New York State to Launch Electric Vehicle Rebate

Archived From: Finance
  • Page :
  • 1
  • Text Only
Voting History
rated:
New York State plans to launch a rebate of up to $2,000 for zero-emission and plug-in electric hybrids by April 1.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/new-york/articles/2017-0...

Member Summary
Most Recent Posts
As far as gas taxes go, GA now charges EV owners a separate fee at annual registration. I did the math one time and it ... (more)

wilesmt (Mar. 08, 2017 @ 6:43p) |

NJ doesn't charge sales tax on BEVs. That is a much larger subsidy, so NYers will continue buying their cars with their... (more)

SpeedingLunatic (Mar. 08, 2017 @ 8:12p) |

??? Now I'm not following you at all. I think the bathroom law lost Republicans the the governors office. Are you saying... (more)

meade18 (Mar. 09, 2017 @ 10:55a) |

Staff Summary
Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

Interesting.  State of Georgia did $5,000 a few years back, and people used it on 24 month leases.  LOL.  

refundable credit?

Rambler said:   Interesting.  State of Georgia did $5,000 a few years back, and people used it on 24 month leases.  LOL.  
  I got in on that.........twice!

wish NC would get in on the action.... instead they charge extra fees for EVs

defjukie said:   wish NC would get in on the action.... instead they charge extra fees for EVs
  
I think NC would be better off as two states -- one with Charlotte and one with Raleigh in it.  Never saw such a politically divided state between the big cities.  

Mind you that Texas' state capitol is the most liberal/dem area of the state, they still "get along" with the rest.  Living in Charlotte during a national and state election was educational...  Talk about dirty politics.

Floridah governor Reich Scott is offering a $500 rebate on
the first cars that run on coal....per his meeting with Trump.

Politician 1: I've got a great idea! You know those new cars that people don't put gas in that no one really wants to buy because they are too expensive? Let's subsidize them so it makes financial sense for the richer people that can afford multiple cars to buy them!

Politician 2: What about taxes? Don't we pay for road upkeep with gas taxes? You said these cars don't run on gas, right? So if we get more of these cars on the road, we'll get less back in gas taxes and it will be harder to maintain the roads.

Politician 1: Then we'll just raise the gas tax!

Politician 2: So what you're suggesting is subsidies for well-off greenies (i.e. our base) and an increase in taxes for everyone else?

Politician 1: Yes.

Politician 2: You've got my vote!

RedWolfe01 said:   
defjukie said:   wish NC would get in on the action.... instead they charge extra fees for EVs
  
I think NC would be better off as two states -- one with Charlotte and one with Raleigh in it.  Never saw such a politically divided state between the big cities.  

Mind you that Texas' state capitol is the most liberal/dem area of the state, they still "get along" with the rest.  Living in Charlotte during a national and state election was educational...  Talk about dirty politics.

  Have you lived in Austin?  Most Austinites I know hate their  guvenor and the dipsh~t AG.

meade18 said:   Politician 1: I've got a great idea! You know those new cars that people don't put gas in that no one really wants to buy because they are too expensive? Let's subsidize them so it makes financial sense for the richer people that can afford multiple cars to buy them!

Politician 2: What about taxes? Don't we pay for road upkeep with gas taxes? You said these cars don't run on gas, right? So if we get more of these cars on the road, we'll get less back in gas taxes and it will be harder to maintain the roads.

Politician 1: Then we'll just raise the gas tax!

Politician 2: So what you're suggesting is subsidies for well-off greenies (i.e. our base) and an increase in taxes for everyone else?

Politician 1: Yes.

Politician 2: You've got my vote!

  Well, no. The whole idea is to create economies of scale, so that electric cars become cheap. That way everyone, not just "well off greenies", pays far less for fuel. Electric costs half or a third as much as gas.
Electric cars also require far less maintenance (again saving the average population money), and have far better low-end torque (making for a better drive).

If only 100 gas-powered cars were sold per year, you can bet that those wouldn't have taken off either. It took many, many years to get gas-powered cars into mass production.The cost of manufacturing small numbers is simply too high. The subsidies are simply kickstarting the mass production process to speed it up.

