I really appreciate all of the visitors I have had since I started this blog. While I have enjoyed putting the information out and I hope you found it useful, I have started a new blog that is less "technical" from a legal perspective. Please check it out if you get a chance:
buildingpurpose.com
Thanks again.
Tuesday, June 11, 2013
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Mississippi: Refund of Ad Valorem Taxes
The Mississippi Attorney General has issued an opinion that
a county board of supervisors may issue a refund of erroneously paid ad valorem
taxes that were paid in protest by an exempt entity. The exempt entity made payments
for the 2007, 2008, and 2009 tax year in February of 2010 and requested a
refund of the taxes paid in protest on October 17, 2012. A county board of
supervisors has the authority to issue a refund of excess or erroneously
collected taxes paid within three years of the date the petition for such
refund is filed with the tax collector. Miss. Code Ann.§ 27-73-7 authorizes a
tax collector, upon request by a taxpayer, and upon order of the board of
supervisors, to refund erroneously paid taxes. The statute of limitations for
such a refund of ad valorem taxes is controlled by Miss. Code Ann.§ 15-1-49,
which requires that a refund of ad valorem taxes may only be issued for payments
that were made within three years of the date the petition for a refund was
filed.
Tax Credits Available for Clean Energy Manufacturers
The U.S. Departments of Energy and the Treasury on February
7 announced the availability of $150 million in Advanced Energy Manufacturing
tax credits for clean energy and energy efficiency manufacturing projects
across the United States. The program supports manufacturing of a range of
clean energy products, from renewable energy equipment to energy efficiency
products. Established by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the
initial round provided $2.3 billion in credits to 183 projects across the country.
The $150 million in tax credits are being made available because they were not
used by the previous awardees.
The tax credits will be allocated on a competitive basis. Projects will be assessed by the Energy Department based on the following criteria: commercial viability, domestic job creation, technological innovation, speed to project completion, and potential for reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. The Department will also consider additional factors, including diversity of geographical locations, technology, project size, and regional economic development.
The tax credits will be allocated on a competitive basis. Projects will be assessed by the Energy Department based on the following criteria: commercial viability, domestic job creation, technological innovation, speed to project completion, and potential for reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. The Department will also consider additional factors, including diversity of geographical locations, technology, project size, and regional economic development.
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
DOE Announces New Funding to Develop Biomass Supply Chain Technologies
The Energy Department on January 28 announced about $6
million for projects that will develop and demonstrate supply-chain
technologies to affordably deliver commercial-scale lignocellulosic biomass
feedstocks such as woody plant tissue to biorefineries across the country. This
funding will help accelerate the development of integrated, cost-effective
supply-chain systems that reduce time and costs to produce biofuels for cars,
trucks, and airplanes.
The Department will make available about $6 million this year for one to two multi-year projects. All selected projects will require a cost share contribution by the grant recipient, including 20% for research and development activities and 50% for demonstration activities.
The Department will make available about $6 million this year for one to two multi-year projects. All selected projects will require a cost share contribution by the grant recipient, including 20% for research and development activities and 50% for demonstration activities.
DOE Expands Technical Assistance for Tribal Energy Projects
The Energy Department on January 30 announced the second
round of the Strategic Technical Assistance Response Team (START) Program,
which provides federally recognized Tribal governments with technical
assistance to accelerate clean energy project deployment. Additionally, the
Energy Department plans to seek information from tribes interested in launching
or expanding utility services in their own communities, which will help
establish a new START Utility Program (START-UP). Additional details on this
effort will be available on the Office of Indian Energy website in the coming
weeks.
Over the past year, the START program has helped nine Tribal communities advance their clean energy technology and infrastructure projects, from solar and wind to biofuels and energy efficiency. The second round of technical assistance awards will build upon the initial successes of the START program and further help Native American and Alaska Native communities increase local generation capacity, enhance energy-efficiency measures, and create local entrepreneurial and job opportunities. In the contiguous United States, Energy Department and national laboratory experts will provide technical assistance on tribes' clean energy project development. In Alaska, the Energy Department and the Denali Commission will help rural Alaska Native communities conduct energy awareness and training programs and pursue new renewable energy and energy efficiency opportunities. Applications are due by March 15, 2013.
Over the past year, the START program has helped nine Tribal communities advance their clean energy technology and infrastructure projects, from solar and wind to biofuels and energy efficiency. The second round of technical assistance awards will build upon the initial successes of the START program and further help Native American and Alaska Native communities increase local generation capacity, enhance energy-efficiency measures, and create local entrepreneurial and job opportunities. In the contiguous United States, Energy Department and national laboratory experts will provide technical assistance on tribes' clean energy project development. In Alaska, the Energy Department and the Denali Commission will help rural Alaska Native communities conduct energy awareness and training programs and pursue new renewable energy and energy efficiency opportunities. Applications are due by March 15, 2013.
