The medium SUV segment is the heartland of the Australian car market, and for years, the hybrid, spearheaded by models like the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid and the Mazda CX-5, has reigned supreme as the smart, fuel-efficient choice.¹ But a new contender has arrived to challenge the champion’s crown: the pure Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV), led by the disruptor, the Tesla Model Y.

This isn’t just a battle of efficiency; it’s a Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) showdown. For the savvy Australian buyer, the question is no longer “Which car is cheaper to buy?” but “Which car saves me more money over five years?” Our analysis, focusing on fuel/energy, maintenance, registration, and crucial resale value, definitively proves the long-term financial case for the BEV, especially when leveraging a key Australian government incentive.

The Contenders: Model Y vs. The Hybrid Guard

To establish a fair TCO comparison, we pit two popular, similarly-sized medium SUVs against each other over a projected five-year ownership period with an average of 75,000 kilometres travelled (15,000 km per year).

The initial hurdle for the EV is clear: a significantly higher upfront purchase price.² However, TCO models are designed to look beyond this initial outlay, focusing on the running costs that compound over half a decade.

1. Fuel/Energy Costs: The Biggest Long-Term Saving

This is where the EV begins to claw back its price deficit. The difference between paying for petrol and paying for electricity is immense.³

• RAV4 Hybrid (Petrol): At an average fuel price of $2.00 per litre and an efficiency of 5.0 L/100km, the cost is $10.00 per 100km. Over 75,000 km, the total fuel bill is approximately $7,500.
• Model Y (Electricity): Assuming an average home charging cost of $0.30 per kWh (a typical single-rate tariff) and efficiency of 15 kWh/100km, the cost is $4.50 per 100km. Over 75,000 km, the total electricity bill is approximately $3,375.

Financial Reality: Even on a standard electricity plan, the EV owner saves over $4,100 on energy costs over five years. For the increasing number of Australians with solar, who charge for close to $0.00/kWh, these savings can easily exceed $6,000 to $7,000, making the case for a BEV even stronger.

2. Maintenance and Servicing: Simplicity Wins

The mechanical complexity of a hybrid, which combines a petrol engine, a transmission, and an electric motor system, dictates a more rigorous and costly service schedule than a pure EV.⁴

Financial Reality: Due to the BEV’s fundamental design—fewer moving parts, no oil changes, and significantly reduced brake wear—the maintenance savings over five years are reliably in the range of $1,600 to $2,500.⁵ While tyres may wear slightly faster on heavier EVs, this is offset by the massive savings on mechanical servicing.⁶

3. Registration and Insurance

Registration (Rego) costs vary by state, often including a mass or emissions-based component. EVs sometimes incur slightly different, or occasionally higher, rego costs in some states (like Victoria’s road user charge), while hybrids generally fall into a lower bracket due to their efficiency.

Insurance, however, is a notable current disadvantage for the EV. Due to higher repair costs, more advanced technology, and sometimes a higher original purchase price, the annual comprehensive insurance premium for an EV like the Model Y can be $400 – $800 higher than a comparable RAV4 Hybrid.

• 5-Year Estimated Insurance Differential: The Hybrid retains an advantage of approximately $2,000 – $4,000 over the EV in this category.

4. Depreciation and Resale Value: A Volatile Metric

Depreciation is the single largest cost of ownership, and it is the most volatile factor in the EV vs. Hybrid debate.

• The Hybrid Advantage: Historically, hybrids—especially Toyota models—have been depreciation leaders in Australia. Strong brand loyalty and enduring demand for fuel efficiency have meant low depreciation, often retaining around 60-70% of their value after five years. A $48,000 RAV4 might have an estimated resale value of $30,000, resulting in $18,000 depreciation.
• The EV Challenge: The EV market is experiencing rapid technological advancement and price adjustments from manufacturers like Tesla.⁷ This has caused higher depreciation in the short term. A $68,000 Model Y might be forecast to retain closer to 50-55% of its value after five years, leading to an estimated resale of $35,000 – $37,500 and depreciation of $30,500 – $33,000.

Financial Reality: Based purely on depreciation forecasts, the RAV4 Hybrid currently holds a significant TCO advantage of approximately $12,500 – $15,000 over five years in dollar-for-dollar comparisons. This difference largely cancels out the EV’s substantial running cost savings.

