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
Interesting to me this outfit got minimal local publicity relative to their Indiana “factory”. Almost like it was known in advance this was a deal that might well not make it.
it was never an under 20K truck, the first week of discussions the pricing was 20K to 27K already. even 20K seems a bit much for a tiny, not all that useful trucklette.
I knew this was too good to be true. I really can’t believe they came out of the gate advertising a price that is dependent on tax incentives that were clearly targeted by the new administration from day 0. And it is their main selling point. Now, what really caught my attention in this article is the sunsetting of the used EV incentive. I’ve been toying with the idea of replacing my 19 yo daily driver with a used Tesla which would be stupid cheap with the $4k rebate. I guess I need to sh!+ or get off the pot.. September is darn-near here!
$50 x 100,000 reservations = $5 million in their pocket with nothing but a press release. Advertising and artificially low selling price to collect reservation cash to then fund operations is a classic start-up tactic. People fall for it time after time after time.
If they would have waited a few more weeks that opportunity to collect free cash would have passed.
The fact that the Maverick has gone up $10K in price in such a short time is unconscionable to me……
it was always ever supposed to be this price. they made the super low priced, 42mpg $19,995 XL was only available tot he fleet market and in very low numbers. it was a marketing scheme to bait and switch, and it worked. Can’t fault the ford guys for doing that I suppose, but I can certainly point and snicker at those still trying to buy one of them.
Well if Ford can sell them at that price, then obviously it was underpriced by 10k.
Also, how much of that is the Trump Tax?
I’m of the “Why am I paying for your tax credit” camp.
This exists all over our tax-code, but this one is pretty in-your-face and blatant so it gets extra hate.
Reminds me of a four hundred million dollar jet your paying to rebuild.
That won’t be ready to fly in Trump’s term and then will be turned over to his library to sit as a prop.
I don’t think jets have props. Lol
What are your opinions on our massive oil subsidies and all the military infrastructure we need to secure our subsidized oil?
I would say, since this is always ever the argument that the subsidies should go directly to electric companies. This solves two issues. Visibility of the subsidies to specific people, and it would offset some of the electricity price hikes we have seen since the inception of this EV push has resulted in higher use in general which tends to result in higher prices overall.
Electrical utilities are an almost 150 year old industry that is completely mature.
What they need is massive reductions in the time for permitting for new lines. It is crazy that it often takes more than a decade to just get the permits to start building a new transmission line due to all the lawsuits.
I don’t know that “completely mature” is really correct .
They have a lot of opportunities to improve generation, safety, distribution, lower prices. Safety sucks, mostly because distribution sucks, generation efficiency is held back by distribution, and prices are high because distribution. And distribution sucks because prices are low. There is a lot of sunk cost in infrastructure that sort of works except for when it doesn’t and burns down cities. Oh, and it’s so insecure fragile and dangerous that it might as well be designed by ou enemies.
Other than that, it’s remarkable how well it works considering it’s doing so much more than it was designed for.
Putting power generation closer to the customer would help a lot.
Public utilities would be one way to do it.
Generally the the “Why am I paying for your tax credit” situations are to get people to do something that benefits society as a whole. Other people having healthy children who aren’t sociopaths for example. Using a technology before economies of scale make it cheap, and before domestic industry gets shut out of the market because of chicken and egg issues.
Then there are people who get tax credits because they are rich enough to bribe politicians to sign on to idiotic ideas like real estate depreciating, or 6000 pound cars are to be encouraged for mysterious reasons. The real estate industry is a remarkable pile of tax credits, as well as out and out money laundering.
I would like to see more people buying electric cars so they get cheap and build up the infrastructure so that when I am in the market for one it is more mainstream and I can afford one.
Seems pretty logical to me.
I think the issue with your logic is the feeling that the use of a humongous battery, inefficiently charged by a system that still uses a great deal of fossil fuels while also making guys like Elon rich is not their definition of benefiting society as a whole.
I wouldn’t have qualified for the credit anyway so no change here.
Every leased EV qualifies for the full $7500 credit. There is a reason that the majority of EVs are leased and it isn’t just people concerned about the pace of change.
