Stellantis to launch Leapmotor EVs in South Africa later this year
The C10 is an electric SUV with a petrol engine used only to charge the battery. More Leapmotor models are expected to be launched next year, including fully electric models, said Mike Whitfield, MD of Stellantis South Africa and sub-Saharan Africa.
Leapmotor created waves with its recent rollout of the all-electric B10 SUV equipped with smart-driving features and lidar sensing technology for less than $18,000 (R316,865).
In Stellantis bought a 21% stake in Leapmotor for $1.6bn (R28.17bn). The two carmakers also formed the joint venture Leapmotor International, in which Stellantis holds a 51% stake.
Leapmotor will help the world's fourth largest carmaker widen its range of affordable EVs, as it presses ahead with electrification while other Chinese carmakers including BYD and Chery Auto are aggressively expanding into Africa.
'South Africa is a critical market for Stellantis and we are committed to unlocking its potential through product, innovation and meaningful partnerships,' Whitfield said.
Stellantis, which entered the South African market four years ago, is building a new plant in the country with a maximum capacity of 100,000 vehicles by 2030. It plans to become the No 1 player in the Middle East and Africa region with 1-million vehicles sold by 2030, with 35% expected to be electric.
In 2024 it sold 500,000 cars in the Middle East and Africa.
With more than 60% of the South African market concentrated below the R400,000 price point, Stellantis's Citroën C3 range is gaining strong traction, with the upcoming C3 Basalt set to complete a competitive line-up in the accessible B-hatch and SUV segments early next year, Whitfield said.
Stellantis will also launch the Citroën C3 Hola panel van, its entry into the growing commercial vehicle sector aimed at small business owners.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
13 minutes ago
- The Citizen
Decay, corruption, and neglect put Gauteng at a crossroads
Gauteng's residents are poorer today than a decade ago, with unemployment soaring and investment fleeing. Joburg was once the City of Gold, a gleaming metropolis whose skyline symbolised hope, jobs and prosperity for multitudes. It didn't merely power Gauteng city region's economy; it was the economic heartbeat of South Africa. In 2015, Joburg contributed around 40% of Gauteng's gross domestic product (GDP). The province, in turn contributes about a third of the national total. No nation can thrive when its economic heart is dying. The people of Gauteng are poorer per person today than 10 years ago, a direct result of ANC misrule and failing economic mismanagement. Residents are 'drowning in filth due to uncollected waste, pothole-infested roads, long grass, sewage, water challenges and power cuts' as colourfully put by The Star in 2023. It's the same all over the province, except in the municipality of Midvaal. Stats SA reports Gauteng's official unemployment rate rose to 34.7% in the first quarter of 2025, up from 34.4% in the fourth quarter of 2024, while the expanded rate climbed to 40%. Youth unemployment remains alarmingly high, at 62.4% for those aged 15 to 24. The effects are visible: shuttered shops, vacant factories and the quiet despair stalking townships across the province. The key to growth is investment. Why do investors not invest? Number one factor is crime. Not only does crime deter investment, in many cases the target of criminals is public infrastructure. Every cable stolen is a power outage somewhere. Every vandalised transformer is going to result in downtime for several businesses. All of these add to the cost of the products and services we sell. Investors would rather invest where energy supply and other services are more reliable and those who do invest have to put in generators and constantly buy diesel, which adds to the cost of the goods we sell. ALSO READ: OPINION | Put Johannesburg under administration In the end, South African goods are too expensive and we lose market share to our competitors. Consequently, our companies go out of business, and jobs are lost. Since 2016, Joburg has endured the upheaval of nine mayors because easily bought councillors in small parties caused relentless instability in fragile coalitions. Alarmed by policy unpredictability, investors have fled, eroding the city's prospects. Our two other metros – Ekurhuleni and Tshwane – have suffered under ANC misgovernance and squabbles over patronage. Factories that once roared with productivity now stand silent as criminal syndicates strip copper cables from infrastructure, paralysing industry and costing jobs. Tshwane, our nation's capital, is burdened by high-level corruption. Deputy mayor Eugene Modise, an ANC councillor, is under intense scrutiny over R21.7 million in unpaid municipal bills on properties tied to his business interests. Joburg's deterioration is an example of the broader crisis facing Gauteng under the ANC's dysfunctional administration, where cadre deployment, corruption and poor governance hollow out the province's economic foundations. Gauteng, South Africa's economic engine, is seizing up. Its failure will cost all of us, regardless of political affiliation. Small businesses are collapsing under the burden of red tape, corruption and persistent service delivery failures. A 2023 peer-reviewed study in the South African Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management found that small, medium and micro enterprises in Gauteng struggle due to infrastructure constraints, leadership shortages, financial pressures, and, critically, high levels of crime and corruption. Gauteng stands at a crossroads. Years of decay, corruption, and neglect have brought our province to the brink. ALSO READ: Tshwane and Joburg squeeze residents for cash
