You're kidding. They did not leave incentives out. And there are good reasons for incentivizing the purchase of evs, climate change, while since by some definitions America is energy dependent and since oil companies are already getting billions
The United States provides a number of tax subsidies to the fossil fuel industry as a means of encouraging domestic energy production. These include both direct subsidies to corporations, as well as other tax benefits to the fossil fuel industry. Conservative estimates put U.S. direct subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at roughly $20 billion per year; with 20 percent currently allocated to coal and 80 percent to natural gas and crude oil. European Union subsidies are estimated to total 55 billion euros annually. https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-fossil-fuel-subsidies-a-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs
"Very informative -- they left out a key ingredient -- policies to encourage the production and use of fossil fuels vs the policies to curtail the production and use of fossil fuels -- EVs vs GP autos for example"
Again see they didn't leave a mention of incentives out. And how long are you intending to ignore:
DE HAAN: Well, he can certainly deregulate some of the system, allowing oil companies to potentially drill more at a easier pace. He could open up additional drilling. It was President Biden that had eliminated leases in some areas on federal land. Now, keep in mind, federal land is a very small total of U.S. oil production on federal land, so it wouldn't have a big impact, but ultimately, there are some things that the president can do to incentivize oil companies, but ultimately, it's at oil companies' whims if they'd like to increase production or not.And should oil prices decline to the point the president likes, it would be at a point where many oil companies are losing money on every barrel.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
