Tesla EV Tax Credits coming back?

[mrwug]

I was going to buy the car anyhow and I am in at $50,990 from a May order so I am already in the green with current pricing. Just irritating that one person is holding this up.

Look at it this way: when you put your order on hold, you were basically placing a bet that the bill would pass. Stakes were ~$8K if you win, a longer wait to get the car if you lose. The only real problem is if you see the $8K as a done deal, which it never was.

 

[voxel]

Where are you getting the 600k sold in the US this year?

Anyways, your general point about most of it going to Tesla and them trying to make Tesla ineligible still stands and I agree. They are already trying to give GM/Ford an advantage with the $4,500 and limiting the Sedan MSRP to $55,000 since GM/Ford mainly just make Trucks/SUVs.

Model 3/Y figures:

Tesla Q3 2021 Vehicle Production & Deliveries | Tesla Investor Relations (228K)
Tesla Q2 2021 Vehicle Production & Deliveries | Tesla Investor Relations (204K)
Tesla Q1 2021 Vehicle Production & Deliveries | Tesla Investor Relations (180K)

They may not have sold those all in the US (i.e Canada but Europe has 3s shipped from China) but by end of the year they should be nearing 600K and with Austin they could hit 1M total which means $7.5B alone to Tesla per year. It's basically written as a tax credit for Tesla owners.

 

[cusetownusa]

Model 3/Y figures:

Tesla Q3 2021 Vehicle Production & Deliveries | Tesla Investor Relations (228K)
Tesla Q2 2021 Vehicle Production & Deliveries | Tesla Investor Relations (204K)
Tesla Q1 2021 Vehicle Production & Deliveries | Tesla Investor Relations (180K)

They may not have sold those all in the US (i.e Canada but Europe has 3s shipped from China) but by end of the year they should be nearing 600K and with Austin they could hit 1M total which means $7.5B alone to Tesla per year. It's basically written as a tax credit for Tesla owners.

When you said 600k sold I thought you were implying that 600k have been sold in the US as the credit only applies to those cars. Yes, they have sold 600k through the end of the 3rd quarter but that also includes all the China sales, Europe, and Canada which is more than half the 600k amount.

But I agree, tesla will be ramping up the fastest over the years and would get the bulk of the credit. But that is also because of consumer choice and kind of the point. Can't have the government pick the winners and losers as that is horribly inefficient. Let the consumers decide who makes the best EVs so that Company can invest in building even more of them.

 

[alexgr]

with most of it going to Tesla purchasers (600K sold this year).

United States of America != World

 

[voxel]

When you said 600k sold I thought you were implying that 600k have been sold in the US as the credit only applies to those cars. Yes, they have sold 600k through the end of the 3rd quarter but that also includes all the China sales, Europe, and Canada which is more than half the 600k amount.

But I agree, tesla will be ramping up the fastest over the years and would get the bulk of the credit. But that is also because of consumer choice and kind of the point. Can't have the government pick the winners and losers as that is horribly inefficient. Let the consumers decide who makes the best EVs so that Company can invest in building even more of them.

I argue the government shouldn’t be subsidizing EVs at all. The demand is through the roof. If anything, they should incentivize manufacturers to make cheaper EVs. Instead, with the current credit, they encourage EV makers to pile on features that only wealthier Americans can afford. Every action has consequence and the government is trying to pick winners with the current and future tax credit (i.e union built cars made in the US)

 

[alexgr]

I argue the government shouldn’t be subsidizing EVs at all. The demand is through the roof. If anything, they should incentivize manufacturers to make cheaper EVs. Instead, with the current credit, they encourage EV makers to pile on features that only wealthier Americans can afford. Every action has consequence and the government is trying to pick winners with the current and future tax credit (i.e union built cars made in the US)

Also, the government should stop then subsidizing oil and gas industry, but then the gas price may jump to $8-10/gal and whoever is at the steering wheel in Washington at the moment may not even survive until the next elections.

 

[cusetownusa]

I argue the government shouldn’t be subsidizing EVs at all. The demand is through the roof. If anything, they should incentivize manufacturers to make cheaper EVs. Instead, with the current credit, they encourage EV makers to pile on features that only wealthier Americans can afford. Every action has consequence and the government is trying to pick winners with the current and future tax credit (i.e union built cars made in the US)

I agree that there shouldn't be subsidies but we would have to remove the fossil fuel subsidies as well. As long as the oil industry in subsidized it will continue to encourage ICE vehicles. If the price of gas naturally went up to $9+ a gallon, people would be flocking to EVs.

 

[PNWLeccy]

If it doesn't get passed before the end of the year, there is no point in holding anymore. At that point, it's either totally dead, or not going to go into affect until 2023 IMO. There will be no more urgency for Congress to pass it and it will get dragged out for many more months.

Let's be real, I don't think any one of us is really getting "screwed" here if this doesn't pass. I have an EDD of end of December and you can be sure I'll put it on hold if it looks like it will pass. The scenario I dread is to take delivery only for the credit to go into affect a few weeks or days later. I highly doubt any of us on the waitlist are only buying because of the credit.

