Electric vehicle subsidies and prices

[ninetyninepct]

Why are Justin, barbie and J. Horgan using our money to pay for other people's cars? The guy in Nanaimo got $16,000 of other people's money to buy his overpriced KIA Soul. I can't afford a nice new overpriced car, but Horgan is happily giving away my money to individuals. The Government is supposed to act for everyone, not just a privileged few. Has the Nanaimo welfare recipient not heard of a car loan from a Bank.

With all the useless carbon taxes making everything so horrible expensive, I can no longer save towards a new car, I have to pay for food and utilities and excessive property taxes and other stuff just to live. I will never own an electric vehicle.

By the way, the guy bought a KIA Soul, priced at over $52,000. The standard Soul is a bit over $26,000. An extra $26,000 just for a few batteries and an electric motor?? When I pointed it out at the dealership, the salesman just laughed. The electric version is priced that high because of the Government "subsidies". The other manufacturers are no different.

PS: The cardboard seats in the electric Soul aren't even power seats. For $52,000?? Ripoff. Same with GM.

[seewood]

This leaves a bad taste in my mouth. No need to wonder why they are doing this,..pander to those in the lower mainland more likely to vote for this incompetent lot.
Horgan, those are my tax dollars you are handing out to those that don't or shouldn't need a subsidy for an electric car.
Why not spend more to monitor our provincial parks, more for homecare, more for the conservation service office for example.
When are you Horgan going to offer metered electric charging stations that include a road tax...?

[OKkayak]

The Government is supposed to act for everyone, not just a privileged few. Has the Nanaimo welfare recipient not heard of a car loan from a Bank.

Technically, they are acting for everyone, everyone qualifies for the same rebates if they choose to buy an EV. The Soul EV Premium will run you you $49,828 after taxes, minus $16,000 of rebates (that everyone qualifies for), you're looking at $33,898 which is about the same price as a mid level standard Soul. Even though I'm not a fan of EVs or the rebates (and yes, I feel the Carbon Tax is nothing more than a cash grab), but they aren't "welfare". The rebates are already being reduced, and eventually will be phased out. Currently, the BC rebate is $5,000 and will be going down to $1,500/$3,000 depending on the vehicle, also EVs that cost more than $55,000 will no longer qualify.

Plug-In Hybrids also qualify for rebates, such as the Hyundai Ioniq or Toyota Prius Prime, both will run you about $33,000 before taxes and the rebates pretty much cancel the taxes. Prius would be a good deal seeing that you can get 1000km range and have the best of both worlds, electric and fuel.

The standard Soul is a bit over $26,000. An extra $26,000 just for a few batteries and an electric motor?? When I pointed it out at the dealership, the salesman just laughed. The electric version is priced that high because of the Government "subsidies". The other manufacturers are no different.

The sales guy was just being friendly with you, batteries are extremely expensive and fact is, that is where the cost goes.

PS: The cardboard seats in the electric Soul aren't even power seats. For $52,000?? Ripoff. Same with GM.

The Soul EV Premium has multi directional power drivers seat and the Limited has multi directional power driver and passenger seats. Both have heated and cooled seats.

Anywho, is there a story or something to this so we can get some sort of context?

[TylerM4]

Why are Justin, barbie and J. Horgan using our money to pay for other people's cars?

Subsidies are very common, have been around for decades, and have proven to be very effective. So effective, than nearly all governments around the world offer/use them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidy

Do you not understand why they're used? You make it sound like you just don't like this subsidy, but this one is very similar to the others. If you'd argue the merit of this subsidy, I could follow you. But you appear to be simply arguing against subsidies in general while using this one as an example.

So to clarify - do you disagree with the idea of subsidies in general? Or is it just this particular subsidy that you don't like? If you don't like it - why? Is it simply because you think only rich people will benefit or something? I hope not as OKkayak has already shown you some of the math. Plus, there are other reasons why this subsidy would improve EV affordability for EVERYONE - not just rich people. For example - many of these EV's will be resold as used vehicles in a few years. Used price will reflect new price - so even you as a "I can't afford a $35k vehicle" person can benefit from this subsidy. Not to mention the impact of lowered costs due to increased production.

[nepal]

.
I don’t get how spending $10,000 extra to buy an electric car can save me money, when I’d be saving maybe $200 per month (2,400/yr) for fuel? I’d have to drive four years just to break even, and by then I’d want a newer technology car. Plus the cost maybe $3,000 to put a charging station in my house. My gas car maintenance is low and the insurance is cheaper. I drive less than 20kkm/yr, as I’m not a taxi.

