Electric and Hybrid Vehicles

Latest story

100 Shares69 Views

Trump’s Tariffs Leave Automakers With Tough, Expensive Choices

by

Carmakers are likely to face higher costs regardless of how they respond to President Trump’s 25 percent tariffs on cars and auto parts.Automakers can respond to President Trump’s new 25 percent tariffs on imported cars and parts in several ways. But all of them cost money and will lead to higher car prices, analysts say.Manufacturers can try to move production from countries like Mexico to the United States. They can try to increase the number of cars they already make here. They can stop selling imported models, especially ones that are less profitable.But whatever carmakers decide, car buyers can expect to pay more for new and used vehicles. Estimates vary widely and depend on the model, but the increase could range from around $3,000 for a car made in the United States to well over $10,000 for imported models.Those figures do not take into account additional tariffs that Mr. Trump said he would announce next week to punish countries that impose tariffs on U.S. goods. He has also said he would increase tariffs further if trading partners like Canada and the European Union raise tariffs in response to his auto tariffs, leading to an escalating tit-for-tat trade war.“It’s going to be disruptive and expensive for American consumers for several years,” said Michael Cusumano, professor of management at the MIT Sloan School of Management.Mr. Trump has long brandished tariffs. But many auto executives had hoped that his threats were a negotiating tool. Mr. Trump dashed those hopes on Wednesday when he said at the White House that the tariffs were “100 percent” permanent.Where Popular Cars (and Their Parts) Come FromHere is a selection of well-known models and where their components come from, as well as where the vehicle is ultimately assembled.

.dw-chart-subhed {
line-height: 1;
margin-bottom: 6px;
font-family: nyt-franklin;
color: #121212;
font-size: 15px;
font-weight: 700;
}

Share of parts by origin country
Source: National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

More stories

  • 125 Shares188 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Tariffs Could Help Tesla, by Hurting Its Rivals More

    by

    The electric car company led by Elon Musk builds all the cars it sells in the United States in California and Texas, shielding it from tariffs that could devastate competitors.As President Trump puts new tariffs on goods from China and threatens a trade war with allies like Mexico and Canada, one global company is likely to suffer less than most of its competitors: Tesla.But the electric car maker led by Elon Musk, which accounts for a third of the billionaire’s wealth, is also vulnerable if relations with China worsen. That country is the company’s second-largest market after the United States and it produces more cars there than anywhere else.Tesla has built largely self-sufficient supply chains in the United States and China, a rarity in a world of interconnected trade. As a result, the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration on Chinese goods, and the continuing threat to put them on Mexican and Canadian products, might help Tesla by hurting its competitors more.Although there is no evidence that Mr. Musk is shaping trade policies, the tariffs are one of several measures adopted by the Trump administration that may benefit Tesla at the expense of its rivals. On Wednesday, Mr. Trump paused 25 percent tariffs on most autos and parts made in Canada and Mexico, but the reprieve expires in a month, leaving automakers in the United States that depend on foreign supply chains in a state of uncertainty.The Tesla factory in Austin, Texas, in 2023. Cars produced here will be shielded from tariffs that will hurt Tesla competitors. Go Nakamura/ReutersThe administration is also trying to eliminate financial support for the construction of fast-charging stations for electric vehicles, a move that could handicap companies seeking to compete with Tesla’s extensive network. And it is attempting to cut or eliminate loans and subsidies that competitors like Ford Motor and Rivian are using to finance electric vehicle and battery factories.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    G.M. Has Plans Ready for Trump’s Canada and Mexico Tariffs

    by

    General Motors, the largest producer of cars in Mexico, won’t provide details on how it would react if President Trump imposes 25 percent tariffs from the two countries.General Motors executives are closely tracking President Trump’s plans to impose tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico, but the company is not yet making any major changes to its strategy in North America in response to the threatened tariffs.The automaker has pulled together an “extensive playbook” of possible options but won’t put them in place “until the world changes dramatically, and we see a permanent level of tariffs going forward,” the company’s chief financial officer, Paul Jacobson, told reporters in a conference call on Monday evening.“I won’t go into the details exactly but we’ve been preparing for that and want to make sure that we are prudent and don’t overreact,” he added.Mr. Trump said last week that he planned to impose tariffs of 25 percent on goods from Canada and Mexico starting on Saturday, Feb. 1. If he followed through on those plans, the tariffs would deal a big blow to G.M. and other automakers that produce vehicles and components in those countries, and probably increase the prices of many vehicles sold in the United States.G.M. produced nearly 900,000 vehicles in Mexico in 2024, more than any other carmaker, and most of those were shipped to the United States. Among them are the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra pickup trucks, as well as the Chevrolet Equinox sport-utility vehicle — all top-sellers and big sources of profit for the company. It also produces some Silverados and electric delivery vans in Canada.G.M. said on Tuesday that it lost $3 billion in the final three months of 2024, stemming from a $4 billion noncash expense related to a restructuring of its joint venture operations in China. The company’s revenue in the quarter rose 11 percent.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Plans to Scrap Climate Policies Has Unnerved Green Energy Investors

