backtop


Print 45 comment(s) - last by flatrock.. on Feb 14 at 3:27 PM

Supporters of EVs say that removing the tax incentive will hurt EV sales

One of the ways that the federal government in the U.S. is trying to push electric vehicles is by offering tax incentives. Those who purchase new electric vehicles are eligible for up to a $7,500 tax credit from Uncle Sam (although President Obama in 2012 wanted to bump that figure even further to $10,000).
 
Some states have also been offering their own tax incentives to encourage residents to “go green.” Notably, California offers up to a $2,500 rebate for the purchase of electric vehicles like the Chevrolet Spark EV or Fiat 500e.
 
Georgia has also offered generous perks in the past, but a new pending bill would eliminate the state’s current [up to] $5,000 tax credit. If the bill passes, it would eliminate the tax break no later than April 1.


2013 Nissan Leaf
 
Advocates of EVs argue that if the state eliminates the tax break for EV buyers it will significantly impact the sales of EVs in the state. But even with the generous tax credit in place (coupled with the federal tax credit), just 1.1 percent of new vehicle registrations in Georgia between January and November were EVs.
 
Despite the higher purchase price of EVs compared to the fossil fuel-burning counterparts, supporters maintain that they are on average a third less costly to maintain/operate over the life of the vehicle.
 
“This frees up a significant amount of money for that consumer, that is then available to stimulate Georgia’s local economies,” EV owner Arthur Blake said. “The more miles driven, the more money saved.”

Source: Bizjournal



Comments     Threshold


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

Good Deal
By tng on 2/13/2014 10:31:42 AM , Rating: 2
I have never seen the need for such a "incentive". Let these things die. A car is either worth buying or not and the buying public should decide that with their own cash, not every taxpayer in the state or country.




RE: Good Deal
By tng on 2/13/2014 10:36:17 AM , Rating: 2
I would also add for all those that have an EV that this statement...
quote:
“The more miles driven, the more money saved.”
is only true for the owner of the EV. It will cost every body else more money in the long run because of the loss of the federal/state taxes that go to maintaining the roads.


RE: Good Deal
By McGaiden on 2/13/14, Rating: -1
RE: Good Deal
By drrockf4d on 2/13/2014 1:20:19 PM , Rating: 4
Wow, you really need to work on your anger and should do a little elementary reading and understanding yourself. Maybe instead of name calling and getting in a huff assuming someone is a climate denialist (sic), you could calm down and read the comment. Nowhere did he mention fossil fuel industry subsidies. The roads in the country are paid for through fuel taxes. An electric car owner will not buy fuel so they will not pay any taxes for the roads. Essentially they get to travel the public roads (you didn't build that) for free.

The system is broken with the new fuel efficient vehicles being pushed with incentives and laws are actually decreasing the fuel taxes and that decreases the amount of money for road maintenance and building. The higher taxes on diesel discourage cars from being built with it because it is assumed it will be used in a heavy truck that will do more damage to the roads than a car. The only real solution to these problems is to tax by miles driven which will allow the electric cars to pay their share of the road costs.


RE: Good Deal
By bsd228 on 2/13/2014 3:00:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The roads in the country are paid for through fuel taxes


fuel taxes pay only a portion of the costs of our road infrastructure. Sales taxes and bond measures (paid by income taxes) are just as significant.


RE: Good Deal
By tng on 2/13/2014 1:56:45 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Everytime Detroit car makers have some issue, they shout at the top of their lungs and the government bails them out. And in addition they get a lot of tax credits and investment from state and local government.
Well... to be fair here, I was against any bailouts, the whole GM thing was politically motivated.

Also shouting at the top of their lungs really helped them with the new CAFE standards didn't it?
quote:
How can people be surprised that America is doing worse and worse on academic tests...
Ironically, your post illustrates your own point here very well...


RE: Good Deal
By shuninxuo on 2/13/2014 6:36:29 PM , Rating: 2
"Or maybe you're a dumb-fucked climate denialist?"

You mean there actually is a climate?! I've always denied the existence of climate. I refuse to believe in climate!


RE: Good Deal
By espaghetti on 2/13/2014 9:42:46 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You think the environmental damage can be wished away with gasoline cars?


