GM Volt Forum banner

1 - 20 of 73 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
Is this really a surprise? These eliminations have nothing to do with policy, growth, the environment, or anything else. They are just desperately trying to find ways to cut tax breaks anywhere they can to pay for cuts to upper income brackets. This one is an easy target.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,488 Posts
I doubt if there will be any real benefit of owning an electric vehicle or plug in electric vehicle by 2020. The Fed Tax Credit will be gone. States that fell in love with the concept of electric vehicles now are screwing over the owners of those vehicles by raising registration fees, in fact it will cost you less money to register a 7,000 lb pickup truck than a 3,000 lb Prius in some states. Now lets see, what causes more damage to the highway, a 7,000 lb pickup truck or a 3,000 lb Prius, help me out here as I went to public school in the 1950's 1960's....

Once again no good deed goes unpunished.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
Raising the credit is politically out of the question, so eliminating it for all would be best now, not later. Hopefully falling battery costs will offset all or part of the credit loss. The incentive to buy electric remains: it's electric, but so does the disincentive: sticker shock. Let the serious discounting begin!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
Raising the credit is politically out of the question, so eliminating it for all would be best now, not later. Hopefully falling battery costs will offset all or part of the credit loss. The incentive to buy electric remains: it's electric, but so does the disincentive: sticker shock. Let the serious discounting begin!
Battery costs aren't falling that fast, so there is only so much discounting available. Without these credits, along with the reduction in CAFE standards the current EPA is interested in, auto makers may pull back production significantly rather than sell cars at a lose.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,198 Posts
Battery costs aren't falling that fast, so there is only so much discounting available. Without these credits, along with the reduction in CAFE standards the current EPA is interested in, auto makers may pull back production significantly rather than sell cars at a lose.
No worries, China will step in to fill the vacuum that will be created as we dis-incentivize US manufacturers from producing energy efficient vehicles. With a lack of prompting, car makers will fall back into a lazy market approach. Then one day they will wonder where the market share went, why the rest of the world has passed them by.

China is making a huge push into "new energy" vehicles, offering huge incentives. They have a plan, and it's to dominate world production of EV's. Our plan, if "anti" can be called a plan, seems to be focus on fossil fuels and inefficient cars like it's 1950.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,642 Posts
Is this really a surprise? These eliminations have nothing to do with policy, growth, the environment, or anything else. They are just desperately trying to find ways to cut tax breaks anywhere they can to pay for cuts to upper income brackets. This one is an easy target.
Here's an easy fix, get rid of all tax breaks, eliminate the tax brackets, and figure out what the right number is for a unified flat tax rate that pays the bills. A flat tax means if you make more you pay more, if you make less you pay less...period.

What amazes me is how really stupid some people are thinking that they want to stay in a lower tax bracket so they take home more money - it doesn't work that way. I've had employees try to decline pay raises which is absolutely ludicrous - the goal is to be in the highest tax bracket, not the lowest!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,410 Posts
No worries, China will step in to fill the vacuum that will be created as we dis-incentivize US manufacturers from producing energy efficient vehicles. With a lack of prompting, car makers will fall back into a lazy market approach. Then one day they will wonder where the market share went, why the rest of the world has passed them by.

China is making a huge push into "new energy" vehicles, offering huge incentives. They have a plan, and it's to dominate world production of EV's. Our plan, if "anti" can be called a plan, seems to be focus on fossil fuels and inefficient cars like it's 1950.
They did it with solar panels...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,634 Posts
I am not a fan of the $7500 tax credit. For one, battery costs are like 1/10th what they were when that was implemented. The way it works is lame and just encourages manufacturers to over price their vehicles.

I think eliminating it will be good, as about half the country that despises might be more tolerant of EVs. If you want to incentivise it, figure out a different way than a tax credit that is only is available to higher income earners.

I would have liked to see it last one more year, and it isn't gone yet, this sounds like it is fairly early draft, it might be put back in. I would rather see some compromise, get rid of that credit, but give a better credit that more people can take advantage of. One that phases out in say 5 years, not based on how many cars a certain manufacturer sells.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,156 Posts
Funny how opioid meds are bad and air pollution is no biggie.
+1. As for opioids, when cocaine users were African Americans the issue was one of self restraint and lack of moral fiber. Now that opioid users are White we have a medical issue. Nice to see progressive thinking but whatever happened to "Just Say No" (not that I ever thought this approach would work, just funny how the narrative changes based on the demographics of users).