IOL News
43 minutes ago
- IOL News
South African women now financing their own homes: a new era of independence
With many people investing in properties, women are not being left behind. They are even securing financed properties independently. Image: Itumeleng English A growing number of South African women are able to finance their new homes, with more doing it on their own. According to Standard Bank's Home Loans data, women have consistently made up 70% of all home loan clients in the past decade, whether as joint or sole applicants. However, in a noteworthy shift, nearly 40% of all main applicants for home loans today are women-up from just 37.9% in 2015. The independence with which women are now entering the property market was even more compelling. In the past two years, 66% of female main applicants bought homes without a co-applicant, thereby signalling a shift in the housing market. 'Women have always featured strongly in our home loans book, but the past two years clearly show growing confidence and empowerment to take the lead in achieving their home ownership goals,' said Toni Anderson, head of home services at Standard Bank. The average price of the properties purchased by female main applicants has increased by 48.2% from R800 000 in 2015 to R1.3 million in 2025. This is supported by the 74.3% growth seen in the average gross income for female main applicants over the last 10 years, whose average income grew from R38 000 in 2015 to R67 000 in 2025. While women of all ages are said to be entering the market, 74% of female main applicants are under the age of 45, pointing to younger women increasingly investing in long-term assets. Female asset ownership is rising beyond property. In Standard Bank's Vehicle and Asset Finance (VAF) division, women's share of the client base grew from 38.5% in June 2015 to 43.9% in June 2025. Those aged 31 to 45 accounted for nearly half of female sales in June 2025. Notably, while still a small group, young female buyers increased sharply, from just 0.002% in 2015 to 0.59% in 2025. However, women continued to spend less on cars than men. A decade ago, the average car purchase price among women was 18% lower than that of men. In 2025, their average spend of R334 914 was 6.5% lower than the R356 972 average spent by men. In Standard Bank's case, this growing trend of women financing assets was said to be driven by the bank's initiatives to support and encourage asset ownership in the country, from financing upfront costs for first-time homebuyers to allowing its clients to add and even re-spread their balloon payments if they need to. 'It's clear that more women are actively participating in the economy and making long-term financial decisions. And Standard Bank is here to support them by financing their dreams,' says Anderson. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ Short-term insurance data also showed a shift, with women increasingly leading in risk management. Drawing on extensive data from the past five years, Standard Insurance Limited's claims data reveal that women now file 51.1% of claims in this age group. Women also dominate claims submissions among those who are divorced, accounting for 64.4% of claims, while men represent just 35.6%. This trend is especially pronounced among women aged 34 to 44, and those who are unmarried or divorced, challenging long-held stereotypes about financial decision-making in households. This shift is a powerful reflection of changing consumer behaviour and dispels the long-held stereotype that men are the primary protectors and financial decision-makers in a household, says Dr Hardy Ncube, head of personal products at Standard Insurance Limited. 'Our data challenges the traditional narrative, showing that women are not only actively engaged but may even surpass men in certain policyholder demographics,' Ncube said. South Africa is seeing a clear and steady shift in ownership patterns as more South African women take on property purchases, reflecting both growing financial independence and confidence in property as a long-term investment. "It's an encouraging sign of transformation in the real estate sector,' said Hayley Ivins-Downes, managing executive of Real Estate at Lightstone, earlier this week. The proportion of homes owned by women as sole buyers-as opposed to men or mixed couple buyers-has increased from 30% in 2014 to 39% in 2025, while mixed couple ownership declined from 39% to 30%. 'Single female buyers' refers to women who are the sole registered owners of the property, regardless of their marital or relationship status. As a result, properties owned solely by women or jointly by women and men account for 69% of all ownership, while properties owned solely by men remain static at 31%. Earlier this year, FNB told this publication that in 2024, its demographic data showed that of its total home finance applicants, females were at 40% compared to males at 60%. Independent Media Property
