# E-bike Tax Credit: Are you kidding



## avlfj40 (Jul 14, 2008)

E-bike tax credit cut in half by Ways and Means Committee

I'm all for reducing our reliance on cars, but this is shortsighted. Battery tech is not green and has to be imported. There is not much thought to adding infrastructure for commuting. So really, this is just about increasing sales in a market segment.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Yep


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

I think it is a step somewhat in the right direction but you are right similar to EV the whole zero emission etc. is greenwashing.
But maybe similar to Tesla manufacturing can be done at home again.
I also wonder why not do that for non powered bicycles too unless you clearly focusing on people who otherwise are not able to use a bicycle or really start commuting on it instead of a car.
Infrastructure should be a main if not the focus because unless an ebike is as fast as regular traffic I will not be seen on a bicycle sharing the road. 

Hope that makes some sense, still waiting for the coffee to fully kick in.


----------



## avlfj40 (Jul 14, 2008)

I thought about Tesla, but most of the ore comes from Asia or Africa, and I had similar thoughts about standard bikes which brought me to thinking this is just a way to increase sales under the guise of a "green" initiative.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

The fact that they are doing this for only ebikes is ridiculous. They should be doing it for bicycles wholesale if they're going to do it. You could argue that aside from environmental, more people commuting on bicycles has impact on other things like our healthcare systems and need to maintain infrastructure (bikes don't tear up roads like cars).

Like every other policy in America, it's a good idea but incredibly short sighted and riddled with private business interest.


----------



## bingemtbr (Apr 1, 2004)

The funds should go to enhancing safety and expanding infrastructure to support pedestrian and bicycle commuters. 

I am really uncertain on the rationalization behind the tax credit. You could commute to work on pretty much any bicycle. Why favor one specific "bicycle" type (e-bike) which has a higher carbon footprint and higher cost of ownership than a regular, human powered bicycle? This bill stinks.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

bingemtbr said:


> The funds should go to enhancing safety and expanding infrastructure to support pedestrian and bicycle commuters.
> 
> I am really uncertain on the rationalization behind the tax credit. You could commute to work on pretty much any bicycle. Why favor one specific "bicycle" type (e-bike) which has a higher carbon footprint and higher cost of ownership than a regular, human powered bicycle? This bill stinks.


Until Americans stop thinking about bicycles as toys, and walking as only being for the poor, we're not going to see any change in infrastructure.

Wait, maybe e-bikes are a gateway drug?


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

Your first mistake is expecting legislative and regulatory bodies to make sensible policy.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

avlfj40 said:


> Battery tech is not green and has to be imported.


Don't tell the Tesla drivers. They are thoroughly enjoying their smugness. It's easy when you're only half educated about something.


----------



## bikeranzin (Oct 2, 2018)

If the credit kicked in assuming you could somehow prove that you got rid of a car or drove fewer miles, I don't even care if it's an e-bike only credit; It's at least a step in the right direction.

While the green-ness of electric vehicles (car, bike, etc.) is overstated, an e-bike is probably better than a gas car pretty quickly.

But,



SingleSpeedSteven said:


> They should be doing it for bicycles wholesale if they're going to do it.


Totally agree. But I'd still like it to require some form of proof of replacing car-miles to qualify for tax credit. I'm not interested in funding other people's toys.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

Is there a retroactive credit for my past 30 years of actual biking?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

My county has had some alternative transportation incentive programs in the past. I made some money from carpooling and commuting by bike (this was prior to ebikes being a thing).

But I spent way too much time on Nextdoor this week in a "bicycles don't belong on the road" thread, with the usual "they always run stop signs and red lights" and "they can't go the speed limit so they impede traffic which is illegal" type posts. One guy apparently rides his bike on the wrong side of the road as he was insisting this is "common sense"! I think he actually rides on the sidewalk on the wrong side and has ridden by my house.

One cyclist linked to a video he made a few years ago of commuting home during rush hour and passing 420 cars in 3 miles. It's the exact route I take; we go different ways after that 3 miles, mine gets a lot nicer, including trails where he has to hit the sidewalk or take a lane on a 6 lane wide road. I remember watching a county meeting when he had tried to convince the county to narrow the lanes and add a bike lane when they were restriping. They didn't. There are bike lanes on that road just past there where it's a different county (which was part of the 3 miles he filmed).


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

chazpat said:


> My county has had some alternative transportation incentive programs in the past. I made some money from carpooling and commuting by bike (this was prior to ebikes being a thing).
> 
> But I spent way too much time on Nextdoor this week in a "bicycles don't belong on the road" thread, with the usual "they always run stop signs and red lights" and "they can't go the speed limit so they impede traffic which is illegal" type posts. One guy apparently rides his bike on the wrong side of the road as he was insisting this is "common sense"! I think he actually rides on the sidewalk on the wrong side and has ridden by my house.
> 
> One cyclist linked to a video he made a few years ago of commuting home during rush hour and passing 420 cars in 3 miles. It's the exact route I take; we go different ways after that 3 miles, mine gets a lot nicer, including trails where he has to hit the sidewalk or take a lane on a 6 lane wide road.


When I still lived in the Midwest, the big argument was "cyclists don't pay gas tax which is what's used to maintain I roads, so they have no right to use the roads".

Literally the dumbest argument you could come up with, and I heard it ad nauseam.


----------



## matadorCE (Jun 26, 2013)

avlfj40 said:


> E-bike tax credit cut in half by Ways and Means Committee
> 
> I'm all for reducing our reliance on cars, but this is shortsighted. Battery tech is not green and has to be imported. There is not much thought to adding infrastructure for commuting. So really, this is just about increasing sales in a market segment.


