Quote:
Originally Posted by Vwbeamer
I agree, only the upper middle class can afford EVs and take advantage of the tax credit, but it funds the R&R of EVs.
Where I live in Mid Georgia, 9 out of 10 vehicles are trucks....including mine.
These Vehicles are going to around for a long time, even if production stopped today. There is going be massive interest in increasing the economy of these trucks.
I'm generally against taxes and favor free markets. But I wouldn't be opposed to a increase in fuel taxes and a tax on tires.
I'd rather have a tax on tires than Government tracking me to see how many miles I drive. This would allow them to tax EV drivers for road repair.
|
The tax credit ultimately allows the manufacturer to increase the sales price and pocket the profit (or lose less profit to meet emissions regulations by selling EVs). We saw the price massively reduced for both Tesla and GM EVs once they lost the federal tax eligibility. In fact, the Bolt can be had now for quite a bit less without any subsidy (~$24k) than before when the subsidy was in place.
I'm for taxation when a specific anti-social behavior needs to be curtailed, or when crucial services are required and best handled at the governmental level rather than privately.
If a heavy tax on tires were levied, people would run their tires to the steel belts, wheel theft would increase, and harder compounds that compromise handling performance would be preferred. Taxing tires is another one of those "schemes" I keep talking about where people try to be too smart by taxing at the micro level (specific products) rather than at a high level (income or sales tax).
As pointed out below, the correct way to fund infrastructure is from the general fund, because it's crucial and everyone depends on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay635703
There are only 3500 BEVs out of millions of cars in my state, seems irrelevant to road funding.
|
It cost more to dream up an extra fee, implement, and administer it for so few BEVs than they will ever recover.