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Some Pending Mississippi Economic Development Bills
The Mississippi Legislature is considering a whole host of bills that could impact Mississippi businesses. Here are a few worth noting:
Strengthening Mississippi Academic Research Through Business Act (“SMART Business Act”) - Encourages private businesses to invest their research dollars in Mississippi universities. The proposal offers a rebate equal to 25% of the research costs to companies who enter into a written agreement with a university for research and development.
Employee Pass-Through Jobs Tax Credit - In lieu of a business utilizing the jobs tax credit, the business may pass all or a portion of the tax credit to one or more employees of the company.
Headquarters Relocation Tax Credit - Provides a tax credit in the amount of actual relocation costs incurred by a business in relocating its corporate headquarters to Mississippi.
Expansion Relocation Tax Credit – Provides a tax credit in the amount of actual relocation costs to existing businesses expanding their workforce in the State of Mississippi. The businesses must qualify for the jobs tax credit provided in the Economic Development Reform Act and must relocate employees to Mississippi from outside the State.
Strengthening Mississippi Academic Research Through Business Act (“SMART Business Act”) - Encourages private businesses to invest their research dollars in Mississippi universities. The proposal offers a rebate equal to 25% of the research costs to companies who enter into a written agreement with a university for research and development.
Employee Pass-Through Jobs Tax Credit - In lieu of a business utilizing the jobs tax credit, the business may pass all or a portion of the tax credit to one or more employees of the company.
Headquarters Relocation Tax Credit - Provides a tax credit in the amount of actual relocation costs incurred by a business in relocating its corporate headquarters to Mississippi.
Expansion Relocation Tax Credit – Provides a tax credit in the amount of actual relocation costs to existing businesses expanding their workforce in the State of Mississippi. The businesses must qualify for the jobs tax credit provided in the Economic Development Reform Act and must relocate employees to Mississippi from outside the State.
Monday, January 28, 2013
Maximizing Depreciation Deductions for Business Real Estate
When buying business real estate, for your own occupancy or
for rental to others, you should take steps that maximize the income tax
depreciation deductions that you can claim for the property. Here are a few
suggestions.
Separating improvements from land. Not all of the cost of acquiring real estate is depreciable. Specifically, the cost of improvements to land is depreciable, but the cost of the land itself is not. Clearly, then, it is desirable to identify and document, at the time that you acquire real estate, the part of your overall acquisition cost allocable to improvements. Thus, when you buy a property, you should either retain a qualified real estate appraiser to make an allocation between land and improvements based on a detailed written analysis, or, if you have enough valuation expertise and knowledge of the locality, write your own detailed analysis and allocation. Also, regarding the allocation, you should be aware that the cost of improvements includes not only the cost of buildings, but also the cost of items such as landscaping and roads, and even some costs of grading and clearing.
Turning land into a deductible asset. Even though land isn't depreciable, there are ways to obtain deductions, for your land cost, that provide a similar tax benefit. One technique is to enter into a long-term lease of the land rather than buy it. If you lease the land, the rents you pay under that “ground lease” are deductible. A different technique, but one which also can turn land into a deductible asset, is the acquisition of an interest in land known as an “estate-for-years.” Under an estate-for-years, you would own the land, but not forever, while an individual or entity “unrelated” to you would own the interest in land that begins when your estate-for-years ends. As the owner of the estate-for-years, you would be allowed to “amortize” (deduct ratably) the cost of the estate-for-years over its duration. Thus, for example, if your estate-for-years is for 50 years, you would be allowed to deduct each year 1/50th of the cost of the estate-for-years.
Separating personal property from buildings. Most business buildings must be depreciated over a period of 39 years, with somewhat more favorable treatment for residential rental real estate (27.5 years) and for certain other types of buildings or building improvements. On the other hand, most personal property (furniture, equipment, etc.) is depreciable over considerably shorter periods. Furthermore, most new personal property is eligible for additional first-year depreciation (bonus depreciation) equal to 50% or 100% of its cost (depending on when the property was acquired and placed in service). In contrast, among buildings or building improvements, only certain leasehold improvements qualify for bonus depreciation. As you can see, if a specific item is classified as personal property rather than as a part of a building, the depreciation deductions for that item will be available sooner and, in economic terms, have a greater “present value” to the property owner. Thus, in the same way that it is desirable to properly allocate between improvements and land, it is important to take steps to identify and document, at the time that you acquire real estate, the items that are personal property and the items that are building parts. For some items, the distinction follows “common sense”, an ordinary chair is personal property, a weight-bearing brick wall is part of a building. However, for many items, for example, lighting fixtures, signs, floor coverings, wall coverings, plumbing, electrical systems and heating and cooling systems, the distinctions are governed by tax rules that can be complex, can involve projections as to the future use of the items, and may even necessitate consultation with engineers or other construction experts. Also, after the personal property and building items are separately identified, they must be separately valued, either by an appraisal, a breakdown of construction costs or both.
