Canada To Impose 100% Tariff On Chinese-Made EVs (www.cbc.ca) 149
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CBC.ca: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Monday Canada will impose punitive tariffs on Chinese-made electric vehicles -- copying a similar initiative that the U.S. is already pursuing to stop a flood of what's been described as unfairly state-subsidized cars. Trudeau made the announcement at the federal cabinet retreat in Halifax where ministers are meeting to craft a strategy for the year ahead -- the last year before an expected federal election in October 2025. Amid industry pressure to copy the U.S. program, Trudeau said a 100 percent surtax will be levied on all Chinese-made EVs, effective Oct. 1. The tariff would effectively double the price of imported vehicles, as it is expected most of the tax would be passed on to consumers.
Ottawa is following through now, Trudeau said, to "level the playing field for Canadian workers" and allow Canada's nascent EV industry to compete at home, in North America and globally. The tariff will apply to electric and certain hybrid passenger automobiles, trucks, buses and delivery vans. Chinese brands like BYD are not a major player in Canada's EV market right now but imports from China have exploded in recent years as Tesla switched from U.S. factories for its Canadian sales to its manufacturing plant in Shanghai. The new tariff will apply to those Shanghai-made Teslas that are sold in Canada -- a development that is expected to force the U.S. automaker to supply the Canadian market with vehicles made at one if its other plants in the U.S. or Europe instead. "Unfortunately, Canada made a decision today that will result in fewer affordable electric vehicles for Canadians, less competition and more climate pollution," said Joanna Kyriazis, director of public affairs at Clean Energy Canada. "Not only could today's announcement have a chilling effect on future EV sales, it could drive up EV prices and slow adoption in the near-term as well," Kyriazis said.
Flavio Volpe, the president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association who lobbied Ottawa to follow through with matching the U.S. tariffs, responded: "Sure, what the Chinese are doing is selling us green products that help fulfill some of our EV mandates, but they do it in a regulatory environment where they forgo any stewardship of the environment," he said.
Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland added that the Chinese industry is "built on abysmal labour standards and it is built on abysmal environmental standards."
Ottawa is following through now, Trudeau said, to "level the playing field for Canadian workers" and allow Canada's nascent EV industry to compete at home, in North America and globally. The tariff will apply to electric and certain hybrid passenger automobiles, trucks, buses and delivery vans. Chinese brands like BYD are not a major player in Canada's EV market right now but imports from China have exploded in recent years as Tesla switched from U.S. factories for its Canadian sales to its manufacturing plant in Shanghai. The new tariff will apply to those Shanghai-made Teslas that are sold in Canada -- a development that is expected to force the U.S. automaker to supply the Canadian market with vehicles made at one if its other plants in the U.S. or Europe instead. "Unfortunately, Canada made a decision today that will result in fewer affordable electric vehicles for Canadians, less competition and more climate pollution," said Joanna Kyriazis, director of public affairs at Clean Energy Canada. "Not only could today's announcement have a chilling effect on future EV sales, it could drive up EV prices and slow adoption in the near-term as well," Kyriazis said.
Flavio Volpe, the president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association who lobbied Ottawa to follow through with matching the U.S. tariffs, responded: "Sure, what the Chinese are doing is selling us green products that help fulfill some of our EV mandates, but they do it in a regulatory environment where they forgo any stewardship of the environment," he said.
Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland added that the Chinese industry is "built on abysmal labour standards and it is built on abysmal environmental standards."
But the environment! (Score:5, Insightful)
Where are the loads of people who should be shouting this is a fantastic win? First, we got rid of plastic straws. Now, cheap and affordable EV's becoming available from over seas!
I mean, we need a carbon tax to encourage people to use ALTERNATIVES because big oil is so bad, and we need to charge more for everything and do it in the name of the environment.
Okay cool, they literally handed you the golden goose, cheap electric vehicles at their expense.
Fantastic. You should be all celebrating for the better impact on the environment, because in the past we were only worried about how much pollution CANADA emits only, based on population. Unless, it was a all scam and you're sacks of dog shit that was just concerned about profit in the name of 'for the environment' and someone is messing with your greed so you're taking action?
