RobStark
Well-Known Member
Subsidizing caviar and champagne will not lead to economies of scale and technology innovation to make champagne and caviar substantially cheaper in the near future.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
What happens to the federal tax credit once Tesla reaches 200,000 cars
- Thread starter mrjedistud
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model S
Subsidizing caviar and champagne will not lead to economies of scale and technology innovation to make champagne and caviar substantially cheaper in the near future.
That would only be true if you think that those industries have maximized all potential improvements based on technology, distribution improvements, and scale.
So, no.
As for that quote from Elon, is there actually a source for that? The car was being adopted long before Ford came around, and there was high demand, it was the mass production methods that had it take off for the mass market.
If there were a substantial number of people who didn't want cars, the industry never would have taken off.
I am sure that there were some people who were negative about the ideas of cars, but it is a bit silly to think that it was prevailing wisdom given how much it did take off.
Besides, how is giving Jayden Smith and DeCaprio $7500 off their taxes when they buy a Tesla making things cheaper in the long term?
Last edited:
Thanks. Here is the updated version:
| Full Credit Amount | 50% of Full Amount | 25% of Full Amount | No Credit | |||
| $7500 USD | $3750 USD | $1875 USD | ||||
| Apr May Jun | Jul Aug Sep | Oct Nov Dec | Jan Feb Mar | Apr May Jun | Jul Aug Sep | Oct Nov Dec |
| 2018 | 2019 |
Summary:
Full federal tax credits for Tesla will continue until the end of:
◘ Sep 2018 (80% likely)
◘ Dec 2018 (20% likely)
◘ Mar 2019 (0% likely)
Details:
| Roadster | Model S & Model X | Model 3 | S+X+3 Global | S+3+X Growth | USA Total | Running total | |||||
| 2010-12 | 1500 | USA | USA / S+X Global | S+X Global | USA | USA / M3 Global | M3 Global | Yearly numbers | Yearly growth | 1500 | 1500 |
| Q3 2012 | 250 | 100.00% | 250 | 2,650 | 250 | 1750 | |||||
| Q4 2012 | 2,305 | 96.04% | 2,400 | 2,305 | 4055 | ||||||
| Q1 2013 | 4,674 | 95.17% | 4,911 | 22,477 | 4,674 | 8729 | |||||
| Q2 2013 | 4,936 | 95.62% | 5,162 | 4,936 | 13665 | ||||||
| Q3 2013 | 4,126 | 74.85% | 5,512 | 4,126 | 17791 | ||||||
| Q4 2013 | 4,089 | 59.33% | 6,892 | 4,089 | 21880 | ||||||
| Q1 2014 | 3,226 | 49.96% | 6,457 | 31,655 | 40.83% | 3,226 | 25106 | ||||
| Q2 2014 | 4,042 | 53.33% | 7,579 | 4,042 | 29148 | ||||||
| Q3 2014 | 4,154 | 53.36% | 7,785 | 4,154 | 33302 | ||||||
| Q4 2014 | 5,267 | 53.56% | 9,834 | 5,267 | 38569 | ||||||
| Q1 2015 | 5,005 | 49.83% | 10,045 | 50,580 | 59.79% | 5,005 | 43574 | ||||
| Q2 2015 | 5,748 | 49.84% | 11,532 | 5,748 | 49322 | ||||||
| Q3 2015 | 5,790 | 49.90% | 11,603 | 5,790 | 55112 | ||||||
| Q4 2015 | 8,659 | 49.76% | 17,400 | 8,659 | 63771 | ||||||
| Q1 2016 | 9,634 | 47.11% | 20,450 | 81,800 | 61.72% | 9,634 | 73405 | ||||
| Q2 2016 | 9,634 | 47.11% | 20,450 | 9,634 | 83039 | ||||||
| Q3 2016 | 9,634 | 47.11% | 20,450 | 9,634 | 92673 | ||||||
| Q4 2016 | 9,634 | 47.11% | 20,450 | 9,634 | 102307 | ||||||
| Q1 2017 | 14,737 | 44.39% | 33,200 | 133,050 | 62.65% | 14,737 | 117044 | ||||
| Q2 2017 | 14,737 | 44.39% | 33,200 | 14,737 | 131781 | ||||||
| Q3 2017 | 14,737 | 44.39% | 33,200 | 14,737 | 146518 | ||||||
| Q4 2017 | 14,737 | 44.39% | 33,200 | 250 | 100.00% | 250 | 14,987 | 161505 | |||
| Q1 2018 | 18,374 | 41.76% | 44,000 | 4,000 | 80.00% | 5,000 | 222,300 | 67.08% | 22,374 | 183879 | |
| Q2 2018 | 18,374 | 41.76% | 44,000 | 5,600 | 70.00% | 8,000 | 23,974 | 207853 | |||
| Q3 2018 | 18,374 | 41.76% | 44,000 | 7,680 | 60.00% | 12,800 | 26,054 | 233907 | |||
| Q4 2018 | 18,374 | 41.76% | 44,000 | 50.00% | 20,500 | 18,374 | 252281 | ||||
| Model 3 cars receiving full credits: | 17,530 |
Color codes:
| Yellow = Estimate |
| Green = Numbers published by Tesla. |
| Blue = Calculation based on estimates |
| Purple = Year on Year Tesla production increase |
Last edited:
RobStark
Well-Known Member
So, yes. Especially Champagne. Which is restricted to specific plots of French land and French specified production procedures.