Corporate wellfare, plain and simple.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> When I still lived in the Midwest, the big argument was "cyclists don't pay gas tax which is what's used to maintain I roads, so they have no right to use the roads".
> 
> Literally the dumbest argument you could come up with, and I heard it ad nauseam.


Oh yeah, that one was in there several times. I posted about the older neighborhoods with no sidewalks, pedestrians using sidewalks and crosswalks, which are part of the roadway. And that I had been delayed plenty of times due to people walking in crosswalks or neighborhoods. They need a license plate on their ass!


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> When I still lived in the Midwest, the big argument was "cyclists don't pay gas tax which is what's used to maintain I roads, so they have no right to use the roads".
> 
> Literally the dumbest argument you could come up with, and I heard it ad nauseam.


Yea, that guy with that Pinarello probably owns at least a couple cars too.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

dysfunction said:


> Yea, that guy with that Pinarello probably owns at least a couple cars too.


Yea. I worked with a guy who used to argue that point all of the time. I finally told him that if we were going to start correlating vehicles and taxes, that he should be required to pay at least 10x more in gas tax than I did because his giant, unnecessary diesel truck caused way more wear and tear on the road than my S10.

He stfu after that.


----------



## dir-T (Jan 20, 2004)

I asked my company about the commuter tax credit when it was first introduced about 15 years ago. Maybe it's changed, but at that time the deal was that ther employer would reimburs the commuter some amount and get a tax credit for that.

My company was like, "we don't have time for that sh*t". I make up for it by posting on MTBR while I'm on the clock.


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

BadgerOne said:


> Don't tell the Tesla drivers. They are thoroughly enjoying their smugness. It's easy when you're only half educated about something.


Yeah but it also often not thought about how much of a positive impact ev's will have when it comes to the need for less fuel transportation and less fluids in the car itself

The damage done to in the roads by heavy semis bringing fuel, less traffic, etc. and if you think about all the fluids dripping from ice powered vehicles getting washed into groundwater, damaging the road itself, posing dangers to motorcycle riders and so on.

For the most positive impact for me would because when there is no need for me to fuel up at gas stations nor for oil changes it means less interactions with people.


----------



## alxrmrs (Jan 18, 2017)

bingemtbr said:


> You could commute to work on pretty much any bicycle. Why favor one specific "bicycle" type (e-bike) which has a higher carbon footprint and higher cost of ownership than a regular, human powered bicycle?


Because it will greatly increase the number of people who will choose the bicycle as a form of commuting. I live in San Francisco, a lot of people come in and commute from Marin. An eBike is faster than a car and easier to deal with once you get into the city for most people. You're looking at 2,000ft+ of climbing once it's all said and done. This is not within the capabilities of most people who aren't really cyclists. Even if they could do it it qualifies as a "weekend grand adventure" for them and is not able to be done within a time frame they find acceptable. I struggle to see people getting to the Golden Gate Bridge let alone riding across it and down the hill the other side. All the taxis in Sausalito have bike racks for people that couldn't make it back up to the bridge.

Yeah, batteries aren't purely eco-friendly, but neither are solar panels. But if you look at the energy density required to move a bicycle it's far less than any car, electric or not. Batteries can also be recycled (the US needs to get better at this) and the battery size of an eBike dwarfs a car by tons.


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

matadorCE said:


> Corporate wellfare, plain and simple.


Yeah same with roads we pay for which without the whole car industry would not exist as we know it.


----------



## alxrmrs (Jan 18, 2017)

acer66 said:


> Yeah same with roads we pay for which without the whole car industry would not exist as we know it.


Nor the bike industry. And before you say this is a MTB forum road bikes were around for nearly a 100 years before MTBs became a thing.


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

alxrmrs said:


> Nor the bike industry. And before you say this is a MTB forum road bikes were around for nearly a 100 years before MTBs became a thing.


Yeah, was just playing along and if it would be up to me I would be doing away with tax credits, subsidies etc. in general.


----------



## alxrmrs (Jan 18, 2017)

acer66 said:


> Yeah, was just playing along and if it would be up to me I would be doing away with tax credits, subsidies etc. in general.


Yeah the system is messed up as a whole I agree. We've been subsidizing bad things for ages (gas, coal) and some things rightfully so (kids, education) and some grey area (Teslas = cars for rich people and wanna be "tech futurists"). Hell Elon himself is the king of subsidies. Starlink is basically one giant global subsidy generator for him. He also derides them because he's a "libertarian" who needs to get punched in the face.


----------



## half_man_half_scab (Mar 7, 2006)

bikeranzin said:


> While the green-ness of electric vehicles (car, bike, etc.) is overstated, an e-bike is probably better than a gas car pretty quickly.


While it's pretty disappointing that there aren't more battery recycling options and extraction for current chemistries screws peoples of developing nations, I have heard one argument that makes sense to me. You can pile up dead batteries in a somewhat containable way, where the same can't be said of carbon, aside from slow growing plants.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

alxrmrs said:


> Yeah the system is messed up as a whole I agree. We've been subsidizing bad things for ages (gas, coal) and some things rightfully so (kids, education) and some grey area (Teslas = cars for rich people and wanna be "tech futurists"). Hell Elon himself is the king of subsidies. Starlink is basically one giant global subsidy generator for him. He also derides them because he's a "libertarian" who needs to get punched in the face.


Yea, I love how Elon is happy to let the government subsidize people buying his cars, but when it comes time to follow public health guidelines to keep his employees safe he has a 3 year old style tantrum. Dude is a complete neckbeard.


