https://electrek.co/2021/03/11/gm-re...joint-venture/

GM reveals next-gen lithium-metal battery cell prototype, announces new joint-venture

These batteries are touted to reduce production costs, be lighter, be scalable, charge faster and be more energy dense. We will see what comes of this, but it looks promising.

https://i2.wp.com/electrek.co/wp-con...o&w=1200&ssl=1
https://i2.wp.com/electrek.co/wp-con...o&w=1200&ssl=1

Forget the solar panels. Power your car with a wiggling, vibrating, phallic pole on your roof. This is what Texas needed.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ULCMJG...ture=emb_title

Funko Bobbleheads.

Opportunity is, uh, wobbling.

Wacky waving arm flailing inflatable tube man?

A little look inside battery recycling.

Elon Musk has suggest that once we have enough used batteries form grid storage, EVs, home storage, etc. then there will be a shift away from mining from materials to recycling of materials. This is less possible with oil and with the recycling of plastics because of the economics; it is just cheaper to extra oil than to recycle, so without carbon subsidies, there is less incentive, but this wouldn't necessarily be the case for lithium, nickel, etc. These materials are harder to extra and sometimes require shipping from other parts of the world (Elon Musk is planning to have local mining), so it will probably be more economical to recycle these materials. It obviously already is or this guy wouldn't be in business.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLr0...&index=2&t=26s

There wont be anyone living in California by 2035

My plan is to have an electric for my commuter and an ICE car for the weekends. I’ll be like John Wick at the airport doing donuts

Unlikely

I'll probably have an ICE car as long as possible as a weekend car. The amount of miles I put on my car now is around 5k/year, so a weekend car would be much less. If my commute changed then I would consider an electric car. The wife will likely go electric on the next vehicle to replace the Q5, but that will be quite a while, as it is a 2016, and we tend to use cars for a long time. My motorcycle will also stay ICE for a long time. I only put like 500-1000 miles a year on the bike.

The average person who does 12k-15k miles a year are the ones we hope to see move to electric and who will make the bigger impact. While enthusiasts do also contribute more with our decatted cars and performance modifications, we represent such a small amount of the vehicles and of the miles traveled that we aren't really the focus.

That's about where I'm at, except I'd probably buy an eBike if I get a new one because I don't take long road trips on it, it's basically either a commuter or a quick Sunday drive through the country. Zero has a 200 mile bike that is very tempting.

Car-wise, I will retain an ICE probably "my forever", but I would would be willing to buy an electric car as a commuter. Since I usually keep one of each that is a practical solution for me. I'm basically just waiting for an EV I find compelling.

Harley's LiveWire is pretty cool....https://www.harley-davidson.com/us/e.../livewire.html

https://i1.wp.com/electrek.co/wp-con...w-header-2.jpg

I like the way it looks but the range is too short to be a commuter for me (I need 90 miles plus reserve) and it is stupid expensive compared to other bikes.

Well... It's a Harley.

Wooo!!! Side track!!
If the big quake happens I'm thinking there won't be much left of California. I'm not referring to the physical State of California, I mean the infrastructure and population of California given where most of the development is located.

Unlikely

Why is that?

Earthquakes don’t happen in multiple places in high magnitudes at the same time. It could, but it is highly unlikely. Even if an 8.0+ earthquake hit the center of LA, it wouldn’t take out Sacramento or the Bay Area. Many newer homes and buildings could be damaged, but not totaled, even in the epicenter. It would be a problem, but it wouldn’t be the end of California or lead to a complete, mass exodus.

We shall see. Or maybe we won't.

Musk leaves California for Texas because of high California taxes. Texas creates new taxes…

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a3...ee-considered/

Texans May Have to Pay $200–$400 Fee for Driving an Electric Vehicle

That's normal. They aren't actually paying extra, it's just a different way of collecting road taxes. Electric cars don't pay that so most states charge them an annual fee.

Using Georgia's tax rate on fuel I paid $255 in road taxes last year on my FRS alone.

Georgia's EV fee is $213.88 for a non-commercial vehicle. Seems on point to me.

I’m not saying it is wrong or off. I’m saying that this could just be the start of more taxes to come that effect EVs and Musk. I’m not saying he isn’t better off leaving California for Texas from a tax perspective, but he would be naive to think some taxes wouldn’t follow him and EVs to Texas.

Understood, I'm just not sure this is one of the "taxes" Musk was referring to when he moved. I think it was primarily personal and corporate income tax.

Elon Musk moving to TX entirely has to do with the personal income tax part of his compensation, which triggered a huge payout when TSLA stock prices hit key benchmarks last year.

https://fortune.com/2021/03/16/elon-...ensation-plan/

EVs are heavier than most ICE (comparable) vehicles. They should pay more for road use maintenance. It's pretty logical. Basically plugging a loophole.

It probably isn't of course, but I think it is just the beginning of taxes to come, and what he says sin't the whole story.

Maybe he wanted to avoid a union forming in California, so he moved to a state where workers are less likely to unionize, but if that was one of the reasons then I doubt he would have said that because it isn't very good for his image.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/25/tesl...eted-nlrb.html

Tesla could have set up the tax HQ in Ireland to avoid taxes like Apple or something. The move to Texas is more nuanced. It probably was a strategic move for cheaper labor, union avoidance, cheaper land to build, central in the country, etc, and for Musk, having residence close to the physical HQ is smart. I wonder if he will move SpaceX HQ out of California.