    by

    President-elect Donald J. Trump is expected to roll back many of the rules and subsidies that have attracted billions of dollars from the private sector to renewable energy and electric vehicles.Money is the mother’s milk of politics, but the outcome of elections also determines where it flows — and last month’s was especially crucial for the energy industry.Clean investment — including renewable energy as well as the manufacturing of electric vehicles, batteries and solar panels — has boomed since the passage of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, championed by President Biden. In the third quarter of 2024, it reached a record $71 billion, according to a tracker maintained by the Rhodium Group, an energy-focused research firm, and M.I.T.The big question looming now on Wall Street: Will President-elect Donald J. Trump, who called Mr. Biden’s policies the “green new scam” during the campaign, pull back enough of those subsidies and regulations to meaningfully change the economics of investing in decarbonization?Market reactions right after the election seemed clear. Clean energy stocks dropped sharply, while shares of oil companies bounced, indicating a divergent view of how the two sectors will fare in the coming years.Near the top of Mr. Trump’s agenda next year is extending his 2017 tax cuts. He will most likely need to reduce spending elsewhere to do that. Clean energy tax credits — worth about $350 billion over just the next three years, according to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation — would be a tempting target. The more those subsidies are pared, the more projects would no longer make financial sense.President Biden has championed the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act and other policies designed to address climate change and spur investment in cleaner forms of energy.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Why Mergers of Carmakers Like Honda and Nissan Often Falter

    by

    The Japanese companies are considering joining forces to survive in a rapidly changing auto industry, but auto history is filled with troubled and failed marriages.The Japanese automakers Honda and Nissan are discussing a possible merger, in a bid to share costs and help themselves compete in a fast-changing and increasingly competitive industry.But a merger, even of two companies from the same country, is no guarantee of success, and the history of automotive deals is littered with failures and disappointments.Combining two large, global manufacturing operations is an incredibly difficult feat that involves reconciling different technologies, models and approaches to doing business. A merger’s success rests on getting ambitious managers and engineers who have spent decades competing with one another to cooperate. Teams and projects have to be scrapped or changed, and executives must cede power to others. In some cases, the merging companies are hamstrung by elected leaders who force them to keep operating money-losing factories.Thomas Stallkamp, an automotive consultant based in Michigan, was involved in the struggles of one of the biggest auto mergers, the 1998 merger of Chrysler and the German company Daimler. Mr. Stallkamp spent years in senior roles at Chrysler and DaimlerChrysler.“Car companies are big, complicated organizations, with large engineering staffs, manufacturing plants all over the world, hundreds of thousands of employees, in a capital-intensive business,” Mr. Stallkamp said. “You try to put two of them together and you run into a lot of egos and infighting, so it’s very, very difficult to make it work.”Honda and Nissan announced plans this year to work together on electric vehicles, and on Monday they formally began talks about extending that cooperation to a merger that could also include Mitsubishi Motors, a smaller manufacturer that works closely with Nissan. A pairing would unite Japan’s second- and third-biggest automakers, after Toyota, and create a company that would be the third largest in the world by number of cars produced, after Toyota and Volkswagen.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 175 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Factory Towns Laid Low by the ‘China Shock’ Are Benefiting From New Investments

    by

    Communities that suffered the worst of plant closings in recent decades are now gaining an outsize share of fresh investment and new jobs.For much of the last half century, economic life in the heart of North Carolina has been dominated by factory closings, joblessness and downgraded expectations. Textile mills and furniture plants have been undercut by low-priced imports from Mexico and China. Tobacco processing jobs have disappeared.Yet over the last several years, an infusion of investment in cutting-edge industries like biotechnology, computer chips and electric vehicles has lifted the fortunes of long-struggling communities.North Carolina presents a conspicuous example of this trend, yet a similar story is playing out elsewhere. From industrial swaths of the Midwest to factory towns in the South, areas that suffered the most wrenching downsides of trade are now capturing the greatest shares of investment into forward-tilting industries, according to research from the Brookings Institution, a public policy research organization in Washington.As furniture manufacturing and textile jobs vanished, Chatham County, N.C., suffered the consequences for decades.Sebastian Siadecki for The New York TimesThe Plant in Pittsboro, N.C., is home to a variety of small businesses and includes outdoor event spaces and restaurants.Sebastian Siadecki for The New York TimesBrookings researchers examined pledges of private investment across the United States, using data compiled by the Biden administration as part of its campaign to subsidize domestic production of computer chips and electric vehicles. They also tapped a Massachusetts Institute of Technology database that tracks investments in clean energy. Over the last three years, $736 billion in investment has been promised for these key industries, the researchers found.When they mapped the investments, the Brookings team concluded that nearly a third of the total is flowing into communities that experienced the worst effects of the so-called China Shock — the factory closures that followed China’s entry to the global trading system in 2001.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    G.M.’s Electric Vehicle Sales Surge as Ford Loses Billions

