EV Discussion thread

michaels

JKenH said:

Ahead of the SMMT’s registration figures for July which, I believe, should be published today I came across this article from Autocar with figures for the private buyer take up for some of the popular EVs. Perhaps we will see better figures this month. 

Industry calls for urgent support as electric car uptake slows

That market share plateau is driven by a slump in overall private EV registrations, which are down about 20% year on year and now account for less than half of the total number of new car registrations. 

As dramatic snapshots of the market, just 13% of Volkswagen ID 5s, 21% of Tesla Model Ys and 41% of Ford Mustang Mach-Es this year have been sold to private customers. 

Research from Auto Trader, published under the title The Road to 2030, further underlines this, suggesting there has been a 65% year-on-year fall in the number of enquiries sent to retailers about electric cars, with EV enquiries currently only accounting for 9% of the total, compared with 27% this time last year. 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/industry-calls-urgent-support-electric-car-uptake-slows

This makes logical/financial sense.  Basically company buyers get a big discount which means for them the effective new price is lower which will apply a similar downward pressure on used prices.  Private buyers don't get the new price discount but still face the lower used price hence higher cost of ownership and thus relatively speaking a bad buy.

eg TM3 list price 40k but effetive price to a company buyer 35k due to the tax incentive.  After 3 years the SH value will be based on the 35k as the vast majority of sales are effectively at this price (just as an example 35k x 40% = 14k), leaving those who pay 40k with no incentive seeing depreciation of 26k rather than the 21k seen by the fleet buyers.  ICE vehicles don't see the subsidy so won't suffer from this effect so make more sense for private buyers.

JKenH

michaels said:

JKenH said:

Ahead of the SMMT’s registration figures for July which, I believe, should be published today I came across this article from Autocar with figures for the private buyer take up for some of the popular EVs. Perhaps we will see better figures this month. 

Industry calls for urgent support as electric car uptake slows

That market share plateau is driven by a slump in overall private EV registrations, which are down about 20% year on year and now account for less than half of the total number of new car registrations. 

As dramatic snapshots of the market, just 13% of Volkswagen ID 5s, 21% of Tesla Model Ys and 41% of Ford Mustang Mach-Es this year have been sold to private customers. 

Research from Auto Trader, published under the title The Road to 2030, further underlines this, suggesting there has been a 65% year-on-year fall in the number of enquiries sent to retailers about electric cars, with EV enquiries currently only accounting for 9% of the total, compared with 27% this time last year. 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/industry-calls-urgent-support-electric-car-uptake-slows

This makes logical/financial sense.  Basically company buyers get a big discount which means for them the effective new price is lower which will apply a similar downward pressure on used prices.  Private buyers don't get the new price discount but still face the lower used price hence higher cost of ownership and thus relatively speaking a bad buy.

eg TM3 list price 40k but effetive price to a company buyer 35k due to the tax incentive.  After 3 years the SH value will be based on the 35k as the vast majority of sales are effectively at this price (just as an example 35k x 40% = 14k), leaving those who pay 40k with no incentive seeing depreciation of 26k rather than the 21k seen by the fleet buyers.  ICE vehicles don't see the subsidy so won't suffer from this effect so make more sense for private buyers.

So, the tax advantages for businesses are effectively deterring potential private new EV buyers?

Exiled_Tyke

michaels said:

JKenH said:

Ahead of the SMMT’s registration figures for July which, I believe, should be published today I came across this article from Autocar with figures for the private buyer take up for some of the popular EVs. Perhaps we will see better figures this month. 

Industry calls for urgent support as electric car uptake slows

That market share plateau is driven by a slump in overall private EV registrations, which are down about 20% year on year and now account for less than half of the total number of new car registrations. 

As dramatic snapshots of the market, just 13% of Volkswagen ID 5s, 21% of Tesla Model Ys and 41% of Ford Mustang Mach-Es this year have been sold to private customers. 

Research from Auto Trader, published under the title The Road to 2030, further underlines this, suggesting there has been a 65% year-on-year fall in the number of enquiries sent to retailers about electric cars, with EV enquiries currently only accounting for 9% of the total, compared with 27% this time last year. 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/industry-calls-urgent-support-electric-car-uptake-slows

This makes logical/financial sense.  Basically company buyers get a big discount which means for them the effective new price is lower which will apply a similar downward pressure on used prices.  Private buyers don't get the new price discount but still face the lower used price hence higher cost of ownership and thus relatively speaking a bad buy.

eg TM3 list price 40k but effetive price to a company buyer 35k due to the tax incentive.  After 3 years the SH value will be based on the 35k as the vast majority of sales are effectively at this price (just as an example 35k x 40% = 14k), leaving those who pay 40k with no incentive seeing depreciation of 26k rather than the 21k seen by the fleet buyers.  ICE vehicles don't see the subsidy so won't suffer from this effect so make more sense for private buyers.

