Trump’s 2020 Budget Plans To Do Away With EV Tax Credit, Add EV Tax

MAR 12 2019 BY EVANNEX 202


Isn’t the Republican party the anti-tax party? Not when it comes to electric vehicles, apparently. Earlier this year, Republican senators introduced another bill to end the federal tax credit for EV purchases, and replace it with a new annual tax on EV owners.

*This article comes to us courtesy of EVANNEX (which also makes aftermarket Tesla accessories). Authored by Charles Morris. The opinions expressed in these articles are not necessarily our own at InsideEVs.

Above: Tesla Model 3 charging at a Supercharger (Image: Teslarati via Redditor WattLOL)

Last month, Senators John Barrasso (R-Wyoming), Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) and Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming), introduced a second bill to kill the tax credit (Senator Barrasso introduced a similar bill last October, during the previous legislative session).

According to campaign finance watchdog OpenSecrets, the Oil and Gas sector is a top financial contributor to all three senators.

Above: Gas pump vs. EV charger (Image: Electrek)

Barrasso told Fox News that all taxpayers share the costs of EVs: “Never before has the electric-car consumer had so many choices. Taxpayers, on the other hand, don’t have any choice. Every time one of these cars sells, the US taxpayer must help pay for it.”

You can contact your senators to express your opinion about this bill – most political activists agree that comments from constituents can indeed make a difference.

As Electrek’s Fred Lambert eloquently points out, the true costs of fossil fuel vehicles (oil spill cleanup, health costs from air pollution, etc etc) are borne not only by US taxpayers, but by the entire population of the Earth.

Above: Tailpipe emissions from fossil fuel powered vehicles aren’t helping to clean up our air (Image: The Bulletin)

Meanwhile, according to Reuters, “Major automakers have been lobbying Congress to extend the [EV tax] credit that phases out after companies hit 200,000 vehicles sold.” It’s reported that, “Tesla Inc and General Motors Co both hit the 200,000 figure last year, but other major automakers are far from that figure.”

Fast forward to the present and (unfortunately) the news worsens. This week, “The White House proposed on Monday eliminating a tax credit worth up to $7,500 on the purchase of new electric vehicles.” Looking back, the move was telegraphed in December when Trump’s economic adviser Larry Kudlow said in response to the EV tax credit, “As a matter of our policy, we want to end all of those subsidies.”


Written by: Charles Morris; An earlier version of this article originally appeared in Charged; Source: ElectrekReuters’

*Editor’s Note: EVANNEX, which also sells aftermarket gear for Teslas, has kindly allowed us to share some of its content with our readers, free of charge. Our thanks go out to EVANNEX. Check out the site here.

Categories: General

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

202 Comments on "Trump’s 2020 Budget Plans To Do Away With EV Tax Credit, Add EV Tax"

newest oldest most voted


The people that have been elected in the House of Representatives and in the Senate will have to approve this budget (I think).

Can anyone elaborate on this?


This doesn’t become a law but it conveys Trump’s message, what he cares about. There’s also a cut of $845 billion to Medicare. 241 billion to Medicaid. No cut at all to the military.
So glad that we at least have a Democrat majority in the house that will try and stop this administration.

@ Ron M

“So glad that we at least have a Democrat majority in the house that will try and stop this administration.”


This man should not be allowed to be in the White House ever again.

Not even as a guest.

Send him to Mars.

Completely agree and all the GOP Senators and Representatives that walk lockstep with him need to be booted out.

“The Martians will pay for it”,

What did Mars do?

it conveys what the gop cares about, not just trump.
Here’s another example of the GOP and Trump screing rate payer to help coal plants.

Yeah, he and the Repugs pretty much want us all dead one way or another..

“So glad that we at least have a Democrat majority in the house…”

Hear, hear! Thank goodness that at least one house of Congress is now acting as a brake to the climate change denying Hard Right ramming their anti-green, pro-plutocrat agenda thru and into law, with the enthusiastic help of all the “oil-igarchs” who are members of the Orange Don’s criminal gang.

There’s no way the house will support it, and it’s doubtful it’ll get enough support in the Senate. It’s career ending for any 2020 Senate re-election candidates that support it IMHO.

The Senate is controlled by the GOP they go along with anything the President wants.
That great tax plan saved me $200. this year. It didn’t pay for itself and never would have so we’ll be adding almost a trillion in debt this year and by the Budgets admission now a trillion a year for the next 4 years. That’s if we get 3% GDP which already forecasts don’t predict we’ll do that. Real GDP was only 2.9% for 2018. Interest on the debt is rising faster than GDP.
Trump couldn’t make money owning a Casino how did anyone expect him to run the largest country.

He wiould declare bankruptcy for America

We’ve already achieved moral bankruptcy with this clown.

John Frey
That comment deserves a 100 likes

Who is downvoting this comment? Is the Trumper base that big a segment of IEVs readership? Very interesting.

It surprises me that a Trump supporter would be an EV supporter. I mean really Trump hates EV’s Renewable Energy, So if your a Trump support it means you love fossil fuels.

The overlap between supporters of the Orange Don and EV enthusiasts is probably pretty small as a percentage, but it’s >0. Heck, it’s even possible to be a science-denying climate change faux “skeptic”** and still enjoy driving an EV.

**Real skeptics are those who haven’t already made up their minds on a given subject.

Trump allegedly owned an early Model S. Don’t know that he ever drove it, but I’m sure he wanted to be associated with the brand’s cachet back then.

Cuts to Medicaid and care would KILL the republican base of old white people.

The same ones that voted for GOP blindly for decades.

Not all of us! The big problem is the “Fly over” states, these people feel left out.

And they were fooled by someone talking at them.

He would successfully blame the Democrats somehow and they would believe it.

Don’t over generalize! There where plenty of factory and energy workers who bought in to the saving their jobs message. Plus you have the religious right vote.

Remember Trump didn’t not win the popular vote.