Daily Maverick
2 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
The JSE displays an unhealthy obsession with secrecy
When a company lost big on the stock market in 2020 and suspected possible market manipulation, it attempted to get information from the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. The JSE stonewalled them, baldly citing privacy and commercial confidentiality issues. This story of one company fighting to access information from a South African public body is playing out every day, across all spheres of government, and illustrates a culture of secrecy in our public administration. Five years ago, a small company, Inhlanhla Ventures, was placed in a difficult financial position. It had been investing in shares on the stock market through a broker. As part of their agreement, the broker would provide credit to Inhlanhla to invest – and then hold shares as security for those loans. However, if the value of any shares held as security dropped below a certain percentage, the broker was entitled to demand additional security or repayment of the debt. If Inhlanhla failed to comply, the broker would be entitled to take ownership of the shares held by it in settlement of Inhlanhla's debt. During the first quarter of 2020, the broker at that point held all the shares owned by Inhlanhla as security. A substantial part consisted of shares in enX Group Limited, a public company listed on the JSE. In May 2020, as a result of an unexpected, rapid and substantial decline in the price of the shares in the Inhlanhla portfolio, particularly the enX share price, Inhlanhla realised that the broker would be entitled to foreclose on the bulk of Inhlanhla's securities. Given the decline of the enX shares, which dropped from 700c per share at the beginning of April to as low as 320c per share on 14 May 2020, Inhlanhla was left with little option other than to relinquish its portfolio to the broker. However, a couple of days after the broker assumed ownership of those shares, the share price rose significantly, meaning the broker benefited handsomely. A rat? Inhlanhla thought it smelled a rat. By examining the trade in enX shares between April and June 2020, Inhlanhla believed that there were grounds to suspect market manipulation. If that was the case, Inhlanhla might be entitled to restitution for the losses it suffered. But it did not have access to the details of all the trades made in respect of the shares, and so it could not get conclusive proof to back up its suspicions. And so, Inhlanhla filed a request for access to information on the identities of the buyers and sellers of the shares and the sale values with the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) under the Promotion of Access to Information Act (Paia). They also narrowed down their focus to the key period from 3 May to 19 May 2020. Public body The JSE is a public body and gets its powers and responsibilities from the Financial Markets Act (FMA). It – like all public and private bodies – is bound by Paia and so must disclose any information requested unless there is a legitimate ground (as set out in the legislation) for it to refuse the request. The JSE refused the Paia request from Inhlanhla, stating baldly that the information sought contained personal, confidential or commercial information and it was prohibited by the FMA and Paia from disclosing such information. As we have previously explained, the Information Regulator (IR) is a new body to which someone unsatisfied with a refusal of their Paia request can file a complaint. Believing that the JSE was incorrect in refusing their request, Inhlanhla approached the regulator. The Information Regulator investigates The IR issued an investigation report, finding that the JSE had no justification in refusing the request, ordering it to disclose the requested information to Inhlanhla. However, this order remains preliminary and Inhlanhla is waiting for a final decision from the IR's enforcement committee. In any case, lawyers acting for the JSE have already written to Inhlanhla, putting the company on notice that if the regulator rules in Inhlanhla's favour, the JSE will go to court to review that decision. This is why this story of one company seeking to get information from one public body in 2020 is relevant. The experience of Inhlanhla is just one example that illustrates South Africa's broken access to information system and how a culture of secrecy within our powerful institutions operates to stymie accountability. Similar stories happen every day, all over the country, with all sorts of public bodies. Municipalities, national government departments and state-owned entities all regularly refuse Paia requests, often based on a misguided interpretation of the law. Although the IR provides a useful mechanism before having to go to court, the delays in accessing the information sought are often ruinous or make the information eventually disclosed irrelevant because of the passage of time. The JSE's trite response The reasons given by the JSE in its refusal of the Inhlanhla request are also reasons we see repeatedly. One common refrain we hear from public