NZ Government Incentives Coming Soon For Buyers of Electric Vehicles!

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › NZ Government Incentives Coming Soon For Buyers of Electric Vehicles!

1 | ... | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | ... | 60

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2254508 8-Jun-2019 19:27

Obraik:

I don't think we need to care that people can or can't use an EV. If its emitting emissions then it needs to pay its way

We could then tax everything an emissions tax. Buy an ICE car, pay a tax. We can add a tax to the power bill when coal is used. We can tax those that dont have solar as in summer and in winter we burn coal. But you just want 10k for those that can already afford to buy an EV? No Government will do that for obvious reasons. What happens in winter when we are burning coal, so the spot price rises, we are then running an EV on coal. Same in summer when the lakes are low. That happens already. It will happen more when we are charging EVs.

It just astounds me that all of the causes of emissions that we have, transport and non transport, and you aim at cars that drive to work and park up all day. While many many many other vehicles are in urban use. Thats just cars.

But we can agree that we can tax anything that causes emissions, and that will go beyond cars. Lots of extra taxes. I guess that will be ok with the public they don't mind taxes. We should actually place a tax on a new EV as that caused emissions to be used to make it. The person should keep their existing car and stop more emissions. We can add a tax on meat and dairy as they cause emissions. Now, you may feel I'm being facetious but its the same basis as your idea. Tax emissions so as to stop the function being used. Except if we did that, instead of paying you and me 10k for our new car, the tax would be used to fund the extra hydro we need, and electric trains, buses etc etc. Not to fund your 12km, 20 minute morning drive. That is my point.

Obraik

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#2254512 8-Jun-2019 19:38

tdgeek:

Obraik:

I don't think we need to care that people can or can't use an EV. If its emitting emissions then it needs to pay its way

We could then tax everything an emissions tax. Buy an ICE car, pay a tax. We can add a tax to the power bill when coal is used. We can tax those that dont have solar as in summer and in winter we burn coal. But you just want 10k for those that can already afford to buy an EV? No Government will do that for obvious reasons. What happens in winter when we are burning coal, so the spot price rises, we are then running an EV on coal. Same in summer when the lakes are low. That happens already. It will happen more when we are charging EVs.

It just astounds me that all of the causes of emissions that we have, transport and non transport, and you aim at cars that drive to work and park up all day. While many many many other vehicles are in urban use. Thats just cars.

But we can agree that we can tax anything that causes emissions, and that will go beyond cars. Lots of extra taxes. I guess that will be ok with the public they don't mind taxes. We should actually place a tax on a new EV as that caused emissions to be used to make it. The person should keep their existing car and stop more emissions. We can add a tax on meat and dairy as they cause emissions. Now, you may feel I'm being facetious but its the same basis as your idea. Tax emissions so as to stop the function being used. Except if we did that, instead of paying you and me 10k for our new car, the tax would be used to fund the extra hydro we need, and electric trains, buses etc etc. Not to fund your 12km, 20 minute morning drive. That is my point.

Our coal usage in power generation is minimal. It's winter now, at 7:30pm (so the peak period) and we're currently using 0 coal with 86% of the generation coming from renewables. Even if all our power was generated by coal, running an EV still has lower emissions than using an ICE vehicle.

It's not about getting a deal on a car, it's about getting people into cars that cut down our emissions. Once again, you've ignored the evidence that these commuter vehicles are a big contributor to carbon emissions. You've also ignored my many statements that none of these subsidies should ignore commercial usage of vehicles - the goal is to get ALL fossil fuel vehicles off the roads. We could get into the whole topic of bringing down emissions in all industries but this thread is a topic about vehicles and talking about those other factors is off topic to this discussion.

Looking to buy a Tesla? Use my referral link and we both get credits

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2254517 8-Jun-2019 19:56

Obraik:

Our coal usage in power generation is minimal. It's winter now, at 7:30pm (so the peak period) and we're currently using 0 coal with 86% of the generation coming from renewables. Even if all our power was generated by coal, running an EV still has lower emissions than using an ICE vehicle.