I’m sure you know this, but the popular vote matters about as much as the color of the hair on my arse when it comes to electing a US President.

You never know. The universe works in mysterious ways. You might want to shave it or dye it by the election, just in case.

That could change soon. A number of states have signed on to an agreement to award their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote. Once states representing 270 electoral votes sign on, the plan kicks in and that’s how it’ll work. The GOP hasn’t had a candidate win 50% of the popular vote in a very long time.

The religious right traded in their bibles for a Playboy President. If only Hell were real…

You mean Medicare

He just needs a Department of Casino Chip Purchases to come in an buy a bunch of casino chips from the Treasury and then toss the bags in the river.

He thinks Putin is his Daddy and will come in and bail him out again.

The House may bring it up for a vote to see how many GOP Congressman vote yes.
McConnell won’t bring it up because they know they would have to vote yes in support of Trump.

Not in the hillbilly states


It would be easier to find a president’s budget that actually PASSED. I don’t think one ever has. Its basically just a talking point.

Well if it did get passed, I think this would be a benefit for Tesla since the FED tax credit will be $0 starting Jan 1, 2020. While all other manufactures are years away from getting there accept for GM who will receive this incentive until the end of Q1 2020.. Just saying that the leading EV manufacturers that have risked the most wouldn’t be disadvantaged by those dragging their feet all this time. Also new entries in the market would not have a $7500 advantage over Tesla.

But the fact that Congress now expects the White House to come up with a budget proposal as a starting point, shows just how far the U.S. Congress has gone in abandoning its responsibilities. It’s the job of Congress to set the nation’s budget, not the White House. The White House should be making suggestions for changes to Congress’s budget proposal… not vice versa.

Trump’s budget is crayon on a wall.

to believe the polar ice melts slower as the planet grows warmer
(the luxury feel of burning fossil fuel on a dying planet)

No reason for electric cars buyers should get money taken from other taxpayers – it is ridiculous. More CO2 is hugely beneficial and there is a mountain of supporting evidence. I am a fan of EVs but it is an economic choice for each individual. EVs are perfectly capable of competing on their own in the marketplace.

I assume you’re deliberately trolling us so I probably shouldn’t bother replying. But I will anyway…

I can understand your economic argument; I disagree with it, but I can understand the political angle that it comes from, and there’s room for healthy debate around that.

But then you throw in that line about CO2 in the middle of it, which is not only completely irrelevant to your argument but also about as wrong and ill-informed as it is possible to get.

Stop all oil and gas subsidies and tax credits then. $5 per gallon gas evens the playing field pretty fast when making that new car decision.

You mean the cars that only the poor and the lower middle class can afford?

The wealthy do not need ANOTHER tax break. We should have Pres. Eisenhower (R) level of taxation…

I imagine he means to the oil companies; the rural poor could still get assistance with gas payments (well if Trump wasn’t president..)

We could have a carbon tax.

“The wealthy do not need ANOTHER tax break.”

If you’re living in US, you are part of global top 1%. Tax yourself if you believe what you say.

Trump uses his Country Clubs to golf and fill otherwise empty rooms. Why do you think he likes having XI at Mar A Lago instead of the Whitehouse. Being President is just an infomercial for Trump.

We don’t have a global government or global taxes. The best we can do is start at home.

And similarly, if you believe in a low-tax regulation-free state, Somalia is open for business. Vote with your feet.

“If you’re living in US, you are part of global top 1%”
The math doesn’t add up. The global top 1% is 75mln people, population of US is 330mln. Even if all the global top 1% lived in US (a big stretch) there would be 260mln left that are out of it.

More to your point, I would say at least 80% of the households in US are financially struggling (or in danger of) because of the exorbitant costs of living and the absence of a safety net. The last thing these 80% are more taxes. Of the other 20%, maybe 15% live more or less decently and maybe 4% are the ones we can could call rich. The remaining 1% has much more money they can know what to do with and incidentally have more net worth than all the rest combined.

Quiz question: since we all agree we have to balance the budget and pay for the new energy, which groups of these should pay for it?

New cars get to be used cars on the used car market benefiting all buyers.

Mister, we could use a man like Herbert Hoover, again. (Before you youngsters freak out, it was what Archie and Edith Bunker sang at the beginning of “All in the Family.” Oh, God, to go back to those days!)

Gee, our old LaSalle ran great* / Those were the days!

*…at maybe 12-14 MPG

Tax pollution. It’s pretty simple.

IMO this is the best way to approach your elected officials on this issue. Especially for those who believe the National Debt is one of the biggest threats to our nation. Don’t argue to keep the EV credit, argue to eliminate ALL related tax incentives including those that benefit the oil industry. This is logical and may quite possibly do more to promote EVs if in fact it leads to $5 per gallon gas in the US. Not everyone qualifies for the full tax credit, but everyone buys gas.

It’s true. More CO2 is very beneficial on a flat earth. Especially since it would melt the ice walls around it and wash illiterates like yourself over the edge.

A am sorry to have to say that you are stupid. The point is not the benefits of CO2 but the apocalyptic danger of too much CO2. Have you ever heard about global warming, or are you among the absolute idiots who think it is a conspiracy of researchers? All the planet is laughing at the US thanks to your president. But when people will die by millions it will be easy for them to find who is responsible. Your stupid war in Irak has bring to you 9-11 and a decade of conflicts, but the victims in Irak are a fraction of the future victims of global warming. So what will happen according to you? You have not finished building walls, lots of very high walls on each side. Hopefully Trump will leave ASAP and US will become clever again.

You do realize if your analogy is to be believed, if the tax credit is indeed so important, why not make it a refundable tax credit and only families who make less than $100,000 per year before deductions can receive it?

Let us test that theory if you really care about the environment, or is this an attempt by financially secure people looking for a handout.

The rich do not need tax breaks.

