XML 56 R19.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.19.3
Income Taxes
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2019
Income Taxes INCOME TAXES

The disclosures in this note apply to all Registrants unless indicated otherwise.

Status of Tax Reform Regulatory Proceedings

For AEP’s various regulatory jurisdictions where the regulatory effects of Tax Reform proceedings have not been fully resolved, the table below summarizes the current status. See Note 4 - Rate Matters for additional information related to regulatory filings in these jurisdictions.
Registrant (Jurisdiction)
 
Change in Tax Rate
 
Excess ADIT Subject to Normalization Requirements
 
Excess ADIT Not Subject to Normalization Requirements
AEP Texas (Texas-Distribution)
 
Order Issued
 
Order Issued
 
Order Issued – Partial (a)
AEP Texas (Texas-Transmission)
 
Order Issued
 
Case Pending
 
Case Pending
I&M (Michigan)
 
Order Issued
 
Case Pending
 
Case Pending
SWEPCo (Louisiana)
 
Case Pending – Rates Implemented (b)
 
Case Pending – Rates Implemented (b)
 
Case Pending – Rates Implemented (b)
SWEPCo (Texas)
 
Order Issued
 
To be addressed in a later filing
 
To be addressed in a later filing


(a)
A portion of the Excess ADIT that is not subject to rate normalization requirements is addressed in a current pending case.
(b)
Rates have been implemented through a filed formula rate plan that is subject to true-up and final commission approval.

Effective Tax Rates (ETR)

The Registrants’ interim ETR reflect the estimated annual ETR for 2019 and 2018, adjusted for tax expense associated with certain discrete items. The interim ETR differ from the federal statutory tax rate of 21% primarily due to increased amortization of Excess ADIT, tax credits and other book/tax differences which are accounted for on a flow-through basis.

The Registrants include the amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements in the annual estimated ETR when regulatory proceedings instruct the Registrants to provide the benefits of Tax Reform to customers over multiple interim periods.  Certain regulatory proceedings instruct the Registrants to provide the benefits of Tax Reform to customers in a single period (e.g. by applying the Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements against an existing regulatory asset balance) and in these circumstances, the Registrants recognize the tax benefit discretely in the period recorded. The annual amount of Excess ADIT approved by the Registrant’s regulatory commissions may not impact the ETR ratably during each interim period due to the variability of pretax book income between interim periods and the application of an annual estimated ETR.

The ETR for each of the Registrants are included in the following table. Significant variances in the ETR are described below.
 
 
Three Months Ended September 30,
 
Nine Months Ended September 30,
Company
 
2019
 
2018
 
2019
 
2018
AEP
 
5.2
 %
 
(16.2
)%
 
1.7
 %
 
5.6
 %
AEP Texas
 
15.1
 %
 
12.6
 %
 
(25.3
)%
 
14.9
 %
AEPTCo
 
21.9
 %
 
18.4
 %
 
20.7
 %
 
20.7
 %
APCo
 
(3.9
)%
 
(962.2
)%
 
(19.1
)%
 
(13.8
)%
I&M
 
(2.7
)%
 
15.9
 %
 
(2.1
)%
 
10.4
 %
OPCo
 
13.9
 %
 
(46.4
)%
 
14.2
 %
 
4.6
 %
PSO
 
6.4
 %
 
5.6
 %
 
4.6
 %
 
8.7
 %
SWEPCo
 
(0.6
)%
 
9.8
 %
 
 %
 
11.4
 %




AEP

Three Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Three Months Ended September 30, 2018

The increase in the ETR was primarily due to $71 million of decreased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements and $14 million of increased state tax expense which impacted the ETR by 19.1% and 1.3%, respectively.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2018

The decrease in the ETR was primarily due to $93 million of increased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements which impacted the ETR by (4.5)%.

AEP Texas

Three Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Three Months Ended September 30, 2018

The increase in ETR was primarily due to significantly higher pretax book income which reduced the impact that favorable tax deductions had on the ETR.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2018

The decrease in the ETR was primarily due to $59 million of increased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements which impacted the ETR by (38.9)%. Amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 reflects Tax Reform elements of the Stipulation and Settlement agreement approved by the PUCT in August 2018 and the Texas Storm Cost Securitization financing order issued by the PUCT in June 2019.

