An Act to amend 71.05 (6) (a) 15., 71.21 (4) (a), 71.26 (2) (a) 4., 71.34 (1k) (g) and 71.45 (2) (a) 10.; to create 71.07 (12), 71.10 (4) (fo), 71.28 (12), 71.30 (3) (do), 71.47 (12), 71.49 (1) (do), 77.54 (76) and 238.401 of the statutes; Relating to: a sales and use tax exemption and an income and franchise tax credit for nuclear energy facilities. (FE)
AB618 would create a package of tax incentives for nuclear energy facilities in Wisconsin. The bill establishes a sales and use tax exemption for tangible personal property sold to construction contractors when the property becomes part of a nuclear energy facility, and it creates a new statutory definition and certification process for such facilities through the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC). The certification would generally last five years, but would end earlier if the facility receives an operating reactor license from the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The bill also creates three parallel income and franchise tax credits for electric public utilities, electric cooperatives, municipal electric companies, and qualified wholesale electric companies. These credits would be available for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2027, and would equal wages paid to full-time employees at a nuclear energy facility in Wisconsin plus certain capital expenditures for construction, improvement, maintenance, development, or operation of the facility. The credits may be transferred, and the bill includes pass-through and administrative rules to integrate the new credits into Wisconsin’s existing individual, corporate, partnership, and tax-option corporation tax systems.
In terms of state law, AB618 amends multiple income and franchise tax provisions and adds new sections to the sales and use tax code. It would exempt qualifying nuclear-facility construction materials from sales and use tax beginning January 1, 2028, and would add new credit provisions to the individual income tax, corporate income/franchise tax, and insurance company tax structures. The bill also directs WEDC to certify facilities for the exemption and defines “nuclear energy facility” as electric generating equipment and associated facilities that derive electricity from nuclear power.
The general sentiment reflected in the available context is limited, but the bill’s introduction by multiple Republican legislators and a Senate cosponsor suggests support among its authors for encouraging nuclear development through tax policy. There are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials, and the bill ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. Because of that, there is no documented floor debate here showing broad bipartisan support or opposition.
The main point of contention likely concerns the use of state tax incentives to promote nuclear energy, including the fiscal cost of the exemption and credits and whether such incentives are an appropriate way to encourage new nuclear investment. The bill’s structure also raises administrative and policy questions about certification by WEDC, transferability of credits, and whether the incentives would effectively subsidize construction and operation before a facility has an NRC operating license. Potentially affected parties include utilities, electric cooperatives, municipal utilities, wholesale electric companies, contractors, and subcontractors involved in nuclear facility development.
AB618 would add new sales and use tax and income/franchise tax provisions to Wisconsin law, creating a targeted tax incentive regime for nuclear energy facilities. It would exempt qualifying construction materials from sales and use tax and authorize new refundable-style, transferable credits tied to wages and capital expenditures for eligible utilities and electric companies. The bill would also require WEDC certification of facilities and integrate the new credits into existing partnership, corporate, and insurance tax filing rules, affecting both facility owners/operators and the contractors and employees associated with nuclear project development.
The available record shows no committee testimony or vote history, so there is little direct evidence of debate sentiment. Based on the bill’s sponsorship and structure, the measure appears to have been introduced as a pro-development, pro-nuclear incentive bill, likely supported by lawmakers favoring expanded nuclear generation and private investment. The bill did not advance and ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1, indicating that it did not secure the necessary legislative support.
The likely areas of contention are the fiscal impact of granting a sales tax exemption and multiple tax credits, the policy choice to subsidize nuclear energy development, and the breadth of eligible expenditures covered by the credits. Critics may question whether the incentives are too generous, whether they should apply before a facility is fully licensed, and whether transferability could reduce transparency or complicate administration. Supporters would likely argue that the incentives are needed to attract large-scale nuclear investment, support high-wage jobs, and expand Wisconsin’s energy supply.