I am not your research assistant. Google is your friend.
$7500 off encourages rich folks to skip premium priced ICEv for Tesla vehicles.
Profits from cars sold to Jayden Smith, DeCaprio, and all rich folks are in part paying for the R&D and tooling for Model 3.
And they demonstrate a viable technology to Wall Street. This allows Tesla to raise billions on Wall Street to complete funding for Model 3.
Google Tesla's Master Plan.
So the Federal tax credit will start to phase out by end of 2018. Is there current legislation in the works to extend this? If not, is there a petition to extend? I'd like to sign up for that.
I know the Solar/Renewable Energy tax credit was extended by Congress to 2020 with the help of lobbying from the Solar panel industry. So it's doable, we just need to act!
I know the Solar/Renewable Energy tax credit was extended by Congress to 2020 with the help of lobbying from the Solar panel industry. So it's doable, we just need to act!
whitex
Well-Known Member
If the rebate was only for Smith and DeCaprio, you'd have a point. But, it's not, so your argument doesn't apply. Also, creating an exemption from the rebate would cost more than the rebates claimed by the likes of DeCaprio.
As for who is considered "rich", that definition varies by person. Most people think others who make ~2x what they do, are rich. So, for those of you making $40K per year, you are rich to the guy making minimum wage - you got lucky in life so you need to share your win-fall, not be asking for any tax breaks! [/sarcasm]
Half Dollar Bill
Traveller, teacher, poet, accountant, innkeeper
Troy:
Curious more than anything.
Why do you insist on 4Q15 being around 40% and carrying that into the following years? If it was 50% in the US for 2015 on average, seems like that's a big jump in foreign demand to come down to 40% for 2016/17. What is your assumption?
Thanks
Curious more than anything.
Why do you insist on 4Q15 being around 40% and carrying that into the following years? If it was 50% in the US for 2015 on average, seems like that's a big jump in foreign demand to come down to 40% for 2016/17. What is your assumption?
Thanks
RobStark as already said part of what I'd say, but it also has to do with developing the technology. Whenever the world has some kind of new technology, there comes a stage where it needs to be in the hands of the public to work out the final bugs as well as develop better mass production techniques. No matter how you slice it, it was going to be expensive to develop affordable electric cars for the masses. ICE are a very well established technology with a support network optimized for them. Electric cars need a very different support chain as well as being a different technology under the hood.
The early EVs were inevitably going to either be undesirable cars with too many compromises or very expensive cars. Most car makers went with the former while Tesla went with the latter. Several years ago Elon Musk laid out the Tesla plan: build a car that proved EVs could be fun and have decent range (the Roadster), then make a more affordable car that was more practical (the Model S and X) and finally make a car that can be mass produced that is as good or better than an ICE and is affordable. Tesla has stuck to this plan and the Model 3 is the final step.
The Model S and X were never going to be mainstream cars because of their price. The only people who were ever going to be able to buy one were the rich or those with enough disposable income to stretch their budgets that far. At minimum you're looking at 1%s or top 10%s with small household budgets. To learn the lessons needed to be able to make the next step to the affordable car, Tesla depends on those tax credits to the wealthy to sell enough cars so they can learn the lessons needed to make the Model 3 as well as make enough money to afford the Model 3 development.
If the government instead had just given grants to car companies to develop electric cars, I doubt Tesla would have gotten as much of the pie as they have and instead all car companies would have taken the money and cranked out more heavily compromised EVs with poor range and not very popular outside the extreme eco crowd. It's other incentives that sell Leafs and Volts. I think there was a survey done of California EV buyers and a large percentage bought one to get the HOV lane sticker which allows them to drive alone in the HOV lane on the freeway. Among non-Tesla buyers, most of the rest were eco car buyers or people trying to avoid the high price of gas, which is not much of a reason these days.
I'm not a big fan of trickle down economics because it depends on those benefiting passing on a fair share of those benefits, which usually isn't the case. In this case, the rich getting the tax breaks aren't passing on their benefit, but Tesla, who also gains through increased car sales, is passing on this benefit by making a more affordable car that the rest of the world can buy. So this is a rare case where trickle down economics actually did work.
The incentive is working some some degree with other car makers. GM is introducing the Bolt next year, which is behind Tesla in many ways, but it is ahead of anything else the mainstream car makers have built thus far. There have been a number of announcements of next generation EVs from various car makers, some may make it to production.
