Why Tesla now needs the EV tax credit that Musk once said should go away
It wasn't long ago that Tesla CEO Elon Musk was advocating for ending the $7,500 tax credit for buyers of electric vehicles.
'Take away the subsidies. It will only help Tesla,' he said in a post on his social media platform X last year, adding 'Also remove the subsidies from all industries!'
But now, with House budget and tax bill known as the 'big, beautiful bill' proposing to end that tax credit, he and Tesla are suddenly arguing for the continuation of those same credits as the Senate debates its own version of the bill.
'Abruptly ending the energy tax credits would threaten America's energy independence and the reliability of our grid' said Tesla's solar power unit in its own post on X late last month.
'There is no change to tax incentives for oil & gas, just EV/solar,' Musk said in a follow-up post.
The turnabout may have to do with the recent financial troubles at Tesla. Many experts believed that getting rid of the EV tax credit would hurt legacy automakers, which continue to lose money on their EV operations, more than it would hurt Tesla. But Tesla's sales took a nosedive this year, and it needs the credits to maintain buyer demand.
The battle over EV tax credits, and Musk's broader opposition to the Republicans' budget and taxation bill, has caused a major split between President Donald Trump and Musk – a member of the administration's inner circle as recently as last week. The outcome could endanger the key legislative priority of Trump and Republicans. It could also affect the finances of the beleaguered Tesla.
Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson have both suggested that the loss of federal support for EV's is driving Musk's opposition to the bill.
'Elon and I had a great relationship, I don't know if we will anymore,' Trump told reporters Thursday. 'I am very disappointed. Elon knew the inner workings of this bill… all of a sudden he had a problem and he only developed the problem after he found out we had to cut the EV mandate.'
Despite Trump's reference to an EV mandate, there has never been a federal rule requiring Americans buy EVs rather than gasoline-powered cars. But the Biden administration did pass the $7,500 EV tax credit in an effort to spur demand for EVs.
Musk immediately denied removal of the EV tax credit was the reason for his opposition to the bill.
'Keep the EV/solar incentive cuts in the bill, even though no oil & gas subsidies are touched (very unfair!!), but ditch the MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK in the bill,' he posted on X shortly after Trump's remarks.
Tesla shares (TSLA) fell 14% following the exchange.
Musk has focused most of his criticism on how the domestic policy bill would balloon the deficit. However, he is also no longer is arguing that ending the EV tax credit would be good for Tesla.
Tesla did not respond to a request for comment. However, Musk's shift on the EV tax credit likely reflects changes at Tesla since late last year.
Backlash to Musk's political activities played a major role in the company's recent sales troubles, including its first drop in annual sales in 2024 and its biggest ever drop in its sales during the first three months of the year. That resulted in a 71% plunge in net income in the first quarter.
While the $7,500 EV tax credit goes to car buyers, it indirectly benefits EV makers by increasing demand. When an earlier version was phased out in 2019, Tesla was forced to cut prices to keep buyers interested.
It's not just Musk who changed his opinion on the credit's important to Tesla. The same analysts who once believed removing the EV tax credit would help Tesla are now concerned over its loss.
In a note to clients the day after the election, Garrett Nelson, an analyst for CFRA Research, wrote that ending the credit 'will widen Tesla's competitive moat by making competing EV models even more uneconomic, as we believe (Tesla) is the only profitable manufacturer of EVs.'
But now, Nelson is expressing worry over Tesla's value if the credits go away.
'Our view is the 'Big Beautiful Bill' would be a net negative for Tesla, as tax credits for EVs, energy storage and solar would be going away,' Nelson said in response to questions from CNN. 'That, and ongoing EV market share losses in China and Europe, are some of the primary reasons why we downgraded the stock in April.'
Still, despite cutting his price target for Tesla, Nelson still has a buy recommendation on Tesla shares, as does Dan Ives, another Tesla bull. The tech analyst for Wedbush Securities said the change in finances at Tesla make the tax credits more important than in the past.
'Musk has definitely changed his tune from earlier on this,' Ives told CNN. 'The reality is it will hurt Tesla less than other EV makers, but it will still hurt. And Tesla needs all of the demand help it can get.'
Under current bill language, the tax credit remains in place for upstart EV makers like Rivian and Lucid but goes away for Tesla and most legacy automakers, said John Murphy, auto analyst at Bank of America. But he said the greatest challenge for Tesla is that demand for EV among American buyers appears to have stalled.
