WSJ : China’s Economy Grew Before Tariffs Kicked In

China’s Economy Grew Before Tariffs Kicked In
Trump’s stiff tariffs on Chinese goods are expected to weaken the country’s economy this year

SINGAPORE—-China’s economy got a boost in the first quarter from a rush of exports to the U.S. ahead of stiff new tariffs, but growth is set to slow as the trade war between Washington and Beijing heats up.

How serious that slowdown will get depends on how successful Chinese exporters are at finding new markets for goods shut out of the U.S. by sky-high new tariffs. It also depends on how big a boost to spending Beijing can generate at home to offset weakness overseas.

Some economists expect Chinese growth to slow to 4% or less this year, which would mark its slowest expansion in decades, outside of the pandemic years 2020 and 2022. In 2018, when President Trump first hit China with tariffs, its economy shrugged it off to report growth of 6.7% that year.

The Trump administration plans to use tariff negotiations to pressure U.S. trading partners to limit their dealings with China, The Wall Street Journal reported, an effort to put a dent in China’s economy and reduce Beijing’s leverage in potential trade negotiations between Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

U.S. officials plan to use negotiations with more than 70 nations to ask them to disallow China to ship goods through their countries, prevent Chinese firms from locating in their territories to avoid U.S. tariffs, and not absorb China’s cheap industrial goods into their economies.

The U.S. is also facing a tariff-induced slowdown—with some economists anticipating an outright recession as higher prices squeeze consumption and uncertainty over trade pinches business investment and hiring. Trump argues that some short-term pain is necessary as he uses tariffs to push companies to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S.

China’s economy expanded 5.4% in the first quarter compared with the same period a year earlier, matching the pace notched in the final three months of last year, China’s National Bureau of Statistics said.

Growth was driven by industrial production, infrastructure investment and exports, which rocketed in February and March as U.S. importers raced to bring in orders ahead of anticipated new tariffs. Following a series of tit-for-tat exchanges last week, Washington and Beijing raised tariffs on each others’ products to more than 100%, potentially crippling U.S.-China trade in all but the most essential items. The two countries’ bilateral trade was $582 billion last year, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

Already, there are signs that those levies are starting to pinch commerce between the world’s two largest economies. Container traffic at Chinese ports fell 6% last week compared with the previous seven days, according to China’s Ministry of Transport, while an index of freight rates for shipping goods to the U.S. West Coast from China tumbled 18%. Chinese wholesalers say orders from the U.S. have dried up.

Retail sales also rose in March, jumping 5.9% year-over-year, suggesting government efforts to pump up consumption by offering shoppers discounts on new consumer goods if they trade in old ones are bearing fruit.

Nonetheless, economists have cut their forecasts for Chinese growth as the trade war escalates.

UBS chief China economist Tao Wang said she expects Chinese exports to the U.S. to fall by two-thirds this year and for Chinese exports overall to decline 10% year-over-year thanks to the knock-on effect of trade conflict on the global economy.

Even with extra government spending, UBS said it expects growth in China to crumble to 3.4% this year and just 3% next year. Annual growth in 2024 was 5%, though many economists say actual growth in China was probably weaker than the reported figure.

Julian Evans-Pritchard, head of China economics at Capital Economics, said he expects Chinese firms should be able to offset at least some lost sales to the U.S. by finding buyers in new markets—though many governments are wary that a flood of cheap Chinese imports might overwhelm key domestic industries.

Sarah Zhang, a Fuzhou-based trader of LED clocks, said about 20% of her company’s orders come from the U.S., with buyers including Walmart and Amazon. Still, more than 70% of orders come from Europe, Japan and South Korea, with the rest from China domestically.

“The U.S. market is still important, but it’s not like we can’t live without it,” Zhang said, adding that they have halted taking new orders from the U.S. One big U.S. customer wanted a 20% to 30% discount following the tariffs but she refused, she said.

Economists and executives also expect supply-chain shifts will allow some Chinese firms to keep selling into the U.S. by moving production to third countries. Trump has signaled he intends to crack down on that, but his plans aren’t clear.

Cassie Yu, who sells aluminum desk stands for cellphones and laptops, said her husband has been in Southeast Asia since Trump announced his slate of tariffs on China and other U.S. trading partners, trying to find factories in countries that haven’t been hit as hard by new U.S. tariffs.

“Our partners in the U.S. started panicking and calling us, so he booked the first flight the next day to Vietnam, and now he’s in Malaysia,” Yu said. “Hopefully, we can nail down some ways to avoid the tariffs.”

China’s other big option for shoring up growth is boosting the domestic economy, parts of which have been struggling thanks to a drawn-out property crunch and tepid consumer spending.

Beijing has signaled plans to boost borrowing and spending to counteract the headwinds from overseas. Most of that extra spending will likely go to investment, especially in infrastructure, though Beijing has also said it wants to pump up consumption, perhaps by expanding trade-in programs that let households upgrade cars and home appliances for newer models at a discount.

Goldman Sachs economists said in a research report that they expect their broadest measure of the government budget deficit in China—which includes borrowing by central and local governments, state-run lenders and a planned step-up in bond sales—to reach 14.5% of gross domestic product this year, from 10.4% in 2024.

That level of support isn’t far off the fiscal expansion China pursued in the wake of Covid-19 lockdowns in 2020, the report said. Even so, that won’t fully offset the drag from weaker trade and a slowdown in global growth, the bank said.

