Utah Sen. John Curtis has placed holds on at least three of President Donald Trump’s nominees for the Treasury Department until he gets answers on how the department will implement the phaseout of wind and solar tax credits passed last month by Congress, a source familiar with the plans told the Deseret News.

Curtis placed holds on Brian Morrissey, nominee for general counsel of the Treasury; Francis Brooke, nominee to be assistant secretary; and Jonathan McKernan, nominee to be the under secretary. Curtis joins Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who formally announced his holds into the congressional record on Friday, citing concerns with the department’s plans to phase out the tax incentives more quickly than the law allows.

Related
Senate Republicans watch carefully to ensure green energy tax credits survive Trump’s latest order

“The Department of the Treasury is expected to issue rules and regulations implementing the agreed upon phase-out of the wind and solar credits by Aug. 18, 2025,” Grassley wrote in the record. “Until I can be certain that such rules and regulations adhere to the law and congressional intent, I intend to continue to object to the consideration of the Treasury nominees.”

The delays come as Trump has pushed Senate Republicans to fast-track his nominees, even initially suggesting lawmakers should cancel their annual August recess to ensure his candidates are confirmed to their positions. However, those efforts were largely thwarted by Democrats — with Grassley’s and Curtis’ holds marking rare Republican pushback to the president’s nomination efforts.

The delayed nominations mark the latest escalation in the fight over wind and solar tax credits, which Curtis and a handful of other Senate Republicans negotiated to preserve in Trump’s massive policy bill. Curtis and Grassley, as well as Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, have requested to meet with Treasury officials for weeks to get more information about how the phaseouts will be implemented, but those requests have gone unanswered, the Deseret News has learned.

Until that information can be shared, Curtis will maintain his holds on the nominees.

The escalation comes after Trump signed an executive order in July directing the federal government to be aggressive in its task to roll back clean energy subsidies, instructing the Treasury to take action it “deems necessary and appropriate” to enforce the termination of the tax incentives.

That language raised questions about whether it allows the Treasury secretary to phase out the green energy tax credits more quickly than the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” permits.

The megabill includes instructions to largely dismantle federal tax incentives for electric cars, wind and solar power usage, and other green energy technologies previously passed by the Biden administration.

However, Curtis and other Senate Republicans managed to include language that would delay expiration of those tax credits, arguing they offer critical support for businesses across the country who will need time to adjust.

54
Comments

The updated bill gives companies a 12-month window to begin construction and still be eligible for the full subsidy. If companies begin construction in that window, they’ll receive the credit for four years after the start date. Those projects would then receive 100% of available subsidies, but must be placed in service by the end of 2027.

The bill says projects that begin after that 12-month deadline must also be completed and placed into service by the end of 2027 to qualify.

Related
Utah Sen. John Curtis plays key role in preserving green energy policies in massive tax bill

However, the executive order directs the Treasury to take any action deemed ”necessary and appropriate to strictly enforce the termination of the clean electricity production.”

“What it means for a project to ‘begin construction’ has been well established by Treasury guidance for more than a decade,’” Grassley wrote. “Moreover, Congress specifically references current Treasury guidance to set that term’s meaning in law. This is a case where both the law and congressional intent are clear.”

Join the Conversation
Looking for comments?
Find comments in their new home! Click the buttons at the top or within the article to view them — or use the button below for quick access.