Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Challenges in Solar Equipment Finance
In recent years, in certain parts of the country, solar electricity generation systems have become increasingly popular for all sorts of consumers, including commercial landlords and tenants. (For ease of reference, this article will refer to such systems, including solar photovoltaic panels, inverters, racking and related equipment as “solar equipment.”) Growth in solar-generation capacity has not been evenly distributed across the country, however, as some states' policies and laws are solar-friendly, while those in other states pose barriers. One such barrier in many states is the lack of access to financing.
Although the costs of solar equipment have decreased dramatically in recent years, many businesses and individuals need access to financing in order to pay the upfront costs of such equipment. In response to this need, many companies active in equipment leasing and finance — some long-standing members of the industry as well as new ones — have stepped in to offer financing solutions for solar equipment. However, many states have laws that limit such participants' flexibility to use certain financing structures. Some states limit financing mechanisms structured as sales of electricity (power purchase agreements), either expressly or because of lack of clarity in the application of existing laws. State laws can also be ambiguous in their application to leases of solar equipment.
This two-part article examines the state laws that limit equipment financiers' ability to offer these solar equipment financing options to distributed generation customers and explores the implications of such limits on the financing industry and its customers. Part One, herein, compares various methods commonly used to finance solar equipment, and then explores state laws that block one such method — the power purchase agreement. Part Two (to be published in next month' issue), will explore laws related to the leasing of solar equipment and discusses the inequitable results that follow from the patchwork of laws currently in place.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.