Biden's Climate Actions Made History; Here's How Trump Could Unravel Them
President Joe Biden's legacy will be a significant aspect of the 2024 ballot, even if he himself is not running. Former President Donald Trump possesses several methods to potentially disrupt Biden's goals concerning energy, infrastructure, and climate change.
TroibNews 
Donald Trump is pledging to dismantle the core of Joe Biden’s governing legacy — a $1 trillion-plus initiative aimed at pro-climate economic reform in the U.S.
Trump may soon have the opportunity.
Even if Trump defeats Vice President Kamala Harris in November, his authority wouldn't be unrestricted. However, he could pursue various strategies to block, modify, or delay significant portions of Biden’s $1.6 trillion in climate, energy, and infrastructure efforts. Republican officials and government spending experts reveal these potential pathways to POLITICO, noting that the extent of his impact would depend on the aggression with which he pursues these changes. The stakes are high, affecting projects from planned electric car, battery, and renewable energy factories to broader goals for mitigating climate change.
While Trump hasn’t specified which parts of Biden’s programs he'd target, his opposition to the climate agenda is clear.
“All of the trillions of dollars that are sitting there not yet spent, we will redirect that money for important projects like roads, bridges, dams and we will not allow it to be spent on meaningless Green New Scam ideas,” Trump stated during his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention, significantly exaggerating the unspent funds Biden's agencies hold.
The GOP platform echoes these sentiments, calling for “terminating the Socialist Green New Deal” and ending Biden’s “ELECTRIC VEHICLE MANDATE.”
**A limited number of forces might be in place to deter Trump.**
Republican governors and legislators whose regions benefit from Biden’s programs might resist efforts to repeal them. Trump would face various legal and practical challenges in reclaiming already distributed funds, particularly the billions allocated for transportation and energy that Congress directed to states.
Administration officials remain optimistic about another safeguard: unless Congress repeals the Biden-era programs, legally, Trump would be obliged to implement them. However, Trump has argued for the authority to override Congress’ spending decisions. This month, the Supreme Court's decision granted presidents broad immunity from legal repercussions for violating certain laws.
A notable risk to Biden’s agenda is that only a small fraction of the $1.1 trillion in congressionally approved funds for energy, climate, technology, and infrastructure has been spent — less than 17% as of April, per a POLITICO analysis of federal data. Reasons include the time required to issue grants, finalize regulations for energy tax credits, and other bureaucratic steps, with some agencies managing unprecedented sums.
Beyond outright appeals to repeal Biden’s programs, Trump could redirect spending to his priorities, such as oil, natural gas, coal, or, with Congress’ cooperation, fund extensions for Trump’s 2017 tax law, which is estimated to cost $4.6 trillion.
Here are some methods Trump could employ to challenge Biden’s vision and the obstacles he might encounter:
**What Trump could do quickly—**
_EasyRewriting tax rules_
The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, a cornerstone of Biden’s climate policy, contains approximately $527 billion in tax incentives for low-carbon technologies. Congress left the implementation details to the Treasury Department, where many regulations remain incomplete. Trump’s appointees at Treasury could revise these rules without Congress’ approval.
For example, tax credits for producing clean hydrogen or less-polluting aviation fuel could face revisions that favor fossil fuels. Although Trump’s Treasury could not entirely repeal these credits without Congress, it could limit eligibility through regulatory changes.
“I am 100 percent sure that a potential Trump administration would change the regulations under which the tax credits are issued,” said Dan Simmons, a former Trump Energy Department official.
Implementation of existing Treasury regulations, like consumer tax breaks for electric vehicles, would be tougher to alter without a lengthy rulemaking process.
_EasyPausing the money flow_
Biden's agenda is underpinned by several major laws: the Inflation Reduction Act, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the American Rescue Plan. Combined, these gave the administration more than $1 trillion to spend on climate, energy, and infrastructure projects. By June, tentative funding decisions were made for $564 billion, but only $208 billion had been spent, per POLITICO’s analysis.
Presidents are legally required to spend money as Congress appropriated it, but Trump’s administration could freeze spending to review allocations, a common tactic for new administrations. Trump promised at a rally to impose “an immediate moratorium on all new spending.”
