EV tax credits in Build Back Better Act - income limit?

Socalsp3

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2021
Threads
22
Messages
596
Reaction score
612
Location
CA
Vehicles
Ioniq 5, Mach E
Country flag
Not true. Just because we “can” afford it doesn’t mean I like throwing money away. As a family we need 2 cars, also pay for daycare, etc. An extra $15000 net is a vacation I could take. I like EVs but not enough to spend an extra 15k (two cars X $7500).

people buying 125k Tesla Plaids? Sure. But many people at the low end of the income cap are trying to buy two nice family vehicles. You have to look at the comparisons. Yes, I could outright buy an id4 without the credit. But Im not in the market for a CRV. It’s XC40 vs XC40 recharge. Or BMW 335 vs i4. Or in our case, Audi Q5 vs Q5 PHEV. The PHEV costs a lot more and the only difference is the powertrain. We aren’t comparing buying an Audi vs the VW id4.

people can hate on higher income people all they want. They certainly aren’t entitled to a tax credit. Frankly I get tired of being attacked on two fronts. We already pay much higher marginal tax rates, then are also expected to pay more for goods and services than other people, and credits and benefits are phased out. The effective marginal rate for a family at the lower end of “wealthy” (300-500k a year) is enormous. Easily more than 50% federal when you factor in the phaseouts of many credits and deductions like the child tax credit. Keep in mind that a family making 350-400k could be a pediatrician or nurse practitioner married to an engineer. Not CEOs and Elon Musk.
If you only have a limited amount of money to give back in tax rebates and you want the most number of people to adopt EVs, an income cap would make sense. Theoretically, people who are financially well off would need less government help to buy EVs. How else would you do it, by lottery?
Sponsored

 

DrSteveBrule

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
114
Reaction score
92
Location
MN
Vehicles
n/a
Country flag
The "right thing" is not cut and dried. What is right/viable for someone living in a big coastal city may be totally unworkable for someone in what are derisively called "flyover states."
I live in a flyover state. The right thing for the environment is pretty ding dang clear.
 

timbop

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Threads
63
Messages
6,729
Reaction score
13,758
Location
New Jersey
Vehicles
Solar powered 2021 MME ER RWD & 2022 Corsair PHEV
Occupation
Software Engineer
Country flag
Its funny how most people think a income limit is a good idea, but think it should be just high enough that it doesn't affect them.
I fully supported the covid payments last year, and I was out of the bracket of eligibility for some of them. In fact, I didn't think my wife and I should have been eligible for any of them. It seemed appropriate to me that the harder hit people should reap the benefit, and while my wife was out of work from her part time job for a while the unemployment benefits made up the difference and we didn't need the relief checks.

While $12,500 in cash is equivalent to a nice vacation, financing that amount over 4 years is a fairly insignificant amount compared to a half million dollar income. If you're planning to pay cash (and can afford to do that) then you don't really need the incentives.
 

Mirak

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2020
Threads
109
Messages
3,657
Reaction score
5,839
Location
Kansas
Vehicles
"Sonic" 2021 MME Grabber Blue First Edition
Country flag
I’m “wealthy” - relatively speaking - and I happily took my $7,500 from my fellow taxpayers for my luxury EV because that’s the law. It’s a stupid law, and I certainly wouldn’t try to defend it to somebody making $70k a year.

Sorry (not sorry), I don’t care how oppressed you are by living in a blue state with higher state and local taxes, higher real estate values, and just higher everything, you don’t need a $50,000 electric SUV, and you don’t need a tax credit to “incentivize you” to buy that electric SUV. That’s a luxury.

This isn’t about saving the environment. If government really cared about putting more EVs on the road, it would invest our billions into massively expanding the charging network now, and heavily subsidizing little econobox peoplemovers (think Leafs and Bolts) down to $10k. That would get a lot more people into EVs, and the affluent folks would still pony up for bigger more luxurious vehicles because that’s what we want and we can afford it.

