CHevy Volt costing taxpayers up to $250K per vehicle in govt subsidies

[Little-Acorn]

And that's PLUS the $39K the eventual buyer pays for each one.

Not that many years ago, I would have dismissed this article as being too fantastically silly to possibly be true. But now, with the fanatic leftists running the government the way they have for the last several years (Solyndra, GM/Chrysler bailouts, etc. etc.), being "fantastically silly" doesn't make it impossible at all.

BTW, keep in mind that many of the Volts sold so far, haven't been to private individuals. They've been sold through - you guessed it - government fleet purchases.

-------------------------------------------------

http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16192

Chevy Volt Costing Taxpayers Up to $250K Per Vehicle

Analyst: 'This might be the most government-supported car since the Trabant'

By Tom Gantert
Dec. 21, 2011

Each Chevy Volt sold thus far may have as much as $250,000 in state and federal dollars in incentives behind it – a total of $3 billion altogether, according to an analysis by James Hohman, assistant director of fiscal policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.

Hohman looked at total state and federal assistance offered for the development and production of the Chevy Volt, General Motors’ plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. His analysis included 18 government deals that included loans, rebates, grants and tax credits. The amount of government assistance does not include the fact that General Motors is currently 26 percent owned by the federal government.

The Volt subsidies flow through multiple companies involved in production. The analysis includes adding up the amount of government subsidies via tax credits and direct funding for not only General Motors, but other companies supplying parts for the vehicle. For example, the Department of Energy awarded a $105.9 million grant to the GM Brownstown plant that assembles the batteries. The company was also awarded approximately $106 million for its Hamtramck assembly plant in state credits to retain jobs. The company that supplies the Volt’s batteries, Compact Power, was awarded up to $100 million in refundable battery credits (combination tax breaks and cash subsidies). These are among many of the subsidies and tax credits for the vehicle.

GM has estimated they’ve sold 6,000 Volts so far. That would mean each of the 6,000 Volts sold would be subsidized between $50,000 and $250,000, depending on how many government subsidy milestones are realized.

If battery manufacturers awarded incentives to produce batteries the Volt may use are included in the analysis, the potential government subsidy per Volt increases to $256,824. For example, A123 Systems has received extensive state and federal support, and bid to be a supplier to the Volt, but the deal instead went to Compact Power. The $256,824 figure includes adding up the subsidies to both companies.

The $3 billion total subsidy figure includes $690.4 million offered by the state of Michigan and $2.3 billion in federal money. That’s enough to purchase 75,222 Volts with a sticker price of $39,828.

Additional state and local support provided to Volt suppliers was not included in the analysis, Hohman said, and could increase the level of government aid. For instance, the Volt is being assembled at the Poletown plant in Detroit/Hamtramck, which was built on land acquired by General Motors through eminent domain.

“It just goes to show there are certain folks that will spend anything to get their vision of what people should do,” said State Representative Tom McMillin, R-Rochester Hills. “It’s a glaring example of the failure of central planning trying to force citizens to purchase something they may not want. … They should let the free market make those decisions.”

“This might be the most government-supported car since the Trabant,” said Hohman, referring to the car produced by the former Communist state of East Germany.

According to GM CEO Dan Akerson, the average Volt owner makes $170,000 per year.


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

[ConHog]

And that's PLUS the $39K the eventual buyer pays for each one.

Not that many years ago, I would have dismissed this article as being too fantastically silly to possibly be true. But now, with the fanatic leftists running the government the way they have for the last several years (Solyndra, GM/Chrysler bailouts, etc. etc.), being "fantastically silly" doesn't make it impossible at all.

BTW, keep in mind that many of the Volts sold so far, haven't been to private individuals. They've been sold through - you guessed it - government fleet purchases.

