Maybe an economist can explain to me.. if you remove taxes on groceries does the price of groceries just go up by the amount of the tax? I suppose that’s not the case with EVs, but it must also depend on how free the market is (opportunity for seller collusion)
Ooo! OOO! I love demand curves!

This is from a blog talking about adding a cigarette tax, but the principles apply to any good, you just have to reverse the movement of the arrows (instead of going from supply to supply+tax, we're going from supply+tax to supply).
Under the economic principle of rational actors, buyers are adjusting their purchases of groceries because of the tax. People who would buy a gallon of milk when it's $2.50, but not when it's $3 are currently not buying milk. If we removed the taxes, those buyers would buy milk. This is shown by the difference in quantity purchased between "supply+tax" and "supply".
On the production side, if we assume sellers are only making $2 per gallon of milk, so the same number of producers are willing to sell at $2 with and without tax. This is shown by the vertical line at 400 quantity in the graph between supply and supply+tax.
Without the tax, the price and quantity would equalize at the market rate. People who are willing to buy milk at $3 and can now get it at $2.50 have a "demand surplus". Sellers who are willing to sell at $2 but can sell at $2.50 have a supply surplus. Those groups are economically better off than they were with the tax. This is represented by the sum of the areas in green, red and blue.
The government is worse off economically because it doesn't have the revenue that resulted from the demand and supply surpluses (areas in red and green).
Overall, the economy is better off by the area in blue without tax, the "dead weight loss". However, if we're talking about the cigarette example, we need to weigh the economic loss against the public policy gain of lower rates of smoking.