If cost of living is such a problem, then come join me in flyoverstan. Great place to raise a family, too.
 


RickMachE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2021
Threads
200
Messages
13,123
Reaction score
17,835
Location
SE MI
Vehicles
2022 Mach-E Premium 4X, 2022 Lightning Lariat
Country flag
This isn’t about saving the environment. If government really cared about putting more EVs on the road, it would invest our billions into massively expanding the charging network now, and heavily subsidizing little econobox peoplemovers (think Leafs and Bolts) down to $10k. That would get a lot more people into EVs, and the affluent folks would still pony up for bigger more luxurious vehicles because that’s what we want and we can afford it.

If cost of living is such a problem, then come join me in flyoverstan. Great place to raise a family, too.
Sssh, don't tell him about the $7.5B in the signed into law infrastructure bill...

The government can't subsidize individual car models for many reasons - 1) favors a specific auto manufacturer, and 2) specifies what people should drive. Choice has to still exist (I hear that on all sorts of subjects).

As to an income level or a cost of vehicle level, I can see both sides. The government shouldn't care WHAT you buy as long as it is an EV. From the same vantage point, subsidizing a personal that makes $500,000 a year is simply wrong.

However, the entire tax system is wrong. It focuses on INCOME, not on ASSETS. So, if a person owns $1B in non-dividend paying stock, they would pay no tax until that stock is sold. At the same time, because they have no income, they'd get the maximum subsidies for things like Medicare, etc. Means needs to be in the tax system.
 

Kevin P

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
424
Reaction score
692
Location
Burlington, KY, US
Vehicles
'21 MMEGT - sold, '23 BMW i4 M50, various others
Occupation
IT
Country flag
I live in a flyover state. The right thing for the environment is pretty ding dang clear.
Not really. The overall environmental impacts between modern ICE cars and EVs is not much different through the lifecycle of the vehicle. EVs have an edge once the miles start piling up, but its not anything huge. And currently, EVs are impractical/unworkable for a decent-sized segment of the population. If I could only own one car, it most certainly would not be an EV. That might change eventually though.
 

Kevin P

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
424
Reaction score
692
Location
Burlington, KY, US
Vehicles
'21 MMEGT - sold, '23 BMW i4 M50, various others
Occupation
IT
Country flag
Sssh, don't tell him about the $7.5B in the signed into law infrastructure bill...

The government can't subsidize individual car models for many reasons - 1) favors a specific auto manufacturer, and 2) specifies what people should drive. Choice has to still exist (I hear that on all sorts of subjects).
The government is favoring certain manufacturers with the proposed legislation, by factoring in union status and manufacturing location. Do you think that the rules favoring GM are accidental?
 

RickMachE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2021
Threads
200
Messages
13,123
Reaction score
17,835
Location
SE MI
Vehicles
2022 Mach-E Premium 4X, 2022 Lightning Lariat
Country flag
The government is favoring certain manufacturers with the proposed legislation, by factoring in union status and manufacturing location. Do you think that the rules favoring GM are accidental?
Clearly, that would be one way to look at it. Of course, Ford chose to make the Mach-E in Mexico. They didn't have to do that, and they're going to make the F-150 Lightning in Dearborn.

They gambled that they won't lose business, even with future laws, on a hot car like the Mach-E. I'm sure they're lobbying hard to get the final law tweaked.
 

Davedough

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dave
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Threads
14
Messages
1,812
Reaction score
4,253
Location
West BYGOD Virginia
Vehicles
Mach E GTPE , Explorer ST
Occupation
Federal IT Sales Engineer
Country flag
My wife and I make a very good income together. We have been fortunate enough to put ourselves in a position where we are comfortable in life. She's an accountant and I have had a 25+ year career in IT which has culminated into a position that affords me monthly bonuses as well as a nice base salary. We pay a ton in taxes as a result, but that's the nature of the game.

