Would I still qualify for current federal rebate?

[MickeyAO]

havent you long ago taken delivery? If so, none of this applies to our trucks

While yes, I should have taken delivery at least two months ago with a blend date of May 23rd, my built date is July 27th and I don't have a shipped date yet (maybe tomorrow?), so I'm still under the gun on this!

Sponsored

 

[ExCivilian]

yea this was covered already later in the thread. Ford apparently hit cap this quarter, so would have applied to any sales the remainder of ‘22.

Ok, well the point was #2 of this statement:

If instead Ford reaches its cap before the last day of September then: (1) people who took delivery before the last day of September will still get the full credit, and (2) people who take delivery from Oct. 1 through end of Q4 will not receive the full $7,500 but instead take the reduced roll-off credit amount (~$4k?).

was not correct. The credit would have still applied for a full quarter after the cap was reached (ie, last delivery (not "sale") on Sept. 29th, full credit applies until Dec 31st).

Regardless, whether "dingbat" is an fun poke at me or rude name-calling, I feel if you want to discuss laws, and especially if you want to instruct people on how they operate, you should be precise with your wording. A bill becomes a law and then is no longer a bill. The EV credits are based on deliveries and not sales. While it may appear pedantic, the distinctions matter when people are trying to suss out the meaning and impact of a law.

 

[cvalue13]

was not correct.

my point was that I’d already been corrected earlier in the thread, thanked that person for their correction, then discussed the consequences of the correction - which is (I thought obviously) what I meant when I told you “yea this [correction] was covered already later in the thread”

Regardless, whether "dingbat" is an fun poke at me or rude name-calling, I feel if you want to discuss laws, and especially if you want to instruct people on how they operate, you should be precise with your wording. A bill becomes a law and then is no longer a bill. The EV credits are based on deliveries and not sales. While it may appear pedantic, the distinctions matter when people are trying to suss out the meaning and impact of a law.

thanks, pal.

I’m a partner at an AmLaw 50 global law firm.

Also, I’ve watched Schoolhouse Rock’s flawless piece on this topic.

But when speaking on this forum, 1/2 the time I’m typing while driving over the speed limit and legal limit, and the other 1/2 of the time I’m trying to prioritize brevity and/or clarity of message to non-lawyers instead of being unnecessarily verbose or pedantic (which is hard for me!).

But let me correct what I said for you, though, so it’s “clear” for you when being precise:

the less certain bit is whether the current version of the [portions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that deal with EV tax credits] will continue at all after the [bill amending the portions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that deal with EV tax credits]is signed, or if instead there is a gap wherein [the law no longer] applies [to give any EV owners tax credits if they take delivery] between signing and 1/1/23 [unless before signing they had a “binding” auto sales contract - whatever that means to the IRS]

that’s me recounting your read of the bill, btw. personally, I think this theory that the present law is gone at signing of the bill but the new law doesn’t take effect until 1/1/23 is a nonsensical read of the bill, but since official interpretation guidance hasn’t been released (and won’t be for months!) I suppose it’s as bad a read as any presently available

 

[ExCivilian]

Oh cool, from one attorney to another then get the fuck off your phone while driving.

Also, to my point, if your goal is to provide clarify to laypersons then why would you dispute that you ought to use precise language?

Using "law" instead of "bill" when appropriate and "delivery" rather than "sales" is not over verbose--they're literally the same number of words! You were simply wrong and it's ok to admit that...

In regards to "my" read of the bill, it's in black letter terms so re-read it since you apparently missed the explicit sunsetting of the current law. Better yet, have one of your parallels read it to you because you've misstated several provisions in it so far.

 

[greenne]

<Grabs popcorn listening to two attorneys bicker with one another>

 

[ExCivilian]

LoL: BigLaw vs. Crusty Old Professor

 

[Lucky EV]

So I’ve got a $500 refundable deposit and a verbal agreement to be first in line to buy a mannequin (demo) at MSRP ($81,544) after the truck times out of the FCTP program rules on 12/12/22, I am below the new bills income limits, the truck has not been registered or titled by the dealership so is being sold as a new vehicle, assuming I take delivery in 2022…do I qualify under the old law without a binding contract?…or do I qualify under the new law?

