India auto dealers cautious on June sales amid rare earth curbs, high inventory
June 6 (Reuters) - Indian auto dealers expect demand to remain cautious in June as high inventory levels, tighter financing and concerns around rare earth shortages weigh on the industry.
While above-normal monsoons are expected to support tractor and two-wheeler sales in semi-urban and rural markets, shortages of rare earths - critical to EV production - could sap demand, the Federation of Automobile Dealers Associations of India said.
Only a third of the industry body's members expect growth in June, while around 55% expect flat sales.
Automakers and dealers have been counting on new EV launches to drive growth this year and soften the blow of slowing sales of combustion engine cars in urban areas.
"...global supply-chain headwinds — from rare-earth constraints in EV components to ongoing geopolitical tensions —may keep urban consumer sentiment in check," FADA said.
To be sure, while sales of EVs in India have been growing at a faster pace than their gasoline counterparts, they still accounted for just 2.5% of the 4.3 million cars sold last fiscal year.
China's suspension of exports of a wide range of rare earths and related magnets has upended supply chains crucial to automakers, aerospace manufacturers, semiconductor companies and military contractors.
Global automakers have warned of production halts due to the export restrictions.
While Indian carmakers are yet to publicly disclose the impact of the curbs, an auto industry body privately told the government last month it expects production "to come to a grinding halt" as early as the end of May or early June.
India's top e-scooter maker Bajaj Auto (BAJA.NS), opens new tab last week said any delays in lifting the export curbs would hurt the production of its electric scooters from July.
TVS Motor (TVSM.NS), opens new tab, too, has warned of an impact by June or July.
The FADA also said high inventories of cars and commercial vehicles remain an overhang for dealers.
Inventories for cars stood at 52-53 days in May, above FADA's recommended level of 21 days.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
6 hours ago
- Daily Mail
BP battles for its independence amid takeover talk
BP is determined to preserve its status as an independent UK-listed oil company amid speculation that a sinking share price and uncertainty over leadership could push it into an unwanted merger. The firm's shares have plunged 22 per cent over the past year (see chart). With a market value of just £56 billion, it is seen as a tempting bid target for one of the US oil giants or a British bid from Anglo-Dutch rival Shell. Predators see the temporary power vacuum caused by the impending departure of chairman Helge Lund as a vulnerability. An urgent hunt for a strong replacement is being led by Amanda Blanc, BP's senior non-executive director, who is also boss of the insurer Aviva. BP is seeking to convince investors that it can dial down the radical green transition led by former boss Bernard Looney by embracing an aggressive drilling and cost cutting agenda. Chief executive Murray Auchincloss, former finance director, is seeking to restore the company's stock market rating by focusing on capital spend and cost cutting. He has so far failed to convince activist investor Elliott Management, which has built a 5 per cent stake in BP, that the company can drill its way out of difficulty and that his cost cuts are sufficient. However, BP has long history of successful exploration and production, and has recently secured valuable drilling rights in India and Azerbaijan, where it has become the leading oil company. Since taking over as chief executive last year, Auchincloss has consulted 70 per cent of the company's shareholding base. It is thought that long-standing British owners, such as insurer Legal & General, which controls 38 per cent of the stock, would be deeply unhappy if BP were to be taken over. It is also thought that the UK Government is supportive of BP as a national champion which is developing the country's biggest electric vehicle network of charging stations with Marks & Spencer. A bid by Shell for BP, favoured by some investment bankers, is seen as much harder to accomplish than generally thought. Both companies, as international explorers, have large trading operations and a deal would almost certainly cause competition problems. Some 35 per cent of the two London-listed firms' operations are understood to overlap. US rivals Chevron and Exxon Mobil, mentioned as possible bidders for BP, have in recent times virtually withdrawn from exploration beyond the Americas, unlike the two big London-listed players. They have instead focused on the riches of the Permian Basin in Texas and Guyana in South America. Chevron is seeking to complete its $53 billion merger with US group Hess. Oil mergers are seen as notoriously tricky to navigate. A quarter of a century after BP, then led by John Browne, took over Amoco, the group is still wrestling with integration of complex accounting systems. BP believes that if it can lift its annual cashflow from $8 billion in 2024 to $14 billion by 2027, it can raise the value of the group, securing its status.
