backtop


Print 89 comment(s) - last by Kurz.. on Sep 11 at 10:23 PM


China isn't as willing to jump on board the idea of Chevy Volt tax credits as the Bush and Obama administrations  (Source: AP Photo)

GM reportedly sold more cars in China last year than the U.S.  (Source: AP Photo)

The Chevy Volt launches in the U.S. November 2010, priced at $41,000 with $7,500 tax credit. It will launch in China next year, priced in excess of $40,000.  (Source: Jalopnik)
Volt will cost over $40k USD when it goes on sale in China later this year

The Obama and Bush administrations saved General Motors from bankruptcy, and now as the company prepares to partially denationalize, the government will help once again to reduce the price of its upcoming EV.  For every one of its 2011 Chevy Volt electric vehicles sold, the government will give qualifying buyers a $7,500 USD tax credit (this also applies to vehicles like the Nissan Leaf).  This helps GM and its competitors to offer a more competitive price (after tax credit) and makes the vehicles potentially profitable for the company.

Critics of the tax credit, rolled out under President Bush's leadership, will likely be even more infuriated with pending proposals to bump the tax credit to as high as $10,000 USD.

For all its fortune in the U.S., GM is finding resistance to its push for government assistance in China.  China, looking to support local EV efforts, has thus far rebuffed GM's urging to adopt a level tax credit for Chinese EV buyers.  GM, which reportedly sold more cars in China last year than the U.S., is currently deciding whether to scrap plans to build a series of EV charging stations in China's urban areas.

GM China VP David Chen complains,"China is the only country that has different subsidy policies [for electric vehicles based on origin].  The U.S. government provides US$7,500 for every electric car no matter where it comes from."

As a result, the Chevy Volt is anticipated to be priced at over $40,000 USD after any applicable tax credits when it launches later this year.  This will be drastically more expensive the domestic hybrids produced by Chinese rivals.

China, no stranger to market regulation itself, recently announced an ambitious plan spend 100 billion yuan ($14.7B USD) to fund its domestic automakers.

At the moment, any EV sold in the U.S. (regardless of the country of origin) can get full tax credits.  In China, though, U.S. EVs receive unequal treatment.  

Even Japan, which long blocked auto imports from the U.S., recently caved in and offered a whopping 3.24 million yen (roughly $38,000 USD) tax rebate for those who buy Tesla Roadster EVs.  The Roadster, a luxury competitor to the Volt, currently retails for 12.8 million yen (roughly $149,200 USD) in Japan.

IHS Automotive analyst to Green Car Advisor writes, "Although the government is looking to increase the numbers of such vehicles sold in the country, it is aiming to maintain the stranglehold of locally built vehicles, and this is unlikely to change."

China's EV dominance isn't merely limited to domestic assembly, though.  The growing giant also maintains a tight grip on around 95 percent of the world's rare earth metal production.  EVs and hybrid vehicles use much more rare earth metals then standard vehicles.  And it takes years to create active mines and processing facilities for rare earth metals.  Thus, to some extent, China will be able to dictate the price of EVs and hybrids internationally.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Ummm...
By Reclaimer77 on 9/8/2010 5:03:19 PM , Rating: 2
Jason I really have just lost all respect for you after reading this.

Right now, as we speak, the debate in Washington rages over the Bush tax cuts BECAUSE letting them expire would hurt the middle class. Bush created an entire NEW tax bracket just for middle class relief. The fact that you, someone who should be up on current events, seems oblivious to this is honestly shocking.

But here you are, talking the same repeated lies about how the tax cuts only helped "the rich".

I don't come to Daily Tech to see a so-called journalist engaging in the same tired failed ideological class warfare talking points. A dishonest one at that.

quote:
While I respect some things Regan did, trickle down economics was not one of his finer creations.


Right which is why you and other Liberals still can't explain how, even though he cut taxes, the treasury collected more tax money than under higher tax administrations like Carters.

Lower taxes promote growth and increase revenues. Reagan didn't "create" trickle down, he just gave it a name. All good economies in our country's history have been the result of this "trickle down" If you had to choose between "trickle down" and Keynesian economics, what would you choose? I shudder to think...

And Jason, please, the hypocrisy of bringing up "pork barrel" projects while in the same breath defending the Obama administration. That honestly just strains the bounds of believability. You CANNOT be that dense. You even brought up Palin lol, you couldn't be more classic Liberal if you tried!


RE: Ummm...
By Lord 666 on 9/8/2010 6:34:40 PM , Rating: 2
Cocaine trade helped fuel the 1980's economy. Not being sarcastic, but both directly and indirectly that's where the money came from. Part of the reason why there is a recent and artificial push to legalize weed, so it could be taxed.

