Brand New Model 3 For Sale

[Olds442]

looking at the sold listings on the bay, he may get his price. again, good luck to the TS.

 

[BMWLover]

looking at the sold listings on the bay, he may get his price. again, good luck to the TS.

I actually did. If you look at all of them, I think only 1 or 2 were not by the same guy who has 3 different reservations (two were his, one was his father's). That same listing of his has sold 6 times now, so there's something fishy going on. Probably insider trading? Not sure what's going on there.

 

[T3SLA_Fanatic]

I actually did. If you look at all of them, I think only 1 or 2 were not by the same guy who has 3 different reservations (two were his, one was his father's). That same listing of his has sold 6 times now, so there's something fishy going on. Probably insider trading? Not sure what's going on there.

I know there can be false bids made in order to force actual people interested to bid higher. The deals never go through, its a scum tactic made by the seller to force more out of msrp

 

[sonic1632]

This car is also on every major city’s Craigslist platform. Funny no mention of practicality there.

Oh shoot! I'll be sure to go add that line . My bad for having half a brain and not just marketing it in one place.

As they say "haters gonna hate". My mistake on the 4, vs 2 years. However, when it comes down to it, if you want a car that just came out, 2 years is really the same as 4 yrs. If you're not interested, that's fine, but there's no need to throw shade. Keep your snide comments and snarky opinions to yourself.

 

[Zorg]

Oh shoot! I'll be sure to go add that line . My bad for having half a brain and not just marketing it in one place.

As they say "haters gonna hate". My mistake on the 4, vs 2 years. However, when it comes down to it, if you want a car that just came out, 2 years is really the same as 4 yrs. If you're not interested, that's fine, but there's no need to throw shade. Keep your snide comments and snarky opinions to yourself.

Next time, just say "would love to keep the car but can't resist making a quick 10G" and nobody would give you a hard time. I am amazed that somebody would be dumb enough to spend over $70K on a 3, but then again it ain't my cash.

 

[dhanson865]

Next time, just say "would love to keep the car but can't resist making a quick 10G" and nobody would give you a hard time. I am amazed that somebody would be dumb enough to spend over $70K on a 3, but then again it ain't my cash.

Window sticker = $57,500
Reserve not met at $68,000

If he had it at 10K it would be past the reserve price already.

So at this point we don't know if his reserve is 15K, 20K, 25K higher than the window sticker.

 

[BMWLover]

Regardless of this 68k one, fully loaded one (minus FSD) just sold for $59,600.00 on eBay. MSRP + destination was $57,500 (not including CA state tax), so that seems to be a more reasonable price. People would be willing to pay 1-3k over MSRP to get it now instead of wait.

 

[Kuhz]

Oh shoot! I'll be sure to go add that line . My bad for having half a brain and not just marketing it in one place.

As they say "haters gonna hate". My mistake on the 4, vs 2 years. However, when it comes down to it, if you want a car that just came out, 2 years is really the same as 4 yrs. If you're not interested, that's fine, but there's no need to throw shade. Keep your snide comments and snarky opinions to yourself.

Right......

 

[McRat]

Why do you believe the Model 3 is impractical? Can you give specifics?

Sounds like a pretty 'hateful' and 'snarky' review of the Model 3?

Just kidding, good luck TTT.

 

[Kuhz]

Window sticker = $57,500
Reserve not met at $68,000

If he had it at 10K it would be past the reserve price already.

So at this point we don't know if his reserve is 15K, 20K, 25K higher than the window sticker.

68k starting bid price and also slapping a reserve. Just in case

 

[MP3Mike]

Regardless of this 68k one, fully loaded one (minus FSD) just sold for $59,600.00 on eBay. MSRP + destination was $57,500 (not including CA state tax), so that seems to be a more reasonable price. People would be willing to pay 1-3k over MSRP to get it now instead of wait.

But aren't they really paying $8,500-$10,500 too much. (Since they can't get the $7,500 federal tax credit?)

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

On the sticker it clearly says $57,500, and the used buyer won't get the $7500 rebate. So that means the price as used shouldn't be higher than $50K if the seller isn't looking to profit from it. If the reason really is that it doesn't work for his needs.

I can understand pocketing the $7500 tax rebate since a buyer without a reservation won't be able to take advantage of the $7500 rebate anyways. So $57,500 would seem like a "Ugh, but okay" price to me.

I could also understand saying "Hey, I have a Model 3 that I'd like to profit from so how high do you think this might go?" approach to it.

I don't have any issues with what motivates the OP, but he should be honest with it.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

But aren't they really paying $8,500-$10,500 too much. (Since they can't get the $7,500 federal tax credit?)

I imagine quite a few early Model 3 buyer will make a healthy profit by pocketing the $7500 tax credit while selling the car at or above the sticker price.

They're taking advantage of the fact that most Model 3 buyers won't be able to take advantage of the federal tax credit. Like I likely won't be able to.

