Arguments for/against Promoting Electric Vehicles

If you wait for the market to get there prices will be high for a long time and we will be importing fuel.

2 Likes

Well we’re here on the Choice forums. Choice is an organisation dedicated to improving consumer rights and safety specifically by lobbying the government to pick winners.

Examples include clearer labeling to let consumers pick more energy efficient devices, introducing regulation for products that have failed self regulation, and lobbying for a crackdown on poor performing super funds. A free market would not result in any of these moves.

5 Likes

This statement is disingenuous or disinformation for the subject at hand. The issue which is being discussed is road going ICE and road going battery EVs and hydrogen fuel cell EVs.

Current direct excises of fuel in Australia is 42.7c/L and fuel is also subject to GST (an additional 10% tax at the bowser). BEV/HFCEVs only have 10% GST on the electricity used for recharging.

The corporate profit ‘tax deductions’ also apply/available to every other businesses including the BEV/HFCEVs. The only concessions which don’t apply are possibly those given to the mining and agricultural industries for their fuel excise exemptions. While one may or may not agree with the rational for such exemptions, this have no relevance to the ICE road going vehicles.

In relation to existing tax deductions for ICE road going vehicle industry, which incidentally also apply to the BEV/HFCEVs industry, should BEV/HFCEVs be given more tax incentives or handouts which don’t currently exist. I would rather see the monies spent to improve education and other critical public services. Maybe if a fraction of the monies, which are being championed by advocates, are used for education into new technologies, Australia could become a world leader again in research abd development in the area. This will pay dividends not only to current and future generations, but will assist Australia in its economic future. I would rather monies at this point in time going to such areas than allowing richer Australian’s buy cheaper BEV/HFCEVs.

Hey, I am for better regulation and don’t believe in so-called “self regulation” by many industries, but I draw the line at subsidising an industry (EV) for which there is a far cheaper existing alternative (fossil fuel driven cars).

That said, I don’t object to trimming the subsidies the fossil fuel industry receives from Joe Taxpayer.

No it isn’t you have misquoted me, my response in the thread was in regards to @Jon01’s post where they stated "we should not have the public subsidise it is my point" and so I pointed to us the public subsidising Fossil Fuels and the linked businesses including fossil fuelled cars (all of this proven time and time again) where the money goes to the Rich and extremely rich. All this Fossil Fuel industry contributes in a very large amount to Climate Change impacts on all of Society
and we Joe Citizen pay for that privilege.

So to clear up this my stated point was “Yet We, the public, subsidise Fossil Fuel and the corporate profits of Fossil Fuel linked Corporations without much complaint it seems. Fossil Fuelled anything including Vehicles, Refining, Exploration, Mining, Fossil Fuel Power supply (Generation and usage) all receive public funding so why should Renewables not benefit?”

And I, in response to your statement about where to spend the saved money currently spent on Fossil Fuel business, agree Education, Health and a number of other sectors should get more. But in light of the urgent need to cut emissions I see why incentives right now to uptake renewables is very important. You may not agree with that need or you may, but one proven way to increase uptake is to make the uptake more financially attractive to anyone.

Then you push a line of only the richer are gaining from benefits of buying BEV and hydrogen fuelled and again I make the point what drove cheaper Motor vehicle uptake
it was the rich
they got them first but it drove the thirst for more people to be able to afford them, so Thank you to Henry Ford for making the Car a mainstream item but we should have moved on to cheaper and better non fossil fuelled transport by now. The reason we haven’t is in part the gross profits made by purveyors of fossil fuel linked industries.

I also point out that originally it was only the rich and richer who could afford Solar Panels until they were subsidised or were able to be produced in numbers that drove costs down, pretty much anything modern we want at some point was only affordable by the rich eg PCs, Smartphones.

It isn’t that clear to me if we are consistently talking about the same winners. Is it the industry or the individual? Much of Jon’s position seems more related to which individuals can take advantage of a subsidy rather than the larger economic, environmental and social reasons to not leave it to the market to alter an industry.

There are other examples of the ability of those with some capital to take advantage of technological changes in comparison to those without. Solar panel take up comes to mind. Solar panels have been subsidised in various ways for quite some time. Was that wrong too because the poor and renters cannot get any of the subsidy? I would be interested to hear what @Jon01 thinks of that and does he/she have solar panels.

1 Like

How will that work? Will you have to self-disclose your current odometer reading when renewing registration?

The point is that newer cars don’t have to go in for a check, which would be the natural way of collecting the odometer reading.

Arguments for/against Promoting Electric Vehicles

The other side of the coin is: Arguments for/against discouraging fossil-fuel vehicles.

The bottom line is that many western countries will be banning the sale of new fossil-fuel vehicles in the foreseeable future (for non-commercial use). No taxpayer subsidy needed. :slight_smile:

1 Like

It’s worth considering governments subsidise or support preferentially so many different groups.

EG

That the cost of building and renovation may have spiked in response, is it really a subsidy to the building industry, and not the home owner with cash to spare? One to cream extra profits or support the industry and it’s large number of trades workers.

The recent demand for new tradies 4WD vehicles might offer one answer.

