The uphill climb for Slate Auto, the newest kid on the EV block, just became a little steeper. At least $7,500 steeper due to the elimination of federal EV credits this week. With the promise of an affordable, sub-$20,000 electric truck, all mention of that important offer has disappeared from the company’s website.
From the outset, Slate has been rightly positioned as a David in an automotive world full of Goliaths, even among other EV automakers and startups. For one thing, its vehicle is small and only offers two doors. The base truck’s overall footprint is comparable to that of a 1985 Toyota SR85 pickup rather than a modern compact truck like the Ford Maverick. However, its key selling point is that the Blank Slate truck is just that: a dirt-cheap vehicle you can customize as much or as little as you like.
And by dirt-cheap, I mean less than $20,000. That originally-advertised price carried an asterisk, of course, which in a tiny-font footnote read “after federal incentives.” At least before today. Below is a screenshot of the Slate homepage from July 1, courtesy of the Wayback Machine:
That changed when Capitol Hill passed the “big, beautiful bill,” which features, among its spending and tax cuts, the discontinuation of incentives toward new and used EV purchases. EV buyers have until the end of September to take advantage of the rebates ($7,500 for new EVs and $4,000 for used). H/T to TechCrunch for being the first to call out the website pricing change.
The EV credits were never meant to be a forever freebie. Although they help in bringing EV prices down, affordability is not exactly synonymous with electric. It’s an even wider gap to bridge if trying to appeal as a vehicle for the masses. But with the coupon crutch gone, a “cheap” but no-frills EV truck might be a tougher sell. As Autopian Editor-in-Chief David Tracy pointed out in April:
To be sure, EV incentives would bring the Slate’s price down below $20,000, which is cheap for any new car, but given the precarious nature of the $7,500 new clean-vehicle incentive, it’s possible this new Slate will cost consumers over $27 big ones when it launches in late 2026. And $27+ grand for a car with no paint, no infotainment system, and no radio is just not competitive at all.
Have you seen how much car you get when you buy a $21,895 Chevy Trax or $21,885 Kia Soul?
[…]
We also have to talk about the other small pickup truck built by an American company: The Ford Maverick. Though the 2024 model cost about the same as the Slate, the 2025 model is now up to $29,285 for the hybrid and $29,860 for the turbo four.
That’s a bit more change, though the Maverick is clearly at least five grand more car, with the turbo four-cylinder coming with an eight-speed automatic that will help Iget the truck to 60 mph in under 6.5 seconds compared to the Slate’s 8 seconds (which is about the same as the 38 MPG hybrid Maverick’s 0-60). But it’s not the acceleration that matters, it’s the standard four doors (which is huge to U.S. consumers) and other standard content.
Nevertheless, Slate’s decidedly different product strategy and coolness factor were enough to garner more than 100,000 handraisers after the vehicle’s unveiling, with each person plunking down 50 bucks for a reservation. Autopian Publisher Matt Hardigree was one of them:
Why did I reserve one? I think the idea of a super cheap electric truck is great and, at the earliest, this truck will be available at the end of next year, which gives me time to merely enjoy the idea of it.
Of course, his praise came with its own asterisk:
What’s important to me is the pricing of all the little additions. If this ends up being a $35k truck, with no tax credit, after all my options then… I’m probably out. If some tax credit is in place and I can finance at a reasonable rate then I’d consider it. For the moment, I’m only out $50.
Well, that $50 reservation fee is fully refundable, so Hardigree would really just lose the time he’s spent thinking about owning the truck. As for the price, Slate never provided a hard number. Today, its website lists the truck’s expected MSRP as “mid-twenties.” That can change again any number of times between now and when the first trucks roll off the line next year. And again, even after that.
What makes the Slate truck and SUV so intriguing is the unique ownership experience and simplicity. Keep it stock or wrap the shell, bring your own music and touchscreen, change the headlight cover design, or make it an open-top — the options are endless.
Too bad most of us don’t have bottomless bank accounts. Although the Slate customization choices are unlikely to change much, the price point comparison to the hybrid Maverick and gas-only Hyundai Santa Cruz gets ever closer. Or as EIC Tracy matter-of-factly put it:
And it seems to me that Slate is relying too heavily on the EV rebate sticking around and tariffs cranking up the prices of other cars in the segment. Because if it’s between even a $3-5K pricier Ford Maverick — which comes with paint, an infotainment system, power windows, and a 120-year old company reputation — and a bare-bones, two-door Slate that can only go 150 miles on a charge, it’s pretty obvious which one is the better “people’s car.”
