Good News: Almost No EVs Will Qualify For The Tax Credits

This is what happens when you neither read nor understand the legislation you’re voting for, when you’re just desperate to Do Something and do not really consider that it actually has to make sense, not just be a Talking Point

The climate bill could short-circuit EV tax credits, making qualifying for them nearly impossible

The U.S. Senate passed a far-reaching climate, energy and health care bill on Aug. 7, 2022, that invests an unprecedented US$370 billion in energy and climate programs over the next 10 years – including incentives to expand renewable energy and electric vehicles.

Rapid and widespread adoption of electric vehicles will be essential for the United States to meet its climate goals. And the new bill, which includes a host of other health and tax-related provisions, aims to encourage people to trade their gasoline-fueled cars for electrics by offering a tax credit of up to $7,500 for new electric vehicles and up to $4,000 for used electric vehicles through 2032.

But there’s a catch, and it could end up making it difficult for most EVs to qualify for the new incentive.

A catch? The hell you say!

The bill, which needs House approval, requires that new electric vehicles meet stringent sourcing requirements for critical materials, the components of the battery, and final assembly to qualify for the tax credits. While some automakers, like Tesla and GM, have well-developed domestic supply chains, no electric vehicle manufacturer currently meets all the bill’s requirements.

Wait, what was that final line? “no EV manufacturer currently meets all the bill’s requirements.” Huh. That’s what you would call a Class 1 Fuckup.

The problem is that the Inflation Reduction Act’s sourcing requirements come online so quickly, starting in 2023, and ratchet upward so rapidly, that the plan could backfire. Instead of expanding electric vehicle adoption, the policy could make almost all electric vehicles ineligible for the tax incentives.

The bill excludes incentives for any new vehicle which contains battery materials or components extracted, processed, manufactured or assembled by a “foreign entity of concern” – a category which includes China.

Whoops. At least 40% of the battery components must come from the U.S. or a nation we have a fair trade deal. China controls somewhere between 60-80% of the market at this time, and are producing 76% of the world’s EV batteries. (that info via Reason)

Although EV manufacturers are already pursuing plans to develop supply chains that meet these sourcing requirements, proposals for mines and processing facilities often face challenges. Indigenous and environmental concerns have slowed a proposed lithium mine in Nevada. In some cases, key materials, such as cobalt and graphite, are not readily sourced domestically or from fair-trade allies.

Double whoops. And, seriously, do you think there won’t be lawsuits left and right if the federal government even greenlights domestic mining? The hardcore enviroweenies won’t allow it. And, if it looks like it has a chance of going forward, they will do anything from mass protests at the site to performing illegal acts.

(Reuters) Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan told Reuters on Tuesday: “It’s a very cumbersome, unworkable credit once the full restrictions set in. There’s conversations going on.”

Perhaps you should have thought of this before jamming the legislation through.

Read: Good News: Almost No EVs Will Qualify For The Tax Credits »

If All You See…

…is horrible carbon polluting concrete, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Victory Girls Blog, with a post on Biden’s Afghanistan debacle one year later.

Read: If All You See… »

NY Times: Consumers Will Totally Save Money From IRA

I love that Democrats are referring to the Inflation Reduction Act as the IRA (when they aren’t referring to it as pretty much anything besides an inflation reduction measure), because it’s going to blow a lot of things up (not paywalled version here)

Consumers Will Benefit From Lower Utility Bills and Cheaper Home Upgrades, Energy Experts Say

spite houseThe Inflation Reduction Act that was passed by the Senate on Sunday could lower electricity bills for consumers and the prices of things such as rooftop solar panels, energy-efficient appliances and electric vehicles, Democrats and some energy experts said.

Under the legislation, a home improvement credit for energy efficiency would allow households to deduct from their taxes up to 30% of the cost of upgrades like heat pumps and insulation. Another provision extends a program that allows households that are installing solar or battery storage systems to deduct 30% of the cost of those projects from their taxes. (skipping a short paragraph on a hardcore leftist group saying it will save $1,800, which I covered here)

The package also continues an incentive for families to replace their gas-powered vehicles with electric. It extends a current $7,500 tax credit for new electric vehicles and $4,000 for a used one. Couples who earn less than $300,000 a year or individuals who earn less than $150,000 a year would be eligible for the credits, and consumers would get the discount at the dealership.

