Up to $2k rebate for efficient cars (not just hybrids) in CDN budget - guzzlers taxed
 

The cool thing is: the rebates apply on a sliding scale to conventional efficient cars too, not just hybrids.

The plan will aim to be revenue neutral by also levying an additional fee on the most inefficient vehicles (not trucks though).

https://www.cbc.ca/news/background/bu...le-rebates.gif

Source:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/background/bu...vironment.html

Of course this only comes to pass if the current minority government's budget is passed in a parliamentary vote. Otherwise, it's election time.

Will try to dig up more details.

Rebates are on the "combined" fuel efficiency (55% city/45% hwy).

L/100 km ... Rebate

5.5 or less ... 2,000
5.6 ? 6.0 ... 1,500
6.1 ? 6.5 ... 1,000

source:
https://www.budget.gc.ca/2007/bp/bpc3...fuel-efficient

Wow. This just gave an enormous advantage to the Toyota Yaris in the sub-compact segment. (As if we don't buy enough of them.)

At 6.3 L/100 km combined it's eligible for the $1k rebate.

The Honda Fit doesn't qualify, missing the cutoff by 0.1 L/100 km (6.6 L/100 km). Neither does the Chevy Aveo/Pontiac Wave (7.6 L/100 km) which is way off the mark.

FlexFuel
 

What sticks out, is that you can buy an E85 Impala or Sebring, get the credit, but not necessarily use the ethanol, right?

Wow, even the Jeep Pariot made the list.

RH77 -

This was the scam in Arizona. A law was passed giving tax breaks to people who had dual-fuel systems retrofitted to their cars. People got the breaks, but no one ever used the other fuel. The person who got the law written was connected to the outfit that did the retrofit. Wa-la, quid pro quo corruption.

CarloSW2

Right. It appears to be something like the E85 loophole that manufacturers can use in the US to exempt a vehicle from the CAFE standard that would otherwise apply.

But potentially more disturbing, I just noticed a single line in the efficiency section of the budget that deals with the new levy on inefficient vehicles.

The new levy replaces an existing federal tax on heavy vehicles: e.g. over 2,268 kilograms (5,000 pounds).

The excise tax was:

So it appears a Cadillac Escalade just got slightly cheaper to buy!

5,459 lbs (2wd model) = 2476 kg.

Old tax would have been: $180. Now: $0. And the vehicle isn't subjected to the guzzler levy because it's a truck (unless I've misread that part, but I doubt it).

Yup:

https://www.budget.gc.ca/2007/bp/bpc3...fuel-efficient

Current list of 2007 m.y. efficient vehicles and flex fuel vehicles that qualify for the $1k-$2k rebate:

https://www.tc.gc.ca/programs/environ...rt/ecoauto.htm

New, unregistered 2006 m.y. cars that meet the requirements also qualify (this would include many diesels, from VW and the smart car).

Still unclear whether the gas guzzler fee applies to SUVs or only passenger cars...

The 2006 smart fortwo cdi is eligible for $2K rebate. For emission law reasons, the importer is selling 2006 models only this year (there are still 1400 2006 models to last until the fall, when the 2008 gasoline model arrives).

At a combined rating of 4.2 L/100 km, it's maxxing out at $2K.

Maybe I should buy another one.....

I can see one drawback with the $2,000 incentive: salespeople will be less reluctant to negotiate the sticker price because "hey, you'll get $2,000 back from the government anyway". Remember, government money is really our money to begin with.

I doubt that would be an issue in most cases. Just as it wasn't when the GST rate was reduced a while back.....I'd rather have that $2K as a starting point than not. The entire profit margin on a base model smart fortwo is more or less $2K, so you'd not do any better than that anyway ;)

Several '06 VW model diesels (if you can find one) are eleigible for rebates also. If you can find an '06 Insight, it also qualifies.

Still no definitive answer on whether SUV's are considered "trucks" under the guzzler levy. Several media stories are leading with the line that the government wants you "out of your Hummer", but I'm not so sure.

Does this mean darin will be insight shopping?

Naah. The Blackfly is good for another 15 years at least ;)

I love this: the new rebate just made a new base Yaris cheaper than a new base Aveo!

Admittedly the Aveo comes with more standard stuff, but with the additional fuel saved, you can option out the Yaris and still come out ahead. (Not to mention reliability & depreciation considerations too.)

My hands - I rub them together in glee!

