House GOP's Tax Plan Will Scrap Electric Vehicle Credit

[William Maley]

One key selling point automakers have been using to move electric vehicles is the federal tax credit of up to $7,500. But a new tax cut bill being proposed by House Republicans could eliminate that credit.

The bill announced today includes a provision of eliminating the credit after the 2017 tax year if the bill goes into law.

The credits are important as it helps level the playing field between internal combustion engines and EVs. Currently, the credit will begin to phase out once an auto manufacturer once it sells 200,000 EVs or plug-in hybrids. Bloomberg reports that Tesla would be the first automaker to reach the limit, followed by GM and Nissan. If that tax credit is eliminated, automakers worry they would experience a plunge in sales.

“The credits matter a lot. In states without EV mandates or incentives, you’ll see sales crater,” said Eric Noble, president of the CarLab.

Bloomberg cites the example of Georgia which cut its $5,000 electric vehicle tax credit back in 2015. Sales tumbled from 1,400 to just fewer than 100.

Automakers are spending a lot of money and time in lobbying to make sure the credit is renewed partly due to new mandates being placed by California and a number of other states saying a certain percentage of new cars sold have to EVs.

"The potential elimination of the federal electric vehicle tax credit will impact the choices of prospective buyers and make the electric vehicle mandate in 10 states — about a third of the market — even more difficult to meet," said Gloria Bergquist, a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a trade group representing various automakers such as GM and Toyota.

Source: Bloomberg, Reuters

View full article

[G. David Felt]

GOP needs to pull their heads out, idiots just do not get that climate change is real and ev auto's need to be the future for a cleaner city experience with less pollution to breath and noise to destroy the hearing.

Glad to see that the Auto Companies are pushing to keep the tax credit in place. Very well worth it.

[smk4565]

14 minutes ago, dfelt said:

GOP needs to pull their heads out, idiots just do not get that climate change is real and ev auto's need to be the future for a cleaner city experience with less pollution to breath and noise to destroy the hearing.

Glad to see that the Auto Companies are pushing to keep the tax credit in place. Very well worth it.

Agree.  Not to make it too political, but EV's are the future, they are cleaner and more quiet.  The technology will get there eventually where EV's are just as cheap to produce as gas cars, and when batteries are cheap, you'll see them take over.

I would be in favor of the incentives staying, because they'll run out in a few years anyway.  If they cut the incentive, then I don't think it is the end of the world either, because some car makers are closing in on 200,000 sales anyway, and by 2023 the battery tech will even out the price and you won't need the credits anyway.

I'd be more concerned about all the EPA cuts and removal of environmental protections.  

[A Horse With No Name]

Personally disgusted with this...electing the current crop of people we have is moronic.

[balthazar]

Interesting to learn how the credit works.

• It's a literal credit on your federal taxes for the year you bought the eligible car. If you buy a Bolt in '17 (eligible for $7500) but you only owe $2500 in federal tax, instead you pay $0 and the other $5000 goes poof!
• If you lease, the credit goes to the lease company, not you.

[daves87rs]

It still needs time to get affordable before they let it go.....

[67impss]

I disagree with the credit there's no reason for me to pay my earnings to the government so an early adapter can buy a new electric car. I can't afford to pay for my own new auto let alone pay for someone else's. Early adaptors are making the choice to buy an auto that is much more expensive and really is a luxury item at this point. I don't mind paying taxes for my own share of the government but I draw the line at paying for my neighbors car and not being able to make enough money to pay for a newer used auto for my own family.

[G. David Felt]

11 minutes ago, 67impss said:

I disagree with the credit there's no reason for me to pay my earnings to the government so an early adapter can buy a new electric car. I can't afford to pay for my own new auto let alone pay for someone else's. Early adaptors are making the choice to buy an auto that is much more expensive and really is a luxury item at this point. I don't mind paying taxes for my own share of the government but I draw the line at paying for my neighbors car and not being able to make enough money to pay for a newer used auto for my own family.

