Used 2012 ES on Ebay for $14,000, no reserve

Mitsubishi i-MiEV Forum

Help Support Mitsubishi i-MiEV Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

archie_b

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
126
A silver ES with just over 5,000 miles is on Ebay with no reserve. Current bid is $14,000, car is in IL, clear title, auction ends Sunday morning.
 
I'd assume any eBay posting is for a used i-MiEV with the tax credit already used/claimed. Which is fine - this is a great opportunity for buyers that either won't have enough taxable income to take advantage of the tax credit this year or can't wait a year to get the refund. In buying any used EV, I personally would want an independent report on battery health, but I've no idea how practical that is, not having looked into it myself.
 
At $15,000 these cars are a good deal. Funny that the residual cost on my leased car, in 2 years, is approximately $24,000. No one in their right mind is going to pay that. Even assuming a perfectly maintained, clean car, at 24,000 miles and with at least some(expected) battery degradation, I think the selling price on the market is probably going to be less than $15,000. Getting the car for that amont today, if you can confirm 5 miles on the odometer is accurate and is actually a brand new car with all warranty, $15,000 is a very nice price.

Lou
 
The listing for the red, new 2012 SE is a reserve auction and at $15,100 the reserve has not been met. The seller could have a reserve set at $25,000 or more.

The silver ES does NOT have a reserve and the current bid of $14,000 means that the high bidder will get the car at the end of the auction. This car also has the balance of the factory warranty remaining. Even if it was sold in early 2012 the car should have 2 years and 30,000+ miles still under warranty.
 
The silver ES sold for $16,600. The red SE was a no sale at $15,600, reserve not met.

Someone got a good deal.
 
Just a comment on used EV's on the market: A local, Phila area Nissan dealer is advertising a 2011 Leaf with 61 miles(yes, 61) for $20,500. Seems to be the highest level Leaf of the 2011 models, from the description on line. If the Leaf is being marketed at $20,000 I would figure that the I would sell for much less(even given that it would be a 2012 I model).
 
A dealership in Dallas did the same thing: They purchased the vehicles themselves, took the $7500 credit, then resold the "used" (yet undriven) vehicles with no reduction in price. They weren't selling them as "new" but obviously this is NOT what the tax credit was to be used for. :evil:
 
aarond12 said:
. . . . but obviously this is NOT what the tax credit was to be used for. :evil:
Well, sorta - Like many other things our government does, the tax credit was designed to benefit only those who are relatively wealthy. You need almost $100K of taxable income to get the full $7500. For more 'average' buyers, the credit is next to useless, or at best, they get a few hundred dollars from it. If you earn say $50K per year and are a family of 4, you won't come close to getting the full credit . . . . if you qualify for many of the exemptions and deductions that an average family does, you may well get none of it

So . . . . the dealer (or his friends) scooping up the credits may well be exactly what our lawmakers had in mind :x

Don
 
"the tax credit was designed to benefit only those who are relatively wealthy. You need almost $100K of taxable income to get the full $7500. For more 'average' buyers, the credit is next to useless, or at best, they get a few hundred dollars from it. If you earn say $50K per year and are a family of 4, you won't come close to getting the full credit."

Hmmmm. I'm about to buy one and really was counting on the $7500 credit being money in my pocket off the total cost.
I'm not sure (I may be misunderstanding) you're correct about "next to useless":

My understanding is that a tax CREDIT is like cash.
If you, say, have only $1000 in tax liability after all your deductions etc, you'd get a refund of $6500.
If you were very low income and had no tax liability you'd get a refund of $7500 (or apply it against next year's taxes.

I'm not a tax-expert by a long shot, but that WAS my understanding.

(FWIW I wildly guesstimate I'd owe about $6000 in taxes 2013 without the $7500 credit.)


Anyone care to educate me?

Alex
 
acensor said:
I'm not sure (I may be misunderstanding) you're correct about "next to useless":

My understanding is that a tax CREDIT is like cash.
Nope - Wish it was. It's a credit against whatever your total tax liability is - If you owe no taxes, you get no credit. If you owe $1,000 after all other credits and deductions, you get a $1,000 credit and not the full $7500
If you, say, have only $1000 in tax liability after all your deductions etc, you'd get a refund of $6500.
If you were very low income and had no tax liability you'd get a refund of $7500 (or apply it against next year's taxes.
Nope

(FWIW I wildly guesstimate I'd owe about $6000 in taxes 2013 without the $7500 credit.)

Anyone care to educate me?
Sounds like you'll do OK - If you owe $6000 in taxes AFTER all other deductions and credits are added up, then you'll get $6000 of the $7500 and owe no taxes at all. Nothing carries forward to the next year

"The federal incentive is usually referred to as a flat $7500 credit, but it's only worth $7500 to someone whose tax bill at the end of the year is $7500 or more. If the buyer only owes say $5,000 in income tax for a particular year, that's all the tax credit will be - Uncle Sam's not writing a refund check for the other $2500, and an unused portion of the credit can't be applied to the following year's tax return" - From the Edmonds website

Study up on IRS Form 8834 if you have any questions

Don
 
Which is why I leased the i instead of buying one because I will not be able to utilize the full credit. By leasing, the leassor gets the credit, and lowers my lease amount accordingly to reflect that credit.
 
