Connect with us

News

Tesla on the winning end of proposed U.S. import tax

Published

on

U.S. automobile sales might slow as a result of the proposed import tax affecting vehicles with manufacturers outside of the country. However, this change could stimulate up to 1 million additional vehicles could be manufactured in the U.S., which would add 50,000 more jobs at car production and part assembly plants.

That good news/ bad news scenario is according to researchers at Baum & Associates, LLC, which advises suppliers. Their report is intended to provide estimates to show the relative impact of the tax plan on each automaker. Dan Luria, an economist at the Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center in Ann Arbor, is the lead author of the Baum & Associates report, which accounts for imports of both finished vehicles and parts for domestic cars that are made overseas.

According to a report by Bloomberg, Tesla is the single automaker that would be able to maintain consistent pricing before and after such a tax implementation, as it manufactures all its cars in the U.S. and incorporates predominately U.S. made parts.

Border tax consequences for automakers

According to Baum & Associates, LLC, most automakers would need to raise vehicle prices by thousands of dollars. They would also likely have to assume a portion of the higher tax burden.

Advertisement
  • Ford, with significant domestic manufacturing, would accrue the smallest price hike among major automakers, at about $282 per vehicle;
  • General Motors Co. would experience a $995 increase per vehicle;
  • Volvo and VW vehicle prices would have to rise by about $7,600 and $6,800, on average;
  • Jaguar’s Land Rover, which is 100% imported, would require an increase of more than $17,000 per vehicle.

According to Alan Baum, the founder of the West Bloomfield, Michigan-based firm which produced the report, “The plan results in a net cost for automakers. Each company will then make its own decisions on pricing in order to best compete and maximize its profits.”

In what direction might a proposed border tax shift automakers’ current business practices? Essentially, the tax would create an incentive for automakers to keep U.S. plants running at the expense of those in Canada and Mexico. It could also steer auto companies currently conducting business in the U.S. to other markets.

  • Automakers may boost U.S. parts procurement and production from existing vehicle assembly plants;
  • Overseas automakers including Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd.’s Subaru, Mitsubishi Motors Corp., Mazda Motor Corp., Hyundai Motor Co., and Kia Motors Corp. may consider expanding existing U.S. operations or building new capacity;
  • Volkswagen AG could build another U.S. assembly plant;
  • Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV may accelerate the conversion of factories in Michigan to build pickups there instead of Mexico;
  • Nissan Motor Co. might export more from Mexico to Latin American markets and less to the U.S.;
  • Mazda and Mitsubishi, which rely entirely on imports to the U.S. market, may have to quit the U.S. market or pay other manufacturers to assemble their cars.

Meanwhile, Toyota Motor Corp. is one of the corporations that is warning that the proposed border tax will result in many costlier products, not only in automobiles, but also in food, clothing, and gasoline, among other areas.

Other analysts weigh in on the effects of a proposed border tax

It’s not just Baum and associates who are advising clients on their prospective bottom lines should a border tax become legislated by U.S. officials. Other analysts are weighing in on the proposed border tax effects on commerce. Colin Langan, an analyst at UBS Securities LLC, argues that the proposed border tax could raise average prices in the U.S. by about 8 percent, or $2,500 per vehicle.

The border tax has the potential to reduce annual sales by about 2 million vehicles, Langan said.

He also projects that, while the tax has the potential to move through the House of Representatives, it is “very unlikely” to pass in the Senate. Langan predicts the chances of the border tax being enacted at less than 50 percent.

Advertisement

The proposal to begin levying companies’ imports and domestic sales and make exports tax-exempt would completely overhaul the U.S. tax code.

Carolyn Fortuna is a writer and researcher with a Ph.D. in education from the University of Rhode Island. She brings a social justice perspective to environmental issues. Please follow me on Twitter and Facebook and Google+

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

California city weighs banning Elon Musk companies like Tesla and SpaceX

A resolution draft titled, “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” alleges that Musk “has engaged in business practices that are alleged to include violations of labor laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety standards, and regulatory noncompliance.”

Published

on

tesla supercharger
Credit: Tesla

A California City Council is planning to weigh whether it would adopt a resolution that would place a ban on its engagement with Elon Musk companies, like Tesla and SpaceX.

The City of Davis, California, will have its City Council weigh a new proposal that would adopt a resolution “to divest from companies owned and/or controlled by Elon Musk.”

This would include a divestment proposal to encourage CalPERS, the California Public Employees Retirement System, to divest from stock in any Musk company.

A resolution draft titled, “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” alleges that Musk “has engaged in business practices that are alleged to include violations of labor laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety standards, and regulatory noncompliance.”

Advertisement

It claims that Musk “has used his influence and corporate platforms to promote political ideologies and activities that threaten democratic norms and institutions, including campaign finance activities that raise ethical and legal concerns.”

