The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is set to add an additional category to its Hybrid Incentive Voucher Program (HVIP) that awards buyers of zero-emissions light-duty commercial vehicles, including the Ford Transit Connect Electric, a discount of up to $15,000 on their green vehicle purchase.

Starting in November, light-duty zero-emissions commercial vehicles with a GVWR between 5,001 and 8,500 pounds will be eligible for vouchers of up to $15,000 in California. This discount will reportedly be available to all fleets, public or private, that register the zero-emissions vehicles in the state of California. This $15,000 discount, coupled with the federal government's $7,500 tax credit, means that some buyers of the Transit Connect Electric will get a whopping $22,500 off the vehicle's $57,400 price tag.

Vouchers for the light-duty zero-emissions category are valued at $15,000 for a fleet's first vehicle ordered, with $12,000 off all purchases thereafter for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2011. Proposed vouchers for Fiscal Year 2012 dip to $12,000 for the first three vehicles, $10,000 for the next 27 purchased, $8,000 for vehicles 31-65 and $6,000 for vehicles 66-100.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 41 Comments
      Danaon
      • 3 Years Ago
      I don't like these subsidies. Why are we taking money out of everyone's pocket to help upper middle class or businesses buy these overpriced "green" vehicles? It's not like you can be poor and still have $7500 or $15000 in tax liability in any given year. We're just subsidizing upper middle class people to buy feel good cars. It's crap.
        sp33dklz
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Danaon
        I absolutely couldn't agree with you more. Seriously, a $57,000 Transit Connect? Why not purchase the peen reducing 4cylinder version for about $25,000, save yourself $10,000 and the good people of CA $22,000, and put the $10,000 you just saved into your company by hiring more people who in turn pay more taxes?
          LEDfoot
          • 3 Years Ago
          @sp33dklz
          @mustang_sallad: Right, with building things like EV batteries most of the pollution happens in China, who the heck cares right? Shoot, California could even recoup the cost of these vouchers by selling China the carbon credits it needs to pollute it's own environment by producing the parts that will keep "our" part of the world "green". It's a brilliant plan!
          mustang_sallad
          • 3 Years Ago
          @sp33dklz
          maybe because it would waste more energy and pollute more? Just making a guess at the motivations here that seem to be leaving everyone baffled...
      - v o c t u s -
      • 3 Years Ago
      ...how do they intend to pay for that? The state is B R O K E beyond repair, with businesses fleeing in droves, tax revenue has been on a steady nosedive since the recession and they STILL THINK that saving the environment is the ship they want to go down on. What the eff. Well, why not anyhow. If they are going to shell out cash they don't have, at least they are giving it to consumers instead of banks and corps.
        - v o c t u s -
        • 3 Years Ago
        @- v o c t u s -
        I take that back. This is a fancy way of shoveling $$$ right at Ford. Ford wouldn't sell ANY of these little vans for $57k a pop if there weren't incentives. They just factor the incentives into the price and, VOILA! it amounts to Govt-funded promotion of their product.
      justgoawaymad
      • 3 Years Ago
      This coming from a state that just CAN'T figure out why there truly broke.......morons. HERE'S A CLUE, STOP SPENDING MONEY YOU DON'T HAVE.
      WillieD
      • 3 Years Ago
      Why can't California just break off of the U.S. already? This is such a waste of money.
      kilauea
      • 3 Years Ago
      It seems California has more money than they know what to do with. Why not return some to every taxpayer?
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      Justin
      • 3 Years Ago
      I think most of the comments here pretty much sum it up.
      Zoom
      • 3 Years Ago
      This is the type of tax credits we should all be supportive of: encouraging emerging technology so that they can become mass market. Bravo, California - continue to lead the way.
        dukeisduke
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        "Zoom This is the type of tax credits we should all be supportive of: encouraging emerging technology so that they can become mass market. Bravo, California - continue to lead the way." Yeah, right into bankruptcy. Lemmings GO!
        gary
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        Bravo, California, bury yourself deeper in debt! I don't disagree with the general concept of government "pump-priming" new technological development with incentives when wide-spread implementation of that technology would benefit society as a whole. And I think electric vehicles meet that criteria on two issues: Emissions (dubious in my mind, but important to a large cross section of the populace) and energy independence (something I personally see a lot of value in). But that's a LUXURY that neither the state nor the federal government can afford. WE'RE F-ING BROKE, HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR THIS FOLLY??!!!!
        patrick
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        Why use government tax credits to support something Nobody really wants or needs, just to make the left happy, If you want this thing so bad, go buy it on your own dime and pay full price and not use the tax payers as you cash cow. Oh wait a minute, nobody will buy it if there is no tax credits, I guess there is no real market for the things.
          LEDfoot
          • 3 Years Ago
          @patrick
          @tnsubie: So what you are saying is that because there are no real savings to be had, the government should go in and make artificial savings? This does not spur innovation because it allows companies to be lazy and not build better products, the government will help them sell their products if they aren't good enough.
          LEDfoot
          • 3 Years Ago
          @patrick
          @Zoom: Yeah it worked marvelously. Now we are awash in hybrid vehicles that don't work; they don't fulfill the promise they were sold on. I'm certainly not thanking our government for this wonderful "help". And personally I think hybrids sold more because of the completely inflated EPA numbers they were given than because of the rebates. Of course that was also thanks to the government and I'm sure Toyota is thanking them in their minds as they laugh themselves all the way to the bank. Not only did they manage to completely mislead their customers, the government actually helped them to do so. Yep, sure worked marvelously,
          tnsubie
          • 3 Years Ago
          @patrick
          Even with potential efficiency savings in the long run it is very difficult for a company to shell out the initial cost difference between the normal vehicle, in this case ~$25K, and the more efficient one (~$57K.) What the tax incentive does is eliminate that initial cost difference. Therefore a company will see the efficiency savings almost immediately. In doing so the new technology is supported, economies of scale can be improved, and future costs will be lowered. These types of incentives are exactly what governments can do in order to spur innovation and create a better environment for everyone.
