The Inconvenient Truth About Electric Vehicles

[BugI02]

An electric car would be perfect for most urban dwellers or suburbanites. The huge majority of my seat time in my SUV or truck is less than 20 miles round trip from my house. As long as someone lived fairy close to work, they'd almost never have a situation where they needed the extended range of a gas engine. I would, however, have another vehicle for extended trips. Or, if I decided on only having 1 vehicle for everything, a hybrid works very well. I used to own a 2010 Prius. While not exactly the most exciting car to drive, it was extremely reliable and a smooth ride. Plenty of space for 4 people and groceries. And never less than 40 mpg, even driving it like I stole it. (Which I did most of the time, in sport mode)

I have had a similar experience to Route 45's. I drove a prius from Columbus to the northwest lake michigan coast about an hour from Traverse (7 1/2 hour drive) for friends who were retiring and moving into their new house. I drove in rain and heavy traffic from Toledo to Lansing then on MI127 and MI115 and drove it in the manner I was comfortable with. While lacking sports car handling, at 75 to 80mph it always answered bells and never made me feel that it wasn't hooked up. I was impressed.
42 to 48mpg calculated based off actual gallons added to tank, not the onboard computer

I also have a friend who has a Tesla S that he uses for a fast, entertaining commute between his business in PHX and his 'cabin' in Flagstaff, 140 or so miles and 5400ft vertical gain, with plenty of charge left to run errands and easily rechargeable in a few hours. Again, I was impressed. I agree that .gov shouldn't be subsidizing the consumer purchase of such devices, but if any here believe that there isn't infrastructure in place to subsidize IC vehicles - don't those blinders interfere with peripheral vision? When we get rid of subsidies for cutting edge electric vehicles, can we also end the deductibility of Lincoln Navigators, X5s and ML320 as 'work trucks' and luxury car leases for the executive class? Why should I subsidize the cost of your Audi or Benz just so you can use it for the critical business function of ... showing up for work

 

[Leo]

When we get rid of subsidies for cutting edge electric vehicles, can we also end the deductibility of Lincoln Navigators, X5s and ML320 as 'work trucks' and luxury car leases for the executive class? Why should I subsidize the cost of your Audi or Benz just so you can use it for the critical business function of ... showing up for work

The last company car I was issued that was not restricted to work only use, I had to pay taxes on the benefit. It was not a Lincoln or a euro sedan, but they were always new full sized cars. Is that no longer the case? The free taxes on dual use personally owned vehicles ended decades ago. I do not know how the tax liabilities for Westinghouse were handled. Since they leased the car, I assume they were able to deduct the price of the lease.

 

[BugI02]

I don't know for sure, but I suspect that W-house was able to deduct 100% of the lease cost. That they would rather do this than buy the fleet and depreciate the vehicles makes me suspect that the lease is a better deduction

But how close to the pointy end of the organizational pyramid are you? The peeps I'm thinking of wouldn't be caught dead in less than an ML400, Q10 or an Evoque. I think they should be free to drive whatever they wish that they are willing to pay for, completely. I only balk at having to prop them up with deductions. These people are senior executives, the vehicles AFAIK are only ever driven by the same individual, and their function appears to consist exclusively with getting his (or her) butt from home to work. We don't exactly run in the same social circles, so I can't say how the vehicles are used away from work; but an incident several years ago might indicate they would/should be cautious - personal assistant was driving CEOs car to get it detailed and caused an injury accident. Vehicle was registered/titled to corporation, corporation has deep pockets so guess who got sued. I guess injured party was inundated by offers of representation. PA was covered under the insurance but as he was employee of the company performing company duties we were still liable for his negligence/culpability. Rumor was a substantial chunk of change was paid to make this go away (millions)

 

[churchmouse]

The last company car I was issued that was not restricted to work only use, I had to pay taxes on the benefit. It was not a Lincoln or a euro sedan, but they were always new full sized cars. Is that no longer the case? The free taxes on dual use personally owned vehicles ended decades ago. I do not know how the tax liabilities for Westinghouse were handled. Since they leased the car, I assume they were able to deduct the price of the lease.

There was a brief period we had to pay Fed. Tax on our take home service trucks.
Every tech at our company (21 of us) started leaving our trucks at the shop and just putting minor tooling on them. Maybe 2 or 3 bags/cases of tools we could take home with us. No more on call no more call outs in the middle of the night. That lasted a very short period of time. Then the company worked it all out. A year or so later and it was no longer an issue.

 

[Leo]

BugI02, I was far from the pointy end of the corp. I was only 2 up from the hourly people that actually produce anything. We drove Fords, Chevys and Dodges, a few could get a Buick. Westinghouse is way top heavy. Even going to meetings at the corporate offices only put me in touch with the middle. I saw the corporate jet take off, but I was never in it.

