make economic sense in all 4O countries studied. For three-wheelers, BEVs outperform their ICE counterparts in the majority of countries, with the exception of two small island countries with heavily on much cheaper secondhand ICEVs (Burkina Faso and Malawi). In the car and bus segments, the BEV uptake scenario offers α cost advantage in 28 and 24 countries, respectively. In the freight sector, the BEV uptake scenario offers a cost advantage in only 18 of 40 countries for LCVs and In financial terms, some countries offer fiscal incentives such as BEV tax or import duty reductions, direct purchase subsidies, fossil fuel taxes, or electricity price subsidies. With these fiscal wedges, the BEV uptake scenario in the car segment shows a cost advantage in 33 countries, compared with 28 in the economic analysis. The fiscal impact on two- and three-wheelers and buses are less significant. BEV tax and import duty incentives are much less common for freight vehicles. In addition, financial analysis excludes the monetized benefits of environmental externalities, both local and global. As a result, the number of countries where BEV uptake shows a cost advantage does not improve in financial terms compared to the economic analysis.