US HOUSE LIKELY TO KILL EV TAX CREDIT, SPEAKER JOHNSON SAYS

[strykerwsu]

Totally agree. And, actually, I would add that even with the tax credit, the US is unlikely to catch up to China's EV tech.

When I was visiting China regularly around seven years ago, I was struck by how quickly electric vehicles (both scooters and cars) had been adopted. Government restrictions on gasoline-powered scooters, affordability, and advancements in technology made electric scooters incredibly common in cities; intersections would fill with hundreds of electric scooters at every red light, which was astounding to witness.

China's aggressive commitment to electric vehicles, combined with their ability to offer significantly better value at lower price points, positions them to dominate global EV markets in a way the U.S. is unlikely to match anytime soon.

Given current U.S. isolationist tendencies (understatement), I anticipate our auto industry will shrink, leaving only a few major manufacturers primarily serving the domestic market. Additionally, younger generations are likely to shift towards alternative modes of mobility rather than owning and driving cars and trucks as previous generations have. That makes me sad because I love driving my Rivian, and I love EVs (and driving in general), but I don't see people in 20-30 years doing mobility anywhere near how we do it today.

Australia here we come. Once a proud industry completely gone.

Sponsored

 

[SANZC02]

Well then it must be about killing the tax credit, which again I don't understand why that is worse than slave labor. Because the tax credit is what this entire threat is about, right?

Don’t think it is EV related, at least that was not my take.

 

[COdogman]

Chinese slave labor is equivalent with tariffs? Really?

Average citizens of all countries involved are who gets punished for tariffs with higher prices for goods they need to survive. Not the politicians or CCP officials who created the current global economy or the companies who choose to take advantage of it.

So yes, fighting immoral Chinese slave labor by punishing those who have no control over it is immoral. And that can be added to the larger pile of immoral acts being committed in our names.

 

[DayTripping]

In a way, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Subsidies like this one and the solar tax credit, artificially inflate the cost to the customer. Why wouldn't you raise the price by 27% or $7,500? If you know the customer is just going to get it back from the government?

Same thing with college grants and tuition assistance.

 

[SASSquatch]

Only the government is capable of determining the future of our personal transportation? Why can't the free market decide?

Personally, I didn't choose to drive an electric vehicle because of a government incentive or a government mandate. I think it's better transportation. I think it's more fun, and I hate getting gas. To me, it's a better way to drive.

Why do you think the government has to force people to do things they don't want to do? I think the free market will decide that electric cars are better, when they really are better. And it's very close to being that way.

#1 You aren't forced to do anything. Last time I checked, nobody was showing up to your door with a gun to your head forcing you to buy an EV.
#2 We don't reduce planet killing emissions we are dooming ourselves and future generations. Last time I checked, humanity doesn't have a back-up planet unless you think Mars looks good.
#3 When ICE vehicles were introduced the ...you guessed it...government heavily subsidized building out infrastructure to support the development of ICE vehicles because that was way more effective technology then steam engines or horse and buggy but it takes massive amounts of money to build out an entirely new type of technology and bring down costs so that the average consumer can afford it.

 

[Zorg]

This administration seems hell bent on winding the clocks back to 1950s, before EVs, when coal mining ruled (never mind the health costs) and automation didn't exist. This is obviously a quixotic endeavor but damage will be real. Our domestic manufacturers will survive for a while because it's impossible to make inexpensive EV large trucks right now, but it's only a matter of time. We sure live in interesting times.

 

[lefkonj]

Stupid is as stupid does. Don't worry though we will gladly give Billions in subsidies to gas companies who are making record profits.

 

[mkhuffman]

Thanks for the interesting, civil debate. I am going to bow out and agree to disagree.

I am very optimistic about the future, and very optimistic our entrepreneurial spirit and freedom will defeat the international competition.

BEVs are better than ICEVs in most attributes. Eventually they will dominate the market, and our companies will be leading the way.

IMO!

 

[SASSquatch]

Thanks for the interesting, civil debate. I am going to bow out and agree to disagree.

I am very optimistic about the future, and very optimistic our entrepreneurial spirit and freedom will defeat the international competition.

BEVs are better than ICEVs in most attributes. Eventually they will dominate the market, and our companies will be leading the way.

IMO!

