Add Yours: 2023 Toyota bZ4X Owner's Registry

Binding contract to retain tax credit.

13705 Views 162 Replies 14 Participants Last post by Motch6, 5 mo ago

rfrancis073

Discussion Starter · 10 mo ago

Seems the new bill has language allowing current EV’s to get the current tax credit, even if delivered after the bill is signed. Other car manufacturers are setting up binding contracts.

electrek.co

If you want an EV, buy now – Rivian, Fisker and others rush to lock in EV tax credits before changes

Electric cars assembled outside of North America may lose access to EV tax credits within a week, and buyers need to act fast to save money.

electrek.co

with that said, could the binding contract be written that you would simply lose a non-refundable deposit if you broke the agreement? Seems like Rivian email offers sort of lean that way.

thoughts?

I might sign one if it can be done this way and the deposit is not to high!

Reactions: 2

1 - 20 of 163 Posts

qs933

· #2 · 10 mo ago

rfrancis073 said:
Seems the new bill has language allowing current EV’s to get the current tax credit, even if delivered after the bill is signed. Other car manufacturers are setting up binding contracts.

Apparently Toyota didn’t respond to Electrek at the time that was written. I would consider doing something now to lock in the $7,500. However, Toyota is in the unique situation in that under the current credit, it will start the phase out process starting Oct 1, 2022.

So if you do a binding contract today — does that effectively lock you into the credit that would have applied had the vehicle been delivered today? Or does that merely allow you to follow the current program and the credit will be applied based on the date delivered, but under the current program.

For example: if I sign the binding contract today (August 10, 2022) and the bZ4X is delivered on March 1, 2023, would I qualify for the $7,500 based on the August 10, 2022 date? Or $1,875 had the original program been in effect on March 1, 2023?

See less See more

Reactions: 1

osiris11

· #3 · 10 mo ago

qs933 said:
Apparently Toyota didn’t respond to Electrek at the time that was written. I would consider doing something now to lock in the $7,500. However, Toyota is in the unique situation in that under the current credit, it will start the phase out process starting Oct 1, 2022.

So if you do a binding contract today — does that effectively lock you into the credit that would have applied had the vehicle been delivered today? Or does that merely allow you to follow the current program and the credit will be applied based on the date delivered, but under the current program.

For example: if I sign the binding contract today (August 10, 2022) and the bZ4X is delivered on March 1, 2023, would I qualify for the $7,500 based on the August 10, 2022 date? Or $1,875 had the original program been in effect on March 1, 2023?

Good question

Reactions: 1

qs933

· #4 · 10 mo ago

The article addresses the Toyota ramp-down in the Nissan section. If I'm reading it correctly, it seems like their understanding is that the delivery date would still drive the credit value (i.e. in a ramp-down period).

They also bring up another twist to this, in that the bZ4X technically isn't available for sale at this point anyway due to the recall. There are strict rules around selling cars under a safety recall. If a "binding purchase agreement" is technically selling a car, that could run afoul of those rules.

This leads to an interesting situation where buyers signing a binding purchase agreement today could conceivably still qualify for the “old” tax credit when they take delivery of an Ariya, but only if that delivery takes place before the “old” tax credit ramps down due to the company hitting the 200k cap. This and the Toyota bZ4X (which just hit the 200k cap) are the only vehicles for which this is the case (we haven’t covered Toyota or Subaru in this post, since their EVs are currently under an indefinite recall and are not being sold).

So, oddly enough, the cap and ramp-down period might still remain relevant for this car, but only if Nissan allows for binding purchase agreements on a car that isn’t yet made.

rfrancis073

Discussion Starter · #5 · 10 mo ago

qs933 said:
Apparently Toyota didn’t respond to Electrek at the time that was written. I would consider doing something now to lock in the $7,500. However, Toyota is in the unique situation in that under the current credit, it will start the phase out process starting Oct 1, 2022.

So if you do a binding contract today — does that effectively lock you into the credit that would have applied had the vehicle been delivered today? Or does that merely allow you to follow the current program and the credit will be applied based on the date delivered, but under the current program.

For example: if I sign the binding contract today (August 10, 2022) and the bZ4X is delivered on March 1, 2023, would I qualify for the $7,500 based on the August 10, 2022 date? Or $1,875 had the original program been in effect on March 1, 2023?

I thought of that after my initial post. I don’t think the language is clear on that. Of course,I would read it that whatever credit is in effect when signed is the credit you get…ie. $7,500! Lol!😁😁🫣

rfrancis073

Discussion Starter · #6 · 10 mo ago

qs933 said:
The article addresses the Toyota ramp-down in the Nissan section. If I'm reading it correctly, it seems like their understanding is that the delivery date would still drive the credit value (i.e. in a ramp-down period).

