Rebates etc.

[Alan Waterman]

Who told you a self install will not be eligible for a federal tax credit ?

I was responding to the post that said you needed a signed contract.

[foo1bar]

My project is DYI. When I first started researching a solar system at least 3 companies told me it would qualify for the tax rebates.

3 equipment vendors?
They're likely correct. If your install would have qualified for fed credits if it was done by an installer it will qualify even if you install it yourself.

. That is what the IRS would be looking for on the paperwork for approval.

The IRS would have to look for when it was "placed in service" - since that's the language used in the tax laws.

Approval by the AHJ and POCO would be pretty solid evidence that it was placed in service before that time.

If it was up and functioning but not approved by either of those, then IMO it's more difficult to prove that it was "in service" on/before Dec. 31st.
It still may be possible, but now it is a matter of what is sufficient to convince an IRS auditor (or tax court judge) that it was in service.
I do no read any requirements within the tax law that would require the installation be done by a licensed person. Even in a state that requires a license for solar installation I think it'd be quite possible to convince the IRS that a system was "placed in service" without it being installed by a licensed electrician/solar-installer.

And as far as I know all the states allow an owner-builder. Even Florida (which has been used as an example of DIY unfriendly state) has owner-builder laws on it's books that should allow someone to do their own install. ("should" being the word - convincing the AHJ to sign off on a DIY install may be difficult)


Of course this is all assuming you even have to provide any evidence at all - which will be only if you're audited.
And if it winds up being 2017 for the placed-in-service date instead of 2016, it's probably a fairly minor difference. For most people it will be just a matter of which year they get the credit.

[Alan Waterman]

The IRS would have to look for when it was "placed in service" - since that's the language used in the tax laws.

Approval by the AHJ and POCO would be pretty solid evidence that it was placed in service before that time.

If it was up and functioning but not approved by either of those, then IMO it's more difficult to prove that it was "in service" on/before Dec. 31st.
It still may be possible, but now it is a matter of what is sufficient to convince an IRS auditor (or tax court judge) that it was in service.

Is it even possible to test a PV install before you get permission to operate? It's not like you can turn it on, at least not legally. I'm sure it would work if you did even without the net metering, but I don't think you're allowed to until your utility operator has installed the meter and given you the ok to throw the switch.

[ButchDeal]

Is it even possible to test a PV install before you get permission to operate? It's not like you can turn it on, at least not legally. I'm sure it would work if you did even without the net metering, but I don't think you're allowed to until your utility operator has installed the meter and given you the ok to throw the switch.

Yes they are turned on for short times to configure and set up as well as test and inspect.
The utility gives you options to operate, operate is different and implies long running.
This is why you generally only need final inspection for the tax incentive

[SunEagle]

3 equipment vendors?
They're likely correct. If your install would have qualified for fed credits if it was done by an installer it will qualify even if you install it yourself.




The IRS would have to look for when it was "placed in service" - since that's the language used in the tax laws.

Approval by the AHJ and POCO would be pretty solid evidence that it was placed in service before that time.

If it was up and functioning but not approved by either of those, then IMO it's more difficult to prove that it was "in service" on/before Dec. 31st.
It still may be possible, but now it is a matter of what is sufficient to convince an IRS auditor (or tax court judge) that it was in service.
I do no read any requirements within the tax law that would require the installation be done by a licensed person. Even in a state that requires a license for solar installation I think it'd be quite possible to convince the IRS that a system was "placed in service" without it being installed by a licensed electrician/solar-installer.

And as far as I know all the states allow an owner-builder. Even Florida (which has been used as an example of DIY unfriendly state) has owner-builder laws on it's books that should allow someone to do their own install. ("should" being the word - convincing the AHJ to sign off on a DIY install may be difficult)


Of course this is all assuming you even have to provide any evidence at all - which will be only if you're audited.
And if it winds up being 2017 for the placed-in-service date instead of 2016, it's probably a fairly minor difference. For most people it will be just a matter of which year they get the credit.

