Tesla to Produce 'Affordable EV' by 2016

Tesla did what GM has not done.

DBCassidy

 

Time will tell.

 

Tesla never got any subsidies. They got a loan, which they paid back, with interest, ahead of time. Please get your terminology straight. The taxpayer is stuck with a bundle of worthless GM stock. Not so with Tesla.

 

Have at it. There are thousands more like them.

1. If Tesla Would Stop Selling Cars, We'd All Save Some Money - Forbes
   
   http://www.forbes.com/.../if-tesla-would-stop-selling-cars-wed-all-save-some-...‎
   
   May 27, 2013 - First, there's the $7500 taxback bonus that every buyer gets and every taxpayer .... Any automaker is eligible for these subsidies, not just Tesla.
2. Tesla's Success Is the Result of Politics and Subsidies - Economic ...
   
   US News & World Report | News & Rankings | Best Colleges, Best Hospitals, and more › Opinion › Economic Intelligence‎
   
   Jun 3, 2013 - Tesla is only profitable thanks to politics and tax subsidies.
3. Tesla CEO Elon Musk Is Wrong About Government Subsidies | New ...
   
   http://www.newrepublic.com/.../tesla-ceo-elon-musk-wrong-about-government...‎
   
   May 30, 2013 - Tesla CEO Elon Musk is wrong to oppose government subsidies. ... have received from the federal government is perhaps understandable.
4. Praise for Tesla ignores subsidies' poor overall performance | The ...
   
   dailycaller.com/.../tesla-praise-ignores-subsidies-poor-overall-performan...‎
   
   May 24, 2013 - Tesla Motors has repaid a government loan nine years early — but that's ... that sell for $70,000 each — received a federal loan of $465 million.
5. (ECO:nomics) Tesla CEO Says Government Subsidies Usually Bad ...
   
   blogs.wsj.com/.../economics-tesla-ceo-government-subsidies-are-usually-...‎
   
   Mar 22, 2012 - His electric-car company would have gone public even without it, Elon Musk says.

 

Time is starting to tell Musk is on the right track.

DBCassidy

 

Sure, if he is able to out-last his expert harvesting of wretchedly excessive subsidies.

 

Again, the US government spends more subsidizing oil than it does batteries.
The margins were positive in the first quarter without including California ZEV credits, which are paid for by other auto companies, not tax payers.

 

Just as he does with solar and space launch, BTW. The guy is an expert at harvesting the dole. I'll give him that.

 

Well you are welcome to your own opinion, just not your own facts.

So now you are claiming SpaceX is getting subsidized because they have a government contract?
By that definition oil goes from 10 Billion a year in subsidies to a heck of a lot more

 

The subsidies are a fact. There is no unsubsidized, economic, retail-priced demand for much of what he produces.

 

We need more Elon Musks in this country. It would help give a boost to the economy and move us closer to the top in technology.

DBCassidy

 

If you could name them, that would be helpful.
The SpaceX flights seem to be well recieved and NASA is contracting many flights. By the way, the SpaceX launches are saving NASA a lot of money as SpaceX costs a lot less than NASA's own launches cost.

The tax credit for EVs is the same type of subsidy as child tax credits, house insurance deductions and a variety of others.
At least in the case of EVs the US government does not find it necessary to spend taxpayer money to have the military keep electric producing areas of the world 'calm'.
I would think you would be happy about that.

 

Well, for starters, Burt Rutan of Scaled Composites is a visionary and produces some unique aircraft. He has a goal of going to the moon and commercializing space travel. I had the privilege of seeing and one of his creations up close: the Proteus model 281.

Very impressive.

DBCassidy

 

hahahah

" it could potentially run as low as $30,000 after tax credits are applied."

a 30.000 car is not cheap at all
there are poeple that still can buy a new car and people that would still be able to buy a cheap car keep driving the one they have because of the economics..

thats wy a 30.000 car is on that list as average. ( i think )

 

The vast majority of car buyers cannot fully utilize the subsidies and tax credits that apply to an EV purchase at the Tesla's price level.

 

???
Cannot fully utilize the subsidies AND tax credits?
We know about the tax credit, what subsidies other than the tax credit are you referring to?

For the tax credit, a single filer would need about a $59,000 income (using standard deduction) to have a $7500 tax liability. A couple filing jointly about $75,000 (again using the standard deduction).

Most couples buying a $30k or more car probably could get the full amount.
I am not sure about single's car buying habits. Personally the first time I spent $30k on any car I was making about $60k, so right at the cutoff.

 

Would you prefer federal, state, local EV-only carve-outs as opposed to subsidies?

 

I would prefer you simply indicate what 'subsidies' you are speaking of.
If they are state or local, feel free to indicate as such.

 

You might be an ideal use case for the battery swapping and super charger tech already in the Tesla Model S and the Model X. If you are using the IRS allowance of 55.5 cents/mile you could be making money driving a Model S today.

$50K/yr in IRS allowances goes a long way toward paying for a top end Model S that you can charge at night using TXU's free nights electric plan. (www.txu.com/view-plans.aspx?cint=5&dwel=01&prom=PS&zip=75215&tdsp=ER_ONCOR)

 

Beyond direct purchaser and component (i.e. vehicle, battery) producer tax credits and subsidies, federal/state/local, there are (certainly not an all-inclusive list) incentives and subsidies such as preferential lane access on public highways, preferential parking and charge station locations on public as well as private property, infrastructure grants for home and public EV charging stations, the list goes on. Not to say the oil lobby doesn't eat at the all-you-can-eat buffet too, but this truism rings: "the experience of the 1970s and 1980s taught us that if a technology is commercially viable, then government support is not needed, and if a technology is not commercially viable, no amount of government support will make it so."