So, if you spend a hundred grand, you can save a bit, eh? Heat pumps: they cost about the same as a new AC system. Why would you replace your existing system if it still works? Also, they’re only good for certain climates. North of the Mason Dixon line they might be OK, but, not in the South and Southwest. It’s much smarter to have a split system, with an AC unit and furnace.

The average cost of installing solar panels is $18,000. Oh, sure, it will be less with federal “rebates”, but, does the average family have that cash sitting around? Then the cost of batteries. Oh, and then the cost of insulation, which had already skyrocketed while Obama was in office pushing the same thing, same with efficient windows, will go up more.

EVs? Well

Republicans said they expected the measure to drive up inflation and said the credits would not help Americans.

“They’re not into buying an electric car any time in the near future,” Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said of his constituents. “They’d like gas prices to come down because we’re producing more oil.”

The majority of EV buyers make at least $150K a year, so, upper middle class and the rich. This is not for the average American. And, that’s the end of the article. There’s nothing else about how this will lower energy bills. Zip. I’ve left just two paragraphs, the aforementioned one on $1,800 savings and

“This bill will help create jobs and lower costs for many American families,” in addition to slowing climate change, said Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del.

No one in the media seems to be asking for actual details, and the media cannot provide details themselves. It really is a giveaway to the rich at the expense of the middle and lower classes

Separately, the Times also delves into food prices, with this wonderful graphic

Yeah, it’s hilariously about upscale dining and increased costs (which never really seem to blame China for releasing COVID19). Gochujang? Scallops? Arugula? Quail?

Read: NY Times: Consumers Will Totally Save Money From IRA »

NY Times: Say, These EVs Are Rather Expensive For The Middle And Lower Classes, Eh?

After all this time pushing how utterly wonderful EVs are, the NY Times finally got the memo. The best part is the subhead

Electric Cars Too Costly for Many, Even With Aid in Climate Bill
Battery-powered vehicles are considered essential to the fight against climate change, but most models are aimed at the affluent.

Oh, now they tell us

Electric vehiclePolicymakers in Washington are promoting electric vehicles as a solution to climate change. But an uncomfortable truth remains: Battery-powered cars are much too expensive for a vast majority of Americans.

Congress has begun trying to address that problem. The climate and energy package passed on Sunday by the Senate, the Inflation Reduction Act, would give buyers of used electric cars a tax credit.

But automakers have complained that the credit would apply to only a narrow slice of vehicles, at least initially, largely because of domestic sourcing requirements. And experts say broader steps are needed to make electric cars more affordable and to get enough of them on the road to put a serious dent in greenhouse gas emissions.

High prices are caused by shortages of batteries, of raw materials like lithium and of components like semiconductors. Strong demand for electric vehicles from affluent buyers means that carmakers have little incentive to sell cheaper models. For low- and middle-income people who don’t have their own garages or driveways, another obstacle is the lack of enough public facilities to recharge.

Sell cheaper? There’s a cost to make a vehicle. Does the NY Times sell it’s paper cheaper, or, do they need to actually sell at a profitable price?

To some extent, the carmakers are following their usual game plan. They have always introduced new technology at a luxury price. With time, the features and gadgets make their way into cheaper cars.

But emission-free technology has an urgency that voice navigation or massaging seats did not. Transportation accounts for 27 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Battery-powered cars produce far less carbon dioxide than vehicles that run on gasoline or diesel. That’s true even accounting for the emissions from generating electricity and from manufacturing batteries, according to numerous studies.

The strange part is that those in a position to demand this stuff, like those in the Credentialed Media, appointed officials, and elected politicians don’t seem, for the most part, to be giving up their own fossil fueled vehicles and travel. If the GOP had any cajones they’d start introducing legislation requiring members of Congress, their staffs, appointed Executive Branch officials, and members of the White House to take non-fossil fueled travel. Sure, it won’t pass at the moment, but, it would show the hypocrisy.

