3 ms·

You're arguments, are erroneous and are so out of topic. Let's do a bit of fact checking on this false narrative. Having worked in government. Most if not all

by xedeon 6y ago

You're arguments, are erroneous and are so out of topic. Let's do a bit of fact checking on this false narrative. Having worked in government. Most if not all financial transactions records are public record and can easily be traced. The only known grant(call it subsidy if you want) that Tesla got from the government is a loan from the Department of Energy. "In January 2010, the Department of Energy issued a $465 million loan to Tesla Motors" Source: https://www.energy.gov/lpo/tesla https://www.energy.gov/lpo/tesla The loan was to buy the old Toyata/GM NUMMI plant. That single plant now hires thousands of workers and produce thousands of electric vehicles a month. That DOE loan was PAID off 10 years early PLUS interest. Therefore, the American taxpayers made money and cemented the U.S. as a leader in EV market share. Source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-doe/electric-carmaker-tesla-pays-off-u-s-loan-idUSBRE94L16520130522 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-doe/electric-carmak... Can you provide the rest of the $1.5B you're claiming? I can already predict you will link the Business Insider and L.A. Times articles. Both of which are inaccurate. They also did not provide sources where they got those numbers from. Before you mention the tax breaks for the Giga Factory in Nevada. This has been a common thing for states to do. So that they can entice companies to build infrastructure. Because that can end up bringing in tax revenue in the long run. BMW have gotten hundreds of millions as well in just South Carolina alone. So that point is moot: https://abcnews.go.com/Business/25-years-ago-bmw-opened-shop-south-carolina/story?id=67581133 https://abcnews.go.com/Business/25-years-ago-bmw-opened-shop... https://www.dw.com/en/mexican-subsidies-for-bmw-under-fire/a-18167227 https://www.dw.com/en/mexican-subsidies-for-bmw-under-fire/a...

webXL 6y ago
Perhaps from this: 200k cars sold * $7500 tax credit (+ the cars sold during the phase out, perhaps another 100k maybe at an average of $2500) Such credits are intended to go completely to consumers, but as many government programs have unintended consequences, or perhaps unadvertised effects, the producer just charges more for the item because they know the consumer is willing to spend more knowing they'll get the tax credit, only if they buy that item. Tesla even factored the credit into the price they showed on their website, which many complained was false advertising as it was very possible not to have $7500 in tax liability, but the vast majority did. It became obvious that Tesla captured a substantial portion of the credit when they lowered the prices every time the tax credit dropped, meeting the people who "lost out" on the credit half way. They had quite a bit of room in their margins to attract new buyers with lower prices. Maybe not $1.5B of margin from the credits, but definitely not $0.
- xedeon 6y ago
  Bad spin. He claims the price is lower because of the “subsidies”. Which is opposite of what you’re implying. Not only that your logic is flawed, the math also doesn’t check out. Why? Not everyone who were the first 200k early adopters got the credit. Because you would have to owed the tax liability. Hence it’s called a tax credit and not refund. Moreover, if we use the logic you’re claiming. Then BMW has benefited from it too! Since they sell the i3 EV. Same with other manufacturers that offer BEVs. Like Chevy, Nissan, Audi and Jaguar etc.

by xedeon 6y ago

webXL 6y ago

Perhaps from this: 200k cars sold * $7500 tax credit (+ the cars sold during the phase out, perhaps another 100k maybe at an average of $2500) Such credits are intended to go completely to consumers, but as many government programs have unintended consequences, or perhaps unadvertised effects, the producer just charges more for the item because they know the consumer is willing to spend more knowing they'll get the tax credit, only if they buy that item. Tesla even factored the credit into the price they showed on their website, which many complained was false advertising as it was very possible not to have $7500 in tax liability, but the vast majority did. It became obvious that Tesla captured a substantial portion of the credit when they lowered the prices every time the tax credit dropped, meeting the people who "lost out" on the credit half way. They had quite a bit of room in their margins to attract new buyers with lower prices. Maybe not $1.5B of margin from the credits, but definitely not $0.

xedeon 6y ago
Bad spin. He claims the price is lower because of the “subsidies”. Which is opposite of what you’re implying. Not only that your logic is flawed, the math also doesn’t check out. Why? Not everyone who were the first 200k early adopters got the credit. Because you would have to owed the tax liability. Hence it’s called a tax credit and not refund. Moreover, if we use the logic you’re claiming. Then BMW has benefited from it too! Since they sell the i3 EV. Same with other manufacturers that offer BEVs. Like Chevy, Nissan, Audi and Jaguar etc.