Separating improvements from land. Not all of the cost of acquiring real estate is depreciable. Specifically, the cost of improvements to land is depreciable, but the cost of the land itself is not. Clearly, then, it is desirable to identify and document, at the time that you acquire real estate, the part of your overall acquisition cost allocable to improvements. Thus, when you buy a property, you should either retain a qualified real estate appraiser to make an allocation between land and improvements based on a detailed written analysis, or, if you have enough valuation expertise and knowledge of the locality, write your own detailed analysis and allocation. Also, regarding the allocation, you should be aware that the cost of improvements includes not only the cost of buildings, but also the cost of items such as landscaping and roads, and even some costs of grading and clearing.
Turning land into a deductible asset. Even though land isn't depreciable, there are ways to obtain deductions, for your land cost, that provide a similar tax benefit. One technique is to enter into a long-term lease of the land rather than buy it. If you lease the land, the rents you pay under that “ground lease” are deductible. A different technique, but one which also can turn land into a deductible asset, is the acquisition of an interest in land known as an “estate-for-years.” Under an estate-for-years, you would own the land, but not forever, while an individual or entity “unrelated” to you would own the interest in land that begins when your estate-for-years ends. As the owner of the estate-for-years, you would be allowed to “amortize” (deduct ratably) the cost of the estate-for-years over its duration. Thus, for example, if your estate-for-years is for 50 years, you would be allowed to deduct each year 1/50th of the cost of the estate-for-years.
Separating personal property from buildings. Most business buildings must be depreciated over a period of 39 years, with somewhat more favorable treatment for residential rental real estate (27.5 years) and for certain other types of buildings or building improvements. On the other hand, most personal property (furniture, equipment, etc.) is depreciable over considerably shorter periods. Furthermore, most new personal property is eligible for additional first-year depreciation (bonus depreciation) equal to 50% or 100% of its cost (depending on when the property was acquired and placed in service). In contrast, among buildings or building improvements, only certain leasehold improvements qualify for bonus depreciation. As you can see, if a specific item is classified as personal property rather than as a part of a building, the depreciation deductions for that item will be available sooner and, in economic terms, have a greater “present value” to the property owner. Thus, in the same way that it is desirable to properly allocate between improvements and land, it is important to take steps to identify and document, at the time that you acquire real estate, the items that are personal property and the items that are building parts. For some items, the distinction follows “common sense”, an ordinary chair is personal property, a weight-bearing brick wall is part of a building. However, for many items, for example, lighting fixtures, signs, floor coverings, wall coverings, plumbing, electrical systems and heating and cooling systems, the distinctions are governed by tax rules that can be complex, can involve projections as to the future use of the items, and may even necessitate consultation with engineers or other construction experts. Also, after the personal property and building items are separately identified, they must be separately valued, either by an appraisal, a breakdown of construction costs or both.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Third Circuit Denies Rehearing in ‘Historic Boardwalk Hall' Tax Credit Case
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Oct. 22
denied a petition for a rehearing en banc in the closely watched Historic
Boardwalk Hall case in which the court held that an investor in a syndicated
partnership that shared in federal historic rehabilitation tax credits was not
a bona fide partner (Historic Boardwalk Hall LLC v. Commissioner, 3d Cir., No.
11-1832, filed 10/22/12).
HBH filed a petition for rehearing Oct. 10, arguing that the Third Circuit's decision was contrary to the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Commissioner v. Culbertson, 337 U.S. 733 (1949), because it constituted “a holding that a partner who has no right to a return of its capital contribution either directly or indirectly from a partnership nonetheless has no risk with respect to its capital, and therefore is not a partner for federal income tax purposes.”
In 2011, the U.S. Tax Court had held that a partnership formed to allow Pitney Bowes to invest in the historic rehabilitation of the East Hall of the Atlantic City, N.J., convention center was entitled to claim historic rehabilitation tax credits because the partnership was not a sham lacking economic substance.
The Third Circuit reversed Aug. 27, 2012, holding that Pitney Bowes was a partner in form, not in substance, and could not claim the tax credits regardless of whether the transaction otherwise had economic substance.
HBH filed a petition for rehearing Oct. 10, arguing that the Third Circuit's decision was contrary to the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Commissioner v. Culbertson, 337 U.S. 733 (1949), because it constituted “a holding that a partner who has no right to a return of its capital contribution either directly or indirectly from a partnership nonetheless has no risk with respect to its capital, and therefore is not a partner for federal income tax purposes.”
In 2011, the U.S. Tax Court had held that a partnership formed to allow Pitney Bowes to invest in the historic rehabilitation of the East Hall of the Atlantic City, N.J., convention center was entitled to claim historic rehabilitation tax credits because the partnership was not a sham lacking economic substance.
The Third Circuit reversed Aug. 27, 2012, holding that Pitney Bowes was a partner in form, not in substance, and could not claim the tax credits regardless of whether the transaction otherwise had economic substance.