Well the Tax Plan passed by a GOP Congress sure gave the rich and corporations a big tax cut. It also gave the midd6class and poor the trillion dollar a year debt. Which is probably what they wanted anyway because the budget includes $845 billion in cuts to Medicare and $241 billion to Medicaid.

I would be all for making it a point of sale rebate that everyone can claim.

That’s right Golgoth!
Let’s take a tax incentive, instituted some years ago for the usual reason of smoothing a difficult societal transition, and start nibbling at the edges just because we are, each one of us, so much smarter than society as a whole!
Get real !

Just like a “design by committee”, what gets passed by Congress into law often or perhaps usually isn’t what’s “smart”, it’s just the compromise that everyone wound up going along with.

“This isn’t the best-possible bill. But it is the best bill possible.”
— Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kansas)

The rich pay the majority of the taxes, so if you don’t cut theirs you basically won’t cut taxes. And as BoltEV said, just about anyone living in the United States is rich by global standards.

I can’t believe that Trump’s polls are still at 35 %. I never would have thought there were that many ignorant voters in the US.

“I never would have thought there were that many ignorant voters in the US”

Well that became stunningly clear with the pseudo-election and reelection of warmonger G W Bush!

I completely disagreed with many policies of GW Bush including the war in Iraq, the tax holiday so companies can bring offshore money back to the US at a lower tax rate, the two tax cuts. etc.
But I never doubted that he loved the country more than a financial gain for himself. Trump and this GOP seem to be working for the Koch Brothers and enriching themselves.

Agree almost 100%, only nit is even Koch Brothers don’t like Trump. Imagine that. Someone so repugnant that helps push through a tax cut that they can greatly benefit from and they still can’t stand him. They must not like kool-aid.

Well said. Bush Jr. and his top advisers (Cheney, Rumsfeld) preferred their own wishful thinking to reality in all too many cases, especially when it came to foreign policy, but no reasonable person can doubt they tried to do what they genuinely thought was best for this country.

Contrariwise, the Orange Don is by far the most successful con man in history. He doesn’t give a f*ck about what’s good for this country, he’s only interested in (a) enriching himself and his gang of criminals, and (b) feeding his staggeringly bloated ego on all the attention which the media unfortunately keeps giving him.

There above 46%

How about starting with eliminating fossil fuel subsidies. For a century the fossil fuel industry has been profitable and yet year after year taxpayers subsidies the fossil fuel industry.

So when the government wants to add a tax, that’s stealing my money, but give me a direct tax cut, and suddenly it’s your money?

Which is it?

Getting YOUR MONEY back is NOT taken from other taxpayers. It’s called tax cut, something Republicans used to support.

With you on that. Anyone that buys an ev can prove at tax time that their money never leaves their account due to the tax credit hence WE KEEP OUR OWN MONEY!!!

Oil and gas guy on the op

CO2 is very useful feet if you want to be Venus. I have a cloud city to sell you

Agree if your state is poor and ignorant it shouldn’t be subsidized neither by the riches states (rich=health care + education + science + diversity – less Facebook)lets cut all the subsidies to see how well they will do. Them we can talk about who are the takers of tax payers.

You must live in either New York or California. This is such a tired argument. The so called poor states that you consider to be subsidized by your rich state are only subsidized because of all the (ridiculous) federal social welfare programs. So here’s an idea, let’s eliminate ALL federal welfare programs and let the states decide to implement their own (or not to) and pay for them at the state level. Not only would that be constitutional, but it would eliminate this tired old argument about the red states being takers. And then people can live in a state that reflects their values. If you think it’s a good idea to have all these welfare programs and you’re willing to pay high taxes to support them, move to one of those states. If not, move to a different one.

Yeah, no, lets not doom poor people in red states to lives of misery and early death. America is bad enough as it is without handing more power to people who would quite happily let the poor starve.

Actually – New Yorkers donate more in federal taxes than they receive from the feds, and then we get doubly punished by only allowing $10,000 on all state and local taxes…..The standard deduction is $12,000 anyway. So now it is even more inequitable.

The ‘trump tax cut’ has greatly increased by taxes. Now he wants to eliminate tax credits – in other words tax me more.

If you’re not a troll, than you’re a rube.

“No reason for electric cars buyers should get money taken from other taxpayers ”

The federal tax incentive allows the tax payer to KEEP HIS OR HER own money not yours. If you are anti tax or a libertarian or for smaller government then you should support it. Why would you advocate the support of nations (Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia) that are hostile to the US?

I agree, but NEITHER should they be PENALIZED for doing the right thing. No subsidies…NO PENALTIES. Free market.

“More CO2 is hugely beneficial…”

You’re invited to show everyone how “hugely beneficial” a significant buildup of CO2 is for living things, by shutting yourself into a tiny and completely airtight room for 24 hours.

With respect, you’re nuts.

Ohh America…

The nonrefunable tax credit only helps wealthy families. So, the poor buy regular ICE vehicles while the environmental benefit is mininal at best. How does rich boys with their toys benefit the environment again? 98% of all vehicles sold each year are still ICE.

With Tesla sales cratering in 2019, the number of new EVs sold each year will drop.

I don’t consider myself one of those rich boys, far from it, but I have owned five EVs. Most of the EVs I bought were used and at a very low price compared to the original MSRP. I’m never going back to smokers but it probably would have been years before I could have gotten into EVs if it weren’t for government subsidizes knocking the prices down.

Respect that you’re buying used EVs. I disagree about government subsidies being a requirement to the previous generation of EV sales, though. I think (and political statements and demographic surveys seem to support) that there are quite a number of substantially wealthy climate-concerned people who bought electric vehicles as a statement. These folks would have been able to purchase their cars with or without subsidies, so the subsidies were in effect just helping the rich. By the time you purchased your EVs, you did not recieve any of the subsidies even though you’re probably in a lower tax bracket than most of the original owners and could have used the subsidies more. So from my standpoint, subsidies should either apply to both new and used EV purchases and only be applicable for those who make less than 6 figures a year, or they should be eliminated entirely. Tesla is proving EVs can sell themselves.

