Brand New Leaf (2012 SL) from Carmax for only $26K?

[LEAFfan]

In Virginia there are numerous dealers with "NEW" LEAF's with around 50-400miles on them never titled. DEMO, Dealer test vehicles where the dealer purchased the car outright, recieved the credit and selling the car for the the depreciated cost.

Yes I do believe reading the 7500 credit is for the initial buyer. If you want the credit upfront go LEASE one, youll get the credits upfront then 2-3months down the road buy it out of the lease, You can play and beat the system that way. (might have to wait 6months) either way youll end up with lower payments (possibly) those first few months. Or just take advantage of that $26k aka New Leaf at an already discounted rate and be ahead in the end.


Only suggestion is to take it to a NISSAN dealer and have them run the computer and do a battery check, make sure it pans out then definately do it for $26k.

That so called battery check is almost worthless. They need to borrow someone's BCM/Gid meter and check the %.


Carmax is a shady business, but sometimes you can get some deals.

 

[Yogi62]

The deal is real! These are new cars eligible for the tax credit. The sales associates (one of which owns a leaf) were really amazed at the pricing and were giddy about how fast they were selling.

Keep in mind the seller isn;'t just a CarMax, it is actually CarMax Nissan of White Marsh. They are one of six(?) CarMax dealerships that are also Nissan dealers and sell new Nissan. We all know that incentives are different from dealer to dealer and possibly there was some incentive added to get their new car numbers up, but I wasn't going to question how they reached their no-haggle number.

In any case, one of the two blue SL's is now in my trailer on the way back up to Boston. I paid $23,972 for an SL, including all fees. I still need to pay 6.5% + $75 to Massachusetts, and it cost about $400 to run down there with my truck and trailer, but in the end it will come out to:

23,972 + 400 + 1,558 + 75 - 7,500 = $18,505.

Looks like there are two left, and they may be gone by Tuesday.

 

[willk55]

Wow! Congratulations. That is a few hundred dollars less than my lease residual.

 

[braineo]

Congrats on the deal/steal... with GA 5K tax credit that would be a 13k new car. I was able to confirm with Nissan the in service date when I purchased a 2011 SL last month for 26k+ tax. After Fed & Ga credits it will end up 16k with taxes. i'm very happy car was delivered to my home and all paperwork was done at my breakfast table.

 

[EdmondLeaf]

That is really great deal but maybe also indication that MY13 price will be much lower. After all why such a rush to clean up 12 inventory?

 

[evnow]

"You also ask if the Federal Tax Savings where include in the price. It was not"

I've no idea what that means - definitely doesn't confirm that tax credit has not already been claimed.

I suggest you explain to them that if the car has already been titled, you won't get the credit. Ask them to give it in writing that the car has not been previously titled and the $7,500 federal tax credit on the car has not been taken by anyone else, including the dealer.

 

[Herm]

That is really great deal but maybe also indication that MY13 price will be much lower. After all why such a rush to clean up 12 inventory?

Much higher range?

 

[EdmondLeaf]

or estimated value Dec 2013?

 

[cwerdna]

A quick search shows they have 4 for sale,
http://www.carmax.com/enus/search-results/default.html?ANa=68&N=4294966976+4294961840&Ne=4&D=90&zip=92130&pD=0&pI=0&pT=400&pC=200&pB=0&No=0&Ep=search:findcar:home&Rp=R&PP=20&sV=List&CD=662+14+966+240+190+398+9&Q=a25dc578-2720-4105-8d00-ba8fabf8663b" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, supposedly new vehicles. Under warranty it says "balance of 3 year-36,000 miles". If it is new why would it state "balance of".

I too am puzzled by "Balance of 3 Years or 36,000 Miles". That makes no sense for a new vehicle.

I really want this to be true and would jump on it myself if I didn't see a risk of being screwed out of the $7500 Federal tax credit and $2500 CVRP.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see whether these lucky (?) folks get audited and denied the credit. The price is just SO LOW that it sounds fishy.

 

[cdub]

i know the GOM is crappy and worthless, but how do you get a car to show 68 miles with 11 bars?
i usually see 80s and charge to 10 bars.

wouldnt a dealer turn off the AC/Heat and put it in ECO to show the max.
that means this GOM really reads about 58.

alright, i see it is in P which reads like D.
but 68 on the GOM with 11 bars?

I get that all the time. I live in the foothills and I like to drive 75mph up a huge hill (the 2 freeway) on the ride home.

It doesn't mean anything. But my mileage is 50-60 with a 80% charge. But that's with the heater and I drive like a bat out of hell.

I get 70ish with full bars. But then again I've never let my car get below one bar.

 

[cwerdna]

Does the IRS really have the ability to cross check the VINs of cars getting the $7500 rebate? I wouldn't be surprised to find the taxpayer is getting fleeced right and left on this.