Did I buy an EV based on the tax credit? Not even in the slightest. I bought one because I like speed (for 5 seconds at a time) and I'm tired of gas. Will I take advantage of the tax credit to the best of my ability? You bet your ass I will. But, if it went away, I would be a little upset, but it wouldn't stop me from getting an EV.
 

Mirak

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2020
Threads
109
Messages
3,657
Reaction score
5,839
Location
Kansas
Vehicles
"Sonic" 2021 MME Grabber Blue First Edition
Country flag
The government can't subsidize individual car models for many reasons - 1) favors a specific auto manufacturer, and 2) specifies what people should drive. Choice has to still exist (I hear that on all sorts of subjects).
The government doesn’t need to specify certain models. It would simply limit the subsidy to cars under a much lower price threshold.
 

Ride_the_lightning

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2021
Threads
6
Messages
546
Reaction score
1,070
Location
Midwest
Vehicles
Mach E Premium SR AWD
Occupation
Engineer
Country flag
I’m “wealthy” - relatively speaking - and I happily took my $7,500 from my fellow taxpayers for my luxury EV because that’s the law. It’s a stupid law, and I certainly wouldn’t try to defend it to somebody making $70k a year.

Sorry (not sorry), I don’t care how oppressed you are by living in a blue state with higher state and local taxes, higher real estate values, and just higher everything, you don’t need a $50,000 electric SUV, and you don’t need a tax credit to “incentivize you” to buy that electric SUV. That’s a luxury.

This isn’t about saving the environment. If government really cared about putting more EVs on the road, it would invest our billions into massively expanding the charging network now, and heavily subsidizing little econobox peoplemovers (think Leafs and Bolts) down to $10k. That would get a lot more people into EVs, and the affluent folks would still pony up for bigger more luxurious vehicles because that’s what we want and we can afford it.

If cost of living is such a problem, then come join me in flyoverstan. Great place to raise a family, too.
Then don’t subsidize expensive EV SUVs. You are just telling me we should subsidize low income people to buy expensive EV SUVs instead. I’m all for a vehicle price cap, just not an income price cap.
 

Mirak

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2020
Threads
109
Messages
3,657
Reaction score
5,839
Location
Kansas
Vehicles
"Sonic" 2021 MME Grabber Blue First Edition
Country flag
Then don’t subsidize expensive EV SUVs. You are just telling me we should subsidize low income people to buy expensive EV SUVs instead. I’m all for a vehicle price cap, just not an income price cap.
<fact check> nope, didn’t say anything of the sort. I said if the purpose of subsidies is to get significantly higher EV adoption, then we should subsidize less expensive cars.
 

DrSteveBrule

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
114
Reaction score
92
Location
MN
Vehicles
n/a
Country flag
Not really. The overall environmental impacts between modern ICE cars and EVs is not much different through the lifecycle of the vehicle. EVs have an edge once the miles start piling up, but its not anything huge. And currently, EVs are impractical/unworkable for a decent-sized segment of the population. If I could only own one car, it most certainly would not be an EV. That might change eventually though.
To what degree depends on where you live and how cleanly your electricity is produced, but everywhere in the US, efficient EVs produce less net carbon emissions than ICE vehicles.
 

Maquis

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dave
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Threads
30
Messages
4,402
Reaction score
6,093
Location
Illinois
Vehicles
2021 Mach E4X, 2023 Lightning Lariat ER
Country flag
To what degree depends on where you live and how cleanly your electricity is produced, but everywhere in the US, efficient EVs produce less net carbon emissions than ICE vehicles.
I believe that only considers propulsion energy.

Equivalent EVs generate generate more carbon in production and transportation to the end user than ICE counterparts, at least currently. The study I read cited the break-even point at about 18,000 miles of operation, after which the EV pulls ahead. I’ll see if I can find a link to it.
Sponsored

 
 




Top