By on May 21, 2020

The European Commission is reportedly preparing an economic stimulus package aimed at helping the EU bounce back from economic hardships caused by the coronavirus lockdown — saving some room for incentivized electric vehicle sales.

As you may have noticed in your home country, stimulus package proposals often involve lawmakers attempting to slip something in to aid their favorite causes. While not every nation in the EU feels similarly on all matters, environmentalism has been a reoccurring theme within the union — and has encouraged it to make aggressive decisions when it comes to promoting vehicles.

For decades, the European Union spent billions in subsidies and tax breaks to make diesel fuel cheaper than gasoline. Diesel engines produced less carbon dioxide and opened the door to biofuels, so the presumption was they were better for air pollution. That turned out not to be true, so the continent then pushed hard into subsidizing EVs, with diesel sales crumbling as a result.

Now seen as the only way to save the world from heavy, gas guzzling crossovers that people actually buy in great numbers, battery electric cars are getting their moment in the sun. And it may get a little brighter. The next EU stimulus package is set to include €20 billion ($22 billion USD) for those deciding to purchase an environmentally friendly passenger car. 

According to German outlet Sueddeutsche Zeitung, the European Commission’s draft papers recommend setting aside €100 billion for the automotive sector — with a fifth of that going to “clean cars” over a period of two years. However, no one has been able to decide what qualifies as a “clean car.” Many also want to incorporate further incentives for those trading in older vehicles with worse fuel economy, similar to what the United States is considering with an updated cash-for-clunkers plan.

We expressed our thoughts on giving it another shot, but the opinion doesn’t vary much from takes given in 2009, when America first decided it was an ideal way to get people back into dealerships. The gist is that it didn’t really seem to play out like the government intended, and turned out debatably worse for the environment than simply encouraging people to continue driving older automobiles — though it did boost new vehicle sales in the short term.

The United States hasn’t discussed the matter much, even though it’s on the table, and the European Union seems lightly interested but nowhere near sold on the idea. Unfortunately, plenty of differing opinions exist on how far into the green the stimulus should be taken. Automotive News reported European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s take on carbon-friendly stimulus measures on May 13th.

“If it is necessary to increase our debt, which our children will then inherit, then at the very least, we must use that money to invest in their future by addressing climate change, reducing the climate impact and not adding to it,” she told the European Parliament.

In the draft, she suggested allotting half of the $100-billion package for transportation to be earmarked for the development of alternative drivetrains that would aid in reducing vehicle emissions and help automakers meet increasingly high carbon caps. Additional funding may be used to help build new charging stations to help spur EV adoption.

The European Commission plans on issuing an early draft of its economic recovery plan on May 27th, but not before a week’s worth of discussion occurs to get everyone on the same page. Those seeking to promote greener cars also have to contend with how cash incentives are basically free money funneled into the chosen industry — which is kind of the point of a stimulus package, when you boil it down.

Many argue that any vehicular incentives designed to help Europe recover from the economic damage that’s been done should go exclusively towards electric vehicles. Others say this is too stringent, and should instead incorporate internal combustion cars of above-average efficiency, or have bemoaned the plan as offering favorable treatment to specific automakers and models, many of which don’t sell in large volumes.

Germany’s transport ministry suggested including cars that emit 140 grams of carbon per km, which is way beyond the EU’s 2021 fleet emission target of 95 g/km. Sueddeutsche Zeitung noted that this would allow high-volume models like the Volkswagen Tiguan to be eligible for subsidies. Obviously, as the most car-focused of all EU member states, Germany wants to get automakers all the help it can. But German Chancellor Angela Merkel has repeatedly voiced that any economic stimulus package needs to incorporate the environment and serve to protect the climate, meaning the country probably won’t push for more than it’s currently asking for.

From Automotive News:

Such a move would be “completely unacceptable,” Stef Cornelis, from the Brussels-based lobby group Transport & Environment, told the paper. Stefan Heimlich, head of the European motorist club ACE, also criticized the German proposal, saying it would hurt, not help, automakers’ efforts to reach CO2 emission reduction targets mandated by the EU.

The European auto industry, the world’s second largest by production after China, has pushed for a coordinated and harmonized fleet renewal scheme for all vehicle types and categories.

On May 14, CEOs from major car and truck manufacturers and their suppliers met with members of the Commission to discuss a recovery plan for the automotive sector “with a view to stimulating the wider economy and bolstering the transformation to a carbon-neutral society.”

