logo
How Canada And Mexico Became So Important To U.S. Car Manufacturing

How Canada And Mexico Became So Important To U.S. Car Manufacturing

Yahoo06-02-2025
President Donald Trump's desire to hit Canada and Mexico with 25 percent tariffs has put a new spotlight on auto manufacturing in the two countries. The two countries have no domestically based automakers of their own, yet they play an integral role in manufacturing for U.S.-based car companies. Sure, right now those tariffs are on hold, but whether they're actually instituted in a few weeks or some sort of deal is reached to avert them altogether, the landscape of auto manufacturing in the U.S. is going to look a lot different for years to come.
Ties between America's Big Three automakers – Ford, General Motors and Stellantis – and their neighbors to the north and south date all the way back to the early 1900s, and the relationship has only gotten closer in the decades to follow. Because of this, the Detroit Free Press has decided to take a look at the history of these very special relationships. Here's more:
[These] ties remained strong throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries. When the automotive industry plummeted into catastrophe during the Great Recession, it wasn't just the U.S. government that pitched in to preserve it. Canada offered its own tax dollars as part of President Barack Obama's task force that led General Motors and Chrysler through bankruptcy.
K. Venkatesh Prasad, senior vice president of research at the Center for Automotive Research, said modern vehicle production in Mexico began with components before full-vehicle production was gradually introduced.
K. Venkatesh Prasad, senior vice president of research at the Center for Automotive Research, said modern vehicle production in Mexico began with components before full-vehicle production was gradually introduced.
In Canada, manufacturers started with systems and jumped directly to producing cars, largely due to the proximity of Windsor to Detroit.
'Over the last four years, what you see is the same pattern, a little bit of inversion with how the dollars are being spent, with potentially more growth in money going to Canada than Mexico because of the investments in electrification,' Prasad said.
The U.S.'s ties with Mexican production date back literally 100 years. In 1925, Ford opened up shop in Mexico City and built its first assembly plant there five years later. The 260-person plant built five Model Ts a day. Eventually, production would expand the the Model A, Mercury Cougar and Ford Mustang, Freep reports. General Motors and Chrysler, seeing the advantages of building vehicles in Mexico, soon followed suit. Both would start production there by 1938.
It wasn't just full automobile manufacturing, either. In the 1960s, automakers from around the world – but especially Japan – started producing parts in Mexico.
Automotive parts production in Mexico flourished in the 1960s with the creation of maquiladoras, foreign manufacturing facilities through which companies can import vehicle parts or assembly products without paying tax. The goal of the duty-free facilities was to encourage international investment in production, while foreign countries like the U.S. and Canada would benefit from cheaper labor.
In the 1970s and 1980s, the influx of Japanese automakers prompted further investment in Mexico, as U.S. automakers sought to offshore labor and cost-intensive production.
The establishment of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994 also made it easier for companies to move goods across the continent without paying duties. The revised agreement signed during Trump's first term still supports this process.
Mexican wages are far lower than those in the U.S., with Mexican autoworkers making roughly about 10% of their northern neighbors today. Nonetheless, Shaiken said, 'What I've found on the ground in many plants in Mexico is, in fact, Mexican productivity is comparable or even higher than U.S. productivity, and the quality is very high,' he said.
Canada's story is just about as old as Mexico's but the workplaces are far different (read: better) because of strong unions in the country. Similarly to Mexico, it started with Henry Ford building his first Canadian automotive plant in 1904. Funny enough, he did this to escape a 35 percent tariff levied on Canadian imports, according to the Free Press.
This lasted until the 1960s, when Canada launched a trade war of its own against the United States after the invention of the automatic transmission, which flooded the Canadian market with vehicles made in Canada, and thus not subject to the tariff. By then, only U.S. companies' branch plants remained in operation due to the scale and investment the auto industry requires.
In 1965, the Canada–United States Automotive Products Agreement was enacted, a precursor to NAFTA that removed tariffs between the two countries. This led to increased auto manufacturing in Canada and more jobs. The agreement was abolished in 2001, but by then NAFTA had more or less superseded it.
Without the tariffs, Ford, GM and Chrysler were able to kick production into high gear and streamline it in North America. The effects were wild. In 1963, out of the 632,000 vehicles built in Canada, just 921 were exported to the U.S. However, by 1973, Canada built 1,589,000 vehicles, and 1,090,000 of them were exported to the United States, the Detroit Free Press reports.
'For more than 60 years, the Canadian and American auto industries have depended on each other. Together, we build best-in-class cars and trucks that remain the envy of the world,' Unifor National President Lana Payne said in an emailed statement. 'Unionized autoworkers fought for and won gold standard collective agreements that created good jobs, raised living standards and built strong, vibrant communities.'
She added: 'Two-way trade in automotive goods is about $160 billion per year and split virtually down the middle in near perfect balance. Threatening damage to this relationship, as Trump is doing, threatens good, union jobs on both sides of the border. It is both reckless and dangerous.'
Anyway, I think that's enough out of me. You all should really head over to the Detroit Free Press for an even deeper dive on U.S. OEM's relationship with Mexico and Canada over the years and where it stands now.
For the latest news, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