He DID benefit from the subsidies even though he bought used because the subsidy made the original purchase cost less, which lowered the residual, thus lowering the used price. It is a pass-thru savings. Some of the ‘new’ buyers of yesteryear could only afford it because of the subsidy (admittedly not all) so the subsidy did help the non-rich too. That is why CA revamped their state rebates to a sliding scale based on income. They wanted to make sure the not-so-rich folks got the benefit too.

“…the subsidies were in effect just helping the rich.”

The EV tax credits were intended to help auto makers afford to put electric cars into production. To a certain extent, they have achieved their objective.

Whether those credits at the same time helped the rich, the poor, the middle-class, or some mix of the above, is really a side issue, and frankly isn’t all that important, especially not when compared to the trillions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer money spent to support the overseas interests of Big Oil, including the Mideastern “wars of choice,” which are by far the most self-destructive and disastrous things that the U.S. has gotten involved with since the Vietnam War. And even worse than all that money wasted is the lives and blood of American servicemen and -women wasted on those worse-than-fruitless wars.

It’s that “subsidy” that’s worthy of debate and a great deal of outrage — not the tiny, insignificant amount of the EV tax credit.

If that first line were true, than Republicans should be all on board with the tax cut. They have millionaires and billionaires a huge tax cut.

The problem is, just as EVs are reaching a price point that the middle class can afford with incentives, the Republicans don’t want that tax cut going to them.

So you actually believe that Republicans want to eliminate the tax credit BECAUSE it might help the middle class instead of exclusively helping the wealthy? Man, are you brain washed. I’m sorry, I dislike name calling, but if you really believe that you have been watching way too much MSNBC and listening to far too much Progress Radio.

Vladimir Putin thanks you for your divisive comment.

You must love paying taxes. So you’re the one idiot who doesn’t take deductions of any kind or take any tax credit available to you to maximize your tax, because you make so much money?

Most people don’t take more than the standard deduction. It’s the rich that has massive tax deductions they take to lower there taxes.

Actually most deductions phase out for high income earners. Morgague interest, education interest, etc all go away at some income level. Wealthy people choose what type of income they make to pay the least amount of taxes. They have the advantage of choosing the type of income as they typically don’t earn a wage.

That is correct. Mainly because the rich pay most of the taxes. Tough to take a tax credit or deduction if you don’t pay taxes.

The 1% have 40% of the weath in the US. The next 9% have 39% of the weath. The other 90% have 21% of the weath. So yeah they pay most of the taxes.
The head of Disney made 65 million in 2017. About 650 times more than than his average employee. No wonder it’s so expensive to take your kids to Disneyland.
In 1970 CEO pay was approximately 40 times the average pay of his employee.
The GOP has consistently supported tax cuts that benefit the rich.
Instead of just see tax returns from the President we should demand all elected officials release their tax returns.

“The nonrefunable tax credit only helps wealthy families.”

No, it’s helping Tesla and other EV makers, so it’s doing what it was intended to do. Not perfectly, but then we can’t expect Congress to get anything perfectly right.

“With Tesla sales cratering in 2019…”

Man, that must be some good s**t you’re smokin’!
😀 😀 😀

Well I’ve warned with comments on InsideEV about Trump and the GOP. Told everyone that would read my comments about Trump’s and the weak GOP that can’t stand up to Trump.
Trump and his administration don’t care about the environment or the debt they rack up. They only care about making money now.
I ve disagreed at times about some policies of other administrations but I always believed the President was trying to do the best for all it’s citizens. This President would sell his country to the highest bidder.

Cutting a tax credit reduces debt (more money being paid to Uncle Sam)…

If you care so much about the environment, why do you need a tax credit again?

Let’s not forget that citizens don’t have to claim the tax credit credit if you don’t want to.

Cutting tax credit does not reduce debt, because debt is symptom of spending. They will gladly increase your tax (aka, get rid of tax credit), and spend even more. Feeding the monster will only help it grow.

Yeah the GOP and Trump gave the rich and corporations a huge tax cut with there Tax Plan. The middle class and poor are getting the trillion dollar a year additional debt. The budget also includes $845 billion in Medicare Cuts and $241 billion in Medicaid Cuts. No cuts to the military or the fossil fuel industry subsidies after a century way are we still subsidizing a profitable industry.

“Cutting a tax credit reduces debt (more money being paid to Uncle Sam)…”
So you are saying you are for raising taxes?

I think most people are in favor of the government not spending more of our money than is taken in every year. (Sadly, congresscritters in general don’t agree.) We citizens just disagree on where that money should come from and where it should be spent.

“If you care so much about the environment, why do you need a tax credit again?”

You must think readers here are amazingly clueless, if you think we can’t see you’re trying to conflate two utterly unrelated issues. Your argument is not even wrong.

Good thing that America is not the world any longer. It will be a major blow to climate change efforts without doubt, but the technology leadership is anyway moving to Asia, and so is global leadership. Good luck being stuck in a 20th century US at least for the next 2 years.

😢 yeah, Trump seems hell bent on a race to the bottom and making America a 3rd world country again.

Like his casinos

Blow to climate how? Even if you follow IPCC guide, that’s only delaying the effect of climate change, not stopping. If you mean few seconds of extra time as “blow to climate”, yeah big whoop.

Ah, it’s another “The perfect driving out the good” argument. Yeah, if we can’t stop 100% of global warming tomorrow, then we shouldn’t bother doing what we can about it. 🙄

The headline says “Adds EV Tax” but I don’t see anything to back that up in the article. What new tax?

First sentence: “Isn’t the Republican party the anti-tax party? Not when it comes to electric vehicles, apparently. Earlier this year, Republican senators introduced another bill to end the federal tax credit for EV purchases, and replace it with a new annual tax on EV owners.”

