Cutting these tax breaks seems counter productive.
What is supposed to happen? The US and vehicle makers doubles down on ICE cars while the rest of the world moves in the other direction?
Sounds like a good way to trash any competitiveness US car makers have....
toomuchtodo•3h ago
These efforts are struggles to maintain the status quo for entrenched interests against unsurmountable momentum as it relates to the clean energy transition [1] and the electrification of transportation. If you're looking for a rational explanation, the human will disappoint. Simply maintain pace and pressure in the appropriate direction. That effort, combined with time, will hopefully equal success. In my personal opinion, the "why" is important to understand from a threat model perspective (ie how do you hack around humans and entities attempting to slow or stop the transition), but not important as a contributor to input to speed the transition (because mental models and identity are rigid, and you're not taking the selfish out of the human, broadly speaking).
Not sure what's supposed to happen, but I can guess what will happen instead: US states will have to pay upfront for new factories to be built instead of promising tax breaks later, because the companies that decide whether to build will trust the promises less than until now.
dalyons•2h ago
So short sighted and self destructive. The US is actively sabotaging its future in innovation, manufacturing and energy. For what? To make its car industry even less competitive? The world is moving on with or without the US, as you say.
toomuchtodo•2h ago
For profits today. There is no will or care to invest for the future in the US.
foobarian•1h ago
Wonder if it's just that, or whether there is a more sinister mindset in place that would gladly see the country slide in reverse towards a backward theocracy that would be easier to control.
georgeecollins•1h ago
Do you mean there is no will to make public investments in the future? Because in the private space the US leads the world in investing in the future. Think about how much we invest in AI and self driving! I think a US private company pioneered electric cars.
dylan604•1h ago
no, they mean there's no interest in tomorrow's profits when you can have them today. besides "they" won't be here tomorrow, so get it now. Don't be a simp and leave things for someone else.
RankingMember•1h ago
> I think a US private company pioneered electric cars.
Electric cars have been around since the late 1800s. If you mean modern ones, in the US the California Air Resources Board basically willed them back into existence in the 90s, and a California automaker (Tesla pre-Musk) made great strides in their public esteem by putting a battery pack and electric motor into a Lotus chassis and selling it as the "Roadster" (leaning on the prior art of companies like Ford and especially GM's EV1).
toomuchtodo•1h ago
I argue you are overvaluing AI and self driving and undervaluing the capability to build high-tech products, systems, and infrastructure.
germinalphrase•55m ago
That US private company was significantly enabled by a (apparently temporary) government policy of direct and indirect financial support. That company does not exist without the direct and intentional support by the US government.
mindslight•1h ago
It's not really "for" anything besides letting increasingly-marginalized people feel like they have some agency. Of course, choosing to politically express themselves with spite instead of constructive solutions based on what they want is exactly why they continue to be increasingly marginalized.
OneLeggedCat•1h ago
Counter productive to whom? Certainly not oil companies, nor the politicians that represent their interests?
bluGill•44m ago
Not really productive for oil companies either. They can fight, but they can't bring down oil prices enough to compete and consumers are catching on.
ryoshoe•26m ago
Unfortunately they can lobby to prevent cheaper alternatives from being made available
ajross•1h ago
> What is supposed to happen?
That's an argument from a rationality perspective. This is a decision from ideology. It's not about making the best choice, it's about making sure the right people lose.
dylan604•1h ago
That sounds exactly like the MAGA plan. bigOil is too ingrained into the party to allow the demand for their product to reduce by eliminating ICE powered anything. To expect MAGA to dump bigOil would be more productive to bang your head on the keyboard and expect to write the code for anything.
geoffeg•1h ago
> would be more productive to bang your head on the keyboard and expect to write the code for anything.
There's gotta be a joke about AI vibe coding there...
dylan604•1m ago
I thought AI vibe coding was the joke
megaman821•1h ago
I am huge believer in the eventual dominance of battery-electric vehicles, but these tax incentives are very inefficient. The money would be better spent on R&D into batteries and motors. The time would be better spent making it easier to build.
01HNNWZ0MV43FF•57m ago
It would be better spent on UBI and walkable cities but you know, sometimes the only progress we get is what voters will support
SV_BubbleTime•1h ago
> makers doubles down on ICE cars while the rest of the world moves in the other direction?
Automotive EE here…
As respectfully as I can; you have no idea what you are talking about and neither do the people cheering you on.
These vehicles are not ready for the markets they are (were) being pushed to.
Current electrics do not make sense in specifically hot or cold climates. They do not make sense for hard use. They do not make sense for long trips. They do not make sense for repair.
They make sense in California for people that will keep them only a couple of years until the next status symbol is available.
I own an electric, I work on some. I like the pluses, and am keenly aware of the negatives. I see people storing them outside in snow and it makes me sad for their owners that think they bought an alternative to an ICE vehicle.
EVs today are not alternatives to ICE vehicles, the are compliments.
Fun fact… right now with the systems today, most EVs that will need a new battery, will be totaled by that cost. I have the tools, I’ve been inside the 600V packs that can easily kill you. Mechanics aren’t trained, prepared for, or will accept the risk. These are not 20 year vehicles. They’re basically 8 year vehicles currently.
Disagree with your feelings all you like, I live it.
LargeWu•59m ago
The country with the highest adoption of EV's in the world is Norway. If they can deal with the cold, so can the US.
I have an EV in Minnesota and it's great. Battery life does take a pretty big hit in winter but that's fine based on how I use it. The real problem is lack of charging infrastructure, not the range.
