The US Treasury Department today announced its expected EV tax credit guidance on the battery component and critical mineral sourcing requirements of the Inflation Reduction Act, changing the availability of EV tax credits in the US, with the net effect of reducing tax credit amounts for many vehicles purchased on April 18 or later.
The Inflation Reduction Act includes a provision that limits the $7,500 EV tax credit to vehicles that are assembled in North America. Beyond that, a certain percentage of each car’s battery components need to be built in North America, and critical minerals need to be sourced from the US or a US free trade country, with these percentages increasing every year. Each of these two requirements make up half of the credit, so if a car qualifies for one but not the other, it’s eligible for $3,750 worth of federal tax credits.
The NA-assembled provision went into effect immediately in August when the bill was signed, but the battery sourcing provisions were left up to the Treasury to decide. It was originally supposed to announce those specifics by December, but pushed back the deadline until today.
This temporarily qualified some vehicles, like the Chevy Bolt (which will now remain a screaming deal through April 17), and some Tesla models for the full $7,500 credit. Both GM and Tesla have previously stated that they don’t expect to qualify for the full purchase credit when the new battery rules go into effect.
Senior administration officials advised that while fewer cars will qualify for the full credit in the short term, the law will work to strengthen the US industrial base and eventually there will be more cars that qualify as production gets on-shored.
In addition to the NA-assembly and battery provisions, cars over $55K and SUVs/trucks over $80K MSRP do not qualify. Also, taxpayers cannot claim the credit if their income is over $150K/$225K/$300K for single/head-of-household/married filing jointly.
The domestic assembly provisions caused some rankling in the international community when the bill was passed, with some foreign automakers and governments decrying it as a protectionist move. Since then, to help smooth over these complaints, the US signed a free trade deal for battery minerals with Japan earlier this week and is working on a similar agreement with Europe.
Senior Treasury and White House officials said today that due to the domestic production provisions of the IRA, $45 billion worth of new electric car manufacturing investments have been announced since the act was signed. The administration said this accounts for tens of thousands of jobs across 24 states, along with several other commitments related to the law’s EV-adoption goals (more public charging, more electric transit, and so on).
Details of the new battery sourcing requirements
Thankfully, the new battery sourcing guidance today held few surprises. It is, however, going into effect a little later than expected: April 17, rather than the end of March (today).
So buyers will have a couple more weeks to purchase an EV before tax credit amounts are reduced, as the new guidance will be applicable to vehicles placed into service on April 18 or later. These vehicles may lose access to half or all of the tax credit, depending on where their battery components and critical minerals are sourced.
To meet requirements set up in the IRA, manufacturers must ensure that battery critical minerals are “extracted or processed in the US or any country with which the US has a free trade agreement,” or recycled in North America. They must also ensure that battery components are “manufactured or assembled in North America.”
Each of these legs accounts for half of the total $7,500 credit.
Each leg also has an “applicable percentage” based on the year the vehicle is “placed into service,” which can be seen in the flowchart below. The process of measuring whether a car meets these requirements is relatively straightforward, and involves identifying the value (rather than weight or volume) of each component or mineral used in the battery supply chain:
The Treasury seems like it intends to take a lenient view of what counts as a “free trade agreement” for the critical mineral provisions, and specifically noted that this week’s agreement with Japan counts. The list of countries it identified was: Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Israel, Jordan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, Nicaragua, Oman, Panama, Peru, Singapore, and Japan
There is one more consideration: After 2024, batteries must contain no components whatsoever that were manufactured or assembled by a “foreign entity of concern” (FEOC) and after 2025, no critical minerals can be extracted, processed, or recycled by a FEOC.
The law itself does not specify a full list of FEOCs, so it falls upon the Treasury to provide that before the end of the year, when the rule first takes effect. The Treasury could not tell us whether this list would focus on national or subnational entities.
Presumably, some significant percentage of those entities will be associated with China, given that the IRA specifically intends to reduce the overreliance on China for batteries, whether the list ends up including all of China itself or not. A senior administration official specifically noted that many minerals currently get extracted in Australia and processed in China. The administration hopes some of those minerals could instead be processed perhaps in Japan, under the US’s newly signed trade agreement focused on environmental standards and workers’ rights.
And there is still a chance to iron out any wrinkles left in today’s guidance, as today’s rule is merely a “proposed” rule, rather than a final one. The proposed rule is published in the federal register, and public comments will be taken through June 16. This also means that vehicles placed into service between April 18 and whenever the final rule goes into effect will use the proposed rule, whereas later vehicles will use the final rule, in whatever form that rule takes. Any changes are likely to be minor.
