[hpark21]

They're trying to re-shore the production. GM Ultium, VW ID.4 cheap model, and like 2 teslas will qualify until stuff is re-homed so chilling effect on a good part of the EV market for a few years.

Well, there are the 2 from Ford. Which GM Ultium are qualified? I think potentially, only Cadillac Lyriq will qualify (no hummer due to price). MAYBE the new Chevy EV truck (when will it even come out)?
I can understand re-shoring, but they should have done in STEPS. First, give all manufacturers who has not reached 200k limit couple of years to build and start producing in US. Nobody thinks the re-shoring will be done within few months so this new "tax credit" isn't going to anyone other than possibly for few Teslas. Now, POTENTIALLY since Tesla sells more than all other EVs combined, one COULD argue that more $$ will be spent to "promote" sales, but it is only good for Tesla for now it appears though I imagine their delivery until the end of the year will be rather abysmal in US.

 

[zamafir]

Well, there are the 2 from Ford. Which GM Ultium are qualified? I think potentially, only Cadillac Lyriq will qualify (no hummer due to price). MAYBE the new Chevy EV truck (when will it even come out)?
I can understand re-shoring, but they should have done in STEPS. First, give all manufacturers who has not reached 200k limit couple of years to build and start producing in US. Nobody thinks the re-shoring will be done within few months so this new "tax credit" isn't going to anyone other than possibly for few Teslas. Now, POTENTIALLY since Tesla sells more than all other EVs combined, one COULD argue that more $$ will be spent to "promote" sales, but it is only good for Tesla for now it appears though I imagine their delivery until the end of the year will be rather abysmal in US.

EVquinox, EVblazer, All the other things they'll announce before the end of the year.

OH I agree with you, I don't like it either.

 

[The IT Guy]

Both Ford's EVs will qualify, right? (Mach E and F150 lightening - or is Mach E built in Mexico?)

Mexico is OK since the bill specifies "North American" assembly. I think I read that an earlier draft said "US" assembled, and Ford stepped in with some suggestions to broaden the geography.

 

[The IT Guy]

but it is only good for Tesla for now it appears though I imagine their delivery until the end of the year will be rather abysmal in US.

I think I'm correct in saying that Tesla's entire production into the first quarter of next year is already sold. A while back I started a configuration on their website to take a look at pricing and delivery was waaaay out.

 

[hpark21]

I think I'm correct in saying that Tesla's entire production into the first quarter if next year is already sold. A while back I started a configuration on their website to take a look at pricing and delivery was waaaay out.

Tesla people were already talking about how to delay their scheduled delivery to after the new year to take advantage of the new credit.
They are interpreting the law as written - Amendment made in this section applies to vehicles placed in service after Dec. 31, 2022 (page 386) - so it appears that if they take POSESSION of the car AFTER new years, then they can get the credit of $7500 even if they ordered a while ago.

 

[The IT Guy]

Tesla people were already talking about how to delay their scheduled delivery to after the new year to take advantage of the new credit.
They are interpreting the law as written - Amendment made in this section applies to vehicles placed in service after Dec. 31, 2022 (page 386) - so it appears that if they take POSESSION of the car AFTER new years, then they can get the credit of $7500 even if they ordered a while ago.

That would be a good buyer strategy, so long as they have a "written binding contract". However, with such a contract, Tesla may be reluctant to disrupt their production flow to accommodate the buyers. Though I have read that a high proportion of Tesla buyers earn too much to qualify under the new Act. Chaos everywhere!

 

[Mrcleop]

So, with new EV credit, what ARE the cars that are qualified? I am GUESSING Model Y that has US sourced batteries will be qualified, but Model 3s are iffy due to the sedan MSRP limit.

None of Toyota's EVs would be qualified since they are built in Japan, right? (BZ4X) Subaru is screwed here since Solterra is built in Japan AND they haven't had chance to claim anywhere CLOSE to 200k.
Chevy BOLT will not qualify since they are made in Korea.
Both Ford's EVs will qualify, right? (Mach E and F150 lightening - or is Mach E built in Mexico?)
Nissan's Arya will not qualify as well (Japan built).
EV6 & Ioniq 5 won't qualify (Korea built).
ID4 SHOULD qualify - I think 2023 models should begin to come out of US factory, I just don't know whether the Battery is enough US sourced.
Volvo Recharge wouldn't qualify same as Polestar.
BMW, Audi won't qualify unless Audi starts building EV in same factory as ID4.
I am GUESSING Porsche won't qualify as well.
Rivian should qualify with their base model (but are they even making the base model? R1T? R1S is cutting even more closer at $73k base)
Lucid won't qualify due to price.