I feel like I should push the dealer for a binding contract on MONDAY.

 

[Amps]

I feel like I should push the dealer for a binding contract on MONDAY.

IMHO, only if they're not open Sunday.

 

[cvalue13]

Oh cool, from one attorney to another then get the fuck off your phone while driving.

joke detector broken

Also, to my point, if your goal is to provide clarify to laypersons then why would you dispute that you ought to use precise language?

reading comprehension also broken

Using "law" instead of "bill" when appropriate and "delivery" rather than "sales" is not over verbose--they're literally the same number of words! You were simply wrong and it's ok to admit that...

You need to re-read the thread

In regards to "my" read of the bill, it's in black letter terms so re-read it since you apparently missed the explicit sunsetting of the current law. Better yet, have one of your parallels read it to you because you've misstated several provisions in it so far.

I’ve addressed this with you at length in a different thread:

Hmmm. Perhaps so, though that interpretation would have an extra odd effect:

On one hand, your read of the transition rule would conclude that the availability of the current bill terminates for anyone who hasn’t already taken delivery or received a binding contract.

On the other hand, the new bill is clear that it doesn’t take effect until after 12/31/22.
“EFFECTIVE DATES.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para-
graphs (2), (3), (4), and (5), the amendments made by this section shall apply to vehicles placed in service after December 31, 2022.”

Combined, then, this interpretation means there is no applicable tax incentive for EVs between the date of enactment (Biden signing), and the bill’s effective date (Jan 1 23).

If that’s the case, the effect for this forum is: anyone (who didn’t already have a binding contract) that takes delivery between Biden signing and Jan 1 23 will have no available EV tax credit (neither the old bill or the new one), regardless of vehicle price, manufacturing location, etc.

I did find one article, from Green Car Reports that suggests just this reading of the bill: “ZETA, a policy and advocacy group representing electric vehicle makers, charging networks, hardware suppliers, battery makers, utilities, and all the industries making and supporting EVs, doesn't see this as a quick turnaround. Based on its reading of the bill and conversations with administrators, it does not expect the EV tax credit to be available for the average consumer until 2023, it confirmed to Green Car Reports Thursday. The group estimates that the timeline of the bill on the way to the President’s desk buys shoppers about two weeks from today. The tax credit goes away for the rest of the year—probably. Contrary to what’s been reported elsewhere, there is no special provision to retroactively apply to electric vehicle purchasers for the rest of 2022.”

Personally, that’s not how I’d read the transition rule, for several reasons of interpretation but just by example:

The act is clear that the North American manufacturing provision (the item “(2)” exception referenced in the effective date clause above) which is moot for Ford (it’s potentially not moot for, eg, Fisker), goes into effect at the bill’s signing: “(2) FINAL ASSEMBLY.—The amendments made by subsection (b) shall apply to vehicles sold after the date of enactment of this Act.” Meanwhile, the per-vehicle dollar limitations (item ‘(3)’ exception referenced in the effective date clause above) are clear those provisions don’t go into effect until after the Secretary releases it’s guidance, which has an outside date of 12/31/22: “PER VEHICLE DOLLAR LIMITATION AND RE-LATED REQUIREMENTS The amendments made by subsections (a) and (e) shall apply to vehicles placed in service after the date on which the proposed guidance described in paragraph (3)(B) of section 30D(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by subsection (e)) is issued by the Secretary of the Treasury (or the Secretary’s delegate).” Meanwhile, the bill is clear that the 200K limit in the present bill (item ‘(5)’ exception in referenced in the effective date clause) doesn’t go away until 12/31/22: “(5) ELIMINATION OF MANUFACTURER LIMITATION.—The amendment made by subsection (d) shall apply to vehicles sold after December 31, 2022.”

So then, if the revised bill’s intent was to make inapplicable to all purchasers the prior bill’s terms from and after the president’s execution (unless they had a binding contract), but to not have the new bill in effect until Jan 1 23, it’s rather odd to in the same article if the bill go to great lengths to state, eg, that the NA manufacturing limit goes into effect at the president’s signing (wouldn’t matter unless some credit is available in this period) and that the 200k limit remainsin effect until Jan 1 23 (wouldn’t matter unless the prior bill’s terms are still available until Jan 1 23).

