[Tell It Right]

Yup, 1+2 are what we are saying and the delay and detriment you mention in your paragraph is deliberate, it's the capitulation Manchin forced. Everything the oil industry is doing is designed to delay delay delay, they're making billions a day profit and enjoying billions a day in subsidies, it's all just cold MBA calculus.

Nothing causes the big oil companies economic pain more than drill baby drill. When there are few drilling permits/leases allowed, only the big companies get the ability to drill. Stricter limits on drilling, especially over dry land, always push out the smaller oil businesses while simultaneously lowering supply and making the cost of oil go up. CEO's of every industry wish their company could make those kind of windfall profits while producing fewer goods like Big Oil. The best friends of Big Oil are always the politicians who are loudest at saying they hate Big Oil.

 

[yticolev]

Respectfully, I never put much into anything the CBO says. By their own rules, the CBO has to do their calculations based on the parameters of the politician making the request for them to research.

Those parameters are what is in the proposed bill. CBO estimates change as the bill is changed. Which this one has now changed many times. The CBO also provides congressional staff with thousands of informal estimates to aid them in drafting bills. If these informal estimates are made public, well that is a shame and no doubt done for political reasons. If these make the news, they are just clickbait and should be ignored. I only read mainstream news and I don't ever recall reading about a CBO estimate that wasn't connected to a drafted bill that appeared serious and likely to end up voted on. However, many estimates in the news come from those people with special interests in the bills, the sponsors and the opposition. These are not considered reliable until the CBO has weighed in but no doubt these multiple estimates confuse the general public.

 

[Mrcleop]

Here's the latest draft of the bill from Aug 3 (start at page 1482). I don't know if this is what the Senate is actually voting on today. But BIG changes from my very limited ability of interpreting this very confusing text.

• $7500 refundable tax credit for EVs
• Another $4500 for union plants
• Domestic battery content is an extra $500
• Final assembly in North America only applies in 2027
• MSRP limits are the same of $55k for cars and $80k for SUVs, vans, etc.
• Income limits are much higher now at $250k for single and $500k for joint

 

[Hodog16]

That's a great update so far--thanks for sharing.

 

[hpark21]

Another $4500 for union plants

where do you see this?
I see that DOMESTIC built cars get extra $1000.
(So, $8500 instead of 7500)

I also see limit of 1 per year per person.

 

[Mrcleop]

where do you see this?
I see that DOMESTIC built cars get extra $1000.
(So, $8500 instead of 7500)

I also see limit of 1 per year per person.

On page 1483, starting at line 19 it says Domestic Assembly is $4500. Then on page 1494, starting on line 20, it defines what that means.

 

[Mrcleop]

Here's the latest draft of the bill from Aug 3 (start at page 1482). I don't know if this is what the Senate is actually voting on today. But BIG changes from my very limited ability of interpreting this very confusing text.

• $7500 refundable tax credit for EVs
• Another $4500 for union plants
• Domestic battery content is an extra $500
• Final assembly in North America only applies in 2027
• MSRP limits are the same of $55k for cars and $80k for SUVs, vans, etc.
• Income limits are much higher now at $250k for single and $500k for joint

I was just reviewing the Nov 2021 version of this bill, and it also had all of these things in it. So I might be completely wrong that this is what's actually being voted on. Sorry for the false hope everyone.

 

[hpark21]

On page 1483, starting at line 19 it says Domestic Assembly is $4500. Then on page 1494, starting on line 20, it defines what that means.

I C... The bill looks so much like the one that has been shot down last year with $4500 Union built clause as well.

But it DOES say 8/3/2022 as date. Interesting.

 

[Mrcleop]

I C... The bill looks so much like the one that has been shot down last year with $4500 Union built clause as well.

But it DOES say 8/3/2022 as date. Interesting.

What I gather is they don't make changes to the original bill during the voting process, they just vote on amendments. Maybe they needed a Aug 3 version to reference for the amendments. So now I'm in search of the latest amendment text...

 

[rbdavis808]

What I gather is they don't make changes to the original bill during the voting process, they just vote on amendments. Maybe they needed a Aug 3 version to reference for the amendments. So now I'm in search of the latest amendment text...

