The Early Demise of the $7500 Credit is BAD News

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I suspect that Big Auto has invested far too much money in EV technology to allow the EV Tax Credit to expire. I'm sure they are lobbying hard to protect it and it is more likely to ultimately be extended than erased.
 
webb14leafs said:
I suspect that Big Auto has invested far too much money in EV technology to allow the EV Tax Credit to expire. I'm sure they are lobbying hard to protect it and it is more likely to ultimately be extended than erased.
Click to expand...
You may be right. Thanks to CARB policies domestically and mandates in significant European and Asian markets, Big Auto knows that they need to sell EVs, and that they'll need to continue to develop EV technology to stay relevant. Given this, they'd rather not be forced to subsidize every EV that they sell. I wouldn't be surprised if GM and Nissan in particular lobby to extend the credit by increasing the per-manufacturer cap.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
SageBrush said:
LTLFTcomposite said:
What giveaway?
Click to expand...
1.3 Trillion over 10 years. Did that paltry sum escape your attention ?
Click to expand...
third highest corporate tax rate in the world.
Click to expand...

We also make it the easiest to avoid and further constitutionally
ONLY CORPORATIONS ARE TO PAY FEDERAL INCOME TAX.

Let’s get back to the constitution and eliminate private income tax and move it to only corporate sales and profits.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
Healthcare costs and student loans are two areas that need to be reined in. The best way to do that is cut back on the availability of money to fund both of them. In healthcare the outcomes aren't any better for all that is being spent. Colleges these days are just places kids goof off protesting stuff they don't even understand rack up debt having their heads filled with liberal nonsense instead of learning anything that prepares them with skills the market demands. 150k in student debt for an art history degree, then complain the interest isn't deductible.
Click to expand...

I don't know how serious you are about this, but the students who have the biggest loans are doctors, lawyers, and engineers. You know, the educated ones that you claim this country needs more of?

Removing these programs to lower corporate tax rates (Warren Buffet has pointed out that he pays a lower tax effective tax rate than his secretary) is the surest way to doom this nation.

Anecdotal, but almost all the engineers and doctors i know are liberals, while the business owners are conservatives.
 
Warren Buffett may pay a lower percentage (because of capital gains) but I'll bet he still pays a whole lot more, and doesn't derive significantly more benefits than the secretary. By allowing WB to keep more of his money he invests it in things that give people jobs (like the secretary). I suppose we could confiscate all his wealth and distribute it "fairly" among the population, if you really think the government allocates resources with greater lasting benefit than WB. I for one do not.
 
I tried using Nissan's live chat to ask about the possibility of leasing a 2018 Leaf in 2017, with delivery in 2018. I was transferred twice, and the eventual answer was, first, "Ask your dealer" and then, when pressed, 'When you lease you take delivery of the car, so no.'
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
Warren Buffett may pay a lower percentage (because of capital gains) but I'll bet he still pays a whole lot more, and doesn't derive significantly more benefits than the secretary. By allowing WB to keep more of his money he invests it in things that give people jobs (like the secretary). I suppose we could confiscate all his wealth and distribute it "fairly" among the population, if you really think the government allocates resources with greater lasting benefit than WB. I for one do not.
Click to expand...

I don't harbor any delusions about government's effectiveness at redistributing wealth. But I do think that cutting the taxes for the rich (and corporations) by 28% (a 10% drop in the tax rate is a 28% reduction in their taxes) would translate to an even WORSE effectiveness at redistributing wealth, because there would be no increased spending (the rich can only eat and play so much) and at best the money will be redistributed as dividends. And who do you think own most of the stocks that would benefit from these dividend disbursements? Certainly not the college student who's trying to pay off his student loan debt. Even with government inefficiencies taking 50% out of every dollar distributed, you're still looking at 50 cents of every dollar going back into the economy, versus 90 cents of every dollar going into some corporations off-shore tax haven (or rich person's swiss bank account).

Per dollar of income, the unwashed masses are the ones who make the greatest contribution towards driving the economy. They "consume" necessities AND products. A rich person got rich from "working hard and saving". I don't begrudge the rich individual for benefitting from their hard work, but they know how to minimize their tax burden, and are generally not above paying their fair share in taxes.