Cars are a lot more complex technology than solar panels. Giving incentives for those is pretty easy to see, give a home owner a tax break and more people will put them on their houses. It's more difficult to see the benefits for cars, but they are there. A lot of things in the car industry have to change to support EVs both on the consumer end as well as in the design and construction. The Tesla skateboard battery pack is beginning to be adopted by other car makers because it's a brilliant redesign to take advantage of the new fuel type. Nobody has yet adopted Tesla's motor placement though, which I can't quite figure out why. It may be due to hidebound car execs who want to see an engine when they open the hood.
Got it! Looks like you aren't even your own research assistant if you are just believing marketing hype. LOL.
So your position is that these multimillionaires wouldn't have bought the cars without that $7500. Well, okay then. That's funny.
There is a big difference between demonstrating a viable technology and a viable business.
There has been no demonstration that what has been developed so far can scale to 500,000 units a year.
I get it though. Marketing hype and tax payer money is needed to keep feeding their cash needs. Webvan had the same needs.
whitex
Well-Known Member
Actually, Tesla keeps creating incentives to upgrade, hence those "rich" buy newer Tesla's creating an affordable used EV market, putting more EV's on the roads. The lowest priced Model S I heard of was $37K for Model S with well over 100K miles on it, but still under the 8 year warranty. Of course you could argue that people who pay $37K for a used car also fall into the "rich" category as they could have gotten a brand new ICE for less than $20K. So ok, they create an affordable EV market for the "less rich", but still putting more EV's on the roads, plus creating pressure on other car manufacturers to produce better EV's (if your choice is a brand new Vols vs. CPO Model S, that Bold better do close to 200miles in range).
Well, Tesla should have the Model 3 made and sold by "Model 3 Motors," a subsidiary of Tesla Motors. Wouldn't that not "reset" the clock? :wink:
The incentive applies to the top level car company. Buick and Chevy don't have 200,000 levels each, it's 200,000 for all of GM. Tesla would have to create a separate company that doesn't report in any way to Tesla Motors to get away with that and it would probably make it difficult to build the Model 3 in the Fremont plant, as well as losing the brand recognition Tesla has now.
Elon Musk is actually against the incentive. He believes that EVs should be incentivized differently. I believe the method he has touted the most is to tax fossil fuels to reflect the actual damage they do. CO2 aside, fossil fuel use does have a big impact on the world: production, transportation, and refining leads to accidents that pollute the environment, cause material damage, and even kill people. Additionally the hydrocarbons in the exhaust contribute to a number of diseases and contribute to bad air quality. Air quality in China is among the worst in the world due to coal burning, but the staggering growth in car sales is contributing too.
freeewilly
Member
Yes, except for Teslas, the sale price for used EVs is very low. I think you can get a couple of year old Leaf in good condition for less than $15K.
That's because Nissan Leafs still have the credit in effect. The price of a new Leaf will effectively go up $7,500 once Nissan sells 200k EVs in the US. Same goes for the Model S and X. The resale value will increase for cars that no longer receive the rebate because the alternative is to buy a much higher priced one new (unless Congress renews the credit or the manufacturer lowers the price of the new vehicle $7,500).
It was a shot in the balls for the economy until the entire transport system is not fully electrified. The cargo trucks are going to be the last vehicles that can get green, and it's still decades away. If you punish the freight companies with high taxes on diesel, they have to increase their prices which would pass-through to all segments of the economy. Basically all consumer goods (food, electronics, etc.) and even services would get more expensive. The deeper they are in the production chain the more expensive they would get. Even Tesla would get the raw materials and assembled parts for higher price.
Are you guys sure that the 200,000 limit is applied to US sales only and not worldwide sales?
The Nissan Leaf reached worldwide sales of 200,000 cars two months ago (US sales cumulative total is only 89,000) (Nissan Leaf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). If you look at the Nissan US website, the $7500 federal credit is not mentioned anywhere in the Nissan Leaf page. The federal credit used to be next to the MSRP price before.
The Nissan Leaf reached worldwide sales of 200,000 cars two months ago (US sales cumulative total is only 89,000) (Nissan Leaf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). If you look at the Nissan US website, the $7500 federal credit is not mentioned anywhere in the Nissan Leaf page. The federal credit used to be next to the MSRP price before.
I agree it would put an extreme burden on the economy until options have wide enough availability.
- - - Updated - - -
It does only apply to US sales, I don't know why Nissan removed it from their website.
http://insideevs.com/top-15-faqs-income-tax-credit-plug-vehicles/
Reviving this thread to get opinions on when Tesla is expected to hit the 200,000 figure in US sales. Before the end of this year, perhaps? The speed of the Model 3 ramp up is the big unknown variable in my calculations. During the Q1 2017 earnings call a few days ago, Elon said his target if to be building 5,000 Model 3/week by the end of the year. But the question is, how fast will the ramp be, and even he readily admits that is very hard to forecast accurately.
Similar threads