That also wouldn’t do anything for me, less than $500 in the bank means anything even remotely nice is off the table.
I put $50 in for a reservation. The EV credit wasn’t in the top 3 reasons for my interest in Slate. I have one 20yo car in my driveway that has the CEL on and I can’t get standard plates. EVs just have less parts that can fail. Not normally a issue under 5 years. But I plan to own for 10 years. I am done dealing with the echeck for registration in my state. That removes the Maverick as an option for me. I only drive 250 miles in a normal week. None of those trips are long distance. I can level 2 charge a EV once or twice a week in my driveway. I need a small pickup for running to the big box store for house projects once a month or so. I enjoy vehicles as a hobby. And the idea of taking a new Maverick apart to customize it is a no go. But the Slate is designed for the customer to take apart and change from delivery. That idea of customizing is why I think the Slate will have a cult following if it ever comes to market with or without a EV credit.
Just to play devil’s advocate: do we have any reason to think that a 20yo EV will require any less maintenance/upkeep than a 20yo ICE?
They’ll probably require less regular maintenance but what they will need is a new battery, which will be prohibitively expensive.
I do wonder how many EV’s will actually reach 20yo before being scrapped due to the price of a new battery.
As I’m facing down the likelihood of replacing an ICE engine on my weekend / tow rig to the tune of $5-$8k, how much different is that vs a low capacity battery with many more years of improvements? I get it seems like a huge 1 time cost but so are engines, transmissions, etc. And one thing I think we’ll see is that the replacement batteries could be better than original so you could effectively get an upgrade.
Again, not saying it isn’t something to consider but I think the impact is rather over exaggerated when consider relative costs.
The aftermarket is coming along nicely to improve the battery situation. There’s a lot more info out there about refurbing the packs and more sources for parts than the early days. It’s still not cheap but it is becoming more realistic all the time.
A family member works for a company that does ICE engine rebuilds for multiple OEMs and they are starting to gear up for doing battery refurbing for EV makers.
I expect battery prices to go way down over the next 20 years.
Manufacturers having the right to bork the car you paid for whenever they feel like it by using intellectual property laws is the real thing preventing cars from lasting as long as a model A which I see driving around on nice days even though some are 98 years old.
The price of the truck hasn’t changed, the EV credit that a lot of people wouldn’t have even qualified for is gone. This was a 25-27K truck and has always been, the credit would have taken it to 20K or under. I don’t know why so many people can’t seem to wrap their heads around that. I have been seeing so many “They’ve already upped the price they’re doomed” speak in random comment sections.
Slate really shouldn’t have pushed the 20K number so much though, as that’s all people saw and are gonna stick with.
You answered your own question there at the end. It’s being talked about because Slate themselves marketed it as effectively being a $20k truck.
This is why I didn’t put down any kind of deposit even though I was tempted. They did a very good job of roping people in with the promise of how cheap this was supposed to be, but in real life, you’re going to be either spending outright or financing close to $30k for a vehicle that’s significantly less useful than a Maverick hybrid.
They shot themselves in the foot with how they advertised the thing. They flashed $20k in big bold numbers. Like you said, people saw that and it’s seared into their brains. It’s like how I always sandbag a little with my bosses. I used to give them the aggressive number on timing or cost for a project with that asterisk, but soon learned not to do that. It doesn’t matter how many disclaimers you include, there is no unseeing the number you gave.
So they blame Trump, their customers probably already hate Trump, this will remind them how much they hate Trump and they buy it anyway. Everybody wins.
Subsidizing brand new cars was never a good idea.
People that can afford to buy a new car don’t need handouts.
The purpose of EV rebates was to accelerate the adoption of a new technology that will drastically cut greenhouse emissions. It has nothing to do with “subsidizing brand new cars” for people who can’t afford them.
Replacing a 3 year old Prius with an EV does not drastically reduce emissions. On a personal level sure, but the rebate money going to getting rid of coal plants would have made a much bigger difference.
Yes … both are laudable goals. But I’m not sure your point is true, and if it is true, it’s still worth encouraging the transition to EV while ending our reliance on coal.
