Norway May Slap A 25% Luxury Tax On Expensive Electric Vehicles

[cawimmer430]

HOW DARE YOU, NORWAY! HOW DARE YOU! 



Norway May Slap A 25% Luxury Tax On Expensive Electric Vehicles

Norway has embraced electrification so much so that more than 90 percent of all vehicles sold there in August were electrified. Now, however, the tax policy that has encouraged the nation's EV buying spree may change.

The country's next government is expected to be a center-left alliance that's likely to be led by a Labour party candidate. That party has vowed to introduce a graduated tax system on expensive EVs. Although all-electric vehicles would still have no tax levied against them for the first 600,000 Norwegian crowns ($69,882 USD), any amount over that would be taxed at 25 percent.

A Porsche Taycan, for example, which starts at 777,000 Norwegian crowns ($90,621), would incur 44,250 Norwegian crowns ($5,160) in taxes on the 177,000 Norwegian crowns ($20,643) it costs above the tax threshold. The Labour party says that this policy is made out of a sense of fairness.

"It is a subsidy. And... the more expensive the car is, the bigger the subsidy," Svein Roald Hansen, a Labour party tax policy spokesperson, told Reuters. Many have called it a luxury tax, and it is by no means unique. Other nations with less aggressive EV policies, like Canada, offer greater subsidies for less expensive EVs so as not to favor the rich, who need less help buying a new car.

"We have in the last couple of years received a lot of new models... there is plenty to choose from for those who still want to buy a car while there is a VAT [value added tax] exemption," Hansen argued.

The idea follows the publication of a paper by the International Monetary Fund, which argued that it was time to add a tax to expensive EVs in the country. It claimed that Norway's blanket tax exemption cost the government 19.2 billion crowns ($2.24 billion). Money raised by a luxury tax, it argued, could be funneled into other environmental policies.

The Norwegian EV Association, however, argues that this is a bad time to mess with one environmental policy (the EV tax break) in favor of another whose outcomes are unknown.

"Now finally the more rural areas are starting to buy more electric cars and it's not the time to remove the tax exemption because we need to also get these areas with higher market shares," Christina Bu, a spokesperson for the association said.



Link: https://www.carscoops.com/2021/10/norway-may-start-introducing-taxes-on-expensive-electric-vehicles/

[GoCougs]

Those poor people - so much economic distortion. WTF are they even doing to themselves.

[Laconian]

Norway has so much money to burn. They can afford to distort. They're one of those "happiest countries" in the world, even in spite of the weather..

My Norwegian friend said that a Model S is cheaper than an ICE Ford Focus.. LOL

[GoCougs]

Norway has so much money to burn. They can afford to distort. They're one of those "happiest countries" in the world, even in spite of the weather..

My Norwegian friend said that a Model S is cheaper than an ICE Ford Focus.. LOL

For now, which is pretty easy with nationalized oil reserves and 90+% homogeneous population of only ~5MM, but at some point the party WILL end, esp. if/when oil begins to falls out of favor with the West (and rises in favor with the East, particularly the nationalization-prone Russians and Chinese).

[Galaxy]

They are aware of that, and are diversifying. Which is why the Norwegian sovereign Wealth Fund is the largest in the world with assets of over $1.3 trillion ($240,000 per citizen), owning 1.4% of all global stocks and shares.

[Morris Minor]

https://youtu.be/hKGwGAHznFQ

Norway husbands its resources, what a novelty. Maybe it should hand out free copies of Financial Planning for Dummies to other countries.

[r0tor]

I think there does need to be some sort of tax on the new excessive EVs coming out... I can't image what a hoard of new Hummers will do to roads/bridges

[RomanChariot]

I think there does need to be some sort of tax on the new excessive EVs coming out... I can't image what a hoard of new Hummers will do to roads/bridges

Honestly a hoard of Hummers would not do much to roads and bridges as they are designed for semi trucks. Most Hummers will be outfitted with 35 inch tires which will have a contact patch that is over 3 times larger than the tires on your average sedan. A Hummer will basically put the same pressure on the asphalt as a 3000lb sedan.

[GoCougs]

They are aware of that, and are diversifying. Which is why the Norwegian sovereign Wealth Fund is the largest in the world with assets of over $1.3 trillion ($240,000 per citizen), owning 1.4% of all global stocks and shares.

That's part of the problem, but the real problem is unearned power in the hands of the state, which is always a bad thing, an near-infinite ways.

[r0tor]

Honestly a hoard of Hummers would not do much to roads and bridges as they are designed for semi trucks. Most Hummers will be outfitted with 35 inch tires which will have a contact patch that is over 3 times larger than the tires on your average sedan. A Hummer will basically put the same pressure on the asphalt as a 3000lb sedan.

Except with 1000hp and tons of torque.  This is how semis ripple all our roads at stoplights.

[GoCougs]

Except with 1000hp and tons of torque.  This is how semis ripple all our roads at stoplights.

Those are braking bumps, not acceleration bumps - the force of braking is hugely larger than the force of acceleration, plus other practical effects such as trailers can also bounce under hard braking.