 

[BugI02]

I figured that might be the case when you said you got a domestic full size sedan to drive; actually not a bad deal and way better than having to use your own vehicle and jump through all the re-imbursement hoops

It's just when I read people advocating for the ending of subsidies for electric and hybrid cars I just wish they would bring the same zeal to ending all subsidies for transportation (not aimed at you, you just had a convenient post to rant upon)

I am all for people of sufficient means having whatever vehicle they choose to drive, so long as they pay the full cost of their decision. Only then will we have an undistorted, truly free market. I just am tired of being forced to be their enabler

 

[Leo]

Funny side story, we had a office manager that really hated a foreman. When our annual cars were assigned, the boss gave this foreman a Dodge K car. We all saw that he was trying to screw with the guy. The foreman didn't mind, he actually liked the car, even to the point he bought for his wife at the end of the year through the corporate purchase program. That had to really upset the office manager.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpJv02Z3SQc

(1981 k car commercil)

 

[jamil]

I figured that might be the case when you said you got a domestic full size sedan to drive; actually not a bad deal and way better than having to use your own vehicle and jump through all the re-imbursement hoops

It's just when I read people advocating for the ending of subsidies for electric and hybrid cars I just wish they would bring the same zeal to ending all subsidies for transportation (not aimed at you, you just had a convenient post to rant upon)

I am all for people of sufficient means having whatever vehicle they choose to drive, so long as they pay the full cost of their decision. Only then will we have an undistorted, truly free market. I just am tired of being forced to be their enabler

I advocate ending all subsidies. Let's not expand the meaning of "subsidy" beyond its definition though. Allowing extravagant or frivolous expenses as deductible isn't something I advocate either, but that's a different discussion from subsidies.

 

[BugI02]

Jamil, explain to me how allowing deductions for accelerated depreciation of one of these bloated, overly expensive executive toys; as if it were a necessary piece of equipment for the conduct of business (such as a backhoe or dozer), is not every bit as much a subsidy in everything but terminology. Does not favorable tax treatment result in the same effect on the buying decision bottom line as a direct subsidy, and are not others perhaps forced to contribute to this payoff through their own less favorable tax situation? I think to be consistent you go the way Trump is heading, simplify the tax code and let people buy what they wish with their tax savings. If they need a new backhoe, they buy that but i don't help pay for it. Same if they want an Audi Q10 - if they can afford it entirely on their own and justify it to the stake/stockholders then more power to them just don't reach into my pocket with the hand of government

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Fine. I have nothing against electric cars except government subsidizing them. You want one, YOU pay for it. All of it. If the market can't make them affordable, you shouldn't expect special tax breaks or credits to make it affordable for you on other people's dime.

^^^ THIS ^^^

I am looking forward to the day that the solar panels on my roof net zero my electricity use from the power company AND charge batteries sufficient to charge my daily commute and errand-running vehicle.

Not because I'm a greenie tree-hugger, but because I am CHEAP! My benchmark is > 10% ROI without guv'ment inducements... that day is nearing, but not yet here.

Disclaimer: I used to be a tree-hugger, but as I've gotten older, now I need a climbing aid when using my tree climbing stand during deer season.

 

[Paul30]

I figured that might be the case when you said you got a domestic full size sedan to drive; actually not a bad deal and way better than having to use your own vehicle and jump through all the re-imbursement hoops

It's just when I read people advocating for the ending of subsidies for electric and hybrid cars I just wish they would bring the same zeal to ending all subsidies for transportation (not aimed at you, you just had a convenient post to rant upon)

I am all for people of sufficient means having whatever vehicle they choose to drive, so long as they pay the full cost of their decision. Only then will we have an undistorted, truly free market. I just am tired of being forced to be their enabler

You are right. Many "subsidies" are simply tax write offs. I read once the number of people receiving farm subsidies were largely wealthy people living in a city like New York City who purchased land so they could qualify for subsidies, even though they really never farmed it. I have a friend who gets a farm subsidy to not farm anything, this keeps the price of crops down because they don't have an over abundance of that crop.
Why Does the Govt. Pay Farmers to Not Grow Crops? | PBS NewsHour

I recall a few years ago you had to purchase a 8,000 lb vehicle to qualify for a tax break of 100% write off. Every business from Mary Kay sales ladies to insurance salesmen were purchasing Humvee's as "business vehicles" to qualify for that subsidy.

The electric car should be developed and if the government needs to subsidize it a bit, I don't mind. Some technology needs a boost to get going. I'm sure when someone suggested putting telephone poles in to carry a wire for phone or electric the rural people at the time said it was a waste of money. They have been lighting the home with wale oil for generations.