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
New Public-Private Partnership to Support U.S. Manufacturing Innovation
The Obama Administration announced on August 16 the launch
of a new public-private institute for manufacturing innovation. The new
partnership, the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute, was
selected through a competitive process to receive an initial award of $30
million in federal funding, matched by $40 million from the winning consortium.
The consortium includes manufacturing firms, universities, community colleges,
and non-profit organizations from the Ohio-Pennsylvania-West Virginia
"Tech Belt."
On March 9, 2012, President Obama announced his plan to invest $1 billion to catalyze a national network of up to 15 manufacturing innovation institutes around the country that would serve as regional hubs for manufacturing. The President called on Congress to act on this proposal and create the National Network of Manufacturing Innovation. Five federal agencies—the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Commerce, the National Science Foundation, and NASA—jointly committed to invest $45 million in a pilot institute on additive manufacturing. Additive manufacturing is a process of making three-dimensional solid objects from a digital model.
On March 9, 2012, President Obama announced his plan to invest $1 billion to catalyze a national network of up to 15 manufacturing innovation institutes around the country that would serve as regional hubs for manufacturing. The President called on Congress to act on this proposal and create the National Network of Manufacturing Innovation. Five federal agencies—the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Commerce, the National Science Foundation, and NASA—jointly committed to invest $45 million in a pilot institute on additive manufacturing. Additive manufacturing is a process of making three-dimensional solid objects from a digital model.
New York, NYC Biotechnology Credit Extended
L. 2012, S7462 (c. 429), effective 08/17/2012, extends the
authorization for New York City to provide a biotechnology credit against the
general corporation tax, unincorporated business tax, and banking corporation
tax until January 1, 2016. Previously this credit was only authorized until
January 1, 2013.
California Postpones Action on Technology Transfer Agreement Tax Rules
California's State Board of Equalization postpones issuance
of regulations governing taxation of software technology transfer agreements
from November to at least January 2013 due to universal opposition from the
business community to the board's draft proposals so far. SBOE is working
toward regulations on taxation of TTAs in the wake of a January 2011 state
appellate court ruling in Nortel Networks Inc. v. SBOE. In that case, the court
said SBOE exceeded its authority when it excluded all prewritten software from
TTAs, which are exempt from sales tax. At an SBOE meeting, Tax Policy Division
Chief Susan Buehler tells the five board members that a second
interested-parties meeting is being moved from September to January to give
board staff and interested parties more time to submit comments and work toward
agreement. Formal regulations will be proposed after the next
interested-parties meeting.
Mississippi, Tax Sale Record Fees
The Mississippi Attorney General issued an opinion stating
that the $50 fee charged by the clerk of the Chancery Court for determination
of the record owner of property sold at a property tax sale under Miss. Code
Ann. § 27-43-3 may be charged at the time of redemption, whether that occurs
before or after the start of the 180-day notice period preceding the expiration
of the redemption period under Miss. Code Ann. § 27-43-1. Accrual of the fee is
dependent upon redemption of the property, not on the notice period, and the
statute does not prohibit the clerk of the Chancery Court from performing work
to ascertain the record owner of the property before the 180-day notice period.
(Attorney General Opinion, 2012-00135, 07/20/2012.)
USDA Funds Boost Renewable Energy Production
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on August 14
announced that 106 projects in 29 states, Guam, and Puerto Rico have been
selected to receive funding for the production of renewable energy and energy
efficiency improvements. Funding comes through the USDA's Rural Energy for America
Program (REAP).
One example of a selected project is in Washington County, Iowa, where a recipient is receiving a guaranteed loan to construct a 50 kilowatt (kW) wind turbine at his agricultural business. The turbine is expected to generate approximately 103,200 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity annually, enough to meet the annual requirements of nine homes. WTE-Dallmann LLC in Calumet, Wisconsin, is another recipient of a REAP grant to help fund the installation of an anaerobic digester that will generate more than 4.8 million kWh of electricity, power for about 420 homes annually. The electricity will be sold to the local utility.
One example of a selected project is in Washington County, Iowa, where a recipient is receiving a guaranteed loan to construct a 50 kilowatt (kW) wind turbine at his agricultural business. The turbine is expected to generate approximately 103,200 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity annually, enough to meet the annual requirements of nine homes. WTE-Dallmann LLC in Calumet, Wisconsin, is another recipient of a REAP grant to help fund the installation of an anaerobic digester that will generate more than 4.8 million kWh of electricity, power for about 420 homes annually. The electricity will be sold to the local utility.
Monday, August 13, 2012
Economic Gardening
With economic uncertainty looming, progressive
American regions have chosen to adopt new economic development approaches. One innovative approach to the ever elusive
hunt for jobs is simply to create your own.