[Laconian]

Turns out the State has its stimulus finger pressing firmly on the scale of exploding fossils.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/06/fossil-fuel-industry-subsidies-of-11m-dollars-a-minute-imf-finds

The IMF found the production and burning of coal, oil and gas was subsidised by $5.9tn in 2020, with not a single country pricing all its fuels sufficiently to reflect their full supply and environmental costs. Experts said the subsidies were "adding fuel to the fire" of the climate crisis, at a time when rapid reductions in carbon emissions were urgently needed.

[GoCougs]

Turns out the State has its stimulus finger pressing firmly on the scale of exploding fossils.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/06/fossil-fuel-industry-subsidies-of-11m-dollars-a-minute-imf-finds

The IMF found the production and burning of coal, oil and gas was subsidised by $5.9tn in 2020, with not a single country pricing all its fuels sufficiently to reflect their full supply and environmental costs. Experts said the subsidies were "adding fuel to the fire" of the climate crisis, at a time when rapid reductions in carbon emissions were urgently needed.

Let's not forget to credit the advantages of fossil fuels - literally, most everything important we know today, from jetliners to skyscrapers to computers to electricity to modern medicine - exists because of advancement of culture and science courtesy of fossil fuels - really, fossil fuel pricing is probably expensive, with the totality of history considered. Even if global warming was true, much of humanity will be dependent on fossil fuels till they run dry; even if the West manages to self-loath them out of use, the 1/2 of the planet that is still developing if not Third World - from rural China to Nigeria to Pakistan - will be 100% all about dat dead dinosaur juice.

[r0tor]

Add to this the $500 billion spent yearly on fossil fuel exploration despite the fact that if the world would burn all of the current reserved we have already found - we would no longer exist.

[SJ_GTI]

Let's not forget to credit the advantages of fossil fuels - literally, most everything important we know today, from jetliners to skyscrapers to computers to electricity to modern medicine - exists because of advancement of culture and science courtesy of fossil fuels - really, fossil fuel pricing is probably expensive, with the totality of history considered. Even if global warming was true, much of humanity will be dependent on fossil fuels till they run dry; even if the West manages to self-loath them out of use, the 1/2 of the planet that is still developing if not Third World - from rural China to Nigeria to Pakistan - will be 100% all about dat dead dinosaur juice.

I agree, we should be mindful of the fact that fossil fuels themselves were an advancement of what we were burning before...wood (and charcoal). Even the worst fossil fuels (coal) were far more environmentally friendly. And as we advanced we have used more and more environmentally friendly fossil fuels with natural gas likely being the apex of environmentally friendly fossil fuels.

And thanks to all the technological advancements that fossil fuels have let us make we are at the point at which we can, more and more, replace those fossil fuels with even cleaner forms of energy production. Lets stay on the path that fossil fuels started...cleaner and cleaner energy into the future! 

[veeman]

Let's not forget to credit the advantages of fossil fuels - literally, most everything important we know today, from jetliners to skyscrapers to computers to electricity to modern medicine - exists because of advancement of culture and science courtesy of fossil fuels - really, fossil fuel pricing is probably expensive, with the totality of history considered. Even if global warming was true, much of humanity will be dependent on fossil fuels till they run dry; even if the West manages to self-loath them out of use, the 1/2 of the planet that is still developing if not Third World - from rural China to Nigeria to Pakistan - will be 100% all about dat dead dinosaur juice.

I agree with this except the "even if global warming was true".  It should be reworded to something along the lines of "global climate change due to mankind's dependence on fossil fuels has consensus in the international scientific community and naysayers are in the same category as flat earthers."

It's also not really dinosaur juice but that's a very minor point and it's more fun to say dinosaur juice.  I think it more prehistoric vegetation/tree juice. 

[veeman]

25% tax actually sounds pretty reasonable to me. As it is you are massively subsidizing EV over ICE in Norway to achieve a good goal but at the same time you don't want to subsidize wealthy peoples' toys. 

[GoCougs]

I agree with this except the "even if global warming was true".  It should be reworded to something along the lines of "global climate change due to mankind's dependence on fossil fuels has consensus in the international scientific community and naysayers are in the same category as flat earthers."

It's also not really dinosaur juice but that's a very minor point and it's more fun to say dinosaur juice.  I think it more prehistoric vegetation/tree juice.

Few people truly believe in global warming, esp. those supposedly closest to the info/experts and those who are in charge of us and have otherwise taken it upon themselves to admonish us so - just look at your favorite celebrity, billionaire CEO or politician, and their private jets, flights to space, yachts, fleets of mansions and vehicles, etc. They do the exact opposite of believing in global warming, so why should I (or you) believe it? Once they start believing in global warming, maybe I'll start paying attention, until then, I'll join them and most others in denying to my inner core the fake news of global warming.

[SJ_GTI]

It's also not really dinosaur juice but that's a very minor point and it's more fun to say dinosaur juice.  I think it more prehistoric vegetation/tree juice.

