The invention of clean energy has given many hope that it could be a future solution to nonrenewable energy sources and less pollutant energy production.

Yet, the reality remains that each year the federal government spends billions of dollars to subsidize the industry. As a result, many of the profits revenues reported by the big, clean energy companies in the U.S. are not without taxpayer money involved.

As the election nears, both political parties have drawn lines in the sand regarding their stands on the clean energy debate. Should the Republicans sweep the general election in November, much of the spending and subsidies could likely be curtailed. Conversely, a Democrat victory could result in continued expansionary policies for clean energy.

Let’s examine three green energy stocks to consider selling, depending on election results.

First Solar (FSLR)

While its stock is still performing stunningly for the year, several hurdles could be forming for First Solar (NASDAQ:FSLR). Between newly announced tariffs on Chinese solar products and the relative indifference Republicans exhibit towards solar, the stock may not be able to keep appeasing lucrative predictions.

Currently, the stock continues to stay on a gentle downtrend since its peak in June. This represents a 7% loss for the month following the peak. For investors, the company may seem more attractive over time. But it’s important to remember that clean energy companies rely on supportive government policies to organically grow. Their expansion investments are capital-intensive due to the cost of clean energy-generating technologies.

As such, investors may want to reconsider FSLR stock throughout August depending on the direction the current presidential race takes. Furthermore, while FSLR may continue to see growth in specialized industries that require solar power, it’s not likely solar will become the primary energy in the U.S. soon.

NextEra Energy (NEE)

NextEra Energy (NYSE:NEE) has repeatedly claimed it’s not worried about the future Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The legislation is central to its government funds. And, a cost-cutting administration could overturn the bill. Furthermore, the heavy reliance NEE has on solar for its clean energy generation could feel the impacts of restricted solar product imports from China as the Biden administration has already raised tariffs on the trade.

Beyond this, while the IRA directly provides funding to clean energy stocks like NEE, the company’s energy prices might struggle to compete in a political landscape where oil and gas become even cheaper. This comes even as NEE’s Chief Financial Officer Rebecca Kujawa admits the company is canceling backlogged projects due to higher-than-expected interconnection costs and energy infrastructure pricing. Taking this into consideration, investors may want to consider NEE one of the clean energy stocks to sell before broader economic pressures catch up to it.

iShares Clean Energy ETF (ICLN)

Whenever the discussion of which clean energy stocks to sell comes around, I always recommend avoiding the iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (NASDAQ:ICLN). Part of my reasoning involves its net negative performance since inception, but also the broader signal it sends about clean energy in general.

At its current composition, the ETF has lost 72% of its original offered value and is down 12% year-to-date (YTD). That trend is not likely to improve through the end of the year if the Republicans secure a victory in the White House and Congress. Moreover, Blackrock’s management of the fund has Enphase Energy (NASDAQ:ENPH) at 6.70% of the fund’s holdings. That’s a company that has lost 22.64% of its value YTD, yet it still makes up the second largest portion of the fund.

As such, investors may want to stay away from this highly specific ETF and prioritize other more certain growth vehicles.

On the date of publication, Viktor Zarev did not have (either directly or indirectly) any positions in the securities mentioned in this article. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer, subject to the InvestorPlace.com Publishing Guidelines.

On the date of publication, the responsible editor did not have (either directly or indirectly) any positions in the securities mentioned in this article.