[Patlenahan]

It appears the in the Build Back Better bill, customers of Rivian can only get a full tax credit if the assembly workers are unionized. This could mean over $4000 in additioinal price reduction of the vehicles. Does Rivian qualify as a Union shop?

 

[RITVT]

NO

 

[JEV]

As it stands now, the only available EV that qualifies is the Chevy Bolt EUV. The Ford Mustang EV is made in Mexico. Ford F150 Lightning would qualify when it is available. The government should not be picking winners & losers.

The starting pay and benefits for an assembly line worker at Rivian are comparable to Ford & GM, from what I can tell in online searches. And they don't have to pay union dues. There's not much incentive to organize a union at this point.

The Senate version of this bill doesn't include the union labor requirement. There are a number of Democrat Senators from states with with non-union auto manufacturers, including Illinois and W Virginia, that could influence the final bill. I hope they eliminate the union requirement and leave it at $4000 for US made.

 

[Mr. Gee]

I hope they eliminate the union requirement and leave it at $4000 for US made.

The government shouldn't be picking winners & losers but should leave in the US made provision?

 

[RayzorBEV]

I'm out either way. The "single with adjusted income of over $250k" disqualify me for any and all tax benefits. Purchasing the R1T and R1S is now in doubt...

 

[JEV]

The government shouldn't be picking winners & losers but should leave in the US made provision?

If Nissan, Suburu, Honda, Toyota, BMW, etc.. build EV's here, then they should get the tax credit. I just don't want to see imports from other countries taking advantage of our tax money.

 

[Chris S]

I'm fine w/ having extra rebates for made in US, but having even a dime contingent on being built by union workers is BS. Govt. has no business favoring union plants over non-union ones.

 

[Yossarian]

The issue for me with the EV tax credit in the Build Back Better bill is the MSRP cap of $80,000, not whether it's $12,500 or subject to a $250k income level test.

I'm still on the fence about R1T vs R1S, but either way need the Max battery pack. The MSRP for the R1T with that option is roughly $83k and while the Max is not yet an option for the R1S, it will surely be well over that. The way the bill is written, it looks like the $80k restriction is an absolute limit, above which there is no credit. If that;s the case, no Rivian with the Max option will qualify.

While I'd really like move away from fossil fuel powered vehicles, I face some financial constraints in going to a BEV that become somewhat less restrictive with a tax credit. The $90,000 plus R1S Max (car plus tax) effectively becomes a $83,000 vehicle with a $7,500 tax credit. That's still quite a financial stretch for me, but with the other advantages of a BEV, probably tips the scales to the Rivian.

The situation is quite a bit different when the out-of-pocket costs are over $90k. I can get a very capable ICE vehicle (we are a one-car family and use our vehicle for everything from shopping trips to hauling our small camper on vacation excursions) for 75% of that value. While that ICE vehicle may not be the same earth-friendly alternative that an R1S is, it's much more comfortable financially.

There may be another EV alternative that is in the ICE vehicle range, the Tesla Cyber Truck. Though I don't really want a pickup, and the the CT is not presently eligible for the tax credit (that may change as the BBB evolves however) the MSRP for the Tri-motor, which will have a range that substantially exceeds that of the R1T Max, is under $70,000. As mentioned, I don't really want a pickup and frankly, I hate its looks, the CT may be the only affordable BEV alternative in my case should the Rivian not qualify for a substantial tax incentive.

 

[tyemoe]

Problems with build back better bill for people wanting to buy Rivian:
1) household adjusted gross income limit: $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for joint filers
2) MSRP of truck/SUV cannot exceed $80K
3) Gives more credit to vehicles that are " made by a unionized worker" - which rivian isn't.

All of these issues can cause a Rivian buyer not to get any/all of the tax credit. Lobby your senator about it.

 

[The Rivi Era]

All of these issues can cause a Rivian buyer not to get any/all of the tax credit. Lobby your senator about it.

Done!

 

[John O]

I'm out either way. The "single with adjusted income of over $250k" disqualify me for any and all tax benefits. Purchasing the R1T and R1S is now in doubt...

Chances are you didn’t get any government subsidy when you bought your last vehicle, I didn’t, I drive a Toyota Tundra and love it. Government subsidy shouldn’t sway you from buying a bad ass EV like a Rivian

 

[John O]

The issue for me with the EV tax credit in the Build Back Better bill is the MSRP cap of $80,000, not whether it's $12,500 or subject to a $250k income level test.