Read: NY Times: Say, These EVs Are Rather Expensive For The Middle And Lower Classes, Eh? »

Politicized FBI Raids Trump’s Mar-O-Lago

This is the same FBI which refused to do its job when Hillary Clinton broke national security law, worked to destroy Trump before the 2016 election, pushed the phony Russia collusion, and tried to cover up Hunter Biden’s stuff and how it links to Joe Biden, among others

FBI Raids Former President Donald Trump’s Home

Former President Donald Trump’s Florida home, Mar-A-Lago, was raided by FBI agents, Trump announced in a statement on Monday.

“These are dark times for our Nation, as my beautiful home, Mar- A-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided, and occupied by a large group of FBI agents,” Trump said. “Nothing like this has ever happened to a President of the United States before.”

“The political persecution of President Donald J. Trump has been going on for years, with the now fully debunked Russia, Russia, Russia Scam, Impeachment Hoax #1, Impeachment Hoax #2, and so much more, it just never ends,” Trump said. “It is political targeting at the highest level!”

He also pointed out that “absolutely nothing has happened” to failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, who deleted 33,000 emails after they were subpoenaed by Congress.

Remember, there was an open FBI investigation, and she wiped a server, which is pretty much obstruction of justice. And they knew she was using the server in violation….you know all this stuff.

So, what happens now? The Democrats have now set the standard, but, will the GOP play this same game, or continue with the get along go along method? If a team is running your big players in the NHL, you don’t sit back and take it, you start throwing hits, and fighting if necessary. Otherwise, the team is going to keep doing it. Just like the Democrats did to the GOP with things like IRS targeting, and the GOP did….nothing. When President Trump tried to fight back, the squishes got squishy and whiny. If the GOP wins the House and/or Senate, there needs to be hardcore hearings all over the place, with subpoenas backed by federal law enforcement going and arresting people, and prosecutions.

Read: Politicized FBI Raids Trump’s Mar-O-Lago »

Climate Crisis (scam) Today: Colorful Birds, Rising CO2

This is all your fault, you know

Birds Losing Feather Colors: Another Effect of Climate Change, Study Reveals

A 15-year study on the common bird known as the blue tit found that as a result of climate change, birds were far less vibrant as their feathers lost their usual bright color.

Because our feathered friends rely on their plumage to attract mates, it is dulling flashy colorful feathers and endangering their ability to survive.

The occurrence raises concerns as it may result in fewer new chicks.

According to Dr. David Lopez-Idiaquez of the University of the Basque Country in Spain, characteristics like coloring serve as signals to let other people know how good a specimen is. For instance, when it comes to breeding, they are decisive. Lopez-Idiaquez is the lead author of the study. (snip)

The conclusions are based on observations of the iconic blue tit, which is distinguished by a bright blue crest and a yellow breast.

Two populations of the bird species in southern France were monitored for 15 years; one was in Corsica and the other was near Montpellier.

According to their study’s findings, both groups’ average levels of color decreased from 2005 to 2019.

So, let me get this straight: they studied two small populations of one type of bird in two small areas, and we’re supposed to devine that the colors of bird feathers is bad everywhere, and that birds are in trouble? Really? Now compare this to a previous Holocene warm period: did the same happen? Or, could it be other conditions, like air, water, and land pollution? Pesticides? Something else? In climate cult world, everything is doom and everything is caused by it.

Earth’s CO2 Level Rose Every Year Since Climate Change Became a National Issue

On June 3 of this year, NOAA scientists announced a weather station at Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Atmospheric Baseline Observatory had recorded carbon dioxide levels at 421 parts per million (ppm) in May.

The last time the earth experienced similar levels of this greenhouse gas was during the Pliocene Epoch millions of years ago, a period when global temperatures increased and sea levels may have reached as high as 20 meters (65 feet) above present-day levels.

Both CO2 and sea level subsequently fell precipitously, and over the past 6,000 years, levels remained around 280 parts per million. No longer. The global average grew from 350.9 ppm to 418.39 ppm between 1988 and 2022, an alarming 19% increase. Today the amount of CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere is more than 50% higher than it was prior to the Industrial Revolution.

