Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Transportation

Norway Says 'Mission Accomplished' On Going 100% EV, Proposes Incentive Changes (electrek.co) 131

Posted by BeauHD from the poster-child dept.
Norway has effectively achieved its 2025 goal of 100% electric new car sales, prompting the government to declare "mission accomplished" and propose scaling back EV tax exemptions to reflect a mature market. "We have had a goal that all new passenger cars should be electric by 2025, and ... we can say that the goal has been achieved," announced Finance Minister Jens Stoltenberg. Electrek reports: With the finish line in sight, the Norwegian government is now fine-tuning its approach. The current incentive program maintains the crucial VAT exemption for EVs, but only up to a purchase price of 500,000 Norwegian kroner (approximately $49,000 USD). This move is designed to target more expensive, luxury EVs, ensuring that the incentive benefits a broader range of consumers.

However, the latest budget proposal aims to reduce the EV tax exemption to vehicles costing 300,000 Norwegian kroner (~30,000 USD). This would apply for 2026, and then the tax exemption would completely end in 2027. Additionally, the government plans to increase taxes on new gasoline and diesel cars, further widening the cost gap between polluting and zero-emission vehicles.

However, the proposal still needs to be adopted by Norway's government, and there is some opposition. EV associations are advocating for a more extended phase-out period to ensure that the adoption rate doesn't decline.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Norway Says 'Mission Accomplished' On Going 100% EV, Proposes Incentive Changes More

Norway Says 'Mission Accomplished' On Going 100% EV, Proposes Incentive Changes

Comments Filter:

  • Gasoline and diesel cars are now obsolete in the Norwegian new car market, with a few hundred new cars per month, while EVs represent roughly 95-97%

    Unless you are also going to make ICE cars intrinsically more expensive to own then you risk backsliding.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Cyberax ( 705495 )
      Why? EVs are just better and cheaper than ICE cars once the charging infrastructure is in place and you don't have some exotic needs. And it's in place in Norway.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by DrXym ( 126579 )
        Norway demonstrates the benefit of joined up thinking. I think a lot of developed countries, the US being the worst, just let market forces fight it out with consumers being used as pawns. Others recognize ICE vehicles suck (air pollution, noise, health, global warming, fuel fluctuations) and since there is a viable alternative they work to shift consumers onto the alternative.

        It reminds me of incandescent light bulbs a few decades ago. Idiots were screaming they'd never use CFL or LED bulbs and spouting

        • To be fair, CFLs were horrible. I have no problem with LEDs, though I wish they would last 20 years as advertised.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by caseih ( 160668 )

            I have CFLs that are 20 years old and going pretty strong. I've had better luck with CFLs than I do with LED for longevity. CFLs do have to warm up, but they are plenty bright and reasonably efficient. The increased efficiency of LEDs is quickly offset by the cost of replacing them when they burn out so frequently. LEDs can last nearly forever too, but not the way they are manufactured today with cheap components in the power supply and overdriving the LED crystals, sometimes by a factor of two. Big Cl

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by caseih ( 160668 )

      I don't know of any every-day EV drivers that ever want to go back to ICE. And the EV lifestyle is getting easier every day for many people. But not all North Americans.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by DrXym ( 126579 )
      That's what Norway has done - imposed disincentives on owning an ICE vehicle (higher parking, tolls, ferry, purchase taxes) while simultaneously creating incentives for owning an EV (infrastructure grants, subsidized parking, tolls, grants). And lo and behold they achieved their aims of shifting from ICE to EV with some joined up thinking.

      Of course this isn't the end of it because there are still plenty of petrol / diesel cars on the road, and large vehicles like trucks but attrition will mean in 10 years

    • Internal Combustion Engines ARE more expensive to own.

      They are cheap to make and cheap to sell. But maintenance and fuel costs are significantly higher. Especially in Norway.

      Norway is powered almost entirely (over 95%) by hydroelectric dams. And they have little to no petroleum deposits. So electricity is far cheaper than gasoline/diesel.

