logo
The world's auto supply chain is in the hands of a few Chinese bureaucrats

The world's auto supply chain is in the hands of a few Chinese bureaucrats

Reutersa day ago

BEIJING, June 5 (Reuters) - In a hulking grey building just east of Tiananmen square in Beijing, a small team in China's Ministry of Commerce is deciding the fate of the global auto industry, one rare earth magnet export permit at a time.
China holds a near-monopoly on rare earth magnets - a crucial component in electric vehicle motors - and it added them to an export control list in April as part of its trade war with the United States, forcing all exporters to apply to Beijing for licenses.
It falls to the Bureau of Industrial Security and Import and Export Control - which is part of China's Ministry of Commerce - to review export permits for the rare earth magnets, which are vital for car motors, wind turbines and even U.S. F-35 fighter jets.
While dozens of licences have been issued since late April, executives, lobbyists and diplomats say they are only a small fraction of the applications that have flooded in from automakers, semiconductor companies and aerospace firms around the world since the tougher export controls were introduced.
Washington says delays in issuing export licences show China is reneging on commitments made during trade talks in Geneva last month and it has retaliated with export curbs on plane engine parts and other equipment.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping held talks by phone on Thursday as the escalating dispute over China's rare earth stranglehold threatened to derail the fragile trade truce agreed between the two superpowers.
When the new rare earth magnet measures came in, the export control bureau had a total of just 30 staff, though this has since been doubled to around 60, according to two sources who were briefed on a meeting between the ministry and Chinese and European semiconductor firms last week.
"We appreciate that MOFCOM has increased its resources to address demand and they're working hard and long hours on these issues," said Adam Dunnett, Secretary General of the European Chamber of Commerce in China, referring to the ministry.
"But the reality is this is having a huge impact on a wide variety of sectors. It's something that could have been better planned and rolled out," he said.
According to personnel records posted to the Ministry of Commerce's website in June 2024, there are only three senior officials within the bureau who can approve the export permits.
The ministry's website lists the export licence bureau's office hours as: Weekdays, 8:30-11:30 a.m., 14:00-17:00 p.m.
Reuters was unable to determine current staffing levels or whether more officials are now able to approve applications.
The Ministry of Commerce did not respond to questions from Reuters on this subject.
The global alarm over shortages underscores the enormous leverage China has acquired through its near-monopoly on rare earth production. It also reveals a complex bureaucratic process that has gone from checkpoint to chokepoint.
"The process for our suppliers to apply for export licences for various rare earths ... since April, is complex and time-consuming, partly due to the need to collect and provide a lot of information," a spokesperson for Bosch, the German engineering and technology multinational, said last month.
A Chinese-language guide to the process published by the Ministry in late March runs to almost 14,000 Mandarin characters.
European auto suppliers alone have filed hundreds of requests since early April, with only about a quarter granted. These applications can range from dozens to hundreds of pages, according to sources who have either filed requests or been briefed about them.
Public Ministry of Commerce guidelines require information including technical product descriptions, signed contracts. Descriptions of production facilities and photos of products are also encouraged.
China's stated aim is to ensure dual-use items don't end up in military equipment, but officials are often overly cautious even though many applications clearly state commercial use, Dunnett said.
"Another concern we have heard from some companies is that they are being asked for sensitive and excessive information that is part of their intellectual property which has led to delays in their applications," Dunnett added.
While applications are meant to be processed in 45 working days, the ministry says applications related to national security will take longer, without defining how long.
Cory Combs, head of critical mineral and supply chain research at Trivium China, a policy research group, said it was not clear whether the delays were due to bureaucratic inertia or intentional weaponisation.
"We do expect these applications to U.S. end-users to be reviewed on par with other countries and approved whenever they're not for military use," he said. "The issue here is that, is it quick enough for the Trump administration to believe that Beijing has not reneged on the Geneva agreement?"
Some U.S. industry figures believe that the bureaucratic backlog is a "strategic excuse".
"China can staff up as fast as they want, if they wanted to," said a source from the U.S. rare earths industry who declined to be named for sensitivity reasons.
In public, Chinese officials have said the export controls apply to all countries, the implication being that they do not count as a U.S.-specific countermeasure under the Geneva agreement.
Foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said on May 30 that the rare earth export controls are "non-discriminatory and not targeted at any specific country".
During the Geneva talks, however, China privately admitted that the rare earth export controls qualified as non-tariff countermeasures, according to a source briefed on the talks.
Rare earths remain a core part of ongoing U.S.-China discussions, the person said.
China's foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a request for clarification.
Chinese scholars openly admit that the rare earth export controls are retaliation for U.S. chip curbs.
"It's a short-term form of leverage which doesn't hurt China, as the rare earths in question have relatively low monetary value," said Zhu Junwei, an international relations scholar at the Grandview Institution, a Chinese think-tank.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Colombia will not paralyze economy to comply with fiscal rule, says minister
Colombia will not paralyze economy to comply with fiscal rule, says minister

Reuters

time13 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Colombia will not paralyze economy to comply with fiscal rule, says minister

BOGOTA, June 6 (Reuters) - Colombian Finance Minister German Avila said on Friday that "paralyzing" the economy to comply with the country's fiscal rule is not an option and that the government will take steps, including increased borrowing, if needed to ensure growth. His remarks follow news that Colombia may invoke an "escape clause" to suspend compliance with the fiscal rule governing government finances.