So then how do you feel about the so called 40+ billion given to the oil companies to offset their R&D when ExxonMobil made 100 Billion profit and paid their CEO hundreds of Millions. Should we not be cutting off that wasted tax dollars then as well as the billions paid to ethanol companies, CNG companies or Bio-Diesel?

Healthy change usually comes by the gov supporting early tech that will lead to a better future for us all.

[67impss]

Maybe that's the amount that they need to be able to meet the regulations that the government likes to throw at the energy corporations. 

See dfelt I to can put you on the defense, I read the articles and posts and I am almost always able to figure out who's going to attack whom. Drew used to police this stuff better but I understand that work and life in general take precedence over the internet. I have been on this board since before Avanti something sold it to Drew and have seen all of the bickering through the years,we used to have discussions with each other but now just attack each other.

I'd move on to another board but I have come to like a lot of you guys and still value quite a few of their opinions even if it conflicts with mine. So maybe I don't share much for a while and just lurk till the climate changes and it's a bit friendlier. We have lost so many good minds because of the bickering already. (Off my soapbox) back to lurking, good night guys.

[Cmicasa the Great]

10 hours ago, dfelt said:

GOP needs to pull their heads out, idiots just do not get that climate change is real and ev auto's need to be the future for a cleaner city experience with less pollution to breath and noise to destroy the hearing.

Glad to see that the Auto Companies are pushing to keep the tax credit in place. Very well worth it.

But  do the Auto Companies have as powerful a lobby as the Oil Companies. Oil companies just won't see their livelihood die without a fight.  I'm surprised gas isn't down to $1.50 right now.. Even more to the point is that they need to be transitioning over to something else.. as it is estimated that the earth has enough oil left for about 50 more years at current production levels. Electric.. or something else.. is the way of the future

[Drew Dowdell]

6 hours ago, 67impss said:

Maybe that's the amount that they need to be able to meet the regulations that the government likes to throw at the energy corporations. 

See dfelt I to can put you on the defense, I read the articles and posts and I am almost always able to figure out who's going to attack whom. Drew used to police this stuff better but I understand that work and life in general take precedence over the internet. I have been on this board since before Avanti something sold it to Drew and have seen all of the bickering through the years,we used to have discussions with each other but now just attack each other.

I'd move on to another board but I have come to like a lot of you guys and still value quite a few of their opinions even if it conflicts with mine. So maybe I don't share much for a while and just lurk till the climate changes and it's a bit friendlier. We have lost so many good minds because of the bickering already. (Off my soapbox) back to lurking, good night guys.

The industry got those regulations because the industry was acting badly.  Corporations will poison your kids for a 5 cent jump in share price if they could get away with it. It is much better to be proactive with regulations than reactive with spill cleanup.

That said, at least these tax credits are helping the end consumers directly instead of going to multi-billion dollar corporations. 

[G. David Felt]

7 hours ago, 67impss said:

Maybe that's the amount that they need to be able to meet the regulations that the government likes to throw at the energy corporations. 

See dfelt I to can put you on the defense, I read the articles and posts and I am almost always able to figure out who's going to attack whom. Drew used to police this stuff better but I understand that work and life in general take precedence over the internet. I have been on this board since before Avanti something sold it to Drew and have seen all of the bickering through the years,we used to have discussions with each other but now just attack each other.

I'd move on to another board but I have come to like a lot of you guys and still value quite a few of their opinions even if it conflicts with mine. So maybe I don't share much for a while and just lurk till the climate changes and it's a bit friendlier. We have lost so many good minds because of the bickering already. (Off my soapbox) back to lurking, good night guys.

I am sorry that you feel I attacked you as my only point was to do just what I did and that is to point out the big waste of tax dollars going to very profitable companies that do not need it and to point out what we have gained by agencies such as Nasa that has brought many amazing products to the markets by having the government pay for the R&D and support the change over to a better way.