At this point, if they just killed the whole thing or said they were pushing it off to next year, it would be a relief for me.

100% agree. Whether it's a decision to pass or not, it would provide clarity that has been lacking and would be a huge relief to me. I already struggle with indecision and dragging this out has made it really difficult to feel good about any decision.

Even though the talks of an EV tax credit earlier in the year caused me to delay ordering at $49k (which I now realize was a mistake since I could've put my order on hold) I still ordered at $53.5k and my trade-in value for my 2018 LR RWD has gone up about ~$6k from the beginning of the year. This has helped close the gap of upgrading which is great.

However, with this EV tax credit bill looming over my head, I can't help but worry about the worse case scenario of taking delivery, narrowly missing an EV tax credit, and then having the trade-in value of my M3 fall because of the announcement. While this is a very specific worse case scenario, it's making me feel like I'm leaving money on the table if I pull the trigger now and risking money if I wait for decision.

At this point, I just want a decision either way so I can feel like I have all the information I need to decide. I know not everyone is so over-analytical about their decisions but dragging out this bill is torturous to me.

 

[voxel]

Also, the government should stop then subsidizing oil and gas industry, but then the gas price may jump to $8-10/gal and whoever is at the steering wheel in Washington at the moment may not even survive until the next elections.

I'm fine with that too. I also dislike the poor quality of interstate highways and love the toll roads (better maintained) in Florida. I'm a big proponent of "pay as you go"

 

[voxel]

I agree that there shouldn't be subsidies but we would have to remove the fossil fuel subsidies as well. As long as the oil industry in subsidized it will continue to encourage ICE vehicles. If the price of gas naturally went up to $9+ a gallon, people would be flocking to EVs.

And we still have tariffs on raw sugar cane. Whatever the government does always has side effects (positive and negative). I don't see the need for EV tax credits because of soaring demand - but I do see a need for EV charging funding (it's a money losing business that needs to be kickstarted while gas stations or malls build out chargers to attract customers).

 

[Roto115]

I ordered a Model Y and it is ready for pickup. Tesla is ok with me pushing it out, it is a performance version which doesn’t have a long turnaround date if ordered today, but they still want me to take it asap. I noted the looming tax credit as one reason for delaying and they told me something I have no been able to validate and I am curious whether any were told the same today- apparently the update was as of this morning.

I was told that the latest revision to the bill is retroactive, and not based on date purchased, but rather on the tax year where he said I could take delivery this week and still get the credit when it passes. And he said that was the latest update they just received this morning.

For reference, this was a MA sales location and I live in NH, picking up car in NJ because of sales tax implications (I can’t pick up in MA). This update from the sales rep doesn’t make sense and I have not see anything like this in the news today. I thought one of the original versions had this retroactive language and it was since struck with the expectation that it will be effective Jan 1 if it passes.

Was anyone told similar by Tesla today? Or has anyone seen this update anywhere today?

I don’t trust it and need to decide whether I take delivery this weekend or wait until January.

Thanks!!

 

[Big Dog]

Also, the government should stop then subsidizing oil and gas industry, but then the gas price may jump to $8-10/gal and whoever is at the steering wheel in Washington at the moment may not even survive until the next elections.

IMO, the government should stop subsidizing ALL industries.

 

[pepperoni]

I argue the government shouldn’t be subsidizing EVs at all. The demand is through the roof. If anything, they should incentivize manufacturers to make cheaper EVs. Instead, with the current credit, they encourage EV makers to pile on features that only wealthier Americans can afford. Every action has consequence and the government is trying to pick winners with the current and future tax credit (i.e union built cars made in the US)

Demand is not through the roof, at least not yet. EV sales accounted for only 2% of total car sales last year. The stated goal of the BBB plan is to get to 50% by 2030, and it does seem likely that government investment will be needed to get us to that figure.

 

[rjpjnk]

I was told that the latest revision to the bill is retroactive, and not based on date purchased, but rather on the tax year where he said I could take delivery this week and still get the credit when it passes. And he said that was the latest update they just received this morning.

That would be great if true, but most guesses I've heard say not retroactive in 2021. Would be a nice surprise though.
Welcome to the forum!

 

[voxel]

Demand is not through the roof, at least not yet. EV sales accounted for only 2% of total car sales last year. The stated goal of the BBB plan is to get to 50% by 2030, and it does seem likely that government investment will be needed to get us to that figure.

That’s because EVs are production constrained. Wait times for EVs are almost a year.

There are 1M cybertruck preorders. So many folks keep on asking me about it. 150K plus Lightning orders too. Folks in the US want trucks and large SUVs not small SUVs like a Model Y. Rivian has 50K orders too ($1000 deposit). RAV4 Prime is so insanely popular they are marking them up $10K. They could easily sell 500K a year IMO (it’s 300hp small SUV that goes 0-60 in 5.5 seconds). This tax credit won’t help manufacturers speed up production…

The Model 3 was the best selling vehicle in Europe last month. Including all ICE cars.

