So the Cybertruck fits in a garage (at under 19ft long)... But was the size reduction worth it for you?

[mhaze]

interested in whether I understand this (as far as a non-tax professional might), it doesn’t seem like that’s quite right

• Must be small business/self-employed
• Must be used>50% of time for documented business purposes to qualify for any deduction, and upwards of that floor up to 100% of the time for the full deduction
• vehicle must be used for business purposes at least 50% of the time over its “class life” (typically 5 years) - if usage falls below 50% in future years, some of the deduction might need to be recaptured.
• in the “heavy” category (>6K lbs), there a Section 179 tax deduction limit of the lower of $28,900 or the allowable bonus depreciation percentage of 80%.
• Luxury vehicles are capped at $20,200 of depreciation in the first year
• above $ caps don’tapply if it’s a vehicle modified for non-personal usage, including one of three categories of non-passenger vehicles:
  • Designed to seat more than nine persons behind the driver's seat;
  • Equipped with a cargo area (either open or enclosed by a cap) of at least 6 feet in interior length that is not readily accessible directly from the passenger compartment; or
  • Vehicles with an integral enclosure fully enclosing the driver compartment and load-carrying device, no seating behind the driver, and no portion of the body extending more than 30 inches beyond the windshield.

the last category above, with the windshield qual, is essentially intended to capture cargo vans

But under the second bullet above, both the CT and any F150 with 6’+ bed seems they should equally qualify under - subject to all the other quals previous

An F150 SCREW wouldn’t, though

It’s true I assumed >50% biz use.

but “any f150 with 6’ plus bed”

Any idea How hard that is to find / buy and how clumsy it is to park? The most common config is a crew cab with 8’ bed….

Sponsored

 

[cvalue13]

It’s true I assumed >50% biz use.

but “any f150 with 6’ plus bed”

Any idea How hard that is to find / buy and how clumsy it is to park? The most common config is a crew cab with 8’ bed….

In the eg XLTs and below i think any supercrew is configurable with a 6.5' bed - higher trim levels, not so much?

assume that's why folks bump to 250s where higher trims and 6.75' beds can be had

and yes, all of those are long trucks.

the CT provides maybe the shortest 179 qualifying truck, and with 4WS etc more than addresses maneuverability/parking constraints on the longer alternatives

 

[anionic1]

There’s no reason to have a longer front end as there is no ICE there. Wake up and see the advantages of less front end and, oh BTW, it coincidentally fits in the standard garage. Win, win!

A frunk is a huge advantage of an EV. I access my truck bed almost daily and its a ford ranger and its already hard to get into and deal with and it doesn't have large sail pillars blocking the way or a massive tailgate. And I am a fairly limber 40 ish year old. Truck beds are very inconvenient for things like groceries or anything you dont want rolling around and usually things move to the mid gate area due to breaking which will make it even harder in the CT. I guarantee that will be one of the biggest complaints about the CT is that stuff in the vault is hard to get to. So the frunk is going to be key. They cut off the nose to fit it in a garage and it didnt just happen to fit. They clearly intentionally did that by at least 6". And with the recent frunk images I bet the frunk will barely be 12" deep, which is enough for groceries and the small Home Depot runs but it will be tight for sure. Even at 18" deep it would almost be half the F150, which has a much more accessible bed. And dont go, well what about the vault in the vault. first of all the latch is in the middle which is a stretch and you will almost have to get in the bed to get anything smaller stuff out of it. Thats exactly why a frunk is extremely useful especially for the typical truck user, which is carrying around a lot of stuff. ie. they bought a truck.

 

[SparkChaser]

It maybe that the gate tilts downward ( to ack as the ramp) and allows for better access to the middle of the bed. I too am very disappointed in the size of the frunk. I looked at the lightning with envy.

 

[mhaze]

In the eg XLTs and below i think any supercrew is configurable with a 6.5' bed - higher trim levels, not so much?

assume that's why folks bump to 250s where higher trims and 6.75' beds can be had

and yes, all of those are long trucks.

the CT provides maybe the shortest 179 qualifying truck, and with 4WS etc more than addresses maneuverability/parking constraints on the longer alternatives

I believe you are correct that such a 6'+ bed F150 truck could be factory configured and ordered. But on the road, they just do not exist. All the guys get the F150 crew cab (5.5' bed) or go to the F250 (8' bed).

