These charts show just how hard Trump's tariffs are hitting Europe's auto giants
Seeking to protect and strengthen the U.S. automotive sector, Trump imposed 25% tariffs on foreign-made vehicles and car parts in early April.
The automotive sector is widely regarded as acutely vulnerable to levies, particularly given the high globalization of supply chains and the heavy reliance on manufacturing operations across North America.
The U.S. president also raised tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to 50% for most countries. Steel and aluminum are essential materials for durable goods like cars and refrigerators.
Trump recently threatened to raise duties on EU auto imports to 30% from Aug. 1, ramping up the pressure on the 27-nation trading bloc. The European Commission, the EU's executive arm, has since been considering its response.
In a surprise update on Monday, Jeep maker Stellantis said that Trump's tariffs had cost the company hundreds of millions of dollars.
The multinational conglomerate, which owns household names including Jeep, Dodge, Fiat, Chrysler and Peugeot, said it expects to have suffered an initial hit of around 300 million euros ($351.1 million) due to net tariffs incurred over the first half of the year.
Stellantis Chief Financial Officer Doug Ostermann also said that the full-year impact of U.S. tariffs could climb to 1-1.5 billion euros, according to Reuters. The company's financial results for the first six months of 2025 will be released on July 29.
Sweden's Volvo Cars, which is seen as one of the most exposed European carmakers to U.S. tariffs, recently reported a sharp year-on-year decline in second-quarter operating profit.
The company said last week that second-quarter operating profit excluding items affecting comparability fell to 2.9 billion Swedish kronor ($302.3 million), down from 8 billion during the same time last year.
In response to Trump's tariffs, Volvo Cars CEO Håkan Samuelsson told CNBC's "Europe Early Edition" on Thursday that the company intends to add its best-selling XC60 sports utility vehicle to the production line of its car plant in South Carolina.
Elsewhere, French carmaker Renault on Wednesday lowered its 2025 guidance and announced the appointment of Duncan Minto as interim chief executive officer.
Renault has fared better than many of its European peers in recent months, with a flurry of new launches boosting sales in key markets.
The automaker, which is not directly present in the U.S. market, has previously been singled out as a company that is relatively insulated from the trade disruption caused by Trump's tariffs.
Even so, Renault has still faced pressure from muted European demand and rising competition from Chinese car manufacturers.
Several European car giants are still to report corporate results. Among them, Germany's Volkswagen, Europe's top carmaker, is scheduled to report half-year results on Friday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
41 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Stellantis Stock (STLA) Powers Forward as Tesla's Chinese Challenge Intensifies
Shares in auto maker Stellantis (STLA) raced higher today as rival Tesla (TSLA) was handed another huge roadblock in the Chinese EV market. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. The Stellantis leap came on reports that Hangzhou-based EV maker Zhejiang Leapmotor Technology is launching a battery-powered sedan in mainland China. Leap Lower The B01, a midsize sedan, offers features similar to Tesla's Model 3 but reportedly at less than half the price at 89,800 yuan. According to a report in the South China Morning Post, it is understood that Leapmotor, which is backed by Stellantis, also plans to launch the car in global markets at a yet-to-be-decided date. Deliveries to mainland Chinese customers will reportedly begin this month and include five variants with driving ranges from 430 kilometers to 650 kilometers. The top-end model is priced at 119,800 yuan, the report said. Meanwhile, a Tesla-made Model 3 is priced from 235,500 yuan to 339,500 yuan. Tesla's China sales have suffered this year, falling month after month, as it suffered more intense competition from domestic rivals such as BYD (BYDDY). That's important given that a fifth of Tesla revenues come from China – see below. Stellantis Charge China's car market has also been dragged into a price war as companies compete to win over consumers who, hit by a sluggish economy, are reluctant to spend. However, Tesla recorded a 0.8% increase in June, delivering 71,599 units and breaking an eight-month losing streak. Meanwhile, deliveries of Tesla's China-made Model 3 and Model Y autos surged 16.1% compared to May. These figures include vehicles sold both within China and exported to other markets. Tesla is hoping for further growth from its revamped Model Y car. The six-seat sports utility vehicle could be launched in the fall. Reports suggest that the new Model Y will be larger than the current five-seat version and will have a top speed of 201 kilometers an hour. As for Stellantis, known for traditional car brands such as Chrysler, it keeps charging forward in the electric space. It has been reported that starting this September, some South African Stellantis dealers will sell Leapmotor electric vehicles, starting with the C10 SUV. More models are set to follow over the course of 2025 and into 2026. It's much needed if it wants to keep making inroads into the likes of Tesla both in China and elsewhere. As we see below it has underperformed Tesla substantially over the last 12 months.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Stunning amount Trump's Scotland trip will cost taxpayers – largely to promote his golf courses there: report