----------



## matadorCE (Jun 26, 2013)

acer66 said:


> Yeah same with roads we pay for which without the whole car industry would not exist as we know it.


Not sure if you're serious but just in case you are, apples /= oranges. Roads aren't welfare for car companies. Giving loans to GM and Chrysler to stay afloat however is the definition of corporate welfare.


----------



## alxrmrs (Jan 18, 2017)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Yea, I love how Elon is happy to let the government subsidize people buying his cars, but when it comes time to follow public health guidelines to keep his employees safe he has a 3 year old style tantrum. Dude is a complete neckbeard.


Watch out, he's paying Tesla employees to find internet/twitter/forum posts bad mouthing him. We're definitely on his "naughty list" and won't be receiving small plastic Model Y toys for our birthdays. You know...the ones that will end up in land fills because no one cares.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

dysfunction said:


> Until Americans stop thinking about bicycles as toys, and walking as only being for the poor, we're not going to see any change in infrastructure.
> 
> Wait, maybe e-bikes are a gateway drug?


I think it's sort of the opposite, until city planners and bureaucrats stop thinking of bikes as toys and that walking is for the poor Americans aren't going to see any change in infrastructure. Build it and they will come, seems like that has worked most everywhere it's been tried.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think it's sort of the opposite, until city planners and bureaucrats stop thinking of bikes as toys and walking is for the poor Americans aren't going to see any change in infrastructure. Build it and they will come, seems like that has worked most everywhere it's been tried.


From the comments I've heard from most Americans, I think it's the populace that's the base here... Not the politicians.


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

dysfunction said:


> From the comments I've heard from most Americans, I think it's the populace that's the base here... Not the politicians.


Yeah, in most places in the world people commute also on motorbikes while here they are mostly used for leisure.


----------



## 411898 (Nov 5, 2008)

Does the tax credit make e-bikes legal to ride in the carpool lane and will they eventually come with auto pilot so that I can take a nap while I commute to the trail head?

On a more serious note, two of my bro-in-laws have Tesla’s. They love the simplicity and functionality but they are constantly talking **** about the build quality, lol. One admited that he has fallen asleep in it in the carpool lane!


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

matadorCE said:


> Not sure if you're serious but just in case you are, apples /= oranges. Roads aren't welfare for car companies. Giving loans to GM and Chrysler to stay afloat however is the definition of corporate welfare.


Kinda, we could have spend way more money on public transportation of all sorts so we not depend so heavily on cars and build roads to this scale.

To honest I lost track what the real costs for the taxpayers in the end were and if saving them was good for our economy in long run or not.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

alxrmrs said:


> We've been subsidizing bad things for ages (gas, coal)


At least it's simple to understand why. Almost 70% of the consumer cost of a gallon of gasoline in the US is one form of tax or another. Forget the industry, it's a never-ending cash cow revenue stream to the federal and local government. There's a reason the talking heads start bloviating about all of this and them work closed door deals to make sure gas is plentiful, uninterrupted, and relatively inexpensive. Then they will usually do something symbolic to placate the greenies and trumpet about it.


----------



## JackOfDiamonds (Apr 17, 2020)

Guys, guys, yes the e-bike credit is a total corporate hand-out. But, the real problem is the bike industry is just not sufficiently creative to get around it. All they have to do is hang a AA battery and a little motor on all the new bikes, making them "e-bikes", and then get the tax credit, and the customer removes the stuff upon delivery. Boom, tax credit for regular bikes too, probably actually help the environment. Modern problems require modern solutions!


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

dysfunction said:


> From the comments I've heard from most Americans, I think it's the populace that's the base here... Not the politicians.


This has been my experience as well. I joined a FB group of cyclists where I used to live who were advocating for better infrastructure. They went to all of the public hearings and really pushed hard with good ideas for how to start adding bike lanes and such.

The non cyclists in the hearings would get borderline irate at the notion that someone would take away a foot of THEIR lane and designate it to bicycles. It was insanity.


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

JackOfDiamonds said:


> Guys, guys, yes the e-bike credit is a total corporate hand-out. But, the real problem is the bike industry is just not sufficiently creative to get around it. All they have to do is hang a AA battery and a little motor on all the new bikes, making them "e-bikes", and then get the tax credit, and the customer removes the stuff upon delivery. Boom, tax credit for regular bikes too, probably actually help the environment. Modern problems require modern solutions!


That sounds be a great business idea!

Then your resell the kinda nos kits back to the bike companies.
Good for the environment and some cash flow

Money for nothing and&#8230;..


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

acer66 said:


> Yeah but it also often not thought about how much of a positive impact ev's will have when it comes to the need for less fuel transportation and less fluids in the car itself
> 
> The damage done to in the roads by heavy semis bringing fuel, less traffic, etc. and if you think about all the fluids dripping from ice powered vehicles getting washed into groundwater, damaging the road itself, posing dangers to motorcycle riders and so on.
> 
> For the most positive impact for me would because when there is no need for me to fuel up at gas stations nor for oil changes it means less interactions with people.


This is a realistic viewpoint and one I've never heard before. Unfortunately most people think ICE vehicles are filthy air killing machines. The reality is that most modern passenger vehicle emissions are so clean you could suck the tailpipe and barely get light headed. I only mention that because facts are important.

For some real enlightenment, check out this article. It's ten years old already, and things have only gotten better since then. TLDR - drive around a Raptor, it is a giant air cleaner.

Raptor vs leaf blower


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

acer66 said:


> Yeah, in most places in the world people commute also on motorbikes while here they are mostly used for leisure.


Even if bikes are only used for leisure it's still a win. Reduced health care burdon (as mentioned) and improved mental health.

