CCSA LICBC Comments for IRS

Status: Original and derived artifacts are available for this document.

Download: pdf

April 13, 2026
Submitted via email
Andrés Garcia
Internal Revenue Service, Room 6526
U.S. Department of the Treasury
1111 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20224
RE: “Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request Burden Related to the
Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit Program,” 91 Fed. Reg. 6,733 (Feb. 12, 2026)
The Coalition for Community Solar Access (CCSA) is the national trade association
representing community solar and distributed solar-plus-storage developers, owners, operators,
and financiers across the United States. CCSA’s members are leading the deployment of
community solar projects and other distributed energy resources that expand access to clean
energy, particularly for low- and moderate-income (LMI) households, renters, and those unable
to install rooftop solar.
Our members develop and operate projects that lower energy costs, increase grid resilience,
and provide meaningful economic and environmental benefits to local communities. CCSA is
committed to working with federal agencies and stakeholders to ensure that policies enable
equitable access to clean energy and support efficient deployment of distributed resources. On
behalf of our member companies, CCSA appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on
the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) request for information regarding the Low-Income
Communities Bonus Credit (LICBC) Program.

I. Introduction
Expanding access to affordable energy for American households—especially low-income and
underserved communities—is a central priority for the community solar and distributed
solar-plus-storage industry. Community solar and distributed solar paired with storage provide a
scalable solution to reduce electricity costs, improve grid reliability, and broaden participation in
the clean energy transition. Unlike traditional energy infrastructure, community solar enables
customers—regardless of homeownership status or rooftop suitability—to benefit directly from
solar generation through subscriptions. When paired with storage, these projects can further
enhance grid flexibility, provide peak load reduction, and deliver additional savings and
resilience benefits to participating communities.

1380 Monroe Street NW, #721​ ​
Washington, DC 20010​​
​
720-334-8045

​
​

​
​

​
​

[email protected]
www.communitysolaraccess.org

Electricity demand in the United States is growing at a pace not seen in decades, driven by data
center expansion, electrification, and domestic manufacturing growth. Distributed solar and
storage resources—particularly community solar—are among the fastest and most
cost-effective resources to deploy to meet this demand while maintaining affordability. These
resources are already being deployed at scale across the country, including in states such as
Texas, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina, Nevada, and Georgia, where community solar and
distributed solar-plus-storage are increasingly critical components of the energy mix.
The LICBC program plays a vital role in ensuring that the benefits of this growth reach
low-income communities and other historically underserved populations. CCSA and its
members strongly support Treasury and IRS’s efforts to implement LICBC in a manner that
maximizes participation, reduces administrative burdens, and accelerates deployment of
projects serving these communities. CCSA offers the following recommendations to improve
program efficiency and reduce unnecessary paperwork.

II. Clarify Application Requirements and Update Application Materials
A. Clarify <5 MW Limitation Documentation
In keeping with IRS’s Paperwork Reduction Act Request for Information, we respectfully request
that IRS provide clear, consistent, and administrable guidance regarding the application of the
<5 MW-AC limitation to reduce unnecessary burden on applicants and improve program
efficiency.
IRS should address the significant uncertainty that has arisen in the application process with
respect to the <5 MW-AC limitation. Multiple projects that were initially allocated credits and
conditionally approved have subsequently received denials based on the <5 MW limitation due
to evolving or unclear documentation expectations. This shifting standard has created
confusion, inefficiency, and substantial costs for CCSA member companies. In the context of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, it is essential that IRS provide guidance that enables applicants to
reliably demonstrate compliance in a manner consistent with real-world project design and
documentation, and that ensures similarly situated projects are treated consistently.
IRS regulations define the Five-Megawatt Limitation based on nameplate generating capacity,
measured as the maximum electrical generating output that a facility is capable of producing
under standard conditions. See 26 C.F.R. § 1.48E-4(a)(3)(i) (2026). At the same time, the
regulations measure output at the inverter level and reflect the practical reality that system
output is determined at the point of conversion to AC power. See 26 C.F.R. § 1.48E-4(a)(3)(i)
(2026). This framework creates tension between a theoretical, nameplate-based standard and
the operational reality that distributed energy systems are designed and constrained by inverter
capacity, interconnection limits, and other binding restrictions.
Current IRS guidance appears to exclude certain software-based inverter limitations, but it is
unclear whether this exclusion is intended to apply broadly or is limited to settings that are
adjustable by the taxpayer. IRS has indicated in informal guidance that “documentation of

