Volkswagen cuts 2025 guidance after $1.5 billion tariff hit in first-half
Global automakers have booked billions of dollars of losses and some issued profit warnings due to U.S. import tariffs. The European industry is also facing stiffening competition from China, and domestic regulations aimed at speeding up the electric-vehicle (EV) transition.
Volkswagen, Europe's biggest carmaker, now expects this year's operating profit margin between 4% and 5%, compared with a previously forecast 5.5-6.5% range. Full-year sales, earlier forecast to rise by up to 5%, are expected to be level with the previous year.
Volkswagen shares dropped after market open on Friday by as much as 4.6%, before paring their losses and turning positive as the day progressed. They were up 2.5% by mid-morning.
Investors had largely anticipated a guidance cut, after the company held off on assessing the damage of tariffs in the previous quarter.
CEO Oliver Blume told investors the company must intensify its cost-cutting efforts in response to the tariffs.
"We need to shift our cost efforts into high gear and accelerate implementation. After all, we cannot assume that the tariff situation is only temporary," Blume said.
Volkswagen and its competitors are pressing European trade negotiators to strike a deal to reduce a 25% punitive tariff they have faced since April.
EU diplomats have indicated that the bloc could be moving towards a broad 15% tariff as it seeks to avoid a 30% levy from August 1. A deal struck between the U.S. and Japan earlier this week raised hopes for a similar agreement for Europe, boosting carmakers' shares.
Volkswagen finance chief Arno Antlitz said the company's profit margin would roughly land in the middle of its guidance with a Japan-style deal, which had a 15% tariff rate.
He warned, however, that the clock was ticking on finding a deal. "We are already in July, so the longer we go into the second half of the year, the more we tend to the lower end of the guidance," he said.
Antlitz declined to comment on price increases when pressed by investors on how the company planned to protect its margins against the tariffs.
Volkswagen reported an operating profit of 3.8 billion euros in the quarter ended June 30, down 29% on the previous year, citing tariffs and restructuring costs, as well as higher sales of lower-margin all-electric models.
While Volkswagen was able to boost deliveries globally by 1.5% in the first six months of 2025, the group saw a decline of almost 10% in deliveries to the U.S.
North America sales revenue accounted for 18.5% of the carmaker's global sales in the first-half.
Car sales data for June underpinned a broader slowdown in Europe's struggling auto sector - and showed Volkswagen among the laggards as the company undergoes a major overhaul to cut over 35,000 jobs by the end of the decade.
Volkswagen Group includes VW's core-brand passenger cars as well as luxury brands Porsche (P911_p.DE), opens new tab and Audi, which are particularly exposed to Trump's tariffs given they have no production in the U.S. and rely heavily on exports.
($1 = 0.8515 euros)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
a few seconds ago
- Reuters
Nuclear fuels producer Orano does not expect any impact from EU-US deal
PARIS, Aug 1 (Reuters) - The trade deal between the European Union and the United States should not impact the business of French nuclear fuels company Orano, as so far the U.S. has not imposed tariffs on uranium products, its CEO Nicolas Maes told reporters on Friday. Under the deal announced last Sunday, the EU agreed to purchase nuclear energy products along with U.S. liquefied natural gas and oil worth in total $750 billion over the next three years. "We have looked at the material, and for all the deals that have been signed so far between the U.S. and other regions of the world, and isotopes, uranium, enriched uranium are exempted," Maes said. However, he said the deal's provision for exports of nuclear fuel from the U.S. to Europe was surprising, given that the U.S. is an importer, rather than exporter of the fuel it needs for its nuclear power plants. "The U.S. market is structurally importing nuclear material and not exporting," Maes said. He also said Orano's plans to expand the company's nuclear enrichment facilities in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, should not be affected by either the trade deal or U.S. President Donald Trump's executive order deregulating the nuclear sector. Trump signed an executive order In May to reduce regulations and fast-track new licences for nuclear reactors and power plants and reinvigorate uranium production and enrichment in the country. Maes said that Orano will maintain its nuclear safety standards but the order may result in easier dialogue between the nuclear safety authority and the utilities during the permitting process. He repeated an earlier comment that a final investment decision on the project is expected in 2027.
