👷‍♂️ Tesla plans for 375K Cybertruck annual production (at least) and have first release candidates by late August! [supplier news 6/8/23]

[anionic1]

My nephew bought a Model Y in LA last month. It qualifies for the full $7,500 rebate but none was given at the time that he completed the purchase. Clearly he will have to submit for the rebate on his 2023 tax return. Although I am not surprised that Tesla does it this way, they certainly 'could' have because they have all of the information the government would require 'except' for the AGI from the tax form and my nephew could certainly have provided that information along with all the other information he was required to submit.

It’s not just Tesla. They changed the law to a tax credit rather than a dealer rebate. Tesla can’t file your nephews taxes or claim his credit. They have no way of getting that money from the gov. Your nephew now had to have paid more than $7500 in taxes this year to get the full credit.

Sponsored

 

[Glenn]

375,00 annual production works out to 7500 Cybertrucks per week if operating at a 50 week production schedule to allow for holidays.

We are all still waiting for the final puzzle piece. Pricing.

It looks pricing will be revealed within the next 7- weeks if the delivery event is planned for the end of August.

Did they also say there will be a Quad now, or is the Tri at the top?

 

[HaulingAss]

It’s not just Tesla. They changed the law to a tax credit rather than a dealer rebate. Tesla can’t file your nephews taxes or claim his credit. They have no way of getting that money from the gov. Your nephew now had to have paid more than $7500 in taxes this year to get the full credit.

I'm hearing the rebate at the time of sale will only be available in the future.

 

[anionic1]

I'm hearing the rebate at the time of sale will only be available in the future.

I do wonder how that would affect pricing. I think it actually keeps vendors more competitive because it keeps their price looking hirer at the point of sale which keeps pressure on them to keep the cost as low as possible. If they were to get the credit and be able to advertise the car for $7500 less there would seem to be less pressure to keep the cost down since the cost would already appear to be down.

 

[TBONO]

So we do not know what on the hood means, nor do we have the details or legislation for implementation on it? Correct?

A chat GPT query on this show is the following response, which is in line with my prior experience where it Hass to go through your personal taxes. Shifting it to the point-of-sale brings up the issue of who has accountability once a rebate is given if it is with the dealer, then the dealer has accountability and authorization to confirm your income, which opens up a whole new can of worms.


I apologize for any confusion caused by my previous response. There is no specific term called "on the hood" in the context of an EV tax rebate. The phrase "on the hood" typically refers to a discount or incentive provided directly at the time of purchase, often applied as a reduction in the vehicle's price.

Cgpt:
When it comes to electric vehicle tax rebates or credits, they are generally claimed after the purchase of the vehicle, typically through the process of filing a tax return. These incentives are usually applied as a credit against your income tax liability, potentially resulting in a lower tax bill or even a tax refund.

It's important to consult with a tax professional or refer to the official guidelines provided by the relevant government agency to understand the specific details and requirements of the EV tax rebate or credit available in your country or region.

 

[rudedawg78]

Did they also say there will be a Quad now, or is the Tri at the top?

Yes, Elon announced there will be a quad motor, and that trim will 'possibly' be built first.

 

[cvalue13]

So we do not know what on the hood means, nor do we have the details or legislation for implementation on it? Correct?

Nah, we do know what on the hood means (see below), there is legislation (30D(g) of the amended Code - see end of post), and we know the basics of implementation (the taxpayer transfers the credit to the dealer at the time of purchase, and so received the credit off the purchase price “on the hood” rather than as a credit in their tax filing).

And these types of point-of-sale rebates aren’t novel, and the IRA has several similar Point-of-sale rebates for appliances (eg stoves) and other classes of assets.

But the details of implementation for BEV sales aren’t yet issued by the IRS or Treasury. And we be curious of details.

Rather than citing the Code language, here is the IRS’s description as provided in its request for comments before rule making - in relevant parts - my emphasis in bold underline. The last paragraph makes clear that if a taxpayer gets a point of sale credit but later is found to not be eligible (eg they make too much $ in the tax year) that they’ll owe the money back come tax time.

but what’s not yet clear until the IRS issues it’s guidance is what the dealer (or IRS) will require at the hood in order to evidence income (though probably about what they require to evidence financing decisions), avoid people gaming the credit (basically, getting a $7,500 loan due back at tax filing), etc.