On the fuel rebates (debated subsidies):
The Government fuel excise rebate and GST credits also support farming/agriculture. It might be time to cut those benefits and put the savings towards Battery Electric farm equipment or 4WD farm utes. Agriculture has so far resisted most moves to get with GHG reductions because it is a cost they do not want to bear. Hence only another subsidy will be good enough to change that outcome?

1 Like

Good question @person. The plan seems to be that when you renew your registration each year, you need to declare your odometer reading, and a charge is then calculated for you to pay.
How that declaration is checked is unknown.
Also, how apportionment between kms travelled in Victoria and kms travelled elsewhere is unknown.

1 Like

The same tax deductions are available to renewables, that being and costs associated with the operation of a business can be used as a deduction for tax purpses. The only difference is fuel excise with doesn’t apply to mining or agriculture
and would apply to renewables like any other non-mining or non-agricultural industries.

Public infrastructure such as electric connection, roads and rail they use are paid for by the mining companies under user pay agreements. They are also available for others to use under user pays agreements. The capital cost of the infrastructure may be borne by government, but. It runs at a profit and is a net revenue generator for government. The capital costs is recouped through the charges in the user pays agreements.

Your question should be should renewables be provided special subsidies and/or new category of tax deductions not available to any other business in Australia. My view is no different that outlined above for BEVs/HFCEVs.

But I’m saying we need more subsidies put into renewables not just tax deductions (which I didn’t say at all). So funding at the same or better magnitude as to what is put into Fossil fuel industry. Just a week or so ago $2.6 Bn to fossil fuel so match that to renewables is my ask this week.

You seem to think that the government gives the fossil fuel industry money
cash handouts or legislated subsidies. I am yet to see a budget or piecenof legislation where this is the case. Renewables have the same concessions as any other industry/business. You seem to think that the government should be giving them something that no other business gets.

I would prefer to spend money of critical government services to ensure a brighter future, than providing public monies through say cash subsidies, to renewable businsesses that are already profitable. One has seen what cash splashes do in different sectors in the past
it doesn’t benefit the consumer but only the business sectors the cash if thrown at.

I point out again $2 Bn to keep 2 refineries going, if not Fossil Fuel Industry what are they? It was Govt funding so there lies 1 example. It has been noted by many eminent experts that Fossil Fuel Industries have received funding
Clean Coal is another example of funding Fossil Fuel industry even if only in research. Building a Gas Fired Power Station again supporting Fossil Fuel use and industry.

Research done here

And more outcry

1 Like

The obvious “level playing field” / “non-distortionery” move from the Vic government would be to apply a tax of 2.5c/km to all vehicles.

Never get between a premier and a bucket of money 


Has this tax been challenged in the High Court? Will it be? State governments have a shaky record of getting this kind of tax through the High Court.

And how does that work in the first year of operation of the scheme?

You have to self-declare your starting odometer?

The scheme doesn’t commence for a year or so and you have to self-declare your odometer at every registration renewal? (so by the time the scheme commences the government already has your odometer reading from the year before)

This tax component is calculated and paid in arrears (whereas the core registration fee is paid in advance)?

Has there been any suggestion that that is relevant??

I would have thought that it is not relevant. They just charge you for all the kms. It is not as if you will pay other state governments 2.5c/km for the kms that you travelled on their roads.

I guess this goes back to the “bad old days” that if you live near the border and you have an EV then you register it over the border - for as long as you can get away with it. LOL.

1 Like

This was covered at some length in a thread about fossil fuel subsidies so I suggest those who want to spend time on the topic go there but as a comparison to possible subsidies for new industries some mention is relevant here I think.

There certainly is scope to argue what is or is not a subsidy. At one end we have the Canavans who religiously declare there are none at all and at the other various local and international assessments that include all manner of things and arrive at vast sums. The truth is somewhere in between.

Without rehashing it all it is hard not to see that direct grants for “clean coal” and royalties for coal and gas that are low by international standards or forgiven, in part or whole, are direct subsidies for specific industries. Historically we have had subsidies for car makers and now refineries.

As well there are very favourable environmental and other approval regimes given to them. Sure other industries pollute and pay little or nothing for it but the scale that fuel extraction and consumption industries pollute is stupendous in comparison so their subsidy in this regard is larger whether expressed as money or in the harm done to health and the environment that has continued for decades.

2 Likes

Seems reasonable to me. Whatever happens with EVs, Australians will have a reliance on fossil fuels for decades to come. Even if, let’s say, Australia were to ban sales of new fossil fuel cars from 2030, when do you think that the last fossil fuel car would cease operation? and that’s not even taking into account commercial vehicles and heavy machinery that might still run on diesel - and other appliances that might still run on petrol.

2 Likes

I didn’t say it wasn’t needed but I do say be equal in generosity so where is the $2 Bn for a renewable power plant and batteries/storage for that energy or the extra $600 Mn for another. Please don’t confuse giving to Fossil Fuel Industry as being fair or reasonable to renewables, it obviously isn’t fair or reasonable to renewables.

1 Like

Yes, I understood that you were arguing that fossil fuel does receive taxpayer subsidy - and comparing that with subsidy to other industries.

A post was merged into an existing topic: Electric and Alternative Vehicle Fuels

A post was merged into an existing topic: Electric and Alternative Vehicle Fuels