Daily Mail
a few seconds ago
- Daily Mail
In a rebuke to Trump, SNP backs world's largest wind farm
The 'largest' offshore windfarm in the world could be built in Scotland after the SNP Government granted planning permission. Ministers confirmed that the giant Berwick Bank project off the south east coast of Scotland - which will contain up to 307 turbines - has been given the go-ahead. Developers SSE Renewables, claim that, if it is fully delivered, then it 'would become the world's largest offshore wind farm'. Conservation groups raised concerns about the danger that the development will kill tens of thousands of puffins, kittiewakes and gannets, including globally important colonies at Bass Rock. It comes just days after Donald Trump attacked the spread of 'windmills' during his visit to Scotland, saying they were 'ruining' countries in Europe. Berwick Bank - proposed to be built 23 miles off the coast of St Abbs - aims to deliver 4.1 gigawatts (GW) of capacity, which is believed to be enough to power every home in Scotland twice over and around 17 per cent of the homes in the UK. The development will feature up to 307 turbines and have two connection points to the grid - one in Dunbar, East Lothian, and another in Blyth, Northumberland. But the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and partner conservation groups condemned the decision to approve the development. Anne McCall, director of RSPB Scotland, said: 'This is a very dark day for seabirds. It is a terrible decision on a really bad development. Berwick Bank would be catastrophic for Scotland's globally important seabirds which are already facing alarming declines. In addition, its impacts are so damaging they will make the relative impacts of other windfarms significantly higher. This one wind farm is going to make it really challenging to accelerate renewable projects across Scottish seas. We are incredibly concerned that Scottish Government have granted consent for a project which could catapult some of Scotland's most-loved seabird species towards extinction.' The National Trust for Scotland said the news was 'deeply disappointing', fearing there will be 'significant harm' caused to seabird colonies at the nearby St Abb's Head National Nature Reserve. A spokesperson said: 'At the National Trust for Scotland we are supportive of the drive towards renewable energy, but not at the expense of the very nature and habitats this effort is supposed to help save in the face of climate change.' The Scottish Government highlighted that the consent is subject to SSE Renewables producing a detailed sea bird compensation plan outlining how adverse impacts on seabirds will be compensated for. Stephen Wheeler, the managing director of SSE Renewables, said news of the approval is 'hugely welcome'. He added: 'At over 4GW of potential capacity, Berwick Bank can play a pivotal role in meeting the mission of Clean Power 2030 for the UK and achieving Scotland's decarbonisation and climate action goals. Berwick Bank has the potential to rapidly scale up Scotland's operational renewable energy capacity and can accelerate the delivery of homegrown, affordable and secure clean energy to UK consumers from Scottish offshore wind, helping meet the UK's clean power ambition by 2030.' The approval comes after the SNP Government unveiled a new target of having up to 40GW of offshore wind capacity by 2040, which is a significant ramping up from the existing target of 8-11GW by 2030. Based on current average operating capacities it would mean an increase from around 1,000 turbines in five years' time to 5,000 within 15 years. Scottish Conservative net zero and energy spokesman Douglas Lumsden said: 'Wind power is an important part of our energy mix, but it is not on its own enough to provide affordable power and energy security. Scotland will only prosper with a realistic energy policy that draws on nuclear, oil and gas and renewables - and only the Scottish Conservatives are committed to that. The hostility of both the SNP and Labour governments to North Sea oil and gas is costing an estimated 400 jobs a fortnight and increasing our reliance on imported fossil fuels. If they care about Scotland's interests, these two left-wing parties should ditch their opposition to our existing energy sector, embrace a mix of solutions and heed Kemi Badenoch's call to ditch the energy price levy.' Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes said: 'Ministers have given the Berwick Bank wind farm application extremely careful consideration. The decision to grant consent to Berwick Bank is a major step in Scotland's progress towards achieving net zero and tackling the climate crisis, as well as supporting national energy security and growing our green economy. It is also an important decision for Scotland's renewables sector, and this investment will be further built upon through the delivery of Scotland's significant future pipeline of offshore wind projects under the ScotWind and the Innovation and Targeted Oil and Gas (INTOG) leasing rounds.'
Spectator
a few seconds ago
- Spectator
Trump hasn't won the trade war
Maybe Trump doesn't always chicken out after all. Rapid trade deals with the UK, Japan, the EU and others in recent weeks may have given the impression that the trade war was essentially over. Today, though, comes Trump's Ardennes offensive, with immediate tariffs of 35 per cent announced for Canada. Other countries have been given a week to prepare for steep increases: India will be subject to 25 per cent tariffs, Taiwan 20 per cent and Switzerland – far from neutral in this particular conflict – 39 per cent. According to Trump, Canada has been singled out for harsh treatment because it has failed to cooperate on the flow of fentanyl across the border. Trump also hinted that he was punishing Canada for recognising Palestine, but then he has just done a trade deal with the EU in spite of France taking the same action, and didn't make any trade threats to Britain in spite of Keir Starmer saying this week that the UK will recognise Palestine in September if Israel does not meet certain conditions. It seems rather more likely that Trump is saying: look, other countries have yielded and agreed to one-sided trade deals with the US – I'm going to carry on beating you about the head until you agree to do the same. But will they? So far, the countries which have agreed to Trump's rather rough and ready trade deals have acted as if the benefits of a trading relationship with the US are one-way – they have more to lose than the US if a deal cannot be struck. But of course that is not always true. Taiwan, for example, produces over 90 per cent of the world's high-end microchips, which are implanted in just about every device manufactured in the US. What benefit does it bring America if those chips are in future taxed at 20 per cent? There is a strange dislocation in attitudes towards Trump's tariffs. Those who insist he has a very clever strategy and is winning tend also to be people who, in any other context, are in favour of low taxes. But a tariff is just a tax like any other – it adds costs to business and so suppresses economic activity. If tariffs are set at modest levels, it may be worth putting up with tariffs' depressing effect in return for the revenue they raise. Raise them above a certain level, however, and revenue will start to decline as business activity is discouraged – the classic Laffer effect. US growth may have proved more resilient than many feared it would be after Liberation Day, but it is certain that tariffs on raw materials and components are a negative influence on US manufacturing industry. A country does not 'win' by taxing its imports more than other countries tax its exports – if it did, the US would be one of the poorest countries in the world while many African countries would be startlingly rich. The US has done brilliantly well out of a regime of low import tariffs – as has Singapore, one of the few countries which, prior to Liberation Day, imposed even lower tariffs than did the US. But even if you do think that imposing higher tariffs than your trading partners amounts to 'victory', it is far from clear that Trump will emerge the eventual winner. Some countries may have yielded to him, but others are clearly holding out, and may well make the calculation that the US has more to lose from a trade war than they do. This war has a long way to run yet.