With the charging infrastructure in no hurry to improve and EVs, in general, turning out to be less popular than hoped, what does Slate’s future look like? Can the company succeed on cool-factor alone?
Top graphic image: Slate Auto
I don’t blame Slate for sticking to the scenario that grants them funding.
They will fail, tho.
Liking better the Telo
this can’t really be a serious comment
My opinion was that a 2 door pickup would be a tough sell in the US market unless the price was incredibly appealing, which at $20K it was. Now that the bargain basement price is gone, so is most of the appeal, especially when a much more practical Maverick is only a small jump up in price.
I somewhat agree. Personally I think their main issue was they went with a 5ft bed instead of a 6ft bed. How much extra cost would 1ft of extra bed length truly cost them?
I’d still get it over a Maverick unless a BEV one comes out in the near future, but the towing number for the Slate is pretty trash.
Suggesting they pivot to a gasoline engine seems like a good idea… on paper.
Building an EV “from the ground up” is easier than a gasoline car because electric motors and batteries are pretty much commodity items at this point. A new vehicle manufacturer has dozens of vendors to choose from.
If anyone remembers the Elio, their big stopping block was deciding to build their own gasoline engine from scratch, rather than being dependent on a major carmaker to source those engines from. And we’re still waiting 20+ years for Elio to sell their first car.
I think adding an ice as a primary or range extender s a back to the drawing board approach. All the crash and safety considerations would probably require a complete redesign. From the frame through the drivetrain.
An ice as a range extender to an all electric drive is probably a little easier but still have all the safety considerations of adding the engine, fuel and emission stuff. Even with the possible use of a slightly smaller battery (75 mile range?) in REV, I think you’re a few years away and way past the 25k target price.
Should have been designed as a REV from the start.
Elio worked perfectly and performed exactly as intended: it fleeced idiots out of their money in the firm of non-refundable deposits, that and other grift. And Elio the man didn’t have to work for a living. It was always a scam and about as imaginative as the Dale. Under-estimating the stupidity of your fellow man is a lost opportunity to stuff your pockets with easy money.
Own a 25 maverick hybrid and have a reservation for a slate. I consider it a compliment to the mav, not a replacement. Don’t need another small truck, just a low cost ev for around town stuff. The simple slate fills that with plastic body panels and minimal tech. Maybe with a superior warranty too?
The loss of the credit might be partially offset with slate using lower cost battery chemistry? The specs battery was chosen based not on lowest cost but on getting federal battery subsidies. If that’s gone too ? maybe Slate can find a better, cheaper battery.
Still if I can get a base model around 25k I’ll probably bite. If not I’ll just find a slightly used Kia/hyundai EV that still has some warranty left. Slate needs to keep the base model under 25k to stand a chance. For now I’ll keep my $50 reservation.
I wouldn’t count on any warranty being available for long, as I don;t think this company will be around much longer than either Fisker.
I’m still hoping they can pull it off, I still think their main target market was Fleets, and as a fleet/rental vehicle the base spec makes pretty good sense. No frills, will haul plumbing or hvac or electrical or paint or flowers or packages with literally zero maintenance but tires.
Then Fleets sell them off after a few years at 40% depreciation, and almost everything can be ordered afterwards to bolt on. So the used market they sell for $15k, and then people buy all the accessories to give it the back seat, lift kit, power windows, whatever, and if the accessories average out to about $5k per person to get it how they want, that’s still only a $20k truck, but with more than the base model.
If that’s the plan, it may still make sense, their initial viral marketing was fake business wrapped trucks so seems like that’s what the strategy is, designed to be wrapped, no frills, backed by Bezos similar to the Rivian Amazon trucks.
^^This^^
Though I love the idea of a truly small, simple, no-frills trucklet (be it EV or ICE, like Toyota’s very-appealing-to-me foreign market Hilux Champ) I was iffy about the sense (or lack thereof) that the Slate pickup made at $27.5K because being (semi)retired I probably couldn’t avail myself of the federal $7,500. tax credit, even if it still existed (which like most everyone else, I knew was going away under the current administration). So now, everyone has to pay $27.5K (or similar) for the Slate, rather than some folks effectively paying $20K for it after the tax credit.