I've had a hate-on for the ridiculously underperforming Aveo ever since it was introduced, and I really hope this new rebate spurs the manufacturers to tweak their models to make them more efficient in this market (Honda could probably squeeze the Fit into rebate territory with a FE transmission option alone.)

Toyota Yaris

MSRP before rebate:

$13,800 - base 3-door hatch
$14,995 - base 5-door hatch

source: https://www.toyota.ca/cgi-bin/WebObje...124060e%2ehtml

After rebate:

$12,800 - base 3-door hatch
$13,995 - base 5-door hatch

Chevrolet Aveo

MSRP - (doesn't qualify for rebate)

$12,995 - base 5-door hatch

source: https://gm.ca/english/vehicles/chevrolet/aveo/index.jsp

Another thought: the rebate may drive prices down for the used (well, "nearly new" slightly used) market for efficient models that qualify for the rebate.

Is there any way to get the rebate for a car purchased in the last year or something such?

Only new, unregistered 2006 & 2007 m.y. vehicles qualify.

I'm sure there are more than a few disappointed people who recently bought eligible cars...

EDIT: just as I'm sure there are some peope rushing out to buy that guzzler today that they were considering - because the guzzler tax does not apply to vehicles currently in stock at dealerships as of Mar 19/07.

OK, so a Jeep Patriot or a Chevrolet Impala qualify for a rebate, but a Honda Fit doesn't. That'll help, uh, someone.... Maybe Honda could add some lead weights to the Fit to make it qualify as a minivan.

Apples to oranges. That's the flex-fuel E85 regulation (for the Impala - I think the Patriot is just the most efficient non-hybrid SUV - though I could be wrong).

To make the Fit qualify, Honda just has to make it better (or add E85 capability). An optional taller 5th gear or final drive would put them over the top. (I'd rather see them do this than E85 - since you can't even get E85 most places.)

And it would reduce fuel consumption, which is the point of the exercise.

What I don't like about this whole rebate thing is that most won't make the EPA numbers but if you show documentaion that you can beat it in your own older car there's no break for you. I rather give a fuel rebate to someone in a fireflea that get's 70 mpg than a FF van that gets 17mpg.:mad: I guess it would be to easy to cheat and impossible to track but there are lots of older cars out there that will beat those numbers. Find a why to base it on actually numbers.

Yes, in an ideal world, our ScanGauges would all connect via WiFi to the government's Central Rebate Computer which would cut our efficiency cheques at the same time it calculates our road tax based on distance driven, and our fines owed to the police departments for speeding. ;)

But seriously - I think that, as in the US, the E85 rebate is a loophole which will be abused.

But I'm behind this efficiency-based carrot & stick system. I look at it this way: perhaps with this approach, in 5 or 10 years we may have more efficient "older" cars to choose from again (assuming consumers & manufacturers respond to it).

In the U.S., the consumers are responding(at least a sizable section of them), but the manufacturers refuse to produce something that will compromise sales of more profitable models.

The most efficient cars for the next 5 years will probably be the Prius and perhaps some form of TDi when VW brings them back here.

TheStar.com - Green rebate expected to fuel Toyota sales


more: https://www.thestar.com/Business/article/194225

Thinking about the Aveo/Wave question...

I just had a quick look, and the Daewoo Kalos (the same car in European and Asian markets) is sold with three smaller engine options than the 1.6 we get in North America. All 4-cylinder, they have 1.2, 1.4 and 1.5L displacements.

Surely one of these would let the car meet the $1K rebate threshold. GM could hike the price of the car by $500, and still undercut the Yaris by $500.

The more I think about it, the more I believe the action in response to this program will be in the price-sensitive econobox market. I'm sure that ALL the manufacturers selling 3 and 4 door hatches here already have EurAsian market engines they could offer that would move their car into at least the $1K rebate category.

In a ideal world you wouldn't have cradle to grave government and numb skull folks that believe in big brother. Sounds like the Big brother thing is alive in well in Canada.

I just wrote my politicians promising a war on my part if they dare do something stupid like this. I also advocate pulling our industrial interest out of Canada. And tightening up the borders.

The thought of this sickens me to my core. Things have to change... God knows they do. But to go to such government in your face orders. I just don't get it. Nor the people that support such insanity.

All this is going to do,, at least if it comes to the states is make a busted machine worse. I guess our neighbors up north love the sheep and the rock rule. Good luck sheep,, cause it looks like your government is squarely on the rock....

psy

Umm.........yeah?

MetroMPG -

Does this sound like a mild version of the Japanse "Kei car" class to you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kei_car

Based on what you said, the law would encourage automakers to offer smaller engine displacements.

