Automakers Navigate New Challenges Amid Tariff Changes

Subscribe to our free newsletter today to keep up to date with the latest manufacturing news.

A set of tariffs recently introduced has reignited tensions in the North American automotive sector. Designed to bolster US manufacturing, the policy targets imports of electric vehicles, critical components, and Chinese-origin parts. With the domestic supply chain still recovering from pandemic-era disruptions, the new trade measures are forcing manufacturers, suppliers, and policymakers to re-evaluate long-held assumptions about globalization and regional competitiveness.

Background on tariff changes and what’s different in 2025

The new tariffs, announced in April 2025, apply to a broad array of products, with electric vehicles from China facing levies of up to 100 percent. Key auto components, including batteries and semiconductors, are also included. China has responded with criticism, while US automakers have raised concerns about their operational flexibility.

These tariffs differ from earlier measures by focusing on future-facing technologies. Previous trade policies emphasized trade balance; the current approach targets industries where the US aims to regain strategic influence.

The administration presents the policy as a corrective strategy to counter unfair pricing and revive industrial competitiveness. For automakers, it presents a scenario of rising costs and added complexity in their production cycles.

Automakers brace for disruption and adapt manufacturing strategies

General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis are all adjusting their North American production footprints. Many are slowing the flow of imported components and reevaluating sourcing from Canada and Mexico. However, replacing Chinese inputs with regional alternatives has proven challenging.

Ford has temporarily suspended shipments of some EV models pending adjustments in supply lines. Suppliers like Magna International are weighing whether to absorb tariff costs or pass them downstream. Smaller firms, particularly those using just-in-time logistics, face liquidity concerns as contracts and shipment schedules shift rapidly.

Trade compliance is now a frontline issue. The details of the new measures, including origin verification clauses, complicate cross-border operations. Components sourced from Asia but assembled in North America may no longer qualify for preferential treatment under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

Consumers will bear the cost as car prices trend upward

Although tariffs are meant to affect foreign exporters, the financial impact often ends up with US buyers. Estimates from Kelley Blue Book suggest that average vehicle prices could rise by approximately $1,500 if companies transfer costs directly. Price-sensitive segments like compact cars and entry-level EVs are expected to experience the steepest increases.

As a result, automakers may delay or cancel the release of imported models, reducing consumer options. Financing costs may also shift as lenders reassess depreciation curves and resale uncertainty.

Some municipal and commercial fleet operators are already reconsidering plans to transition to EVs, citing altered cost projections. Projects based on competitive EV pricing now require fresh analysis to determine feasibility under the new economic conditions.

USMCA’s complex role in this new tariff landscape

The USMCA, originally introduced to facilitate regional trade and simplify tariff exemptions, has taken on new importance. Components manufactured or assembled in Mexico but sourced from Asia may no longer meet exemption criteria. This nuance is driving automakers to reassess sourcing strategies and consider new investments in domestic manufacturing.

Battery production is emerging as a priority. Several firms are moving to build or expand operations in Nevada, Michigan, and Ontario. These efforts align with national policy goals but will take time to scale.

Trade tensions are also surfacing diplomatically. Both Canada and Mexico have expressed concern that US trade actions may conflict with the spirit of the agreement. Continued strain could spill over into other industries that depend on cross-border alignment, such as aerospace and food production. Much will depend on how global partners respond and whether domestic capacity can ramp up in time to meet demand.

Sources:

• The New York Times