They’re going to sell fewer Slates than they initially thought. I’ll leave my $50. deposit with them, since actual production is still a ways off (if it happens at all) and $50. is a small price to pay for a spot in line just in case effective pricing changes for the better.
Welp, I guess I’m out – probably going to get a refund on my reservation. The only way I was actually going to follow through on purchasing one was if the final price was close to 20k. It’s most likely going to be 30-35k now, which I will not be able to afford. Oh well, it was a neat idea for a while.
Slate needs to look abroad for their market – the US market cannot be depended on.
Australia – New Zealand – the UK – Canada – Portugal – Spain – Greece –
This is the right trucklet for them too (if the steering wheel is moved to the right for the first three markets)
Well I expect a permanent duty on any car not USMCA compliant going into Canada. The Slate is not USMCA compliant. So it will face a duty.
I found out today the Rivian r1s and r1t are being hit with duties coming into Canada as USMCA non compliant. The R1s I test drove today has gone up 25% since the trade spat started due to tariffs.
Cars that are USMCA compliant can be imported tariff free right now. Which is still a lot of cars.
This is actually quite wide reaching. The Audi’s made in Mexico were allowed into Canada tariff free even though they are not USMCA compliant and now they get the pay a 25% tariff. I expect that tariff to be permanent.
Cars from Japan, South Korea, Europe also are tariff free into Canada. This is because of existing trade agreements that we honour with our allies.
If I was Prime Minister I would change laws to accept European crash standard to allow import of EU built cars that have not gone through the significant cost of North American standard certification. Might as well import and support from our actual allies.
Slate sent the $50 depositors a drawing of the proposed vehicle. This will relieve their obligation to refund your money. Your fifty dollars was for the drawing, not the actual vehicle. I hope Matt frames his sketch and maybe with his autograph it’s worth it!
I’m not mourning the loss of Slate, assuming this kills it (euthanizes might be a better word). This vehicle needed a 25% discount for anyone to be interested. If a product won’t sell without cutting the price by 25%, that product probably sucks. EVs are no exception.
Realistically, with current EV technology, affordable EVs are going to suck. Instead of manipulating the market to get people to buy cars that are undesirable, why not wait for technology to catch up? In the meantime, hybrids are an affordable solution to reduce carbon emissions (plus, as other posts on this site have shown, the environment/climate might be better served by diverting resources to build hybrids instead of BEVs). Further, if someone desperately wants an affordable EV over a hybrid, they can buy a used one. You can get some spectacular deals on a used EV. I don’t think the US market needs an affordable new BEV right now.
Also, is it really a good idea to build an EV with marginal range like the Slate? Its batteries will degrade like any other. I previously owned a Leaf and currently drive a Tesla – I can confirm battery degradation is a far bigger deal in a short range EV. My Tesla’s battery has degraded by roughly the same percentage as my Leaf’s battery, yet the Tesla is still useful where the Leaf wasn’t (I sold the Leaf to someone with very limited driving needs; it was useless to an average driver). Low-range EVs are going to become useless far faster than longer range EVs. I don’t see how it is good for the environment to build EVs that are going to be discarded after 8-10 years instead of 12-15.
My incorrect hot take:
The BBB will cause vehicles to finally reveal their true cost. Aka, electric cars become way cheaper than ICE’s naturally and organically.
Battery supply hasn’t and won’t stop. Pretty soon we are going to see the battery prices tank. Demand in the biggest market will slow, but the industry continues to grow.
It’s amazing how much they hate resources that aren’t “on tap”. They can’t monetize and exploit solar, wind, and water in the same way they can with gasoline.
It’s already too late, the general public knows that having an array of solar panels on your roof, farm, or field is good.
Warm Backwash Take: The presence of the rebate (and its resurrection) enabled high pricing on EVs and probably subtly stifled innovation because the manufacturers felt like it was a sure thing. I don’t think I ever saw a survey where buyers were asked how big a role the rebate played in their decision.
For me as a casual EV/PHEV shopper, it was the tipping point in making them competitive. I think we’re about to see a lot more of them disappear, well beyond Slate. It’s become an entitlement.
