Factories and Manufacturing

More stories

  • 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

  • 163 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    How U.S. Firms Battled a Government Crackdown to Keep Tech Sales to China

    by

    An intense struggle has unfolded in Washington between companies and officials over where to draw the line on selling technology to China.At a meeting in Washington this spring, tech company representatives and government officials once again found themselves at odds over where to draw the line when it came to selling coveted technology to China.The Biden administration was considering cutting off the sales of equipment used to manufacture semiconductors to three Chinese companies that the government had linked to Huawei, a technology giant that is sanctioned by the United States and is central to China’s efforts to develop advanced chips.Applied Materials, KLA Corporation and Lam Research, which make semiconductor equipment, argued that the three Chinese companies were a major source of revenue. The U.S. firms said that they had already earned $6 billion by selling equipment to those Chinese companies, and that they planned to sell billions more, two government officials said.U.S. officials, who view the flow of U.S. technology to Huawei as a national security threat, were stunned by the argument. In regulations issued this month, they ultimately rejected the American companies’ plea.Over the past year, an intense struggle has played out in Washington between companies that sell machinery to make semiconductors and Biden officials who are bent on slowing China’s technological progress. Officials argue that China’s ability to make chips that create artificial intelligence, guide autonomous drones and launch cyberattacks is a national security threat, and they have clamped down on U.S. technology exports, including in new rules last week.But many in the semiconductor industry have fought to limit the rules and preserve a critical source of revenue, more than a dozen current and former U.S. officials said. Most requested anonymity to discuss sensitive internal government interactions or exchanges with the industry.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

  • 100 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Mexican President Mulls Retaliatory Tariffs After Trump’s Threats

    by

    Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, hit back on Tuesday morning at President-elect Trump’s vow to impose 25 percent tariffs on all products coming into the United States from Mexico, signaling that her country was prepared to respond with retaliatory tariffs of its own.Ms. Sheinbaum also said that raising tariffs would fail to curb illegal migration or the consumption of illicit drugs in the United States, an argument that Mr. Trump had made in his warning on tariffs.“The best path is dialogue,” Ms. Sheinbaum said at her daily news conference, calling for negotiations with the incoming Trump administration while laying out steps that Mexico has already taken to assuage some of Mr. Trump’s concerns.Ms. Sheinbaum, reading from a letter she is planning to send to Mr. Trump, noted that illegal crossings at the border between Mexico and the United States had plunged from December 2023 to November 2024, largely as a result of Mexico’s own efforts to stem migration flows within its own territory.“Migrant caravans no longer reach the border,” she added.Ms. Sheinbaum also called on U.S. authorities to do more to address the root causes of migration.“Allocating even a fraction of what the United States spends on warfare toward peace building and development would address the deeper drivers of migration,” Ms. Sheinbaum wrote in the letter.Ms. Sheinbaum also raised the specter of a broader tariff war that could inflict damage on the economies of both nations, pointing to multinational car manufacturers like General Motors, Stellantis and Ford Motor Co., which have operated in Mexico for decades.“Why endanger them with tariffs that would harm both nations?” Ms. Sheinbaum wrote. “Any tariffs imposed by one side would likely prompt retaliatory tariffs, leading to risks for joint enterprises.”Mexico is far more dependent on trade with the United States than vice versa, exporting about 80 percent of its goods to its northern neighbor.But numerous sectors in the United States, such as semiconductor and chemicals manufacturers, also rely on exporting to Mexico. Exports to Mexico accounted for nearly 16 percent of overall American exports in 2022.Ms. Sheinbaum also said that Mexico was already taking steps to combat the smuggling of fentanyl to the United States. But she argued that the core problem was demand for fentanyl within the United States, calling the crisis “fundamentally a public health and consumption issue within your society.”“It is widely known that the chemical precursors used to produce fentanyl and other synthetic drugs are illegally entering Canada, the United States, and Mexico from Asian countries,” Ms. Sheinbaum wrote. “This underscores the urgent need for international collaboration.” More

