[george]

Originally Posted by george

My concern is the extinction of my right to drive a car that has an infrastructure in place to keep me and others safe. As others have pointed out, our tax dollars shouldn’t be spent to prop up a technology that is not reliable enough for us as a society on a whole. That includes difficult decisions regarding charging these vehicles in inclement weather. I’m not against the technology when it is safe, efficient, affordable and reliable. No matter how people spin this, this technology is being subsidized by the government and the majority of the public can’t afford it. It’s not right that elite get $7500 subsidies for these EVs costing 35k at a minimum, when I know people that can’t even afford a used ICE car that costs $7500. It’s wrong for our government to grease the skids rather than let the market dictate what is best. Germany is already balking. They are revising the use of “biofuels” such as HVO100 (hydrated vegetable oil) for their diesel vehicles. Diesel vehicles in Germany are abundant and they are very reliable. HVO has been shown to be very environmentally friendly and decreases emissions by 95-100 percent with today’s technology. Diesel is actually cheaper per liter than gasoline in Europe. There is also development in biofuels for ICE vehicles. The Germans are saying this is the bridge until alternative EVs become more affordable, economical and reliable.

Here’s a nice compromise. It’s our diesel in Germany with 650Nm torque that gets 50 mpg (600 miles on a tank of gas) running on biodiesel.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by george

My concern is the extinction of my right to drive a car that has an infrastructure in place to keep me and others safe. As others have pointed out, our tax dollars shouldn’t be spent to prop up a technology that is not reliable enough for us as a society on a whole. That includes difficult decisions regarding charging these vehicles in inclement weather. I’m not against the technology when it is safe, efficient, affordable and reliable. No matter how people spin this, this technology is being subsidized by the government and the majority of the public can’t afford it. It’s not right that elite get $7500 subsidies for these EVs costing 35k at a minimum, when I know people that can’t even afford a used ICE car that costs $7500. It’s wrong for our government to grease the skids rather than let the market dictate what is best. Germany is already balking. They are revising the use of “biofuels” such as HVO100 (hydrated vegetable oil) for their diesel vehicles. Diesel vehicles in Germany are abundant and they are very reliable. HVO has been shown to be very environmentally friendly and decreases emissions by 95-100 percent with today’s technology. Diesel is actually cheaper per liter than gasoline in Europe. There is also development in biofuels for ICE vehicles. The Germans are saying this is the bridge until alternative EVs become more affordable, economical and reliable.

What income level do you consider people elite?

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

What income level do you consider people elite?

Government subsidies for EVs have been in place since 2010, and for a long time all one could buy were expensive Tesla models or sad jokes like the Nissan Leaf. Even now, the latest revisions of this law exclude cheaper EVs. Although I don't want to speak for him, I think anyone who was ever able to afford a Tesla Model S is part of "the elite" George referred to.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Government subsidies for EVs have been in place since 2010, and for a long time all one could buy were expensive Tesla models or sad jokes like the Nissan Leaf. Even now, the latest revisions of this law exclude cheaper EVs. Although I don't want to speak for him, I think anyone who was ever able to afford a Tesla Model S is part of "the elite" George referred to.

Good news: Those that are likely able to afford the Model S in the newest version of the incentives when Tesla was eligible again last year are likely in the income bracket that don't qualify for the credit. Tesla became ineligible for the credit around 2019 off hand memory because they hit the sales cap in the older version.

Also Model S doesn't qualify either even if someone wanted to stretch their finances to get one. Model S is too expensive.

But there is some merit to the criticism. It's a joke that as long as it is a truck or SUV, the cap on price of the vehicle to get the credit is $80K. Cars are capped to $55K. It was such a joke that for awhile the Model Y LR was classified as a car so before Tesla cut their prices to get under the cap, the LR didn't qualify. But the Model Y Performance was classified as a SUV so it did get the credit.

IMHO, the cap should be $55K-$60K. SUV, car, truck, etc doesn't matter. You could convince me to make the cap be $50K. But yeah $80K cap for SUV's and trucks is a joke.

EDIT: Went to look at the X, the dual motor model qualifies by being under the $80K cap by $10. But hope you like the stock model as changing paint color, interior, seat configuration, etc pushes it beyond the cap.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

I read an article this morning that described the 'elite' as people with graduate degrees and household incomes in excess of $150,000 a year. I'm not sure I agree with that though. The income seems a bit low for elite and I'm not sure about the degree requirement either.

