Ford F-150 Lightning Set To Lose Federal EV Tax Credit

[Effonefiddy Lightning]

my take on this subject: Manufacturers didn't create tax incentives, the GOVERNMENT did.

so, manufacturers can't be 'blamed' because they use the very incentives that we ALL do, when we can, to lower our costs, or to create EVs, that, otherwise, yes, might be years down the road, when it comes to when they are 'cheaper' to build> Actually, they will NEVER be cheaper to build.

The GOVERNMENT offers incentives for manufacturers to build an EV, because, well, in their judgement, they want the US population to drive more 'eco friendly' and less 'gas using' vehicles. It's NOT us, or buyers, or manufacturers.

Yes, we will enjoy the incentive benefits, when and if they are offered - I doubt anyone has turned them down, no matter what your 'view' of this subject might otherwise be.

Should incentives continue? Well, that's a different subject, and one that alludes to whether the US 'needs' incentives, moving forward, or whether we are at the moment in time when buying an EV is as close to a similar choice as buying any other type of vehicle.

Sometimes those in Government want to motivate the public, and use incentives to do so. Those incentives don't take away anyone else's tax refunds, or cost any other tax payers 'more money'... so the idea that those of us using incentives in our buying decisions are not in any way 'harming' anyone else, nor should we want to.


Me : )

In my view its part of wasteful spending. And we are all paying for it.

Sponsored

 

[Firn]

For those of us who aren't "man made climate change" believers, government involvement makes no sense. At least to me it doesn't and that is the main reason why a certain party wants the tax credit to exist. A better more enjoyable driving vehicle is not a good use of tax payers money. Man made climate change is debatable and has not been a proven fact. IMOP and many others.

Speak for yourself. I laid out why the incentive makes sense, and it had nothing to do with climate change.

It’s not just a "nicer" vehicle, it has real potential to be both better and cheaper overall.

We can argue about climate change another time. What’s not up for debate is local air quality—just look at LA smog before and after.

From a vehicle standpoint, EVs are already close to cost parity with gas cars, and there’s no reason that trend won’t continue. Cheaper to own, cheaper to operate.

From a manufacturing angle, EVs have already cracked the near-monopoly legacy automakers had on the U.S. market. That’s a win for consumers, that's more competition.

From a power perspective, EVs push us toward a more flexible and decentralized grid. That means more competition, more resilience, and less risk of big outages.

That same shift benefits everything else we power; businesses, homes, tech. Right now, we invest in vehicle fuel and grid infrastructure separately. With EVs, it’s all connected.

And don’t forget: you can make your own electricity. Try drilling for oil in your backyard. Energy independence isn’t just about geopolitics—it’s personal.

Let's not forget the world's largest automobile market is now 50% EV for new vehicle sales. We are buying down development cost to compete on the global scale.

As for environmental impact, even if you’re not worried about climate change, the footprint is smaller. Period.

 

[Firn]

In my view its part of wasteful spending. And we are all paying for it.

Expending money isnt necessarily a bad thing. I expend money into my retirement. I expend money into my savings.

If the narrative was that it was an investment into US global manufacturing would it change the mindset? The social media and echo chamber manipulations continuously claim "climate change" and they are "spending" money, but the truth of the matter is it is quite literally investing in our manufactures so we remain competitive on a global scale. China is quite literally eating our lunch on manufacturing, and failure to invest in the market is how we got there on other products (among other things). And if you want to invest in the auto manufacture, there is no better way than doing so directly on the thing you want investment in and paid explicitly for making it.

 

[Effonefiddy Lightning]

Speak for yourself. I laid out why the incentive makes sense—and it had nothing to do with climate change.

It’s not just a "nicer" vehicle—it has real potential to be both better and cheaper overall.

We can argue about climate change another time. What’s not up for debate is local air quality—just look at LA smog before and after.

From a vehicle standpoint, EVs are already close to cost parity with gas cars, and there’s no reason that trend won’t continue. Cheaper to own, cheaper to operate.

From a manufacturing angle, EVs have already cracked the near-monopoly legacy automakers had on the U.S. market. That’s a win for consumers, that's more competition.

From a power perspective, EVs push us toward a more flexible and decentralized grid. That means more competition, more resilience, and less risk of big outages.

That same shift benefits everything else we power; businesses, homes, tech. Right now, we invest in vehicle fuel and grid infrastructure separately. With EVs, it’s all connected.

And don’t forget: you can make your own electricity. Try drilling for oil in your backyard. Energy independence isn’t just about geopolitics—it’s personal.

As for environmental impact, even if you’re not worried about climate change, the footprint is smaller. Period.

I was speaking for you, but the whole EV thing was highjacked by a certain party for climate change reasons. It was and is the main driver behind the tax incentive. I agree with your other comments about the matter, I just think the market should dictate what happens, not government. We'll get to that happy place when technology advances but I don't like government taking my choices away, ie the California governor.

 

[HOTAS]

No worries soon we will have the technology to plan ahead for the monthly major weather disasters.......... OH WAIT, they cut that too!

MAGA !!! (sic fux)

Time for a dose of reality. FEMA was bankrupted by Sleepy Joe and his cohorts in order to flood this country with millions of illegal immigrants. And support them.
sic fux

 

[Effonefiddy Lightning]

Expending money isnt necessarily a bad thing. I expend money into my retirement. I expend money into my savings.

