I'm not sure even Tesla unambiguously qualifies here. Looking at the NHTSA part 583 list for 2025 [0], none of the Tesla vehicles have a "US" content higher than 75% (which I think includes Canada?). The highest is the base Kia EV6 at 80%. This seems to be coming from the Kogod manufacturing index. That's a more qualitative ranking that attempts to deal with things like corporate structures rather than just origin like the NHTSA numbers.<p>As someone who works in the industry, "where" something comes from is an inherently fuzzy concept. Different parts of the government use radically different definitions. For example, under NAFTA "domestic" parts are usually things manufactured anywhere in North America. This was done to onshore automotive manufacturing that wasn't realistically going to come back to the US, but political leaders didn't want to stay in Asia. One result of these tariffs may actually be that more auto manufacturing moves to Asia as the advantage of North American manufacturing is lost.<p>[0] <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2025-04/MY2025-AALA-Alphabetical%204_7_2025.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2025-04/MY2025-A...</a>
This headline is misleading because it makes it seem like tariffs are a step function that activate below 85%, which isn't true.<p>The formula is a simple, linear equation: tariffs = 0.25 * MSRP * (percent foreign content - 15)<p>Companies with 84% domestic content will pay a 25% tariff on 1% of the MSRP, companies with 70% domestic content will pay a 25% tariff on 15% of the MSRP, etc.<p>This is a common sense way to incentivize companies to make parts here without requiring perfection.<p>Here is the proclamation:<p><a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/amendments-to-adjusting-imports-of-automobiles-and-automobile-parts-into-the-united-states/" rel="nofollow">https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/amen...</a>
So how does this encourage a shift to domestic manufacturing? It's basically a reward for those who have already done what you want rather than incentivizing those who's behavior you'd like to change. It's a carrot for sure, but the carrot is out of reach since now you're putting financial stress on those you're hoping to bear the cost of moving onshore by giving an advantage to their competitors.<p>It's similar to giving special status to Apple by not penalizing their China-based manufacturing, then hoping that OTHER not-too-big-to-fail companies will be able to do what Apple couldn't (manufacture at a competitively cheap price onshore) while additionally facing this unfair competition.<p>It seems it'd be more effective to have incremental (based on % domestic manufacture & labor) rewards/penalties for those making changes rather than carve-outs for those too-big-to-fail and making competition even harder for those you are trying to incentivize.<p>Also, never mind manufacturing - how about addressing IT offhsoring, which is something far easier for US companies to change if incentivized/penalized appropriately. Is it really domestic clothing sweatshops that we want to encourage, not domestic high-tech industry with well paying jobs, paying high taxes, and helping retain onshore talent in an area of importance to national security?
From the 2025 Part 583 for this year:<p>- Tesla model 3 - 70-75% US/Canada content<p>- Tesla model Y - 70% US/Canada content<p>- Tesla Cybertruck - 65% US/Canada content<p>- Tesla model S - 65% US/Canada content<p>Perhaps it is calculated differently since no one hits 85%.<p><a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2025-04/MY2025-AALA-Percentage%204_7_2025.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2025-04/MY2025-A...</a>
I wonder how much their lack of union plays into this. The auto factories fled Flint/Detroit due to the UAW basically an attempt to limit the scope of strikes and violence from the UAW. Tesla doesn't have to worry about unions (at least yet), and so they have very centralized factories where an enormous amount of work is done. Probably makes it easier to do everything in the US if you can do it all in one building
I don't know if it's the same people but many of the comments here seem the opposite of the comments on EUs rules where people say they're targeting specific companies and comments say "no, the rules are such than all companies over a certain size are covered".<p>If the rule is 85% domestic than any company can do it.<p>I'm not saying the tariffs are good. Only that their point is to get things made domesticly
Lutnick is a man of his word:<p><a href="https://fortune.com/2025/03/20/howard-lutnick-pumps-tesla-stock/" rel="nofollow">https://fortune.com/2025/03/20/howard-lutnick-pumps-tesla-st...</a><p>Tesla is now above that price from March again. Orangehorseshoe loves Tesla!
There is a thing, i call "cos-playing" - where basically everybody agrees upon a "golden past" and by "reenacting" the golden past in clothing, language and behaviour, this "golden past" will be brought back and forced to stay.
Not in the picture are external circumstances, circumstances the golden past brought about, that make a repetition impossible (pension systems calcifying society, monopolies, etc. ).<p>The truely dangerous phase is reached, when the frantic cosplaying shows no effect and the conclusion slowly crawls towards "insanity is what you do with your life". Because then you have people with nowhere to go and the tools of the past, wishing for an end.
I have zero faith in "free market" ideologues, because what we actually get when they gain power is just favoritism for "free market" ideologues.
I am kind of surprised that the collection of people at the tops of all the big companies commanding so many billions, don't have some sort of behind the scenes levers they can pull to make him squeal like a pig, elected office or no.<p>I can only assume they're all actually largely ok with it.<p>I would not have imagined that they just never thought about things like that in general and now have actually no idea what to do now that this kind of situation has happened. <i>I</i> have no previously considered reactions or plans for most things and life just smacks me in the face like I've been walking with my eyes closed, but <i>I'm</i> a hapless midwit.