This is correct. It is believed that the "fossil fuels" are mostly from old organic matter (trees for instance) that died before bacteria (and other microorganisms) had also evolved to feed off the dead matter. Because the dead matter wasn't "recycled" into the ecosystem it instead stayed with the rock/soil from the same time period and slowed decayed into the oil/coal we now use. Hence why it is assumed there is only a limited amount...the earth/ecosystem isn't creating more fossil fuels because there are now decaying plant matter is now recycled back into the ecosystem as quicker as it is formed.

[GoCougs]

I agree, we should be mindful of the fact that fossil fuels themselves were an advancement of what we were burning before...wood (and charcoal). Even the worst fossil fuels (coal) were far more environmentally friendly. And as we advanced we have used more and more environmentally friendly fossil fuels with natural gas likely being the apex of environmentally friendly fossil fuels.

And thanks to all the technological advancements that fossil fuels have let us make we are at the point at which we can, more and more, replace those fossil fuels with even cleaner forms of energy production. Lets stay on the path that fossil fuels started...cleaner and cleaner energy into the future! 

Don't forget whale oil.

China, India, Nigeria, etc.; literally half the planet that is still developing, couldn't care less about "renewable" energy even outside their catastrophic costs and dubious environmental advantages, and it will be full steam ahead for them on dino juice for many of our lifetimes.

[r0tor]

Few people truly believe in global warming, esp. those supposedly closest to the info/experts and those who are in charge of us and have otherwise taken it upon themselves to admonish us so - just look at your favorite celebrity, billionaire CEO or politician, and their private jets, flights to space, yachts, fleets of mansions and vehicles, etc. They do the exact opposite of believing in global warming, so why should I (or you) believe it? Once they start believing in global warming, maybe I'll start paying attention, until then, I'll join them and most others in denying to my inner core the fake news of global warming.

So I'm only allowed to believe in what elitist assholes believe in?

[r0tor]

Don't forget whale oil.

China, India, Nigeria, etc.; literally half the planet that is still developing, couldn't care less about "renewable" energy even outside their catastrophic costs and dubious environmental advantages, and it will be full steam ahead for them on dino juice for many of our lifetimes.

China has a massive and booming renewable energy industry and generation

[veeman]

Few people truly believe in global warming, esp. those supposedly closest to the info/experts and those who are in charge of us and have otherwise taken it upon themselves to admonish us so - just look at your favorite celebrity, billionaire CEO or politician, and their private jets, flights to space, yachts, fleets of mansions and vehicles, etc. They do the exact opposite of believing in global warming, so why should I (or you) believe it? Once they start believing in global warming, maybe I'll start paying attention, until then, I'll join them and most others in denying to my inner core the fake news of global warming.

Oh they believe in it.  They just choose to not let it affect their extravagant lifestyles.  It's not blissful ignorance.  It's willful deceit. 

You have this thing against flying but the good from tourism dollars on "3rd world" economies far outweighs the carbon footprint. 

[FoMoJo]

Oh they believe in it.  They just choose to not let it affect their extravagant lifestyles.  It's not blissful ignorance.  It's willful deceit. 

You have this thing against flying but the good from tourism dollars on "3rd world" economies far outweighs the carbon footprint. 

Yes, most will be dead before global warming is a serious threat to them so what does it matter.  As for the rest of us, we don't really want to inconvenience ourselves too much...other than to give a bit of lip service about the impact on future generations.

[GoCougs]

Oh they believe in it.  They just choose to not let it affect their extravagant lifestyles.  It's not blissful ignorance.  It's willful deceit. 

You have this thing against flying but the good from tourism dollars on "3rd world" economies far outweighs the carbon footprint.

Some, sure, but mostly, purveyors use global warming as tool for hegemony and bullying and all the rest. Turns out global warming is better than the threat of nuclear war for that sort of thing, though the pony rony is giving global warming a run for its hegemony money.

That tourism distorts the local economies and cultures (esp. the seedy part such as sex trafficking), and transmits at unnatural velocity stuff like the pony rony, beyond just the pollution of air travel and airports in general.

Environmentalism begins at home, by which is to say global warming, even if real, would be solved in a day, if people bought right-sized homes and cars, and otherwise paid attention to their personal lives. But NOPE.

[veeman]

Some, sure, but mostly, purveyors use global warming as tool for hegemony and bullying and all the rest. Turns out global warming is better than the threat of nuclear war for that sort of thing, though the pony rony is giving global warming a run for its hegemony money.

That tourism distorts the local economies and cultures (esp. the seedy part such as sex trafficking), and transmits at unnatural velocity stuff like the pony rony, beyond just the pollution of air travel and airports in general.

Environmentalism begins at home, by which is to say global warming, even if real, would be solved in a day, if people bought right-sized homes and cars, and otherwise paid attention to their personal lives. But NOPE.

Tourism distorts the local economy is the same as tourism supports the local economy.  Because of global commerce factors outside their control, it is very difficult to support "3rd world" economies by selling coffee beans etc. So if you don't have a healthy tourism economy you are more apt to become like Haiti as opposed to the Dominican Republic.  It's not the only factor but it's a significant factor. 

[Laconian]

What's an undistorted economy?

[Galaxy]

What's an undistorted economy?

An Egyptian Bazar.