Regarding deductions, I think it was reduced to 80% of value for 2023 but clearly the 26,200 section 179 limit does not apply. Effectively there is something like an 80% cap anyway say if you use the vehicle 80% business 20% personal. Makes one wonder whether compliance with the second bullet point below "not readily accessible from the passenger compartment" was a driving factor in the lack of pass-thru or midgate. Sure reads that way. "6 feet in interior length that is an open area or is designed for use as an open area but is enclosed by a cap and is not readily accessible directly from the passenger compartment"

"Trucks and vans with a GVW rating above 6,000 lbs. but not more than 14,000 lbs. generally have the same rules: no bonus depreciation limitation, but a $26,200 section 179 deduction limit. These vehicles, however, are not subject to the section 179 limit if any of the following exceptions apply:

• The vehicle is designed to have a seating capacity of more than nine persons behind the driver's seat;
• The vehicle is equipped with a cargo area at least 6 feet in interior length that is an open area or is designed for use as an open area but is enclosed by a cap and is not readily accessible directly from the passenger compartment; or
• The vehicle has an integral enclosure, fully enclosing the driver compartment and load-carrying device, does not have seating behind the driver's seat, and has no body section protruding more than 30 inches ahead of the leading edge of the windshield."

 

[cvalue13]

but clearly the 26,200 section 179 limit does not apply.
…

• The vehicle is equipped with a cargo area at least 6 feet in interior length that is an open area or is designed for use as an open area but is enclosed by a cap and is not readily accessible directly from the passenger compartment; or

• Equipped with a cargo area (either open or enclosed by a cap) of at least 6 feet in interior length that is not readily accessible directly from the passenger compartment; or

… under the second bullet above, both the CT and any F150 with 6’+ bed seems they should equally qualify under - subject to all the other quals previous

 

[Kremmen]

In comparison to a 1/2 ton mainstream truck, that makes the CT a ridiculously good deal. I can tolerate the chopped off front end (barely).

Please be joking

It's not chopped off

Check any other photo or video, I beg you

 

[mhaze]

Here is my proposed deduction.

1) Wire $70,000(??? whatever) for purchase price of the truck to Tesla.
2) Pick up the truck in Austin on 12-27-2023, drive 101 miles back to my business address, park it inside a warehouse, then Uber home.
3) Do not drive the CT until 1-1-2024, hence for tax year 2023, the CT is 100% business use.
4) Deduct 100% of the CT for 2023 taxes

Well, I can dream, right?

 

[mhaze]

Please be joking

It's not chopped off

Check any other photo or video, I beg you

Look, it's only a little bit chopped off. I mean, suppose your fingers were only a little bit chopped off. It really wouldn't matter, right? Everything would be fine. It'd be fair to say, they really WERE NOT chopped off, after all.

So okay, I'm only joking, it's not really chopped off.

 

[Gurule92]

im afraid this functional argument doesn't work, because it's not really true, CT has just as much front end as say an an F150.

it's just that the CT's front end is 1/2 behind/under the windshield. the stubby "appearance" is only an artifact/illusion of the design

Here's a proportional comparison of a CT and a Raptor. The point here isn't measurements, it's merely proportions.

• the red lines are nose/tail tips
• the yellow line is front door jam/pillar
• the green line is rear door jam/pillar
• purple line rear of cab (you can't quite see CTs, but it's also right there)

are there design / appearance differences that give the two very different looks? absolutely

are there underlying proportional differences in "head" vs "thorax" vs "legs" - none to speak of

so if you don't like the stubby 'look' of the CT, you're kinda just saying you don't like the design/appearance.

i love it

matches the f150 wrap pretty well. Almost supports the theory that they did that to show size difference

 

[cvalue13]

matches the f150 wrap pretty well. Almost supports the theory that they did that to show size difference

apparently that's the take-away *theory* for some of y'all -- so whether or not that's what was intended by Tesla, it's having that effect for some of y'all.

