- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
“POOLE, England, July 21 (Reuters) - A little-publicized clause in the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act has companies scrambling to recycle electric vehicle batteries in North America, putting the region at the forefront of a global race to undermine China’s dominance of the field.”
You must log in or register to comment.
Seems reasonable for the most part -
“The IRA includes a clause that automatically qualifies EV battery materials recycled in the U.S. as American-made for subsidies, regardless of their origin. That is important because it qualifies automakers using U.S.-recycled battery materials for EV production incentives.”
But my question is why even make the qualifier ‘US made’ if foreign made batteries qualify? Don’t lie, just say they’re battery recycling regardless of origin.
But my question is why even make the qualifier ‘US made’ if foreign made batteries qualify? Don’t lie, just say they’re battery recycling regardless of origin.
The for the tax credit rule is:
- New batteries manufactured in the USA
- New batteries manufactured in the USA or outside the USA, but recycled in the USA
The reason “Batteries manufactured outside of the USA” doesn’t count is because it does nothing to incentives battery manufacturing or recycling in the USA.
I think your complaint is really with the wording the author of the article chose. Here’s straight from the US Treasury department on the Inflation Reduction Act:
“To meet the critical mineral requirement and be eligible for a $3,750 credit, the applicable percentage of the value of the critical minerals contained in the battery must be extracted or processed in the United States or a country with which the United States has a free trade agreement, or be recycled in North America—as mandated by the Inflation Reduction Act.”
No ambiguity in that wording.