40,000 are not enough 'stealing' 1,000 from Tesla

socialism, it's coming to a town near you!

 

YOU are CANCELED ! ! !

.

 

The talks should be easy. Tesla’s position has always been that they welcome other cars, as long as they contribute to building the infrastructure.
I don’t think Tesla cares if the added help comes from the manufacturer or the government, as long as it is linked to the number of cars added.

 

If the German system is anything like the US, virtually every supercharger installation has been subsidized by cash grants, tax credits or tax deductions. As such, the government (representing the people) probably has a right to ask Tesla to allow ALL interested customers to buy their product.

The opinion that "Tesla owners paid for" the supercharger network combined with the implied right to exclusive use of that network does not hold water. I'd be pissed off to think that I "paid" for something and then have to pay again every time I used it. Like golf courses and toll bridges.

I'd be even more pissed off that my taxes paid for infrastructure that I could not even pay to use.

 

Your assumption about Tesla superchargers being subsidized in the USA is incorrect.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that the government doesn't have a "right" to ask. Ask being the important word.
When the government (if they did in Germany) provided incentives for EV chargers, did they "ask" that the chargers be made available to all cars? Doubtful.

So Tesla has a right to "ask" the car makers to pay into the Supercharger network. Very simply, Tesla should compute the cost to install each charger, times the number of chargers, divided by the number of cars shipped, plus some profit and time-value of money and "ask" the other manufacturers to pay up.

Mike

 

Pretty sure that I'm not far off.

For Immediate Release: May 17, 2021


Applications open May 18


SACRAMENTO – The California Energy Commission (CEC) announced today that $17.5 million is available to expand public electric vehicle (EV) charging in 13 rural counties. Incentives available through the new Inland Communities Incentive Project will cover up to 75 percent of EV charging equipment costs. More than a third of the funding is dedicated to installations in under-resourced communities.


Eligible counties include Butte, El Dorado, Imperial, Kings, Merced, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tulare and Yolo.


The effort is one of 10 regional initiatives established under California Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Project (CALeVIP) which provides incentive funds for new charging stations at local businesses, shopping centers, gas stations, public facilities, multifamily housing and other community locations throughout the state.

 

if the government provides incentives of any sort, they need to make the correct stipulations in the same bill, not after the fact.
but this is germany, so let's not link u.s. law to the unknown

if you have a fact, present it with proof. if you have an opinion, express it.
but please don't present an opinion and try to dress it up as factual.

i got a $2,500. tax credit for buying a plug in. does that give someone else a right to use it?

 

Even if this is true, The EXISTING 10K+ (?) Superchargers in the US (25K worldwide) were installed without this.
It should also be noted that these subsidies are generally structured for business owners to install on their property.
This means that they go in store parking lots, at hotels, in parking garages for buildings...usually L2 chargers.

I don't know how the Tesla deals work, but they don't already own properties with enough power anywhere, really.
In some cases they probably make a deal with the owner of a restaurant or store.
In others they are buying and leasing properties...in which case the subsidies only cover a small fraction of the cost.

In this case the land cost, purchased or leased, is very high:
Tesla's 62 stall Santa Monica V3 Supercharger hits speed bump, LA housing crisis takes priority

Mike

 

I don't think Superchargers count as public.

 

Redefining a charger as being "not public" certainly changes things. Riiiight.

Tesla does not get subsidies, right? Not right. They get them from several different directions. When they say that they build the price of the superchargers into the price of the cars, they are also saying that the subsidies for purchase of those cars are also paying for the chargers.

How about in Texas.... From Op-Ed: Tesla continues subsidy shopping in Texas despite stock surges | National | thecentersquare.com

Now Texas is the latest state to fall for Musk’s pleas for more money. Commissioners in Travis County (home of state capital Austin) recently awarded property tax breaks worth roughly $15 million to Tesla in the hopes of luring the company down to the Lone Star State. And, that’s on top of the $47 million in property tax abatements green-lit by the Del Valle School District Board approved for Tesla earlier this month.

