Future of EVs in California Upended as Senate Blocks 2035 Gas Car Ban
The U.S. Senate repealed California's plan to phase out gas-only vehicles by 2035, dealing a blow to EV mandates and sending the measure to President Trump.
The electric handcuffs get removed from the wrists of automakers
Today, the U.S. Senate has voted to block California's landmark plan to phase out gasoline-only vehicles by 2035 in a landmark decision, as reported by news outlet Reuters. Not only does this impact the country's most progressive anti-fossil fuels state, but it also signals a move that could very well affect the rest of the country.
What this decision means
GMC Hummer electric vehicles on the production line at General Motors' Factory ZERO all-electric vehicle assembly plant in Detroit, Michigan, U.S., on Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2021. —
Source: Emily Elconin/Bloomberg via Getty Images
The move effectively reverses a waiver granted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under former President Biden's administration that allowed California to enforce strict emissions regulations. That waiver enabled California to require at least 80% of new vehicles sold by 2035 to be electric or plug-in hybrid, with some automakers having warned they might need to limit gas-powered vehicle sales in certain states to meet California's stringent rules. The Senate vote is viewed as a major victory for automakers, including General Motors, Toyota, Volkswagen, Hyundai, and Stellantis. These companies, represented by the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, have lobbied against the rules, arguing they are unrealistic and financially burdensome.
'These EV sales mandates were never achievable,' said John Bozzella, CEO of the Alliance. 'Complying would have required diverting limited capital from the EV transition just to purchase compliance credits from Tesla.'
Elon Musk and Donald Trump next to a Tesla Model S —
Source: Getty
Tesla did not offer immediate comment, but GM welcomed the decision, saying it brings emissions standards more in line with current market conditions. In contrast, environmental advocates sharply criticized the vote. Abigail Dillen, president of Earthjustice, said, 'While our Republican leaders may try to put the horse back in the barn when it comes to electric vehicles, the world has already shifted under their feet.'
These legislative moves are part of a broader political effort to scale back federal and state-level EV incentives. On the same day, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would eliminate the $7,500 federal tax credit for new EVs, impose a new $250 annual fee on EV owners to fund road maintenance, and phase out battery production tax credits by 2028. The bill also aims to roll back federal emissions regulations that encourage automakers to expand EV production.
These rollbacks could give automakers more legal elbow room to delay or reduce planned EV production, which has recently been tumultuous. Numerous changes have been made to both short—and long-term EV strategies that were affected by changes in the market and production hurdles.
Some view it as a detriment to environmental progress
CA Governor Gavin Newsom in a Tesla —
Source: Governor Gavin Newsom
California's initiative, which was first announced five years ago, has already been adopted by eleven other states and impacted approximately a third of the American automotive market. Environmental groups and clean energy advocates praised it for its daring measures, which they viewed as hard-hitting against air pollution and climate change.
California has historically led the country in emissions standards, but some have viewed their measures as Draconian and far too lofty (and costly) a goal for automakers to reach in such a short time. The legislation now heads to President Donald Trump, who is expected to support the repeal.
2025 Chevrolet Equinox EV 1LT —
Source: Chevrolet
The Senate also voted to overturn the EPA's 2023 approval of California's plan to gradually increase the number of zero-emission heavy-duty trucks. California already requires 35% of new light-duty vehicles sold by the 2026 model year to be zero-emission, but automakers argue that the demand for electric vehicles remains too low in many states to reach this goal. In response, Vermont and Maryland have already postponed their compliance timelines.
