$12,500 tax credit possible?

[Geo]

I have been thinking of ordering a EV, with a large capacity battery. Then find somewhere I could charge it for free while at work or shopping. Then I could go home and use it to live off the grid.

Sponsored

 

[Larry Arizona]

Had an EV, took advantage of the FREE government discount......for the 3 years I owned the vehicle, nothing ruined the EV experience more than the guilt of that $7500 discount.

 

[Brian Head Yankee]

Huh?

 

[RavenYZF-R6]

Had an EV, took advantage of the FREE government discount......for the 3 years I owned the vehicle, nothing ruined the EV experience more than the guilt of that $7500 discount.

I’ll take my $7,500 back anytime the guilt gets to be too much....

 

[Larry Arizona]

I’ll take my $7,500 back anytime the guilt gets to be too much....

You are picking up what I am laying down......

 

[Blainestang]

$27,000

In a way I don't have an issue with this, even being an EV owner. EVs are heavy (even a Leaf can be close to 2 tons) and heavy vehicles contribute more to road wear than a lighter one, all things being equal. Taxing to fund road maintenance and expansion as a function of miles driven per year and the weight of a vehicle would be a somewhat objective way of having those that contribute the most to the wear of the roads pay the most, though like any tax change, it will ruffle feathers somewhere and have ripple effects across things indirectly tied to transportation.

I agree that people should pay a reasonable share of road costs (assuming gas taxes even go to that, etc.). The issue is that road damage is not linear with weight. It's exponential, and as such, it's really unlikely that the tax is going to be done in an way that matches up with actual damage done by each vehicle.

A ballpark calculation of relative damage is: (W1/W2)^4

So, a 6000lb truck vs a 3000lb car is not double the damage.

(W1/W2)^4 = (6000/3000)^4 = 2^4 = 16

So, the truck does 16x the damage of the car.

Now compare a Semi to that truck. Even if we divide the weight per axle, it's outrageous how much more damage the semi does:

((80,000/6)/(6000/2))^4 = (13333/3000)^4 = 390

So, a semi does 390x the damage of a truck... and 6200 times as much as a car. Not a typo.

So, a FAIR tax based on the amount of damage one does would mean Semis would pay basically all of it and you and I driving cars would pay pennies.

An interesting quote:

“The damage due to cars, for practical purposes, when we are designing pavements, is basically zero. It’s not actually zero, but it’s so much smaller -- orders of magnitude smaller -- that we don’t even bother with them,” said Karim Chatti, a civil engineer from Michigan State University in East Lansing.

Now, I suppose that perhaps everyone should share the BUILD costs more evenly, but the repair costs basically go exclusively to big trucks.

So, I agree with you that perhaps EVs should pay something, but it should be done in light of reality. Cars do basically zero damage. Trucks do a tiny amount of damage. Semis and such do basically all of it.

 

[Pedaldude]

A ballpark calculation of relative damage is...

The main problem with this argument is that it includes math and a politician will only listen to emotion. The politician's eyes will roll up into the back of their head until they hear someone yell, "...their fair share!"

A similar argument was tried back before toll transponders to exempt motorcycles from bridge and road tolls in NY because people were getting killed by cars while they were stopping to take their gloves off, unzip their jackets to pay the toll, zip their jackets back up, then put their gloves back on. The politicians who could be bothered to listen were more worried about what drivers in cars would think, in addition to thinking of crazy 'what if' scenarios like 'but what if someone registered their car as a motorcycle to get out of the toll?'

Here in AZ, starting a few years ago there was talk about a tax for EVs and hybrids and all of it was based on the thought that some people were getting away with something. So nearly every year now in the house, along with gas tax increases, there have been surcharges for EV and hybrid vehicles. None have passed in the Senate yet as far as I know but it's only a matter of time.

https://www.consumerreports.org/hyb...tting-electric-vehicle-owners-with-high-fees/

https://www.greencarreports.com/new...s-charging-electric-cars-tax-at-1-43-per-mile

 

[BigDill]

This thread has taken a bit of an interesting turn to a debate about the efficacy and equality of the potential $12,500 tax incentive as opposed to its possibility.

