Green Cronyism Gone Wild: It Looks Like The State Of California Is Bailing Out Tesla

Date: 18/07/17 | Wolf Richter, Business Insider

The California state Assembly passed a $3-billion subsidy program for electric vehicles, dwarfing the existing program. The bill is now in the state Senate. If passed, it will head to Governor Jerry Brown, who has not yet indicated if he’d sign what is ostensibly an effort to put EV sales into high gear, but below the surface appears to be a Tesla bailout.

Tesla will soon hit the limit of the federal tax rebates, which are good for the first 200,000 EVs sold in the US per manufacturer beginning in December 2009 (IRS explanation). In the second quarter after the manufacturer hits the limit, the subsidy gets cut in half, from $7,500 to $3,750; two quarters later, it gets cut to $1,875. Two quarters later, it goes to zero.

Given Tesla’s ambitious US sales forecast for its Model 3, it will hit the 200,000 vehicle limit in 2018, after which the phase-out begins. A year later, the subsidies are gone. Losing a $7,500 subsidy on a $35,000 car is a huge deal. No other EV manufacturer is anywhere near their 200,000 limit. Their customers are going to benefit from the subsidy; Tesla buyers won’t.

This could crush Tesla sales. Many car buyers are sensitive to these subsidies. For example, after Hong Kong rescinded a tax break for EVs effective in April, Tesla sales in April dropped to zero. The good people of Hong Kong will likely start buying Teslas again, but it shows that subsidies have a devastating impact when they’re pulled.

That’s what Tesla is facing next year in the US.

In California, the largest EV market in the US, 2.7% of new vehicles sold in the first quarter were EVs, up from 0.4% in 2012, according to the California New Dealers Association. California is Tesla’s largest market. Something big needs to be done to help the Bay Area company, which has lost money every single year of its ten years of existence. And taxpayers are going to be shanghaied into doing it.

To make this more palatable, you have to dress this up as something where others benefit too, though the biggest beneficiary would be Tesla because these California subsidies would replace the federal subsidies when they’re phased out.

It would be a rebate handled at the dealer, not a tax credit on the tax return. And it could reach “up to $30,000 to $40,000” per EV, state Senator Andy Vidak, a Republican from Hanford, explained in an emailed statement.

This is how the taxpayer-funded rebates in the “California Electric Vehicle Initiative” (AB1184) would work, according to the Mercury News:

The [California Air Resources Board] would determine the size of a rebate based on equalizing the cost of an EV and a comparable gas-powered car. For example, a new, $40,000 electric vehicle might have the same features as a $25,000 gas-powered car. The EV buyer would receive a $7,500 federal rebate, and the state would kick in an additional $7,500 to even out the bottom line.

And for instance, a $100,000 Tesla might be deemed to have the same features as a $65,000 gas-powered car. The rebate would cover the difference, minus the federal rebate (so $27,500). Because rebates for Teslas will soon be gone, the program would cover the entire difference – $35,000. This is where Senator Vidak got his “$30,000 to $40,000.”

The Tesla Model 3 would be tough to sell without the federal $7,500. But this new bill would push Californian taxpayers into filling the void. It would be a godsend for Tesla.

Full post

HT/The GWPF

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

150 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
chadb
July 19, 2017 12:40 pm

So here’s a question – Gasoline is taxed at what, like $0.5/gallon at $2.26 per gallon that’s 22%. Let’s take Tesla’s supercharging stations and tax their delivery at 22%. Now let’s take the c-max hybrid at 42mpg $24k and ask how far a Tesla 3 would have to run at $0.12/kwh and 215mi/60kWh. The C-max costs $0.0538/mi and the Tesla costs $0.0335 per mile for a savings of $0.020/mile. In order to make up the $10k price difference you only have to drive 492k miles. No problem, I am sure the battery pack in the model 3 will last the required 2,300 recharge cycles no problem. So basically you only have to run through a full charge every day for 6 years (11 years if your driving is only on weekdays for 50 weeks a year) for the model 3 to make sense. I’m sure the market will go bonkers for it.
Unless you depreciate the cost of future savings like all financial calculators do. Then of course the Model 3 never makes financial sense. However, it still allows virtue signaling, which is the entire point of the car. In fact their new marketing campaign is
“Virtue signaling, not just for Beverly Hills”

chadb
Reply to  chadb
July 19, 2017 1:35 pm

By the way, if you make the electricity free the payback is cut to a mere 185k miles.

whiten
July 19, 2017 12:56 pm

Let the Games begin…….
More, lots more popcorn…. and more fizzy drinks…….
Elon does not know what to do next,,,, can not even be able to make his own mind up and decide according to his own free will, as he is not allowed to do so anymore under any circumstances given , with all his wealth and all that to count for……really to bad….a real pity, for such a guy,,,,, seems like a huge waste…
Hopefully he makes it out of this crazy “Rat Barrel” walk in he is ordered to walk in to…..which will result in end up to for him be no more or no less than food for cannon…for the survival of the cannibal savage rats like Moony….or Aly
cheers

July 19, 2017 1:31 pm

In some states it is illegal for auto manufacturers to sell vehicles directly to the customer. The way I understood Tesla gets around this is that they “sell the car to the customer in California” according to the paperwork and the customer simply gets to takes delivery of the vehicle in one of their neighboring states. This is how Wikipedia describes the sale of Tesla’s in Texas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_US_dealership_disputes#Texas
I wonder if California tax payers will be subsidizing Tesla sales in Texas and other states?