It's not about getting a deal on a car, it's about getting people into cars that cut down our emissions. Once again, you've ignored the evidence that these commuter vehicles are a big contributor to carbon emissions. You've also ignored my many statements that none of these subsidies should ignore commercial usage of vehicles - the goal is to get ALL fossil fuel vehicles off the roads. We could get into the whole topic of bringing down emissions in all industries but this thread is a topic about vehicles and talking about those other factors is off topic to this discussion.

If you want to talk about coal usage, get Flick Electric you will learn then when it's used. If commuter vehicles are a big contributor, you are ignoring the traffic that goes on all day every day after you have arrived at work. Or is all that traffic less significant than your daily driver that parks up all day? Now, if you wish to give your 10k subsidy to replace all ICE vehicles, thats a lot of money. It was calculated on another thread, or maybe this one, it is billions and billions. Thats a lot we need to raise for each new ICE being imported, as you wish to get that cash from just new cars. Id suggest you would not raise enough.

When would you introduce your plan? Now? In 6 months?

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 429
Inactive user

#2254522 8-Jun-2019 20:15

tdgeek:

Now, if you wish to give your 10k subsidy to replace all ICE vehicles, thats a lot of money. It was calculated on another thread, or maybe this one, it is billions and billions. Thats a lot we need to raise for each new ICE being imported, as you wish to get that cash from just new cars. Id suggest you would not raise enough.

The idea with EV incentives is to get the ball rolling away from petrol vehicles and towards EVs. You don't need to budget for "billions and billions" because once EVs are a better deal to buy than petrol vehicles (as in Norway), then you gradually ease back on the incentives as they are no longer needed.

But in NZ, we simply haven't yet got the EV ball rolling, and incentives would do that, as evidenced in lots of overseas countries.

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 429
Inactive user

#2254524 8-Jun-2019 20:22

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/shows/2019/06/climate-change-what-new-zealanders-have-to-change-and-when.html

From the above:

"By 2030, the Productivity Commission says 80 percent of NZ vehicle imports need to be electric and by 2050, nearly every vehicle will need to be electric. As at March 2019, electric vehicles (EVs) made up just 0.3 percent of our fleet.

"We swap out our cars on average about every 15 years so if you were to go out and buy a car today, then the next car you buy 15 years from now will have to be an electric," says James Shaw.

The Climate Change Minister says the Government's long-promised electric cars policy is still being developed, with concern for low-income families behind the hold-up."

It's interesting that "concern for low-income families" is the hold-up for the Government's electric cars policy!

shk292

2916 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2040

Lifetime subscriber

#2254538 8-Jun-2019 20:35

Surely the easy way is just to put a (more) tax on fuel. Drive an ICE = pay carbon tax on petrol/diesel.

This will mean the subsidy goes to where it is effective, ie it won't be economical to buy an EV if your main use of it is a 23km return commute. If you have a 100km commute however, it will start to make sense.

We need to make sure we get cost effective use of tax payers' dollars. Like TDgeek, I'm far from convinced that subsidising wealthy people to buy a new EV that will spend 90% of its time parked is value for money.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2254557 8-Jun-2019 20:43

frednz:

tdgeek:

Now, if you wish to give your 10k subsidy to replace all ICE vehicles, thats a lot of money. It was calculated on another thread, or maybe this one, it is billions and billions. Thats a lot we need to raise for each new ICE being imported, as you wish to get that cash from just new cars. Id suggest you would not raise enough.

The idea with EV incentives is to get the ball rolling away from petrol vehicles and towards EVs. You don't need to budget for "billions and billions" because once EVs are a better deal to buy than petrol vehicles (as in Norway), then you gradually ease back on the incentives as they are no longer needed.

But in NZ, we simply haven't yet got the EV ball rolling, and incentives would do that, as evidenced in lots of overseas countries.

Norway is wealthy, due to oil. You cannot compare that to NZ. We cannot afford 10k per new car, simple as that. And as many said early in this thread, you are just giving money to buyers that are buying anyway. There are waiting lists, so that shows we need no incentives. There are high petrol prices that an incentive.