When it comes to the allocation of repair costs, I would consider utility vs actual impact, meaning that there is more untility of an 18 wheeler delivering low cost consumer goods vs me driving to work. No one would be happy paying $2 more for bread because the Walmart has to pay a 10x tax for using trucks on the road. The solution is probably tolls, but no one wants to be the person who implements them on previously un-tolled roads. It’s a political nightmare.

Regardless of my interest in this car, I think the tax credit is smart. EVs are still an emerging technology and the more that are on the road, the more advancements there will be in technology and infrastructure. I think about it like a cell phone. They were once a brick in a suitcase, but now are more advanced than computers most of us were using even 10 years ago. Sign me up for $12,500 on the hood. Heck, I’ll even be happy with just the $7,500 sticking around.

 

[F150ROD]

I think everyone's bigger worry should be when EVs and every car for that matter starts getting taxed on mileage. Fuel taxes are already insufficient for needed road repair. When EVs reach a certain saturation, it's only a matter of time!

I already get taxed on mileage with Vehicle Registration fees which are much higher for EVs than ICE at least in California

 

[shutterbug]

I already get taxed on mileage with Vehicle Registration fees which are much higher for EVs than ICE at least in California

In Arizona, Vehicle Lecence tax for EV is changed to a rate of $4 per $100 of assessed valuation, which is determined by the following.

 

[Larry Arizona]

This thread has taken a bit of an interesting turn to a debate about the efficacy and equality of the potential $12,500 tax incentive as opposed to its possibility.

When it comes to the allocation of repair costs, I would consider utility vs actual impact, meaning that there is more untility of an 18 wheeler delivering low cost consumer goods vs me driving to work. No one would be happy paying $2 more for bread because the Walmart has to pay a 10x tax for using trucks on the road. The solution is probably tolls, but no one wants to be the person who implements them on previously un-tolled roads. It’s a political nightmare.

Regardless of my interest in this car, I think the tax credit is smart. EVs are still an emerging technology and the more that are on the road, the more advancements there will be in technology and infrastructure. I think about it like a cell phone. They were once a brick in a suitcase, but now are more advanced than computers most of us were using even 10 years ago. Sign me up for $12,500 on the hood. Heck, I’ll even be happy with just the $7,500 sticking around.

Using your cell phone analogy, the $12500 or even the $7500 government incentive is the same as when Obama gave out free cell phones.

 

[Blainestang]

The main problem with this argument is that it includes math and a politician will on listen to emotion. The politician's eyes will roll up into the back of their head until they hear someone yell, "...their fair share!"

Oh yeah, for sure. It'll never happen the way it SHOULD happen.

That's why I am OK with the basic idea, but not the way that it will inevitably be implemented.

 

[Pedaldude]

One other problem with justification for letting commercial trucks basically destroy the infrastructure that costs 4X as much to build in order to accommodate them is that it's a regressive tax burden for people that consume the least and lightest. Politicians won't care because they aren't supporting their campaigns. The roads in my city have been unnecessarily repaved multiple times in the last decade, meanwhile on the other side of the tracks, the roads are barely maintained and those people are still paying registration fees and road taxes.

One peculiarity noted by truckers of poor accountability of road wear and tear is the common practice of adjusting tolls per axle. While a quick way of assessing the weight carrying ability of a truck and trailer combination. It really works against the spirit of the practice, since more tires reduce the road pressure that does some of the damage to roads. Tag axles that can be lifted have been devised to in part reduce the tolls faced when empty in addition to the benefit of less wear and better maneuverability. But either way, a truck will pay the same toll whether it's empty or 80,000lbs.

Every once in a while some crazy Karen will freak out about bicycles not being subjected to road taxes. My city used to require it and even had bicycle license plates but it cost more money to implement than it brought in and was widely ignored.

 

[BigDill]

Using your cell phone analogy, the $12500 or even the $7500 government incentive is the same as when Obama gave out free cell phones.

The Lifeline program (or more recently called "Obamaphone") began in 1985 under Reagan. But hey, if you don't want the credit, you are certainly free to reject it, just like a free phone.

 

[Larry Arizona]

The Lifeline program (or more recently called "Obamaphone") began in 1985 under Reagan. But hey, if you don't want the credit, you are certainly free to reject it, just like a free phone.

Just not proud of taking welfare from taxpayers, especially when I can afford it.
That is the gripe about the Tesla handouts, do people who can afford $150k cars deserve a taxpayer funded handout?

Sponsored