[ASAP]

And this is your net effect... some see it, others dont-

This is a free subsidy for us manufacturers at a massive cost of taxpayers.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-...rice-increase/

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by M3AWD

He says "These changes mean that our vehicles, which currently qualify for up to a $7,500 federal tax credit today, will no longer qualify as soon as the President signs this legislation."

But doesn't the PHEV X5 45e plug-in still qualify if its MSRP is below $80k? It's assembled in North America as far as I'm aware and it meets the minimum battery size requirement

The $7500 will now be broken up into two $3750 portions. One for battery mineral minimum and one for battery component minimum.

Depends when the new mineral and components minimums start. 40% of minerals need to mined or processed in US or FTA countries. Starts once the Secretary defines "guidance". That could be this week or latest 12-31-22.

BMW definitely sources their minerals mostly from China, as does most manufacturers. If there battery cells are made outside of FTA countries, it won't qualify for 50% component minimum either.

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by ASAP

And this is your net effect... some see it, others dont-

This is a free subsidy for us manufacturers at a massive cost of taxpayers.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-...rice-increase/

Irony is E-transit and Mach-E will be losing their $7500 credit. Ford mostly gets their minerals from China. Mach-E and E-Transit battery cells are made in LG Chem factory in Poland. They will not qualify under new battery minimum materials/components guidance. F150 at best will get $3750 half credit. Ford just signed new mineral contracts through 2026 and they are definitely outside FTA countries.

Already been reported, there are 72 electrified vehicles sold in US. 70% lose their EV credits at the signing of this bill.

[alpella42]

Originally Posted by Paladin1

The President signs the bill on Tuesday....

That's exactly what the president was signing on Tuesday.

[NGT2]

Originally Posted by akkando

Inflation is mostly a supply issue so it probably won't. Either buying power needs to be reduced or we need more supply of goods. Right now there's globally low supply of "stuff" and there's people willing to pay more for the limited supply of goods.

In the US it's actually as much or more a labor supply issue as it is goods supply chain. Increased wages due to lack of available workers is driving up a lot of costs.

[notso]

Standard US Government. Just as almost every manufacturer is attempting to get on the EV and PHEV train, they develop new cars which takes forever, and are going to roll out several new options in the coming year or two, they kill the whole incentive for anyone trying to get on board. People like realtors and other 1099 employees that could use this incentive are now getting screwed. The other people trying to get the 7500 incentive just for tax purposes now just have to find a different way to make that up instead of adding to the economy by buying a new car. Stupid.

[bloozemanAZ]

Originally Posted by notso

Standard US Government. Just as almost every manufacturer is attempting to get on the EV and PHEV train, they develop new cars which takes forever, and are going to roll out several new options in the coming year or two, they kill the whole incentive for anyone trying to get on board. People like realtors and other 1099 employees that could use this incentive are now getting screwed. The other people trying to get the 7500 incentive just for tax purposes now just have to find a different way to make that up instead of adding to the economy by buying a new car. Stupid.

Not a value add comment.

[TurtleBoy]

Originally Posted by notso

Standard US Government. Just as almost every manufacturer is attempting to get on the EV and PHEV train, they develop new cars which takes forever, and are going to roll out several new options in the coming year or two, they kill the whole incentive for anyone trying to get on board. People like realtors and other 1099 employees that could use this incentive are now getting screwed. The other people trying to get the 7500 incentive just for tax purposes now just have to find a different way to make that up instead of adding to the economy by buying a new car. Stupid.

The government shouldn't have to provide the incentive to buy, the product should.

[bloozemanAZ]

Originally Posted by ASAP

And this is your net effect... some see it, others dont-

This is a free subsidy for us manufacturers at a massive cost of taxpayers.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-cars/a40861076/ford-f-150-lightning-price-increase/

Not sure how this tracks to the OPs post. Granted I may be off base as haven't followed anything Ford in decades. That said if a smart legal council (regardless of brand) can find a corporate loophole they will. Take it t from a guy who lived in the F50 world and took every advantage possible.

[bloozemanAZ]

Originally Posted by TurtleBoy

The government shouldn't have to provide the incentive to buy, the product should.