CarloSW2

Psy: I take it you won't be wishing me a happy Canada Day this July? ;)

Not necessarily - Toyota manages to get reasonably good efficiency out of the Yaris' 1.5L motor. The Corolla's 1.8 is also on the rebate list.

I only pointed out the smaller displacement options for the Aveo because they appear available right now in other markets, and I assume they're more efficient - they don't seem to be able to coax decent FE out of their 1.6 drive train.

(EDIT: PS - it's not a law. It's a just a rebate ... incentive. Doesn't force anyone - individuals or corporations - to do anything they don't want to.)

Even moreso in the U.S. Compared to Canada, our government trades more social and political freedom in support of a monopoly-run faux free market system.

It is pretty stupid, mostly because:

a) Regulations don't work unless they are extremely strong and enforced very well
b) Regulations often discourage innovation
c) These particular regulations are laden with gaping loopholes
d) Regulations often impose unnessessary burdens onto individual people who wish not to be subjected to them

In an ideal world, however, there would actually be lots of small auto companies, and not a few giant behemoths that pretend to compete while shoving onto the consumers a limited array of choices. But these particular companies aren't individual people, and have managed to overregulate small busiensses to the point that they can't compete while the large automakers have the cash to stay afloat.

Border tightening, like most regulation, won't do much. In order for it to work, an extreme amount of effort must be focused to this one issue, but by that time, you've turned America into a police state. Your paper's please? Oh, wait...

Our industrial interest should be centered in America, Canada's should be centered in Canada. NAFTA, WTO, GATT, and the like all erode our national sovereignty. The people of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico would mostly appreciate it if these things were ended, except for those business interests and bureaucrats profiting from it all. Canada and the US have been rapidly losing their manufacturing base. A service economy cannot sustain itself forever.

I propose a separation of oil and state. ;)

NAFTA can Work
 

This may be true about Sovereignty, but with the European Union strengthening, North America needs to unite to be competetive on a global scale. In our Capitalistic society, there will always be profiteers and bureaucrats eating up the cash, but if "We the People" keep an eye on things instead of blindly living our lives, then these agreements can benefit the Continent. Free trade can work if the proper individuals are at the helm. Compared with the Euro (or especially the British Pound), the U.S. Dollar is weakening (it even has with the CDN Dollar) and that's a problem. I think the open nature of the EU is a good reference model.

Even further, China's offset pricing structure and "Big-Box" Wal-Mart stores eating up the merchandise at the cost of the U.S. Citizenry also needs to be addressed.

Canada, the U.S. and Mexico all have respective strong points to offer one another. In the global marketplace, this team must be forged to compete.

Now on a lighter note:

cfg83: thank goodness you weren't referring to this "K-Car"

https://pic16.picturetrail.com/VOL698.../239749433.jpg

RH77

Heck, let's rope in sough America too. We'll have a common currency called "Amerigos" :D

Likewise the Honda Fit; elsewhere there are smaller and/or more fuel efficient engine (1.2L, 1.3L, and 1.5L i-DSI vs the 1.5L VTEC here) and transmission (CVT and taller manual) options.

Just to repeat: these aren't laws/regulations in the conventional sense. They're incentives and selective taxes that don't force anyone to do anything they don't want to.

That said - your sentiment was echoed in a number of media forums I followed - the suggestion being that the disincentives (the guzzler tax tiers) aren't high enough.

In this specific case, I can't see that happening. Particularly because the carrots/sticks are technologically neutral; e.g. they're not rewarding hybrids only, rather efficiency in general. Manufacturers are free to ignore the dis/incentives, or use whatever technical approach they wish to leverage them to their advantage.

No argument there.

Yes, and? That goes without saying.

True, true.

Yeah, I had read that also. It's not rocket science. They could give us more efficient choices, they just don't.

The more I read of the auto makers' responses, the more skeptical I'm becoming that (a) this program is going to stand as-is, and (b) that the automakers are willing to respond technologically.

Hyundai's response has been "we have to ratchet up our marketing (to promote their warranty differences)."

The only manufacturer to come out in favour of it has been (not surprisingly) Toyota:

Drop in the bucket makes a lot of waves
From Thursday's Globe and Mail

I'll be pleased if a gearing change is enough to get the Fit to 6.5. Then I'll find a <strike>ricer</strike> performance enthusiast with an '08 to swap transmissions.

:D That's a downright entrepreneurial idea!

(You do know you live in Marxist Canada, don't you? Might want to keep those ideas under your hat. )