Free EVs for the poor! Seriously!

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

tkdbrusco

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
510
I really can’t take this anymore! Too all of you at or below 400% of the federal poverty line (for a family of 4, that’s $99,000/year), you now get a free car! Oh no, I’m not kidding. If you live in either the greater LA area or San Joaquin Valley regions, you can get anywhere from $6,500-$12,000 to purchase a used (or new) hybrid, plug-in, or electric vehicle. Purchase a plug-in or electric vehicle and they will give you an extra $2,000 to install a charging station in your house. Oh wait, you rent and your landlord won’t allow you to… they passed a law a few months back that requires your landlord to let you put one in if you pay for it. So there you go, in addition to welfare payments, health insurance, food stamps, HUD, and free cell phones, here’s a free car as well. Someone remind me why I still work for a living? Oh yeah, I remember now! To pay for other people’s free stuff! Goodbye sweet America.

http://insideevs.com/california-breaks-new-ground-plug-electric-car-incentive-program-low-income-families/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
tkdbrusco said:
I really can’t take this anymore! ... Someone remind me why I still work for a living? Oh yeah, I remember now! To pay for other people’s free stuff! Goodbye sweet America.
http://insideevs.com/california-breaks-new-ground-plug-electric-car-incentive-program-low-income-families/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
But it's just fine when there's 10k in incentives on a brand new EV since only hard-working guys like you can afford the car or make use of the tax credit?

Makes sense to me to get some 20 yo smoke belching clunkers off the street finally.
 
Previous thread on-topic:

California $ incentives on used BEVs/PHEVs/ICEVs
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=20018" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tkdbrusco said:
I really can’t take this anymore! ... Someone remind me why I still work for a living? Oh yeah, I remember now! To pay for other people’s free stuff! Goodbye sweet America.
Is your outrage selective?

How do you feel about those, some of whom are on this forum, who have received far larger cash incentives from government agencies in the form rebates, tax credits, free ICEVs and "free" charging public charging, for their multiple BEV/PHEVs?

How about those who have received rebates, tax credits, and also benefit from net metering (imposing additional costs on other ratepayers) for their home PV installations?
 
before we commit on this, we should see if it is real and if funds are in place. they are not at this time. it is just a draft of a law.
 
tkdbrusco said:
I really can’t take this anymore! Too all of you at or below 400% of the federal poverty line (for a family of 4, that’s $99,000/year), you now get a free car! Oh no, I’m not kidding. If you live in either the greater LA area or San Joaquin Valley regions, you can get anywhere from $6,500-$12,000 to purchase a used (or new) hybrid, plug-in, or electric vehicle. Purchase a plug-in or electric vehicle and they will give you an extra $2,000 to install a charging station in your house. Oh wait, you rent and your landlord won’t allow you to… they passed a law a few months back that requires your landlord to let you put one in if you pay for it. So there you go, in addition to welfare payments, health insurance, food stamps, HUD, and free cell phones, here’s a free car as well. Someone remind me why I still work for a living? Oh yeah, I remember now! To pay for other people’s free stuff! Goodbye sweet America.

http://insideevs.com/california-breaks-new-ground-plug-electric-car-incentive-program-low-income-families/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That's outrageous -- I thought California was broke ages ago... why would they even consider doing this?
 
Quit your job, go on various social welfare programs, and then report back in a couple years on how awesome (or not) your life is compared to what it is now.
 
While I am in favor of EV subsidies at the present time, I see no need for them to be tied to personal income. It would be enough to change the federal EV tax credit into a point of sale rebate, since lower income people do not earn enough to take the tax credit. Aside from that,it seems to me that there is no shortage of used EV's on the market, at very reasonable prices. Our tax money would be better spent building more charging infrastructure.

Also, I believe there is a positive correlation between personal income and technological and scientific literacy. It is not unreasonable to expect that people with more money will tend to be more open to adopting new technologies, including EV's. Of course, this is only a broad generalization, and it is great to see lower income people buying EV's. I just don't think the government needs to subsidize those purchases more than it already is.
 
When I first read it my thoughts were . I was ok used leaf $10k , how many times have I been tight on range knowing that I can charge at home? not the case in the "hood". there is no charge stations there and few up the 5 and 99. yes it is a bad idea. would be a nice gift to Nissan for lease returns... I think that has something to do with it.
 
I agree - incentives should not be tied to income, that's one reason I object to the current federal $7500 rebate - it should be available to all equally.

However, the real question in my mind on this issue is why provide an incentive for used EVs? Assuming that an incentive was already given when new (and at this point I believe that is the case) what is the point here?

I believe Colorado has a used EV incentive program in place, but there they limit it to used EVs that have never been registered in Colorado - i.e. basically passing some of the CO 'new' incentive potential down to the used vehicles. It appears to be available to anyone which is good IMO.
 
Slow1 said:
I agree - incentives should not be tied to income, that's one reason I object to the current federal $7500 rebate - it should be available to all equally. .
Don't agree there..
Woz (Steve Wozniak) mentioned he got the incentives when he got his Tesla. He thought it was silly, but he wasn't going to turn it down. ;-)
I think there are certain income levels that don't need incentives.

And, if you want to keep older cars off of the road, there are certain income levels that could use them more.

Wasn't Canada doing something like "trade in your "old" car and get XXXX off of an EV?? Two birds with one stone there..

desiv
 
desiv said:
Slow1 said:
I agree - incentives should not be tied to income, that's one reason I object to the current federal $7500 rebate - it should be available to all equally. .
Don't agree there..
Woz (Steve Wozniak) mentioned he got the incentives when he got his Tesla. He thought it was silly, but he wasn't going to turn it down. ;-)
I think there are certain income levels that don't need incentives.

