A new tax incentive could mean big money. But questions
remain about its equity implications and whether the industry will use it.
Clean energy advocates are working to raise awareness about
a “giant money fire hose” made available to the industry starting this year.
The glut of cash, tied to a portion of the federal Tax Cuts
and Jobs Act of 2017, stems from an incentive framework called Opportunity Zones. The sleeper provision offers tax
benefits to equity investors that put money into over 8,700 designated
“economically distressed” opportunity areas. It’s designed to encourage
investment in low-income communities that haven’t seen equal attention from
investors.
The incentive holds several tax benefits, but it’s
basically a capital gains shield. Equity investors can defer taxes on gains put
into an “Opportunity Fund,” the investment vehicles organized to invest in the
zones, until December 2026. If investors hold their investments for five to
seven years, they can increase their basis on the investment by 10 and 15
percent, respectively. If investors hold their investments for at least a
decade, they also don’t have to pay out taxes on capital gains made from
investments in those zones.
The law is purposely flexible and scalable, with no cap on
the money that can be deployed and few restrictions on the sectors that can
take advantage, according to the Economic Innovation Group (EIG), a research
and advocacy organization that helped design the legislation that modeled the
Opportunity Zone provision in the tax bill.
In testimony to Congress, EIG President and CEO John
Lettieri said, “This incentive has the potential to unlock an entirely new
category of investors and create an important new asset class of
investments.”
An EIG analysis estimated $6.1 trillion in unrealized
capital gains was floating around in 2017. That’s such a huge lump of money
that even if just a portion of it went to Opportunity Zones, EIG said it would
already be the largest economic development initiative in the U.S. And,
according to several experts watching the space, there’s big potential for the
clean energy industry to take advantage.
“Industry folks should be jumping all over this,” said Jon
Bonanno, chief experience officer at the nonprofit California Clean Energy
Fund. “It’s a giant money fire hose, and we want to point it at the things we
want.”
So far, much of the attention for Opportunity Zones has
focused on the real estate industry. But because renewables projects are also
long-term, place-based investments, advocates say clean energy is a natural
fit. Wind and solar also don’t have the same gentrification and displacement
implications tied to real estate development in low-income communities, one of
the biggest concerns about the program.
The potential financial benefits are so great
that Bonanno characterized it as a “watershed moment” for the clean energy
industry.
“This is really an incredible mechanism,” said Bonanno. “It
creates such compelling returns that we will see these assets going mainstream
because of it.”
“Almost as simple as looking at a map”
According to those working on Opportunity Zones, if a
developer locates a project in one of the thousands of zones located throughout
the U.S. and U.S. territories, it can be eligible for funds from a certified
fund. That money would come into the project timeline at the same time equity
usually does.
“For developers, it should actually be fairly
straightforward and almost as simple as looking at a map,” said
Cody Evans, a graduate student at Stanford University, who has been researching Opportunity Zones with professor Dr.
Rebecca Lester. “From the developer’s perspective, it wouldn’t necessarily look
any different than any source of funding; it would just likely come at a lower
cost of capital.”
Evans added that developers also have to pass two tests to
qualify property for the incentive. Projects have to add “substantial
improvement,” increasing the basis of the property compared to the
pre-investment value. Projects also have to derive 50 percent of gross income
from active business in the zone.
For wind and solar developments, those qualifications should
be pretty easy to meet. But so far, Evans said, “there’s a lot more runway for
the industry to wake up to this tool and take advantage of it.”
Gregory Rosen, founder and principal at High Noon Advisors,
said any opportunity that lowers the average weighted cost of capital for
renewables deserves some attention. But he said recruiting investors will
likely fall on the industry.
“Part of it is up to the industry to be proactive in
educating folks,” said Rosen. “The jury is still out on how many [Qualified
Opportunity Zone] investors there are that are interested in investing in
solar.”
According to a list compiled by accounting and consulting firm
Novogradac & Company, out of 49 funds that have registered to join the
firm’s Opportunity Zone Listing, only three mention solar as an investment
focus. After a call for letters of inquiry from fund managers working on
Opportunity Zone projects, the Rockefeller Foundation — working with the Kresge
Foundation — said only one of the 141 responses it received had a clean energy focus, and even that had a
real estate bent, describing its aim as “energy efficient property
development.”
Bonanno called the lack of attention for renewables
“abysmal.”
“The renewable energy business needs to get their act
together and focus on this,” he said.
Despite the delay, those watching the funding expect 2019 to
be a “boom year,” said Abraham Reshtick, a business and tax attorney at Mintz.
That’s in part because investing this year allows investors to realize the most
benefits with the timeline of the incentive. The incentive can also be paired
with the soon-declining federal Investment Tax Credit and Production Tax Credit
benefits.
At the same time, Reshtick added, “There needs to be the
right opportunities.”
“It’s the next few months that will give us the best
indication as to whether this is an attractive enough program,” he said.
“Our collective responsibility”
Even as advocates urge the renewables industry to leverage
the funding, though, they also caution that regulations for Opportunity Zones
are yet to be finalized.
The IRS released an
initial batch of proposed guidance in October, offering some clarity on the
particulars of the law. But the agency canceled a January 10 public hearing on
those regulations due to the ongoing government shutdown. It’s anyone’s guess
when that meeting will actually happen. Investors are also awaiting additional
guidance.
In the meantime, it’s difficult for funds to fully organize.
Though those working on the funding, like Rockefeller and Kresge, have seen a
surge of activity — Rockefeller said the responses they received are a
“testament to the enormous market interest” — adoption will be halting until
there’s more clarity.
Before the rules are finalized, stakeholders are also hoping
for some changes. Currently, Evans said, the rules make it difficult for
multi-asset funds to participate in the program. He said allowing that
participation would encourage more investment and allow diversification of risk
across a portfolio.
And an “insane oversight,” according to Bonanno, is the lack
of a community impact requirement tied to the funding. Though the program is
structured to increase investments in low-income census tracts, the law doesn’t
say the project necessarily has to benefit the community in any measurable way.
“You could just be a banker and you could invest in a solar
project — you stick the solar project in an Opportunity Zone. They don’t see a
penny, they don’t get any of the work, and honestly, it’s not necessarily
helping those communities,” said Rosen at High Noon Advisors. “It’s our
collective responsibility to take these opportunities and proactively have them
benefit communities.”
This is especially a concern in Opportunity Zones already
experiencing displacement of low-income residents and communities of color.
Though EIG notes that under 4 percent of the selected census tracts have seen
high socioeconomic change between 2000 and 2016, some communities are
skeptical.
A study that looks at the potential for gentrification
stemming from the Opportunity Zone program, conducted by a national coalition
of real estate developers and investors called LOCUS, in partnership with
George Washington University, highlighted downtown Oakland, downtown Portland,
downtown Newark, and Seattle’s downtown and International District as the most
vulnerable for “accelerated gentrification” without policies in place to stop
it.
Past research has also suggested that place-based tax incentives don’t equate
to improvements for communities.
But staunching the negative impacts of the law may be left
to states and cities. California, for instance, still has a state-level capital
gains tax in place and could require certain community impact requirements in
order to grant an exemption.
How implementation shakes out will be especially important
in states and metropolitan areas where gentrification is already an issue. In
the LOCUS ranking of vulnerable areas, 13 of the top 50 vulnerable locations
are in California and 13 are in New York. Many of the most vulnerable
Opportunity Zone locations are also in states with significant renewables
development, including California, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts.
No comments:
Post a Comment