Artman
Well-Known Member
- First Name
- Art
- Joined
- May 15, 2021
- Threads
- 11
- Messages
- 262
- Reaction score
- 192
- Location
- Maryland/Florida
- Vehicles
- 2022 4S Cross Turismo
Uh oh... "Manchin strikes major deal with Schumer"
Sponsored
Here are some take-aways that I see.looks like its for vehicles placed in service after december 31, 2022. but its all legalese to me...
the transition period is the most confusing, if anyone could help clarify, it would be great! my car is between the port and the dealership, seems like i should go fast just in case
EV credit is around page 366 +/-
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/inflation_reduction_act_of_2022.pdf
What 'taking service's means the customer must actually take delivery and finalize purchase paperwork of the vehicle prior to 12/31/22 to avoid all the new limitations dictated by this new EV tax credit legislation.Here are some take-aways that I see.
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Which basically means anyone who takes delivery of an imported EV or buys even a domestic luxury EV above the stated price caps starting Jan 2023 is likely screwed out of qualifying for Fed EV tax credits on a new vehicle.Commercial vehicles weighing over 14,000 pounds are eligible for a tax credit of $40,000 or 30% of the vehicle cost, whichever is less.
Vehicles with a gross weight less than 14,000 pounds are eligible for a $7,500 tax credit.
The $7,500 tax credit can be availed for new clean energy vehicle purchases by those whose income is under $300,000 for joint filers, $225,000 for heads of households and $150,000 for others.
Used clean vehicle purchasers would get a $4,000 tax credit.
All EVs bought after Dec. 31, 2022 would qualify for the EV credit.
The tax credit would run through Dec. 31, 2032.
To be eligible for the tax credit, the vehicle should be made in North America.
There are retail price caps of $80,000 for vans, SUVs and pickup trucks; $55,000 for others, including sedans; and $25,000 for used cars.
Batteries have to contain a certain level of critical minerals extracted or processed in any country the U.S. has a free trade agreement with or are recycled in North America.
The bill also seeks to do away with the previous mandate that required qualified vehicles to have solely plug-in electric drive motors and the 200,000-vehicle per manufacturer cap.
The $4,500 bonus credit to cars made by companies with unionized labor has also been removed.
Based on what I read in the bill, you are correct. Also there are income caps on EV car buyers.Which basically means anyone who takes delivery of an imported EV or buys even a domestic luxury EV above the stated price caps starting Jan 2023 is likely screwed out of qualifying for Fed EV tax credits on a new vehicle.
I somewhat agree with you. My only difference in perspective is I don’t think the choices are mutually exclusive. You can want to protect the environment and help build the foundation to give the segment wings and accelerate adoption and the transition to sustainability. However, you can do so without feeling unrewarded when others are. Perhaps, you would have bought a 911 for the same share of your hard earned funds but you chose a Taycan for the former goal.Well, I guess it depends upon your perspective and primary goals.
If your primary goal is your own pocketbook, then this bill, assuming you own a Taycan, is bad for all of us.
If your primary goal instead is to reduce emissions, and you assume as true both that mass adoption of EVs will help achieve this goal and that resources (e.g., government spending/tax cutting) are limited, then this bill would be good for all of us no matter where you fall on the economic ladder because it will focus financial incentives on the segment of the market who is most likely to choose EVs only if they become more affordable.
I personally would have bought a Taycan even if there were no incentives. I would like to see more mass adoption by the lower segments of the market. And of course I'm a hypocrite and wish there were incentives for me personally, but if it is either or, then I'll sacrifice mine for the middle class.
Yes, many of us have multiple goals that are inconsistent. My comment was focusing on differences between primary goals.I somewhat agree with you. My only difference in perspective is I don’t think the choices are mutually exclusive. You can want to protect the environment and help build the foundation to give the segment wings and accelerate adoption and the transition to sustainability. However, you can do so without feeling unrewarded when others are. Perhaps, you would have bought a 911 for the same share of your hard earned funds but you chose a Taycan for the former goal.
If there wasn't incentives, there may not have been a Taycan. The incentives is what pushed many people to buy Teslas when the rest of the industry was saying things like "Nobody will ever make any money selling EV's". Tesla proved that you can in fact make money on EV's, but it took incentives to get there. Many Tesla buyers stretched over 2x the price (after all the incentives) of their next most expensive car they ever purchased. For me personally I probably would not have tried EV's if it wasn't for the incentives, because in my mind it helped me offset the risk of a new, unproven technology. I would have bought another high powered ICE instead, which might have costed more than the Tesla, but the risk in my mind was less, residuals fairly well understood, etc.There should’ve never been an incentive on any Porsche (or Tesla either)