Sadly, it’s all a moot point now. We’re on the absolute worst of timeline.
Coal was just an example, the point being most pollution comes from commercial/industry, not personal cars.
We could wave a magic wand and replace every single car in the US with an EV and it would be a couple of percent reduction overall. It isn’t nothing, but there’s gotta be much better ways to spend all that money.
According to Perplexity AI (which cites its sources):
Cars (and light-duty trucks) emit more greenhouse gas in America than any other single source, making them the top contributor to the nation’s GHG emissions
Actually it does.
That 3 year old Prius gets sold to someone that then sells their 6 year old car, who then sells their 12 year old car to the guy that sends his 24 year old gross polluting car burning a quart of oil per week to the scrapyard.
Coal plants are shutting down left and right because most were built in the 60’s and 70’s and they are no longer economically viable. Fracking and cheap natural gas has devastated coal power plants. Coal has dropped from about 50% of US electricity generation in 2000 to 15% in 2024
Well someone who can’t afford a Prius will get a deal on a Prius then. Win.
Then why have the Prii I’ve owned come with PZEV (partial zero emissions vehicle) stickers?
Tesla only survived because they could sell regulatory emission credits to other automakers.
Success has always been subject to the government to varying degrees.
For readers of a site like this, which is usually one of the best informed auto sites out there, a lot of really ridiculous comments. Disappointing.
Most of these peeps wouldn’t have qualified for the credit anyway, and so on…but it’s amusing to see the reverse-sheep-angle going on right now in this comment thread
I’m just here waiting for cheap used EVs, or for prices to drop to what they would be if the Chinese were competing.
How many years did it take for digital watches to go from $2000 to $10? About 5 years?
Comparing to tech isn’t fair?
Ok
Model T runabout in 1910 $950.
Model T runabout in 1916 $360.
My iPhone outperforms million dollar computers from just a few years ago ago.
Making cheaper ICE cars isn’t going to happen.
I’m riding this into the ground and will get one on principle alone at this rate.
Wow, none of us saw THAT one coming! It’ll make good YouTube documentaries ten years from now.
The EV tax credit was always stupid and market distorting and a lot of the potential buyers of this make too much money for the tax credit’s income cutoff ($150,000 single, $300,000 married couple) unless they leased.
The Maverick is made in Mexico so it is going to face continued tariff pressure.
To me the competition for this was and is cheap new and used EVs, and they are all losing their new and used credits.
This should also qualify for the stupid auto loan interest deduction for US vehicles.
I think the loss of the credit is less important than others do, but this is still going to face a lot of challenges from the glut of cheap used EVs.
lots of those brown manual wagon drivers just got their reason to bail that they have been waiting for
The other thing market distorting is the massive oil industry subsidies. If people had to pay the true cost of fossil fuel and the pollution it causes BEVs would be cheap by comparison.
THIS.
If Americans paid the true, unsubsidized cost of filling up like everyone else does, suddenly EV’s would become the frugal choice.
I suggest you go to your AI chatbot of choice and ask it this question: “In the United States, in net on a per gallon basis and including all upstream payments and tax breaks that financially benefit oil companies, is the price of gasoline taxed or subsidized?”
Based on the provided information, the price of gasoline in the United States, on a net per-gallon basis and considering both taxes and tax breaks that benefit oil companies, appears to be subsidized, particularly when accounting for the full societal costs of fossil fuel consumption.
Here’s why:
In summary, while consumers directly pay gasoline taxes at the pump, the overall economic picture suggests that, considering tax breaks and the broader societal costs (externalities), the fossil fuel industry benefits from considerable subsidies, leading to a potentially subsidized net price for gasoline.
Thanks for posting that nuanced answer. I’ve lived in Japan and spend a lot of time in Europe and am used to the true cost of filling up my car’s tank. Big Oil Co. owns America’s lawmakers and benefits from billionaire socialism.
That is precisely the opposite of the answer I received, but in my case “negative externalities” we’re not part of the equation:
In the United States, **gasoline is effectively taxed, not subsidized**, on a **net per-gallon basis**, when accounting for direct taxes at the pump. However, the situation is more nuanced when **upstream subsidies and tax breaks** to oil companies are included.
