-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
New "Fiscal Cliff" bill seems to keep EV tax credit
- Thread starter aviators99
- Start date
steve841
Active Member
If it isn't mentioned it will continue, AFAIK. The bill only expires, per manufacturer, after they produce 200,000 cars. So no mention is a 'continuation'. It would have to be specifically mentioned for it to end.
This is my understanding of the way the credit was written. I could be wrong.
Here is the text:
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/01/01/american.taxpayer.relief.act.pdf?hpt=hp_t1
It definitely talks about 2-3 wheeled vehicles, but doesn't mention 4. If it's true that it automatically extends, then it will extend.
- - - Updated - - -
Btw, VFX's quote is not inconsistent with it not being extended for 4-wheeled vehicles.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/01/01/american.taxpayer.relief.act.pdf?hpt=hp_t1
It definitely talks about 2-3 wheeled vehicles, but doesn't mention 4. If it's true that it automatically extends, then it will extend.
- - - Updated - - -
Btw, VFX's quote is not inconsistent with it not being extended for 4-wheeled vehicles.
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
Indeed - the $7,500 federal tax credit for 4-wheeled plug-in vehicles was never in danger as it was written to expire on volume rather than time. (Well, somebody could have explicitly canceled it, but nobody ever tried, to my knowledge).
It does look like we might get the EVSE and 2-3 wheel credits back. That would be nice, as they expired at the end of 2011 just as equipment was arriving. Plug In America has been following this very closely, and we helped make sure that the EV incentives were part of the extenders bill; but there hasn't been a lot we could do to make sure the extenders bill passed as anything we said would have been lost in the fiscal cliff noise. (As Jay Friedland likes to say, we are the bacteria in the gut of the flea on the tail that is wagging the dog).
It does look like we might get the EVSE and 2-3 wheel credits back. That would be nice, as they expired at the end of 2011 just as equipment was arriving. Plug In America has been following this very closely, and we helped make sure that the EV incentives were part of the extenders bill; but there hasn't been a lot we could do to make sure the extenders bill passed as anything we said would have been lost in the fiscal cliff noise. (As Jay Friedland likes to say, we are the bacteria in the gut of the flea on the tail that is wagging the dog).
Last edited:
That's my understanding, too. The tax credit stays unless congress undoes it. Here's the law from 2009 establishing the tax credit (Page 212, Section 1141):
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1enr.pdf
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1enr.pdf
Beavis
Model S Signature 991
It doesn't automatically expire in 2013. The concern with the credit was twofold. First, that if the Republicans won, the credit would be a casualty given that Romney mentioned Tesla and Fisker in the debates and on the campaign trail. Second, some owners were counting on getting it in 2012 rather than 2013 and paid estimated payments or pegged their withholding accordingly.
I still don't get where people were finding this linkage. The objection to Tesla, Fisker, Solyndra, etc. was in government investment in individual companies (rather than venture capitalists). Buyer incentives broadly for EVs is a different thing entirely. At least as I understand it.
Similar to: home mortgage tax deduction vs. giving a loan to an individual home construction company.
You are trying to use logic to explain things the Congress does. Stop it. It doesn't apply.
The linkage was really that EV credits are considered "Obama policies" (even though they really aren't). So, all Republicans had to be against it since they opposed anything Obama-related. As an exmaple, in the heat of the campaign, I rec'd a letter from my GOP Congressman decrying the EV tax credit as a waste of taxpayer money. This letter was really a piece of work simultaneously implying the deficit was significantly increased by the EV credit and the EV's were a failed proposition. This statement can only be wrong because the credit only is paid when a sale occurs. So, if the sales were minimal as the letter claimed, then there would be no impact to the deficit since the money wouldnt be paid. A complete joke of a letter.
Anyways, many hoped that it would be better once the election passed. Jury is still out on that.
The EV credit for cars would need to be specifically repealed/ended. Reinstating (and backdating to 2012) the EVSE credit is a welcome addition as well. So, anyone who paid for the HWPC (or any other charging solution) can claim up to 30% of the costs of it and the install. Hmm, maybe I will opt for it then.
I have no problem expecting politicians to follow illogic. What I found surprising and concerning was TMC forum members doing so.
Beavis
Model S Signature 991
I don't think it's illogical to believe that the right wanted to do away with renewable energy subsidies. Based on campaign trail comments about eliminating subsidies, deductions and credits as a means to pay for reducing rates and promote simplification, I think it is more illogical to think that they would support the EV credit.
Yes, it should be eligible as well, assuming it is passed.
Edit: Actually, let me backtrack. I can't say for certain if installation costs (incl. 14-50) is eligible for the federal one. I know some states' do/have allowed install costs. But not sure about the federal one. Sorry for confusion!
Edit: Actually, let me backtrack. I can't say for certain if installation costs (incl. 14-50) is eligible for the federal one. I know some states' do/have allowed install costs. But not sure about the federal one. Sorry for confusion!
Last edited:
EarlyAdopter
Active Member
I am in no way a tax lawyer, but the text of the credit just says property "for the recharging of motor vehicles propelled by electricity, but only if the property is located at the point where the motor vehicles are recharged." I don't see why a NEMA 14-50 socket wouldn't qualify as long as it was installed for the purpose of recharging a motor vehicle.
The US tax credit instructions (IRS form 8911) contain the following qualifications:
The amount of credit is the smaller of $1,000 or 30% of the cost. This would make it seem like a NEMA 14-50 installation is qualified.
States vary. Illinois, for example, requires it to be a UL-listed J1772 EVSE. The Tesla HPWC and its installation do not qualify.
