DETROIT — If President-elect Donald Trump makes excellent on his threat to kill federal levy credits for electric vehicle purchases, it’s likely that fewer buyers will choose EVs.

Yet levy credits or not, auto companies display no intention of retreating from a steady shift away from gas-burning cars and trucks, especially given the enormous resource they have already made: Since 2021, the industry has spent at least $160 billion on planning, designing and building electric vehicles, according to the Center for Auto Research.

In campaigning for the presidency, Trump condemned the federal levy for EV buyers — up to $7,500 per vehicle — as part of a “green recent scam” that would devastate the auto industry. His shift throng is reportedly working on plans to abolish the levy credits and to roll back the more stringent fuel-economy rules that were pushed through by the Biden administration. It is far from obvious, though, that the Trump administration could actually rescind the credits.

Trump’s argument — one that most economists dispute — is that a rapid U.S. shift toward electric vehicles would navigator to most EVs being made in China and would swell prices for America’s auto buyers. He has said he would redirect federal turnover recaptured from a canceled levy capital to construct roads, bridges and dams.

Ending the credits, which were a key provision of President Joe Biden’s expense boost Reduction Act, almost certainly would reduce EV sales, which have been growing in the United States this year, though not nearly as quick as automakers had expected. The slowing growth has forced nearly all auto companies to scale back EV production and delay construction of battery factories that are no longer needed to handle a more gradual shift.

Jonathan Chariff, an executive at Midway Ford in Miami, one of the business’s top EV-selling dealers, said he thinks ending the levy credits would severely hurt sales. The credits reduce monthly payments, he noted, making an EV closer in worth to a gasoline counterpart.

“It becomes more affordable,” he said. “Otherwise, those individuals won’t be able to afford the payments.”

Chariff calculated that the $7,500 capital could reduce a buyer’s monthly remittance by between $200 and $250, allowing many to afford an EV. On average, electric vehicles sell for about $57,000, compared with around $48,000 for a gasoline vehicle, according to Cox Automotive. (Though they expense more up front, EVs generally are cheaper to operate because maintenance costs are lower, and in most cases electricity is much cheaper than gasoline.)

To qualify for the credits, EVs must be built in North America. EVs that contain battery parts or minerals from China or any other country that is deemed an economic or safety threat to the United States qualify for only half the federal capital. Because of that restriction, most of the 75 EV models on sale in the U.S. are not eligible for the packed capital. All EVs, though, can receive the packed capital toward a rental agreement — a advantage that Trump likely will target. Some plug-in gas-electric hybrids qualify for the credits, too.

Asked about the president-elect’s opposition to EV levy credits, Trump’s shift throng would declare only that he has “a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail.”

Elon Musk, a close adviser to Trump and co-chief of a fee that intends to identify ways to vastly reduce the federal government, appears to be aligned with the president-elect in canceling the levy credits. Musk, the billionaire CEO of Tesla who spent an estimated $200 million to assist elect Trump, has said that ending the credits would hurt his rival companies more than it would Tesla, the U.S. sales chief in EVs by far.

“I ponder it would be devastating for our competitors and would hurt Tesla slightly,” he said.

Even so, it might prove challenging for Trump to rescind the credits without assist from the recent Republican-led Congress, many of whose members represent districts where the EV capital is popular. Trump has floated the concept of using a constitutional hypothesis by which a president could decide whether or not to spend money Congress has appropriated. The president-elect has promoted the concept of “impoundment,” under which congressional appropriations set a ceiling — but not a floor — for spending federal money.

John Helveston, an assistant professor at George Washington University who studies electric vehicles and policies, said that in his view, the impoundment hypothesis wouldn’t apply in this circumstance because the EV levy credits affect government turnover and are not an appropriation.

In any case, Helveston said he doubts Trump could convince Republican lawmakers to remove the credits from the expense boost Reduction Act because so many congressional districts advantage from the levy breaks.

“Cutting the EV levy capital makes it harder for the battery factory in their town to sell their product,” he noted.