I am very glad your still here and at least lurk with the occasional comment, I too remember the days of the old owner before Drew. It was good then and good now, we are just more vocal and willing to point out our beliefs and thoughts on this amazing auto industry.

Even Ocnblu comments / attacks on EV's allow for a discourse of discussion and dispelling with misconceptions or understandings of a product segment in the auto industry. After all he once was very vocal about his dislike of the Aluminum F150 and lately has been thinking of an F150 FX4. 

We can all change and I understand change is harder for some than others. Yet I truly believe in my heart we all want a better life, a cleaner place to live and less cost out of pocket.

Make it a Great Day 67impss!   

[surreal1272]

Come on folks! How else is our wonderful government going to protect our old dinosaur industries? Eliminate those pesky EV feeebies while doling out a million times that to subsidize the old guard industries. 

 

Oh, and our government is just a laughing stock at this point. 

[ccap41]

Well, if EV's are all they're talked up to be then people will still buy them, right? 

I also don't think it's a huge issue. Like it's already been said, Tesla, GM, and Nissan are coming up on their 200,000 anyway. 

What's more important? Letting consumers potentially save $7500 on something that they probably don't need to be buying or spending the $7500 somewhere else or just reducing debt? 

FWIW, as far as I know, nobody here has even taken advantage of the credit anyway.. Nobody is on the verge of it(or at least spoken out about it). 

[Drew Dowdell]

24 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Well, if EV's are all they're talked up to be then people will still buy them, right? 

I also don't think it's a huge issue. Like it's already been said, Tesla, GM, and Nissan are coming up on their 200,000 anyway. 

What's more important? Letting consumers potentially save $7500 on something that they probably don't need to be buying or spending the $7500 somewhere else or just reducing debt? 

FWIW, as far as I know, nobody here has even taken advantage of the credit anyway.. Nobody is on the verge of it(or at least spoken out about it). 

Changing a technology like this requires investment.  There won't be chargers without EV demand and there won't be EV demand without chargers. It's a chicken and egg problem. Also, until any of these things hits large scale, there won't be economies of scale and the price won't come down. The Federal government started the EV credits to help prime the pump and lower costs until the price comes down. 

Lest we forget, the government paid for a whole bunch of paved roads 100 years ago to enable vehicle traffic. Prior to that, roads between cities were largely dirt paths with mud axel deep. It wasn't "The Market" that paved those roads. 

 

 

[ccap41]

7 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The Federal government started the EV credits to help prime the pump and lower costs until the price comes down. 

And they have primed the pump... And according to ppl here EVs can be driven everywhere so there's already enough infrastructure so why do they need to keep priming a pump that's already primed? Or I guess, how much longer should they do this? 

[smk4565]

I am all for taking any subsidies away from oil and gas companies, they will find a way to make a profit.  I wouldn't subsidize any corporation for that matter, they can sink or swim on their own.  

I like that there is an EV tax credit, but it is going to expire anyway, so if they take it away then it is only speeding up the process. 

If we all had vertical take off drones for travel we wouldn't need roads.  Then the Government wouldn't have to spend money paving them.   But I have always said if you want to inspire EV sales, raise the gas tax.

[FAPTurbo]

murricans: STOP SENDING OUR GAS MONIES TO FEREIGN SAND PEEPLE AND BE SELF DOING OUR ENERGIES FREEDUM AIN'T FUHREE

us gov't: Okay, here's subsidies to foster adoption of vehicles that will lessen foreign energy dependance, clean our air and help our automakers lead the world in R&D. 

murricans: MUH TAX DOLLARS SHUDN'T BE GOIN TO LIBTARDS, THEN WHO GON SUBSIDIZE MAH HIGH FRUKTOZE CORN SYRUP CARAMEL FOR MY MONSANTO POP-A-MA-CORN

us gov't: ...

[Drew Dowdell]

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

And they have primed the pump... And according to ppl here EVs can be driven everywhere so there's already enough infrastructure so why do they need to keep priming a pump that's already primed? Or I guess, how much longer should they do this? 