13 House Republicans urge Senate to scale back clean energy cuts in bill they voted for
13 House Republicans urge Senate to scale back clean energy cuts in bill they voted for

NBC News

time20 minutes ago

  • NBC News

13 House Republicans urge Senate to scale back clean energy cuts in bill they voted for

WASHINGTON — Thirteen House Republicans who voted for President Donald Trump's " big, beautiful bill" sent a letter Friday urging Senate GOP leaders to scale back some of its clean energy cuts, sparking pushback from conservative hardliners. The unusual criticism of their own bill indicates a modicum of regret by the GOP lawmakers, whose votes were critical to the bill passing the House by a narrow margin last month. 'While we were proud to have worked to ensure that the bill did not include a full repeal of the clean energy tax credits, we remain deeply concerned by several provisions,' said the Republicans in the letter, led by Rep. Jen Kiggans, R-Va. They cited provisions that 'abruptly terminate several credits just 60 days after enactment for projects that have not yet begun construction,' and 'restrictions to transferability.' 'This approach jeopardizes ongoing development, discourages long-term investment, and could significantly delay or cancel energy infrastructure projects across the country,' the group of House Republicans said in criticizing the legislation they voted for, while suggesting some changes to 'mitigate' the harm it could cause. Kiggans, like most of the signatories, represents a competitive district that Democrats are targeting in the 2026 election. Other politically vulnerable members include: Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa.; Juan Ciscomani, R-Ariz.; Mike Lawler, R-N.Y.; Don Bacon, R-Neb.; Gabe Evans, R-Colo.; Young Kim, R-Calif.; David Valadao, R-Calif.; Rob Bresnahan, R-Pa.; and Tom Kean, R-N.J. The remaining three, who sit comparably safer seats, are Reps. Mark Amodei, R-Nev.; Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y.; and Nick LaLota, R-N.Y. The 13 Republicans warned that 'the House-passed bill includes a phase out schedule for credits that would cause significant disruption to projects under development and stop investments needed to win the global energy race.' The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee mocked the letter and said the lawmakers will own their votes for the bill. 'These 13 Republicans promised not to support cuts to clean energy tax credits, then cast the deciding votes to raise energy costs on American families, kill tens of thousands of jobs, and undermine our nation's energy security. They are responsible for this Big, Ugly Bill and all the harm it will cause,' DCCC spokesperson Viet Shelton said. 'This toothless letter is the worst kind of political hypocrisy and voters will see it for what it is, a lie perpetrated by endangered House Republicans who caved to their D.C. party bosses at the expense of the American people.' Kiggans' office did not immediately return a request for comment on whether she was aware of the provisions when supporting the bill, or if she'd vote for one that falls short of her new demands. Senate Republicans are eying changes to the House bill to ease some of the negative impacts of the funding cuts. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, told NBC News her version of the bill will probably relax some of the deadlines to cut off funding. But she said Thursday that there probably won't be massive changes to the House-passed bill. 'I imagine it's going to track fairly similarly, but I think some of the deadlines are pretty tight in terms of when you have to have construction and those things,' Capito said. 'We've been approached by several employers who need some of those tax.' Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he's willing to undo some of the clean energy funding, but he wants to make sure that existing business investments aren't harmed by the bill. 'What we're trying to focus on is to make sure that if businesses have invested and have projects in progress, that we do everything we can to hold them harmless,' he said. 'Whether or not we continue some of these programs out into the future — that's a separate question that I'm willing to entertain.' Meanwhile, the conservative group Club For Growth is running ads targeting Sens. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., John Curtis, R-Utah, and Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, for backing more modest rollbacks of the clean energy funding, which carries benefits for their states. There's another reason changing the bill is easier said than done: The speedy cuts to clean energy funding under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act were part of an House agreement to win the votes of conservative hardliners who want to reduce the bill's red ink. House Republicans have a majority of 220 to 212, meaning they can only spare three 'no' votes in their ranks to pass the bill when the Senate sends back their revised version. 'You backslide one inch on those IRA subsidies and I'm voting against this bill,' Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said Friday on the House floor. 'So you do what you want to do in the Senate, House of Lords, have your fun. But if you mess up the Inflation Reduction Act, Green New Scam subsidies, I ain't voting for that bill.'

