Uh, Oh... looks like the EV tax credits are hitting an obstacle

[MikePinkston]

Here is how it will play out.

I will buy an F-150 all electric battery operated truck with a payment that makes me cry every month. Six months after I sign the dotted line, Toyota will announce a earth shattering breakthrough in hydrogen generation, storage, and transportation. EV vehicles will go out of style and it will be cloudy all the time because of all the water vapor being generated by the millions upon millions of hydrogen vehicles and my solar panels will only generate enough electricity to power my TV so I can binge watch "America's Funniest Videos" for days on end.

I guess there is a worse way to live.

Sponsored

 

[SteffanG]

You can't compare the Kona EV to other EV cars...it is literally an ICE car with a EV power train slapped into it. There is barely any design changes and not even a frunk in it. It is a very poorly designed EV for the price point (it is so significantly more expensive than the ICE vehicle, yet the only difference is that it has an EV powertrain). The only difference you see from the outside is the front grill is blocked off.

The Bolt is another odd ball. They have had very bad press on the batteries catching on fire (even though it was not very many compared to how many are on the road) that people are avoiding them for this reason alone. GM will have issues getting past this recall on that vehicle and getting people to start buying them again.

The F150L is not just an EV power train slapped on the ICE version. It is the ICE cab/bed slapped onto an actual EV skateboard, with some upgrades. It is also priced competitively to an ICE truck, not over $10k more than a hybrid.

There are no incentives on vehicles over $60k in Canada (rules out any version of the F150L here) yet those EVs have no problem selling here. Why does the US think they need a $12k incentive to get people to buy a vehicle that would be sold out even without that incentive? Seems like a waste of taxpayer money to me.
There are a lot of people here that say that without it they wouldn't buy it, but there are many more people nkt on this forum that would not only buy it without the tax credit, but would also pay ADM on it (i dont get why anyone would buy for more than MSRP but thats another story)

 

[Snakebitten]

Why does the US think they need a $12k incentive to get people to buy a vehicle that would be sold out even without that incentive? Seems like a waste of taxpayer money to me.

I'm only guessing because I've watched us for the last 6+ decades and we don't feeeeel the pain of frivolous money printing? We want what we want and we want it cheaper today!
Send the invoice to our grandbabies please. ??

Fortunately for MY grandchildren, Pawpaw (that'd be me) will TRY to leave them with some inheritance to get by on. But I can't make them any guarantees, that's for sure.

 

[sotek2345]

If no-one likes spending gov't cheddar to push for help stop CO2 emissions, you could always take the stick approach. Bumping the gas tax by ~$1/gallon would have roughly the same push towards EVs as the credits do (added lifecycle costs for ICE vehicles), but I doubt it would be very popular politically and would be very painful for low income families.

 

[Snakebitten]

Seems to me they are working both ends?
Higher fuel prices and getting my grandkids to pay for some of their neighbors car. ??

I've pretty much accepted the shenanigans are inevitable. So I hope you don't hear too much "whine" in my typed words. Maybe a little eyerolling, but mostly with a smile.

 

[danane]

I know that I for one wouldn't be buying either the Lightning or the 4xe I just ordered if it weren't for the credits. Seems like it'd be difficult to impossible to really prove that neither of those purchases (or those of anyone like me) will increase EV sales. You'd probably have to prove that increased dealer orders don't lead to increased allocation, that increased reservations/orders don't lead to increased factory production, etc.

I think we can all agree that dealers can sell out of these in-demand vehicles, but to argue that X level of new additional orders will not lead to ANY increase in actual sales may be a stretch...especially when companies like Ford are citing increased reservations (which are at least partly a byproduct of EV subsidies) as the motivation for building more/bigger production facilities.

 

[shutterbug]

If no-one likes spending gov't cheddar to push for help stop CO2 emissions, you could always take the stick approach. Bumping the gas tax by ~$1/gallon would have roughly the same push towards EVs as the credits do (added lifecycle costs for ICE vehicles), but I doubt it would be very popular politically and would be very painful for low income families.

Pretty sure gas tax had already gone up by $1 in the past year. Only instead of going to the government, we're paying it to Russia and Venezuela and Saudi Arabia.

 

[JTmass]

Provide whatever stupid study links you want - the FACT IS THAT NOT ONE SINGLE ADDITIONAL EV WILL BE ON THE ROAD AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED BBB TAX CREDITS, FULL STOP. THAT IS FACT. You can't provide a single fact or study that can refute this statement.

Where is this coming from? Because you don't want BBB to pass? Your bias is showing.