Section 13401(g) of the IRA amends § 30(D)(g) of the Code applicable to vehicles placed in service after December 31, 2023, to provide that, subject to such regulations or other guidance as the Secretary determines necessary, a taxpayer may elect under § 30D(g) to “transfer” a § 30D credit with respect to a new clean vehicle to an eligible entity (transfer election). If the taxpayer who acquires a new clean vehicle makes a transfer election under § 30D(g) with respect to such vehicle, the § 30D credit that would otherwise be allowed to such taxpayer with respect to such vehicle is allowed to the eligible entity specified in such election (and not the taxpayer). Section 30D(g)(2) defines an “eligible entity” with respect to the vehicle for which the credit is allowed as the dealer that sold such vehicle to the taxpayer and that satisfies the following four requirements set forth in § 30D(g)(2)(A) through (D):​

(A) The dealer, subject to § 30D(g)(4), must be registered with the Secretary for purposes of § 30D(g)(2), at such time, and in such form and manner, as the Secretary prescribes.​

(B) The dealer, prior to the transfer election and not later than at the time of sale, must have disclosed to the taxpayer purchasing such vehicle (i) the manufacturer's suggested retail price, (ii) the value of the credit allowed and any other incentive available for the purchase of such vehicle, and (iii) the amount provided by the dealer to such taxpayer as a condition of the transfer election.​

(C) The dealer, not later than at the time of sale, must have paid the taxpayer (whether in cash or in the form of a partial payment or down payment for the purchase of such vehicle) an amount equal to the credit otherwise allowable to such taxpayer.​

(D) The dealer with respect to any incentive otherwise available for the purchase of a vehicle for which a credit is allowed under § 30D, including any incentive in the form of a rebate or discount provided by the dealer or manufacturer, must have ensured that (i) the availability or use of such incentive does not limit the ability of a taxpayer to make a transfer election and (ii) such election does not limit the value or use of such incentive.​

​

Amended § 30D(g)(3) provides that any transfer election cannot be made by the taxpayer any later than the date on which the vehicle for which the § 30D credit is allowed is purchased. Amended § 30D(g)(4) provides that upon determination by the Secretary that a dealer has failed to comply with the requirements described in​

§ 30D(g)(2), the Secretary may revoke the dealer’s registration.​

Amended § 30D(g)(5) provides that with respect to any payment described in​

§ 30D(g)(2)(C), such payment (A) is not includible in the gross income of the taxpayer, and (B) with respect to the dealer, is not deductible under the Code. Section 30D(g)(6) provides that, in the case of any transfer election with respect to any vehicle (A) the requirements of § 30D(f)(1) and (2) apply to the taxpayer who acquired the vehicle in the same manner as if the § 30D credit determined with respect to such vehicle were allowed to such taxpayer, (B) § 30D(f)(6) does not apply, and (C) the requirement of § 30D(f)(9) is treated as satisfied if the eligible entity provides the vehicle identification number of such vehicle to the Secretary in such manner as the Secretary may provide.​

Amended § 30D(g)(7)(A) provides for the establishment of a program to make advance payments to any eligible entity in an amount equal to the cumulative amount of the credits allowed with respect to any vehicles sold by such entity for which a transfer election described in § 30D(g)(1) has been made. Amended § 30D(g)(7)(B) details that rules similar to the rules of § 6417(d)(6) apply for purposes of any excessive payments.​

Amended § 30D(g)(8) defines the term “dealer” as a person licensed by a State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any other territory or possession of the United States, an Indian tribal government, or any Alaska NativeCorporation (as defined in § 3 of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602(m)) to engage in the sale of vehicles.​

​

Amended § 30D(g)(10) provides that in the case of any taxpayer who has made a transfer election with respect to a new clean vehicle and received a payment from an eligible entity, if the §30D credit would otherwise (but for § 30D(g)) not be allowable to such taxpayer pursuant to the application of § 30D(f)(10), the income tax imposed on such taxpayer under chapter 1 of the Code for the taxable year in which such vehicle was placed in service must be increased by the amount of the payment received by such taxpayer.​

 

[cvalue13]

PS, anyone taking the point-of-sale credit and with income near the cutoffs may want to watch their (and their joint filing parter’s) pennies towards year end.

