Nissan to Start Selling California ZEV Credits, Joining Tesla

First, there’s the $7500 taxback bonus that every buyer gets and every taxpayer pays. Then there are generous state subsidies ($2500 in California, $4000 in Illinois—the bluer the state, the more the taxpayers get gouged), all paid to people forking out $63K (plus taxes) for the base version, to roughly $100K for the really quick one.

@thelaine All true. I was just referring to the $68 million in ZEV credits which enabled Tesla to report a profit.

@Ron Manufacturers like Honda, forced to buy credits, pass costs on to buyers who cannot afford Teslas.

@thelaine Cost has very little to do with price, one reason why the Big Three went bankrupt a few years ago -- they had to compete on price with the lower-cost Koreans and Japanese.

Truth. Plus giant houses, vacations around the world etc. They are sucking down more energy than 100 middle class people. More power to them. Livin' the dream. I just can't get used to subsidizing them. Elon knows a gravy train when he sees one though. Got to hand it to him. California forces Honda to pay Elon to make cars for rich people, whose purchase is then subsidized by taxpayers. Wow.

A large percentage of Tesla drivers do use them for their every day transportation as their 200+mi range is enough for 99% of the use that 99% of the population needs. So yeah it does eliminate the oil consumption. Not all Tesla owners are uber rich, there is a guy with one in my neighboor hood and it is his families primary car. It replaced a Leaf as he is a techie that likes EVs and also has some home built EVs in his fleet. Of course he certainly isn't poor, the value of houses in my neighborhood start around the average price of a home in our area to slightly more. Honda does have their own cars so they don't have to purchase credits any more, they just have to have give away leases on the FIT EV and limit the sale of the introduced early 2014 Accord PHEV to sale in CA and NY.

This article is about Nissan, but somehow the class envy came out for Tesla. I've been driving my Leaf daily for 11 months now. My 'Porsche' is a Kia Sedona, and my 'BMW' is a 12-year-old Hyundai Elantra. Since I'm unable to drive two cars at once, the Leaf has to schlep me around while others in the family drive the gas-burners. If you live in the US, I wouldn't count on coal as an investment - Obama has it targeted for elimination. The liberals seem to like solar, though.

@Scoutdude This one neighbor doesn't represent 99% of the Tesla owners. Most likley don't have them as daily drivers. I'm fine whne he can afford the car, good for him. But i somehow pay a higher price for a car becasue Tesla susbidized his with the credits my car company was forced to purchase. Tesla advertises 4.2 s for 0-60, so no This is not a family car and the price tag is not for normal people (people that actually pay taxes)

@SCE to AUX If complaining about tax and regulatory policies that subsidize wealthy car buyers out of the pockets of everyone else is class envy, you got me, formerly gslip.

@thelaine I didn't link EV rebate policies with class envy. I don't even support such policies. I'm objecting to the characterization of EV buyers in general and Tesla buyers in particular as 'rich', when any number of people who spend as much on a loaded F-350 are never demonized that way.

@SCE to AUX I know you don't support that stuff, and I agree with you about EV buyers. However, Tesla buyers? C'mon man! They are going to be wealthy as a group, I would be willing to bet you on that one. Nevertheless, I would not demonize them for having money. That is stupid. More power to 'em. I have never met anyone who did not want to have more money. The idea that they should be supported by tax dollars because they are supposedly saving energy or helping the environment is where some of us begin to part company. The wealthier you are, the more energy you use, and Tesla buyers are wealthier than most.

@thelaine "If complaining about tax and regulatory policies that subsidize wealthy car buyers..." The tax credits don't subsidize the car buyers, wealthy or otherwise. They subsidize the manufacturer. Tesla charges higher prices than it would if there were no credits. The buyer overpays, then gets a rebate on the overpayment. Tesla gets the benefit of that overpayment.

SCE to AUX, I think the demonizing comes from the tax credit. People who buy a loaded F-350 didn't do it with my tax dollars (hopefully). And you have to make a decent amount of money to get the full benefit of the tax credit, unless that has changed.

@Pch101 Depends on how you look at it and your definition of wealthy. But, my understanding is that you need to have a tax liability of $7500 or more at the Federal Level to get the money back. If you have less than that, you don't get all of the money back. I agree that it probably wouldn't be this high if the credits didn't exist, but these credits are for people who make a good amount of money.

@Pch101 Apparently the difference between "tax cuts for fat cats" and, ahem, "subsidies" is the green-ness of the target. Who knew?

@Pch101 It would be much easier for you to comprehend these concepts if you would understand it as a basic economic point. I've used this analogy elsewhere, which hopefully helps with the understanding the economics at work here. Let's apply a similar example to something other than cars. Let’s suppose that the going rate for a six-pack of your favorite beer is $6. Now the brewer of your favorite beer decides to start brewing it in an environmentally sensitive green brewery, which qualifies it for a tax credit of $4 for every six-pack that is sold. If the company keeps selling that beer for $6, then the benefit goes to the customer. The $6 beer is now being sold at a net cost to the consumer of $2 (you pays $6, then get a $4 refund on your tax return). The benefit goes to the customer, who gets to pay a lower price. But if the brewer jacks up the price to $10, then the net price to the consumer remains at $6. The extra four bucks is really going to the brewer, not to the beer drinker because the beer is now priced above market. None of this has anything do with whether you like or dislike Tesla, or like or dislike subsidies. It has absolutely nothing to do with whether you are right-wing or left-wing. It simply explains who gets the benefit of the subsidy. And in this case, Tesla charges above-market prices, which means that the benefit goes to the company. The tax credit only makes up for the excess payment; it doesn't save the customer any money on a net basis.

@Pch101 My fundamental objection, of course, is to the policy in general. Hence your sanctimonious hand-waving, to try to falsely cast it as a partisan or educational issue. Pointing out the hypocrisy of you redistributionists is merely a bit of fun.

@thelaine I comprehend that my money is being taken from my pocket and redistributed to people much wealthier than me. Rich car buyers or Elon Musk. Whatever. Who gives a sh*t?

@thelaine "Rich car buyers or Elon Musk. Whatever. Who gives a sh*t?" Apparently, you do, as you're the one who is complaining about "tax and regulatory policies that subsidize wealthy car buyers." Which is fine, except that they don't. "My fundamental objection, of course, is to the policy in general." If you're going to object to the policy, then it would help you to understand how it works. The point of the credit is to reduce Tesla's losses, not to make things cheap for Tesla's customers who obviously aren't getting bargain prices. (And in case you were too busy to notice, I also happen to oppose this particular policy in this instance. I somehow manage to object to such things without being motivated by hatred for the enviromental movement or the government.)