It's Time to Face Facts: The U.S. Government is Anti-EV

In partnership with

Before I get into today’s topics, you must watch this PSA-style ad that I saw on Bluesky the other day. I promise you it’s not going where you think it is. It’s worth the watch.

In This Issue

• The U.S. Government is Anti-EV

• Trump Take Jeep

The U.S. Government is Anti-EV

Leading up to the election of Donald Trump as president, candidate Trump would talk at length about how he was going to eliminate the EV mandate in the United States. Ignoring the fact that an EV mandate doesn’t exist, Trump’s supporters said that all Trump wanted to do was level the playing field and allow consumers to choose the vehicles they want. It’s all about choice.

Of course, if it were just about leveling the playing field, we wouldn’t subsidize farmers to produce corn that we can shove in gasoline that doesn’t actually help reduce climate change. Or we’d stop subsidizing oil and gas projects. Or we’d close the light truck loophole in the gas guzzler tax.

But it’s all about choice. Except it’s not.

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson said recently, and talked about in Bloomberg, that the U.S. House of Representatives is likely to kill the EV tax credit that has been wildly popular with consumers. Why? Well, we have to pay for more tax cuts for the people who are tearing apart our government. Plus, they also hate EVs.

The government has shut down all of its EV charging infrastructure, even stations that work, wasting potentially millions of dollars in charging infrastructure. A bill is also being floated that would require EV owners, in addition to state registration, pay $200 to the federal government when they renew their registrations each year.

It’s to pay for the roads that EV damages, except it’s hardly fair. While the rest of the world advances technology, with smart powertrains and innovative technology, we’re meadnering along with protectionist ideologies that somehow will make us all great and rich.

Many states already charge EV owners more money to renew their registrations to help make up the cost for the gasoline tax that they do not pay. Why does the federal government need to be involved at all? The party of small government and limited taxation strikes again.

The fairest system, of course, would be a GPS-based system that track miles of every car, and a fee per mile established depending on what type of vehicle it is. Yes, EVs are heavier, but their limited range means that not as many are driving as far as others with gas cars. Why punish someone who drives 5,000 miles a year with the same tax rate as someone who drives 25,000 miles a year? One is damaging the infrastructure more than the other.

I’m not a fan of GPS-based tracking of citizens, but it’s clear by the actions of Trump, Johnson, and many of the folks in the federal government (but not all, some Republicans like some of the alternative energy incentives because it helps their state), that the government is simply anti-EV.

Which makes the United States less competitive. But when we’re trying to isolate ourselves from the rest of the world, competitiveness doesn’t matter to these folks.

Start learning AI in 2025

Everyone talks about AI, but no one has the time to learn it. So, we found the easiest way to learn AI in as little time as possible: The Rundown AI.

It's a free AI newsletter that keeps you up-to-date on the latest AI news, and teaches you how to apply it in just 5 minutes a day.

Plus, complete the quiz after signing up and they’ll recommend the best AI tools, guides, and courses – tailored to your needs.

Sign up to start learning.

Trump Take Jeep

Earlier this week, Stellantis in Europe debuted the new Jeep Compass build atop Stellantis’s STLA Medium platform. Across the pond, it’s available as a 48-volt mild-hybrid, a plug-in hybrid, and a full battery-electric vehicle. It’s built in Italy, and looks like a great upgrade for the small Jeep.

The expectation was that the new Compass would eventually be produced in Canada — Brampton, Ontario to be specific — but that appears to be on hold. A Jeep representative told Motor1 that;

Of course, a “temporary pause” isn’t permanent, but it’s a clear indication that Trump’s tariff policies are directly impacting an automaker’s plans to sell a vehicle in North America. It doesn’t take an MBA to realize that this isn’t good, and it will hurt Jeep’s ability to profit in the United States and Canada, and help get the brand back on stable footing in North America.

When you factor in that both Ford and General Motors have predicted billions of dollars in less revenue because of our current trade and business environment, it continues to baffle the mind why people voted for — and businesses supported — such an obvious loser for the economy into the office of President of the United States.