If the narrative was that it was an investment into US global manufacturing would it change the mindset? The social media and echo chamber manipulations continuously claim "climate change" and they are "spending" money, but the truth of the matter is it is quite literally investing in our manufactures so we remain competitive on a global scale. China is quite literally eating our lunch on manufacturing, and failure to invest in the market is how we got there on other products (among other things). And if you want to invest in the auto manufacture, there is no better way than doing so directly on the thing you want investment in and paid explicitly for making it.

All wasteful spending by the government has a narrative of investing for the good of the future. Expending money in retirement or savings is not.

 

[TaxmanHog]

Those incentives don't take away anyone else's tax refunds, or cost any other tax payers 'more money'... so the idea that those of us using incentives in our buying decisions are not in any way 'harming' anyone else, nor should we want to.

The increasing National Debt impacts EVERYONE.

 

[Firn]

All wasteful spending by the government has a narrative of investing for the good of the future. Expending money in retirement or savings is not.

Sure, WASTEFUL spending is frequently driven by a narrative of it being good, but that is not the same a spending money that IS an investment for the future that is not wasteful.

Don't conflate that wasteful spending exists also means any and all spending is wasteful.

I was speaking for you, but the whole EV thing was highjacked by a certain party for climate change reasons. It was and is the main driver behind the tax incentive. I agree with your other comments about the matter, I just think the market should dictate what happens, not government. We'll get to that happy place when technology advances but I don't like government taking my choices away, ie the California governor.

No, you are not speaking for me, and dont assume you can.

Because it was said that was A reason, and echoed profusely, does not mean there was not other reasons.

As for the market, understand that the market will NOT always and perfectly decide what is "best". Any economics course will show that the market will drive for the highest profit and anything as wide reaching and complex as global supply chains and country wide charging networks will not just magically happen. And technology does not advance without investment but no single company can invest enough to make global changes and implement nation wide billion dollar architectures.

As far as California goes, go there. See the dirt clouds hanging over the cities and ask who IS responsible for fixing that? Individuals? The Tragedy of the Commons is a very real thing.

 

[Effonefiddy Lightning]

Tax credits are gone, China is building a coal burning plant a day, I doubt the country will go to crap because of it, and I'm not losing any sleep.

 

[Effonefiddy Lightning]

Sure, WASTEFUL spending is frequently driven by a narrative of it being good, but that is not the same a spending money that IS an investment for the future that is not wasteful.

Don't conflate that wasteful spending exists also means any and all spending is wasteful.



No, you are not speaking for me, and dont assume you can.

Because it was said that was A reason, and echoed profusely, does not mean there was not other reasons.

As for the market, understand that the market will NOT always and perfectly decide what is "best". Any economics course will show that the market will drive for the highest profit and anything as wide reaching and complex as global supply chains and country wide charging networks will not just magically happen. And technology does not advance without investment but no single company can invest enough to make global changes and implement nation wide billion dollar architectures.

As far as California goes, go there. See the dirt clouds hanging over the cities and ask who IS responsible for fixing that? Individuals? The Tragedy of the Commons is a very real thing.

The air cleared up a bit in L.A. long befor EVs hit the road. All smog attributed to the U.S. is not all American made and you are discounting smog for the wild fires all over N. America. EVs are not going to solve the world problems. You might think so, but they're not.

 

[Effonefiddy Lightning]

The increasing National Debt impacts EVERYONE.

Yes.

 

[Effonefiddy Lightning]

I bought my two Teslas and my Lightning because EVs are awesome, not because I wanted to save the world or electrify the country. I'll leave that to the experts. Did I take advantage of the tax credit, YES I DID, because it was legally available to me, otherwise, I would have just bought a cheaper truck.

 

[Firn]

The air cleared up a bit in L.A. long befor EVs hit the road. All smog attributed to the U.S. is not all American made and you are discounting smog for the wild fires all over N. America. EVs are not going to solve the world problems. You might think so, but they're not.

The air cleaned up because of CARB, but there are still issues. Answer the question, who is responsible?

This was before the wildfires and was DIRECTLY over the city, a little brown cloud that never went away.

Don't be a child, I never claimed they would, straw man arguments and ignoring what was said isnt an argument.

 

[hturnerfamily]

my brother-in-law falls into the same boat of 'blaming' us EV buyers because, as he says, 'he' shouldn't have to help pay for my purchase of an EV truck, we should all just let the vehicles 'pay' for themselves, without any government, and tax payers, helping us...

well, that's fine, until GM gets 'bailed out' by the government, when they are not able to stay in 'business', themselves, when "Both GM and Chrysler faced imminent bankruptcy and potential collapse, which could have had devastating consequences for the economy. "
He drives a Chevy truck, built after this 'bailout'.

Yes, it's easy to look at today's incentives and somehow feel that they are not fair, with new buyers getting incentives that we feel we didn't get , if that's your perspective, although, if we all look at the government's reasons for incentives, thru history, we might just find ourselves in that same 'boat'...

 

[ryun]

The increasing National Debt impacts EVERYONE.

Sure would be nice if any party would take that semi-seriously. Especially the one that seems to cry the loudest about it and then makes it worse when it's their turn.

Sponsored