The GOP’s latest bill contains the immediate effective repeal of the investment tax credit (ITC) and production tax credit (PTC) for wind and solar projects. It requires projects to be placed in service by December 31, 2027, to get the credit, which applies to wind and solar only. Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC) requirements begin immediately. In addition, a new excise tax is imposed on all solar and wind facilities—not only those that would have qualified for 45Y/48E—in the amount equal to 30 percent (solar) or 50 percent (wind) times the percentage by which a facility fails the material assistance cost ratio times the facility's manufactured component cost. This means that after the credit is gone, the supply chain requirements are still imposed as a penalty on both utility-scale wind/solar and rooftop solar projects. ITC/PTC credit remains for other zero-emission energy generation (geothermal, hydropower, nuclear) and energy storage, although FEOC restrictions apply.

The previous version from Senate Finance phased out wind and solar beginning in 2026, at which time wind and solar projects would only get 60 percent of the value of the credit (i.e., an 18 percent credit). In 2027, that percentage would have dropped to 20 percent of the value of the credit (i.e., a 6 percent credit), and by 2028, the credit would be completely phased out. For hydropower, nuclear, and geothermal, the credit remained available at 100 percent of the credit value through 2033, 75 percent of the value in 2034, 50 percent of the value in 2035, and 0 percent in 2036. By contrast, the latest Senate bill is much more punitive to clean energy. It applies a placed-in-service standard on an even shorter timeline than the House, as well as FEOC restrictions. It also levies an extremely punitive new tax on solar and wind.

The latest Senate version will effectively repeal the credits immediately and crush the booming manufacturing and clean energy industries in communities across the United States. Repealing the clean energy tax credits would worsen the affordability crisis, raise energy bills, harm grid reliability, kill jobs, and inflame the climate crisis.

• Skyrocketing energy prices: The Senate’s proposed repeal of the clean energy tax credits would raise American household energy bills. It could increase annual energy bills up to $140-$220 per household across the country in 2040, and over $500 per year in some states. 
• Kill good-paying jobs: Full repeal of the 45Y and 48E clean energy tax credits alone would result in roughly 100,000 fewer full-time jobs across the country by 2040. The updated Senate bill could approach those levels of job loss.
• Harm grid reliability: These tax credits are enhancing grid reliability in the face of increased electricity demand and extreme weather. Clean energy is the fastest, cheapest way to add new power to the grid. In fact, clean energy accounted for 93 percent of the new energy capacity added to the U.S. grid last year.
• These changes jeopardize billions of dollars of existing investments, including any project underway now that won’t be fully operational by 2027. By stifling the booming solar and wind industries, Republicans are ensuring that our international competitors take the lead on clean energy development, setting back American energy dominance.
• Slashing the clean energy tax credits would worsen the climate crisis. Saving the 45Y and 48E tax credits would cut climate pollution by 300 to 400 million tons compared to no tax credits in 2035. That’s 29-46 percent lower than a scenario without clean energy tax credits. After a year marked by devastating, billion-dollar climate disasters, floods, and fires, it’s more important than ever that we address climate head-on.

This proposal would end EV tax credits for new EVs (30D) and used EVs (25E), commercial clean vehicles (45W), and fueling infrastructure (30C). This bill distinguishes between heavy-duty commercial vehicles (considered under commercial vehicle requirements) and light-duty commercial vehicles (considered under personal vehicle requirements).

The updated Senate bill would eliminate credits faster than the House bill proposal. The bulk of the credits (25E, 30D, and 45) end after September 2025. Vehicle charging infrastructure ends after June 2026. 

• The used EV (25E) tax credit is eliminated by September 30, 2025. In the House version, it was the end of 2025. In the previous Senate version, it was within 90 days of passage. 
• The new EV (30D) tax credit is eliminated by September 30, 2025. In the previous Senate version, it was within 90 days of passage. In the House version, it was the end of 2025. In the House bill, drivers can get a tax credit for qualified vehicles from manufacturers who have not yet hit the 200,000 EV cap through December 31, 2026. There is no such provision in the updated Senate bill. 
• The new clean commercial vehicle (45W) tax credit is eliminated by September 30, 2025. In the House bill, it was the end of 2025. 
• The vehicle charging infrastructure (30C) tax credit is eliminated by June 30, 2026. This stands in contrast to the House bill, which ended the credit at the end of 2025. In the previous Senate bill, the credit was eliminated a year after the bill’s enactment. 