No, there is still not enough infrastructure to start widespread adoption yet. 

[ccap41]

Well I would have been convinced otherwise according to members' talk. How often to people need to drive more than 230 miles in a day? Charge at home and we don't even need an infrastructure. 

[Drew Dowdell]

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

I am all for taking any subsidies away from oil and gas companies, they will find a way to make a profit.  I wouldn't subsidize any corporation for that matter, they can sink or swim on their own.  

I like that there is an EV tax credit, but it is going to expire anyway, so if they take it away then it is only speeding up the process. 

If we all had vertical take off drones for travel we wouldn't need roads.  Then the Government wouldn't have to spend money paving them.   But I have always said if you want to inspire EV sales, raise the gas tax.

I drove from Pittsburgh to NY to Pittsburgh earlier this week.  It shouldn't be surprising to me that people are idiots on the road, but on the first leg of that trip I wanted to nuke the whole east coast.   I can't imagine the idiots who can barely operate a Corolla operating a flying drone car... 

[surreal1272]

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

And they have primed the pump... And according to ppl here EVs can be driven everywhere so there's already enough infrastructure so why do they need to keep priming a pump that's already primed? Or I guess, how much longer should they do this? 

You do realize that the original credit would expire after 200,000 by each manufacturer right? It was going away eventually but the GOP has to pay back their oil masters somehow. 

[Drew Dowdell]

20 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Well I would have been convinced otherwise according to members' talk. How often to people need to drive more than 230 miles in a day? Charge at home and we don't even need an infrastructure. 

I'm not sure if you're intentionally trolling or are actually missing the nuance of what I said. Infrastructure is more than just charging stations, though yes, those also need to increase. There is also the infrastructure in lithium mines, battery construction, electric motor construction.   GM is geared up today to build millions of 4-cylinder engines world wide... but they'll only build maybe a hundred thousand electric motors for EVs this year. (Bolt, Volt, CT6 PHEV, eAssist).  It's not easy to quickly turn an engine manufacturing plant into a motor manufacturing plant. 

The subsidies need to continue in order to make the technology available to a wider audience.  That wider audience will drive demand for infrastructure higher.  The pump still needs to be primed for a while. 

[surreal1272]

27 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Well I would have been convinced otherwise according to members' talk. How often to people need to drive more than 230 miles in a day? Charge at home and we don't even need an infrastructure. 

And trolling/fallacy argument of the day goes to...

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

You do realize that the original credit would expire after 200,000 by each manufacturer right? It was going away eventually but the GOP has to pay back their oil masters somehow. 

I absolutely know that, that's why I said that already. 

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I'm not sure if you're intentionally trolling or are actually missing the nuance of what I said. Infrastructure is more than just charging stations, though yes, those also need to increase. There is also the infrastructure in lithium mines, battery construction, electric motor construction.   GM is geared up today to build millions of 4-cylinder engines world wide... but they'll only build maybe a hundred thousand electric motors for EVs this year. (Bolt, Volt, CT6 PHEV, eAssist).  It's not easy to quickly turn an engine manufacturing plant into a motor manufacturing plant. 

The subsidies need to continue in order to make the technology available to a wider audience.  That wider audience will drive demand for infrastructure higher.  The pump still needs to be primed for a while. 

It's not trolling at all. That's what has been proven to me by yourself and dfelt... on multiple occasions. 

All of this superior technology should sell itself. It isn't like they haven't been in the market for awhile now. I don't think it is a NECESSITY for the tax credit. It would be nice but I don't think this is that big of an issue. 

Edited November 3, 2017 by ccap41

[Drew Dowdell]

10 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

It's not trolling at all. That's what has been proven to me by yourself and dfelt... on multiple occasions. 

All of this superior technology should sell itself. It isn't like they haven't been in the market for awhile now. I don't think it is a NECESSITY for the tax credit. It would be nice but I don't think this is that big of an issue. 

