
Stellantis and Renault push for new e-car category amidst Chinese competition in Europe
With
Chinese automakers
pushing into Europe,
Stellantis
and
Renault
are lobbying for a new, less-regulated category of
small cars
with fewer safety features, making them cheaper to build.
Over the last two months, Stellantis Chairman John Elkann and Renault CEO Luca de Meo have engaged in a rare public campaign to get the European Union to consider the matter.
The aim is to revive a small car segment largely abandoned by Europe's automakers as such models were unprofitable, a problem they blame on regulations that make the vehicles larger, heavier and more expensive.
Elkann last week said Europe needs its own version of Japan's "kei cars", small, urban vehicles with size and engine restrictions that enjoy lower tax and insurance costs - which he said could be called the "e-car".
"There's no reason why if Japan has a kei car, which is 40 per cent of the market, Europe should not have an e-car," he said at an event in Turin, echoing similar comments in a joint editorial with Renault's de Meo published last month.
Though de Meo is set to leave Renault in July, the company is expected to maintain its support for the proposal.
"Small cars are a pocket of growth one cannot, and must not, ignore right now," said Francois Provost, Renault's director of procurement, partnerships, and public affairs.
Chinese rivals have so far focused on larger EVs and hybrids in their bid for market share in Europe, but smaller EVs are on the way.
The Dolphin Surf from
China
's BYD hit the market one month ago, priced from under 20,000 euros ($23,124) with features such as a rotating large touch screen and anti-steam rear mirrors.
By comparison, the Renault 5, which is similar though can carry one more passenger, costs almost 5,000 euros more when similarly equipped.
Facing that pressure, European manufacturers are examining the potential for cheaper cars to help them boost sales and achieve their CO2 targets, said Flavien Neuvy, auto analyst and head of research firm Cetelem.
"The market is down 20 per cent compared with 2019, so there is not enough volume for everyone, and the Chinese are coming," he said.
Though small cars currently account for just 5 per cent of the market, they made up as much as half the market in the 1980s, and the segment could rebound with more launches, said S&P Global, which estimates sales could reach 600,000 by 2030, up about 20 per cent from last year.
'A LOT OF EXCUSES'
The lobbying effort targets the EU's General Safety Regulations 2 (GSR2), which mandates safety features such as side airbags, sensors detecting whether a driver is falling asleep, lane-crossing warning, and more thorough crash tests.
Such requirements and European rules on pollution add between 850 and 1,400 euros ($983-$1,607) to the cost of a car, estimates a source familiar with the lobbying.
Lobbyists argue there is no need for safety requirements like those for high-speed collisions when it comes to small cars designed for city drivers.
Backed by industry group the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA), they want an entirely new vehicle category called M0, or e-car.
The European Commission is looking into the matter, said spokesperson Lea Zuber.
Revamping requirements for smaller cars without compromising on safety will be complex and will not necessarily be implemented, said people familiar with the discussions.
And whether less-regulated models could compete against Chinese EVs also remains to be seen.
Matthew Avery, director of strategic development at Euro NCAP, which tests new cars for safety, said the idea that small city cars would not be involved in highway accidents is nonsense.
The Chinese are bringing cars to Europe that consistently get five-star ratings from Euro NCAP, said Avery. Although its ratings do not carry legal weight, consumers take them into account and many corporate fleets will not buy cars with less than five stars.
A change in regulations to cut some safety requirements could leave smaller European cars with two- or three-star ratings, Avery said.
"If they want to, they can de-spec a car for safety," Avery said, but noted Euro NCAP's tests and safety ratings will remain unchanged. "Our job is just to say, well, this car is safer than that car."
Emmanuel Bret, deputy head of BYD France, says the company will continue offering small cars that meet all current EU regulations and that blaming the bloc for making them unaffordable is just "a lot of excuses".