I'm still on the fence about R1T vs R1S, but either way need the Max battery pack. The MSRP for the R1T with that option is roughly $83k and while the Max is not yet an option for the R1S, it will surely be well over that. The way the bill is written, it looks like the $80k restriction is an absolute limit, above which there is no credit. If that;s the case, no Rivian with the Max option will qualify.

While I'd really like move away from fossil fuel powered vehicles, I face some financial constraints in going to a BEV that become somewhat less restrictive with a tax credit. The $90,000 plus R1S Max (car plus tax) effectively becomes a $83,000 vehicle with a $7,500 tax credit. That's still quite a financial stretch for me, but with the other advantages of a BEV, probably tips the scales to the Rivian.

The situation is quite a bit different when the out-of-pocket costs are over $90k. I can get a very capable ICE vehicle (we are a one-car family and use our vehicle for everything from shopping trips to hauling our small camper on vacation excursions) for 75% of that value. While that ICE vehicle may not be the same earth-friendly alternative that an R1S is, it's much more comfortable financially.

There may be another EV alternative that is in the ICE vehicle range, the Tesla Cyber Truck. Though I don't really want a pickup, and the the CT is not presently eligible for the tax credit (that may change as the BBB evolves however) the MSRP for the Tri-motor, which will have a range that substantially exceeds that of the R1T Max, is under $70,000. As mentioned, I don't really want a pickup and frankly, I hate its looks, the CT may be the only affordable BEV alternative in my case should the Rivian not qualify for a substantial tax incentive.

I know the government’s intention in putting the $80,000 cap on price tag and $250,000 AGI cap is so as to not throw more tax benefits to high income earners who can afford the vehicle without the tax credit. I get the logic but it’s still bullshit. Every EV sale benefits the economy and everyone benefits from a growing economy so everyone who makes an EV purchase should receive the same tax credit, no sales price cap and no AGI cap since you don’t get any more tax credit by spending more. Spending more actually helps the economy more.

 

[O. horridus]

Yeah, we all want free money from the government. But would your rather have a clean planet or not? If you're considering buying an EV, do it for the right reasons, not just because it's a good deal for you.

 

[tyemoe]

Yeah, we all want free money from the government. But would your rather have a clean planet or not? If you're considering buying an EV, do it for the right reasons, not just because it's a good deal for you.

Or maybe some of us are considering our budget and $12500 goes a long ways on purchasing a car.

 

[Tanquen]

Or maybe some of us are considering our budget and $12500 goes a long ways on purchasing a car.

But not everybody can have everything all the time. The incentive isn't meant to and or cannot work for everyone. It's intended to incentivize people that might not be able to afford an EV to get an EV and as many of them as possible for the money giving out.

If you're making over 250 grand a year and you still can't afford it because of XYZ, a vacation home, a boat, and McMansion, one or two divorces, buying a new car every few years, a drug or gambling habit, too many kids in too many colleges, etc. That's your deal.

The current Rivian trucks are not just trucks their luxury vehicles that also happen to be EVs and are pretty pricey. If 12 grand is a deal breaker for you, maybe you shouldn't be buying an $80,000 luxury vehicle?

 

[FastEddieB]

Chances are you didn’t get any government subsidy when you bought your last vehicle…

In fact, we got the full $7,500 tax credit on our 2018 Honda Clarity PHEV. In fact, we purchased it when we did because 2018 was a unique year for us in that we had enough tax liability to take full advantage of the credit - in retirement we normally don’t. Effectively took $7,500 off the Clarity’s $32,500 price, dropping it well into the range of ICE sedans, similarly equipped.

As an aside, it’s been a great car, serving as an EV around town and a 42 mpg hybrid on trips.

For us, it’s a race between the R1T and the CyberTruck, and we have deposits on both. We’re assuming either is at least 2 years away, giving plenty of time for things to sort out, tax benefits among them. Good news is at our age, the years do tend to fly by!

 

[John O]

But not everybody can have everything all the time. The incentive isn't meant to and or cannot work for everyone. It's intended to incentivize people that might not be able to afford an EV to get an EV and as many of them as possible for the money giving out.

If you're making over 250 grand a year and you still can't afford it because of XYZ, a vacation home, a boat, and McMansion, one or two divorces, buying a new car every few years, a drug or gambling habit, too many kids in too many colleges, etc. That's your deal.