Hate to go $500 over the income limit and trigger a $7,500 tax liability

 

[HaulingAss]

So we do not know what on the hood means, nor do we have the details or legislation for implementation on it? Correct?

A chat GPT query on this show is the following response, which is in line with my prior experience where it Hass to go through your personal taxes. Shifting it to the point-of-sale brings up the issue of who has accountability once a rebate is given if it is with the dealer, then the dealer has accountability and authorization to confirm your income, which opens up a whole new can of worms.

No, I know enough about taxes and collection to know the Department of Revenue would NEVER put the burden of determining eligibility of a tax incentive on a car dealer. It always rests with the individual filing their taxes/claiming the rebate. That means an individual could potentially sign a statement transfering the rebate to the dealership, but, ultimately, the liability falls on the taxpayer. If the taxpayer took the benefit of a credit they were not eligible for, it is the taxpayer that would be on the hook to the IRS.

Why do you keep stating a point-of-sale rebate would necessitate shifting the liability to the dealer?

 

[cvalue13]

Department of Revenue would NEVER put the burden of determining eligibility of a tax incentive on a car dealer

ultimate liability for predicting YE income? No

impose various requirements for vetting probability of qualification at time of sale, in order to avoid bad actors gamin the rebate as a $7,500 loan? Absolutely

which dealer responsibilities are the benefit of the bargain: if you want to attract customers for sales with $7,500 off the purchase contract on the hood, there are hoops you must jump through. If you don’t want to jump through those hoops, then tell the customer instead to take the credit at filing.

This isn’t rocket surgery

 

[TBONO]

No, I know enough about taxes and collection to know the Department of Revenue would NEVER put the burden of determining eligibility of a tax incentive on a car dealer. It always rests with the individual filing their taxes/claiming the rebate. That means an individual could potentially sign a statement transfering the rebate to the dealership, but, ultimately, the liability falls on the taxpayer. If the taxpayer took the benefit of a credit they were not eligible for, it is the taxpayer that would be on the hook to the IRS.

Why do you keep stating a point-of-sale rebate would necessitate shifting the liability to the dealer?

I am not stating it shifts liability to the dealer. I am asking if it does.

Overall on the hood seems quite challenging to implement either that or quite challenging for someone to explain it

 

[HaulingAss]

I am not stating it shifts liability to the dealer. I am asking if it does.

Overall on the hood seems quite challenging to implement either that or quite challenging for someone to explain it

No, you stated it shifted liability to the dealer.

The fact is, the IRS is tasked with developing rules to re-imburse the dealer so "cash on the hood" can be implemented in 2024. Because the dealer gets re-imbursed by the IRS, the obvious way this will be implemented is for the car buyer to fill out a form certifying they are eligible, the dealer gives them the discount knowing the IRS will re-imburse them, and the IRS will re-imburse them as long as the buyer has submitted the proper signed statement claiming eligibility. Then, if the tax-payer lied, or if they were wrong, they owe an obligation to the IRS, not the dealer.

The U.S. taxpayer is always responsible for filing a correct tax return, the IRS can audit them at any time. It's a system very much based on the honor system with periodic audits to keep most people honest. All the responsibility will fall upon the taxpayer/car buyer, not the dealership. The dealership will only be responsible for ensuring the buyer has a proper signed statement declaring eligibility under penalty of claw back by the IRS.

I hope this helps you understand enough that you will stop confusing the issue by claiming this must put the responsibility of verifying the buyers tax return on the dealership. That is ridiculous.

 

[HaulingAss]

Also, the rules regarding eligibility for the $7500 state that either the previous year's taxes or the current years taxes can be used for eligibility. If you qualify under either year, you can take the $7500.

 

[PattiPRN]

Supplier communication/report would seem pretty solid info to rely on so this is an exciting base volume production we're seeing Tesla telling suppliers to plan for!

Tesla plans for 375,000 Cybertrucks per year, will have release candidates by late August

Source: https://electrek.co/2023/06/08/tesla-plans-375000-cybertrucks-per-year-release-candidates-late-august/

Now, Electrek gets more details through communications that Tesla sent to suppliers for the Cybertruck program, which it calls “Project Everest,” internally and with suppliers.​

​

Tesla has asked suppliers to plan to meet a base production volume of 375,000 Cybertrucks per year. For a base volume, it seems to be a bit more aggressive than what Musk communicated publicly at Tesla’s annual shareholder’s meeting, but Tesla has been frequently adjusting to target.​

​

Earlier this year, it was about 100,000 units lower. Also, the number is planned for the production lines running at 85% efficiency. We also got some details on Cybertruck’s timeline for production.​

​

According to communications to suppliers, Tesla is planning to have its first Cybertruck release candidates at the end of August.​

​

Release candidates are built on the production line and are the last step before official start of production. Based on the current timeline, the official start of production is planned for early October.​

​

It points to Tesla’s delivery event being only for employees and Tesla insiders, like it was for Tesla’s latest vehicle program to launch, the Model Y.​

 

[PattiPRN]

Supplier communication/report would seem pretty solid info to rely on so this is an exciting base volume production we're seeing Tesla telling suppliers to plan for!

Tesla plans for 375,000 Cybertrucks per year, will have release candidates by late August

Source: https://electrek.co/2023/06/08/tesla-plans-375000-cybertrucks-per-year-release-candidates-late-august/

Now, Electrek gets more details through communications that Tesla sent to suppliers for the Cybertruck program, which it calls “Project Everest,” internally and with suppliers.​

​

Tesla has asked suppliers to plan to meet a base production volume of 375,000 Cybertrucks per year. For a base volume, it seems to be a bit more aggressive than what Musk communicated publicly at Tesla’s annual shareholder’s meeting, but Tesla has been frequently adjusting to target.​

​

Earlier this year, it was about 100,000 units lower. Also, the number is planned for the production lines running at 85% efficiency. We also got some details on Cybertruck’s timeline for production.​

​

According to communications to suppliers, Tesla is planning to have its first Cybertruck release candidates at the end of August.​

​

Release candidates are built on the production line and are the last step before official start of production. Based on the current timeline, the official start of production is planned for early October.​

​

It points to Tesla’s delivery event being only for employees and Tesla insiders, like it was for Tesla’s latest vehicle program to launch, the Model Y.​

Supplier communication/report would seem pretty solid info to rely on so this is an exciting base volume production we're seeing Tesla telling suppliers to plan for!

Tesla plans for 375,000 Cybertrucks per year, will have release candidates by late August

Source: https://electrek.co/2023/06/08/tesla-plans-375000-cybertrucks-per-year-release-candidates-late-august/

Now, Electrek gets more details through communications that Tesla sent to suppliers for the Cybertruck program, which it calls “Project Everest,” internally and with suppliers.​

​

Tesla has asked suppliers to plan to meet a base production volume of 375,000 Cybertrucks per year. For a base volume, it seems to be a bit more aggressive than what Musk communicated publicly at Tesla’s annual shareholder’s meeting, but Tesla has been frequently adjusting to target.​

​

Earlier this year, it was about 100,000 units lower. Also, the number is planned for the production lines running at 85% efficiency. We also got some details on Cybertruck’s timeline for production.​

​

According to communications to suppliers, Tesla is planning to have its first Cybertruck release candidates at the end of August.​

​

Release candidates are built on the production line and are the last step before official start of production. Based on the current timeline, the official start of production is planned for early October.​

​

It points to Tesla’s delivery event being only for employees and Tesla insiders, like it was for Tesla’s latest vehicle program to launch, the Model Y.​

do we need to call our Tesla shop to say we are ready?

Sponsored