Ford EVs no longer eligible for IRS tax credit as of January 1, 2025

[K6CCC]

OK, now I'm in a hurry. I officially started looking yesterday for a new Flash. Gonna have to get this rolling!

Sponsored

 

[21st Century Truck]

Avalanche is the color I am looking for also. I guess I have to decide if I want ProPower or Sunroof.(yes I know there are more differences, but those are the two main things that I am looking for)

I advise You get the ProPower. FYI - my old Mach E's panoramic sunroof just SUCKED the heat out of the cabin every Winter. Besides, I find the ProPower receptacles more and more useful the longer I have this truck.

...and Good Luck in the hunt!

 

[Zed]

Just saw this on the F150Lightning subreddit:

Maybe a false alarm? Would be good if someone else can confirm this is legit.....

 

[Maineiac12]

Interesting. I get the platinum not qualifying because of price… but why not the pro?

 

[The Weatherman]

Just saw this on the F150Lightning subreddit:

Maybe a false alarm? Would be good if someone else can confirm this is legit.....

Read the first page on the tread.

 

[KevinC]

Interesting. I get the platinum not qualifying because of price… but why not the pro?

Perhaps the Pro is shifting to Lithium Iron Phosphate import.

 

[TaxmanHog]

I"m still pissed that I didn't qualify for ANY tax credit for my purchase as my MSRP was well above the 80K cutoff. Why is/was there a cutoff anyway? It's all BS.

Social Engineering

 

[Scorpio3d]

Social Engineering

Because if you can afford an $80,001 vehicle you are too rich or make too much money and you don’t need a tax credit! But everybody can afford an $80,000 vehicle-

 

[KennyB123]

Let's be honest, the tax credit is going away soon after January 20th. It's pretty much a given at this point. I'm not trying to get political, it's just the likely truth.

 

[TaxmanHog]

Lobby your representatives, they write these laws, some type of line was drawn in the sand, what they decide is seldom considered logical.

 

[Grease Lightning]

How sad. America taking huge steps backwards. Fools.

It is not a huge step backwards. Subsidies on a per car basis makes absolutely no sense. The subsidy should and will always be better spent on R & D say in the battery technology, the materials that go into the batteries, and such things that can be shared equally with the “domestic” producers.

Providing me $7,500 only gave me an incentive to buy not for Ford to make and frankly I could have bought it either way as it only was a credit on my taxes anyway.

Rather than a per car basis, we need the cost of the battery technology to fall, to make them more affordable across the board.

 

[Pioneer74]

Let's be honest, the tax credit is going away soon after January 20th. It's pretty much a given at this point. I'm not trying to get political, it's just the likely truth.

I bet it's closer to the end of the year. It sounds like there will be two reconciliation packages next year. The first will deal with other things. The second will deal with the expiring tax rates. That's when I believe they will get rid of it.

Of course, I could be totally wrong and they take it in the first package. That should be around March.

 

[broncoaz]

Wow, this could have some serious impacts on insuring these vehicles.

A friend who's Tesla was totaled in the first year of ownership got a payout from the at-fault party's insurance company for full replacement value less the Fed and Colorado credits under the assumption that they would qualify for those. I got $12,500 in government incentives for my Lightning and if it gets totaled, I'd sure hate to have to cover that $12,500 to replace it.

I pay a small additional fee (maybe $20-40 per vehicle) for the car replacement assistance that pays 20% over normal value for the replacement cost.

 

[PrimeRisk]

I pay a small additional fee (maybe $20-40 per vehicle) for the car replacement assistance that pays 20% over normal value for the replacement cost.

My carrier has a similar offering that I pay for that pays for a completely new vehicle in the first year of ownership and after that it will pay out for a vehicle that is one model year newer and 12,500 less miles. The point I'm getting at is we pay a premium based on the probability of an event and the cost if that even happens. The probability on Jan 1, 2025 will be the same, but the cost will go up with the elimination of the incentives. That translates into further increases in premiums, a reduction of coverage, or both.

 

[Pod]

It is not a huge step backwards. Subsidies on a per car basis makes absolutely no sense. The subsidy should and will always be better spent on R & D say in the battery technology, the materials that go into the batteries, and such things that can be shared equally with the “domestic” producers.

Providing me $7,500 only gave me an incentive to buy not for Ford to make and frankly I could have bought it either way as it only was a credit on my taxes anyway.

Rather than a per car basis, we need the cost of the battery technology to fall, to make them more affordable across the board.

While I agree, subsidizing R&D for domestic manufacture should be a priority ( to match the subsidies of domestic oil and gas at the national level), the consumer level tax credits are needed to encourage adoption. Ending them now is silly. There was a subsidy exit plan at X amount of unit sales. It was well thought out and works. Changing the implementation plan is short sighted. We cannot afford to fall behind further in EV adoption. I support companies like Ford for the forward thinking strategies.

Sponsored