www.communitysolaraccess.org

adjustable inverter settings adjusted by the taxpayer or similar nonhardware limitations is not
sufficient to demonstrate that the requirement has been met,” while acknowledging that reduced
power ratings established by the manufacturer may be taken into account.1 This distinction
suggests that the current limitation is directed at taxpayer-adjustable settings, rather than
manufacturer-programmed limitations.
Accordingly, IRS should clarify that a distinction exists between inverter limitations that are
programmed and fixed by the manufacturer and those that are configured or adjusted by the
taxpayer post-installation. Manufacturer-programmed limitations, including reduced power
ratings embedded in inverter firmware or hardware configurations, are integral to the
equipment’s design and function similarly to nameplate limitations under the regulations. See 26
C.F.R. § 1.48E-4(a)(3)(i) (2026). These limitations should be treated as part of the facility’s
maximum net output.
By contrast, IRS may appropriately distinguish taxpayer-programmed or adjustable inverter
settings, which may be more readily modified after installation. However, even in those cases,
where such settings are binding, verifiable, and enforced through interconnection requirements
or system controls, they may still reflect the facility’s effective maximum export capability. Where
inverter-based limitations are durable and enforceable, they operate as functional constraints on
maximum net output consistent with the regulatory focus on AC output. See 26 C.F.R. §
1.48E-4(a)(3)(i) (2026).
IRS should further clarify what constitutes acceptable limitations for purposes of determining
maximum net output, including whether utility-imposed export limits, interconnection agreement
caps, and permanently programmed inverter settings (including locked or password-protected
configurations) may be treated as equivalent to manufacturer-imposed limits. To reduce
administrative burden while maintaining enforceability, IRS should allow taxpayers to
demonstrate compliance through a combination of documentation and attestation, including
interconnection agreements specifying export limits, engineering specifications or
commissioning reports, and certifications that inverter settings are fixed and will not be modified
to exceed 5 MW-AC. These limitations are durable and enforceable through utility
interconnection requirements and system controls, and are not subject to unilateral modification
by the developer, ensuring that the facility cannot exceed the specified maximum output.
IRS should consider expanding acceptable forms of documentation to demonstrate compliance
with the <5 MW-AC.. For example, IRS could explicitly permit submission of photographic
evidence of inverter nameplates as part of the application materials, which would provide a
straightforward and objective method of confirming manufacturer-rated capacity. In addition, IRS
should clarify whether references to manufacturer-imposed limitations require formal
certifications issued directly by the manufacturer or whether other forms of documentation are
acceptable. If formal certifications are required, IRS should specify the expected format and
content; if not, IRS should confirm that alternative documentation—such as a letter from the
IRS Frequently Asked Questions, Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit Program, FAQ
(added Nov. 13, 2023).
1

www.communitysolaraccess.org

manufacturer attesting to the inverter’s maximum rated output—would be sufficient. Providing
clear guidance on these documentation options would improve consistency, reduce applicant
uncertainty, and enhance the overall efficiency of the application process.
Finally, IRS should clarify that the relevant metric is the facility’s maximum export to the grid (net
output), rather than theoretical inverter capacity, where export is constrained by binding and
enforceable limits. This approach would better align the Five-Megawatt Limitation with real-world
system operation while remaining consistent with the regulatory framework governing AC
output. See 26 C.F.R. § 1.48E-4(a)(3)(i) (2026). IRS should also consider establishing a clear
safe harbor under which certain types of documented and durable export limits will be deemed
compliant. At the same time, IRS should confirm that any post-certification modification that
increases output above 5 MW-AC would constitute a recapture event, thereby preserving
B. Clarify Documentation and Attestation Requirements
Community solar and distributed solar-plus-storage projects often involve multiple stakeholders
and varying interconnection and commissioning processes. IRS should provide flexibility in
acceptable documentation to confirm placed-in-service dates, including alternatives such as
conditional PTO (Permission to Operate) letters or customer activation records where standard
documentation is unavailable. A PTO letter is the utility’s formal “green light” that a project is
complete and allowed to operate on the grid. IRS should also provide standardized attestation
templates for each facility category to streamline submissions, particularly for applicants
managing multiple projects. Additionally, IRS should clarify whether amendments to
interconnection agreements after application submission must be reported.