I also appreciate the civil debate. We are all in this forum (mostly) because love Rivian and want to see it succeed. Underneath all of that is a commitment to trying preserve and protect humanities only home.

What I find disgusting and unfathomable is how utterly stupid this administration is in not recognizing that embracing a new energy paradigm is paramount to not only saving humanity but maintaining our energy independence and national security.

The Chinese control 90% of the current supply of rare earth minerals that go into technologies like EV batteries. By removing government support for EV infrastructure - and even decommissioning tens of thousands of EXISTING chargers being used at federal facilities - they are disincentivizing investment in these critical technologies. Already OEMs are scaling back plans for facilities and rollouts while the Chinese power ahead to take an insurmountable lead fuelled by massive government investment and subsidy.

We are allowing other countries to dominate the future energy market and we are doing so while embracing old planet killing technologies that are finite and a dead end.

In order for companies to succeed when investing in new technologies that require massive infrastructure scale they must be done in partnership with government investment. Companies will not willingly do the hard work and risk going bankrupt or being left holding the bag if USG pulls out.

I will agree to disagree with you but your confidence in the commercial sector coming to the rescue without government incentive and support is wildly misguided.

The only reason ICE vehicles and gas stations exist today in volume and geographic density is because the US government provided trillions of dollars in subsidies to enable that. Even today, Big Oil, who has record profits, get $50Billion in subsidies every year they don't need.

 

[Who-Dat]

hugely disappointing if this happens. We need incentives and investment into the American EV industry.

" You know not to get political, but I saw yesterday where more Democrats buys EV so that should tell you lot about why this cut is coming and who really wants to save the planet." It sounds like some people in Congress is getting kick back money from BIG Oil.

 

[Thedude]

" You know not to get political, but I saw yesterday where more Democrats buys EV so that should tell you lot about why this cut is coming and who really wants to save the planet." It sounds like some people in Congress is getting kick back money from BIG Oil.

Buying an EV to save the planet has to be the worst argument ever. Personal vehicle transportation is a minuscule portion of carbon emissions and barely even worth the thought to reduce when focusing on the real sources.

 

[HaveBlue]

I don't know. Growing up in the 70s and 80s with daily smog alerts was terrible. Cars got cleaned up and cities no longer have those days. Before cars, horses became a health hazard in cities with overwhelming feces. This is another step and people should be allowed to choose what they want with their money. Premium ice vehicles aren't really cheaper these days than a Rivian. Everything has gotten out of hand. Even if something like slate doesn't get subsidized, it will be a value product as an entry EV.

 

[emoore]

Buying an EV to save the planet has to be the worst argument ever. Personal vehicle transportation is a minuscule portion of carbon emissions and barely even worth the thought to reduce when focusing on the real sources.

I don't think it's minuscule. I seem to remember its around 15% of total carbon emissions. So not a majority but not nothing.

 

[CosmicRivian]

Buying an EV to save the planet has to be the worst argument ever. Personal vehicle transportation is a minuscule portion of carbon emissions and barely even worth the thought to reduce when focusing on the real sources.

While it's true that individual transportation isn't the largest single source of global emissions, it's far from minuscule and absolutely worth addressing here and for EV ownership/usage.

According to the EPA (source link here), in the US, the transportation sector accounts for the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions at 28% in 2022 with light-duty vehicles being a significant contributor within that (so, cars/trucks as part of the larger transportation sector with things like commercial trucking, etc).

A shift to EVs (like our awesome Rivians!), especially when powered by increasingly renewable energy sources, significantly reduces the carbon footprint per mile compared to gasoline vehicles. Every step towards decarbonization, including individual choices, contributes to the larger effort needed to tackle climate change, even though the individual steps alone seem small by comparison.

So, all those Amazon Rivian EDVs I see all over my city means fewer gas-powered delivery vans which means smaller carbon footprint per mile of delivery.

The existing tax incentives for individual EV owners is the value expression of the US government's commitment to encouraging EV adoption, use, and a reduction in the overall carbon footprint for mobility. Eliminating it is more than just the material loss; it reflects a retreat from encouraging and supporting what we as a community value, which is a more sustainable planet (and I realize that not everyone values a more sustainable planet -- why is a mystery to me -- but I think most people would rather have a clean planet than a dirty one, so it's the language I'm using here).

Sponsored