Unless I missed something, he got stock options. That only increased his wealth, but not his income. He doesn't have to claim that on his income taxes. It is only taxable when he cashes out his stocks, but like most CEOs and billionaires, he only cashes out a small amount of his wealth each year. I wouldn't be surprised if this amount averages to under $10 million per year.

Really? Is there a similar tax applied to pickup trucks and SUVs/CUVs?

Yes, since they typically use more fuel.

Road maintenance notionally paid for by fuel taxes, a reasonable sliding scale that automatically compensates for heavy or inefficient vehicles, how much each individual pounds pavement, etc. EV's don't pay fuel taxes so womp. Agree, not an unreasonable rebalancing for infrastructure maintenance, as Dadhawk points out Georgia is already doing it.

Outrage: not found
Amusement: high that this thread is still alive
:popcorn:

edit; fuck beaten to the punch.

Not just Georgia. At least 17 states have a similar charge.

Not sure how recent this article is.

Any amount he's cashing out still needs to be taxed, so he is just preventing future state income tax by going this route and setting up other shell companies or charities to offset the tax hit.

I offset/spread enough of my income on an annual basis to the point where zero state income tax is not an incentive for me to move. But I'm also not at the point where 95%+ of my income could be taxed at the highest bracket...

Edit: I should add that "payout" in my previous post is what he is compensated for. If/when he turns that into reported income is when all this matters, he's purely doing it for PR reasons as to not receive bad press. But he's already semi-manipulating the markets by constantly talking about crypto.

Loosely, typically. We have a Q5 with the 3.0T, but the standard 2.0T is heavier than the Q3, but has better fuel economy because it has two more gears in the transmission, among other things.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a2...-fuel-economy/

I'm not saying the EV tax isn't logical. I'm just saying it isn't about vehicle weight.

The original H1 was 8,000lbs and had far less performance. The H2 was much smaller, and again, it wasn't in the same league. It was essentially a Chevy 2500 with a shell. Considering the 1000hp and performance and features, I would say the 9,000lbs is pretty good.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2024...cs-comparison/

https://www.motortrend.com/uploads/s...d%7C770:481.25

The question is if he moves the HQ of Tesla to Ireland five years before he retires and liquidates his shares, is he paying Ireland's capital gains taxes or Texas? I'm not a tax expert, so I don't know. Hypothetically, if his house is in California, but the headquarters for Tesla is in a shell in Ireland, but the factory is in Texas, but he spends the entire year at a luxury hotel in Thailand working from phone calls and Zoom, and then he cashes out stock options, where does he pay taxes?

I guess my main point is that he cashes out such a small percentage of his wealth that A) the 13% or less in California taxes is a drop in the bucket, and B) he has all the time in the world to figure out how to avoid taxes for the bulk of his wealth in the future.

Say he cashed out $10 million, and he has to pay $1.3 million in California taxes, but he is worth $150 billion, then he just cashed out 0.0066% of his wealth and paid 0.00086% of his wealth in taxes, which is analogous to a person who has $100k in savings cashing out $660 of their 401k and paying $86 in taxes. Probably not something that would cause anyone to bail from California. Maybe he plans to start dumping his stocks.

To avoid US income tax he would have to give up his US citizenship. A US citizen has to pay income tax regardless of where it is earned, for the very reason you describe.

I agree, I'm just hoping this doesn't lead to a standardized non-fuel road tax, which has been suggested in the past (one where you have to report mileage every year).

We aren't talking about Federal taxes. We are talking mostly about state taxes because he moved out of state to avoid state taxes, apparently. Part of that was saying if he lived in Ireland or Thailand, but had a residence in Texas then does he pay Texas taxes...well, Texas doesn't have state income tax, but would he pay California income tax? My uncle and aunt have a house in Georgia, a lake house in North Carolina and a ski house in Aspen Colorado, but I don't think they have to pay state income taxes in Georgia, North Carolina and Colorado. Say they gave themselves stock options in their company when the company or when they were/lived in Georgia, but they excised those stock options when they retired in California and when the company moved to Oregon: what state do they pay taxes from?

I already do that on my insurance to get a reduced premium. I know it would be bad for you because you travel far to work, but is it unfair to you?

I'm no tax expert but he probably donates shares to his foundation, then gives it away.

Oh, he moved the foundation to Texas last year too.

https://www.vox.com/recode/22221173/...lthiest-person

True. If you live in one state and work in another, it can be complicated if the states do not have a reciprocal agreement for taxes. Somes states that border each other have this agreement so you only have to file taxes in your declared resident state, assuming you have to file taxes.

I have quite a few fellow employees that live in Alabama but work in Georgia. They have to file in both states, Georgia as a non-resident and Alabama as a resident. You would though, pay only one tax, that of your home state as the money can only be taxed once. My employer withholds state taxes based on your address of record.

At the other end of the state, if you live in Georgia (6% tax) and work in Florida (0% tax) you would pay Georgia tax. Live in Florida and work in Georgia? You still pay the Georgia income tax.

As I recall, earnings on stock options are considered regular income rather than capital gains. I could be wrong on that portion though.

It's not unfair if everyone is doing it, and they drop the gas tax altogether. I already pay my share based on miles driven, but it's also based on fuel economy. I pay about half what I would pay if I were driving my Suburban back and forth to work (16 MPG vs 32 MPG). A straight mileage based solution would not likely take that into account.

So, if it fully replaces the gas tax AND it takes into account fuel economy, I'm OK with it. The state already knows how much I drive every year anyway because I'm in an emissions testing area.