Donald Trump's five-day golf trip to Scotland is expected to cost U.S. taxpayers millions of dollars, according to a new report. The president departed Joint Base Andrews in Maryland aboard Air Force One on Friday morning, hoping to leave behind the MAGA firestorm around his administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. After an estimated 43 golf trips in the first six months of his second term, Trump's Scottish visit for the opening of a new course, being billed as 'the greatest 36 holes' in the sport, is expected to cost about $9.7 million, according to an analysis by HuffPost. Those estimates are based on a Government Accountability Office report detailing the costs of Trump's 2017 trips to his country club in Palm Beach, Florida. Costs were not adjusted for inflation, meaning they could be substantially higher in today's terms. This trip will mark the president's fifth international trip since beginning his second term in January. Designated by the White House as a 'work trip,' Trump is expected to visit his Turnberry and Menie golf courses, as well as open the new MacLeod Course at Trump International Golf Links near Aberdeen, dedicated to his mother. He is also expected to meet with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to discuss trade and Scotland's First Minister, John Swinney. Expenses factored into the upcoming trip include Secret Service overtime, the hourly operating cost of Air Force One for its 3,000-mile transatlantic journey, and the transportation of Marine One helicopters and motorcade vehicles aboard C-17 aircraft. According to the GAO report, the hourly operating cost to run Air Force One is just over $273,000, meaning the total for flights to and from Scotland alone would be around $3.8 million. Marine One helicopters cost between $16,700 and nearly $20,000 per hour to operate, according to Pentagon data for fiscal year 2022. Estimates also include the need for a second aircraft for Trump aides who would not travel domestically. HuffPost has based its forecast on a modified Boeing 757 being used, which is much cheaper to run than Air Force One, a Boeing 747. According to previous reporting by the news outlet's analysts, Trump's golfing trip bill for his first term, including taxpayer-funded travel and security, totaled $151.5 million, and a total of 293 days at his own resorts. 'We're at a point where the Trump administration is so intertwined with the Trump business that he doesn't seem to see much of a difference,' Jordan Libowitz, vice president of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told ABC News. 'It's as if the White House were almost an arm of the Trump Organization.' A Trump spokesperson called the report of the Scotland trip expense 'deeply pathetic and transparent' and cited Joe Biden's frequent trips to his beach house in addition to his unrelated use of an autopen to sign orders, before saying, 'While in Scotland, the president will meet with Prime Minister Starmer to refine the historic trade deal that expanded markets for American farmers and workers and strengthen our treasured relationship with the United Kingdom.' Trump's visit is expected to demand a major police operation, which is expected to cost Scottish taxpayers millions of pounds, as protests are planned throughout the weekend. During the president's four-day trip to Scotland in 2018, the BBC reported that more than 5,000 police officers were deployed, with the U.K. Treasury contributing about £5 million ($6.8 million) to help cover the costs incurred by the Scottish police force. A decade ago, Trump frequently and venomously blasted then-President Barack Obama for leaving the White House for the golf course. 'I don't have time for that,' he said at a campaign rally in 2015. 'I love golf. I think it's one of the greats, but I don't have time.' Trump went on to play about 260 rounds of golf during his first term, according to estimates by The Washington Post, and declared himself the 'best golfer of all the rich people.' This term, the president's expensive golf trips have not gone unnoticed. At the House's Delivering on Government Efficiency March, Democratic Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett criticized the Trump administration for what she called hypocrisy in its government spending. 'If we are gonna talk about efficiency,' she began, taking a jab at Trump's government slashing force, the Department of Government Efficiency. 'Let's talk about the fact that, as of March 30, Trump's golfing has cost us approximately $26 million.' 'Maybe we need to talk about the president and his golfing habits,' the Texas lawmaker added.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
They're rich. They're anti-Trump. And they don't want their big tax cut.