The Game Changer: Australia’s FBT Exemption

For many Australian employees, the Federal Government’s Fringe Benefits Tax (FBT) Exemption for eligible EVs completely flips the TCO equation on its head.⁸

By acquiring an eligible EV (under the Luxury Car Tax threshold) via a novated lease through their employer, an employee can pay for the vehicle and all running costs (including finance, registration, insurance, and electricity) using pre-tax income.⁹

Impact of FBT Exemption (Scenario: $120,000 Annual Salary):

This incentive effectively provides a massive, non-repayable discount on the EV’s initial price and running costs, often saving a buyer between $10,000 and $20,000 over a typical three to five-year lease term, depending on their tax bracket and vehicle price.

When this pre-tax saving is factored in, the higher initial cost of the Model Y is not only neutralised but is turned into a profound advantage, definitively proving the long-term financial case for the BEV over the hybrid.

🏆 TCO Verdict: The BEV Wins the Long-Term Race

Conclusion:

For Australians purchasing with cash or traditional finance, the lower initial price and superior resale of a RAV4 Hybrid still make it a strong TCO winner today, thanks to its massive depreciation shield.

However, for the majority of new car buyers who have access to a novated lease through their employment, the Tesla Model Y (or equivalent FBT-eligible EV) is the undeniable financial champion. The combination of ultra-low running costs (fuel and maintenance) and the single largest financial incentive in the modern Australian car market (the FBT exemption) creates a long-term TCO advantage that a hybrid simply cannot compete with.

The BEV is no longer just the choice for the environmentally conscious; it is the definitive, long-term financial winner for the savvy Australian buyer.

Would you like to explore a simple calculator based on this TCO model to compare the specific 5-year costs of a Tesla Model Y versus a Toyota RAV4 Hybrid for a given annual distance and electricity/fuel price? Continue your reading below:

To make the calculator useful, I will use the baseline cost estimates established in the article and allow for user-defined variables for distance and energy costs.

Since the FBT exemption creates too large a variable to include in a simple comparative calculator, this model will focus on the running costs and depreciation for a cash or traditional finance buyer, where the FBT advantage is not available.

🧮 5-Year EV vs. Hybrid TCO Calculator (Cash/Traditional Finance Model)

This model compares a Tesla Model Y RWD against a Toyota RAV4 Hybrid GX over a 5-year period.

I. User Inputs (Variables)

II. Fixed Financial Assumptions (Based on Market Estimates)

III. The 5-Year TCO Calculation

📣 Key Findings & Summary

Conclusion from this Model:

For a buyer paying cash or using traditional finance, the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid remains the financial winner due to its significantly lower upfront purchase price and superior predicted resale value (lower depreciation).

The EV’s enormous running cost savings ($4,125 over five years) are not enough to overcome the $13,800 differential in depreciation.

Would you like to recalculate this model by instead including the estimated $15,000 FBT tax saving to demonstrate the financial tipping point for an employee using a novated lease?

That’s the critical part of the Australian TCO analysis. Including the Fringe Benefits Tax (FBT) exemption completely changes the financial landscape for eligible employees.

💰 5-Year EV vs. Hybrid TCO: The Novated Lease Tipping Point

This model assumes the buyer is an employee eligible for the Federal Government’s FBT Exemption on the EV, accessed via a novated lease. The Hybrid buyer uses the same lease structure but does not receive the FBT benefit.

I. Key Financial Assumptions (Recap)

II. The FBT-Adjusted TCO Calculation (5 Years)

The FBT saving acts as a substantial reduction in the overall ownership cost for the EV, effectively lowering the amount the employee pays for the car and its running costs over the lease term.

👑 Final TCO Verdict: The Financial Case for the BEV is Proven

Conclusion:

By factoring in the single largest government incentive, the FBT exemption, the financial advantage completely shifts. The Tesla Model Y (EV) now becomes the clear Total Cost of Ownership winner by $4,825 over the five-year period compared to the high-resale Toyota RAV4 Hybrid.