Griff
Reply to  jgriggs3
July 20, 2017 6:26 am

I’ve always wondered about that – does not sound like a free market/capitalism to me… not what one expects in the USA!

don rady
Reply to  jgriggs3
July 25, 2017 11:50 pm

The beauty of unintentional consequences: if this law goes through, there will be a new black market for Tesla’s in California. ie; no one will buy a Tesla in any other state. There will be become a black market network popping up selling Tesla’s in California for all buyer’s across the country. Of course at the expense of the sucker California tax payers. The $$ differential from California to any other state to purchase a Tesla will be huge.
What else can go wrong with unintentional consequences of this new law?

Coeur de Lion
July 19, 2017 1:59 pm

What about air con in hot St Barbara, eh? And full headlights. Twenty miles?

drednicolson
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
July 19, 2017 10:00 pm

Headlights! Hadn’t thought about EVs and night-driving until now. In a regular ICEV, the alternator supplies the headlights with power while the engine is running, so they’re only a drain on the battery when turned on while the engine is off. In a full EV, they will always be a drain on the battery and lessen effective range.
Hope the nearest hospital isn’t that far away. Because pregnant women never go into labor in the middle of the night. /[arcasm-say]

July 19, 2017 2:07 pm

Tesla isn’t making a profit so essentially none of the money is going to Musk himself. It’s going to Tesla and being distributed to Musk’s employees as well as his supply chain to run the business and manufacture and maintain the cars.
I always sense people here think Musk is somehow personally reaping these subsidies and that “the people” pay and don’t benefit but in fact the people directly benefit if they’re employed by Musk or are part of his supply chain.

Reply to  TimTheToolMan
July 19, 2017 8:54 pm

He’s living his dream. You cant blame a man for that. He strikes me as being the kind of person who puts living the dream well above wealth accumulation. At least Musk produces useful things in cars, batteries and rockets. If you want to vent anger over people taking more than their share at the expense of others whilst producing nothing of value, look at Wall St.

Reply to  TimTheToolMan
July 20, 2017 2:24 am

Well he made a fortune from starting PayPal originally. He’s not short on cash. As I understand it he initially funded Tesla and Space X himself.

willhaas
July 19, 2017 5:04 pm

I am willing to do my part by driving an EV to run errands. The trouble is that I cannot afford to buy one. I want the state of Calfornia to supply me with the car and a solar charging system to provide the energy.

July 19, 2017 7:05 pm

California is a Ponzi beneficiary as well . They front the 3 billion here but inflate Tesla CA employment and bubble benefits that much longer. When it busts it will be someone else’s fault.
First Solar and Germany have done this dance for years. Stock 80% off high and still at the subside troth acting like a startup to be nurtured by government.
Musk is a welfare queen.

JDN
July 19, 2017 9:47 pm

Now that it’s a rebate instead of a tax credit, can anyone walk into California, buy a subsidized Tesla then sell it out of state? Just asking for a friend.

observa
Reply to  JDN
July 19, 2017 11:01 pm

Sounds like Californians will have lots of friends interstate with this racket 🙂

Dr. Strangelove
July 20, 2017 4:58 am

Zero to 60 MPH in 5.6 sec. Tesla Model 3 is pathetic. Slower than my grandma’s car
Caroll Shelby in the 1962 Shelby Cobra (0 to 60 in 4.9 sec.)
http://static.robbreport.com/sites/default/files/images/articles/2016Jun/2315251//02-caroll-shelby.jpg

July 20, 2017 8:40 am

Elon Musk is a criminal and a mobster. He bribed over 30 Congressional and DOE staff to get his money and then laundered campaign funds for Obama and Hillary. He supported the latest invasion of Afghanistan to get people killed for his lithium mining. If Eric Holder and Jeff Sessions were not running cover for Musk, Musk would be in federal prison.

Joel Snider
July 20, 2017 12:18 pm

I wonder if it’s THIS sort of thing that’s hurting California economy.
Y’ know – instead of anything to do with Climate Change?

Caligula Jones
July 20, 2017 1:18 pm
July 22, 2017 2:11 pm

I believe this is more than mere cronyism.
The state of California has engaged in some legislative activities lately that are mind-bendingly ignorant of economic realities (the bullet train to nowhere, the $400 billion per annum socialized medicine bill). I think it may be that the Lefty-loosies are running scared and it is rattling their brain pans.
Reality is closing in on them and the only response they can offer, the only trick left in their playbook, is to simply deny reality and keep on cuttin’ them checks like there’s no tomorrow.

Verified by MonsterInsights