Re:But the environment! (Score:5, Informative)
s/antimony/acrimony (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese vehicles contain large amounts of antimony, unlike American vehicles which mainly run on gaslight.
Re:But the environment! (Score:4, Insightful)
Your venn diagram is incomplete, or it would be accurate.
You're missing 'Environmentalists who truly believe the pollution canada emits significantly impacts the world and causing people in poverty to suffer more is worth it and people who claim it's about the environment really are just looking to find more ways to get extra money from people to line their own pockets' with 'People concerned over China taking over manufacturing'
You'll find some interesting results.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You need to read more closely. The post was antiNomy, not antiMony.
Re: (Score:2)
*squints*
*humbled*
But at least I learned a new word.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The Venn diagram of "people who want to stop China taking over manufacturing" and "people who want cheaper electric cars" has an intersection that causes some amount of antinomy.
Like this? [media.mas.to]
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent funnier.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Where are the loads of people who should be shouting this is a fantastic win?
The gist of it is that yes, some people are totally happy doing the mental gymnastics to come to the conclusion that a bit more pollution and oil consumption is better than allowing whatever sort of economic shenanigans China is pulling to sell cheap EVs. If I didn't already own a used Chevy Bolt that I got a crazy good deal on due to a rather unlikely confluence of events (high ICE used car values, low EV used car values, a brand new battery due to the recall, and a tax credit on used EVs), I'd be a bit m
Re: (Score:2)
That is officially my new favorite song.
Re: (Score:2)
Canada's problem is population density plus northern climate. But Canada's problem is not the world's problem. Canada emits about 1.5 percent of the world's co2. Whether you carve it up into per capital or not is irrelevant. That's what you have to work with. So if you equalize the emissions to, say, the per capital emissions of the US... let me do the math... you fix the worldwide problem by approximately diddly / squat.
Re: (Score:3)
Canada's population is 0.5% of the world so that 3 more times the average. It matters even though its a small percentage of the total because that's an argument most countries will use. Most countries will just say oh its such a small portion it won't impact anything and then nothing gets done, its just an excuse to continue destroying the planet, we all need to do as much as we can. Sure it might not work, hell it probably won't work but doing nothing and saying there is nothing we can do certainly won't
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No you don't get to use the population argument.
When a large portion of your population lives in poverty and can't afford to purchase products and services you can't act as if you're greener. You can only compare the per capita argument on similar standards of living. If you're argument is we should live like China so our per capita is down, that's a poor argument.
If you were to measure the per capita of the wealthy people in China, you'd see their per capita grossly outweighs the rest.
The same can be said
Re: (Score:2)
Mcdonalds charges for bags now. Who the hell is not going to need a bag for most orders? You want to see how quickly that BS plays out, have a car of 4 people all ordering, and tell them you don't want a bag. You don't want to pay the extra, and it's better for the environment. You see how quickly it shows it's all about money once they stop charging for the bags and make it mandatory.
Mcdonalds Bags Like plastic shopping bags are/were reused normally for collecting the other wrappers and packaging which makes it easier to put the whole lot in a bin helping clean up. The number of times I see where people unloaded there Mcdonalds wrappers in shopping centre car parks it is never in a bag additionally this has become worse since the plastic shopping bag ban. This ban in my opinion has been worse for the enviroment.
BTW I found a magnetic clip for sunglasses https://www.amazon.com.au/dp/B.. [amazon.com.au]
Re: But the environment! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Paper bags decay into methane and co2. plastic is a form of carbon capture and storage.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"wood-rot fungi produce methane anaerobically without the involvement of methanogenic archaea via a new, halomethane-dependent pathway." - https://journals.asm.org/doi/1... [asm.org]
"One tonne of decomposing paper emits up to 90 kg of methane."
- https://open.library.ubc.ca/me... [library.ubc.ca].
my argument about plastic being carbon capture is albeit a cheeky one not meant to be serious. But I WILL tell you i firmly beleive plastic bags are better and more economical and environmentally freindly than paper ones or reusable ones. Y
Re: (Score:2)
A plastic bag doesn't do those things.
