Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVs will sink or swim on their merits now, rather than advancing only due to subsidies from the government.

If EVs are cost-effective, functional, convenient, and attractive, they will sell just fine without government subsidies. If ICE vehicles are more attractive, buyers will vote with their wallets accordingly.

If that is the case why not let Chinese EVs in? They have EVs that cost $20,000 and are better vs Tesla S models. They also have EVs in The $10,000 range.

If they let the Chinese EVs in, it would kill the US auto industry. Even the most die-hard conservative understands why that would not be beneficial to making America great again...

+1

China is the enemy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVs will sink or swim on their merits now, rather than advancing only due to subsidies from the government.

If EVs are cost-effective, functional, convenient, and attractive, they will sell just fine without government subsidies. If ICE vehicles are more attractive, buyers will vote with their wallets accordingly.

If that is the case why not let Chinese EVs in? They have EVs that cost $20,000 and are better vs Tesla S models. They also have EVs in The $10,000 range.

If they let the Chinese EVs in, it would kill the US auto industry. Even the most die-hard conservative understands why that would not be beneficial to making America great again...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVs will sink or swim on their merits now, rather than advancing only due to subsidies from the government.

If EVs are cost-effective, functional, convenient, and attractive, they will sell just fine without government subsidies. If ICE vehicles are more attractive, buyers will vote with their wallets accordingly.

If that is the case why not let Chinese EVs in? They have EVs that cost $20,000 and are better vs Tesla S models. They also have EVs in The $10,000 range.

Same reason we’ve been protecting our domestic auto industry for six decades with the “chicken tax.”

The $7500 federal rebate has already been renewed/extended at least once. The Model Y, at least at one point, was the best selling car in the world.

I don’t think that anyone can seriously continue to make the claim that EV buyers still need $7500 federal tax rebates as subsidies. I, personally, think electric vehicles are great. They should not need any more rebates. And I expect that this new Congress and President Trump will end them in the next budget.

Yep, we're just ceding EV dominance to China. They're already beating us, but we're accelerating it.

It's propping up the whale oil industry when the light bulb is getting more popular.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVs will sink or swim on their merits now, rather than advancing only due to subsidies from the government.

If EVs are cost-effective, functional, convenient, and attractive, they will sell just fine without government subsidies. If ICE vehicles are more attractive, buyers will vote with their wallets accordingly.

If that is the case why not let Chinese EVs in? They have EVs that cost $20,000 and are better vs Tesla S models. They also have EVs in The $10,000 range.

Yes, ~$15K EVs. We can't compete with that currently -- don't see Elon/Tesla wanting to, either.

Anonymous wrote:EVs will sink or swim on their merits now, rather than advancing only due to subsidies from the government.

If EVs are cost-effective, functional, convenient, and attractive, they will sell just fine without government subsidies. If ICE vehicles are more attractive, buyers will vote with their wallets accordingly.

If that is the case why not let Chinese EVs in? They have EVs that cost $20,000 and are better vs Tesla S models. They also have EVs in The $10,000 range.

Anonymous wrote:EVs will sink or swim on their merits now, rather than advancing only due to subsidies from the government.

If EVs are cost-effective, functional, convenient, and attractive, they will sell just fine without government subsidies. If ICE vehicles are more attractive, buyers will vote with their wallets accordingly.

You may not have read my earlier post very carefully. The subsidies are continuing for now.

I own three EVs now. Two were bought without rebates. EVs can increasingly stand on their own. In the long term, I am convinced that EVs will be a more compelling option for most buyers. But, ICE vehicles have entrenched advantages. This is simply the difference between a mature technology and an emerging one. EVs need some help during the transition period. It would be very short-sighted not to provide that support.

The bigger impact will be that there will be no new support to help make the EV transition.

Meanwhile, the irony is that as much as Trump rails against China, they invested heavily in their EV industry (ignoring any trade war impacts), which is now why they are so far ahead of the rest of the world. And, they continue to prop them up, so their lead will continue to grow while the US will fall further behind. Eventually, the US auto industry will need some sort of bailout. Thus, it would have been better to just keep incentivizing EV adoption/expansion than breaking it and then trying to fix it.

On a lighter note, won't it be interesting to see rural Republicans driving around in their new Teslas in support of Musk/Trump? They might even keep the EV market afloat

EVs will sink or swim on their merits now, rather than advancing only due to subsidies from the government.

If EVs are cost-effective, functional, convenient, and attractive, they will sell just fine without government subsidies. If ICE vehicles are more attractive, buyers will vote with their wallets accordingly.

Forgive me, but this is standard Trump. His RTO EO for civil service workers let individual office/agency heads keep any remote workers they felt were needed.

 It also calls for ending a waiver allowing states to ban internal-combustion cars by 2035. Specifically targeting the repeal of a waiver granted to California in December, Trump said the EPA should terminate, "where appropriate, state emissions waivers that function to limit sales of gasoline-powered automobiles."

Also would expect fuel economy / CAFE standards to be rolled back, which would require less EVs to balance out vehicles with lower MPG averages.

So there has been a lot of money invested in plants and soon to be complete plants for EVs and EV batteries in the US by foreign and domestic car manufacturers. These are creating a lot of jobs in largely red states.

House members and senators from those states will strongly oppose any changes in EV and EV subsidies. Add in all the domestic car manufacturers lobbying efforts and it will be extremely hard roll anything back.

Everyone in the car industry knows EVs are the future and China is a major threat. If Trump kills things in the US it will severely cripple the US car manufacturers in a few years.

There has been a lot of talk about what the second Donald Trump administration will mean with regard to electric vehicles. An executive order that Trump signed yesterday gives some early indications. Based on what we've seen so far, there is likely to be considerably more smoke than fire. The EO in question was titled, "Unleashing American Energy". The document mentions electric vehicles in two sections. First, in section 2, it says that it is the policy of the United States to "eliminate the “electric vehicle (EV) mandate’ and promote true consumer choice...". The primary problem with this is that there is no "electric vehicle mandate". As best I can tell, this refers to an executive order issued by former President Joe Biden that calls for "bolstering our domestic market by setting a goal that 50 percent of all new passenger cars and light trucks sold in 2030 be zero-emission vehicles..." This is simply an aspirational goal, not a law, not a regulation, and certainly not a mandate.

In the same section of Trump's EO, it says that the administration will consider "the elimination of unfair subsidies and other ill-conceived government-imposed market distortions that favor EVs over other technologies...". This would appear to target the tax credits that EVs now receive. However, it only says that such elimination will be considered. At this point, nothing is being done in regard to those rebates. Moreover, since the rebates are written into law, a law will be required to change them. While this could happen as part of the reconciliation bill being considered on the Hill, it is likely that EV rebates will survive for the time being.

Electric vehicles come up again in Section 7, in which the EO calls for pausing funding for Green New Deal programs, including "funds for electric vehicle charging stations made available through the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program and the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program..." This refers to the NEVI program that is aimed at installing EV fast chargers along freeways throughout the country. However, NEVI grants are administered by states, and almost all of the funds have already been distributed. A federal pause will have almost no impact on the building of NEVI charging sites.

It would be naive to suggest that the Trump administration will have no impact on the future of EVs. Clearly, there will be an effect, and it will not be good. But things are not as dire as some may have feared. A mandate that does not exist has been repealed, tax credits will remain available, and a funding pause that affects almost no money at all will go into effect. This is probably the least amount of damage for which EV fans could have hoped.