I think plenty of commuters utilize bike paths too though and many of them wouldn't commute iffpaths weren't available.


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

BadgerOne said:


> This is a realistic viewpoint and one I've never heard before. Unfortunately most people think ICE vehicles are filthy air killing machines. The reality is that most modern passenger vehicle emissions are so clean you could suck the tailpipe and barely get light headed. I only mention that because facts are important.
> 
> For some real enlightenment, check out this article. It's ten years old already, and things have only gotten better since then. TLDR - drive around a Raptor, it is a giant air cleaner.
> 
> Raptor vs leaf blower


Yeah I heard that before but never seeing in writing like that.
Thank you.

Come to think about it it makes even more sense because pollution was one major reason why they did away with 2 stroke motorbikes a long time ago.
The only ice powered yard tool I have is a ride on mower and if that ones dies I will hopefully be able to go battery powered.


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Even if bikes are only used for leisure it's still a win. Reduced health care burdon (as mentioned) and improved mental health.
> 
> I think plenty of commuters utilize bike paths too though and many of them wouldn't commute iffpaths weren't available.


Yup, once I started digging myself out of a prolonged phase of depression and was able to go cycling again it was a big boost to my mental health first and then my physical wellbeing.
First was hard to get into it again but now I am going out of my way to go riding every other day.
Did not realize and/or forgot how much I missed cycling and how much good it does me.


----------



## Zguitar71 (Nov 8, 2020)

If it goes through I would take advantage of it immediately. I already commute daily on a “regular” bike but going to the store sucks. I load a backpack up and ride home and it isn’t very comfortable to say the least. I was going to get a trailer but have wanted a cargo ebike. I’ll wait, if I can get it for less that is killer. It won’t replace my Tacoma but it does cut my driving down in a big way. Mostly I love to ride so I commute on a bike and it also keeps me in tune with my bike. I feel more at one with it on the trails since I’m on the thing almost every day.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I promise you that an eBike would NOT change how many people I see on my commute. The infrastructure sucks. While yes, the work of having to ride your bike and expend energy is slowing people down, it isn't what stops people, it is the fact that there is literally no safe way to get from one place to the other, at all. There are LESS dangerous routes I can take, and most of them add an hour or more to my commute. 

An hour, for slightly less dangerous.

I enjoy riding my bike and staying in shape, that's why I do it. My alternative is a motorcycle which has the same mental benefits without the physical ones. Driving is a no go, it just ruins my mood (except for when I drive because I am mountain biking after work)


----------



## alxrmrs (Jan 18, 2017)

BadgerOne said:


> At least it's simple to understand why. Almost 70% of the consumer cost of a gallon of gasoline in the US is one form of tax or another. Forget the industry, it's a never-ending cash cow revenue stream to the federal and local government. There's a reason the talking heads start bloviating about all of this and them work closed door deals to make sure gas is plentiful, uninterrupted, and relatively inexpensive. Then they will usually do something symbolic to placate the greenies and trumpet about it.


It's not even close toe 70%. CA which has some of the highest gas taxes in the nation is $0.511 per gallon. But why should my subsidies go to those that drive farther, etc? I bought a new car in November 2018 and driven it less than 8k miles since. 2k of that was a one off event of moving back from Colorado to CA. Why should I subsidize gas guzzler cars because people think they need a GMC Suburban to go to the grocery store? Even if this costs are showing up in goods in stores, etc that's better because it'll help the market move towards products that are more carbon friendly rather than subsidizing the base rate for transport.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

It's amazing how cheap gas is in the US. AMAZING.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

dysfunction said:


> It's amazing how cheap gas is in the US. AMAZING.


I spent $75 filling up a Nissan Versa hybrid in Norway. I hate the government subsidizing big business just as much as the next guy, but I don't think people here realize how much of a burden fuel would be if we didn't subsidize it.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> I spent $75 filling up a Nissan Versa hybrid in Norway. I hate the government subsidizing big business just as much as the next guy, but I don't think people here realize how much of a burden fuel would be if we didn't subsidize it.


No, most start to whine when prices here approach those in the 80s elsewhere


----------



## alxrmrs (Jan 18, 2017)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> I spent $75 filling up a Nissan Versa hybrid in Norway. I hate the government subsidizing big business just as much as the next guy, but I don't think people here realize how much of a burden fuel would be if we didn't subsidize it.


The irony being that Norway is one of the biggest oil producers in the world. The Norwegian Sovereign Wealth fund basically controls all the oil production, sells it, then invests the proceeds. The government uses those funds (but only the _gains_ from the fund) for infrastructure and social projects in the country.


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

As somebody who has an eMTB and lives close enough to bike/e-bike commute to work/gym in a climate that is favorable for it most of the year, I would otherwise welcome the tax credit for an appropriate commuter e-bike... except for the fact that I would be loathe to park it anywhere for fear of theft.

Sure, a tax credit will certainly facilitate the reduction of car trips in a subset of circumstances in which the infrastructure exists (i.e. multi-use paved trails, ideally protected; secure parking)... but the reality is that we live in a wealthy nation that's plagued by less-than-first-world problems (eg. low-competence drivers, reactionary culture, wide wealth disparity, low-consequence property crime, etc.) that makes prioritizing the acquisition of e-bikes a bit of putting the cart before the horse. Or maybe the idea is to drive the necessary infrastructure/legal/social/cultural changes by making the concerns of bike commuters near-and-dear to a greater proportion of the populace?  (As in, if this is the intended approach... that's a lot of problems to solve with one tax credit. Quite optimistic, LOL.)

