Will the Rhode Island GOP follow suit?
This story was originally published by Canary Media and is reproduced here as part
of the Climate
Desk collaboration.
Republicans shifted from giving tax credits for
solar to charging extra
New Hampshire Republicans are attempting to do away with
a 50-year-old property tax exemption for households and businesses with
solar, contending that the policy forces residents without the clean energy
systems to unwittingly subsidize those who have them. Supporters of the
exemption, however, say this argument is misleading, insulting, and at odds
with New Hampshire’s tradition of letting communities shape their own local
governments.
The focus of the debate is a bill proposed in the New Hampshire House this month by Republican Representative Len Turcotte and several co-sponsors in his party. The measure would repeal a law, established in 1975, that authorizes cities and towns to exempt owners of solar-equipped buildings from paying taxes on whatever value their solar systems add to their property. As of 2024, 153 of the state’s municipalities — roughly two-thirds — had adopted the exemption, one of the only incentives offered in support of residential solar power in the state.
The exemption means that homeowners without solar must pay
more property tax to make up for the money not being collected from the “extreme
minority” who have solar panels, Turcotte said while
presenting his legislation at a hearing of
the House Science, Technology, and Energy Committee last week. This “redistribution” of the tax
burden is unfair, he said.
The solar property tax exemption is a fairly common
policy: Nationally, 36 states offer some version of it. While
legislators in many states have targeted pro-solar policies like net metering, property tax exemptions have so far
avoided similar attacks. New Hampshire, therefore, could end up as
a proving ground for whether this approach can find traction.
New Hampshire does not have a sales tax or an income
tax and leans heavily on local property taxes for revenue; its rates are among
the highest in the country. That makes changes to property tax policy
a particularly sensitive subject. The solar exemption bill has
Republicans, who are typically tax averse, walking a fine line between
championing what they say is fairness for all and pushing a policy that
will inevitably raise taxes for some.
The state authorizes 15 other property tax
exemptions — including for elderly residents, veterans, and those with
disabilities — but Turcotte’s bill targets only the one for solar.
The exemption is a “local option” policy, meaning cities and towns
must opt in through a vote in each municipality.
Turcotte, however, doubts the average resident realized that they were signing
up to pay more on their own taxes.
“They see a feel-good measure,” he said. “Do they
truly understand? I don’t believe
they do.”
After Turcotte presented his bill, the remaining speakers —
about a dozen clean energy advocates, lawmakers, business leaders, and
local solar owners — uniformly opposed his proposal.
Removing the exemption would be an unfair rule change after
homeowners invested in solar systems with the understanding they’d be getting
a tax break, many argued. Businesses using solar could face a “significant
tax increase,” said Natch Greyes, vice president of
public policy at New Hampshire’s Business and
Industry Association. The change could cost homeowners with solar hundreds of
dollars per year while barely reducing the property tax rate for everyone else,
others said.
In the town of Hudson, for example, $2.2 million in
property value isn’t taxed because of the exemption, out of a tax base of
$5.1 billion, its chief assessor, James Michaud, testified. Removing the
exemption would have virtually no effect on the tax rate, he said.
“It’s almost incalculable how small it is,” he said.
Whatever tiny tax shift the exemption creates is worth it,
others argued, saying that it provides an incentive for the public good: More
solar means lower greenhouse gas emissions and less burden on the grid.
Turcotte countered that these broader benefits of solar — many of which have
been well documented — are “subjective.”
The question of local control also loomed large in the
testimony. In New Hampshire, whose motto is “Live Free or Die,” the right of
individual towns to decide on their own rules and regulations has long been a point of pride. Repealing the exemption would mean
overriding decisions made by voters. Turcotte’s claim
that residents didn’t understand what they were getting
into is not only condescending but also just plain wrong, several witnesses
said.
“You are essentially, with this bill, substituting your
judgment about what is proper at the level of local taxation for that of town
meetings and city councils throughout the state,” said Representative Ned
Raynolds, a Democrat, while questioning Turcotte.
The bill now awaits a vote in committee before it can
face a floor vote from the full House. It would then advance to the
Senate. Republicans control both chambers of the state Legislature and the
governor’s office.
But the bill’s opponents hope that lawmakers will heed their
arguments and give weight to the mass of voters who have approved the exemption
across the state.
“This is the reason two-thirds of the towns have adopted it:
They can see it’s a good thing,” testified David Trumble, a solar
owner from the town of Weare. “Solar is a good thing.”
