Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In
Image: ##http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2013/10/cash-for-clunkers-evaluation-gayer## ##Brookings Institution##

Turns out paying people to buy cars isn't a great policy for the economy or the environment. That's the determination of a pair of Brookings Institution researchers who evaluated the effectiveness of the 2009 Cash for Clunkers program.

The $2.85 billion program, part of President Obama's economic stimulus package, produced only 2,050 "job-years," according to researchers Ted Gayer and Emily Parker. That means every year of employment attributed to it cost taxpayers about $1.4 million -- a far worse cost-benefit ratio than many other stimulus programs.

Between June and September 2009, about 700,000 people took advantage of the program known formally as the Car Allowance Rebate System (get it?). The federal government gave each participant a rebate between $3,500 and $4,500, depending on the estimated emissions reduction compared to the purchaser's previous car. New vehicles purchased averaged about 25 miles per gallon, compared to an average of about 16 m.p.g. for trade-ins.

However, Brookings determined that of these sales, only about 380,000 were a direct result of the program; the other 320,000 participants would have purchased cars during that time period anyway. And even many of the stimulated sales would have occurred during the following months without any subsidy, researchers determined.

"The net result was a negligible increase in GDP, shifting roughly $2 billion into the third quarter of 2009 from the subsequent two quarters," said Gayer and Parker.

Cash for Clunkers' environmental returns were less than stellar as well. The program resulted in reduced carbon emissions of between 9 and 28 million tons, at a cost of $91 to $301 per ton.

"The cost per ton of carbon dioxide reduced by the CARS program far exceeds the estimated social cost of carbon, suggesting it is an inefficient approach to reducing emissions," Gayer and Parker write. The cap-and-trade proposal rejected by the Senate in 2009 would have been far more meaningful, they add.

Cash for Clunkers produced similar environmental returns to the electric vehicle subsidy -- which, we've reported before, is not such a great use of tax dollars either.

At the time Cash for Clunkers passed, Washington failed to enact a less-expensive, $2 billion proposal to help preserve transit service for millions of Americans.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

NYC Warns Delivery Apps to Follow New Worker Protection Laws

The Mamdani Administration sent letters to over 60 delivery app companies, warning they must comply with new regulations.

January 20, 2026

What the ‘Abundance’ Agenda Could Mean For Equitable Transportation

Could Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson's buzzword usher in an era of bountiful transportation options, or just more highways?

January 20, 2026

Tuesday’s Headlines Weigh Perception and Reality

It may be driven largely by the media — car crashes are too common to make the news — but a feeling that transit isn't safe is hurting ridership.

January 20, 2026

Monday’s Headlines Wonder About E-Bikes’ Future

E-bike sales surged in 2020 and 2021 but have been flat ever since.

January 19, 2026

Friday Video: How ‘Car Brain’ Warps the Way We See the World

How can we fix the brains distorted by car culture?

January 16, 2026

Friday’s Headlines Are the Best

People for Bikes named its top bike lane projects of the past year.

January 16, 2026
See all posts