But, I’ve got to get packed and leave to go to the beach for 10 days - best of luck to all

Accordingly, speaking of lack of clarity, it would be good if you to confirm that, like the article from Green Car Reporte, you believe no one who takes delivery of an EV between the signing of the Bill and 1/1/23 will receive tax credits (other than, perhaps those few with the pre-signing “binding” sales order, whatever that means).

those who teach…

<Grabs popcorn listening to two attorneys bicker with one another>

sincere apologies …beginning my self-flagellation now

 

[PA Lightning]

Can you two attorney fellows take your argument outside. You are blowing up the thread with your petty insults

 

[rdr854]

So I’ve got a $500 refundable deposit and a verbal agreement to be first in line to buy a mannequin (demo) at MSRP ($81,544) after the truck times out of the FCTP program rules on 12/12/22, I am below the new bills income limits, the truck has not been registered or titled by the dealership so is being sold as a new vehicle, assuming I take delivery in 2022…do I qualify under the old law without a binding contract?…or do I qualify under the new law?

I feel like I should push the dealer for a binding contract on MONDAY.

I would recommend that you consult your tax advisor first thing Monday morning (unless of course, they are working today). You cannot assume that anyone here is qualified to provide accurate advice - especially since you cannot vet his or her credentials. This is not meant as a slight to those of us who might be attorneys, etc., but not all attorneys are familiar with the finer points of the Internal Revenue Code, IRS regulations and tax court decisions. Simply put, the practice of tax law and being a CPA is highly specialized and complex.

 

[RidetheLightning]

I (not a lawyer, nor an accountant) looked around the site yesterday morning when I was going through the text of the bill and somehow missed this thread. Better responses than I've seen anywhere on this, including on the Reddit forum. The only thing I would have to add is that those of us taking delivery of >$80k trucks are sh*tting $7500 bricks based on the language about whenever the Treasury Secretary issues guidance. Some seem to assure that this won't happen until 1/1/23, but may happen sooner, but it seems like that exact date is totally up in the air but the possibility increases each day after Biden signs the bill? My build week was 8/1 so I'm hoping that the Treasury Secretary goes on a good long vacation for all of our sakes who have >$80k trucks until 12/31. I am hoping nothing happens before I take delivery of my truck since my dealer won't do a binding contract before then. Hope is not a plan, but I seem to have no other option, just hope to slide in under the wire before the Treas. Secretary does their thing.

1. PER VEHICLE DOLLAR LIMITATION AND RE-
2. 10 LATED REQUIREMENTS.—The amendments made by
3. 11 subsections (a) and (e) shall apply to vehicles placed
4. 12 in service after the date on which the proposed guid-
5. 13 ance described in paragraph (3)(B) of section 30D(e)
6. 14 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by
7. 15 subsection (e)) is issued by the Secretary of the Treas-
8. 16 ury (or the Secretary’s delegate)

 

[luebri]

I would recommend that you consult your tax advisor first thing Monday morning (unless of course, they are working today). You cannot assume that anyone here is qualified to provide accurate advice - especially since you cannot vet his or her credentials. This is not meant as a slight to those of us who might be attorneys, etc., but not all attorneys are familiar with the finer points of the Internal Revenue Code, IRS regulations and tax court decisions. Simply put, the practice of tax law and being a CPA is highly specialized and complex.

I asked my tax consultant and he basically said. "I dont focus on tax law too much until its passed into law and the IRS interpretations have been made." That said, I am 8/15 build week. $80K+. I have a “motor vehicle purchase contract” signed with my dealer with my vin and there is a 5% penalty if I don’t take delivery so if that does not constitute binding contract other then full payment ahead of delivery I dont know what does. The language in the agreement is as follows....

"As a deterrent to purchaser failing to take delivery on the vehicle as herein provided, you agree that if you
do not accept delivery, you shall, at dealer's option, forfeit to dealer as a penaltv. 5% of the cash price of the vehicle as authorized by Section 218.0141 Wisconsin Statutes. Dealer retains the right to bring action for actual damages caused by breach of this contract, in lieu of the above penalty."