Which is weird, because there was a pause, roughly between 1998 and 2012, in which the rising temps were considered “statistically insignificant.” And there’s currently a smaller pause. So, perhaps CO2 is not the big deal the climate cultists think.

Read: Climate Crisis (scam) Today: Colorful Birds, Rising CO2 »

If All You See…

…is are horrible carbon pollution clouds, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on the Woke Green Lantern show being cancelled.

Read: If All You See… »

NY Times, Mayor Adams Upset Those Seeking Asylum In Texas Dropped Off In NYC

See, they weren’t seeking asylum, something that only 10% or less qualify for, in Texas, but, the United States, and unfettered illegal immigration is something that the NY Times and Mayor Adams support and push for. The next few buses should drop illegals off near the NY Times building on West 41st Street and Gracie Mansion, the government home of the NYC mayor (paywalled Times article here)

Seeking Asylum in Texas, Sent to New York to Make a Political Point

The first 3,500 miles of Jose Rodríguez’s journey from Venezuela to here took nearly two months.

The last 2,000 took less than two days, aboard a bus chartered by the state of Texas.

Rodríguez was among about 50 migrants who arrived at the Port Authority Bus Terminal in Times Square early Friday amid a raging political battle over immigration.

Since April, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, has been shipping newly arrived asylum-seekers to immigrant-friendly Democratic cities on the East Coast to try to pressure the Biden administration into cracking down at the border. Abbott’s press office said the bus that arrived in Manhattan on Friday, which left Eagle Pass on Wednesday afternoon, held “the first group of migrants bused to New York City from Texas.”

The Times is upset that this was done to make a political point. And that NYC suddenly has to deal with a small portion of what Texas border towns have to deal with.

Like Washington, New York is “the ideal destination for these migrants, who can receive the abundance of city services and housing that Mayor Eric Adams has boasted about within the sanctuary city,” Abbott said in a statement Friday. “I hope he follows through on his promise of welcoming all migrants with open arms so that our overrun and overwhelmed border towns can find relief.”

Just because they’re a sanctuary city doesn’t mean they want to put their money where their mouth’s are.

Adams is having a bit of a hissy fit

(Fox News) Adams gave a news conference Sunday morning at the Port Authority where he greeted an incoming bus of around 40 migrants — only 14 of whom disembarked in the Big Apple.

“This is horrific when you think about what the governor is doing,” Adams said, noting that many of the arriving families did not realize they were coming to New York City.

He should see what’s going on in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona, especially the border towns, how have to deal with all the things that come with unfettered illegal immigration.

“We’re finding that some of the families are on the bus that wanted to go to other locations, and they were not allowed to do so,” the mayor said. “They were forced on the bus with the understanding that they were going to other locations that they wanted to go to, and when they tried to explain they were not allowed to do so.”

They came illegally. They should be put back on the other side of the border, but, because of Democrat rules, it takes forever to go through the asylum hearings, and, even if found not eligible, most do not get deported. And, what of the Biden admin flying them all over the country and dropping them off? Did they want to go to those places? Really, it doesn’t matter where they want to go, they’re here illegally, and will go where they’re sent.

Read: NY Times, Mayor Adams Upset Those Seeking Asylum In Texas Dropped Off In NYC »

Climate Cult Wants To Reduce Your Sugar Consumption Through Taxation

I think back to when I switched from believer (small b) in anthropogenic global warming to Skeptic, and I started saying this was all about higher taxation and fees, government control of the economy and energy sector, along with a loss of freedom, liberty, and life choices. Many skeptics said I was wrong that this had nothing to do with science. And once again

Reducing Sugar Consumption Through Taxation Could Help Fight Climate Change, New Study Finds

Reducing sugar consumption could help fight climate change and promote sustainability, according to a new study. The study from the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology of the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ICTA-UAB) revealed the potential for climate and sustainability by reducing sugar consumption. The study found that reducing sugar consumption by redirecting land used for sugar to alternative sources could be extremely beneficial for the environment.

The study, published in the journal Nature Sustainability, highlights how the adaptation of a sugar tax could help the environment and public health as sugar is one of the worst foods to consume.