01HNNWZ0MV43FF•55m ago
Hybrids once again totally undervalued. I don't know why the industry and the consumers are going so hard on pure EVs
blacksmith_tb•14m ago
Hmm, I drive a PHEV, but full EVs are extremely simple vehicles, as long as you work out charging, they'll need tires eventually, and brake pads (slowly, since they mostly have regen), and that's about it. No fluids (and leaks), no belts, no going to gas stations - pretty compelling for the motorist (and scary for dealerships and repair shops).
kingstnap•16m ago
EVs are better suited to most commute patterns. The ICE would be the compliment, and the EV, the daily driver.
With better charging infrastructure, that most turns into virtually all.
bryanlarsen•2m ago
> They’re basically 8 year vehicles currently.
The major EV makers provide an 8 year warranty on their batteries. If EV batteries only lasted 8 years on average, it means they'd be replacing half of them under warranty, which would cost them a fortune and show up on their balance sheet. Tesla & Hyundai aren't bankrupt; batteries last significantly longer than 8 years.
kevin_thibedeau•1h ago
Hybrids will be viable for a long time for regions of the world that don't have ready access to a charging station and for users that need to make long trips without delays from 30+ minute charge times.
bluGill•45m ago
Hybrids only are viable so long as they exist in large numbers thus ensuring that there is enough money to be made in having infrastructure. Since getting a PHEV I've massively cut down my gas purchases. Car buyers who care about money are catching on to just how much cheaper it is to fuel and EV, and the PHEV looks like the best of both worlds (lets not get into that debate). I'm predicting that in about 5 years EVs will be common enough that gas stations stop going up as fast - not that they will go out of business, but they companies building them will be more careful about there they put them in because demand just isn't there in many locations. Starting in 10 years there will be an increase in the number of going out of business because the demand just isn't there to support several of them on less busy corners. (both of these will be hard to see at first - there are other business cycles in play that make the trends hard to be sure of so it will be another decade before you can be sure) In 20 years gas will be hard to find - not impossible (collectors will still buy it, and long distance travel will be the last place is goes away so freeways will keep it much longer)
Good, that's the way it should be. If EVs are the future of personal vehicles (and I think they will be), then there's all the reasons to trade short term pain for long term gain.
contagiousflow•1h ago
What is the short term pain exactly?
enticeing•1h ago
Presumably short term pain for Ford from missing out on federal incentives they would've gotten otherwise
throwaway48476•1h ago
This also hurts innovation into more efficient gas engines for hybrids. Without needing the engine to power the wheels new engine types become viable.
laidoffamazon•55m ago
It’s unclear if they will or won’t - but given the current presidents tendency to attack any entity that crosses him with “lawfare” it doesn’t seem safe to accurately project their intentions
duxup•3h ago
What is supposed to happen? The US and vehicle makers doubles down on ICE cars while the rest of the world moves in the other direction?
Sounds like a good way to trash any competitiveness US car makers have....
toomuchtodo•3h ago
[1] Texas Legislature Beats Back Assault on Clean Energy - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44277367 - June 2025
(China installed 93GW of solar in May 2025, more than every other country combined in 2024: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44359105)
Arnt•2h ago
dalyons•2h ago
toomuchtodo•2h ago
foobarian•1h ago
georgeecollins•1h ago
dylan604•1h ago
RankingMember•1h ago
Electric cars have been around since the late 1800s. If you mean modern ones, in the US the California Air Resources Board basically willed them back into existence in the 90s, and a California automaker (Tesla pre-Musk) made great strides in their public esteem by putting a battery pack and electric motor into a Lotus chassis and selling it as the "Roadster" (leaning on the prior art of companies like Ford and especially GM's EV1).
toomuchtodo•1h ago
germinalphrase•55m ago
mindslight•1h ago
OneLeggedCat•1h ago
bluGill•44m ago
ryoshoe•26m ago
ajross•1h ago
That's an argument from a rationality perspective. This is a decision from ideology. It's not about making the best choice, it's about making sure the right people lose.
dylan604•1h ago
geoffeg•1h ago
There's gotta be a joke about AI vibe coding there...
dylan604•1m ago
megaman821•1h ago
01HNNWZ0MV43FF•57m ago
SV_BubbleTime•1h ago
Automotive EE here…
As respectfully as I can; you have no idea what you are talking about and neither do the people cheering you on.
These vehicles are not ready for the markets they are (were) being pushed to.
Current electrics do not make sense in specifically hot or cold climates. They do not make sense for hard use. They do not make sense for long trips. They do not make sense for repair.
They make sense in California for people that will keep them only a couple of years until the next status symbol is available.
I own an electric, I work on some. I like the pluses, and am keenly aware of the negatives. I see people storing them outside in snow and it makes me sad for their owners that think they bought an alternative to an ICE vehicle.
EVs today are not alternatives to ICE vehicles, the are compliments.
Fun fact… right now with the systems today, most EVs that will need a new battery, will be totaled by that cost. I have the tools, I’ve been inside the 600V packs that can easily kill you. Mechanics aren’t trained, prepared for, or will accept the risk. These are not 20 year vehicles. They’re basically 8 year vehicles currently.
Disagree with your feelings all you like, I live it.
LargeWu•59m ago
I have an EV in Minnesota and it's great. Battery life does take a pretty big hit in winter but that's fine based on how I use it. The real problem is lack of charging infrastructure, not the range.
01HNNWZ0MV43FF•55m ago
blacksmith_tb•14m ago
kingstnap•16m ago
With better charging infrastructure, that most turns into virtually all.
bryanlarsen•2m ago
The major EV makers provide an 8 year warranty on their batteries. If EV batteries only lasted 8 years on average, it means they'd be replacing half of them under warranty, which would cost them a fortune and show up on their balance sheet. Tesla & Hyundai aren't bankrupt; batteries last significantly longer than 8 years.
kevin_thibedeau•1h ago
bluGill•45m ago