I wonder if Slate (<a href="https://www.slate.auto/" rel="nofollow">https://www.slate.auto/</a>) will be exempt as well since they tout "Made in USA"
Flagging this for the highly misleading headline. It makes it sound as if Tesla is getting some kind of carve out which is the furthest thing from the truth.
Apparently you get a credit of 15% of the car price to use against imported parts so presumably something like a Mustang with 20% imported parts would pay tariffs on a quarter of the value of the parts.
This is reasonably close to a continuation of what the Biden administration did.<p>Though they did it with tax credits not tariffs.
To get the tax break you had to buy a car made in America.
(Which pissed off car makers outside the US)<p>If I understand the below from NPR, then few electric cars
qualified back then as wel, and one of the few was Tesla Model Y<p>"As of May 3, 2024, eligible vehicles include the best-selling Tesla Model Y, the budget-friendly Chevrolet Bolt (which is no longer in production, but can still be found on some dealer lots), the Volkswagen ID.4 "<p><a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/12/28/1219158071/ev-electric-vehicles-tax-credit-car-shopping-tesla-ford-vw-gm" rel="nofollow">https://www.npr.org/2023/12/28/1219158071/ev-electric-vehicl...</a>
Used cars are ALSO exempt.<p>And, all used goods bought at secondhand stores are tariff-exempt as well. And so is FB marketplace, Craigslist, and others.<p>My protest is meager, but effective for us - we just will buy used and use 'Reduce, Reuse, Repair, Recycle' where we can. EnEnough of us doing that will slow and hamper the economy (read: rich peoples' money).
Japan’s trade barriers on foreign autos have been legendary.<p><a href="https://www.americanautomakers.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/181/Japan%27s%20Protected%20Auto%20Market%20copy_0.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.americanautomakers.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/...</a>
STATUS CHANGE: Incoming Trump change on auto tariffs in last few hours.[1] Not fully analyzed in the press yet.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/trump-scales-back-tariffs-on-automakers-but-analysts-still-expect-car-prices-to-rise/ar-AA1DQtJi" rel="nofollow">https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/trump-scales-back-ta...</a>
The CEO of Ford is very critical of Trump.<p>But Ford can probably get the USA content for gas-powered Mustangs up from 80% to 85%. The electric version is made in Mexico, but once Ford's Blue Oval City plant in Tennessee comes up in 2027, that will move to the US.<p>Of course, who knows where Trump will be by then.
Ah yes, the "free market" at work!<p>Also a friendly reminder that all these tariffs are being made possible by a "state of emergency" declared by Trump because of fentanyl coming from Canada and China. Otherwise, only Congress would have the power to impose tarriffs.<p>So shall we just be honest and say we're heading towards a centrally planned economy, China style?
How many memecoins did Musk purchase for this exemption?<p>Or was it an in-kind deal for his amateur-hack-a-billy work at DOGE?<p>Musk as presidential prostitute is not something I had on my bingo card when he first arrived on the scene.<p>This is the kind of bullshit your reputation will never recover from - no matter how many puff pieces you buy or retweet.<p>RIP Tesla.<p>RIP Elon.
This was predictable and frequently predicted when musk got involved. Of course there would be new rules that would be written specifically so hurt his competitors and not him. That's why tesla stock rose sharply when trump won.
Unfortunately companies have a bigger voice than people. Until that isn't the case there will always be doubts about the 'neutrality' of a particular law/policy/etc. The bigger thing here is that this particular administration rarely, if ever, does things in a 'neutral' manor. It is always 100% transactional with Trump. There is absolutely no doubt that the 85% is designed to give Tesla, and more specifically Musk, a huge win. It is foolish or outright disingenuous to even pretend that this isn't the case.
I didn't see any of this whingeing when Biden was making EV incentives that blatantly excluded Tesla.<p>This is what happens when you go along with lawfare or weaponized government.<p>The canon gets turned around and pointed the other way soon enough.
I was thinking about buying an EV in the next several years, but I'll never buy a Tesla, until I see Elon Musk in prison. And I don't think I'm alone.<p>Major effect of Trump's trade war is yet to be felt. I think Americans' perception of Trump will get much worse soon, and Tesla's brand image will follow suit. A tariff exemption is cute but I don't think that's enough to save Tesla.
Odd how sentiment about Elon Musk changed rapidly...
Some HN users pointed out in the comments here that not even Teslas reach 85%. Is the article wrong?
Interesting that everyone is talking about favoriting, but no one talks the anti-favoriting of Tesla during the Biden administration. Tesla wasn't invited to any EV conference that was organized by the previous admin. They are the biggest EV factory in the US yet somehow they were never invited...smh
The irony here is that Democrats, for more than a decade, did anything and everything, by bankrolling taxpayers money into incentives and subsidies, to protect Tesla, help it compete and even flourish and scale, in the auto market where margins are razor thin and true innovations are hard to come by, even less so from smaller players. Nobody, except Republicans, batted an eye because climate change, science and environment comes first supposedly.