AutomobilesClean EnergyElectric carsFeaturedFederal subsidiesGeneral MotorsHybrid cars

G.M. takes $1.6 billion loss after electric vehicle subsidy goes away

Sales of electric vehicles (E.V.s) surged in August and September as buyers took advantage of a federal tax credit before it expired. Now, automakers expect to sell fewer E.V.s—and lose money on them—for the rest of the year.

It raises the question, Is the American E.V. market just a creation of government policy?

“General Motors said it is reducing its electric-vehicle manufacturing capacity and booking a $1.6 billion charge on its EV business as demand sinks,” reports The Wall Street Journal‘s Sharon Terlep. “In a regulatory filing, the company said that EV sales are expected to fall with the end of government-funded subsidies and regulatory mandates that fueled EV growth.”

This was a monumental shift within just a few years: In 2021, General Motors CEO Mary Barra announced the auto giant would phase out all gas-burning vehicles by 2035.

Under the Biden administration, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) adopted emissions rules that would effectively require more than half of all new vehicles produced by 2032 to be electric. The agency rescinded those rules in March, after President Donald Trump reentered office.

In September, Congress ended a Biden-era program providing a $7,500 tax credit for purchasing an electric vehicle. Motorists apparently flocked to dealerships ahead of the program’s sunset date, but analysts expected demand to plummet once the credit went away. “The demise of the tax credit will probably bring the party to an end,” Neal E. Boudette wrote last month in The New York Times. “Sales of electric models are expected to plummet in the last three months of the year and then remain sluggish for some time.”

To be clear, slow electric vehicle sales are not General Motors’ only problem, or even the biggest drag on its profits: The tariffs Trump has imposed by fiat are hurting the automaker’s bottom line, as well. As Terlep noted, the $1.6 billion E.V. charge “comes on top of an estimated $4 billion to $5 billion that GM projects it will pay in tariff-related costs this year.” Just in the second quarter of this year, Ford Motor Co. paid $800 million in tariffs and posted its first quarterly financial loss since 2023.

Still, General Motors’ announcement supports the concern that without infusions of taxpayer money, E.V.s are not entirely viable on their own. It’s no wonder, since they have not been driven by consumer preference.

From the start, the Biden-era rules prioritized all-electric vehicles over hybrids, which the EPA estimated would account for only 16 percent of all new vehicles sold by 2032. (For comparison, it estimated there would still be nearly twice that many cars with internal combustion engines.) But consumers have made it clear that if they get rid of their gas-burning cars, they’re more comfortable with a hybrid than an electric.

“While EV sales are growing, their pace is falling well short of the industry’s ambitious timetable for transitioning away from combustion engines,” Tom Krisher of the Associated Press reported in 2023. “Instead, buyers are increasingly embracing a quarter-century-old technology whose popularity has been surging: The gas-electric hybrid, which alternates from gas to battery power to maximize efficiency.”

In its 2024 annual consumer survey, the American Automobile Association (AAA) found similar results: While only 18 percent of respondents said they were likely to buy an electric, 31 percent were open to a hybrid.

“Access to a hybrid vehicle lessens the anxiety for consumers because it allows people to enjoy the benefits of electrification without feeling like they are disrupting their current lifestyle or travel plans (longer distance driving, less charging options, etc.),” AAA noted of its findings.

Even though federal incentives have nudged them in other directions, automakers have tried to follow consumer sentiment. In August 2024, Ford announced it was shifting focus from electrics to hybrids. The automaker had separated its production lines into traditional and electric divisions just two years earlier, and since then, “Ford’s electric vehicle division has lost $12 billion, including $2.2 billion in the first half of this year,” the Times reported in August.

In January 2024, Toyota chairman Akio Toyoda predicted all-electric vehicles would only ever make up about 30 percent of the total automotive market. Instead, Toyoda advocated a “multi-pathway approach” to cutting carbon emissions on the road, and said “customers, not regulations or politics,” should drive innovation.

Toyoda is right. General Motors followed the trend of government rather than consumer sentiment, and now it’s scrambling to adapt when the government changes hands.

Source link

Related Posts

On April 12, 2021, a Knoxville police officer shot and killed an African American male student in a bathroom at Austin-East High School. The incident caused social unrest, and community members began demanding transparency about the shooting, including the release of the officer’s body camera video. On the evening of April 19, 2021, the Defendant and a group of protestors entered the Knoxville City-County Building during a Knox County Commission meeting. The Defendant activated the siren on a bullhorn and spoke through the bullhorn to demand release of the video. Uniformed police officers quickly escorted her and six other individuals out of the building and arrested them for disrupting the meeting. The court upheld defendants’ conviction for “disrupting a lawful meeting,” defined as “with the intent to prevent [a] gathering, … substantially obstruct[ing] or interfere[ing] with the meeting, procession, or gathering by physical action or verbal utterance.” Taken in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence shows that the Defendant posted on Facebook the day before the meeting and the day of the meeting that the protestors were going to “shut down” the meeting. During the meeting, the Defendant used a bullhorn to activate a siren for approximately twenty seconds. Witnesses at trial described the siren as “loud,” “high-pitched,” and “alarming.” Commissioner Jay called for “Officers,” and the Defendant stated through the bullhorn, “Knox County Commission, your meeting is over.” Commissioner Jay tried to bring the meeting back into order by banging his gavel, but the Defendant continued speaking through the bullhorn. Even when officers grabbed her and began escorting her out of the Large Assembly Room, she continued to disrupt the meeting by yelling for the officers to take their hands off her and by repeatedly calling them “murderers.” Commissioner Jay called a ten-minute recess during the incident, telling the jury that it was “virtually impossible” to continue the meeting during the Defendant’s disruption. The Defendant herself testified that the purpose of attending the meeting was to disrupt the Commission’s agenda and to force the Commission to prioritize its discussion on the school shooting. Although the duration of the disruption was about ninety seconds, the jury was able to view multiple videos of the incident and concluded that the Defendant substantially obstructed or interfered with the meeting. The evidence is sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction. Defendant also claimed the statute was “unconstitutionally vague as applied to her because the statute does not state that it includes government meetings,” but the appellate court concluded that she had waived the argument by not raising it adequately below. Sean F. McDermott, Molly T. Martin, and Franklin Ammons, Assistant District Attorneys General, represent the state.

From State v. Every, decided by the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals…

1 of 83