Abstract
Many countries have adopted electric vehicle (EV) rebate policies to accelerate EV uptake and decarbonize the transport sector. However, the welfare implications of such policies remain contested, particularly regarding their effectiveness and distributional consequences. In this study, we use a discrete choice experiment with a representative sample of 1500 Australian taxpayers to elicit their preferences for EV rebate policies, focusing on the equity and efficacy concerns inherent in rebate financing and targeting. Under the homogeneous preference specification, we find that respondents value both equity and efficacy, where they prefer rebates that are targeted towards low-income earners and higher-income earners to contribute more to financing. Participants value an increase of 1000 new EVs at $5 million; however, are unwilling to finance this rebate through their own tax contributions. Contrarily, respondents are willing to contribute $67 by themselves for taxpayers in their income bracket to be eligible for the rebate and for the government to spend $170 million for them to be eligible, emphasizing the preference towards private gains. Once the assumption of homogeneous preferences is relaxed, we find substantial variation across individual preferences. There is significant heterogeneity in attitudes toward targeting, rebate magnitude, and the degree of tax progressivity, as well as in the valuation of efficiency gains. While, on average, respondents express a preference to be eligible for the subsidy themselves and support higher-income households contributing more, these preferences are far from uniform.