[adastra22]

Going a step further, why should there be tax incentives at all for a product that is wildly popular and seeing adoption even without a tax credit? These credits were introduced back when the field was new and the presumption was some government influence was necessary to jumpstart mass production.

[czhu12]

Perhaps one can see it as the inverse of a tax on ICE vehicles without adding a tax? It will be revenue negative for the state but I think the net effect on consumers would be the same?

I guess one could argue that a tax on ICE vehicles are to pay for the externalities of pollution

[adastra22]

Taxpayers pay for the tax credit. An ICE tax would be added revenue.

[ivewonyoung]

> why should there be tax incentives at all for a product that is wildly popular and seeing adoption even without a tax credit?

To reduce air pollution and combat climate change. To encourage ICE manufacturers to switch.

[adastra22]

The point is that the tipping point has already been reached. People who want electric vehicles are going to buy one, with or without the tax credit. Those who don't (e.g. because they can't have a charger where they live) aren't going to be swayed by the tax credit. It's not clear it has any effect on EV adoption anymore.

[ivewonyoung]

There's enough people on the fence for $7500 to matter. Car demand is price elastic.