In any case, if this tax credit were to become a reality... my only rational course of action would be to N+1 another eMTB for play, not commuting. I figure I can always buy a commuter e-bike with or without the tax credit (or simply adapt an older eMTB) when the conditions for bike/e-bike commuting finally becomes favorable. As-it-stands, I am more likely to e-scooter* for the simple fact that I can fold it up, take it inside, and charge it under my desk.

Now, I figure that my willingness to N+1 isn't going to be universal... but the way this tax credit seems to be constructed makes it applicable to enough that just on that basis it needs to be revised to be a whole lot tighter. There is no reason for policy to facilitate anybody's plaything. (And if you don't understand that this is a policy discussion, and come back with, "well, if you dislike how you can abuse the claimed intent of the policy, just don't abuse it yourself," then you've disqualified yourself from this policy discussion. It's the same sort of "well, if you want to pay more taxes, you can make your own donations to the gov't," idiocy.)

* But that's a whole other can of worms for which cyclists might be amazed at the restrictive policies that currently exist (as in, you might be surprised that scooters/e-scooters are not legal on many roads that bikes/e-bikes have full right to... regardless of the speed capabilities of the e-scooter), not entirely without reason... but still exists as an obstacle to reducing automotive commutes. It probably doesn't need to be said, but I'll say it anyways: America(ns) isn't serious about reducing automotive commuting.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

alxrmrs said:


> It's not even close toe 70%. CA which has some of the highest gas taxes in the nation is $0.511 per gallon. But why should my subsidies go to those that drive farther, etc? I bought a new car in November 2018 and driven it less than 8k miles since. 2k of that was a one off event of moving back from Colorado to CA. Why should I subsidize gas guzzler cars because people think they need a GMC Suburban to go to the grocery store? Even if this costs are showing up in goods in stores, etc that's better because it'll help the market move towards products that are more carbon friendly rather than subsidizing the base rate for transport.


It is that high. You're speaking of only the state tax. I'm talking about taxation from production all the way until it makes it to the pump. I have a breakdown of it somewhere, let me see if I can find it.


----------



## alxrmrs (Jan 18, 2017)

BadgerOne said:


> It is that high. You're speaking of only the state tax. I'm talking about taxation from production all the way until it makes it to the pump. I have a breakdown of it somewhere, let me see if I can find it.


Do you have a source for this? The US doesn't have a VAT tax. I.e. your bike shop doesn't pay taxes when it buys from QBP, only when it sold to the final customer.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> I spent $75 filling up a Nissan Versa hybrid in Norway. I hate the government subsidizing big business just as much as the next guy, but I don't think people here realize how much of a burden fuel would be if we didn't subsidize it.


The other angle here is that we are not set up as a country anything like most of Europe. The US is not only vast, it is largely still sparse, and it is impossible to set up things like efficient public transit and alternatives to cars. Thus cars and the highway systems are the only means to get from one sparse area to another. The only locations you can really make this happen are the population centers, and some cities have done an OK job, but nothing like Europe (they don't have a choice really). People forget the inherent limitations of a huge and sparse country for transportation infrastructure. Combine that with both parties spending like drunken Marxists every time they are in power and we'd never be able to fund those types of projects anyway.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

alxrmrs said:


> Do you have a source for this? The US doesn't have a VAT tax. I.e. your bike shop doesn't pay taxes when it buys from QBP, only when it sold to the final customer.


I do, let me try to find it. Total tax rate by the time it hits the pump was something like 66 or 68 percent. It was in a book I read 4 or 5 years ago, with full citation of sources.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

BadgerOne said:


> The other angle here is that we are not set up as a country anything like most of Europe. The US is not only vast, it is largely still sparse, and it is impossible to set up things like efficient public transit and alternatives to cars. Thus cars and the highway systems are the only means to get from one sparse area to another. The only locations you can really make this happen are the population centers, and some cities have done an OK job, but nothing like Europe (they don't have a choice really). People forget the inherent limitations of a huge and sparse country for transportation infrastructure. Combine that with both parties spending like drunken Marxists every time they are in power and we'd never be able to fund those types of projects anyway.


I definitely wasn't arguing one way or another. I was just pointing out that while people here are melting down over $4/gal, people who choose to own cars in other parts of the world are paying way, way more than that. Infrastructure is a whole other conversation, but definitely a huge part of the overall discussion.


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

I recently bought a Vado 4.0. It's great. I can't believe how few people use ebikes, I often ride on nearly deserted bike paths.

The big problem is energy needs to reflect it's true costs, until we can find a carbon neutral solution we need it to cost more. Running air conditioners and driving two-ton vehicles around on a whim everyone you go are the two biggest problems we can mitigate very quickly.


----------



## r-rocket (Jun 23, 2014)

BadgerOne said:


> I do, let me try to find it. Total tax rate by the time it hits the pump was something like 66 or 68 percent. It was in a book I read 4 or 5 years ago, with full citation of sources.


I've seen claims like that fully debunked, despite bogus citations. Those numbers depend upon adding in taxes that don't have anything to do with the price of oil. Like adding up all the total State and Federal income taxes that oil and refining employees pay PERSONALLY to the govt on their wages (nothing to do with corporate taxes).

They also include how much they pay the owners of the land for the oil itself as if it were a tax. When an oil extraction company extracts oil from private land, they pay the land owner for the oil in various payment agreements. It is the price of the oil itself that they have to pay. When they extract from public lands they have to pay the owners for that oil too. That oil is owned by the public (We The People), and they are paying the owners (us) so they can make private profits refining and reselling our oil back to us.

The debunked studies try to pretend that this is a tax. It is not. They are paying the owner for an item of value and getting that item of value in exchange. It is a purchase, not a tax. The same as if they bought it from a private property owner.