Here's your full stop fact: If there is no credit for the Lightning I will not buy the EV, I will buy the hybrid .

EVs are more expensive than their ICE counterparts. So yes, the credit encourages people that might be on the fence about buying an EV to give it a try. This credit is all about encouraging adoption.

 

[F150ROD]

I honestly have no idea why this is even a politically dividing issue. If we do not take the lead in EV technology another certain country will and we will be left with people crying on how we have fallen behind blah blah blah.

 

[Blainestang]

Here's your full stop fact: If there is no credit for the Lightning I will not buy the EV, I will buy the hybrid .

And someone else will buy "your" Lightning for a markup, anyway. No change in net sales... because for the next 2-3 years, at least, the limiting factor is production, not demand.

EVs are more expensive than their ICE counterparts.

Not always.

Taycan is cheaper than Panamera (before credit). MINI Cooper SE is the same price as a similar-trim Cooper S (before credit). Model 3 is cost competitive with 3-series (without credit). Lightning SR Pro is cheaper than a comparatively spec'd gas XL (before credit).

So yes, the credit encourages people that might be on the fence about buying an EV to give it a try. This credit is all about encouraging adoption.

Buyers don't need encouragement to buy all the good EVs that will be built over the next 2-3 years. Ford will sell all the Mach Es and Lightnings they can build. Tesla will sell all the cars they can build.

Manufacturers may make more money (see how Tesla and GM just adjust prices to eat up the credit, but the actual price to the consumer doesn't change much), and the credit may increase sales somewhat after the first 2-3 years when supply can catch up (and because manufacturers are more confident about their margins/demand with the credit in place), but for the first 2-3 years, the credit gives poor ROI because the good EVs are going to sell as many as they can build regardless. The credit will mostly just increase manufacturer profits and not meaningfully increase sales until further down the line.

 

[Pioneer74]

If no-one likes spending gov't cheddar.....

It's not the Governments money. It belongs to the taxpayers. A lot of people forget that.

 

[greenne]

It's not the Governments money. It belongs to the taxpayers. A lot of people forget that.

I, as a taxpayer, would rather pay someone to drive a cleaner EV than to pay MORE for the environmental cleanup and MORE for the health problems due to dirty air.

I'd also like us to leave our children and grandchildren with a planet not in environmental disaster.

As an aside I find it odd the same people who "don't want to leave our children with debt" have no problem leaving them with debt to pay for tax cuts and more military spending. But hey, keep on with that selected outrage.....

 

[greenne]

And someone else will buy "your" Lightning for a markup, anyway. No change in net sales... because for the next 2-3 years, at least, the limiting factor is production, not demand.







Buyers don't need encouragement to buy all the good EVs that will be built over the next 2-3 years. Ford will sell all the Mach Es and Lightnings they can build. Tesla will sell all the cars they can build.

Manufacturers may make more money (see how Tesla and GM just adjust prices to eat up the credit, but the actual price to the consumer doesn't change much), and the credit may increase sales somewhat after the first 2-3 years when supply can catch up (and because manufacturers are more confident about their margins/demand with the credit in place), but for the first 2-3 years, the credit gives poor ROI because the good EVs are going to sell as many as they can build regardless. The credit will mostly just increase manufacturer profits and not meaningfully increase sales until further down the line.

So what if it takes 2-3 years to realize the gain? Do you really think the political landscape will allow another chance at this 2-3yrs in the future? I doubt it.

 

[EaglesPDX]

I would guess that the credits have the most impact at the lower end of the market.

Correct and we see this playing out in the market with low end EV's sitting, $15-20K more than an ICE. Even with the current $7,500 and a state rebate pushing it to $10k, a big nut for working people to afford.

Its why subsidies have proven effective in the EV market around the world. In US, probably the least supportive of EV's compared to EU and China, the Federal tax credit is a secondary tax credit meaning there's no rebate as for a full tax credit, just countering of taxes. You have to be in the $100k income range (twice the median income in the US) to be able to fully cash in the $7,500.

And don't kid yourself, the $10k is meaningful to $100k + income earners also. I would not consider the $75k F150EV without the basic $10k in rebates.

 

[shutterbug]

I honestly have no idea why this is even a politically dividing issue. If we do not take the lead in EV technology another certain country will and we will be left with people crying on how we have fallen behind blah blah blah.

It really shouldn't be a political issue. The simple fact is that EV incentives just shuffle money around. I would much prefer if the government had figured out a way to generate capacity to build more EVs. Now that non-Tesla OEMs have figured out how to build EVs that people actually want, we do not have a adoption problem. We have a capacity problem.

Sponsored