'I think 8% market share might be the high water mark for EV,' he said at a presentation Wedneday, speaking about overall demand for electric vehicles in the US market. Because of that, and the lack of new Tesla models, especially a lower-priced version that had been promised, 'I think (Musk) is going to be challenged to grow volume.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Tulsi Gabbard Flips Sides in MAGA Civil War Over Iran's Nuclear Capabilities
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has flipped her stance on Iran after President Donald Trump nuked her intelligence as 'wrong.' Gabbard told the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 25 that there was no intelligence to suggest Iran was building nuclear weapons, though the country had enriched its uranium to higher levels. Following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's June 12 'preemptive' strike on Iran—which he justified by saying that the country has a 'secret plan' to weaponize uranium—Trump sided with Israel's countervailing position. On two separate occasions this week, Trump rebuffed Gabbard's earlier assessment of Iran's nuclear program. 'I don't care what [Gabbard] said,' Trump said aboard Air Force One. 'I think they were very close to having one.' In another comment on Wednesday, the president added that Iran was 'a few weeks' away from turning their uranium into a weapon, echoing similar sentiments shared by Netanyahu. Then on Friday, Gabbard fell in line with Trump, attacking the media for having the gall to believe what she said. 'The dishonest media is intentionally taking my testimony out of context and spreading fake news as a way to manufacture division,' Gabbard wrote to her 600K followers. 'America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly.' She added, 'President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree.' Gabbard included a clip of what she called her 'full testimony,' which has since racked up 8.9 million views. The world has been thrown into a state of limbo while Trump weighs a decision on whether to get the United States involved in strikes on Iran, a decision the country warned would be 'very dangerous.' In a statement read on Thursday by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Trump said he would make his decision 'within the next two weeks' based on the fact that there 'is a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.' Reuters reported that the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with a group of European diplomats in Geneva on Friday for nuclear talks.
Fox News
8 minutes ago
- Fox News
Interventionists vs isolationists, GOP split on Iran
All times eastern Fox Report with Jon Scott Fox Report with Jon Scott FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: Failed senate candidate Beto O'Rourke joins Senator Bernie Sanders on the 'Fighting Oligarchy' Tour
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Top economist who previously sounded the alarm on tariffs sees a possible scenario where Trump ‘outsmarted all of us'
Torsten Sløk, chief economist at Apollo Global Management, laid out a potential scenario where President Donald Trump's tariffs are extended long enough to ease economic uncertainty while also providing a significant bump to federal revenue. That comes as the 90-day pause on Trump's 'reciprocal tariffs' is nearing an end. Businesses and consumers remain in limbo over what will happen next with President Donald Trump's tariffs, but a top economist sees a way to leave them in place and still deliver a 'victory for the world.' In a note on Saturday titled 'Has Trump Outsmarted Everyone on Tariffs?', Apollo Global Management Chief Economist Torsten Sløk laid out a scenario that keeps tariffs well below Trump's most aggressive rates long enough to ease uncertainty and avoid the economic harm that comes with it. 'Maybe the strategy is to maintain 30% tariffs on China and 10% tariffs on all other countries and then give all countries 12 months to lower non-tariff barriers and open up their economies to trade,' he speculated. That comes as the 90-day pause on Trump's 'reciprocal tariffs,' which triggered a massive selloff on global markets in April, is nearing an end early next month. The temporary reprieve was meant to give the U.S. and its trade partners time to negotiate deals. But aside from an agreement with the U.K. and another short-term deal with China to step back from prohibitively high tariffs, few others have been announced. Meanwhile, negotiations are ongoing with other top trading partners. Trump administration officials have been saying for weeks that the U.S. is close to reaching deals. On Saturday, Sløk said extending the deadline one year would give other countries and U.S. businesses more time to adjust to a 'new world with permanently higher tariffs.' An extension would also immediately reduce uncertainty, giving a boost to business planning, employment, and financial markets. 'This would seem like a victory for the world and yet would produce $400 billion of annual revenue for US taxpayers,' he added. 'Trade partners will be happy with only 10% tariffs and US tax revenue will go up. Maybe the administration has outsmarted all of us.' Sløk's speculation is notable as he previously sounded the alarm on Trump's tariffs. In April, he warned tariffs have the potential to trigger a recession by this summer. Also in April, before the U.S. and China reached a deal to temporarily halt triple-digit tariffs, he said the trade war between the two countries would pummel American small businesses. More certainty on tariffs would give the Federal Reserve a clearer view on inflation as well. For now, most policymakers are in wait-and-see mode, as tariffs are expected to have stagflationary effects. But a split has emerged. Fed Governor Christopher Waller said Friday that economic data could justify lower interest rates as early as next month, expecting only a one-off impact from tariffs. But San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly also said Friday a rate cut in the fall looks more appropriate, rather than a cut in July. Still, Sløk isn't alone in wondering whether Trump's tariffs may not be as harmful to the economy and financial markets as feared. Chris Harvey, Wells Fargo Securities' head of equity strategy, expects tariffs to settle in the 10%-12% range, low enough to have a minimal impact, and sees the S&P 500 soaring to 7,007, making him Wall Street's biggest bull. He added that it's still necessary to make progress on trade and reach deals with big economies like India, Japan and the EU. That way, markets can focus on next year, rather near-term tariff impacts. 'Then you can start to extrapolate out,' he told CNBC last month. 'Then the market starts looking through things. They start looking through any sort of economic slowdown or weakness, and then we start looking to '26 not at '25.' This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
