Senate Bill Deal to Expand EV Tax Credits (7/27/2022)

[Mach1E]

Because, for me, it only made financial sense with the rebate. Which it doesn't mean I didn't have the means to pay more. I'm pragmatic and diligent with money, and things need to fit their cost into the value I attribute to them, not the other way around. The exception is cape cod potato chips, I'd pay anything for that.

If the goal is to help the environment, and the government is assuming that more people driving BEVs will, then the incentives would be simple:

Everyone who buys a BEV gets a discount.

But that isn’t REALLY the goal (or at least it’s not the only goal).

Instead they use it as the headline/marketing goal to push a bunch of other agendas: tax increases, wealth transfer, union support, etc.

But it’s all for a “good cause” (wink).

And I’ve repeated this multiple times. But again, the OLD credits probably helped keep the Mach E prices down.

This new round of a decade of credits? Will have the opposite effect. It’ll make the prices higher overall, but create some weird version of capitalism* where the price you pay for an identical product depends on how much money you make. I guess we don’t care if rich people help the environment?

*ie not capitalism.

Sponsored

 

[dbsb3233]

What a mess this sounds like it will be for battery manufacturers. Maybe the US EV market isn't big enough for them to even care whether 40% (or 50%) of source materials come from "approved" countries. But where they can shuffle things around and allocated the "approved" materials to batteries bound for US sales, they'll probably be able to charge more for them. Something like selling the "US subsidy approved" batteries for 20% more than the not-approved ones (that will probably go to China).

 

[Mach1E]

What a mess this sounds like it will be for battery manufacturers. Maybe the US EV market isn't big enough for them to even care whether 40% (or 50%) of source materials come from "approved" countries. But where they can shuffle things around and allocated the "approved" materials to batteries bound for US sales, they'll probably be able to charge more for them. Something like selling the "US subsidy approved" batteries for 20% more than the not-approved ones (that will probably go to China).

Yes, because everyone knows only batteries from “approved countries” help save the environment. ?

It’s like donating money to your friends charity…….. and your friend gets paid $2 million/yr for running the charity.

Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.?

 

[J5hort]

Ok, I understand the motivation for incentives to boost EV sales..and am one who enjoyed both the EV tax credit and state rebate. It made a big difference in my purchase, but one of the things that is keeping people from buying EV is not fully understanding the technology and the financial incentives that are available... dealers included! This new bill just complicates things further.

...and somebody has to explain the dealer including the tax credit...are we talking just advertising a price for people who can't to math or only paying the post credit price (ie. this is still a tax event that requires filing).

 

[voxel]

I agree with you and if people are willing to buy a MY for $63k+ or more if they raise prices even more now due to the tax credit and people are still lining up to buy it, then so be it because clearly, the demand is still there.

The average income of a Tesla owner is $135K or something. I suspect half of new Tesla buyers are over the new income limits.

FYI.. the lowest trim Model Y LR starts at $67.2K+ (with $1200 destination).

This bill isn't about supporting and getting folks to buy EVs (we already know folks want to buy them with the crazy demand). I see this bill as "America First" - trying to push for EV carmakers to move production to the US/Mexico/Canada.

 

[timbop]

They won't at the moment because the market is so high from demand being so much higher than supply. But I'm talking a normal situation. For instance, that's what happened with the Bolt. When GM ran out of credits, they offered big discounts on the Bolt. In fact at one point shortly after GM's expired, I was looking at them and Chevy was offering an $8500 off incentive, even bigger than the $7500 tax credit that went away.

2 things happened when GM hit the threshold: the Tesla model 3 SR+ started being shipped in volume, and of course the incentive went away. I know because I was cross-shopping the Bolt and Model 3 in late 2019, and when the Mach-E was announced I added that to the mix. At the time Chevy was starting to add a few incentives, but certainly nothing like they've had to do since then.

In my comparisons the Bolt was way behind the Mach-E Select and the Model 3, and the price was only a few thousand less. For what was a few grand more you got a car with auto lane centering, much faster DCFC charging, far better styling and comfort, and overall just a better vibe than the Bolt's econobox feel. I remember sitting in one at the Philly auto show in 2020 and being absolutely turned off - not only was it cheap feeling it was very uncomfortable.

When it was first came out in 2017 the Bolt was a breakthrough for its range at that price point, but the Mach-E Select and M3 SR+ just obliterated it in terms of value 2 years later.

