Tracking P85D delivery thread

[jweinstein]

There is a pretty good thread on the official forums from someone who also has received his P85D. He is reporting that his energy consumption is significantly higher that his P85 under identical conditions. He says the he is using 28 rated miles in a 15 mile commute while driving conservatively in "sport" mode vice "insane." Interesting data point.

Is there a thread (as of yet) for P85D owners to report their Wh/mi figures and observations around efficiency and energy comsuption? This TM forum comment got me thinking about this as a potential concern...

Thanks,
Josh

 

[randompersonx]

This is a common tactic for the IRS. You may think it's funny but they really do this.

I can confirm this -- A while back a business colleague and friend who lives a few blocks away had an issue with the IRS which ultimately boiled down to a total error on the IRS's part -- but it didn't stop the IRS from going door to door to speak to all of his neighbors.

 

[skilly]

I posted on this about 2 weeks back in this thread:
Tracking P85D delivery thread - Page 111

If you sign the paperwork to accept delivery while the car is still in California sometime in 2014, but then don't ultimately receive it before 2015 and thusly don't drive the car until 2015, I think you would lose if the IRS noticed. Title passing isn't even mentioned in the actual tax code, that's only mentioned in the IRS bulletin and I believe that was intended to stop people from trying to claim putting vehicles in service that they didn't own.

You might get away with it if Tesla let you drive it around the block and then you dropped it at the service center. If that happened in California that would trigger sales taxes that would be higher than the tax credit you're trying to preserve. Otherwise Tesla would have to ship the car to wherever you were going to receive it and then complete whatever remedial work happened after. Which I have no idea if they are willing or able to do this. But even that feels a tad stretched, since I'm not sure that driving it around the block really qualifies as putting it into service.

Personally, I wouldn't play games here. I'd take the credit in the year you actually receive delivery. I'm sorry that doesn't help you.

- - - Updated - - -



Doesn't help.



This is a common tactic for the IRS. You may think it's funny but they really do this.



You might be able to insure and register the car without actually having it. But quite frankly if you're going to the effort to fabricate evidence by insuring and registering a car you don't have yet I think you're clearly breaking the law. Sure doing those things means the IRS is less likely to notice. But it also means if they do notice, they're going to use what you did as evidence that you knew what you were doing is wrong.

I don't see what's so ambiguous about this:

If it goes into service with a legitimate registration and taxes/fees paid you should be good. That's the proof required for delivery. As long as it was registered and exchanged hands legally that's the only thing an auditor *could* measure. There are already miles on the car and there is no stipulation (as far as I know) in the tax code that would determine mileage having to be driven to constitute delivery. Even out of state only delays you registering it in your state (which if you don't require an inspection, you could immediately register anyway). Bill of Sale and ownership change is going to determine the date of transfer and when exactly that took place. I have purchased MANY cars...far more than I care to remember actually (slightly obsessed)

To be sure, just drop a call into your CA - it should be very black and white.

 

[RAW84]

I posted on this about 2 weeks back in this thread:
Tracking P85D delivery thread - Page 111

If you sign the paperwork to accept delivery while the car is still in California sometime in 2014, but then don't ultimately receive it before 2015 and thusly don't drive the car until 2015, I think you would lose if the IRS noticed. Title passing isn't even mentioned in the actual tax code, that's only mentioned in the IRS bulletin and I believe that was intended to stop people from trying to claim putting vehicles in service that they didn't own.

You might get away with it if Tesla let you drive it around the block and then you dropped it at the service center. If that happened in California that would trigger sales taxes that would be higher than the tax credit you're trying to preserve. Otherwise Tesla would have to ship the car to wherever you were going to receive it and then complete whatever remedial work happened after. Which I have no idea if they are willing or able to do this. But even that feels a tad stretched, since I'm not sure that driving it around the block really qualifies as putting it into service.

Personally, I wouldn't play games here. I'd take the credit in the year you actually receive delivery. I'm sorry that doesn't help you.

- - - Updated - - -



Doesn't help.



This is a common tactic for the IRS. You may think it's funny but they really do this.



