The US Senate is reportedly considering changes to the extra $4,500 incentive for electric vehicles built at union factories in the US that is part of

[RivianXpress]

https://electrek.co/2021/12/08/sena...-for-electric-vehicles-built-union-factories/

The US Senate is reportedly considering changes to the extra $4,500 incentive for electric vehicles built at union factories in the US that is part of the Build Back Better act.

It comes as several countries are pushing to stop the proposal.



The US Senate is now discussing the Build Back Better Act, which includes a much-needed reform of the federal EV incentive.

But it also includes a more controversial $4,500 additional incentive for electric cars made by unions in the US.

It has caused controversy for reasons including putting automakers who don’t have unionized workforces at a disadvantage even if the employees don’t want to unionize. Several countries have criticized the proposition as a protectionist initiative.

Last week, Canada sent a delegation led by Mary Ng, Canada’s minister of international trade, export promotion, small business and economic development, to Washington to try to impact the initiative.

She didn’t comment on the diplomatic mission, but her office said that they made “progress” and several senators are going to review the specific clause in the EV incentive reform.

Separately, Bloomberg reported that Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) confirmed that the union clause will be discussed as part of a review this week:

A package of tax credits including a proposal by Democrats to offer an additional $4,500 in tax credits to the buyers of electric vehicles manufactured by American plants that are unionized will undergo a review by the Senate Parliamentarian this week, Sen. Ben Cardin said in an interview.

Both Canada and Mexico have stated that they believe the extra incentive for electric vehicles built by union workers at US factories violates the renegotiated NAFTA trade agreement, which is now called the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or the USMCA.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has also voiced his opposition to the new EV tax credit. At first, he expressed that the union clause was purposefully leaving Tesla out of the maximum incentive possible since the automaker’s workforce in the US is not unionized.

More recently, the CEO opined that the whole Build Back Better act should be dropped because he feels it will cause a significant increase in the federal deficit.

Sponsored

 

[MIG]

Was this written by a human? Reads like an AI summary of old news. The only news being reported is Musk's dismissive comment. Very weird.

 

[DuckTruck]

Was this written by a human? Reads like an AI summary of old news. The only news being reported is Musk's dismissive comment. Very weird.

WHAT?! How does this sound like A.I.?! When didn't Elon Musk sound dismissive? I believe "Dismissive" is his middle name.

We have long-standing, multi-national, bipartisan trade agreements in place that were crafted and agreed upon to level the playing field. Now the current administration wants to slant the field to favor only U.S. manufacturers, especially those that are unionized? WTF?! How is that fair? That sounds like the "New A.I.", now to be known as "Artificial Incentives".

Granted, if I'm a politician, I'd love to toss a bone to those who helped put me into office, but this country was founded upon the principles of freedom. Those constitutional freedoms have spawned innovation at a level never before seen on Earth, at least not since the discovery of fire, or maybe since the subsequent steam machine. (Speaking of bones, I don't think this is the proper forum for discussing the voting habits of the deceased, so I'll leave that to others.)

I love that the UAW has done so much for the auto industry, and American workers in general. Over the past century, they've helped make family life possible and brought us inventions like "The Weekend". That said, why do the old, established OEM's need a leg up over everyone else in bringing EV's to market? Why reward stodgy, legacy automakers over the innovators and start-ups who, along with their "no union needed" employees, have ventured everything to push for the world-changing technology that unionized, legacy automakers have shunned for so long? (See "Who Killed the EV1" from the last millenia). In many respects, Ford and GM have blood on their hands.

The old guard didn't give a rip about EV's until some upstart decided to build an all-electric Roadster. "Cute!" they said. "It'll never catch on" they said.

The same auto-making giants who conspired to rip out LA's mass transit system in the 50's, to make certain that gas-guzzling automobiles ruled supreme (along with help from big oil and tire makers) only came to see the light after that same Roadster-building kid went on to build a nationwide electrical charging system. He then started producing a bunch of "battery-powered" cars that kicked the living crap out of Detroit's best. Even Jay Leno has become a fan-boy of Tesla. (I can't wait for him test drive an R1T! I so badly want him to do that test drive in mine - if you're listening, Jay, I'll even cover my own gas expense to get there.)

If the Rivians and Teslas of the world take care of their workers to the point that unions aren't needed, so be it. If they don't take care of their workers, the unions will rightfully take hold. Through no fault of the unions, the legacy automakers chose not to pursue developing and producing EV's, kind of like ignoring the Arab oil embargo of the early 70's. Back then, they chose to bury their heads in the Middle Eastern sand and continued to build land-yachts, while Japan whooped our ass with gas-sipping cars that turned out to be fairly reliable (Thank you, William Edwards Deming!).

I thank all of you if you've managed to endure my ranting to this point. I want to see EV's become the way of personal and commercial transport sooner, rather than later. Its inevitable. I think petroleum products serve very useful purposes. They are central to many of the goods we need and use each and every day. They are also better than any renewable fuel (at least for now) in allowing for aviation to happen. Accordingly, I think it's wise to use it where it's likely the best possible near-term fuel source. BEA's (Aircaft) sound cool, but I'll pass until they've proven themselves for at least ten years.

Now that I've said that, I'm wondering "Who am I fooling?" I'll be long gone by then, but at least I'll still be voting! ?

It's late, I'm done.... Thanks again.

 

[JEV]

Reach out and contact your senators. I sent messages to both Senator Durbin and Senator Duckworth in Illinois to remind them that Rivian is not unionized and is providing a huge economic boost in the state. Either make changes to the bill and strike the union requirement or just drop the extra $4500 altogether. Maybe a good compromise would be an extra $2000 for made in the US, without any additional stipulations.

