Committee tables SB55 after fiscal-impact questions and broad public support for larger solar credit

The House Taxation and Revenue Committee tabled Senate Bill 55 after public testimony and a fiscal-impact discussion about how the state credit is scored.

Jennifer Fabian, an economist with the Legislative Finance Committee, told the committee that the solar tax credit in law has a $30,000,000 cap and that this bill does not change that cap. Fabian said the credit has historically been undersubscribed — roughly $9,000,000 claimed annually — and that scoring the new or expanded credit at the cap can create an apparent $21,000,000 impact in the revenue estimate used for budgeting.

Sponsor Senator Stewart said the bill would raise the state credit from 10% to 30% through 2032 while keeping the $30,000,000 statutory cap. Stewart said the change aims to help the local solar industry recover workforce and business losses after the federal 30% credit ended.

Industry witnesses described local economic effects. "Our industry employs about 2,000 people," said Jim Desjardins, executive director of the Renewable Energy Industries Association of New Mexico, who said the sudden federal change led to layoffs and business contraction. Small-business owners, tribes and advocacy groups including the League of Women Voters and NM Native Vote urged support, citing greenhouse-gas reductions, affordability for low-income and tribal households and economic benefits for locally owned solar firms.

Committee members raised consumer-protection and distributional concerns. Members confirmed the credit is refundable (so taxpayers with little or no tax liability can receive a refund), but the bill contains no income test — meaning households across income levels would be eligible. Representative Terrazas and others recounted complaints about some installers, including allegations that homeowners were left liable for liens or that expected credits did not reach customers; those implementation and consumer-protection issues are not addressed in the bill as written.

Given the fiscal questions and the committee’s regular practice of placing tax changes into a tax package, Representative Lundstrom moved to table SB55 for now; Representative Montoya seconded. The committee voted to table the bill, 11–1.

The tabling is procedural: supporters said the Senate could include the measure in the larger tax package or the House could revisit appropriations treatment after further fiscal analysis. The committee reserved time for follow-up hearings and asked staff to circulate additional materials.