Re: (Score:2)
This argument is nonsense. we are a post "natural" forest world. not many trees in the developed world are cut down for timber that aren't in managed forests, and were not planted for the purpose of being timber. Remember reaping the California redwoods and most of the rainforest? Pepperidge Farms remembers.... and they are gone. there is more demand now than ever.
Re: (Score:2)
plastic is a form of carbon capture and storage.
The carbon was already stored, IN THE GROUND, AS OIL. Just don't pump out the oil and make the plastic in the first place! The decay of the paper is just returning the what the tree took out of the atmosphere. It's a closed cycle.
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose driving big oil consuming tractors and trucks to collect the wood doesn't factor into your equations. nor the fact that we use the forests faster than they can be replenished. and this will never be a solved problem. Not to mention the large swathes that keep getting burned down by "accident". (looking at you Canada)
Yes oil now it can be stored and be useful in my cupboard and then later back in the ground. The only villains here are the manufacturers of so called biodegradable plastics. these peo
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno somehow the rest of the world has managed where plastic bag charging has become a thing.
Seems that it's only (North?) America which cannot cope with the idea of unlimited amounts of free plastic shit and responds somehow by using even more plastic.
Re: (Score:3)
You missed the point. The climate doesn't give a toss about how many people are tied to a particular molecule of Co2. That only matters to fulfill the emotional need some people have to assign blame.
If you really want to fix the problem you apply pressure to the places where it truly matters. Canada is the 11th largest emitter, and insignificant next to the US and China.
Most countries can't move the global needle. In fact, if the largest two don't, the rest of the world probably can't close the gap without
Re: (Score:3)
If you really want to fix the problem you apply pressure to the places where it truly matters.
Which applying pressure to the people causing the most emissions which is the powerful and wealthy regardless of where they live. The idea that rich Canadians are exempt from having to change their behavior because there are fewer of them is ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
China is moving the needle though, it's the US that is lagging. And even for China, they need to keep their foot on the accelerator.
It's not just those two either, we have India and Brazil both coming up with large populations that are emitting more and more CO2.
The reason why it matters for countries like Canada to go for net zero is that it helps develop the technology and reduce the cost, so other less wealthy countries can adopt it sooner. It also proves that the technology works even in extremes of col
Re: (Score:2)
You guys just live in your own little world of "facts", don't ya?
https://ourworldindata.org/gra... [ourworldindata.org]
Re: But the environment! (Score:2)
Why are you worrying about Canadaâ(TM)s population density? Canada is highly urbanised and close to the US border. In fact Windsor (Detroit) to Quebec City is a huge proportion of the population. Furthermore, Toronto is the same latitude as Marseille in the south of France, yet far further north in Norway, electric cars are very successfully. As somebody who lived in Toronto for nearly a decade and cycled all year around, itâ(TM)s not that cold (probably the coldest day I cycled was -22C). Th
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
funny thing is that canada barely produces any electric vehicles, they are just now starting to adapt to some portion of the supply chain, e.g. for batteries. so, extreme as a 100% tariff is, this isn't even a protectionist move because there's really nothing to protect. the real motive will be anybody's guess ... but let's hope good canadian citizen will be pleased to pay a hefty premium for u.s. imported cars if mr trudeau asks politely.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that 100% is probably too extreme, but if they do have an intention of developing an EV industry, it will never get off the ground if they have to compete with a product that is being dumped on the market. I'd argue that it is even more important for a developing market to protect itself, because there is no existing loyalty or reputation for domestic brands to use as a counterbalance to artificially low prices because any burgeoning brands won't have any history in the market.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Right
Percentage of CO2 emissions in the world - China 32.88% 12,667,428,430 tons.
Canada - 1.51% 582,072,950 tons.
Yes, clearly the oil in Canada is the problem.
Re:But the environment! (Score:5, Interesting)
Right -- so China emits roughly 22x the carbon. On the other hand it has roughly 36x the population. So on a per capita basis China emits only 2/3 the carbon Canada does, and about a quarter of that is for export goods. On top of that, Chinese per capita GDP is only about 20% of Canada's. So I *could* characterize what you're saying is that poor people who emit far less carbon for their personal use should bear the burden of carbon reduction, not wealthier people if they happen to live in a smaller country.