I am extraordinarily interested in what form of transportation you believe will wish it away. Right now and for the foreseeable future, coal, natural gas and nuclear are what is charging EVs. Solar and wind have yet to prove themselves economically viable.

One more point, it's 39° and clear right now. Yesterday it was about 25° and cloudy. Of course climate changes.


RE: Good Deal
By tayb on 2/13/2014 11:15:32 AM , Rating: 4
I agree. While we are talking about electric cars let us all kill the following tax credits that no one seems to ever complain about.

Purchasing a new home (incentive to buy a house)
Earned income (incentive to work)
American opportunity (incentive to go to college)
Lifetime learning (another incentive to go to college)
Savers (incentive to save)
Childcare (incentive to procreate)
Energy efficient home upgrades (incentive to conserve energy)
Adoption (incentive to adopt children)
Health coverage (incentive to stay healthy)

And the list goes on and on and on.

If the free market doesn't support home buying, higher education, child care, adoption, or any other credits these things should just die. Not every tax payer in the state or country should be bothered with this garbage.

I wonder why no one ever complains about these gifts from the public treasury but people seem to bitch endlessly about EV credits?


RE: Good Deal
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 2/13/2014 11:18:38 AM , Rating: 2
Lawnchair, beer, cigars, Reclaimer, Fitcamaro.

**puts on shades**


RE: Good Deal
By Reclaimer77 on 2/13/14, Rating: 0
RE: Good Deal
By amanojaku on 2/13/2014 11:24:49 AM , Rating: 2
People DO complain about it. Just not too often on this site, because none of the other credits are related to TECHNOLOGY (except for the energy efficiency credits). But if you read comments from people opposed to EV tax credits, it's clear that they don't like the rest of the incentives, subsidies, etc...


RE: Good Deal
By Solandri on 2/13/2014 1:38:24 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, a lot of those subsidies are to help offset things where the costs are front-loaded. e.g. the LED/CFL light bulb subsidies. People tend to buy incandescents because they're cheapest in the store. Their up-front cost are lower, but in the long run the extra electricity they burn makes them more expensive. A 100 Watt incandescent left on 6 hours/day uses about $25 worth of electricity per year, vs about $6 for a CFL/LED. So you can make back the purchase price difference in just a year or two.

The subsidy helps correct this mismatch in market pricing (actually it helps compensate for the lack of mathematical prowess of the average buyer, who is unable to calculate the lifetime cost of the bulb for himself - it steers him to making the right purchase based on purchase price alone; the DOE Energysaver labels which show appliance electricity usage in $/yr do the same thing). These types of subsidies are actually good for the economy, because they channel people into making more economically efficient decisions (saves them money in the long run).

You can try to make the same argument for EVs - their higher initial purchase cost is offset by their lower lifetime cost to operate in terms of fuel and maintenance. However, unlike the light bulb case, that savings isn't enough to offset the initial purchase price. When you add the two up (purchase + operating costs), the overall lifetime costs are the same with the EV (the battery replacement cost is a bit dubious to me, and removing it results in roughly the same lifetime costs; same with the engine replacement cost except I can see spending that much in general engine maintenance). (Sorry for the non-link, but for some reason the site seems to reject a lot of links now.)
www.dailyfinance.com/2013/06/24/gas-vs-electric-c ars-cost-comparison/

So what you're left with is that the subsidy is there to encourage R&D of the technology. But if that's the case, why even bother with end-user subsidies? Just send the money straight to the companies as an R&D grant. Then all of the money you spend is focused on advancing the technology, instead of going into the pockets of people who adopt the technology and muddying up the sales/economic viability figures.


RE: Good Deal
By Nutzo on 2/13/2014 5:18:45 PM , Rating: 2
Except you are assuming people are too stupid to do a cost/benefit analysist.

These subsidies are mainly used to push someone's opinion of what others should be buying, or to make over priced item seem cost competative by making other pay part of the price.

Using your example, I need a light bulb for basement storage area. I need a 100 watt bulb, and it's only used for an average of 30 minutes a month. How many decades will it take for me to pay for that CFL

What if the bulb is for a storage shed in my back yard, and the CFL won't work when it gets below freezing? Guess I'm out of luck since they are not allowed to make incandescent 100 watt bulbs any more.