I am not so sure whether they are TRYING to promote or dissuade people from buying an EV...
All of sudden, only handful of cars currently selling in the market are going to be qualified for EV credit.
Yes, 200k limit will be lifted but 90% of cars won't qualify ANYWAYS.. Before, only 2 companies completely exhausted the 200k limit.

The Chevy Bolt is made in Michigan. Its batteries come from Korea, which is a fair trade country. The only question is where the battery minerals are from.

 

[Mrcleop]

So, with new EV credit, what ARE the cars that are qualified? I am GUESSING Model Y that has US sourced batteries will be qualified, but Model 3s are iffy due to the sedan MSRP limit.

None of Toyota's EVs would be qualified since they are built in Japan, right? (BZ4X) Subaru is screwed here since Solterra is built in Japan AND they haven't had chance to claim anywhere CLOSE to 200k.
Chevy BOLT will not qualify since they are made in Korea.
Both Ford's EVs will qualify, right? (Mach E and F150 lightening - or is Mach E built in Mexico?)
Nissan's Arya will not qualify as well (Japan built).
EV6 & Ioniq 5 won't qualify (Korea built).
ID4 SHOULD qualify - I think 2023 models should begin to come out of US factory, I just don't know whether the Battery is enough US sourced.
Volvo Recharge wouldn't qualify same as Polestar.
BMW, Audi won't qualify unless Audi starts building EV in same factory as ID4.
I am GUESSING Porsche won't qualify as well.
Rivian should qualify with their base model (but are they even making the base model? R1T? R1S is cutting even more closer at $73k base)
Lucid won't qualify due to price.

I am not so sure whether they are TRYING to promote or dissuade people from buying an EV...
All of sudden, only handful of cars currently selling in the market are going to be qualified for EV credit.
Yes, 200k limit will be lifted but 90% of cars won't qualify ANYWAYS.. Before, only 2 companies completely exhausted the 200k limit.

Reddit thread where someone attempted to collate info.

 

[rbdavis808]

The Chevy Bolt is made in Michigan. Its batteries come from Korea, which is a fair trade country. The only question is where the battery minerals are from.

Only critical mineral content can come from foreign FTA partners. Battery components and manufacture must be within N. America (at the defined percentages). Here's the language:

(1) Critical minerals requirement

(A) In general
The requirement described in this subparagraph with respect to a vehicle is that, with respect to the battery from which the electric motor of such vehicle draws electricity, the percentage of the value of the applicable critical minerals (as defined in section 45X(c)(6)) contained in such battery that were—
(i) extracted or processed in any country with which the United States has a free trade agreement in effect, or
(ii) recycled in North America, is equal to or greater than the applicable percentage (as certified by the qualified manufacturer, in such form or manner as prescribed by the Secretary).

(B) Applicable percentage
[ percentages deleted ... ]

(2) Battery components

(A) In general
The requirement described in this subparagraph with respect to a vehicle is that, with respect to the battery from which the electric motor of such vehicle draws electricity, the percentage of the value of the components contained in such battery that were manufactured or assembled in North America is equal to or greater than the applicable percentage (as certified by the qualified manufacturer, in such form or manner as prescribed by the Secretary).

(B) Applicable percentage
[ percentages deleted ... ]

 

[Mrcleop]

Only critical mineral content can come from foreign FTA partners. Battery components and manufacture must be within N. America (at the defined percentages). Here's the language:

(1) Critical minerals requirement

(A) In general
The requirement described in this subparagraph with respect to a vehicle is that, with respect to the battery from which the electric motor of such vehicle draws electricity, the percentage of the value of the applicable critical minerals (as defined in section 45X(c)(6)) contained in such battery that were—
(i) extracted or processed in any country with which the United States has a free trade agreement in effect, or
(ii) recycled in North America, is equal to or greater than the applicable percentage (as certified by the qualified manufacturer, in such form or manner as prescribed by the Secretary).

(B) Applicable percentage
[ percentages deleted ... ]

(2) Battery components

(A) In general
The requirement described in this subparagraph with respect to a vehicle is that, with respect to the battery from which the electric motor of such vehicle draws electricity, the percentage of the value of the components contained in such battery that were manufactured or assembled in North America is equal to or greater than the applicable percentage (as certified by the qualified manufacturer, in such form or manner as prescribed by the Secretary).

(B) Applicable percentage
[ percentages deleted ... ]

Thanks for clarifying! I was going by this electrek article.

 

[IonicZ]

Never discuss politics with friend, family or forums. You are simply asking for trouble.

 

[Mrcleop]

Thanks for clarifying! I was going by this electrek article.

I was wrong anyway. The Bolt’s batteries are also made in Michigan.

 

[rbdavis808]

I was wrong anyway. The Bolt’s batteries are also made in Michigan.