----------



## avlfj40 (Jul 14, 2008)

davec113 said:


> I recently bought a Vado 4.0. It's great. I can't believe how few people use ebikes, I often ride on nearly deserted bike path.


You are one of the lucky. Where I live we are geographically lock. River and mountains. There's little room or appetite for Greenways in the southeast.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk


----------



## theMeat (Jan 5, 2010)

The funny thing is oil is the same price for any country. It's traded on the open market. The cost of transport and refining can vary but the big cost difference by country is tax. In America it's a fraction of a penny per gallon. If that's not an incentive idk what is. Raise that a dollar or two and watch the scooter, ebike and ev industry explode.


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

theMeat said:


> The funny thing is oil is the same price for any country. It's traded on the open market. The cost of transport and refining can vary but the big cost difference by country is tax. In America it's a fraction of a penny per gallon. If that's not an incentive idk what is. Raise that a dollar or two and watch the scooter, ebike and ev industry explode.
> View attachment 1948780


This reminds me of the oil embargo in the 70's. When it looked like america was going to fall into a life of high efficiency cars the OPEC nations realized that they would make less money with americans in 30+mpg cars and they dropped the price and just as soon as compact cars were gain a foothold they fell away and now we are laden with 18mpg minivans and SUVs.

We were seeing a resurgence with high efficiency diesel cars but then the whole emissions cheating thing kinda killed them and we are laden with 18mpg minivans and SUVs.

Electric cars are coming but the infrastructure to support them is neither there or accessible or green.


----------



## theMeat (Jan 5, 2010)

rockcrusher said:


> This reminds me of the oil embargo in the 70's. When it looked like america was going to fall into a life of high efficiency cars the OPEC nations realized that they would make less money with americans in 30+mpg cars and they dropped the price and just as soon as compact cars were gain a foothold they fell away and now we are laden with 18mpg minivans and SUVs.
> 
> We were seeing a resurgence with high efficiency diesel cars but then the whole emissions cheating thing kinda killed them and we are laden with 18mpg minivans and SUVs.
> 
> Electric cars are coming but the infrastructure to support them is neither there or accessible or green.


Lest not forget our support of Israel military was the cause of that. It jolted our path to energy independence. In hindsight that is good on many levels, pretty much a disaster environmentally. Oil spills, fracking&#8230;
Circle round to ebikes. Bike transport is more a city thing. Things are closer and more bike able. Ebikes can widen the range. Where someone might not want to pedal 15 miles each way. With the sergeancy of ebikes there will be blowback. In my city ebikes were banned because thousands of restaurants started using them for delivery, and silent bikes traveling 30mph zooming all over the city was getting crazy problematic. In 2020 pedal assist was allowed. And now just last week full electric with 25mph limit is now allowed.
If there was better bike infrastructure there would be more who do it, I would. In the last 10-15 years have seen bike paths go from non existent, to quickly growing. Good things


----------



## mtbbiker (Apr 8, 2004)

Unfortunately because of who is in power, this party believes in climate change. Whether you believe in climate change or not, the people in power do! According to them and their scientist, CO2 is one of the biggest green house gas causing climate change. 

If you understand what CO2 is (what we breathe out), when internal combustion engines are running its most efficient, is also when CO2 is at its highest in the tail pipe and why we have so many cars that shut off when at a stop. 

According to the experts, the only way to stop that is to stop driving internal combustion engines, period! That is the premise our government is going on and there is nothing we can do to stop this. 

CA governed Newsome has passed legislation in CA stating 2035 all new car sales in CA will be electric vehicles. Biden has jump on board and has already stated by 2030, 50% of all new car sales will be electric vehicles only! EV is coming and this tax credit was most likely not meant for Emtb’s, but more commuter style ebikes. Luckily for those that like Emtb’s, maybe we can take advantage of this huge push to get rid of internal combustion engines. 

I’m sure next on tax credits will be solar panels and charging stations. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

mtbbiker said:


> Unfortunately because of who is in power, this party believes in climate change. Whether you believe in climate change or not, the people in power do! According to them and their scientist, CO2 is one of the biggest green house gas causing climate change.
> 
> If you understand what CO2 is (what we breathe out), when internal combustion engines are running its most efficient, is also when CO2 is at its highest in the tail pipe and why we have so many cars that shut off when at a stop.
> 
> ...


You forgot that their scientists also put stuff out that makes frogs gay.

Besides you might want to take a look in here.


https://www.mtbr.com/threads/posting-rules.1070103/


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

Anything not burning gas or diesel is green, come on guys.

Nobody wants to ride those un-e-bikes.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

Sigh.


----------



## mtbbiker (Apr 8, 2004)

acer66 said:


> You forgot that their scientists also put stuff out that makes frogs gay.
> 
> Besides you might want to take a look in here.
> 
> ...


I'm not talking about opinions here, this is a fact. Most people who talks about politics are giving their opinions.

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/09/23/g...cent of California's Greenhouse Gas Emissions








FACT SHEET: President Biden Announces Steps to Drive American Leadership Forward on Clean Cars and Trucks | The White House


President Biden Outlines Target of 50% Electric Vehicle Sales Share in 2030 to Unleash Full Economic Benefits of Build Back Better Agenda and Advance




www.whitehouse.gov





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

Mods that don't believe in climate change... This forum gets more retarded by the day.


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

mtbbiker said:


> I'm not talking about opinions here, this is a fact. Most people who talks about politics are giving their opinions.
> 
> https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/09/23/g...cent of California's Greenhouse Gas Emissions
> 
> ...


