Regardless of party affiliation, few Americans support taxpayer subsidies for the rich and well-off. But if you look closely at his plans for electric vehicles, that’s exactly what President Biden is currently promoting.
The president included a whopping $174 billion for electric-vehicle subsidies in his $2 trillion “infrastructure” proposal. And in a recent speech, Biden argued that “the future of the auto industry is electric. … There’s no turning back.”
He went on to insist that “we have to look forward. … That means new purchasing incentives for consumers to buy clean vehicles like the electric Ford 150 — a union-made product — right here in America.”
This vision of government-led innovation spurring a green-technology renaissance to the benefit of all sounds nice, at least at first glance.
But the truth is Biden’s proposed “green” spending binge amounts to nothing more than a taxpayer-financed handout to environmentally conscious rich people.
To understand why, consider the consumer-focused approach to subsidizing electric vehicles the president has in mind.
His remarks and White House releases alike constantly refer to “purchasing incentives,” which is just politician-speak for tax money subsidizing consumption — in this case, subsidies for purchases of new electric vehicles.
That’s a pretty wealthy demographic. For one, most working-class Americans buy used cars, not new ones. And electric vehicles are still significantly more expensive than traditional ones, further narrowing the purchasing pool to well-off folks.
Just think about it like this: Have you ever seen a poor person driving a Tesla? Or a working-class person behind the wheel of a Prius?
We don’t have to speculate about who would benefit from Biden’s increased electric-vehicle subsidies — current federal subsidies largely end up in the pockets of the rich.
Yes, there already exists a federal tax credit for plug-in electric vehicles. Taxpayers can claim a credit of up to $7,500 for qualifying purchases.
Despite Biden’s rhetoric, it isn’t the working class that has made use of this existing program, at least to any meaningful degree.
According to the Congressional Research Service, nearly 80 percent of the tax credit’s beneficiaries in 2016 had incomes of more than $100,000, while 7 percent of those who benefited from the carve-out were millionaires.
And per IRS data, 62 percent of 2018 beneficiaries had incomes exceeding $200,000.
It’s clear that the existing program overwhelmingly benefits the well-off. Under the circumstances, it seems reasonable to expect that Biden’s expansion of it would largely be more of the same.
There are several other difficulties with the president’s proposal to throw money at the electric vehicle market.
For one, the existing tax-credit program has serious problems. A 2019 report from the Treasury Department concluded that the Internal Revenue Service “does not have effective processes to identify and prevent erroneous claims.”
The report found that the current system has resulted in at least 16,510 taxpayers receiving a whopping $73.8 million in potentially erroneous subsidies.
Moreover, further expanding electric vehicle subsidies would skew the transportation system in favor of wealthier taxpayers.
Right now, we have federal gas taxes and other taxes on fuel that are used to finance roads, highways, and infrastructure. But electric vehicle owners drive on these same roads without contributing to all of these taxes.
To be sure, there have been proposals to change or supplement the existing fuel-tax regime, but, for now anyway, further subsidizing and hastening the purchase of electric vehicles by wealthy consumers shifts more of the tax burden for road upkeep onto lower-earning Americans.
Of course, if the president’s proposal would truly save the day when it comes to climate change, perhaps it could be argued that the downsides are all worth it. But it’s hard to see how it would make any difference at all.
According to the Cato Institute, American passenger vehicles are responsible for roughly 2.4 percent of global carbon emissions.
Eliminating that 2.4 percent in its entirety would be unlikely to make much of a difference to the outlook for the climate, and Biden’s subsidy binge certainly wouldn’t do that.
Not everyone would switch even with massive subsidies, and electric vehicles run on … well, electricity — which still mostly comes from fossil-fuel sources.
Read rest at National Review
No way will I purchase a $45,000 “golf cart” to replace my paid-for 30 mpg gas car to pick up groceries. Will someone do an honest vacation report driving any fully electric vehicle on a 1200 miles round trip?
A friend of mine took his EV to Cape Cod. Accordingly, he had to find a hotel to stay at that was near a charger (there was only one in the city and it was a slow charger). Halfway back from the Cape, the battery died near Worcester. Had to have it towed. He’s selling it for an internal combustion engine (ICE).
The early automobiles were for only for the rich. That is until Henry Ford and his assembly line and living wage for workers came along.
Many electric vehicles can be found for under $45,000 and prices are dropping as fast as the range is increasing.
Don’t forget that most families can not afford a new gasoline automobile and only buy used ones. The battery life is the big issue for electric vehicles. Until they can come up with a battery that can reliability hold most of its charge up to 250,000 miles, the electric vehicle is not a viable replacement for gasoline and diesel vehicles for most families. It is just too expensive to replace the batteries. My primary car has over 250,000 miles on it. We live in a rural area that will never be served by public transportation.
The other issue is the electric grid. It is pretty certain that without nuclear, renewables can not provide power to the grid at its current level. Electric cars, busses, and semi trucks would make the situation even more impossible.
It is true that the original automobiles could only be afforded by the rich. In those days rural Americans used horse and buggies to commute to town. Are we expected to get a horse and buggy? I’m sure going back to the time when horse droppings where on the streets would not be appreciated.
Wow, only $45,000, where do I sign, I’ll have two.
I am a retired aerospace engineer that has held leadership positions. Even if I was still working, buying a brand new gasoline car would be out of reach, so an electric vehicle would be impossible. Typical of working class families we have always purchased used cars. The average age of cars on US roads is 12 years and 25% are 16 years or older. Biden and climate activists have such low intelligence that they expect electric cars to follow the same pattern as we have now and are expecting electric cars to replace those that use fossil fuels as automobiles age. They are not smart enough to take into account that batteries for electric cars have a limited life and cost thousands of dollars to replace. The Tesla battery is rated for eight years and replacing the battery costs between $12,000-$15,000 not counting labor and other parts needed. I have said before what the middle class is going to be forced to do is continue to fix existing cars. We will adopt the Cuba scenario.
Action on climate change has caused significant shifts in the priorities of the Democratic Party. They are subsidizing the rich for electric cars. Their policies which raise the cost of fuel and electricity disproportionally harm the middle class, elderly, poor, and communities of color. They have abandoned the best interests of blue collar workers in favor of the desires of the wealthy elite.
Is there anyone out there that can post a picture of their 12 year old electric vehicle ?
I drive a thirty year old Tempo several times per week. I have a truck, too. That’s only twelve years old.
And here all this time we were being told that the GOP was the Party of the Rich while the Democ-Rats was the Party of the Poor But just take good look at all the Wealthy Democrats The Kennedy’s the Gores Etc
“But the truth is Biden’s proposed “green” spending binge amounts to nothing more than a taxpayer-financed handout to
environmentally consciousvirtue signaling rich people.”Fixed it for you.
Here in U.K. 70% EV buyers are rich, have a double garage, a ICE car which does more mileage, and, of course, a private charging point with mebbe an arrangement with supplier for low nighttime rates
This website is a nonsensical echo chamber. It truly looks like a scam site. So much weirdness. So little rational thinking.