-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Trump will end Biden's EV (tax credit) policies
- Thread starter voyager
- Start date
It’s pretty classic Elon Musk to say something like that…
It doesn’t mean that A) he doesn’t plan to give any more to a PAC or SUPERPAC… so NOT a candidate technically, right in the EM tricky messaging wheelhouse.
Or B) doesn’t mean that he isn’t going to LOAN 500M to the OI, so it’s NOT a donation and not direct to a candidate, it’s just a loan between friends. (And since it’s the trump co that owes the majority of the money he could LOAN Trump Co. the money)
And his tweet can still ring plausibly true.
Frankly, I think EM might just do exactly one or both of these things, but get concessions that a possible / probable future OI administration does NOT eliminate all the renewable benefits or tax credits, etc. It’s worth more to EM and Tesla to keep those things, than to lose out on 500M in interest or for EM to keep losing BILLIONS of net worth per week going forward.
It doesn’t mean that A) he doesn’t plan to give any more to a PAC or SUPERPAC… so NOT a candidate technically, right in the EM tricky messaging wheelhouse.
Or B) doesn’t mean that he isn’t going to LOAN 500M to the OI, so it’s NOT a donation and not direct to a candidate, it’s just a loan between friends. (And since it’s the trump co that owes the majority of the money he could LOAN Trump Co. the money)
And his tweet can still ring plausibly true.
Frankly, I think EM might just do exactly one or both of these things, but get concessions that a possible / probable future OI administration does NOT eliminate all the renewable benefits or tax credits, etc. It’s worth more to EM and Tesla to keep those things, than to lose out on 500M in interest or for EM to keep losing BILLIONS of net worth per week going forward.
No one is forced to buy an EV, nor mandating the end of ICE vehicles, that's hyperbole.
If you don't like the tax credits, that's fine. Many of us have misgivings re: tax credits, but let's put home mortgage deductions, child tax credits and all the other deductions/credits on the table too instead of choosing those we like, or don't...
If they are taking away EV subsidies, why not take away oil subsidies, take away all subsidies and not just one sided.
Mr. Musk had posted more than 20 times on X this year about former President Donald J. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee. In those posts, Mr. Musk defended Mr. Trump, arguing that he is a victim of media and prosecutorial bias in the criminal cases that the former president faces.
Mr. Musk has steadily ramped up his criticism of Mr. Biden as the campaign season heats up before the November presidential election. Mr. Musk has posted about Mr. Biden on X at least seven times a month since January, attacking the president for everything from his age to his policies on immigration and health. Before that, he posted about Mr. Biden twice in December and not at all in November, according to a New York Times analysis. In all, Mr. Musk had posted nearly 40 times about Mr. Biden this year, compared with about 30 times for all of last year.
Raffy.Roma
Rome (Italy)
As far as I know Mr. Trump is against EVs, Elon is the CEO of Tesla and President Biden supports EVs.
So I don't understand this behavior of Elon.
Elon obviously feels that there are other bigger problems that need addressing even if it does conflict with his business. Trump is being an idiot about EVs and will backtrack on his rhetoric if elected. Or he is being smart just to get the vote and then do nothing. Even republicans that have massive EV investments in their state realize that EVs are a good thing.
There's a lot of anti-EV on the internet. It does not track with reality. Actual sales and trending numbers show EV growth continues and all legit forecasts show the growth is global.
I hope you’re right, but that’s not clear for the US at least. Electric Vehicle Sales and Market Share (US - Updated Monthly)
In summary, Musk is for a free market to decide the 'winner' of the ICE vs EV competition. In a free market EV's will eventually take over through consumers being motivated to make the choice based on cost, operating expenses, user experience, etc. But tariffs and tax credits etc distort the free market. Musk's position has been against the tax credits even before the US IRA bill was passed. But his position is against ALL tax credits including those on fossil fuels. Biden recently increased the US tariffs on Chinese EVs to 100%, a position even Biden earlier said was stupid. Biden has done this to protect union workers and pander for their votes. But these tariffs won't stop the inevitable. Musk is not for unions for all the obvious reasons. So I think Musk would be in favor of removing ALL tax subsidies and tariffs and pressure from the Gov't to unionize and let the market be as free as possible. But since politicians are politicians this will never happen.