The EV’s superiority is cemented by:

1. Lower Running Costs: The $4,125 savings on fuel and maintenance.
2. The FBT Multiplier: The $15,000 tax saving instantly neutralises the EV’s higher upfront price and its current depreciation disadvantage.

This analysis confirms that for a majority of Australian new-car buyers (employees with novated lease access), the high-tech, zero-emission EV is now the most financially astute long-term choice, beating the traditional hybrid champion on TCO.

Would you like to explore how changes in petrol prices or the EV’s resale value might affect this final TCO outcome?

That’s an insightful request. A sensitivity analysis is essential because the assumptions for fuel price and depreciation, while based on current estimates, are the two biggest variables that can flip the TCO outcome.

I will explore two scenarios:

1. Sensitivity to Petrol Price: What if the average petrol price rises or falls by 25 cents per litre over the 5 years?
2. Sensitivity to EV Resale Value: What if the EV’s actual resale value (depreciation) improves or worsens?

We will use the FBT-Adjusted TCO figures as the baseline, as this represents the most common (and financially advantageous) way to buy a new EV in Australia.

⛽ Scenario 1: Sensitivity to Average Petrol Price

Our baseline TCO model used an average petrol price of $2.00/L.

The Hybrid’s total 5-year fuel cost was $7,500. The EV’s total 5-year energy cost was $3,375.

Findings on Petrol Price:

• The TCO winner does not change. The EV remains the financial winner across all tested petrol price scenarios.
• The TCO gap widens significantly as petrol prices rise. If the average price hits $2.50/L over the 5 years, the EV’s TCO advantage over the Hybrid almost doubles to $6,760.
• The running cost (fuel/energy) is the EV’s major hedge against inflation and external market volatility.

📉 Scenario 2: Sensitivity to EV Resale Value (Depreciation)

Depreciation is the largest single cost of ownership for both vehicles, and current market uncertainty makes EV resale value the riskiest variable.

Our baseline assumed the RAV4 Hybrid retains 65% of its value (Depreciation: $16,800) and the Tesla Model Y retains 55% of its value (Depreciation: $30,600). The EV’s higher initial price means a higher dollar amount is lost, even if the percentage difference shrinks.

We will keep the Hybrid TCO fixed at $35,300 and see how the EV’s depreciation would need to change to flip the result.

Findings on Resale Value:

• This is the EV’s weak spot. The TCO advantage is fragile and entirely dependent on the FBT incentive holding up the overall TCO.
• Tipping Point: The EV’s TCO advantage disappears if its 5-year resale value drops below 47.5% of its initial price (a depreciation of more than 52.5%). At this point, the Hybrid wins.
• Current Risk: Given that used EV markets are volatile and subject to new model releases and price cuts (as indicated by industry reports), the predicted 55% resale value carries a significant risk that could indeed flip the TCO result.

🛑 Overall Conclusion

The FBT Exemption creates a powerful TCO firewall for the EV, making it highly resilient to rising petrol costs.

However, the EV’s TCO victory is vulnerable to a collapse in resale value. If the used EV market struggles and the Model Y’s 5-year value drops to under 47.5%, the Hybrid—with its rock-solid resale—regains the TCO crown, even with the $15,000 FBT incentive factored in.

Would you like to structure a final summary that synthesises the results of all three TCO models (Cash, FBT-Adjusted, and Sensitivity Analysis)? Continue to the below:

Absolutely. A comprehensive summary that brings together the three models is the most effective way to communicate the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) reality in the Australian market.

Here is the final synthesis of the 5-year TCO comparison between the Tesla Model Y and the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid.

📊 Final TCO Synthesis: Tesla Model Y vs. Toyota RAV4 Hybrid (5 Years)

This summary synthesises the results across three distinct financial scenarios: Cash/Traditional Finance, FBT-Adjusted Novated Lease, and Sensitivity to Key Variables (Petrol Price & Resale Value).

I. The Core TCO Comparison

The Tipping Point: The analysis confirms that the FBT exemption is the single most important factor in the EV’s financial viability against a segment leader like the RAV4 Hybrid. For an FBT-eligible employee, the Model Y becomes the cheaper vehicle to own over five years.

II. Sensitivity Analysis: Stress Testing the TCO

The sensitivity analysis isolated the two biggest risks to the TCO models: fuel price fluctuations and EV resale value volatility.