Then there's the $1 Billion in tax breaks that Tesla got for it's New York Gigafactory.


And there's this point: California has a program that provides a $7500 incentive for each California Tesla purchase. If you want to take the stance that the California superchargers are paid for by purchase of Tesla cars, then you have to accept the fact that a significant portion of that purchase was paid by a subsidy.

From: Op-Ed: Tesla continues subsidy shopping in Texas despite stock surges | National | thecentersquare.com

It’s hard to find a total dollar amount of California’s subsidies for Tesla, but the subsidies have been thick and fast. Until this year, the state government covered $7,500 of every Tesla bought in the state. The Tesla factory applied for and qualified for plenty of tax breaks.


Early on, it got $612 million in tax breaks from California, according to Green Car Reports.


The federal government also subsidized the factory in question. Musk was a major donor to and fundraiser for Barack Obama. Obama’s administration issued a $465 million loan to help Musk’s company, Tesla, build the Fremont factory that would build components for all-electric cars. (Tesla has since repaid the loan, according to the Energy Department.)


It was fitting that in 2013, Musk used that factory to announce a subsidy auction: He was taking bids for massive subsidies for his next factory. As the Los Angeles Times put it: “Late in 2013, Tesla summoned economic development officials from seven states to its auto factory in Fremont, Calif. After a tour, they gathered in a conference room, where Tesla executives explained their plan to build the biggest lithium-ion battery factory in the world — then asked the states to bid for the project.”


Nevada “won” that contest, bringing in Tesla with $1.25 billion in subsidies.

 

Geez, isn’t that the new business model, with subscription software? And then there’s property taxes.

 

I’m pretty sure you are

A: Your original supposition was that the US(A) system paid for the superchargers. This is the point in question. Not state subsidies, but federal ones.

B: The quoted subsidy is likely for level 2 charging and likely excluded Tesla.

C: You have yet to show one subsidy that is unique to Tesla. If you want to complain about big business subsidies, I’d be happy to join you.
I live just a few miles from a sports stadium that got tons of subsidies. And they still won’t let me go to a game for free!

Update:

Here is a link to the actual requirements: Inland Counties Incentive Project | CALeVIP

I was incorrect, it is for both level 2 and DC fast charging.
Tesla would also not qualify for a number of reasons listed under site requirements.

 

There are gas stations out there that aren't public. That is, not every car off the street can get fuel there. Sounds an awful lot like how Superchargers operate.

According to the EU, which is where the OT takes place, Superchargers are not public.
"However, the definition of “Public Charger” in the Directive specifically excludes discriminatory provision. The wording is fairly confusing using the negative of “non-discriminatory” rather than just “discriminatory,” but it is clear enough that providers like Tesla which provide charging exclusively for Tesla drivers are not considered to be providing “public chargers,” and so the rules do not apply to them."
Standardization Of EV Charging In The EU | CleanTechnica

In the beginning, the Model S had life time Supercharger access, but it was not a standard feature at first. At the time, it was a $2000 option. Since it was so popular, it was a made a standard feature, and the option price added to the car. The best federal, state, and local incentives for a BEV added up to $12k to $15k. the Model S back started in the $70k to $80k range. The incentives for the car can lower the price without touching the amount that went to the Supercharger network, which only got part of its funding from the sale of cars.

Superchargers are now fee based. Those fees pay for upkeep and expansion. So now there is no chance a car incentive could go to the chargers.

As for subsidies to build factories, every business goes looking for such handouts. Toyota got $46.75 million to move their headquarters to Texas. Will North Texas ever get another Toyota? How Plano landed a historic corporate catch This a regular practice of business and government, and part of why the religion of Capitalism is a joke.

So yes, Tesla goes looking for and uses subsidies, but so does every business on the planet.

 

sometimes, governments go looking for businesses...

 

i wonder how governments are dealing with vdub charging infrastructure