Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

progree

(12,008 posts)
1. Nuclear subsidies are also on the chopping block in the Republican House bill
Thu May 15, 2025, 11:37 PM
May 15

Nuclear power ‘dead in its tracks’ with House GOP tax bill, advocates warn, Washington Examiner, 5/15/25
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/nuclear-power-dead-in-its-tracks-with-house-gop-tax-bill-advocates-warn/ar-AA1EQC0i

If the phase-out of tax credits stays, the article says no SMRs (small modular reactors) would qualify because the bill requires that they be completed by 2031, and none are expected to be by then. And AFAIK there aren't any nukes of any kind under construction in the U.S. that will be online before 2032, so the only ones that would get subsidies would be ones like Palisade that are being restarted or that are operating already. 3 Mile Island? Duane Arnold? V.C. Summer?

additionally there is a phase-out period ending in 2031 ... the subsidy is reduced year by year.

Article says this isn't likely to pass in the Senate as there are some Republican senators opposed to the phase outs of the tax credits, and because of the very thin Republican majority, they need all Republicans on board whatever bill in order for it to pass. The bill is ultimately intended to be passed as budget reconciliation, and thus filibuster-proof, so it will only take a simple majority, but with more than one or two Republican senator no votes (or whatever the number is), it would fail to pass unless some Democrats vote for it.

I know the Washington Examiner is a horrible source, but on this particular issue I'm guessing their story is reasonably accurate, but maybe not.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Trump administration to a...»Reply #1