Kimberly Hoover has been to most Michelin-star restaurants on the East and West coasts. She and her wife, multimillionaires from their real estate firms, own homes in or near New York City, Washington, Miami and Quebec. Their lives are filled with skiing, fine wine and long trips to Europe. Hoover's accountant estimates that the new tax law that President Donald Trump signed this month will save her several million dollars over the next few years. While many Americans might rejoice at that kind of windfall, Hoover worked hard to stop it from becoming a reality, arguing to lawmakers that she has more money than she needs. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. 'At some point, it starts to feel wrong. It starts to feel excessive. It starts to feel somehow inappropriate. And at some point, it just doesn't feel good,' said Hoover, who spoke while on break from a sapphic literature conference she helps sponsor in Albany. 'Imbalanced is really not good for anyone, even if you're on the positive end of that imbalance, because it's unsustainable.' Hoover's experience reflects an unusual irony of Trump's signature tax legislation: Many of its biggest beneficiaries fiercely oppose the president - and even oppose policies he is pushing that will make them richer. The mismatch is partly a result of a crucial, if ongoing, evolution of the role class plays in American politics. During the administrations of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush, affluent Americans who benefited from tax cuts were more likely to be Republicans. The political party they supported delivered material benefits that boosted their pocketbooks. Democratic voters, by comparison, were more likely to be working or middle class. Now, more than half of upper-income families - defined as those earning more than $215,400 per year - vote Democratic, according to a 2024 Pew Research survey, as more highly educated voters shift to the left. The top fifth of earners went from supporting Barack Obama in 2008 by a 2.5-point margin to supporting Joe Biden in 2020 by close to 15 percentage points. 'Affluent Americans used to vote for Republican politicians. Now they vote for Democrats,' one 2023 paper found. That shift intensified during the 2024 presidential election, when large numbers of Black and Latino voters, who tend to be lower-income, defected to the Republican ticket for the first time in decades, according to several political scientists, exit polls and studies. 'There's been a lot of talk about how even though the Republican coalition has changed and gotten more working class, their policies have not,' said Matt Grossmann, a political scientist at Michigan State University. 'But there's been less attention to a similar but true fact on the other side - a lot of Democratic politicians were elected by very rich constituents who are more likely to benefit from Republican tax policy than Democratic policy.' As a result, many of the provisions of the GOP tax law will benefit a voting bloc that is increasingly Democratic. The $3.4 trillion legislation extends a lower tax rate for the top tax bracket, rejecting the president's suggestion of a new tax on million-dollar earners. It expands and makes permanent a smaller federal estate tax, allowing up to $15 million to be passed on tax-free ($30 million for couples). It also makes permanent a large deduction for businesses formed as pass-through entities, while raising the cap on what filers can deduct in state and local taxes. (The GOP's 2017 tax law also permanently lowered the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent.) When all these provisions are combined, Trump's second tax bill devotes roughly $1 trillion in tax cuts for those earning more than $400,000 per year - roughly the size of the law's cuts to Medicaid, the federal health insurance program for the poor. (Most of the bill's cost, though, comes from provisions that largely benefit middle-class households, such as a larger child tax credit and standard deduction.) Steve Lockshin, a financial adviser and co-founder of the estate advisory platform Vanilla, represents clients with at least $50 million and whose fortunes are sometimes in the billions of dollars. A tax cut of about 2 percent for a middle-class family translates into about $1,800 per year, according to the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank. But for Lockshin's clients, saving several percentage points in taxes can mean hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, per year. One provision that has become particularly beneficial to his clients is the law's expansion of 'Opportunity Zones,' which allow investors to defer capital gains taxes by reinvesting profits into designated economically distressed areas. The program allows wealthy individuals to delay or, in some cases, permanently avoid paying taxes on capital gains if they make investments in specified zones. 