Though SoCal Edison had told me that they'd be cutting a check for
the hefty negative balance, it turns out that was not true. They
get you coming and going. The _actual_ check I'll get from them
will be at 2.7 cents a kWh, not the 23 cents they charge for the
power I generate.
This puts the payment to me for unused solar electricity in the
$300- $400 range, versus about $2000 paid to Tesla over the same
period. (I use roughly 10% of the generated power. I can't imagine
what persuaded the previous owners to put in the solar panels.
None of the appliances in the house run on electricity; they're
all propane.)
So if this is a Schedule C business, it's going to show a loss
every year, to the tune of $1500 or so. I wouldn't mind reducing
my taxable income in that way, but can I really do that? I thought
a Schedule C business couldn't just keep showing losses
indefinitely.
On 4/5/21 11:51 AM, Stan Brown wrote:
I live in California, and the solar panels on the roof generate
considerably more electricity than I use. Consequently, I'll be
getting a check from SoCal Edison (in the low four figures) for the
electricity that I put back on the grid over the past year.
The way my solar lease works, I have to pay Tesla for every kWh I
generate, whether I use it myself or it goes out on the grid. Thus I
will net only a few hundred dollars for the year.
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 1:19:43 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
As far as I can tell, there has not been any change to the tax
rules (federal and CA). You are not a business so NO Schedule C.
The amount you netted is taxable Other Income (1040 Schedule 1
Line 8).
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 15:50:40 EDT, ira smilovitz wrote:
I'm not sure I agree. The production of excess electricity is an
ongoing activity. By selling the excess electricity for more than
the cost to produce it, you have established that there is a profit
motive. It doesn't need to be your primary (or even significant)
source of income to be a business.
Thanks to everyone who responded, and to Ira especially.
Though SoCal Edison had told me that they'd be cutting a check for
the hefty negative balance, it turns out that was not true. They get
you coming and going. The _actual_ check I'll get from them will be
at 2.7 cents a kWh, not the 23 cents they charge for the power I
generate.
This puts the payment to me for unused solar electricity in the $300-
$400 range, versus about $2000 paid to Tesla over the same period.
(I use roughly 10% of the generated power. I can't imagine what
persuaded the previous owners to put in the solar panels. None of the appliances in the house run on electricity; they're all propane.)
So if this is a Schedule C business, it's going to show a loss every
year, to the tune of $1500 or so. I wouldn't mind reducing my taxable
income in that way, but can I really do that? I thought a Schedule C
business couldn't just keep showing losses indefinitely.
On 4/5/21 11:51 AM, Stan Brown wrote:
I live in California, and the solar panels on the roof generate considerably more electricity than I use. Consequently, I'll be
getting a check from SoCal Edison (in the low four figures) for the electricity that I put back on the grid over the past year.
The way my solar lease works, I have to pay Tesla for every kWh I generate, whether I use it myself or it goes out on the grid. Thus I will net only a few hundred dollars for the year.
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 1:19:43 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 15:50:40 EDT, ira smilovitz wrote:As far as I can tell, there has not been any change to the tax
rules (federal and CA). You are not a business so NO Schedule C.
The amount you netted is taxable Other Income (1040 Schedule 1
Line 8).
I'm not sure I agree. The production of excess electricity is anThanks to everyone who responded, and to Ira especially.
ongoing activity. By selling the excess electricity for more than
the cost to produce it, you have established that there is a profit
motive. It doesn't need to be your primary (or even significant)
source of income to be a business.
Though SoCal Edison had told me that they'd be cutting a check for
the hefty negative balance, it turns out that was not true. They get
you coming and going. The _actual_ check I'll get from them will be
at 2.7 cents a kWh, not the 23 cents they charge for the power I
generate.
This puts the payment to me for unused solar electricity in the $300-
$400 range, versus about $2000 paid to Tesla over the same period.
(I use roughly 10% of the generated power. I can't imagine what
persuaded the previous owners to put in the solar panels. None of the appliances in the house run on electricity; they're all propane.)
So if this is a Schedule C business, it's going to show a loss every
year, to the tune of $1500 or so. I wouldn't mind reducing my taxable
income in that way, but can I really do that? I thought a Schedule C
business couldn't just keep showing losses indefinitely.
