A solar energy system tax credit is available for both residential property and business property located in Iowa as provided in Iowa Code section 422.11L and this rule.
Iowa Solar Energy System Tax Credit Rates for Installations On or After January 1, 2016,* Based on 50% of Applicable Federal Rate Under Sections 25D and 48 of the Internal Revenue Code in Effect on January 1, 2016 | |||
Applicable Property | Calendar Year Construction Begins | Calendar Year Property Placed in Service | Iowa Tax Credit Rate |
Qualified Residential Solar Electric Property Under Section 25D(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code | N/A | 2016-2019 | 15% |
N/A | 2020 | 13% | |
N/A | 2021 | 11% | |
N/A | 2022 or later | 0% | |
Qualified Residential Solar Water Heating Property Under Section 25D(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code | N/A | 2016-2019 | 15% |
N/A | 2020 | 13% | |
N/A | 2021 | 11% | |
N/A | 2022 or later | 0% | |
Qualified Business Energy Property (electric, heat/cool, solar process heat) Under Section 48(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) of the Internal Revenue Code | 2016-2019 | 2016-2023 | 15% |
2024 or later | 5% | ||
2020 | 2020-2023 | 13% | |
2024 or later | 5% | ||
2021 | 2021-2023 | 11% | |
2024 or later | 5% | ||
2022 or later | 2022 or later | 0% | |
Qualified Business Energy Property (fiber-optic solar illumination) Under Section 48(a)(2)(A)(i)(III) of the Internal Revenue Code | N/A | 2016 | 15% |
N/A | 2017 or later | 0% | |
*For a description of Iowa tax credit rates for installations placed in service prior to January 1, 2016, consult the prior versions of this rule. |
EXAMPLE 1: Taxpayer A is a farmer who installs solar energy property during 2020 that provides power to two farm buildings and A's residence. Taxpayer A submits one application for the Iowa solar energy system tax credit showing $100,000 of total eligible expenditures. Taxpayer A provides evidence to the department that adequately explains A's method of allocating the solar energy system's total usage between business use and personal use, and shows that 40 percent of the solar energy property is used for residential purposes and 60 percent is used for farm business purposes. The department determines the amounts and the method for determining those proportions to be reasonable and therefore considers the taxpayer to have submitted a tax credit application requesting both a residential solar energy system tax credit and a business solar energy system tax credit. The residential tax credit request includes $40,000 ($100,000 × 40%) of eligible expenditures, subject to the $5,000 tax credit cap. Therefore, A is eligible for a residential tax credit of $5,000 ($40,000 × 13% Iowa credit rate = $5,200, less $200 in excess of cap). The business tax credit request includes $60,000 ($100,000 × 60%) of eligible expenditures, subject to the $20,000 tax credit cap. Therefore, A is eligible for a business tax credit of $7,800 ($60,000 × 13% Iowa credit rate). Taxpayer A receives a total Iowa tax credit of $12,800 ($5,000 + $7,800). Although A submitted one tax credit application in this situation, the resulting tax credit amount would have been the same if A had instead submitted two separate tax credit applications: one residential application with $40,000 of eligible expenditures and one business application with $60,000 of eligible expenditures.
EXAMPLE 2: Same facts as Example 1, except that taxpayer A does not submit adequate evidence to the department supporting a reasonable method of determining the proportion of the solar energy property used for residential and business purposes, and the department is unable to determine reasonable proportions from the information provided by A. The department deems the entire installation used for residential purposes, subject to the $5,000 tax credit cap. Therefore, A receives a total Iowa tax credit of $5,000 ($100,000 × 13% Iowa credit rate = $13,000, less $8,000 in excess of cap).
Placement on a waitlist shall not constitute a promise binding the state that persons placed on the waitlist will actually receive the credit in a future year. The availability of a tax credit and approval of a tax credit application pursuant to this rule in a future year is contingent upon the availability of tax credits in that particular year.
EXAMPLE 3: Taxpayer B applies for and is awarded an Iowa solar tax credit for a solar installation that powers taxpayer B's workshop. Two years after that solar installation is placed in service, the solar inverter malfunctions. Taxpayer B purchases and installs a new solar inverter, which keeps the solar installation in working order. At the same time, B also replaces several functioning solar panels on the solar installation with new, higher quality panels that increase the solar installation's production capacity. Taxpayer B submits a second application for the costs of the solar inverter and the solar panels. These costs are considered a repair or maintenance and do not qualify as separate and distinct from the prior installation. Therefore, they do not qualify for the Iowa solar tax credit. This is the result even if the costs qualify for the federal tax credit and even though the solar panels improve the productivity of the solar installation.
EXAMPLE 4: Taxpayer C applies for and is awarded an Iowa solar tax credit for a solar installation that powers taxpayer C's business. One year after that solar installation is placed in service, it is destroyed beyond repair by a severe storm. Taxpayer C's insurance policy does not cover damage to a solar installation. Taxpayer C purchases and places in service another solar installation that powers taxpayer C's business and timely applies for the Iowa solar energy system tax credit. Taxpayer C's subsequent installation may be eligible for the Iowa solar energy system installation credit as a replacement installation.
