From only a few areas approved for subsidy projects since 2009, the project's capital investment to complete the subsidy is already very good, removing 30% of funds from the temporary deductions (the document stipulates that 70% of the subsidy will be disbursed ahead of schedule, with projects After the acceptance, the fund settlement will be re-allocated 30%), and the declaration cost of the subsidy item will be deducted. If the subsidy funds account for 50% of the total investment of the project, it is initially estimated that less than 35% of the subsidy funds will actually be available during the implementation of the project. In Other words, the actual investment in the national PV subsidy accounts for 1/3 of the total project investment. In this case, if the local and project investors do not invest in matching funds, the installed capacity of the project can only be completed 1/3. It is understood that, in some areas, the actual situation of most projects is consistent with this.
According to the requirements of Document 623 issued by the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, “For projects completed within the above-mentioned time limit, the Ministry of Finance will carry out fund liquidation based on the actual installed capacity, installation types of photovoltaic buildings, etc., and appropriate funds for the remaining subsidies. If the project is completed within the prescribed time limit, the remaining subsidies will not be allocated and the previously subsidized funds will be recovered. The question is, how can funds be recovered? What kind of responsibilities should the local and project reporting party's supporting funds not be allocated? Are there any specific legal restrictions?
The government has repeatedly stressed the determination of promoting the application of solar photovoltaic power generation and the continuity of the policy. There is no doubt that the problem may lie in emphasizing "promotion" and ignoring "pulling."
Photovoltaic subsidy policy is essentially a top-down policy of subsidizing high input of photovoltaic power generation with subsidies. Local and project investors drive subsidies for short-term and short-sighted interests. Photovoltaic power generation does not bring obvious vested interests. Therefore, matching funds become the figures in the reporting report. In essence, for investors in photovoltaic projects, there is a lack of real interest incentives and a consumption-pulling mechanism that lacks subsidies. Therefore, the subsidy policy of this photovoltaic project only initiated the solar photovoltaic application market. As a long-term sustainable policy, it still expects a more optimized path.
The consumer market may be able to become the basic starting point for the sustainable development of photovoltaic buildings. We can conceive of such a market-oriented mode of operation: building owners as investors, will be the roof of the building or building facade facing the power sector applications as a carrier of photovoltaic power generation; after obtaining the agreement, designed by the photovoltaic system integration company and to the power The department submits the approval; the owner installs it with its own funds and bank special loan investment, and then the power company checks and joins the power company's purchase meter to measure the grid connection, and pays the purchase fee to the owner on time; the power department pays the difference over the conventional electricity, and The government grants relief or subsidies through taxes. In this way, all parties have obtained corresponding benefits: the state actually bought electricity from photovoltaics through subsidies, power companies received returns on tax relief or subsidies, building owners received direct benefits from sales of high-priced photovoltaic power generation, and the owners continued to use them as routine. Low-cost electricity consumers.
The above model is not a utopia of Utopia. It is a mature market model that Western countries have operated for many years. The photovoltaics policies of the United States, Japan, and South Korea all started with subsidies, legislation, subsidies, taxes, and banks.
According to the requirements of Document 623 issued by the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, “For projects completed within the above-mentioned time limit, the Ministry of Finance will carry out fund liquidation based on the actual installed capacity, installation types of photovoltaic buildings, etc., and appropriate funds for the remaining subsidies. If the project is completed within the prescribed time limit, the remaining subsidies will not be allocated and the previously subsidized funds will be recovered. The question is, how can funds be recovered? What kind of responsibilities should the local and project reporting party's supporting funds not be allocated? Are there any specific legal restrictions?
The government has repeatedly stressed the determination of promoting the application of solar photovoltaic power generation and the continuity of the policy. There is no doubt that the problem may lie in emphasizing "promotion" and ignoring "pulling."
Photovoltaic subsidy policy is essentially a top-down policy of subsidizing high input of photovoltaic power generation with subsidies. Local and project investors drive subsidies for short-term and short-sighted interests. Photovoltaic power generation does not bring obvious vested interests. Therefore, matching funds become the figures in the reporting report. In essence, for investors in photovoltaic projects, there is a lack of real interest incentives and a consumption-pulling mechanism that lacks subsidies. Therefore, the subsidy policy of this photovoltaic project only initiated the solar photovoltaic application market. As a long-term sustainable policy, it still expects a more optimized path.
The consumer market may be able to become the basic starting point for the sustainable development of photovoltaic buildings. We can conceive of such a market-oriented mode of operation: building owners as investors, will be the roof of the building or building facade facing the power sector applications as a carrier of photovoltaic power generation; after obtaining the agreement, designed by the photovoltaic system integration company and to the power The department submits the approval; the owner installs it with its own funds and bank special loan investment, and then the power company checks and joins the power company's purchase meter to measure the grid connection, and pays the purchase fee to the owner on time; the power department pays the difference over the conventional electricity, and The government grants relief or subsidies through taxes. In this way, all parties have obtained corresponding benefits: the state actually bought electricity from photovoltaics through subsidies, power companies received returns on tax relief or subsidies, building owners received direct benefits from sales of high-priced photovoltaic power generation, and the owners continued to use them as routine. Low-cost electricity consumers.
The above model is not a utopia of Utopia. It is a mature market model that Western countries have operated for many years. The photovoltaics policies of the United States, Japan, and South Korea all started with subsidies, legislation, subsidies, taxes, and banks.
Molding series,High Quality Molding series,Molding series Details, Huzhou Kade Electronic & Technology Co., Ltd.
Low Frequency Transformer Co., Ltd. , http://www.chinaferritecore.com