· 5 min read
When a leaked draft from the U.S. Treasury hit the wires last week, solar developers’ stocks jumped more than 30% in a single day. The guidance, while still unofficial, suggested that new restrictions on clean energy tax credits may not be as severe as feared. The reaction was swift proof of just how much policy and regulation continue to shape the energy transition both in terms of carbon and in billions of dollars of market value.
Leaked Treasury guidance offers conditional relief for renewables
Markets rallied after a leaked Treasury draft suggested the Trump administration will not fully shut down access to wind and solar tax credits, despite earlier fears. The guidance would eliminate the long-standing “5% safe harbor” test, requiring projects to begin physical construction, but still allows offsite work to qualify and preserves a four-year completion window. Solar manufacturers such as First Solar and Enphase saw share prices jump by over 13%, while developers like Sunrun surged by more than 30%. The 45X manufacturing credit remains intact, signaling continued support for domestic solar supply chains. Still, developers warn that the changes mark a sharp departure from bipartisan precedent and risk slowing new projects just as electricity demand climbs. The draft reflects broader political crosswinds: hardline conservatives have demanded tighter restrictions, while Senate Republicans from energy-heavy states publicly lobbied Trump to avoid policies that could choke supply.
What this means for leaders:
• Renewable developers still face tighter timelines and definitions, but the preservation of offsite work and safe harbor provisions offer hope.
• Manufacturing credits reinforce the push from the Trump Administration toward domestic supply chains, a potential opportunity for investors and corporates with U.S. footprints.
• Regulatory volatility is becoming a strategic risk: business models must be resilient to shifting federal policies and political showmanship.
Triggering positive climate tipping points
A new study from the University of Exeter outlines how policymakers can accelerate “positive tipping points,” self-reinforcing shifts that make climate solutions mainstream. The researchers argue that the global economy is decarbonizing at least five times too slowly to meet Paris goals, and that strategic interventions can help turn the tide. Electric vehicles, solar power, and heat pumps in the UK are cited as areas close to tipping. Other shifts, such as reducing meat consumption, may be more likely than expected, while technologies like nuclear and concrete lack the conditions for tipping. The study proposes a framework for identifying systems ripe for tipping and using regulation, mandates, and targeted investments to unlock them. Crucially, it warns that tipping strategies must consider equity: rapid change can produce new justice concerns even as it alleviates climate harms.
What this means for leaders:
• Policy and regulation remain the levers that can push emerging technologies from niche to norm.
• The most effective climate strategies will target the sectors close to these positive tipping points.
• Justice concerns will increasingly shape political support for disruptive transitions.
Insurance as a lever for climate resilience
As climate risks intensify, the insurance industry finds itself both exposed and indispensable. Hurricanes, wildfires, floods, and heat are making large swaths of the U.S. harder or impossible to insure. Premiums are rising, and non-renewals are climbing, threatening not only households but also local economies and tax bases. Yet, as a new Carnegie Endowment study reminds us, this is not the first time insurers have faced systemic risk and responded by reshaping standards and markets.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, insurers built institutions like Underwriters Laboratories and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. By investing in science, codes, and regulation, they reduced fire and auto risks, helping to create safer communities and, crucially, more insurable markets. That history suggests a path forward: insurers can once again partner with governments to establish resilience standards, support research, and incentivize mitigation. Recent successes, like the return of major insurers to Paradise, California after the adoption of wildfire resilience codes, show what’s possible when industry, regulators, and communities act in concert.
The challenge is urgency. Only 21% of hazard-prone jurisdictions have adopted the latest building codes, leaving most communities underprepared. Meanwhile, the costs of inaction are soaring, $112 billion in insured catastrophe losses in the U.S. in 2024 alone.
What this means for leaders:
• Insurance is becoming an essential driver of resilience standards and urban planning.
• Public–private collaboration will determine whether large portions of the U.S. and other places remain insurable.
• Transparency and credible risk data, potentially through “digital twin” modeling of communities, will increasingly inform how risks are priced and shared.
Targeting wealthy polluters: The low-hanging fruit of climate policy
The World Economic Forum highlights a central equity challenge: the richest 1% of people produce 16% of global CO₂ emissions, more than the bottom 50% combined. The top 10% now account for up to 45% of global emissions, a share set to exceed 1.5°C-aligned levels by 2030 regardless of others’ efforts. The authors argue climate policy should focus first on luxury and high-consumption behaviors: frequent flyer levies, private jet and yacht taxes, steep charges on luxury cars, and tiered electricity tariffs. Eliminating fossil fuel subsidies for the wealthy could reduce emissions by 2–3% globally, roughly equal to the annual output of France, Italy, and the UK combined, while saving governments $100–200 billion per year. These measures are socially progressive, ensuring the wealthy bear costs proportionate to their footprint, while easing fairness concerns that often derail climate policy. Political resistance from vested interests remains likely, but forums like the G20 and IMF could create peer pressure to normalize such reforms.
What this means for leaders:
• Equity is moving to the center of climate policy design; strategies that ignore fairness risk backlash.
• Subsidy reform and luxury-focused levies are both fiscally attractive and climate-effective.
• Business leaders should anticipate scrutiny of high-consumption practices, from corporate fleets to executive travel.
This article is also published on Substack. illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.
Curious how major companies measure up on climate? On illuminem’s Data Hub™, explore verified emissions data, net‑zero targets, and sustainability performance of thousands of firms — from industry leaders to emerging innovators.
