Juggling Act: Tesla Will Have to Deal With a Tax Credit Gap

Matthew Guy
by Matthew Guy

Much to the delight of EV fanatics and sandal enthusiasts around the world, Tesla reported last week that 325,000 people had placed refundable $1,000 deposits on its Model 3 sedan. Even pessimistically projecting a defection rate of 25 percent, that’s still nearly a quarter of a million cars which need to be built and delivered starting late next year.

Industry analysts have nattered at length about the logistics of the mass order and Tesla’s ability to pull it off. However, there is a new obstacle on the horizon, this time involving the core reason many have given for reserving a Model 3: tax credits.

Electric vehicle credits and their limitations vary by country. In America, arguably Tesla’s biggest market for the Model 3, the Feds put a yearly limit on the number of $7,500 tax credits able to be claimed by single manufacturer. Currently, that limit stands at 200,000 credits.

Sharp eyed readers and mathematicians alike will note this figure is far less than the number of Model 3 sedans reserved to date and much less than Tesla’s goal of eventually building half a million vehicles per year. It seems then some customers may come up empty handed. Losing a $7,500 incentive would sting even for purchasers of a $100,000+ Model X; at the Model 3’s price point, it may prove ruinous. After all, $7,500 is a very attractive carrot on a $35,000 car.

The problem is compounded when one considers the $30,000 (after credit) Chevrolet Bolt, which heads to showrooms this fall. Expected to sell at a slower pace (simply because it’s not a Tesla), a sizable price gap could open up between the Bolt and Model 3 after Tesla runs out of credits.

The upshot to all this? The IRS in America doesn’t close the $7,500 credit for electric-drive vehicles until the end of the quarter after the one in which a company hits the 200,000 vehicle delivery mark in the U.S.

Put plainly, Tesla could plan to hit its credit limit on Day 1 of a particular quarter, delivering vehicles over the next two quarters until the credits are used up like napkins at a Waffle House.

It’s like a high stakes game of musical chairs using someone else’s money. Cynics in the audience might speculate that Tesla could simply say “damn the torpedoes,” manufacture and deliver as many Model 3 sedans as possible, and let customers figure out the tax credits on their own. Once all the tax credits are gone: tough luck, Mister.

The thing is though, Musk himself seems to have acknowledged this strategy during an April 3 Twitter AMA, saying, “We always try to maximize customer happiness even if that means a revenue shortfall in a quarter.” This seems to indicate Tesla is aware and planning for a credit shortage.

This is not to say Elon & Co. are intentionally gaming the system, but it does beg the question: will some customers be left standing with a $7,500 surprise when the music stops?

[Image: Tesla Motors]

Matthew Guy
Matthew Guy

Matthew buys, sells, fixes, & races cars. As a human index of auto & auction knowledge, he is fond of making money and offering loud opinions.

More by Matthew Guy

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 119 comments
  • Mcs Mcs on Apr 11, 2016

    "The problem is compounded when one considers the $30,000 (after credit) Chevrolet Bolt, which heads to showrooms this fall. Expected to sell at a slower pace (simply because it’s not a Tesla), a sizable price gap could open up between the Bolt and Model 3 after Tesla runs out of credits." The Bolt is going to lose it's credits too thanks to help from Volt sales. They'll probably be gone shortly after the Model 3 ships.

  • Vagvoba Vagvoba on Apr 11, 2016

    No one should be given tax credit for buying a luxury product. It is ridiculous to give tax dollars to those who can afford buying a Model S or a Model X. The credit should be applied only to cheaper cars. For example the full credit should apply to cars not costing more than $25K, then it should linearly decrease and disappear at $40K. That would incentivize the industry to develop cheaper electric cars that more people can afford. Of course in the same time the credit should be reduced, so that more people can get it.

    • SCE to AUX SCE to AUX on Apr 11, 2016

      The intent of the subsidy was to reduce the pollution footprint of purchased vehicles. The income of the buyer is irrelevant to achieving that end. Nissan is still (barely) the all-time sales leader for EVs in the US, but Tesla is way ahead now in sales pace. Nissan's Leaf has become less compelling in the last two years, and so people aren't buying it. The same $7500 credit - plus heavy Nissan discounting - still can't move Leafs now. $80k Model Ss are selling at 3x the rate of $16k Leafs.

  • ChristianWimmer The body kit modifications ruined it for me.
  • ToolGuy "I have my stance -- I won't prejudice the commentariat by sharing it."• Like Tim, I have my opinion and it is perfect and above reproach (as long as I keep it to myself). I would hate to share it with the world and risk having someone critique it. LOL.
  • SCE to AUX Sure, give them everything they want, and more. Let them decide how long they keep their jobs and their plant, until both go away.
  • SCE to AUX Range only matters if you need more of it - just like towing capacity in trucks.I have a short-range EV and still manage to put 1000 miles/month on it, because the car is perfectly suited to my use case.There is no such thing as one-size-fits all with vehicles.
  • Doug brockman There will be many many people living in apartments without dedicated charging facilities in future who will need personal vehicles to get to work and school and for whom mass transit will be an annoying inconvenience
Next