France’s Finance Minister, Bruno Le Maire said on May 18 that any aid offered to the industry by his government offered would seek to encourage sales of cars with lower emissions.

Sounds like there’s no chance of the stimulus pack not skewing toward promoting green tech; something we probably should have expected. We would caution Europe to be very cautious in how it allows this to play out. The EU could find itself looking at electric cars in a few years the way it views diesel today — especially now that we’re learning of some of the shortcomings of EVs and the concept of green energy. Still, few expect Europe to take a cautious or measured approach. Many countries in the region are already making plans to ban diesel sales and prohibit where internal combustion vehicles can drive, similar to what’s happening in the People’s Republic of China.

China incentivized EV purchases for years in an effort to encourage their growth. It worked for a while… until its government pulled the perks and sales fell off a cliff. Dumping money onto electric cars may only serve to prop them up while that extra cash is in play. (The Chinese market had other issues and was arguably in decline before subsidies were cut, giving us plenty to consider.)

Still, we think the best way to encourage EV adoption is to help build the infrastructure that supports them (e.g. charging stations). Give the industry the tools it needs to make these cars work for the population, stand back, and see what consumers do as the technology continues to improve. They might surprise you with their purchasing decisions.

[Image: nrqemi/Shutterstock]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

30 Comments on “EU Considers $22 Billion Electric Vehicle Stimulus, U.S. Mulls Cash-for-clunkers Redux...”

  • avatar

    I tell you what… this is may be time. I have a Mazda3 with 155K on it. If they give me $5-7K for it… I see Mustang Bullet MSRPed 51K+ goes for $43K… I like

  • avatar

    Trading it in and putting it in a salvage yard where it can live on by being parted out to keep OTHER cars on the road is one thing, but forcibly DESTROYING the engines had to be the absolute DUMBEST thing ever.

  • avatar

    Whenever I see the words “save the world,” I shudder inside. mainly because shortly thereafer a poorly worded law and a host of unintended consequences usually arrive.

    • 0 avatar

      Soviet Union tried to save the world for 70 years and still failed to do so. Germans were more efficient.

    • 0 avatar

      Why do I have the feeling that this is more about recycling money into already rich people’s pockets than about save this ball of crud floating through space that we live on?

      How terribly cynical of me.

      Are their any realistic projections for what the impact on (the alleged) greenhouse gases would be year by year during conversion to all electric vehicles including the effect of all the required infrastructure changes? I haven’t seen any such projections, but I could easily have missed it.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    “Give the industry the tools it needs to make these cars work for the population, stand back, and see what consumers do as the technology continues to improve.”

    With the exception of a universal charging standard, this has already been done, and is being done. The EV landscape will have even more choices in the next few years. EVs enjoy very high customer satisfaction, once someone actually gets one.

    The real battle is with the mfrs – they have little incentive to invest billions, and then to lose money on EVs when they can make a fortune on conventional drivetrains.

    • 0 avatar

      I have no doubt that electric car owners, having been snookered into spending big $$$ for a limited use vehicle that has less functionality than the cheapest Nissan or Mitsubishi and depreciates even faster, will express “satisfaction” in order to save face.

      Electric cars make no economic sense and are impractical except in specific, limited circumstances. I’ll never own one unless maybe someone comes up with something like Mr. Fusion to power them.

      As far as another “cash for clunkers” program, I’ll tell the government thugs the same thing I told them in the first one: Shove it where the sun doesn’t shine. I didn’t turn in eligible vehicles then and will not do so if they bring that nonsense back. (I guess the proponents of such programs hate poor people because the cars accessible to the poor are the ones that will be destroyed.)

      • 0 avatar
        SCE to AUX

        “impractical except in specific, limited circumstances”

        Sure, like my 40-mile round-trip commute, plus everything else I need to do every day.

        Silent, high-torque, instant-response driving can’t be beat.

        • 0 avatar

          +1 SCE to AUX – As I commented once or twice in 2019, a friend has a Model 3. He didn’t have any philosophical predisposition toward purchasing a Tesla or an electric car in general; he just liked the Model 3 best out of the cars he cross-shopped.

          I skew KISS/Luddite in my tastes, so I’m not a fan of some of the Model 3’s technology for technology’s sake, specifically the door handles and HVAC controls.