If it was blue and if he wasn't charging more than $57,500 I could see considering it. For the range I don't think any new Model S can really compete price wise even with the tax credit.

My reasons to be opposed would be the early build (build quality concerns), and that I really want AWD. But, in Cali I imagine pocketing a $10K profit off it would be fairly easy.

The OP seems to want a $20K profit, and I think that's a bit greedy. But, I can't blame him for trying even if I think he could be more honest about his intentions.

 

[Zorg]

If one buys the car for resale, as is the case here, one cannot claim the federal tax rebate. I imagine that people will anyway but that would tax fraud.

 

[BMWLover]

But aren't they really paying $8,500-$10,500 too much. (Since they can't get the $7,500 federal tax credit?)

Yes and no. The people that are buying these new Model 3s are probably later on the waitlist and by the time they get their 3, the tax credit won't be available anymore. So they figure, if they have to wait 1.5 yrs and pay the same money with no tax credit, may as well pay it now and enjoy it for the next 1.5 years instead.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

If one buys the car for resale, as is the case here, one cannot claim the federal tax rebate. I imagine that people will anyway but that would tax fraud.

Is that according to you, or the government?

Do you have anything official to back that up? I'm not aware of any rule that says one has to hold onto a car for longer than X number of months to qualify.

And, why would it be tax fraud? It's not like the government is losing any money that wasn't already planned. They limited supply by design, and with limited supply comes the opportunity to profit.

He's selling it as a used car, and not a new car. So people know they're getting a used car. Normally it would be a depreciating asset.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Oh, good MP3Mike disagreed and he's a good disagreer.

Within a few min should come proof that I'm actually wrong about what I said.

To give you a head start here is the form you can use to prove to me that my reading comprehension skills have failed me. Which does happen quite routinely so your chances are good.

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8936.pdf

 

[BMWLover]

Is that according to you, or the government?

Do you have anything official to back that up? I'm not aware of any rule that says one has to hold onto a car for longer than X number of months to qualify.

And, why would it be tax fraud? It's not like the government is losing any money that wasn't already planned. They limited supply by design, and with limited supply comes the opportunity to profit.

He's selling it as a used car, and not a new car. So people know they're getting a used car. Normally it would be a depreciating asset.

Here it is from their website, "The vehicles must be acquired for use or lease and not for resale. Additionally, the original use of the vehicle must commence with the taxpayer and the vehicle must be used predominantly in the United States. "

So, above poster is correct, but yes, there is also no specific timeline stated, so there is no way to prove whether you bought it for resale or not. You can buy a car, drive it for one day, not like it, then sell.

 

[MP3Mike]

Is that according to you, or the government?

Do you have anything official to back that up? I'm not aware of any rule that says one has to hold onto a car for longer than X number of months to qualify.

And, why would it be tax fraud? It's not like the government is losing any money that wasn't already planned. They limited supply by design, and with limited supply comes the opportunity to profit.

He's selling it as a used car, and not a new car. So people know they're getting a used car. Normally it would be a depreciating asset.

That is according to the government. There is no number of day limit, the wording is that the car can't be purchased for resale and still claim the credit. So you would have to convince the IRS that after only owning the car for a little while and selling it for a profit that you really did intend to keep it and not sell it. (It sure looks like a purchase for resale to me.)

It would be tax fraud because they claimed something that they didn't qualify for. As far as money, yes it would deprive the government of that $7,500 that otherwise wouldn't have been claimed. (It isn't limited by dollars, it is limited by time after a quantity of cars have been sold.)

Of course you could just read all the details yourself: Plug In Electric Vehicle Credit IRC 30 and IRC 30D | Internal Revenue Service

The exact wording is: "The vehicles must be acquired for use or lease and not for resale."

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

That is according to the government. There is no number of day limit, the wording is that the car can't be purchased for resale and still claim the credit. So you would have to convince the IRS that after only owning the car for a little while and selling it for a profit that you really did intend to keep it and not sell it. (It sure looks like a purchase for resale to me.)

It would be tax fraud because they claimed something that they didn't qualify for. As far as money, yes it would deprive the government of that $7,500 that otherwise wouldn't have been claimed. (It isn't limited by dollars, it is limited by time after a quantity of cars have been sold.)

Of course you could just read all the details yourself: Plug In Electric Vehicle Credit IRC 30 and IRC 30D | Internal Revenue Service

The exact wording is: "The vehicles must be acquired for use or lease and not for resale."

We read the same thing, but it comes down to interpretation.

To me it forbids buying a car where you act as a reseller (like a reseller of new Apple computers), and claiming the tax credit. That's to prevent more than one person getting the tax credit on the same car.

What this guy did was he bought the car NEW, and he's selling it as Used.

Only one person gets the tax credit, and that's all the government cares about. No fraud is committed because the government doesn't lose any money.

As an aside when are you getting your Tesla? I think you might be the only one that's exceed 4000 post without having the car.