I truly hope Bolt is eligible. Between the restored and newly refundable credit and its new lower price (if that stays in effect now) that would really open the EV market to folks with less disposable income. There are many details of the EV part of this bill which I do not like, but this is one thing that would be great. Of course if GM kills Bolt in favor of tricked-out $50+K Blazers and Equinoxes as rumored I'll be cheesed.

 

[ArizonaJon]

The Chevy Bolt is made in Michigan. Its batteries come from Korea, which is a fair trade country. The only question is where the battery minerals are from.

Actually the batteries have been made in the US for over a year now. But no one knows it the key mineral content of any manufacturers batteries will meet the requirements.

 

[zamafir]

I truly hope Bolt is eligible. Between the restored and newly refundable credit and its new lower price (if that stays in effect now) that would really open the EV market to folks with less disposable income. There are many details of the EV part of this bill which I do not like, but this is one thing that would be great. Of course if GM kills Bolt in favor of tricked-out $50+K Blazers and Equinoxes as rumored I'll be cheesed.

The Blazer is indeed in the 45k+ range but GM's been saying the Equinox should replace the Bolt at the 30k level. I think the bolt is short for this world and wouldn't be surprised if they get rid of it once the Equinox hits decent numbers as they're very clear that all the new EV's are being built around the Ultium platform and variations there of (egimp style).

 

[rbdavis808]

A couple of news articles of interest have been published in the last two days. Lots of discussion about this in the VW forum where I found these references.

(1) The CBO is saying that not many buyers will be able to use the proposed EV credit.

(2) An even more negative article in WSJ is reporting that automakers are quite unhappy over the battery requirements and are saying it will be years before any sizable number of US-made EVs would qualify. This article contains lots of interesting charts which document the Chinese hammerlock on the mineral supply chain.

I fully agree with the goals of helping US workers and securing the supply chain, but I wonder if those ends will be accomplished by a bill that helps virtually no one buy an EV (and thus help the carmakers and autoworkers) before it expires. It can take years to make these kinds of changes to supply infrastructure. Seems like the smarter thing to do would be to relax a number of these requirements, e.g., give foreign carmakers another year or two to on-shore their production to N. America (which would also help buyers stuck in the order pipeline), and ease up on the battery requirements. My sense is that there's going to be little, if any re-working of this bill before it's voted up or down, however.

 

[zamafir]

A couple of news articles of interest have been published in the last two days. Lots of discussion about this in the VW forum where I found these references.

(1) The CBO is saying that not many buyers will be able to use the proposed EV credit.

(2) An even more negative article in WSJ is reporting that automakers are quite unhappy over the battery requirements and are saying it will be years before any sizable number of US-made EVs would qualify. This article contains lots of interesting charts which document the Chinese hammerlock on the mineral supply chain.

I fully agree with the goals of helping US workers and securing the supply chain, but I wonder if those ends will be accomplished by a bill that helps virtually no one buy an EV (and thus help the carmakers and autoworkers) before it expires. It can take years to make these kinds of changes to supply infrastructure. Seems like the smarter thing to do would be to relax a number of these requirements, e.g., give foreign carmakers another year or two to on-shore their production to N. America (which would also help buyers stuck in the order pipeline), and ease up on the battery requirements. My sense is that there's going to be little, if any re-working of this bill before it's voted up or down, however.

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.

 

[Mrcleop]

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.

We have to remember Senator Manchin didn't want the EV tax credit at all. So there's very little likelihood he'll budge on these. If more vehicles aren't eligible, and buyers truly end up choosing not to buy EVs because of it, the oil companies will be ecstatic.

 

[zamafir]

We have to remember Senator Manchin didn't want the EV tax credit at all. So there's very little likelihood he'll budge on these. If more vehicles aren't eligible, and buyers truly end up choosing not to buy EVs because of it, the oil companies will be ecstatic.

Yup, $2.8 B a day in profit relying on $16 B a day in subsidies and you understand why they're spending hundreds of millions on politics and shady news sources to disparage alternatives, can't have things that make the world a better place cut into that subsidy gravy train!

 

[Tell It Right]

The CBO is saying that not many buyers will be able to use the proposed EV credit.

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. That's why over a decade ago you'd read that the CBO predicts Obamacare will make healthcare more expensive, then a week later read the CBO saying the opposite. A Democrat asks the CBO to assume various beliefs knowing it'll result with one "official" prediction from the CBO; then a Republican asks the CBO to re-run the calculations but assume other beliefs to generate an "official" report from the CBO saying the opposite. This is even without a change in the proposed legislation. Both sides know how to craft the parameters of the request to get the result they want from the CBO, all in the hopes of us peons thinking it's an "official" prediction.