Bingo and just like the stimulus checks (forgoing the PPP loan fraud which is an entire different story) most in the market for a BMW don't qualify anyway. If you're living on a shoestring and buy a BMW based on the incentives then the buyer is at fault at least IMO.

I don't qualify for my intended replacement of my current 2020 M85Oi coupe in 2024 (buying the current lease out with cash). Do I care? Nope. My destiny is set and ultimately a 2024 can bring the new AMG SL or something else. My choice not the governments.

[bloozemanAZ]

Originally Posted by M3WC

Already been reported, there are 72 electrified vehicles sold in US. 70% lose their EV credits at the signing of this bill.

I will praface the following with it's just my opinion. That said boo hoo and anybody that buys an EV based on tax credits is choosing to make a choice and if the tax credits were a factor good luck with that.

Toyed with a P90 and then a P100 both with Ludicrous Speed. Could have gotten the full boat of tax credits on either plus an environmental plate that allowed me a free pass in the car pool lane. Nope chose ICE each time and not losing any sleep over it. Still drive in the carpool lane 8 years later and if ever caught the $400 to $1K fine is a long lost rounding error in my checkbook. Never buy anything for an incentive but rather be the master of your destiny.

[JK479]

Originally Posted by RalphT5

It's bs like this that makes me feel even better about my inbound M5C. I'll stick with my ICE.

They (media, car companies) made us all contemplate adjusting to EV life and thrown every obstacle in our way. Enjoy the M- I'm still torn on another x5 or ix. If the IX came from SC- I'd already have one. These German builds take forever post COVID.

[zinner]

Don't worry the billions we are spending on IRS agents will help you figure out your 7500 tax credit. Rich people don't care, they have lawyers and llc's and write offs that run circles around folks that file 1040's. In the end the price of EV just got raised 7500 bux.

[RalphT5]

Originally Posted by JK479

They've (media, car companies) have made us all contemplate adjusting to EV life and thrown every obstacle in our way. Enjoy the M- I'm still torn on another x5 or ix. If the IX came from SC- I'd already have one. These German builds take forever post COVID.

Hate to say it but the whole EV thing pushed me in the direction of the M5. I had been on the fence seriously contemplating a G80 to replace my F80. I then saw the new dash on the G80 and realized that 2023 was the last year for the F90 and its V8 so it was now or never. After riding in a coworker's Model S, I was convinced ICE is still where my heart is. Now my F90 is on a ship between Europe and Galveston and I'm anxiously awaiting delivery in September.

[Bimmer5]

Originally Posted by RalphT5

It's bs like this that makes me feel even better about my inbound M5C. I'll stick with my ICE.

This ^^^^

No interest in EVs,

[NGT2]

Originally Posted by TurtleBoy

The government shouldn't have to provide the incentive to buy, the product should.

Totally agree. I'd be happy if they did away with all the credits and incentives and just let the market work it out. Now they're not just manipulating general product selection/demand but they're also manipulating which brands will have a leg up. It's bullshit.

But I don't think it will change overall demand for products offered by BMW or Mercedes, etc. What sucks for the American consumer is less products offered. I won't be surprised if, for example, BMW sees this as less incentive to import a larger array of PHEV sedans. So now less choices for the consumer.

Market manipulation and insider trading are illegal for everyone except the US government.

[hutchsoclutch]

Originally Posted by yousefnjr

We got a similar email from Rivian regarding our R1S reservation. They said they weren’t 100% sure but that by making $100 of the deposit non-refundable they thought that would constitute a binding order. Who knows.

It's the IRS we're talking about here… they'll poke a hole in anything they want to to make their money. And in regards to Rivian trying to pull a rabbit out of their ass it can hardly be a binding contract with no exact VIN, price, or delivery date. Hell- you can buy a car and as long as you don't drive it off the lot you can come back the next day and shred the contract and renege. So nothing binding about a purchase agreement signed by both parties.

[Tpriest7893]

Originally Posted by MackSea70

Background: I split my drive time between a F97 (x3Mc) and a Tesla model Y. (and have another F90 (M5c) on order.)

Personally I like the NA CEO's message here. We just had a major blow towards our electrification efforts - please do all you can to pre-date your orders into sales in order to look out for the best interests of our customers.

