Английская Википедия:Inflation Reduction Act

Материал из Онлайн справочника
Перейти к навигацииПерейти к поиску

Шаблон:Short description Шаблон:Use mdy dates Шаблон:Infobox U.S. legislation

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) is a landmark[1][2] United States federal law which aims to curb inflation by possibly reducing the federal government budget deficit, lowering prescription drug prices, and investing into domestic energy production while promoting clean energy. It was passed by the 117th United States Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden on August 16, 2022.

It is a budget reconciliation bill sponsored by Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Joe Manchin (D-WV).[3] The bill was the result of negotiations on the proposed Build Back Better Act, which was reduced and comprehensively reworked from its initial proposal after being opposed by Manchin.[4] It was introduced as an amendment to the Build Back Better Act and the legislative text was substituted. All Democrats in the Senate and House voted for the bill while all Republicans voted against it.[5][6]

According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), the law will raise $738Шаблон:Nbspbillion from tax reform and prescription drug reform to lower prices, as well as authorize $891Шаблон:Nbspbillion in total spending – including $783 billion on energy and climate change, and three years of Affordable Care Act subsidies.[3][7][8] The law represents the largest investment into addressing climate change in United States history.[9] It also includes a large expansion and modernization effort for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).[10]Шаблон:Efn According to several independent analyses, the law is projected to reduce 2030 U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to 40% below 2005 levels.[11] The projected impact of the bill on inflation is disputed.

Background

Шаблон:See also Шаблон:Joe Biden series The Build Back Better Plan was a legislative framework proposed by United States President Joe Biden between 2020 and 2021. Generally viewed as ambitious in size and scope, it sought to make the largest nationwide public investments in social, infrastructural, and environmental programs since the 1930s Great Depression-fighting policies of the New Deal.[12]

The plan was divided into three parts: one of them, the American Rescue Plan, a COVID-19 relief spending bill, was signed into law in March 2021.[13] The other two parts were reworked into different bills over the course of extensive negotiations within and among Congressional entities. The American Jobs Plan (AJP) was a proposal to address long-neglected infrastructure needs and reduce America's contributions to climate change's destructive effects;[14] the American Families Plan (AFP) was a proposal to fund a variety of social policy initiatives, some of which (e.g. paid family leave) had never before been enacted nationally in the U.S.[15]

The Build Back Better Act was a bill introduced in the 117th Congress to fulfill aspects of the Build Back Better Plan. It was spun off from the American Jobs Plan, alongside the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, as a $3.5Шаблон:Nbsptrillion Democratic reconciliation package that included provisions related to climate change in the United States (centered around Senator Ron Wyden's technology-neutral, tax incentive-first approach)[16][17] and social policy, lowered to approximately $2.2Шаблон:Nbsptrillion. The bill was passed 220–213 by the House of Representatives on November 19, 2021.

In December 2021, amidst negotiations and parliamentary procedures, Senator Joe Manchin publicly pulled his support from the bill citing its cost and a too-aggressive transition to clean energy,[18] then retracted support for his own compromise legislation. This effectively killed the bill as it needed 50 senators to pass via reconciliation, and all 50 Republican senators opposed it.

In the summer of 2022, Manchin and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer engaged in negotiations over a revised reconciliation bill with about $1 trillion in revenue from tax reform, $500 billion in climate and health care spending, and $500 billion in deficit reduction.[19] However, Manchin announced abruptly on July 14, 2022 that he wouldn't support new climate spending or tax reform due to his fear that the bill would worsen inflation.[20] He later stated that he would be open to revisiting those elements a few months later, provided that inflation slowed meaningfully.[21] Biden nonetheless conceded defeat on a climate bill, urging Congress to pass whatever Manchin would agree to (a slim, $280 billion health care bill that would acquire its revenue from allowing Medicare to negotiate prices and spend $40 billion on Affordable Care Act subsidies).[22][19]

Unbeknownst to nearly everyone in Washington, Manchin and Schumer reengaged in secret negotiations on July 18, 2022.[23] On July 27, hours after the Senate passed the CHIPS and Science Act,[3] the two men released a statement announcing the $891 billion Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which included climate spending and tax reform.[24]

The sudden deal was widely regarded as a "shocker", as Democrats had voiced little hope for a revival of their climate and tax priorities, in addition to Manchin himself being rather pessimistic on the prospect of an expanded bill.[25]

As the revised bill made its way through the chambers of Congress, the new reality of Biden unexpectedly having a clear path to enacting substantial portions of his domestic agenda into law led to a wide reevaluation of the success of the Biden presidency thus far and was expected to give the President and his party a boost in the 2022 midterm elections.[26][27][28]

Legislative history

Файл:P20220816CS-0389 (52386878143).jpg
President Joe Biden signing the bill into law in the State Dining Room of the White House on August 16, 2022. (L-R) Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC), Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ), and Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL).

The Build Back Better Act, which passed the House on September 27, 2021, was used by the Senate as the legislative vehicle for this legislation. On August 6, 2022 Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer proposed an amendment which would replace the text of the previously passed bill with the text of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. This substitute amendment was later adopted.[29]

Schumer's lead staffer, Gerry Petrella, recalls the surprise phone call came from Manchin's office just prior to the August recess and the breakthrough negotiations occurred on the final summer weekend.[30]

On August 7, 2022, following the vote-a-rama, an unlimited marathon voting session on amendments, that lasted nearly 16 hours, the Senate passed the bill (as amended) on a 51–50 vote, with all Democrats voting in favor, all Republicans voting against, and Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie.[5] On August 12, 2022, the bill was passed by the House on a 220–207 vote, with all Democrats voting in favor and all Republicans voting against it.[6] On August 16, 2022, the bill was signed into law by President Joe Biden.[31]

Provisions

Over a period of 10 years, the law is estimated to raise revenue from:[32][33][34]

In the same time period, it would spend this revenue on:[32][39]

$663 billion of the law's climate action investments are embedded in the federal tax code.[41][8] As part of the overall investment into clean energy, the law created a green bank,[42][43][44] extended the solar investment tax credit for 10 years[45] and invested $30 billion in nuclear power. It also invests $12 billion in electric vehicle incentives, $14 billion in home energy efficiency upgrades, $22 billion in home energy supply improvements, and $37 billion in advanced manufacturing.[46][32] (The latter amount includes $5.46 billion for a DOE program for zero-emissions industrial tech demonstrations,[47][48] $10 billion for the renewed 48C tax credit, and more than $5 billion to the USDOT and GSA to lower embedded emissions in procurement.[49]) $19.5 billion goes to investments in climate-smart agriculture, more than $5 billion goes to revising remediation programs for those affected by discriminatory USDA lending practices, $5 billion goes to forest protection and urban heat island reductions, and nearly $3 billion goes to coastal habitat protection.[50][51][52]

Alternatively, the Act's climate investments can be summarized as follows: $220–372 billion in energy, $67–183 billion in manufacturing, $28–48 billion in building retrofits and energy efficiency, $33–436 billion in transportation, $22–26 billion in environmental justice, land use, air pollution reduction and/or resilience, and $3–21 billion in agriculture.[53][54][55][56][57]