AEPTCo

Three Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Three Months Ended September 30, 2018

The increase in the ETR was primarily due to $3 million of increased state tax expense and $2 million of decreased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements which impacted the ETR by 1.3% and 1%, respectively.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2018

The ETR remained consistent for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018.
APCo
 
Three Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Three Months Ended September 30, 2018
 
The increase in the ETR was primarily due to $56 million of decreased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements and $6 million of increased state tax expense which impacted the ETR by 947.3% and 34.8%, respectively. Amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements primarily decreased from the prior year due to the discrete impact of the West Virginia Tax Reform order which enabled APCo to utilize $73 million of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements to offset certain regulatory asset balances in the third quarter of 2018.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2018

The decrease in the ETR was primarily due to $9 million of increased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements which impacted the ETR by (4.6)%. Amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 reflects the October 2018 and March 2019 Virginia SCC Tax Reform orders as well as the August 2018 and February 2019 WVPSC orders.

I&M

Three Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Three Months Ended September 30, 2018

The decrease in the ETR was primarily due to $10 million of increased amortization of Excess ADIT, $3 million of increased favorable book/tax differences accounted for on a flow-through basis, $2 million of decreased state income tax expense and $1 million of increased parent company loss benefit which impacted the ETR by (11.3)%, (3.2)%, (1.8)% and (1.6)% respectively.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2018

The decrease in the ETR was primarily due to $16 million of increased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements and $12 million of increased favorable book/tax differences accounted for on a flow-through basis which impacted the ETR by (6.9)% and (4.8)%, respectively. Amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 reflects the Tax Reform elements of the 2017 Indiana Base Rate Case approved by the IURC in May 2018.

OPCo

Three Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Three Months Ended September 30, 2018

The increase in the ETR was primarily due to $35 million of decreased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements and $1 million of decreased parent company loss benefit which impacted the ETR by 60% and 2%, respectively. Amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to amortization requirements decreased from the prior year primarily due to the discrete impact of the Ohio Tax Reform order which enabled OPCo to utilize $38 million of Excess ADIT not subject to rate normalization requirements to offset certain regulatory asset balances in the third quarter of 2018.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2018

The increase in the ETR was primarily due to $24 million of decreased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements which impacted the ETR by 10.8%. Amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to amortization requirements decreased from the prior year primarily due to the discrete impact of the Ohio Tax Reform order which enabled OPCo to utilize $38 million of Excess ADIT not subject to rate normalization requirements to offset certain regulatory asset balances in the third quarter of 2018.
PSO

Three Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Three Months Ended September 30, 2018

The ETR remained comparable for the three months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2018

The decrease in the ETR was primarily due to $15 million of increased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements which impacted the ETR by (6.8)%. Amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 reflects the August 2018 OCC Tax Reform order as well as Tax Reform elements of the 2018 Oklahoma Base Rate Case approved by the OCC in March 2019.

SWEPCo

Three Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Three Months Ended September 30, 2018

The decrease in the ETR was primarily due to $11 million of increased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements which impacted the ETR by (9.7)%. Amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 reflects Tax Reform elements incorporated in the Louisiana 2018 Formula Rate Filing as well as the Arkansas Tax Reform order issued by the APSC in September 2018.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2018

The decrease in the ETR was primarily due to $15 million of increased amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements which impacted the ETR by (10.4)%. Amortization of Excess ADIT not subject to normalization requirements for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 reflects Tax Reform elements incorporated in the Louisiana 2018 Formula Rate Filing as well as the Arkansas Tax Reform order issued by the APSC in September 2018.

Federal and State Income Tax Audit Status

AEP and subsidiaries are no longer subject to U.S. federal examination by the IRS for all years through 2013. During the IRS examination of years 2011 through 2014, the statute of limitations for these years was extended to coincide with the examination of 2015. During the third quarter of 2019, AEP and subsidiaries elected to amend the 2014 and 2015 federal returns. Due to the amendment of these federal returns, the 2014 and 2015 years will remain open for possible IRS examination for only the items that were amended on the 2014 and 2015 federal returns. The IRS examination of 2016 began in October 2018 and concluded in March 2019.

State Tax Legislation (Applies to AEP, AEPTCo, I&M and OPCo)

In April 2018, the Kentucky legislature enacted House Bill (H.B.) 487. H.B. 487 adopts mandatory unitary combined reporting for state corporate income tax purposes applicable for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2019. H.B. 487 also adopts the 80% federal net operating loss (NOL) limitation under Internal Revenue Code Sec. 172(a) for NOLs generated after January 1, 2018 and the federal unlimited carryforward period for unused NOLs generated after January 1, 2018. In addition, H.B. 366 was also enacted in April 2018, which among other things, replaces the graduated corporate tax rate structure with a flat 5% tax rate for business income and adopts a single-sales factor apportionment formula for apportioning a corporation’s business income to Kentucky. In the second quarter of 2018, AEP recorded an $18 million benefit to Income Tax Expense (Benefit) as a result of remeasuring Kentucky deferred taxes under a unitary filing group. The enacted legislation did not materially impact AEPTCo’s, I&M’s or OPCo’s net income.