I don't even understand the purpose of this legislation other than to punish high income tax payers.

The administration is hell bent on driving us green - this is fine, while I enjoy my 625 HP ICE engine, I can get behind conservation efforts. Yet nothing in the EV credit section of the bill make sense.

EVs are (due to their tech nature) more expensive than their ICE counter parts - putting EVs out of the reach of the average car shopper. In some cases the tax incentives available DO bring those vehicles in reach of the slightly higher than average income earner - and yet we're taking that tax credit away.

Next, we all know that when we look at the lifecycle of a EV compared to an equivalent ICE counterpart the EV is actually more polluting. So for higher income buyers who want to at least convey the image that we're doing something good for the environment, we have the benefit of the tax credit. Remove the tax credit and you're removing a reason a lot of people (my neighbor for example) are willing to pay more for a car that pollutes less (but more over its lifespan).

None of this seems like a way to get the already skeptical population to buy more EVs and actually achieve reduced carbon emissions. You're taking an already expensive product, making it even more expensive, not making it more broadly available, nor doing anything to improve the substantially lacking electrical infrastructure needed to truly make EVs a reality.

What am I missing here?

Just keep buying gas cars and living life too the fullest 😎

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by MackSea70

Background: I split my drive time between a F97 (x3Mc) and a Tesla model Y. (and have another F90 (M5c) on order.)

Personally I like the NA CEO's message here. We just had a major blow towards our electrification efforts - please do all you can to pre-date your orders into sales in order to look out for the best interests of our customers.

I don't even understand the purpose of this legislation other than to punish high income tax payers.

The administration is hell bent on driving us green - this is fine, while I enjoy my 625 HP ICE engine, I can get behind conservation efforts. Yet nothing in the EV credit section of the bill make sense.

EVs are (due to their tech nature) more expensive than their ICE counter parts - putting EVs out of the reach of the average car shopper. In some cases the tax incentives available DO bring those vehicles in reach of the slightly higher than average income earner - and yet we're taking that tax credit away.

Next, we all know that when we look at the lifecycle of a EV compared to an equivalent ICE counterpart the EV is actually more polluting. So for higher income buyers who want to at least convey the image that we're doing something good for the environment, we have the benefit of the tax credit. Remove the tax credit and you're removing a reason a lot of people (my neighbor for example) are willing to pay more for a car that pollutes less (but more over its lifespan).

None of this seems like a way to get the already skeptical population to buy more EVs and actually achieve reduced carbon emissions. [...]

There are a couple of incentives.

No 1:. Provide an advantage to domestic production.

No 2:. Incentivize production of lower cost vehicles. Of which there are a larger pool of buyers which will allegedly accelerate adoption. Selling 6-figure EV's in a broken market (the car market is broken) is not the way to encourage wide scale adoption.

The downside is that it reduces profit margin per unit in a supply constrained market

The CAP is an attempt to reduce the deficit inducing nature of the subsidy.


Btw EV's can be less polluting from a lifecycle perspective. It just depends on the energy source used to build the thing

[jayp98]

Have they defined final assembly?

[techwhiz1]

Originally Posted by M3WC

BMW definitely sources their minerals mostly from China, as does most manufacturers. If there battery cells are made outside of FTA countries, it won't qualify for 50% component minimum either.

This is not true.
BMW sources cobalt and other materials from around the world. Cobalt comes from Morocco and Australia.

They don't use rare earth materials in their motors. Check their Responsible Minerals Initiative and the Global Battery Alliance.

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by NGT2

Totally agree. I'd be happy if they did away with all the credits and incentives and just let the market work it out. Now they're not just manipulating general product selection/demand but they're also manipulating which brands will have a leg up. It's bullshit.

But I don't think it will change overall demand for products offered by BMW or Mercedes, etc. What sucks for the American consumer is less products offered. I won't be surprised if, for example, BMW sees this as less incentive to import a larger array of PHEV sedans. So now less choices for the consumer.

Market manipulation and insider trading are illegal for everyone except the US government.

Problem is that so many major markets are phasing out ICE by some future date. Iirc EU is aiming for 2035.