Currently, I’d rather buy a well priced/equipped/long-range efficient gas car, and save lots of money. As for saving the planet, well the energy has to generated somewhere at some environmental cost.

EV seems like a false economy, and a car dealers/manufacturers marketing $$$bonanza (dealers pocket the gov rebates for themselves) .

I’m also worried about extra electricity demand driving up the price of electricity that I use to run my house.
https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/12/americas-power-grid-isnt-ready-electric-cars/577507/

[rustled]

The Government is supposed to act for everyone, not just a privileged few. Has the Nanaimo welfare recipient not heard of a car loan from a Bank.

Technically, they are acting for everyone, everyone qualifies for the same rebates if they choose to buy an EV. ...

I'm agreeing with the jist of what ninetyninpct is getting at here.

Only people who drive and CAN afford to buy a NEW car qualify.

Many of us cannot afford to throw money away like that. I did it once, won't ever do it again.

This sort of subsidy only helps those who are already in a better position financially or, worse IMO, encourages people who are not actually in a financial position to buy new to do it anyway, when they should be purchasing good used and maintaining it properly. There's no assurance these vehicles will be properly maintained or more worth purchasing used. Ultimately it's like subsidizing people purchasing Betamax instead of VHS.

There's no incentive here for people who are already doing the right thing. It's using our collective resources to finance fuzzy feel-good stuff.

[rustled]

BUMP.
Castanet story, Debunking EV Myths
https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/267135 ... g-EV-myths

According to BC Hydro, charging a Nissan Leaf at home every day would add about $20 to the home's electricity bill each month. The average monthly gas bill for a vehicle is approximately $170.

That's between double and four times what I pay for gas each month, which presumably means I'd pay $5 to $10 on my home electric bill to charge up.

Some of the taxes I pay at the pump go to road maintenance and infrastructure.

So: If, say, 25 per cent of us buy electric cars and stop fueling up at the pumps, presumably people who would gain more than I would because they currently pay a lot more at the pump than I do, how would the government make up the money they currently use for roads?

Looks to me like their only option will be to increase the cost of electricity for everyone, regardless of what they drive or even if they drive.

Has anyone seen their proposal for making up for the revenue lost at the pump?

[Trīewth]

Has anyone seen their proposal for making up for the revenue lost at the pump?

I'm no big fan of EVs in general. The economics can only be supported through subsidies and the environmental benefit analysis invariably ignores the eventual impact of production, battery disposal and electrical requirements. (plus they're ugly).

But some thoughts on your question...

The Zero-Emission Vehicles Act (ZEVA) mandates that 100 per cent of all new cars and trucks sold in BC be zero emission by 2040.

The BC Gov't does not have to require an increase in the unit price of electricity in order to make up the lost gas tax revenue. Since BC Hydro is required by law to provide the government an annual dividend equal to 85% of its net income, its a "volume" thing.

Which of course means that the provincial drive towards the electrification of everything is entirely self-serving and perhaps more than a bit conflicted.

[zoo]

Some of the taxes I pay at the pump go to road maintenance and infrastructure.

So: If, say, 25 per cent of us buy electric cars and stop fueling up at the pumps, presumably people who would gain more than I would because they currently pay a lot more at the pump than I do, how would the government make up the money they currently use for roads?

Looks to me like their only option will be to increase the cost of electricity for everyone, regardless of what they drive or even if they drive.

Has anyone seen their proposal for making up for the revenue lost at the pump?

I just looked at both Fortis and BC hydro web sites and still see the topic of peak demand, high usage, requests and advise on how people and business can help cut back when the demand is stressful on the system. Even mentions possible use of higher price rates at these times.
And you bet the government is already figuring out ways to recoup 100's of millions in taxes via us purchasing electricity.
Not to mention my senior mom cant afford to heat her own home because of the high price of electricity compared to gas.
And I see all the incentives governments are offering to switch every ones home away from the fossil fuel, ozone damaging Natural gas people use right now. Oh, wait, that ain't happening.
I heat only on electricity, where is my discount, incentives from them for me because im doing my Part??? Give me $10000 please.
Funny how people are bragging about their part of being green with these EV's and then crank their homes up to a 22 degree temp with gas when they park their EV in the garage.
Why not make it all law in 2040 that all homes must only use electricity. Because the government is not into this for the environment. Its about politics and money, bottom line.
Its guaranteed that everyone will be screaming on day about the unaffordable rates of electricity.