### 1. **At the Pump: Gasoline is Taxed**
* **Federal gasoline tax:** 18.4 cents per gallon.
* **State gasoline taxes:** Average about 30 cents per gallon (varies by state).
* **Total average tax:** \~48.4 cents per gallon (as of recent data).
* These taxes are **paid directly by consumers** at the point of sale and fund transportation infrastructure (e.g. highways via the Highway Trust Fund).
### 2. **Upstream Subsidies and Tax Breaks for Oil Companies**
Oil companies receive various financial benefits that reduce their overall costs:
* **Intangible drilling cost deductions**
* **Percentage depletion allowance**
* **Domestic manufacturing deduction (Section 199, now limited)**
* **Royalty relief and favorable leasing terms on public lands**
The total value of these subsidies is **debated**, but credible estimates put federal fossil fuel subsidies at:
* \~\$10–15 billion per year (according to U.S. Treasury and independent studies).
* This is mostly in the form of **tax expenditures** rather than direct payments.
When spread over total U.S. gasoline consumption (\~135 billion gallons/year), the **federal subsidy value per gallon** is roughly:
* \$0.07 to \$0.11 per gallon (depending on scope and accounting).
### 3. **Net Impact: Still a Net Tax**
Even **after subtracting** the estimated upstream subsidy value from the average per-gallon tax:
* **Taxes (≈ \$0.48) – Subsidies (\~\$0.10) = Net ≈ \$0.38 per gallon paid by consumers.**
* Therefore, gasoline is **still taxed on net** in the U.S., not subsidized, per gallon.
### Important Caveats
* Some argue that **indirect subsidies**, like unpriced externalities (e.g. climate change, air pollution, military protection of oil routes), should be counted. Including these would suggest gasoline is **underpriced**, but those are **not direct fiscal subsidies**.
* The actual **fiscal cost to the government** is lower than what the consumer pays due to these subsidies, but the consumer still sees a net tax per gallon.
—
### Conclusion:
**On a net fiscal basis (including both direct pump taxes and upstream subsidies), gasoline is taxed in the United States.** The tax burden far outweighs the per-gallon benefit from oil company subsidies.
Apologies, the formatting of the above came out as disaster, but on mobile I’m not well equipped to fix it.
I keep seeing “negative externalities” claimed as a “subsidy”, and I take issue with that. I’ve been a liberal voter ever since I realized that arguments in favor of liberal stances were generally based on facts, while the conservative arguments are built on fear, but this is an example of the left taking from the right’s playbook, and I hate it.
If the economic analysis doesn’t give you an answer you like, expand the scope of your analysis of hypothetical “costs” until it does. Those are NOT costs, because NO ONE is paying them. In all likelihood no one ever will. These arguments hold about as much water for me as “If all those people I don’t believe should be allowed to be Americans hadn’t voted, my side would have won in a landslide, so that means my side won.”
How much negative externality do you want to figure into the cost of your mobile phone? How about for vinyl flooring? Synthetic materials that allow you not repaint your house every year like your grandparents did? How about the opportunity cost of every dollar directed to fossil fuels over the last 100 years not being directed toward battery research, resulting in the discovery of li-ion chemistry 50 years earlier?
Ask your LLM if any of those externalities figured in its analysis were distributed across things such as vinyl or the synthetic rubber of the soles of your shoes, or low cost shipping that powers a globalized economy? I tried it on my end and the answer was “no”, but the reality of LLMs is that if you ask the same question tomorrow you might get a different answer.
People absolutely do pay for a lifetime of medical care to treat respiratory illnesses caused by air pollution that comes directly out of the tailpipes of internal combustion vehicles.
No different that dumping raw sewage into the river to save the cost of sewage treatment (like we used to do) and then claiming the typhoid and cholera outbreaks are unrelated and shouldn’t be factored into the cost / benefit calculation of sewage treatment.
What the What?
That’s 3X what my wife and I make, and we’re were in the market.
How much do you think the average American makes? The mean average household income in the US is $74,225.