III. Update the Application Portal
The RFI invites comments on ways to minimize the burden of information collection and improve
efficiency. Given the scale and structure of community solar and distributed portfolios—where a
single developer or owner may manage numerous projects or subscriber
allocations—streamlined processes are essential.
A. Allow for Bulk Application Submissions
Community solar and distributed solar-plus-storage developers often manage large portfolios of
eligible projects, each serving many individual subscribers. The current requirement to submit
applications individually creates unnecessary administrative burden and delays deployment.
IRS should implement a bulk application submission process that allows applicants to upload
multiple projects or facilities simultaneously, including required attestations. A
spreadsheet-based upload mechanism would significantly improve efficiency and align with best
practices from existing state programs.
If a bulk upload option is not feasible, IRS should simplify the application workflow by
consolidating it into a single-page format to reduce navigation time and improve usability.

www.communitysolaraccess.org

B. Permit Bulk Downloads of Approval Letters
For companies managing large portfolios of community solar or distributed solar-plus-storage
projects, downloading approval letters individually is inefficient and creates challenges for
compliance and recordkeeping.
IRS should enable bulk download functionality for approval letters and ensure that each letter
includes key identifying information such as project name or ID, physical address, and system
capacity. Allowing customizable file naming conventions would further reduce administrative
burden and eliminate the need for manual file management.
C. Allow Related Entities to Manage and Edit Applications
Community solar projects are frequently structured through multiple related entities, including
special purpose project companies and tax equity partnerships. The current limitation of a single
applicant profile restricts efficient portfolio management.
IRS should allow authorized entities to submit, manage, and monitor applications across related
entities, including permitting multiple user logins. This change would better reflect the ownership
and operational structures common in community solar and distributed solar-plus-storage
development.
Additionally, IRS should address Login.gov synchronization issues that can result in user
lockouts and delays in submission.
D. Permit Edits to Data Fields and Submitted Applications
Applicants managing portfolios of projects need the ability to track and sort application data
efficiently. IRS should expand the available data fields in the application portal and allow users
to sort or export information such as approval dates, project identifiers, and system
characteristics.
Further, applicants should be able to edit submitted applications prior to review. The current
requirement to withdraw and resubmit entire applications for minor corrections is inefficient and
can delay project timelines.
E. Point of Contact for Taxpayers
IRS should consider establishing a clear and accessible point of contact or support mechanism
for taxpayers with questions related to documentation and data collection requirements.
Currently, applicants lack a reliable avenue to confirm that they are providing the correct
information, resulting in an uncertain and inefficient process that can lead to rework, delays, and
inconsistent outcomes. Providing a dedicated resource would improve applicant confidence and
reduce administrative burden. This type of process improvement would directly support the
objectives outlined in the RFI, including enhancing the quality, utility, and clarity of the

www.communitysolaraccess.org

information collected, as well as minimizing the burden on respondents through more efficient
and streamlined information exchange.

IV. Conclusion
CCSA appreciates Treasury and IRS’s efforts to implement the LICBC program, which is
essential to expanding access to affordable, reliable, and clean energy for low-income
communities. Community solar and distributed solar-plus-storage projects are uniquely
positioned to deliver these benefits at scale.
The recommendations outlined above would reduce administrative burden, improve program
accessibility, and accelerate deployment of projects serving the communities the LICBC
program is intended to benefit. CCSA and its members look forward to continuing to work with
Treasury and IRS to ensure successful implementation of this important program.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. If you have any questions, please contact
Elizabeth Perera at (917) 575-9328 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Elizabeth Perera
Sr. Director, National Programs and Policy | CCSA
President, Community Solar Action Fund | CSAF

www.communitysolaraccess.org