 

[cvalue13]

I would recommend that you consult your tax advisor first thing Monday morning (unless of course, they are working today). You cannot assume that anyone here is qualified to provide accurate advice - especially since you cannot vet his or her credentials. This is not meant as a slight to those of us who might be attorneys, etc., but not all attorneys are familiar with the finer points of the Internal Revenue Code, IRS regulations and tax court decisions. Simply put, the practice of tax law and being a CPA is highly specialized and complex.

And given how the thread turned, I’d add to your all-important caveat above the additional one with which I opened my participation in this thread:

Ignoring the fact that nobody here (or anywhere else) actually knows the answer to your question (because not only is the bill not finalized, more importantly the IRS hasn’t made its interpretations or rule makings, which will be months away)…

Setting that all-important but aside:

Fact is, this bill is 750+ pages long, and finalized in a day-long horse-trading negotiation among 100+ politicians (if including aides) that no doubt may have punted both completeness and clarity

 

[greenne]

I (not a lawyer, nor an accountant) looked around the site yesterday morning when I was going through the text of the bill and somehow missed this thread. Better responses than I've seen anywhere on this, including on the Reddit forum. The only thing I would have to add is that those of us taking delivery of >$80k trucks are sh*tting $7500 bricks based on the language about whenever the Treasury Secretary issues guidance. Some seem to assure that this won't happen until 1/1/23, but may happen sooner, but it seems like that exact date is totally up in the air but the possibility increases each day after Biden signs the bill? My build week was 8/1 so I'm hoping that the Treasury Secretary goes on a good long vacation for all of our sakes who have >$80k trucks until 12/31. I am hoping nothing happens before I take delivery of my truck since my dealer won't do a binding contract before then. Hope is not a plan, but I seem to have no other option, just hope to slide in under the wire before the Treas. Secretary does their thing.

1. PER VEHICLE DOLLAR LIMITATION AND RE-
2. 10 LATED REQUIREMENTS.—The amendments made by
3. 11 subsections (a) and (e) shall apply to vehicles placed
4. 12 in service after the date on which the proposed guid-
5. 13 ance described in paragraph (3)(B) of section 30D(e)
6. 14 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by
7. 15 subsection (e)) is issued by the Secretary of the Treas-
8. 16 ury (or the Secretary’s delegate)

FWIW I'm not a lawyer and not a CPA. I do complete my own taxes and years ago I was trained by the IRS/Military to work at a non profit providing tax consultation to military members and military families. So disclaimer--take what I say at your own risk

That said, I have spent my entire life in government service and can say the wheels of government move SLOW. This is a complex bill requiring a lot of effort/input from the IRS to make it happen. From a procedural point, I wouldn't worry guidance is coming from the Treasury Secretary anytime soon. I don't see how to make some of these changes this tax year. What are they going to do, offer two different forms based upon whether you obtained your EV prior to XXX date or after? How will they enforce it? Its a mess for sure.

Also, this EV credit snafu has all the ingredients of a Manchin con job. Manchin never liked the credit, so he purposely made it as restrictive as he could. Playing politics for sure. The Biden admin, including Yellen are way more EV friendly. My guess is she will not play Manchin's game and will withhold guidance as long as possible. There is no advantage to her ruling on this sooner. Bottom line-- if the guidance is due Dec 31, I would expect it sometime in Dec. If this does preclude a number of EVs or consumers from using the EV credit..the Biden admin isn't gonna want to advertise that months in advance

(I also wouldn't be surprised to see some sort of short term waiver on some of the requirements, but we'll see).

Again, just my opinion. But nothing in DC moves fast..I would not see an advantage to fast track any ruling on this and quite frankly the Treasury Sec is probably busy trying to keep the inflation from destroying our economy.

PS-- Most of the expert advice say the North American part come into play upon passage so I don't see the feds being able to slow roll that. (Hyundai/Kia folks better get on the ball quick). All the other stuff the feds can delay with releasing the guidance as late as possible.

Also, I don't see anywhere this bill(law) repeals any of the old tax credit, it just replace it piece by piece. Logic tells me that means the old law is still applicable until it is replaced by a particular revision in the new guidance. That means even if Ford were to hit 200k we'd still be good in 4th qtr and still could use old tax credit until this guidance is released

Sponsored