You try to pin this just on the current administration and "their" scientist here for some reason* but there is a world wide consent among climate scientist about that.

Since you did not seem to bother to look into the link I posted here is a quote from the posting rules on this forum.

No Politics. No Religion. NONE. ZERO tolerance for anything political or religious.

* rhetorical


----------



## theMeat (Jan 5, 2010)

acer66 said:


> You try to pin this just on the current administration and "their" scientist here for some reason* but there is a world wide consent among climate scientist about that.
> 
> Since you did not seem to bother to look into the link I posted here is a quote from the posting rules on this forum.
> 
> ...


Talking about climate is not against the rules yet like politics and religion you can't talk about facts or history without offending someone's sensitivities


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

theMeat said:


> Talking about climate is not against the rules yet like politics and religion you can't talk about facts or history without offending someone's sensitivities


Yeah I was a bit cranky this morning but still.
Is there a cranky-o-meter app?

I should only post here after a ride, seems to have a relaxing effect on me.


----------



## theMeat (Jan 5, 2010)

acer66 said:


> Yeah I was a bit cranky this morning but still.
> Is there a cranky-o-meter app?
> 
> I should only post here after a ride, seems to have a relaxing effect on me.


Knowing is half the battle. Also a good first step


----------



## mtbbiker (Apr 8, 2004)

acer66 said:


> You try to pin this just on the current administration and "their" scientist here for some reason* but there is a world wide consent among climate scientist about that.
> 
> Since you did not seem to bother to look into the link I posted here is a quote from the posting rules on this forum.
> 
> ...


I guess I should have worded this way: Ca Governor introduces legislation to make all new car and truck sales in 2035 100% EV in Ca. Current President introduces legislation so that 50% of all new car sales are EV. in the USA. Does that work for you?

I was just trying to help people understand why tax credit maybe offered to Ebikes, nothing else. As internet combustion engines are soon to be replaced by EV vehicles. Many people in big cities, probably do not need a car and this tax credit maybe what they need as incentive to commute mostly by ebike.

Climate change is happening. Just not 100% sold on going full EV. I'm in So Ca and we have rolling blackouts now on hot days. Can you imagine when the grid has to deal with everyone driving EVs and charging them? In So Ca, at least we have a lot of sun light for solar power, but every households will also need to supplement solar with good size batteries. The more EV cars people own the bigger the house batteries will need to be.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

mtbbiker said:


> I guess I should have worded this way: Ca Governor introduces legislation to make all new car and truck sales in 2035 100% EV in Ca. Current President introduces legislation so that 50% of all new car sales are EV. in the USA. Does that work for you?
> 
> I was just trying to help people understand why tax credit maybe offered to Ebikes, nothing else. As internet combustion engines are soon to be replaced by EV vehicles. Many people in big cities, probably do not need a car and this tax credit maybe what they need as incentive to commute mostly by ebike.
> 
> ...


If you now throw in that other government's in world do the same then we are golden.?

But yes, I was reading the way I wanted to read it and reacted from my almighty high horse.
I also agree that battery powered transportation as of now can only be an transition to an environmentally safer form whatever that may be.

I hope that we also use the increased electrical demand to invest in a better a grid which is as you pointed out correctly pretty bad in most places and should be fixed ev's or not.

Thank you for your response and ?


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

CO2 is plant food. I like plants. I like to see them, smell them, see stuff make homes in them, grow them, and eat them. Long live CO2!


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

theMeat said:


> Talking about climate is not against the rules yet like politics and religion you can't talk about facts or history without offending someone's sensitivities


Don't need to worry about offending someone because they are too sensitive.

That's their issue not mine.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## acer66 (Oct 13, 2010)

Shark said:


> Don't need to worry about offending someone because they are too sensitive.
> 
> That's their issue not mine.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

Everyone has forgotten this lately.









Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

In an ideal situatiin there wouldn't be any need for a tax credit for ebikes, but since motor vehicle use is heavily subsidized, I currently support a tax credit. An egalitarian system where motorists pay per mile, would be the best situation for long term. 
For every person in the US:
1- 900 dollars is given to the automobile drivers for vehicle crashes.
2- 579 dollars is given to automobile drivers for infrastructure that by and large terrorizes cyclists and pedestrians. 
3- 600 dollars is given to automobile drivers for oil subsidies.
Every American citizen is given 2,000 dollars in freebies to drive a car and that number is wildly underinflated when you consider loss of land value, loss of quality of life, impacts to the environment, costs of war, previous tax dollars going to road construction, draining of police budgets etc.
In an egalitarian system, high automobile users would pay at least double per person then the average and those who do not rely on the automobile would pay at least 2,000 dollars less every year in taxes per person.


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

In a comparison to regular bikes, some perspectives point to ebikes being more environmentally friendly, but that is a silly and unnecessarily divisive discussion that distracts from the far more important focus of the automobile. Anything that replaces an automobile whether electric or combustion is a net improvement for society by a huge margin.


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

They should be giving credits to those that don't participate in overpopulating the earth.
Oh wait, that is exactly opposite of what they do. Lol

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## alxrmrs (Jan 18, 2017)

Shark said:


> They should be giving credits to those that don't participate in overpopulating the earth.
> Oh wait, that is exactly opposite of what they do. Lol
> 
> Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


How else will we keep stonks and GDP up and to the right?


----------



## mrpizza (Jun 2, 2013)

I wish I could ride my bike to work. It's 7.5 miles one way but I would get slaughtered on half of that distance by the cars that fly down these roads. I'm in a rural area. 
Plus carrying all my work stuff on a bicycle would totally suck.


