Collateral damage of hostile de-globalisation. European, South Korean and Japanese EV manufacturers face a de facto lock out of US market. Outcompeted already in China, there may not be many other obvious markets to go
The reality is that if USA can't produce a majority of EV batteries itself then there will never be any serious reduction of investment in gasoline engines since it will pretty much be required for national security reasons.
Same reasons it's presently in the process of basically relocating TSMC to Arizona.
> Same reasons it's presently in the process of basically relocating TSMC to Arizona.
Right as the global semiconductor market implodes because demand has shrunk while production has recovered.
There is a snowball's chance in hell that the US semiconductor factories will be able to turn a profit; they will likely shut down quickly, if they ever open. They'll be partially built, just enough to claim the grants and tax breaks...and then rot.
It's just yet another policy that throws tanker-trucks full of cash at the already unfathomably wealthy with little accountability and zero expectation of payback (either real or in terms of ancillary benefits to society) while the poorest Americans have to file reams of paperwork just to be able to get basic assistance for things like eating and healthcare.
nah this is different because USA has no interest in fighting China over Taiwan. But it also can't have the microchip supply chain cut off. Hence, relocating Taiwan's most valuable assets to Arizona before the war starts.
That's always been the gameplan for free trade. Open markets where your country has a competitive advantage, subsidies and tariffs and closed markets when it doesn't.
We gave China free access to our markets for decades. China, in turn, has never given any foreign entity free access to their market, not without paying bribes at least. You always have to have majority Chinese ownership in your joint company.
It's not surprising that the US and EU are slowly waking up to just how bad of a clusterfuck they maneuvered themselves into and starting to cut out toxic dependencies.
Nobody 'gave' China anything - US corps exploited cheap Chinese labour to grow globally dominant consumer tech, whilst providing US consumers with cheaper-than-otherwise consumer goods. Entry into any domestic market requires observing local laws, the US dominated banana republic era ended in the '80s
> We gave China free access to our markets for decades.
I comment about the nature of 'free markets' in the general (but more specifically in the context of 'peer'-nation trade between the context of US-EU), and someone inevitably jumps in with an off-topic gripe about China.
China this, China that, it's like Beelzebub. Say the word 'trade' three times, and the thread's in for a derailment.
> I comment about the nature of 'free markets' in the general (and especially in the context of US-EU), and someone inevitably jumps in with an off-topic gripe about China.
We are talking about the US sanctioning Chinese battery supply chains specifically, to quote TFA:
> The rules are aimed at weaning the United States off dependence on China for EV battery supply chains and are part of President Joe Biden's effort to make 50% of U.S. new vehicle sales by 2030 EVs or PHEVs.
>
The law, enacted in August, required vehicles to be assembled in North America to qualify for any tax credits, eliminating nearly 70% of eligible models at the time. On Jan. 1, new price caps and limits on buyers income took effect.
> The IRA requires that 50% of the value of battery components be produced or assembled in North America to qualify for $3,750, and that 40% of the value of critical minerals be sourced from the United States or a free trade partner for a $3,750 credit.
The battery sourcing requirement means that 'China' is only relevant to a small portion of this question, but makes for a great distraction.
Indeed. I didn't notice this on the first read of the article because I didn't notice the "Show more" button - seriously, WTF is this crap news sites tend to pull? I get it on content container / teaser pages, but an article page?!
In any case: nothing stops foreign car makers from coming back to Detroit or whatever and producing cars there. BMW at least has a decent presence in Spartanburg, not sure about the others - but Tesla has shown that this model can work, their first plant in Fremont was a retooled GM/Toyota plant.
"The rules are aimed at weaning the United States off dependence on China for EV battery supply chains and are part of President Joe Biden's effort to make 50% of U.S. new vehicle sales by 2030 EVs or PHEVs."
Japanese and European car manufacturers can just source batteries from somewhere else other than China, then problem solved. Car/electronics manufacturers are already moving out of China at a rapid pace this year anyways. According to the office for national statistics in China, for jan/feb of 2023 http://www.ce.cn/xwzx/gnsz/gdxw/202303/27/t20230327_38464161..., electronics manufacturing profits is down 71% and car manufacturing profits is down 41.7%, due to slacking demand. Smart to move sourcing early anyways, it looks like China is starting to be confirmed to help Russia militarily https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-says-it-is-find...
Actually, it would appear that Chinese EV manufacturers have not much place to go. EV market in China peaked at 2021. With regards to Europe, BYD only sold tens(!!) of cars in Germany in 2023, compared to thousands of Tesla cars sold.
The link you supplied belies the myth that Ford paid his workers such that they could buy his cars. Ford paid his workers what he did so that he could get more reliable, productive workers.
There's no EV battery supply chain in the US, just like there's no real solar supply chain.
You can't just snap your fingers and say "OK, subsidies only for US made batteries!" when there is little industry and ramping it up would take many years.
The policy is just a way of "soft" killing the subsidies.