With the new tax credit guidance only released today, a full list of qualifying vehicles is not yet available. Manufacturers will have to certify that their cars meet these new sourcing requirements and submit that information before the proposed rule goes into effect on April 17. The government will publish a list of eligible vehicles and the amount of credit each vehicle receives on fueleconomy.gov on April 18, and we at Electrek will keep you updated when that list comes out.
Electrek’s Take
With today’s battery sourcing guidance, we’ve moved one step closer to the end of the long and complicated EV tax credit implementation saga. Most provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act are now somewhat clear, with the primary exception of the future point-of-sale tax credits, slated for 2024, which will allow buyers instant access to EV discounts instead of having to wait to file their taxes.
There will be a few more changes over time, as manufacturers move to onshore production, or as the US government possibly makes more deals with other countries as it did with Japan this week. These should gradually qualify more cars for tax credit access.
On the other hand, some cars might lose out over time due to increases in the “applicable percentage” as years tick by. We’ll keep you updated about any changes as we learn about them, but hopefully things will settle into a bit more of a steady state from here on out.
It would have been nicer if the journey was a little simpler, but given that the legislation had the goal of not only increasing electric car adoption but also increasing American manufacturing in a world where manufacturing is so globalized, it was always going to end up being a little complex.
And in the end, more cars will take advantage of the tax credit than before, when credits were capped at 200,000 per manufacturer, so it’s still an improvement, if an imperfect one.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
CASE arrived at bauma 2025 with an innovative new electric wheel loader with a striking, sharp-edged design that ditches the traditional operator cab in favor of remote or autonomous operation for improved accessibility and safety.
CASE says the cabin-less design of the Impact electric wheel loader enhances operational flexibility by enabling operations in extreme environments and adverse weather conditions. It also means that job site, disaster recovery, or even rescue operations can continue 24/7, with operators in different time zones logging in for their shifts.
More important – and more practical – is CASE’s claim that the new Impact concept, “marks a significant advancement in accessibility, as operators with motor impairments and other disabilities can now operate the machine without physical limitations, representing an important step toward inclusivity in the industry.”
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Along with integrated AI, a full suite of sensors, and autonomous operation built in, CASE says the Impact is a glimpse into a smarter, safer, and more sustainable working future.
Electrek’s Take
Driven by an aging workforce and not enough new talent entering the field, virtually every industrial field is struggling with an international equipment operator shortage. The concept of automation addresses some of that, but remote operation open up the field significantly, and I could easily older operators forced out of work due to injury getting back into it or younger operators halfway around the world who would give anything for an opportunity – and paycheck – like this could provide.
Smart move from CASE, and it’s great to hear them call that out specifically.
Electricity grid demands are on the rise in part due to energy-hungry technology like AI, and while experts believe renewable energy alone is not enough, it is essential to a broader supply equation. But with funding freezes, subsidy walk backs and tariffs on key components all on the table, solar, wind, and hydrogen companies are working harder than ever to make their business models work, even if they never intended to rely on federal support for the long term.
“One of the hats I used to wear was planning for the City of New York. For the longest time, there was decreasing [energy] demand,” said Aseem Kapur, chief revenue officer of GM Energy, an arm of General Motors that the company introduced in 2022. “Over the course of the last five or so years, that equation has changed. Utilities are facing unprecedented demand.”
Beyond New York City, U.S. energy demand is poised to grow upwards of 16% in the next five years, a big difference from the 0.5%it grew each year on average from 2001 to 2024, according to the Center for Strategic & International Studies.
For the renewable energy companies looking to break into the mainstream, subsidies have helped them get through their early days of growth. But President Trump has targeted these solutions from the first day of his presidency. In an executive order from Jan. 20, the Trump administration promised to “unleash” an era of fossil fuels exploration and production while also eliminating “unfair subsidies and other ill-conceived government-imposed market distortions that favor EVs over other technologies.” Last week, Trump issued an EO pushing for more coal production.
In a six-year study breaking down energy subsidies from the U.S. Energy Information Administration from 2022 (the most recent edition), 46% of federal energy subsidies were associated with renewable energy, making them the largest slice of the energy pie. At the same time, natural gas and petroleum subsidies became a net cost to the government in 2022, reversing what had been a source of revenue inflows.
“Every company I’ve talked to recognizes that subsidies were required to help them through an R&D cycle, but they all believed they had to get to a cost parity point,” said Ross Meyercord, CEO of Propel Software (and former Salesforce CIO), whose manufacturing software solution serves energy clients like Invinity Energy Systems and Eos Energy Storage. “Every company had that baked into their business model. It may happen faster than they were planning on, and obviously that creates challenges.”