The current Rivian trucks are not just trucks their luxury vehicles that also happen to be EVs and are pretty pricey. If 12 grand is a deal breaker for you, maybe you shouldn't be buying an $80,000 luxury vehicle?

Well said brother.

 

[John O]

In fact, we got the full $7,500 tax credit on our 2018 Honda Clarity PHEV. In fact, we purchased it when we did because 2018 was a unique year for us in that we had enough tax liability to take full advantage of the credit - in retirement we normally don’t. Effectively took $7,500 off the Clarity’s $32,500 price, dropping it well into the range of ICE sedans, similarly equipped.

As an aside, it’s been a great car, serving as an EV around town and a 42 mpg hybrid on trips.

For us, it’s a race between the R1T and the CyberTruck, and we have deposits on both. We’re assuming either is at least 2 years away, giving plenty of time for things to sort out, tax benefits among them. Good news is at our age, the years do tend to fly by!

Good for you that you got this credit to offset your tax liability. Don’t miss my point though, what I’m saying is, if the Rivian vehicle is worth paying for, pay for it, if it’s too expensive without the tax credit buy something more affordable. And there are other ways to get tax credits besides buying an EV if tax credits are that important to you. Just talk to a competent CPA.

 

[The Rivi Era]

But not everybody can have everything all the time. The incentive isn't meant to and or cannot work for everyone. It's intended to incentivize people that might not be able to afford an EV to get an EV and as many of them as possible for the money giving out.

I would argue that the EV credit is intended to change consumer behavior and get as many people transitioned off of gas guzzling ICE vehicles and into EVs as soon as possible, rather than it being intended to get people into cars that they otherwise couldn't afford. Sure, it would be great if everyone who could afford an EV without a tax credit just went ahead and did it without external incentives. But we all know that's not how the world works -- so a family deciding between an R1S and, say, a V8 Chevy Tahoe who would prefer the R1S for environmental reasons may still go for the Tahoe without the tax credit, even if they CAN afford an $80K vehicle; consumers are pricing against their other options in the marketplace, not just EVs.

 

[Tanquen]

I would argue that the EV credit is intended to change consumer behavior and get as many people transitioned off of gas guzzling ICE vehicles and into EVs as soon as possible, rather than it being intended to get people into cars that they otherwise couldn't afford. Sure, it would be great if everyone who could afford an EV without a tax credit just went ahead and did it without external incentives. But we all know that's not how the world works -- so a family deciding between an R1S and, say, a V8 Chevy Tahoe who would prefer the R1S for environmental reasons may still go for the Tahoe without the tax credit, even if they CAN afford an $80K vehicle; consumers are pricing against their other options in the marketplace, not just EVs.

I don't think you're really arguing anything too different. I did say it's mostly for folks that may not be able to afford an EV to get an EV and to get as many of those as possible for the money given out.

The incentive got passed for numerous reasons. I like others, think it's a good idea to get as many EVs on the road as possible. Some just want the money to help sell their cars, some don't think there should be incentives even though there's tons of incentives that aren't called incentives, that ICE/Oil has gotten over the last many decades and.

I don't think giving money to millionaires to buy $100,000 vehicles is going to make that big of a dent in the EVs in the market. I'm sure there'll be a handful that can totally afford it, but they'll be upset that they can't get the free 12 grand and get the gas guzzler luxury vehicle instead but I don't think that's really who the incentive is for.

I think it would be better if there was $40,000 cap on the vehicle and folks that make less than $100,000 a year. For better or worse, companies like Tesla and others have said that cannot be done because they don't have the capital to build the facilities and manufacturing plants to build cars at a scale that could be sold for $20,000 to $30,000 after incentives. They want the incentives but want to start slow with low volume $100,000 cars.

Luckily there was some political will and there was a company like Tesla to really get things rolling but it could have been even better if there was more political will to spend more money on it and see the true benefits to be had. Tax incentives or whatever else is needed could be spent on building one or two big plants that just build electric motors. There's always going to be a need for them. We should have research facilities working on how to build cheaper, lighter, more efficient electric motors and we should have a few factories in states that want to invest in something like that. The same with battery packs.

Eventually they'll be enough manufacturing plants, making motors and battery packs or hydrogen cells or whatever else to power them. It's just a question of when and where the manufacturing plants will be. Unfortunately right now it looks like we'll be buying $20,000 and $30,000 electric vehicles from China.