3 ms·

EU to hit Teslas imported from China with 19% tariffs

32 points by ChumpGPT 2y ago

carimura 2y ago
https://archive.is/yAcTb https://archive.is/yAcTb
gamblor956 2y ago
FTA: "The US company’s Chinese operations have benefited from subsidised rates for land, income tax reductions and other support from Beijing, including beneficial rates when buying batteries, according to EU officials." EDIT: But see: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/european-union-slashes-planned-tariffs-china-made-tesla-evs-chinese-fi-rcna167361 https://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/european-union-slashe... which suggests that China-made Teslas will only be subject to a 9% tariff.
- alephnerd 2y ago
  All foreign made cars have a 10% base tariff in Europe. The 9% is the additional tariff due to Chinese subsidizes for Tesla. Most other Chinese manufacturers are getting hit by a 38% additional tariff because they are directly owned by Chinese governments (local or federal) so subsidized at a level beyond a private player could expect.
alephnerd 2y ago
That's actually a lower rate than for other Chinese manufacturers (who face upwards of 48%), because Tesla is manufacturing within the EU and working to incorporate European manufactured components. The message is clear - if you want to sell in Europe, make sure to build in Europe. Down the grapevine, plenty of European components manufacturers are expanding domestic capacity in intermediate parts like Analog Circuits, Power Electronics, Battery Manufacturing, etc over the next decade. Ik for a fact that Infineon is massively expanding their Austria fab at the expense of their Chinese operation.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  The issue is that EVs require less humans to manufacture, both for battery cells, packs, and the chassis assembly. The protectionism is understandable, but the job quantities are going to decline regardless (unless very intentional efforts are made to shuffle labor around from legacy industries to the energy transition) vs internal combustion supply chains. There is a lot of work left, but labor is not fungible and a race to the bottom is not something to optimize for.
  - x0x0 2y ago
    Regardless of the employment counts, it's smart policy to require domestic manufacturing capability, both knowledge, personnel, and equipment; given world events in Russia and China pulling away from the west.
    - toomuchtodo 2y ago
      Strong agree. A resilient supply chain is a national security issue. The US is learning this the hard way, which is arguably the best way. Makes the lesson stick.
      - lancesells 2y ago
        I would think it's probably better for a cleaner planet as well. Possibly better regulation on keeping it clean, plus the ocean has less polluting ships running through it. This doesn't apply to 100% of industry but I would think in a lot of cases it would be better. It also doesn't cause a loss of convenience for consumers.
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    > EVs require less humans to manufacture Absolutely, and I've pointed this out a bunch as well. Yet why should host country accept foreign imports that are subsidized? Either put CapEx in the host country (and this stimulate the broader economy) or don't participate. The jobs aspect is rhetoric, but the real issue is CapEx and taxation. South Korean, Japanese, and Western manufacturers have gladly built domestic manufacturing capabilities in host countries, and even become critical players in those countries (eg. Honda, Toyota, VW, Hyundai in America; Suzuki and Hyundai in India; Ford and Tesla across the EU). Why should Chinese companies get a pass? This is why Geely (via Volvo and Polestar) and now BYD have been investing in European capacity, and this is why most countries are now forcing Chinese companies to transfer IP to domestic players (just like China did 20 years ago).
mamonster 2y ago
Another nail in the coffin of "Net Zero at any cost". Would've been unimaginable even like 5 years ago but basically everyone has made transition subservient to other goals(domestic employment/geopolitics/etc). Gonna be interesting to see what the offramp for Green parties in EU is going to be.
- The_Colonel 2y ago
  Nice strawman. There was never a "net zero at any cost" policy.
  - mamonster 2y ago
    2016-End of COVID your average Green politician in Europe in a TV debate was an ecology priest who could effortlessly reprimand any party that wasn't strong enough on ecology, with approval from host + audience, and was the voice for authority on whether irreparable damage to the environment would be by 2032 or by 2027. >There was never a "net zero at any cost" policy Look at what the German greens and Habeck cooked up so far. And they have been restrained by the fact that geopolitics made a comeback.
    - The_Colonel 2y ago
      > your average Green politician in Europe in a TV debate was an ecology priest That's what Greens do. But nowhere in Europe are Greens ruling (either alone or as the senior partner in government), thus not having the power to institute such policy.