The tax credit makes the vehicle more affordable for a broader audience.  That means it increases sales for the companies and it helps with the financial justification for investment into the infrastructure.  Superior technology is also usually more expensive technology.   If this tax credit goes away, expect EV sales to crater and Tesla to possibly go under. 

The removal of the tax credit turns the Bolt from a $30k car into a $37,500 car.... base.  Even with the credit, GM is likely losing money on each one sold.  These are very long term investments for 10 - 20 years into the future. 

[ccap41]

9 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The tax credit makes the vehicle more affordable for a broader audience.  That means it increases sales for the companies and it helps with the financial justification for investment into the infrastructure.  Superior technology is also usually more expensive technology.   If this tax credit goes away, expect EV sales to crater and Tesla to possibly go under. 

The removal of the tax credit turns the Bolt from a $30k car into a $37,500 car.... base.  Even with the credit, GM is likely losing money on each one sold.  These are very long term investments for 10 - 20 years into the future. 

With or without the tax credit does not change how much it costs GM to produce a Bolt. That's a consumer credit. 

Yeah I know it makes it more affordable for a broader spectrum of people... why does everybody deserve to drive an EV? If you can afford one and want one, buy it. If you're that close to being able to afford it or nor afford it, you likely SHOULDN'T be buying it anyway. Maybe instead of a $37,500 Bolt they should have done something more Leaf-like and start under 31k pre-tax. I don't have the answer but I don't think this credit is a necessity, or at least this amount. 

If I remember correctly, beyond the 200,000 cap, it dropped to $5,000 for X amount of units then maybe $2,500 for another X number of units before going completely away? 

[Drew Dowdell]

7 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

With or without the tax credit does not change how much it costs GM to produce a Bolt. That's a consumer credit. 

Yeah I know it makes it more affordable for a broader spectrum of people... why does everybody deserve to drive an EV? If you can afford one and want one, buy it. If you're that close to being able to afford it or nor afford it, you likely SHOULDN'T be buying it anyway. Maybe instead of a $37,500 Bolt they should have done something more Leaf-like and start under 31k pre-tax. I don't have the answer but I don't think this credit is a necessity, or at least this amount. 

If I remember correctly, beyond the 200,000 cap, it dropped to $5,000 for X amount of units then maybe $2,500 for another X number of units before going completely away? 

And this is why I was thinking you were trolling or deliberately being obtuse. 

Tax credits = higher sales

Higher sales = better economies of scale = lower costs per unit.

The Leaf only has a 107 mile range - Batteries cost per KwH - KwH = range - Bolt has more than double the range

No one here, or anywhere, is saying that we all deserve to drive EVs - don't use fallacies.

The Credit is there to get more EVs onto the market to drive more demand for the infrastructure to be built so that more EVs can get on to the market at a lower cost in the future. 

[ccap41]

46 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

And this is why I was thinking you were trolling or deliberately being obtuse. 

Tax credits = higher sales

Higher sales = better economies of scale = lower costs per unit.

The Leaf only has a 107 mile range - Batteries cost per KwH - KwH = range - Bolt has more than double the range

No one here, or anywhere, is saying that we all deserve to drive EVs - don't use fallacies.

The Credit is there to get more EVs onto the market to drive more demand for the infrastructure to be built so that more EVs can get on to the market at a lower cost in the future. 

Yeah and you and I are paying for these tax credits.. so people can buy their vehicles are cheaper prices. So unless anybody here is in the market for an EV in the next year it doesn't make any difference. Which, it doesn't seem like anybody is. 

Yes the Bolt does ave double the range but as I've been proven, most aren't driving that far anyway so why spend 7k more for something you'll hardly ever use? 

I know what the credit is for. It's been there. It's been going on. It doesn't need to keep going. 

How long do you want to compensate other people's vehicles for? I understand it was to kick start the "movement" and it has been kick started. Every automaker has a ton of EVs coming to marker in the next 5-10 years. Do you think this will suddenly stop them? 