bodies is that they cannot disclose the information because doing so would violate a statutory obligation they hold to protect personal, private or confidential information. Often, the public body refers to the Protection of Personal Information Act. Here, the JSE also said that the FMA prevented it from disclosing any confidential information. But this must be a misreading of the law, as Parliament could not have intended the FMA to act as a justification to refuse Paia requests. And, in fact, Parliament did not exclude Paia from the obligations under the FMA. The Act states that confidential information cannot be disclosed 'unless disclosure is required or permitted in terms of a law or court order'. Paia is one of those laws. The IR, in its investigation report, confirmed that one of the objectives of Paia is to 'promote transparency, accountability and effective governance'. It is a vital cog in the constitutional framework which enables citizens to hold powerful institutions, government bodies and individuals to account. The JSE's reliance on the FMA is a betrayal of these principles. The JSE's stance is particularly galling, because as the IR's investigation report points out, its claims of blanket confidentiality on the details of who trades shares in listed companies, exactly when they do it, and how much they pay, go to the heart of a transparent market – especially when there are claims of market manipulation. As the IR report notes, our courts have emphasised the non-private nature of how companies conduct their affairs, especially when they involve publicly traded securities. The FMA, the regulator said, also supports this principle by promoting transparency in the financial markets. Early in South Africa's constitutional democracy, the Constitutional Court, in Bernstein v Bester, explained that a company's business was not a purely private matter. The Supreme Court of Appeal, in Nova Property Holdings v Cobbett, confirmed that this principle extended to companies' securities registers, which were 'not inherently private'. The IR investigation found that disclosure of information in this case was not unreasonable, as it pertained to market activities conducted under the regulatory oversight of the JSE. Commercial harm? The JSE also stated that it could not provide the information that Inhlanhla sought because to do so would violate the mandatory protection of commercial information of a third party. This is also an oft-seen tactic – the bald claim that commercial harm would result from the disclosure of the information. The IR stressed that a public body cannot make this claim as a 'mere assertion' and had to provide evidence of how disclosure would actually harm the relevant third party. But, despite the multiple court judgments explaining that disclosure of information must be the default and that access to information should be granted unless valid, specific and justified grounds for its refusal exist, public bodies like the JSE continue to issue bald refusals – and so the IR investigation rejected this claim, too. The JSE also claimed it owed a duty of confidentiality to third parties and so could refuse disclosure in terms of Paia. However, the JSE failed to seek third-party consent (as it was obliged to) and also failed to identify any agreement with third parties which provided such an undertaking of confidentiality – again, leading the IR investigator to reject the JSE's reliance on the ground of refusal. Public interest override Paia provides that, notwithstanding other prohibitions, the public body must assess whether the disclosure of the records would reveal evidence of a substantial contravention of, or failure to comply with, the law and whether the public interest in the disclosure of the record clearly outweighs the harm contemplated in the grounds of refusal. The IR investigation noted that Inhlanhla had furnished the JSE with an analysis of the Traded enX Shares over the period 1 April 2020 to 30 June 2020 and that it had clearly invoked concerns regarding 'substantial contravention of the law', in the form of market manipulation. The IR took the view that the JSE had simply not properly engaged in the balancing exercise required by Paia to determine whether the public interest override would apply, and found that mandatory disclosure in the public interest was relevant or applicable under the circumstances. Where to from here? As mentioned earlier, the IR enforcement committee still needs to review and make a determination on the investigator's preliminary report. After that, either party can take the IR decision to court – as the JSE has already indicated it will do if it is ordered to make the requested disclosures. As the Inhlanhla story demonstrates, the process to challenge a refusal is so onerous and so lengthy that often someone seeking access to information is forced to give up. It's hard not to think that the public bodies know this and so know that – despite their misreading of the law and judicial precedent – their refusals of the public's Paia requests will probably go unchallenged. With public bodies defaulting to secrecy rather than transparency, and our access to information mechanisms taking years to resolve complaints, is it any wonder that we're in an accountability vacuum in South Africa? DM