I think question is different here, only original owner get MCO, after that title. If dealer registered car than one will get title no MCO. Honesty of taxpayer? I asked dealer selling "new" Leaf on ebay for 23K if comes with MCO, he never reply.

MCO?

 

[Yogi62]

A quick search shows they have 4 for sale,
http://www.carmax.com/enus/search-results/default.html?ANa=68&N=4294966976+4294961840&Ne=4&D=90&zip=92130&pD=0&pI=0&pT=400&pC=200&pB=0&No=0&Ep=search:findcar:home&Rp=R&PP=20&sV=List&CD=662+14+966+240+190+398+9&Q=a25dc578-2720-4105-8d00-ba8fabf8663b" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, supposedly new vehicles. Under warranty it says "balance of 3 year-36,000 miles". If it is new why would it state "balance of".

I too am puzzled by "Balance of 3 Years or 36,000 Miles". That makes no sense for a new vehicle.

I really want this to be true and would jump on it myself if I didn't see a risk of being screwed out of the $7500 Federal tax credit and $2500 CVRP.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see whether these lucky (?) folks get audited and denied the credit. The price is just SO LOW that it sounds fishy.

There are a multitude of reasons the price would be low, and I suspect it won't look that low compared to 2013's with better range, but the range is good enough for me. Interestingly, the NADA trade in value for a clean 2012 SL with 4 miles is 23,300.

For the "balance" question:

The normal warranty is for 36 months from the in service date and 36,000 miles on the odometer. It is not for 36,000 miles after purchase, or in this case 36,004 miles. So it is the balance of 36,000 miles.

For the "audit/denied question:

If anyone is going to get denied, it would be the dealer because they are not entitled to the credit on a resale. A leasing company the (i.e. NMAC) can claim the credit if the car is leased. In this case it was straight cash sale of a new vehicle with 4 miles on it.

from http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxevb.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To be certified for the credit by the manufacturer, the vehicle must meet the following requirements:

• The vehicle must be made by a manufacturer (i.e., it doesn't include conventional vehicles converted to electric drive).
  It must be treated as a motor vehicle for purposes of title II of the Clean Air Act.
  It must have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of not more than 14,000 lbs.
  It must be propelled to a significant extent by an electric motor which draws electricity from a battery which has a capacity of not less than 4 kilowatt hours and is capable of being recharged from an external source of electricity.

The following requirements must also be met for a certified vehicle to qualify:

• 
  The original use of the vehicle commences with the taxpayer—it must be a new vehicle.
  The vehicle is acquired for use or lease by the taxpayer, and not for resale. (The credit is only available to the original purchaser of a new, qualifying vehicle. If a qualifying vehicle is leased to a consumer, the leasing company may claim the credit.)
  The vehicle is used mostly in the United States.
  The vehicle must be placed in service by the taxpayer during or after the 2010 calendar year.

 

[Weatherman]

Does the IRS really have the ability to cross check the VINs of cars getting the $7500 rebate? I wouldn't be surprised to find the taxpayer is getting fleeced right and left on this.

I think question is different here, only original owner get MCO, after that title. If dealer registered car than one will get title no MCO. Honesty of taxpayer? I asked dealer selling "new" Leaf on ebay for 23K if comes with MCO, he never reply.

MCO?

Manufacturers Certificate of Origin

Whoever is in possession of a car before it's titled should have this document. It's probably the easiest way to confirm that you will be able to take the tax credit. If the seller isn't willing to show you the document, or doesn't know what it is, then you can be pretty sure something fishy is going on.

 

[hyperlexis]

I say go for it!

As an attorney, I would LOVE to represent you in a fraud suit against CarMax, if, in fact they have already used the tax credit on this 'new' car.....

(I am looking to buy a Leaf and I actually saw this CM ad and thought the same thing. How can it be claimed as 'new' if CM is not a true Nissan dealer? Or can CM get untitled cars to sell as brand new? When you buy from CM, are the new cars titled to CM then re-sold? I have never dealt with them so I am not knowledgeable on this.)

Honestly this only emphasizes the urgent need for EV tax credit reform. They really should be converted into true 'rebates' available immediately at the time of sale, not subsequent credits.

 

[TonyWilliams]

"You also ask if the Federal Tax Savings where include in the price. It was not"
If there is some way to check before hand please let me know.

It doesn't matter to me if the taking of the credit is legit for the dealer or not. This scam is a COMMON scam that I'm trying to protect you from.

I would have them include in the deal a statement that read:

************

The seller (CarMax) has not, nor will not, apply, file, claim, or otherwise pursue or accept the USA federal tax credit, otherwise known as the "Qualified Plug-in Electric Drive Motor Vehicle Credit" for the following vehicle: (Nissan LEAF VIN xxxxxx) sold this date (today's date).