The Biden administration is working to allocate as much funding as possible by January 20. However, significant portions of the funds are not available until the fiscal year beginning October 1 or later. Implementing key aspects of Biden's agenda, such as clean hydrogen initiatives and electric vehicle charging stations, has been slow.
A new administration could slow fund distribution, reorient funding goals, or reevaluate criteria for recipients.
_EASYThrottling the loans_
The Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office, which could finance innovative projects that struggle to receive traditional lending, has over $200 billion in authority. Under Trump’s first term, the office was mostly inactive, aside from backing some nuclear projects.
Under Trump, this office could stop or redirect funds to projects like domestic supply chains for green technologies. Trump’s team could delay loan finalizations, leaving some projects unfunded.
He’d have to fight — or stretch the law—
_MediumRewriting Biden’s finished regulations_
Trump would need a cumbersome process to undo completed Biden administration rules, such as those defining eligibility for EV tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act. Revising these rules would require a full bureaucratic procedure, extensive public comments, and could potentially lead to lawsuits against the Treasury.
Trump has consistently criticized EVs. “The electric vehicle tax credit, I think it's going to be probably the number one most vulnerable component of the IRA,” said a former Trump official.
Companies are already claiming some tax credits to spur clean energy manufacturing, complicating efforts to retroactively change regulations. Agencies historically do not modify rules retroactively.
He could need help from Congress — or the courts—
_HardImpounding congressional spending_
Trump has vowed to reclaim presidential authority to withhold congressionally approved spending, known as impoundment. Historically, Congress restricted this practice in a 1974 law, yet Trump has argued it’s unconstitutional.
Impoundment could potentially target Biden's energy and infrastructure laws. This practice was problematic during Trump’s tenure, leading to the 2019 impeachment over withheld military aid to Ukraine. Despite controversy, Trump aides believe he can withhold money if he disagrees with its allocation.
Trump’s campaign advisor, Jason Miller, noted that Trump “will seek to reassert impoundment authority to cut waste.”
Legal experts, like Alan Morrison, argue impoundment contradicts constitutional principles, akin to the Supreme Court's invalidation of the Line Item Veto Act.
The fight over impoundment could lead to litigation and leave its constitutionality up to the courts. Potential impeachments for violations are less likely with Republican control of Congress.
The Biden administration insists Trump must implement the IRA and related laws unless Congress repeals them. “The executive branch has no authority to withhold appropriated funds just because it disagrees with the policies Congress enacted,” stated White House spokesperson Jeremy Edwards.
_HARDChoking money still in the pipeline_
Cash mid-disbursement could be reviewed by Trump’s presidency, but once awarded, it generally remains safe from interference.
David Hayes, a Stanford Law professor and former climate advisor, believes completed grants are protected from new administrative actions. However, awards that are not yet finalized could see redirected prioritization.
Some former Trump officials warn that priorities and requirements could be altered before the money is disbursed.
_HARDRepealing the tax breaks_
Trump would need Congress to eliminate Biden's tax breaks. Budget reconciliation, a legislative mechanism used by Democrats to pass the climate law, allows for swift fiscal changes with simple majority votes.
Republicans are considering gutting IRA provisions to fund Trump’s first-term tax cuts. Yet, not all GOP members support rolling back subsidies that have spurred investments in green technologies within their constituencies.
Former Trump Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette believes most of IRA would remain under a Republican government, despite conservative critiques advocating for extensive rollbacks.
Another legislative tool, the Congressional Review Act, could reject recent regulatory measures, but repealing established funding mechanisms, like those incentivizing EV production, would be complex.
**This spending is probably safe—**
_Long shotMoney that’s completely out the door_
Formally awarded funds are likely secure from Trump’s attempts to rescind. For instance, EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund must distribute grants by September 30, ensuring they're allocated before a potential Trump administration could intervene.
_Long shotMandatory infrastructure funding_
The $383 billion in mandatory funding under the Infrastructure Law for highway and transit programs enjoys bipartisan support and likely remains intact. However, highway dollars allotted for EV chargers might face scrutiny.
Susan Howard of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials argues these funds are risk-averse to political influence.
_Long shotRepublican priorities_
Grants and loans under the law, supported by Republican lawmakers or industries, may also be safe. This includes funding tied to job creation or critical sectors like nuclear power.
