If you are over the income limits (150/300k) of the new bill and haven't gotten your truck....

[greenne]

whoops, maybe so, I shouldn't have said "all" Fords, but certainly the LF150L seems safe (we'll get the "old" credit)

The credit applies to vehicles assembled in North America. The MME is good on the assembly part..

Sponsored

 

[FordLightningMan]

Seems like a binding order is a no brainer, if your dealer will allow for the contract to be written that way. I assume the vast majority of the people on here are going to accept their trucks at delivery. As a bonus, you can get assurance the ADM won't be there sooner than later. The downside may be losing $600 if something unexpected happens between now and December 31st, but the upside is getting $7,500. If there is some crazy rule where the Lightning doesn't qualify based on foreign components or your income disqualifies you, those changes will all be irrelevant with that binding purchase order.

 

[merek]

It would be nice if Ford put out some guidance to dealers ASAP for them to follow...perhaps pre-drafted agreements, etc. @Ford Motor Company

 

[ExCivilian]

This entire thing is becoming a boondoggle...at least for our purposes.

So now everyone is under current (and retroactive) income limits thereby limiting what kinds of income/investment changes one could do to meet the threshold.

But that's not even the worst of it: now we have a new $80K MSRP limit that will completely screw over anyone who ordered a Lariat ER with a special paint. Looks like I've got an $8,000 paint job coming into port in a few weeks...

And why did they write it this way? The only group this appeases is GM as far as I can tell. Maybe some Teslas, too, although that depends on the assembly details.

 

[bydabeach]

Short answer: Merely reserving/ordering the vehicle will NOT QUALIFY UNDER THE "OLD" EV TAX CREDIT.

Ok I read the relevant text of the bill. I believe this is the relevant part for us (Starting at page 402):

TRANSITION RULE.—Solely for purposes of the 19 application of section 30D of the Internal Revenue Code 20 of 1986, in the case of a taxpayer that—
(1) after December 31, 2021, and before the date of enactment of this Act, purchased, or entered into a written binding contract to purchase, a new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle (as defined in section 30D(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act), and

2) placed such vehicle in service on or after the date of enactment of this Act, such taxpayer may elect (at such time, and in such form and manner, as the Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary’s delegate, may prescribe) to treat such vehicle as having been placed in service on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.

I pulled up the Ford Reservation Terms and Conditions here, which says in part (for Mach-E but assume they are the same):

By completing the Reservation Process, you are not ordering or purchasing a vehicle. The Reservation Process allows you to configure a Vehicle and pay the Reservation Deposit (“Reservation Deposit”) to Ford. Participation in the Program does not guarantee you vehicle delivery. You must contact a Dealer to discuss final transaction pricing, arrange any necessary financing, and complete your purchase of the Vehicle.

Maybe the order of the vehicle is different? Found those terms and it still is not a "purchase":

By completing the Order Process, you are not purchasing a vehicle. The Order Process allows you to configure a Vehicle and pay the Order Deposit (“Order Deposit”) directly to an authorized Ford Dealer (“Dealer”). By paying an Order Deposit, you are agreeing to the Dealer’s selling price for your selected vehicle, which may differ from the MSRP.

Can you provide a link to where you got that info? Google did not find it for me. Thanks.

 

[ExCivilian]

It also is ambigious as far as whether or not I can double claim since my truck will be part of my solar system.

What do you mean by this? What's the plan here?

 

[bydabeach]

Did some research on whether a customer order is a binding contract to purchase in the State of NJ. The law in each state will vary to some extent, but in this link and the linked case, "the only document signed by the parties was an order form for the vehicle. While this may have been a contract between the parties, the dealership promised only to order the vehicle for the plaintiff, a promise it fulfilled. The order form lacked several essential terms that are included in a contract for an automobile purchase, including the VIN number for the car and an odometer reading, among others. "
The document also omitted dealer preparation charges, warranties, sales taxes, and a variety of other important details integral to the sale of a motor vehicle.

Could not find any more recent cases--but at least for NJ, it would be smart to make sure the VIN#, dealer charges (window etching, etc.), warranty, sales tax (no sales tax on EVs in NJ) to make the document a binding contract.

Not sure if a dealer would want to sign such an agreement. But there is no downside for them. They will not renege on their agreement to sell the car to the person who signed the document. Ford would not like that and probably penalize the dealer. Let's say they are afraid the buyer will renege on the deal----well then, they can sell the vehicle at a premium. Seems like a no lose situation.

It should not be this complicated, but when dealing with Congress, most of these people are lawyers, and lawyers almost always make things difficult.

Links:
https://www.hnwlaw.com/2012/04/11/n...rm-not-a-binding-contract-to-deliver-vehicle/

https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/appellate-division-unpublished/2012/a3197-10.html

 

[Simpso57]

Can you provide a link to where you got that info? Google did not find it for me. Thanks.

https://thehill.com/wp-content/uplo...GczcnFrTHpVSDVncERtcW5BX3BjUlVoMm5nZ245Tk82Ng..

