guess you didnt read the article, its all being destroyed.

I did, but lots of things that are supposed to be destroyed end up on secondary markets.

probably not when part of the requirements to get the subsidy are destroying the old equipment.

Maybe your definition of "destroyed" is maintaining this misunderstanding. Their definition of "destroyed" is some paper saying that the destruction is being handled by a specialized company. That company can "outsource the destruction overseas" without being liable.

You’d be surprised.

I'd be surprised if you'd be willing to risk the sanctions for buying equipment you knew was defrauding the US government. The feds play for keeps...

Unless the destruction process is thoroughly documented so following up the mandatory requirements will ensure the hardware is totaled and whatever remains of it is beyond repair, there are always some chances it would be disposed of in a less than irreparable manner, and someone would just recover it and sell for profit.

It doesn't require malicious intent, just negligence, ignorance, lack of awareness and/or poorly worded instructions.

It probably is thoroughly documented, with approvals to recycle the materials to avoid running afoul of various environmental regs, etc. then it gets parted out on eBay.

It’s like when your insurance company destroys your car, that just means selling it to a wrecker that parts it out and eventually crushes what remains. The vehicle can’t be registered but as long as you have a frame with a good VIN you’re good to go.

My comment you replied to was not suggesting defrauding the government (definitely don’t ever do that, going on the record I don’t support that) but commentary on how frequently something that should happen (equipment destruction) as required by law, policy, or contract doesn’t happen. Very similar to how hard drives with very sensitive information on them always seem to end up on eBay (or marketplace of your choice).