What's new
By:

The Changing EV Climate in the U.S.

hmp10 said:
U.S. investment in EV battery production being pulled back:

Click to expand...
It can't be fun running a car company over the last 15 years. Government policies pushing, pulling, extorting, bribing, threatening, and flopping back and forth. Now we're finally back to the normal "let the market decide" point. Be interesting to see what the more normal growth path of EVs will be now that they have to stand on their own two feet. (Well, with US federal policy, anyway. Some states are still handing out credits. And some other countries.)

The article did forget to mention that whatever slower growth the domestic EV sector may experience will likely be offset by slower losses in the ICE/hybrid sector. Pretty much a wash on that front. (If even that as EVs should theoretically require fewer manufacturing jobs than ICE, because of a smaller parts supply.)
 
dbsb3233 said:
Now we're finally back to the normal "let the market decide" point.
Click to expand...

I must have slept through that "normal" let-the-market-decide epoch..

Government has been putting its hands on the scales of one industry and product or another for decades, no matter what party is in power. Tax codes have always favored certain endeavors and penalized others. The current administration -- with its "drill, baby, drill" campaign mantra -- is putting its hand heavily on the scales in favor of fossil fuels, just as it did last time around with a coal industry that had become moribund largely because of the unfavorable economics of coal. And the current tariff zig-zagging is largely about penalizing businesses for decisions they have made about outsourcing, often driven by market and economic pressures, and penalizing consumers for buying products they prefer at the lowest prices they can get them. The administration is even weighing in on whether restaurant chains should change their decor or logo in an attempt to contend with dropping customer interest.

I'm not arguing here about the advisability of one policy versus another. But this notion that we are now returning to a golden age of less government intervention is pure fantasy. What we are entering is a period where the government is actively disincentivizing renewable energy initiatives and encouraging a resurgence of investment in fossil fuels supported by a quickening drumbeat of climate denialism. And EVs are not the only target. Every form of renewable energy is.
 
hmp10 said:
I must have slept through that "normal" let-the-market-decide epoch..

Government has been putting its hands on the scales of one industry and product or another for decades, no matter what party is in power. Tax codes have always favored certain endeavors and penalized others. The current administration -- with its "drill, baby, drill" campaign mantra -- is putting its hand heavily on the scales in favor of fossil fuels, just as it did last time around with a coal industry that had become moribund largely because of the unfavorable economics of coal. And the current tariff zig-zagging is largely about penalizing businesses for decisions they have made about outsourcing, often driven by market and economic pressures, and penalizing consumers for buying products they prefer at the lowest prices they can get them. The administration is even weighing in on whether restaurant chains should change their decor or logo in an attempt to contend with dropping customer interest.

I'm not arguing here about the advisability of one policy versus another. But this notion that we are now returning to a golden age of less government intervention is pure fantasy. What we are entering is a period where the government is actively disincentivizing renewable energy initiatives and encouraging a resurgence of investment in fossil fuels supported by a quickening drumbeat of climate denialism. And EVs are not the only target. Every form of renewable energy is.
Click to expand...
Actually, some of the states themselves are also disincentivizing EV purchases. I live in a very blue state(Oregon). You would think that they would be promoting EV's for cleaner air, etc. Instead the registration fees are an extra $700 per car for each EV (we own 2)each time the registration needs to be renewed. In addition there is an extra surcharge fee for the title of an EV car and they are trying to pass a bill that would require that your EV be checked every year and fees added on for each mile you drive.I can understand this would be done in "red states", but I am surprised this is being done in very liberal blue state. I guess revenue enhancement tops environmental concerns. Again, I agree with hmp10, if its not the government that is overbearing the states are also making it more difficult to convince people to buy EV's.
 
hmp10 said:
I must have slept through that "normal" let-the-market-decide epoch..

Government has been putting its hands on the scales of one industry and product or another for decades, no matter what party is in power. Tax codes have always favored certain endeavors and penalized others. The current administration -- with its "drill, baby, drill" campaign mantra -- is putting its hand heavily on the scales in favor of fossil fuels, just as it did last time around with a coal industry that had become moribund largely because of the unfavorable economics of coal. And the current tariff zig-zagging is largely about penalizing businesses for decisions they have made about outsourcing, often driven by market and economic pressures, and penalizing consumers for buying products they prefer at the lowest prices they can get them. The administration is even weighing in on whether restaurant chains should change their decor or logo in an attempt to contend with dropping customer interest.