As far as I can find the State of Florida still requires someone with a solar certification which is usually a Contractor to perform an installation of a solar pv or thermal system. Without that being done it can't be approved and therefore can't be "placed in service".

Now there are some small city/counties that may have some allowances for a homeowner to perform the installation if all local codes are followed but for the majority of the state I can't find anything that states all homeowners are allowed to perform a DIY unless they have both an electrical contractors license and solar certification.

If you can find any specific laws stating otherwise then I would love to read them because I want to install a system and believe I can perform just about all parts of a ground install myself including the connection to the main panel.

[foo1bar]

As far as I can find the State of Florida still requires someone with a solar certification which is usually a Contractor to perform an installation of a solar pv or thermal system.

There is the 'owner-builder' exemption to that.
In florida the owner-builder exemption can be used if you're the owner, and it is your personal residence (not a rental unit and not selling it )

Here's one Florida city's permitting info - specifically mentioning owner-builder:

http://www.capecoral.net/department/community_development/permitting/docs/Photovoltaic_guidelines__Solar_DCD_70551.pdf

Now there are some small city/counties that may have some allowances for a homeowner to perform the installation if all local codes are followed but for the majority of the state I can't find anything that states all homeowners are allowed to perform a DIY unless they have both an electrical contractors license and solar certification.

If you can find any specific laws stating otherwise then I would love to read them because I want to install a system and believe I can perform just about all parts of a ground install myself including the connection to the main panel.

It looks like at least one semi-state-wide thing is chapter 489:

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0489/0489.html

That would apply to any AHJ that participates in the '“United States Department of Energy SunShot Initiative: Rooftop Solar Challenge” grant'

And if you're in an AHJ that didn't participate in that grant, I think there's still probably a good chance you can DIY.
IMO you'd want to be exceedingly polite when asking the AHJ staff about the procedure to file a building permit.
And be prepared for multiple trips to the building department's office (or whatever the AHJ's office is called)
Probably at least 2. The first just to find out what the procedure is and where to get the paperwork. The second to actually file the permit application and pay for the permit.
And of course you'd want your permit application to be as good as any installer's application.

[SunEagle]

Thanks. I saw the doc for cape coral and the other for any city being part of the SunShot Initiative.

Unfortunately I plan on building on the East end of Hernando County which is on the West coast in the middle of the state. I have checked and there is not much going on there to help support solar or relax the existing solar installation requirement of the certification. But maybe in a year or so when I actually have the home built things will have changed.

[Brian53713]

Permit needed for offgrid also, in FL?

[SunEagle]

Permit needed for offgrid also, in FL?

Probably not in most places but in some towns you aren't allowed (by law) to even go off grid.

There was someone recently that generated all their own power via solar, collected all the own water and purified it, had their own septic, grew a lot of their own food, all on their own land, but were being told they were in violation of the city code and would be fined (and possibly evicted from their own property) unless they reconnected to the city utilities.

Crazy but it was a city ordinance that they must abide by.

So while you probably can build an off grid system without a permit I would strongly recommend making sure it met all safety codes just to keep anyone from making a stink and causing you pain.

[Andygt02]

Technically, couldn't you just not pay the electric bill until they terminate service, pay the bill to avoid collections, then finally, not pay a reconnect fee?

[SunEagle]

Depends. Not paying a bill can cause them to include penalties. It will also affect your credit rating. It still comes down to city law. You either follow it 100% or they can fine you or take you to court.

[ButchDeal]

Probably not in most places but in some towns you aren't allowed (by law) to even go off grid.

There was someone recently that generated all their own power via solar, collected all the own water and purified it, had their own septic, grew a lot of their own food, all on their own land, but were being told they were in violation of the city code and would be fined (and possibly evicted from their own property) unless they reconnected to the city utilities.

Crazy but it was a city ordinance that they must abide by.

So while you probably can build an off grid system without a permit I would strongly recommend making sure it met all safety codes just to keep anyone from making a stink and causing you pain.

The florida woman that was in the news about that was actually still connected to the city sewer system. That was the problem. They like many places require you to be connected to both city water and city septic. She disconnected from city water but was still on the sewer, and they charge for the use of the sewer by the water bill.