Fully repealing the IRA’s EV tax credits would drive a wrecking ball through the American-made EV industry and would cause major job losses, according to the CEO of the Ford Motor Company, and would benefit China, according to General Motors. For households, new and used electric vehicles would become less financially accessible, meaning consumers would have fewer transportation options.

The GOP’s bill accelerates the phaseout of 45X tax credits for manufacturing batteries, wind turbines, and critical minerals. It also adds metallurgical coal to the list of eligible critical minerals. The new text does maintain credit stackability, allowing manufacturers to claim the 45X credit for subcomponents (e.g., a photovoltaic cell) and additional IRA tax credits for the final product (e.g., a finished solar panel). The Senate bill also tightens FEOC restrictions to limit the pool of manufacturers that can receive the credit, arbitrarily excluding facilities with a certain proportion of investment from “prohibited foreign entities.”

It’s a slightly different story for 48C. The Senate text severely limits 48C projects’ viability by instituting a two-year “placed in service” requirement, which will inject uncertainty for developers and investors who counted on receiving the credit before the artificial two-year timeline was put in place. The Senate’s changes will also effectively repeal the credit after two years by not allowing for the recycling of rescinded credits from failed projects to qualified ones.

For 45X, this version adds metallurgical coal as an eligible critical mineral. It adjusts the FEOC provisions covering this credit, including setting an escalating “material assistance cost ratio,” which establishes the proportion of material financial assistance allowed for eligible components. While the previous Senate text eliminated credit eligibility for components that have been integrated into other eligible components, this version restores that eligibility (in keeping with the House text). Phaseout timelines are only slightly tweaked from the previous Senate version. The general thrust of prematurely winding down the credits remains. 

Meanwhile, the 48C section remains identical to the previous Senate Finance text, and 48C was untouched in the House version.

The 45X Advanced Energy Manufacturing Credit has sparked a renaissance in U.S. manufacturing, especially for electric vehicles, advanced batteries, and solar energy and their supply chains. The credits have helped incentivize over $200 billion in new investment in the U.S. and positioned the U.S. to be competitive in critical 21st-century global industries. This incentive has contributed to job and manufacturing growth—most of which is in districts that Republicans represent. The GOP’s call for repeal would directly harm the jobs and livelihoods of their constituents, while sending American manufacturing jobs overseas. 

The 48C’s “placed in service” restriction will inject uncertainty for developers and investors who were counting on receiving this credit before the Senate GOP inserted this artificial two-year timeline. It will threaten the certainty of building these facilities and the jobs that come with them. It also means the credit will be repealed after two years, not allowing for the recycling of rescinded credits from failed projects to qualified ones.

The GOP’s bill would eliminate the Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit (25C) at the end of 2025. It would eliminate the New Energy Efficient Home Credit (45L) after June 2026. The Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Deduction (179D) is amended so that it does not apply to property whose construction begins after June 2026. 

In the updated Senate text, the Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit (25C) is eliminated at the end of 2025. This is the same timeline as the House version. The previous Senate version proposed 180 days after bill enactment. In the updated Senate text, the New Energy Efficient Home Credit (45L) is eliminated for homes acquired after June 30, 2026. The House bill eliminates the credit at the end of 2025 unless the home construction begins before May 12, 2025. The House bill did not include the elimination of the Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Deduction (179D). 

Cutting building energy efficiency credits takes money out of people’s pockets by making home energy upgrades more expensive and raises everyone’s utility bills by reducing efficiency and putting more pressure on the electric grid. Households can currently save $990 per year on utility bills if they utilize the 25C tax credit, and these credits create 240,000 jobs. By effectively terminating the Energy Efficient Home Credit for new buildings, this is a major gut punch to any builders trying to provide new homes to address the housing crisis.