Of course, with any budget plan, nothing is set in stone or decided. But, there has been talk of an annual EV tax at the national level, like some states have adopted.

Like CA has added $100 extra tax EV.


What do federal gas taxes pay for?

“What is the Federal Gasoline Excise Tax Rate?
Plus, the other taxes your state will add on.”

/not that I’m pro-taxes, … but you knew this day would/will come — eventually.
//wouldn’t it be better to actually talk about the issue rather than whipping people up into a frenzy?

Too late. Everything rump touches is a cluster-frenzy.

And Wa. St. is going to tax ev’s @ $350/yr.

But the headline says that Trump’s budget includes an EV tax, and that doesn’t appear to be true (or if it is, there’s no details, context, or link).

There is no context or link because the budget plans are simply proposed. There has been talk for some time about adding an EV tax. By the time the actual budget is approved, who knows what the story may be. As more details become clear, we’ll provide more content.

So does the Trump 2020 budget plan include an EV tax, or not? I’m not defending Trump at all, I just want to know the answer to that question. The headline states it as fact, but the article gives no evidence.

There is no fact yet. The budget “plan” may or may not eliminate the EV tax credit and the budget “plan” may or may not have and add and EV tax. We’ll know in about a year, haha. President’ budget plans are just proposals and there’s a lot on the table, but no way of knowing what will actually take hold.

I made the title even more clear now. Thank you.

Unless Trump says EV’s are a threat to our National Security. Lol
I shouldn’t laugh he’s proven to be capable of anything. Except acting Presidential

Just like some states are already adding an EV tax. Only this will be a Federal Tax because of road usage. This administration wants nothing more than to kill EV’s and renewable energy.

The problem is even worse in states like GA where I live I already pay a state EV tax ($206 annually) that is more than what I would pay in federal gas tax for the same miles in an ICE. Add a federal tax equal in size and I will be paying double the tax as my neighbor driving a gas car. I can guarantee that GA won’t out of the goodness of their hearts decide to lower the state tax to the appropriate levels once a federal tax is in place.

Ohio is in the process of passing a transportation bill that will access an annual state tax of $200 for BEVs and $100 for hybrids. Then you have to add the normal registration fees of about $50. If I had a 30mpg ICE vehicle, I would pay $26 a year in state tax for my normal mileage. The bill has passed the House and is now in the Ohio Senate. Ohio drivers can email their Senator here if they wish to express their views:

Budgets have to originate in the House anyways. I imagine there will just be a continuing resolution again as I don’t see how this House, this Senate, and this President will be able to negotiate a new, different budget.

Eliminating the credit is, I imagine, DOA for any legislator who wants to cozy up to the auto industry in general because it would favor Tesla over the legacy automakers.

I wouldn’t be shocked though if Trump started churning out Presidential orders to get what he wants done. He is already queuing up an entire list of inappropriate overreaching orders now as we speak. Congress of course can simply block them but only with a super-majority which as we have seen with the recent emergency declaration for wall funds won’t happen. Bizarrely the GOP has decided to hand over legislative power to the Executive branch when just 3 years ago they screamed at the heavens when Obama signed any Executive order. Only the courts can counter now.

Bizarrely the GOP handing over legislative power. The GOP was all behind the Tax Plan that they knew wouldn’t pay for itself. They didn’t care because they think Medicare and Social Security are something they call socialism.
There plan was to get deep in debt and then cut takes on entitlements. Like the plan to cut $845 billion in Medicare and $241 billion in Medicaid. But not a dime of cuts to the fossil fuel industry.
Also Paul Ryan is getting $150,000 a year in retirement and a gold health care plan but to him that’s not an entitlement.

In my opinion, ICE is like the fast food of transportation. The adage, “You can’t afford to eat cheap” applies to ICE. Folks are so myopic, they think because they spend $8k-$10k less for a Chevy Cruz over a Volt TODAY that it’s actually cheaper, but it’s not. Explaining the lifetime savings of an EV over ICE is still practically impossible, due to humans’ sheer inability to look one week/year/decade into the future. It’s real. And it’s pretty sad.

Your analogy is even more ironic because the customer can no longer even choose between a Volt and the lesser efficient Cruz since GM is canning production for both so the customer now can only buy an even more inefficient truck or SUV.


Better to kill the tax credit then to keep it in it’s current form. It’s bizarre that US taxpayers are subsidizing foreign manufacturers at the expense of American manufacturers. The tax credit has already claimed the Chevy Volt, the Honda Clarity gets the $7500 credit, the Volt gets nothing so there was no way it could survive. The Bolt survives only because GM needs the ZEV credits but it’s sales are going to plummet this year because the Kona, a very similar car, get the tax credit and the Bolt doesn’t. The loss of the tax credit also puts Tesla at a disadvantage, at the high end the Audi, Porsche and Jaguar get the credit, Tesla doesn’t, and at the low end the $35K Model 3 also has to compete with the Kona.

The Kona is going to be a rare beast in the US, and the Bolt is already marked down significantly under the Kona MSRP pricing and dealers are even marking up the Kona EV.

Bolt Sales should be fine for awhile yet.

GM can lower the price for the Bolt to whatever price they need to. They will continue to make the Bolt at compliance numbers for ZEV credits so they will have no problem absorbing any losses on each unit sold since there will be so few.

The problem with Bolt is that the base trim doesn’t have the basic modern safety features. So for most shoppers they have to start with the premier trim, which is too expensive.

Yeah that’s why China’s leading in EV and manufacturing. They provide a $10,000 subsidy for EV’s and don’t charge the $12,000 licensing fee. You can drive it eveyday not just even or odd.

“Taxpayers, on the other hand, don’t have any choice. Every time one of these cars sells, the US taxpayer must help pay for it.”

Uh, NOoooooooooo. Nobody had to pay more in taxes as a result of an EV tax CREDIT. The purchaser of the EV got to send LESS of their money to the Gubmnt (ie, OTHER taxpayers).