You might be able to insure and register the car without actually having it. But quite frankly if you're going to the effort to fabricate evidence by insuring and registering a car you don't have yet I think you're clearly breaking the law. Sure doing those things means the IRS is less likely to notice. But it also means if they do notice, they're going to use what you did as evidence that you knew what you were doing is wrong.

I don't see what's so ambiguous about this:

What I think is funny is the notion that my neighbors would know, let alone remember, precisely when I put my vehicle in to service.

I am just asking how they could 'see' it's in service. You suggested he drive it around the block in CA as if that's something they could 'see'. They will be looking at documents, if all the documentation says he got it in 2014, I don't see what they would 'notice'.

What's ambiguous is the definition of "placed in service". If Tesla delivered it to someone's house, registered and insured, on 12/24, then the buyer immediately hopped on a plane without driving it for two weeks, you'd argue they didn't place it in service until 2015? What if the customer's son takes it for a spin while he's gone? What if his 'tint-guy' picks it up to have it ready for his return? See how confusing this could get? Seems to me the IRS attempted to clarify this confusion by specifying that thetitle must be passed.

Personally, I would not be worried about it if I were in that situation.

 

[NigelM]

Is there a thread (as of yet) for P85D owners to report their Wh/mi figures and observations around efficiency and energy comsuption? This TM forum comment got me thinking about this as a potential concern...

Thanks,
Josh

Not that I've noticed. If you have some real measurements for discussion you can start a new thread in the Model-S-Battery-Charging section.

 

[EV_Steve]

I finally have a reason to post in this thread. My car went into production this morning Vin 64009. It was supposed to be delivered to Denver by 12/20. I don't see this being very likely at this point though. I'll update the spreadsheet too.

 

[RomeoT]

What is a resale? If you take delivery, have the car registered and have driven the car for a month. Does that fit the definition of resale?

 

[scott2613]

Cool Scott! You and I went into production same day so I'm keeping my fingers crossed! Congrats man!

Thanks, There was one P85D Production complete during the 1st week of Dec. 8 in the second week and 5 already this week so things look good for all of us.

 

[wk057]

One of my Nerf armaments has been received!

First P85D adopters stuck in black hole - Page 20

 

[breser]

What I think is funny is the notion that my neighbors would know, let alone remember, precisely when I put my vehicle in to service.

I am just asking how they could 'see' it's in service. You suggested he drive it around the block in CA as if that's something they could 'see'. They will be looking at documents, if all the documentation says he got it in 2014, I don't see what they would 'notice'.

I didn't say they'd remember precisely when you put it into service. But if the IRS had a suspicion that you're cheating, they might ask your neighbors if they saw the vehicle before 2015. If they didn't they might look more closely. I think the definitive answer for the IRS is going to be what Tesla says. I don't believe that Tesla is going to lie about when they delivered the car.

What's ambiguous is the definition of "placed in service". If Tesla delivered it to someone's house, registered and insured, on 12/24, then the buyer immediately hopped on a plane without driving it for two weeks, you'd argue they didn't place it in service until 2015? What if the customer's son takes it for a spin while he's gone? What if his 'tint-guy' picks it up to have it ready for his return? See how confusing this could get?

I didn't say that, quite frankly I think your straw manning me here since you're telling me what I'd argue. I said I thought driving the car around the block and then dropping the car back off since it's not really ready seems questionable to me. It seems questionable to me because "placed in service" has a specific legal meaning. It's used in other places in the tax code with respect to depreciating assets.

Specifically the IRS in that context says the following:

You place property in service when it is ready and available for a specific use, whether in a business activity, an income-producing activity, a tax-exempt activity, or a personal activity. Even if you are not using the property, it is in service when it is ready and available for its specific use.

So accepting delivery of the car meets that definition. Taking the car around the block and then taking it back to Tesla to finish assembly does not.

There's nothing even slightly confusing about the circumstances you present when you use that definition.

Seems to me the IRS attempted to clarify this confusion by specifying that thetitle must be passed.