* Same building(s) or structure(s). If the applied-for solar installation will power buildings or structures that are also being powered by another solar installation, or that were being powered by another solar installation at some point during the 12-month period before the applied-for solar installation was placed in service, then the installations have the same electrical generation purpose. However, adequate proof from the taxpayer of a substantial increase in electricity demand is evidence tending to indicate that the solar installations do not have the same electrical generation purpose. A "substantial increase in electricity demand" exists when the sum of the average monthly electricity consumption of each building or structure powered by the applied-for solar installation for the 12-month period before the applied-for solar installation is placed in service is at least 50 percent greater than the sum of the average monthly electricity consumption of each building or structure powered by the other solar installation for the 12-month period before the other solar installation was placed in service. Average electricity consumption shall be measured in kilowatt hours. With respect to the other solar installation, if any applicable building or structure was not in service for a period of 12 months before the other solar installation was placed in service, the average monthly electricity consumption for that building or structure shall be the average electricity consumption for the first 12 months the building or structure was in service. With respect to the applied-for solar installation, the calculation of the average monthly electricity consumption for any building or structure that was not placed in service prior to the other solar installation shall be calculated using a denominator of 12 even if that building or structure was not in service for a period of 12 months before the applied-for solar installation was placed in service. The reason for the increased electricity consumption shall not be relevant in determining if a substantial increase in electricity demand exists.
EXAMPLE 5: Taxpayer D is awarded a solar energy system tax credit for a solar installation that provides power to D's home. Three years later, D installs a second solar installation that also provides power to D's home. Absent additional information from D that would show a substantial increase in electricity demand, the second solar installation has the same electrical generation purpose as the first installation because they both provide power to D's home. Therefore, the second solar installation would not be considered an independent installation.
EXAMPLE 6: Taxpayer E owns an apartment building with ten apartment units. In 2021, taxpayer E installs solar energy business property with a cost of $300,000 that will power the apartment building. Taxpayer E submits solar tax credit applications for ten different solar installations, one for each unit within the apartment building. Each application claims $30,000 in qualifying costs and requests an Iowa solar credit of $3,300 ($30,000 × 11%) for business property, for a sum total of $33,000 in tax credits. Because the solar installations claimed on all ten applications provide power to the same apartment building, they all have the same electrical generation purpose. Therefore, only one of the solar installations could qualify for the tax credit as an independent installation, subject to the $20,000 per-installation tax credit cap. The other nine installations would all fail to qualify as independent installations. The result is the same whether or not the apartment units have separate utility meters. See Example 10 for a different result if the building were organized as a multiple housing cooperative or horizontal property regime.
EXAMPLE 7: Taxpayer F, a machinist, is awarded a solar energy system tax credit for a solar installation that provides power to F's machine shop. Several years later, F installs a second solar installation that will provide power to F's machine shop but also to F's office building. Taxpayer F submits a complete and timely application for the solar energy system tax credit. Absent additional information from F that would show a substantial increase in electricity demand, the second solar installation has the same electrical generation purpose as the first solar installation because they both provide power to F's machine shop. Therefore, the second solar installation would not be considered an independent installation.
EXAMPLE 8: Assume the same facts as Example 7, except that taxpayer F provides additional information to the department regarding the electricity consumption of F's machine shop and office building. Taxpayer F provides utility bills which show that for the 12-month period before the first solar installation was placed in service, the average monthly electricity consumption for the machine shop was 1,000 kilowatt hours. For the 12-month period before the second solar installation was placed in service, the average monthly electricity consumption for the machine shop was 1,200 kilowatt hours. Additionally, the office building was constructed and placed in service three months before the second solar installation was placed in service. Taxpayer F provides utility bills which show that for the three months the office building was in service, the monthly electricity consumption for the office building was 1,400 kilowatt hours, 1,600 kilowatt hours, and 1,800 kilowatt hours, respectively. This means that the average monthly electricity consumption of the office building for purposes of the "substantial increase in energy demand" test is 400 kilowatt hours [i.e., (1,400 + 1,600 + 1,800) ÷ 12 = 400]. Therefore, for the 12-month period before the second solar installation was placed in service, the average monthly electricity consumption for the machine shop and office building was 1,600 kilowatt hours [i.e., 1,200 + 400 = 1,600]. Because this 1,600 monthly kilowatt hour average applicable to the second solar installation exceeds by at least 50 percent the 1,000 monthly kilowatt hour average applicable to the first solar installation, taxpayer F has shown a substantial increase in electricity demand and the second solar installation may qualify as an independent installation.
* Different building(s) or structure(s). If the applied-for solar installation will not power any building or structure that is also being powered by another solar installation, or that was also being powered by another solar installation at some point during the 12-month period before the applied-for solar installation was placed in service, this is an indication that the solar installations may have a different electrical generation purpose.