RE: Good Deal
By tng on 2/13/2014 1:51:01 PM , Rating: 2
All of the "incentives" that he named there I am for getting rid of them all. The only one I see there that maybe is worth it is the Adoption Credit.


RE: Good Deal
By Rukkian on 2/13/2014 11:47:22 AM , Rating: 1
I wish I could give you a +6 on this. While I do not like credits for things like EV's, it is necessary in just about any industry to get it started. All those opposed to this credit, however seem to think that all the other credits should be fine (since they are receiving benefits form them), but any credit they don't get something from should go away.

Before we start axing credits like this, let get rid of all tax credits. Just go to a flat tax of some sort (usage tax?) and get the government out of picking winners and losers.

I would even think that charitible contributions should not be tax deductible at all. If people do not think something is worth putting their money too (instead of everybody's money), then that charity should go away. Lets let the markets truly decide.


RE: Good Deal
By Reclaimer77 on 2/13/14, Rating: 0
RE: Good Deal
By Rukkian on 2/13/2014 1:15:37 PM , Rating: 2
My point is why is it any different - that is right because it does not benefit you (or me either). I don't own and ev and dont plan to, I do not even think they are viable right now, however they may be in the future - my crystal ball is on the fritz).

How does it have anything to do with being liberal with what I said? If anything, it is libertarian. Even though those 2 share a few letters, they are really opposed in most ways.

The point of this, is you are screaming about EV credits because you hate EV's and it doesn't benefit you. Instead of just being against the ones that don't benefit me, I say get rid of all of them - even the ones that do benefit me.

I am not in favor of this credit, I just don't think worrying so much about this one credit, when in the end it is so minuscule compared to all the other credits is not worth it. Just because this is new, does not mean it is bad, no matter what Faux News tells you.


RE: Good Deal
By Reclaimer77 on 2/13/14, Rating: 0
RE: Good Deal
By Rukkian on 2/13/2014 2:46:24 PM , Rating: 2
You keep responding to me calling me a liberal, when I have always said I don't agree with this.

quote:
That's your opinion. If you need to create that illusion that someone is sitting around "hating" EV's to make sense of the issue, maybe it's too complex for you.


This is coming for the person that whenever any article that has any connection (even just perceived) to anything automobile that is electrified in any way, you immediately start going on and on about the tax credit, and how it is the end of life as we know it.

quote:
Not to mention most subsidies aren't nearly as large in impact. Depending on state, you can get over $10k! Just for a car? Come on....


Yet, by your own accord, nobody is buying these, so the overall effect to the budget (either federally, or state) is negligible.

I don't personally like the way these are run. I do not think there should be a tax credit. With all of the other credits out there, I can't get all worked up about anything that is attempting to advance technology right here in the USA. If the other credits were not there, then yeah, I understand it should not be either.

In the end, it seems, it would not matter what this was, if Obama put it in, you would be against it. If any right-wing put something through (even this very program), and Faux news said it was good, you would be all over it.

I don't like Obama, I don't think he is doing a good job. I don't have an affiliation with either party, as I think they are both corrupt, and anybody who just tows the party line (for any party) is just reinforcing the current client in the government.


RE: Good Deal
By Reclaimer77 on 2/13/2014 7:11:45 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Text You keep responding to me calling me a liberal, when I have always said I don't agree with this


And you keep digging up that pathetically immature "faux" nonsense in a serious discussion. Which seems to the #1 play in the liberal arsenal of stupid.

For someone who doesn't agree with this, you sure are passionate to shoot others down who don't either.

I can tell when someone isn't being honest, especially with themselves. Wanna come at me on this, at least come at me straight.


RE: Good Deal
By TheEquatorialSky on 2/13/2014 12:51:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
...get the government out of picking winners and losers.


Yes.

In my opinion, the government should be like a referee to a football game. They are there to establish and uphold the rules of the game, not give free first downs to the losing team.

Libertarians probably wouldn't like this, but I'd also have the referees level the playing field by continuously breaking-up the winning teams and reforming new teams out of a composite of all players. In economic terms, destroy monopolies and companies "too big to fail" by continuously breaking them into smaller entities... even if that means less overall economic efficiency.


RE: Good Deal
By jimbojimbo on 2/13/2014 11:57:53 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Earned income (incentive to work)
In actuality it's an incentive not to work.


