
Auto tariffs seen hiking car prices by nearly $2,000 per vehicle
Car buyers will bear the brunt of the $30 billion cost of President Donald Trump's tariffs, driving up already high US auto prices by almost $2,000 per vehicle, according to consultant AlixPartners.
The firm expects auto companies to pass along 80% of the cost of Trump's tariffs — which it calculates as $1,760 more per car. AlixPartners, as part of its annual global automotive outlook, also cautioned that the administration's anti-electric vehicle policies risk relegating American automakers to bit players in the global EV market.
'These tariffs bring a big wall of cost,' Mark Wakefield, global auto market lead for AlixPartners, told reporters in an online briefing. We see 'consumers taking the majority of the hit.'
General Motors Co. and Ford Motor Co. have already said they expect a $5 billion and $2.5 billion tariff impact this year, respectively, though they say they will find offsets in part through price adjustments.
Those higher prices will result in about 1 million fewer vehicles sold in the US over the next three years, Wakefield said. But the consultant expects US auto sales to reach 17 million in 2030, 1 million more than last year, as the impact of tariffs abates.
AlixPartners' predicted sales hit is more muted than some other projections because the firm sees tariff rates falling as the US negotiates trade deals with other countries. It forecasts the 25% auto tariff will ultimately fall to 7.5% on assembled autos, 5% on parts and even lower on cars and parts that are compliant with the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.
'This tariff wall is not likely to last forever,' Wakefield said.
What's likely to have a longer-lasting impact is the Trump administration's move to reduce and eliminate incentives to spur the sale of electric vehicles, such as the $7,500 consumer tax credit for purchasing a battery powered model, he said.
That will steer car buyers away from EVs as they 'follow their pocketbook' and buy traditional gasoline-fueled vehicles, Wakefield said.
AlixPartners slashed its forecast for EV sales in the US by nearly half. It now sees battery electric vehicles making up just 17% of US auto sales in 2030, down from a previous prediction that EVs would make up 31% of sales by then.
Traditional internal combustion engine vehicles will account for half of US sales in 2030, up from AlixPartners' previous prediction that they would only make up about one-third of sales.
The consultant sees traditional hybrids accounting for 27% of the US market in 2030, up from its prior forecast of 24%, while plug-in hybrids and extended-range electric vehicles will account for just 6% of US auto sales by then, down from a previous prediction of 10%.
That will hurt US automakers' competitiveness and perhaps even leave them dependent on global EV leader China, Wakefield said.
'It makes it much more likely that they end up licensing or joint venturing or otherwise using platforms and EV technologies from China,' he said in an interview.
The 'aggressive take-down of support' for EVs, will leave American automakers with the dubious distinction of being the world leader in big, gas-guzzling engines, a century-old technology that's in decline, Wakefield said.
'They'll have the world's best V8 engines by 2028,' Wakefield said of American automakers. 'They'll probably also have the world's only V8 engines by 2028.'
Naughton writes for Bloomberg.
Hashtags

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


CBS News
4 minutes ago
- CBS News
What to know about the MOP and the B-2, the bunker-buster bomb and plane that could be used to strike Iran
B-2 Spirit Bombers: The planes that could be used to target Iran's Fordo nuclear site Israel's strikes against Iran have killed a number of its top nuclear scientists and battered its nuclear facilities, but complete destruction of Iran's ability to make weapons-grade uranium is believed to be out of reach — unless the U.S. agrees to help. At least one key uranium enrichment site, Fordo, has so far been unscathed. Located 300 feet beneath a mountain and protected by Russian-produced air defenses, Fordo is believed by military experts to be key to Iran's nuclear program. Nuclear non-proliferation experts say this is where Iran has tried to enrich uranium for weapons purposes and expand its stockpile of enriched uranium. Israel's best chance at destroying the facility at Fordo could lie with a U.S.-produced bomb that's so heavy that it can only be dropped by a U.S. plane. At a hearing Wednesday, Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire raised this with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. "It's being reported that the president is being asked to consider providing the bunker-buster bomb that is required to be carried only by the B-2 Bomber and would require a U.S. pilot," she said, asking Hegseth whether he had been asked to provide President Trump with options for striking the Middle East. He declined to answer. Mr. Trump is considering joining Israel's offensive against Iran, and approved attack plans Tuesday, but has not made a final decision, CBS News has reported. The White House said Thursday that the president would make a decision on whether to order a strike within the next two weeks. Sources told CBS News that the president had discussed the logistics of using bunker-buster bombs as he weighs whether to wade into the conflict between Iran and Israel. Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb In this photo released by the U.S. Air Force on May 2, 2023, airmen look at a GBU-57, or the Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb, at Whiteman Air Base in Missouri. U.S. Air Force via AP, File The bomb that Shaheen was referring to is the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, known as a MOP. It is designed to attack "deeply-buried facilities and hardened bunkers and tunnels," according to the Air Force. It's guided by military GPS and is meant to reach and destroy targets in well-protected facilities. The MOP measures about 20.5 feet in length and 31.5 inches in diameter, according to the Air Force. It weighs in at just under 30,000 pounds, including about 5,300 pounds of explosive material. The Air Force says that the MOP's explosive power is over 10 times that of its predecessor, the BLU-109. It's designed to penetrate up to 200 feet underground before exploding. The warhead is encased in a special high-performance steel alloy, which is meant to enable it to carry a large explosive payload while maintaining the penetrator case's integrity during impact, according to an Air Force fact sheet. Boeing developed the GBU-57, and as of 2015, the aerospace company had been contracted to produce 20 of them, according to the Air Force. Because of the GBU-57's weight — it's the heaviest bomb produced by the U.S. — the B-2 Spirit is currently the only aircraft in the Air Force that is equipped to carry and deploy it. B-2 Spirit A U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit stealth bomber lands at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire. Steve Parsons/PA Images via Getty Images One of the key attributes of the B-2 Spirit is its stealth — it's able to evade air defenses and reach heavily defended targets. It's aerodynamically efficient and its internal weapons bays can carry two of the GBU-57 bombs. Because of what the Air Force refers to as the plane's "low-observable technologies," the B-2 Spirit has a "high level of freedom of action at high altitudes." It's built with a combination of "reduced infrared, acoustic, electromagnetic, visual and radar signatures." This, along with composite materials, special coatings, wing design and other classified processes, make the B-2 difficult for even the most sophisticated defense systems to detect and track. Without refueling, its range is about 6,000 nautical miles. The B-2 took its first flight in 1989, in California, but now, Whiteman Air Force Base, in Missouri, is the only B-2 base. It's been used for airstrikes in the Kosovo War, in Afghanistan and in Iraq. The prime contractor for the B-2 is Northrop Grumman. For years, some lawmakers and defense experts have suggested that the U.S. provide Israel with GBU-57 bombs and jets capable of carrying them — but the idea is controversial, with critics arguing the move would be provocative.


New York Times
7 minutes ago
- New York Times
Live Updates: Trump Will Decide on Iran Attack ‘Within the Next Two Weeks,' White House Says
Iran retains the naval assets and other capabilities it would need to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, a move that could pin any U.S. Navy ships in the Persian Gulf, American military officials say. In meetings at the White House, senior military officials have raised the need to prepare for that possibility, after Iranian officials threatened to mine the strait if the United States joined Israel's attacks on the country. Pentagon officials are considering all of the ways Iran could retaliate, as President Trump cryptically hints at what he might do, saying on Wednesday that he had not made a final decision. In several days of attacks, Israel has targeted Iranian military sites and state-sponsored entities, as well as high-ranking generals. It has taken out many of Iran's ballistic missiles, though Iran still has hundreds of them, U.S. defense officials said. But Israel has steered clear of Iranian naval assets. So while Iran's ability to respond has been severely damaged, it has a robust navy and maintains operatives across the region, where the United States has more than 40,000 troops. Iran also has an array of mines that its navy could lay in the Strait of Hormuz. The narrow 90-mile waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to the open ocean is a key shipping route. A quarter of the world's oil and 20 percent of the world's liquefied natural gas passes through it, so mining the choke point would cause gas prices to soar. Image A satellite image of the Strait of Hormuz, showing the Iranian coast at top, and Qeshm Island and the United Arab Emirates below. Credit... Gallo Images, via Getty Images It could also isolate American minesweepers in the Persian Gulf on one side of the strait. Two defense officials indicated that the Navy was looking to disperse its ships in the gulf so that they would be less vulnerable. A Navy official declined to comment, citing operational security. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. Iran has vowed that if attacked by American forces, it would respond forcefully, potentially setting off a cycle of escalation. 'Think about what happened in January 2020 after Trump killed Suleimani and times that by 100,' Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, said. Qassim Suleimani, a powerful Iranian general, was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Baghdad, during Mr. Trump's first administration. Iran then launched the largest ever ballistic missile barrage at American bases in Iraq, leaving some 110 troops with traumatic brain injuries, and unintentionally hitting a Ukrainian passenger jet, killing all 176 people aboard. 'Iran is strategically weaker but operationally still lethal across the region,' Mr. Katulis said, 'and Americans still have troops across that part of the world.' Iran has mined the Strait of Hormuz before, including in 1988 during its war with Iraq, when Iran planted 150 mines in the strait. One of the mines struck an American guided missile frigate, the U.S.S. Samuel B. Roberts, nearly sinking it. Image The U.S.S. Samuel B. Roberts being towed after hitting a mine in the Persian Gulf in April 1988. Credit... Associated Press Gen. Joseph Votel, a former leader of U.S. Central Command, and Vice Adm. Kevin M. Donegan, a former commander of U.S. naval forces in the Middle East, each said on Wednesday that Iran was capable of mining the strait, which they said could bring international pressure on Israel to end its bombing campaign. But such an action would probably invite a massive American military response and further damage Iran's already crippled economy, Admiral Donegan added. 