Despite all the happy talk I have some trouble seeing the tax proposal going anywhere. The principle problem is that people feel losses far more intensively than gains. Consequently if you give someone a $1000 tax cut and end a deduction worth $500, that person will feel aggrieved to the tune of something like $1500.

Temporarily cutting taxes when unemployment is low fails a policy test on two fronts. First it has no chance of producing growth -- just inflation. Second is that temporary tax cuts don't change behaviors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
459 Posts
Here's an easy fix, get rid of all tax breaks, eliminate the tax brackets, and figure out what the right number is for a unified flat tax rate that pays the bills. A flat tax means if you make more you pay more, if you make less you pay less...period.

What amazes me is how really stupid some people are thinking that they want to stay in a lower tax bracket so they take home more money - it doesn't work that way. I've had employees try to decline pay raises which is absolutely ludicrous - the goal is to be in the highest tax bracket, not the lowest!!!!
Exactly, or better yet move to a federal sales tax. If you spend more you pay more.

Regarding getting rid of this deduction, I think it's a good thing. GM and Tesla will be hitting the cap soon, and the credit will only serve as an incentive to those manufactures who chose to wait, while creating a disincentive for the purchaser to buy a GM or Tesla. I'd rather see it go then introduce this disparity.

I still won't be going back to a gas car. The credit doesn't change this for me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,156 Posts
Mary and Mark aren't afraid and they knew the credits wouldn't last:
Yes. For GM and Tesla this isn't a big deal. The credits were going to be reduced significantly in 2018 and be phased out completely in 2019. Makes them more competitive since other manufacturers won't have that up their sleeve as an incentive.

Note the CARB credits are still around. These could be upped in value fairly easily by increasing the fine amount for not hitting the targets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,416 Posts
Yes. For GM and Tesla this isn't a big deal. The credits were going to be reduced significantly in 2018 and be phased out completely in 2019. Makes them more competitive since other manufacturers won't have that up their sleeve as an incentive.

Note the CARB credits are still around. These could be upped in value fairly easily by increasing the fine amount for not hitting the targets.
P.S.: There is no tax law yet and some of the folks are flippin' out already. Reminds me of Pelosi earlier last month saying she didn't know what was in the bill but then proceeded to tell us what it was. THERE WAS NO BILL!! Get a grip.........

But if it does go away it's only a sooner rather than later thing, and you in states with rebates don't have my sympathy at all. I'll likely be paying full price on my next EREV, assuming there's one to buy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
No worries, China will step in to fill the vacuum that will be created as we dis-incentivize US manufacturers from producing energy efficient vehicles. With a lack of prompting, car makers will fall back into a lazy market approach. Then one day they will wonder where the market share went, why the rest of the world has passed them by.

China is making a huge push into "new energy" vehicles, offering huge incentives. They have a plan, and it's to dominate world production of EV's. Our plan, if "anti" can be called a plan, seems to be focus on fossil fuels and inefficient cars like it's 1950.
Next thing you know we'll be trying to tariff our way out of the problem we've created.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
I am not a fan of the $7500 tax credit. For one, battery costs are like 1/10th what they were when that was implemented. The way it works is lame and just encourages manufacturers to over price their vehicles.

I think eliminating it will be good, as about half the country that despises might be more tolerant of EVs. If you want to incentivise it, figure out a different way than a tax credit that is only is available to higher income earners.

I would have liked to see it last one more year, and it isn't gone yet, this sounds like it is fairly early draft, it might be put back in. I would rather see some compromise, get rid of that credit, but give a better credit that more people can take advantage of. One that phases out in say 5 years, not based on how many cars a certain manufacturer sells.
Your assuming this tax bill is being put together under standard order in committee with both parties. Ah the good 'ol days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
+1. As for opioids, when cocaine users were African Americans the issue was one of self restraint and lack of moral fiber. Now that opioid users are White we have a medical issue. Nice to see progressive thinking but whatever happened to "Just Say No" (not that I ever thought this approach would work, just funny how the narrative changes based on the demographics of users).
The current administration allocated no new money to fight opiod addiction. They just used different words to indicate "just say no". As usual, all show, no go.
 
1 - 20 of 73 Posts
Top