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

Does this news mean the $2500 rebate is back?

Discussion in 'California' started by privater, Sep 2, 2016.

  1. privater

    privater 2016 Model S60 owner

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Messages:
    89
    Location:
    Ca
  2. Tanquen

    Tanquen Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2016
    Messages:
    138
    Location:
    United States
    Maybe:
    "It would spend $133 million for the state's main subsidy program for low- and zero-emission vehicles, and another $80 million for a second subsidy for low-income Californians living in poorer parts of Los Angeles and the San Joaquin Valley."
     
    • Informative x 1
  3. xav-

    xav- Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    Messages:
    422
    Location:
    Orange County CA
    Apparently Fiat is claiming that it is back
     
  4. xav-

    xav- Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    Messages:
    422
    Location:
    Orange County CA
    The ca gov website still says there's a waiting list...
     
  5. JPP

    JPP Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Messages:
    1,842
    Location:
    SF Bay area, CA
    It's back, but with a new revised lowered income cap/means test. Now its something like $300,000 for a couple/$150,000 single filer. Will probably eliminate a lot of Tesla buyers.
     
    • Dislike x 1
  6. BluestarE3

    BluestarE3 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2016
    Messages:
    1,012
    Location:
    Norcal
    #6 BluestarE3, Sep 3, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2016
    But, hopefully, this will still include a lot of Model 3 buyers who aren't necessarily in the income levels of current Tesla owners; that is, assuming funding for this incentive will still be available when the 3 comes out.
     
  7. Tanquen

    Tanquen Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2016
    Messages:
    138
    Location:
    United States
    Some of use do know how to save up for stuff we want. If you make more than 150k, why would you needed government help to buy an expensive EV?
     
    • Like x 1
  8. Tony8489

    Tony8489 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2015
    Messages:
    111
    Location:
    Glendale, CA
    "Eliminate" doesn't mean these people won't buy a Tesla because now it's $2,500 more expensive. Base price of the car has had movement in that range, most recently the $1,500 increase for the facelift in April. Besides, the $7,500 federal credit is still there for another 2 years of Tesla buyers.
     
  9. Wshowell

    Wshowell Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    239
    Location:
    Arroyo Grande Ca
    From my perspective the goal of the rebate (which is funded by polluters FYI) is to offset as much of the green house gases as possible, as quickly as possible. So, does it matter what the income bracket is of the company doing it? I don't think so. In fact, if we are going to start to put all sorts of qualifiers on the rebate then it should go to the people that will bring the largest benefit to society as a whole. That'd be the people that use their cars the most and burn the most fossil fuel by the nature of what they do (even a Prius driver can only limit his/her emissions so much), not what they earn. So the guy or gal that has a 100 mile commute each day should get the biggest rebate and the person that works from home (like me) should get no rebate or very small. Taxi fleets, cop cars, highway patrol etc should get a huge rebate. I don't see this as an income issue in the least bit but I know the politicians do. Just because someone that makes >$150K gets the same rebate as someone making $50K has no effect on anything other than two people trying to reduce their emissions be it through a $25k leaf or a $145K P100DL.
     
    • Like x 1
  10. Tanquen

    Tanquen Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2016
    Messages:
    138
    Location:
    United States
    Nope, buying EV is not mandatory and there are limited funds. Giving it to people that want to buy 100k+ EV is not helping. Giving it to people that already have more than enough money to buy one, let alone a cheaper one is not helping. And people with long commutes are already getting artificial hand outs and we don't need to encourage more of them. Even if all the cars, trucks, vans, taxes and so on were EVs, congestion is still a problem. We don't need more people driving further which, is going to be a whole nother problem if EVs and autonomous cars get as good and cheap as it appears they're going to. One problem at a time though I guess. Less noise and pollution but it will take 3 hours to get anywhere because even more people will want to live 50+ miles away from where they work and can now nap, read or eat in their cheap autonomous car. Maybe...
     