BTW: If we don't develop this, we'll be beat to it by the Europeans and Chinese. We'll lose our auto industry. Then certain people will whine about "all the jobs going overseas".

I've never understood why the right like to bash them, except that it's new technology and so they're naturally against it.

meade18, your objection implies that there aren't massive subsidies for gas cars. There are, but they're not as direct and we're used to them. I don't know which is a better investment, but we do sink a ton of money into securing access to cheap oil, and pay huge costs (financial and political) as a consequence of directing so much money to the few who control a lot of those resources. Slowing or stopping increases in dependence on that oil should provide some financial and other benefit too.

the funnier part is the fact that $2k wouldn't even cover the 8% sales tax on the car, so they're still getting it out of you one way or the other

Honestly, I was just telling a slightly political joke. It was more a joke about politicians and how ridiculous they are, than something to try and make a point. I could easily tell a similar joke where Politician 1 and 2 are on the other side proposing a law that their base likes but screws everyone else. If I tried to cover all the ins-and-outs of why they are doing it or the subsidies for fossil fuels, the joke would be even lamer than it already is. Hope this thread doesn't turn into a political debate over the electric car, but I'll take responsibility for throwing gas on the fire (or volts into the battery lol) if it goes that direction.

I have news for you...Rich people don't care about the price of gas...most cars bought by the wealthy such as : Mercedes, Jaguar, Cadillac, et al are not gas savers.....they would not be caught in a no Status Prius.....

RedWolfe01 said:   
defjukie said:   wish NC would get in on the action.... instead they charge extra fees for EVs
  
I think NC would be better off as two states -- one with Charlotte and one with Raleigh in it.  Never saw such a politically divided state between the big cities.  

Mind you that Texas' state capitol is the most liberal/dem area of the state, they still "get along" with the rest.  Living in Charlotte during a national and state election was educational...  Talk about dirty politics.

  My brief involvement in Charlotte politics in the run-up to the 2008 general election was basically enough to make me swear off politics forever.

belgique said:   I have news for you...Rich people don't care about the price of gas...most cars bought by the wealthy such as : Mercedes, Jaguar, Cadillac, et al are not gas savers.....they would not be caught in a no Status Prius.....
  Well, not quite true. The current models of the Tesla are cars aimed squarely at the rich. And they ARE a status symbol.

That's where all technology starts out, though. What really counts is whether mass production can drop the price to a competitive level.

canoeguy1 said:   
belgique said:   I have news for you...Rich people don't care about the price of gas...most cars bought by the wealthy such as : Mercedes, Jaguar, Cadillac, et al are not gas savers.....they would not be caught in a no Status Prius.....
  Well, not quite true. The current models of the Tesla are cars aimed squarely at the rich. And they ARE a status symbol.
 

  But there's also the much higher volume econobox electric golf carts (Prius), along with Volt and Leaf.  And "regular car" vehicles like Focus and Fusion (plugin or hybrid) or Camry.  Majority of electric and electrified vehicles are not "status" luxury vehicles.

For economies of scale to FIX the problem, economies of scale have to BE the problem. It's not economies of scale driving most of the cost of EVs. It is the raw material cost of the exotic metals used in the batteries.

I don't think the Government should be subsidizing them, but didn't stop me from taking advantage when I bought my Volt ($7500 Federal, $2000 PA Rebate, and $50 utility). This was on top of a $14k mark down because the car was sitting on a lot. Ended up with a loaded Volt for the price of a Carolla.

Rambler said:   Interesting.  State of Georgia did $5,000 a few years back, and people used it on 24 month leases.  LOL.  
  
And now you can buy used Leafs cheap from GA! 
 

 
IMBoring25 said:   For economies of scale to FIX the problem, economies of scale have to BE the problem. It's not economies of scale driving most of the cost of EVs. It is the raw material cost of the exotic metals used in the batteries.
  

