This is a cut of 1000 Euros versus previous. This will result in a very few high-income (headline notwithstanding, this is predicated on income, not wealth) households buying an ICE or hybrid instead of an EV.
Obviously incentives matter, but this doesn't seem particularly severe policy change.
We're in the market for a new-to-us car (in the US). The used EV tax credit is not available to us, so we're going to end up buying a car with a gas engine (likely a hybrid) to join our existing BEV [bought because of the 2014 tax credit]. I can't really complain, as the used EV credit is relatively new and if government policy says we do or don't get a credit, we incorporate that into our decision process. (If the overall population didn't do this, incentive policies like this would have no effect, so it's good that they do in order to nudge marginal decisions one way or the other.)
Get rid of all EV subsidies.
Redirect the funding to charging infrastructure that is priced properly. Charging should have a cost and the chargers should be made in the USA with the Tesla standard plug. Chargers should have a state tax per kw equal to equivalent gas tax for an ICE vehicle to support the road network, adjusted for weight.
This network can be financed and bonds on the profits yield sold.
Subsidies support Chinese battery manufacturers. EVs can easily float on their own, no engine to make, only batteries to build!
I don't understand these policies. I am in a relatively wealthy % of the US, but when I recently bought a car I didn't buy an electric car specifically because I didn't qualify for the subsidy and the cost was more without the subsidy.
These means tested measures seem like they sometimes don't stay targeted on the goal.
Easy- it's because electric cars as a class of product aren't there yet (every company with significant EV production capacity is busy producing late-alpha-quality products except for Teslas that are early-beta). Therefore, consumers need an incentive to buy and manufacturers need an incentive to create cars that are worse in most ways in the hopes that they'll be able to fund the development of technology that would actually make EVs viable for the average consumer.
As far as the politics go, the wing of the government that believes electric cars are the future spent all its money on a public health measure (the success and necessity of that is out of scope), and relevantly for France industrial inputs got more expensive because the US finally got the war on the European border they'd been trying to ignite for the past 10 years.
Environmental policies are ultimately luxuries; and in a new era of austerity after 3 years of unrestrained spending it's not a surprise that subsidies are disappearing.
Obviously incentives matter, but this doesn't seem particularly severe policy change.
We're in the market for a new-to-us car (in the US). The used EV tax credit is not available to us, so we're going to end up buying a car with a gas engine (likely a hybrid) to join our existing BEV [bought because of the 2014 tax credit]. I can't really complain, as the used EV credit is relatively new and if government policy says we do or don't get a credit, we incorporate that into our decision process. (If the overall population didn't do this, incentive policies like this would have no effect, so it's good that they do in order to nudge marginal decisions one way or the other.)