  11. NikeWings

    NikeWings Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages:
    974
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    So give it to the people that get 15 EV miles in their hybrid and keep burning gas???
     
  12. Wshowell

    Wshowell Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    239
    Location:
    Arroyo Grande Ca
    Here's my question for the sake of the discussion. Guy in LA buys a new Ferrari that gets 14 MPG, he pays the $5500 Gas Guzzler tax. Now that money is to be used to offset the crap his V12 spits out the tailpipe. First question, where should it be spent (BEV rebates, trains, buses, LED bulb rebates, carpooling incentives, planting trees) and second question, who has the right to utilize the money on ANY of those ideas? If I buy an LED bulb at Costco with a $9 rebate and the person checking me out says "what's your income sir, you may not qualify and we have to wait for someone with a low income to come along and buy this bulb..." How does that help the fact that the Ferrari is fueling up at the pump while Costco is reviewing my 1099s? If it it's a bus and I go to get on the bus and they say "hey, u look like like u make over $150K, get off the bus, you can afford to drive with all your money!" One (income) has nothing to do with the other (carbon offset).

    There is an odd thing going on in this country about vilifying people that make $X dollars a year that distracts from the end goal. I don't understand it. It's a scarcity mentality like my kids at dinner. daughter "hey! you ate more than your share of the pizza" son 'You said you were full and felt like throwing up.". Daughter "yea well that doesn't matter, you ate my piece of pizza!".
     
    • Like x 6
  13. eye.surgeon

    eye.surgeon Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2014
    Messages:
    707
    Location:
    California
    You think the government is "giving" me $2500? I pay more than that per week in taxes, as do many here. The Government produces nothing and can therefore give nothing. All they do is take from one to give to another.
     
    • Like x 6
  14. FlatSix911

    FlatSix911 918 Hybrid

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2015
    Messages:
    2,346
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    Well done :cool:
     
    • Dislike x 1
  15. whttiger25

    whttiger25 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2016
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    Any idea what this means for people with approved applications on the wait list and an income above $150k?
     
  16. Tanquen

    Tanquen Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2016
    Messages:
    138
    Location:
    United States
    No, not hybrids. We could have done full EVs a long time ago.
     
  17. Tanquen

    Tanquen Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2016
    Messages:
    138
    Location:
    United States
    #17 Tanquen, Sep 4, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2016
    You're going just a little over-the-top there. It should be done where it makes sense. Incentivizing cheap LED light bulbs for the masses, yes who cares. Giving $2,500 from a limited fund to someone who wants to buy a $100,000 car, who most likely would have bought it anyway, doesn't make a lot of sense. It's not a big deal to look at someone who's making a very large purchase and see if they need some help making it or not. It's like trying to smog every ICE on the road vs going all electric and then focusing on power plants.
     
  18. Tanquen

    Tanquen Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2016
    Messages:
    138
    Location:
    United States
    Yes that is exactly what they are doing. You don't even have to have paid any taxes to get the $2,500, it's not a tax deduction or credit.
    Come on you can be smarter than that. You know there's people out there that work just as hard or way harder than you and make way less than you, get over it. YOU, lucked out and EVERYONE, to some degree makes that possible. Not just you out in the wild in some perfect little bubble. Is it okay for folks to just run around saying you didn't earn any of that money you just found a technically legal way to take more from others? More than $2,500 a week in taxes? Is that the 30 to 40% that the little people pay or is that the sweetheart 10 to 13% that the people in this country that do real work get?
     
    • Like x 1
    • Dislike x 1
  19. RubberToe

    RubberToe Supporting the greater good

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    842
    Location:
    Pasadena, Ca
    Whats the term that is the opposite of "A meeting of the minds"?

    RT
     
    • Funny x 1
  20. Wshowell

    Wshowell Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    239
    Location:
    Arroyo Grande Ca
    You didn't answer the questions...WHERE should the money go? WHO should QUALIFY for your programs?
     

Share This Page