Also 50% of all cars in 2030 won’t work with the EV charging infrastructure we have. Owners will curse EVs and go back to ICE cars. I see the foaming mouths and angry owners on ID.4 and Mach-E forums.

More importantly we need to get away from lithium liquid electrolyte batteries (especially NMC/NCA based ones). They degrade (dendrite problem) and become explosive fireballs due to thermal runaways. Solid state batteries are still 4-5 years away and until then we will have another Bolt/Kona like recall I suspect.

 

[jsmay311]

I was told that the latest revision to the bill is retroactive, and not based on date purchased, but rather on the tax year where he said I could take delivery this week and still get the credit when it passes. And he said that was the latest update they just received this morning.

For reference, this was a MA sales location and I live in NH, picking up car in NJ because of sales tax implications (I can’t pick up in MA). This update from the sales rep doesn’t make sense and I have not see anything like this in the news today. I thought one of the original versions had this retroactive language and it was since struck with the expectation that it will be effective Jan 1 if it passes.

Was anyone told similar by Tesla today? Or has anyone seen this update anywhere today?

As I understand it, the House bill’s language had it retroactive and the Senate’s language had it effective 1/1/22, and when the White House put out its BBB draft text a few weeks ago, it aligned with the Senate language.

Of course, everything is still in flux and neither side has passed anything concrete yet. But since (A) Manchin is driving the bus, it’s not unreasonable to assume that the language in the Senate bill will win the day, and (B) the White House put out text aligning with the Senate language, I’m pretty much discounting anything in the House bill that conflicts with the Senate bill.

But since the House bill is what’s getting worked on more actively in recent days, I could see why someone could mistakenly think that that’s *the* bill.

 

[Corndart]

As I understand it, the House bill’s language had it retroactive and the Senate’s language had it effective 1/1/22, and when the White House put out its BBB draft text a few weeks ago, it aligned with the Senate language.

Of course, everything is still in flux and neither side has passed anything concrete yet. But since (A) Manchin is driving the bus, it’s not unreasonable to assume that the language in the Senate bill will win the day, and (B) the White House put out text aligning with the Senate language, I’m pretty much discounting anything in the House bill that conflicts with the Senate bill.

But since the House bill is what’s getting worked on more actively in recent days, I could see why someone could mistakenly think that that’s *the* bill.

Sounds about right to me as well.

If the only Manchin objection is a union labor component, it seems likely we'll see at least the $7500-8000 incentive, assuming other elements of the overall package don't jam up ratification of that overall package.

CBO has stated they'll get numbers in by Friday EoD so that is the next logical click stop in this process. Until then, I wouldn't expect much in the way of news.

In terms of relying on any SA / Tesla interpretation, not sure why anyone would assume them to be an authoritative source of information. Pure conjecture / speculation, just like we're doing here.

 

[Fluffhead]

As I understand it, the House bill’s language had it retroactive and the Senate’s language had it effective 1/1/22, and when the White House put out its BBB draft text a few weeks ago, it aligned with the Senate language.

Of course, everything is still in flux and neither side has passed anything concrete yet. But since (A) Manchin is driving the bus, it’s not unreasonable to assume that the language in the Senate bill will win the day, and (B) the White House put out text aligning with the Senate language, I’m pretty much discounting anything in the House bill that conflicts with the Senate bill.

But since the House bill is what’s getting worked on more actively in recent days, I could see why someone could mistakenly think that that’s *the* bill.

The house bill no longer has it as retroactive. The language is paraphrased as "the later of 1/1/2022 or date the bill is signed." There is absolutely no way it will be a retroactive credit. They are trying to reduce the size of the bill so it makes no sense to make it retroactive.

 

[mjatx]

I just found an article discussing Manchin's issues with the union portion and there is a quote from the House Ways and Means Chairman that is interesting.

Neal said he’d consider a potential compromise that would allow the bonus credit for any electric vehicles assembled in the U.S., not just those subject to collective bargaining agreements. “I’d be open to something along those lines, yeah,” he said.

Full article here if interested in any more context.

 

[Spidey616]

As I understand it, the House bill’s language had it retroactive and the Senate’s language had it effective 1/1/22, and when the White House put out its BBB draft text a few weeks ago, it aligned with the Senate language.

Of course, everything is still in flux and neither side has passed anything concrete yet. But since (A) Manchin is driving the bus, it’s not unreasonable to assume that the language in the Senate bill will win the day, and (B) the White House put out text aligning with the Senate language, I’m pretty much discounting anything in the House bill that conflicts with the Senate bill.

But since the House bill is what’s getting worked on more actively in recent days, I could see why someone could mistakenly think that that’s *the* bill.

You have them flip flopped. Senate language was retroactive originally and House Ways and Means was effective 2022. The language most recently adopted closely follows what was in the House Ways and Means version.

Retroactive hasn’t been on the table in months which makes all the timing of delivery a pain.