Trump hasn’t addressed his stance on the CHIPS and Science Act, bipartisan legislation focused on semiconductor manufacturing, which might remain undisturbed due to its emphasis on countering China.
Thomas Evans contributed to this report for TROIB News
Trump may soon have the opportunity.
Even if Trump defeats Vice President Kamala Harris in November, his authority wouldn't be unrestricted. However, he could pursue various strategies to block, modify, or delay significant portions of Biden’s $1.6 trillion in climate, energy, and infrastructure efforts. Republican officials and government spending experts reveal these potential pathways to POLITICO, noting that the extent of his impact would depend on the aggression with which he pursues these changes. The stakes are high, affecting projects from planned electric car, battery, and renewable energy factories to broader goals for mitigating climate change.
While Trump hasn’t specified which parts of Biden’s programs he'd target, his opposition to the climate agenda is clear.
“All of the trillions of dollars that are sitting there not yet spent, we will redirect that money for important projects like roads, bridges, dams and we will not allow it to be spent on meaningless Green New Scam ideas,” Trump stated during his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention, significantly exaggerating the unspent funds Biden's agencies hold.
The GOP platform echoes these sentiments, calling for “terminating the Socialist Green New Deal” and ending Biden’s “ELECTRIC VEHICLE MANDATE.”
**A limited number of forces might be in place to deter Trump.**
Republican governors and legislators whose regions benefit from Biden’s programs might resist efforts to repeal them. Trump would face various legal and practical challenges in reclaiming already distributed funds, particularly the billions allocated for transportation and energy that Congress directed to states.
Administration officials remain optimistic about another safeguard: unless Congress repeals the Biden-era programs, legally, Trump would be obliged to implement them. However, Trump has argued for the authority to override Congress’ spending decisions. This month, the Supreme Court's decision granted presidents broad immunity from legal repercussions for violating certain laws.
A notable risk to Biden’s agenda is that only a small fraction of the $1.1 trillion in congressionally approved funds for energy, climate, technology, and infrastructure has been spent — less than 17% as of April, per a POLITICO analysis of federal data. Reasons include the time required to issue grants, finalize regulations for energy tax credits, and other bureaucratic steps, with some agencies managing unprecedented sums.
Beyond outright appeals to repeal Biden’s programs, Trump could redirect spending to his priorities, such as oil, natural gas, coal, or, with Congress’ cooperation, fund extensions for Trump’s 2017 tax law, which is estimated to cost $4.6 trillion.
Here are some methods Trump could employ to challenge Biden’s vision and the obstacles he might encounter:
**What Trump could do quickly—**
_EasyRewriting tax rules_
The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, a cornerstone of Biden’s climate policy, contains approximately $527 billion in tax incentives for low-carbon technologies. Congress left the implementation details to the Treasury Department, where many regulations remain incomplete. Trump’s appointees at Treasury could revise these rules without Congress’ approval.
For example, tax credits for producing clean hydrogen or less-polluting aviation fuel could face revisions that favor fossil fuels. Although Trump’s Treasury could not entirely repeal these credits without Congress, it could limit eligibility through regulatory changes.
“I am 100 percent sure that a potential Trump administration would change the regulations under which the tax credits are issued,” said Dan Simmons, a former Trump Energy Department official.
Implementation of existing Treasury regulations, like consumer tax breaks for electric vehicles, would be tougher to alter without a lengthy rulemaking process.
_EasyPausing the money flow_
Biden's agenda is underpinned by several major laws: the Inflation Reduction Act, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the American Rescue Plan. Combined, these gave the administration more than $1 trillion to spend on climate, energy, and infrastructure projects. By June, tentative funding decisions were made for $564 billion, but only $208 billion had been spent, per POLITICO’s analysis.
Presidents are legally required to spend money as Congress appropriated it, but Trump’s administration could freeze spending to review allocations, a common tactic for new administrations. Trump promised at a rally to impose “an immediate moratorium on all new spending.”
The Biden administration is working to allocate as much funding as possible by January 20. However, significant portions of the funds are not available until the fiscal year beginning October 1 or later. Implementing key aspects of Biden's agenda, such as clean hydrogen initiatives and electric vehicle charging stations, has been slow.