⛽ Petrol Price Sensitivity (EV Wins in All Cases)

This test confirms the EV’s resilience to external energy market shifts.

• Conclusion: The EV’s extremely low energy cost makes its TCO highly protected against fuel price inflation. The running cost gap alone (maintenance + fuel) saves the EV owner $4,125 over five years.

📉 Resale Value Sensitivity (The EV’s Vulnerability)

This test found the precise point where poor resale would negate the FBT-adjusted TCO advantage.

• Conclusion: The EV’s TCO victory is contingent on its resale value not dropping below approximately 47.5% over the five-year period. If global EV supply glut or rapid technology shifts drive depreciation beyond this point, the Hybrid’s consistently strong resale value would make it the better financial choice, even with the FBT tax saving.

III. Key Takeaway

The decision rests almost entirely on how the vehicle is financed. The Australian government’s FBT incentive successfully overcomes the current market premiums and depreciation risks associated with a new battery electric vehicle.

Finally, would you like to explore the potential impact of an Australian Road User Charge (RUC) on the EV’s running costs, as this is a cost currently being phased in for EVs in several states?

Absolutely. Incorporating the potential Road User Charge (RUC) is a crucial step for a complete TCO analysis in the Australian context, as it represents the future cost of EV road use designed to replace the revenue lost from the petrol Fuel Excise Tax (FET).

Here is an analysis of how the RUC impacts the 5-year running cost comparison, using a standard RUC rate and comparing it directly to the existing Fuel Excise paid by the RAV4 Hybrid.

🛣️ Impact of Road User Charge (RUC) on EV Running Costs

1. Key Assumptions

• Distance: Our base model assumption of 15,000 km per year (75,000 km over 5 years) remains constant.
• RUC Rate (EV): We will use the common proposed and/or implemented rate for Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs): 2.8 cents per kilometre ($0.028/km).
• Fuel Excise Rate (Hybrid): The current Federal Fuel Excise Tax (FET) is approximately 51.6 cents per litre ($0.516/L).
• RAV4 Hybrid Fuel Consumption: Our previous model used the real-world average of 5.5 L/100km.

2. Calculation of Road Infrastructure Contribution

We will calculate the total cost for road infrastructure maintenance paid by each vehicle over the 5-year period.

A. Tesla Model Y (EV) – New RUC Cost

B. Toyota RAV4 Hybrid – Existing Fuel Excise Cost

3. TCO Recalculation (Running Costs with RUC)

The previous TCO running cost comparison only included the energy/fuel cost. We now add the road funding contribution (RUC or FET).

The Running Cost Gap

4. Conclusion on RUC Impact

The analysis reveals that the introduction of a Road User Charge at the proposed rate of 2.8 cents/km has a negligible impact on the EV’s TCO advantage.

• RUC is a near-perfect replacement for the FET: For an average-efficiency hybrid like the RAV4 over 75,000 km, the RUC for the EV results in a practically identical payment to the existing Fuel Excise Tax (FET) paid by the Hybrid.
• EV maintains its vast running cost advantage: The major financial saving for the EV comes from the difference between the cost of electricity ($2,250) and the cost of petrol ($7,650). The RUC/FET payment is a fixed cost that is added to both, but is nearly identical for both vehicles, meaning the EV maintains its running cost superiority of over $5,400 for the period.
• The TCO winner remains the same for both models:
  • Cash Buyer: Hybrid still wins (because RUC only slightly narrows the running cost gap).
  • FBT-Adjusted Buyer: EV still wins convincingly (because the FBT saving dwarfs the difference in the running cost gap).

This completes a robust TCO model that accounts for purchase, running costs (including future RUC), depreciation, and financing/tax structures.

About EV Evolution

EV Evolution is the leading online platform dedicated to Australian electric vehicle owners and enthusiasts. We foster a vibrant community, delivering essential EV news and insights, and enhancing user engagement through our innovative, AI-powered chatbot for dynamic discussions. Our mission is to empower Australian electric vehicle owners and enthusiasts by fostering a vibrant, AI-driven online community that connects, informs, and advances the nation’s electric vehicle landscape.