This bill would eliminate the Residential Clean Energy Credit—which incentivizes homeowners to install solar panels, water heating, fuel cells, wind, geothermal heat pumps, and battery storage facilities—after December 31, 2025. The credit will no longer apply “with respect to any expenditures made after December 31, 2025.” 

The House version is the same, eliminating the credit at the end of 2025. The previous Senate bill eliminated the credit 180 days after the bill’s enactment.

Households would see higher costs for home energy upgrades and lose access to $1,250 in savings per year on utility bills. At the same time, we would be cutting a huge source of new energy capacity just as demand on the grid is increasing, which will raise energy costs for everyone. Plus, cutting the residential clean energy tax credits would kill hundreds of thousands of jobs in the home energy and rooftop solar sector. 

The Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC) restrictions applied across clean energy and manufacturing tax credits are unworkable and, in some cases, extraordinarily punitive for industry. The bill establishes a material assistance cost ratio framework—modeled after the existing domestic content bonus—that sets credit-specific eligibility thresholds based on the share of inputs used across different technologies. It applies material assistance requirements to solar and wind projects that commence construction after June 2025. Projects must also pass new Prohibited Foreign Entity (PFE) tests tied to foreign ownership and influence. For solar and wind energy projects, as mentioned above, the Senate text also includes a new excise tax that functions as a supply chain penalty even after the underlying credits expire. The tax is equal to the percentage by which a facility fails the material assistance cost ratio times the facility's manufactured component cost. 

The final Senate bill FEOC restrictions are more cumbersome, take effect more quickly, and are accompanied by new penalties. The text also includes some changes to address industry concerns about FEOC restrictions.

FEOC restrictions will make the credits effectively repealed immediately for solar and wind projects—raising energy costs, killing jobs, and undermining U.S. investment and economic competitiveness. Some adjustments were made to the House bill to address industry concerns, but FEOC restrictions will also raise costs and hardship for energy and manufacturing projects. 

The GOP’s bill repeals Section 134 of the Clean Air Act, in which the GGRF was created. Any unobligated balances are rescinded.

There is no change to the House version.

The GGRF is unlocking a historic wave of public and private investment, delivering local economic development opportunities that would not have materialized without this program, especially in disadvantaged communities. But the Trump administration has already been attacking the GGRF through an illegal funding freeze, and a court battle is currently raging with program awardees, in particular the NCIF and CCIA programs. The GGRF funding has technically been obligated, and only minimal GGRF funds remain unobligated and available for rescission. But this bill would harm program implementation and oversight at EPA. It may also represent an attempt by Congress and the administration to block or claw back funds that have been legally obligated.  

The bill rescinds any unobligated funding under the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) for plans and implementation grants.

Same as the previous version.

The CPRG program is a primary vehicle for states to fund their pollution reduction programs. Rescinding unobligated funding for the CPRG program would dramatically harm program implementation at the agency. Many awarded states could have to stall or permanently halt their pollution reduction plans that were intended to create jobs, reduce energy and transportation costs, and mitigate pollution in impacted communities.

The Senate GOP’s bill rescinds all unobligated funding under Section 60201 of the IRA, which provided funding for highly flexible grants to nonprofit organizations serving disadvantaged communities.

The Senate version closely mirrors the House version.

Without EJ Block Grants, there will be less financial support for on-the-ground, community-led organizations that provide life-changing services to households based in disadvantaged communities or living near sacrifice zones. Examples of critical services include community-led pollution monitoring, prevention, and remediation; projects that reduce indoor air pollution; projects to counter health risks from urban heat islands, extreme heat, and wildfires; improved community engagement in public processes; and technical assistance. Much of these funds are unobligated.

The bill rescinds all unobligated funding from Section 60113 of the IRA, which provided funding to the EPA for financial and technical assistance for methane monitoring and mitigation. Senate Republicans retain a fee on excessive methane waste, known as the Waste Emissions Charge (WEC), but the language is altered so that the collection of charges is postponed until 2034, as opposed to 2024 under current legislation. This renders the fee largely ineffective for the next decade.

This is similar to previous versions of the text.

