Disappointment Thursday

[FordLightningMan]

While I fully agree with you that it’s ridiculous to subsidize $80K vehicles, it would still help in replacing carbon spewing gas vehicles with clean EVs. And that’s the stated purpose of the whole tax credit. Making it refundable will help many more people benefit from it.

I agree that replacing carbon spewing gas vehicles is the whole purpose of the credit. When the credit was introduced, there was skepticism over EVs and even wealthy people needed to be pushed to become early adopters in the technology. The $7,500 tax credit that's now phasing out did a wonderful job in luring early adopters, I would say the current credit was an overwhelming success. We just don't live in the same world now, as when the $7,500 credit was introduced. Tesla specifically has proven the EV demand far exceeds the supply. There just isn't logic to put taxpayer money into an incentive, when no incentive is needed.

Where there still are many carbon spewing vehicles is in the sub-$40k segment, which is where a majority of car buyers are shopping. If we need to put $20k incentives on these sub-$40k EVs for households with earnings less than the national average, I am all for it. This would have an exponentially greater impact on the environment than giving someone who was going to buy an EV anyway $7.5k-$12.5k. Wealthy people had their chance to get a piece of the pie already and many upscale automakers still have incentives, so I don't see this as unfair.

Sponsored

 

[GDN]

I agree that replacing carbon spewing gas vehicles is the whole purpose of the credit. When the credit was introduced, there was skepticism over EVs and even wealthy people needed to be pushed to become early adopters in the technology. The $7,500 tax credit that's now phasing out did a wonderful job in luring early adopters, I would say the current credit was an overwhelming success. We just don't live in the same world now, as when the $7,500 credit was introduced. Tesla specifically has proven the EV demand far exceeds the supply. There just isn't logic to put taxpayer money into an incentive, when no incentive is needed.

Where there still are many carbon spewing vehicles is in the sub-$40k segment, which is where a majority of car buyers are shopping. If we need to put $20k incentives on these sub-$40k EVs for households with earnings less than the national average, I am all for it. This would have an exponentially greater impact on the environment than giving someone who was going to buy an EV anyway $7.5k-$12.5k. Wealthy people had their chance to get a piece of the pie already and many upscale automakers still have incentives, so I don't see this as unfair.

The problem with the incentives is that the manufactures have learned how to put the money right into their pocket. Maybe the "discount" is what has allured many of us to buy and get that credit, however, most manufactures just inflate their price by near that amount and adjust after the credit is gone. So while you might argue it worked, it didn't truly go into the pocket of the buyer. It just screwed the buyer and incentivized the manufacture to charge a higher price.

 

[FordLightningMan]

The problem with the incentives is that the manufactures have learned how to put the money right into their pocket. Maybe the "discount" is what has allured many of us to buy and get that credit, however, most manufactures just inflate their price by near that amount and adjust after the credit is gone. So while you might argue it worked, it didn't truly go into the pocket of the buyer. It just screwed the buyer and incentivized the manufacture to charge a higher price.

This was actually the point, to increase the margin on EVs to provide the manufacturers with incentive to make them. There was massive R&D costs in making a transition to EV manufacturing, so the $7,500 subsidized a lot of this cost. The fact that the most valuable car brand in the world is now EV showed this incentive definitely helped automakers get over the initial R&D hump. The initial problem of generating cash for EV R&D investment has largely been solved.

The next problem is getting the 40% of Americans who have household income of $50k or less into an EV. I guess we can hope automakers use their expanded margins created from the $7,500 program to have a trickledown effect on making cheaper EVs... but if that was a natural progression, why isn't the most valuable automobile company in the world planning a cheaper car? It's because demand is so high for wider margined expensive EVs, that there isn't an incentive to invest downstream. Only by targeting the incentives to these buyers will you see genuine mass adoption. Or plan B is just let the incentives dry up, and wait for the transition to happen naturally, which will be through the used vehicle market over the next 10 years.

 

[VTbuckeye]

Is the incentive for the buyer or the manufacturer? Buyer who wants to make the purchase needs to have the product available. Without the incentive maybe the manufacturer won't make the product. Or is it a situation where without the EV incentive the buyer wouldn't make the purchase even in an over supply situation. We are certainly not in the second situation, but 5 years ago that was how things were. *Made up numbers but an example: If a manufacturer can produce an ice vehicle for 45k and sell it for 60k and can also produce a matching EV for 55k and sell it for 65 why would they produce the EV? If the tax credit is in play the EV comes out on top.
With our current supply constrained system and huge EV demand the tax credit does not make sense.

 

[VTbuckeye]

The next problem is getting the 40% of Americans who have household income of $50k or less into an EV. I guess we can hope automakers use their expanded margins created from the $7,500 program to have a trickledown effect on making cheaper EVs... but if that was a natural progression, why isn't the most valuable automobile company in the world planning a cheaper car? It's because demand is so high for wider margined expensive EVs, that there isn't an incentive to invest downstream. Only by targeting the incentives to these buyers will you see genuine mass adoption. Or plan B is just let the incentives dry up, and wait for the transition to happen naturally, which will be through the used vehicle market over the next 10 years.

Either let it expire or make the credit applicable up to a specific price (actual transaction price not MSRP). Income limits would work as well, but transaction price limits could drive the manufacturers to build more inexpensive cars. Or maybe a combination of income and transaction price. A credit for used EV purchases could help in theory however it would be swallowed up by the alerts getting a higher price (which may not be so bad as it may encourage the seller to part with a car sooner and that seller may be a purchased the of another new EV). It all gets complicated when trying to encourage behaviors without benefitting the wealthy individual or manufacturer (though that may be required to make it happen).