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Trade Agenda Could Benefit Friends and Punish Rivals

    by

    Donald Trump has a record of pardoning favored companies from tariffs. Companies are once again lining up to try to influence him.The sweeping tariffs that President-elect Donald J. Trump imposed in his first term on foreign metals, machinery, clothing and other products were intended to have maximum impact around the world. They sought to shutter foreign factories, rework international supply chains and force companies to make big investments in the United States.But for many businesses, the most important consequences of the tariffs, enacted in 2018 and 2019, unfolded just a few blocks from the White House.In the face of pushback from companies reliant on foreign products, the Trump administration set up a process that allowed them to apply for special exemptions. The stakes were high: An exemption could relieve a company of tariffs as high as 25 percent, potentially giving it a big advantage over competitors.That ignited a swift and often successful lobbying effort, especially from Washington’s high-priced K Street law firms, which ended up applying for hundreds of thousands of tariff exemptions. The Office of the United States Trade Representative, which handled exclusions for the China tariffs, fielded more than 50,000 requests, while the Commerce Department received nearly 500,000 exclusion requests for the tariffs on steel and aluminum.As Mr. Trump dangles new and potentially more expensive tariffs, many companies are already angling to obtain relief. Lawyers and lobbyists in Washington say they are receiving an influx of requests from companies that want to hire their services, even before the full extent of the president-elect’s tariff plans becomes clear.In his first term, Mr. Trump imposed tariffs of as much as 25 percent on more than $300 billion in Chinese goods, and 10 percent to 25 percent on steel and aluminum from a variety of countries, including Canada, Mexico and Japan.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

  • 100 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Biden Cements TSMC Grant Before Trump Takes Over

    by

    The White House is racing to finish grant agreements for chip manufacturers, but some of its biggest successes might be credited to the Trump administration.The Biden administration said on Friday that it had completed an agreement to award Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company up to $6.6 billion in grants, as federal officials race to put in place their plans to boost U.S. chip manufacturing before the end of President Biden’s term.The administration struck a preliminary agreement in the spring to provide TSMC with the funding, which will support three new factories in Phoenix. The government will give TSMC the money in tranches as the company meets milestones.In a statement, Mr. Biden said that the foreign direct investment in the facilities was the largest for a new factory project in U.S. history, and that the announcement on Friday was “among the most critical milestones yet” in the rollout of his chips program.The agreement “demonstrates how we are ensuring that the progress made to date will continue to unfold in the coming years, benefiting communities all across the country,” Mr. Biden said.The administration is expected to finish more grant awards in the coming weeks. But the projects might come too late for Mr. Biden to receive much credit. Chip factories take years to build, and many of these projects will not break ground — or produce chips — until well into President-elect Donald J. Trump’s term.Mr. Biden’s administration is working to cement its legacy with the grants as part of a $39 billion program to revitalize U.S. technology manufacturing and reduce reliance on foreign nations for critical semiconductors. The program is a pillar of the president’s economic policy, which has largely focused on bolstering American manufacturing.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

  • 100 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Win Shows Limits of Biden’s Industrial Policy

    by

    When President Biden addressed the nation this week after a gutting election, his reflections on his economic legacy offered a glimpse into why Democrats were resoundingly defeated.The efforts by the Biden-Harris administration to reshape American manufacturing were the most ambitious economic plans in a generation, but most voters had yet to see the fruits of those policies.“We have legislation we passed that’s only now just really kicking in,” Mr. Biden said, explaining that a “vast majority” of the benefits from federal investments that his administration made would be felt over the next decade.Legislation enacted by the Biden-Harris administration was designed to pump hundreds of billions of dollars into the United States economy to develop domestic clean energy and semiconductor sectors. The investments were likened to a modern-day New Deal that would make American supply chains less reliant on foreign adversaries while creating thousands of jobs, including for workers without a college degree.But anger over more immediate and tangible economic issues — including rapid inflation and high mortgage rates — dwarfed optimism about factories that had yet to be built. That reality helped topple Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign and showed the limits of industrial policy as a winning political strategy.In the days since Mr. Trump’s victory, current and former Biden administration officials have been grappling both privately and publicly with why their economic strategy did not prove to be more popular. They have comforted themselves with the fact that inflation has led to the defeat of incumbent leaders around the world, although most of those governments were also struggling with weak economies, whereas growth in the United States remains robust.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