But I wouldn't, because it's a lot more complex than that. Each country has opportunities and challenges to reducing carbon emissions. China is a big chunk of the world's carbon footprint, so even small marginal changes will have a huge impact. But Canada is relatively speaking a rich country, and if it had the political will it could probably improve its per capita carbon emissions, but it'd be politically painful since fossil fuels are about 12% of the country's GDP.
Re: (Score:2)
That 12% of GDP is Canada's entire energy sector. Canada exports a staggering amount of electricity to the US, mostly the northeast, representing about 3/4 of its energy sector revenues. Its fossil fuel sector is only 3.2%, for which is expels 40% of its GHG emissions burning coal to power the upgrading of bitumen from the oil sands into crude oil. Most of the coal burned is actually petcoke, the leftovers from upgrading bitumen into crude oil, which has even higher CO2 emissions than coal.
But good luck con
Re: (Score:3)
And it is not just emissions. The pollution it creates is astounding.
EVs aren't good for the environment (Score:5, Insightful)
I think Canada is smart to do this. The Chinese have a long history of dumping product to destroy local industry and they are heavily heavily subsidizing their electric car industry.
Those low prices won't last once the American electric car industry is gone and it will take too much to build it back up.
I can see bringing in cheap Chinese solar panels because we can do a lot with that electricity and it can offset The damage it can do to local industries if it's properly managed. But solar panels have a nice long lifespan whereas car is not so much especially these cheaper Chinese ones which are the only ones worth bothering to import (if I have to import something the costs as much or more as something built in America that's just silly).
Re:EVs aren't good for the environment (Score:5, Insightful)
If you care about the environment you're pushing for walkable cities and trains.
People are unbelievably defeatist about the idea of installing EV charging infrastructure, and we're talking in a developed country that already has an extensive electrical grid. They're literally saying it's too expensive and too much effort to connect some equipment to the existing grid and putting some parking spaces in front of them. Now imagine trying to convince the same people they need to make all the infrastructure changes required to make the vast stretches of American suburbia walkable and implementing public transit that isn't just additional smelly, slow buses.
Not being 100% behind the effort to electrify private transportation is truly a case of letting perfect become the enemy of good. I live in a neighborhood with an absolutely terrible walkability score and unless the real estate fairy comes down from the heavens and gives me a magical condo downtown for the same price I'm presently paying, there's no way I could ever afford the move. I did, however, snag a good deal on a Bolt late last year and now my trips don't involve a vehicle that's guzzling down dinosaur juice just so I can pick up some Chipotle for dinner.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is fast chargers. Take a decent size truck stop, multiply by at least four, (forty minutes instead of ten to refuel) then take that number times Kw per unit and then you will see where the problem is.
Charging at home is no problem. I have a spare 240 V 30 amp circuit that would do nicely, but not a full charge in 40 minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
I think of this as consumer protection more than environmental. Canada has unique issues to overcome that no other country besides maybe russia would understand.
We have a cold climate. We have to travel long distances. Alot. Most of these cars do not do well AT ALL in the cold. Chinese cars have a history of being very bad reliability in the cold especially.
Also all these so called environmental benefits of electricity completely disappear if you have to heat the interior of the car. Like we do for half the
Re: (Score:2)
An electric heat pump is vastly more efficient than using waste heat from internal combustion. Using electrical resistance is not so good but I have never heard of it being less efficient.
Re: (Score:2)
this is an interesting concept and it can feel a little counter intuitive so let me try my best to explain:
Electrical resistance heating is basically 100% efficient. there are almost no losses if you just measure energy in vs energy out as heat. so far, so good.
however now you are essentially "wasting" energy heating your car from its batteries that can no longer be put towards the mileage of the vehicle. and the batteries are also less efficient in cold temperatures. Meaning up to 50% less efficient drivin
Re: (Score:2)
By that measure a heat pump is more than 100% efficient. More heat is pumped into the car than would be produced by converting the electric power to heat.
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like an infrastructure problem. If there was a fast charger either at the destination, or reasonable close on the freeway, he wouldn't have had to wait.
Re: (Score:2)
which then becomes an environmental disaster faster, as batteries only have a limited number of charge cycles, and fast charging is harder on them than slow charge.
