Search results

Yep, totally agree. I haven't seen the whole Fisker contract, but what you described sounds like real consideration on behalf of Fisker.

I agree with you that Rivian was trying to do what we all wanted. I'm just pointing out that when the IRS takes a look at this, they could easily say that none of us have a binding contract based on the wording of the Rivian Agreement they sent us.

Good question. If an agreement isn't enforceable, then it isn't a contract (and certainly not a binding contract).

I am an attorney (and also an early pre-oder holder), and in my opinion, the Agreement that Rivian sent definitely has some issues. My impression is that Rivian was trying to do the right thing by offering customers a way to utilize the "transition rule" that is currently part of the Inflation...