I'm not arguing here about the advisability of one policy versus another. But this notion that we are now returning to a golden age of less government intervention is pure fantasy. What we are entering is a period where the government is actively disincentivizing renewable energy initiatives and encouraging a resurgence of investment in fossil fuels supported by a quickening drumbeat of climate denialism. And EVs are not the only target. Every form of renewable energy is.
Click to expand...
We'll, sure, the govt still over regulates in general, over taxes in general, manipulates and controls. But selective $7500 subsidies on just certain $50,000 car purchase but not others is well beyond the norm. Removing that puts vehicle purchases more on par with each other. That was my point.
 
WildRide47 said:
Actually, some of the states themselves are also disincentivizing EV purchases. I live in a very blue state(Oregon). You would think that they would be promoting EV's for cleaner air, etc. Instead the registration fees are an extra $700 per car for each EV (we own 2)each time the registration needs to be renewed. In addition there is an extra surcharge fee for the title of an EV car and they are trying to pass a bill that would require that your EV be checked every year and fees added on for each mile you drive.I can understand this would be done in "red states", but I am surprised this is being done in very liberal blue state. I guess revenue enhancement tops environmental concerns. Again, I agree with hmp10, if its not the government that is overbearing the states are also making it more difficult to convince people to buy EV's.
Click to expand...
I don't live in Oregon, but my understanding is that a lack of gas tax revenue to fund highway infrastructure is what's driving some of the push to impose registration and/or milage fees on EVs. Not how I would run the government if I become king, but not entirely crazy either.
 
jbawden said:
I would add that we (collective EV owners) need to back off the EV's are everyone's future mantra a bit. They might be, eventually, but to ICE fans its nothing more than a veiled endorsement of those trying to ban ICE. Some here are completely ungrounded to myriad reasons why people choose ICE. ICE is going to coexist with EV's and whatever else comes around as a motivating power for decades. @dbsb3233 I would argue the same is true for the majority of buyers uninterested in EV's: They not avoiding them for political reasons, they just aren't compelling options to them.
Click to expand...

I’m just thrilled that you used “uninterested”, which is correct, versus “disinterested”, which is not.
 
cleantechnica.com

The Top Selling Electric Vehicles in the USA — CHARTS - CleanTechnica

Support CleanTechnica's work through a Substack subscription or on Stripe. After reporting on the overall US EV market and how it changed in Q2 2025 compared to Q2 2024, Q2 2023, Q2 2022, and Q2 2021, I want to now get into specific EV models and how their sales have ... [continued]
cleantechnica.com cleantechnica.com
 
GM's midsize SUV/Crossover platform is doing pretty well if you count Prologue + ZDX + Lyric + Blazer. I am surprised the Hummer EV is outselling the Cybertruck. Gravity shows up as 5 on the bottom lol.
 
TahoeMichael said:
I don't live in Oregon, but my understanding is that a lack of gas tax revenue to fund highway infrastructure is what's driving some of the push to impose registration and/or milage fees on EVs. Not how I would run the government if I become king, but not entirely crazy either.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand that the $700 registration fee is supposed to make up for the lack of gas tax revenue, but an increased EV title fee that is going to triple and an additional fee for mileage driven actually makes it more expensive to own than a comparable ICE car. This defeats the whole purpose of trying to get people to buy EV's for a cleaner environment. This is going to considerably slow EV adoption in Oregon.
 
This month is my third year. Free charging expires. No worries, I have a home charger. (what's in your ICE garage?)
The inspection stickers were put on three years ago. The local mechanic didn't even look at the car, he just put on the stickers for free.
I bought the shop lunch. We still take the wife's ICE car there. She, like most people, doesn't think she has to do anything to make climate change go away. She doesn't seem to care about her kids = let them burn...let them drown...let them fight hordes of strangers fleeing climate catastrophe.

I haven't done an oil change or tune-up. The brakes are virtually new. But I guess I need to call Lucid for the annual service visit.