Also @ -40 the fact is they just don't charge, so they have to use energy to keep the batterys warm so they can even KEEP a charge.
Li-ion can be fast charged from 5C to 45C. its is below that for over half the year.
Re: (Score:3)
I live in a neighborhood with an absolutely terrible walkability score and unless the real estate fairy comes down from the heavens and gives me a magical condo downtown for the same price I'm presently paying, there's no way I could ever afford the move.
Walkability isn't a magical feature from day one. It's something we create. America used to have walkable cities. (Fun fact, cars didn't always exist). But they were torn down to make spaces for parking lots.
Contrast it to a place like Amsterdam - one of the world's most walkable cities. I invite you to go look at pictures of Amsterdam in the 1960s. There was no public transport, there were cars everywhere, every place without a building was a parking lot, you couldn't tell it apart from New Amsterdam --- I
Re: (Score:2)
"The Chinese have a long history of dumping product to destroy local industry"
And then you mention solar panels where they did exactly the same thing.
Then there is the rare earth industry where they also did the same thing.
If you don't want to be totally beholden to Emperor Xi then the tariffs on Chinese imports need to be high enough to offset the value of forced labor and the lack of environmental laws as well as the targeted money from the central bank to the favored industries.
Re: (Score:2)
The very concept of tariffs applied to combat China's dumping of consumer goods pretty much sounds the death knell of globalism, and the efficacy of economic sanctions. I'm sure the Chinese care, but they don't care enough to change their policies. They have other markets.
We're on the losing side of this equation. We need to do something different.
Re: (Score:2)
If you care about the environment you're pushing for walkable cities and trains.
If you care about so many things, then walkable cities and trains. Also trams, buses and bikes. But especially trams which are uniquely awesome.
It's really not just the environment. There is so much wrong with how North America does roads. They are expensive, dangerous, have terrible traffic AND bad for the environment.
Re: (Score:2)
I think Canada is smart to do this. The Chinese have a long history of dumping product to destroy local industry and they are heavily heavily subsidizing their electric car industry.
Wouldn't Canada have to have a local industry related to manufacturing electric vehicles before that industry could be affected by such tactics? What industry is Canada protecting here?
Re: (Score:2)
We have companies like Ford saying the essentially can't be bothered to try to compete because there is "insufficient demand," then at the same time we are putting tariffs on imported vehicles because they are in too much demand and unfairly taking jobs away from local manufacturing. All while we are trying to reduce greenhouse emissions to protect the climate...
You can't make this stuff up...and it is a good example of how complex systems interact with each other.
Re:But the environment! (Score:5, Funny)
It's bad. For people who want Tesla's too, they will now come with the inferior US battery packs.
I'd say that Elon Musk has been a bit inferior to his prior self lately, too, so it's not the only awkward feeling you'll have buying a Tesla these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Modded flamebait as usual, but it's just a fact. Tesla is a rare opportunity to compare US made and Chinese made batteries directly, in a car that is otherwise identical. The Chinese ones go further, charge faster, and last longer.
Those are simple facts, born out by hard numbers and direct testing. The US made batteries aren't American tech anyway, they are Panasonic (Japanese) cells that Tesla assembles into a pack.
I predict (Score:3)
that the Chinese will soon pay a pretty Yuan for a bottle of maple syrup.
Hate to say it, but I hope so. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: Hate to say it, but I hope so. (Score:3)
Your ignorance is astounding.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if that was already factored into your joke, but a week ago or so when the EU imposed 36% tariffs on Chinese EVs, China retaliated with tariffs on French cheese. https://www.reuters.com/world/... [reuters.com] So yeah they are going to look into their Canadian imports, apparently fruit/grain/seed, mineral oil, wood/pulp https://tradingeconomics.com/c... [tradingeconomics.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that the Chinese will soon pay a pretty Yuan for a bottle of maple syrup.
China is a country that imported fuck all maple syrup only 20 years ago. I predict that the Chinese won't pay a pretty Yuan for a bottle of maple syrup. I predict that the exports of maple syrup will drop and the Chinese will just buy something else.
Worthy? (Score:2)
What other country do we know that once engaged in genocide and slave labor? Would they be worthy of our $$$?