-------------------------------------------------

http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16192

Chevy Volt Costing Taxpayers Up to $250K Per Vehicle

Analyst: 'This might be the most government-supported car since the Trabant'

By Tom Gantert
Dec. 21, 2011

Each Chevy Volt sold thus far may have as much as $250,000 in state and federal dollars in incentives behind it – a total of $3 billion altogether, according to an analysis by James Hohman, assistant director of fiscal policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.

Hohman looked at total state and federal assistance offered for the development and production of the Chevy Volt, General Motors’ plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. His analysis included 18 government deals that included loans, rebates, grants and tax credits. The amount of government assistance does not include the fact that General Motors is currently 26 percent owned by the federal government.

The Volt subsidies flow through multiple companies involved in production. The analysis includes adding up the amount of government subsidies via tax credits and direct funding for not only General Motors, but other companies supplying parts for the vehicle. For example, the Department of Energy awarded a $105.9 million grant to the GM Brownstown plant that assembles the batteries. The company was also awarded approximately $106 million for its Hamtramck assembly plant in state credits to retain jobs. The company that supplies the Volt’s batteries, Compact Power, was awarded up to $100 million in refundable battery credits (combination tax breaks and cash subsidies). These are among many of the subsidies and tax credits for the vehicle.

GM has estimated they’ve sold 6,000 Volts so far. That would mean each of the 6,000 Volts sold would be subsidized between $50,000 and $250,000, depending on how many government subsidy milestones are realized.

If battery manufacturers awarded incentives to produce batteries the Volt may use are included in the analysis, the potential government subsidy per Volt increases to $256,824. For example, A123 Systems has received extensive state and federal support, and bid to be a supplier to the Volt, but the deal instead went to Compact Power. The $256,824 figure includes adding up the subsidies to both companies.

The $3 billion total subsidy figure includes $690.4 million offered by the state of Michigan and $2.3 billion in federal money. That’s enough to purchase 75,222 Volts with a sticker price of $39,828.

Additional state and local support provided to Volt suppliers was not included in the analysis, Hohman said, and could increase the level of government aid. For instance, the Volt is being assembled at the Poletown plant in Detroit/Hamtramck, which was built on land acquired by General Motors through eminent domain.

“It just goes to show there are certain folks that will spend anything to get their vision of what people should do,” said State Representative Tom McMillin, R-Rochester Hills. “It’s a glaring example of the failure of central planning trying to force citizens to purchase something they may not want. … They should let the free market make those decisions.”

“This might be the most government-supported car since the Trabant,” said Hohman, referring to the car produced by the former Communist state of East Germany.

According to GM CEO Dan Akerson, the average Volt owner makes $170,000 per year.


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)


Nothing surprised me when it comes to anything our government is involved in. They want an electric car regardless of actual cost. But know that GM would NEVER sell a Volt at $200K.

On the other hand, there are MANY companies that routinely take a financial hit up front to introduce a new technology. Sony comes to mind as an example. Rumor is that they lost $500 per PS3 sold in the first year in the US in order to introduce Blu Ray. That worked out pretty well for them in the long run.

[Little-Acorn]

On the other hand, there are MANY companies that routinely take a financial hit up front to introduce a new technology. Sony comes to mind as an example. Rumor is that they lost $500 per PS3 sold in the first year in the US in order to introduce Blu Ray. That worked out pretty well for them in the long run.

And how much of it was government subsidized?

[ConHog]

And how much of it was government subsidized?


And that is why unlike Sony's venture, this isn't a good idea.

[Nukeman]

All you need is a Tesla motors vehicle. they have the roadster and now the family sedan. they are supposed to be coming out with a SUV and smaller compact car in 2012.. Every model they make gets cheaper.. Can't wait to see the new model next year... Ohh and without big subsidies and bailout monies from Uncle Sam

[fj1200]

They've had some subsidies/loans haven't they?

[ConHog]

They've had some subsidies/loans haven't they?