Instead of directing precious financial resources towards carefully
crafted plans that focus on recruiting new business from “outside-in,” economic
gardening embraces a philosophy designed to generate new jobs from the existing
base of businesses already located within the community. Diversifying a community’s economic
development portfolio to embrace an economic gardening model hinges upon
providing targeted incentives such as a job creation tax credit, educational
enhancements, and networking opportunities to innovative home-grown businesses
operating in the region. While the success
of traditional economic development recruiting can bring about a great deal of
publicity and create a large number of jobs, not all communities will be able
to succeed at the game of landing the big projects. Some communities will have difficulty producing
the right amount of incentives to lure high-profile jobs; however, by using the
long term “inside-out” economic gardening approach, the payoff in terms of job
creation and economic growth for certain communities could be huge.
A prime example of the philosophical framework behind Economic Gardening is found in Littleton, Colorado. Not unlike many small towns in Mississippi, the community of Littleton consisted of roughly 40,000 and was attempting to recover from the layoff of several thousand employees by the town’s major employment anchor. In response, Littleton’s community leaders looked inward by focusing on its entrepreneurial economic development infrastructure instead of loading its lure with quick fix incentives in search of the big project.
The framework for economic gardening is both innovative and simple. At its core, the philosophy suggests that a sustainable economic development policy must strike a balance between applying “outside-in” and “inside-out” growth strategies, subject to the unique attributes and resources of a given community. Littleton’s policy was based on a simple belief: small local entrepreneurial firms would be the engine for the creation of sustainable wealth and new jobs, and the role of the city was to provide a nurturing environment within which these small firms could flourish. As a testament to economic gardening’s vitality, other communities throughout the United States have also experienced success as a result of diversifying their economic development portfolio.
In Oakland, California, the city’s economic development office launched an economic gardening program that encouraged entrepreneurialism in connection with the abundance of venture capital firms throughout the region. In Santa Fe, New Mexico, the Santa Fe Economic Development, Inc. crafted a plan using economic gardening principles to use conventional industry cluster development techniques to create jobs from existing local businesses. In Madison, Wisconsin, the State of Wisconsin used economic gardening principles to establish the Wisconsin Entrepreneurs’ Network and Wisconsin PeerSpectives Network to enhance connectivity and exchange amongst business owners and community leaders.
One of the main goals of Economic Gardening is to create an environment where entrepreneurs can flourish. Of particular importance to this concept are intellectual stimulation, openness to new ideas, and the support of infrastructure like venture capital and local universities. Embedded within this economic model is also the notion of Mississippi’s creative class – a development which contends that creative companies and creative entrepreneurs are responsible for a great deal of Mississippi’s new jobs and wealth. Thus, nurturing Mississippi’s creative environment is conducive to entrepreneurial activity and prosperity. As noted by the Mississippi Arts Commission’s and Mississippi Development Authority’s joint study to explore the realization of the economic potential of creativity in Mississippi, communities in Mississippi stand poised to reap the rich benefits of their cultural and creative splendor. Moreover, economic development practitioners see Mississippi’s creative class as a vehicle for job creation and economic opportunity for communities throughout the state.
For cash strapped communities suffering from revenue shortfalls, economic development from a localized approach may be the key. In January 2011, the State of Mississippi, through the Mississippi Development Authority’s Pilot Entrepreneur Training Program, launched an effort to target small businesses and entrepreneurs in order to introduce them to business planning resources, the legal aspects of business and management, human resources and management principles, marketing research and analysis, financial statement resources, trade and exporting, government contracting and information on purchasing or expanding a business. Thus, the key to the puzzle is for communities to seek to generate added value from their rich cultural and historic heritage. Each community should seek to find its own economic development identity or form regional clusters to pool their resources with neighboring communities. In diversifying a community’s economic development portfolio, community leaders must be confident in the proposition that there is a light at the end of the tunnel because entrepreneurs ultimately drive the United States economy.
A prime example of the philosophical framework behind Economic Gardening is found in Littleton, Colorado. Not unlike many small towns in Mississippi, the community of Littleton consisted of roughly 40,000 and was attempting to recover from the layoff of several thousand employees by the town’s major employment anchor. In response, Littleton’s community leaders looked inward by focusing on its entrepreneurial economic development infrastructure instead of loading its lure with quick fix incentives in search of the big project.
The framework for economic gardening is both innovative and simple. At its core, the philosophy suggests that a sustainable economic development policy must strike a balance between applying “outside-in” and “inside-out” growth strategies, subject to the unique attributes and resources of a given community. Littleton’s policy was based on a simple belief: small local entrepreneurial firms would be the engine for the creation of sustainable wealth and new jobs, and the role of the city was to provide a nurturing environment within which these small firms could flourish. As a testament to economic gardening’s vitality, other communities throughout the United States have also experienced success as a result of diversifying their economic development portfolio.
In Oakland, California, the city’s economic development office launched an economic gardening program that encouraged entrepreneurialism in connection with the abundance of venture capital firms throughout the region. In Santa Fe, New Mexico, the Santa Fe Economic Development, Inc. crafted a plan using economic gardening principles to use conventional industry cluster development techniques to create jobs from existing local businesses. In Madison, Wisconsin, the State of Wisconsin used economic gardening principles to establish the Wisconsin Entrepreneurs’ Network and Wisconsin PeerSpectives Network to enhance connectivity and exchange amongst business owners and community leaders.