And the further question is:  do manufacturers realise this and so get away with keeping their prices higher than they need to to make more profit out of businesses knowing they will be losing a relatively smaller amount of private buyers?  With the tax situation as it is the difference in costs is absurd. Anyone who wants an EV and can get it through a company really should.   

On other the hand I have friends who wouldn't ever contemplate and EV nor buying a new car who now have had the opportunity to do so.  

thevilla

Surely the tax incentives should be loaded against ICE.  Increase fuel duty on fossil to incentivise alternative fuels.  Less need to give takes breaks to employees and a less skewed EV market.

The govt won't do it though as the right wing press in particular, use fossil fuel price as a dog whistle.  The fuel price escalator of the 1990s(?) was a good idea.

JKenH

thevilla said:

Surely the tax incentives should be loaded against ICE.  Increase fuel duty on fossil to incentivise alternative fuels.  Less need to give takes breaks to employees and a less skewed EV market.

The govt won't do it though as the right wing press in particular, use fossil fuel price as a dog whistle.  The fuel price escalator of the 1990s(?) was a good idea.

The government will be mindful that over 90% of the electorate still drive ICE cars, as will any new government elected in 2024.

Exiled_Tyke

thevilla said:

Surely the tax incentives should be loaded against ICE.  Increase fuel duty on fossil to incentivise alternative fuels.  Less need to give takes breaks to employees and a less skewed EV market.

The govt won't do it though as the right wing press in particular, use fossil fuel price as a dog whistle.  The fuel price escalator of the 1990s(?) was a good idea.

the issue here as we've seen with the London ULEZ is that hammering fossil fuels punishes those most  who can least afford the change.   I reckon we need a number of devices to achieve the shift but most of all we need government commitment AND to have the courage and political will to distance themselves from the FF companies. 

shinytop

thevilla said:

Surely the tax incentives should be loaded against ICE.  Increase fuel duty on fossil to incentivise alternative fuels.  Less need to give takes breaks to employees and a less skewed EV market.

The govt won't do it though as the right wing press in particular, use fossil fuel price as a dog whistle.  The fuel price escalator of the 1990s(?) was a good idea.

I thought they were.  Fuel duty, VAT on fuel and BiK and (to date) road tax to name a few. 

Increasing taxes for the less affluent majority (ICEV drivers) while decreasing them for the affluent minority (EV drivers) isn't going to be a vote winner for any government.                

michaels

thevilla said:

Surely the tax incentives should be loaded against ICE.  Increase fuel duty on fossil to incentivise alternative fuels.  Less need to give takes breaks to employees and a less skewed EV market.

The govt won't do it though as the right wing press in particular, use fossil fuel price as a dog whistle.  The fuel price escalator of the 1990s(?) was a good idea.

I suspect if you worked out how much tax is being lost through the BK the amounts are eyewatering (although of course they have hugely altered purchasing patterns).  If instead they had spent the same £5-£10bn subsidising buyers of UK produced EVs as the US did we would have the same number of EVs but they would have been produced in the UK.  Not sure why the UK govt finds it so uniquely hard to tie together environmental and industrial policeis?

CKhalvashi

michaels said:

thevilla said:

Surely the tax incentives should be loaded against ICE.  Increase fuel duty on fossil to incentivise alternative fuels.  Less need to give takes breaks to employees and a less skewed EV market.

The govt won't do it though as the right wing press in particular, use fossil fuel price as a dog whistle.  The fuel price escalator of the 1990s(?) was a good idea.

I suspect if you worked out how much tax is being lost through the BK the amounts are eyewatering (although of course they have hugely altered purchasing patterns).  If instead they had spent the same £5-£10bn subsidising buyers of UK produced EVs as the US did we would have the same number of EVs but they would have been produced in the UK.  Not sure why the UK govt finds it so uniquely hard to tie together environmental and industrial policeis?

I'm not sure that is possible under trade agreements.

There generally are non discrimination clauses in these.

Exiled_Tyke

CKhalvashi said:

michaels said:

thevilla said:

Surely the tax incentives should be loaded against ICE.  Increase fuel duty on fossil to incentivise alternative fuels.  Less need to give takes breaks to employees and a less skewed EV market.

The govt won't do it though as the right wing press in particular, use fossil fuel price as a dog whistle.  The fuel price escalator of the 1990s(?) was a good idea.

I suspect if you worked out how much tax is being lost through the BK the amounts are eyewatering (although of course they have hugely altered purchasing patterns).  If instead they had spent the same £5-£10bn subsidising buyers of UK produced EVs as the US did we would have the same number of EVs but they would have been produced in the UK.  Not sure why the UK govt finds it so uniquely hard to tie together environmental and industrial policeis?

I'm not sure that is possible under trade agreements.

There generally are non discrimination clauses in these.

I think you are right on this. Even if UK government isn't barred from incentivising UK production under trade agreements there would surely be retaliation by other countries.   However the point raised is an important one.  The benefits have been given to those who need them least and those billions could probably have been spent far more imaginatively to produce the step change we need (and that's before we talk about battery factories and the government's role in that debacle!!)