I am also a firm believer that the government wants its citizens to be fat. Fat people are lazy and unmotivated. They also consume more food, medical services and medicines to treat their condition, and die faster so less of a drain on social services. That's the reason ephedra was banned because it actually worked.

If the government wanted to legalize useful drugs, they would start with Clenbutorol and Winstrol.


RE: Ummm...
By rdawise on 9/8/2010 7:49:08 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Right which is why you and other Liberals still can't explain how, even though he cut taxes, the treasury collected more tax money than under higher tax administrations like Carters.


...While the deficit grew to over a trillion dollars.

Fixed it for you!


RE: Ummm...
By JasonMick (blog) on 9/9/2010 9:03:52 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Jason I really have just lost all respect for you after reading this.


Well I'm really not trying to earn your "respect". I do find it amusing and/or fortunate when we happen to occasionally agree.

quote:
Right now, as we speak, the debate in Washington rages over the Bush tax cuts BECAUSE letting them expire would hurt the middle class. Bush created an entire NEW tax bracket just for middle class relief. The fact that you, someone who should be up on current events, seems oblivious to this is honestly shocking.


FALSE. Bush threw a pitiance towards the middle class. For example my rebate check was roughly $1,000 if I recall correctly and I payed around $30,000 in taxes that year. And that was a one shot deal. I believe I might have received one other check for around $500.

That's small change, wrt the amount of taxes I'm paying.

Who Bush DID give big tax cuts/loopholes too were large corporations, oil companies, and the investment firms. The amount of tax burden lifted from them grossly outweighed these small tax rebates. And further, Bush actually increased a lot of taxes outside the income tax directly affecting the middle class.

Take this 2004 study by the Congressional Budget Office:
The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.

Over that same period, taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A611...

Bush increased a variety of taxes directly impacting the middle working class such as taxes on students, veterans, property taxes, and taxes on users of parks:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b340...

quote:
Right now, as we speak, the debate in Washington rages over the Bush tax cuts BECAUSE letting them expire would hurt the middle class. Bush created an entire NEW tax bracket just for middle class relief. The fact that you, someone who should be up on current events, seems oblivious to this is honestly shocking.


No, the fact of the matter is that I do not really agree with either side. The Republicans support the flawed Bush cuts that largely serve as a machine to funnel money to the wealthy, while the Democrats, for the most part, want to scrap the cuts altogether, leaving everyone with higher taxes.

Either way the government is not serving the best interests of the majority of its systems.

quote:
But here you are, talking the same repeated lies about how the tax cuts only helped "the rich".


Look at the numbers, buddy.

quote:
I don't come to Daily Tech to see a so-called journalist engaging in the same tired failed ideological class warfare talking points. A dishonest one at that.


Look, I'm entitled to my opinion. I reserved it here for the comments. And there's nothing dishonest about my opinion.

quote:

Lower taxes promote growth and increase revenues. Reagan didn't "create" trickle down, he just gave it a name. All good economies in our country's history have been the result of this "trickle down" If you had to choose between "trickle down" and Keynesian economics, what would you choose? I shudder to think...


You completely mistunderstood what I said because apparently you lack reading comprehension. I was ADVOCATING tax cuts. What I believe is that cuts to large business, which predominated the Regan and Bush Jr./Sr. years do not benefit the majority of Americans.

I believe in tax cuts directly for citizens and in a flat dollar amount. That way all citizens will see their tax burden reduced by a set amount.

I think both Reganomics and Keynesian economics have their flaws. We need to look at the system anew and there's definitely the need to trim some fat and cut taxes.

quote:
And Jason, please, the hypocrisy of bringing up "pork barrel" projects while in the same breath defending the Obama administration. That honestly just strains the bounds of believability. You CANNOT be that dense. You even brought up Palin lol, you couldn't be more classic Liberal if you tried!


I was defending Obama? News to me! I thought I was just criticizing his tax credit program? Or did you yet again fail at reading comprehension?

Again, this is a tiresome debate as obviously you aren't going to read what I'm saying and understand it.

Look -- if Obama is trying to raise taxes on the middle class I oppose that. If Obama (or any future present) wants to close tax loopholes and credits for select large corporations like the oil industry I do NOT oppose that.

I support a flat tax cut direct to the American population. I do not support tax cuts for large businesses.

When it comes to economic policy, I don't support Bush or Obama or anyone who supports either cutting tax cuts to U.S. citizens or raising tax cuts for large corporations.