--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/ https://OakRoadSystems.com/
Shikata ga nai...
--
On 4/15/2021 1:02 PM, Stan Brown wrote:
On 4/5/21 11:51 AM, Stan Brown wrote:
I live in California, and the solar panels on the roof generate
considerably more electricity than I use. Consequently, I'll be
getting a check from SoCal Edison (in the low four figures) for the
electricity that I put back on the grid over the past year.
The way my solar lease works, I have to pay Tesla for every kWh I
generate, whether I use it myself or it goes out on the grid. Thus I >>>> will net only a few hundred dollars for the year.
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 1:19:43 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
As far as I can tell, there has not been any change to the tax
rules (federal and CA). You are not a business so NO Schedule C.
The amount you netted is taxable Other Income (1040 Schedule 1
Line 8).
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 15:50:40 EDT, ira smilovitz wrote:
I'm not sure I agree. The production of excess electricity is an
ongoing activity. By selling the excess electricity for more than
the cost to produce it, you have established that there is a profit
motive. It doesn't need to be your primary (or even significant)
source of income to be a business.
Thanks to everyone who responded, and to Ira especially.
Though SoCal Edison had told me that they'd be cutting a check for
the hefty negative balance, it turns out that was not true. They get
you coming and going. The _actual_ check I'll get from them will be
at 2.7 cents a kWh, not the 23 cents they charge for the power I
generate.
This puts the payment to me for unused solar electricity in the $300-
$400 range, versus about $2000 paid to Tesla over the same period.
(I use roughly 10% of the generated power. I can't imagine what
persuaded the previous owners to put in the solar panels. None of the appliances in the house run on electricity; they're all propane.)
So if this is a Schedule C business, it's going to show a loss every
year, to the tune of $1500 or so. I wouldn't mind reducing my taxable income in that way, but can I really do that? I thought a Schedule C business couldn't just keep showing losses indefinitely.
Yes, it can, as long as there is a profit motive and it is not merely a hobby.
--
Something doesn't seem right. Using the information you'veprovided, you're paying a net of $1600 for electricity ($2000 paid to
On Thursday, April 15, 2021 at 6:53:01 PM UTC-4, Taxed and Spent wrote:
On 4/15/2021 1:02 PM, Stan Brown wrote:
So if this is a Schedule C business, it's going to show a loss every year, to the tune of $1500 or so. I wouldn't mind reducing my taxable income in that way, but can I really do that? I thought a Schedule C business couldn't just keep showing losses indefinitely.
Yes, it can, as long as there is a profit motive and it is not merely a hobby.
I know of a dog breeder that has consistently lost high 5 figures each year and has survived several IRS audits. Not showing a profit shifts the burden to the taxpayer to prove a profit motive.
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:07:19 EDT, ira smilovitz wrote:
On Thursday, April 15, 2021 at 6:53:01 PM UTC-4, Taxed and Spent wrote:
On 4/15/2021 1:02 PM, Stan Brown wrote:
So if this is a Schedule C business, it's going to show a loss every year, to the tune of $1500 or so. I wouldn't mind reducing my taxable income in that way, but can I really do that? I thought a Schedule C business couldn't just keep showing losses indefinitely.
Yes, it can, as long as there is a profit motive and it is not merely a hobby.
I know of a dog breeder that has consistently lost high 5 figures each year and has survived several IRS audits. Not showing a profit shifts the burden to the taxpayer to prove a profit motive.Perhaps I'm being too timid, but based on https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/2016ntf-for-profit-activity-hobby.pdf
I don't really think I could establish a profit motive.
--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/ https://OakRoadSystems.com/
Shikata ga nai...
--
According to Taxed and Spent <nospamplease@nonospam.com>:
Do people with solar really report this on their taxes? Hard to believe.
I don't think there are a lot of people in this situation. I believe that refundable
solar credits are unique to California.
I'm in New York where I have remote net metering, in which I
conceptually rent part of a solar farm nearby and the power it
generates is credited to my electric bill, same deal as though the
solar cells were on my roof. When it generates more power than I use
(most of the summer) the credit is carried forward but is not
refundable.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 53:04:58 |
| Calls: | 6,650 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 12,200 |
| Messages: | 5,330,489 |