Surprise! Oh, and they want control of land, too

The authors looked at three scenarios of how to redirect existing sugar cropland to alternate uses.

  1. The EU reforesting its existing sugar cropland.
  2. The EU switching its sugar beet crops to ethanol production.
  3. The EU exporting its excess sugar production while Brazil switches its sugarcane crops to ethanol production.

How nice

Sugar taxation will be the most effective tool for reducing sugar consumption. This will be not only great for the environment but also for public health. Reports have found that processed food and sugar lead to malnutrition and obesity. Check out these recipes to help Curb Your Cravings for Sugar With These Naturally Sweet Foods!

Well, yes, too much sugar is bad for your health. Of course, the same people who believe in climate doom will accuse the people push this tax as fatphobic. Also, these people can mind their own f’ing business. They don’t want sugar? Then don’t have it in their own lives. Leave everyone else the F alone

Cory Booker, senator from New Jersey, is challenging Americans to take a sugar-free challenge with him for the next three months.

I dare him, and all the ones signing up for his challenge, to give up their use of fossil fuels.

Read: Climate Cult Wants To Reduce Your Sugar Consumption Through Taxation »

Who Are The Winners And Losers In Democrats “Inflation Reduction” Bill

You know one thing that’s not a winner? Inflation reduction. No one is mentioning inflation reduction now

Winners and Losers in Democrats’ Signature Tax and Energy Bill

President Joe Biden and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer are the biggest winners now that a huge piece of Democrats’ economic agenda is hurtling toward enactment.

That remains to be seen come the elections in November. Will Republicans take advantage of the terrible bill? Who are the winners (there are more at the link)

  • The Wealthy
  • Electric Carmakers (that most Americans cannot afford)
  • Renewable Energy (that will increase the price of energy for middle and lower class Americans in a time of skyrocketing energy prices)
  • Oil Companies (in theory, but, not practice, as the Biden admin will not allow more drilling, nor will the activist groups)
  • The IRS

That last one should be fun

Supercharged IRS Will Audit Lower- and Middle-Income Earners

“Congress wants more tax revenue because it can’t control its appetite for spending. That’s why it wants a tax agency in beast mode,” writes the Editorial Board of the Wall Street Journal in a new op-ed.

The new Manchin-Biden Build Back Better bill allots $80 billion in new funding for the IRS – more than six times the agency’s current annual budget.

Included in the $80 billion is funding to send 87,000 new IRS agents after you and your family-owned business on the belief that everyone is a tax cheat. The IRS has already been targeting lower and middle income earners, yet Democrats want to hire new IRS agents to audit individuals and small businesses. They’ve also promised to revive their invasive bank surveillance scheme.

If anyone thinks all these extra IRS agents will target The Rich, well, sure, some, but, they have lots of accountants and lawyers to be used to fight the IRS. The mom and pop running the nail salon, burger joint, and other small businesses don’t. Nor individuals. The IRS can simply come for your bank account and make you prove you didn’t make a mistake. And there is almost no way to stop this unless the GOP has the House, Senate, and White House come 2025. Will they balk in making sure 87,000 IRS employees are promoted to private citizen?

Who are the losers

  • Republicans (will see how that plays out in the mid-terms)
  • Pharmaceutical Companies (until they figure out ways around this. I’m not against lower prices, but, there are always unintended consequences when Congress plays these games)
  • Tech Companies (this is about a minimum tax and stock buybacks. I doubt many of us care about them paying more, but, again, unintended consequences, plus, you know there must be a loophole, since they mostly donate to Democrats)
  • The SALT Caucus (bummer, Democrats in Dem states cannot write off more due to high state taxes)
  • Bernie Sanders (yeah, he wanted more spending).

Not mentioned was the middle class, liberty, freedom of choice, and affordable products. Things like air conditioning units and furnaces had already been slated to go up thousands of dollars next year. You can bet refrigerators, washers and dryers, and so many other products will, too. Windows, insulation, wood, you name it.

Read: Who Are The Winners And Losers In Democrats “Inflation Reduction” Bill »

Pirate's Cove