By cutting methane pollution and other harmful pollutants, the WEC would have helped prevent asthma attacks and other health-harming impacts. The program would have reduced an extremely harmful greenhouse gas superpollutant. Altering the WEC will disproportionately impact communities of color and disadvantaged communities. The methane fee is also a revenue raiser, so its alteration increases the budget deficit and would necessitate even deeper cuts to other vital programs to comply with the GOP’s self-imposed spending cut targets.

Senate Republicans have created a new “opt-in fee” mechanism that would allow project sponsors to receive special treatment in the environmental review process. In exchange for a fee of 125 percent of the costs to prepare the environmental document, the project sponsor receives an expedited review. 

The previous Senate version had a provision that allowed project sponsors to skirt judicial review for a fee. The parliamentarian found the judicial portion violated the Byrd rule and was therefore struck.

This is a continuation of the “pay-to-play” politics we saw in the GOP’s House version, but this time, the bill is attacking the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which provides for environmental reviews of all major government actions. 

Scientists and peer-reviewed academics have repeatedly found that there simply is no room for new coal, oil, and gas fields if we want to limit planetary warming to 1.5C. Flying in the face of climate science, the Republicans’ ENR bill recklessly accelerates oil and gas extraction on America’s public lands and waters. This bill sets a floor for the minimum number of onshore and offshore oil and gas sales annually and lowers the barriers to oil and gas leasing, including in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the Gulf of Mexico, and Alaska’s Cook Inlet. This bill would reinstate onshore non-competitive leasing processes, lengthen drilling permit terms, and cut royalty rates. Each of these provisions lowers the barrier to access for Big Oil to exploit U.S. public lands and waters. The bill also proposes a massive expansion of coal leasing across federal lands, making at least 4 million acres of public land available for coal leasing. The bill text provides significant handouts to Big Coal by reducing the royalty rates for coal extracted on federal land.

Leasing was made competitive so that government agencies could ensure the best and most efficient use of taxpayer dollars and reduce opportunities for corruption. This bill opens the door to backroom dealing through expanded non-competitive processes and reduced fees. This bill also encourages gas and oil drilling nationwide, which will increase air pollution, increase greenhouse gas emissions, and hold our national economy back by supporting reliance on non-renewable energy resources. Make no mistake: This is a cheap sell-out of our nation’s precious natural resources, an act of climate arson, and a poisoning of communities—all to facilitate a gargantuan handout to fossil fuel corporations.

This version of the bill does not rescind unobligated funds for transmission facility financing.

The previous version repealed and rescinded unobligated funds for transmission facility financing, grants to facilitate the siting of interstate electricity transmission lines, and interregional and offshore wind electricity planning, as well as modeling and analysis.

It would seem that Republicans have finally come to terms with the fact that transmission reform and funding are necessary to deliver energy to Americans—even as the GOP aggressively eliminates opportunities to build clean energy. By eliminating clean energy programs that make our energy grid a secure and reliable source of affordable power, Republicans are pushing the nation farther away from energy dominance.

Rescinds unobligated balances from LPO programs under Sections 1703 and 1706.

In addition to rescinding unobligated balances, the previous Senate text also repealed LPO’s authorities under Sections 1703 and 1706. Only rescinding unobligated balances puts this bill in line with the House Energy and Commerce text, which also rescinded funding but did not repeal it altogether.

Eliminating LPO’s new loan authority would be a devastating blow for the U.S., especially amidst rising energy demand and a competitive global race to build and manufacture the energy technologies that will power the 21st century. It would harm American businesses and U.S. technology leadership. Not only that, over the long term, shrinking LPO will cost American taxpayers money, as the successful program has already returned $5 billion in profit to the American taxpayer, via interest on its loans.

Rescinds unobligated balances.

In addition to rescinding unobligated balances, the previous Senate text also repealed AIFDP. Only rescinding unobligated balances puts this bill in line with the House E&C text, which also rescinded funding but did not repeal it altogether.

Rescinding unobligated balances and eliminating the AIFDP program would deal a major blow to U.S. global economic competitiveness as American businesses fight for market share in increasingly decarbonized steel, cement, aluminum, and other heavy industries.