Well, "need" is not really the issue is it? IF the objective is to get more EVs on the road then perhaps it wasn't a factor for Steve, but it did get his Tesla on the road (i.e. without the incentive Tesla may not be able to sell enough cars to make it a viable company).

IF the objective of an incentive is to support getting the companies making EVs and getting them on the road, the income of the drivers/buyers really shouldn't matter... now if the objective of the incentive is to get "those with incomes between x and y driving EVs" then it would matter. Really a matter of objectives.

In any case, the whole "non-refundable" aspect of the federal rebate is a political/accounting game. Unfortunately it has the effect of setting an income level where potential EV purchases have to be leases or the benefit is lost. I frankly consider this to be a rather poor idea (to put it nicely).

desiv said:
And, if you want to keep older cars off of the road, there are certain income levels that could use them more.

Wasn't Canada doing something like "trade in your "old" car and get XXXX off of an EV?? Two birds with one stone there..

IF the objective is to reduce the number of "XYZ" vehicles (fill in your own criteria) then indeed, tie the incentive to retiring "XYZ" vehicles (send them to the crusher, whatever).

When I hear/read "there are certain income levels that could use..." statements, I tend to get a bit riled up. This sounds like income redistribution which I do NOT believe is the place of government. Sure, let our collective resources encourage behaviors/purchases that benefit our society as a whole (I tend to believe the EV industry falls into this category) but don't turn it into a welfare program or however income redistribution is classified.
 
Slow1 said:
(i.e. without the incentive Tesla may not be able to sell enough cars to make it a viable company).
Personally, I don't think a $7,500 incentive is a reason most people buy an $80,000 car.
I think if you have no incentive, Tesla sells about the same number of cars.

Nissan/Chevy/Kia/Fiat/etc.. Not so much.. ;-)

desiv
 
desiv said:
Personally, I don't think a $7,500 incentive is a reason most people buy an $80,000 car.
I think if you have no incentive, Tesla sells about the same number of cars.
Sure, the $7500 incentive is a smaller fraction of the purchase price. But I'd rather see someone purchase an $80K Tesla instead of a $60K ICE. Cross-shopping between Teslas and cheaper ICEs takes place all the time. When government incentives plus fuel savings are factored in, that $80K Tesla isn't so far in cost from that $60K ICE. People with money do think about how much they're spending, sometimes more carefully than those with less money. One must also consider that, for a great many, an expensive Tesla is a much more functional car than a LEAF and can replace many more ICE miles.
 
desiv said:
Slow1 said:
(i.e. without the incentive Tesla may not be able to sell enough cars to make it a viable company).
Personally, I don't think a $7,500 incentive is a reason most people buy an $80,000 car.
I think if you have no incentive, Tesla sells about the same number of cars.

Nissan/Chevy/Kia/Fiat/etc.. Not so much.. ;-)

Hard to be certain - there are bound to be some folks on the fence there somewhere that are pushed over by the savings. Even at $80K, that is almost a 10% savings so it will affect some folks. I'm very close to that line frankly - but still below it for now so no Telsa in my immediate future...

Certainly agree the effect of the rebate is significantly greater on less expensive vehicles. And those are the ones that are more likely to have potential buyers who don't have enough tax liability (for whatever reason) to fully benefit from the rebate as currently structured.
 
Wasn't Canada doing something like "trade in your "old" car and get XXXX off of an EV?? Two birds with one stone there..

desiv[/quote]
B.C. has up $3250 rebate, independent of any Nissan incentives and in addition to the $5000 CEV program. Hopefully it doesn't run out of cash before Leaf v:2 rolls out. I suspect more leafs will be showing up around here. https://scrapit.ca/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; https://scrapit.ca/ev-program/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; https://www.cevforbc.ca/clean-energy-vehicle-program" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
Sorry, been offline for the day... First and foremost. I never agreed with any of the credits and rebates from day 1. I don't think government should have meddled in this business at all. In fact, I think Tesla's would be selling well regardless of these incentives. In fact if we never meddled in the middle east, or artificially kept oil prices low for so many years, high gas prices would have driven the EV movement on their own, but this is besides the point.

Giving someone enough money to basically get a used EV for free is totally insane! Nothing justifies it, not the environmental argument, the EV movement, getting low income people better transportation, whatever!

And yes, I agree that the existing tax credit of $7500 favors the larger earners, because you have to pay at least that much in taxes to claim it. So if you're poor, you can't take advantage of it. Here's a simple solution, instead of giving a $7500 tax credit, you issue a $10,000 rebate on the purchase of the EV. A rebate is taxable income if it is over $600. What this means is that if you are a high earner, with a high tax rate, you will only be able to see $5500-6000 of this money, since the rest will be taxed. If you make very little money, you might see $9000-9500 of it after taxes. So what you've effectively done, it created a progressive rebate with the tax code.
 
^^ The $10,000 point-of-sale rebate is already in the/Obama's next federal budget proposal. If I'm not mistaken though, the consensus here is that it will never make it through the Republican House. I don't know the voting dates or the exact approval process, so for all I know, it's already been rejected.

One possible benefit of a very poor family being able to obtain a car in this manner would be that it enables the head-of-household to get a job at all. I'm sure that other benefits could be imagined as well. "Poor people" are probably much more likely to own high-mpg 'clunkers', or gross polluters, e.g., which would partly justify the program on environmental grounds.

Finally,
tkdbrusco said:
I really can’t take this anymore! [...] Goodbye sweet America.
if you really can't take it, then get out of the (American) kitchen. And be sure to let us know what country you choose to relocate to. Corporate and "one-percenter" welfare dwarfs 'poor individual' welfare, and many people can't take (and more should voice their unhappiness about) that!
 
Back
Top