Theres about $600 worth of lithium and $220 worth of cobalt in the Tesla model S batteries.

Thats not most of the cost.

 

Xnarg1 said:   
RedWolfe01 said:   
defjukie said:   wish NC would get in on the action.... instead they charge extra fees for EVs
  
I think NC would be better off as two states -- one with Charlotte and one with Raleigh in it.  Never saw such a politically divided state between the big cities.  

Mind you that Texas' state capitol is the most liberal/dem area of the state, they still "get along" with the rest.  Living in Charlotte during a national and state election was educational...  Talk about dirty politics.

  Have you lived in Austin?  Most Austinites I know hate their  guvenor and the dipsh~t AG.

  
Lived in Austin and lived in Charlotte.  NC republicans launched a NATIONAL campaign to embarrass Charlotte with HB2 that entrenched the sides and pandered to their bases fears for their children.  (hint, there isn't any mention of bathrooms in the so called "bathroom bill" and it only removed access restrictions on all PUBLIC facilities.  It took a very twisted reading to come up with little girls being at risk in bathrooms)  Austin never quite went that far in dirty politics.  Closest we get was when Perry tried to threaten to line item de-fund a Special Investigative DA office.  

Even better was when the NC house made a deal to demolish HB2 in exchange for status quo ante in Charlotte... and then reneged on the deal after Charlotte did their part.    Without the HB2 shenanigans I think Clinton would have taken NC, it was close enough.  NOBODY frothing at the Mouth about it on the local and national forums ever READ the Charlotte ordinance or understood what it was.  It was right along the lines of asking someone in public if they ever stopped beating their wife...  

In almost any other state a Texas Democrat is actually pretty close to a Moderate Republican.  For example any Democrat here that was pro-gun control would be lucky to be elected to dogcatcher.  
belgique said: I have news for you...Rich people don't care about the price of gas...most cars bought by the wealthy such as : Mercedes, Jaguar, Cadillac, et al are not gas savers.....they would not be caught in a no Status Prius.....

er, depends on what industry you are in.  Green cars are very popular with the sorts that cater to liberals.  Go to Hollywood and look around.  Plenty of rich in Prii, Karmas and Teslas.  The i3 is pretty popular too.  The subsidy is low enough not to matter for the Tesla S, but it WILL help get i3, Volt, Bolt, ect... into the state.  There is a HUGE short range commuter market in NY state that would be well served by the lower range electrics.   
 

belgique said:   I have news for you...Rich people don't care about the price of gas...most cars bought by the wealthy such as : Mercedes, Jaguar, Cadillac, et al are not gas savers.....they would not be caught in a no Status Prius.....
 Hmmm ...I weep every time the pump reminds me of premium v regular price spread

RedWolfe01 said:   Lived in Austin and lived in Charlotte.  NC republicans launched a NATIONAL campaign to embarrass Charlotte with HB2 that entrenched the sides and pandered to their bases fears for their children.  (hint, there isn't any mention of bathrooms in the so called "bathroom bill" and it only removed access restrictions on all PUBLIC facilities.  It took a very twisted reading to come up with little girls being at risk in bathrooms)  Austin never quite went that far in dirty politics.  Closest we get was when Perry tried to threaten to line item de-fund a Special Investigative DA office.  

Even better was when the NC house made a deal to demolish HB2 in exchange for status quo ante in Charlotte... and then reneged on the deal after Charlotte did their part.    Without the HB2 shenanigans I think Clinton would have taken NC, it was close enough.  NOBODY frothing at the Mouth about it on the local and national forums ever READ the Charlotte ordinance or understood what it was.  It was right along the lines of asking someone in public if they ever stopped beating their wife...  

In almost any other state a Texas Democrat is actually pretty close to a Moderate Republican.  For example any Democrat here that was pro-gun control would be lucky to be elected to dogcatcher.   
 

