Proposed U.S. $12,500 tax credit . . . BUT

[kort]

I, for one, come to special interest forums like this to get away from the political insults and narrow minded, poorly informed arguments that characterize many other social media platforms. Disappointed to see them bubble up here.

Does this forum have moderators? Seems like a good time for one to step in.

are opinions that aren't in lock step with your views poorly informed and narrow minded?
is the leftist pandering to unions ok in your book? it is abhorrent to many others.

Sponsored

 

[Kingske]

Looks like the union manufactured only EV credit maybe a real PIA for the US. Apparently, many EU countries say it violates various trade agreements. See https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/international-opposition-mounts-proposed-u-181311123.html

Those ex-US car manufacturers have a point.

 

[Bella]

Those ex-US car manufacturers have a point.

Even if they change this the price points of the Taycan are an issue. It appears Congress doesn’t want expensive Cars to have a Rebate. I’m figuring my 1/22 delivery will miss the cut off. I asked my dealer if I could pay for the Car, before delivery, in 2021 once I had a Vin number. He said the Car has to be delivered to me.

 

[285kph]

It appears Congress doesn’t want expensive Cars to have a Rebate.

Or one might say Congress doesn't want to continue public subsidies of millionaires' luxury toys. Certainly for widespread EV adoption a subsidy in the ballpark of the typical EV/ICE price difference right in the middle of the market is more important than paying for someone's Burmester sound system on a Turbo S.

 

[Mike in CA]

are opinions that aren't in lock step with your views poorly informed and narrow minded?
is the leftist pandering to unions ok in your book? it is abhorrent to many others.

I was careful not to point to any particular comment or opinion in my post. You've apparently made your own assumptions about which ones qualify as poorly informed and narrow minded.

Bottom line, some of the opinions being expressed here and, more importantly, the way some of them are being expressed, is to be expected on other social media platforms. Since this is a forum for those interested in the Taycan, though, it would be nice to think we can find some common ground around that topic without bringing political bias and insults into the mix. Nice, but evidently too much to expect.

 

[Kingske]

Even if they change this the price points of the Taycan are an issue. It appears Congress doesn’t want expensive Cars to have a Rebate. I’m figuring my 1/22 delivery will miss the cut off. I asked my dealer if I could pay for the Car, before delivery, in 2021 once I had a Vin number. He said the Car has to be delivered to me.

Too bad.

 

[RickDC]

This is a Democratic bill, I expect it will not apply to even the base Taycan. Democrats have a thing about seeing any money going to anyone who can afford any car which does anything more than take you from point A to B. Those people got lucky in the lottery of life and need to pay their fair share, not get subsidies. Democrats don't understand encouraging/subsidizing new technologies, they only look at the short term optics - we let someone who can afford a new EV keep some of their taxes, no way! If they really have their way, they will pass a great $12,500 incentive for EV's, but the conditions will be such that nobody will qualify (e.g. cannot make more than $40K a year, which means almost anyone who can afford a new EV will be disqualified, and even if they swing it, they don't have a $12,500 federal income tax liability - the bill has changed since btw, it longer requires a tax liability to get the full incentive like the current $7,500 incentive). I saw an earlier draft of this bill which was very close to that. I remember thinking, Democrats are brilliant, they can pass this, claim the glory of incentivizing EV's, but it will cost them nothing because nobody will qualify! Genius!

PS> If I read the news correctly today, this bill didn't go anywhere either. Apparently to pass a $550B infrastructure bill the Democratic representatives are demanding that it be tied to a $1,750B social spending bill, or they will not pass it. Welcome to politics, "feed poor children" bill gets tied to "give money to me and my constituents" or I will not vote for it.

well Republicans only drive trucks are wishing coal as the energy resource of the 21st century, denied technology,, science global warming a pandemic and hate EVs, so this bill only will affect Democrats anyway

 

[RickDC]

Is Jim Bridenstine brainwashed?

https://www.realclearscience.com/bl...n_climate_change_he_is_a_scientific_hero.html

Sure the whole planet live in your Facebook subreal world of ignorance

 

[kort]

well Republicans only drive trucks are wishing coal as the energy resource of the 21st century, denied technology,, science global warming a pandemic and hate EVs, so this bill only will affect Democrats anyway

is that so?
it is sad how foolish your remark sounds.

 

[ericj320]

It’s pretty amazing the level of uninformed and revisionist history going on this thread. I think everyone needs to do a little research more than what some pundit tells you in an echo chamber, before they start laying blame on one side vs the other. And that goes for both sides.

One thing is clear, this is the one tax cut the right seems opposed to, and in some cases actually wants to add a tax to EV ownership. And in some ways they may be correct. Roads and such are paid for from taxes on gas and vehicle registration. We all can’t just switch to EV and expect the government to be able to magically maintain and improve roads with the loss of revenue from tax of petrol.

And let’s remember, the original amendment to the spending bill was proposed by the GOP, all GOP senators, except one (from a state set to build batteries) and 3 Dem senators (from red states and/or coal states), voted in favor of limiting EV credit based on income and exclude high priced vehicles. It’s only still there to keep Manchin, Kelly, and Sinema onboard in getting the bill passed.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/insideevs.com/news/526243/senate-ev-tax-credit-limit/amp/

Pre-pandemic stimulus attempts by the right to kill EV tax credits completely

https://www.google.com/amp/s/electr...-end-federal-tax-credit-for-electric-car/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehil...xclude-the-rich-from-electric-vehicle-tax?amp

I’m not necessarily taking a side one way or another, the left is pandering to the unions for the rebate for vehicles produced in union plants, of course don’t pretend the right is so righteous and benevolent that their attempts to kill EV tax credits for years hasn’t been to the benefit of the oil companies and manufacturers who were reluctant to move toward EV.