EV maintenance is simple and cheap. Do nothing. Install the software updates. Change the wiper blades. New tires every three years or so. We'll soon find out how long electric motors last ( like, forever). People will get bored with their EV long before the useful lifetime. Soon the very expensive battery will need to be recycled. By then more efficient replacement batteries that cost less and perform better will be available. Instead of turbochargers car tinker nuts will be installing more powerful batteries (and instead of fat exhaust systems: fat wires!

Save your kids the trouble and expense by leaving ICE vehicles behind: Old folk need to start getting rid of all life's accumulations = including the ICE vehicles.


Just how many ICE SUV reefs can we put around Florida? Maybe we can use them as a breakwater and raise New York a dozen meters above the new sea level.

SS United States leaving Philadelphia to be sunk as an amusement in Florida.
Still the fastest average speed crossing of the Atlantic (Blue Riband holder).
1756647913563.webp
The family did a N. Atlantic crossing in March, 1963. It was the most sick I have ever been. Haven't been on a ship since.
1756649237857.webp

"I'll never put on a life jacket..."
 
Last edited:
hmp10 said:
I must have slept through that "normal" let-the-market-decide epoch..

Government has been putting its hands on the scales of one industry and product or another for decades, no matter what party is in power. Tax codes have always favored certain endeavors and penalized others. The current administration -- with its "drill, baby, drill" campaign mantra -- is putting its hand heavily on the scales in favor of fossil fuels, just as it did last time around with a coal industry that had become moribund largely because of the unfavorable economics of coal. And the current tariff zig-zagging is largely about penalizing businesses for decisions they have made about outsourcing, often driven by market and economic pressures, and penalizing consumers for buying products they prefer at the lowest prices they can get them. The administration is even weighing in on whether restaurant chains should change their decor or logo in an attempt to contend with dropping customer interest.

I'm not arguing here about the advisability of one policy versus another. But this notion that we are now returning to a golden age of less government intervention is pure fantasy. What we are entering is a period where the government is actively disincentivizing renewable energy initiatives and encouraging a resurgence of investment in fossil fuels supported by a quickening drumbeat of climate denialism. And EVs are not the only target. Every form of renewable energy is.
Click to expand...
I miss the good old days when Coke could decide to change their formula without government input. Then when they came out with “New” Coke, nobody accused them of being Woke. There was no social media to stir up protests on one side or the other. People just tasted both, voted with their wallets and “new” coke eventually died due to lack of demand. Free market at it’s finest.
 
scal_air said:
Well, for decades and even now, the government provides subsidies to oil companies which indirectly lowers the price of gasoline favoring ICE cars. In my opinion not providing any subsidies to EVs does not put them on "par". Beyond that, tampering with renewable energy as the recent Dept of Interior's revocation of wind projects already 80% complete, show that this administration is not interested fewer regulations nor "free" markets.
Click to expand...
That's not really the case though, even though that's the frequent narrative. Every industry has tax treatment that applies to it's unique business specifics, and it's easy to single that out and highlight it for one industry without addressing the counterparts in others. The way to cut through all that noise and compare govt treatment for each industry is to compare bottom lines: EFFECTIVE TAX RATE.

I know this is a decade old but it hasn't changed dramatically. The NY Times did an analysis to show effective tax rates by industry. The energy sector (which is dominated by oil/gas companies) paid the 2nd highest effect tax rate of all industries (behind only insurance) at 37%.

archive.nytimes.com

Across U.S. Companies, Tax Rates Vary Greatly

Last week, in a Congressional hearing, Apple got grilled for its low-tax strategy. But not every business can copy that approach. Here is a look at what S.&P. 500 companies paid in corporate income taxes — federal, state, local and foreign — from 2007 to 2012, according to S&P Capital IQ.
archive.nytimes.com
 
WildRide47 said:
Yes, I understand that the $700 registration fee is supposed to make up for the lack of gas tax revenue, but an increased EV title fee that is going to triple and an additional fee for mileage driven actually makes it more expensive to own than a comparable ICE car. This defeats the whole purpose of trying to get people to buy EV's for a cleaner environment. This is going to considerably slow EV adoption in Oregon.
Click to expand...
Could you elaborate a bit on what that $700 entails? When I Google Oregon EV fees I'm not seeing anything that big above and beyond normal registration fees that all vehicles pay.
 
dbsb3233 said:
That's not really the case though, even though that's the frequent narrative. Every industry has tax treatment that applies to it's unique business specifics, and it's easy to single that out and highlight it for one industry without addressing the counterparts in others. The way to cut through all that noise and compare govt treatment for each industry is to compare bottom lines: EFFECTIVE TAX RATE.