  • 150 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    With Trump Tariffs Looming, Businesses Try to ‘Run From a Moving Target’

    by

    Rick Muskat woke up the morning after the election with an urgent task. He got his agent in China on the phone at 4:30 a.m. Beijing time and pressed him to ask their factory how many more pairs of men’s dress shoes they could make before Chinese New Year, at the end of January.“I told them if they could make an additional 30,000 pairs, we would take that,” Mr. Muskat, the co-owner of a shoe company called Deer Stags, said on Thursday.The impetus was not a sudden jump in demand for shoes but the looming threat of steep tariffs on Chinese products. By stockpiling now, Mr. Muskat reckoned, his company could avoid at least some of the levies that President-elect Donald J. Trump has promised to impose when he takes office in January.“We’re going to take whatever they can make,” Mr. Muskat said.The election of Mr. Trump is already cascading through global supply chains, where companies are grappling with his promises to remake international trade by raising the tariffs the United States puts on foreign products. Mr. Trump has floated a variety of plans — including a 10 to 20 percent tax on most foreign products, and a 60 percent tariff on goods from China — that would raise the surcharge American importers pay to a level not seen in generations.Much remains unclear about his proposals, including which countries other than China would face tariffs, what products might be excluded and when they would take effect. But given Mr. Trump’s history of imposing taxes and the challenges those pose to global businesses that depend on moving products across borders, many executives are not waiting to see what he does.Some, like Mr. Muskat, are preparing to stock up their U.S. warehouses before tariffs might go into effect. Others have been accelerating plans to move out of China, reaching out to lobbyists and lawyers in Washington and calling board meetings to discuss what the tariff threats could mean for their businesses.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

    Could Trump’s Tariffs Lead to Higher Prices? Here’s What to Know.

    by

    The president-elect says that tariff is “the most beautiful word in the dictionary.” You may be hearing it a lot.President-elect Donald J. Trump has professed a belief in the power of tariffs for decades. Now, as he prepares to take office, they are a central part of his economic plan.Mr. Trump argues that steep tariffs on foreign goods will help benefit U.S. manufacturing and create jobs. His proposals would raise tariffs to a level not seen in generations. Many economists have warned of potentially harmful consequences from such a move, including higher costs for American households and businesses, and globally destabilizing trade wars.Here are five crucial things to know about Mr. Trump’s sweeping trade plans.Mr. Trump has floated several hefty tariff plans.While campaigning for the White House, Mr. Trump offered up a running list of tariffs. He talked about a “universal” tariff of 10 to 20 percent on most foreign products. He has proposed tariffs of 60 percent or more on Chinese goods. And he has suggested removing permanent normal trading relations with China, which would result in an immediate increase in tariffs on Chinese imports.Mr. Trump has also promoted the idea of a “reciprocal” tariff, in which the United States would match the tariff rates that other countries put on American goods. He has suggested using tariff revenue to replace income taxes. And he has threatened tariffs of 100, 200 or even 1,000 percent on Mexico, saying the country should do more to stop flows of migrants and shipments of Chinese cars.The Biden administration has also raised tariffs on goods from China, but Mr. Trump’s plans are much larger — affecting trillions of dollars of products, rather than tens of billions.Mr. Trump says foreign companies pay the tariffs. That’s usually wrong.A tariff is a tax that is put on a product when it crosses a border. For instance, a company that brings its product into the United States — the importer — actually pays the tariff to the U.S. government.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