Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
What happened to a couple days ago BTW when Alex V was in here saying he had first hand sources that EU deliveries for Q4 were really good but couldn't say why he knew?
The two top countries are not yet in, but the rest of the countries is practically at the same level of the record of all European countries in Q1. We’re probably going to end up beating the previous record of Q1 by around 25%.
 
The only conditions are that:
- the lease term needs to be short enough not to be an effective sale
- it can't be set up so the customer has a large incentive to buy the vehicle at the end of the lease term.

So, all Tesla should need to do is have a typical lease deal.

  • The overall point is it can't be a purchase dressed as a lease.
  • The FAQ provides examples, it is not an exhaustive list
  • The post referenced an excessively short term with pricing that aligns with a purchase (lease would not include the driven off the lot depreciation hit)

Q6. What factors are used to determine if a transaction is a "lease" for tax purposes? (added December 29, 2022)​


A6. Based on longstanding tax principles, the determination whether a transaction constitutes a sale or a lease of a vehicle for tax purposes is a question of fact. Features of a vehicle lease agreement that would make it more likely to be recharacterized as a sale of the vehicle for tax purposes include, but are not limited to:


  • A lease term that covers more than 80% to 90% of the economic useful life of the vehicle
  • A bargain purchase option at the end of the lease term (that is, the ability to purchase the vehicle at less than its fair market value at the end of the term) or other terms/provisions in the lease that economically compel the lessee to acquire the vehicle at the end of the lease term
  • Terms that result in the lessor transferring ownership risk to the lessee, for example, a terminal rental adjustment clause (TRAC) provision that requires the lessee to pay the difference between the actual and expected value of the vehicle at the end of the lease.
 
The only conditions are that:
- the lease term needs to be short enough not to be an effective sale
- it can't be set up so the customer has a large incentive to buy the vehicle at the end of the lease term.

So, all Tesla should need to do is have a typical lease deal.
But, to allow Tesla to sell you the car for only $25000 after only 2 years, wouldn't the monthly payments be ridiculously high? I have never leased, so I have no idea what the buyout price is like, but to pay off $40,000 of a $65,000 car in only 2 years is $20,000/year, not including interest. Is that doable?
 
Concerning any unfair advantage that the incumbents now have due to the IRA, remember that a week ago, every competitor to Tesla Automotive other than GM, already had a $7,500 advantage the past 2 years. Are we really concerned that now we add GM to the opposing team? Granted, a few will have expired their allotment soon but did Tesla really struggle to compete here in the US against the seasoned veterans?
 
What a bizarre way of putting it by Gary. Every business, in every industry, in every market, in every country in the world has to manage a fluctuating demand curve. It is an inevitable part of doing business and Tesla is, and always has been managing it just fine. When demand was through the roof and waiting lists stretched into the future, they jacked up prices and when demand softens they have managed that by offering some discounts. You know, like succesful businesses do. This is not some step-change, it is simply a fact of doing business through different cycles of the business environment. Tesla is no different to other companies in this regard and they have already proved that they get it.

As @NicoV pointed out, pan out a bit, and the demand curve is only pointing one way: upwards. The headwinds in the current environment are severe and Tesla has proved it is adept at managing them, viz 40% YOY growth.

So no Gary, Tesla doesn't need a new set of skills, it is already set up to manage a wide range of business risks
 
No action was taken was done to specifically exclude the 5 seat Y. Its exclusion is a default state of being.

The $80k MSRP is for SUV, vans, and pickup trucks which are all versions of 'light truck'.
The Federal Law, since 2009, has allowed a vehicle with minimal ground clearance to qualify as a 'light truck' if it has 3 rows of seats where 2 rows fold flat for cargo (only reason a 7 seat Y qualifies). 49 CFR § 523.5 - Non-passenger automobile.
This section of the law is under NHTSA section.
The EPA definitions also rely on this regulation (light ttuck vs passenger vehicle). However, the EPA Administrator can modify vehicle classifications. Further, the EPA allows grouping cars by model line which apparently allows the latitude to group all Y under the SUV banner.

Treasury could update guidance to expand the groupings. If they do, that opens them to further criticism since some person/ group becomes the sole judge of MSRP cutoff.
Corrupt anti Tesla politicians went back in time and established those regulations.