In addition, the seller guarantees that there are no known previous applications, filings, claims or otherwise pursuit of this federal tax credit made BY ANY ENTITY extent to (CarMax) concerning the specified sale vehicle. That includes private parties, persons, or entities who are, or have been, employees, agents, contracted, or otherwise directly related to the seller (CarMax).

The specific information and application of this tax credit is found in Internal Revenue Service Form 8936 and for businesses, Form 8900.

This referenced vehicle is sold as "new", and the seller (CarMax) holds and will transfer to the buyer the Manufacturers Certificate of Origin.

Only the legitimate buyer (your name) shall apply, file, claim or otherwise accept said tax credit.

********

I must add that anything written in this transmittal is not legal advise, and that I am not licensed to practice law in the state of California, nor anywhere else. Consult your own counsel concerning any legal issues regarding these issues. No client / attorney privilege has been established.

 

[Insureit1]

In Maryland Carmax is a franchised dealer for Nissan, Toyota and Scion. All of the new 2012's listed on Carmax's website show "balance of factory" warranty while all of the 2013's show "manufacturer warranty applies". I will ask for the MCO when I pick up the car. I have probably bought 6 new cars from Carmax over the years and they have always had the best price I could find shopping other dealers in my area. On top of that they have a true no haggle approach and make the buying process painless. When I was looking for a Prius in 2010 they had the only red Prius V I could find (they had the best price as well). I called them and told them I was coming to look at the car and 40 minutes after I arrived (after a test drive of 15 minutes) I was done with the paperwork and driving home. I much prefer their no nonsense approach to the back and forth that most dealers engage in. Before I sign the paperwork I will confirm everything VERY thoroughly but I am confident the tax credit will be mine. If not I have a forum member here that can help with the fraud suit that would be forthcoming.

 

[cwerdna]

^^^
Good luck to you. I still find that it sounds way too good to be true. You're lucky that the dealer's local to you and you can better watch what's happening and see the car, paperwork, whether the guys seem shady, etc. vs. me being on the other side of the country.

For me, it'd be a $10K gamble ($7.5K Federal tax + $2.5K CVRP).

Honestly this only emphasizes the urgent need for EV tax credit reform. They really should be converted into true 'rebates' available immediately at the time of sale, not subsequent credits.

Agree. This would lower the upfront cost, make more people eligible and would prevent this type of non-sense from happening (due to the delays involved w/claiming the tax credit, waiting to see if the IRS rejects it, etc.)

 

[evnow]

Honestly this only emphasizes the urgent need for EV tax credit reform. They really should be converted into true 'rebates' available immediately at the time of sale, not subsequent credits.

It may be "better" - but it would need to be authorized every year as part of the budget. Can you see it pass through this congress every year ?

 

[hyperlexis]

Honestly this only emphasizes the urgent need for EV tax credit reform. They really should be converted into true 'rebates' available immediately at the time of sale, not subsequent credits.

It may be "better" - but it would need to be authorized every year as part of the budget. Can you see it pass through this congress every year ?

Why would it have to be done that way, every year?

Also, I thought we didn't actually have a new fed budget yet in place, i.e. one that was proposed and passed. They just keep extending the prior ones?

Something must be done, regardless. I'm surprised more EV owners are not actually lobbying their congressmen for changes over this, frankly. Because right now, every single new qualifying EV immediately loses value upon sale for the full $7,500+, basically. -- Regardless of whether the first owner actually ever saw that full credit from the IRS, he will still get hit with the loss. It's factored in by the market. A used car buyer would expect the full discount be incuded in the price (and then some for mileage and normal wear and depreciation), because so many other available used EVs have had the credit applied after initial sale. This, therefore artificially, and unfairly pulls the depreciation of EVs down for every new buyer. If the Feds' goal is to increase use of EVs, forcing less wealthy buyers into the position that they will be losing the same, large amount of value on their new cars, just driving them off the dealers lots, as would wealthy buyers with higher tax liability, yet they won't even be able to claim the same full tax credit as did wealthier buyers, would be a significant deterrent to such people buying EVs. (Buy an EV, but because of your income you only qualify for $5,000 of the $7,500 in IRS rebate, plus, to boot, your car will still, inherently, depreciate for the full $7,500 immediately....) A real kick in the teeth, thank you.

The manufacturers and legislators have a serious pickle on their hands with this issue and something needs to be done to publicize and address the problem in a fair, equal manner.

 

[evnow]

Why would it have to be done that way, every year?

Because, money would have to be set aside for that purpose, unlike tax credits, which are just part of the tax code and will continue untill congress changes it (or when it is slated to expire).