The nice thing about an electric car is when they get it right, it will have almost no maintenance, and would also cut pollution by a lot. It is easier to regulate a power plant smog control, than millions of independent exhaust systems. Fuel supplies fluctuate, it is much easier to change a power plant over to another fuel source, than replace millions of cars on the road. People driving electric, will reduce the fuel consumption and that will reduce the price of fuel to others who's driving needs are such than an electric car will not satisfy their needs. The battery is the major roadblock, and although the current batteries work alright, future batteries will likely work much better. Battery technology is evolving quickly. Without mother necessity, where would we be?

 

[jamil]

Jamil, explain to me how allowing deductions for accelerated depreciation of one of these bloated, overly expensive executive toys; as if it were a necessary piece of equipment for the conduct of business (such as a backhoe or dozer), is not every bit as much a subsidy in everything but terminology. Does not favorable tax treatment result in the same effect on the buying decision bottom line as a direct subsidy, and are not others perhaps forced to contribute to this payoff through their own less favorable tax situation? I think to be consistent you go the way Trump is heading, simplify the tax code and let people buy what they wish with their tax savings. If they need a new backhoe, they buy that but i don't help pay for it. Same if they want an Audi Q10 - if they can afford it entirely on their own and justify it to the stake/stockholders then more power to them just don't reach into my pocket with the hand of government

Tax deductions aren't the same as subsidies. Businesses should not pay taxes on their total revenue. They should be able to subtract what it cost them to make the revenue so that they're taxed on net profit. The executive's Ferrari may be part of the compensation package for the executive. In that case, you may not like it, but it's up to the company to determine the compensation employees get. I wouldn't want the government to determine for businesses what fair compensation is. That's between the employer and the employee. Salaries and wages are a cost of business and must be considered to determine profit. In that case, that's a legitimate business expense.

But even if it is a frivolous deduction, that's still not a subsidy. You're bending the term, which is fine. I do that often myself (remember "filibuster" in the 9/11 thread?) But when we bend words figuratively, we still recognize that that's what we did. It seems apparent to me that you meant it in a more literal sense. A subsidy is "a grant by a government to a private person or company to assist an enterprise deemed advantageous to the public." A subsidy is therefore redistributive. Whether it's a grant or tax credit, it is taking money out of the treasury to pay the person or business that is deemed to be advantageous to the public. Allowing tax deductions for expenses we think are frivolous is not literally that. It'd be a stretch to say it's even figuratively that.

 

[BugI02]

I will largely concede the point, except where you assert that a tax credit is somehow worse than a deduction. The only difference I see is in how the amount is derived, 100% of the credit coming off your tax liability as opposed to the deduction reducing your taxable income by the prescribed amount and your savings being (deduction x marginal rate). I don't believe the electric vehicle tax credit can drive your tax liability below zero and result in a cash refund to the consumer (like the ****ing EITC) but I could be wrong - I'm not conversant of any tax accountancy black magic that does not directly affect me. If I am correct the only difference I see is the credit is more useful than the deduction. I see no '...taking money out of the treasury', I see the government declining to collect as much as they might otherwise - exactly like a deduction in effect if not in methodology

 

[Spike Jones 5 2002]

I stopped in a GMC dealer and a Chevy Dealer near by.
None of the salesmen had any information about the Volt.
I do MEAN NO information.
one told me to go on the internet.
Read the information.
If I decided to purchase one.
They would order it for me.

 

[HoughMade]

That just pitiful.

Car salesmen, by and large, are not car guys, they are salesmen.

...and these guys don't even appear to be very good salesmen.

 

[jamil]

I will largely concede the point, except where you assert that a tax credit is somehow worse than a deduction. The only difference I see is in how the amount is derived, 100% of the credit coming off your tax liability as opposed to the deduction reducing your taxable income by the prescribed amount and your savings being (deduction x marginal rate). I don't believe the electric vehicle tax credit can drive your tax liability below zero and result in a cash refund to the consumer (like the ****ing EITC) but I could be wrong - I'm not conversant of any tax accountancy black magic that does not directly affect me. If I am correct the only difference I see is the credit is more useful than the deduction. I see no '...taking money out of the treasury', I see the government declining to collect as much as they might otherwise - exactly like a deduction in effect if not in methodology

If you owe and paid zeto income tax, you cant take any deductions because you can't reduce your tax burden lower than zero. If you owe and paid zero income tax, and are eligible for a rebate. They send you a check.

 

[Clay]

There are many more variables to consider. I like the idea of electric vehicles, they may not be the solution for all users, but they have their place.