Yeah $150K is upper middle class, hardly elite.

But hey it's the direction society is moving in trying to get us to hate each other, divide us, etc.

But can't go much further than that before going too far into politics.

[arpad_m]

Well, it definitely depends on what one views as "elite". $150K a year represents ~20% of the total US population, whether or not it's elite is in the eye of the beholder.

It may certainly look so to the bottom 80%, while those in the top 20 percent are easily convinced that the "elite" is the 1% or 0.1% with multi-million or even billion dollar incomes.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Well, it definitely depends on what one views as "elite". $150K a year represents ~20% of the total US population, whether or not it's elite is in the eye of the beholder.

It may certainly look so to the bottom 80%, while those in the top 20 percent are easily convinced that the "elite" is the 1% or 0.1% with multi-million or even billion dollar incomes.

Hence me saying it's being used to further divide us. Both sides of the political spectrum hate the, "elite". But both sides are trying to use different metrics to define what the elite are in order to exploit that hatred/dislike.

$150K is well off. It's not wealthy, not rich, etc. Depending on where they live, that may be just enough to be able to afford a decent house.

And as a single filer, $150K is also the cap to where you don't qualify for the credit. Even if it did, at $150K a year, I wouldn't even think about buying a $70K-$90K car. Then again...... Did see a person asking about financing a C8 Z06 when they made $90K. So the world is upside down in my perspective in terms of income and affording these high priced vehicles......

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

Good news: Those that are likely able to afford the Model S in the newest version of the incentives when Tesla was eligible again last year are likely in the income bracket that don't qualify for the credit. Tesla became ineligible for the credit around 2019 off hand memory because they hit the sales cap in the older version.

Also Model S doesn't qualify either even if someone wanted to stretch their finances to get one. Model S is too expensive.

But there is some merit to the criticism. It's a joke that as long as it is a truck or SUV, the cap on price of the vehicle to get the credit is $80K. Cars are capped to $55K. It was such a joke that for awhile the Model Y LR SR was classified as a car so before Tesla cut their prices to get under the cap, the LR SR didn't qualify. But the Model Y Performance was classified as a SUV so it did get the credit.

IMHO, the cap should be $55K-$60K. SUV, car, truck, etc doesn't matter. You could convince me to make the cap be $50K. But yeah $80K cap for SUV's and trucks is a joke.

EDIT: Went to look at the X, the dual motor model qualifies by being under the $80K cap by $10. But hope you like the stock model as changing paint color, interior, seat configuration, etc pushes it beyond the cap.

Fun fact on that classification. It goes back to the Plymouth PT Cruiser and the Chevrolet HHR. Those cars, ironically designed by the same person, were classified as trucks for the EPA CAFE calculations. They had tailgates instead of trunks and they had low load floors so they technically met the simplified classification of SUV (truck). So did every small crossover vehicle. And that is why there are so many of them. Automakers could balance out their CAFE by putting small utilities in the Truck CAFE fleet to bring up the average.

So the EPA (or was it NHTSA?) changed the requirements for Truck to add a ground clearance requirement and/or AWD. The Model Y SR has one motor (no AWD) and low ground clearance so it didn’t qualify as an SUV on either count.

There is another interesting swing to the IRA incentive qualifications, at least for Tesla. In 2024, the %requirements for “friendly” sourcing of battery minerals and components shifts upward. The base Model 3 with LFP batteries does not qualify for one penny. The Model 3 Long Range is sort of on the fence, but with Tesla’s current sourcing pattern it does not qualify. The Model 3 Performance qualifies. So, with their pricing structure, for those whose household income allows them to qualify for the incentive, the Model 3 Performance becomes the most affordable vehicle.

[Nataphen]

There are good arguments against the way that some things are being done with a technology that’s still practically in its infancy, but I don’t understand the arguments against subsidies for it. Fossil fuels are the most heavily subsidized industry in the US and have been for a long time. It’s the main reason that the price of gas hasn’t been ~$10 per gallon on average for years now. Oil has had many years of government benefits and infrastructure building to get where it is now, so EVs are absolutely going to need some help to hope to compete with something that established.