But corporations are NOT people and should not get to purchase a government that's supposed to be "by the people and for the people". They should not get a tax reduction at the cost of healthcare for people (corporations don't need healthcare after all)!
 
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
LTLFTcomposite said:
Warren Buffett may pay a lower percentage (because of capital gains) but I'll bet he still pays a whole lot more, and doesn't derive significantly more benefits than the secretary. By allowing WB to keep more of his money he invests it in things that give people jobs (like the secretary). I suppose we could confiscate all his wealth and distribute it "fairly" among the population, if you really think the government allocates resources with greater lasting benefit than WB. I for one do not.
Click to expand...

I don't harbor any delusions about government's effectiveness at redistributing wealth. But I do think that cutting the taxes for the rich (and corporations) by 28% (a 10% drop in the tax rate is a 28% reduction in their taxes) would translate to an even WORSE effectiveness at redistributing wealth, because there would be no increased spending (the rich can only eat and play so much) and at best the money will be redistributed as dividends. And who do you think own most of the stocks that would benefit from these dividend disbursements? Certainly not the college student who's trying to pay off his student loan debt. Even with government inefficiencies taking 50% out of every dollar distributed, you're still looking at 50 cents of every dollar going back into the economy, versus 90 cents of every dollar going into some corporations off-shore tax haven (or rich person's swiss bank account).

Per dollar of income, the unwashed masses are the ones who make the greatest contribution towards driving the economy. They "consume" necessities AND products. A rich person got rich from "working hard and saving". I don't begrudge the rich individual for benefitting from their hard work, but they know how to minimize their tax burden, and are generally not above paying their fair share in taxes.

But corporations are NOT people and should not get to purchase a government that's supposed to be "by the people and for the people". They should not get a tax reduction at the cost of healthcare for people (corporations don't need healthcare after all)!
Click to expand...

Well said, although my take is somewhat different.

I'm not much of a proponent of re-distribution of wealth as an ideology, but I do recognize that NO ONE -- not me, not my neighbor, or the corporation licensed in Jersey but operating in California, operates in a vacuum. We all benefit and are dependent on our communities, states, and federal government for our successes. Corporations get rich by employing an educated, healthy labor pool. The educated took advantage of public libraries, an open internet, colleges and universities subsidized by the taxpayer. So it makes absolutely no sense to tax corporations at rates lower than individuals. As for why rates might be higher, that actually has to do with a corporations' legal right to defer taxation on retained earnings to later years. As an individual, I would happily accept a higher statutory rate for the same privilege.
 
I contacted Nissan about this issue, and their response was bland and not very interested. They essentially said that you can only get a 2017 in 2017, that the 2018 Leaf will be available in February, and to wait until then to find out any financial details. So the moment it becomes clear that the tax credit will be killed, I go out and lease a Bolt Premiere. Nissan isn't going to like their Leaf sales figures in the US if this happens, but maybe that won't bother them either...
 
It is bad for new customers A s for me and lot of existing people om leases the mfg already took the credit. is really for future cars
 
We understand your concern regarding federal tax credits. However, information confirming rebates and incentives for the 2018 Nissan LEAF will not become available until the 2018 year. Your local dealer will be the best resource as it pertains to update of available inventory and offers within the Mid-February time-frame. Our Nissan News website also publishes upcoming annoucements, and new releases of information for all of our future models.

Please feel free to contact our Nissan LEAF Concierge Team back by phoning (855) 467-3214 or chatting with us between the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. EST Monday through Friday.


At Nissan, we are committed to the highest level of customer service. Please take a moment to provide your feedback through our quick survey:


Click Here


Thank you for your interest in the Nissan LEAF.


Sincerely,


Courrey
Click to expand...

I guess that that's that. The make and model of my next car rests in the hands of the Republican-controlled Congress.
 

Similar threads

G
IEVS: White House Seeks To End EV Federal Tax Credit
Replies
1
Views
2K
Nubo
Nubo

Latest posts

Back
Top