There was no problem with her being off grid for electricity.

Most places still require permits even for off (electric) grid work on an occupied house. The insurance companies really don't like non-permited work on insured homes either.

[SunEagle]

The florida woman that was in the news about that was actually still connected to the city sewer system. That was the problem. They like many places require you to be connected to both city water and city septic. She disconnected from city water but was still on the sewer, and they charge for the use of the sewer by the water bill.

There was no problem with her being off grid for electricity.

Most places still require permits even for off (electric) grid work on an occupied house. The insurance companies really don't like non-permited work on insured homes either.

That must have been a different person. The one I remember was about a younger couple that had solar panels for power, large septic tank and a rain water collection system with a cistern water system and some type of purification tank.

I agree that if the electrical power is used inside the home the insurance company would have an issue if the wiring system was not permitted even from an off grid system.

If the off grid system was used for a barn or shed or any non-living building then the insurance company might look the other way unless the homeowner filed a claim for that structure.

[tyab]

Looking at the IRS instructions for form 5695 they only refer to costs and costs are defined in the instructions as:

"Costs. For purposes of both credits, costs are treated as being paid when the original installation of the item is completed, or, in the case of costs connected with the reconstruction of your home, when your original use of the reconstructed home begins. "

It goes on to talk about home reconstruction with alternative energy. My reading is "once the installation is complete". Does that include authorization from the POCO to start generating? Not sure. I gave up on doing my taxes years ago so I'll let my accountant figure this one out. My plan is to hand him my folder of all receipts and mileages driven (don't forgot your mileage driving to pickup whatever is part of your costs as long as it is solely for the purpose of the system)

Now that you all bring this up, this may affect me. I'm having retaining walls built to meet the erosion requirement but they will not be done before the system is finished. I talked to the building department last week and they are ok with that as long as they see all the stuff needed there (which it is - just a large number of massive concrete blocks) and over 1/2 is already done. But now I will have to have a chat with my accountant - will cost paid (retaining wall materials and labor) after the system is operationational be part of the costs allowed by the IRS?

Now I know that PG&E is really backed up. On of the parents in my scout troop is a OSHA compliance officer at PG&E and we were talking last week and he was asking how my system is going. I told him I'm busting hard to get it done and he said that he knows there is a significant backlog and to get my app in as soon as I pass the final inspection. He did not know what the backlog is only that they guys that review this stuff are swamped with applications.

I'm in a rural area so county AHJ inspection turnarounds are just a few days here - most of the time it is next day.

[foo1bar]

My reading is "once the installation is complete". Does that include authorization from the POCO to start generating?

I think the phrase used by congress was "placed in service" - so it's possible someone could do the install, let it sit until the next calendar year, and then turn the switch on.
(Seems unlikely anyone would choose to do that and even a bad idea to do it that way, but I think it could be done.)

I do not believe authorization from the POCO is a absolute requirement - BUT - that authorization (and evidence of the meter running backwards) would be really good evidence that the system was "in service".

will cost paid (retaining wall materials and labor) after the system is operationational be part of the costs allowed by the IRS?

That's a different question than the point you first brought up.
And I believe that costs paid in a different tax year are all brought under the tax year when the system was placed in service.
(ex. if you paid for parts of the system in 2015, 2016, and 2017 and it was up and running in 2016, all of those costs would be considered to be applicable to 2016 taxes.)
I'd definitely rely on your accountant, but I believe that it'll be determined by when the system is "in service" - not when the work is done.
(At least that's how I interpreted it. I did some stucco patching in the following tax year (fix the holes made for installation) and I considered that to be part of the cost of the system.)

. He did not know what the backlog is only that they guys that review this stuff are swamped with applications.

I think many people are trying to get in on NEM1.0
PG&E is down to 46MW before hitting the NEM1.0 cap and I think they have 449MW of applications.

[foo1bar]

Actually after re-reading their web page, I think they've processed enough applications to hit the NEM1.0 cap. Reading their page is making me more confused about how the NEM1->NEM2 transition is going to work.