The west has been outcompeted on green tech (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if the US and Canada manage to protect their own domestic market and force their own population to buy shitty overpriced EVs, the US (with the exception of Tesla) and Canada have already lost the rest of the world as a market for selling EVs. We've been outcompeted, because of of environmental denialism and oil-bathed economy and lobbying.
This tariff move is the pathetic last gap of an economic loser, and I say that as a citizen of one of those countries.
Canada's economy will no doubt now be punished severely by China's justified tit-for-tat retaliatory moves.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
It helps if you have slave labor and few environmental rules.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It helps when your auto makers still make their money from selling product, rather than from interest on the loans to buy said product.
Canadian Politics explained (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
LOL... this person is clearly not canadian if he thinks that the liberals are a "left wing" party, or even have many left leaning views. They are currently propping up landlords, corporate interests and big business. They bought and run an oil pipeline. They are bringing in tons of low skill foreign workers with the only reason being to depress wages for citizens and help business friends make more dividends. They said recently that their primary concern is to ke
China Has LOWER emissions per capita (Score:2)
Both the United States or Canada have greater emissions per capita than China. This is likely to make that problem worse.
The objection is to China subsidizing production of low emission vehicles and exporting them to other countries. My bet would be most of those vehicles are being purchased instead of a new ICE vehicle rather than a new US/Canada EV. They are cheaper than an ICE vehicle to purchase and cheaper to operate.
By contrast EV vehicles produced in North American are not price competitive with I
Do it (Score:3)
2035? (Score:2)
You will shut up about Tibet and Uighurs (Score:2)
or we will remotely disable your transportation infrastructure.
Xi has shown that he is not above such moves.
I for one might buy an EV for my next car - whenever that happens - but I would not ever buy any kind of car made in China.
Where this gets interesting is cars like Volvo (which makes a couple of EVs) but is owned by Geely: a Chinese company.
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that non-EV cars have computers and wireless receivers in them too, don't you?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The Dems and Liberals are desperately hoping that voters forgot that Chinese anti-dumping tariffs were Donald’s idea.
Nope, Pepperidge Farms remembers. At the time I was saying the tariffs were a terrible idea because we'd end up with rampant inflation, since domestic manufacturing capacity doesn't just magically appear out of thin air. We'd still need our shit from China, only now our money buys less of it.
Well whaddaya know... we got the inflation. Funny how that worked. Since the current administration did nothing to roll any of this back, now you know where "both sides are the same" arguments get their fuel. Don't
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Stop with the stupid fucking pepperidge farm remembers shit. It's not clever, it's not funny, and just fucking stupid.
It's supposed to be condescending, because the implication that this sort of thing happens because voters have a short memory is disingenuous. When the stars align and both major parties get behind the same dumb idea, there's nothing you can do about it as a voter. Yeah, you can vote for the independent candidate who doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell for all the good it will do, but it's not going to make a difference.
Democracy doesn't always produce ideal results. News at 11. Now you can get ang
Re: (Score:3)
The foreign tariffs did nothing to inflation. Bupkis.
I'm guessing you hadn't been watching prices on Ali since the tariffs began. Chinese manufacturers had been just eating most of the tariffs initially. Once that party started coming to an end, you might've seen more obvious signs such as Dollar Tree raising their prices. Fun fact, that happened in 2021. Russia hadn't yet invaded Ukraine.
US business that are reliant upon Chinese manufacturing have had to pass on the costs, and yes, that ultimately means your dollar has less buying power when you go to sw
Re: (Score:3)
What are your thoughts on gasoline prices from when Bush took office to when he left 8 years later? $1.50 a gallon to nearly $4.00.
Re: (Score:3)
On the plus side, Haliburton's revenues went up by 50%.
Re: (Score:2)
Re-education camps in the capitalist ideology for anyone who disagrees with Anonymous Coward? The problem with "beginning courses" in ideology is that the simplified ideology is never tested in the real world. I think its important to remember that many of these tariffs will never be paid, the products will simply not be imported. Protecting domestic auto makers and keeping them in business may well lower prices in the long run by increasing competition. And since Chinese EV's aren't really being imported
Re: (Score:2)
Ford says nobody wants EVs. Why do we need a tariff for something people don't even want?