I have always wondered if the incentives are/were actually bad for long-term EV adoption. I agree the incentives removed the need to innovate – why develop affordable EVs if the government was going to pay you to build expensive ones?
I also had two other major concerns:
1 – EV incentives got a lot of uninformed buyers to purchase an EV. These buyers had a casual interest in EV ownership and were unaware of their limitations. For them, EV ownership was a negative experience and they will be reluctant to choose one in future when the experience is improved.
2 – EV incentives are a disincentive for those who do not qualify. The income limits ($150k for a single person) were too low; $7500 is not a trivial amount of money if you are making $151k (particularly if you live in an area with a higher cost of living). I know a few people who wanted an EV but didn’t buy one because they did not qualify for the incentive. Also, my concern with buying a new EV without the incentive is that, in the event you get hit by a bus driving it off the lot, your insurance company hands you a $30k check for a vehicle you just bought for $37.5k. That sucks.
While I think the concept of Slate is cool, if the incentive was the only thing driving interest it is probably better off dead. I think a lot of Slate owners would have had serious buyer’s remorse. If the goal is to get more people to dump ICE vehicles, this is a bad thing.
I agree with this I think the incentive just pushed companies to keep making 45K+ EV’s we are just now seeing some cheaper(ish) EV’s like the Equinox EV (yes I know Chevy was dumb for killing the bolt before). But for the past few years things like the Blazer Ev, Mach E, Ioniq 5 and EV6 all seemed to be 45K or more for the base model because they knew they were going to get the incentive. Funny thing is you are now seeing the fully loaded trims of these EV’s that are slightly used (2-3 years old) in the 30-35k range (when they were originally like 55-60k)
30-35k is if anything pretty okay depreciation. So 48-52 after tax credit, 60% residual = $29-32k.
For all the people in “1” above, I’d say there is an equal or larger amount that had a positive experience.
The biggest EV mistake was going “big” with them. Like, physically big. The initial focus should have been a better balance of physical size to support more battery choices.
It’s one of hte things I did like about the Slate, was it was small, offering more choices for batteries. You could live with the tiny one, provided it suited your needs. Meanwhile, having a long range option is easier with a smaller vehicle. My point is, perhaps it may be well suited to ride this wave out because of these options? I don’t know. I doubt it, but I have hope.
“For all the people in “1” above, I’d say there is an equal or larger amount that had a positive experience.”
That is probably true. My concern is that negative press always gets more attention than “satisfied customer enjoys purchase.” There are still many people who have never driven an EV nor known anyone who has owned one. These people only know EVs through what they have heard, and most of what they have heard is mostly not good. They do not know that EVs can be cheap to run, comfortable, reliable, low maintenance, and fast, but they do know about range anxiety, the high cost of battery replacement, and that some of them catch on fire.
I think it would have been better off to let EVs grow slowly by selling to highly motivated buyers, and let them gradually expand to the general population. I suspect the “right” buyers would have still bought EVs without incentives, although in lesser numbers.
For those reasons I disagree that EVs should have started smaller. Big, luxurious EVs were only going to be bought by highly motivated buyers. I think the industry got ahead of itself and tried to mass market products that buyers weren’t ready for, and that is setting EV adoption back years.
Of course, I’m only commenting on the American market. Small, cheap, short range EVs probably make sense in a lot of other markets, though.
I agree, only the strong will survive. The rebates were the things specifically encouraging me to buy one. Without them, I would not have.
That said, if they offered the same rebate on an ICE vehicle, I’d probably take that too.
Which, if we are being honest, is exactly what has happened over the last century with all the support the government has offered to the oil companies.
I’m going to miss the rebates, but I also tend to agree with the points you are making. China would not be making all these cheap EV’s without government incentives either.
Does a $27k Slate make sense, nope. I’d love to see the amortization tables on all the tooling.
Something that is rarely discussed is royalties. Here In Canada, and I assume similarly in the US, the provincial and federal governments collect royalties on resource extraction. Add to that things like gasoline taxes and there is very little incentive to legislate towards renewable energy. Taxes are an addiction. It’s hard to tax the wind and the sun. Yes, probably carriage fees on the grid can do some of that, but the fear for oil and gas producing provinces is the massive potential loss of revenue. Ironically the biggest ones, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland are some of the best places to harvest wind and solar, but two of those three don’t exactly have the brightest bulbs in their lights when it comes to leadership.