Why is this so hard to comprehend?

I always suspected there were a large number of fact EV supporters on Inside EV. People who pretend they support EV’s but really are fossil fuel lovers. In my opinion you can’t support Trump or GOP and support Trump or GOP.

I don’t know, why do you have such a hard time understanding it?

As long as the gov’t is spending in deficits, the US taxpayer IS paying for the credit because that is money that is borrowed *at interest* by the government. ‘Tax credit’ is a reduction of income to the gov’t, but since the bills still have to be paid, the rest have to pay more taxes to make up for that.

Nobody’s taxes were increased as a result of an EV tax credit. it is a pre-determined tax table.

“…the US taxpayer IS paying for the credit because that is money that is borrowed *at interest* by the government.”

No. Factually incorrect.

There’s no special part of the Federal budget that has to be paid 100% by borrowing, any more than there’s a special part of it which isn’t at all paid for by borrowing. It’s all part of a pool.

The problem isn’t that somebody is getting a tax credit; the problem is that Congress keeps passing budgets that spend more than is taken in by taxes and fees. And that, in turn, is the fault of us voters, who don’t demand from our representatives that they absolutely MUST make a budget that doesn’t spend more than is taken in.

You’re trying to shift the blame.

You are partially correct in my opinion. Yes it’s all one big pool and I do support tax credits for electric cars because I think they’ll be better for the world overall but I still believe that if somebody gets a tax credit that they otherwise wouldn’t get then either that money has to be made up somewhere else probably by someone else or there will be more money added to the deficit.

First of all I’m not coming out here saying I’m against the tax credit but if someone is given$7,500 off of their federal taxes then assuming there is some concern for the debt it has to be made up somewhere else by someone else. Or maybe a tax cut I was going to get for my bracket meets with more resistance because of the increased deficit. Or my 12 year old son will have more he has to pay down the road

“the US taxpayer must help pay for it”

My answer is that getting MY MONEY back is not “US taxpayer paying”. Democrats saying this nonsense is understandable since they think my money belongs to them. But nowadays, I hear this nonsense from Republiturds / Republitards, too.

Having said that, it makes no sense to have the tax credit expire on Tesla and GM (US companies) while keeping it for non US companies. If only available choices are ending vs only for non-US EV, better to end it.

Democrats passed paygo so tax cuts and spending must be balanced with new revenue. This ensures new initiatives are not simply a debt burden on future generations.

Republicans care not about this balance so literally every tax cut they pass has to be paid for by everyone else eventually. This is because an unbalanced tax cut is basically a law that decides not to pay for other laws and borrow money instead. Paygo is also why Republicans had to suspend the budget-limiting rules to try to repeal the health care law. It is rather strange that an EV tax credit from 2007 is important to them after doubling the deficit over the last two years however. The justification is basically a lie that only works on people who will believe any party justification whether or not it’s consistent. The real reason is of course lobbyists.

Can’t wait for him to be kick out of office. We need a viable candidate that can win the Midwest on the Dems side

Sherrod Brown would have been good for that but apparently he’s not running

What to expect for 3 brilliant senators from “ third world states” of course that’s the game and it will pass, ignorance is the weapon of politicians and big companies.

I’ll gladly return the $7500 tax credit I received on my Tesla if all government support for the fossil fuel industry was eliminated.

The tax credit should simply become a credit regardless of tax burden. In addition, the credit should only apply to manufacturers which have produced MORE then 200,000 EV’s.

is it any wonder where the gop stands on climate change?

Trump on Tuesday shared a quote from a “Fox & Friends” guest who denied that climate change was caused by humans or that it is a threat.

Trump tweeted out comments from Patrick Moore, the former co-founder of environmental group Greenpeace, who described the climate crisis as “fake news” and “fake science.”

“The whole climate crisis is not only Fake News, it’s Fake Science. There is no climate crisis, there’s weather and climate all around the world, and in fact carbon dioxide is the main building block of all life,” Moore said on “Fox & Friends.”

“Wow!” Trump added in sharing the quote.

Fact check: Patrick Moore was an influential early member of Greenpeace, but was not a “co-founder”, nor even a charter member.

But then, given that the Orange Don said it, you didn’t really think it was entirely true, did you? But hey, it’s partly true, which is better than his average.

Good! The affluent people buying EVs don’t need tax credits anyway and it levels the playing field for all manufacturers.

Non-affluent people need the tax credit to afford the EV in the first place and they certainly don’t need an EV tax after the fact for having done so. However, if affluent people don’t need a tax break, maybe we can look into raising taxes on the affluent? I mean just until we have something like a balanced budget at least.

An EV tax is basically a tax on only Tesla because every other major car company can just stop selling EVs when consumers balk at the higher prices.

Then surely they’ll end the subsidies going to big oil, right? Of course they won’t.

This is not a Trump or anti-Trump comment, but there has always been the question of who pays for infrastructure maintenance and upgrades if EV’s don’t pay a fuel tax but also get to use the roads? That’s what the tax is for. As for the elimination of EV credits, EV’s are no longer a “startup” business. Also, it was an incentive to get people to buy EV’s, but if financial incentive is what motivates people to buy an EV, then that model is clearly broken. Go ask Tesla, who will no longer be eligible for federal EV credits, why is there a waitlist for the Model 3? Answer is to build a good product. That’s what motivates people to buy an EV.

So I already pay more state tax for my EV annually in GA ($206) than I would for total gas tax on a similar gas car. So when an equally punitive federal EV tax is implemented on top of the state tax why I should I have pay double the road tax that a gas car would pay? I know the reason why and it doesn’t have anything to do with fairness in EV owners paying for road maintenance.

Entirely correct. According to my “napkin math”, a BEV would need to pay ~$200 per year to make up for lost revenue from gasoline sales. But that $200 is for both State and Federal gasoline taxes, not just one or the other! A Federal fee for EVs on top of a State fee that’s already over $200 would be punitive… which of course is exactly what Big Oil wants, and why it’s bribing lobbying Congress to pass that.