Maybe that's only those of y'all who don't live with an F150 to see the issues with that *theory*?

but if you *do* live with an F150, you can pretty quickly see a dozen indications that the features and proportions of the wrap shown on the CT are distorted, out of place, or misaligned.

which isn't because Tesla is doing anything funny, but instead because as a functional matter, those distortions are necessary to print a panel-specific wrap that realigns the various mismatches in proportions of the CT and F150

just to give one easy example: unlike an F150 (a 2020 model pictured in the wrap), the "wedge" shape of the CT includes a waistline that's upswept compared to its lower body line, whereas the F150 waistline is parallel to its lower body line:

meanwhile, the CT also has a rearward-slanting tailgate

As a result of these basic proportional differences, Fremont had to morph and distort the F150 proportions to "fit" the CT wedge so that the rear and front 'corners' of the vehicles lined up

Conversely, let's look at how things would align if, as is being suggested, they merely took the two vehicles outermost 'corners' to match, and then overlayed the F150 "at scale"

notice that the CT's front door panel gap aligns, but as you move rearward in the vehicle things go way off of what's shown in the wrapped CT

and, no, these aren't intended to be determinative of anything except to show how a scale F150 wrap, fitted to the corners of the CT, would not map over like we see in the wrapped CT whose door lines match, tailights are properly placed, etc.

and that's before we get to the front picture that suggests the entire F150 grill would fit on the CT's forwardmost SS grill panel

and again, I'm just giving the above as one of the more obvious examples of what sort of distortions are required to make a panel-specific CT wrap "match" up with the differing proportions of a 2020 F150

and the purpose of pointing this out isn't to suggest Tesla's doing anything squirrely here.

only to show that these spatially impaired conjectures that this is a "scale" wrap intended by Tesla to demonstrate relative proportions is ... silly

 

[Gurule92]

apparently that's the take-away *theory* for some of y'all -- so whether or not that's what was intended by Tesla, it's having that effect for some of y'all.

Maybe that's only those of y'all who don't live with an F150 to see the issues with that *theory*?

but if you *do* live with an F150, you can pretty quickly see a dozen indications that the features and proportions of the wrap shown on the CT are distorted, out of place, or misaligned.

which isn't because Tesla is doing anything funny, but instead because as a functional matter, those distortions are necessary to print a panel-specific wrap that realigns the various mismatches in proportions of the CT and F150

just to give one easy example: unlike an F150 (a 2020 model pictured in the wrap), the "wedge" shape of the CT includes a waistline that's upswept compared to its lower body line, whereas the F150 waistline is parallel to its lower body line:

meanwhile, the CT also has a rearward-slanting tailgate

As a result of these basic proportional differences, Fremont had to morph and distort the F150 proportions to "fit" the CT wedge so that the rear and front 'corners' of the vehicles lined up

Conversely, let's look at how things would align if, as is being suggested, they merely took the two vehicles outermost 'corners' to match, and then overlayed the F150 "at scale"

notice that the CT's front door panel gap aligns, but as you move rearward in the vehicle things go way off of what's shown in the wrapped CT

and, no, these aren't intended to be determinative of anything except to show how a scale F150 wrap, fitted to the corners of the CT, would not map over like we see in the wrapped CT whose door lines match, tailights are properly placed, etc.

and that's before we get to the front picture that suggests the entire F150 grill would fit on the CT's forwardmost SS grill panel

and again, I'm just giving the above as one of the more obvious examples of what sort of distortions are required to make a panel-specific CT wrap "match" up with the differing proportions of a 2020 F150

and the purpose of pointing this out isn't to suggest Tesla's doing anything squirrely here.

only to show that these spatially impaired conjectures that this is a "scale" wrap intended by Tesla to demonstrate relative proportions is ... silly

I agree it's probably slightly off. I'm sure the person who did the wrap isn't a wizard. But it's pretty close tho.

Im not willing to spend the time investigating it to any degree. Just an interesting theory.

They should do an R1T next lol

 

[FutureBoy]

Here is my proposed deduction.

1) Wire $70,000(??? whatever) for purchase price of the truck to Tesla.
2) Pick up the truck in Austin on 12-27-2023, drive 101 miles back to my business address, park it inside a warehouse, then Uber home.
3) Do not drive the CT until 1-1-2024, hence for tax year 2023, the CT is 100% business use.
4) Deduct 100% of the CT for 2023 taxes

Well, I can dream, right?

Or perhaps you just buy the CT in the business name instead of for yourself. Add a customized wrap with business signage. Then use it as advertising as you drive around your area on business trips.

Assuming of course you and only you own the business.

 

[Molotov]

"It's not about the length, but the width."

#thatswhatshesaid

 

[mhaze]

Or perhaps you just buy the CT in the business name instead of for yourself. Add a customized wrap with business signage. Then use it as advertising as you drive around your area on business trips.

Assuming of course you and only you own the business.

That's also an excellent idea, and I was thinking along those lines when I placed a deposit on (separately ) 2 of these trucks in 2019. Today I have more flexibility.

Sponsored