[A Horse With No Name]

5 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Come on folks! How else is our wonderful government going to protect our old dinosaur industries? Eliminate those pesky EV feeebies while doling out a million times that to subsidize the old guard industries. 

 

Oh, and our government is just a laughing stock at this point. 

I certainly have lost all respect for them...

[Drew Dowdell]

4 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Yeah and you and I are paying for these tax credits.. so people can buy their vehicles are cheaper prices. So unless anybody here is in the market for an EV in the next year it doesn't make any difference. Which, it doesn't seem like anybody is. 

Yes the Bolt does ave double the range but as I've been proven, most aren't driving that far anyway so why spend 7k more for something you'll hardly ever use? 

I know what the credit is for. It's been there. It's been going on. It doesn't need to keep going. 

How long do you want to compensate other people's vehicles for? I understand it was to kick start the "movement" and it has been kick started. Every automaker has a ton of EVs coming to marker in the next 5-10 years. Do you think this will suddenly stop them? 

Why not just let the 200k vehicle credit run its course?

Our gas taxes only cover 43% of the highway budget.  I work from home most days now so my contribution to the highway fund via gas taxes is very minimal.... my income taxes are subsidizing your driving whether you buy an EV or not and I'm okay with that because that's how civil society works. 

[ccap41]

2 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

I certainly have lost all respect for them...

Did you have respect before? Politics have been corrupt and $h!ty since the beginning of time. 

[ccap41]

Just now, Drew Dowdell said:

Why not just let the 200k vehicle credit run its course?

Our gas taxes only cover 43% of the highway budget.  I work from home most days now so contribution to the highway fund is very minimal.... my taxes are subsidizing your driving whether you buy an EV or not and I'm okay with that because that's how civil society works. 

How close are they now? 

I understand how that works but subsidizing 20% of somebody's personal vehicle? That's the Bolt, the Leaf would be almost 25%. Is that how civil society works, we help people buy cars?

Now, an idea, maybe if it was a certain percentage up to a max dollar amount(so your 120k Tesla isn't getting like 20k in tax credits or some crazy sh!t)

[ccap41]

If my calculator fingers are correct GM has sold 158,063 plug in EV's through October 2017. Obviously this year is the biggest year with the Bolt and CT6(only 275 CT6's) and Volt going strong. So realistically, in about a year-year and a half GM will be out of theirs. I heard Tesla was even closer so I'll just guesstimate and say 8-10 months? 

[Drew Dowdell]

Just now, ccap41 said:

How close are they now? 

I understand how that works but subsidizing 20% of somebody's personal vehicle? That's the Bolt, the Leaf would be almost 25%. Is that how civil society works, we help people buy cars?

Now, an idea, maybe if it was a certain percentage up to a max dollar amount(so your 120k Tesla isn't getting like 20k in tax credits or some crazy sh!t)

Tesla will run out of credits first, followed by GM. Nissan has to be on that list somewhere too.  I do not know how close they are. 

Why is subsidizing 57% of someone's road use okay, but not 20% of someone's vehicle purchase?     Putting it another way; If you're so worried about tax credits on EVs, why aren't you worried that we haven't raised the gas tax from 18.4 cents per gallon to 43 cents per gallon.... a 133.7% increase in the gas tax?

[surreal1272]

18 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Why not just let the 200k vehicle credit run its course?

Our gas taxes only cover 43% of the highway budget.  I work from home most days now so my contribution to the highway fund via gas taxes is very minimal.... my income taxes are subsidizing your driving whether you buy an EV or not and I'm okay with that because that's how civil society works. 

Your first sentence is exactly my point. Wonder how he would feel about gas prices if that same government cut out big oils many subsidies. 

[Drew Dowdell]

Just now, surreal1272 said:

Your first sentence is exactly my point. Wonder how he would feel about gas prices if that same government cut out big oils many subsidies. 

Heck, just raise the gas tax to the point where the highway trust fund is fully funded.... No one would flinch at an extra 25 cents a gallon these days.... no one would even notice it. 