The law contains provisions that cap insulin costs at $35/month and will cap out-of-pocket drug costs at $2,000 for people on Medicare, among other provisions.[32][36][37]

Several provisions in the initial deal between Schumer and Manchin were changed after negotiations with Senator Sinema: a provision narrowing the carried interest loophole was dropped, a 1% excise tax on stock buybacks was added, manufacturing exceptions were added to the corporate minimum tax, and funding for drought relief for western states was added.[58][59][60]

Projected impacts

Economic

Файл:Inflation-reduction-act-50.png
Inflation Reduction Act summary graphic from the White House

The CBO estimated that the Act would have no statistically significant effect on inflation.[61] The Penn Wharton Budget Model also estimated that the Act would have no statistically significant effect on inflation, and initially projected that it would reduce cumulative deficits by $264 billion.[62] Its second analysis, with a higher projection of total spending, does not include deficit reduction.[55]

The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget analyzed the Act and concluded that the "deficit reduction, along with other elements of the bill, is likely to reduce inflationary pressures and thus reduce the risk of a possible recession."[63] It further estimates that the Act would reduce the federal deficit by $1.9Шаблон:Nbsptrillion over a 20-year period. This figure includes the resulting savings on interest payments.[64]

The World Economic Forum, a Swiss business lobbying non-profit,[65] states "…in the medium to long-term, the impact of the IRA is likely to be deflationary" and cites a prediction by the University of Massachusetts that the law will generate 912,000 jobs per year.[66]

The Tax Foundation, a fiscally conservative think tank, stated that the Act "may actually worsen inflation by constraining the productive capacity of the economy." It estimated the Act would result in a loss of 29,000 full-time equivalent jobs and a 0.2% reduction in GDP, while resulting in $324Шаблон:Nbspbillion of additional revenues, which would go towards deficit reduction.[67]

Modeling by the Energy Innovation group, a nonpartisan energy and climate think tank, estimated that this bill would lead to the creation of 1.4 million to 1.5 million additional jobs and increase the GDP 0.84–0.88% by 2030.[68]

The climate think tank Rocky Mountain Institute estimated that if businesses and consumers take sufficient advantage of the Act's provisions to meet national climate goals, Texas would see investments of $131 billion creating 116,000 jobs, California would see $117 billion creating 140,000 jobs, Florida $62 billion creating 85,000 jobs and Illinois $38 billion creating 42,000 jobs.[69] The same analysis notes that the states seeing the four largest per capita investments from the Act, ranging between roughly $7,000 and $12,000, would be Wyoming, North Dakota, West Virginia, and Louisiana, all Republican-leaning states.[69][70]

Energy and climate change

Climate action's fiscal impact

The Inflation Reduction Act is the largest piece of federal legislation ever to address climate change.[71] According to the CBO and JCT, it will invest $783 billion in provisions relating to energy security and climate change.[7][8] This includes $663 billion in tax incentives,[8] and $27 billion for a green bank created by amending the Clean Air Act.[72][73][42] However, other forecasts differ from the CBO's and JCT's reports. A report by Credit Suisse projects that the total climate spending in the Act would be $800 billion,[56][57][74] Goldman Sachs predicts a total of $1.2 trillion, the Penn Wharton Budget Model predicts $1.045 trillion, and an analysis by the Brookings Institution finds a central case of $902 billion.[75][55][76]

Assessments of spending by area

The summary provided by Senate Democrats identifies primary goals as driving down consumer energy costs, increasing energy security, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, with an emphasis on neutral treatment of technology choice for the energy tax credits, as described by Ron Wyden.[16][17] According to science communicator Hank Green, the largest allocation areas are: $128 billion for renewable energy and grid energy storage, $30 billion for nuclear power, $12 billion for electric vehicle incentives, $14 billion for home energy efficiency upgrades, $22 billion for home energy supply improvements, and $37 billion for advanced manufacturing.[46] (The latter amount includes $5.46 billion for a DOE program for zero-emissions industrial tech demonstrations,[47][48] $10 billion for the renewed 48C tax credit, and more than $5 billion to the USDOT and GSA to lower embedded emissions in procurement.[49]) An assortment of additional measures includes $32 billion for investments in rural economies, racial justice in farming, forestlands and coastal habitats, $3 billion in tax incentives for installing carbon capture and storage at existing power plants, $3 billion to electrify the USPS fleet, $3 billion to reconnect neighborhoods harmed by infrastructure potentially via freeway removal, investments in sustainable aviation fuel, grants for high voltage electric power transmission and decarbonization of port equipment, garbage trucks, school buses and local government fleets, and purchases of rural electric cooperative debt alongside other assistance to cooperatives.[77][50][46][51][78]

Climate scientist Miriam Nielsen's alternative summary of the Act's climate provisions, using much broader categories and rough estimates from Ben Beachy of the BlueGreen Alliance,[53] is as follows: $220 billion in energy, $67 billion in manufacturing, $48 billion in building retrofits and energy efficiency, $33 billion in transportation, $26 billion in environmental justice, land use and resilience, and $21 billion in agriculture.[54] Wharton's estimates, however, yield $372 billion in energy, $183 billion in manufacturing, $28 billion in building retrofits and energy efficiency, $436 billion in transportation, $22 billion in air pollution reduction, and $3 billion in agriculture.[55] Credit Suisse projects at least $250 billion in advanced manufacturing tax credits and $326 billion in energy tax credits will be used.[56][57]

Home energy assistance

The Act aims to decrease residential energy costs by focusing on improvements to home energy efficiency. Measures include $9 billion in home energy rebate programs that focus on improving access to energy efficient technologies, and 10 years of consumer tax credits for the use of heat pumps, rooftop solar, and high-efficiency electric heating, ventilation, air conditioning and water heating.

The Act includes a 30% tax credit ($1,200 to $2,000 per year) and different types of rebates (reaching $14,000) for homeowners who will increase the energy efficiency of their homes. In some cases, all upgrade expenses will be returned.[79]

Energy production

There are also funds allocated to national clean energy production. This includes the continuation of the production tax credit ($30 billion) and investment tax credit ($10 billion) toward clean energy manufacturing, including solar power, wind power, and grid energy storage. Modifications to these credits effectively allow the federal government to predictably and directly pay utility cooperatives and publicly-owned utilities without them needing to attract investment firms, in a manner similar to the Earned Income Tax Credit.[80]

Hydrogen

The Act changes the Section 45V tax credit to offer increased percentages to green hydrogen and pink hydrogen producers for each kilogram produced via electrolysis of water, allowing 100 percent coverage for very low-carbon methods, thus potentially enabling more than $100 billion[56] in forgone revenue to go toward building the hydrogen economy. On December 22, 2023, the Treasury Department released its proposed guidance on eligibility. It mandates that most of these electrolyzers must be placed near new clean energy production sites (the principles of "geographic correlation"/"deliverability" and "additionality"/"new supply"), and run at the same time as peak supply periods (the principle of "hourly matching").[81][82][83][84][85][86]

Transportation

The Act extends the $7,500 Section 30D tax credit[87] for the purchase of new electric vehicles while also providing a $4,000 tax credit toward the purchase of used electric vehicles, in an effort to increase low- and middle-income access to this technology.[88] This is projected to lead to an average of $500 in savings on energy spending for every family that receives the maximal benefit of these incentives.[89][79]