 

[Amps]

It also is ambigious as far as whether or not I can double claim since my truck will be part of my solar system.

What do you mean by this? What's the plan here?

Claiming the truck as an energy storage device.
It's not ambiguous. It's a truck.

 

[greenne]

Did some research on whether a customer order is a binding contract to purchase in the State of NJ. The law in each state will vary to some extent, but in this link and the linked case, "the only document signed by the parties was an order form for the vehicle. While this may have been a contract between the parties, the dealership promised only to order the vehicle for the plaintiff, a promise it fulfilled. The order form lacked several essential terms that are included in a contract for an automobile purchase, including the VIN number for the car and an odometer reading, among others. "
The document also omitted dealer preparation charges, warranties, sales taxes, and a variety of other important details integral to the sale of a motor vehicle.

Could not find any more recent cases--but at least for NJ, it would be smart to make sure the VIN#, dealer charges (window etching, etc.), warranty, sales tax (no sales tax on EVs in NJ) to make the document a binding contract.

Not sure if a dealer would want to sign such an agreement. But there is no downside for them. They will not renege on their agreement to sell the car to the person who signed the document. Ford would not like that and probably penalize the dealer. Let's say they are afraid the buyer will renege on the deal----well then, they can sell the vehicle at a premium. Seems like a no lose situation.

It should not be this complicated, but when dealing with Congress, most of these people are lawyers, and lawyers almost always make things difficult.

Links:
https://www.hnwlaw.com/2012/04/11/n...rm-not-a-binding-contract-to-deliver-vehicle/

https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/appellate-division-unpublished/2012/a3197-10.html

Tbh it doesn't even matter what your state says...this is a federal tax credit and will follow federal rules.

In the absence of what the IRS defines as a "binding agreement", it is up for interpretation.

Unless someone calls me out or gives me a specific definition, i consider an electronic order agreed to by both parties...with selling price, vin#, vehicle details to be binding agreement and will file for the credit on my taxes.

 

[bydabeach]

Tbh it doesn't even matter what your state says...this is a federal tax credit and will follow federal rules.

In the absence of what the IRS defines as a "binding agreement", it is up for interpretation.

Unless someone calls me out or gives me a specific definition, i consider an electronic order agreed to by both parties...with selling price, vin#, vehicle details to be binding agreement and will file for the credit on my taxes.

You may be correct, and it may be difficult for the IRS to track down and enforce. But if an EV buyer is audited by the IRS, this could come up for review, and if it did, and the IRS determined that the agreement was not binding, they could require the buyer to pay the $7500 tax credit. Everybody has a different level of risk aversion and can make their own choices.

BTW, whether the contract is being would be judged based on the state law of where the vehicle is sold. Federal court apply state law all the time on questions specific to state law. And here, the question is whether the agreement is binding.

 

[cvalue13]

It also is ambigious as far as whether or not I can double claim since my truck will be part of my solar system.

I don’t think this is ambiguous, from the perspective of the solar incentives - which require storage to be both ~permanent and also not of dual-usage.

Unless you plan to put your F150 on blocks as battery storage, which would be an expensive strategy

 

[bryan995]

Claiming the truck as an energy storage device.
It's not ambiguous. It's a truck.

Brilliant. I will also claim the truck as part of my home solar / battery system. 30% off + $7500 back.

How long do we need the truck to be immobile on blocks to qualify ?

 

[cvalue13]

Not sure if a dealer would want to sign such an agreement. But there is no downside for them. They will not renege on their agreement to sell the car to the person who signed the document.

Think the dealer will see plenty of downside. Namely, the prospect of being sued by a customer for specific performance to deliver the vehicle, if there were any scenario where the dealer was unable to provide the exact truck ordered. Need an example? How about a Platinum with massaging seats…

It should not be this complicated, but when dealing with Congress, most of these people are lawyers, and lawyers almost always make things difficult.

That must be it. Nevermind that the raw bill is difficult to interpret today because it has not yet gone through the subsequent and months-long process of having the actual interpretations and rule-making drafted by the IRS in order to make it interpretable.

I can empathize with *wanting* a crystal ball that sees months into the future, but…

 

[DKZB]

This is a real mess. Very clear what the rules WERE before this bill, very clear what the rules WILL BE in 2023, all of us expecting to get our truck in the next couple of months (mine is being built tomorrow) have to deal with this mess.

HOPEFULLY Ford will work with their dealers to give customers guidance ASAP before it is too late. That said, the more likely scenario is they will tell us to speak with our tax advisor because some attorney in some cubical advised them not to touch this for fear of getting it wrong and creating for liability for the company.

Sponsored