from Hacker News

Tesla Paid Zero Federal Income Tax in 2024, Despite $2.3B in Income

by cdme on 1/31/25, 10:57 PM with 236 comments

  • by SeanAnderson on 1/31/25, 11:17 PM

    I wish this article was written with a less biased tone. I'm genuinely interested in understanding it better.

    As far as I can tell, the article cites two things: $500M tax savings by using an accelerated depreciation schedule (unclear if they saved $500M more by using accelerated vs a regular depreciation schedule, but I assume no) and they claimed $300M in tax credits.

    The article doesn't address the other $1.5B, presumably because it's easier to defend. I didn't read through the 10-K to try and figure this out.

    I don't really know enough about what an accelerated depreciation schedule implies, but, taken at face value, they'd have to pay more in taxes in a deferred year which doesn't seem like foul play to me. Tax credits seem to make sense for an EV company?

    EDIT: I did some learning, woohoo.

    Federal corporate tax rate in America is 21%. The $300M in tax credits is post-tax not pre-tax. The $500M is a pre-tax deduction.

    $2.3B - $0.5B = $1.8B

    $1.8B * 0.21 = $378M

    $378M - $300M = $78M

    So, I can't really explain why they didn't owe ~$78M in taxes, but I assume rounding and cursory other stuff. The article probably didn't call out other, minor deductions, but it's also fair of them to not have done so. I was wrong when I said, "The article doesn't address the other $1.5B, presumably because it's easier to defend."

    I think the real thing here is the weaponization of EV tax credits as some sort of boogeyman. Personally, I'm all for incentivizing EV companies to create in America.

  • by erulabs on 1/31/25, 11:15 PM

    > "hoard wealth"

    > No mention of reinvestment

    > "Tesla was able to avoid paying ... taxes ... by claiming ... tax credits" (presented as bad somehow)

    > "We're not backing down"

    Where or where is the media coverage that attempts to speak to people who don't already buy in to the premise? This isn't journalism it might as well be blogging. Congratulations, you've made the world more polarized!

  • by lvl155 on 1/31/25, 11:30 PM

    You know what’s ironic is that Tesla survived because of Obama era subsidies. They were desperate to get one private enterprise to succeed because so many solar and other “clean” energy private ventures failed during that period. So, in my view, Obama created Elon. Now the rest of America has to deal with it in addition to the abject failure that is PPACA which ballooned US healthcare costs (not that Republicans have any alternative solutions or the desire to fix it).

  • by fishtoaster on 1/31/25, 11:16 PM

    Sounds like this is the result of "accelerated depreciation." As far as I can tell, that's a strategy that ultimately allows you to pay less tax one year and more tax in a later year. I don't have a strong feeling on the value of that particular tax law, but it seems somewhat less nefarious than the implied "not paying taxes at all."

  • by casenmgreen on 1/31/25, 11:12 PM

    I may be wrong, but I understand this is because the company invests all of its income into its business - which means more jobs, work for other companies, and so on.

    I think it better money goes into the economy, in a reasonably efficient way, rather than being taken by the State, and used in an unreasonably inefficient way.

  • by andreygrehov on 1/31/25, 11:21 PM

    > Sharon Zhang is a news writer at Truthout covering politics, climate and labor.

    In other words, no experience with how corporate taxes work.

  • by anon-3988 on 1/31/25, 11:42 PM

    Can a private citizen do the same things that companies do? People reinvest in themselves too.

  • by wnevets on 1/31/25, 11:32 PM

    Why pay taxes when you can just buy the Whitehouse? It's so much cheaper.

  • by icameron on 2/1/25, 1:24 AM

    I’m still shocked that Tesla income is just 2.3B, compared to like, Meta who reports 62.3B net income. I didn’t realize how tiny Tesla is for the amount of media attention and stock valuation they have. Even amongst automakers they are tiny. Toyota had like 32B net income.

  • by humanbee on 2/7/25, 11:22 PM

    Ran this article through a news bias customGPT and then through Deep Research (https://chatgpt.com/share/67a68e7b-5df4-8006-8da8-d76f11c2f1...)

  • by normalaccess on 2/1/25, 12:00 AM

    These topics always remind me of this Dave Chappelle skit.

    The system IS rigged, and everyone knows it. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/lNi9DIVkXpo?feature=share

  • by blackeyeblitzar on 1/31/25, 11:30 PM

    Are we still doing this in 2025? The same complaints were brought up about Amazon years ago. Companies can have no income tax liability based on the tax credits they get (for R&D or numerous other possible reasons), the way they depreciate assets, how their profits and losses are managed from an accounting perspective, etc. It doesn’t mean there is anything wrong happening. In fact it probably means the right thing is happening - companies typically are able to lower tax liability by doing things we incentivize them to do.

  • by whatever1 on 2/1/25, 3:23 AM

    Only the W2 losers are paying taxes.

  • by xnx on 1/31/25, 11:47 PM

  • by morpheos137 on 2/1/25, 3:31 PM

    How much of that "income" is attributable to government subsidies (for EVs, solar)?! Lol.

  • by kemotep on 1/31/25, 11:59 PM

    A Single Tax regime aka the Land Value Tax would make these articles a thing of the past.

    We could solve the deficit, pay down our debts and many people would pay less in taxes, if we eliminated all taxes and replaced them with a Land Value Tax.

  • by cozzyd on 1/31/25, 11:27 PM

    Hmm I have an idea for how DOGE can raise more revenue...

  • by swframe2 on 2/1/25, 12:05 AM

    trump spreads his income perfectly across all his LLCs. Their expenses always exactly match their income to the penny. I wonder why he is able to do that?

  • by lotsofpulp on 2/1/25, 12:49 AM

    The d

  • by spiderfarmer on 1/31/25, 11:10 PM

    This will be the downfall of the USA. With the government filling up with grifters, the people and companies who still pay up will feel like losers.

  • by smsm42 on 2/4/25, 5:15 AM

    > Advocates for fairer taxation have said that, due to the way that tax law is written and enforced, it is essentially optional for Musk and other billionaires to follow tax guidelines

    What kind of bullshit is this? If Musk didn't follow the "guidelines" (i.e. laws, there are no "guidelines" when taxes are concerned, there are laws), why won't you point out where he doesn't and provide evidence? If he does follow the laws, but you don't like what these laws allow him to do (which is a legitimate opinion, of course), then don't tell "it's optional for him to follow tax guidelines" - he follows the guidelines, that is, laws, it's just that the laws, in your opinion, need to be changed. Don't vaguely accuse people in being criminals without any evidence of any crime.

    Then in the ending blurb they are vaguely implying Trump is somehow threatening their lives, without again providing any evidence. I suspect this source is not at all trustworthy and is worried more about raising money on sensationalized clickbait than informing people.