[surreal1272]

Just now, Drew Dowdell said:

Heck, just raise the gas tax to the point where the highway trust fund is fully funded.... No one would flinch at an extra 25 cents a gallon these days.... no one would even notice it. 

Very true but the end of subsidies for big oil would lead to increased prices at the pump as well. 

[Drew Dowdell]

@ccap41 - The point that @surreal1272 and I are making here is that driving has been subsidized by taxpayers for decades....  So while I can't speak for him, I'm a little confused as to why you protest this particular subsidy that is, in the grand scheme of things, very small.   If you're against all subsidies, that's a perfectly valid position to have.  Just understand the full gravity of what comes with that position with regards to traditional cars.

[ccap41]

10 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Tesla will run out of credits first, followed by GM. Nissan has to be on that list somewhere too.  I do not know how close they are. 

Why is subsidizing 57% of someone's road use okay, but not 20% of someone's vehicle purchase?     Putting it another way; If you're so worried about tax credits on EVs, why aren't you worried that we haven't raised the gas tax from 18.4 cents per gallon to 43 cents per gallon.... a 133.7% increase in the gas tax?

Because everybody uses roads... One individual drives their own car(or couple/family/etc). 

I have stated that gas tax could use an increase. With how little it's gone up and how much costs have increase, I understand that. I haven't opposed it, you just don't remember. 

4 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

@ccap41 - The point that @surreal1272 and I are making here is that driving has been subsidized by taxpayers for decades....  So while I can't speak for him, I'm a little confused as to why you protest this particular subsidy that is, in the grand scheme of things, very small.   If you're against all subsidies, that's a perfectly valid position to have.  Just understand the full gravity of what comes with that position with regards to traditional cars.

I have said it a few times already, I'm not protesting or opposed to it, It just don't think it is as big of an issue as it is being made out to be. 

[William Maley]

13 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Tesla will run out of credits first, followed by GM. Nissan has to be on that list somewhere too.  I do not know how close they are. 

 

I can give some rough numbers via the Bloomberg article along with sales numbers for September and October.

General Motors: 153,228*
Tesla Motors: 136,520**
Nissan: 113,268

*Doesn't include CT6 Plug-In (couldn't find any sales stat for that, yet)
**Based on estimates from Automotive News.

[Drew Dowdell]

8 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Because everybody uses roads... One individual drives their own car(or couple/family/etc). 

I have stated that gas tax could use an increase. With how little it's gone up and how much costs have increase, I understand that. I haven't opposed it, you just don't remember. 

I have said it a few times already, I'm not protesting or opposed to it, It just don't think it is as big of an issue as it is being made out to be. 

Then I would ask if you've read the article William posted that we're commenting on....

 

Quote

Bloomberg cites the example of Georgia which cut its $5,000 electric vehicle tax credit back in 2015. Sales tumbled from 1,400 to just fewer than 100.

100 years ago, those roads didn't exist. It took federal subsidies to create them.   Eventually, possibly in your and my lifetime, everyone will be driving EVs except for a few old dotards who keep a gas powered Toronado in the garage. 

[surreal1272]

36 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

@ccap41 - The point that @surreal1272 and I are making here is that driving has been subsidized by taxpayers for decades....  So while I can't speak for him, I'm a little confused as to why you protest this particular subsidy that is, in the grand scheme of things, very small.   If you're against all subsidies, that's a perfectly valid position to have.  Just understand the full gravity of what comes with that position with regards to traditional cars.

You echoed my sentiments entirely there Drew. Why some ignore the history and bigger picture here is beyond me. 

[ccap41]

30 minutes ago, William Maley said:

*Doesn't include CT6 Plug-In (couldn't find any sales stat for that, yet)

I saw a minuscule 143 units. 

https://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

 

[G. David Felt]

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

Yes the Bolt does have double the range but as I've been proven, most aren't driving that far anyway so why spend 7k more for something you'll hardly ever use? 