If adopted, Davis would bar the city from entering into any new contracts or purchasing agreements with any company owned or controlled by Elon Musk. It also says it will not consider utilizing Tesla Robotaxis.

Hotel owner tears down Tesla chargers in frustration over Musk’s politics

A staff report on the proposal claims there is “no immediate budgetary impact.” However, a move like this would only impact its residents, especially with Tesla, as the Supercharger Network is open to all electric vehicle manufacturers. It is also extremely reliable and widespread.

Advertisement

Regarding the divestment request to CalPERS, it would not be surprising to see the firm make the move. Although it voted against Musk’s compensation package last year, the firm has no issue continuing to make money off of Tesla’s performance on Wall Street.

The decision to avoid Musk companies will be considered this evening at the City Council meeting.

The report comes from Davis Vanguard.

It is no secret that Musk’s political involvement, especially during the most recent Presidential Election, ruffled some feathers. Other cities considered similar options, like the City of Baltimore, which “decided to go in another direction” after awarding Tesla a $5 million contract for a fleet of EVs for city employees.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla launches new Model 3 financing deal with awesome savings

Tesla is now offering a 0.99% APR financing option for all new Model 3 orders in the United States, and it applies to all loan terms of up to 72 months.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has launched a new Model 3 financing deal in the United States that brings awesome savings. The deal looks to move more of the company’s mass-market sedan as it is the second-most popular vehicle Tesla offers, behind its sibling, the Model Y.

Tesla is now offering a 0.99% APR financing option for all new Model 3 orders in the United States, and it applies to all loan terms of up to 72 months.

It includes three Model 3 configurations, including the Model 3 Performance. The rate applies to:

  • Model 3 Premium Rear-Wheel-Drive
  • Model 3 Premium All-Wheel-Drive
  • Model 3 Performance

The previous APR offer was 2.99%.

Tesla routinely utilizes low-interest offers to help move vehicles, especially as the rates can help get people to payments that are more comfortable with their monthly budgets. Along with other savings, like those on maintenance and gas, this is another way Tesla pushes savings to customers.

Advertisement

The company had offered a similar program in China on the Model 3 and Model Y vehicles, but it had ended on January 31.

The Model 3 was the second-best-selling electric vehicle in the United States in 2025, trailing only the Model Y. According to automotive data provided by Cox, Tesla sold 192,440 units last year of the all-electric sedan. The Model Y sold 357,528 units.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla hasn’t adopted Apple CarPlay yet for this shocking reason

Many Apple and iPhone users have wanted the addition, especially to utilize third-party Navigation apps like Waze, which is a popular alternative. Getting apps outside of Tesla’s Navigation to work with its Full Self-Driving suite seems to be a potential issue the company will have to work through as well.

Published

on

Credit: Michał Gapiński/YouTube

Perhaps one of the most requested features for Tesla vehicles by owners is the addition of Apple CarPlay. It sounds like the company wants to bring the popular UI to its cars, but there are a few bottlenecks preventing it from doing so.

The biggest reason why CarPlay has not made its way to Teslas yet might shock you.

According to Bloomberg‘s Mark Gurman, Tesla is still working on bringing CarPlay to its vehicles. There are two primary reasons why Tesla has not done it quite yet: App compatibility issues and, most importantly, there are incredibly low adoption rates of iOS 26.

Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works

Advertisement

iOS 26 is Apple’s most recent software version, which was released back in September 2025. It introduced a major redesign to the overall operating system, especially its aesthetic, with the rollout of “Liquid Glass.”

However, despite the many changes and updates, Apple users have not been too keen on the iOS 26 update, and the low adoption rates have been a major sticking point for Tesla as it looks to develop a potential alternative for its in-house UI.

It was first rumored that Tesla was planning to bring CarPlay out in its cars late last year. Many Apple and iPhone users have wanted the addition, especially to utilize third-party Navigation apps like Waze, which is a popular alternative. Getting apps outside of Tesla’s Navigation to work with its Full Self-Driving suite seems to be a potential issue the company will have to work through as well.

According to the report, Tesla asked Apple to make some changes to improve compatibility between its software and Apple Maps:

Advertisement

“Tesla asked Apple to make engineering changes to Maps to improve compatibility. The iPhone maker agreed and implemented the adjustments in a bug fix update to iOS 26 and the latest version of CarPlay.”

Gurman also said that there were some issues with turn-by-turn guidance from Tesla’s maps app, and it did not properly sync up with Apple Maps during FSD operation. This is something that needs to be resolved before it is rolled out.

There is no listed launch date, nor has there been any coding revealed that would indicate Apple CarPlay is close to being launched within Tesla vehicles.

Advertisement
Continue Reading