    by

    Ford is struggling to make money on battery-powered models while General Motors, which started more slowly, says it is getting close to that goal.In the race to be second to Tesla in the U.S. electric vehicle market, Ford Motor leaped to an early lead four years ago over its crosstown rival, General Motors, with the Mustang Mach E, an electric sport utility vehicle with a design and a name that nodded to its classic sports car.But the contest looks much different today.Sales of G.M.’s battery-powered models are starting to surge as the company begins to reap its big investments in standardized batteries and new factories. Ford’s three electric models, including the F-150 Lightning pickup truck and a Transit van, are still selling well but are racking up billions of dollars of losses.The latest view into how Ford’s quick-start strategy has run into trouble came on Monday, when the company reported that its electric vehicle division lost $1.2 billion before interest and taxes from July to September. In the first nine months of the year, it lost $3.7 billion.Ford’s chief financial officer, John Lawler, said it was a “solid quarter,” noting that revenue had risen for the 10th quarter in a row, by 5 percent to $46.2 billion. But the company’s overall profit of $896 million in the third quarter was down 24 percent from a year earlier, largely because of problems with electric vehicles, warranty costs and other factors.“Our strategic advantages are not falling to the bottom line the way they should because of cost,” Mr. Lawler said.Ford made an early entry into the electric vehicle market compared to other established automakers with the Mustang Mach E.David Zalubowski/Associated PressWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    How Elon Musk Might Use His Pull With Trump to Help Tesla

    by

    Although Donald Trump has opposed policies that favor electric cars, if he becomes president he could ease regulatory scrutiny of Tesla or protect lucrative credits and subsidies.Former President Donald J. Trump has promised, if he is re-elected, to do away with Biden administration policies that encourage the use and production of electric cars. Yet one of his biggest supporters is Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla, which makes nearly half the electric vehicles sold in the United States.Whether or not Mr. Trump would carry out his threats against battery-powered cars and trucks, a second Trump administration could still be good for Tesla and Mr. Musk, auto and political experts say.Mr. Musk has spent more than $75 million to support the Trump campaign and is running a get-out-the-vote effort on the former president’s behalf in Pennsylvania. That will almost surely earn Mr. Musk the kind of access he would need to promote Tesla.But Mr. Musk would also have to confront a big gap between his Washington wish list and Mr. Trump’s agenda.While Mr. Musk rarely acknowledges it, Tesla has collected billions of dollars from programs championed by Democrats like President Biden that Mr. Trump and other Republicans have vowed to dismantle.In Michigan, a battleground state and home to many auto factories, the Trump campaign has run ads that claim that Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, wants to “end all gas-powered cars” — a position that she does not hold.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    E.V. Tax Credits Are a Plus, but Flaws Remain, Study Finds

    by

    The Inflation Reduction Act was a compromise between competing priorities. Evaluating the law on the effectiveness of the $7,500 tax credit for E.V.s is tricky.A team of economists has taken on a central component of the Inflation Reduction Act: the $7,500 tax credit for U.S.-made electric vehicles.The challenge in evaluating it is that the policy has sometimes conflicting goals. One is getting people to buy electric vehicles to lower carbon emissions and slow climate change. The other is strengthening U.S. auto manufacturing by denying subsidies to foreign companies, even for better or cheaper electric vehicles.That’s why totaling those pluses and minuses is complex, but overall the researchers found that Americans have seen a two-to-one return on their investment in the new electric vehicle subsidies. That includes environmental benefits, but mostly reflects a shift of profits to the United States. Before the climate law, tax credits were mainly used to buy foreign-made cars.“What the I.R.A. did was swing the pendulum the other way, and heavily subsidized American carmakers,” said Felix Tintelnot, an associate professor of economics at Duke University who was a co-author of the paper.Those benefits were undermined, however, by a loophole allowing dealers to apply the subsidy to leases of foreign-made electric vehicles. The provision sends profits to non-American companies, and since those foreign-made vehicles are on average heavier and less efficient, they impose more environmental and road-safety costs.Also, the researchers estimated that for every additional electric vehicle the new tax credits put on the road, about three other electric vehicle buyers would have made the purchases even without a $7,500 credit. That dilutes the effectiveness of the subsidies, which are forecast to cost as much as $390 billion through 2031. “The I.R.A. was worth the money invested,” said Jonathan Smoke, the chief economist at Cox Automotive, which provided some of the data used in the analysis. “But in essence, my conclusion is that we could do better.”How the Environmental and Safety Costs of Gas- and Electric-Powered Cars Stack UpMeasuring the cost to society of carbon emissions from driving and manufacturing, local air pollutants and the danger of crashes, a new economic analysis finds that some gas-powered vehicles are less damaging than electric and hybrid vehicles.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    The five least and most costly gas- and electric-powered vehicles
    Averages are weighted by the number of each model registered within each powertrain category. Total costs subtract fiscal benefits from gas taxes and electricity bills.Source: Hunt Allcott, Stanford; Joseph Shapiro, U.C. Berkeley; Reigner Kane and Max Maydanchik, University of Chicago; and Felix Tintelnot, Duke UniversityBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More