        LEDfoot
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        Yes it's brilliant, waste more taxpayer money on products that don't work so that they can become mass market and people with _think_ they are doing something good for the environment.
        Tiberius1701
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        For a state that is so in the red..they sure give away a lot...didn't they learn from the first time Governor Clown was in office..BTW, No fan of the "Governator" was I....Flame away enviroweenies.
          Zoom
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Tiberius1701
          Um, exactly how has CA gotten better since Reagan destroyed the state?
        Danaon
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        You realize that by subsidizing inefficiently produced and overpriced products you actually are destroying wealth? The government only gets money but taking it out of private hands or by printing money (inflation, which is a tax on everyone). Throwing other people's money at a product that can't compete in the marketplace without it is destruction of wealth, plain and simple. Kind of like cash for clunkers, where we took people's money in the form of taxes, and then paid people to destroy their serviceable older vehicles to buy new vehicles. End result: used car prices have skyrocketed and we spent a bunch of money to pull forward a few sales. Stupidity at it's finest.
          Zoom
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Danaon
          C4C was an amazing success. We are seeing high used car prices because NEW car sales plummeted, resulting in people holding onto their newer used cars longer. People aren't trading in their 2005 Camrys for new Camrys because 1. they lost their home/job or 2. the bank wont lend them money (probably a good thing). Learn some facts before spewing.
          Zoom
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Danaon
          Someone has Rush on the alarm clock radio this morning.
          tnsubie
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Danaon
          The logic that goes into these incentives is the same that occurs in municipalities all of the country everyday. Governments provide tax incentives, through TIFs, tax holidays, etc in order to spur development in their jurisdiction. Without these incentives businesses have a harder time growing, moving, adding employees, etc. Tax incentives is one thing that has been proven time and again to be beneficial to both public and private interests. Using such ideas to help increase our energy efficiency is a no-brainer. It not only helps business save cost, it spurs innovation, and it goes to alleviating a constantly growing threat of energy instability.
      Jared Schwager
      • 3 Years Ago
      I am sick and tired of all this "green vehicle" bull crap and how much our government is supporting it! All we're doing with electric vehicles is moving the pollution to another location and in some cases we're actually creating more pollution!
        mustang_sallad
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Jared Schwager
        thoroughly unresearched, well done! Here, this will help you do the calculations yourself and see how far off you are from reality: http://greet.es.anl.gov/
        Zoom
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Jared Schwager
        controlling pollution at the source (power plants) is much easier than controlling millions of vehicles.
      Greg
      • 3 Years Ago
      All that providing these tax credits to these cars accomplishes is getting the consumer to expect mass amount of money to be refunded to them any time they buy a fuel efficient car. It would be make sense in the long term for the market to come around naturally to these options. That way, the automakers will be forced to tackle every hurdle to mass market popularization themselves, instead of relying on the local government to take care of the cost equation. Just as -Voctus- said, isn't CA bankrupt? Is it really necessary for them to add on an additional rebate on top of the current federal choices? It just seems as if they are giving away money for something which really doesn't need it.
        Zoom
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Greg
        The market won't get around to it, why? Because corporations are only on the outlook for the next 6 months-2 years. They want to eek out the maximum profits in the short term, regardless of the external affects of their actions (ie health problems, environmental problems). If a company can outsource the problems and rake in the benefits they will. We need government (us) to regulate this process.
      tenspeeder
      • 3 Years Ago
      I'm still trying to figure out why the van is listed at over $57k. Seriously, do the EV components really add $25-30k to the price of a std van?
        Oscar
        • 3 Years Ago
        @tenspeeder
        What do you expect with an immature technology and very low production volumes? In any case, I agree with others...taxpayers shouldn't be subsidizing EV's and the govt shouldn't be meddling in free enterprise in this manner.
          Oscar
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Oscar
          Zoom, I don't disagree with you entirely, but you missed my point. There's a huge distinction btwn infrastructure (internet, interstate hwys) for the common good, and interfering with market forces. We have ample examples of Govt failures in venture capitalism and meddling. Govt needs to be constrained. Get a clue yourself.
          Zoom
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Oscar
          Government has been meddling in the "free" market since it's inception. We wouldn't have transcontinental railroads with out government intervention, the internet, the interstate system, so on, and so forth. Get a clue.
      lorenzo
      • 3 Years Ago
      you could make this a 7 passenger electric vehicle......by adding back the seats and side glass THAT would be really cool for soccer moms all over the country....
        patrick
        • 3 Years Ago
        @lorenzo
        How about putting in a gas engine, and adding back seats and side glass for the soccer moms and asking $19,000. TOO EASY
        justgoawaymad
        • 3 Years Ago
        @lorenzo
        And how looooooong would it take to economically pay for this vehicle? longer than it would last that's for sure. And lets NOT even get into the carbon footprint of pure electric vehicles. You know the very thing NO ONE wants to admit.
          LEDfoot
          • 3 Years Ago
          @justgoawaymad
          Duh electricity has no carbon man! Neither do the batteries (only toxic chemicals). Why do you hate the environment? Think of the unicorns maaan!
    • Load More Comments