A UFC fight at the White House? Dana White says it's happening as part of deal with Paramount
A UFC fight at the White House? Dana White says it's happening as part of deal with Paramount

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

A UFC fight at the White House? Dana White says it's happening as part of deal with Paramount

Hours after Paramount and UFC announced a billion-dollar rights deal, Dana White said he had yet to hear from his friend, President Donald Trump, on his thoughts about the fight company's new streaming home. That was fine with White. The UFC CEO was set to travel to Washington on Aug. 28 to meet with Trump and his daughter, Ivanka, to catch up and discuss logistics on the proposed Fourth of July fight card next year at the White House. Trump said last month he wanted to stage a UFC match on the White House grounds with upwards of 20,000 spectators to celebrate 250 years of American independence. 'It's absolutely going to happen," White told The Associated Press. 'Think about that, the 250th birthday of the United States of America, the UFC will be on the White House south lawn live on CBS.' The idea of cage fights at the White House would have seemed improbable when the Frittata brothers purchased UFC for $2 million in 2001 and put White in charge of the fledging fight promotion. White helped steer the company into a $4 billion sale in 2016 and broadcast rights deals with Fox and ESPN before landing owner TKO Group's richest one yet — a seven-year deal with Paramount starting in 2026 worth an average of $1.1 billion a year, with all cards on its streaming platform Paramount+ and select numbered events also set to simulcast on CBS. ESPN, Amazon and Netflix and other traditional sports broadcast players seemed more in play for UFC rights — White had previously hinted fights could air across different platforms — but Paramount was a serious contender from the start of the negotiating window. The Paramount and UFC deal came just days after Skydance and Paramount officially closed their $8 billion merger — kicking off the reign of a new entertainment giant after a contentious endeavor to get the transaction over the finish line. White said he was impressed with the vision Skydance CEO David Ellison had for the the global MMA leader early in contract talks and how those plans should blossom now that Ellison is chairman and CEO of Paramount. 'When you talk about Paramount, you talk about David Ellison, they're brilliant businessmen, very aggressive, risk takers,' White said. 'They're right up my alley. These are the kind of guys that I like to be in business with.' The $1.1 billion deals marks a notable jump from the roughly $550 million that ESPN paid each year for UFC coverage today. But UFC's new home on Paramount will simplify offerings for fans — with all content set to be available on Paramount+ (which currently costs between $7.99 and $12.99 a month), rather than various pay-per-view fees. Paramount also said it intends to explore UFC rights outside the U.S. 'as they become available in the future.' UFC matchmakers were set to meet this week to shape what White said would be a loaded debut Paramount card. The UFC boss noted it was still too early to discuss a potential main event for the White House fight night. 'This is a 1-of-1 event,' White said. There are still some moving parts to UFC broadcasts and other television programming it has its hands in as the company moves into the Paramount era. White said there are still moving parts to the deal and that includes potentially finding new homes for 'The Ultimate Fighter,' 'Road To UFC,' and 'Dana White's Contender Series.' It's not necessarily a given the traditional 10 p.m. start time for what were the pay-per-view events would stand, especially on nights cards will also air on CBS. 'We haven't figured that out yet but we will,' White said. And what about the sometimes-contentious issue of fighter pay? Some established fighters have clauses in their contracts that they earn more money the higher the buyrate on their cards. Again, most of those issues are to-be-determined as UFC and Paramount settle in to the new deal — with $1.1 billion headed the fight company's way. 'It will affect fighter pay, big time,' White said. 'From deal-to-deal, fighter pay has grown, too. Every time we win, everybody wins.' Boxer Jake Paul wrote on social media the dying PPV model — which was overpriced for fights as UFC saw a decline in buys because of missing star power in many main events — should give the fighters an increased idea of their worth. 'Every fighter in the UFC now has a clear picture of what the revenue more PPV excuses,' Paul wrote. 'Get your worth boys and girls.' White also scoffed at the idea that the traditional PPV model is dead. There are still UFC cards on pay-per-view the rest of the year through the end of the ESPN contract and White and Saudi Arabia have teamed to launch a new boxing venture that starts next year and could use a PPV home. White, though, is part of the promotional team for the Canelo Álvarez and Terence Crawford fight in September in Las Vegas that airs on Netflix. 'It's definitely not run it's course,' White said. 'There were guys out there who were interested in pay-per-view and there were guys out there that weren't. Wherever we ended up, that's what we're going to roll with.' White said UFC archival footage 'kills it' in repeat views and those classic bouts also needed a new home once the ESPN deal expires. Just when it seems there's little left for UFC to conquer, White says, there's always more. Why stop at becoming the biggest fight game in the world? Why not rewrite the pecking order in popularity and riches and go for No. 1 in all sports? 'You have the NFL, the NBA, the UFC, and soccer globally,' White said. 'We're coming. We're coming for all of them.' ___ AP sports:

