EV Charging After the One Big Beauiful Bill

Big Picture: Policy and Funding Implications

Will Policy Changes Impact Commercial EV Adoption? During the presentation, a discussion on consumer and infrastructure incentives found that policy changes, cost realities, and shifting market sentiment were concerning, beginning with the removal of two major incentives: the commercial vehicle federal credit (45W) and various government fleet targets. Niese noted the vanishing target for government fleets. State-level measures such as California’s Clean Fleet Act have also been rolled back or challenged. Without these pillars, adoption drivers for commercial fleets have weakened. Darren Palmer , vice president of electric vehicle programs at Ford Motor Company, underscored that “there’s effectively no positive credit to get there and then no requirement to do that.” He added that the impact is compounded by the unexpected expense of charging infrastructure for commercial vehicles, with some customers discovering costs as high as $15,000 to install Level 2 chargers. These higher costs force fleets to reassess the total cost of ownership, often concluding that the payback period is too long without

commercial and retail decision-making, noting that “it makes complete sense” that incentives were never the sole reason to invest in charging. For retailers, as with fleets, other factors often outweigh the presence or absence of credits. Turning to the truck stop and heavy-duty segment, Kimberly Okafor , general manager of zero emissions for Trillium and Love’s Travel Stops, said the passenger vehicle EV charging credit was “really nice to have” but not a deciding factor in their investments. With expira- tion looming, the priority is to install as many chargers as possible before the deadline. However, on the heavy-duty side, total cost of ownership was already a major barrier compared with diesel or CNG/RNG, and the removal of incentives has further dampened interest. “We didn’t have very many fleets knocking on our door...now we’re seeing even less,” she said. Niese reflected that the EV sector is in a period of recalibration. “The euphoria of a couple of years ago” has subsided he said, and it will take time to untangle which slowdowns stem from policy changes versus those from a natural market reset.

incentives. Palmer commented that infrastructure costs may be more damaging than policy rollbacks because even willing adopters are reconsidering. From the perspective of the government sector, Jessica Stoll Lowery , transportation policy advisor at Atlas Public Policy, explained that many government entities relied on the 45W commercial vehicle credit. Without it, “it’s definitely putting a wrench in their financing strategy” and delaying timelines. She said some fleets are still waiting on payments from months-old filings, which has made “it really complicated” and has turned some away from the funding mechanism, if not from EVs entirely. Still, interest remains high, with the shift affecting speed more than commitment. Niese added that some infrastructure investors never factored credits into their initial business cases, meaning deals could still work without them. Lowery agreed, recalling that some government clients were skeptical of the credit’s existence in the first place, using it only as a “nice bonus” for purchasing additional EVs. On the retail side, Jay Smith , executive director at the Charge Ahead Partnership, drew parallels between