** EDIT **
I dug up my spreadsheet from back then and the Tesla M3SR+ had a base price of $37,500 and the Bolt LT was selling for $34,000 but Chevy started offering $2500 back, depending upon typical OEM hoops to jump through. The Mach-E Select was more than I remembered, at around $42,000 base price. The "tech package" on the Mach-E put it at $45,000.

 

[DennisD]

If the goal is to help the environment, and the government is assuming that more people driving BEVs will, then the incentives would be simple:

Everyone who buys a BEV gets a discount.

But that isn’t REALLY the goal (or at least it’s not the only goal).

Instead they use it as the headline/marketing goal to push a bunch of other agendas: tax increases, wealth transfer, union support, etc.

But it’s all for a “good cause” (wink).

And I’ve repeated this multiple times. But again, the OLD credits probably helped keep the Mach E prices down.

This new round of a decade of credits? Will have the opposite effect. It’ll make the prices higher overall, but create some weird version of capitalism* where the price you pay for an identical product depends on how much money you make. I guess we don’t care if rich people help the environment?

*ie not capitalism.

This I know from history. One side of the political persuasion has done very little to nothing for the environment since the 70's. The President that was in office in the early 80's pulled the Solar Panels off the White House and "investment" into an alternative energy source turned into a "bad word" for one side of the aisle. Deregulation also turned good soil into contaminated in many parts of this Country because the "big bad gov't. was trying to tell you what you can and can't do". Why oh why can't I ruin the Earth to save a few bucks??

Fast forward to today.

The same side of the aisle, if you will, will find every excuse not to invest in an alternative energy solution. If we could harness their energy in whining and complaining about who gets what, we would solve the climate disaster that we are living through by their energy of blowing hot air. (if we could get them to shut up, that would solve some of the hot air issues we are having)? Interesting dilemma. ?

Unfortunately we are living in a World that has been neglected for far too many years solely due to greed (i.e. capitalism) I guess I can inject that phrase in as well on this topic.?

While this new Bill is far from perfect, it is much better than the Bill the opposing side is offering. That was a joke btw. There is no counter solution. So we have what we have and if you don't like it, please persuade the opposing side to offer up answers as opposed to resistance to solving issues at hand.

If you could please be so kind and offer what you think the best solution to curbing climate change through EV technology and the like, I am all ears.

If you think you can sell a product that many are not sold on and they need to pay a higher price for said product than the "old" product, how do you propose they market it without incentives and have people buy them? And I know what you will counter with, they are flying off the shelves now. Well I have an answer for that, the shelves are bare because of supply issues. I can't buy a Corvette either. That doesn't mean that everyone wants to buy a Corvette because "the shelves are bare of Corvettes".

So once again, how do you get a majority of the people to buy something that costs more than the ICE counter part without an incentive?

Riddle me that..................?

 

[MisterSofa]

They should only allow 1 tax credit every 5 years to each individual. That would stop a lot of flippers.

 

[Mach1E]

This I know from history. One side of the political persuasion has done very little to nothing for the environment since the 70's. The President that was in office in the early 80's pulled the Solar Panels off the White House and "investment" into an alternative energy source turned into a "bad word" for one side of the aisle. Deregulation also turned good soil into contaminated in many parts of this Country because the "big bad gov't. was trying to tell you what you can and can't do". Why oh why can't I ruin the Earth to save a few bucks??

Fast forward to today.

The same side of the aisle, if you will, will find every excuse not to invest in an alternative energy solution. If we could harness their energy in whining and complaining about who gets what, we would solve the climate disaster that we are living through by their energy of blowing hot air. (if we could get them to shut up, that would solve some of the hot air issues we are having)? Interesting dilemma. ?

Unfortunately we are living in a World that has been neglected for far too many years solely due to greed (i.e. capitalism) I guess I can inject that phrase in as well on this topic.?

While this new Bill is far from perfect, it is much better than the Bill the opposing side is offering. That was a joke btw. There is no counter solution. So we have what we have and if you don't like it, please persuade the opposing side to offer up answers as opposed to resistance to solving issues at hand.

If you could please be so kind and offer what you think the best solution to curbing climate change through EV technology and the like, I am all ears.

If you think you can sell a product that many are not sold on and they need to pay a higher price for said product than the "old" product, how do you propose they market it without incentives and have people buy them? And I know what you will counter with, they are flying off the shelves now. Well I have an answer for that, the shelves are bare because of supply issues. I can't buy a Corvette either. That doesn't mean that everyone wants to buy a Corvette because "the shelves are bare of Corvettes".

So once again, how do you get a majority of the people to buy something that costs more than the ICE counter part without an incentive?

Riddle me that..................?

It’s not a riddle.