      As for maintenance, electric cars have far fewer moving parts. Basically the wheels. No movement = no wear and tear. You know those non-car people that ask don't ch

      • They are cheap to make and cheap to sell. But maintenance and fuel costs are significantly higher. Especially in Norway.

        Hopefully it will be enough to keep people from considering them. Humans are remarkably shortsighted when it comes to money.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by caseih ( 160668 )

        No oil? What are you talking about? Norway's economy has been powered by oil exports for years. They have so much they put the oil money in a big fund called Oljefondet (oil fund) which is now valued at $2 trillion! They wisely use all this money to invest in hydro and other renewables, and to push the EV transition. Very wise on their part. But make no mistake, their wealth came from oil!

  • No way! (Score:5, Funny)

    by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Wednesday October 15, 2025 @10:07PM (#65728300)

    Someone better hurry up and tell Norway that winter is coming and EVs don't work in winter!

    • Someone better hurry up and tell Norway that winter is coming and EVs don't work in winter!

      Ned Stark tried that - and, well, we all saw how that turned out for him.

    • Re:No way! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by caseih ( 160668 ) on Wednesday October 15, 2025 @11:54PM (#65728430)

      Most of the very populated parts of Norway don't get too cold, but other parts definitely do! In Alberta Canada, EV range drops to about 2/3 when it's very cold, and you really need to keep it plugged in overnight (or in a garage) to keep the battery warm. But 2/3 range is quite amazing actually, given cabin heating on top of batteries running colder.

      • Re:No way! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Thursday October 16, 2025 @03:07AM (#65728664)
        Most of the populated parts of Norway are still subzero over Dec/Jan. And the eastern parts of Norway which have sizable populations are MUCH colder. It can be -15C sometimes. Sweden & Finland aren't aggressively pursuing EV adoption but they still have EV sales of 35%. Even Iceland has EV sales at 65%.

        I think as we see sodium ion batteries become more prevalent that they'll become very popular in colder climates because of their better performance in lower temperatures. As you say, most cars need heat pumps to warm up the battery for charging otherwise.

        • Most of the populated parts of Norway have winter lows that only just cross into sub-zero. The winter lows rarely drop below -5C which isn't cold by any measure. Nights where it gets -15C are incredibly rare, and days even more so. Norway is considered the most temperate country in its latitude. It's just not that cold and it's only just at the threshold where an EV would even bother taking any kind of action to maintain the battery. Even without any kind of special engineering EV range just isn't dramatica

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by caseih ( 160668 )

          My parents lived in a sweden for a while not that long ago. In Stockholm, which is pretty warm, there are lots of EVs, and in fact teenagers can get licenses to drive very small, speed-limited cars, and many of those are now EVs.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hawk ( 1151 )

        > Most of the very populated parts of Norway don't get too cold,

        methinks that we have very different notions of "too cold" . . .

        ("Above" and "below" should never be part of a temperature!)

        hawk

    • They do work in the winter, but the range is less, but looking at my ICE car, I also see a much higher consumption when it gets cold. And ICE cars also have big trouble when it REALLY gets cold.
  • The rest of us buy used cars. Norway focused on incentives to its very large number of rich people.

    Norway's wealth and size undoubtedly played a role in its EV success. The country has a population of 5.5 million and is one of the world's richest nations, thanks to substantial oil reserves — the largest in Europe after Russia. However, these factors alone don't fully explain the remarkable progress made. ...

    Tax breaks and ease of movement helped

    Favorable state policies have, undoubtedly, helped smooth the transition to electric vehicles. Norway levied no VAT (Value-added tax) or import duties on EVs, which can make up between a third and almost half of the cost of a new car.

    EVs were also exempt from toll road charges and parking fees. They could even use bus lanes in and around the capital, Oslo.

    Higher-income groups benefited the most from the tax breaks and the newly purchased EV was often a second family car.

    Having almost reached the 2025 adoption goal, the government recently rolled back some of those incentives. VAT is now partially applied to large and luxury EVs, costing more than 500,000 kroner ($44,200, €42,500). Drivers from low-income groups still gain from many of the incentives and falling electric vehicle prices.

    Bjorne Grimsrud, director of the Oslo-based transportation research center TOI, thinks the government incentives have been "very costly" but affordable, given the country's wealth and desire to be climate-neutral by 2050.

    "The government used to collect 75 billion kroner annually from taxes and tolls on cars, but that has been cut in half," Grimsrud told DW.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kenh ( 9056 )

      Norway achieved (essentially) 100% EV sales by eliminating all VAT and Tariffs on new EVs up to 500,000 Kr, $50K US....

      The majority of cars on the road in Norway are likely still ICE cars, bought before the EV incentives went into effect.

      When a Norwegian buyer went into the showroom, there could have been up to a 50% price difference, with the EV being half the price of the similar ICE vehicles.

      This is great and all, but few governments charge similar VAT and taxes on cars, and if they do, they likely lack

      • I think that is right. But they also made EV's cheaper and more convenient to operate than an ICE vehicle. So EV's have an advantage even in the used car market. Which meant there was almost no reason for someone to choose the ICE vehicle. An EV was cheaper to buy. cheaper and more convenient to operate and held its value better.

        I don't think its impossible to create those conditions in other places. The problem is political and the power of the legacy industries. If the United States opened its doors to c

        • You must live somewhere where they have an interest in building chargers.
          • Most people only need one charger at home except for the relatively rare long trip. Norway seems to have focused on other advantages like access to bus lanes to bypass congestion.
            • So by your logic, most people never go on a long trip?
              • No. That must be your logic. My logic just says that people only rarely need a public charging station. You can draw whatever conclusions from that your logic creates for you. The conclusion I draw is that once a minimal network of chargers is available it stops being much of an issue for people to consider when buying a car.
                • Ok but it doesn't really matter if they rarely need a charging station. Wherever people go there needs to be a charging station.
                  • Sort of. If you mean somewhere nearby after driving for several hours. Yes. But people don't need a charger when they park at work or go to the store. They do need a charger at home where they park overnight. And that is clearly a problem for some people. But adding public chargers to fix it is probably overkill.

  • ...erm oil and gas don't kill it's just the way you use them.

    But, this is good. If we have to burn stuff, better to do it in one place generating juice and manage it better, rather than travelling all over the place and not managing it at all. Aside from C02, think smog, asthma, copd and general grubbiness in polluted cities.

    And respect to Norway for their sovereign wealth fund and welfare state. Hear the king is pretty cool too. Can I emigrate, is Norwegian hard to learn?

  • Norway (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fluffernutter ( 1411889 ) on Thursday October 16, 2025 @03:33AM (#65728694)
    They made it happen by selling enough oil for every vehicle 100 times over, but yes let's congratulate them for it. Because all that oil was sold with an agreement not to burn it, right?

    • This (Score:3)

      by Viol8 ( 599362 )

      Norway polishes its enviromental halo in one hand while making an absolute killing by selling oil and gas to the rest of the world. Their sovereign wealth fund which is almost exclusively funded by fossil fuels is currently valued at 2 TRILLION dollars.

      No one does enviromental hypocrisy like the Norwegians.

      • Many EVs lose 40% of their range at just -17c according to CAA. How much of Norway even gets that cold?

      • Norway isn't one of the top oil producing countries in the world [wikipedia.org] and they're way behind the top producers in volume. They're known as an oil nation because of a small population relative to the amount of hydrocarbons they produce. More to the point, they never put a gun to anyone's head to force them to buy their oil (or perhaps, never sent a team of Viking berserkers to intimidate people into buying their oil). If people weren't buying their oil, they'd be buying from Saudis instead.

        Oil is used for a lot m

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Viol8 ( 599362 )

          Well done on completely missing the point. Its no different in principle to a group promoting healthy eating yet making its money selling burgers and doughnuts down the road.

          If you believe in the enviroment leave the oil in the ground or make sure it only gets sold to companies for manufacturing purposes, not as fuel.

          • Well done on completely missing the point. Its no different in principle to a group promoting healthy eating yet making its money selling burgers and doughnuts down the road.

            There's some hypocrisy but I'm not sure what path you're suggesting here. Should Norway stop pumping gas/oil so that people go buy it from Saudi/Iran/Russia/USA/Venezuela instead? They'd make no meaningful impact on global hydrocarbon usage, and leave their people worse off in the process.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Viol8 ( 599362 )

              Not sure whats so difficult to understand. Practice what you preach is a well known phrase, maybe you've heard of it. I'm not talking about overall oil consumption, I'm talking hypocrisy - google its meaning. You're probably the sort of person who'd see nothing wrong with a doctor telling someone to stop smoking for their health while sitting behind his desk puffing away.

              • So... your recommendation would be the "make no meaningful impact on global hydrocarbon usage, and leave their people worse off in the process" approach?

                You're probably the sort of person who'd see nothing wrong with a doctor telling someone to stop smoking for their health while sitting behind his desk puffing away.

                The flaw in this analogy is that the doctor could stop smoking and improve their health in the exact same way that they're encouraging their patient to do. The Norwegians can't stop pumping oil and have any meaningful positive environmental impact. But regardless, I think professionally duty requires that even a chain-smoking doctor advise that their pati

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by Viol8 ( 599362 )

                  I really don't know why you have a problem with the analogy, the meaning of the word hypocrisy or you're just playing devils advocate because you're bored. Either way, I think I'll just file you under "idiot" and leave it there.

                  • Did you not read my first response where I open with "there's some hypocrisy" and then ask what real world approach should be taken given that?

          • If you believe in the enviroment leave the oil in the ground

            If, starting from tomorrow, every single oil-producing country completely stopped selling any oil, civilization would collapse within, maybe, a few years. As it stands, trucks, shipping vessels, airplanes, concrete producing factories and many other essential things all run on hydrocarbons. For many developing nations almost all their power stations need oil or gas or coal. In order to combat climate change we need to come up with ways all these things can still function without needing oil anymore. Like, f

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Viol8 ( 599362 )

              So let the developing nations pump the oil then. A nation with 2 trillion in the bank doesn't need to especially while pretending to be green by mandating EVs on the population.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by kenh ( 9056 )

          Norway is sitting on a lot of oil, they only drill/produce less than they could.

          Their wealth is from state ownership of the oil, and they use that wealth to help fund the govt, but let's not pretend Norway is some low-tax utopia, the citizens pay a healthy tax rate on most things (except, of course, EVs)

    • Yes we should do so. Every country made most of its money exploiting a usually dirty history and natural resource. The difference is Norway invested that money into a fund for its future while most other countries blow it on meaningless expenses that provide no benefit to its citizens.

      Because all that oil was sold with an agreement not to burn it, right?

      If you're going to point out the indignities of the past as a reason to not support something in the future I remind you you once came screaming and crying bleeding out of a woman's vagina. But we won't hold that against you.

  • 100% is a complete lie, as even in Norway new ICE cars are still sold. I think it would be more like 96-98%. But it makes sense for people in Norway to buy an EV, as electricity is much MUCH cheaper in Norway as about anywhere else, so charging your car is a LOT cheaper as

  • Population of Norway: 5.6 million.
    Population of USA: 340 million
    Number of cars in Norway: 2.9 million
    Number of cars in USA: 285 million.

    What can or should be done in Norway has absolutely nothing to do with the US.

  • Norway is only 5.5 million people. NY city alone is 8.5 million and Norway is the size of an average US state. Who really cares what they do, they are pretty insignificant to the world in general.

Slashdot Top Deals

Life's the same, except for the shoes. - The Cars

Close