We could also say that since people do not drive hundreds of miles a day then why do they need to have 18 gallon gas tanks, 28, 32, 44 or 50 gallon size tanks. Might as well just make them all 5 or 10 gallon size tanks at most since you can just stop more often at your local gas station.

[ccap41]

26 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

100 years ago, those roads didn't exist. It took federal subsidies to create them.   Eventually, possibly in your and my lifetime, everyone will be driving EVs except for a few old dotards who keep a gas powered Toronado in the garage. 

So then what's the point?  If its inevitably happening why subsidize it even longer? 

And why do we care what EV sales drop a little for? It's inevitable that they're coming. Other countries mandates on EV's and displacement are going to assure us we will be getting the same EV doses even if it isn't a 100% mandate like some countries/cities.If this was going to make EV's go away, I wouldn't want it but they're not going to go away from this tax credit that is close to running up anyway. 

[Drew Dowdell]

3 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I saw a minuscule 143 units. 

https://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

 

Yeah, I think they were directed to China first. 

Just now, ccap41 said:

So then what's the point?  If its inevitably happening why subsidize it even longer? 

And why do we care what EV sales drop a little for? It's inevitable that they're coming. Other countries mandates on EV's and displacement are going to assure us we will be getting the same EV doses even if it isn't a 100% mandate like some countries/cities.If this was going to make EV's go away, I wouldn't want it but they're not going to go away from this tax credit that is close to running up anyway. 

Because we need the change to happen sooner rather than later. 

[ccap41]

1 minute ago, dfelt said:

We could also say that since people do not drive hundreds of miles a day then why do they need to have 18 gallon gas tanks, 28, 32, 44 or 50 gallon size tanks. Might as well just make them all 5 or 10 gallon size tanks at most since you can just stop more often at your local gas station.

Absolutely. There are gas stations everywhere to fill up, no reason to make a big heavy gas tank taking up valuable space. *sarcasm(because it's tough to read that through internet words)* 

1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Yeah, I think they were directed to China first. 

Because we need the change to happen sooner rather than later. 

So in the next 18 months THAT much is going to change that was NEED this credit? 

Anybody find out if this was a step-down tax credit like I thought it was earlier? If so, it seems more necessary to ween people on but if it's a sudden cut-off anyway.. doesn't matter when if it's only a year to a year and a half away anyway. 

Also, you say "need" to happen sooner than later, why? 

[G. David Felt]

10 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Absolutely. There are gas stations everywhere to fill up, no reason to make a big heavy gas tank taking up valuable space. *sarcasm(because it's tough to read that through internet words)* 

So in the next 18 months THAT much is going to change that was NEED this credit? 

Anybody find out if this was a step-down tax credit like I thought it was earlier? If so, it seems more necessary to ween people on but if it's a sudden cut-off anyway.. doesn't matter when if it's only a year to a year and a half away anyway. 

Also, you say "need" to happen sooner than later, why? 

Yet just as people say they would buy an EV but are concerned about the short range of battery packs, same with ICE auto's, People want 200-300 mile range so they do not have to worry about running out of power.

In regards to the tax credit, yes once they hit their magic number, it then reduces down.

The credit begins to phase out for vehicles at the beginning of the second calendar quarter after the manufacturer has sold 200,000 eligible plug-in electric vehicles (i.e., plug-in hybrids and EVs) in the United States as counted from January 1, 2010. IRS will announce when a manufacturer exceeds this production figure and will announce the subsequent phase out schedule (Plug-In Electric Drive Motor Vehicle Credit Quarterly Sales).

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxevb.shtml

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/plug-in-electric-vehicle-credit-irc-30-and-irc-30d

https://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/409

https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/plug-in-electric-drive-vehicle-credit-section-30d

Hopefully all the various agencies all stating the same thing is enough info about the phase out of EV auto credit once 200,000 are sold.

Not sure why it is so difficult for peeps in DC to understand the benefits of the program.