I always felt like Slate was going to be a disruptive truck the same way that Musk is going to start a disruptive third party (no, really). We’ll all fondly remember them like…um…Ross Perot and the EV1.
Politically-driven incentives are a strange prospect: we know they’re coming to an end by design, but when that day comes, politicians almost all kick and scream that we can’t hurt the people like that! Anything that’s enacted by one president and then expires in a subsequent president (even if it’s 47 acting like he doesn’t know who 45 was; strategy or dementia?) is treated like a whole new era. Mortgage rates over 5%? How will we survive?! Fed Funds rate at 4%+ (benefiting retirees and savers)? You’re stifling the economy!
To be clear, I hated the rebates when they came out, and I hate their one-and-done repeal. Politicans are idiots, or in reality are good at playing the part to condescend to their base.
My wife and I despised our CRV’s gold color. It was the only one that came with a manual locally (a 2006 model). Over the years I looked into having it wrapped. I was quoted at anywhere from $3500-5000. Not exactly cheap. I realize Slate claims the panels are all simple to wrap, but any company that does wraps still wants to remain in business, and would likely not take much money off.
Yep, the “just get a wrap” doesn’t make sense once you look at the cost of getting a wrap. Doubly so when you consider that a wrap is only expected to last 3-5 years, 7 at most, and could be significantly shorter if not properly cared for (which is more complicated than paint).
I was working at a Hyundai dealership years ago when the Veloster came out and had the factory matte wrap on it. There was a rather long list of how to care for it and some cleaning products that came along with purchase. I always wonder just how many people took the time to read it and abide by the cleaning instructions. “No going through a car wash!”
If you are buying it as a business vehicle, just park it unsecured behind your business for a few weeks and it will be covered in graffiti in no time at all. Works perfectly well here in downtown Toronto.
Commenters and the author make some good points, but once again I will be the contrarian here.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY!
Slate had fucked itself by being an EV only and not having some dinky little simple ICE motor. A lot of the comments in the slate articles say “I wish it had a dinky little ice motor”. Well, now that being an EV does jack shit for your customers and your accountants, they can break out of that hole they dug, and bring us a dinky little ice motor that is simple,proven and cheaper than a battery pack. Grab me some little honda powersport/generator motor and strap it in!
I don’t need to go fast! I just don’t want anyone else coming along for the ride in my truck, univited. I am talking about Google, Apple and the God-damned FBI. I just want to be freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee and not have to rely on dealers to fix a simple little truck.
People don’t seem to understand my frustration over privacy. I don’t think the NSA is coming after me, or there’s any conspiracy to frame me (yet lol).
I just want my car to be a car. It’s an escape from reality. If I want connectivity I’ll choose to use my phone and Carplay. I don’t even want auto-pairing with BT, let me confirm via a button.
I also don’t want curated Google, different internet results based on whether I’m on desktop or mobile, or in a different location. And as I discovered yesterday, even though I disabled all smart features on my Nest thermostats, there’s still something called “Nest Renew” that can change your requested temp based on the perceived CO2 emissions of your local power demands. I’m not kidding. And you have to go to an entirely standalone website to disable it (and it eventually comes back!).
I love the convenience of connectivity sometimes, but I’m just tired of feeling like I’m driving someone else’s car or living in someone else’s home. It’s creepy and we shouldn’t let it become the norm.
Don’t you want your car to know when you are angry so it can tell everyone else to get the hell out of your way? I’d subscribe to that. /s
I dumped my Nest snd went back to analog and am very happy. Nest effed up often and cost a fortune. Having said that I think that the market for Slate is me. Older, ok old, have toys, wants a simple, uncomplicated car/truckette for all the shit one has to do in an American suburb, fucking hates big oil, wants to do a small part in leaving a habitable earth to grandkids. Do is that worth an extra 7500? In my world it does. Would I like an extra 7500? Well sure, but it isn’t a deal breaker. It brings me back to the original beetle, unsafe, slow, cheap to keep, sorta ugly, and a non mechanic could fix stuff on it. I’m leaving my 50 buck ante in
It never had a shot at success anyway, so it didn’t take any hit. This thing was DOA, and still is.
