TL;DR: EV cars & SUVs will face an average 16% effective price increase, with the lowest cost model up more than 28%, if the law passes the Senate and goes into effect as written.
It’s hard to imagine any way this doesn’t throw a huge wrench into the adoption of sustainable car technology for the USA.
Only about 8% of new cars sold last year in the USA were electric, compared to 13% for the EU or 25% for China. Seems like exactly the wrong moment to cut tax incentives for the tech.
It’s not gonna make a huge difference, they have been inflating msrp because of the rebates anyway. Now we will see the true cost of ev.
This was always my gripe with these credits. They were just a subsidy for car manufacturers and dealers. The consumer didn’t save a penny.
My better half and I were actually discussing exactly this.
I’m shopping for an EV used, and magically, the price is exactly the same for EVs that are eligible for the credit and the ones that aren’t.
The dealerships treat the rebate as basically a manufacturer spiff, I pay the same either way.
So yeah, I agree. Pulling all of them at once might cause some market disruption, though, and legacy autos are already not committed to EV transition, so it will worsen an already problematic tendency, I think.
Which caused the manufacturer to want to sell more and pivot to marketing and manufacturing them more as they had a bit of an extra margin.
It is what was and probably still is needed, tapering off is a better idea but America doesnt accept those.
For shame, OP, removing a key word in the title. When you posted this, and as I type this reply, this legislation has passed the house but not the senate. Whether or not it will is yet to be seen, but the tax credit is not yet set to expire.
(Lol, thanks for the downvote. Let me get you a full refund.)
First two sentences clear that up, don’t you think? Here, I’ll add the TL:DR to the article description above.
For the record, I didn’t download the article. I don’t particularly care if the body of the article “clears it up “. You removed a key word and that changes the title. And you know it.
I’m not a journalist, I’m a comedian, we heckle back :) If you can’t read 2 sentences deep, I really don’t give a fuck what you think
You don’t need to be a journalist to copy/paste a title verbatim
OK, let me ask more pointedly. For what reason did you choose to remove that one specific word? You didn’t just repost an article you saw, you saw the word likely and decided it didn’t belong. Why?
If it’s a “joke “I don’t get it.
I’m not big on the “we have to beat China” rhetoric, but it’s like republican politicians wake up every morning and ask themselves “What can I do today to further Chinese dominance in the next century?”
It’s almost like China and Russia worked to put them in those positions…
^— Yeah, this.
Unless one’s goal is weakening the US in the world, in which case more chaos, and destruction works great.
It is honestly hard to see what the strategy is. It’s tough when you squint at the administration and wonder how an adversary-backed Manchurian Candidate type might do things differently, and you come up mostly dry.
honestly hard to see what the strategy is
Not when you finally realize there exists no strategy apart from transferring as much wealth as possible from the plebes to the Robber Barons…
Everything MAGAts do is either in furtherance of that goal, or a distraction from that goal.
In this case, it’s for the benefit of fossil fuel related Robber Barons. 🤷♂️ 🤦♀️
The goal is to protect the oil industry.
the tax credit didn’t incentivize ANY EV, there were North America assembly standards that had to be met to qualify. so do you want manufacturing back in the US or not? make up your fuckin minds.
in the bigger picture, this ridiculous 4-year yoyo of legislating everything with simple majority budget bills is not sustainable. we can’t build anything like this.
It’s pretty clear that what they say they want, and what they are actually working towards are not the same.
I agree they have no legitimate plan and are just fumbling with a bunch of idiotic moves and call it governing, but I also agree with the other commentor that these credits aren’t as great as people think because manufactures have time and time again raised prices by amounts equivalent to these credit amounts (like when Biden revamped the expiring credit system) so all we’re really doing is subsidizing these major corporations with our tax dollars.
That’s called lying.
Important information: This only applies to the United States.
Ope, right you are. Tweaked it.
It’s hard to imagine any way this doesn’t throw a huge wrench into the adoption of sustainable car technology for the USA.
I think that’s goal
7% of our exports are currently vehicles (about $145b annually), that will dwindle to nearly nothing as ICE vehicles become a legacy side-show to EVs and PHEVs :,|
That’s to say nothing of serving our own market, and the pride of having Americans at work building brilliant and cutting edge things.
GUH, I GOTTA STOP READING THE NEWS.
I’d think that tariffs driving up, among other things, battery prices probably won’t help much either.
kagis
This says that BEVs are more disadvantaged than ICEs by tariffs.
This edition of the quarterly publication examines how new U.S. tariffs are threatening consumer adoption and sales of battery electric vehicles (BEVs). It also explains why these automobiles are at a disadvantage compared to their internal combustion engine (ICE) counterparts when it comes to import taxes.
“Rapid shifts in trade policy are reshaping the automotive landscape, with tariffs affecting not only the cost of components but also the dynamics of assembly, supply chain transparency and even pricing strategies,” said Ryan Mandell, Mitchell’s director of claims performance. “While these challenges impact all automakers doing business in the U.S., they are more pronounced for manufacturers of BEVs. Insurers will need to collaborate closely with suppliers and collision repair partners to navigate tariff complexities and prepare for future uncertainty.”
The tax credits are just a money grab for the manufacturers and dealers. If you do the math, a 68k loan with a 6-7% interest rate and the $7500 tax credit has the same total cost as no tax credit and a 0.99% rate. That’s why they always offer “manufacturer incentives” with $0 due at signing or those 0-2% loans, but almost never both.
It really depends on if you have good credit or not to make the tax credit a good deal.
Let me guess this wont affect tesla
That’s the rub, this legislation punches Tesla right in the nuts.
They wanted this when they were the top EV maker to impact their competition, but now I wonder if thats still the case
There’s also a $250 a year tax on EVs. I’m not sure that’s even constitutional though, because I thought only states could levy taxes on land.
Are you referring to taxes aimed at funding road repairs that is currently accounted for in gas taxes?