Final thoughts
The Senate's decision to block California's ambitious 2035 zero-emissions vehicle mandate marks a significant shift in the national conversation around EV policy, states' rights, and the future of automotive regulation. While automakers may find temporary relief from aggressive compliance targets, the long-term direction of the industry remains driven by global trends, technological advancements, and shifting consumer preferences. EVs might have hit a hurdle, but they're not going to disappear.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
12 minutes ago
- Sky News
Downtown LA is a scene of pandemonium and lawlessness
Why you can trust Sky News A shirtless man waving a Mexican flag stands atop a burning car in the heart of Los Angeles, as another man throws a traffic cone into the flames and some play drums and shout chants in opposition to immigration officials. In the background, city hall can be glimpsed through a haze of thick black smoke. The downtown district of one of America's biggest cities was a scene of pandemonium and lawlessness as protests, which had previously been mainly peaceful, turned ugly. Critics of Donald Trump said the president's extraordinary decision to deploy National Guard troops, defying the wishes of the state's governor, had inflamed tensions and stoked emotions. The 101 Freeway, the main highway cutting through the downtown area, was also closed down for much of the day as police and protesters faced off, with flash bang devices sending some people scattering. Bottles and other projectiles were hurled towards police, who responded by using tear gas and rubber bullets. It was this chaos, his critics say, that Donald Trump wanted to provoke. Trump's decision to call in 2,000 National Guard troops, several hundred of whom were on the streets of LA on Sunday, was taken without consultation with the California governor and LA mayor, and marked an extraordinary escalation by the president. The military arrived on Sunday morning and was ordered to guard federal buildings, after two days of protest against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. As part of Trump's closed border policy, ICE has been ordered to find, detain and deport as many illegal immigrants as possible, and it was these raids that stoked the first signs of protest on Friday into the weekend. By midday Sunday, the military was surrounded by protesters outside the Metropolitan Detention Centre in downtown LA. It was here that many immigrants had been held before being shipped off to detention facilities. The walls and floors are covered in expletive-ridden graffiti, reading f*** ICE. The Los Angeles police soon split the crowd and drove a wedge between the National Guard and the crowd. California Governor Gavin Newsom has called Donald Trump's acts those of a "dictator, not a president". He's formally requested that the Trump administration withdraw the National Guard. The White House say the military will remain there until order is restored. Five hundred marines are still on standby. Los Angeles Police Department police chief Jim McDonnell, asked whether the National Guard was needed, said: "This thing has gotten out of control." He said that although the LAPD would not initially have requested assistance from the National Guard, the disorder had caused him to reevaluate his assessment. Several people were arrested. Sky News witnessed a young woman, who called herself Gabriella, riding her motorbike at speed towards a line of police officers. One of the police officers used his arm to push her off the bike. She said she was protesting because her "people were being rounded up." Politicians on both sides of the aisle condemned the violence, but some vehemently disagreed about what actions led to the escalation.
Reuters
18 minutes ago
- Reuters
Auto companies 'in full panic' over rare-earths bottleneck
BERLIN/LONDON/DETROIT, June 9 (Reuters) - Frank Eckard, CEO of a German magnet maker, has been fielding a flood of calls in recent weeks. Exasperated automakers and parts suppliers have been desperate to find alternative sources of magnets, which are in short supply due to Chinese export curbs. Some told Eckard their factories could be idled by mid-July without backup magnet supplies. "The whole car industry is in full panic," said Eckard, CEO of Magnosphere, based in Troisdorf, Germany. "They are willing to pay any price." Car executives have once again been driven into their war rooms, concerned that China's tight export controls on rare-earth magnets – crucially needed to make cars – could cripple production. U.S. President Donald Trump said Friday that Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to let rare earths minerals and magnets flow to the United States. A U.S. trade team is scheduled to meet Chinese counterparts for talks in London on Monday. The industry worries that the rare-earths situation could cascade into the third massive supply chain shock in five years. A semiconductor shortage wiped away millions of cars from automakers' production plans, from roughly 2021 to 2023. Before that, the coronavirus pandemic in 2020 shut factories for weeks. Those crises prompted the industry to fortify supply chain strategies. Executives have prioritized backup supplies for key components and reexamined the use of just-in-time inventories, which save money but can leave them without stockpiles when a crisis unfurls. Judging from Eckard's inbound calls, though, "nobody has learned from the past," he said. This time, as the rare-earths bottleneck tightens, the industry has few good options, given the extent to which China dominates the market. The fate of automakers' assembly lines has been left to a small team of Chinese bureaucrats as it reviews hundreds of applications for export permits. Several European auto-supplier plants have already shut down, with more outages coming, said the region's auto supplier association, CLEPA. "Sooner or later, this will confront everyone," said CLEPA Secretary-General Benjamin Krieger. Cars today use rare-earths-based motors in dozens of components – side mirrors, stereo speakers, oil pumps, windshield wipers, and sensors for fuel leakage and braking sensors. China controls up to 70% of global rare-earths mining, 85% of refining capacity and about 90% of rare-earths metal alloy and magnet production, consultancy AlixPartners said. The average electric vehicle uses about .5 kg (just over 1 pound) of rare earths elements, and a fossil-fuel car uses just half that, according to the International Energy Agency. China has clamped down before, including in a 2010 dispute with Japan, during which it curbed rare-earths exports. Japan had to find alternative suppliers, and by 2018, China accounted for only 58% of its rare earth imports. "China has had a rare-earth card to play whenever they wanted to," said Mark Smith, CEO of mining company NioCorp (NB.O), opens