RE: Good Deal
By TheEquatorialSky on 2/13/2014 12:42:47 PM , Rating: 2
I realize you're being sarcastic, but I agree with removing those tax incentives. We currently need high-paid professionals and/or software to migrate the current tax code. Why not make state and federal taxes a straightforward progressive income tax?

People don't need to be incentivized to do any of those things. The incentive to buy a house is a higher quality of living. The incentive to work is a higher quality of living. The incentive to go to college is a higher quality of living. The incentive of health care is a higher quality of living...

All the tax code has seemed to accomplish is distort the market. Houses got outrageously expensive because government reduced the cost of getting a mortgage. College got outrageously expensive because government reduced the cost/difficulty of attending. More people have children today that shouldn't because government reduced the cost of child-rearing.


RE: Good Deal
By tng on 2/13/2014 2:05:38 PM , Rating: 3
Social Engineering...

The boobs in congress want to push the us "common folk" to do what they want and this is how they do it.


RE: Good Deal
By japlha on 2/13/2014 1:01:22 PM , Rating: 2
Fine by me.

Just end taxes period then each person can dictate where their money goes. There would be no need for these tax credits.


RE: Good Deal
By Motoman on 2/13/2014 1:10:19 PM , Rating: 2
Uh-huh. Because helping to fund your purchase of an EV is of equal social value to those programs. A$$hat.

All those things you listed are clearly massively beneficial to the welfare of the citizen, and really society as a whole.

Giving incentives to buy an EV is simply an abusive posture against everyone else.

STFU and GTFO.


RE: Good Deal
By Rukkian on 2/13/2014 1:24:10 PM , Rating: 5
Everyone of those mentioned is a form of the government subsidizing a certain life style.

There is no reason the country as a whole should be subsidizing people to buy ev's, buy houses, have children, go to college, etc. If somebody wants to do that, let them, but only if it makes sense to them.


RE: Good Deal
By Motoman on 2/14/2014 11:50:47 AM , Rating: 1
I...I...I can't repel morony of this magnitude.

Here's your sign.


RE: Good Deal
By tayb on 2/13/2014 4:14:49 PM , Rating: 2
I was waiting for you to show up and make your hypocrisy known. Thanks for joining.


RE: Good Deal
By Motoman on 2/14/2014 11:49:41 AM , Rating: 2
Game, set, match. You lose. You don't get to see me prove you wrong and then declare victory, Napoleon.


RE: Good Deal
By flyingpants1 on 2/13/2014 11:36:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All those things you listed are clearly massively beneficial to the welfare of the citizen, and really society as a whole.


Since you're obviously one of the climate change skeptic people, we won't bring up that obvious point. But let me ask you a question: how do you feel about the fact you, along with all of your friends and family, are probably breathing poisonous gas (exhaust fumes) every single day? The fact that living in a major city will take at least a couple years off your life? Or are we skeptical about that too?

What if it were cigarettes? Not the best analogy, but I could sort of see the argument for a tax break on e-cigarettes that produce absolutely no (first- or second-hand) smoke. Or do you want that type of smoke blowing in your kids' faces as well?

How's this for beneficial:
-Cleaner air, which translates into longer life expectancy, less disease
-No more deaths, accidental or otherwise, from leaving the car on in the garage
-Less noise pollution
-Less energy consumption (more efficient vehicles in general), slower resource depletion
-Possibility of 100% solar power (2kW panel = 12k miles/year 100% free driving forever)
-Less dependency on foreign oil

And that's without even mentioning global warming.

I don't agree with the way the tax rebates are implemented, but I wouldn't mind some form of incentive for EVs. I think a good incentive would be to give everyone who buys one an all-in-one 2kW solar system:
-Gives the consumer free driving for life
-Shuts up the green people
-Shuts up the anti-green people who claim EVs are still dirty
-Shuts up the anti-subsidy people because the price of such a system falls every year.
-All while subsidizing solar.

Everybody wins.

At your age, you should have learned by now not to swear at people who disagree with you.


RE: Good Deal
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 12:20:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But let me ask you a question: how do you feel about the fact you, along with all of your friends and family, are probably breathing poisonous gas (exhaust fumes) every single day?


That's a lie. Air quality today is better than at any point since the Industrial Revolution. Enough with the hyperbole. Even in major cities, the air is NOT poisonous!

quote:
The fact that living in a major city will take at least a couple years off your life?