----------



## kmccune (Sep 25, 2021)

BadgerOne said:


> Don't tell the Tesla drivers. They are thoroughly enjoying their smugness. It's easy when you're only half educated about something.


They are enjoying no oil changes too.


----------



## kmccune (Sep 25, 2021)

acer66 said:


> Yeah, was just playing along and if it would be up to me I would be doing away with tax credits, subsidies etc. in general.


I would like a point of sale credit, some of us are poorer than most. Subsidies are good used correctly.


----------



## kmccune (Sep 25, 2021)

Zguitar71 said:


> If it goes through I would take advantage of it immediately. I already commute daily on a "regular" bike but going to the store sucks. I load a backpack up and ride home and it isn't very comfortable to say the least. I was going to get a trailer but have wanted a cargo ebike. I'll wait, if I can get it for less that is killer. It won't replace my Tacoma but it does cut my driving down in a big way. Mostly I love to ride so I commute on a bike and it also keeps me in tune with my bike. I feel more at one with it on the trails since I'm on the thing almost every day.


EUNORAU has a nice looking"budget" cargo bike.


----------



## kmccune (Sep 25, 2021)

Shark said:


> They should be giving credits to those that don't participate in overpopulating the earth.
> Oh wait, that is exactly opposite of what they do. Lol
> 
> Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


Yes there are too many of us,I would imagine I will be helping the cause in a few short years.


----------



## PHeller (Dec 28, 2012)

Posted some thoughts on this topic on the ebike and frame builders forums. 

Wish the tax credit also covered "ebike conversion parts" and "bike components associated with ebikes" so you could use it on an ebike frame from a local builder, or to modify an existing frame to be turned into an ebike. 

I've got a Surly Big Fat Dummy that I adore, and turning it into a Big Fat Easy would be a super sweet.


----------



## Calsun (May 12, 2021)

With all the pollution from diesel powered vehicles the cities need zero pollution vehicles to have a chance to get cleaner air. Billions are spent on asthma treatment and heart disease and even covid deaths have been much areas in areas with high levels of air pollution (which is why more people of color have died as they have been forced to live in these areas). 

Half the land area in American cities is used by motorists to move, park, and store their vehicles. Contrast that with the space required for bikes and the gain with getting more people to use them benefits everyone. Far better to subsidize e-bikes than motor vehicles and less able in the future to devastate countries to take their oil or to use fracking in this country that poisons the water people drink. 

Some cities are already starting to reduce on-street parking and give this public space to bicyclists making it far safer for people to do the right thing.


----------



## kmccune (Sep 25, 2021)

Calsun said:


> With all the pollution from diesel powered vehicles the cities need zero pollution vehicles to have a chance to get cleaner air. Billions are spent on asthma treatment and heart disease and even covid deaths have been much areas in areas with high levels of air pollution (which is why more people of color have died as they have been forced to live in these areas).
> 
> Half the land area in American cities is used by motorists to move, park, and store their vehicles. Contrast that with the space required for bikes and the gain with getting more people to use them benefits everyone. Far better to subsidize e-bikes than motor vehicles and less able in the future to devastate countries to take their oil or to use fracking in this country that poisons the water people drink.
> 
> Some cities are already starting to reduce on-street parking and give this public space to bicyclists making it far safer for people to do the right thing.


Most "coal rollers" have never heard of nanoparticles and wouldn't care if they did, they think they have a God given right to pollute the air we have to breathe( the atmosphere cannot be a garbage dump forever.)


----------



## chrisrizzo (9 mo ago)

It's crazy that they're just doing this for ebikes. If they're going to do it, they should do it for wholesale bicycles. You might argue that, aside from the environment, more people riding bicycles to work has an influence on other things like our healthcare systems and the need for infrastructure maintenance (bikes don't rip up roads like vehicles). Wish the tax credit to get financial help also covered "ebike conversion parts" and "bike components associated with ebikes". It's a nice idea, but it's horribly short-sighted and loaded with private economic interests, just like every other policy in America.


----------



## CRM6 (Apr 7, 2021)

Claimed my ebike on last years tax return....


----------



## Zguitar71 (Nov 8, 2020)

chrisrizzo said:


> It's crazy that they're just doing this for ebikes. If they're going to do it, they should do it for wholesale bicycles. You might argue that, aside from the environment, more people riding bicycles to work has an influence on other things like our healthcare systems and the need for infrastructure maintenance (bikes don't rip up roads like vehicles). It's a nice idea, but it's horribly short-sighted and loaded with private economic interests, just like every other policy in America.


I agree, plus, there should be a tax credit for commuting on a bike or feet for every mile travelled in my opinion. It can be recorded just like the mileage on a vehicle. Making this only for e bikes looks like a way to boost an industry not actually promote alternative commuting.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

There has to be an income threshold, right? Darn it. I bet it is just below what I make,.


----------



## Zguitar71 (Nov 8, 2020)

Flyer said:


> There has to be an income threshold, right? Darn it. I bet it is just below what I make,.


$75k single and $150k filing jointly are the thresholds for the $900 credit. After that it goes down. That is for bikes up to $3000, 30% of the cost. It will exclude bikes over $4000, which is stupid imo.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Spammer reported. 

We don't qualify, though I'm poor as hell (a lot of family obligations) but this is an excellent idea. A commuter sounds great and we got my wife one. It is a bit small but I can use it too. In fact, I had to drop off both vehicles for repair (around 20 miles away) and we usually have to double up vehicles to drop off and pick up. With the e-bike, I simply rode back and rode there to pick up, and was still not worn out, and had time to work. We work from home now but will try to use the e-bike for more errands and commutes.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

Ebikes, bikes, scooters...anything that doesn't require fuel.


----------

