These GM Electric Vehicles Would Be Eligible For Proposed Tax Credit58
The recent passage of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 includes extended incentives for the purchase and production of new electric vehicles. That likely includes a range of new GM EVs, as detailed right here.
Before we launch into this, it’s worth noting that the list of GM vehicles that may eligible for the proposed tax credit has yet to be confirmed, and that it’s possible the list may be dramatically changed sometime in the future. However, given the current limits and expanded eligibility of the IRA, it’s possible to draw a few conclusions as to which GM vehicles are likely to include the proposed $7,500 tax credit.
So then, what are those criteria? For starters, eligible vehicles must be built in North America and include a starting price under $80,000 for trucks, vans, and SUVs, and under $55,000 for passenger cars. Additionally, the bill states that vehicles which utilize battery materials sourced from Chinese suppliers will be phased out after 2023, a provision which a lobby of domestic and foreign automakers, including GM, attempted to remove on the grounds of limited infrastructure in North America for mining, processing, and production.
With that covered, the following GM electric vehicles are speculated to be eligible for the $7,500 tax credit:
- Cadillac Lyriq
- Chevy Bolt EV
- Chevy Bolt EUV
- Chevy Silverado EV
- Chevy Blazer EV
- Chevy Equinox EV
- GMC Sierra EV
Note that three of these vehicles include additional caveats – the Cadillac Lyriq will need to be classified as an SUV to qualify, while the Silverado EV and Sierra EV will only be eligible for lower trim levels due to the price cap.
That said, the rising requirements for battery material and component sourcing may be an issue here, as it’s unclear at this time what percentage of materials and components are used in GM’s EVs. That said, the GM Ultium battery packs themselves will be built in either the U.S or Mexico.
Meanwhile, the GMC Hummer EV will not qualify, given a base MSRP of $84,650 before the $1,995 Destination Freight Charge (DFC). Additionally, the upcoming Cadillac Celestiq will also be ineligible given an expected $300,000 price tag.
GM Authority reached out to General Motors to ask which GM EVs would meet the tax credit criteria proposed in the new bill. According to a company spokesperson, “GM is not able to speculate which vehicles may or may not qualify in the near-term, but do think the legislation aligns very well with GM’s long-term plans and over the life of the credit we intend to offer a number of eligible vehicles.”
Additionally, the automaker provided GM Authority with the following statement:
“General Motors welcomes the U.S. Senate’s passage of the Inflation Reduction Act that includes provisions to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles and strengthen American manufacturing and jobs. GM is already making historic investments in the U.S., and this legislation will help drive further investments in American manufacturing, clean energy and sustainable, scalable, and secure supply chains as we work to establish the U.S. as a global leader in electrification.”
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM electric vehicle news, GM technology news, GM-related politics news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
- Sweepstakes Of The Month: Win a 2023 Corvette Z06 Convertible. Details here.
I’m sure this will help sell some EV’s but I believe the vast majority will still buy ICE vehicles from whomever still produces them.
Of course, most will still buy ICE vehicles. But with incentives, more will buy EV’s than without incentives. That’s the point.
Tax breaks will help. EVs, long-term, will be more profitable for automakers because they contain less moving parts. Unfortunately, they are brutal on the environment from battery mining/production to the production of electric to operate the vehicle. EVs will only be environmentally more friendly if covered in solar which won’t make Big Energy any money so likely won’t happen.
EVs are virtue signaling by people who don’t understand anything about cars. They should only be considered a medium-term solution until things like solar and hydrogen are better understood.
Don’t forget about the environmental impacts from fracking and other oil extraction.
And oil spills that occurred in Alaska as well as the Gulf of Mexico causing immeasurable damage to natural habitat that will be felt for decades.
And also do not forget about the strip mining damage down gathering rare earth materials for batteries.
I agree, I think BEV’s are a temporary stepping stone until humans are able to perfect hydrogen cell cars. Most of the electricity is still being made by nuclear fission, which makes nuclear waste that has to be buried for thousands of years. So like you said if ALL or MOST of the electricity produced is from renewables, then it would be a better idea. But reality is, our electricity is still dirty. Also batteries aren’t recyclable, and creates a lot of pollution from mining/manufacturing.
Hydrogen seems like the perfect source of fuel. The waste product of burning hydrogen is water… And doesn’t require huge batteries with terrible pollution footprint.