The Act allocates $3 billion for helping disadvantaged communities with sustainable transportation matters, including reconnecting communities separated by transport infrastructure, assuring safe and affordable transportation "and community engagement activities".[88] This should improve transit-oriented development.[90] Projects improving connectivity and walkability in these neighborhoods can get grants reaching 80–100% of the overall cost.[91] The Act also supports biking.[92]

Agriculture, forests, marine and rural development

Some $14 billion of the clean energy package will go to rural areas, and include building biofuel infrastructure.[88][78] This includes $9.5 billion for a new grant program called Empowering Rural America, with cooperatives encouraged to apply during a window from July 31 to September 15, 2023.[93]

The Act also allocates funds for rural communities, racial and economic justice in farming, marine ecosystems and forestland, including $19.5 billion to invest in climate-smart agriculture (split into $8.45 billion for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, $4.95 billion for the Regional Conservation Partnership Program, $3.25 billion for the Conservation Stewardship Program, and $1.40 billion for the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program, $1 billion for conservation technical assistance, $300 million for a carbon sequestration and emission inventory program, and $100 million in administrative expenses), $5 billion to invest in forest conservation and urban tree planting (split into $2.15 billion for the National Forest System and $2.75 billion for other forests including in urban areas), $3.1 billion to help farmers with high-risk operations caused by USDA-backed loans, $2.6 billion to protect and restore coastal habitats, and $2.2 billion to redress proven claims from socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers of discrimination by the USDA's lending programs, as well as "$125 million for technical assistance, outreach, and mediation; $250 million for land loss assistance, such as heirs' property and fractionated land; $250 million for agricultural education emphasizing scholarships and career development at historically Black, tribal, and Hispanic colleges; and $10 million for equity commissions at USDA".[52][88][50][78][51]

New financing

One $27 billion competitive grant program is a green bank called the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, intended to capitalize smaller regional green banks.[94] The Act established it by amending the Clean Air Act. The Fund will award $14 billion to a select few green banks nationwide for a broad variety of decarbonization investments, $6 billion to green banks in low-income and historically disadvantaged communities for similar investments, and $7 billion to state and local energy funds for decentralized solar power in communities with no financing alternatives.[72][73][42][43][44] The EPA set the deadline to apply for the first two award initiatives for October 12, 2023[95] and the Solar for All initiative for September 26, 2023.[96]

Pollution and emissions

The Act also provides funds toward the decarbonization of the economy in other areas, providing various tax credits and grants and loans toward decarbonizing the industrial and transportation sectors. Among these is a program to reduce methane emissions from production and transportation of natural gas. The Act also provides for a focus on communities and environmental justice by providing several grants targeting historically marginalized and disadvantaged communities that have been disproportionally impacted by environmental pollution and climate change.[88]

The Act should cut the global greenhouse gas emissions by a level similar to "eliminating the annual planet-warming pollution of France and Germany combined" and may help to limit the warming of the planet to 1.5 degrees Celsius - the target of the Paris Agreement.[97][98] With the Act and additional federal and state measures, the USA can fulfill its pledge in the Paris Agreement: 50% greenhouse gas emissions reductions by the year 2030.[99][100][101]

An assessment by the Rhodium Group, an independent research firm, estimated it would reduce national greenhouse gas emissions 32–42% below 2005 levels by 2030, compared to 24–35% under current policy while reducing household energy costs and improving energy security.[99] Furthermore, Rhodium Group projects that the nuclear provisions in the Act are likely to "keep much, if not all" of the nation's nuclear reactors that are at risk of retiring, estimated to be 22–38% of the fleet, online through the 2030s.[102]

A preliminary analysis by the REPEAT Project of Princeton University estimated that the investments made by the law would reduce net emissions 42% below 2005 levels, compared to 27% under current policies (including the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act).[103][104]

The Energy Innovation group estimated the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions at 37–41% below 2005 levels in 2030, compared to 24% without the Act.[105][106] This estimate of the greenhouse gas emission reduction lines up with the figure provided by the Act's authors which is a 40% reduction in carbon emissions relative to 2005 levels.[107]

Modeling from the nonpartisan research institution Resources for the Future indicates the Act would decrease retail power costs by 5.2–6.7% over a ten-year period, resulting in savings of $170–220 per year for the average U.S. household. The modeling also predicts that the Act would tend to stabilize electricity prices.[108][109] The Act would help foster a tripling in the size of the American solar power industry and provide unprecedented investment security, according to a September 2022 report by the trade group Solar Energy Industries Association.[110]

In reaction to the Supreme Court case West Virginia v. EPA, which limited the EPA's authority to institute a program such as the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, Title VI of the IRA amended the Clean Air Act to explicitly designate carbon dioxide, hydrofluorocarbons, methane, nitrous oxide, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride as air pollutants to unambiguously provide the EPA congressional authorization to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, as well as to promote renewable energy.[111][112]

Drug prices

One of the most consequential aspects of this act is the increased negotiating power granted to Medicare. Before the enactment of the Inflation Reduction Act, Medicare was notably restricted in its ability to negotiate drug prices directly with pharmaceutical companies. This limitation often resulted in higher costs for both the program and its beneficiaries. With the new rule, Medicare now engages directly with drug manufacturers, aiming to secure more favorable pricing agreements. This development has the potential to significantly alter the landscape of drug pricing, especially for high-cost medications under Medicare Part D.[113] The Congressional Budget Office projects the Medicare drug price negotiations will save the government $98.5 billion over the next decade.[63][114] The savings will be used to increase Medicare Part D benefits.[35][115][116] Together, these drugs amounted to more than $45 billion in Medicare Part D spending from June 2022 to May 2023.[117]

First selected drugs

In September 2023, Medicare announced the first 10 drugs selected for negotiations under the agency's drug price negotiation program. This list includes treatments for:

Taxes and distributional impact

Файл:20220826 Share of unpaid taxes, by income level - area chart, treemap - NYTimes - Dept of Treasury.svg
U.S. Treasury Department estimates of unpaid taxes indicate that over half of all unpaid taxes are attributable to the top 5% of earners.[119]

Excerpts from the nonpartisan JCT indicated that the legislation might lead to increased payments on personal taxes for Americans of all incomes (an increase in $16.7Шаблон:Nbspbillion for taxpayers earning less than $200,000 a year, $14.1Шаблон:Nbspbillion for taxpayers earning between $200,000 and $500,000, and $23.5Шаблон:Nbspbillion for taxpayers earning over $500,000). This calculation was based on the assumption that companies would indirectly pass on parts of the minimum corporate tax to employees, an assumption that was criticized by Steven M. Rosenthal, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center (TPC).[120] Economist William G. Gale, who is also co-director of the TPC, comments that it is important to consider that the calculations by the JCT did not take into account the provisions in the Act that would extend premium tax credits for health plans for low- and middle-income taxpayers, provide households with tax credits for making their property more energy-efficient, and lower the price of prescription drugs.[121]