'The general mentality is the same across the board with my clients: 'I want to pay the least I can. I also want the best for my country, and I would invert the two if it had a meaningful impact,'' Lockshin said. 'And if you are wealthy - but aren't pro-Trump and just along for the ride - most of my network is thinking, 'While Rome is burning, at least I'll save a few dollars in taxes.'' Opposition to tax cuts has surfaced in many wealthy liberal enclaves. At the Harvard Club in New York City, 'everyone under 50 feels this way,' said Bob Elliott, chief executive of Unlimited, an investment firm. 'The classic question is how much do you worry about it benefiting yourself versus the societal consequences - that's the trade-off,' Elliott said. 'Many of the people who don't like the bill are saying, 'Really, even if I get money, it's still at the expense of taking people off Medicaid.'' Nonpartisan estimates have found that the GOP tax law will lead to more than 13 million fewer Americans having health insurance. Some experts say rich people have self-interested reasons to oppose the tax cuts that go beyond the broader social consequences. Many of the law's short-term benefits come with long-term drawbacks, said Constance Hunter, chief economist at the Economist Intelligence Unit, a research firm. That, she said, is because many people at least intuitively understand the concept of 'Ricardian equivalence' - the idea that deficits will need to be paid for eventually through higher taxes, so consumers adjust their behavior accordingly by saving more in preparation. 'I think there are a number of people, some of whom are affluent and that span the political spectrum, who realize we cannot keep expanding our deficits indefinitely, especially at a time when our economy is showing resilience and growing,' Hunter said. 'A lot of wealth is held by business owners, and while certain provisions may be providing tax cuts now, these are likely to be accompanied by greater financing costs for business owners,' as reflected in the higher interest rates needed to combat increases in inflation. Drew E. Pomerance, a Los Angeles lawyer in business and commercial litigation, said that his net worth is in the tens of millions of dollars and that he will probably save tens of thousands of dollars from the law every year. While he said 'it never ceases to amaze me that people vote against their own economic self-interest,' he also said he will benefit from the bill but thinks 'it's terrible for America.' 'Don't get me wrong: I like money. I like having money. I'm not opposed to having money,' he said. 'But at the expense of what it does to the rest of the country, it should not be a priority to give me and other rich people more money.' The willingness of some liberals to vote against their economic self-interest should give them pause before they accuse conservatives of doing the same, said Michael Strain, an economist at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank. He said Republican voters in lower-income states are often unfairly maligned this way, pointing to the 2004 book 'What's the Matter With Kansas?' 'Nothing is the matter with Kansas. The people of Kansas vote for a variety of reasons, one of which is economic self-interest,' Strain said. Some multimillionaires, such as Morris Pearl, who served as managing director at the investment firm BlackRock, say they are getting money from the tax cut they do not need. (Pearl, like Hoover and Pomerance, is part of Patriotic Millionaires, a group of rich Americans devoted to trying to raise taxes on the rich.) Pearl's mother-in-law died last year, and he and his wife benefited from the 2017 changes to the estate tax. He has taken advantage of the low-tax Opportunity Zone rules, though he does not remember where or how much he has invested. He will probably continue to do so now that they have been extended. 'It's great for me personally, financially,' Pearl said. 'But even looking at my own and my family's long-term self-interest, I would prefer less inequality and less of a country of very rich and very poor, and more of a country with lots of people doing all right.' In August, Pearl is traveling to a fundraiser for Democratic lawmakers in California. Every year, he donates hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democratic politicians, which he described as the first thing he would cut back on if his fortune started to shrink. Thanks in part to the GOP tax law, Pearl added, that is not going to happen any time soon. Related Content Hulk Hogan was a well-known Trump supporter. Their ties go back 40 years. Mendelson reaches deal with Commanders on RFK site amid growing pressure Amy Sherald cancels major Smithsonian show over 'censorship'