As far as I can see, they have never received any money from the government in the way of loans or grants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Motors#2010_initial_public_offering

[fj1200]

As far as I can see, they have never received any money from the government in the way of loans or grants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Motors#2010_initial_public_offering

Tesla Motors Bags Federal Cash (http://www.drivingtoday.com/news_this_week/2009-07-17-4337-driving/index.html#.TvJT9DV8AVU)

There were smiles all around the Silicon Valley as electric carmaker Tesla Motors received approval for about $465 million in low-interest loans from the U.S. Department of Energy to accelerate the production of “affordable, fuel-efficient electric vehicles.” The loans are part of the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program (ATVM), which provides incentives to new and established automakers to build more fuel-efficient vehicles. Created in 2007, the $25 billion ATVM aims to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil. Tesla was quick to point out the program is entirely unrelated to the stimulus package or the bailout funds that General Motors and Chrysler have received.
Tesla says it will use $365 million for production engineering and assembly of the Model S, an all-electric family sedan that will transport up to seven people and is said to travel up to 300 miles per charge. Another $100 million will be used to build and equip a power train manufacturing plant. The company hopes the facility will supply all-electric power train solutions to other automakers, greatly accelerating the availability of mass-market EVs.

Not including tax credits on the purchase of an EV.

[ConHog]

Tesla Motors Bags Federal Cash (http://www.drivingtoday.com/news_this_week/2009-07-17-4337-driving/index.html#.TvJT9DV8AVU)

Not including tax credits on the purchase of an EV.

WOW how did I miss THAT

Scratch them from of the good companies then. I don't believe the government needs to be in the business of funding things like that. Even in the form of loans.

[MtnBiker]

Maybe the coal industry should be making loans to the auto makers that are using their electricity to power those cars.

[Nukeman]

They've had some subsidies/loans haven't they?


WOW how did I miss THAT

Scratch them from of the good companies then. I don't believe the government needs to be in the business of funding things like that. Even in the form of loans.

Low interest loans are one thing... Freaking bailouts is another. There is NOTHING wrong with taking advantage of low interest loans, Hell private citizens do it every year for school now don't they, only and IDIOT would take a higher interest loan for principals sake.... You guys would all be POOR business owners in my opinion due to your unwillingness to take lower interest loans just because they come from the govt.. At least "loans" are payed back......

[fj1200]

^It's the intervention that is the issue. Taking the loan if it's offered to a business person is completely different than fundamentally stating that government shouldn't be in the business of loaning public money to private enterprise.

[ConHog]

^It's the intervention that is the issue. Taking the loan is completely different than fundamentally stating that government shouldn't be in the business of doing that.

I agree with that. Can't really fault the company for taking the money if it was out there I suppose, but why is the government even offering it? It seems that if the electric car future was so bright that private venture money would be available.

[MtnBiker]

Low interest loans are one thing... Freaking bailouts is another. There is NOTHING wrong with taking advantage of low interest loans, Hell private citizens do it every year for school now don't they, only and IDIOT would take a higher interest loan for principals sake.... You guys would all be POOR business owners in my opinion due to your unwillingness to take lower interest loans just because they come from the govt.. At least "loans" are payed back......

I believe it is prudent to question the governments envolvement in granting loans. Are loans paid back? Yes, mostly. However there are some examples that immediatly come to mind; Solyndra, FannieMae and FreddieMac buying bundled loans, there is alot of money that was not paid back. When it comes to bussiness it is a dangerous thing when the government starts picking winnners and losers on loans, those desicions are not always made based on the best business model, political desicions will always come into play.

[Nukeman]

I believe it is prudent to question the governments envolvement in granting loans. Are loans paid back? Yes, mostly. However there are some examples that immediatly come to mind; Solyndra, FannieMae and FreddieMac buying bundled loans, there is alot of money that was not paid back. When it comes to bussiness it is a dangerous thing when the government starts picking winnners and losers on loans, those desicions are not always made based on the best business model, political desicions will always come into play.Very valid point.