A new administration could slow fund distribution, reorient funding goals, or reevaluate criteria for recipients.
_EASYThrottling the loans_
The Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office, which could finance innovative projects that struggle to receive traditional lending, has over $200 billion in authority. Under Trump’s first term, the office was mostly inactive, aside from backing some nuclear projects.
Under Trump, this office could stop or redirect funds to projects like domestic supply chains for green technologies. Trump’s team could delay loan finalizations, leaving some projects unfunded.
He’d have to fight — or stretch the law—
_MediumRewriting Biden’s finished regulations_
Trump would need a cumbersome process to undo completed Biden administration rules, such as those defining eligibility for EV tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act. Revising these rules would require a full bureaucratic procedure, extensive public comments, and could potentially lead to lawsuits against the Treasury.
Trump has consistently criticized EVs. “The electric vehicle tax credit, I think it's going to be probably the number one most vulnerable component of the IRA,” said a former Trump official.
Companies are already claiming some tax credits to spur clean energy manufacturing, complicating efforts to retroactively change regulations. Agencies historically do not modify rules retroactively.
He could need help from Congress — or the courts—
_HardImpounding congressional spending_
Trump has vowed to reclaim presidential authority to withhold congressionally approved spending, known as impoundment. Historically, Congress restricted this practice in a 1974 law, yet Trump has argued it’s unconstitutional.
Impoundment could potentially target Biden's energy and infrastructure laws. This practice was problematic during Trump’s tenure, leading to the 2019 impeachment over withheld military aid to Ukraine. Despite controversy, Trump aides believe he can withhold money if he disagrees with its allocation.
Trump’s campaign advisor, Jason Miller, noted that Trump “will seek to reassert impoundment authority to cut waste.”
Legal experts, like Alan Morrison, argue impoundment contradicts constitutional principles, akin to the Supreme Court's invalidation of the Line Item Veto Act.
The fight over impoundment could lead to litigation and leave its constitutionality up to the courts. Potential impeachments for violations are less likely with Republican control of Congress.
The Biden administration insists Trump must implement the IRA and related laws unless Congress repeals them. “The executive branch has no authority to withhold appropriated funds just because it disagrees with the policies Congress enacted,” stated White House spokesperson Jeremy Edwards.
_HARDChoking money still in the pipeline_
Cash mid-disbursement could be reviewed by Trump’s presidency, but once awarded, it generally remains safe from interference.
David Hayes, a Stanford Law professor and former climate advisor, believes completed grants are protected from new administrative actions. However, awards that are not yet finalized could see redirected prioritization.
Some former Trump officials warn that priorities and requirements could be altered before the money is disbursed.
_HARDRepealing the tax breaks_
Trump would need Congress to eliminate Biden's tax breaks. Budget reconciliation, a legislative mechanism used by Democrats to pass the climate law, allows for swift fiscal changes with simple majority votes.
Republicans are considering gutting IRA provisions to fund Trump’s first-term tax cuts. Yet, not all GOP members support rolling back subsidies that have spurred investments in green technologies within their constituencies.
Former Trump Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette believes most of IRA would remain under a Republican government, despite conservative critiques advocating for extensive rollbacks.
Another legislative tool, the Congressional Review Act, could reject recent regulatory measures, but repealing established funding mechanisms, like those incentivizing EV production, would be complex.
**This spending is probably safe—**
_Long shotMoney that’s completely out the door_
Formally awarded funds are likely secure from Trump’s attempts to rescind. For instance, EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund must distribute grants by September 30, ensuring they're allocated before a potential Trump administration could intervene.
_Long shotMandatory infrastructure funding_
The $383 billion in mandatory funding under the Infrastructure Law for highway and transit programs enjoys bipartisan support and likely remains intact. However, highway dollars allotted for EV chargers might face scrutiny.
Susan Howard of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials argues these funds are risk-averse to political influence.
_Long shotRepublican priorities_
Grants and loans under the law, supported by Republican lawmakers or industries, may also be safe. This includes funding tied to job creation or critical sectors like nuclear power.
Trump hasn’t addressed his stance on the CHIPS and Science Act, bipartisan legislation focused on semiconductor manufacturing, which might remain undisturbed due to its emphasis on countering China.
Thomas Evans contributed to this report for TROIB News
