The chart shows the fallacy in the argument - EVs don't depreciate, but instead are subsidized by various public and private schemes - meaning their new asking price as paid by consumers is not the same as the sticker prices.

The first hit of 'depreciation' is when this contradiction appears in the used price, after that they depreciate like normal.

that makes no sense. an EV that cost $50k with or without subsidy that now costs half that is depreciation.

What's more interesting from reading the discussion here is that the depreciation of EV goes beyond the battery and thermal/geographic tax its that there is nothing special from the car market point of view that suggests a mass produced EV should hold its value against some truly sought after ICE cars that offer a unique novelty.

Even the Porsche EVs have not held their value very well compared to their ICE cars. There is simply no appeal to taste when you have to generate ICE sounds via speaker and signals EVs aren't very fun to drive or offer much novelty beyond the fact that its an EV compared to ICE cars where each engine is unique to the maker and has ton of parts all synchronized into a controlled chaos.