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/payn_c9479420111221120100.jpg

[Kathianne]

It's not just the Volt that is a problem for GM:

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/20/big-trouble-for-obamas-gm/


Obama’s going to run on this bailout? Really? GM’s make-or-break compact Chevrolet Cruze (http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/20/big-trouble-for-obamas-gm/#), hyped as a “home run,” (http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/editors_notebook/1112_2012_chevrolet_cruze_2lt/index.html) is actually “headed for flopsville,” (http://twitter.com/#%21/Tweetermeyer/status/149200340632350721) according to Edward Niedermeyer of Truth About Cars. He has the damning chart (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/12/chart-of-the-day-the-rise-and-fall-of-the-chevrolet-cruze/#more-422951). Cruze sales were great at first, when its competitors from Honda and Toyota had been crippled by the Japanese earthquake and tsunami.
…

[t]he Cruze seemed to show that the “new” GM was capable of selling smaller cars on their merits, rather than as afterthoughts to more profitable truck, SUV (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/12/chart-of-the-day-the-rise-and-fall-of-the-chevrolet-cruze/#) and large car offerings. And indeed, through the first half of this year, it seemed that the Cruze was something of a roaring success, regularly outselling its segment competitors. But then, in June, when production shifted from 2011 models to 2012 models, something changed: sales started to slow, and inventories started to rise. As Cruzes began piling up on dealer lots (http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/20/big-trouble-for-obamas-gm/#), GM trimmed production moderately, but still, inventories began to grow out of control. Clearly something was going wrong


P.S.: Sorry, McArdle (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/2010/11/can-gm-get-its-groove-back/8247/) (scroll for “Cheap Date No. 1″).
…

P.P.S.: It’s not that hard to think of a reason why Cruze sales might have crumped (apart from the renewed production of Honda Civics and Toyota Corollas). The Cruze had significant early reliability problems (http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/26/bad-nuze-for-gm/). People who buy small cheap cars (http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/20/big-trouble-for-obamas-gm/#) typically can’t afford breakdowns. Word gets around. Corrective efforts by GM may have fixed (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/12/truedelta-updates-reliability-data/)the Cruze glitches, but at this point in the launch it could be too little too late. That’s the story of GM (and the UAW, for that matter).
…

P.P.P.S.–Now he tells us: Even cars with relatively low sales volumes can be profitable, of course, if costs are in line with prices. But that may not be the case with New GM, which is saddled with a union contract preserving existing UAW members’ pre-bankruptcy wage rates. Speaking in Detroit, Obama’s auto czarlet Steve Rattner admitted that Obama hadn’t asked the UAW to give up enough in the bailout. (Gee, that’s not what I recall him–or Obama–saying at the time.) Video here (http://www.autonews.com/article/20111220/VIDEO/312209774/1219). From the Detroit News (http://detnews.com/article/20111216/AUTO01/112160346/Rattner-Auto-Task-Force-should-mandated-UAW-wage-cuts?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE%7Cp ):

Yet Rattner acknowledged that American automakers still have substantially higher labor costs than their foreign competitors — a gap he wishes the task force had done more to close.

“We asked all the stakeholders to make very significant sacrifices,” he said. “We should have asked the UAW to do a bit more. We did not ask any UAW member to take a cut in their pay.”


...

[ConHog]

It's not just the Volt that is a problem for GM:

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/20/big-trouble-for-obamas-gm/

COMPLETELY the unions fault to. Can't be blamed on American workers, plenty of American workers building foreign cars with no reliability issues.

Here's the differences I see when I've been at my dad's shop. A $20K Honda or Toyota is built to the quality of a $30K GM. Why? Because GM has to cut costs on parts and engineering to make up for the higher labor cost relative to Toyota or Honda.


What Obama SHOULD have done was bail GM out (had to be done or all 3 builders probably would have went under) while breaking the union. But instead he made the unions hand even stronger. Proving where his true loyalties lie.

[PostmodernProphet]

since my son is now working at the new battery plant that supplies Volt, I am keeping my mouth shut......