"Let customers choose," Bret said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
The success of a key Nato summit is in doubt after Spain rejects a big hike in defence spending
The success of a key Nato summit is in doubt after Spain rejects a big hike in defence spending (Image: AP) BRUSSELS: The success of a key Nato summit hung in the balance on Friday, after Spain announced that it cannot raise the billions of dollars needed to meet a new defence investment pledge demanded by US President Donald Trump . Trump and his Nato counterparts are meeting for two days in the Netherlands from next Tuesday. He insists that US allies should commit to spending at least 5 percent of gross domestic product, but that requires investment at an unprecedented scale. Trump has cast doubt over whether the US would defend allies that spend too little. Setting the spending goal would be a historic decision. It would see all 32 countries invest the same amount in defence for the first time. Only last week, Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte expressed confidence that they would endorse it. But in a letter to Rutte on Thursday, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez wrote that "committing to a 5percent target would not only be unreasonable, but also counterproductive." "It would move Spain away from optimal spending and it would hinder the (European Union's) ongoing efforts to strengthen its security and defence ecosystem," Sanchez wrote in the letter, seen by The Associated Press. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Perdagangkan CFD Emas dengan Broker Tepercaya IC Markets Mendaftar Undo Spain is not entirely alone Belgium, Canada, France and Italy would also struggle to hike security spending by billions of dollars, but Spain is the only country to officially announce its intentions, making it hard to row back from such a public decision. Beyond his economic challenges, Sanchez has other problems. He relies on small parties to govern, and corruption scandals have ensnared his inner circle and family members. He's under growing pressure to call an early election. In response to the letter, Rutte's office said only that "discussions among allies on a new defence investment plan are ongoing." Nato's top civilian official had been due to table a new proposal on Friday to try to break the deadlock. The US and French envoys had also been due to update reporters about the latest developments ahead of the summit but postponed their briefings. Rutte and many European allies are desperate to resolve the problem by Tuesday so that Trump does not derail the summit, as he did during his first term at Nato headquarters in 2018. Budget boosting After Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Nato allies agreed that 2 percent of GDP should be the minimum they spend on their military budgets. But Nato's new plans for defending its own territory against outside attack require investment of at least 3 percent. Spain agreed to those plans in 2023. The 5 percent goal is made up of two parts. The allies would agree to hike pure defence spending to 3.5 percent of GDP. A further 1.5 percent would go to upgrade roads, bridges, ports and airfields so that armies can better deploy, and to prepare societies for future attacks. Mathematically, 3.5 plus 1.5 equals Trump's 5 percent. But a lot is hiding behind the figures and details of what kinds of things can be included remain cloudy. Countries closest to Russia, Belarus and Ukraine have all agreed to the target, as well as nearby Germany, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands, which is hosting the June 24-25 summit. The Netherlands estimates that Nato's defence plans would force it to dedicate at least 3.5 percent to core defence spending. That means finding an additional 16 billion to 19 billion euros ($18 billion to $22 billion). Supplying arms and ammunition to Ukraine, which Spain does, will also be included as core defence spending. Nato estimates that the US spent around 3.2 percent of GDP on defence last year. Dual use, making warfighting possible The additional 1.5 percent spending basket is murkier. Rutte and many members argue that infrastructure used to deploy armies to the front must be included, as well as building up defence industries and preparing citizens for possible attacks. "If a tank is not able to cross a bridge. If our societies are not prepared in case war breaks out for a whole of society approach. If we are not able to really develop the defence industrial base, then the 3.5 percent is great but you cannot really defend yourselves," Rutte said this month. Spain wanted climate change spending included, but that proposal was rejected. Cyber-security and counter-hybrid warfare investment should also make the cut. Yet with all the conjecture about what might be included, it's difficult to see how Rutte arrived at this 1.5 percent figure. The when, the how, and a cunning plan It's not enough to agree to spend more money. Many allies haven't yet hit the 2 percent target, although most will this year, and they had a decade to get there. So an incentive is required. The date of 2032 has been floated as a deadline. That's far shorter than previous Nato targets, but military planners estimate that Russian forces could be capable of launching an attack on an ally within 5-10 years. The US insists that it cannot be an open-ended pledge, and that a decade is too long. Still, Italy says it wants 10 years to hit the 5 percent target. Another issue is how fast spending should be ramped up. "I have a cunning plan for that," Rutte said. He wants the allies to submit annual plans that lay out how much they intend to increase spending by. The reasons for the spending hike For Europe, Russia's war on Ukraine poses an existential threat. A major rise in sabotage, cyberattacks and GPS jamming incidents is blamed on Moscow. European leaders are girding their citizens for the possibility of more. The United States also insists that China poses a threat. But for European people to back a hike in national defence spending, their governments require acknowledgement that the Kremlin remains Nato's biggest security challenge. The billions required for security will be raised by taxes, going into debt, or shuffling money from other budgets. But it won't be easy for many, as Spain has shown. On top of that, Trump has made things economically tougher by launching a global tariff war - ostensibly for US national security reasons - something America's allies find hard to fathom.


Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
The success of a key NATO summit is in doubt after Spain rejects a big hike in defense spending
The success of a key NATO summit hung in the balance on Friday, after Spain announced that it cannot raise the billions of dollars needed to meet a new defense investment pledge demanded by U.S. President Donald Trump . Trump and his NATO counterparts are meeting for two days in the Netherlands from next Tuesday. He insists that U.S. allies should commit to spending at least 5% of gross domestic product, but that requires investment at an unprecedented scale. Trump has cast doubt over whether the U.S. would defend allies that spend too little. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Victoria Principal Is Almost 75, See Her Now Reportingly Undo Setting the spending goal would be a historic decision. It would see all 32 countries invest the same amount in defense for the first time. Only last week, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte expressed confidence that they would endorse it. But in a letter to Rutte on Thursday, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez wrote that "committing to a 5% target would not only be unreasonable, but also counterproductive." Live Events "It would move Spain away from optimal spending and it would hinder the (European Union's) ongoing efforts to strengthen its security and defense ecosystem," Sanchez wrote in the letter, seen by The Associated Press. Spain is not entirely alone Belgium, Canada, France and Italy would also struggle to hike security spending by billions of dollars, but Spain is the only country to officially announce its intentions, making it hard to row back from such a public decision. Beyond his economic challenges, Sanchez has other problems. He relies on small parties to govern, and corruption scandals have ensnared his inner circle and family members. He's under growing pressure to call an early election. In response to the letter, Rutte's office said only that "discussions among allies on a new defense investment plan are ongoing." NATO's top civilian official had been due to table a new proposal on Friday to try to break the deadlock. The U.S. and French envoys had also been due to update reporters about the latest developments ahead of the summit but postponed their briefings. Rutte and many European allies are desperate to resolve the problem by Tuesday so that Trump does not derail the summit, as he did during his first term at NATO headquarters in 2018. Budget boosting After Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, NATO allies agreed that 2% of GDP should be the minimum they spend on their military budgets. But NATO's new plans for defending its own territory against outside attack require investment of at least 3%. Spain agreed to those plans in 2023. The 5% goal is made up of two parts. The allies would agree to hike pure defense spending to 3.5% of GDP. A further 1.5% would go to upgrade roads, bridges, ports and airfields so that armies can better deploy, and to prepare societies for future attacks. Mathematically, 3.5 plus 1.5 equals Trump's 5%. But a lot is hiding behind the figures and details of what kinds of things can be included remain cloudy. Countries closest to Russia, Belarus and Ukraine have all agreed to the target, as well as nearby Germany, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands, which is hosting the June 24-25 summit. The Netherlands estimates that NATO's defense plans would force it to dedicate at least 3.5% to core defense spending. That means finding an additional 16 billion to 19 billion euros ($18 billion to $22 billion). Supplying arms and ammunition to Ukraine, which Spain does, will also be included as core defense spending. NATO estimates that the U.S. spent around 3.2% of GDP on defense last year. Dual use, making warfighting possible The additional 1.5% spending basket is murkier. Rutte and many members argue that infrastructure used to deploy armies to the front must be included, as well as building up defense industries and preparing citizens for possible attacks. "If a tank is not able to cross a bridge. If our societies are not prepared in case war breaks out for a whole of society approach. If we are not able to really develop the defense industrial base, then the 3.5% is great but you cannot really defend yourselves," Rutte said this month. Spain wanted climate change spending included, but that proposal was rejected. Cyber-security and counter-hybrid warfare investment should also make the cut. Yet with all the conjecture about what might be included, it's difficult to see how Rutte arrived at this 1.5% figure. The when, the how, and a cunning plan It's not enough to agree to spend more money. Many allies haven't yet hit the 2% target, although most will this year, and they had a decade to get there. So