The Tax Policy Center estimated that the bottom 80% tax filers by income would receive a net benefit, if ACA premium tax credits (subsidies) are included. The 80th-99th percentile would incur a small cost (0-0.1% increase in average federal tax rate) while the top 1% would incur a 0.2% increase. The costs mainly are imposed indirectly as corporations facing higher taxes may reduce the wage increases or levels for workers; individual tax rates were not changed.[122]

Implementation and results

Economy

Research from climate policy analyst Jack Conness has revealed that $102 billion worth of 149 climate-friendly tech manufacturing investments within the United States, have been announced by companies since the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, creating 85,500 projected jobs Шаблон:As of; when considered together with CHIPS Act investments, the total comes out to 177 projects worth $259 billion creating 110,900 jobs.[123]Шаблон:Update after[124][82][125][48][126]

Citing Conness' research up to her reporting date, Nichola Groom of Reuters noted on March 7, 2023 that $43.5 billion of these investments will be in right-to-work law states that allow laborers to not join a labor union in a represented workplace, in contravention of Biden's policy theme of supporting the labor movement.[127] Conness found that due to the Act's incentives, North Carolina would receive the individual project with the most money ($12.6 billion from Toyota in battery plants), while Georgia would host the most projects (24), the most new jobs overall (14,019), the second most jobs created by an individual project (3,350), and the largest dollar amount in overall investments ($15.8 billion, followed by North Carolina's $13.7 billion), and South Carolina would receive the individual project with the most jobs created (4,000 from Scout Motors). More of the Act's investments in dollars went to counties with majorities that voted for Donald Trump in 2020 ($72,212,150,000) than for Biden ($29,931,050,000). 71 percent of the Act's investments were in batteries, while electric vehicle investments made up 12 percent and solar investments made up 12 percent.[123][128][129]

In a November 2023 report the interest group Environmental Entrepreneurs and the research firm BW found 210 announced projects directly linked to the Inflation Reduction Act, in the first year since its signing. They stated that the projects would create nearly 403,000 jobs, more than 100,000 of which would be permanent.[130] According to editor in chief Jeff St. John of Canary Media, "During the projects’ construction phases, assumed to last five years from project announcement to completion, the report estimates the creation of 142,300 direct jobs, 55,900 indirect jobs and 105,300 jobs induced by the direct and indirect workers spending their wages." More than 185,000 of these jobs would be in electric vehicles, 48,795 would be in battery storage, 42,100 would be in solar and wind power, 21,322 would be in clean fuels, and nearly 5,600 would be in electric power transmission and distribution.[131] The authors project that the Act would bring about "$156 billion added to U.S. GDP, $111 billion in new wages for workers, and more than $32 billion generated in tax revenue for federal, state, and local governments."[130]

In a video dated December 6, 2023, the Financial Times found the IRA and CaSA together catalyzed over $224 billion in investments and over 100,000 new jobs by the preceding July.[132] The next day, the Rhodium Group-Massachusetts Institute of Technology partnership Clean Investment Monitor put the October 2022-September 2023 investment total at $225 billion, most of it in electric vehicle supply, though it did not explicitly mention the Act. Clean investment grew by 4.2 percent during that period. As a share of nationwide private investment, it grew from 3.4 percent to 4.9. The states that benefited the most were Nevada, South Carolina, Arizona, Tennessee, and Montana.[133]

Wellesley College professor of environmental studies Jay Turner said that Шаблон:As of the Act fostered $83 billion in 92 new investments in the electric vehicle supply chain, creating a projected 54,350 new jobs across the United States, Canada and Mexico. The number of new mines the Act incentivized in 2023 was 101, the amount of battery manufacturing capacity brought up to 348 GWh, and the maximum number of electric vehicles able to be built brought to 2,913,900.[134]

The League of Conservation Voters-, Center for American Progress-, and Sierra Club-affiliated research firm Climate Power estimated that the Act spurred $89.5 billion of investments in over 90 new projects creating 101,036 predicted clean energy-related jobs in 31 states, between August 16, 2022 and January 31, 2023, and that while Georgia, Michigan, and Texas saw eight new IRA-linked projects each, the most of any states, Georgia, Idaho and Tennessee would see the largest overall investments by dollar amount (ranging from $10.4 billion to $15.3 billion), and Kansas, Georgia and Tennessee would see the most jobs created.[135][136]

In August 2023, the Solar Energy Industries Association reported that the Act had created more than 20,000 jobs and incentivized $20 billion in new solar power tech manufacturing and 155 gigawatts of generating capacity in the law's first year, and projected it would incentivize $144 billion more in such investments by 2033 than under a no-Act scenario.[137]

The trade group American Clean Power's January 2023 assessment of business announcements of IRA-linked investments in renewables and battery plants, during the period between the Act's signing and November 30, 2022, yielded a figure of over $40 billion creating 6,850 jobs. 80 percent of these investments are in Republican-held districts, mostly in the Great Plains or South.[70][138] Its August 2023 update recorded a total of 97 manufacturing investments worth $270 billion spurred by the Act between the August 16 enactment date and July 31, 2023, 83 with defined locations, with the majority of these being solar power tech plants. American Clean Power estimates these investments are worth more than all those made in the previous eight years combined, and will create 29,780 new jobs and $4.5 billion in customer savings.[139]

According to the New Democrat-linked think tank Center for American Progress, the Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act have together catalyzed over 35,000 public and private investments.[140] The Biden administration itself claimed that Шаблон:As of, the IIJA, CaSA, and IRA together catalyzed over $649 billion in private investment (including $235 billion in electronics and semiconductors, $161 billion in electric vehicles and batteries, $133 billion in clean power and $75 billion in the clean energy industry) and over $442.6 billion in public infrastructure spending (including $38.6 billion in energy aside from tax credits in the IRA).[141]Шаблон:Update after

Fiscal impact

In February 2024 The New York Times and Energy Storage News reported that it was clear that companies were using the credits accorded by the law far more than was predicted. According to government officials they interviewed, the increase of revenue from improved Internal Revenue Service tax enforcement will be more than enough to cover the losses, so the deficit will still be reduced.[142] The tax credits with the highest market value are for grid energy storage.[143]

Environment

According to Rhodium Group and the World Economic Forum, in the first year of implementation, the Act had a significant impact on the environment. The Rhodium Group's expectations for GHG emissions reductions by the year 2030, relative to the level of 2005, moved from 17%-30% to 29%-42%, and to a 32%-51% decline by the year 2035. More than 170,000 green jobs were created. The sales of heat pumps exceeded the sales of gas boilers for the first time in history. 15% of households now use a heat pump as a primary source of heating. The United States Environmental Protection Agency used dozens of millions of dollars to improve air quality and hundreds of millions for environmental justice and local climate plans. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration spent hundreds of millions for protecting coastal communities and ecosystems from the impact of climate change. More than $1 billion is allocated to equitable access to urban trees.[144][145][146]

The law significantly enlarged the tax credit market. It includes significant tax credits for companies making products considered environmentally-friendly, but small companies tend not to pay enough taxes, so the law doesn't help them. The law allows such companies to sell their tax credits to larger companies. The market is expected to reach $80 billion per year and help those large companies.[147]