I will be buying ICE or Hybrid for as long as I’m able to, but if I am forced to buy a BEV The Blazer RS or SS is the first car on my list.
You are misinformed. The only country I know of that gets a significant percentage of its electrical power from nuclear is France.
You are right, all the environmental activists killed the Nuclear Energy program back in the US back in the 1980’s.
Batteries are recyclable, just ask J.B. Straubel, co-founder of Tesla. His Redwood company is already recycling lithium batteries in a large plant south of the Gigafactory, near Reno. Until we can make Hydrogen cheaply, which we can’t yet, that dog may not hunt. With safe nuclear, possibly fusion, and solar, wind, geo, hydro, etc., electric cars, trucks, planes, trains, boats can be almost carbon free. That’s the future.
Nuclear fusion is the future of the future. But it might take a very very very long time before we can replace nuclear fission with fusion. If we can harness fusion, we will have unlimited clean energy. But I think hydrogen fuel cell is a closer reach than fusion.
Wrong batteries are recyclable . And can be used for other things after done in a car. A former Tesla executive has his own battery recycling company. People need to check their facts before blindly saying you can’t recycle ev batteries.
It would be helpful to have a comparison study on how brutal an ICE-driven car compared to an electric car on the environment. Any car will make environmental impacts. Having leased an electric car (Leaf), I dare say that electric car that I leased needed very little maintenance. I really get tired of changing the oils and other the cost of maintaining my ICE-driven cars
I think you are using 2015 or so talking points. Batteries are far less brutal on the environment than gas/oil. This is a big part of the problem with EVs. Lies about them have been passed around for a decade and never passed the smell test because of from where they were pulled.
The FACTS about EVs took a lot longer to come out because they required study and analyses and actual data.
But the misinformation, much of which describes what you wrote above, has a big head start on the facts.
I have solar pannles on my barn and produce 100 percent of the juice needed for car and i drive a lot. There are more and more people finding out how easy it is every day. Maybe you should look into it.
That’s what I said.
The trend apparently is that manufacturers will increase their prices to keep the tax rebate in their pockets, like Ford did on the 2022 f-150 lightning. I see other manufacturers doing the same thing very soon. So, in real world, the new tax credit incentives will be for manufacturers, not for consumers.
It comes off the msrp 23 Bolt ev, Starting at $26,595 – $7500. = $19,0095 then all the peripherals are added. dealer mark up, on star, upgrade on the car, tax, and so forth. The dealer are not going to screw you over without you seeing it first and sign the contract. My Bolt incentives of $9500 is sitting out in my drive way, and it worth of $22k making a trade in for a 23 very attractive at $19k.
Actually that’s not too bad. So basically the MSRP -$7.5k usd. I’ve always thought EVs were overpriced, but that makes sense now.
I stumbled on this story while researching latest all electric and plug-in hybrid and my heart jumped when reading that the $7500 credit may be back-on. This definitely tips the balance between EV and PHEV for me.
Get your tax credit and then be audited up the wazoo.
better build back
Nobody knows better than GM if the 2023 Chevy Bolt will qualify for the full $7500 tax credit based on the current text of the IRA.
GM, don’t duck and cover! Will the Bolt qualify or not?
It will, right after gm raises the price by $7500.
Ford is doing the same thing with the F150, why should they get all the profit
As soon as the new $7,500.00 upfront tax credit gets cleared by the Senate, Ford took it for their profit in the F150 Lighting, basically that rebate is not for customers, it is for the big companies. I see GM doing a price increase on all their EV models to keep the rebate in their pockets.
I see myself sticking to ICE.
If the article is on point, I hope those GM products qualify especially the Truck, Equinox to be and Blazer. There is a point to be made that materials should be sourced by us considering the state of world events. But this could be a ploy by Manchin to delay things intentionally knowing the supply chain is not fully in place though 2023 year grace period may not be enough to get it done. There are NAmerican companies building out some supplies as well as recycle but it is not nearly going to be big enough to supply the entire market that needs to qualify for these credits/rebates/freebies. I patiently wait for GM to get the Blazer and Equinox out the door. My volt is aging!
I will be ordering a new Silverado with the updated Baby Duramax. The 30+ mpg works for me.
