New EV tax credits signed into law as part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 have remained a hot topic over the past few months for a number of reasons – chiefly among them, raw material sourcing requirements that determine whether or not a particular model is eligible for the credit or not. There’s also a lot of confusion pertaining to the way MSRP requirements were determined for eligible models, though the Ford Escape PHEV is on that short list, for now at least. Regardless, though Ford CEO Jim Farley still believes the new EV tax credits will be beneficial for the company and both its retail and commercial customers alike, U.S. Senator and Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee chair Joe Manchin doesn’t feel that way at all, according to Reuters.
Rather, Manchin has called on the U.S. Treasury to pause the implementation of the new EV tax credits following that agency’s newly-issued guidance that will allow automakers to take advantage of commercial vehicle tax credits for consumer leasing that do not have the same, stricter battery sourcing requirements that are present in consumer purchase credits.
Machin said the guidance “bends to the desires of the companies looking for loopholes and is clearly inconsistent with the intent of the law. It only serves to weaken our ability to become a more energy secure nation.”
This contention boils down to the fact that EVs leased by consumers are in fact eligible for the $7,500 credit, including those assembled outside of the U.S. Automakers and EV battery companies have argued that such a move is necessary – at least for now – to make the credits more accessible, as it enables those credits to apply to far more vehicles. Regardless, the new guidance did not change the definition of what constitutes North American assembly for purchases, nor does it place the same sourcing restrictions on commercial purchases.
We’ll have more on the Inflation Reduction Act soon, so be sure and subscribe to Ford Authority for 24/7 Ford news coverage.
Comments
It’s wrong to force tax payers to subsidize someone’s decision to buy an EV in the first place. If they are truly that great, they wouldn’t need subsidies.
Due to the beginning state of the EV industry, early-adopter buyers are being made to pay more for their cars because the economies of scale haven’t kicked in yet. It’s appropriate to subsidize them until the demand, and industry, become fully established.
🥇
Wrong and you know it.
Thurston doesn’t understand the nature of technology incubation and probably doesn’t accept the imperative driving this tech change.
A century ago rural electrification was handled the same way.
you are addicted to petroleum, the biggest and most dangerous sham-scam, and don’t even know it. we need to go further, faster, and get rid of plastics in automobiles whereever we can.
American taxpayers are also supporting subsides to energy companies, farms, the lumber industry, the coal mining industry and countless other products. Policy is set for the good of the economy, not individual market preferences. You’re not really stupid enough to think otherwise are you?
Yes, I think he is. Or else he part of a K-street troll farm. Abject ignorance can’t explain all of it.
It’s also wrong to force taxpayers to pay other countries wars, so what’s new with our government?
As it’s better to just develop and stockpile material to be used against a foe, but not to give it to another country who, when that foe goes on full attack, drives the foe back for a cost under 10% of the US’ annual defense budget?
The penny wise and pound foolishness of comments like yours here is mind bogglingly dense.
the petroleum industry is subsidized out the wazoo. you don’t get the funds…the oil companies do. check yourself before you speak.
“Those new fangled horseless carriages will never replace old Dobbin! There’s no place to buy fuel, they break down every fifty miles, and nobody likes them. The government shouldn’t be spending our tax money to build roads, and subsidize Ford and Standard Oil.” (The government did all the of those things.) Buggy whip makers were soon forced to get other jobs, too. And don’t get me started on what typewriters did to the scribes union, or how the personal computer crushed the typewriter industry. Same story different chapter. Haters always gonna hate.
The EV tax credit is such a scam. Incenting people to buy an EV by offering a tax credit, which could potentially wipe out the buyer’s entire tax obligation for that year. Meanwhile 147M other taxpayers pay their tax obligation, a portion of which funds these EV adopters so they can have a free tax year for making a personal choice to purchase an EV.
As much as I feel the Government wastes money hand over fist, I would rather just see the Government use the money earmarked for these tax credits to subsidize the building of EV charging stations. Don’t give it to the buyers of EVs, give it to the companies as incentive to build reliable, state-of-the-art public charging stations. Once a certain number of public charging stations have been built (say 500,000 since that is the current goal of the US Government), stop the subsidies. Then, if a commercial company wants to build a charging station, it is wholly on their dime as a business venture.
Reality is the tax credits will largely go to people who don’t need them, and would buy them anyways.
Given that most of these new EVs have multi year long waiting lists (whether real buyers or not), it’s pretty clear that the demand for the vehicle exists, and there’s no need to artificially inflate demand via subsidy.
What is needed is a subsidy for low cost EVs. I would be on board with a tax credit for EVs with an MSRP of 33k or less, with the amount being capped to a certain % of the purchase price. This would mean that normal people would be incentivized to buy a modest EV, and people buying status symbol EVs wouldn’t be receiving taxpayer money.
It’ll be so nice when old idiots die out finally.