The EU is a source of problems, it’s a government that is not a government, it acts autonomously while citizens are supposed to believe its being influenced by ministers. Because it’s ways are so opague it can not be trusted and should be replaced by an organization of elected officials only. We already have the trade commissioner Karel de Gucht representing the US WTO position against the interest of Europe and the environment, now we have a ruling for an austrian man that has the potential to draw all owners of solar panels into the economic equasion, which is exactly what should not happen, not in its current form.
The Ruling
Is the operation of a network-connected photovoltaic installation with no independent power storage capability on or adjacent to a privately owned house used for private residential purposes, which is technically designed such that the power generated by the installation is, on a continuing basis, below the total quantity of power privately consumed by the installation operator in the privately owned house, an ‘economic activity’ of the installation operator within the meaning of Article 9(1) of the EU VAT Directive?
Pros and Cons
The above ruling may cause some cheers, after all, now one can pay the VAT of its purchase with the VAT of its production. This is a nice givaway. Besides there are probably rules for the freedom to be enjoyed by those that pay VAT, freedom of trade or freedom of transportation of the good produced, that may help break barriers against the energy oligarchy that tries to keep renewables under control.
But there are problems too. Any solar installation with storage now becomes more expensive, while solar panels already where made more expensive through import taxes. This while panels with storage are the way to freedom from the same energy oligachy (this is not some conspiracy theory, just central producers protecting their monpoly).
Another problem is that pulling panels in to the economic system, forcing more transactions and administration means more cost associated with them. This is not too big a problem because most countries have a treshold for VAT, and most solar producers are below that, so they don’t need to report. This may mean there is no advantage as well.
But most of all the issue of money, the flow of money, the illusion of taxation (VAT) is all preserved in a situation that is completely different from the average consumptive act. The EC recognizes someone produces energy, a ‘good’, but it does not recognize the nature of the ‘good’, energy, which is what we trade with our money, our carboncredit. Energy allows production, and producers need money to buy the energy they need. So with every Joule of energy generated some money should pop into existence.
So energy people produce should not be payed for by the energy company, it should cause the creation of money, of credit, by the state in the account of the producer (to the degree his/her electricity can be traded). The state could stil tax, by keeping a portion of the created money for itself. This straightening of the true role of a solar panel owner however goes against every fiber of the banking oligarchy, that wants to retain the monopoly on money creation.
By drawing all grid tied solar producers into the economic traffic the above pure situation of credit granted by the state may come about, but it may also go the other way, because small entrepeneurs paying VAT are the least protected, big money always has better ‘legal’ advise. We once again see that the carboncredit system, the combination of the energy and banking sector, are a combined force that keeps us from a better system, one where all people can be a bank (cause the creation of energy credits) and and all of most people produce energy, a system without banks or energy companies.