EV (electric vehicle) News and Discussion

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › EV (electric vehicle) News and Discussion

1 | ... | 716 | 717 | 718 | 719 | 720 | 721 | 722 | 723 | 724 | 725 | 726 | ... | 771

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#3368863 29-Apr-2025 17:36

johno1234:

The EV subsidy never sat right with me because it effectively had mid to low income tax payers subsidising people wealthy enough to afford a Tesla.
There are now affordable EVs but people still aren’t buying many despite the price not being such an issue anymore. However adjusting people’s attitude to EV operation and charging remains an issue. Ask people any they didn’t buy an EV and you’ll hear about depreciation, range and charging. Making charging more accessible, faster, easier and cheaper will help.

This tells me you had no idea how the EV rebate worked.

The Rebate was funded by equally well-off people buying new high emission vehicles, such as your high-spec Rangers, Range Rovers or other large European SUVs and utes. While the initial burst of funds to supply the rebate was borrowed from a tax fund, the intent was that it would be kept around long enough that the fees paid by those buying new high emission vehicles would pay off that amount borrowed.

Ironically, because National killed it, it did end up becoming tax payer funded because it never existed long enough to repay itself.

Also, to say that it "only subsidised people wealthy enough to buy an EV" ignores the used car market, which doesn't just magically appear out of thin air. Encouraging those that can afford to buy a new car to buy an EV means that there are plentiful used EVs available for those market in the decades to follow.

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

gzt

18685 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7826

Lifetime subscriber

#3368869 29-Apr-2025 18:23

The EV subsidy never sat right with me because it effectively had mid to low income tax payers subsidising people wealthy enough to afford a Tesla.

That is easy to agree with. Removing it completely for that reason alone would have been simplistic and perhaps a bit silly. Maybe it was.

For example the government could have reduced the price ceiling to exclude the higher end

fastbike

448 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 321

#3368871 29-Apr-2025 18:24

Obraik:

This tells me you had no idea how the EV rebate worked.

Also, to say that it "only subsidised people wealthy enough to buy an EV" ignores the used car market, which doesn't just magically appear out of thin air. Encouraging those that can afford to buy a new car to buy an EV means that there are plentiful used EVs available for those market in the decades to follow.

Exactly. I managed to purchase a late model NZ new second hand EV at a cost that was substantially lower than the same aged vehicle 2 years earlier, because the "feebate" had incentivised people to buy an EV.

Otautahi Christchurch

dafman

4054 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2652

Trusted

#3368920 29-Apr-2025 18:45

Obraik:

johno1234:

The EV subsidy never sat right with me because it effectively had mid to low income tax payers subsidising people wealthy enough to afford a Tesla.
There are now affordable EVs but people still aren’t buying many despite the price not being such an issue anymore. However adjusting people’s attitude to EV operation and charging remains an issue. Ask people any they didn’t buy an EV and you’ll hear about depreciation, range and charging. Making charging more accessible, faster, easier and cheaper will help.

This tells me you had no idea how the EV rebate worked.

The Rebate was funded by equally well-off people buying new high emission vehicles, such as your high-spec Rangers, Range Rovers or other large European SUVs and utes. While the initial burst of funds to supply the rebate was borrowed from a tax fund, the intent was that it would be kept around long enough that the fees paid by those buying new high emission vehicles would pay off that amount borrowed.

Ironically, because National killed it, it did end up becoming tax payer funded because it never existed long enough to repay itself.

Also, to say that it "only subsidised people wealthy enough to buy an EV" ignores the used car market, which doesn't just magically appear out of thin air. Encouraging those that can afford to buy a new car to buy an EV means that there are plentiful used EVs available for those market in the decades to follow.

Any way you cut it, it was a subsidy for people wealthy enough to fund a $70k+ car purchase. In a world of significant wealth inequality, there are more worthy recipients for the limited pool of government subsidies IMHO.

And the fact that it wasn’t tax neutral meant it was a tax payer-funded hand out. Saying it didn’t last long enough to pay for itself is disingenuous. The question of whether it would have paid for itself is dependent on the ratio of high emission vehicles purchased relative to eligible EVs purchased and what that future ratio would have been is an unknown. What we do know is that the ratio up until the time of cancellation was insufficient to fund the subsidy and it could have remained so into perpetuity.

HarmLessSolutions

1230 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 812

Subscriber

#3368921 29-Apr-2025 18:50

dafman:

Any way you cut it, it was a subsidy for people wealthy enough to fund a $70k+ car purchase. In a world of significant wealth inequality, there are more worthy recipients for the limited pool of government subsidies.

We used the CCD to help purchase our $14,000 2016 Nissan Leaf. It'll pay for itself in fuel savings in <8 years (less if not for RUCs), and keep on running emissions free far beyond that.

https://www.harmlesssolutions.co.nz/

johno1234

3357 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2843

#3368927 29-Apr-2025 19:31

Obraik:

This tells me you had no idea how the EV rebate worked.

The Rebate was funded by equally well-off people buying new high emission vehicles, such as your high-spec Rangers, Range Rovers or other large European SUVs and utes. While the initial burst of funds to supply the rebate was borrowed from a tax fund, the intent was that it would be kept around long enough that the fees paid by those buying new high emission vehicles would pay off that amount borrowed.

Ironically, because National killed it, it did end up becoming tax payer funded because it never existed long enough to repay itself.

Also, to say that it "only subsidised people wealthy enough to buy an EV" ignores the used car market, which doesn't just magically appear out of thin air. Encouraging those that can afford to buy a new car to buy an EV means that there are plentiful used EVs available for those market in the decades to follow.

