Ampion’s Synthetic Community Solar Product: Real or Bullshit?

I call bullshit…. but with respect for the creativity.

When Ampion recently announced its new “synthetic” community solar product a couple of weeks ago¹, I was intrigued—but also skeptical. According to their announcement, community solar credits generated from a Maine-based solar project are being applied to reduce utility bills for low-income households in Illinois.

That’s a bold claim, especially because Ampion asserts that this structure complies with the Category 4 Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit under the federal Investment Tax Credit (ITC) program. I wanted to walk away with clarity and appreciation for how this product works, because nothing would make me happier than if this were possible. Instead, I was left with more questions than answers, and I want to walk through them together.

Why “Synthetic” Community Solar Matters
Synthetic community solar is a model where the financial benefits of a community solar project are delivered to households who are not actually subscribed to the project—and in some cases, don’t even live in the same state.

This idea is close to my heart. Over a year ago, I published a three-part series for Solar Power World proposing a similar concept: delivering community solar benefits to low-income households without tying them to the risks and complexities of being directly subscribed to a community solar project. You can read the series here: Part I, Part II, and Part III.

The appeal is clear. Traditional community solar has a reach problem: many renters, multi-family residents, and low-income households are left out simply because their market doesn’t offer a program. Synthetic models could change that, scaling community solar benefits nationwide.

The reason I love this concept is also because synthetic community solar removes friction for low-income households. Instead of navigating the mechanics of paying for the value of credits, they’d simply see net savings, like through utility consolidated billing.

The model could also create accretive opportunities for our industry. Imagine delivering benefits to households in Arizona or Ohio, where enabling legislation has lagged. By showing policymakers the tangible value of community solar, synthetic approaches could help build the political will to pass new programs and ultimately expand the community solar pie.

But here’s the catch: this only works if the state and federal regulators permit it and it can comply with the law.

When I proposed these alternative models of delivering financial benefits to the Treasury and the IRS, they shot me down.²

Treasury’s Position: Narrow and Unyielding
Let’s be clear about what the IRS and Treasury have actually said—because this matters.

In both the 2023 and 2025 Final Regulations, Treasury and the IRS made their position clear regarding what qualifies as financial benefits for Category 4 compliance:

• “At least 50 percent of the total financial benefits of the electricity produced by the applicable facility must be assigned to Qualifying Households.”³


• “[F]inancial benefits to eligible low-income households can only be delivered via utility bill savings. Based on industry and market research, community solar programs primarily use utility bill savings to deliver financial benefits to households. For this reason, the Treasury Department and the IRS have defined financial benefits in this manner.”⁴


• “If documentation is submitted from the participating utility, government body, or program administrator, the documentation must also include additional information, such as a copy of the relevant statute or regulatory order, that confirms that the low-income program in which the facility is participating requires the facility to serve multiple Qualifying Households.” (emphasis added)⁵

Let’s break that down. “Assigned” means the household must be allocated to the project. The benefit must show up as utility bill savings, resulting from actual community solar credits applied to the household’s utility account. This cannot be a gift card, a direct payment, or a check.

Unfortunately, the IRS has shied away from enabling creativity and flexibility for Category 4 projects. Therefore, the idea that financial benefits from a community solar project in one state could be delivered to qualified households in another seems to contradict both the intent and the plain language of the regulations.

Ampion’s structure—crediting a Maine project and applying the monetary value to pay down utility bills in Illinois—doesn’t seem to fit that definition, at least not under the current rules.

So how is Ampion Attempting to Make this Work?
The most plausible theory is that Ampion (or its client) is collecting the dollar value of the solar credits generated in Maine and then using those funds to make partial payments towards the utility bills of low-income households in Illinois. It’s clever. But is it compliant?

Could this partial payment/credit be considered utility bill savings assigned to Qualified Households that are enrolled in a subscription program? I guess, but man, that requires some serious mental gymnastics and adopting exceptionally broad definitions of critical terms in the regulations and law.

To qualify this as “utility bill savings” under Category 4, you would need to adopt a very broad interpretation of what counts as:

• “Assigned” financial benefits
• “Utility bill savings”
• “Participation” in a community solar project

And you’d be taking that risk in a program where non-compliance could trigger ITC clawbacks—which is no small matter.

What the IRS Examples Tell Us
Beyond the regulatory language, Treasury and the IRS also published three illustrative examples of compliant structures for delivering financial benefits under Category 4:⁶

• Traditional dual-billing community solar model
• Net-credit/utility consolidated billing community solar model
• A program where benefits are delivered via a utility or government body, within the same jurisdiction

None of these examples contemplate benefits being delivered to Qualified households not subscribed to the project, let alone residing in a different state altogether. And if the Treasury intended to support synthetic structures like Ampion’s, they had the opportunity to say so. They didn’t.

Final Thoughts
Let me be absolutely clear: I want Ampion’s synthetic community solar model to succeed. I think we need more flexibility in how we deliver clean energy benefits to low-income families. But under the current regulatory guidance, I don’t believe this model meets the requirements for Category 4 Low-Income ITC bonus compliance.

If Ampion or others want to pursue this model, that is entirely their business decision, but I’d urge caution. Risk is a relative thing, and these regulations and rules are open to interpretation, but when the project economics depend on bonus ITC, I certainly would want greater certainty of compliance before adopting this model wholesale.

I welcome working with my friends at Ampion and other community solar stakeholders to affect the change we want to see. But I also want to hear your take. Could synthetic community solar models become compliant with better-defined structures or future rulemaking? Should the Treasury consider expanding the definition of “financial benefits”?

Let’s talk. Connect with me directly on LinkedIn or at jason.kaplan@powermarket.io.

---

¹ Ampion Debuts New Product to Break Down State Barriers and Expand Community Solar Access
² Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Additional Guidance on Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit Program, 88 Fed. Reg. 59,890, 59,931–32 (Sept. 6, 2023), https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2023-17078. “To promote more flexibility with respect to financial benefits requirements in Category 4, a few commenters requested that the Treasury Department and the IRS extend the same flexibility is provided for Category 3 projects regarding financial benefits to Category 4 projects as well. These commenters requested that a manner other than bill credits be permitted to provide financial benefits directly to low-income subscribers in Category 4 that still meets the nominal 20 percent discount requirement, like gift cards, direct payments, or checks...The Treasury Department and the IRS considered the comments requesting expansion or flexibility with respect to financial benefits for Category 4 to allow methods other than utility bill savings but ultimately decided not to adopt the commenters’ suggestions in these final regulations. Requiring financial benefits via utility bill savings is the only means through which the Treasury Department and the IRS can ensure that the provision of financial benefits to qualifying households is sufficiently regulated such that the requirements of section 48(e)(2)(C) are satisfied. Therefore, the final regulations clarify that financial benefits for Category 4 must be tied to a utility bill of a qualifying household. The Treasury Department and the IRS may consider other methods of determining Category 4 financial benefits in future years.”
³ 26 C.F.R. § 1.48E(h)-1(ii) (2025).
⁴ Additional Guidance on Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit Program, 88 Fed. Reg. 59890, 59890–38 (Sept. 6, 2023) (codified at 26 C.F.R. pt. 1).
⁵ Documentation and Attestation Requirements, Rev. Proc. 2024-19, 2024-13 I.R.B. 699 (Mar. 25, 2024), 26 C.F.R. § 601.201.
⁶ Federal Register, Vol. 90, No. 7, at 2,865 (Jan. 5, 2025).