is the Maverick holding its value?

[Laketime]

Just hope it holds til Toyota has a mini hybrid pickup.

Agree!! Can't help but think the wait we went thru would not hold a candle to the wait if we want a Toyota Stout.

Sponsored

 

[BlueRaven]

traded my 22 xl eb awd 4k last month. had 20k on it. dealer gave me $25k for it. I paid $29k for it after taxes. $4k loss for 1 1/2 years driving it. couldn't rent a rental for that.

stop reading jalopnick and other click bait sites. go ask your dealer for actual prices and offers.

 

[JASmith]

The article is talking about vehicles in general, and those that purchased EVs are the hardest hit, losing about half their value after 5 years, which is painful when people paid full sticker (sometimes plus dealer addendums).

The good news is that it means that used cars may finally make sense again.

Certain vehicles do much better than average, generally hybrids and the Maverick as well since Ford hasn't done much to ramp up production. Combine the two, a Mav hybrid, and guarantee you can get big bucks for those still.

Most states have tax incentives for trades, courtesy of NADA + lobbying + corrupt state politicians.

Especially ridiculous when they are taxing something that has already been taxed, just because it changed hands. And the same groups patted themselves on the back for setting a "standard presumptive value" for private party sales, so you end up paying a certain amount of tax no matter what you set the sale price to.

They also have no grace period, so say you private party sell a vehicle, and then buy another a week later, you pay full tax and not just the difference.

 

[Dslaughterbeck]

I just KBB my Lariat Tremor paid 37 k. Quoted me at 37 k.

 

[710-oil-614]

Holy shit! I just checked CarMax and they are offering me $34,000 now!

I paid $31,300 (sticker was $34,800). I've got 8,300 miles on it.

 

[2lbgill]

The article is talking about vehicles in general, and those that purchased EVs are the hardest hit, losing about half their value after 5 years, which is painful when people paid full sticker (sometimes plus dealer addendums).

The good news is that it means that used cars may finally make sense again.

Certain vehicles do much better than average, generally hybrids and the Maverick as well since Ford hasn't done much to ramp up production. Combine the two, a Mav hybrid, and guarantee you can get big bucks for those still.

Especially ridiculous when they are taxing something that has already been taxed, just because it changed hands. And the same groups patted themselves on the back for setting a "standard presumptive value" for private party sales, so you end up paying a certain amount of tax no matter what you set the sale price to.

They also have no grace period, so say you private party sell a vehicle, and then buy another a week later, you pay full tax and not just the difference.

In Wisconsin only the cash difference is taxable.

 

[Godzilla]

https://jalopnik.com/everyone-is-underwater-on-their-car-loans-as-values-plu-1851340337

Just received email from Carvana yesterday offering 26400 for my Ecoboost XL. I paid a little over 20 for it with my private offer. I have driven it for 13 months. Of course I love my truck and now have it the way I want it.

 

[JASmith]

In Wisconsin only the cash difference is taxable.

Yeah, but generally speaking you shouldn't be able to tax the same good over and over again, as in theory you could collect more in taxes than the original value of the commodity if it just passed hands often enough.

For example, if I buy a vacuum cleaner, I pay tax on it, fine. If I sell that vacuum cleaner to my next-door neighbor, it would be ridiculous to have that same good taxed again. And you don't, but on a vehicle you do because the dealerships lobbied for it and the government and dealership unions (which are now big corporations, few dealers are independent) patted themselves on the back that they'd both get more money with the only loser being the citizens. Pure scam!

The same happens to individual investors who pay taxes on dividends, as those earnings were already taxed at the corporate level, so the government is double-dipping charging the same income twice. There are organizations out there trying to fight it, but its hard to convince the government not to steal when the government has to agree with you... clear conflict of interest.

Sponsored