Dealer: the Taycan was good for us; it's now a disaster

Thing is with the Taycan being a Porsche many if not most will have thousands of pounds worth of extras. Some which are to add stuff that comes as standard on cars much cheaper. So the realistic price of a new 4S is imho touching 100k.

Then used dealers in this sector also want more than £5k of margin. 10 or even 15k of margin is typical to cover the risk of the car sticking and needing to be discounted to move. Yes 40 to 45k of used buy back value would be more realistic but that’s not what the finance deals behind these assumed. Also little under a year ago you’d have to pay effective overs on a 6 to 12 month old used example. So there are used buyers that stand to take quite a hit when trying to move on two year old examples.
The market dynamics are completely distorted and unrealistic for new vs used.

Predicted residuals were IMHO based on much lower sales volumes of typical exec cars.

Lol you can't even understand unintended consequences? Diesel was the way forward back then but not today, comprendez.

TX.

I am not saying that low bik isn’t a very significant driving force, but I know quite a lot of EV drivers who have bought (or rented) the cars personally. Some new, some used. So it definitely isn’t “everyone” getting tax relief on their EV. Some personal friends, quite a lot of people I have encountered in various Ev forums / Facebook groups

I thought Tesla was the ones to get bashed for badly built cars on here. Are Taycans that bad?

For the 100% write down that's correct, but when you dispose of the vehicle, whether bought new or used, a balancing calculation is made that reduces the actual CT offset to be whatever value the vehicle actually depreciated by.

So buy a new £100k car, you can I think put it's full value down against CT. Sell it 3 years later for £60k, and a balancing adjustment is made and, unless you buy another new car, the CT on the £60k would become due. So it's essentially an exercise in kicking the can along the street - it's a tax delay, not saving.

If you buy the same car at 3 years old, instead of 100% you get, I think, 25% year one then 18% each year until you dispose of it, and again you then make a balancing calculation so that the CT offset represents the actual depreciation during the period of ownership.

BIK is the real tax saving and that applies however the car is bought/leased.

Nice one, thanks for the explanation. We bought a little i3S on the scheme and it’s been a great little thing-the tax break only sweetens the deal.

If it stays reliable, I can’t see us ever “selling” it. If the BIK rules change we’ll simply sell it to ourselves and run it privately as the other on going costs are so low.

We can luckily run a commercial pick up truck alongside it in our game so that’s two family vehicles run through the company for buttons.

Just a real shame we can’t get the Ineos Grenadier through the books as a commercial otherwise I’d have one of those too.

Exactly, and Salary Sacrifice only works for the well paid. Wife used to work part time and her pension contribution was normally SS, in weeks she didn’t work enough hours it took her under the cutoff and was a standard deduction which meant she paid more NI and was worse off.

The counter argument would be that the poorest in society aren't subsiding anything, it's the high earners who are subsidising them with tax contributions that far outweigh what they take out of the system over the same period?

As an example 4 x £30k earners will pay a combined £20k in tax over a year. 1 x £120k earner will pay £45k in tax over the same period.

If you work hard why would you want the reward to be that other people subsidise your car? That is surely a sign that you aren’t actually very successful at all if your neighbours have to chip in for your Taycan

Surely the reward of hard work is being able to buy the car without the help of others?

The people I know with Taycan S are worth many millions and could easily afford to buy the car but get it though the company instead, it sits alongside their range rovers, GT3s, 911 turbos and race cars, do you genuinely believe that tax payers should be subsidising those purchases?

If we didn’t have a complete lack of decent public services and had loads of money left over then sure, but that isn’t the case.

You seem to misundertand the tax benefits on EVs, as the government/ poor people aren't subsidising company cars.

The company buys/leases/PCPs the car at full price and then like a company ICE car purchase, can offset the depreciation against the company's profits and hence corporation tax. Nothing new here and no poor people are involved.

The driver of a company car then pays income tax on the benefit in kind. Because BiK tax on company cars had become so high in this country, there were virtually no company cars anymore, so I believe very little car BIK tax was being collected.

Then the government introduced the zero and now 2% BiK rate for EVs. Given the subsequent massive increase in company cars, the government I would imagine is getting at least as much if not far more BiK tax than previously. So again, no poor people subsidising £160k Taycans.

This enormous number of ex-company EVs are now starting to leave company fleets and appear on the second hand market. Given the sheer volume of them, they depreciate and become affordable to many others who don't have access to company car. The £160k Taycan will then be sold on for far less and the company will pay for the depreciation, in one form or another, not any poor people.

So, the poorest in society are not subsidising £160k Taycans or any other EV as companies are paying full price for them out of their profits, their employees are paying more tax and as has been well reported on here, EVs are becoming more and more affordable.