They already got the ball rolling with BEVs with the old law. Further tax credits won’t help.

Before this new hundreds of billions of $$ some of the top auto manufacturers in the world are already promising 100% electric by 2035.

Why pay them more to do something they’re already doing?

If the goal is to help the environment by spending money, the answer is “spend it on literally anything else environmental.”

Again, not a riddle, pretty simple answer really. In 2036 you can’t buy a new gas powered Corvette. No government $$ needed for that future to become reality.

 

[jecjackal]

I thought mach e didn't qualify because the battery isn't made in the US?

 

[DennisD]

It’s not a riddle.

They already got the ball rolling with BEVs with the old law. Further tax credits won’t help.

Before this new hundreds of billions of $$ some of the top auto manufacturers in the world are already promising 100% electric by 2035.

Why pay them more to do something they’re already doing?

If the goal is to help the environment by spending money, the answer is “spend it on literally anything else environmental.”

Again, not a riddle, pretty simple answer really. In 2036 you can’t buy a new gas powered Corvette. No government $$ needed for that future to become reality.

That push to go electric came from incentives. I am sure that there were many out there that didn't like those either.

Without the initial incentives, we would not be having this conversation today. It would be more likely to happen years from now without the "push" from the Govt. Similar to gas mileage. The cars of today are getting much better mileage through the push of making it mandatory. Just imagine what gas prices would be with out regulation of gas mileage. People tend to forget about that little detail.

Once again, the Bill that is being proposed is not perfect by no means. But the push to getting the cost affordable is accelerating in part because of what you mentioned.

The incentives will expire in 2032 (if the Bill passes as written)and all will be "normal" at the end of the day so to speak. This is just a kickstart until we are up to full speed in 2036.

Once again, this will ease the pain of transitioning. An "incentive" if you will.

 

[Mach1E]

That push to go electric came from incentives. I am sure that there were many out there that didn't like those either.

Without the initial incentives, we would not be having this conversation today. It would be more likely to happen years from now without the "push" from the Govt. Similar to gas mileage. The cars of today are getting much better mileage through the push of making it mandatory. Just imagine what gas prices would be with out regulation of gas mileage. People tend to forget about that little detail.

Once again, the Bill that is being proposed is not perfect by no means. But the push to getting the cost affordable is accelerating in part because of what you mentioned.

The incentives will expire in 2032 (if the Bill passes as written)and all will be "normal" at the end of the day so to speak. This is just a kickstart until we are up to full speed in 2036.

Once again, this will ease the pain of transitioning. An "incentive" if you will.

I understand what you’re saying. We just seem to disagree that we still need a push.

You call it “not perfect.” I call it “hot garbage waste of hundreds billions of dollars.”

Like I said, that money would be better spent on literally anything else.

Except not right now. More urgent issue is inflation. We don’t need hundreds of billions of new spending and $$ pumped into the economy right now.

No point in funding cancer research to find a cure in 100 years when you have an open bullet wound.

 

[generaltso]

I thought mach e didn't qualify because the battery isn't made in the US?

North America.

 

[DennisD]

I understand what you’re saying. We just seem to disagree that we still need a push.

You call it “not perfect.” I call it “hot garbage waste of hundreds billions of dollars.”

Like I said, that money would be better spent on literally anything else.

Except not right now. More urgent issue is inflation. We don’t need hundreds of billions of new spending and $$ pumped into the economy right now.

No point in funding cancer research to find a cure in 100 years when you have an open bullet wound.

If the tax credit's expire, people will gravitate more towards the ICE vehicles. Because the tax credits (more times than not) somewhat offset the extra cost to purchase an EV, many will purchase an ICE vehicle instead if these credits expire. I for one, will certainly look at my bottom dollar at the end of the day and it will most likely dictate my future purchases.

So in short, whether we agree or disagree with this Bill, it will undoubtedly spur more growth towards EVs in the very near future. That is the main intention of the Bill. The other side of the aisle mainly despise the "electric future" and many would rather see ICE live on and the Planet burn with it rather than see people get a tax credit to purchase an EV.

 

[yngwenli]

The average income of a Tesla owner is $135K or something. I suspect half of new Tesla buyers are over the new income limits.

FYI.. the lowest trim Model Y LR starts at $67.2K+ (with $1200 destination).

This bill isn't about supporting and getting folks to buy EVs (we already know folks want to buy them with the crazy demand). I see this bill as "America First" - trying to push for EV carmakers to move production to the US/Mexico/Canada.

Wow, Tesla raised prices again. $66K now I see for MY.

Sponsored