Electric Vehicles

Question A: The current $200 annual fee for registering electric vehicles in Ohio is progressive.

Question B: To encourage greater take-up of electric vehicles, public expenditure on infrastructure to support them (such as charging stations) is likely to be more cost-effective than providing equivalent amounts as tax credits/purchase rebates for buyers.

Question A: The current $200 annual fee for registering electric vehicles in Ohio is progressive.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	8	This is technically correct, but $200 has a trivial impact on the progressivity of our overall tax system and it is irrational to subsidize EVs to encourage use and then tax it back! It should add a teeny amount of progressivity given that the average fleet age of electric cars is a lot newer than for gas cars and that the ratio of high-end electric cars is higher than for gas cars and the fact that the poorest Ohioans don't have a car or generally drive a used, gas-powered car.
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Agree	8
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Agree	9
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	7
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Strongly Agree	9	Progressive? Yes, as few low-income families are buying EVs. I would, however, support reducing the fee to support the use of green vehicles.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Agree	5	Essentially this comes down to whether households increase their likelihood to drive an electric car increases more or less than proportionately with income. I think it increases more than proportionately with income, which would make the fee progressive, at least in the income range where people are at least somewhat likely to own electric cars.
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Strongly Agree	10	The fee is a substitute for the gas tax that the EV owner is not paying. EV owners use the road in the same way combustion engine owners do. It is a good fee.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Disagree	8
Michael Myler	University of Mount Union	Agree	7	Let's assume that (1) the fee, after federal subsidy, is about the same for every electric vehicle; (2) every electric vehicle costs about the same amount; and (3) only high-income earners buy electric vehicles. Then the $200 fee is progressive. Drop any one of these assumptions, and the question becomes much more complex!
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Uncertain	5	Currently, it is somewhat progressive but only because purchases of electric cars are by higher income individuals (so only they are paying the fee). As lower-income households begin to purchase, this would be regressive.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Agree	9
Kay E. Strong	Independent	Strongly Disagree	10	A progressive tax would rise with income. The flat fee has a greater regressive impact. Encouraging conversion to non-gas vehicles should not be punitive for middle lower and lower income individuals.
Albert Sumell	Youngstown State University	Strongly Disagree	10
Andy Welki	John Carroll University	Uncertain	5	I do not know about the distribution of electric car ownership by income group.
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Agree	8	As long as e-vehicles remain signals of income. As that shifts then it will become regressive.

Question B: To encourage greater take-up of electric vehicles, public expenditure on infrastructure to support them (such as charging stations) is likely to be more cost-effective than providing equivalent amounts as tax credits/purchase rebates for buyers.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	7	I'm sure this would have been true in the past when infrastructure was a big problem for electric cars, and I'd guess that it may still be true partly because buyer subsidies are expensive relative to the cost of level-2 charging stations and partly because the government sometimes does a better job producing infrastructure than an absence of involvement, but this is too complicated for me to prognosticate about without more data.
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Agree	9
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	7
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Uncertain	1	I don’t have enough information.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Uncertain	5	I'd lean toward agreeing (that infrastructure is more cost-effective than tax credits) but I'm really unsure. I suspect that a lack of charging infrastructure is much less important in Ohio, where most car-owners have a garage to charge in, than in states with populations in dense urban cities.
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Agree	4
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Strongly Agree	10	The price of EVs will fall as technology progresses. The infrastructure will eventually benefit all drivers. In fact, it will benefit all Americans with cleaner air.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Agree	6
Michael Myler	University of Mount Union	Agree	8	A car is more useful to you if you know at the time of buying it that you can use it for long-distance driving. I see no direct link between rebates and increased number of charging stations. "Range Anxiety" is not an insignificant issue that buyers can easily ignore.
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Agree	6	Rebates and tax credits are good for bringing the purchase price down, but the lack of infrastructure (or perceived lack of charging stations, etc.) makes it less likely households will choose to buy even if the price of the vehicle is lowered.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Strongly Agree	10	My answers are probably biased because I own a Nissan Leaf as my primary vehicle.
Kay E. Strong	Independent	Strongly Agree	10
Albert Sumell	Youngstown State University	Uncertain	7	This question is challenging. Both are very important in the choice of consumers. The federal government should also be involved in incentivizing usage of electric vehicles, but state governments should devote more resources toward improving infrastructure.
Andy Welki	John Carroll University	Disagree	6
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Disagree	8	Both are needed