A new bill introduced in the House of Representatives yesterday would give consumers cash vouchers to purchase a new car if they turn in an old car that is at least eight-years old. The bill is designed to get older, less efficient cars off the road while at the same time spurring sales of new cars.
Of course, there are all sorts of conditions placed on the swap. The new car must be a 2009 model or newer and get better mileage than the car being turned in. It also has to cost less than $35,000, and if it's built in North America you get more than for buying an import.
In one of the bills more optimistic passages, it also allows for a $7,500 voucher for buying a plug-in hybrid that gets over 100mpg after the 2011 model year.
Most of these bills have been defeated in the past, in part thanks to lobbying from groups like SEMA that contend they unnecessarily target collectible cars. Doesn't seem like that's the case here, but rest assured there will be plenty of opposition when it goes to a vote.
firstwagon says:
04:08 PM, 03/18/09
Sure I would. My 91 Subaru Legacy is starting to show it's age and I'd really like to buy a new car this spring. I would never get $3500 to $5000 on a trade in so this sounds like a great idea to me.
jkp1187 says:
04:15 PM, 03/18/09
Yes, but not for any vehicle currently manufactured by the Detroit Dinosaurs.
greenpony says:
05:13 PM, 03/18/09
It depends on the incentive. Current dealer incentives haven't enticed me out, so why would a government handout? It almost never makes financial sense to buy a new car, unless maintaining your old car costs more than a car payment + maintaining your new car. How many people are on the cusp of decision anyway: "Gosh, if only I could dig up an extra (eg. $2,000), I'd trade in this old clunker and buy me a brand new American car!"
This bill isn't on Thomas yet, but it's HR 1550 for those who care.
jederino says:
05:37 PM, 03/18/09
I agree with Greenpony. Hasn't the Government learned anything? Why would they encourage more personal leveraging to purchase new cars?!
firstwagon says:
06:23 PM, 03/18/09
I would rather see them hand out money to car buyers to buy new cars rather hand out billions to car makers. Both ways will help the car industry but bail outs only really help the big corporations.
Helping people buy cars helps the companies, inproves safety, emmisions and makes people happy.
Win Win.
brn says:
06:43 PM, 03/18/09
I really don't need my tax dollars going toward giving you a ridiculous amount of money for your old car.
As the economy recovers, car sales will too.
If you want to encourage the purchase of American vehicles, tax the imports.
There is no stinking money tree!
People are already encouraged to replace their vehicles. Older vehicles cost more to run and maintain. If they're lasting longer, let's not penalize that.
Building a new car isn't necessarily more 'green' than keeping your older one. If you're concerned, bring back emissions testing.
altimadude00 says:
10:04 PM, 03/18/09
Dang! And you were saying the new Challenger has front overhang?!
festiboi1 says:
11:20 PM, 03/18/09
Sounds good, but I don't think it'll work in my case. It'd be tough to beat my Subaru Justy's 43mpg EPA rating and there aren't any American cars that can. *sigh!*
heffling says:
06:31 AM, 03/19/09
So, they're introducing a bill as follows:
1) Won't take effect for two years, despite the fact that we're in the middle of an economic downturn now.
2) Won't immediately aid the ailing auto manufacturers, despite the fact that they need help now.
3) Only applies toward purchasing of a car that currently does not existing in any production form.
4) Only applies to cars that do not meet the current design goals for plug-in hybrid technology. For example, the Volt will not get 100+ mpg.
5) Spends money the government does not have and cannot recoupe from this progam.
Sounds like typical government policy to me.
sabastian says:
08:49 AM, 03/19/09
I plan on trading my '94 Saab 900 this spring for a 2009 Mini Cooper, so it seems like this bill was made for me.
redliner says:
11:40 AM, 03/19/09
I would only trade it in for cash if i was already going to get rid of it. The cash would not accelerate that decision.
fezo says:
12:20 PM, 03/19/09
I'm guessing enough people would figure out all the loopholes to sink this even if it did pass.
Say you are in my shoes where the most likely candidate would be our 200 Accord. I'd be better off selling it privately, buy a bomb and trade that in on a new car. I dunno.
greenpony says:
05:48 PM, 03/19/09
brn "bring back emissions testing."
I don't know where you live, but emission testing has been alive and kicking here (near Chicago) since I started driving. I've noticed that the testing isn't done further away from the city, where population densities are lower, and I know why. The cost of building, staffing, and maintaining emission test centers in remote areas, combined with the inconvenience to drivers in those areas (who may need to drive 20+ miles just to get to a test center), is enough to stifle its expansion. One of the few "smart" choices the Illinois government has made.