[RacerX00]

I like how the article just copied the Reddit post for the details.

Or maybe the Reddit thread took it from the article.

I'd like to think electrek has at least some journalistic standards (not to mention intelligence). If they say they parsed it, I trust them I guess.

 

[mrcleop]

Or maybe the Reddit thread took it from the article.

I'd like to think electrek has at least some journalistic standards (not to mention intelligence). If they say they parsed it, I trust them I guess.

Haha yeah, I guess the order that I read things isn’t indicative of actual order of release.

 

[knoepler]

Those of you who are convinced that you've figured out how this is supposed to work are ahead of me.

Let's say that on January 1 a man walks into his local Chevy dealer and asks "How much is that Chevy Bolt?" Does the dealer just knock $7500 off the price, then ask the federal government (the IRS?) to reimburse him? If some of the individuals who get the $7500 rebate/credit turn out not to be qualified for all or part of it, how is that enforced? Does the dealer have to report the transaction to the IRS? Does the IRS wait until it receives your 1040 for that year, match you up against their list of people who received the rebate/credit, determine whether you qualified for the full $7500, then add the difference between $7500 and the amount that you qualified for to your tax bill?

 

[RacerX00]

Those of you who are convinced that you've figured out how this is supposed to work are ahead of me.

Let's say that on January 1 a man walks into his local Chevy dealer and asks "How much is that Chevy Bolt?" Does the dealer just knock $7500 off the price, then ask the federal government (the IRS?) to reimburse him? If some of the individuals who get the $7500 rebate/credit turn out not to be qualified for all or part of it, how is that enforced? Does the dealer have to report the transaction to the IRS? Does the IRS wait until it receives your 1040 for that year, match you up against their list of people who received the rebate/credit, determine whether you qualified for the full $7500, then add the difference between $7500 and the amount that you qualified for to your tax bill?

No if the car is $35,000 you now pay or finance $27,500. It's super simple and not complicated at all.

Edit: Pending confirmation the battery components and materials conform to legislation standards. There's are requirements for these things to come from the US or nations it has free trade agreements with. Most of us are assuming it'll qualify but this is an assumption that can only be confirmed by presumably GM and Buttigieg.

 

[mrcleop]

Those of you who are convinced that you've figured out how this is supposed to work are ahead of me.

Let's say that on January 1 a man walks into his local Chevy dealer and asks "How much is that Chevy Bolt?" Does the dealer just knock $7500 off the price, then ask the federal government (the IRS?) to reimburse him? If some of the individuals who get the $7500 rebate/credit turn out not to be qualified for all or part of it, how is that enforced? Does the dealer have to report the transaction to the IRS? Does the IRS wait until it receives your 1040 for that year, match you up against their list of people who received the rebate/credit, determine whether you qualified for the full $7500, then add the difference between $7500 and the amount that you qualified for to your tax bill?

Also the bill states the dealers have to report to the IRS the VIN and SSN of the buyer.

 

[mrcleop]

Maybe if you know your income is too high, you could take that free loan from the IRS when you buy the car and just pay it back at tax time.

 

[Lencapnc]

If anyone is interested here is the link to the pending Bill - the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, all 725 pages. It's a lot more than just an EV directed Bill. Whether you agree with the Bill or not, it is well written to target the priorities that the sponsors of the Bill envisioned.

Inflation Reduction Act of 2022

 

[knoepler]

No if the car is $35,000 you now pay or finance $27,500. It's super simple and not complicated at all.

Edit: Pending confirmation the battery components and materials conform to legislation standards. There's are requirements for these things to come from the US or nations it has free trade agreements with. Most of us are assuming it'll qualify but this is an assumption that can only be confirmed by presumably GM and Buttigieg.

So if that's all there is to it, is there any reason why someone who doesn't need the car ASAP might choose to execute the deal before January? Putting it another way, if I'm either GM or a dealer, how can I convince someone who doesn't need the car ASAP to buy now instead of waiting?

 

[mrcleop]

So if that's all there is to it, is there any reason why someone who doesn't need the car ASAP might choose to execute the deal before January? Putting it another way, if I'm either GM or a dealer, how can I convince someone who doesn't need the car ASAP to buy now instead of waiting?

I don’t think they need to. There’s enough demand that even if existing orders are canceled, the Bolt is still such a good deal that other buyers will snatch them up. It’s the same concept as those paying $5000 markups. The market is so upside down that for some people, waiting is not worth $7500.

 

[knoepler]

Maybe if you know your income is too high, you could take that free loan from the IRS when you buy the car and just pay it back at tax time.

If it really is a tax credit that's just masquerading as a point of sale rebate, I suspect there will be many more people who will be unpleasantly surprised to discover that they didn't earn enough to be eligible for the full $7500 (because their tax liability for that year was less than that) than people who make too much to be eligible for the credit. I think you're the only person I've seen so far who's said that dealers will have to report the VIN and the buyer's SSN to the IRS.

 

[mrcleop]

If it really is a tax credit that's just masquerading as a point of sale rebate, I suspect there will be many more people who will be unpleasantly surprised to discover that they didn't earn enough to be eligible for the full $7500 (because their tax liability for that year was less than that) than people who make too much to be eligible for the credit. I think you're the only person I've seen so far who's said that dealers will have to report the VIN and the buyer's SSN to the IRS.

It’s on page 368 starting at line 9. Technically they say the taxpayer ID number but I don’t know what else that would be other than SSN.

