Zero Emission Vehicle Rebate

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 17, 2006
Messages
19,528
Location
Lake Forest, CA
Federal rebate for zero emission vehicle is $7,500 in the form of tax credit, California has $2,500 rebate for qualifying electric vehicles ($1,500 for plug-in hybrids). But it will change soon, the new rebate is now income based. Higher income buyer will receive no rebate for Battery EV but no change for Fuel Cell EV at $5,000, lower income buyer will receive higher rebate up to $4,000 for a battery EV, $6,500 for Fuel Cell EV and $3,000 for Plugin Hybrid.

What do you think, income based rebate is fair ?

http://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/wi...html/?a=viewall
 
A rebate either way wouldn't make or break my purchase of a Tesla. They are good enough to stand on there own merits.
 
Originally Posted By: CT8
I don't think any government rebate is fair.


I agree with this. People should buy cars because they believe the Car to be a good value whether that is luxury value, fuel economy value or visual appeal. Rebates are the govt playing favorites, it's that simple.
 
When I bought my Volt I was happy that I finally received a small percentage back of the money I've paid in. It seems like everyone gets a tax break for something so why pick on the EV rebate. Have a kid, get another personal exemption. Put a small down payment and finance most of your house, get a mortgage interest deduction. I would be fine with taking it away if we do away with all the others.
 
The Cash-for-Clunkers would give up to a $4,500 rebate, but I understand that it cost ~$25,000 in administration fees, paid for by the taxpayer.
The rebate that's based on income sounds good to a lot of people until you give them this scenario: You are in line at a fast food joint and the person in front of you gets the #1 combo and it costs him $7.50. So then you get to the front of the line and you also order the #1 combo. The cashier tells you that the price will be $20.
When you ask why your combo costs more than the previous guy, but yet you are getting the exact same thing, the cashier tells you that the combo price is based on income and that the person who was in front of you is poor and your price is higher because you make more money than the previous guy, and the price of everything is based on income.
At this point, many people don't like the "rebate based on income" rule.
Sounds good when they pass the law though, doesn't it?
 
A teaspoon in the ocean compared to all the other government waste, rebates and tax abatements out there. If you're eligible, you might as well take advantage of it.
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
...What do you think, income based rebate is fair?

Yes, as 'fair' as other clever workarounds in our convoluted and oppressively burdensome tax laws.
The family paying taxes on $500,000.00+ income each year probably won't sweat a few thousand additional dollars when deciding on their vehicle purchases.

-Incentive
-Rebate
-Deduction
-Loophole

Largely dependent on one’s perspective and his or her financial wherewithal and machinations.
 
Originally Posted By: cheatsheet.com
Depending on who you ask, it was either an attack on the 1% or a new wrinkle in spurring electric vehicle purchases. Either way, the California Air Resources Board approved income qualifications for those hoping to access state EV rebates, as reported by Cars Direct. Under the new system, the Golden State’s richest will no longer get the credit while the state’s poorest gain access to higher rebates. The shift is unlikely to affect Tesla sales in any way, but it could make progress toward increasing the number of EVs on state roads.

California EV buyers have received a $2,500 rebate for qualifying electric vehicles ($1,500 for plug-in hybrids) regardless of income, but the program is about to change. As the table below illustrates, individuals earning over $250,000 and heads of households earning over $340,000 will no longer receive that rebate. Those earning less than 300% of the federal poverty level (about $35,000 for individuals, $60,000 for heads of household) see a higher rebate in store, up to $4,000 for a battery EV. Rebates for fuel cell vehicles will not change.

Unaffected (and under no circumstances in play) is the $7,500 federal tax credit offered to EV buyers of any income bracket. Taken as a whole, the state’s poorest auto consumers now have a total of $11,500 to deduct from the purchase price of an EV. Buyers who earn over $250,000 will “only” be able to deduct $7,500 from tax credits for buying a vehicle like the Tesla Model S or BMW i3 in California.

According to statistics from the Center for Sustainable Energy (per Cars Direct), 26% of those who received the $2,500 rebate in the second quarter of 2015 earned over $200,000, while almost 75% of those enjoying the rebate in 2015 earned over $100,000. The average sales price for a Tesla stands around $100,000.

Taking in these statistics, it would be hard to imagine Tesla buyers passing because of $2,500 — the cost of silver cyclone wheels on a new Model S. On the other hand, buyers at lower income brackets could enter the EV fray with the policy shift with access to another $1,500 toward a purchase. For someone at 300% the poverty level, it is the equivalent of half a month’s income.

Comparing the Ford Focus Electric ($29,170) versus the standard gasoline S sedan model ($17,160) reveals how far this extra cash could go for buyers in low income brackets. The Focus EV sticker drops to $17,660 after subtracting state and California incentives for qualifying buyers. Considering the cost of maintenance and gas, this deal could sway shoppers on the hunt for greater economy in their daily commutes, as long as range anxiety does not scare them off.

CARB officials had this target in mind, so we’ll see if the adjustment moves the needle in the state with 40% of the country’s electric vehicles on the road. As for the many Tesla buyers in California, it’s unlikely this shift will change anything.

In fact, maybe the priciest EVs should have no incentives attached to them. After all, they outperform rival luxury sedans head-to-head. Why enable luxury car purchases? To improve air quality and reduce the drastic effects of greenhouse gas emissions, increasing the sale of mass-market EVs is crucial. Why not remove the federal tax break for luxury EVs and add another $2,500 to $5,000 for those under $40,000? With that plan in effect, we’d wager the needle wouldn’t just move; it would jump.

If Federal and various State governments want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, then remove tax break for the rich and increase rebate for lower income buyer of zero emission vehicles is a good way to achieve that goal.
 
Come on no one on this forum that works doesn't take advantage of some sort of write off.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Come on no one on this forum that works doesn't take advantage of some sort of write off.



Ya think?
The tax code is a bonanza for those who do a little research.
Take those iffy credits and deductions.
The worst that might happen is that you might have to pay additional tax, but unless you're a very high income taxpayer, the chances of being called on any credit or deduction taken are between slim and none.
 
Can we please move on from the narrative of labeling electric cars as "zero emission vehicles" since that's factually a misnomer?


Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
...remove tax break for the rich and increase rebate for lower income buyer of zero emission vehicles is a good way to achieve that goal.

It’s likely that most moderate income families are far more concerned with paying the mortgage and their offsprings’ university tuition than
“reducing greenhouse emissions,” a few thousand dollars' worth of reduced tax burden notwithstanding.


Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Come on no one on this forum that works doesn't take advantage of some sort of write off?

I simply retain highly skilled CPAs and tax attorneys to ensure that my family "pays their fair share.”


http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-4
 
Originally Posted By: splinter
Can we please move on from the narrative of labeling electric cars as "zero emission vehicles" since that's factually a misnomer?


I agree, they are coal fired cars.
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR

What do you think, income based rebate is fair ?


No. That's a socialist notion, but not surprising coming from the socialist republic of California. Government should treat each citizen exactly the same regardless of status, income, race, religion, gender, etc.

But then given the overall incompetence of California as a whole, nothing the government or citizens do surprises me.
 
Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers by choosing to offer some buyers rebates and not others.

If a technology is so good, government rebates are not needed. Let's get a rid of them all. No rebates or breaks for oil companies, solar panel systems, hybrid or electric cars, or any other deductible purchase.
If a carmaker wants to rebate with their money, great. If the Sierra Club wants to help members buy a Prius, good on them. But no government funds. No help to buy cars or sports stadiums.

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Federal rebate for zero emission vehicle is $7,500 in the form of tax credit, California has $2,500 rebate for qualifying electric vehicles ($1,500 for plug-in hybrids). But it will change soon, the new rebate is now income based. Higher income buyer will receive no rebate for Battery EV but no change for Fuel Cell EV at $5,000, lower income buyer will receive higher rebate up to $4,000 for a battery EV, $6,500 for Fuel Cell EV and $3,000 for Plugin Hybrid.

What do you think, income based rebate is fair ?

http://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/wi...html/?a=viewall
 
I would be very happy with a flat rate. We all pay the same, rich or poor. Payroll taxes count in that percentage.

If I could do my taxes on a post card, or simple web page, excellent.

No more refund fraud if there are no refunds to claim.
Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Quote:

I don't think any government rebate is fair.


Any tax deduction is a rebate; this includes mortgage interest.
 
Originally Posted By: splinter
Can we please move on from the narrative of labeling electric cars as "zero emission vehicles" since that's factually a misnomer?

Zero emission vehicle are the one that emits no tailpipe pollutants from the onboard source of power, therefore pure battery powered and fuel cell vehicles are zero emission vehicles. Now the source of hydrogen and electricity is another story.

Remember, there are 2 rebates: one for BEV(Battery EV) and one for FCEV(Fuel Cell EV).

For the state of California there is virtually no coal power plant, so the emission of power plants here is fairly low. I don't know how much hydrogen production emission is.
 
As any economist will tell you, if you want more of something, make it cheaper while if you want less of it, make that thing more dear.
The state apparently feels that it can realize an improvement in air quality by increasing the number of EVs in use.
The state apparently also thinks that higher income buyers need no particular incentive to buy Teslas, while middle income buyers might find the tax credit to be the factor that tips them into something like a Nissan Leaf over a Prius or Civic.
States and the feds using the tax code to encourage desired choices is nothing new and the federal tax code is full of income-based preferances as well.
It's neither picking winners and losers nor socialism.
It's merely a way of advancing a public policy goal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top