100 years ago cars replaced horses in major cities in ~13 year timeframe. I'm not aware of any tax credits that forced this conversion. It happened because the car was a better form of transportation than horses. If the market were left to regulate itself the same thing would happen if the true costs of products were paid by consumers. Consumers will act in their own best interest. But all these manipulations of the market by politicians hide the true costs from consumers so they are making suboptimal decisions. This will result eventually in a massive correction. The US can't be an ICE/Fossil Fuel island to itself.
I'll quote a Kia ev owner I saved his comment, he said it better than I: (this was dec 2023)
"Except most headlines don't actually say the "growth rate" is slowing (I don't think anyone believed EVs were going to be able to sustain a 70%+ growth rate), they mostly seem to say "EV demand is slowing" which would imply to the average reader that the sales rate is declining, not the rate of growth in the sales rate is declining. There's a very big difference in those two things.
US EV sales only have to grow an average of 25% in order for them to be 100% of sales by 2035. Growth this year was 50%. Thus even if the growth rate got cut in half the market would stay well ahead of all of even the most optimistic projections. In CA which is way ahead of the rest of the country growth only has to maintain 12-13% per year to hit 100% by 2035."
Here's a good white paper on this topic
There is consistent anti-ev messaging and very intentional twisting of facts and headlines through mainstream media.
clicks get views, sheep love to read reinforcing headlines that are misleading at best, yet EV growth continues much more rapidly than big oil and the big 3 predicted. Coincidentally, those same industries spend literally tens of billions on media, lobbying and ad dollars.
dhrivnak
Active Member
But it would help some in cutting fossil fuel demand, and raise needed highway funds.
Last edited:
The IMF estimates that tax and other subsidies total $760 billion in 2022; This is for US only.
Consumption appears to be about 137 billion gallons per year. Usually expressed in other units of course - this was from 2023.
760/137 is right about $5.50 per gallon.
Would people buy EVs at much higher numbers if gas was $9 a gallon and predicted to be somewhere near that for the future?
Now - without subsidies, the oil price would change. Saudi oil might be a lot cheaper relative to US oil. And then demand would fall, also changing prices. Given that, $7 is a fair estimate and comparable to what the rest of the developed world pays outside of the oil producing countries.
Consumption appears to be about 137 billion gallons per year. Usually expressed in other units of course - this was from 2023.
760/137 is right about $5.50 per gallon.
Would people buy EVs at much higher numbers if gas was $9 a gallon and predicted to be somewhere near that for the future?
Now - without subsidies, the oil price would change. Saudi oil might be a lot cheaper relative to US oil. And then demand would fall, also changing prices. Given that, $7 is a fair estimate and comparable to what the rest of the developed world pays outside of the oil producing countries.
What are you taking about? Are you saying this is the usa domestic gasoline tax per annum?
@Rocket_man that is a very interesting last post. I don't know if I agree with all of it but that perspective has never been so clearly presented before that i've read.
jabloomf1230
Minister of Silly Walks
Since Elon is such a anti-subsidy libertarian, maybe he should start lobbying to remove US oil and gas subsidies. Here's a list:
Subsidies not taxation. The fact is the US government - according to the IMF - spends about $760 billion a year on oil. This could be in the form of tax breaks - in fact that is the usual form.
Read up on well depreciation. Check how the Permian Basin is in an opportunity zone. An OZ allows you to defer capital gains and after 10 years of owning, pay no capital gains. So you can depreciate the well to zero and then pay no capital gains when you sell.
Investing in oil fields and wells is very subsidized by the federal government.
The TCJA of 2017 left it up to the states to decide what areas would be OZ's. Very political and in TX, that meant oil fields. So build a well and you are helping an impoverished area. It isn't completely wrong - since I am sure the area around a well is fairly poor. And I imagine the workers buy food at a local store....
It is essentially criminal.
Read up on well depreciation. Check how the Permian Basin is in an opportunity zone. An OZ allows you to defer capital gains and after 10 years of owning, pay no capital gains. So you can depreciate the well to zero and then pay no capital gains when you sell.
Investing in oil fields and wells is very subsidized by the federal government.
The TCJA of 2017 left it up to the states to decide what areas would be OZ's. Very political and in TX, that meant oil fields. So build a well and you are helping an impoverished area. It isn't completely wrong - since I am sure the area around a well is fairly poor. And I imagine the workers buy food at a local store....
It is essentially criminal.
Similar threads