I know exactly how the scheme worked and I know that the ute tax was never even close to covering the EV subsdidy. The net cost of about $300 million was covered by the tax payer. Never mind the fact that all the farmers and builders and business owners had no option to operate utes back when the scheme was in place so that was a cost that would have been passed onto the public.

Also, to say that it "only subsidised people wealthy enough to buy an EV ..."

You just presented as a quote something that I never said and by inserting "only" not even close to what I said.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Obraik

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#3368929 29-Apr-2025 19:33

dafman:

Any way you cut it, it was a subsidy for people wealthy enough to fund a $70k+ car purchase. In a world of significant wealth inequality, there are more worthy recipients for the limited pool of government subsidies IMHO.

And the fact that it wasn’t tax neutral meant it was a tax payer-funded hand out. Saying it didn’t last long enough to pay for itself is disingenuous. The question of whether it would have paid for itself is dependent on the ratio of high emission vehicles purchased relative to eligible EVs purchased and what that future ratio would have been is an unknown. What we do know is that the ratio up until the time of cancellation was insufficient to fund the subsidy and it could have remained so into perpetuity.

I mean, if you want to ignore everything I wrote about how the rebate worked then sure, your explanation works. That's not the reality of it tho. The current government is responsible for making it a "tax-payer-funded handout". Again, if you knew how the rebate worked you would have known that as it progressed, less rebate would have been given out while those expensive high-emission vehicles would have continued to pay the same fee. It would have been self-funding if it had been allowed to exist as planned.

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

Obraik

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#3368931 29-Apr-2025 19:36

You say this:

johno1234:

I know exactly how the scheme worked

But then say this:

johno1234:

I know that the ute tax was never even close to covering the EV subsdidy. The net cost of about $300 million was covered by the tax payer. Never mind the fact that all the farmers and builders and business owners had no option to operate utes back when the scheme was in place so that was a cost that would have been passed onto the public.

So no, you don't know how it worked and ignored the explanation I gave of how it was meant to work. I'd also love to see all these struggling farmers that are going out and buying brand new utes, too 😉

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

johno1234

3357 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2843

#3368933 29-Apr-2025 19:39

Obraik:

I mean, if you want to ignore everything I wrote about how the rebate worked then sure, your explanation works. That's not the reality of it tho. The current government is responsible for making it a "tax-payer-funded handout". Again, if you knew how the rebate worked you would have known that as it progressed, less rebate would have been given out while those expensive high-emission vehicles would have continued to pay the same fee. It would have been self-funding if it had been allowed to exist as planned.

You're interviewing your keyboard and making stuff up. If the scheme continued people would have kept buying EVs costing big numbers and people would have kept buying utes contributing smaller numbers. Industry and trades would have copped a chunk of the cost and passed it on to consumers.

You can continue to post your opinions as fact if you wish but I have no interest. Jog on.

Obraik

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#3368935 29-Apr-2025 19:41

johno1234:

You're interviewing your keyboard and making stuff up. If the scheme continued people would have kept buying EVs costing big numbers and people would have kept buying utes contributing smaller numbers. Industry and trades would have copped a chunk of the cost and passed it on to consumers.

You can continue to post your opinions as fact if you wish but I have no interest. Jog on.

Once again, not knowing how it worked 😉 As the scheme progressed, the amount of rebate that was given out reduced to the point that it was giving out almost nothing while collecting fees from the expensive high-emission vehicles, leaving the scheme fully capable of paying for itself.

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

dafman

4054 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2652

Trusted

#3368950 29-Apr-2025 21:07

Obraik:

I mean, if you want to ignore everything I wrote about how the rebate worked then sure, your explanation works. That's not the reality of it tho. The current government is responsible for making it a "tax-payer-funded handout". Again, if you knew how the rebate worked you would have known that as it progressed, less rebate would have been given out while those expensive high-emission vehicles would have continued to pay the same fee. It would have been self-funding if it had been allowed to exist as planned.

The rebate vs fees scheme kicked off in April 2022 and by the end of the year it had paid out twice as much in rebates as it collected in fees.

The level of rebalancing required to close this gap (approx $100 million) after such a short period would have required a significant reduction in the EV rebate, putting the ongoing feasibility of the scheme at risk (Infometrics put out an opinion piece along these lines).

So far from certain that it ever would have been self-funding.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

Obraik

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#3368951 29-Apr-2025 21:18

That was how it worked tho. As the years went on, the value of the rebate (and the ability for vehicles to quality) reduced. The last few years would have been mostly fee and little rebate, giving plenty of opportunity to pay itself back.

But that never happened because the party of fiscal responsibility killed it before it could.

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

Ge0rge

2114 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2060

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3368955 29-Apr-2025 21:41

Polestar 2 received OTA update to 3.4.4 today. Installed this evening, and now have phone as key working perfectly. Chuffed!

Obraik

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#3368960 29-Apr-2025 21:44

Ge0rge:

Polestar 2 received OTA update to 3.4.4 today. Installed this evening, and now have phone as key working perfectly. Chuffed!

Good to see more cars getting that feature! Do you just need the phone present on you for it to work or do you hold it up to an NFC reader on the car?

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

Ge0rge

2114 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2060

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3368962 29-Apr-2025 21:46

Just needs to be within arm's reach of the car to unlock/open, and inside the car to drive.

1 | ... | 716 | 717 | 718 | 719 | 720 | 721 | 722 | 723 | 724 | 725 | 726 | ... | 771