32 points by ChumpGPT 2y ago

https://archive.is/yAcTb https://archive.is/yAcTb

FTA: "The US company’s Chinese operations have benefited from subsidised rates for land, income tax reductions and other support from Beijing, including beneficial rates when buying batteries, according to EU officials." EDIT: But see: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/european-union-slashes-planned-tariffs-china-made-tesla-evs-chinese-fi-rcna167361 https://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/european-union-slashe... which suggests that China-made Teslas will only be subject to a 9% tariff.

alephnerd 2y ago
All foreign made cars have a 10% base tariff in Europe. The 9% is the additional tariff due to Chinese subsidizes for Tesla. Most other Chinese manufacturers are getting hit by a 38% additional tariff because they are directly owned by Chinese governments (local or federal) so subsidized at a level beyond a private player could expect.

alephnerd 2y ago

That's actually a lower rate than for other Chinese manufacturers (who face upwards of 48%), because Tesla is manufacturing within the EU and working to incorporate European manufactured components. The message is clear - if you want to sell in Europe, make sure to build in Europe. Down the grapevine, plenty of European components manufacturers are expanding domestic capacity in intermediate parts like Analog Circuits, Power Electronics, Battery Manufacturing, etc over the next decade. Ik for a fact that Infineon is massively expanding their Austria fab at the expense of their Chinese operation.

toomuchtodo 2y ago
The issue is that EVs require less humans to manufacture, both for battery cells, packs, and the chassis assembly. The protectionism is understandable, but the job quantities are going to decline regardless (unless very intentional efforts are made to shuffle labor around from legacy industries to the energy transition) vs internal combustion supply chains. There is a lot of work left, but labor is not fungible and a race to the bottom is not something to optimize for.
- x0x0 2y ago
  Regardless of the employment counts, it's smart policy to require domestic manufacturing capability, both knowledge, personnel, and equipment; given world events in Russia and China pulling away from the west.
  - toomuchtodo 2y ago
    Strong agree. A resilient supply chain is a national security issue. The US is learning this the hard way, which is arguably the best way. Makes the lesson stick.
    - lancesells 2y ago
      I would think it's probably better for a cleaner planet as well. Possibly better regulation on keeping it clean, plus the ocean has less polluting ships running through it. This doesn't apply to 100% of industry but I would think in a lot of cases it would be better. It also doesn't cause a loss of convenience for consumers.
- alephnerd 2y ago
  > EVs require less humans to manufacture Absolutely, and I've pointed this out a bunch as well. Yet why should host country accept foreign imports that are subsidized? Either put CapEx in the host country (and this stimulate the broader economy) or don't participate. The jobs aspect is rhetoric, but the real issue is CapEx and taxation. South Korean, Japanese, and Western manufacturers have gladly built domestic manufacturing capabilities in host countries, and even become critical players in those countries (eg. Honda, Toyota, VW, Hyundai in America; Suzuki and Hyundai in India; Ford and Tesla across the EU). Why should Chinese companies get a pass? This is why Geely (via Volvo and Polestar) and now BYD have been investing in European capacity, and this is why most countries are now forcing Chinese companies to transfer IP to domestic players (just like China did 20 years ago).

mamonster 2y ago

Another nail in the coffin of "Net Zero at any cost". Would've been unimaginable even like 5 years ago but basically everyone has made transition subservient to other goals(domestic employment/geopolitics/etc). Gonna be interesting to see what the offramp for Green parties in EU is going to be.

The_Colonel 2y ago
Nice strawman. There was never a "net zero at any cost" policy.
- mamonster 2y ago
  2016-End of COVID your average Green politician in Europe in a TV debate was an ecology priest who could effortlessly reprimand any party that wasn't strong enough on ecology, with approval from host + audience, and was the voice for authority on whether irreparable damage to the environment would be by 2032 or by 2027. >There was never a "net zero at any cost" policy Look at what the German greens and Habeck cooked up so far. And they have been restrained by the fact that geopolitics made a comeback.
  - The_Colonel 2y ago
    > your average Green politician in Europe in a TV debate was an ecology priest That's what Greens do. But nowhere in Europe are Greens ruling (either alone or as the senior partner in government), thus not having the power to institute such policy.