The ZEV credits are granted to Tesla by California. By regulation, other car manufacturers have effectively been forced to purchase these, giving them value. Put simply: these credits only exist and have value because of government.
You can play games with semantics, and political pundits can argue about the merits of programs like California's, but those doing due diligence on Tesla should understand the regulations and how these credits may be valued in the future. For instance, if more auto manufacturers develop electric vehicles, the value of the credits will likely decrease over time, perhaps substantially, while the competition in the EV market will at the same time increase. Will Tesla suffer substantially in this scenario? Maybe or maybe not, but I haven't seen many analyses of the company delve into this, at least around here.
As for Tesla's track record: I think one can be truly impressed by what the company has accomplished thus far from a technology perspective without jumping to the premature conclusion that the company's investment has produced a viable long-term business.
Your wording simply suggested to me that you thought these were somehow backed with government money. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted here.
Musk has said in conference calls that their 25% margin target is not predicated (at all) on credit revenue, but he can't magically make money appear, so that remains to be seen.
There is a very worthwhile recap of the regulatory credits systems here:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/16357-Regulato...
That said, Tesla clearly has a brilliant track record of putting money to use. They built a frickin fully electric luxury sedan in 2 years on a $450M budget.