I know this is a decade old but it hasn't changed dramatically. The NY Times did an analysis to show effective tax rates by industry. The energy sector (which is dominated by oil/gas companies) paid the 2nd highest effect tax rate of all industries (behind only insurance) at 37%.

archive.nytimes.com

Across U.S. Companies, Tax Rates Vary Greatly

Last week, in a Congressional hearing, Apple got grilled for its low-tax strategy. But not every business can copy that approach. Here is a look at what S.&P. 500 companies paid in corporate income taxes — federal, state, local and foreign — from 2007 to 2012, according to S&P Capital IQ.
archive.nytimes.com
Click to expand...

The linked article is only an archived page. I did notice that the page said that three oil companies paid the most taxes in absolute terms but that does not say anything about the effective tax rate.

Here is an excerpt from a recent article (updated 2024) from the right leaning Tax Policy Center -

"Subsidizing investment in fossil fuel development diverts capital from investments in other assets with higher pretax yields. Several studies have found that the effective marginal tax rate—the extent to which all applicable tax provisions reduce the after-tax return on new investment—is much lower for oil, gas, and coal development than for other assets."

 
You can annoy your accountant and get some dividends partially tax free thanks to special carve outs for fossil fuels by exploring the wild world of MLPs (and take on risky assets). You too can see first hand that the government subsidizes oil and gas projects.

The free market can decide if we ever see a free market. Until then I don’t see how deprioritizing the early EV market makes any sense.

(Again not financial advice, making a point about how available and present tax carve outs are for the oil and gas industry)
 
dbsb3233 said:
I know this is a decade old but it hasn't changed dramatically. The NY Times did an analysis to show effective tax rates by industry. The energy sector (which is dominated by oil/gas companies) paid the 2nd highest effect tax rate of all industries (behind only insurance) at 37%.
Click to expand...

scal_air said:
The linked article is only an archived page. I did notice that the page said that three oil companies paid the most taxes in absolute terms but that does not say anything about the effective tax rate.
Click to expand...

That "analysis" by the NYT was actually fairly cursory. Yes, it showed the oil and gas industry paid a relatively high effective tax rate on adjusted income. However, it did not look at other federal provisions and deductions that reduce the income on which the tax rate was calculated or confer other advantages that are not received by other companies.

For instance, oil companies are allowed immediate deductions for the full cost of drilling and development instead of having to depreciate those costs over time as most other companies must. They are also allowed to deduct a fixed percentage of their gross revenue as capital expenses without actually having to account for those expenses. The government also levies preferentially low royalties for fossil fuel extraction on federal lands.

The DOE also provides loan guarantees and even some low-interest direct loans to help finance energy projects, guarantees and loans which are not available to many other industries.
 
hmp10 said:
That "analysis" by the NYT was actually fairly cursory. Yes, it showed the oil and gas industry paid a relatively high effective tax rate on adjusted income. However, it did not look at other federal provisions and deductions that reduce the income on which the tax rate was calculated or confer other advantages that are not received by other companies.

For instance, oil companies are allowed immediate deductions for the full cost of drilling and development instead of having to depreciate those costs over time as most other companies must. They are also allowed to deduct a fixed percentage of their gross revenue as capital expenses without actually having to account for those expenses. The government also levies preferentially low royalties for fossil fuel extraction on federal lands.

The DOE also provides loan guarantees and even some low-interest direct loans to help finance energy projects, guarantees and loans which are not available to many other industries.
Click to expand...
That's how taxation works for all businesses - deducting expenses from revenues to determine taxable income.