The technology is very simple and clean. They don't need the numerous parts an Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) uses. No fuel pump, no exhaust system, no belts, no transmission, etc. etc. If you walk into an Auto Zone, most of the replacement parts you see there, are not needed on an electric car. Gas has to be trucked to the station, electricity travels on high voltage wires. Last time I checked, an electric vehicle cost to charge it was about the same as filling your car for about $2. Maintenance involves filling the windshield washer fluid. No oil changes, coolant changes, spark plugs, air filters, fuel filters, etc. etc. You have a battery, motor, and speed controller. The motor should be able to be replaced in about an hour if designed well. The motor wear should be in the bearings, so simply change out the bearings and you have an engine overhaul. Most electric vehicles have a shorter range unless you pay a lot for the larger battery like the Tesla model S. I do like how they offer the battery in different price points so you can buy what you need. The average person doesn't drive more than 100 miles per day and could plug in at night and be charged by morning. The electric car has some limitations, but they are trade offs.

https://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/wells-to-wheels-electric-car-efficiency/

The Bolt should be released soon too. Fast-charging a 2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV electric car

there are maintenance downsides too...... there is still a transmission in most of these cars, they are not direct coupled. There are also liquid cooled motors and batteries in some, so there are still maintenance items that need attention just like in a ICE vehicle. Also, some of the maintenance requirements are heavy hitters to the wallet. Batteries don't last forever, and the replacement cost is usually $$$$$, and I know some are better than others. Teslas still seem to have 80% battery life after 100K miles.

 

[rhino]

there are maintenance downsides too...... there is still a transmission in most of these cars, they are not direct coupled. There are also liquid cooled motors and batteries in some, so there are still maintenance items that need attention just like in a ICE vehicle. Also, some of the maintenance requirements are heavy hitters to the wallet. Batteries don't last forever, and the replacement cost is usually $$$$$, and I know some are better than others. Teslas still seem to have 80% battery life after 100K miles.

So the batteries still have enough to spontaneously combust even after 100K miles! Woo-hoo!

 

[Paul30]

there are maintenance downsides too...... there is still a transmission in most of these cars, they are not direct coupled. There are also liquid cooled motors and batteries in some, so there are still maintenance items that need attention just like in a ICE vehicle. Also, some of the maintenance requirements are heavy hitters to the wallet. Batteries don't last forever, and the replacement cost is usually $$$$$, and I know some are better than others. Teslas still seem to have 80% battery life after 100K miles.

Most electric cars do not have transmissions, electric motors can deliver torque on a completely different power curve. https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/videos/your-emails-why-dont-electric-cars-have-geared-transmissions/

Many of the batteries I have read are still on the road after 10 years. The batteries are expensive, but considering what I spend on ICE repairs, it may be cheaper and easier to expect the bill. When my turbo locked up on my truck, it was $2000 to rebuild it. When the egr valve stuck, overheated the engine, blew a head gasket, it was about $6000. Granted it was a Ford 6.0 diesel, but other ICE vehicles have had lemon years where the transmission was known to have problems, the engines were known to have problems like the old Dodge Intrepid. I had a friend got an Intrepid and quickly found out the new rebuilt engine was going to go out again very soon. Oil Sludge and Engine Failure Toyota sold a fully electric RAV 4 before the crooked oil industry sued them into stopping production on them. The inventor of the battery they used sold the patent to Chevy because the EV1 was the electric car of the future and he figured they would share the technology with the world. Of course if you sell a vehicle that doesn't go bad and doesn't need service or parts, you go broke. Chevy sold the patent to Texaco oil before the ink was dry on the purchase from the inventor. Texaco oil surprisingly told all companies to cease and desist using "their" patented batteries on electric vehicles. The electric vehicle would be stifled for a long time due to no usable battery tech. The one loophole was a company could use these type batteries in smaller batteries about the size of a laptop. Tesla used about 6000 of those laptop batteries in a huge "bank" to power their car to get around this legal problem. A person who commutes to work under 80 miles round trip per day could use the Nissan Leaf which gets 100 miles per charge and slowly charge over night. Gas prices have fallen a lot lately, I have seen it around $1.60 per gallon this year which is cheap for fuel in this age. When it was $4 per gallon and I was commuting 70 miles round trip to work daily, I was definitely wanting to buy an electric vehicle, but none were being sold at the time.

 

[Clay]

Most electric cars do not have transmissions, electric motors can deliver torque on a completely different power curve.

they do have a transmission, or a gearbox, or a reducer. What ever you want to call it. They just aren't multi-speed like what most transmissions in ICE vehicles are. They (EV) are not typically directly coupled to the wheel.