Re:Trump tariffs (Score:5, Insightful)
Ford says nobody wants EVs.
Considering that there's hardly any selection available for cheap new cars in the USA these days, I don't see what right to protectionism they have for a market segment all the major car manufacturers have abandoned.
If you hate the idea that someone might buy a cheap BYD instead of your $55k truck, maybe you should start producing economy EVs too. Of course, they don't want to have to do that, because there's significantly less profit in entry-level cars. They'd rather sell the spendy models to the folks who can afford them, and everyone with a lesser budget gets the wealthier folks' sloppy seconds when they hit the used market.
Re: (Score:3)
Ford announced in 2018 that, except for the Mustang, they were stopping productions of cars in favor of higher profit margin SUVs and Trucks, so Ford doesn't want people to have the choice of cheaper BYD EVs over their SUVs and Trucks and their more expensive EV versions
Re: (Score:3)
American car manufacturers don't have have some irrational preference for SUVs and pickups. They like those vehicles because they make a good profit: they command higher prices relative to their cost to build. If Ford could make the same profit selling cheap EVs, it would like them just as much. But it probably can't make a profit on economy EVs *at all*.
The trick to making a good profit with an EV is to keep your battery costs down, since it is the single most expensive component by far. If you can't get
Re: (Score:2)
https://caredge.com/guides/for... [caredge.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Ford says nobody wants EVs. Why do we need a tariff for something people don't even want?
Except for the Mustang, Ford announced they would stop selling cars, in favor of higher-profit margin SUVs and Trucks, in 2018. So what Ford is really saying is that no one wants the more expensive EV versions of their SUVs and Trucks.
Re: (Score:2)
No they weren't (Score:3, Informative)
His current proposal is an across the board 10% tariff on all imports which is effectively a regressive taxation on anyone that works for a living. If you're reading this now and you're an American it will cost you on average $4,000 a year.
I can't afford to throw $4,000 a year away so that I can vote for Donald Trump but maybe you can.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't afford to throw $4,000 a year away so that I can vote for Donald Trump but maybe you can.
Doubtful many others can either after donating money to his campaign ...
Re: (Score:2)
Quit buying Chinese crap and the tariffs won't bother you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Those tariffs affect me even on a hobbyist level. I buy components from Digikey or Mouser and random items have a tariff tacked onto them. This certainly isn't helping any small businesses who now have a smaller profit margin or had to pass the costs onto the consumer.
Re: (Score:2)
Canada has an auto manufacturing industry and yes they’re copying the USA.
Suddenly the free market isn’t so free.
Re: (Score:2)
US is always clamoring for "free markets" here and there, until someone comes up with competitive products that would slam them because most of their manufacturers have been asleep these last few years.
I mean, in theory Tesla can compete with BYD just fine. But Ford and friends will be trashed by the Chinese.
Protectionism is protectionism though. So ultimately the consumer pays by not having options and having to pay the price.
But I think that's the point: make sure people don't buy EVs. The oil masters can
Market Share? (Score:2)
So when is selling something at a loss to gain market share not a "free market" business model? Its certainly how Amazon was built, its Uber's business model and its the business model of most startups. They run at a loss until they build their market share and then they raise prices.
Its not clear that is the Chinese model. It may be that the government subsidies are aimed at creating the jobs and a growing economy that will sustain social stability. In other words, these are political policies rather tha
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Canada produces over 80% of its electricity using carbon-free sources, with hydroelectric accounting for nearly half of all production. Meanwhile, China produces around 53% of its electricity using carbon-free sources, mostly using a mixture of solar, wind, and hydro.
Unless by "produce" you mean "manufacture" and not "generate". Which is true. But they got to that point using rampant economic espionage, currency manipulation, massive government subsidies that encouraged price dumping, and lax environment
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Were you referring to the US corporations that set up shell companies in Canada? Inquiring minds want to know.
Re: (Score:2)
orange hitler
Good on you for criticizing Republican talking points as well!
Re: (Score:2)
When I enter: "China lots of EV left to rot?" in Google search I get a story by Bloomberg. They have huge amount of EVs left to rot outside and many of the EV makers in China are no longer in business.