The CEOs of several automakers signed a letter addressed to the United States Congress asking for the removal of the 200,000 unit cap on electrified vehicle incentive eligibility
-
60% of the time, it works every time!
-
@KngT I would also like more money please thank you.
-
@KngT I say drop the cap. You're either on board, or you're not.
They can drop the credit altogether once the market is well established.
I don't think there's a cap on credits here in Canada. It's getting close enough price wise that I could see myself buying within a few years. assuming the credit is still there or prices simply come down enough.
-
@KngT More incentives would be good. But I wouldn't just expand the cap. Instead:
- Have an open incentive pool. If a manufacturer doesn't have their shit together at this point, that's on them. Let them know they will miss out if they don't start moving EVs pronto.
- Cap incentive eligibility at 50% of the average price of a new car or something (maybe a sliding scale). The market for premium EVs is well established, where we need help is in cars for the general population.
- Start the new incentive a year or two out. This will help ensure demand as the market cools, and gives one last chance for manufacturers to get on board.
Side note, Chevy, which has hit its limit for the current incentives, just announced a $6000 price cut on the Bolt to make it more competitive with other EVs that are still getting the subsidy. This sort of competition is a bit unfair which is why incentives should be applied to all sellers, and not come from a reserved per manufacturer pool.
-
@ibRAD The market IS well established, though. Asking for more credits is a cash grab. Tesla still moves units without any federal credits left.
-
@Qaaaaa said in The CEOs of several automakers signed a letter addressed to the United States Congress asking for the removal of the 200,000 unit cap on electrified vehicle incentive eligibility:
@ibRAD The market IS well established, though. Asking for more credits is a cash grab. Tesla still moves units without any federal credits left.
Maybe that was a poor choice of words. How about 'until the prices are competitive with ICE cars'
I don't think 'average consumer' is realistically considering an EV yet.
-
@Qaaaaa The market is nowhere near as big as it needs to be if we are going to be carbon neutral by 2050. Right now California has the highest EV adoption, but it's still only ~12.5% of new cars. That really does need to be near 100% within a dozen years or so, and everywhere, not just California. The right way to do that is to put a (revenue neutral) price on carbon, but since that's not happening, we need to subsidize (though doing so at this instant is less important)
-
@KngT The cap should be lifted for all EV's below $50k selling price (before taxes). The cap should include dealer markups and fees so dealers are discouraged from ADM. They should also have lager incentives for lower priced cars than expensive ones. Anything between $50k-$75k should be limited to 1 million units and anything above $75k doesn't get the incentive. I also think there should be incentives for higher efficiency EVs and those that are not efficient should pay a "EV guzzler tax" (looking at you Porsche/Audi/Hummer/Rivian). We need to focus on where the biggest gains will be made for emissions and also understand road maintenance/safety. Having 3 ton EVs doesn't make sense for both of these.
I should also say that having a single EV like a Hummer that uses an enormous battery takes away precious resources that could be used for multiple lower priced smaller EV's. This doesn't make sense when we are trying to increase EV adoption and dealing with issues with generating these resources.
"We might lose ourselves but we will never be lost"
-
@ibRAD Well yeah, the average consumer still doesn't have a reliable place to charge one
@facw Carbon neutral by 2050 was never the goal. The goal is to sell cars. Carbon neutrality doesn't even require a shift to EVs, which aren't carbon neutral to start with, and will still require an actual solution.
-
Definitely agree with incentivizing makers to bring products to market below a certain price point.
manual . RWD . LS3 . MagneRide . Brembos ... 4 doors + 5 seatbelts
-
@Qaaaaa What is also going to happen is as EV adoption rises, ICE car prices will increase as manufactures have to spread development costs over smaller number of units. There will be a point where ICE cars will cost more than their EV counterparts. As far as charging infrastructure, that is a big issue and needs to be addressed as part of EV sales. You get an incentive to buy the car but also upgrade your home to be able to charge your car.