Another lie. There's not a single credible study that even comes close to supporting that.

I'm tired of the lies. If you want an EV, fine! Go buy an EV. But don't pretend there's some horrible air quality issue that your EV is going to solve.

quote:
And that's without even mentioning global warming.


You say this as a huge part of the country is currently getting snowed-in for the second time in as many weeks. Yes please, save us from all the "warming".


RE: Good Deal
By flyingpants1 on 2/14/2014 10:49:04 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, I knew it! An air pollution denier!

quote:
Air quality today is better than at any point since the Industrial Revolution.


That's not an argument at all. That's like saying today's cigarettes cause less lung cancer than ever before.

quote:
Even in major cities, the air is NOT poisonous!

It's extremely well-established that car exhaust is poisonous, the only question is, to what degree is it poisonous? I'm not naive enough to think that there are absolutely no long term effects when I inhale diesel fumes on a daily basis.

quote:
You say this as a huge part of the country is currently getting snowed-in for the second time in as many weeks. Yes please, save us from all the "warming".


Are you insane? Global warming refers to the rise in average global temperature, not the temperature in your specific country. I am going to find you in real life and eat your head.


RE: Good Deal
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2014 11:17:12 AM , Rating: 2
"Global Warming" (btw isn't it climate change?) has been attributed to everything from a tornado to a drought to a snowstorm to pretty much any natural event. A better question is what isn't an indicator of global warming. Since, you know, NONE of the warming predictions actually came true.

quote:
An air pollution denier!


Wait what? Please, enough with the "denier" nonsense.

Nobody is denying there's air pollution. It's simply not nearly as high as you alarmist are pretending. And it's dropping steadily! You people act like we're living in China or something.

quote:
I'm not naive enough to think that there are absolutely no long term effects when I inhale diesel fumes on a daily basis.


Then don't inhale diesel fumes, move out of the city. Just don't tell me that forcing me to pay for your EV is the solution.


RE: Good Deal
By Motoman on 2/14/2014 11:47:46 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Since you're obviously one of the climate change skeptic people


...what? I'm one of the few people with a brain around here who's actually made an attempt to point out that the "skeptics" are clinically insane.

Do ICE cars generate CO2? Yes. Does driving an EV mean you're not doing the same thing? No. You're just displacing it back to the power-plant instead of doing it with your car. An EV isn't a free lunch there. If you want to make a significant difference in personal vehicle CO2 output, try to convince people to switch to mass transit if they live in cities, or to use more efficient vehicles when it's appropriate for them to do so. But EVs aren't the answer to that question. Especially granted the massive amounts of CO2 that come from the coal power plants that feed the EVs.

I've said many, many times that if you want EVs to be valid, first you have to build the trillion-dollar smart grid and whackloads more nuke plants. Which we should be doing anyway.

And then you have to deal with the massive problems of the EVs themselves...like horribly deficient range, incapability to recharge them in anything vaguely approaching gas-refill time (and stop with the BS dreams of battery-swap stations all over the country - that is *never* happening), vastly higher cost of the vehicle, the lifespan of the batteries (which then become so much toxic waste) and the high cost of replacing them, on top of the problems of CO2 generation to create the electricity needed to feed them and the environmental losses in getting that electricity to them (without a smart grid). And on top of that, you as$hats tend to be stupid enough to scream that you want wireless charging for your EVs at home, since the 5 seconds it would take to plug it in is vastly too much for your limp little wrists to take. Thereby wasting maybe 10% of the energy that *does* get to your house, massively increasing the cost of the energy that has to be generated in the first place, creating yet more CO2 as well.

You people seem to think that you'll all automatically start sh1tting rainbows just by buying an EV...and you're just as clinically insane about that as climate change deniers are.

Oh...and I don't simply swear at people who disagree with me. I swear at people who are f%cking stupid.


RE: Good Deal
By flatrock on 2/14/2014 3:13:32 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I wonder why no one ever complains about these gifts from the public treasury but people seem to bitch endlessly about EV credits?


If you haven't heard people bitching about the other credits then you are being selective in who you listen too.

There are lots of different groups of people proposing tax reform that are very opposed to the government doing social engineering through the tax system.