As for Palin, I only use her as an example, as I think she a shining example of the hypocrisy of the supposed "conservative" movement. Many "conservative" politicians are just as bad as liberal ones when it comes to pork.

I oppose both equally.


RE: Ummm...
By FITCamaro on 9/9/2010 10:13:44 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Bush threw a pitiance towards the middle class.


If you pay $30,000 in taxes, you are not "middle class". That implies you make roughly 3 times as much as I do which would be nearly $200,000 a year.

And the Bush tax cuts were an ACROSS THE BOARD tax cut. Everyone got a tax cut. Poor people got the biggest. He eliminated the 10% income tax bracket. Making millions more people who paid NO taxes. Tax cuts mean the rich have a larger dollar amount in the cut because they make more.

And how did the Bush tax cuts affect LOCAL property taxes? There is no federal property tax on your home or car. As far as students, I saw no difference. I was a student in 2003. And users of parks? So they had to pay something or a little more. Boo f*cking hoo. National parks to me are not a priority. I would cut funding to every national park to balance the budget. Parks are a luxury, not a necessity.


RE: Ummm...
By FITCamaro on 9/9/2010 10:22:16 AM , Rating: 2
And a flat tax cut (aka these "rebate checks" that everyone got) are nothing but welfare for a large number of people. Because they didn't factor in whether or not you actually paid taxes. Millions got the rebates who pay no taxes or who were already sucking off the system. And millions more who pay a lot of taxes, like my parents, who make a decent living but, from an earlier comment of yours make less than you, got a smaller or no rebate.

And there were those in the Democrat party who wanted to give them to illegals.

The fact is the Bush tax cuts expiring is going to kill small businesses and investment. The capitol gains tax is going up 20%. What do you think that is going to do to the stock market? And ultimately jobs. There is zero growth in the private sector even today. The only jobs being created are those which get some kind of federal funding. And now they want to spend billions more on roads and other transportation. Will it create jobs? In the short term yes. And then what? More spending projects?

There is no hope or chance for economic recovery along the path you want. Businesses go where they pay the least taxes generally. That is not the United States anymore. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world and in January they're going up.


RE: Ummm...
By Reclaimer77 on 9/9/2010 3:30:42 PM , Rating: 1
Ok I just can no longer take part in this sickening class warfare discussion that you Liberals insist on using. The "rich" in this country pay a ridiculous disproportionate amount of taxes. And you make it seem criminal when they are given the slightest bit of tax relief. The top 1% income earners pay something like 80% of the taxes. Taxes that WE would be paying if not for them. You bemoan corporate wealth while at the same time ignoring that the U.S has the second highest corporate tax rate in the entire world.

quote:
FALSE. Bush threw a pitiance towards the middle class. For example my rebate check was roughly $1,000 if I recall correctly and I payed around $30,000 in taxes that year. And that was a one shot deal. I believe I might have received one other check for around $500.


Terrible example Jason. If you paid 30k in Federal Income taxes that year, you sure as HELL aren't middle class. You're doing a lot better than this middle class you seem to claim to represent.

quote:
I was ADVOCATING tax cuts. What I believe is that cuts to large business, which predominated the Regan and Bush Jr./Sr. years do not benefit the majority of Americans.


Taxes WERE CUT!!! For everyone. Again, this class warfare argument you use to say this side didn't get cut enough or that side got cut too much is besides the point. You're being so petty, it's really sad.

quote:
I was defending Obama? News to me!


This is what I mean by dishonest. Fit makes a comment about bailouts of GM and the Volt rebate, and you launch into a diatribe about Reagan, Bush, you even brought up Palin!!! If you don't think you're defending Obama, you're not just lying to me, but yourself as well.

Moral relativism is a pretty weak defense, but you're certainly not above using it apparently. But make no mistake, it IS a defense.

You can pretend to be impartial all you want, and feign neutrality. But when you have to dig up a dead president from the 1980's, regurgitate the same old class warfare liberal talking points, and throw in a Palin bash.. well, let's be honest here. You aren't impartial by ANY means.


RE: Ummm...
By WhosNext on 9/10/2010 4:29:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Jason I really have just lost all respect for you after reading this.


Congratulations Jason.


RE: Ummm...
By Kurz on 9/9/2010 6:29:10 PM , Rating: 2
He isn't saying that... He is stating tax credits, taxation, subsidies, are all equally bad since they all pick losers and winners to be determined by the government.

If the taxes were 10% flat for individuals and 5% flat fore business. (Just picking numbers) You'll not have the same disparity with the government deciding who gets those 'incentives'.


"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki