• long running

Electric Vehicle Government Subsidies, Registration, Stamp Duty Discounts @ States & Federal Governments

2664

I don't know where these post belong. If Mods believe it belongs into Forum then they can remove it.
I found an article that has very good information regarding EV Incentives in Federal, States and Territory.
These post is for people that thinking of purchasing an EV vehicle and inform them about the various available incentives by Federal, States and Territory.

Federal https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislat…
Incentives
The Labor Government launched its first ever electric vehicle strategy in September 2022, and in November 2022, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Electric Car Discount) Bill passed through the Federal Parliament, which will provide up to $2000 off the purchase price of battery-electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEV), as well as Fringe Benefits Tax (FBT) exemptions for fleets and novated leases.
The Government will apply the exemption retrospectively to eligible cars first used on or after July 1, 2022.
PHEVs will initially be covered, but the offer will expire on April 1, 2025.
Tax
The Luxury Car Tax threshold for low-emission vehicles has been raised to $84,916, from the standard vehicle starting rate of $71,849.
Alongside the removal of the Fringe Benefits Tax the five per cent import tariff for EVs priced under the LCT limit has been cut.
The FBT savings amount to $9000 per annum for an employer, or $4700 for an individual with a salary sacrifice agreement for a $50k electric vehicle.
Cutting import tariffs drops purchase prices by a further $2500, according to the documents.

NEW SOUTH WALES official gov. website

Incentives
$3000 rebate for the first 25,000 EVs or FCEVs sold which are priced under $68,750 – but read the fine print, the offer is on the RRP plus the delivery charge and optional extras
Stamp duty waived on both types of vehicle under $78,000 – all from September 1, 2021
EV drivers can also use T2 and T3 transit lanes across NSW

Registration fee discounts.
Tax
2.5c/km BEV, 2c/km PHEV – but only as of July 1, 2027

VICTORIA official gov. website

Incentives
$3000 subsidy given for the first 20,000 EVs or FCEVs sold which are priced under $68,740,** as with NSW the **offer is on the RRP plus the delivery charge and optional extras
Reduced stamp duty rates
$100 discount on registration annually.
Tax
2.6c/km BEV, 2.1c/km PHEV from July 1, 2022

Update: as of June 30th 2023, The Victorian government has ended this scheme.

QUEENSLAND official gov. website

Incentives
$3000 rebate for new BEVs up to $58,000 on 15,000 cars as of March 16, 2022, like the other states the **offer is on the RRP plus the delivery charge and optional extras
Lowest car registration for BEVs – $263 a year
Lower stamp duty rates than ICE cars.
Tax
No plans at this time.

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY official gov. website

Incentives
Two years’ free registration for BEVs and FCEVs as of May 24, 2021 until June 30, 2024
Older EVs eligible for 20 per cent off rego fees
Stamp duty may also be waived on vehicles purchased for the first time
ACT drivers are also able to access up to $15,000 in interest-free loans to help cover the upfront purchase cost of an electric vehicle up to a cap of $77,565.
Tax
None yet – Distance and/or congestion based charging for all vehicle types “may be considered in the medium term”.

NORTHERN TERRITORY official gov. website

Incentive
BEVs and PHEVs to get cheaper rego and stamp duty from July 2022, the latter slashed by $1500
Discounts to last five years
Grants for home, workplace and public EV chargers, and opportunities offered to develop local skills to service technology and install infrastructure.
Tax
None – No current proposal, could possibly be in the long term.

TASMANIA official gov. website

Incentives
Two years’ free stamp duty for new and second-hand EVs as of July 1, 2021
Two years’ free rego on EVs purchased by car rental companies and coach operators.
Tax
Not plans at this time, but will monitor based on what’s happening in other states.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA official gov. website

Incentives
7000 subsidies worth $3000 taken off purchase price at point of sale, for a limited (unspecified) time only up to value of $68,750 **– this one is tricky, SA says the **offer "may or may not" include the delivery charge and optional extras depending on whether it is used to calculate stamp duty
Three years' free registration for vehicles first registered from October 28, 2021 up to June 30, 2025
Up to $2000 to install EV smart chargers at home, but limited to 7500 households.
Tax
EV tax initially pushed back from July 1, 2022 to July 1, 2027 or 30 per cent uptake (whichever comes first) – same as NSW – but was repealed by the State's Parliament in February 2023 due to public backlash
Would have meant a 2c/km charge for plug-in hybrid vehicles, and 2.5c/km for any other electric vehicles
Calculated and billed in arrears as part of the vehicle registration process and based on the distance travelled since the last renewal.

WESTERN AUSTRALIA official gov. website

Incentives
EVs exempt from 10 per cent on-demand transport levy
Largest incentive offer in Australia – $3500 rebate for the first 10,000 Western Australians to buy an EV or FCEV from May 10, applying to vehicles under $70,000 before on-road costs, note the offer is on the RRP plus the delivery charge and optional extras.
Tax

EV tax to start from July 1, 2027
2c/km km for plug-in hybrid vehicles, and 2.5c/km for any other electric vehicles.

Related Stores

Whichcar
Whichcar
ACT Government
ACT Government
Australian Government
Australian Government
Australian Government - Support for Businesses
Australian Government - Support for Businesses

Comments

        • +1

          Battery are not really clean

          Oh they are. They don't emit much.

          And what happens when batteries die?

          Lithium gets recycled. In fact according to Dr Karl, recycled lithium from a battery is more pure then mined lithium and easily reused.

          We can have infrastructure built in no time should ev be needed

          Why do you believe that? We can't even build infrastructure, energy, transport, etc quickly or efficiently.

          I don’t understand your logic of ev being cleaner than ice

          I.C.E. = internal combustion engine. I e. Burning fuel to power an engine.

          Where do you think they mine minerals for battery ?

          Australia

          We are a nation with 30 million

          26 million according to ABS

          • @M00Cow: m00cow:

            Lithium gets recycled.

            cow:

            Where links ?

            Show me where anyone can recycle a lithium battery today in Au or any other country. Share links on tesla.com

            ~

            m00:
            In fact according to Dr Karl, recycled lithium from a battery is more pure then mined lithium and easily reused.

            cow:

            Bogus.

            Lithium batteries are made up of many components.

            No battery of any kind is pure anything. For starters every single battery has at least two different components the anode and the cathode. Each of them is made of compeltey different materials because different materials have the two compeltely different chemical properties.

            You have no idea what youa re talking about, do yourself a favour and read wiki for starters.

            • @CowFrogHorse: 17/19 Maria St, Laverton North VIC 3026

              You have no idea what youa re talking about,

              Yes Mr bot

              • @M00Cow: Funny how you didnt actually answer any of my statements.

                You do realise they are called lithium as a shortcut, we use short cuts all the time, silicon chips for example are not 100% silicon, they for example have copper traces and there are many other metals and chemical compounds.

                But hey why did you say lithium batteries are 100% recyclable when lithium batteries are not 100% lithium ?

          • @M00Cow: mooL: recycled lithium from a battery is more pure then mined lithium and easily reused.

            cow:

            If its so easy WHERE are the recycling options ? List several addresses in AU or EU or USA ?

              • -2

                @LlamaLlamaLamp: https://thedriven.io/2023/03/03/ev-battery-recycler-hits-95-…

                During the first 12 months of the Californian pilot program, Redwood says it has collected 1,268 EOL battery packs totalling around 500,000 pounds (227 tonnes) from 19 different BEV and hybrid models.

                Wow 1300 batteries ?

                They recycled. in one year less than the EV cars sold in one day.

                What happens to the millions of other batteries that were sold ? Where do they get dumped ? Are you aware of how toxic batteries of all kinds are ? Go read the components…

                The article also fails to mention the cost, so you can be sure it costs them far MORE to recycle than the value of the components.

                https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/08/ev_batteries_solar_st…

                B2U Storage Solutions has reportedly deployed more than 1,300 used EV batteries at a solar facility in Lancaster, California, where it claims it is able to store more than 25 megawatt-hours of electricity, enough to supply power to a couple of hundred homes.

                What happens when the batteries have almost no storage and are useless as batteries ?

                • @CowFrogHorse: Mate, nothing is going to change your mind but businesses like this don't just become profitable instantly. The biggest takeaway is that it's possible to recycle them.

                  • @LlamaLlamaLamp: Llama: Mate, nothing is going to change your mind

                    cow: Wow you are classy - starting with a statement that you have zero evidence for. Wow do you believe in religion ?

                    ~

                    Llama: but businesses like this don't just become profitable instantly.

                    cow: EV cars have been reasonably popular for over 5 years, thats 5 - 10 million cars, and your story says they have only recycled 1268 batteries ?

                    DO you maybe think that nobody is recycling because its not possible ?

                    ~

                    Llama: The biggest takeaway is that it's possible to recycle them.

                    cow: If i said everyone will NOT can, win lotto is that truth or bullshite ?

                    Surely you can tell the difference between 1 and 1 million.

      • What do you think will happen to the batteries ?

        Feel free to show me links on tesla about recycling options…

        Given battery tech is constantly changing who is going to want oild batteries when new tech is completely different ?

        Are batteries toxic ?

        • Haha his research is front page of Google. Have no idea what he is talking about. Altho ev might be the way to the future, I don’t see it in australia just yet.

          • +1

            @unhuman: Really you have no idea that batteries are toxic ?

            In your house batteries are ALMOST the only thing the local council basically begs you not to throw out in the red bin… because batteries of all kinds are the worst toxic crap.

            NIMH Nickel

            NICD Cadmium

            LeadAcid Lead

            Do i really need to tell you how nasty those metals are ?

      • +1

        The real question is why are so many people driving all the time for hours a day ?

        Surely theres a better way than "requiring" people to travel for everything ?

        Beats me why people think its great to waste 2 - 4 hours a day travelling for work thats unpaid for starters and a total waste of time and pollution.

    • I understand that perspective but it needs momentum to become more viable.

      For example….Sodium batteries now being produced for cars at a much cheaper cost and less environmental impact

      get things moving, make them mainstream and things will just get better and better

  • I could understand the discounts, but how use transit lanes is related to electric vehicles?

  • +1

    More government handouts to the already wealthy.

    • Exactly! Worth a neg.

  • Since when is NSW doing EV tax per km u drive? I must be living in cave

  • +5

    Socialism for the rich.

    • +1

      Well I'm sure you support abolishing the stage 3 tax cuts and support the increasing of the tax rate on super balances of more than $3m

      • +2

        I don't. Taxing financial assets is just plain stupid; it just increases the cost of capital (for both productive investment and household anticipated consumption, i.e. mortgages). I do support abolishing all taxes, but the taxes on real assets. Here, read this. It's old, but gold. Literally!

        • +1

          Yeah, nah.

        • Worked well for feudalism. Tax the poor and let the wealthy spend their money unempeded as the trickle down economics will benefit the poor.

      • +3

        Don't worry if implemented those with over 3 mil will move assets on to a more tax efficient environment than paying 30% on those assets. The Govt will be lucky to get half of the current forecasts from them . eg They will never tax the family home . Time for them to upgrade hehe :)

        • +1

          Then this will give the Givernment the incentive to clean up a bunch of the tax evading systems. This could get rather interesting.

          • +1

            @try2bhelpful: If they were serious about tax avoidance, they'd be targeting former and current public service employees on massive pension payouts first.

            • @infinite: Yeah, nah. There are much bigger fish to fry that a few public servants.

      • +2

        Well I'm sure you support

        The examples you gave were just more cases of socialism. Why do you think a public servant in Canberra is better at spending my money than I am?

        • +1

          Bc that's the essence of the socialist crede: technocracy. It was never about economic justice; it's always been about shifting power from people to bureaucrats:

          The expressions “learned socialist,” “scientific socialism,” etc., which continuously appear in the speeches and writings of the followers of Lassalle and Marx, prove that the pseudo-People’s State will be nothing but a despotic control of the populace by a new and not at all numerous aristocracy of real and pseudo-scientists. The “uneducated” people will be totally relieved of the cares of administration, and will be treated as a regimented herd. A beautiful liberation, indeed! — Mikhail Bakunin, Statism and Anarchy, 1873.

          • @wisdomtooth:

            it's always been about shifting power from wealthy few to bureaucrats:

            FTFY.

        • So how many hospitals have you built, how many roads, airports, schools, battleships, etc. you get the drift. Funnily enough there are lots of things where the Government is better at spending “your money” than you are. You guys have no idea what socialism is. Your rightwing tropes are quite comical. Like a child who thinks it understand nuclear physics.

          • @try2bhelpful:

            You guys have no idea what socialism is.

            Yet you're the one that avoided the simple question: Why do you think a public servant in Canberra is better at spending my money than I am?

        • The examples you gave were just more cases of socialism.

          That's because socialism is how society works.

          Healthcare, Roads, Police, Education, Fire, Defence, and plenty more - these are all basic services delivered via socialism.

          Are you taking a position against socialism ?!

          • +1

            @Nom: I just think these people are very confused. They listen to rightwing commentators who complain about socialism but don’t understand what that means. In fact I think, as you rightly point out, they don’t even understand what society means. They seem to spend a lot of their time talking in rightwing tropes and not being able to put forth coherent arguments.

            • -1

              @try2bhelpful:

              They seem to spend a lot of their time talking in rightwing tropes and not being able to put forth coherent arguments.

              I put forward a question which is the standard Socratic method for providing a logical argument, and you avoided it. Your contribution so far has been to give us your opinion on what you believe I am thinking.
              Tell us again who can't put a coherent argument together?

          • @Nom: "That's because socialism is how society works."

            Not sure if you know what website you are on, but 99% of how stuff works in here is pure 100% capitalism, and most people seem to prefer that, even if they lack the ability to see it.

            Healthcare, Roads, Police, Education, Fire, Defence, and plenty more - these are all basic services delivered via socialism.

            So now learn the difference between 'some' and 'all', then tell me where the line is, and why some things are on one side of it and why most are on the other?
            Also, in your examples above, think about which of those services which is offered by private and public is higher quality?
            Private hospitals, better or worse than public?
            Private roads?
            Security services?
            Private schools?
            Fire control?
            Military?

            So sure some services are delivered via socialist methods, but does that make them the best method to deliver such things? How do you decide?

            • +1

              @1st-Amendment: dude…what?

              Private roads? Private…military? (as in militias?) (!) Did you just write 'private' in front of words?
              The only two of those that make sense are "schools and hospitals", but its hugely simplistic to think they are automatically better as most people can't afford them. And if they could, they would cave under the weight of the increased consumption, just as the public equivalents tend to do.

              • @carlscott1982:

                Private roads?

                Yes plenty of them around if you look hard enough…

                Private…military?

                Again, there are plenty of examples in the recent wars. Even outside of war, a large chunk of military services are provided by private contractors
                Or do you just ignore reality when it doesn't suit you?

                but its hugely simplistic to think they are automatically better

                Not AUTOMATICALLY better, but proven to be better through better results. Next time you go to the toilet ask yourself, do I prefer a privately owned toilet or a public one?

                And if they could, they would cave under the weight of the increased consumption, just as the public equivalents tend to do

                Ah you've almost discovered the problem here without realising it. So if weight of consumption causes problems, then how is the solution to centralise everything under one really, really large organisation (ie the government)?

                So we agree that Socialism ,which is simply centralised means of production, is less efficient the larger the population size? And therefore the solution to this is smaller government and/or privatisation of services?
                Your membership to the conservatives is in the mail 😂

                • +1

                  @1st-Amendment: Yes, but the better results example is BECAUSE they are expensive and fewer people use them. What you're advocating for are expensive services that function the same as the current public ones because the public ones wouldn't exist and private ones would be therefore overtaxed. You are arguing entirely against your own interests.
                  A much better option is similar to what we have now, but with more investment in the social services. The private services are there to supplement those services for those that can afford them, which is a perfectly reasonable function for capital to take on.
                  Centralised means of production is obviously not less efficient the larger the population size because there is a larger population contributing to revenue. It is only inefficient when it isn't resourced.
                  Your membership to…just normal economics in 2023, I guess…is in the mail. :)

                  • -2

                    @carlscott1982:

                    but the better results example is BECAUSE they are expensive and fewer people use them

                    Not always. That is the beauty of a free market you have more choices. Take any market segment and you have cheaper no frills options and you have more expensive luxury options. With a socialised services you have one single lowest-common-denominator, bottom-of-the-barrel option. If the government made TVs do you honestly think they'd create a better product than Sony, LG, Samsung or TCL?

                    What you're advocating for are expensive services that function the same as the current public ones

                    Nope and let me use a real world example. When the Telecom was the national carrier you had no choice and terrible service, now you have lots of choice and different options to suit your needs. Does anyone seriously think the old Telecom is better than the telco market now? (sure it still has faults, but it is HEAPS better than it was). Same goes for the airline industry, privatisation resulted in more choices and cheaper options and now more people have access to air travel at both ends of the scale. Compare how that works in any socialist country. I've been to a few of them so I can tell you first hand they are the worst options on the planet. That is the power of competition.

                    but with more investment in the social services

                    You'd like to decide how my money is spent? How very noble of you. Throwing more money at inefficient process doesn't make them better it just burns more money. See the recent increases in education funding and the lack of any tangible gain from that spend for a real world example.

                    Centralised means of production is obviously not less efficient the larger the population size because there is a larger population contributing to revenue

                    Which means larger waste, which means larger inefficiencies. Let's use the education system as an example again. In NSW it cost approx $400k per classroom per year to run. Do you think you could run a classroom for less than that? The teacher takes $120k, where is the rest going? (bear in mind that they bought most of their property 100 years ago so there is no cost there)

                    It is only inefficient when it isn't resourced.

                    It's inefficient because the processes used to spend public money are hamstrung by bureaucracy. Let me give you another example. Space X charge $60M per launch, but when the USAF use a SpaceX rocket it costs them $120M because of all the additional red tape they put on top. Exactly thew same service, but higher cost and longer process to launch.
                    Government can never be efficient as a private company because of the funding and accountability models they are forced to use.

                    Another example, when I was acquiring business partners, I'd meet a couple with a good reputation, give them a statement of work, catch up for lunch and a beer and sign a contract. I could have that done in a week with the work completed the following week. When I do the exact same process for gov, it requires a public tender that takes 3 months, another 3 months to review and score, another 3 months to engage and agree on the contract, then another 3 months to engage all the special interest groups that demand representation, then becasue it's gov they all inflate their quotes by 100% and you might get something done in 18 months for twice the price, if you are lucky.
                    It is completely laughable that anyone would think the government is more efficient at service delivery than the private sector.

                    Your membership to…just normal economics in 2023

                    Your definition of 'normal economics' does not match anything in the real world. I'll stick to the economics that matches reality thanks.

  • +2

    Wow Victoria sucks.
    So much for wanting to support EV!!

    Taxed so highly.

  • +13

    We got an EV in December last year. Haven't paid a cent to drive since since our solar charges it. The naysayers on this thread are quite amusing.

    • How much of it did you pay for it, and how much did us lot, Aussie taxpayers, including subsidies to both vehicle and panels?

      • +1

        I'm quite proud of my legal usage of subsidies. If you want to change the law change it. In the meantime let me break down my subsidies courtesy of your tax $.

        We have 2 EVs now. one around 75k. one right at the LCT threshold (84k). Both on novated leases.
        Both in ACT meaning we got free rego for 2 years and no stamp duty for both ($8000k savings conservatively)

        I'm on the highest marginal bracket (45%) over 4 years combined will save around $10k per year, per vehicle. That's $80k over 4 years.

        On top of that no rego, no stamp duty as above. How could any sane person say no?

        For our home battery and solar we got around $5k as a grant for that.

        You may reeeeeeee.

        • +6

          One thing is playing the rules to one's advantage; a whole other is celebrating rules that only the privileged few can take advantage of. Fine if you're an outright aristocratic elitist, but if that's in the name of bs "environmental justice," the hypocrisy will not do.

          • +2

            @wisdomtooth: I don't particularly espouse environmental views and probably fly more per year than I should. I don't care about heavy metals, or carbon emissions or any of that nonsense. I read the Australian. I'm pretty moderate in my views.

            I'm always going to do the best thing financially for my family, and in a similar sense that a corporation has a duty to shareholders, I have one to my family.

            Why shouldn't I use every legal, available means to maximise money in my pocket? Anyone can take advantage of these rules.

            I get taxed >200k a year. I pay division 293 — a literal tax on a tax. Then I pay the medicare levy. I have no problems paying taxes. But I won't pay any more than I am legally required to.

            • +2

              @meowsers:

              Why shouldn't I use every legal, available means to maximise money in my pocket?

              You should.

              I don't care about heavy metals

              That I do.

              Anyone can take advantage of these rules.

              Anyone?

              We have 2 EVs now. one around 75k. one right at the LCT threshold (84k). … I'm on the highest marginal bracket (45%)

              • +1

                @wisdomtooth: Anyone with a PAYG job or their own corporate structure. I should probably be more specific.

                In any case these rules will have the function of delivering more EVs into the market.

                Without getting into a tu quoque fallacy - the FBT free tradie ute thing has been going on for yonks.

                • +2

                  @meowsers:

                  Anyone with a PAYG job or their own corporate structure.

                  Right, literally everyone 🙄

                  • +1

                    @wisdomtooth: Well seeing as literally everyone can get a job or setup a corporation. Yes. Everyone.

                    Then you just need an employer who will support novated leases and the majority do. And then you need a job where your income makes it worth it.

                    Everyone qualifies or can qualify. Whether it makes financial sense for their situation is something else entirely.

                    If I was a commonwealth judge or a member of parliament I would be exempt from Div 293 tax. I don't go around whinging about that. Plenty of inequity everywhere.

                    • +1

                      @meowsers: Let's break that up, shall we?

                      • literally everyone can get a job
                      • … or setup a corporation.
                      • you need a job where your income makes it worth it.
                      • Everyone qualifies or can qualify.
                      • O
                      • M
                      • G! 😒

                      Plenty of inequity everywhere.

                      Yep, just that some are more unequal than others.

                      • @wisdomtooth: Yes, well I also don't complain about my lack of access to the dole. Everyone can qualify for that too.

                        And yes. Not everyone is equal. People's worth as a human isn't defined by their job. However people's value to society is defined by their job in the form of salary.

                        • +1

                          @meowsers:

                          people's value to society is defined by their job in the form of salary.

                          I see… So those who don't have a job — the elderly, the disabled… — or those who earn a low salary, are just "useless eaters", yeah? Perhaps they're not even "lives worthy of life."

            • +1

              @meowsers: Tks for your tax contribution . There are people out there legally pay 0 tax on much larger earnings than that . And I'll highlight within ATO guidelines. I'm glad you found some satisfaction with your EVs . You deserve it .

              • +1

                @lostgoat: What, you aren't going to tell him he's going to "enjoy long books or queues for powering up away from home"? Lol

    • +1

      Haven't paid a cent to drive since since our solar charges it.

      Well you have paid, you're just too ignorant to know how. Look up 'Opportunity Cost' in any Economics 101 book…

      • +3

        Oh aren't you the smart ass.

        What if I told you that the cost of my solar is dwarfed by what I have saved in self power generation and what I feed into the grid. If I didn't have solar, I would be paying to charge my car as well as my home energy use.

        Now I have an asset on my house that I pay $1500 a year for instead of paying $1500 a year in power bills.

      • +2

        Look up 'Opportunity Cost' in any Economics 101 book…

        In Australia a basic solar system doesn't have an opportunity cost if you own the home and pay the power bill - it will easily cover the gains you could have made with investment of the installation capital.
        Easily.

        • +2

          1st-Amendment seems to be uninformed. Which is ok. His / her choice, seeing as they're probably into their '1st amendment' rights etc etc. No matter that we have no 1st amendment in Aus…

        • In Australia a basic solar system doesn't have an opportunity cost

          If you have solar and choose to use that to charge your car, then you cannot also use those same kw's to power your house at the same time. This is what an opportunity cost is, and it applies to everything.

          • +1

            @1st-Amendment: The opportunity cost for most people with EXCESS solar production is to lose $0.05 per kWh feed in tarrif…. Which is pretty close to nothing.

            Hell, some ppl get $0 feed in

            • -1

              @dangerdanger:

              The opportunity cost for most people with EXCESS solar production is to lose $0.05 per kWh feed in tarrif

              So there is a cost then? Exactly like I said…

              Also, how many of them are there in reality? Because that is really important.
              Looking at my own solar output as one example, most of this excess is in the middle of the day, when I'm at work and I can't charge my car nor use my home electricity. When I get home in the evening there is ZERO solar generation for at least 6 months of the year during this period. So there is a very real cost.

              None of this is news, we know the consumption profile and the peaks across the country are 6pm-8pm when the sun isn't shining for half of the year.

              If you switch off the ABC and start thinking about these things a little bit more, you'll realise that renewable energy, while useful, cannot be a 100% solution because the supply can never match demand. Economics 101.
              So there is always additional costs, and wishful thinking doesn't make these go away

              • +1

                @1st-Amendment:

                So there is a cost then? Exactly like I said…

                I don't sweat about 5c per kWh. I don't believe 5c is an opportunity cost worth bringing up, but hey, some people do. Lol. If that keeps your argument going, then go ahead. I'll keep doing me, you keep doing you.

                • -2

                  @dangerdanger:

                  I don't sweat about 5c per kWh

                  The question wasn't whether you sweat about it, it whether there is a cost or not, which you now seem to accept. Well done for overcoming that emotional hurdle.

                  I don't believe 5c is an opportunity cost worth bringing it up

                  Cool, you accept that the cost now exists which is progress…

                  • +1

                    @1st-Amendment: Thanks for being you. Now we all know where we both stand. I didn't neg you by the way

    • +1

      How large a panel do you have? Does it cover EV + home consumption all year round? How long did it take you to break even? Genuinely interested in the economics here.

  • -8

    The truth about EV’s:

    • currently cost more to run than petrol equivalent for the lifetime of the vehicle when factoring all costs involved including initial cost of the vehicle itself

    • does not drive as well as petrol equivalent vehicles

    If money is no object than go buy an EV

    • +4

      absolute lies and hearsay. did Toyota and big oil get to you with their propaganda?

      • +1

        Doesn't Toyota sell EVs? Isn't Big Oil the largest sponsor and promoter of the "sustainability" agenda? Short answer: it is.

        • Mainstream car manufacturers are diversifying into EVs.

          Apart from anything else EVs are much cheaper, and easier, to maintain. The number of moving parts is reduced.

  • +9

    Upvoted solely to spite wisdomtooth

    • +9

      Wisdomtooth might need to change his username to just tooth 😃

    • +1

      Quite a few negative comments here; not sure why they're not followed up by negative votes. Perhaps teeth is precisely what's missing.

      • +4

        Because your stupidly exceeds the 5 daily downvote limits of all sane people on this forum.

        • +2

          Ozbargin premium! For more downvotes. Or the exclusive “-10” vote in one click so others don’t have to see dribble.

  • -2

    EV only possible with blood batteries, slave labour in the Congo, well done EV owners.

    • Indeed! Worth a neg.

      • +1

        How much do you have in oil stocks/industries that will suffer from mass EV adoption?

    • +2

      Then buy a EV with cobalt-free LFP batteries…

      Silly FUD. :/

      • +3

        It's not just cobalt though, that's the problem.

        • +1

          Lol. It is funny how "you people" care so much about the environmental and social impact of anything green, but don't put anything else under the same microscope.

          • @Aureus: I ride my bike to work, don't own a car.

    • +1

      Typed in on a device that also utilises these.

    • Because the petroleum industry is not without fault… not

  • Wait for the sun tax and ev tax to screw everyone who invested in a hope to help save environment.. ! Just vote liberal and it will be brought forward in NSW first..!

  • What number are we up to of the 25,000 NSW vehicles? Can't find info on it

  • -3

    Government subsidising luxury cars so rich people can feel better about their environmental impact is an obscene & criminal misuse of taxpayer funds.

    • It's got more to do with the government looking good to continue burning fossil fuels.

    • EV's aren't luxury cars.

      • +2

        Why aren't $20K EV's available yet?

        • +3

          A lot of cars aren't $20K anymore. Want a Toyota Corolla? That'll be $32k. Want a MG ZS EV? That'll be $44k. Not a massive difference and certainly not above the LCT threshold.

          More affordable EV's aren't quite there yet as you say. Unfortunately when you say EV people think of an expensive Tesla and nothing more.

          It's important not to forget the Mitsubushi i-Miev too. That was under $20k years ago, however the range was up to 100km and there's been a lot of advances since then which obviously cost more to manufacture. Give it time.

          • +1

            @Clear: What I understand of EV's right now in Australia is they ARE marketed as luxury cars - to complement the solar panel + limited charging stations lifestyle.

            Otherwise we would already have LOTS of compact EV's running around here, like the Chevrolet Bolt in the USA. $17K USD
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRjzqQyn_Mg

            But no, all the EV's I see driving around are $40+K units, and STILL WAITING for MG to publicly release pricing on their MG4.

            • -1

              @THICKnSLOW: It's called availability, ease of market access and supply & demand.

              Same reason we don't have sub $10k cars here from India & China

          • @Clear:

            A lot of cars aren't $20K anymore.

            New cars, sure. I've never spent more than 15k on a car.

            More affordable EV's aren't quite there yet as you say. Unfortunately when you say EV people think of an expensive Tesla and nothing more.

            When I think of EVs, I still think of "unaffordable". Maybe my next car will be a used EV, in 10 years (assuming 10 year old EVs are worthwhile what with battery charge cycles, etc).

            • @idonotknowwhy:

              New cars, sure. I've never spent more than 15k on a car.

              Correct. There's not a whole lot of used EV's around, let alone new EV's.

              When I think of EVs, I still think of "unaffordable". Maybe my next car will be a used EV, in 10 years (assuming 10 year old EVs are worthwhile what with battery charge cycles, etc).

              It's a good plan. Plenty of promising battery improvements and EV popularity is increasing the research and development.

      • From the OP:

        "The Luxury Car Tax threshold for low-emission vehicles has been raised to $84,916, from the standard vehicle starting rate of $71,849."

        Seeing as they needed to shift the taxation goalposts it seems to me like they are, and this is a means to keep people buying them.

Login or Join to leave a comment