The Everything Tesla/EV Argument Thread

[dvarapala]

Originally Posted by LATB

This assumes the taxpayer has at least $7500 in tax due.

True. If they don't owe that much, they still get to keep the incentive - the IRS isn't going to claw that money back. They'll just take it from Lars and Steve instead.

[GrandSportC3]

Originally Posted by RedLS1GTO

Can't lie, the guy hellbent on pushing EVs saying this made me chuckle.

Keep up the good work.

What does liking EVs have to do with government wasting money? You think that I support for example the bill to spend $7B on chargers and then they only built one? The rest of the money is gone. I'm against government wasting money. Virtually everything government does includes massive waste

[GrandSportC3]

Originally Posted by dvarapala

True. If they don't owe that much, they still get to keep the incentive - the IRS isn't going to claw that money back. They'll just take it from Lars and Steve instead.

I don't think that a person with less than $7500 tax liability should spend money on a new car . Not even sure how they'd qualify for a loan..

[dvarapala]

Originally Posted by GrandSportC3

I don't think that a person with less than $7500 tax liability should spend money on a new car.

Well that's an entirely different issue.

Not even sure how they'd qualify for a loan..

A lot of them did during the pandemic, but not so much now that stimulus payments have stopped and interest rates are high.

[GrandSportC3]

Originally Posted by dvarapala

Well that's an entirely different issue.



A lot of them did during the pandemic, but not so much now that stimulus payments have stopped and interest rates are high.

People are so irresponsible with their money. I drove used cars until I made enough to easily afford a new car. Now I spend big on cars but now I can easily afford it.

[LATB]

Originally Posted by dvarapala

True. If they don't owe that much, they still get to keep the incentive - the IRS isn't going to claw that money back. They'll just take it from Lars and Steve instead.

How does this work? The dealer discounts the truck 7500? I don’t think so. I assumed that the buyer would receive the tax benefit when he files. Which means the buyer pays the 7500 and only gets the “discount” when he files his taxes.
Correct?

[LATB]

Originally Posted by GrandSportC3

I don't think that a person with less than $7500 tax liability should spend money on a new car . Not even sure how they'd qualify for a loan..

I don’t think that a person with less than 7500 tax liability should qualify to vote. But they do.

[Mick]

Originally Posted by LATB

I don’t think that a person with less than 7500 tax liability should qualify to vote. But they do.

You and I are close on this one. I am fine with someone who doesn't make enough money to pay taxes having the right to vote. But IMO, when someone takes welfare or the like, they should NOT be allowed to vote.

Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who said something like when those who don't make anything can vote to take from those that do, democracy will end?

[LATB]

Originally Posted by Mick

You and I are close on this one. I am fine with someone who doesn't make enough money to pay taxes having the right to vote. But IMO, when someone takes welfare or the like, they should NOT be allowed to vote.

Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who said something like when those who don't make anything can vote to take from those that do, democracy will end?

My view on voting qualifications includes a minimum of a net income tax paid.
But I also think that it should go further.

[dvarapala]

Originally Posted by LATB

How does this work? The dealer discounts the truck 7500? I don’t think so. I assumed that the buyer would receive the tax benefit when he files. Which means the buyer pays the 7500 and only gets the “discount” when he files his taxes.
Correct?

What's new for 2024: instant rebate

Starting in January, EV buyers won't have to wait until the following year's tax season to claim — and pocket — the clean vehicle tax credit.

Instead, there's a new option to take the credit as a rebate right when you purchase the vehicle. This means that after a bit of paperwork at the dealership, the credit will be available as essentially cash in hand (or, more likely, knocked off the cost of the vehicle) on the day of purchase.

It will work like this: First, after confirming the sale is eligible for the tax credit, the dealer basically fronts you the money. If you're eligible for $7,500, the dealer credits you for that money as though you'd brought it in as cash.

Then the dealer submits documentation to the IRS, and the IRS pays back the dealer that $7,500 — effectively meaning the tax credit is being handled through the dealership.

It no longer matters how much you owe in taxes

This is another big benefit to taking the credit as a rebate: You get the full credit, regardless of your tax liability.

Previously, a buyer would need a tax liability at least $7,500 in a given year to get the full benefit of the credit. That's because the credit could reduce your tax bill to zero, but it would never result in the IRS actually paying you.

That functioned like an income minimum, since many low- and middle-income families owe less than that in taxes. It was also just another headache for people trying to figure out how much the credit was actually worth to them.

Now, even families with no tax liability at all can get the tax credit, effectively as a cash discount for the vehicle purchase.

And if you take the credit as a rebate, you don't need to calculate your taxes in advance to be confident in the amount you'll get.

(IRS documents still state that your tax credit can't exceed your tax liability, and that remains true if you wait to claim it on your tax return. But this FAQ confirms that that if you choose to take a credit as an up-front rebate and it exceeds your tax liability, that "excess" money "is not subject to recapture" by the IRS. That means you get to keep it.)

https://www.npr.org/2023/12/28/12191...sla-ford-vw-gm

[dvarapala]

Originally Posted by LATB

My view on voting qualifications includes a minimum of a net income tax paid.
But I also think that it should go further.

We should bring back the rule that only land owners can vote.

[LATB]

Originally Posted by dvarapala

https://www.npr.org/2023/12/28/12191...sla-ford-vw-gm

Thanks for the explanation.
And this is totally bullchit.

[LATB]

Originally Posted by dvarapala

We should bring back the rule that only land owners can vote.

Agree.

I also think that you should have to be 35 years old. If you have to be 35 to run you should have to be 35 to vote

[dvarapala]

Originally Posted by LATB

Thanks for the explanation.
And this is totally bullchit.

Realistically, very few people with less than $7500 tax liability can afford to buy a brand new EV, so it's not as bad as it could be.

But thanks Biden.

[LATB]

Originally Posted by dvarapala

Realistically, very few people with less than $7500 tax liability can afford to buy a brand new EV, so it's not as bad as it could be.

But thanks Biden.

You spelled **** wrong.

[GrandSportC3]

Originally Posted by LATB

You spelled **** wrong.

[Loco Vette]

Tow vehicle fail

[GrandSportC3]

Originally Posted by Loco Vette

Tow vehicle fail

like gas vehicles don't catch on fire.. 10 times more frequently (and that number is in scale, not just total number of fires)

[Steve_R]

Originally Posted by GrandSportC3

like gas vehicles don't catch on fire.. 10 times more frequently (and that number is in scale, not just total number of fires)

You keep typing that. Got a link to actual fire rate data for EVs and ICE cars?

[Loco Vette]

Originally Posted by GrandSportC3

like gas vehicles don't catch on fire.. 10 times more frequently (and that number is in scale, not just total number of fires)

But not usually underwater.