EV’s are still in there infancy. We’ve been giving the fossil fuel industry subsidies for a century and we still do. Why do we subsidy a highly profitable industry.

I agree that at some point, taxes should be imposed on PEVs (Plug-in EVs) to make up for the lost revenue from gasoline sales. I most certainly do not agree that this needs to be done when only ~1% of the cars on the road (or even less) are PEVs!

EVs are still in the “early adopter” stage, and therefore most definitely are still in the startup phase of the EV revolution. Instead, the gasoline tax should be incrementally increased every year to encourage people to make the switch. That will make far more difference in tax revenue than imposing fees on the ~1% of cars licensed to drive on public roads which are PEVs!

Already pay my state $120.00 a year for the roads.
Feels like there is a target on my car because it is electric

I already have a stupid $208 / year tax on my EVs from GA which pretty much wipes out the bulk of my gas savings. A federal tax on top of that would be crazy…….they are really trying to suppress EV adoption when the world is going in the complete opposite direction….

It’s a shame that reasonable people can’t meet in the middle any more in politics. The Republicans are taking a stance that global warming is fake news, and ANY environmental regulation is bad, and some democrats want to rid of gas cars tomorrow. Certainly, like most things there ought to be a logical middle ground. But in our country today, the middle ground is gone, it’s one extreme side or the other.

Democrats don’t actually advocate getting rid of gas cars tomorrow or next year or in five years or in 10 years or in any unreasonable time period. The earliest year even debated is 2030, with advocates on the left also considering 2040 or 2050, but the majority opinion is never formally getting rid of ICE.

The Republican position seems to be to punish the environment and I’m not really sure what the purpose of that is since you don’t really get an economic boost from additional environmental destruction in an economy that is mostly IT, finance, and heath care.

Maybe if Republicans could actually articulate their long term vision for the country, people could agree across party lines. What is the GOP vision for 2050?

“The Republican position seems to be to punish the environment and I’m not really sure what the purpose of that is since you don’t really get an economic boost from additional environmental destruction”

They are like the ICE buyers who look only at the immediate costs. If you factor in total cost of operation and ownership over 5-8 years, EVs are less than ICE, but most people don’t do that. Same with the GOP. They don’t count the cost of pollution or ‘environmental destruction’ in their analysis, so by ignoring some of the costs, their analysis ‘appears’ to show there is no benefit to EVs. Turn a blind eye to the cost of destruction and all you’ll see are economic benefits.

Democrats know EV’s aren’t going to happen tomorrow but if Democrats don’t fight the GOP would like to kill EV’s.

“…some democrats want to rid of gas cars tomorrow.”

You must know some Democrats I don’t. 🙄

Well they may want to but they know it’s impossible when you can’t possibly get production ramped up anywhere near that fast.
It will be another 10 years to make a reasonable dent.

The tax credit has the effect of depressing the value of the used market. Which is nice if you can’t afford a new one. Ditching the credit now will seriously interfere with my plan to buy a used 2020 Soul in about three years.

Not that it matters, the Trump budget is merely a joke, similar to the Trump presidency. But no one is laughing. Because like most of what Trump does it’s not funny, but sad, just like him.

Send Trump and his family and all Republican Senators to Gitmo and throw away the key.

Lumping all Republican Senators into the same bag is as bad as the Orange Don calling all illegal immigrants criminals, drug runners, and gang members.

The way to fight intolerance isn’t to counter it with more intolerance.

The GOP passed the Tax Plan it never had a chance in hell a paying for it self. This budget admits that now a trillion dollar deficit for at least the next four years.
Now the want to cut costs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to balance the budget.
There are more older people in the country than in the past. They paid into these programs and expected to receive these benefits.
If you send a trillion on military and homeland security. CIA etc. to protect the country. a trillion on Social Security, a trillion on Medicare and Medicaid. then all the other services, Federal workers retirement, FAA, FBI, etc. etc. You end up with over 4 Trillion in costs but you only bring in over 3 trillion in revenue.
The GOP has been completely dishonest with the public on taxes unfortunately the GOP voters don’t seem to understand the costs. They blame the welfare and food stamps but compared to other costs these are negligible.
But say tax cuts works to get GOP voters someone they don’t care about deficits until Democrats are in power.
GOP is borrow and spend party.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

Cut the OPEC welfare/subsidies!

If anything, I recommend cutting the $7500 in half for ALL car makers then eliminate in 12months.

Average person uses 750 gallons of gas/year x .30c federal gas tax = $225
Of course you must add on state taxes which adds another .15c or $112.
So tax the fuel not the car. Just use tiered usage system the more you use the more it costs.
So naturally people driving ev, and charging them would pay a bit more, since they use more electricity. A few more cents a kWh after you hit the next tier. Like demand charges, but much less. That would be the most equitable.

Fossil fuels are damaging the environment and have been subsidized for a century.
EV’s are in there infancy and are protecting the planet. There’s no way to explain subsiding fossil fuels and taxing EV’s.

So you propose instead of all taxpayers paying for EVs that all electricity payers pay for EVs? Then those who charge from solar would be exempt! That doesn’t accomplish what you want to do. What you want is for EVs to pay their part of the road maintenance. Gas tax doesn’t do that equitably. Electricity tax doesn’t do that equitably. A ‘road tax’ would, but that is quite difficult to implement on a federal level. Better solutions need to be devised, one that accounts for PHEVs too, since they pay some gas tax already.

30¢/ gallon Federal gas tax? That’s a fake figure.

“The United States federal excise tax on gasoline is 18.4 cents per gallon and 24.4 cents per gallon for diesel fuel… On average, as of January 2017, state and local taxes and fees add 31.04 cents to gasoline and 31.01 cents to diesel, for a total US average fuel tax of 49.44 cents per gallon for gas and 55.41 cents per gallon for diesel.”

