The
oil and natural gas industries employ over 10 million Americans, paying on
average seven times the federal
minimum wage. “I
am willing to work on constructive proposals to modernize and innovate our
nation’s energy production, but not at the expense of millions of good-paying
American jobs.
“Furthermore,
I cannot support attaching labor requirements to energy tax policy. “Linking
labor policy to energy-related tax credits is unprecedented, and I have
concerns not only about the policy, but also about the dangerous precedent it
sets for amending the tax code.
“Finally,
in order to maximize taxpayer dollars, we have to take a close look at those technologies
that are market mature and end their government subsidization.
“Our
tax code should encourage technology-wide clean energy innovation, helping to
bring breakthrough power generation to deployment until new technologies can
compete independently in the market.
“My
technology-inclusive bipartisan energy tax proposal, ESIC, would accomplish
this by working with experts at the Department of Energy, national labs, and other
stakeholders to target tax credits for innovative clean energy technologies.
“As
these technologies become mature, the credits systematically decrease to ensure
taxpayer dollars do not subsidize cost-competitive technologies.
“I
thank Senator Whitehouse for leading this proposal with me in the Senate, and
we will be introducing it sometime in the near future.
“In
addition, Mr. Chairman, Senate Republicans are currently negotiating an
infrastructure package with the White House.
“Infrastructure
has always been an area where we have had broad bipartisan agreement.
“Our
goal in those negotiations is to make a deal on the things we can agree on and
continue to work on the rest.
“Mr.
Chairman, we have a shared goal to bolster effective, clean energy investment
and strengthen U.S. energy independence.
“However,
I expect a robust debate today about how this proposal could result in job
losses and negatively impact states for members on both sides of the aisle; the
likely effect on gas prices at the pump for consumers; concerns about adding
Davis Bacon labor and prevailing wage requirements to the tax code; and the
need to assess whether certain energy tax credits continue to be necessary, or
whether they have served their intended purpose of incentivizing growth and
investment.
“Going
forward, we should work together to get a deal on the things we can agree on,
and keep working on the rest.”