  
That's a one sided over simplification of what happened/is happening in NC. And without the HB2 shenanigans, things in NC would have gone the opposite way.  Not only would Clinton have still lost NC, but McCrory would have been reelected. HB2 is the main thing that made the election in NC as close as it was.

meade18 said:   
RedWolfe01 said:   Lived in Austin and lived in Charlotte.  NC republicans launched a NATIONAL campaign to embarrass Charlotte with HB2 that entrenched the sides and pandered to their bases fears for their children.  (hint, there isn't any mention of bathrooms in the so called "bathroom bill" and it only removed access restrictions on all PUBLIC facilities.  It took a very twisted reading to come up with little girls being at risk in bathrooms)  Austin never quite went that far in dirty politics.  Closest we get was when Perry tried to threaten to line item de-fund a Special Investigative DA office.  

Even better was when the NC house made a deal to demolish HB2 in exchange for status quo ante in Charlotte... and then reneged on the deal after Charlotte did their part.    Without the HB2 shenanigans I think Clinton would have taken NC, it was close enough.  NOBODY frothing at the Mouth about it on the local and national forums ever READ the Charlotte ordinance or understood what it was.  It was right along the lines of asking someone in public if they ever stopped beating their wife...  

In almost any other state a Texas Democrat is actually pretty close to a Moderate Republican.  For example any Democrat here that was pro-gun control would be lucky to be elected to dogcatcher.   

  
That's a one sided over simplification of what happened/is happening in NC. And without the HB2 shenanigans, things in NC would have gone the opposite way.  Not only would Clinton have still lost NC, but McCrory would have been reelected. HB2 is the main thing that made the election in NC as close as it was.

  
Its not really that one sided..  I actually READ the ordinance and what was changed, versus just screaming about how "my daughter was going to get attacked" in the bathroom -- NONE of the conservative talking points actually quoted the ordinance.  For a good reason, it was condensed down to a BS legal "what if" case where OTHER laws would have applied.  Does anyone REALLY think that a) someone willing to "attack your daughter" cares about the law or b) that the police can't come up with a different law besides "in the wrong bathroom" if it does?  Again, the law wasn't even about bathrooms except in that they are "public."  First thing I did when the smoke started rising was look for the fire -- and read the background on the ordinance and changes.  I was one of the few that did.  

I disagree that Clinton would have still lost NC, I think there was more than enough votes in play before the "dirty liberals want to help men use the bathroom with your daughter" riled up the rural areas.  Most definitely would have been an even tighter race.  It definitely saved the Governors office for the GOP, no doubt about that at all. 

It was very effective, and very dirty pool.  It did manage to "keep Charlotte from stealing the election" by making them the "enemy of the righteous."  Those quoted phrases were very similar to things I actually heard SAID, BTW.     

And yes, I am simplifying it because unless you were in Charlotte you didn't get much detail on the issue.  (I am, BTW, moderate republican -- but would have preferred Clinton to Trump on the National level)  

As far as gas taxes go, GA now charges EV owners a separate fee at annual registration. I did the math one time and it comes out almost exatly to what a driver with an average mpg car driving average miles pays a year.

So yea, I pay for my roads, thank you very much.

NJ doesn't charge sales tax on BEVs. That is a much larger subsidy, so NYers will continue buying their cars with their NJ LLCs/Corps for the time being...

RedWolfe01 said:   It definitely saved the Governors office for the GOP, no doubt about that at all. 
  
??? Now I'm not following you at all. I think the bathroom law lost Republicans the the governors office. Are you saying it helped, but only enough for Trump to win and not McCrory? That doesn't make sense. The bathroom law was a state issue. You're claiming the GOP riled up all the rural areas because of the bathroom law, and that got Trump elected, but still lost the governorship based on the bathroom bill? Doesn't it makes more sense to say that the not-quite-as-rural-areas-but-not-urban areas got riled up by Trump, but didn't like the bathroom law, considering what the actual results were?

We can definitely agree on something. The Republicans in NC (and other parts of the country) have taken the wrong tact with these "bathroom" laws. I am not a fan of the "our daughters won't be safe" argument either. I care much more about the bigger picture, but that's neither here nor there when it comes to this thread, so I'm going to drop it for now.



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2017