3 ms·
This is incredibly overstated. There are "incentives" for all sorts of activities. These incentives were available to all manufacturers. We should have "incenti
by bko 1mo ago
This is incredibly overstated. There are "incentives" for all sorts of activities. These incentives were available to all manufacturers. We should have "incentives" to produce electric vehicles and manufacturing in America. Insane not to. And these incentives are often "you would normally have to pay us X million in taxes, but we'll let you pay less". When the alternative is something not being built and no tax revenue, it makes sense. And a lot of subsidies were to buyers of EVs
- throwawayqqq11 1mo ago> In 2019, the loss was $862 million, but for 2020 there is a huge profit of $721 million. > However: A closer look at the figures published last week shows that Tesla is still making losses with actual sales of electric cars - around $500,000 in 2020. > In 2020, carbon certificates brought in $1.6 billion, without this revenue the numbers would still be below red. https://www.electrichunter.com/ev-news/tesla-makes-money-co2-certificates https://www.electrichunter.com/ev-news/tesla-makes-money-co2... With a "profit" margin that jumpy and a history of unrentability, i think it's fair to say that Tesla only exists today because of subsidies. It's not just tax benefits, as you frame it, but in this case EU-CO2 certificates, a direct "revenue" stream.
- inemesitaffia 1mo agoAlso available to other companies
- throwawayqqq11 1mo agoBack then tesla was a unicorn.
- inemesitaffia 1mo agoBillionaires can claim child benefits too. And Unicorns are about valuation, not money in the bank.