The entry level Tesla Model 3 and Model Y are cheaper than the average price of a new car or crossover, especially if they qualify for the tax credit which is redeemed at the time of purchase as of 2024. It’s like putting $7500 cash down without any out of pocket costs. They’re not prohibitively expensive for anyone who’s in the market for a new vehicle. You don’t have to be “elite” to reasonably afford a new $35K-$40K car. There are MSRP and income cutoffs for the credit, so it’s currently setup for non-wealthy buyers to get the direct benefits.

I don’t disagree that the infrastructure and general charging reliability aren’t on the level of ICE vehicles for most cases yet, but I think they will close the gap quickly over the next few years. Look how far it’s already come in the last decade. That was also almost exclusively accomplished by one company and their charging network, which is now being opened to other brands for use. It’s weird to me that so many arguments seem to leave out the charging at home aspect as well. You can’t fill up from a gas pump in your garage while you sleep. Outside of a power outage, which is rare in most cases, you’re just not going to have to think about it in typical day-to-day use. Most households would be fine having an EV for their primary runabout. Current shortcomings are lack of flexibility on roadtrips, towing, and living in apartments or extreme environments where you don’t have reliable home charging available. Outside of those things I think people would be surprised if they’d just give them a shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Fun fact on that classification. It goes back to the Plymouth PT Cruiser and the Chevrolet HHR. Those cars, ironically designed by the same person, were classified as trucks for the EPA CAFE calculations. They had tailgates instead of trunks and they had low load floors so they technically met the simplified classification of SUV (truck). So did every small crossover vehicle. And that is why there are so many of them. Automakers could balance out their CAFE by putting small utilities in the Truck CAFE fleet to bring up the average.

So the EPA (or was it NHTSA?) changed the requirements for Truck to add a ground clearance requirement and/or AWD. The Model Y SR has one motor (no AWD) and low ground clearance so it didn’t qualify as an SUV on either count.

There is another interesting swing to the IRA incentive qualifications, at least for Tesla. In 2024, the %requirements for “friendly” sourcing of battery minerals and components shifts upward. The base Model 3 with LFP batteries does not qualify for one penny. The Model 3 Long Range is sort of on the fence, but with Tesla’s current sourcing pattern it does not qualify. The Model 3 Performance qualifies. So, with their pricing structure, for those whose household income allows them to qualify for the incentive, the Model 3 Performance becomes the most affordable vehicle.

I had it wrong as well, but it wasn’t LR vs SR vs Performance or AWD vs RWD. It was the seat configuration. Model Y configured as a 7 seater was classified as a SUV, but 5 seaters as a car.

https://insideevs.com/news/629064/fi...al-tax-credit/

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

I had it wrong as well, but it wasn’t LR vs SR vs Performance or AWD vs RWD. It was the seat configuration. Model Y configured as a 7 seater was classified as a SUV, but 5 seaters as a car.

https://insideevs.com/news/629064/fi...al-tax-credit/

Right! Forgot about that part. Lyriq single motor was also considered a car at that pointbutwaseventally reclassified as an SUV.

[george]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Government subsidies for EVs have been in place since 2010, and for a long time all one could buy were expensive Tesla models or sad jokes like the Nissan Leaf. Even now, the latest revisions of this law exclude cheaper EVs. Although I don't want to speak for him, I think anyone who was ever able to afford a Tesla Model S is part of "the elite" George referred to.

Thank you, yes.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by george

Thank you, yes.

Then good news for you is the elite don't qualify for the credits.


The Model S doesn't get the subsidies either.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

Then good news for you is the elite don't qualify for the credits.


The Model S doesn't get the subsidies either.

The difference between the 2010 incentives and the IRA incentives is

• 2010 was based on battery size.
• 2010 allowed for incentives for up to 200,000 vehicles from any automaker. This was at a company level, not a brand level. So for example, GM got up to 200,000 including anything from Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick, GMC all totaled together. Not 200,000 each.
• IRA requires that the vehicles be built in North America in order to promote jobs.
• IRA requires that the battery packs be assembled in North America in order to promote jobs.
• IRA requires a percentage of the materials and battery components come from North America or friendly trade partners. The amount increases each year. The purpose of this is to give car makers time to transition sourcing of these materials away from China and to the US and friendly trade partners.
• IRA puts a top dollar value on eligible vehicles to prevent subsidizing the elite purchasing high priced toys.
• IRA puts income limits in place for purchasers in order to avoid subsidizing high income buyers purchases of high priced toys.
• The IRA includes an incentive for low income buyers to buy used EVs priced up to $25,000.