 

[Sgt Beavis]

Sounds more and more likely the Collective Bargaining language is going to come out. I think the ”made in the USA” language is going to come out too. The question becomes, will we just stick with the $7500 credit in a tax rebate form or will they increase the credit overall?

Just speculation on my part but I think we’ll see a $10K rebate for all EVs. Perhaps there will be some other changes to bring the costs down like removing rebates for plug in hybrids.

 

[LoneStar]

Unless Hillary's crew knocks-off Sen. Manchin, none of this matters... no BBB passing.

 

[ATX]

Isn’t it better for Rivian (and many of us) under the current law? Current law allows for a $7500 credit until phase out at like 200k vehicles sold, which Rivian won’t hit for years. Meanwhile Tesla and GM have phased out already. What is the advantage to us or to Rivian under what is being discussed particularly given that there’s a special interest bonus for unions that doesn’t apply to Rivian?

 

[Dbeglor]

Isn’t it better for Rivian (and many of us) under the current law? Current law allows for a $7500 credit until phase out at like 200k vehicles sold, which Rivian won’t hit for years. Meanwhile Tesla and GM have phased out already. What is the advantage to us or to Rivian under what is being discussed particularly given that there’s a special interest bonus for unions that doesn’t apply to Rivian?

As drafted, it is bad for Rivian relative to the status quo, as it cuts out MSRP over $80k (Max Pack) and high-income buyers, while also providing a significant cost advantage to competitors.

They would likely be on board for the added incentive becoming all US made while keeping the MSRP and income limits. Their volume sellers down the line won't have issue with the MSRP limit (or income either for that product). Presumably that is why they were seen in DC with R1Ts, to lobby their case.

 

[Mjhirsch78]

WHAT?! How does this sound like A.I.?! When didn't Elon Musk sound dismissive? I believe "Dismissive" is his middle name.

We have long-standing, multi-national, bipartisan trade agreements in place that were crafted and agreed upon to level the playing field. Now the current administration wants to slant the field to favor only U.S. manufacturers, especially those that are unionized? WTF?! How is that fair? That sounds like the "New A.I.", now to be known as "Artificial Incentives".

Granted, if I'm a politician, I'd love to toss a bone to those who helped put me into office, but this country was founded upon the principles of freedom. Those constitutional freedoms have spawned innovation at a level never before seen on Earth, at least not since the discovery of fire, or maybe since the subsequent steam machine. (Speaking of bones, I don't think this is the proper forum for discussing the voting habits of the deceased, so I'll leave that to others.)

I love that the UAW has done so much for the auto industry, and American workers in general. Over the past century, they've helped make family life possible and brought us inventions like "The Weekend". That said, why do the old, established OEM's need a leg up over everyone else in bringing EV's to market? Why reward stodgy, legacy automakers over the innovators and start-ups who, along with their "no union needed" employees, have ventured everything to push for the world-changing technology that unionized, legacy automakers have shunned for so long? (See "Who Killed the EV1" from the last millenia). In many respects, Ford and GM have blood on their hands.

The old guard didn't give a rip about EV's until some upstart decided to build an all-electric Roadster. "Cute!" they said. "It'll never catch on" they said.

The same auto-making giants who conspired to rip out LA's mass transit system in the 50's, to make certain that gas-guzzling automobiles ruled supreme (along with help from big oil and tire makers) only came to see the light after that same Roadster-building kid went on to build a nationwide electrical charging system. He then started producing a bunch of "battery-powered" cars that kicked the living crap out of Detroit's best. Even Jay Leno has become a fan-boy of Tesla. (I can't wait for him test drive an R1T! I so badly want him to do that test drive in mine - if you're listening, Jay, I'll even cover my own gas expense to get there.)

If the Rivians and Teslas of the world take care of their workers to the point that unions aren't needed, so be it. If they don't take care of their workers, the unions will rightfully take hold. Through no fault of the unions, the legacy automakers chose not to pursue developing and producing EV's, kind of like ignoring the Arab oil embargo of the early 70's. Back then, they chose to bury their heads in the Middle Eastern sand and continued to build land-yachts, while Japan whooped our ass with gas-sipping cars that turned out to be fairly reliable (Thank you, William Edwards Deming!).

I thank all of you if you've managed to endure my ranting to this point. I want to see EV's become the way of personal and commercial transport sooner, rather than later. Its inevitable. I think petroleum products serve very useful purposes. They are central to many of the goods we need and use each and every day. They are also better than any renewable fuel (at least for now) in allowing for aviation to happen. Accordingly, I think it's wise to use it where it's likely the best possible near-term fuel source. BEA's (Aircaft) sound cool, but I'll pass until they've proven themselves for at least ten years.

Now that I've said that, I'm wondering "Who am I fooling?" I'll be long gone by then, but at least I'll still be voting! ?

It's late, I'm done.... Thanks again.

Bruce on a podium seems fun.

New game:
Bruce (fill in the blank) 2024

go…

 

[DuckTruck]

Bruce on a podium seems fun.

New game:
Bruce (fill in the blank) 2024

go…

Well, I guess I'm up to two votes now! ?
FWIW, cash and bitcoin contributions are welcome anytime!

Please forward them to my legal team, Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe.

 

[electruck]

Unless Hillary's crew knocks-off Sen. Manchin, none of this matters... no BBB passing.

I'm not sure it will require such extremes. Manchin's own constituents are now pressuring him to pass BBB:

https://thehill.com/business-a-lobb...coal-miners-union-urges-manchin-to-reconsider

 

[fotoflux]

Not trying to get political, but the union only wants this massive bill due to marginal benefits (if you think about the entire population of WV). Not sure if it's going to be enough to sway Manchin's vote. Also, they weren't lobbying for the additional EV incentive. So if another bill comes up, no guarantee that will even be in there.

Sponsored