Meyercord believes that clean energy companies can handle either a subsidy decrease or a rise in tariffs, but both at the same time will add substantial stress to the market, which could have negative downstream effects on the grid — and the people who rely on it.
‘Not going to get rid of fossil fuels overnight’
Like any energy source, Kapur says success always comes down to economics. In the current environment, with interest rates, and fears that inflation will reignite, he said, “it’s going to come down to, ‘What are the most cost-effective solutions that can be brought to market?'” That may vary by region, he added, but notes that solar and energy storage have already reached parity in many cases and, in some instances, are below the cost of producing energy from natural gas or coal-powered resources.
This economics equation is true even in Texas, where the state’s Attorney General Ken Paxton has voiced anti-renewables sentiment in favor of the coal market (his lawsuit against major investment firm BlackRock and others in late November claims these firms sought to “weaponize their shares to pressure the coal companies to accommodate ‘green energy’ goals”). Wind accounts for 24% of the state’s energy profile, according to the Texas Comptroller, suggesting a penchant for any energy source that’s viable and cost-effective.
“The reality is, we’re not going to get rid of fossil fuels overnight,” said Whit Irvin Jr., CEO of hydrogen energy company Q Hydrogen. “They are going to have a very significant piece in our energy ecosystem for decades, and as new technologies come out on a larger scale, the use of fossil fuels will be curtailed, but we need to continue research, development and innovation in a way that makes sense.”
Irvin emphasizes the need for innovation from all sides, including creating new technologies that have a massive impact on large scalability and carbon reduction. “We don’t want to turn off that spigot. We just want to make sure that it’s going to the right places,” he said.
Hydrogen energy itself is one such source of innovation. Hydrogen ranges in sustainability depending on the fuel it uses to source its hydrogen. For example, green hydrogen — the only climate-neutral form of hydrogen energy — stems from renewable energy surplus. Grey hydrogen stems from natural gas methane. Q Hydrogen is working to open the world’s first renewable hydrogen power plant that will be economically viable without a subsidy. Irvin Jr. says the company, which produces hydrogen using water, plans to launch its New Hampshire facility this year.
“Hydrogen fuel cells are a really good way to provide backup power or even prime power to a data center that would be considered essentially off grid,” said Irvin, likening hydrogen fuel cell production to a form of battery storage. While hydrogen is not the most economical because of its comparative immaturity, Irvin said heightened energy demand will outcompete cost sensitivity for tech companies requiring more and more data storage.
While hydrogen projects continue to reap federal incentives to propel the industry forward, Irvin said subsidies were never part of his company’s business equation. “If they do exist, we’ll be able to take advantage of them,” he said. “If they don’t exist, that will still be fine for us.”
But that might not be true for every alternative energy company depending on where they’re at in the R&D cycle. Changes in federal incentives have real power to shift the progression of renewable energy in the U.S., especially when combined with tariffs that could stifle companies’ international relationships and supply chains. Meyercord, Kapur and Irvin all foresee private industry partnerships making a huge impact for the future of the grid, but recognize that the strain is increasing as energy tech of all kinds becomes smarter and more grid-dependent.
Based on the excellent Hyundai IONIQ 5 N platform, Vanwall gives its Vandervell H-GT a high-performance aesthetic makeover inspired by the classic Lancia Delta HF Integrale. But what makes this body kit a genuine “high-performance” upgrade isn’t the way it makes the car look: it’s the 500 lb. weight savings!
Developed by Austrian racing team ByKOLLES Racing and invoking the name of a 1950s Formula 1 team, the Vandervell H-GT is essentially a new Hyundai IONIQ 5 N in aggressive, Lancia Delta-inspired carbon-fiber bodywork that the company claims gives the car an, “unprecedented weight optimization in this vehicle category.”
The H-GT’s new “thin wall” carbon fiber body slashes the car’s weight by over 230 kg (507 lbs.), which means ByKOLLES’ new Vandervell can do anything that Hyundai’s “special” IONIQ 5 N hot hatch can do. Only faster.
The car was first announced in 2023 (along with the renderings shown, below), when ByKOLLES was competing in the World Endurance Championship (WEC) with what used to be called an LMP car – but they keep changing the names of these things so it could be a Daytona Prototype, Hypercar, or even a 24 Hour LeMans Wonkavator by now.
The important part, however, is that a few of these cars have now broken cover, with ex-Formula 1 supremo, Bernie Ecclestone, having been seen trying the new-age Lancia on for size.
The Vanwall Vandervell website still shows the same €128,000 ($145,405, as I type this) price tag and specs it did in 2023, which either means they haven’t updated it in a while, were really, really good at pricing the thing in the first place, or both.
That’s presumably on top of the IONIQ N’s already hefty $66,100 price tag.