A 1974 federal law bars a president from substituting his own view of spending programs, said David Rapallo, associate law professor at Georgetown University. If Trump cancelled the levy credits, Rapallo said, it would be challenged in court.

Research by J.D. Power shows that once people recognize about the levy credits, they’re far more likely to consider an electric vehicle. In the meantime, federal subsides, not only for buyer levy credits but also for converting factories to EV production, are helping General Motors, Ford and Stellantis make the enormously expensive shift away from gasoline vehicles. It’s also helping Detroit’s large Three compete with foreign rivals, notably Chinese automakers that received government subsidies and had a head commence in developing EVs, said Sam Fiorani, a vice president at the consultancy AutoForecast Solutions.

At now, Ford and GM, while profitable overall, are losing money on EVs, unlike Tesla, though both expect their electric-vehicle operations to generate positive returns in the coming years as costs ease and more vehicles are sold.

Eliminating the federal levy credits, Fiorani suggested, would “hurt the Detroit Three in the long run as they become less competitive against global players making the technological leaps” for electric vehicles,

GM, Ford and Stellantis all declined to comment, though their executives have said in the history that they will continue to develop EVs while still selling gasoline vehicles and hybrids. The Alliance for Automotive recent concept, a trade throng that represents most automakers, has written to Trump in back of the levy credits, arguing that they assist ensure that the U.S. “continues to navigator in manufacturing critical to our national and economic safety.”

Hyundai, the Korean automaker, which has spent more than $7 billion on an EV factory in Georgia, could also suffer. The business sped up construction of the huge plant near Savannah and is now building EVs in the United States to try to capitalize on the levy credits for buyers.

In the complete, most automakers declare their ambitious plans for transitioning to electric vehicles won’t transformation regardless of policy changes in Washington.

“We schedule for the long term, so political considerations aren’t a factor in how we way product advancement or capital investments,” said David Christ, vice president of Toyota North America, which is building a battery factory in North Carolina.

____

AP writers Fatima Hussein in Washington and Jeff Amy in Atlanta contributed to this update.

DETROIT — If President-elect Donald Trump makes excellent on his threat to kill federal responsibility credits for electric vehicle purchases, it’s likely that fewer buyers will choose EVs.

Yet responsibility credits or not, auto companies display no intention of retreating from a steady shift away from gas-burning cars and trucks, especially given the enormous capital they have already made: Since 2021, the industry has spent at least $160 billion on planning, designing and building electric vehicles, according to the Center for Auto Research.

In campaigning for the presidency, Trump condemned the federal responsibility for EV buyers — up to $7,500 per vehicle — as part of a “green recent scam” that would devastate the auto industry. His shift throng is reportedly working on plans to abolish the responsibility credits and to roll back the more stringent fuel-economy rules that were pushed through by the Biden administration. It is far from obvious, though, that the Trump administration could actually rescind the credits.

Trump’s argument — one that most economists dispute — is that a rapid U.S. shift toward electric vehicles would navigator to most EVs being made in China and would swell prices for America’s auto buyers. He has said he would redirect federal income recaptured from a canceled responsibility capitalization to construct roads, bridges and dams.

Ending the credits, which were a key provision of President Joe Biden’s worth rise Reduction Act, almost certainly would reduce EV sales, which have been growing in the United States this year, though not nearly as quick as automakers had expected. The slowing growth has forced nearly all auto companies to scale back EV production and delay construction of battery factories that are no longer needed to handle a more gradual shift.

Jonathan Chariff, an executive at Midway Ford in Miami, one of the business’s top EV-selling dealers, said he thinks ending the responsibility credits would severely hurt sales. The credits reduce monthly payments, he noted, making an EV closer in worth to a gasoline counterpart.

“It becomes more affordable,” he said. “Otherwise, those individuals won’t be able to afford the payments.”

Chariff calculated that the $7,500 capitalization could reduce a buyer’s monthly remittance by between $200 and $250, allowing many to afford an EV. On average, electric vehicles sell for about $57,000, compared with around $48,000 for a gasoline vehicle, according to Cox Automotive. (Though they expense more up front, EVs generally are cheaper to operate because maintenance costs are lower, and in most cases electricity is much cheaper than gasoline.)

