Action Round 3: Major Tax Deduction in Congress (H.R. 6899) Takes Two Steps Back

[esmith]

That's bad.

Hopefully, Aptera will either try to get the code amended or add a non-functional 4th wheel. (For example, it could be 2 inches in diameter and positioned under the rear wheel skirt behind the driving wheel)

[jstdadd]

Sorry, naysayers, I don't buy it.

First: what was a great idea two weeks ago is a great idea today, still.

Second: I would hope that about 1000 typ-1e buyers in front of me would drop out - but I don't think I could ever be so lucky. At #1631(e), I don't expect to get my Aptera until 4th quarter 2009 at best. Since I have never been incredibly fortunate to get the best deal in the best time, I expect that once the "Aaaawwww!..." moment passes, we still realize that an Aptera is a much better choice than the Chevy Volt, unless the Volt changes its design to use about half the gasoline that it will use in the current design.

I hope, hope, hope that a whole lot of people drop out in front of me. But I'm not betting on it.

[KarenRei]

Originally Posted by Rat

Unfortunately you missed the key provision - the one that defines a motor vehicle (Section 30(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code). It reads:

Where are you getting that text from? I'm obviously very curious. Under most contexts, a "motor vehicle" applies to everything from a scooter to a semi. If that's not the case here, that'd be a big problem.

I'm trying to figure out what's being referenced, but looking up chapter 1, subchapter A, part IV, subpart B, which is what's being amended, I see:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/2...0---C000-.html

Which is about alternative vehicle refuelling properties, not electric vehicles. I'll keep digging...

[esmith]

Right code, wrong section:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/2...0----000-.html

[KarenRei]

Update2: Oh, wait, here it is:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/2...0----000-.html

You're right. Drat. Drat, drat, drattity drat.... :P

[esmith]

On the bright side: if the code is amended to remove 4-wheel requirement, all-electric Aptera will be subject to a $675 tax credit under the section 30(a), and hybrid Aptera will be subject to a credit of up to $3400 under the section 30B(d)(2)(A).

add a non-functional 4th wheel

on the second thought, it would cease to be a motorcycle and it would be exposed to a lot more red tape.

[Rat]

I think it's time to start another lobbying campaign with your legislator, only this time it's your congressperson or U.S. Senator, not your assemblyman or state senator. There no policy reason why this credit shouldn't apply to the Aptera. When the law was drafted they were probably trying to avoid giving credits to three-wheeled scooter-type trikes - i.e. the toys out there, not fully enclosed car-sized (footprint) vehicles like the Aptera that replace 4-wheeled cars. Maybe Aptera can get on this. As an employer, and a green one at that, they have more clout that a handful of us, who will sound like hobbyists.

[Rat]

I just wrote both Sen. Feinstein and my congresswoman urging a modification of this definition. Please do the same. The definition is in 26 U.S. Code (that's the Internal Revenue Code) section 30(c)(2).

[garygid]

Has to have "4 wheels", so ...
The Aptera does have 4, three on the ground, and one for steering!

[KarenRei]

This thread has been superceded by:

http://www.apteraforum.com/showthrea...4448#post24448