an incentive is required. The date of 2032 has been floated as a deadline. That's far shorter than previous NATO targets, but military planners estimate that Russian forces could be capable of launching an attack on an ally within 5-10 years. The U.S. insists that it cannot be an open-ended pledge, and that a decade is too long. Still, Italy says it wants 10 years to hit the 5% target. Another issue is how fast spending should be ramped up. "I have a cunning plan for that," Rutte said. He wants the allies to submit annual plans that lay out how much they intend to increase spending by. The reasons for the spending hike For Europe, Russia's war on Ukraine poses an existential threat. A major rise in sabotage, cyberattacks and GPS jamming incidents is blamed on Moscow. European leaders are girding their citizens for the possibility of more. The United States also insists that China poses a threat. But for European people to back a hike in national defense spending, their governments require acknowledgement that the Kremlin remains NATO's biggest security challenge. The billions required for security will be raised by taxes, going into debt, or shuffling money from other budgets. But it won't be easy for many, as Spain has shown. On top of that, Trump has made things economically tougher by launching a global tariff war - ostensibly for U.S. national security reasons - something America's allies find hard to fathom.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Oil tumbles, stocks rebound after Trump Middle east pause
Stock markets ticked higher on Friday while oil skirted close to its biggest daily drop since April after President Donald Trump pushed back a decision on US military involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict. Rising risks from the Middle East have loomed large on the world's top indexes again this week. Europe's main bourses all rose between 0.5 per cent-1 per cent after similar gains across Asia, although it was touch and go whether it would be enough to prevent a second straight weekly loss for MSCI's main world index. Israel bombed targets in Iran, and Iran fired missiles at Israel overnight as the week-old war continued although Friday's markets moves, which also included a modest drop in the dollar, showed an element of relief. That was largely pinned on Thursday's statement from the White House that Trump will decide in the next two weeks - rather than right away - whether the US will get involved in the war. European foreign ministers were to meet their Iranian counterpart in Geneva on Friday, seeking a path back to diplomacy over its contested nuclear programme. The relief the US wasn't charging into the conflict sent oil prices down as low as $76.10 per barrel, although they were last at just over $77 and still up 4 per cent for the week and 20 per cent for the month. " Brent crude is down 2.5 per cent today in the clearest sign that fears over an imminent escalation in the Israel/Iran conflict have eased," MUFG strategist Derek Halpenny said. Gold, another traditional safe-haven play for traders, was also lower on the day although Nasdaq, S&P 500 , and Dow futures were all in the red after US markets had been closed on Thursday. Asian shares had gained 0.5 per cent overnight thanks to a 1.2 per cent jump in Hong Kong's Hang Seng and as newly elected President Lee Jae Myung's stimulus plans saw South Korea's Kospi top 3,000 points for the first time since early 2022. China's central bank held its benchmark lending rates steady as widely expected in Beijing, while data from Japan showed core inflation there hit a two-year high in May, keeping pressure on the Bank of Japan to resume interest rate hikes. That in turn lifted the yen and pushed down the export-heavy Nikkei in Tokyo. Oil retreats The dollar was ending an otherwise positive week lower on the day, with the euro up 0.3 per cent against the US currency at $1.1527 and the pound 0.2 per cent higher at $1.3494. The US bond market, which was also closed on Thursday, resumed trading with the key 10-year Treasury bond yield flat at 4.39 per cent, while German 10-year yields , which serve as Europe's borrowing benchmark rate, fell 2.5 basis points to 2.49 per cent. Gold prices eased 0.5 per cent to $3,354 an ounce, but were set for a weekly loss of 2.3 per cent. But the main commodity market focus remained oil. Brent crude futures were last down $1.60, or around 2.2 per cent, at $77.28 a barrel in London although they were still on track to end the week 4 per cent higher. PVM analyst John Evans said the big market risk of the Middle East troubles was "unintended action that escalates the conflict and touches upon oil infrastructure". "The world has more than adequate supply for 2025, but not if the nightmare scenario of 20 million (barrels per day) being blocked in the seas of Arabia, however briefly that might be," he said.