They also bring up another twist to this, in that the bZ4X technically isn't available for sale at this point anyway due to the recall. There are strict rules around selling cars under a safety recall. If a "binding purchase agreement" is technically selling a car, that could run afoul of those rules.

my car has been built, has a VIN and is in port in NY USA!! 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 😁 (based on cars that aren’t already made portion of the Nissan question)

qs933

· #7 · 10 mo ago

rfrancis073 said:
my car is made and has a VIN!😁 (based on cars that aren’t already made portion of the Nissan question)

Mine too, but, if I’m reading it correctly, it still means the ramp-down would be in effect based on the actual delivery date. The main benefit, though, would be it wouldn’t get cut off completely come Jan 1.

rfrancis073

Discussion Starter · #8 · 10 mo ago (Edited)

qs933 said:
Mine too, but, if I’m reading it correctly, it still means the ramp-down would be in effect based on the actual delivery date. The main benefit, though, would be it wouldn’t get cut off completely come Jan 1.

I’m more worried about it getting cut off immediately when the bill becomes law. Without waivers, I feel that’s the case. Ugh.

I’m off to read some of the bill text again.

EDIT:

(1) after December 31, 2021, and before the date of enactment of this Act, purchased, or entered into a written binding contract to purchase, a new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle (as defined in section 30D(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act), and

(2) placed such vehicle in service on or after the date of enactment of this Act, such taxpayer may elect (at such time, and in such form and manner, as the Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary’s delegate, may prescribe) to treat such vehicle as having been placed in service on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.

Seems to me this states that the BZ would be considered sold and placed into service the day before the act, which is in the $7,500 credit window if done by or before September 30th, 2022.

Edit 2: I suppose the law 'enactment date' could be given a waiver by the Secretary of Treasury which could push the day before the enactment past September 30th.

Damn, this bill has so many unknowns and ways to interpret it.

See less See more

Reactions: 2

qs933

· #9 · 10 mo ago

rfrancis073 said:
Damn, this bill has so many unknowns and ways to interpret it.

Not to mention the bZ4X still doesn’t show up in the IRS’s list of eligible vehicles under section 30D. The Solterra is there, but not the bZ4X.

I would be willing to do a “written binding contract to purchase” with a non-refundable (say, $100) fee, but with release clauses if it’s determined the bZ4X won’t qualify for the $7,500 credit, or if delivery slips way out, or if there’s a material increase in price.

Reactions: 2

rfrancis073

Discussion Starter · #10 · 10 mo ago

qs933 said:
Not to mention the bZ4X still doesn’t show up in the IRS’s list of eligible vehicles under section 30D. The Solterra is there, but not the bZ4X.

I would be willing to do a “written binding contract to purchase” with a non-refundable (say, $100) fee, but with release clauses if it’s determined the bZ4X won’t qualify for the $7,500 credit, or if delivery slips way out, or if there’s a material increase in price.

I would like the same. I would probably be OK with more than $100.

I don't think there would be a price increase for those already in port but......who knows.

As for the $7,500 credit, I'm not sure if anyone, possibly even the IRS, would know at the time the contract was actually fufilled.

Motch6

· #11 · 10 mo ago

qs933 said:
The article addresses the Toyota ramp-down in the Nissan section. If I'm reading it correctly, it seems like their understanding is that the delivery date would still drive the credit value (i.e. in a ramp-down period).

They also bring up another twist to this, in that the bZ4X technically isn't available for sale at this point anyway due to the recall. There are strict rules around selling cars under a safety recall. If a "binding purchase agreement" is technically selling a car, that could run afoul of those rules.

These are good points, and I was aware of the the fact they aren't able to sell once that Recall goes into affect.

Although, I had to go back and look at my Purchase Order agreement with my dealership! Mine was affectively signed on 6/9/22.... I wonder if that could be considered a SALE BEFORE the recall, or since my funding was only partially funded at the time, would it be not considered a done and done deal....

If my rep at Toyota corporate calls me back on Friday, I'll see if they can update my case and see if that means I could technically finalize the deal and get locked in!! (even though I won't see the car, obviously until its delivered to the dealership, technically that puts me in the same boat as those that had it taken from them!!).

FelineFreddie

· #12 · 10 mo ago

qs933 said:
The article addresses the Toyota ramp-down in the Nissan section. If I'm reading it correctly, it seems like their understanding is that the delivery date would still drive the credit value (i.e. in a ramp-down period).

They also bring up another twist to this, in that the bZ4X technically isn't available for sale at this point anyway due to the recall. There are strict rules around selling cars under a safety recall. If a "binding purchase agreement" is technically selling a car, that could run afoul of those rules.

Don’t confuse a sales contract with vehicle delivery. A product may be under recall, but the legal assumption (at least, I think) that, while it can’t be delivered while under recall, it can certainly be contracted for sale while under recall, with the assumption the vehicle will be delivered once the recall has been lifted.

IMO…The real issue, tax credit-wise, is if the vehicle is still under recall at the end of the grace period… but then, if that time-out date is 12/23, no one in their right mind probably wouldn’t want any vehicle under an 18-month recall…I know I wouldn’t. If the order was executed with a non-refundable deposit prior to the recall, then I can’t imagine the recall could possibly have any effect on the tax credit under the grandfathered section of the legislation, since the contract would still be binding, recall or no recall, unless specifically stated within the sales contract,

In other words, if you sign a sales contract for a Belchfire 6000 SUX today and make a non-refundable deposit at the same time to secure the order, and the vehicle goes under recall the next day, it doesn’t negate the sales contract. It just delays the date the vehicle can be delivered.