One of the main goals of Economic Gardening is to create an environment where entrepreneurs can flourish. Of particular importance to this concept are intellectual stimulation, openness to new ideas, and the support of infrastructure like venture capital and local universities. Embedded within this economic model is also the notion of Mississippi’s creative class – a development which contends that creative companies and creative entrepreneurs are responsible for a great deal of Mississippi’s new jobs and wealth. Thus, nurturing Mississippi’s creative environment is conducive to entrepreneurial activity and prosperity. As noted by the Mississippi Arts Commission’s and Mississippi Development Authority’s joint study to explore the realization of the economic potential of creativity in Mississippi, communities in Mississippi stand poised to reap the rich benefits of their cultural and creative splendor. Moreover, economic development practitioners see Mississippi’s creative class as a vehicle for job creation and economic opportunity for communities throughout the state.
For cash strapped communities suffering from revenue shortfalls, economic development from a localized approach may be the key. In January 2011, the State of Mississippi, through the Mississippi Development Authority’s Pilot Entrepreneur Training Program, launched an effort to target small businesses and entrepreneurs in order to introduce them to business planning resources, the legal aspects of business and management, human resources and management principles, marketing research and analysis, financial statement resources, trade and exporting, government contracting and information on purchasing or expanding a business. Thus, the key to the puzzle is for communities to seek to generate added value from their rich cultural and historic heritage. Each community should seek to find its own economic development identity or form regional clusters to pool their resources with neighboring communities. In diversifying a community’s economic development portfolio, community leaders must be confident in the proposition that there is a light at the end of the tunnel because entrepreneurs ultimately drive the United States economy.
Defense, Interior Departments Pursue Renewable Energy on Federal Lands
The Interior Department announced on August 6 that Secretary
of Defense Leon Panetta and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar have signed a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that encourages appropriate development of
renewable energy projects on public lands that are set aside for
defense-related purposes, and on other onshore and offshore areas near military
installations. The MOU establishes the Renewable Energy Partnership Plan, which
aims to harness the solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass energy resources
located on or near military installations across the country.
Department of Defense (DoD) installations encompass roughly 28 million acres in the United States, including 16 million acres previously managed by the Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that were withdrawn for military use. About 13 million acres of these withdrawn lands are located in the West and are rich in wind, solar, and geothermal resources. In addition, offshore wind is an abundant renewable energy resource available to many DoD installations on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, along the Gulf of Mexico, and in Hawaii.
Access to renewable energy will allow a military base to maintain critical functions for weeks or months if the commercial grid goes down. To keep the military operating in the event of a grid failure, each of the military services has committed to deploy one gigawatt of renewable energy on or near its installations by 2025. In pursuit of these goals, the MOU establishes a framework for an offshore wind partnership and forum; provides a blueprint for Interior and the DoD to identify onshore renewable energy projects at DoD installations; creates a working group on geothermal energy; and commits the DoD and the BLM to developing a pilot process for authorizing solar energy projects on several military installations in Arizona and California.
Department of Defense (DoD) installations encompass roughly 28 million acres in the United States, including 16 million acres previously managed by the Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that were withdrawn for military use. About 13 million acres of these withdrawn lands are located in the West and are rich in wind, solar, and geothermal resources. In addition, offshore wind is an abundant renewable energy resource available to many DoD installations on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, along the Gulf of Mexico, and in Hawaii.
Access to renewable energy will allow a military base to maintain critical functions for weeks or months if the commercial grid goes down. To keep the military operating in the event of a grid failure, each of the military services has committed to deploy one gigawatt of renewable energy on or near its installations by 2025. In pursuit of these goals, the MOU establishes a framework for an offshore wind partnership and forum; provides a blueprint for Interior and the DoD to identify onshore renewable energy projects at DoD installations; creates a working group on geothermal energy; and commits the DoD and the BLM to developing a pilot process for authorizing solar energy projects on several military installations in Arizona and California.
DOE Award $3 Million for Energy Storage Technologies
The Energy Department announced on August 2 that 19 new
projects will receive a total of $43 million from the department's Advanced
Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) to develop breakthrough energy storage
technologies. The projects will focus on innovations in battery management and
storage to advance electric vehicle (EV) technologies, help improve the
efficiency and reliability of the electrical grid, and provide important energy
security benefits to U.S. armed forces. The projects are supported by two new
ARPA-E programs: Advanced Management and Protection of Energy Storage Devices
(AMPED) and Small Business Innovation Research.
Twelve research projects are receiving $30 million in funding under the AMPED program, which aims to develop advanced sensing and control technologies that could dramatically improve grid-scale and vehicle batteries. Unlike other Energy Department efforts to push the frontiers of battery chemistry, AMPED is focused on maximizing the potential of existing battery chemistries. These innovations will help reduce costs and improve the performance of next-generation storage technologies, which could be applied in both plug-in and hybrid EVs. For example, Battelle Memorial Institute in Columbus, Ohio, will develop an optical sensor to monitor the internal environment of a lithium-ion battery in real-time.