To qualify for the credits, EVs must be built in North America. EVs that contain battery parts or minerals from China or any other country that is deemed an economic or safety threat to the United States qualify for only half the federal capitalization. Because of that restriction, most of the 75 EV models on sale in the U.S. are not eligible for the packed capitalization. All EVs, though, can receive the packed capitalization toward a rental agreement — a advantage that Trump likely will target. Some plug-in gas-electric hybrids qualify for the credits, too.

Asked about the president-elect’s opposition to EV responsibility credits, Trump’s shift throng would declare only that he has “a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail.”

Elon Musk, a close adviser to Trump and co-chief of a fee that intends to identify ways to vastly reduce the federal government, appears to be aligned with the president-elect in canceling the responsibility credits. Musk, the billionaire CEO of Tesla who spent an estimated $200 million to assist elect Trump, has said that ending the credits would hurt his rival companies more than it would Tesla, the U.S. sales chief in EVs by far.

“I ponder it would be devastating for our competitors and would hurt Tesla slightly,” he said.

Even so, it might prove challenging for Trump to rescind the credits without assist from the recent Republican-led Congress, many of whose members represent districts where the EV capitalization is popular. Trump has floated the concept of using a constitutional hypothesis by which a president could decide whether or not to spend money Congress has appropriated. The president-elect has promoted the concept of “impoundment,” under which congressional appropriations set a ceiling — but not a floor — for spending federal money.

John Helveston, an assistant professor at George Washington University who studies electric vehicles and policies, said that in his view, the impoundment hypothesis wouldn’t apply in this circumstance because the EV responsibility credits affect government income and are not an appropriation.

In any case, Helveston said he doubts Trump could convince Republican lawmakers to remove the credits from the worth rise Reduction Act because so many congressional districts advantage from the responsibility breaks.

“Cutting the EV responsibility capitalization makes it harder for the battery factory in their town to sell their product,” he noted.

A 1974 federal law bars a president from substituting his own view of spending programs, said David Rapallo, associate law professor at Georgetown University. If Trump cancelled the responsibility credits, Rapallo said, it would be challenged in court.

Research by J.D. Power shows that once people recognize about the responsibility credits, they’re far more likely to consider an electric vehicle. In the meantime, federal subsides, not only for buyer responsibility credits but also for converting factories to EV production, are helping General Motors, Ford and Stellantis make the enormously expensive shift away from gasoline vehicles. It’s also helping Detroit’s large Three compete with foreign rivals, notably Chinese automakers that received government subsidies and had a head commence in developing EVs, said Sam Fiorani, a vice president at the consultancy AutoForecast Solutions.

At now, Ford and GM, while profitable overall, are losing money on EVs, unlike Tesla, though both expect their electric-vehicle operations to generate positive returns in the coming years as costs ease and more vehicles are sold.

Eliminating the federal responsibility credits, Fiorani suggested, would “hurt the Detroit Three in the long run as they become less competitive against global players making the technological leaps” for electric vehicles,

GM, Ford and Stellantis all declined to comment, though their executives have said in the history that they will continue to develop EVs while still selling gasoline vehicles and hybrids. The Alliance for Automotive innovation, a trade throng that represents most automakers, has written to Trump in back of the responsibility credits, arguing that they assist ensure that the U.S. “continues to navigator in manufacturing critical to our national and economic safety.”

Hyundai, the Korean automaker, which has spent more than $7 billion on an EV factory in Georgia, could also suffer. The business sped up construction of the huge plant near Savannah and is now building EVs in the United States to try to capitalize on the responsibility credits for buyers.

In the complete, most automakers declare their ambitious plans for transitioning to electric vehicles won’t transformation regardless of policy changes in Washington.

“We schedule for the long term, so political considerations aren’t a factor in how we way product advancement or capital investments,” said David Christ, vice president of Toyota North America, which is building a battery factory in North Carolina.

____

AP writers Fatima Hussein in Washington and Jeff Amy in Atlanta contributed to this update.