Market distortion was the entire point.
Why even mention it?
The leasing thing was a feature not a bug. The EV goes off lease, and someone who couldn’t afford to buy new gets a credit on a used EV, and the resale price is propped up.
Win win win!
I put a deposit down, but I am thinking more and more I won’t actually get one. $27,500 with crank windows and shit range? I would be much more inclined to be into it if they had the 4WD option at launch… But then for me to make my weirdo EV rendition of an S10/1980s Pathfinder 2-door with optional power windows, 4WD, etc… How much is that going to be? $37,500? $40,000? You’re starting to lose me on this.
It’s clearly not entirely a value play, but if the value is out of whack it’s doomed to fail. This is going to be within 10% if a base Ford Maverick and that car has more range, power windows and more!
Have you driven a modern EV? IMHO no hybrid or ICE alternative can compare in terms of the driving experience. You got basically equivalent horsepower and more torque, via a powertrain that delivers power instantly, with no performance loss due to altitude. I’m up at 7100ft of elevation and I out accelerate any car I’ve seen in my 147hp Nissan Leaf.
About a month ago I saw someone in an mid to late 2000s Audi S4 or something of the sort with a loud exhaust driving like an asshole and I thought to myself “If I had something that loud and slow I’d take that POS back to the Harley dealership”.
With regen and the instant power delivery cruise control is seamless, if I’m going down too steep of a hill to maintain the set speed regen seamlessly applies, the only way you notice it is watching the regen meter and seeing that the speed isn’t increasing, and when going uphill it adds power seemlessly. In my 94 Toyota pickup I used to have to turn off the AC to keep it from disengaging cruise control on uphills as the load with AC was too hard for the little 3.0L V6.
Ford should have made a BEV Maverick years ago, but it’s not too late for them to do so.
Yes, I had a Chevy Bolt and am very familiar with EVs… that’s part of why I think this isn’t a very good value play.
The Chevy Bolt was new around $23,000 after rebates and had a ton more equipment, more range, more power, and you didn’t have to put it together yourself.
This is going to have 150 miles of range, which means it’s going to have 100 miles of range, which means it’s most similar to first-gen Nissan Leaf in performance.
My 2025 Leaf has 149 Miles of range, I got it for $21,500 brand new earlier this year. For my use case it works perfectly (basically all in town driving in the occasional day trip out of town).
I would have much rather gotten a Slate pickup had the option existed
There is plenty of room to improve on the Slate that the manufacturers should do (offer a limited slip diff, offer a locking diff, AWD option with LSD and Locker options for the front as well, etc.
Something that most any mechanic can fix, built from the factory to have good parts availability, not tied to any dealership network, that uses NACS, is really all the value I need.
I bought my Leaf not because the low price, but because it had most of the features I wanted, and the vehicle I previously tried to get (2024 Jeep Wrangler Sport 2 Door V6 6MT with the hard top and trailer tow package) ended up being broken from the factory, and with it being the last of its configuration on dealer lots new, and the 2025 model having deal breaker features as standard, after waiting a month for a replacement part that Jeep corporate refused to allocate meanwhile they were putting it on oodles of 25 Wranglers.
My thinking was pretty simple. ‘If Jeep Corporate won’t allocate a part that is in production for a new vehicle they built wrong after a month, what happens when something breaks and my little podunk Jeep Dealer in my little podunk town in my little podunk state requests a part or series of parts, how long will I have to wait then?’
So I settled for various unnecessary electric bits (electric windows, trunk release, refueling port release, etc. and got a BEV that has been in production for 8 years, that uses a lot of parts from the previous gen of that vehicle, and both generations have had a shit ton of them made, and I could get a Limited Slip Differential made for the performance arm of the manufacture (NISMO) made for them by Quaife. Which I did and now I probably have the only LSD Equipped Leaf in the US (It’s a JDM part).
If the Slate releases them I’m getting 1-3 of them minimum.
Additional problem: it would have to park beside the 2005 4×4 Tundra with an 8′ bed I got for $7500. Sub 20k I like a Slate as a fun and functional runabout. More than that and alllll the compromises become too much to bear.