At least, that’s my best legal interpretation. Who knows how the law will actually end up being interpreted…

See less See more

qs933

· #13 · 10 mo ago

FelineFreddie said:
Don’t confuse a sales contract with vehicle delivery. A product may be under recall, but the legal assumption (at least, I think) that, while it can’t be delivered while under recall, it can certainly be contracted for sale while under recall, with the assumption the vehicle will be delivered once the recall has been lifted.

According to the NHTSA, both selling or delivering are prohibited. “The Safety Act prohibits a dealer from selling, introducing or delivering for introduction into interstate commerce, or delivering under sale or lease, motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment that contain a safety-related defect or that do not comply with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard about which notice has been given…”

Now, would a “written binding contract to purchase” not be considered an actual sale? It’s a commitment to complete a sale, but not the actual “sale” itself? It’s like a ”letter of intent,” but with a binding commitment of some sort to actually complete the transaction. No idea…I’m just grasping at straws here.

FelineFreddie

· #14 · 10 mo ago

I think you’ve hit on the key in your second paragraph. A “bill of sale” can also be a binding contract to purchase, but a binding contract to purchase isn’t a bill of sale, if that makes sense. So, is a contract, which can only be enforced when it’s suitable to deliver the product the same as a sales contract to deliver something immediately?

Part of the implied rules of a sales contract is that the product must be legal to sell, and is fit for the purpose it’s being sold. As long as the sales contract doesn’t compromise either of those constraints, theoretically is should pass muster.

But, in the end, you’re correct…it depends on how the term “selling” is interpreted… sort of like when Bill Clinton made the statement “It depends on what one’s definition of ‘is’ is.”

Like you, I’m only speculating. In the end, if a dealership refuses to agree to sign a sales contract in the first place due to the recall, everything else is irrelevant…

See less See more

John Puruntong

· #15 · 10 mo ago

I just found out the hard way that there is no such thing as a binding contract (bill of sale) with Toyota until the vehicle is delivered to the dealer, issued a certificate of origin and the owner takes possession.

rfrancis073

Discussion Starter · #16 · 10 mo ago

John Puruntong said:
I just found out the hard way that there is no such thing as a binding contract (bill of sale) with Toyota until the vehicle is delivered to the dealer, issued a certificate of origin and the owner takes possession.

From what I understand, a binding contract does not have to be a bill of sale. I can understand not being able to issue a bill of sale. I'm guessing they don't wont to do it and know that the cars will sell regardless.

FelineFreddie

· #17 · 10 mo ago (Edited)

^^^ That ^^^

A bill of sale can also be a binding contract, but a binding contract may not be a bill of sale.

For example:

Like buying a house, one usually entered into a binding contract demonstrating a commitment to purchase, paying some amount of deposit at the contract signing (which is commonly referred to as a binder). This contract may have exclusions, such as a release for the purchaser if suitable financing can’t be located, the home must pass an inspection, etc.

The actual bill of sale (in the case of a home) is the combination of the deed and the closing documentation.

In the case of a vehicle, no bill of sale can be completed without an actual VIN in any sate that I know of…but if you order a vehicle, your dealer will most likely have you place a deposit down on a vehicle (with exact vehicle options, color, etc.), and there is no VIN at that point.. A manufacturer may, once the order is entered into their scheduling system, issue an initial VON (vehicle order number) for tracking purposes thru manufacturing, which at a later point in time, 8nclude the VIN once it has been assigned.

See less See more

Reactions: 1

Motch6

· #18 · 10 mo ago

John Puruntong said:
I just found out the hard way that there is no such thing as a binding contract (bill of sale) with Toyota until the vehicle is delivered to the dealer, issued a certificate of origin and the owner takes possession.

I too just got off the phone with the bZ4X team... they WILL NOT DO A BINDING agreement. They said they discussed it this morning with management. Any way I tried to explain it to them, they told me I would have to consult my accountant about the Tax Credit... I laughed and said. I AM THE ACCOUNTANT... you don't understand what's going to happen come Friday!!! She would just repeat herself.... TOYOTA doesn't give a CRAP about the Tax Credit... they have no clue!!!

I personally have a SIGNED purchase order dated before the Recall began showing my Large Down payment. I'm going to fall back on that as my PROOF, if it comes down to it.

I'm beyond pissed off at this point.

Reactions: 2

FelineFreddie

· #19 · 10 mo ago

My question would be if the down payment is refundable or not if YOU cancel the order…

rfrancis073

Discussion Starter · #20 · 10 mo ago

If that's the case, I'll just let it ride until the law is signed and broken down. Maybe a waiver will happen....maybe it won't. If no waiver and neither Toyota or the dealer will bend on the price, time to move on. I'm about worn out over the issue.

Reactions: 1

1 - 20 of 163 Posts