Auto Blog
7 hours ago
- Auto Blog
Most Expensive Tesla Models Compared: The $100k EV Battle
Only One Top Tesla Can Win Tesla prices may have come down in recent years, but there is still no sign of its $25k EV, and the manufacturer still has at least two models hovering at just below the six-figure mark. These most expensive new Teslas find themselves competing with an array of high-performance or luxury models from prestigious German brands, but how do they compare with each other? Here's how the two priciest Teslas match up. 0:05 / 0:09 2025 Ford Maverick: 4 reasons to love it, 2 reasons to think twice Watch More Most Expensive Teslas: Model X Plaid Vs. Cyberbeast The two most expensive new Tesla models both cost $99,990 each, and they're the Model X Plaid SUV and the most powerful version of the Cybertruck – the Cyberbeast pickup truck. In its current form, the Model X Plaid is one of Tesla's oldest models, while the Cyberbeast is a much newer product. A difference in age aside, both of these Teslas have a set of on-paper stats that leave them without any true rivals, such has been Tesla's mastery of high-performance EVs. The key difference between the two is obvious: One is an SUV and one is a pickup. If you need to seat six people, the Model X Plaid is an easy pick. But if you want to tow more and have the flexibility to carry larger or awkwardly shaped items, the Cybertruck is better. The Model X's only party trick isn't always visible – we're talking about those Falcon Wing rear doors, which still turn heads when open. However, the rest of the SUV has begun to date, which is no surprise since the Model X went into production a decade ago. The lines are clean and stealthy, but it's no longer a particularly exciting SUV to look at. The Cybertruck makes much more of a statement, for better or worse, but we doubt it'll age as gracefully as the Model X. Being a pickup, it has a 6' x 4' bed with a standard motorized hardtop, various power outlets, and full-length bed lamps. If you want your expensive Tesla finished in a brighter color, you'll have to go for the Model X, as the Cybertruck sticks with its groundbreaking cold-rolled stainless-steel alloy body panels. Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. Interior And Features: Model X Seats More, But Cybertruck Can Carry More Stuff Both EVs have Tesla's minimalist interior layout, centered around a large touchscreen. The Model X has softer lines and panels, and its Cream interior color is warmer than any option available on the Cybertruck. The Model X Plaid has three displays, including one for rear passengers, along with tri-zone climate control, a 22-speaker sound system, and heated seats for every passenger. It also seats six across three rows. The Cybertruck has a darker, even more spartan cabin, especially in standard Tactical Grey. Only a thin ambient lighting strip breaks up the exceedingly dark environment. Finishes are a bit more rugged, from the suede textile trim to the stainless accents. It has a 15-speaker sound system, heated seats front and back, and dual HD touchscreens. Rear-seat space is good, in spite of the dramatically sloping roofline. Both these vehicles are practical, with large frunks and useful interior storage. There are a few differences, though, such as the Cybertruck having a bigger frunk (7.1 to 6.5 cubic feet), and the obvious differences behind the second row. The six-seater Model X Plaid has 15 cubes behind the third row, 33 behind the second row, and 85.8 behind the first row. In the Cybertruck, there are 56.2 cubes (enclosed) in the bed, another 3.4 in a lower storage space, and 54.2 cubes behind the front seats with the rear cushions folded up. This actually gives the Cybertruck more enclosed cargo space with two occupants, plus it has the versatility to carry much taller objects in the open bed. Performance: Two Of The Very Best Despite being vastly different vehicles, these expensive Teslas are remarkably closely matched in a straight line. The tri-motor Model X Plaid produces 1,020 horsepower and will hit 60 mph in just 2.5 seconds, before completing the quarter-mile in 9.9 seconds. Even years later, those are staggering numbers for a three-row SUV that weighs 5,248 lbs. Somehow, the Cyberbeast nearly matches the Model X Plaid to 60 (2.6 seconds), despite having less power from its three motors (845 hp) and being significantly heavier (6,863 lbs). Based on independent testing, the Model X Plaid's extra power and smoother body come into play at higher speeds, though – the Cyberbeast needs 11 seconds to complete the quarter-mile and will top out at 130 mph, as opposed to 163 mph for the Model X Plaid. In day-to-day driving, both EVs are fast enough to leave behind other traffic in a flash. The Cybertruck is a bit of a revelation for a pickup, with a steer-by-wire system and rear-wheel steering making it feel startlingly agile for such a heavy vehicle. Source: Tesla Cyberbeast Is Better For Range, Towing, And Off-Roading The small edge the Model X has in acceleration off the mark is overshadowed by the wide spread of capabilities of the Cyberbeast. Whereas the Model X Plaid has an EPA-certified range of 314 miles on 20-inch wheels, Tesla claims the Cyberbeast can hit 320 miles on a full charge. The Model X Plaid is almost guaranteed to be more efficient, but that will be confirmed when the EPA releases MPGe ratings for the Cyberbeast. The Plaid can tow up to 5,000 lbs, but the Cyberbeast crushes it with a maximum towing capacity of 11,000 lbs. With chunkier tires and up to 16 inches of ground clearance, the Cybertruck