The back-and-forth of trade negotiations between the US and China
The back-and-forth of trade negotiations between the US and China

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

The back-and-forth of trade negotiations between the US and China

TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) — The United States and China have extended a trade truce for another 90 days, the latest development in a months-long showdown between the world's two biggest economies. Both U.S. President Donald Trump and China's Commerce Ministry both announced postponing the date for a further increase of U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports, which are already at a relatively high 30%. Beijing would have likely responded by raising retaliatory levies on U.S. exports to China. The announcement came late Monday in the U.S. and early Tuesday in China. The pause, which clears the way for a possible meeting later this year between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, is the latest development in a high-stakes back-and-forth of tariff threats and negotiations that have rattled the two economic powerhouses. Here is a play-by-play of how U.S. and Chinese tariffs and trade truces have unfolded since the beginning of Trump's second term in office: Feb. 1, 2025 Trump signs an executive order imposing 10% tariffs on China, as well as 25% duties on Mexico and Canada. He later announces a 30-day reprieve on the Mexican and Canadian tariffs. Feb. 4 The 10% tariffs on all Chinese imports to the U.S. come into effect. China retaliates the same day by announcing a flurry of countermeasures, including duties on American coal, liquefied natural gas and agricultural machinery. March 4 Trump imposes additional 10% tariffs on all Chinese goods, bringing the total level of duties to 20%. China responds with tariffs of up to 15% on imports of key U.S. farm products including chicken, pork, soy and beef, and expanded controls on doing business with key U.S. companies. March 10 Chinese tariffs and measures announced on March 4 go into effect. April 2 On Trump's so-called tariff 'Liberation Day,' he announces additional 34% duties on all Chinese imports, alongside tariffs on goods from countries around the world. The sweeping tariffs are to come into effect April 9. April 4 China fights back by imposing 34% tariffs on all U.S. goods, effective April 10, as well as other retaliatory measures including more export controls on rare earth minerals. China also suspends imports of sorghum, poultry and bonemeal from several U.S. companies, adds 27 firms to lists of companies facing trade restrictions, and starts an anti-monopoly probe into DuPont China Group, a subsidiary of the U.S. company DuPont. April 7 Trump threatens China with additional 50% tariffs if it doesn't roll back its 34% reciprocal tariffs. April 9 Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs come into effect. The U.S. raises tariffs on China even higher than previously announced, to 104%. Beijing retaliates with duties of 84% on U.S. goods, effective April 10. Trump further raises tariffs on all Chinese goods to 145%, effective immediately. April 11 China raises its tariffs on all U.S. goods to 125%, effective April 12. Beijing says it would not raise the duties any further. May 10-12 Chinese and U.S. trade negotiators meet in Geneva, Switzerland, for talks meant to de-escalate their trade war. The negotiators agree to a 90-day deal to slash massive tariffs and restart stalled trade, setting off a rally in global financial markets. U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods go from 145% down to 30%, and Chinese tariffs on U.S. goods go from 125% to 10%. June 9-10 Chinese and U.S. trade officials hold two days of negotiations in London, at the end of which they say they have agreed on a framework for resolving their differences. The talks focus on finding a way to resolve disputes over critical minerals and technology exports that had shaken the fragile truce on trade reached in Geneva the previous month. July 28-29 The two countries hold another round of trade talks, this time in Stockholm. The talks conclude without a deal to prevent tariffs from surging again. Aug. 11 Trump announces extending a trade truce with Beijing for another 90 days, delaying the showdown once again. Simina Mistreanu, The Associated Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Russians hail historic Alaska ties ahead of Trump-Putin Ukraine summit
Russians hail historic Alaska ties ahead of Trump-Putin Ukraine summit

