Not OP, but I’m pretty sure the point was to increase adoption of EVs. That includes the buyer, the seller, and even third parties like charging stations and equipment.
Although I will grant that the implementation was presented as savings for the customer.
CAs was for EV adoption and applied broadly to domestic and international brands, feds excluded non-US manufacturing so is goal was to “build back better” manufacturing in US (50% less rebate if battery wasn’t sourced US, too) while also promoting EV adoption-- supposedly meant to be a compromise with the America first crowd.
Neither quite work as intended due to the mark up, but it’s technically divided between consumer and seller, so there’s some benefit to consumers even if it’s only a fraction. Incentives for companies still help EV adoption too, although that really didn’t seem to work on short sighted American companies.
Frankly, the real problem was only 6 EV models qualified for the federal originally, and Tesla made out like a fucking bandit… Plus it’s not like they even had gas vehicles to sell anyway!
That might be how the subsidies were sold to you, but any economist will tell you that isn’t how subsidies work, or why they are implemented as policy. As the other poster noted, subsidies don’t exist to benefit consumers, but to increase the use of a particular product. A faction of political power determined that increased adoption of EVs would be in the public interest, so subsidies were instituted to speed up EV adoption. Who gets the money or who benefits is completely besides the point.
(As a side note, I think EV subsidies are not really the best idea in terms of the public good, and the money would be better spent on public transit improvements or micromobility subsidies. But EVs thread the needle of political palatability, so here we are.)
Where did I say it wasn’t economics? I said they’re ripping people off.
That says nothing about how capitalist fucks will celebrate it.
If you think ripping people off isn’t bad just because it’s taking place in a market… then congratulations: You’ve learned nothing from history.
What would constitute “not a ripoff” in your view?
Passing the savings off to the consumer, as was the entire fucking supposed point of the subsidies.
Not OP, but I’m pretty sure the point was to increase adoption of EVs. That includes the buyer, the seller, and even third parties like charging stations and equipment.
Although I will grant that the implementation was presented as savings for the customer.
CAs was for EV adoption and applied broadly to domestic and international brands, feds excluded non-US manufacturing so is goal was to “build back better” manufacturing in US (50% less rebate if battery wasn’t sourced US, too) while also promoting EV adoption-- supposedly meant to be a compromise with the America first crowd.
Neither quite work as intended due to the mark up, but it’s technically divided between consumer and seller, so there’s some benefit to consumers even if it’s only a fraction. Incentives for companies still help EV adoption too, although that really didn’t seem to work on short sighted American companies.
Frankly, the real problem was only 6 EV models qualified for the federal originally, and Tesla made out like a fucking bandit… Plus it’s not like they even had gas vehicles to sell anyway!
That might be how the subsidies were sold to you, but any economist will tell you that isn’t how subsidies work, or why they are implemented as policy. As the other poster noted, subsidies don’t exist to benefit consumers, but to increase the use of a particular product. A faction of political power determined that increased adoption of EVs would be in the public interest, so subsidies were instituted to speed up EV adoption. Who gets the money or who benefits is completely besides the point.
(As a side note, I think EV subsidies are not really the best idea in terms of the public good, and the money would be better spent on public transit improvements or micromobility subsidies. But EVs thread the needle of political palatability, so here we are.)