EXAMPLE 9: Taxpayer G, a farmer, is awarded a solar energy system tax credit for a solar installation that provides power to G's equipment barn. Later, G installs a second solar installation that will only provide power to G's livestock building. Because the first solar installation only provides power to G's barn and the second solar installation only provides power to G's livestock building, this is an indication that each solar installation has a different electrical generation purpose. The second solar installation would be considered an independent installation, unless additional information shows the contrary to be true.
EXAMPLE 10: Taxpayer H, a multiple housing cooperative under Iowa Code chapter 499A, owns an apartment building with ten apartment units. In 2021, H installs solar energy property with a cost of $300,000 that will power the apartment building. The owner of each apartment unit submits a solar tax credit application for a solar installation claiming a proportionate share of H's qualifying expenditures for the solar energy property, which in this case is $30,000 per owner, and requesting an Iowa credit of $3,300 ($30,000 × 11%), for a sum total of $33,000 in tax credits. Since this building is organized as a multiple housing cooperative under Iowa Code chapter 499A, each apartment constitutes a building or structure and each owner's proportionate share of qualifying expenses incurred by the cooperative constitutes a solar installation paid by the owner. This is the first solar installation with respect to each of these apartments, so they are not being powered by another solar installation that received an Iowa tax credit. Therefore, this is an indication that each solar installation has a different electrical generation purpose. Each of the ten solar installations would be considered an independent installation, unless additional information shows the contrary to be true. The result would be the same if the building were organized as a horizontal property regime under Iowa Code chapter 499B. However, see Example 7 regarding apartment buildings not organized as a multiple housing cooperative or horizontal property regime.
* Location. The department will consider the physical location of each solar installation. When two or more solar installations are in close physical proximity, this is an indication that the installations may not be independent installations. The farther in physical proximity the installations are, the stronger the likelihood that they are independent installations. Locating an installation at the same address or on the same or adjacent parcel as another installation is a stronger indication that the two installations are not independent installations than if they were located at different addresses or on nonadjacent parcels. The expansion in physical size or production capacity of an existing solar installation is an indication that the installations are not independent installations. If two or more solar installations are physically attached or connected to the same building or structure, this is an indication that the installations are not independent installations.
EXAMPLE 11: Taxpayer Q submits a complete and timely solar energy system tax credit application for a solar installation located at an address that is adjacent to the address of a prior solar installation for which taxpayer Q received a solar energy system tax credit award. Based on the information provided by the taxpayer, the department is unable to determine the electrical generation purpose of the solar installations. Without additional information, the proximity of the two solar installations supports a determination by the department that the second solar installation is not an independent installation.
* Billing. The department will consider the manner in which a utility company issues bills associated with solar installations. Even when a solar installation does not actually provide electricity to any buildings or structures that are also being powered by another solar installation, if a utility company issues bills associated with a solar installation under a net metering agreement in a manner that allows credits from the net outflow of one solar installation to be applied against the utility costs of buildings or structures that are powered by another solar installation, the department will evaluate the solar installations subject to the net metering agreement as if they were powering the same buildings or structures for purposes of determining electrical generation purpose in numbered paragraph 304.48(5)"b"(2)"1" above.
* Utility metering. The department will consider whether each solar installation is connected to a separate utility meter and the business reason, if any, for using separate utility meters. For purposes of this subrule, "utility meter" means a device installed by a utility company used to monitor the amount of electricity consumed or produced by a consumer. When a metering agreement requires a person to install two unidirectional meters, the set will be considered a single utility meter for purposes of this subrule. The department will not consider a measuring device installed and used by a person for personal monitoring of electricity production or consumption to be a "utility meter" for purposes of this subrule. This should not be interpreted to require a person to connect the person's solar installation to a utility provider's grid in order to be eligible for the tax credit.
* Payment for installation or service. The department will consider how expenses incurred for construction or servicing of a solar installation are paid. When expenses incurred for two or more solar installations are paid by related parties, it may indicate that the installations are not independent installations. However, the department may request additional information to evaluate the relationship between the person who pays for such expenses and the person who claims the tax credit.
* Contract terms. The department will consider the terms of installation and service contracts related to the solar installation and may require a person to provide installation and service contracts related to any prior solar installation for which the department has received a tax credit application. When contract terms indicate that the solar installations have been installed as or are serviced as a single, functional unit or system, the department will consider that as evidence that the installations are not independent installations.
* Timing of installation or application. The department will consider when the applied-for solar installation was placed in service and when a person submits the tax credit application as compared to other solar installations.
This rule is intended to implement Iowa Code section 422.11L.
Iowa Admin. Code r. 701-304.48
ARC 0361C, IAB 10/3/12, effective 11/7/12; ARC 1303C, IAB 2/5/14, effective 3/12/14; ARC 1666C, IAB 10/15/14, effective 11/19/14; ARC 2925C, IAB 2/1/17, effective 3/8/17; ARC 5590C, IAB 4/21/21, effective 5/26/21; Editorial change: IAC Supplement 11/2/22; Editorial change: IAC Supplement 10/18/23