This bill is formal acknowledgment that current EV technology is simply not competitive in today’s vehicle market. The original $7500 tax credit expired after initial sales volumes were attained so that production efficiencies could be achieved and make EV vehicle production costs competitive. Tesla and GM have passed these volume levels but the issue is not production efficiencies now but rather continually increasing material costs. GM, Tesla, Ford, Rivian, Lucid etc have all had significant price increases recently due to this issue. Ironically, the material cost problem will become worse as EV production volume increases as competition for materials increases and further drives up material prices. This bill recognizes this and now restores government subsidies for EVs. It is also interesting that the “starting price” level is $55K for cars and $80K for trucks / EVs. When the “starting price” is set that high it certainly does not motivate auto companies to explore new technologies to build lower cost vehicles. Finally, using “starting price” as a criteria (rather than final price with delivery and options) invites the auto companies to offer basic “stripped” base vehicles that qualify for the subsidy and then load them up with expensive “options” to make them “saleable”. Due to this material cost issue, this $7500 EV subsidy will not only be continued beyond the current law but the $ amount will be further increased until better technology is available. Your taxpayer $ at work!
Oscoda’s first sentence is unprovable. But even if it were true, why are all comments ignoring the biggest reason to go electric? That would be the dire need to reduce CO2 into our atmosphere, to help head off global catastrophe. Those who deny global warming are wearing blinders, and whether EV’s are competitive or not is not important in the big picture. With that in mind, kick-starting EV adoption with gov. rebates makes total sense.
Per US government published studies, worldwide vehicle emissions (including aircraft, trains, trucks) amount to roughly 20 – 25% of total CO2 emissions. An EV uses electricity made in power plants which are powered by 60% natural gas / coal so while CO2 emissions do not exist at the vehicle level they are moved to the power plants. Further, due to inefficiencies in electrical transmission as well as vehicle charging, the net reduction of CO2 is roughly 50% which nets to 10 – 12% in total worldwide emissions if all ICE vehicles were shut down tomorrow. When you consider the amount of mining / pollution required to make the millions of batteries / motors for EVs the overall effect on the environment could actually be negative for EVs. A much faster / cheaper approach might be to aim efforts at reducing the energy requirements for heating and cooling commercial and residential buildings (buildings are a bigger energy consumer in total than vehicles). We could ban air conditioning in all but hospitals, nursing homes, etc. 75 years ago we did just fine without AC. Would you be willing to give up your AC and set your thermostat at 55 in winter? The effect would be immediate, no-cost and much larger than a gradual ramp in EVs.
Finally, just to help one of us who is wearing blinders, can you give a written explanation as to how the earth warmed up over 50 degrees after the ice age 10000 years ago?
You had me until you turned off the AC. Realistically, let’s make better AC. We’re on out third central unit since 1986. Big improvement each time along with better insulation.
Still early days in battery technology, and already new companies like Redwood are recycling lithium batteries. Much improvement yet to come in that component. New smaller, less expensive, safer nuclear reactors are coming, to bridge the gap until more clean energy (or fusion) comes on-line. How about mandating nearly all lights be LED? How about mandating building codes that require more insulation and triple-pane windows. How about doing more to return to using highly efficient railways? None of this happens overnight, and we are whistling by the cemetery as evidence of global warming is everywhere. Meanwhile this retired engineer/car-guy finds his Bolt to be an excellent car.
The problem with government mandates, Jim is that they cost money and have an inverse impact on the people who can least afford them. I just repleced all of the windows in my house a couple of years ago with new, energy efficient, windows at cost of about $20,000. Not everyone can afford that.
Why did you leave out the reduction in emissions by reducing the amount of crude oil transportation and impacts of refining crude?
Of course it’s, why else would people need to be paid to buy one?
Whether everyone agrees on BEV’s getting Rebates or not is everyone own opinion.
Strictly disusing the Bill, I am shocked and pleasantly surprised that they kept the Minerals Not coming from China part in the Final Bill. That within itself will do multiple things….
Weaken China’s Stronghold in Battery Production.
If they want to sell here (Which they desperately do) they need to Produce their Cars in NA and source Minerals outside of China.
This will produce many good paying NA Jobs.
Now Automakers need to react and so so very quickly as they have about a year to do so.
China owns minerals around the world. They won’t get shut out.
