Wind power has more than tripled in the past decade and now produces almost 8% of the country’s electricity. Solar power, which generated less than 1 percent of the country’s electricity in 2010, now generates around 2 percent and is growing rapidly. Economists generally agree that the Obama stimulus, which injected roughly $ 40 billion in loans and tax incentives into these industries, deserves partial credit.
But experts also point to a fundamental problem with financing climate change: it is not a particularly effective way to reduce pollution emissions caused by global warming. While Obama’s green spending created new bloat construction jobs and helped turn a handful of boutique wind and solar companies into a thriving industry, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions heat-trapping greenhouse have remained roughly the same, five million tonnes per year since 2010, and are expected to remain at the same level over the next decades, in the absence of new policies to force cuts, such as taxes or regulations.
Mr. Obama had hoped to pair the clawback bill money with a new law that would cap global warming emissions, but that effort died in Congress. His administration then enacted emissions regulations, but they were blocked by the courts and overturned by the Trump administration.
The stimulus act “succeeded in creating jobs, but it failed to meet emission reduction targets,” said David Popp, professor of public administration at Syracuse University and lead author of the National Bureau of Economics study on the green stimulus. money. “And this new stimulus alone will not be enough to reduce emissions.
“Unless they can pair it with a policy that forces people to cut emissions, a big spending bill doesn’t have a big impact,” Popp said.
Stimulus payments would be $ 1,400 for most recipients. Eligible people would also receive an identical payment for each of their children. To qualify for the full $ 1,400, a single person would need adjusted gross income of $ 75,000 or less. For heads of households, the adjusted gross income should be $ 112,500 or less, and for married couples reporting jointly, this number should be $ 150,000 or less. To be eligible for payment, a person must have a social security number. Read more.
Buying insurance through the government program known as COBRA would temporarily become much cheaper. COBRA, for the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, generally allows a person who loses a job to purchase coverage through the former employer. But it’s expensive: under normal circumstances, a person may have to pay at least 102% of the cost of the premium. Under the relief bill, the government would pay the full COBRA premium from April 1 to September 30. A person who qualified for new employer-based health insurance elsewhere before September 30 would lose their eligibility for coverage at no cost. And someone who voluntarily quit their job would not be eligible either. Read more
This credit, which helps working families offset child care costs for children under 13 and other dependents, would be significantly expanded for just one year. More people would be eligible and many beneficiaries would benefit from a greater break. The bill would also make the credit fully refundable, meaning you could collect the money as a refund even if your tax bill was zero. “This will be helpful for people at the bottom of the ladder,” said Mark Luscombe, senior federal tax analyst at Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting. Read more.
There would be a big one for people already in debt. You would not have to pay income tax on the forgiven debt if you qualify for forgiveness or loan cancellation – for example, if you followed an income-based repayment plan during the number years required, if your school defrauded you, or if Congress or the President pays off $ 10,000 in debt for a large number of people. This would be the case for the debt canceled between January 1, 2021 and the end of 2025. Find out more.
The bill would provide billions of dollars in rent assistance and utilities to those experiencing hardship and at risk of eviction from their homes. About $ 27 billion would go to emergency housing assistance. The vast majority of it would replenish the so-called coronavirus relief fund, created by the CARES Act and distributed by state, local and tribal governments, according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition. This is in addition to the $ 25 billion in assistance provided by the relief plan adopted in December. To receive financial assistance – which could be used for rent, utilities, and other housing expenses – households would have to meet several conditions. Household income cannot exceed 80% of the area’s median income, at least one member of the household must be at risk of homelessness or housing instability, and individuals should be entitled to unemployment benefits or have experienced financial hardship (directly or indirectly) due to the pandemic. The assistance could be provided for up to 18 months, according to the National Coalition for Low Income Housing. Low-income families who have been unemployed for three months or more would receive priority assistance. Read more.
But, he added, “spending money is politically easier than adopting emission reduction policies.” If this “sets up energy saving so that it is ultimately less costly to reduce emissions, it could create more political support to do it later” by making laws or regulations less painful, he said. he declared.