By gherkin007 on 2/13/2014 2:00:25 PM , Rating: 2
I look at it as another industry to make this country stronger and maybe become a leader in the global marketplace.

Consumer Reports rated the Tesla Model S car as the best ever car in May 2013. Best. ever. car. An American company, are we hatin' on it because a democrat is in the white house.

Sure, let's get rid of tax subsidies and credits...to the oil and gas industry. I think that industry is on its feet after 100+ years, they receive more than 4 billion a YEAR in subsidies. Seriously.

I know they are up in arms over that subsidy on Fox. Oh, yeah, they never talk about it.





By TheEquatorialSky on 2/13/2014 3:05:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sure, let's get rid of tax subsidies and credits...to the oil and gas industry.


Take a moment to understand *how* the energy sector is subsidized. Remove the subsidies and you lose the strategic petroleum reserve, tax breaks for farmers who use fuel but not public roads and reduced heating oil costs for the poor. The vast majority of oil subsidies were designed to help third parties, not the oil companies. Whether such subsidies should end is still a worthy debate...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2012/04/2...

Very few people are inherently against EVs or the Tesla Model S. People are against giving companies unfair competitive advantage and wealthy people substantial tax breaks on luxury cars. If people want to buy fancy electric cars for their free-market unsubsidized price... great!


By Solandri on 2/13/2014 3:16:16 PM , Rating: 2
The subsidies for oil and gas amount less than 0.3% of their revenue. Contrast that to renewables whose subsidies are up around 10% of revenue (for a $80k Tesla S, the $7.5k federal subsidy + $5k Georgia subsidy would be 15.6%).

Don't get me wrong, I'm actually for subsidies and R&D funding for renewables because having alternative energy sources is always good. But trying to paint the oil and gas companies as bogeymen who are unfairly helped by subsidies is just silly. The government actually makes far more money from oil and gas fuel taxes than it pays in subsidies. $27 billion for federal fuel taxes (2009), $41 billion in state and local fuel taxes (2011). I'm sure the oil industry would be overjoyed if you offered to eliminate any government fiscal interference in their business - i.e. get rid of both subsidies and fuel taxes.

www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/pubs/hf/pl1102 8/chapter6.cfm
www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm ?Docid=401


By Nutzo on 2/13/2014 5:26:06 PM , Rating: 2
The Tesla is an amazing car, but also an expensive car that most people can't afford.

I resent giving $10,000 ($7,500 fed, and $2,500 state) of taxpayers money to the people who can afford buy one (and most who would buy one even without the subsidy)


About time
By half_duplex on 2/13/2014 10:29:17 AM , Rating: 2
In 50 years we're going to look back and be amazed at the amount of effort put into propping up this mythical scheme.




By jimbojimbo on 2/13/2014 12:05:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The more miles driven, the more money saved.
Well, shouldn't that be more like "The more miles driven, 100 miles at a time, the more money saved?"

Why would anybody complain about the state trying to save money on such a HUGE tax credit? For the extremely rich they can buy a EV car for $12,500 off sticker price?? That's ridiculous! Who pays $5,000 of state tax? You have to be making a lot of money to be able to take advantage of that.

Even with the incredible credits you get the state is not jumping on the bandwagon. That just shows the consumers don't want it.

Georgia, I hope you get rid of it.




No sh1t
By Motoman on 2/13/2014 1:08:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Supporters of EVs say that removing the tax incentive will hurt EV sales


Of course it will. Because it's eminently clear that EVs are nowhere near worth it without taxpayer-punishing incentives that make *everyone else* help pay for your new wind-up toy car.

The incentives were a horrible abuse of the market, and taxpayer, to begin with. Whatever shortfall that was actualized via these incentives was made up on taxes by the rest of us...and/or the loss of funds to other public services, etc. Only horribly daft morons believe they were "free." Nothing is free. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

Make EVs prove they can compete on their own merits. If they can't, then they aren't fully baked yet.




Why single out EVs
By flatrock on 2/14/2014 3:27:45 PM , Rating: 2
One of the reasons I'm against the EV tax credit is that it singles out a specific technology and gives it preferential treatment at taxpayer expense.

I think that electric vehicles and hybrids will have their time, but it is still a way off from being economically feasible. There are other technologies that show more short term promise. Let the auto industry and consumers find the best solutions, not a bunch of politicians.




"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone














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