To the editor: In making the case against the federal tax credit for electric vehicle buyers, Veronique de Rugy stresses the truth that those that buy EVs are largely rich. The implication is that peculiar middle-class drivers don’t profit.
This doesn’t jibe with my actuality.
I’m a retired L.A. metropolis faculty trainer. After some analysis, I bought a 2024 Hyundai Ioniq 5 EV. At a suggestion from the seller, I leased the automobile for 3 years.
I received $1,000 for my outdated automobile, got here up with $5,500 as a down fee and was “blessed” with rebates and credit totaling $14,000. With the automobile’s web price round $20,000, I used to be capable of set my month-to-month lease fee at about $280.
My present price of gas: nothing.
My present enhance in energy utilization: virtually nothing since I’ve photo voltaic panels.
My present month-to-month automobile price (aside from the lease fee of $280): just about nothing
My feeling from serving to to attenuate the local weather disaster: large satisfaction.
Gerald Schiller, Newbury Park
..
To the editor: The Instances’ “hold” editorial on the federal EV tax credit score and De Rugy’s “kill” counterpoint each current wonderful arguments. They stress local weather change, authorities income and results on the poor and the rich.
Nevertheless, neither mentions hybrids as a compromise.
Each EVs and hybrids use much less gas than vehicles powered solely by fuel. Due to this fact, drivers of those automobiles pay much less or no gasoline tax, which works towards sustaining and bettering our roads.
The state prices EV and plug-in hybrid drivers an extra price at automobile registration renewal, however relying on miles pushed, it won’t make up the distinction. Maybe the state ought to take into account charging as a part of the registration price a “miles pushed price” for all.
Perhaps this specific and extra clear price might decrease state taxes on fuel and make California extra reasonably priced for residents and vacationers.
George Wolkon, Pacific Palisades
..
To the editor: From my perspective, De Rugy’s arguments had been higher than these offered within the editorial. Whereas the credit score might assist create jobs within the EV trade, a like variety of jobs can be misplaced producing gas-powered automobiles.
De Rugy makes a extra persuasive case that this credit score does little to scale back emissions, as most EV patrons would make the acquisition with out the subsidy.
It must be famous that electrical automobiles already obtain a subsidy by not paying the gasoline tax. As well as, electrical automobiles can qualify for the carpool lane in California, a misguided coverage that will increase congestion, which provides to air pollution. Congestion tolls can be higher for the setting.
Allen Wisniewski, Redondo Seashore
..
To the editor: De Rugy feels EV tax credit are ineffective, enhance the deficit, are unfair to the poor and let the federal government decide winners and losers.
I disagree, however she might want the Power Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act.
Research present that pricing carbon emissions, because the act does, and returning collected charges equally to all Individuals are among the many best methods to scale back planet-warming emissions with out growing the deficit.
The poorest two-thirds of us would break even or lower your expenses, with the poorest amongst us saving probably the most and seeing the quickest and best enchancment in air high quality. The coverage is technology-neutral — it rewards least carbon-intensive producers with out selecting winners or losers.
Tom Hazelleaf, Seal Seashore