'Mining also hurts Iran; they would lose income from oil they sell to China,' he said. 'Now though, Iranian leadership is much more concerned with regime survival, which will drive their decisions.' Military officials and analysts said missile and drone attacks remained the biggest retaliatory threat to U.S. bases and facilities in the region. 'These would be shorter-range variants, not what they were launching against Israel,' Admiral Donegan said. 'That Iranian capability remains intact.' Admiral Donegan also expressed concerns about the possibility that the Quds Force, a shadowy arm of Iran's military, could attack U.S. troops. 'Our Arab partners have done well over the years to root most of that out of their countries, however, that Quds Force and militia threat still remains in Iraq, and to some extent in Syria and Jordan,' he said. Iranian officials are seeking to remind Mr. Trump that, weakened or not, they still can still find ways to hurt American troops and interests in the region, said Vali Nasr, an Iran expert and a professor at Johns Hopkins University. Striking Iran, he said, 'gets into such big unknowns.' He added, 'There are a lot of things that could go wrong.' Image Damage from a suspected Iranian missile attack in Petah Tikva, Israel, this week. Credit... Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York Times Much is at stake for Iran if it decides to retaliate. 'Many of Iran's options are the strategic equivalent of a suicide bombing,' said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran policy expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'They can do enormous damage to others if they mine the Strait of Hormuz, destroy regional oil facilities and rain a missile barrage against Israel, but they may not survive the blowback.' But Iran can make it hugely expensive, and dangerous, for the U.S. Navy to have to conduct what would most likely be a weekslong mine-clearing operation in the Strait of Hormuz, according to one former naval officer who was stationed on a minesweeper in the Persian Gulf. He and other Navy officers said that clearing the strait could also put American sailors directly in harm's way. Iran is believed to maintain a variety of naval mines. They include small limpet mines containing just a few pounds of explosives that swimmers place directly on a ship's hull and typically detonate after a set amount of time. Iran also has larger moored mines that float just under the water's surface, releasing a hundred pounds of explosive force or more when they come in contact with an unsuspecting ship. More advanced 'bottom' mines sit on the seafloor. They use a combination of sensors — such as magnetic, acoustic, pressure and seismic — to determine when a ship is nearby and explode with hundreds of pounds of explosive force. The Navy has four minesweepers in the Persian Gulf, each with 100 sailors aboard who have been based in Bahrain and are trained in how to deal with underwater hazards. Should Iran place mines in the Strait of Hormuz or other parts of the Persian Gulf, a small Navy contingent in Bahrain called Task Force 56 would respond. Usually led by a senior explosive ordnance disposal officer, the task force would take advantage of technologies like autonomous underwater vehicles that can scan the seafloor with sonar much more quickly than the last time Iranian mines threatened the strait. And while the Navy has been experimenting with underwater robots to destroy mines, the task force will still need to deploy small teams of explosive ordnance disposal divers for the time-consuming and dangerous task of approaching each mine underwater and carefully placing charges to destroy it.


Fox News
8 minutes ago
- Fox News
Caroline Sunshine: I Don't See A Reason For The U.S. To Militarily Engage In The Middle East At This Current Moment
Former Trump 2024 Campaign Deputy Communications Director Caroline Sunshine joins Fox Across America With guest host Rich Zeoli to explain why she is opposed to the U.S. getting involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran. In our country, the government derives its power from the consent of the governed. And the power resides with us, the people, and we give that power. And we have given that power to President Trump because the leaders of the past have failed us, particularly on foreign policy. And a huge reason President Trump was elected was because the American people saw that prolonged conflicts in the Middle East have been costly to us in terms of blood, in terms treasure, in times of time. They haven't seen how they've in the interest, in our interest. And every conflict always starts with some big, bold promise or that it'll be quick, that it will be just a strike, that it would be five minutes, but then it fails to answer the question of then what. And our country doesn't have a good track record there. And so, like President Trump said, great nations don't fight prolonged conflicts. And I don't see a how it is directly in the interests of the American people to go get involved in this conflict right now. And I do see a huge downside, which is that getting involved in the conflict, I see derailing President Trump's domestic agenda, which is so important and another reason why he was elected. I think if we get involved with this conflict, this war will become a huge distraction. And President Trump's extremely popular agenda here at home of deporting the 15 million illegal immigrants that were let in under the previous administration, implementing tariffs, and rebuilding our middle class will get completely derailed. And those things are more directly in the interest of the American people than getting involved in a conflict again in the Middle East. Caroline Sunshine Reacts To The Trump-Elon Feud Check out the podcast to hear their full discussion!