"We might lose ourselves but we will never be lost"
-
@KngT remove the cap on any EV sold with a retail selling price under $40,000. Stop giving rich people the help and convince manufacturers to make electric cars for everyday people. Also tax the shit out of any new car that gets under 25 mpg to pay for the tax credits on EVs.
-
@KngT the incentive isn't even needed anymore, enough governments have banned ICE cars starting within the next decade that automakers either switch to electric or go out of business when the bans take effect. I mean, it's their choice, they can pick which option they want
-
@davesaddiction As it was pointed out, Tesla doesn't need incentives to sell their cars because their buyers don't need a financial subsidy. It's the normal people who buy CUVs/ used cars that need it. Look at how Hyundai is killing it with the EV6/Ionic5 but I bet there are people that would like to buy one but are just below the income threshold to afford one.
-
@krustywantout I really think the original intention of the federal EV subsidy structure has been fulfilled. The money is better spent on subsidizing sustainable carbon neutral power generation, distribution infrastructure, and charging infrastructure.
-
@Qaaaaa Amen to that. We need more nuclear power plants for a start. Our lack of investment in nuclear energy has really hurt our ability to lower our carbon emissions. Hopefully people see that the newest generation of nuclear technology is safe, reliable and has less waste than the previous ones. We also need to spend more resources upgrading the transmission infrastructure to reduce waste. But I do think that there should be incentives for lower priced EVs or people with lower income levels.
"We might lose ourselves but we will never be lost"
-
Great posts in here, and I was going to say that we need multiple tiers of means testing to prevent already-wealthy, already-going-to-buy-an-EV people from claiming the credit. This test could also apply to manufacturers, so if someone is intentionally building very affordable, basic EVs, they should get to sell more than 200k of them because of the level of service to society they are providing.
Anecdotally, I would not currently buy an EV or PHEV without the credit. The end. I'm sure 90% of other EV-curious people are in the same boat. When I look at these cars, I already subtract $7,500 from the price and STILL have to work hard to get the numbers to work out.
We're about to enter a very difficult time in EVs as the market starts to accelerate. Fast innovation could quickly lead to faster depreciation, which also underscores the need for incentives. It's a tough spot.
2015 Honda Odyssey EX-L (nearing 100k)
2001.5 VW Passat GLX Wagon 4motion -
@KngT what greedy little shitlords. Those incentives boost EV sales at taxpayer expense. They're just there to boost adoption and help automakers get established in the EV space. If you're building more than 200k units, you don't need the help anymore.
-
I read somewhere in the news that part of our current gas price woes are down to a significant drop in gas production in the US. One of the reasons the refiners cite is the rise of electric vehicles. Can't say that we've got enough of those to justify shutting down one of the largest gas refineries in TX. If ever there was a time to go full beans on EV production, now is the time.
#Planelopnik all the things
Yamaha YTR-8335
Yamaha YTR-8445
Schilke P5-4 -
@ttyymmnn said in The CEOs of several automakers signed a letter addressed to the United States Congress asking for the removal of the 200,000 unit cap on electrified vehicle incentive eligibility:
One of the reasons the refiners cite is the rise of electric vehicles
Lies, lies. All lies and scapegoating. The real reason gas prices are so high is because Mr. CEO Moneybucks just has to have his four megayachts, and they're not cheap to run dontchaknow.
The person reading this is a doo-doo head
-
@ttyymmnn I'm sure our infrastructure will keep up.
-
@EssExTee I was speaking with someone who works in oil/gas this weekend. He says the Saudi's are making $1 billion per day. That's their profit! He thinks oil prices will go up to $140 per barrel.
"We might lose ourselves but we will never be lost"
-
@krustywantout the Saudis also have crazy low production costs, they practically scrape the ground and the oil's there. Those margins are thick
2022 Ioniq SE
1964 Corvair Monza -
@ranwhenparked He said $10 was their cost. I think it's about $120 for fracking.
"We might lose ourselves but we will never be lost"
-
The cap should be lifted for all EV's below $50k selling price (before taxes).
How is that price determined? MSRP? Price with all fees? What about dealer markup?