The governors of four states, Florida, South Dakota, Iowa, and Kentucky, refused to accept decarbonization grants from the Act. The Act allows the forfeited money, $3 million per state, to go to the three largest metropolitan areas in each state instead, though cities such as Davenport, Iowa and Sioux Falls, South Dakota have still refused the money.[148][149]

Energy efficiency

Significant improvements were achieved in the domain of green building through the installation of efficient heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, and more.[150]

For the first $8.5 billion in home rebate programs, the Department of Energy released its first draft guidance for states on July 27, 2023. The guidance entails the DOE distributing $4.3 billion to states to work with the DOE to create rebate programs for whole-home upgrades and $4.28 billion to states for appliance replacement rebates, with the suggestion that half the money go to households below 80 percent of area median income.[151][152]

On December 15, 2023, the EPA announced it had notified the competitors in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program of their standings.[153]

On March 25, 2024, the Biden administration announced the first 33 grant recipients of the Department of Energy's $6 billion Industrial Demonstrations Program to reduce embedded emissions in factories and materials processing, of which the Inflation Reduction Act funds $5.46 billion. Cement and concrete industry projects received $1.5 billion in total, steelmaking projects received $1.5 billion, chemical engineering and refinery projects $1.2 billion, other metals $930 million, and glass, paper, and food and beverage supply the remainder of the $6 billion. These projects are located mostly in environmental justice communities across more than 20 states, and were selected for their best balancing of deep emissions cuts, market viability, speedy completion, and community benefits. The Biden administration expects these projects to drive 1.4 million tons in carbon emissions cuts.[154]

Ecosystems

In 2023 an agreement between seven states (Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming)[155] was achieved, aiming to preserve the Colorado River water system from collapse due to poor management and climate change. The United States is heavily dependent on the river for power generation, drinking water, agriculture, wildlands restoration, and native cultural practices. Some states will reduce water use, receiving $1.2 billion in compensation for it from the federal government. Many other projects for preserving the river such as water recycling and rainwater harvesting are being advanced. The funding comes from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act.[156][157]

According to a Biden administration statement, in the first year of implementation, around $2 billion was allocated to protect and restore land and marine ecosystems, including National Parks and the National Wildlife Refuge System.[158] In August 2023, $150 million was given to small and underserved forest owners, and intended to link them to climate markets, providing incentives to conserve the forests.[159] Another $145 million were delivered with the same goal in March 2024.[160]

In November 2023, the Biden administration announced it would provide the National Parks System $166 million for ecosystem resilience and environmental planning.[161]

Sustainable agriculture

Шаблон:Expand section From October 2022 to September 2023 more than $850 million dollars was given by the Natural Resources Conservation Service to its Environmental Quality Incentives Program, Conservation Stewardship Program, Regional Conservation Partnership Program and Agricultural Conservation Easement Program to advance sustainable agriculture.[162]

Environmental justice

In October 2023 the United States Environmental Protection Agency allocated $128 million to 186 projects linked to environmental justice. $104 million comes from the Inflation Reduction Act. The projects are designed to solve pollution and climate-related disasters in underserved communities. The projects include creating parks for addressing floods, protecting Duck Valley Indian Reservation natural and cultural resources, teaching children about repairingШаблон:Clarify and more.[163] The full list of projects with short descriptions has been published.[164][165]

In November 2023, the Biden administration announced the Department of the Interior would be spending $20 million to establish the Kapapahuliau Climate Resilience Program, named for the process of navigating through rough seas and winds, to the Native Hawaiian community for climate adaptation and resilience. The deadline to apply for program award grants is February 29, 2024.[161][166] It also announced the EPA would spend $2 billion on its new Community Change Grants Program [167] for partnerships between local nonprofits, governments and indigenous tribes, and colleges and universities to “deploy clean energy, strengthen climate resilience, and build community capacity to respond to environmental and climate justice challenges”.[161]

Drug prices

The Biden administration announced the first ten drugs to have their prices negotiated in 2026 by Medicare on August 29, 2023. They are Eliquis, Jardiance, Xarelto, Januvia, Farxiga, Entresto, Enbrel, Imbruvica, Stelara, and Fiasp and NovoLog. The list selection, made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, was based on whether these drugs lacked competition, how much they cost Medicare, and how long they have been on the market.[114][118] The manufacturers, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Merck, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Immunex, Pharmacyclics, and Novo Nordisk, had until October 1, 2023 to declare their intent to participate, upon penalty of a large excise tax, or they would withdraw their drugs from Medicaid and Medicare.[114] The Biden administration announced two days later that all companies had agreed to the negotiations.[168]

The Medicare drug price negotiation provisions are facing eight protest lawsuits filed by drug manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, variously claiming that the federal government is violating the First, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution, which deal with freedom of speech, just compensation for takings, and excessive fines.[117][169] Larry Gostin, a public health and legal scholar, told The New York Times that he does not expect the provisions to be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States.[114][170][169] A "second wave" of lawsuits, likely focusing on the price negotiations' bureaucratic process, is expected in the coming weeks, according to Stephen Ubl, CEO of the pharmaceutical industry lobbying group PhRMA.[171] Some legal commentators speculate the cases are intended to produce a variety of rulings across the federal courts, making it more likely for the Supreme Court to hear them.[172] While the healthcare investors' consulting firm Avalere claimed in July 2022 that $455 billion in revenue would be lost by drug manufacturers[173] and the trade group Vital Transformation claimed 139 fewer new drugs would be approved over the next decade due to the Act,[174] the Congressional Budget Office projects only one fewer drug will be approved than without the Act over the next decade, five fewer over the succeeding decade, and seven fewer over the decade after that.[170][35]

Taxation

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen directed IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig to not use the new funding allocated in the Act to increase the rate of audits of those making less than $400,000 a year above historical levels, but to instead focus on "high-end noncompliance".[175] A Treasury report indicated that half of the funding would be allocated to preventing tax evasion from large corporations and wealthy individuals.[176]

Due to larger than expected use of the Act's tax credits, the administration of Joe Biden has begun to reevaluate how much in unpaid taxes the IRS can collect to cover the costs.[142] According to its new findings, full reorganization of the IRS will result in $851 billion in new revenue from 2024-2034 without having to add tax burdens to those who earn annual incomes less than $400,000; it notes that "the top 10 percent of the income distribution is responsible for 64 percent of unpaid taxes."[177][178][179]

The Treasury and Internal Revenue Service published guidance on eligibility for electric vehicle owners to claim tax credits worth between $3,500 and $7,500, including outlining a requirement for the vehicle to undergo final assembly in North America. The Department of Energy and the Department of Transportation also published resources identifying vehicles that will likely meet all requirements for tax credits.[180][181] The Department of Energy indicated that their list of eligible vehicles is not a guarantee for credit, and states that the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) will give full manufacturing details and locations.[182] Those qualified will receive the tax credit known as the Clean Vehicle Credit, previously called the Qualified Plug-In Electric Drive Motor Vehicle Credit. The US Treasury Department has also stated that owners who purchase eligible vehicles previous to August 16, 2022, but did not possess the vehicle until after that date, also qualify for the Clean Vehicle Credit.[183] However, because of the requirement that qualified EVs must have half or more of its battery materials built in the US[184] and "at least 40 percent of materials sourced from North America or a US trading partner by 2024" (with this minimum percentage meant to increase each year)[184] and the batteries cannot contain minerals that "were extracted, processed, or recycled by a foreign entity of concern", most currently available EVs on the market will not qualify for the tax credits.[185][186] The Treasury released its next draft guidance for EV buyers on March 31, 2023, effective immediately, with finalization expected in June; the allowed materials source list includes the 20 United States free-trade agreements partners and Japan.[184]

