Legislation watch
- Home
- Create an account
- Advanced searches
- Scorecards
- Links
- About
2008 Senate Bill 1048: Authorize “energy star” appliance tax subsidies
Public Act 287 of 2008
Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Sen. Patricia Birkholz (R) on January 22, 2008, to authorize an income tax credit equal to 10 percent of the purchase and installation cost of windows, doors, insulation, high-efficiency heating and cooling equipment, and any appliances such as dishwashers, clothes washers, and refrigerators meeting the federal “energy star” standards. The maximum tax credit would be $100, $200 for a joint return.
- Referred to the Senate Energy Policy & Public Utilities Committee on January 22, 2008.
- Reported in the Senate on May 22, 2008, with the recommendation that the bill pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on June 27, 2008, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that also authorizes a credit equal against the increased cost of the renewable energy electricity mandate contained in Senate Bill 213. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on June 27, 2008.
- Referred to the Senate Energy Policy & Public Utilities Committee on January 22, 2008.
- Passed 20 to 17 in the Senate on June 27, 2008, to authorize an income tax credit equal to the increased cost of electricity due to the renewable energy mandate imposed by Senate Bill 213. Also, to authorize an income tax credit equal to 10 percent of the purchase and installation cost of windows, doors, insulation, high-efficiency heating and cooling equipment, and any appliances such as dishwashers, clothes washers, and refrigerators meeting the federal “energy star” standards. The maximum tax credit would be $100, $200 for a joint return.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on July 16, 2008.
- Referred to the House Energy and Technology Committee on July 16, 2008.
- Substitute offered by Rep. Mary Valentine (D) on September 18, 2008, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that makes the proposed credits temporary, caps them at just 25 percent of the higher electricity costs mandated by Senate Bill 213, and limit eligibility for these credits and the home improvements one on the basis of household income. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on September 18, 2008.
- Amendment offered by Rep. John Proos, IV (R) on September 18, 2008, to not offer a tax credit for clothes dryers but do offer one for dishwashers. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on September 18, 2008.
- Amendment offered by Rep. David Palsrok (R) on September 18, 2008, to clarify the source and provider of the higher electriciity rates against which the proposed tax credits would apply. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on September 18, 2008.
- Passed 106 to 0 in the House on September 18, 2008, to authorize a means-tested, non-refundable and temporary income tax credit to partially offset the increased cost of electricity from the renewable energy mandate imposed by Senate Bill 213. The credit would end in 2012. Also, to authorize an income tax credit equal to 10 percent of the purchase and installation cost of energy-saving home improvements. The maximum tax credit would be $75, $150 for a joint return. Only households with incomes less than $37,500 (single filer) or $75,000 (joint filer) would be eligible, and double that for the increased electricity cost credit.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on September 18, 2008.
- Passed 36 to 0 in the Senate on September 18, 2008, to concur with the House-passed version of the bill, which makes the proposed tax credit against the increased cost of electricity from the renewable energy mandate imposed by Senate Bill 213 partial, means-tested and temporary.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on October 6, 2008.
Most Recent Comments
1) "no vote explanation" by Admin003 on June 29, 2008Senator Switalski, under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 1048 and moved that the statement he made during the discussion of the bill be printed as his reasons for voting “no.”
The motion prevailed.
Senator Switalski’s statement is as follows:
I appreciate that the bill is well-intentioned and that we would want people to buy energy-efficient appliances, but the price tag of $200 million is not paid for in the bill. There is no provision to pay for that. We have just gone through earlier today a number of budgets that we had to trim because we don’t have the revenues that we thought we were going to have. This bill would go ahead and reduce those revenues another $200 million. When you look at efficiency and the choices that consumers are making, the market forces are telling them that energy is getting more expensive. You can make a better purchase in the long run if you get a more efficient appliance. The market forces are telling people to do that. If you look at what is happening in the automotive market right now, people are changing from inefficient vehicles that get low miles per gallon to more efficient vehicles. People will do the same with appliances. We don’t need to give away $200 million that we can’t afford. We need to promote it, and we need to encourage people to do that. But unless this is paid for, we can’t afford this.
Reply
books for saving the world.
Reply
That's kind of your job is to not have a life for a few years while you LEAD and make wise decisions that increase the QUALITY of life for all.
Reply
View Full Conversation