new tab, which is developing a rare-earth project in Nebraska scheduled to start production within three years. Across the industry, automakers have been trying to wean off China for rare-earth magnets, or even develop magnets that do not need those elements. But most efforts are years away from the scale needed. "It's really about identifying ... and finding alternative solutions" outside China, Joseph Palmieri, head of supply chain management at supplier Aptiv , said at a conference in Detroit last week. Automakers including General Motors (GM.N), opens new tab and BMW ( opens new tab and major suppliers such as ZF [RIC:RIC: and BorgWarner (BWA.N), opens new tab are working on motors with low-to-zero rare-earth content, but few have managed to scale production enough to cut costs. The EU has launched initiatives including the Critical Raw Materials Act to boost European rare-earth sources. But it has not moved fast enough, said Noah Barkin, a senior advisor at Rhodium Group, a China-focused U.S. think tank. Even players that have developed marketable products struggle to compete with Chinese producers on price. David Bender, co-head of German metal specialist Heraeus' magnet recycling business, said it is only operating at 1% capacity and will have to close next year if sales do not increase. Minneapolis-based Niron has developed rare-earth free magnets and has raised more than $250 million from investors including GM, Stellantis and auto supplier Magna ( opens new tab. "We've seen a step change in interest from investors and customers" since China's export controls took effect, CEO Jonathan Rowntree said. It is planning a $1 billion plant scheduled to start production in 2029. England-based Warwick Acoustics has developed rare-earth-free speakers expected to appear in a luxury car later this year. CEO Mike Grant said the company has been in talks with another dozen automakers, although the speakers are not expected to be available in mainstream models for about five years. As auto companies scout longer-term solutions, they are left scrambling to avert imminent factory shutdowns. Automakers must figure out which of their suppliers – and smaller ones a few links up the supply chain – need export permits. Mercedes-Benz ( opens new tab, for example, is talking to suppliers about building rare-earth stockpiles. Analysts said the constraints could force automakers to make cars without certain parts and park them until they become available, as GM and others did during the semiconductor crisis. Automakers' reliance on China does not end with rare earth elements. A 2024 European Commission report said China controls more than 50% of global supply of 19 key raw materials, including manganese, graphite and aluminum. Andy Leyland, co-founder of supply chain specialist SC Insights, said any of those elements could be used as leverage by China. "This just is a warning shot," he said.
The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Tariff-hit firms should review bonuses or risk backlash, US lawyers warn
Businesses hit by tariffs should start reviewing their bonus policies and how deeply they may need to cut executive payouts if they hope to avoid a public backlash, lawyers have said. Partners at the Silicon Valley law firm Cooley said that while pay was probably the last thing on bosses' minds as they scramble to adapt to Donald Trump's unpredictable tariff policies, pay committees should start assessing their options soon. 'Many will encounter rising material costs and reduced profit margins, particularly given the significant pressure on the supply chain,' a memo by its top lawyers said. 'Taken together with the recent stock market volatility, companies (both public and private) will need to address the impact of these challenges on their business and, importantly, consider the effects on director and executive compensation programs.' Cooley – whose clients have included Netflix, Apple, Meta, and Twitter before its takeover by Elon Musk and rebrand as X – said that without a proper review of pay policies, companies may end up handing big bonuses to bosses while the rest of the workforce suffers from cost cuts and job losses. That may be due to remuneration policies that do not automatically account for the impact of so-called 'black swan events', such as a dramatic U-turn in US trade policy or a global pandemic. Michael Bergmann, a partner at Cooley, told the Guardian: 'There is a meaningful risk that rank-and-file employees are going to suffer here, and that could take the form of layoffs, folks losing their jobs or wages.' The memo said: 'Given the overall macroeconomic and sociopolitical climate, there is a strong risk that any accommodation for those [tariff] impacts will be viewed as unduly rewarding executives, particularly if rank-and-file employees do not benefit in a proportionate way. Accordingly, compensation committees and boards must tread deliberately and carefully.' Cooley lawyers said there was also a possibility that executives might be unduly punished for tariff impacts that were beyond their control, and that this should also be considered by remuneration committees. It is likely that pay packets will start to reflect tariff impacts from early next year. Trump rolled out sweeping tariffs against most countries in April, in a shock move that left companies looking at how they could offset a potential hit to trade and revenues. The US president later paused and then reduced most tariffs, but last week he refocused attention on steel and aluminium imports, doubling tariffs for all countries except the UK to 50%. Tech companies have also suffered as a result of Trump's trade war with Beijing, which has included an order restricting AI chip exports to China. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion While Cooley's original memo was aimed at US companies, Bergman said the warning was relevant to others around the world, including in the UK, with the ripple effects also due to hurt businesses even if they do not directly trade with US companies. 'The company's nationality is not really the driving question here,' he said. Luke Hildyard, the director of the High Pay Centre thinktank, suggested the tariff fallout should prompt a more fundamental review of executives' multimillion-pound pay packets. 'The entire flawed premise of vast executive pay awards is that business success is driven by a tiny number of business leaders, and that companies should pay whatever it takes to attract and retain the best ones,' he said. 'The tariff furore is only the latest example – following energy supply challenges in Europe, the pandemic or the supply chain issues in its aftermath – of business leaders being pretty powerless in the face of wider events. Maybe the most useful lesson here is that they are mortals like the rest of us and more moderate pay awards that reflect that fact would be appropriate.'