I'd agree that this was an attempt to clarify this if they didn't word it the way they did. They didn't say the vehicle was acquired when the title passes. Instead they say the vehicle can't be considered acquired until the title passes. Note that this creates an additional limitation rather than loosening the rules. I believe this was their attempt to clarify that the law doesn't apply to a lessee. That's actually somewhat ambiguous with the way the law is written.

Personally, I would not be worried about it if I were in that situation.

I'll agree that more than likely no matter what you do the IRS probably isn't going to notice. Said as much before. But in my opinion I wouldn't push your luck, especially if you can't take the credit in 2015.

 

[RAW84]

Is there a thread (as of yet) for P85D owners to report their Wh/mi figures and observations around efficiency and energy comsuption? This TM forum comment got me thinking about this as a potential concern...

Thanks,
Josh

MarcG just posted this about his first trip from San Fran to Tahoe

First SF-Tahoe trip in P85D

 

[breser]

What is a resale? If you take delivery, have the car registered and have driven the car for a month. Does that fit the definition of resale?

The law as I read it with respect to resale is about intent. You can't buy the car with the plan to sell it to someone else and take the tax credit. I believe this limitation is here mostly to prevent dealers from taking the tax credit.

 

[meltoots]

Got an email this am (EST) that my P85D is being built. Out of the prod queue and now being built. VIN 66083 Cleveland OH, thru Columbus. Very excited. Thanks again to MarcG for posting all his experiences!

 

[stevezzzz]

Got an email this am (EST) that my P85D is being built. Out of the prod queue and now being built. VIN 66083 Cleveland OH, thru Columbus. Very excited. Thanks again to MarcG for posting all his experiences!

Progress! Congrats...


*sigh*

Still languishing in the production queueueueueueueueue, myself...but it can't be long, now, right? Right?

*sigh*

[...trying not to jeopardize the title of MPG (Most Patient Guy), bestowed on me by tezco last week: so proud... ]

Tracking P85D delivery thread - Page 228

 

[randompersonx]

Is there a reason why the spreadsheet now shows @redox as having 3 cars? 63837 64190 64182?

 

[RobinF]

Awesome!! My P85D is VIN P64055 and my DS estimates that it's being built this week.

 

[Andyw2100]

Now production complete! That was a little fast for my liking. I know I shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth, while others are lingering in the black hole for weeks, but should they really be able to build a car --that-- quickly? I guess I can just hope that the status update of when the vehicle really started production was delayed, and that this one is accurate. I'll update again when I hear from my DS about a delivery date, which I expect may happen tomorrow. I have no idea about seats, but haven't heard that I don't have the seats I ordered, which are the Next Generation grey.

I have updated the spreadsheet.

I called my DS just now and learned that my car is now "Ready for Transport." He's not certain about what seats are in the car. (I ordered it with Next Generation grey seats.) He is attempting to check with production and let me know, and will also let me know when he gets more information with respect to a possible delivery date.

 

[randompersonx]

I called my DS just now and learned that my car is now "Ready for Transport." He's not certain about what seats are in the car. (I ordered it with Next Generation grey seats.) He is attempting to check with production and let me know, and will also let me know when he gets more information with respect to a possible delivery date.

I think it is unlikely that a car would be delivered with old seats without you already knowing by now. Also, Tesla probably realizes that swapping out seats at the factory (faulty new seats -> old seats) and then again at the dealer (old seats -> fixed new seats) will probably be absurdly expensive and time consuming. I would think the only ones with this sort of job will primarily be very close to the Factory (so that the slightly used seats could be returned there and may live on to serve some other purpose).

 

[LetsGoFast]

I think it is unlikely that a car would be delivered with old seats without you already knowing by now. Also, Tesla probably realizes that swapping out seats at the factory (faulty new seats -> old seats) and then again at the dealer (old seats -> fixed new seats) will probably be absurdly expensive and time consuming. I would think the only ones with this sort of job will primarily be very close to the Factory (so that the slightly used seats could be returned there and may live on to serve some other purpose).

I thought the conventional wisdom was that no one was getting delivery of the car with new seats.

 

[Firewired]

I got the call from My DS informing me today that my car was coming with prior versions black Nappa performance seats and would be swapped out at the SC in the future.