 

[DrZoidberg]

Getting more hopeful. Ford updated the Lightning page and it has a ton more info and now has a countdown timer.

 

[greenne]

Is the incentive for the buyer or the manufacturer? Buyer who wants to make the purchase needs to have the product available. Without the incentive maybe the manufacturer won't make the product. Or is it a situation where without the EV incentive the buyer wouldn't make the purchase even in an over supply situation. We are certainly not in the second situation, but 5 years ago that was how things were. *Made up numbers but an example: If a manufacturer can produce an ice vehicle for 45k and sell it for 60k and can also produce a matching EV for 55k and sell it for 65 why would they produce the EV? If the tax credit is in play the EV comes out on top.
With our current supply constrained system and huge EV demand the tax credit does not make sense.

Well I can speak for myself here. My wife drives a 2009 Ford Escape Hybrid approaching 150k miles. Despite its age it still gets decent mpg and is relatively cheap to own, even with the $4/gal gas prices.

If there were to be a $7.5k -12.5 refundable tax credit on the table I'd replace it this year with either an EV or PHEV. If not, then I'll hold off.

 

[Ford4Life2319]

Wow a lot of new info added to the Ford website. Even has Search Inventory, Specs, Build and Price, Lease incentives (if available), etc.

 

[greenne]

Wow a lot of new info added to the Ford website. Even has Search Inventory, Specs, Build and Price, Lease incentives (if available), etc.

There's something that says "The countdown is on" and has counter to the "Launch of the F150 Lightning".

Details--
You're invited to join the F-150 Lightning team on YouTube, April 26 at 1:30 pm ET as we launch the only EV that can call itself an F-150. Come and see the smartest, most innovative truck we've ever built.

YouTube: http://ford.to/LightningStrikes

-------------------------------------------

 

[VTbuckeye]

Well I can speak for myself here. My wife drives a 2009 Ford Escape Hybrid approaching 150k miles. Despite its age it still gets decent mpg and is relatively cheap to own, even with the $4/gal gas prices.

If there were to be a $7.5k -12.5 refundable tax credit on the table I'd replace it this year with either an EV or PHEV. If not, then I'll hold off.

Our phev is a 2016 Volvo XC90. Paid off. 25 to 30 mpg on trips. Comfortable, safe less than 35k miles. I could probably turn it into 30k+ cash in the current vehicle market. If it was a choice between convenience or 5k to 10k, I would choose convenience and flexibility every time. 30k is real money that could pay for our rooftop solar array or almost half a lightning. If the car was in a wreck and totalled tomorrow, the cash would go towards the lightning/ solar. If
it isn't in a crash, it will continue as a one drive per week/trip car (it feels like a waste to have a nice car that does not get regular use).

 

[TaxmanHog]

Getting more hopeful. Ford updated the Lightning page and it has a ton more info and now has a countdown timer.

found it

https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/f150-lightning/

 

[DrZoidberg]

This give me hope my ambient lighting isn't gone!

 

[greenne]

Our phev is a 2016 Volvo XC90. Paid off. 25 to 30 mpg on trips. Comfortable, safe less than 35k miles. I could probably turn it into 30k+ cash in the current vehicle market. If it was a choice between convenience or 5k to 10k, I would choose convenience and flexibility every time. 30k is real money that could pay for our rooftop solar array or almost half a lightning. If the car was in a wreck and totalled tomorrow, the cash would go towards the lightning/ solar. If
it isn't in a crash, it will continue as a one drive per week/trip car (it feels like a waste to have a nice car that does not get regular use).

Also in the BBB is an extension of the solar tax credit for 10yrs AND the solar credit becomes a refundable type credit. (Currently you can carry it over, but not get cash back). If solar installers could offer a cash rebate at purchase that would remove a huge obstacle to rooftop solar. As it stands now, solar requires a pretty hefty down payment or a loan of some sort.

 

[greenne]

Our phev is a 2016 Volvo XC90. Paid off. 25 to 30 mpg on trips. Comfortable, safe less than 35k miles. I could probably turn it into 30k+ cash in the current vehicle market. If it was a choice between convenience or 5k to 10k, I would choose convenience and flexibility every time. 30k is real money that could pay for our rooftop solar array or almost half a lightning. If the car was in a wreck and totalled tomorrow, the cash would go towards the lightning/ solar. If
it isn't in a crash, it will continue as a one drive per week/trip car (it feels like a waste to have a nice car that does not get regular use).

I'm looking very hard at the xc60 or xc90 phev. They have improved it for 2022 with more range..up to 35mi and a stronger rear motor so it is drivable in EV mode. With the improved hybrid system it now has 450hp. 0-60 in about 4.5s. Much improved over the older phev hybrid system. I've always liked Volvos...

 

[VTbuckeye]

I'm looking very hard at the xc60 or xc90 phev. They have improved it for 2022 with more range..up to 35mi and a stronger rear motor so it is drivable in EV mode. With the improved hybrid system it now has 450hp. 0-60 in about 4.5s. Much improved over the older phev hybrid system. I've always liked Volvos...

The new one would be great with the bigger battery and more powerful motor. I manage to stay EV most of the time. My wife...not so much (she drives an EV xc40 and does not modulate the throttle gently enough for all EV operation). I drive it wanting it to be EV and get frustrated when the engine starts for no good reason (usually because the car thinks that it is too cold). My commute is usually 13 to 14 miles round trip and I can usually do it all EV if it is more than 50 degrees outside. It was easier three or four years ago, but the electric range has dropped some in the last two years. At 6 years old, it is also one significant problem away from being very expensive.

Sponsored