Of course I want $7,500 back from a purchase I’m going to make either way. But let’s also remember, as it’s being reported now, the bill eliminates the 200,000 unit limit, essentially putting Tesla back in the mix, it increases the rebate for several vehicle types based on where the cars and batteries are made. Every one is entitled to their opinion on this or any other legislation, but misinformation, pointing fingers at the other side is the root of the problem in this country. No one is willing to look at their own side as part of the problem, nor can we allow “our” side to be caught compromising with the “other” side to actually make meaningful legislation happen. We have to stop seeing the other side as the enemy instead of just fellow Americans who have different view points on relevant issues.

Ok, of my soap box, back to hating each other.

 

[285kph]

is that so?
it is sad how foolish your remark sounds.

I thought it was funny, to each their own.

 

[Mike in CA]

It’s pretty amazing the level of uninformed and revisionist history going on this thread. I think everyone needs to do a little research more than what some pundit tells you in an echo chamber, before they start laying blame on one side vs the other. And that goes for both sides.

One thing is clear, this is the one tax cut the right seems opposed to, and in some cases actually wants to add a tax to EV ownership. And in some ways they may be correct. Roads and such are paid for from taxes on gas and vehicle registration. We all can’t just switch to EV and expect the government to be able to magically maintain and improve roads with the loss of revenue from tax of petrol.

And let’s remember, the original amendment to the spending bill was proposed by the GOP, all GOP senators, except one (from a state set to build batteries) and 3 Dem senators (from red states and/or coal states), voted in favor of limiting EV credit based on income and exclude high priced vehicles. It’s only still there to keep Manchin, Kelly, and Sinema onboard in getting the bill passed.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/insideevs.com/news/526243/senate-ev-tax-credit-limit/amp/

Pre-pandemic stimulus attempts by the right to kill EV tax credits completely

https://www.google.com/amp/s/electr...-end-federal-tax-credit-for-electric-car/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/485470-gop-senator-wants-to-exclude-the-rich-from-electric-vehicle-tax?amp

I’m not necessarily taking a side one way or another, the left is pandering to the unions for the rebate for vehicles produced in union plants, of course don’t pretend the right is so righteous and benevolent that their attempts to kill EV tax credits for years hasn’t been to the benefit of the oil companies and manufacturers who were reluctant to move toward EV.

Of course I want $7,500 back from a purchase I’m going to make either way. But let’s also remember, as it’s being reported now, the bill eliminates the 200,000 unit limit, essentially putting Tesla back in the mix, it increases the rebate for several vehicle types based on where the cars and batteries are made. Every one is entitled to their opinion on this or any other legislation, but misinformation, pointing fingers at the other side is the root of the problem in this country. No one is willing to look at their own side as part of the problem, nor can we allow “our” side to be caught compromising with the “other” side to actually make meaningful legislation happen. We have to stop seeing the other side as the enemy instead of just fellow Americans who have different view points on relevant issues.

Ok, of my soap box, back to hating each other.

Factual unbiased analysis, good data/references and no insults. Well done.

 

[whitex]

One thing is clear, this is the one tax cut the right seems opposed to, and in some cases actually wants to add a tax to EV ownership. And in some ways they may be correct. Roads and such are paid for from taxes on gas and vehicle registration. We all can’t just switch to EV and expect the government to be able to magically maintain and improve roads with the loss of revenue from tax of petrol.

This is a perfect example of how politicians, and the public, are mixing up purposes for different things. People experience cognitive dissonance when trying to makes sense of "EV purchase incentive" and "EV road usage tax", since to them it seems like the government is giving with one hand and taking away with another. Those are two completely separate things, with separate goals which are not at all contradictory when considered separately. EV incentives goal is to incentivize the purchase of more EV's, they should have nothing to do with road taxes, buyers income, or the price of the car. Each incentive brings one more EV to the market. The only dependency which might make sense would be to perhaps incentivize EV's with longer range and/or longer expected lifespan. Usage taxes on the other hand are there to replace the funding for the roads, in the past funded by gas taxes. Of course it makes sense for EV's to pay road usage taxes just like any other car. How to do it is a whole different discussion (examples include per mile, annual flat fee, or some more out of the box solution move road funding to property taxes for example, since it is the properties which in the end benefit from the roads around them and it would make it proportional to the property value). Incentivizing unions, or taxing the wealthy are yet whole different purposes which should be considered separately (e.g. give union shops income tax discounts per car sold, add a luxury tax on any car above some value), mixing those in with unrelated programs just muddies the waters even more. I wish we could get some rational, goal oriented politicians, though given that they are elected and the majority of people are not rational, this does seem like a lost cause.

 

[Henke]

Sure the whole planet live in your Facebook subreal world of ignorance

My Facebook subreal world of ignorance is NASA? What a bizarre comment

 

[WilderAZ]

EV incentives goal is to incentivize the purchase of more EV's, they should have nothing to do with road taxes, buyers income, or the price of the car. Each incentive brings one more EV to the market.

Generally I agree with your sentiments but for those quoted above. As a matter of sound policy it makes sense to only offer credits where they are likely to serve their primary purpose—in this case replacing ICE vehicles with EVs. Those earning very high incomes are less likely to alter their decision to purchase an EV or specific EV model at the level of credits under consideration than those earning modest incomes. The elasticity of demand being more flexible for the former than the latter. As much as I would enjoy the credit I can certainly understand why a Taycan would be excluded.

Sponsored