should be a much more capable off-road tool, too. Source: Tesla So, Which Expensive Tesla Is Best? We can't say one of these EVs is definitively better than the other, given that they compete in different segments. The Model X is ultimately quicker, expected to be more efficient, and can seat six. But the Cyberbeast has a longer list of advantages. It's much more visually impactful, and although it can only seat five, it provides more overall cargo space and versatility. The claimed range is better, it's going to feel just as quick up to the legal speed limit, and towing is vastly superior. Plus, it's the clear winner if you plan to do any off-roading at all. If the styling doesn't turn you off, the Cyberbeast does a better job of justifying its high price than the Model X Plaid. In both cases, be prepared for the heavy depreciation that blights EVs, especially expensive ones like these. About the Author Karl Furlong View Profile
Telegraph
7 hours ago
- Telegraph
No more leprechaun economics: Ireland's tax swindle is finally ending
Donald Trump has sent Ireland to the naughty step. Once the altar boy of American commerce, Dublin now finds itself blacklisted alongside China, Germany and Vietnam, each a prime candidate for tariffs and sanctions. The offence? Running a surplus with the United States. On the face of it, the complaint seems petty. One country sells more than it buys. So what? But Ireland's problem, like the others on Trump's list, is that its surplus rests on a creed that has fallen out of favour. As offshoring hollowed out Middle America, the old Clinton mantra 'It's the economy, stupid' has begun to sound rather less clever than it once did. That, at least, is the mood in Trump's Washington. And judging by his campaign-trail fixation with the word tariff, many Americans agree: a reckoning is overdue. Ireland offers a particularly inviting target. Its surplus owes less to tangible exports than to tax gymnastics. A pill is made in Ireland for 50 cents, sold to a sister company (also in Ireland) for €10, and then shipped to the global market at the same price. The profit is booked in Dublin, while tax collectors elsewhere are left out of pocket. The trick doesn't stop there. Intellectual property is shifted to Irish subsidiaries, global sales are routed through Irish entities, and profits vanish into low or no-tax jurisdictions. Together, these sleights of hand form what we're invited to call the Irish economic miracle – a miracle that, by one estimate, deprives other countries of nearly $20 billion a year in tax revenue. The question being asked in Washington is: who benefits? Ireland, clearly. One in every eight euros of its tax revenue now comes from US firms. That's a fivefold increase since 2010, driven by Ireland's famously 'competitive' tax regime. It accounts for a large slice of a €150 billion bilateral surplus. When Irish Taoiseach Micheál Martin visited the Oval Office in March, Trump put it plainly: 'We do have a massive deficit with Ireland, because Ireland was very smart. They took our pharmaceutical companies away.' It's hard to argue with the logic. Ireland has been undeniably clever at attracting American capital. Spending it is another matter. Much of the money sits on Irish books without generating the economic activity one might expect. The state's coffers may be overflowing, but the windfall is narrowly concentrated. Public spending, as ever, has been handled with something shy of brilliance. From roads and hospitals to housing and energy, the services most visible to the public have seen little improvement, despite years of surging revenues. Meanwhile, resources have been channelled into more headline-friendly ventures: a €350,000 bike shed outside parliament; a vast new hospital project already among Europe's most expensive; and billions annually to accommodate asylum applicants – most of whom, the government has conceded, are economic migrants. The miracle, it seems, left little room for prudence. As every lottery winner learns, easy money tends to breed excess. But with full coffers, Ireland could afford to paper over the cracks. Meanwhile, American tech and pharma giants have flourished. Apple, Microsoft, Pfizer and others have routed billions through Ireland, to the delight of shareholders and pension funds. If Trump moves to close loopholes or impose tariffs, these are the interests he'll have to console ahead of the midterms. The losers, predictably, are the American workers left behind by the long, slow flight of industry and tax revenue. Worse off still are the countries quietly drained by Ireland's magic act. The sums involved are vast. The structures that move them are so complex they can feel impossibly abstract. But the consequences are not. According to modelling by the Universities of St Andrews and Leicester, this tax loss has deprived more than 100,000 children of school attendance and some 1.1 million people of access to basic sanitation. Quibble with the methods if you like, but the core truth is hard to deny: when profits are rerouted, people are short-changed. Not that Dublin seems overly troubled. Only last month, Ireland's Taoiseach declared: 'Ireland earns its living from an open and fair approach to world trade.' The most pious nations often turn out to be the most artful. Ireland rarely misses a chance to sermonise on Gaza, climate justice, or whichever cause currently allows it to cast itself as Europe's moral compass. But as La Rochefoucauld noted, hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue. And by that measure, Ireland has paid handsomely.