Don said:
Well, sorta - Like many other things our government does, the tax credit was designed to benefit only those who are relatively wealthy. You need almost $100K of taxable income to get the full $7500.
I agreed with this at first but then I gave it some more thought. This new technology is expensive and we need to get as many EV's out there as we can so the price will eventually come down. One reason that they haven't sold well is because it is still cheaper to buy and run a fuel efficient car than an EV. So we need the 'wealthy' people referenced above to spend the money to get the ball rolling. The tax credit is just what we need to accomplish this. Those of us who won't buy until the prices come down are counting on it.

Mike
 
blownb310 said:
So we need the 'wealthy' people referenced above to spend the money to get the ball rolling. The tax credit is just what we need to accomplish this. Those of us who won't buy until the prices come down are counting on it.
. . . . and if it was just a flat, across the board rebate for anyone and everyone who wanted to buy one, it wouldn't accomplish that?

Why should it be designed to help only those wealthier buyers and not the rest of us?

Don
 
You might be right, but my logic is that the majority of the rest if us still wouldn't buy it even with a $7500 discount. When the day comes that an EV becomes a better deal than a gas car, they will sell like hotcakes.

Mike
 
I'll defer to your logic . . . . which I don't understand at all, BTW

I, for one, think an EV is a better deal right now than anything which burns gasoline because it's an emission-free vehicle which doesn't depend on foreign oil to operate and I think the country needs all of those it can get . . . . and we sure shouldn't be waiting for them to eventually be cheaper than other cars, if that ever happens

If a richer buyer needs $7500 off to get him interested in buying an EV, but you seem to think a poorer person doesn't, then I guess this scenario would discourage all but the richest buyers from even considering the car - That's bound to put a huge crimp in sales if only the rich can afford your car!! Here, the richer folks (who don't really care what gas costs) are all driving luxury cars which get terrible gas mileage, while the rest of us who cringe at the thought of $4 gas, would LOVE to be able to afford a 'no gas' around town car, but we don't qualify for the rebate

My 'logic' would dictate that if the government can afford to give away $7500 to a rich person to get them to buy new technology, they should be able to do the same for anyone who is willing to invest in the same thing. As I said earlier, it seems like a law written by the rich, for the benefit of only the rich . . . . but what do I know?? :roll:

I get a huge kick out of the local commercials running on TV by our Mercedes dealership advertising $579 per month leases on new cars - The last line in their spiel is "Now that's affordable luxury". The rich must look at things differently from the rest of us :lol:

Don
 
Don said:
blownb310 said:
So we need the 'wealthy' people referenced above to spend the money to get the ball rolling. The tax credit is just what we need to accomplish this. Those of us who won't buy until the prices come down are counting on it.
. . . . and if it was just a flat, across the board rebate for anyone and everyone who wanted to buy one, it wouldn't accomplish that?

Why should it be designed to help only those wealthier buyers and not the rest of us?

Don

The Obama administration has proposed replacing the "up to $7500" tax credit incentive with a direct at point of sale $10,000 the taxpayer throws in. Of course it would have a politer name than that. The folks who mentioned it also mentioned that it has very little chance of becoming a reality in the current congressional climate. It would apply to all vehicles, mostly, but not just, electrics, that have low carbon footprints and low use of oil. But it would, as Don would want, remove the objection to the current credit which he rightly points out is of the least help to the buyers most likely to need help getting into an EV.
 
blownb310 said:
You might be right, but my logic is that the majority of the rest if us still wouldn't buy it even with a $7500 discount. When the day comes that an EV becomes a better deal than a gas car, they will sell like hotcakes.

Mike

If there were not hidden government/taxpayer subsidies (that you and I pay) on gasoline at the gas pump it would be clear that right now an EV is for most people a better deal.

Various economists types have tried to calculate those hidden costs, and depending on who you believe has done it right (it's a bit of a tricky business to calculate) our actual cost at the gas pump is somewhere between IIRR $10 and $20 per gallon right now.
Even at the low end of that, if we were paying $10 out-of-pocket at the pump EV orders would be backlogged two years.
The kind of costs they are adding in to come up with those numbers include relatively easy to calculate tax deductions and exemptions that oil companies get, and harder to calculate but still real costs such as prorated share of the cost of the US Navy protecting the oil lanes (can you imagine the cost to Exon passed on to us if it had to operate a private navy to deter attacks on its tankers?). They did NOT include what you and I paid in taxes to support three wars in the middle east and maintain a military presence there, even though it is somewhat questionable if we'd be involved there at all if we didn't need to protect our ability to get oil from that region.
If there was some legit way to add some prorated share of those wars costs in the cost of gas would suddenly make EVs not just a better deal, but irresistable.
My two cents.

Alex
 
Back
Top