Maybe those kids in Africa digging cobalt out of the mud will get a raise. Probably not.
You’re not going to legislate away China’s enormous material and manufacturing advantage over us.
You could make things more expensive for Americans though, which is all your plan would do.
Some things are worth paying for.
Please, GM, keep Bolt prices low, even when IRA kicks in with incentive for buying a Bolt. Ford recently increased their F-150 Lightning prices by at least $7,000 recently and that left me with a bad feeling that IRA gave Ford a reason to increase prices. Make it affordable and reliable and you will have my loyalty.
Ford already got the $7500 tax credit, not really the reason for their price increase. Things are more expensive than when they announced pricing 18 months ago or whatever.
If GM is able to keep it’s promise of a $30,000 base price and keep the styling as seen in the pictures of the Chevy Equinox EV, it will be a game changer for GM. Now the question is, where will it be made? In order to get the tax credit it will have to be made in the USA at one of GM’s union plants. Currently, all Equinoxes are made in Ingersoll Canada. Will GM move it’s Equinox assembly line to the USA for what maybe GM’s most popular EV so USA customers can take advatage of the tax credit? What do you think?
Jeff, it’s my understanding that U.S. assembly was required for the EV credit but that the IRA text was changed to “North America,”…i.e. U.S., Canada and Mexico.
Ah, Got it. North America would include GM’s Canada and Mexico plants. Sorry about that. I was wrong, the Equinox EV and Blazer EVs would be eligible.
Jeff, GM vehicles will qualify for IRA credit only if complying with the minimum % of raw materials sourced from USA or USA defined partners. Currently most battery components are imported from China, which doesn’t qualify. GM needs to source I think at least 40% of them from USA qualifying partners. It’s my understanding that GM is taking the steps to comply with that requirement, so most likely GM EVs will become eligible for IRA tax credit.
It’s “IRS” – not “IRA”. Internal Revenue Service….
No – Ingersoll makes a commercial EV.
According to the WSJ, the price of Lithium has increased by 750 percent since the beginning of last year along with all the other rare earth metals. The chances of GM producing a $30,000. SUV in a union shop are slim and none.
I actually Just purchase a 2022 chevy bolt ev I was bummed to hear that due to the 200,000 vehicle cap gm has I am not eligible for the tax credit. I was wondering if I would then be eligible for the credit this upcoming year even if I purchased the vehicle before the bill was signed.
Thanks for your question, Ivan. The new IRA law applies for EV’s delivered on/after Jan. 1, 2023 (exception: transition rule which wouldn’t apply in your case since you’ve already purchased the vehicle and taken delivery.)
Your purchase, Ivan, occured while the existing EV credit program was in effect (and still is.) Part of that program established caps for the number of qualifying vehicles each manufacture can sell and have those vehicles eligible for the $7500 tax credit. Since GM reached that cap some time ago, I’m very sad to report that your vehicle purchase will not be eligible for any federal tax credit. Many states, however, have their own EV incentive program so I’d encourage you to look into that if you haven’t already.
How do you like your Bolt?
THE AUTHOR DOES NOT STATE WHEN THE LAWS WOULD TAKE EFFECT. 2O23?
Johnny Mars, great question. Unfortunately, the answer is not simple. The “date of enactment” for the new law is the date on which president signs the law. But that’s only part of the story. Consumers can still get the “old” tax credit if they have a “binding written contract” signed by the dealer or manufacturer before the date of enactment but delivered after the date of enactment. For instance, let’s say you sign a contract to buy a GV60 before the date of enactment but take delivery afterwards. You’d be eligible for the $7500 tax credit (applying the original program rules) even though the GV60 is not assembled in No. America. If you sign a contract for a GV60 after the date of enactment, you will get zero tax credit since your purchase falls under the newer EV tax scheme, called the Inflation Production Act.
It’s best to zero in in the vehicle you want then ask if that model’s eligible. Good luck.
Pres. signed the bill. $7500.00 for EV’s
With all the restrictions of the new bill, I strongly believe that almost no vehicle will qualify at medium term, car makers could take 2 to 3 years to adapt products and source raw material from a qualifying country. W would not expect any credit for consumers for at least 3 years.
The new bill is intended to motivate car makers to change their manufacturing practices in favour of North America, not to reward what they’re already doing.