Form this USA Today summary they’ve figured out how to keep you from buying a clunker just to get the cash. The clunker has to have been registered to you for a year.
What would keep you from finding someone with a clunker who is willing to buy a vehicle on your behalf? Obviously the two parties would have to trust each other but it seems like it could work.
It’s a trade-in program, so the person that gets rid of the old clunker has to buy a new car. I suppose that person could turn around and sell the new car to you, but that person would be without a car.
Otherwise I guess there’s nothing that would stop someone from getting rid of a car they don’t need, buying a new car, then selling it to you and keeping whatever profit there is to be made. But the program would still work in terms of getting an old clunker off the road and pumping up the economy by selling a new car.
Sorry… I understood how the program would work. To be more clear I should have pointed out that you can’t buy a clunker in order to trade it in right away and get up to $4500 off on the new car.
Seems like a lot of trouble if you dont need a vehicle right now, you could buy and register the clunker ,depending on how long the Cash for Clunkers program is going to last for, if its less than six months its not worth it ,but if it goes a year or more ,then yeah wait the term.
Also I would not be surprised to hear of any dealerships that will pro rate the trade in, ie not do the paper work for more than 3 months or so , or at least trying.
Declan
It looks like my two clunkers don’t qualify. I’m primarily interested in getting rid of my 2002 Olds Alero 6-cyl. (New MPG = 21 combined… 18/27 city/hwy). With the rules as they are now, I’d need to find a car that is rated at 31mpg to get the $4500. 25mpg for $3500.
I’m also have a GM-branded credit card. They are (were?) running a promotion where they upped the redemption limits. In theory, I could redeem the $4500 in credit card rewards and $4500 on an otherwise worthless trade and get $9000 off a new vehicle. That’d make it worth it.
The way I see it, if you had enough foresight 10 years ago to not buy a car that gets less than 18 miles per gallon, no soup for you. If you’ve spent the last decade pissing away gasoline, go ahead, the taxpayers have your back.
So if I trade my 19 mile per gallon 1994 minivan in on a 40 mile per gallon hybrid I get jack, but if someone with a 14 mile per gallon car trades on an 19 mile per gallon vehicle, “Woo hoo, $4500 free money.” That works great, just about what I expected.
In order to qualify, you need to have registered and insured the vehicle for a year (or maybe two?). The junker that’s been up on blocks in the yard doesn’t count.
It is my understanding the money goes straight to the dealer (who passes it along as a discount), and is not cash to you. Is that correct?
That’s not true, at least according to the article in the OP. There are 2 ways to get the money. First is to trade in an 18mpg (or lower) car. Second, if your new car gets 10mpg better than the old car, you get the $4500. 4-9mpg better gets you $3500.
I’m not sure I’d describe it as a discount, but yes, that’s correct.
Actually, I believe you need to do both; trade in a car getting less than 18MPG and purchase a new one getting at least 10MPG more.
Well, yes. I don’t think they’ll give you the money if you trade in an 18mpg minivan for a 12mpg Viper. 
The article specifies a “combined” city/highway rating, while the referenced site gives separate values. Do you just average them for the combined, or is it more difficult than that?
More complicated than that. The Federal “combined” mileage is based on 55% city and 45% highway driving.
You can get the Fed combined mileage figures here.
Not according to the article I read in the OP. It is an and gate. All of the conditions have to be true. The original car has to get less than 18 miles per gallon, it has to have been registered for the last 12 months to the person making the trade, the new car purchased has to cost less than $45,000 and get at least 4 miles per gallon more than the trade in.
So, like I said, someone who owns a 14 mpg vehicle can get $3,500 by trading in on a car that gets one mile per gallon less than my current vehicle, but if I trade mine for a car getting 21 miles per gallon more, I get nothing.
The State is all about removing responsibility. They don’t want people thinking about their actions. Thinking leads to disloyalty. Just wave your flag harder and the State will pat you on the head and give you anything you want. I’m vegetarian. Why do tofu dogs cost me FOUR TIMES as much as dead animal hot dogs? Why is it that I can buy a steak cheaper than an eggplant? Why does TVP – a waste material which was once burned or fed to animals – cost the same as hamburger (made from cows which might well have been fed on TVP at 20 kilos of TVP to one kilo of beef)? All government subsidy. Your taxes are paying to keep you fat, stupid, unhealthy, and totally irresponsible. You are rewarded for waste and punished for thrift.
Is it time for the Second American Revolution yet?
Wow, I just read that summary. The qualifications for trucks are just plain stupid.
Well, you CAN get the regular trade in value from the dealership. The trade in value for a lot of cars is probably more than you can get from this program anyways. Although probably not on the 1994 minivan.
They had to balance the cost and restrictions of the program aganist the getting the most overall improved fuel economy, in addition to stimulating auto sales.
All these turned in vehicles are going to be destroyed. If you’re pulling vehicles off the road, it makes sense to target the worst ones.
…the hell? I just checked on the mpg of my current truck (2000) vs this year’s model (2009), and the fuel economy went down! Thanks a lot, Nissan.
Of course, I’m planning on driving my current truck at least 200,000 more miles, so the exercise was strictly for information, but still.
The method of calculating mpg changed between 2000 and 2009, so it’s not an apples to apples comparison. Even so, a box is only going to do so well.
This program is stupid - Given the same amount of money I could remove at least ten times the number of gas guzzlers from the market.
Finally, what’s the point of paying to get rid of gas guzzlers while still alllowing the guzzlers to be sold? Maybe a $4,500 tax on new gas guzzzlers (anything less than 18 mpg?) should be part of this program.
How?
Thats what the CAFE standards are for.
If they’re going to tax anything to improve fuel efficiency, it should be the fuel itself