ARPA-E is also awarding $13 million to seven enterprising small businesses that are pursuing cutting-edge energy storage developments for stationary power and electric vehicles. These businesses will develop novel battery chemistries and battery designs as part of the larger department-wide Small Business Innovative Research/Small Business Technology Transfer program. For example, Energy Storage Systems, Inc., in Portland, Oregon, will construct a flow battery for grid-scale storage using an advanced cell design and electrolyte materials composed of low cost iron.
Twelve research projects are receiving $30 million in funding under the AMPED program, which aims to develop advanced sensing and control technologies that could dramatically improve grid-scale and vehicle batteries. Unlike other Energy Department efforts to push the frontiers of battery chemistry, AMPED is focused on maximizing the potential of existing battery chemistries. These innovations will help reduce costs and improve the performance of next-generation storage technologies, which could be applied in both plug-in and hybrid EVs. For example, Battelle Memorial Institute in Columbus, Ohio, will develop an optical sensor to monitor the internal environment of a lithium-ion battery in real-time.
ARPA-E is also awarding $13 million to seven enterprising small businesses that are pursuing cutting-edge energy storage developments for stationary power and electric vehicles. These businesses will develop novel battery chemistries and battery designs as part of the larger department-wide Small Business Innovative Research/Small Business Technology Transfer program. For example, Energy Storage Systems, Inc., in Portland, Oregon, will construct a flow battery for grid-scale storage using an advanced cell design and electrolyte materials composed of low cost iron.
USDA Supports Growers of Feedstocks for Advanced Biofuels
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced on July
27 a total of $19.4 million in payments to 125 advanced biofuel producers to
support the production of advanced biofuels from a wide variety of non-food
sources, including waste products. The funding will be provided through USDA's
Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels, which makes payments to eligible
producers based on the amount of biofuels a recipient produces from renewable
biomass, other than corn kernel starch. Eligible feedstocks include crop
residue; animal, food, and yard waste; vegetable oil; and animal fat.
For example, Somerset Hardwood Flooring in Somerset, Kentucky, will receive a $7,040 payment for producing wood pellets from residual sawdust from its hardwood flooring manufacturing process. The company produces about 40 tons of wood pellets annually. Likewise, FPE Renewables, LLC, based in Lyden, Washington, will receive a payment of $9,612 for using dairy waste to produce biogas, which is then converted to electricity. And Virginia Biodiesel Refinery in West Point, Virginia, will receive a payment of $7,900 for making biodiesel from soybean and recycled cooking oil.
For example, Somerset Hardwood Flooring in Somerset, Kentucky, will receive a $7,040 payment for producing wood pellets from residual sawdust from its hardwood flooring manufacturing process. The company produces about 40 tons of wood pellets annually. Likewise, FPE Renewables, LLC, based in Lyden, Washington, will receive a payment of $9,612 for using dairy waste to produce biogas, which is then converted to electricity. And Virginia Biodiesel Refinery in West Point, Virginia, will receive a payment of $7,900 for making biodiesel from soybean and recycled cooking oil.
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Small Business Innovation Research Program (SBIR)
SBIR is a highly competitive program that encourages small
business to explore their technological potential and provides the incentive to
profit from its commercialization. By including qualified small businesses in
the nation's R&D arena, high-tech innovation is stimulated and the United
States gains entrepreneurial spirit as it meets its specific research and
development needs.
Competitive Opportunity for Small Business:
SBIR targets the entrepreneurial sector because that is where most innovation and innovators thrive. However, the risk and expense of conducting serious R&D efforts are often beyond the means of many small businesses. By reserving a specific percentage of federal R&D funds for small business, SBIR protects the small business and enables it to compete on the same level as larger businesses. SBIR funds the critical startup and development stages and it encourages the commercialization of the technology, product, or service, which, in turn, stimulates the U.S. economy.
Since its enactment in 1982, as part of the Small Business Innovation Development Act, SBIR has helped thousands of small businesses to compete for federal research and development awards. Their contributions have enhanced the nation's defense, protected our environment, advanced health care, and improved our ability to manage information and manipulate data.
SBIR Qualifications:
Small businesses must meet certain eligibility criteria to participate in the SBIR program.
American-owned and independently operated
For-profit
Principal researcher employed by business
Company size limited to 500 employees
The SBIR System:
Each year, eleven federal departments and agencies are required by SBIR to reserve a portion of their R&D funds for award to small business.
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Education
Department of Energy
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Homeland Security
Department of Transportation
Environmental Protection Agency
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Science Foundation
These agencies designate R&D topics and accept proposals.
Three-Phase Program:
Following submission of proposals, agencies make SBIR awards based on small business qualification, degree of innovation, technical merit, and future market potential. Small businesses that receive awards then begin a three-phase program.
