4 ms·

To be honest it would probably be better to add a progressively increasing tax on non-electric car fares - so first year it is announced, second year it's 5% of

To be honest it would probably be better to add a progressively increasing tax on non-electric car fares - so first year it is announced, second year it's 5% of the fare, third it's 10%, fourth 15%, fifth 20%, etc. And use that tax pool to create programs for acquiring EVs (business or otherwise). You can even add an exemption to offset the start period by a year or two for cars bought within a year to avoid screwing over people who just invested in a new car for this purpose.

benj111 7y ago
Wouldn't you want a higher tax earlier to offset the higher EV cost? A 1% tax isn't going to help if EVs are twice as expensive, whereas in 20 years time where hopefully EVs are approaching cost parity a 20% tax shouldn't be needed. But on the other hand you want to broadcast to everyone that in the medium term your taxi will need to be electric, so plan accordingly. Taxes are hard!
- rubber_duck 7y ago
  Well you need to give time for market to readjust so the ramp-up is a grade period - but instead of doing it 1% per year you do it in 5% per year or some similar significant increment - this way you're clearly signaling what's going to happen without completely screwing people who invested in ICU.
Noos 7y ago
The problem is it would just force people out of the market. Like in the USA the average car is getting up to the 25-35k range and is not something people can change to easily. You're asking someone working for Wal-mart wages (which tend to be what many Uber people essentially make) to incur a huge new debt load or progressively harsher taxes. You guys need to understand the impacts of the policies you recommend, because this is why people are against climate change efforts so vigorously.
- rubber_duck 7y ago
  Well one option is to give subsidies for electric cars to offset this a bit, the other is hope that electric production ramps up and drives the cost down - that's why it would be increased gradually - from barely significant to unable to compete in 5 years. Around here we already have a law that any taxi drivers (Uber and others included) cannot use a car older than 5 years.

benj111 7y ago

Wouldn't you want a higher tax earlier to offset the higher EV cost? A 1% tax isn't going to help if EVs are twice as expensive, whereas in 20 years time where hopefully EVs are approaching cost parity a 20% tax shouldn't be needed. But on the other hand you want to broadcast to everyone that in the medium term your taxi will need to be electric, so plan accordingly. Taxes are hard!

rubber_duck 7y ago
Well you need to give time for market to readjust so the ramp-up is a grade period - but instead of doing it 1% per year you do it in 5% per year or some similar significant increment - this way you're clearly signaling what's going to happen without completely screwing people who invested in ICU.

Noos 7y ago

The problem is it would just force people out of the market. Like in the USA the average car is getting up to the 25-35k range and is not something people can change to easily. You're asking someone working for Wal-mart wages (which tend to be what many Uber people essentially make) to incur a huge new debt load or progressively harsher taxes. You guys need to understand the impacts of the policies you recommend, because this is why people are against climate change efforts so vigorously.

rubber_duck 7y ago
Well one option is to give subsidies for electric cars to offset this a bit, the other is hope that electric production ramps up and drives the cost down - that's why it would be increased gradually - from barely significant to unable to compete in 5 years. Around here we already have a law that any taxi drivers (Uber and others included) cannot use a car older than 5 years.