[TylerM4]

The 2 tier system does that automatically. Anyone who has an EV that's regularly charged at home can expect to be well into the 2nd tier and you could look at it like "I pay the 2nd tier rate for the electricity used to charge my EV".

An electrician could rake it in if he/she specialized in EV chargers/installs and marketed themselves that way.

[alanjh595]

The 2 tier system does that automatically. Anyone who has an EV that's regularly charged at home can expect to be well into the 2nd tier and you could look at it like "I pay the 2nd tier rate for the electricity used to charge my EV".

An electrician could rake it in if he/she specialized in EV chargers/installs and marketed themselves that way.

The same will apply when the TOD rates start. Electricians can make extra $$$ by installing timers on those charging units.

[ninetyninepct]

My whole arguement is that Horgan and Trudeau are using my money to buy cars for people who can obviously afford them. I pay but I can't use that car. The way I look at it, since I have paid for a portion of every EV, I own that small portion and I am quite entitled to kick in my door or bash my headlight. I have a gas engine car and will never ever be able to afford an fancy new electric vehicle. Ever. I am punished at the gas pump, I am punished with high taxes and i am punished paying for someone else's car. I will never be able to access those subsidies.

[Bsuds]

I see your point but this is not uncommon in other areas as well.

What about someone who does not have children? They pay School taxes that they will never get any benefit from. So should they not have to pay them?

I worked for over 50 years and never in my life collected unemployment! I want my money back!...Oh wait, I am now collecting a Gov't pension.

The minuscule amount of your money going to those subsidies is not enough for you to complain about.

[Sparki55]

What about someone who does not have children? They pay School taxes that they will never get any benefit from. So should they not have to pay them?

The minuscule amount of your money going to those subsidies is not enough for you to complain about.

You think school tax is the same as a car handout?

Not enough to complain about? Maybe for this one subsidy but if you add all they stupid things we pay for it becomes too much of our money.

You must see the issue which ninteyninepct is speaking of? Taking tax dollars from people who can only afford a $5,000 used car and gasoline and giving the money to wealthy people who can afford a $50,000 car. These people would have purchased an expensive gas car had the tech not been available but now they get to save on car costs and gas costs. Since it's all in the name of climate change its ok tho.

Why don't we also offer rebates on carbon net Zero homes? A solar panel setup with geothermal heating and a zeroscaped yard, $150,000 subsidy on a $650,000 home. We'll tax the polluting homes (condos, old homes, townhomes, ie all the affordable ones) to pay for the well off to afford homes. Lol

[spooker]

You think school tax is the same as a car handout?

Not enough to complain about? Maybe for this one subsidy but if you add all they stupid things we pay for it becomes too much of our money.

You must see the issue which ninteyninepct is speaking of? Taking tax dollars from people who can only afford a $5,000 used car and gasoline and giving the money to wealthy people who can afford a $50,000 car. These people would have purchased an expensive gas car had the tech not been available but now they get to save on car costs and gas costs. Since it's all in the name of climate change its ok tho.

Why don't we also offer rebates on carbon net Zero homes? A solar panel setup with geothermal heating and a zeroscaped yard, $150,000 subsidy on a $650,000 home. We'll tax the polluting homes (condos, old homes, townhomes, ie all the affordable ones) to pay for the well off to afford homes. Lol

Bsuds was pretty much on target with his comparison with ninetyninepct's argument of using his tax dollars to pay for EV subsidies vs someone without kids complaining about their tax dollars funding public schools ...

Someone who can only afford a $5,000 car is not paying the same amount of tax as someone who can afford a $50,000 ... not sure where you are trying to go with this one ... or, if they are paying the same amount of taxes then that brings up a whole raft of things regarding fiscal responsibilities and priorities ...

Sure, there are stupid things our taxes pay for ... but helping to incentivise getting gasoline fueled vehicles off the road in favour of hydro-powered vehicles seems like a good thing ... or is it that we don't care about pollution or unsustainable energy sources?

Actually there are rebates for building energy efficient new homes, or retrofitting an existing home ... https://betterhomesbc.ca/rebate-guide/

Part of the design of new affordable housing is to make it energy efficient so that while you don't have to spend a fortune to buy you also don't have to sell your first-born to pay for the maintenance ...