Musk could lose billions of dollars depending on how spat with Trump unfolds
Musk could lose billions of dollars depending on how spat with Trump unfolds

The Independent

time20 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Musk could lose billions of dollars depending on how spat with Trump unfolds

The world's richest man could lose billions in his fight with world's most powerful politician. The feud between Elon Musk and Donald Trump could mean Tesla's plans for self-driving cars hit a roadblock, SpaceX flies fewer missions for NASA, Starlink gets fewer overseas satellite contracts and the social media platform X loses advertisers. Maybe, that is. It all depends on Trump's appetite for revenge and how the dispute unfolds. Joked Telemetry Insight auto analyst Sam Abuelsamid, 'Since Trump has no history of retaliating against perceived adversaries, he'll probably just let this pass.' Turning serious, he sees trouble ahead for Musk. 'For someone that rants so much about government pork, all of Elon's businesses are extremely dependent on government largesse, which makes him vulnerable.' Trump and the federal government also stand to lose from a long-running dispute, but not as much as Musk. Tesla robotaxis The dispute comes just a week before a planned test of Tesla's driverless taxis in Austin, Texas, a major event for the company because sales of its EVs are lagging in many markets, and Musk needs a win. Trump can mess things up for Tesla by encouraging federal safety regulators to step in at any sign of trouble for the robotaxis. Even before the war of words broke out on Thursday, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration requested data on how Musk's driverless, autonomous taxis will perform in low-visibility conditions. That request follows an investigation last year into 2.4 million Teslas equipped with full self-driving software after several accidents, including one that killed a pedestrian. A spokesman for NHTSA said the probe was ongoing and that the agency "will take any necessary actions to protect road safety.' The Department of Justice has also probed the safety of Tesla cars, but the status of that investigation is unclear. The DOJ did not respond immediately to requests for comment. The promise of a self-driving future led by Tesla inspired shareholders to boost the stock by 50% in the weeks after Musk confirmed the Austin rollout. But on Thursday, the stock plunged more than 14% amid the Trump-Musk standoff. On Friday, it recovered a bit, bouncing back nearly 4%. 'Tesla's recent rise was almost entirely driven by robotaxi enthusiasm," said Morningstar analyst Seth Goldstein. 'Elon's feud with Trump could be a negative.' Carbon credits business One often-overlooked but important part of Tesla's business that could take a hit is its sales of carbon credits. As Musk and Trump were slugging it out Thursday, Republican senators inserted new language into Trump's budget bill that would eliminate fines for gas-powered cars that fall short of fuel economy standards. Tesla has a thriving side business selling 'regulatory credits' to other automakers to make up for their shortfalls. Musk has downplayed the importance of the credits business, but the changes would hurt Tesla as it reels from boycotts of its cars tied to Musk's time working for Trump. Credit sales jumped by a third to $595 million in the first three months of the year even as total revenue slumped. Reviving sales Musk's foray into right-wing politics cost Tesla sales among the environmentally minded consumers who embraced electric cars and led to boycotts of Tesla showrooms. If Musk has indeed ended his close association with Trump, those buyers could come back, but that's far from certain. Meanwhile, one analyst speculated earlier this year that Trump voters in so-called red counties could buy Teslas 'in a meaningful way.' But he's now less hopeful. 'There are more questions than answers following Thursday developments,' TD Cowen's Itay Michaeli wrote in his latest report, 'and it's still too early to determine any lasting impacts.' Michaeli's stock target for Tesla earlier this year was $388. He has since lowered it to $330. Tesla was trading Friday at $300. Tesla did not respond to requests for comment. Moonshot mess Trump said Thursday that he could cut government contracts to Musk's rocket company, SpaceX, a massive threat to a company that has received billions of federal dollars. The privately held company that is reportedly worth $350 billion provides launches, sends astronauts into space for NASA and has a contract to send a team from the space agency to the moon next year. But if Musk has a lot to lose, so does the U.S. SpaceX is the only U.S. company capable of transporting crews to and from the space station, using its four-person Dragon capsules. The other alternative is politically dicey: depending wholly on Russia's Soyuz capsules. Musk knew all this when he shot back at Trump that SpaceX would begin decommissioning its Dragon spacecraft. But it is unclear how serious his threat was. Several hours later — in a reply to another X user — he said he wouldn't do it. Starlink impact? A subsidiary of SpaceX, the satellite internet company Starlink, appears to also have benefited from Musk's once-close relationship with the president. Musk announced that Saudi Arabia had approved Starlink for some services during a trip with Trump in the Middle East last month. The company has also won a string of other recent deals in Bangladesh, Pakistan, India and elsewhere as Trump has threatened tariffs. It's not clear how much politics played a role, and how much is pure business. On Friday, The Associated Press confirmed that India had approved a key license to Starlink. At least 40% of India's more than 1.4 billion people have no access to the internet. Ad revival interrupted? Big advertisers that fled X after Musk welcomed all manner of conspiracy theories to the social media platform have started to trickle back in recent months, possibly out of fear of a conservative backlash. Musk has called their decision to leave an 'illegal boycott' and sued them, and the Trump administration recently weighed in with a Federal Trade Commission probe into possible coordination among them. Now advertisers may have to worry about a different danger. If Trump sours on X, "there's a risk that it could again become politically radioactive for major brands,' said Sarah Kreps, a political scientist at Cornell University. She added, though, that an 'exodus isn't obvious, and it would depend heavily on how the conflict escalates, how long it lasts and how it ends.' ___

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store