Of course he is trying to kill of the electric revolution, ill bet he is backed by the coal and oil industries. Its kind of sad, he doesent seem to care about jobs, enviroment or the future. Maybe he is an old, selfish and wealthy person..

You don’t have to bet.
The Kochs put $850 Million into the GOP for the presidential election, and $400 Million in the mid-terms.
They are getting thousands on the dollar back from their investment in politicians.

Shame they didn’t also end subsidies to fossil fuels. Funny how renewables have to stand on their own two feet, but oil and coal get lots of taxpayer help.

The subsidies to energy industry are aimed at providing energy security for the country. If you compare the size of subsidies to their portion of energy mix, renewable have received more subsidies than other sources of energy. If the government had spent all the subsidies on renewables, the US would have been less energy secure today. Having said that, as renewables get better, it makes sense to shift more resources to them and this is happening already.

If the U.S. had spent just the money it spent on Gulf War I and Gulf War II, it could have bought every single driver in the U.S. a new plug-in EV. That, dear sir, would result in far, far more energy security for our country, and a much better balance of trade, than using trillions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to subsidize Big Oil’s overseas interests, including “wars of choice” in the Mideast to support Saudi Arabia and our other Arab allies.

I am against those wars, but they happened when there were no EVs. So your comment is hypothetical.

US has a completely different picture in terms of energy production and technology. I am pretty sure if there were a disruption to worldwide energy production in 90s or 2000s US would have ground to a standstill. That won’t happen today mainly thanks to fracking and to a much lesser degree EVs and renewables.

I think the eventual outcome is reduced federal credits, probably something in $3000-$4000 range, with income cap limit. I think the current credits are not needed anymore and are too generous.

I notice people talk about massive credits in China. The difference is that China imports most of their oil. US is getting close to energy independence. So from government perspective it makes sense to offer larger incentives in China. They keep the money in their economy instead of sending it to the middle east. For US it is the opposite, the government wants to support the huge oil industry, so it makes sense to have a more balanced approach.

The downside is that it might result in US automakers fall behind in EV technology. But the reality is that the EV part is not that complex technology, the forefront of vehicle technology is autonomous driving which is not tied to EVs.

Is anybody reacting on here so strongly to this move even remotely open to the possibility that:

A: This move is directed first and foremost toward a segment of his base among the voting public,

B: A sizable fraction of that base has researched the data from primary sources( or at least substantially cross-shopped the many public secondary sources on various sides), evaluated the information in light of reasonable moral and social priorities and concerns, and have come to an informed, good faith outlook to which this policy is meant to appeal for whatever political motives, and

C: That fraction of the voting public is at least approximately equal to the fraction of climate change advocates whose stance is based on the same.

Disagreement on policy or political priorities =/= a justifiable shorthand for intellectual or moral depravity, UNLESS they touch directly on personal, one on one moral first principles, which this does not.

*Sigh* I’m just sick of political elephant hurling.

“A sizable fraction of that base has researched the data from primary sources…”

No, I’m sure that the vast majority of those who still support the Orange Don, despite all he has done and still is doing to damage this country, don’t have the slightest idea what it means to find a primary source when researching data, let alone why that’s important. We are, after all, talking about people who generally prefer to be spoon-fed “alternative facts” by Fox News and other dispensers of far right talking points.

This was telegraphed repeatedly in every single official Republican House and Senate energy policy document. For years they have been saying the govt should only support endless research and do nothing to support production

The fed incentive is officially called a production incentive

Buy used EV. The best bang for the buck!

Yeah, largely because of the tax credit when new.

Trump is a buffoon. The panel gap on that Model 3’s trunk id is very uneven BTW.. It’s much narrower down by the tail light than up near the hinge area.

Its time to get rid of the fed’s $7,500 rebate. Tesla is willing to sell without it. GM is not much interested and that’s why they closed Volt leaving Bolt alone.
Other’s are moving at the pace of tortoise.

Eliminate the EV credit…well, okay. Tax EV owners for doing the right thing…you just lost one of your 2016 votes, Donny.

Fascinating that anyone admits voting for him the first time. The US’s Caligula using the fall of the Rome as an historical parallel, an overextended military state (200 overseas bases, 70% of budget to military, oil import dependent, $20T in oil war debt) puts in an irrational, incompetent, divisive head of government. Classic. Attacking EV’s is similar to GOP’s long standing attack on fuel efficiency which killed US automobile industry as world demanded efficient cars. Now that world is demanding EV’s, GOP takes US out of the industry.


Shouting by using ALL CAPS is not helping your message.

“…a new annual tax on EV owners.”

I’m horrified, but not surprised. Big Oil has much, much too great an influence over the present, thoroughly corrupt administration, as well as on the U.S. Congress.

But this is pure Trump as fossil fuel, US auto mfgs and US weapons mfg. all had big influence before but the EV credit stayed and even some GOP’ers talked of expanding it.

Promoting EV’s is at the top of Democrats Green New Deal. New industry, new jobs in alternative energy economy of which EV’s and battery mfg are at the top. Increasing the Federal tax credit to $10,000 and extending it until 50% of US cars on the road are EV or non-gasoline using, zero emissions. And it should be a five year credit so people with lower earnings can take full advantage of the $10,000. Or make it a straight up credit not tied to taxes. $50,000 car value gets full $10,000 credit. Up to $75,000 gets $7,500 credit. Up to $100,000 gets $5,0000. No credit after $100,000.

Cutting US military to same as Russia and China COMBINED, $400B will save US $400B per year.

Promoting EV’s will eliminate $300B per year oil import trade deficit.

$700B boost for US economy while cutting green house gas emissions. Smart effective government policy.

This really is a shot at CA.

$711,547,500 of credits came here in 2018 alone. CA is almost 10x bigger than the next largest state for EV sales, NY. Do you think he cares what those 2,000 people in Ohio care?