Now, if we have a situation where there are EV's on the way and they can't sell them, lets think again. But we both know that won't be the case. Right now there are few cars to buy. So, those who want to buy a $80k Kona instead of the ICE $40k Kona, they will do that, no issue there. Over time, and IF we supported businesses, then in 3 years we will have the business cars released onto the consumer market. That's what will help, not giving you or me a free 10k. An incentive is to get people buying them, well, they are here. You need to be on a waiting list.

The ball is rolling here, but if you feel thats its not, the cars aren't there to buy. Thats why we have wait lists, and incentives will not change anything if the demand is already here.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2254566 8-Jun-2019 20:52

frednz:

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/shows/2019/06/climate-change-what-new-zealanders-have-to-change-and-when.html

From the above:

"By 2030, the Productivity Commission says 80 percent of NZ vehicle imports need to be electric and by 2050, nearly every vehicle will need to be electric. As at March 2019, electric vehicles (EVs) made up just 0.3 percent of our fleet.

"We swap out our cars on average about every 15 years so if you were to go out and buy a car today, then the next car you buy 15 years from now will have to be an electric," says James Shaw.

The Climate Change Minister says the Government's long-promised electric cars policy is still being developed, with concern for low-income families behind the hold-up."

It's interesting that "concern for low-income families" is the hold-up for the Government's electric cars policy!

I agree with most of that. They also feel that its about businesses. NZ already has a list of EV friendly policies in place. If they are concerned over low income families, I would take that as extra fuel taxes for EV infrastructure, GST or FBT benefits for businesses perhaps.

I also feel that PHEV's need to be excluded as they are ICE

Obraik

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#2254567 8-Jun-2019 20:55

shk292:

Surely the easy way is just to put a (more) tax on fuel. Drive an ICE = pay carbon tax on petrol/diesel.

This will mean the subsidy goes to where it is effective, ie it won't be economical to buy an EV if your main use of it is a 23km return commute. If you have a 100km commute however, it will start to make sense.

We need to make sure we get cost effective use of tax payers' dollars. Like TDgeek, I'm far from convinced that subsidising wealthy people to buy a new EV that will spend 90% of its time parked is value for money.

By putting the tax on petrol you're impacting those that are low income. I think taxing new and new to NZ vehicles is the fairest way to go about it.

Looking to buy a Tesla? Use my referral link and we both get credits

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2254568 8-Jun-2019 20:56

shk292:

Surely the easy way is just to put a (more) tax on fuel. Drive an ICE = pay carbon tax on petrol/diesel.

This will mean the subsidy goes to where it is effective, ie it won't be economical to buy an EV if your main use of it is a 23km return commute. If you have a 100km commute however, it will start to make sense.

We need to make sure we get cost effective use of tax payers' dollars. Like TDgeek, I'm far from convinced that subsidising wealthy people to buy a new EV that will spend 90% of its time parked is value for money.

And you can't consider anything unless there are EV's for purchase. Its tough to be taxed on every litre when there is a cheque for the EV in the glovebox, but I cant find any, none in stock, waiting lists. But you can help businesses and thats without foregoing GST and FBT, you can give them a huge cashflow benefit. Then in 3 years, lots of second hand, well maintained EV's up for sale. At second hand prices, not 73k

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2254608 8-Jun-2019 21:00

Obraik:

By putting the tax on petrol you're impacting those that are low income. I think taxing new and new to NZ vehicles is the fairest way to go about it.

Not enough new cars to do that. And as more EV's become available, so we can finally get the one on the waitlist, there will be less ICE sold, so you have an equation where you are bringing in more EV's, and thus requiring more ICE's to pay for the subsidy, but its now less ICE coming in to pay for your subsidy. That article looked at $1000 penalty and $10,000 subsidy, so you need 10 ICE for one EV and for ICE sales to grow, in order to cover the growing EV sales. But as EV grows, ICE reduces.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

Obraik

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#2254612 8-Jun-2019 21:07

tdgeek:

Obraik:

By putting the tax on petrol you're impacting those that are low income. I think taxing new and new to NZ vehicles is the fairest way to go about it.