Phase I is the startup phase. Awards of up to $100,000 for approximately 6 months support exploration of the technical merit or feasibility of an idea or technology.
Phase II awards of up to $750,000, for as many as 2 years, expand Phase I results. During this time, the R&D work is performed and the developer evaluates commercialization potential. Only Phase I award winners are considered for Phase II.
Phase III is the period during which Phase II innovation moves from the laboratory into the marketplace. No SBIR funds support this phase. The small business must find funding in the private sector or other non-SBIR federal agency funding.
Competitive Opportunity for Small Business:
SBIR targets the entrepreneurial sector because that is where most innovation and innovators thrive. However, the risk and expense of conducting serious R&D efforts are often beyond the means of many small businesses. By reserving a specific percentage of federal R&D funds for small business, SBIR protects the small business and enables it to compete on the same level as larger businesses. SBIR funds the critical startup and development stages and it encourages the commercialization of the technology, product, or service, which, in turn, stimulates the U.S. economy.
Since its enactment in 1982, as part of the Small Business Innovation Development Act, SBIR has helped thousands of small businesses to compete for federal research and development awards. Their contributions have enhanced the nation's defense, protected our environment, advanced health care, and improved our ability to manage information and manipulate data.
SBIR Qualifications:
Small businesses must meet certain eligibility criteria to participate in the SBIR program.
American-owned and independently operated
For-profit
Principal researcher employed by business
Company size limited to 500 employees
The SBIR System:
Each year, eleven federal departments and agencies are required by SBIR to reserve a portion of their R&D funds for award to small business.
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Education
Department of Energy
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Homeland Security
Department of Transportation
Environmental Protection Agency
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Science Foundation
These agencies designate R&D topics and accept proposals.
Three-Phase Program:
Following submission of proposals, agencies make SBIR awards based on small business qualification, degree of innovation, technical merit, and future market potential. Small businesses that receive awards then begin a three-phase program.
Phase I is the startup phase. Awards of up to $100,000 for approximately 6 months support exploration of the technical merit or feasibility of an idea or technology.
Phase II awards of up to $750,000, for as many as 2 years, expand Phase I results. During this time, the R&D work is performed and the developer evaluates commercialization potential. Only Phase I award winners are considered for Phase II.
Phase III is the period during which Phase II innovation moves from the laboratory into the marketplace. No SBIR funds support this phase. The small business must find funding in the private sector or other non-SBIR federal agency funding.
Small Business Technology Transfer Program (STTR)
STTR is an important small business program that expands funding
opportunities in the federal innovation research and development arena. Central
to the program is expansion of the public/private sector partnership to include
the joint venture opportunities for small business and the nation's premier
nonprofit research institutions. STTR's most important role is to foster the
innovation necessary to meet the nation's scientific and technological challenges
in the 21st century.
Competitive Opportunity for Small Business:
STTR is a highly competitive program that reserves a
specific percentage of federal R&D funding for award to small business and
nonprofit research institution partners. Small business has long been where
innovation and innovators thrive. But the risk and expense of conducting
serious R&D efforts can be beyond the means of many small businesses.
Conversely, nonprofit research laboratories are
instrumental in developing high-tech innovations. But frequently, innovation is
confined to the theoretical, not the practical. STTR combines the strengths of
both entities by introducing entrepreneurial skills to high-tech research
efforts. The technologies and products are transferred from the laboratory to
the marketplace. The small business profits from the commercialization, which,
in turn, stimulates the U.S. economy.
STTR Qualifications:
Small businesses must meet certain eligibility criteria to
participate in the STTR Program:
American-owned and independently operated
For-profit
Principal researcher need not be employed by small business
Company size limited to 500 employees
The nonprofit research institution must also meet certain eligibility
criteria:
Located in the US
Nonprofit college or university
Domestic nonprofit research organization
Federally funded R&D center (FFRDC)
The STTR System:
Each year, five federal departments and agencies are
required by STTR to reserve a portion of their R&D funds for award to small
business/nonprofit research institution partnerships.
Department of Defense
Department of Energy
Department of Health and Human Services
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Science Foundation
These agencies designate R&D topics and accept
proposals.
Three-Phase Program:
Following submission of proposals, agencies make STTR
awards based on small business/nonprofit research institution qualification,
degree of innovation, and future market potential. Small businesses that
receive awards then begin a three-phase program.
Phase I is the
startup phase. Awards of up to $100,000 for approximately one year fund the
exploration of the scientific, technical, and commercial feasibility of an idea
or technology.
Phase II awards of
up to $750,000, for as long as two years, expand Phase I results. During this
period, the R&D work is performed and the developer begins to consider
commercial potential. Only Phase I award winners are considered for Phase II.
Phase III is the
period during which Phase II innovation moves from the laboratory into the
marketplace. No STTR funds support this phase. The small business must find
funding in the private sector or other non-STTR federal agency funding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)