NBC News

time24 minutes ago

  • NBC News

Russians hail historic Alaska ties ahead of Trump-Putin Ukraine summit

The choice of Alaska — a territory the United States purchased from the Russian Empire 158 years ago — for talks between Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin is being seen as symbolic by some Russian commentators who are framing it as a nod to historic ties and a chance for closer relations in future. It appears that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has not been invited to the summit about the war in his homeland and representatives from Europe have also been excluded, fueling Kyiv's worst fears that its future might be decided without its input. But Moscow's media and political elite have praised the choice of venue framing it as a reminder that the U.S. and Russia are geographically close to one another and suggesting it could strengthen relations between the two nations. 'Russia and the United States are close neighbors, bordering each other,' Putin's aide on foreign affairs, Yuri Ushakov, said on Telegram last week. Russia's former ambassador to the U.S. added that it seemed 'quite logical for our delegation to simply fly across the Bering Strait and for such an important and anticipated summit of the leaders of the two countries to be held specifically in Alaska.' Russian Senator Vladimir Dzhabarov also called the location 'very wise,' in an interview on Tuesday with the state-owned news channel Russia24. He added that it was 'very far from Ukraine,' which is around 5,000 miles away of Alaska and 'very far from, unfortunately, Europe, which is now largely hostile to us.' Russian commentators also praised the choice of Alaska. Among them is Alexander Bobrov, who in an editorial for the state-controlled Russian broadcaster RT on Monday, wrote the summit was 'more than just a meeting between two leaders,' and a 'return to the logic of direct dialogue without intermediaries.' The summit in Alaska — where Russian Orthodox churches still dot the landscape and place names like Nikolaevsk and Voznesensk speak to their shared history — could help build ties across the Bering Strait, which separates the two countries, Bobrov said. 'Alaska's story began as Russian, continued as American — and now has the chance to become a shared chapter, if both sides choose to see it as an opportunity rather than a threat,' he added, referring to Russia's sale of Alaska to the U.S. in 1867 for $7.2 million to avoid losing the territory to Britain and to raise funds. The White House did not immediately respond to NBC News' request for comment about Russian praise for Alaska. While the state invokes an historic cooperation between the two nations, Ukraine and Europe have urged both superpowers to include Kyiv in any discussions to end the war. Ukraine's Zelenskyy said Saturday that any decisions taken without Ukraine were 'decisions against peace,' adding, 'They will not achieve anything.' Asked Monday if the Ukrainian president was invited to the Alaska summit Trump said Zelenskyy 'wasn't a part of it' and while he had participated in numerous meetings during the course of the war, little had come of them. 'I would say he could go, but he's gone to a lot of meetings. You know, he's been there for three and a half years — nothing happened,' Trump added. European leaders meanwhile, are set to hold a videoconference on Wednesday to to coordinate negotiations to end the war ahead of a separate call with Trump and Vice President JD Vance, a spokesperson for the German government told Reuters on Tuesday. Sidelined from the Trump-Putin tete-a-tete, a joint statement by European Union leaders on Sunday welcomed Trump's efforts 'towards ending Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine,' but stressed that 'a path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine.' Promises of talks between Trump and Putin have done little to quiet the violence on the ground since their announcement. The Kremlin's larger army is slowly advancing deeper into Ukraine at a great cost in troops while it relentlessly bombards Ukrainian cities. Overnight into Tuesday, Russian drone strikes killed two civilians and injured 13 more across multiple Ukrainian regions, officials in the country said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store