Announcing our new "CLUBS" section where you can join or create a Rivian club or group! You can use this new feature to conveniently plan and discuss local events, gatherings or other club/group related topics.
So we encourage you to join (or start) special-interest and regional-based Rivian clubs at: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/group-categories/clubs-groups.1/
That's ok we can end it here and I agree mostly with your statement that individuals would rather not cause the earth harm but the fact is that many corporations prioritize profits over doing the right thing in regards to pollution and climate change and sadly in my opinion one party caters to those profits in how they legislate.
It is an interesting problem to tackle. By nature we tend to only look at immediate affects (effects?) and ignore long term ones. But the true cost of a product should include both because we all pay for it eventually.
Firstly I took @cc84 statement that the 2020 election was different in the context that mail in voting, by default without requesting absentee ballot, changes voting accessibility which may favor one parties base over another, not it was rigged. This would give less credibility to your statement that one party was able to gain more moderate/ independent votes to secure the win (maybe one parties base just had easier accessibility).
Everyone within a given district/state would/did have the same rights and access to mail in voting, etc. By itself that shouldn’t favor one party over the other, now if one party is going to tell voters not to vote by mail, that is a choice in strategy they made. On the other hand policies requiring special IDs, closing of polling places, limiting of voting hours are purely meant to restrict access and make it harder vote.
I don’t need a peer reviewed study, I just need to look at the platform of the different parties.
This brings up a good question. How many here agree? I had thought about this quite a bit myself and decided I would buy even without it, but I’ll admit it is helpful. This is by far the most expensive vehicle I have ever purchased and even though I can afford it, it’s a big leap for me. Getting a $2500 state credit and the $7500 federal credit would make it easier.
For what it’s worth I will do it with or without, however I do hope to get it. The challenge for me in getting the $7500 is that we generally do not have a tax liability that I could apply it to. So for me the timing of when I receive the truck will be important to make it count. I’ll need to modify my withholdings so that I actually do have a liability of that size in time.
Sounds like you're confusing tax liability with tax refund. if you (your household if filing jointly) pay a total of $10,000 federal throughout the year via payroll deductions then after filing taxed get a $2,000 refund your tax liability for the year was $8,000. In this case you could claim the entire credit. You can preemptively take it by reducing your payroll deductions by 7500/# of pay periods or take it lump some at the end when filing in which case your refund in my hypothetical $2,000+ $7,500= $9,500. I guess technically you could do a combination of the two.
I do not think the current tax credit has an income limit. That comes into play with the new bills they are debating but, if they do not go anywhere I think the current one stays in place.
Correct. No change yet. I believe Manchin is no longer at the negotiating table. The last I heard, they are going to try and break BBB into smaller bills and see what they can get passed individually.