 

[knoepler]

I don’t think they need to. There’s enough demand that even if existing orders are canceled, the Bolt is still such a good deal that other buyers will snatch them up. It’s the same concept as those paying $5000 markups. The market is so upside down that for some people, waiting is not worth $7500.

I don't know... Unlike Tesla, GM's target market for the Bolt doesn't seem to include a lot of people who can afford to leave $7500 on the table. I can imagine some dealers taking advantage of people who've been living in a cave and haven't heard that if they wait until January they'll save $7500, but I think that would take more nerve than even most car dealers have.

 

[knoepler]

It’s on page 368 starting at line 9. Technically they say the taxpayer ID number but I don’t know what else that would be other than SSN.

If the car is purchased by a business it would be the company's "employer identification number (EIN)" which is the business equivalent of a social security number.

 

[MichBolt]

The text of the bill also includes language about a program to provide advance payments to dealerships:

The Secretary shall establish a program to make advance payments to any eligible entity in an amount equal to the cumulative amount of the credits allowed under subsection (a) with respect to any vehicles sold by such entity for which an election described in paragraph (1) has been made.

It really does sound like the intent is to make this a point of sale price reduction.

 

[mrcleop]

I don't know... Unlike Tesla, GM's target market for the Bolt doesn't seem to include a lot of people who can afford to leave $7500 on the table. I can imagine some dealers taking advantage of people who've been living in a cave and haven't heard that if they wait until January they'll save $7500, but I think that would take more nerve than even most car dealers have.

When there’s an actual bill signed, and we know more about how much the Bolt qualifies for due to its batteries and minerals, then I’m going to have a conversation with my dealer. I don’t think it’s worth engaging now. But I have a nonrefundable deposit down, so I don’t know if they’ll let me transfer that to a new order. I don’t know how many others are in the same boat with nonrefundable deposits. The dealer definitely can tie my hands and force me.

 

[RacerX00]

So if that's all there is to it, is there any reason why someone who doesn't need the car ASAP might choose to execute the deal before January? Putting it another way, if I'm either GM or a dealer, how can I convince someone who doesn't need the car ASAP to buy now instead of waiting?

Nothing is guaranteed.

1. The bill hasn't passed
2. No one can tell you if the Bolt will qualify based on battery requirements
3. No one can tell you that GM won't raise the price of the Bolt
4. Nothing is stopping dealerships from marking up above MSRP and negating the incentive

I'd personally bet people get better deals in January but I don't know!

 

[Charli]

Anybody have thoughts on this line item?

“Transition provision for EVs with written sales orders dated in 2022 prior to the date of President signing the bill but delivered in 2023 allows purchaser to claim the “old” credit in 2023. (Page 386, line 20).”

So you have to have a written sales order before the president signs the bill and the vehicle has to be delivered in 2023?
You loose any chance of the old credit if your vehicle is purchased after the president signs the bill and is delivered in 2022
This has the potential to (insert word of choice) a lot of people, no?

 

[RacerX00]

Anybody have thoughts on this line item?

“Transition provision for EVs with written sales orders dated in 2022 prior to the date of President signing the bill but delivered in 2023 allows purchaser to claim the “old” credit in 2023. (Page 386, line 20).”

So you have to have a written sales order before the president signs the bill and the vehicle has to be delivered in 2023?
You loose any chance of the old credit if your vehicle is purchased after the president signs the bill and is delivered in 2022
This has the potential to a lot of people, no?

From my understanding you can get the old credit, provided the OEM still qualifies, on any car in 2022 up until 1/1/23 and you can still get the same old credit if your contract is written on 12/31/22 and you take delivery in say, March.

 

[knoepler]

The text of the bill also includes language about a program to provide advance payments to dealerships:


It really does sound like the intent is to make this a point of sale price reduction.

I like "reduction" - it gets around the whole "is it a rebate or a tax credit" question.
By doing it at the point of sale the government is telling the seller that each time he sells a qualified EV he'll get $7500 that he won't get if he sells an unqualified vehicle - not a bad plan if you're the government and you want to see qualified EVs replacing ICE vehicles.
So why don't they just make it an ordinary rebate? I think it may be because the government is hoping to recover some of that $7500 from buyers who either make too much to be eligible or don't make enough to have a tax liability of at least $7500. That, in turn, might have something to do with the fact that in order to pass the legislation with a simple majority the Democrats will have to argue that when all is said and done, the net cost of the legislation to the government will be zero. Regardless, I'd expect that there will be quite a few buyers who will be made aware of the fact that the dealer is knocking $7500 off the price but not that they may have to give some or all of that back to the IRS when they file their taxes.

 

[MichBolt]

I like "reduction" - it gets around the whole "is it a rebate or a tax credit" question.
By doing it at the point of sale the government is telling the seller that each time he sells a qualified EV he'll get $7500 that he won't get if he sells an unqualified vehicle - not a bad plan if you're the government and you want to see qualified EVs replacing ICE vehicles.
So why don't they just make it an ordinary rebate? I think it may be because the government is hoping to recover some of that $7500 from buyers who either make too much to be eligible or don't make enough to have a tax liability of at least $7500. That, in turn, might have something to do with the fact that in order to pass the legislation with a simple majority the Democrats will have to argue that when all is said and done, the net cost of the legislation to the government will be zero. Regardless, I'd expect that there will be quite a few buyers who will be made aware of the fact that the dealer is knocking $7500 off the price but not that they may have to give some or all of that back to the IRS when they file their taxes.

But if the credit is transferred to the dealer (which is the election referred to in the bill), then the customer has nothing to report on their own return...?