Not enough new cars to do that. And as more EV's become available, so we can finally get the one on the waitlist, there will be less ICE sold, so you have an equation where you are bringing in more EV's, and thus requiring more ICE's to pay for the subsidy, but its now less ICE coming in to pay for your subsidy. That article looked at $1000 penalty and $10,000 subsidy, so you need 10 ICE for one EV and for ICE sales to grow, in order to cover the growing EV sales. But as EV grows, ICE reduces.

Which article, the one about Sweden? It's a yearly fee that is paid on new ICE vehicles in Sweden.

The idea is that the subsidy wouldn't be forever and would eventually taper off. The idea of subsidies now is to subsidise the R&D cost premium that EVs currently have. As the years go on these premiums will start to reduce and EVs will naturally become the same if not cheaper than an ICE vehicle and the subsidy will no longer be required.

Looking to buy a Tesla? Use my referral link and we both get credits

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 429
Inactive user

#2254613 8-Jun-2019 21:09

tdgeek:

The ball is rolling here, but if you feel thats its not, the cars aren't there to buy. Thats why we have wait lists, and incentives will not change anything if the demand is already here.

The "wait lists" aren't very long, simply because EVs are too expensive even for so-called "wealthy" people!

Anyway, if I really wanted a new EV I could have one by the end of this week! We need incentives urgently, and if this means that wait lists do in fact get very long, well that doesn't matter provided that the ball starts rolling away from petrol vehicles and in the direction of EVs.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2254615 8-Jun-2019 21:17

Obraik:

tdgeek:

Obraik:

By putting the tax on petrol you're impacting those that are low income. I think taxing new and new to NZ vehicles is the fairest way to go about it.

Not enough new cars to do that. And as more EV's become available, so we can finally get the one on the waitlist, there will be less ICE sold, so you have an equation where you are bringing in more EV's, and thus requiring more ICE's to pay for the subsidy, but its now less ICE coming in to pay for your subsidy. That article looked at $1000 penalty and $10,000 subsidy, so you need 10 ICE for one EV and for ICE sales to grow, in order to cover the growing EV sales. But as EV grows, ICE reduces.

Which article, the one about Sweden? It's a yearly fee that is paid on new ICE vehicles in Sweden.

The idea is that the subsidy wouldn't be forever and would eventually taper off. The idea of subsidies now is to subsidise the R&D cost premium that EVs currently have. As the years go on these premiums will start to reduce and EVs will naturally become the same if not cheaper than an ICE vehicle and the subsidy will no longer be required.

The article about subsidies based on 10 ICE feeding one EV. As per what I just stated, if EV sales grow then ICE needs to grow and the $1000 per ICE to support one EV every 10 ICE sales will soon fail. Off course as EV grows ICE will decline so the equation fails.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2254619 8-Jun-2019 21:27

frednz:

tdgeek:

The ball is rolling here, but if you feel thats its not, the cars aren't there to buy. Thats why we have wait lists, and incentives will not change anything if the demand is already here.

The "wait lists" aren't very long, simply because EVs are too expensive even for so-called "wealthy" people!

Anyway, if I really wanted a new EV I could have one by the end of this week! We need incentives urgently, and if this means that wait lists do in fact get very long, well that doesn't matter provided that the ball starts rolling!

So can I, an incentive wont magically make it so I can afford one. When the supply of new EV;s does not have demand, lets talk then. I'd wager that doesnt happen. There are plenty of early adopters to pick these up, and in 3 years if my business plan is taken up, there are sales of EV's for the those the next price tier down.And this businesses are replacing with new EV;s which is another 3 years is another release to consumers. Win Win. No subsidy needed.If availability of new EV;s is matched by buyers, this is not s subsidy situation. Plus the NZ taxpayer cannot contribute, so that should work out ok. If we taxed new ICE's those numbers will drop over time, and wont support the growing number of EV. But IMHO, the numbers of EV will grow as the incentive is fuel savings.

If a Tesla is $73k and a Kona is 80k, do you really feel that a 10k subsidy will be a big deal? I cant see it making any difference. I want it, so I buy it as 80k. Or, the extra 40k I have to pay for a Kona isn't worth it over the ICE, its the same at 80k less 10k

1 | ... | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | ... | 60