          That said, I really like it on the whole. It’s roomy (much better back seat than most of today’s sedans), quiet, very fast, and (belying the criticism of some scribes) well put together.

          He’s discovered that range anxiety is basically claptrap. He’s used a public charger exactly twice: once just to see what it was like and once when we were at the midpoint of a 230-mile day trip. We probably could have made it home but thought, “Better safe than sorry.” So that’s approximately 20 minutes at a public charging stations for all the time he’s owned the car versus all of the analogous stops for gas he would’ve had. (I’ve never found gassing up to be a big inconvenience, so I won’t argue that it is. But I’d categorize “topping up” as either a push or slightly in the Tesla’s favor.)

          One fly in the ointment is if you live in an apartment or old row house or street park. That scenario, yes, favors the current gas car paradigm. Apartment complexes with assigned spots? Not a tough upgrade in the vast scheme of things, IMO. Single family home scenario? As described above, that actually already favors the electric car for most owners.

          My friend’s shift to using the Tesla has been fraught with all of the drama of using an electric stove rather than a natural gas stove.

      • 0 avatar

        2many cars – still need gasoline to get to 88 MPH before Mr. Fusion does its thing.

        Poor people comment – If we are going to do this stupid program again, they should one, require the replacement vehicle to get 20% better mileage than whatever is being “traded” in. Two, don’t destroy the “trade” unless it is a wreck. Instead, allow those of limited means to bring their wreck that leaks oil and smokes for a swap with a better vehicle. Crush the wrecks.

  • avatar

    What’s the EU trying to save the world from? I mean it’s been here for 6 Billion years without anyone trying to save it?

    • 0 avatar

      Oh, the world will live on. It’s the humans they’re worried about. (The cockroaches will survive no matter what.)

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Given the history of the 20th Century, The EU should focus on saving the world from European Nations. For all the talk of The US or China kicking off WWIII, again, history shows when it comes to global conflicts the Europeans have historically kicked them off.

      • 0 avatar

        All Europeans who can fight immigrated to US.

        • 0 avatar
          Arthur Dailey

          Actually a great many went to South America. Some to Israel. Many more stayed in Russia.
          And the Brits retained enough to be the only nation to defeat communist insurgencies (Greece and Malaya). Something that the USA has never quite been able to do on its own.

          • 0 avatar

            Arthur Dailey,

            HA! In conversations with the people who, you know, ultra-patriots… “We will defeat [xxx]” I always pointed out -you have not defeated a single communist regime – Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, not even Israeli Kibbutz… And even USSR failed not due to a cold war but rather a war between Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

          • 0 avatar

            @ Arthur – I’m not surprised that a Canadian with functioning grey matter got it right, but I’ll give you a +1 anyway for using “Brits” rather than “English,” as too many of us south of the 49th parallel conflate the two. I have a friend whose Scottish father served in Malaya, so I’m being persnickity on his behalf.

            One of my favorite WWII tidbits is the deployment of British forces at the Second Battle of El Alamein: I can only assume a logistical screw-up forced Monty to include the Northumbrian and Home Counties divisions in the front line rather than Canadian, Northern Irish, or Welsh units. The latter three would have been a more appropriate complement to the Aussies, Scots, Kiwis, South Africans, Indians, Greeks, and French. ;-)

      • 0 avatar

        Well… WWII is a term made up by journalists. Interestingly, it ended by defeat of Japan, but started “officially” when Germany attacked Poland. But by Japan logic and based on the fact that China is one of the “winners” and is permanent UN Security Council member, war started when Japan attacked China. By the time Germany went to Poland, 20Mil Chinese already died. So, did WWII really started in Europe. I think, retrospectively, it started in China

    • 0 avatar


      Interestingly, someone else, after giving usual characteristics to the EU, said the following – “I have a house on a creek. There we have beavers building the dam. There no presidents, cabinet members, members of parliament, their secretaries… No voting… And all the work gets done with great efficiency…”

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • EBFlex: “Another thing is that I sneak up on deer all the time on my mountain bike.” No….you...
  • EBFlex: ORV is just off road vehicle. A more broad term than ATV or UTV. And again, those are not analogous. Those...
  • Kenn: When I walked by the open door of the GM’s office at a SoCal Toyota dealer, the day I took delivery of my...
  • slavuta: Before traveling to space he could take care of public transport. You should like this...
  • ToolGuy: I spend that $169/year on washer fluid and oil filters instead.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber