An under-the-radar battle between electric car manufacturer Tesla and the state’s car dealers has burst into the open — and become increasingly personal.
Legislation was introduced in the state House on Thursday to make clear that California-based Tesla may legally sell its high-dollar electric vehicles directly to consumers. Sponsored by Rep. Chuck Martin, R-Alpharetta, House Bill 393 would add an exemption to the state's franchise laws for any vehicle manufacturer who sells directly to the public if the builder has never used franchisees in Georgia.
The bill’s filing is not a surprise. In fact, Tesla’s nemesis, the Georgia Automobile Dealers Association, all but dared Tesla to seek legislative change during a legal hearing in December. GADA has petitioned the Department of Revenue to revoke Tesla’s new car dealer’s license on the grounds that state law requires car manufacturers to use franchises — that is, car dealers — to sell their vehicles.
Tesla, which has showrooms in Atlanta, Decatur and Marietta, limits itself to selling 150 vehicles a year in Georgia.
Tesla says the law doesn't apply to it because the company has never used franchises. At that December hearing, GADA attorney Anne Lewis argued the opposite and said, if Tesla doesn't agree, "go the General Assembly and change it."
But, now, the fight has entered a new phase. An administrative law judge has scheduled another hearing on the car dealers’ petition for next week. In preparation, GADA subpoenaed Bruce Bowers, Tesla’s lobbyist at the Capitol. Bowers declined to comment.
But he could be asked to testify about his conversations with lawmakers, something that veteran lobbyist Jet Toney said he’s never heard of happening before.
“The subpoenaing of lobbyists to testify in administrative proceedings will significantly chill the necessary communication between lobbyists and public officials,” said Toney, the president of the Georgia Professional Lobbyists Association. “Registered professional lobbyists will know that they are ethically obligated to advise public officials that the lobbyist is under a subpoena. The full exchange of information between knowledgeable advocates and public officials will be, unfortunately, diminished, and the public policy-making process will suffer from a curtailing of the free flow of relevant information.”
But a spokesman for the car dealers said legal proceedings require witnesses.
“As an organization that lobbies at the Capitol, GADA fully understands and respects the relationship between legislators and lobbyists,” Chip Lake said. “However, the dispute between GADA and Tesla is a pending legal case. In court, witnesses are always necessary to establish the facts, and this case is no different.”
Martin, who filed the Tesla bill, said he’s interested only in advancing free markets, not getting involved in the Tesla-GADA dispute.
Martin is an interesting choice to carry the bill. He's also the sponsor of House Bill 122, which eliminates the $5,000 state income tax credit for the purchase of an electric car, including Teslas and the popular Nissan Leaf.
Martin said the two bills are consistent. They level the playing field, he said.
“If we think so much of electric cars, we certainly don’t want to get in the way of people who want to buy them,” he said. “Let the free market system work.”
About the Author