Thanks for digging into this, the bill-making process is certainly confusing! However, given the Bloomberg article that was just posted today and the fact that no on else seems to be reporting on these monumental changes to the EV credit requirements in the new bill, I'm led to believe they have not been made as described in that KY house rep's document. It is a mystery why that thing has an August 3 date slapped on it. CNN also said nothing in their post today to give any hope on those points, but rather reported that Stabenow (D-MI) is not terribly happy.

 

[The IT Guy]

Here's the latest draft of the bill from Aug 3 (start at page 1482). I don't know if this is what the Senate is actually voting on today. But BIG changes from my very limited ability of interpreting this very confusing text.

• $7500 refundable tax credit for EVs
• Another $4500 for union plants
• Domestic battery content is an extra $500
• Final assembly in North America only applies in 2027
• MSRP limits are the same of $55k for cars and $80k for SUVs, vans, etc.
• Income limits are much higher now at $250k for single and $500k for joint

That's the House "Build Back Better" Bill which the House is still playing with. It was shot down by Manchin a while back. The one we should be paying attention to is the Senate Bill which we have been discussing. The BBB Bill is going nowhere.

 

[Mrcleop]

Okay I'm back with the actual bill text they're voting on, according to this article (bill text is at the bottom). Looks like nothing changed from July 27.

 

[The IT Guy]

Senator Marco Rubio is attempting to eliminate ALL TAX CREDITS on EVs

Rubio Says No Tax Credits for Electric Vehicles with Chinese Parts

Politico explains how difficult it is to meet the requirements as written, and how Rubio's changes would make it impossible for any EV to comply.

Washington bureaucracy could rescue Democrats from their EV tax credit problem

 

[yticolev]

Rubio can say no all he wants, he will not vote for the bill even if he succeeds with one of thousands of vote-arama amendments. Clickbait.

 

[Elad9000]

Maybe the name of this thread should be changed to: How quickly can Republicans Democrats and Manchin destroy the Federal $7,500 tax credit?

 

[The IT Guy]

Maybe the name of this thread should be changed to: How quickly can Republicans Democrats and Manchin destroy the Federal $7,500 tax credit?

That's the irony! I'm the OP, and I did NOT see this coming, nor as quickly!

 

[Tell It Right]

That's the irony! I'm the OP, and I did NOT see this coming, nor as quickly!

Given the creation of the Methane Emissions Reduction team created by the law, and the penalties/fees that will be added to the natural gas fueled power plants that were created by the prior Democrat (Obama) forcing many utilities to shut down coal plants and replace them with nat gas plants ... maybe the thread should be called the "How Much Will Democrats Raise the Cost of Charging EV's?"

 

[ArtyB]

If I bought a car this year, can I claim a $7500 tax credit when filling my taxes next year?

 

[The IT Guy]

If I bought a car this year, can I claim a $7500 tax credit when filling my taxes next year?

Some of the considerations include this:-

"Page 386, Line 20
TRANSITION RULE.—Solely for purposes of the application of section 30D of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, in the case of a taxpayer that—
(1) after December 31, 2021, and before the date of enactment of this Act, purchased, or entered into a written binding contract to purchase, a new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle (as defined in section 30D(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act), and
(2) placed such vehicle in service on or after the date of enactment of this Act, such taxpayer may elect (at such time, and in such form and manner, as the Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary’s delegate, may prescribe) to treat such vehicle as having been placed in service on the day before the date of enactment of this Act."

 

[ArtyB]

Some of the considerations include this:-

"Page 386, Line 20
TRANSITION RULE.—Solely for purposes of the application of section 30D of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, in the case of a taxpayer that—
(1) after December 31, 2021, and before the date of enactment of this Act, purchased, or entered into a written binding contract to purchase, a new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle (as defined in section 30D(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act), and
(2) placed such vehicle in service on or after the date of enactment of this Act, such taxpayer may elect (at such time, and in such form and manner, as the Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary’s delegate, may prescribe) to treat such vehicle as having been placed in service on the day before the date of enactment of this Act."

So, the short answer is Yes