This really isn't the place to dig deep into this long-standing debate (especially an EV forum) So I'll bow out here with a final link from an org that opposes govt subsidy for ANY industry. Good night all.

 
dbsb3233 said:
That's how taxation works for all businesses - deducting expenses from revenues to determine taxable income.
Click to expand...

Not really. There's a big difference in managing the bottom line each year in when those deductions can be taken. And allowing depreciation to be captured all at once instead of over a number of years can be very advantageous to the companies on which such a benefit is conferred -- in this case on the oil and gas industry.
 
illopp00 said:
GM's midsize SUV/Crossover platform is doing pretty well if you count Prologue + ZDX + Lyric + Blazer. I am surprised the Hummer EV is outselling the Cybertruck. Gravity shows up as 5 on the bottom lol.
Click to expand...
illopp00 said:
cleantechnica.com

The Top Selling Electric Vehicles in the USA — CHARTS - CleanTechnica

Support CleanTechnica's work through a Substack subscription or on Stripe. After reporting on the overall US EV market and how it changed in Q2 2025 compared to Q2 2024, Q2 2023, Q2 2022, and Q2 2021, I want to now get into specific EV models and how their sales have ... [continued]
cleantechnica.com cleantechnica.com
Click to expand...
I saw those charts posted in Reddit a few days ago. I would be very curious to see the same charts for Q3 2025, since it appears to be some additional EV demand before 9/30 when the federal incentives expire.

I am impressed with GM and their EV platform offerings. Chevy brand, Cadillac, but also Prologue and ZDX you mentioned (Honda / Acura). I test drove both Equinox EV and Blazer EV a couple of weeks ago, and was impressed with what they offer for the price. Minus the “frunk” (no such thing with them), I actually laughed when the popped the hood to show me. A fully loaded Blazer EV RS AWD (not even the SS), had very decent power and things like HUD and digital rear view mirror. My wife’s Ioniq 5 four year lease is expiring in less than two years. I highly doubt it the Lucid mid-size will be ready by then, and depending on how Rivian R2 or R3x pan out, I am confident there will be other good choices on that segment (affordable small / midsize crossovers), and obviously the big elephant in the room, Tesla Model Y, if my wife ever decides to consider a Tesla.

dbsb3233 said:
Now we're finally back to the normal "let the market decide" point
Click to expand...

Assuming you were referring to removing the $7,500 federal tax rebate, I agree it caused a lot of resentment from many people, typically those who would not even consider an EV purchase in the first place (for political reasons mostly, but also for other reasons). Now that is gone, that “argument “ no longer applies and the “playing field is level”. I have a feeling this will not stop the same group of folks opposing EVs just the same
 
Bdr100 said:
If you live in an apartment or some other place without available home charging and also live in town/city without good charging infrestructure then ICE will dominate. This is even more so if your area has cheep gas prices. With the elimination of EV tax credit, this will become even more applicable. This is why I see many manufacturers reticent to dip into the low price EV market. Here in Texas, most apartments do not have on-site charging. Those that do are higher end apartments that are more likely to have owners with higher end cars. I am pro EV but also recognize that you will continue to see ICE cars (and particularly trucks) selling in big numbers for decades to come.
Click to expand...
Also we need to take into account that the average American car has been on the road 12 years. Most people buy used cars - the vast majority of those used cars are ICE. Those will particularly be true for the bottom end of the market for years and years - even if/when we get to a majority of new cars being EV. I think the transition will happen, but it is going to be a few decades.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Lucid Plans to Double EV Production in 2025 Despite Tariff Concerns
Replies
0
Views
2K
alanmaz85
A
theqazman
Real Talk: The Good and Bad After 1,000 Miles in the 2025 AGT
Replies
19
Views
4K
LucidDropkick
LucidDropkick
Alex
Lucid Group, Inc. (LCID) Deutsche Bank Global Auto Industry Conference (Transcript)
Replies
6
Views
11K
hmp10
H
Joe
Lucid Ocean? With Fisker now bankrupt, another EV automaker is swooping in on the trademark
2
Replies
34
Views
11K
canuck
C
S
Audi Claims EV Model Dominance in the US—Beating Even Tesla
Replies
2
Views
1K
thecodingart
thecodingart
Back
Top