Additional tax credits were presented in the Act for energy efficiency in buildings, expanding current incentives in a tier-based system beginning in 2023.[187] The Act specifies that commercial buildings must update efficiency by 25%, compared to a reference building, to qualify for $0.50 per square foot of tax credit for the first tier, increasing to a maximum of $5.00 per square foot for the final tier. The tax credits also extends to single and multi-family housing, requiring 50% less annual energy consumption compared to similar units.[181] Vincent Barnes, a senior vice president from Alliance to Save Energy in Washington, D.C, stated that these policies were meant to reduce energy costs and demand on the power grid.[188]

The Treasury Department also clarified on May 12, 2023, that in order to be eligible for select tax credits, solar panel manufacturers and installers need to source at least 40 percent of their components in total from within the U.S., regardless of solar cell origin, thereby creating a compromise between solar panel installers who favored keeping Chinese imports cheap and domestic solar cell manufacturers who want to build more factories in America.[189]

Per state

Florida

The state received $3.75 million for urban forests and nature conservation, $209,000 for fighting pollution, and $78.7 million to protect the state from climate change impacts (the third amount is from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act combined).

However, the governor, Ron DeSantis, refused to accept $346 million for rebates to homeowners who will want to retrofit their houses for energy efficiency, $3 million to fight pollution, a program for helping low income people buy solar panels as well as $24 million from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act for improving sewage systems in rural areas.[190] DeSantis later reversed course and attempted to reclaim some of the rejected home energy rebate funds.[191]

The money can go to local cities and authorities. Three cities in Florida accepted some amounts. Other states want to take the money forfeited by Florida for themselves, namely Rhode Island and Kentucky.[192]

The funds for the rebates were requested by the Florida state energy office and the legislature, but DeSantis vetoed them. He is the only governor who did so. The program was intended to help people to lower their energy bills and create jobs. Half of the money would have gone to low-income households.[192] Making a house more energy efficient can cut utility bills by 25% for an average family in Florida.[193] Part of the money would have gone to weatherization of houses.[194]

Texas

Some aspects of the law are the same as in other states, while some are specific to Texas. Considerable tax credits and tax rebates are afforded. House weatherization, solar energy, electric vehicles, are advanced. House weatherization can save around $283 per year for an average family in Texas, while raising the value of the property and reducing air pollution in the same time. Some improvements can be made for free to low income households. The cost of an energy audit is reduced by 30% and some can even get it for free.[195]

A third of Texas households can get a 100% rebate for installing a heat pump (generally costing US$8,000).[196] Forest protection is advanced, and farms that adopt climate-friendly practices get economic incentives.[197]

Alaska

In February 2024, $1 million was delivered to Alaska remote communities. The aim is to strengthen resilience and food security, improve cooperation with indigenous tribes, and use their knowledge.[198]

Reactions

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) issued a statement for his support of the bill.[199] President Joe Biden also stated his support for the proposed bill.[200] On August 4, Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) issued a statement indicating that she would support the bill after striking a deal with fellow Democrats to change several tax provisions.[201]

Congressional Republicans have voiced unanimous opposition to the bill, claiming the legislation would do little to combat inflation, or would exacerbate it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) denounced the legislation as "reckless spending" and Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called it "insanity".

In a letter sent to congressional leadership and touted by Senate Democrats, 126 economists including Robert Rubin, Jack Lew, Jason Furman, Lawrence Summers, Mark Zandi, and Joseph Stiglitz, wrote that the bill is more than fully paid for, lowers prices for consumers and will lower inflation.[202][203]

In a letter sent to congressional leadership, 230 economists including Vernon Smith, Robert Heller, Kevin Hassett, Jim Miller, and Larry Kudlow, wrote that the bill will increase prices for consumers and will increase inflation.[204][205]

Tom Philpott, an agriculture journalist writing in Wired, praised the bill's investments in climate-smart agriculture and remedies for USDA loan discrimination, but heavily criticized Sinema's deletion of the carried interest loophole modification and the lack of provisions to expand funding for the National School Lunch Act and improvements to child nutrition (as expressed in the original Build Back Better Act) and for soil erosion prevention programs (which enhance small-scale carbon farming and encourage a shift away from monoculture-dependent farming for ethanol fuel in the United States).[51]

Climate activists Miriam Nielsen, Raya Salter and Heather Tanana examined the Act's effects eight months after passage, and raised questions on whether the Act would provide tax credits and grants equitably, mentioning the home energy upgrade grants and the Biden administration's Justice40 Initiative for racial justice, whether the Act would disproportionately help larger environmental groups with more resources rather than smaller ones, and how it would implement $4 billion in Western drought resilience grants and make accessing them easier.[206]

Public organizations

Darren Woods, the CEO of oil and gas energy giant ExxonMobil, called the bill "a step in the right direction" and endorsed its provisions related to oil and gas.[207] Multiple coal industry groups, including the West Virginia Coal Association, criticized the bill for "[obviating] any need to innovate coal assets" and doing "nothing for coal or coal generation".[208]

Many mainstream environmental organizations supported the bill, such as the Nature Conservancy, the National Wildlife Federation, and American Forests.[209][210] The director of North America policy for the Nature Conservancy, Tom Cors, called the legislation "historic", while Aviva Glaser of the NWF called the infusion of spending "transformative." The Natural Resources Defense Council argued that despite continued acceptance of fossil fuels in the IRA, its climate mitigation policies would outweigh their impact ten times over.[211] Health and environmental justice organizations like Earthjustice have welcomed the law.[212]

However, not all environmental groups expressed unqualified support. Some environmentalists noted that the bill contained more "carrots", or incentives for positive behavior, than "sticks", or new regulations.[209][213] Several groups argued that as the legislation did not seek to eliminate fossil fuels entirely, it was inadequate to meet the threat of climate change. Jean Su, the energy justice program director at the Center for Biological Diversity, called the legislation "a backdoor take-it-or-leave-it deal between a coal baron and Democratic leaders in which any opposition from lawmakers or frontline communities was quashed."[214] The Climate Justice Alliance criticized the IRA, saying that "the strengths of the IRA are outweighed by the bill's weaknesses and threats posed by the expansion of fossil fuels and unproven technologies such as carbon capture and hydrogen generation."[214]

The heads of the National Cooperative Business Association, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, National Farmers Union, and National Council of Farming Cooperatives praised the IRA for its provisions assisting cooperatives in energy and agriculture, particularly direct grants and debt forgiveness. Cornelius Blanding, head of the U.S. Federation of Southern Cooperatives, also praised the IRA, but expressed concern that its revisions of the American Rescue Plan's debt relief programs for minority farmers would worsen racial discrimination in agriculture.[77]

Cycling organizations criticized the IRA for removing the incentives for electric bicycles in the original Build Back Better Act, having a better energy-per-incentive ratio and reaching a wider demographic, than for electric cars remaining in the IRA.[215] Sean Jeans-Gail, Vice President of Government Affairs and Policy at the Rail Passengers Association, criticized the IRA saying, "It's a bitter pill in terms of rail and transit, which is the one clearly established, low-carbon emission transportation systems we have going". He also criticized the bill for being car centric.[216]

Relationship with foreign policy

Among American foreign policy analysts and officials, Anna McGinn of the think tank Environmental and Energy Study Institute praised the Act for helping the U.S. meet its commitments to the Paris Agreement, but criticized the Act for lacking commitments to loss and damage and other forms of climate-related foreign aid as well as to creating a cohesive national climate strategy.[100] Jason Bordoff, writing on the International Monetary Fund's website, cautioned that it could expose the U.S. to the beginnings of trade war, but if implemented deftly, the Act could strengthen diplomacy with Europe and help create special rules to advance the trade of clean energy.[217] Commentators at the Center for Strategic International Studies and in The Diplomat, along with United States Trade Representative Katherine Tai, have acknowledged increased economic competition with China as one of many motivators behind the Act.[218][219][220]

Internationally, reactions were mixed. Fatih Birol, the head of the International Energy Agency, called it "the single most important climate action since the Paris Agreement in 2015". However, some were concerned about the law's provisions favoring American industry. In an interview with Time Amitabh Kant, the chairman of the 2023 G20 meeting in India, called it "the most protectionist act ever drafted in the world", asking American officials, "You believed in market forces and now you do this?" Later countries have begun to create their own similar laws.[221]

27 European Union finance ministers have expressed "serious concerns" about the financial incentives of the Inflation Reduction Act, and are considering challenging it. They have listed at least nine points in the legislation, which they say could be in breach of World Trade Organization rules. They were opposed to the subsidies for consumers to buy North American-assembled electric cars, as EU officials believe the subsidies discriminate against European carmakers. One EU official told CNBC that, "there is a political consensus (among the 27 ministers) that this plan threatens the European industry"[222][223][224] and its supply of raw materials.[225] In February 2023, the European Commission announced it would propose the "Net Zero Industrial Act", similar to the IRA,[226] in turn putting pressure on the United Kingdom[227][228] and South Korea.[229]

On March 10, 2023, President Biden and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen announced they would be initiating top-level talks to mitigate issues of subsidy competition.[230][225][224]

Representatives from South Korea have also voiced similar concerns to Europe, given that the legislation can also restrict Hyundai's and other South Korean carmakers' business in the American market.[229][231][232][222]

Labor officials

Some members of the trade union United Auto Workers, including former vice president Cindy Estrada, have obliquely commented to The American Prospect that the Inflation Reduction Act's implementation regarding prevailing wage requirements and collective bargaining rights (particularly at electric vehicle factories owned by startup companies) may be weakened, and if not properly implemented, the Act could be linked to poor hiring practices and working conditions.[233] Other labor union representatives, from the AFL–CIO, Southwest Laborers District Council, Ironworkers Local 848 and United Steelworkers, told Reuters in March 2023 that investments announced due to the Act have not improved labor unions' ability to organize particularly in right-to-work law states, but that they were hopeful in pushing ahead.[127]

Implementation criticisms (2023-)

The ProspectШаблон:'s editor, Robert Kuttner, commented in January 2023 that the Treasury Department's interpretation of the Act regarding electric vehicle leasing could also potentially undermine the Act's U.S. domestic supply provisions in favor of European or Chinese suppliers.[223] Manchin expressed disappointment with the Treasury's new guidance and its more lenient provisions for foreign trading partners upon its release on March 31.[184] On December 18, he wrote a letter to Gene Dodaro, head of the Government Accountability Office, asking for a legal opinion on if Congress can overturn the Treasury guidance on Section 30D, on the basis that it is technically a proposal and not finalized, but is being enforced as the latter.[234][235]

On December 13, 2023, Manchin also expressed his disappointment with the Biden administration's implementation of his Section 45V tax credit for clean hydrogen after the draft guidelines were leaked, claiming it was "horrible" and too stringent beyond his intent for the credit.[236] Manchin later said he would bring a lawsuit against the Biden administration upon release of the guidelines. Constellation Energy, the United States' largest nuclear power plant operator, said it would pull back on green and pink hydrogen projects if the guidelines were released.[237]

See also

Notes

Шаблон:Notelist

References

Шаблон:Reflist

External links

Шаблон:Joe Biden Шаблон:United States environmental law Шаблон:Portal bar

  1. Шаблон:Cite news
  2. Шаблон:Cite news
  3. 3,0 3,1 3,2 Шаблон:Cite web
  4. Шаблон:Cite web
  5. 5,0 5,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  6. 6,0 6,1 Шаблон:Cite news
  7. 7,0 7,1 7,2 7,3 7,4 7,5 7,6 Шаблон:Cite web Note the original September 7 CBO estimates are $391 billion for climate action, $108 billion for health care, $281 billion from health savings, and $457 billion from tax reform, for a net total of $238 billion in deficit reduction.
  8. 8,0 8,1 8,2 8,3 8,4 Шаблон:Cite web
  9. Шаблон:Cite web
  10. Шаблон:Cite news
  11. Шаблон:Cite news
  12. Шаблон:Cite web
  13. Шаблон:Cite web
  14. Шаблон:Cite web
  15. Шаблон:Cite web
  16. 16,0 16,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  17. 17,0 17,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  18. Шаблон:Cite news
  19. 19,0 19,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  20. Шаблон:Cite news
  21. Шаблон:Cite web
  22. Шаблон:Cite news
  23. Шаблон:Cite web
  24. Шаблон:Cite web
  25. Шаблон:Cite web
  26. Шаблон:Cite web
  27. Шаблон:Cite news
  28. Шаблон:Cite web
  29. Шаблон:Cite web
  30. Emma Dumain. (28 July 2023). "Q&A: Former Schumer aide on IRA behind the scenes". E&E Daily website Retrieved 29 August 2023.
  31. Шаблон:Cite web
  32. 32,0 32,1 32,2 32,3 Шаблон:Cite web Estimates from the United States Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation or Congressional Budget Office, depending on the number.
  33. Шаблон:Cite web
  34. Шаблон:Cite web
  35. 35,0 35,1 35,2 Шаблон:Cite web
  36. 36,0 36,1 36,2 Шаблон:Cite journal
  37. 37,0 37,1 37,2 Шаблон:Cite journal
  38. 38,0 38,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  39. Шаблон:Cite news
  40. Шаблон:Cite news
  41. Up from the CBO's original projection of $270 billion. Шаблон:Cite web
  42. 42,0 42,1 42,2 Шаблон:Cite web
  43. 43,0 43,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  44. 44,0 44,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  45. Шаблон:Cite web
  46. 46,0 46,1 46,2 Шаблон:Cite AV media
  47. 47,0 47,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  48. 48,0 48,1 48,2 Шаблон:Cite web
  49. 49,0 49,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  50. 50,0 50,1 50,2 Шаблон:Cite report
  51. 51,0 51,1 51,2 51,3 Шаблон:Cite magazine
  52. 52,0 52,1 Шаблон:Cite report
  53. 53,0 53,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  54. 54,0 54,1 Шаблон:Cite AV media
  55. 55,0 55,1 55,2 55,3 Шаблон:Cite web
  56. 56,0 56,1 56,2 56,3 Шаблон:Cite web
  57. 57,0 57,1 57,2 Liu, Alex; Шаблон:Cite web
  58. Шаблон:Cite web
  59. Шаблон:Cite news
  60. Шаблон:Cite web
  61. Шаблон:Cite web
  62. Шаблон:Cite web
  63. 63,0 63,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  64. Шаблон:Cite web
  65. Шаблон:Cite web
  66. Шаблон:Cite web
  67. Шаблон:Cite web
  68. Шаблон:Cite web
  69. 69,0 69,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  70. 70,0 70,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  71. Шаблон:Cite web
  72. 72,0 72,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  73. 73,0 73,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  74. Шаблон:Cite web
  75. Шаблон:Cite news
  76. Шаблон:Cite web
  77. 77,0 77,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  78. 78,0 78,1 78,2 Senate Agriculture Committee one-pager, retrieved October 20, 2022
  79. 79,0 79,1 Шаблон:Cite news
  80. Шаблон:Cite web
  81. Шаблон:Cite web
  82. 82,0 82,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  83. Шаблон:Cite web
  84. Шаблон:Cite web
  85. Шаблон:Cite web
  86. Шаблон:USC
  87. Шаблон:USC
  88. 88,0 88,1 88,2 88,3 88,4 Шаблон:Cite web
  89. Шаблон:Cite web
  90. Шаблон:Cite web
  91. Шаблон:Cite web
  92. Шаблон:Cite web
  93. Шаблон:Cite web
  94. Шаблон:Cite web
  95. Шаблон:Cite web
  96. Шаблон:Cite web
  97. Шаблон:Cite news
  98. Шаблон:Cite news
  99. 99,0 99,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  100. 100,0 100,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  101. Шаблон:Cite book
  102. Шаблон:Cite news
  103. Шаблон:Cite web
  104. Шаблон:Cite web
  105. Шаблон:Cite web
  106. Шаблон:Cite web
  107. Шаблон:Cite web
  108. Шаблон:Cite web
  109. Шаблон:Cite web
  110. Шаблон:Cite web
  111. Шаблон:Cite news
  112. 136 Stat. 2063, Шаблон:Uspl
  113. Шаблон:Cite journal
  114. 114,0 114,1 114,2 114,3 114,4 Шаблон:Cite web
  115. Thread by Stacie Dusetzina, health policy analyst at Vanderbilt University. Шаблон:Cite tweet
  116. Шаблон:Cite web
  117. 117,0 117,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  118. 118,0 118,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  119. Шаблон:Cite news
  120. Шаблон:Cite news
  121. Шаблон:Cite web
  122. Шаблон:Cite news
  123. 123,0 123,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  124. Шаблон:Cite web
  125. Шаблон:Cite web
  126. Шаблон:Cite web
  127. 127,0 127,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  128. Шаблон:Cite news
  129. Шаблон:Cite web
  130. 130,0 130,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  131. Шаблон:Cite web
  132. Шаблон:Cite AV media
  133. Шаблон:Cite web
  134. Шаблон:Cite web
  135. Шаблон:Cite web
  136. Шаблон:Cite web
  137. Шаблон:Cite web
  138. Шаблон:Cite web
  139. Шаблон:Cite web
  140. Шаблон:Cite web
  141. Шаблон:Cite web
  142. 142,0 142,1 Шаблон:Cite news
  143. Шаблон:Cite web
  144. Шаблон:Cite web
  145. Шаблон:Cite web
  146. Шаблон:Cite web
  147. Шаблон:Cite news
  148. Шаблон:Cite web
  149. Шаблон:Cite web
  150. Шаблон:Cite web
  151. Шаблон:Cite web
  152. Шаблон:Cite web
  153. Шаблон:Cite web
  154. Шаблон:Cite web
  155. Шаблон:Cite web
  156. Шаблон:Cite web
  157. Шаблон:Cite news
  158. Шаблон:Cite web
  159. Шаблон:Cite web
  160. Шаблон:Cite news
  161. 161,0 161,1 161,2 Шаблон:Cite web
  162. Шаблон:Cite web
  163. Шаблон:Cite web
  164. Шаблон:Cite web
  165. Шаблон:Cite web
  166. Шаблон:Cite web
  167. Шаблон:Cite web
  168. Шаблон:Cite web
  169. 169,0 169,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  170. 170,0 170,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  171. Шаблон:Cite web
  172. Шаблон:Cite web
  173. Шаблон:Cite web
  174. Шаблон:Cite web
  175. Шаблон:Cite web
  176. Шаблон:Cite news
  177. Шаблон:Cite web
  178. Шаблон:Cite book
  179. Шаблон:Cite news
  180. Шаблон:Cite web
  181. 181,0 181,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  182. Шаблон:Cite web
  183. Шаблон:Cite web
  184. 184,0 184,1 184,2 184,3 Шаблон:Cite web
  185. Шаблон:Cite web
  186. Шаблон:Cite web
  187. Шаблон:Cite web
  188. Шаблон:Cite news
  189. Шаблон:Cite web
  190. Шаблон:Cite news
  191. Шаблон:Cite web
  192. 192,0 192,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  193. Шаблон:Cite web
  194. Шаблон:Cite web
  195. Шаблон:Cite web
  196. Шаблон:Cite web
  197. Шаблон:Cite web
  198. Шаблон:Cite news
  199. Шаблон:Cite news
  200. Шаблон:Cite web
  201. Шаблон:Cite news
  202. Шаблон:Cite web
  203. Шаблон:Cite web
  204. Шаблон:Cite web
  205. Шаблон:Cite web
  206. Шаблон:Cite AV media
  207. Шаблон:Cite web
  208. Шаблон:Cite web
  209. 209,0 209,1 Шаблон:Cite news
  210. Шаблон:Cite web
  211. Шаблон:Cite news
  212. Шаблон:Cite journal
  213. Шаблон:Cite web
  214. 214,0 214,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  215. Шаблон:Cite web
  216. Шаблон:Cite web
  217. Шаблон:Cite web
  218. Шаблон:Cite journal
  219. Шаблон:Cite web
  220. Шаблон:Cite web
  221. Шаблон:Cite news
  222. 222,0 222,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  223. 223,0 223,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  224. 224,0 224,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  225. 225,0 225,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  226. Шаблон:Cite web
  227. Шаблон:Cite web
  228. Шаблон:Cite web
  229. 229,0 229,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  230. Шаблон:Cite web
  231. Шаблон:Cite web
  232. Шаблон:Cite web
  233. Шаблон:Cite web
  234. Шаблон:Cite web
  235. Шаблон:Cite letter
  236. Шаблон:Cite web
  237. Шаблон:Cite web