TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

5 Suggestions for a Better U.S. EV Incentive

Discussion in 'Energy, Environment, and Policy' started by Patrick0101, Apr 18, 2016.

  1. Patrick0101

    Patrick0101 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Messages:
    45
    Location:
    Oregon
    1. Make it a point-of-sale incentive instead of a tax credit
    2. Increase it to $10,000
    3. The limit should not be per manufacturer
    4. Incentive persists until plug-in cars are 2% of sales
    5. Gradually decrease the incentive amount
    More details here <link>
     
    • Like x 3
    • Helpful x 1
    • Love x 1
  2. Craig9080

    Craig9080 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    Messages:
    100
    Location:
    GA
    My opinion: Leave the government (i.e. my tax dollars) out of it and let automakers make compelling electric cars and have the market sort out the winners and losers.

    I think Tesla has already proven that the ICE age is coming to an end.
     
    • Dislike x 2
  3. techmaven

    techmaven Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    2,579
    That's just myopic. It isn't how the world works, it isn't how the world has worked, and it ultimately does not help the U.S at all. There are good government policies, there are bad government policies, but just letting "the market sort out the winners and losers" is simplistic trope.

    There is no such thing as a market without government, unless you want to back to no legal system backed bartering. I doubt anyone actually wants that in the modern world. So we're not talking about no government, we're talking about what does the government do to establish the market such that the market operates in a functional way that hopefully leverages the best of capitalism and minimizes the downfalls of capitalism. We can argue over what that means, but the simplistic trope of "leave the government out of it" and "have the market sort out winners and losers" just doesn't logically add up.
     
    • Like x 4
    • Helpful x 1
  4. techmaven

    techmaven Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    2,579
    I wholeheartedly agree.

    I dont't think we need to increase it to $10,000, but we should index it based on something... maybe a combination of energy efficiency and range? Therefore you get higher incentives based on longer range, and higher incentives based on higher efficiency. Certainly the cap should be based on the extra cost of electric vehicles, but not all of it. Maybe 75%, such that there is still incentive to drive down the price, but helps in the interim. That could be the sunset provision, as the 75% approaches zero as the cost of electric drivetrains approach the cost of ICE vehicles.

    I do think it is unfair that the Volkswagen Group has 3 separate entries: Audi, VW, and Porsche. GM doesn't get to have additional credits for Cadillac and Chevrolet. Why should VAG? Why not just spin off additional subsidiaries to gain more tax credits? It just wasn't well conceived, not to mention the problem of punishing the early pioneers.

    Qualified Vehicles Acquired after 12-31-2009
     
    • Like x 2
  5. Bangor Bob

    Bangor Bob Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2015
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Bangor, ME
    Thing is, in the absence of regulatory nudges, the conventional automakers will do everything in their power to continue the status quo as long as possible - and riding that out to their eventual destruction harms a lot of people which will need support from... .Your tax dollars.

    Pushing for an "orderly transition" helps the market allocate resources better, resulting in lower taxpayer impact all around.
     
    • Like x 2
  6. Bangor Bob

    Bangor Bob Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2015
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Bangor, ME
    If additional nudges are needed, a bonus/malus system can work. If you want to choose the more polluting vehicle, you're going to have to pay more for it (IOW, revisit the "gas guzzler tax"), and that goes to people who buy the cleaner vehicles...
     
    • Like x 3
    • Helpful x 1
  7. EinSV

    EinSV Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    884
    Location:
    NorCal
    Thanks for posting -- this is a great concept. I would favor a slightly modified and simplified version:

    1. Make it a point-of-sale incentive instead of a tax credit
    2. $7500 credit through 12/31/2018, $5000 through 12/31/2000
    3. No limit by manufacturer
    4. After 2000, gradually decrease the incentive amount until it phases out in 2025
    I don't think Tesla needs the incentives, but this could help encourage other manufacturers to jump into the game without giving all the laggards an unfair competitive advantage over Tesla after its credits phase out/expire under the current regime.

    It is also simple, straightforward and easy for everyone -- consumers, manufacturers, Congressional Budget Office, etc. -- to understand.
     
  8. Craig9080

    Craig9080 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    Messages:
    100
    Location:
    GA

    So If I have $5 and you have 3 apples we can't do business without regulation?
     
  9. ronsbell

    ronsbell Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2015
    Messages:
    21
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Possible amendment to your five?

    Consider offering incentives larger credits for less expensive cars to encourage manufacturers to develop more cost effective EVs and to promote more widespread buyer adoption.
     
  10. Craig9080

    Craig9080 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    Messages:
    100
    Location:
    GA
    But why not let the people vote on it with their bank accounts?

    The purpose of the federal government is to do things that the state governments can't do, the purpose of the state governments is to do what our local governments can't do, and the purpose of the local governments is to do things that individuals cannot. In this case, individuals have already overwhelmingly voted with their bank accounts that they want compelling EVs. The government's job, at any level, is done at this point.
     
  11. techmaven

    techmaven Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    2,579
    #11 techmaven, Jun 11, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2016
    Nope, we can't. If we flip this, where you have the 3 apples and I have $5... did you use slave labor to work your apple orchard? What pesticides did you use? If you end up poisoning me or my family, do I have any recourse? Is there any way to stop you from poisoning others? What is even $5... is that fiat money? Why would you accept this government manipulated fiat money?
     
  12. techmaven

    techmaven Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    2,579
    Ah, no. Individuals have not, and the footholds that have been gained thus far will backslide easily. Look at what happened in Georgia.
     
  13. Craig9080

    Craig9080 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    Messages:
    100
    Location:
    GA
    Joke?
     
  14. hybridbear

    hybridbear Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2015
    Messages:
    354
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    I like that idea. If Philadelphia can institute a tax on sugary drinks under the guise of using the money to fund schools then there should be a tax on gas guzzling vehicles with the reasoning being to raise money to help protect the environment.
     

Share This Page