I love the truck. Interested in why you feel that way.
because hot takes are cool
There’s no legit reason for anyone to view it this way, but ppnw has it all figured out
It was DOA because of the promised price for a made-in-the-USA vehicle from a startup with no economy of scale.
You can’t make a low volume niche vehicle and sell to at a profit for $27,500
I suspect ALL automakers in the US are in trouble soon.
Being given permission to not innovate and more forward, the domestics will be far behind the other global manufacturers. Another bailout is inevitable.
Soon? What rock have you been under? 😉
My attitude is that we’ll be very lucky if any gas and/or electric vehicle increases price by only $7500 (and/or decontented accordingly) in the next year or so. All EVs (and PHEVs?) that qualified for credits will take this hit. And, uncertain tariffs screw with the price of everything. The only thing that matters is whether it’s still a bargain relative to the alternatives, when/if they actually start delivering.
Gentle reminder that “refundable” is likely meaningless if the company goes bankrupt first.
That said, I’m not sure the price is an issue by the time it launches. Many things can happen between now and then.
I was, and remain, skeptical that people want a barebones truck rather than the idea of a barebones truck.
I like the bare bones truck but this went a step too far. no radio ? seriously? and if you “option” for the radio you get the equivalent of a two cheap bluetooth speakers on the dash. they don’t even have a six inch door speaker provisioned. I guess you can always install kick speaker boxes by your feet like its the late 90s!
also the range is garbage. and no fast charging! you are just so much better off in an old pickup truck in every way except efficiency.
It’s not so much the no-radio thing as it is the no-way-to-take-a-call-hands-free-as-the-law-requires (other than a headset). Not to mention driving directions from your phone.
It’s possible with the phone’s speaker, but far from ideal.
Modern humans are helpless.
I mean sure. But it also would be pretty reasonably…. $50 in wire? To go from a single/double din slot in the dash to optional speaker boxes behind/under the bench seat as in any old truck with no door speakers.
Screw the poors! They’re the ones that have been gaming the system and ruining society all along! (yeah I know 50 mil. wedding in the sewer boy funded it) Find out how absurd/catastrophic the BBB is, the medicaid/snap cuts don’t bite till after the mid term, because they are Soo shrewd.
The poors living on welfare, relying on Medicaid and benefiting from Snap are the same people who voted for Trump. Republicans have become experts at getting morons to vote against their own interests.
Don’t disparage them as morons. There hasn’t been a decent public education system for generations in the US to help them along.
this is another ridiculous take, but please keep them coming
Public education is what you make of it
I’m still in on Slate. It’s new and interesting and seems like it would add some utility to the fleet.
Of course, they have not released pricing on the accessories (most importantly for me the SUV top kits. Those could quickly kill the whole deal for me. $40k buys a lot of vehicle. I wouldn’t pay an extra $15k just to be the first one on the block with a Slate.
I didn’t pay more to be the first with an xB or FR-S, and those were both much more interesting vehicles.
Same, the only thing this changes for me is not getting the SUV topper to offset the cost.
Even since the quote from April those maverick numbers are now too low by about $1500.
yep…wait until you see the Mav price in 2027, even as it gets decontented
Since it’s more than 4 years away anyway this may not matter. The tax credit could come back.
An EV.
From a Startup company.
With an unbelievably low price advertised.
Who could have ever seen this coming?
Well, if they follow theprecedent set by another EV company, they should just blatantly lie about their future products.
You need to be more specific.
That describes many EV companies.
Only one.
From memory: Nikola, Elio, Aptera, Arcimoto, ZAP, Bright, Coda, Detroit Electric, Fisker (twice), Faraday Future, Think, Canoo, Lordstown Motors ……
No doubt there are more failed EV startups that promised that they had the secret to making an EV for less than the big guys.
How do you know that they haven’t already?
Slate is definitely in trouble and so is every other regular market EV out on the road.
If they can still get it out the door at $25K it’d be worth looking at, especially with the Maverick going up in price.
Wait a sec, that’s the answer. Don’t try to make EVs cheaper or simpler, just make everything else more complex and expensive. That way the EVs seem like a deal.
Man, I could totally work in marketing.
Are you a recent college grad looking to kill time and meet a spouse?