Wednesday’s data showed industrial production expanded at a 7.7% annual rate in March, China’s National Bureau of Statistics said, while exports rose 12.4%. Real estate continues to drag on the economy, with average sale prices in 70 major cities falling 5% on the year.

FT : Donald Trump pledges to cut drug prices for Americans

Donald Trump pledges to cut drug prices for Americans
Latest executive order could shake up US pharma industry

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order aimed at lowering drug prices for Americans in a move that would shake up the pharmaceutical industry in its biggest and most profitable market.

The order stops short of implementing a “most favoured nation” status, which would force drugmakers to offer their lowest prices in the world to the US. Trump has previously railed against other countries for “freeloading” on US consumers, saying that American patients are subsidising medicines that are cheaper abroad.

But a US official said on Tuesday that the government was “very focused on narrowing the delta between what the United States gets for prices versus what other developed nations do”.

The US paid about 3.2 times more for branded drugs than other developed countries in 2022, according to research by RAND healthcare for the health and human services department — the most recent data available.

The official said the executive action would “foster a more competitive prescription drug market”.

Trump’s order will direct the US drugs regulator, the Food and Drug Administration, to allow more states to import medicines directly from countries with lower prices, after Florida was authorised in January 2024 to import from Canada.

It also includes changes to the drug-pricing measures included in former president Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which for the first time allowed Medicare, the public insurance programme for seniors, to negotiate the cost of drugs.

Most notably, in a win for the pharmaceutical industry, the order pushes for an end to the different price negotiation regimes for pills and injectables. Under the IRA, Medicare could negotiate the price of popular pills after nine years, but would have to wait for 13 until it could negotiate the price of injectables, which was criticised by pharma companies.

But the order does not say how many years drugmakers would have to wait for each category, or explain how they would avoid creating higher costs for Medicare.

In his first term, Trump announced a number of measures to try to reduce drug prices, including instructing the health and human services secretary to test a payment model for a most favoured nation policy, but this was never implemented.

The president’s order directs the FDA to clear a backlog of generic and biosimilar drug approvals by “streamlining” the approval process. It also cuts the prices of insulin and allergy injectors such as EpiPen for the uninsured and those on low incomes.

On Monday the Trump administration launched a national security probe that could lead to tariffs on pharmaceuticals — and a sharp escalation of his trade war — but a US official maintained that the drug prices could still be reduced.

“We can pursue two things at one time — making sure government payment and [intellectual property] are optimised to deliver prices that correspond with the value of a drug, and that we have a secure supply chain in case of geopolitical strife or a natural disaster,” the official said.

FT : Nvidia to take $5.5bn hit as US clamps down on exports of AI chips to China

Nvidia to take $5.5bn hit as US clamps down on exports of AI chips to China
Trump administration’s curbs send chipmaker’s shares sliding in after-hours trading

Nvidia has said it expects to take a $5.5bn blow after the US clamped down on its ability to export artificial intelligence chips to China, sending the Silicon Valley behemoth’s shares sliding in after-hours trading.

The group said in a regulatory filing late on Tuesday that the H20 chip, which is tailored for the Chinese market to comply with export controls that already prevent the sale of its most powerful chips in China, would now require a special licence to sell to customers there.

Nvidia said the US had said the move was necessary to address the risk of H20 chips being used in “a supercomputer in China”.

The chipmaker said it would take a $5.5bn charge in the quarter to April 27 related to H20 chips. Its shares fell 6 per cent in after-hours trading on Tuesday, while futures tracking the tech-focused Nasdaq 100 index declined more than 1 per cent.

Washington’s crackdown on H20 chips is the latest example of how the US is using tariffs and other trade barriers to increase pressure on Beijing. President Donald Trump has already increased tariffs on Chinese imports to 145 per cent, although some consumer electronics have received a temporary reprieve.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Tuesday urged China to cut a new trade deal with the US, saying, “the ball is in China’s court”.

The US commerce department confirmed later on Tuesday it was issuing new export licensing requirements for the H20, as well as AMD’s MI308 and equivalent chips. 

“The commerce department is committed to acting on the president’s directive to safeguard our national and economic security,” a spokesperson said. 

AMD is Nvidia’s closest direct competitor in the AI data centre chip market. The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The US’s move also underscores how Nvidia, the chip designer at the heart of the AI boom, which saw unchecked growth over the course of last year and briefly became the world’s most valuable company, is exposed to geopolitical tensions between Washington and Beijing.

On Monday, the Trump administration launched a national security probe that could lead to new tariffs on semiconductors, as it holds off from immediately applying steeper levies on chips.

The restrictions come despite Nvidia chief executive Jensen Huang joining other tech executives in seeking to court Trump. Huang recently dined with Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort and met the president at the White House in January.

Nvidia also said on Monday it would spend up to half a trillion dollars on US AI infrastructure over the next four years through partnerships with companies including Taiwan’s TSMC and Foxconn. The Financial Times had first reported on its investment plans.

The company introduced its China-focused H20 processors last year after the Biden administration imposed export controls on its chips.

They are less powerful than its top range of graphics processing units, or GPUs, coveted by Microsoft, OpenAI, Google and Amazon.

Despite its reduced performance, the H20 has still seen solid demand in China. But Beijing has taken steps to encourage local tech companies to use homegrown chips from companies such as Huawei, and could freeze out Nvidia’s products with new energy-efficiency rules.

Nvidia’s shares are down about 16 per cent since the start of the year, as of Tuesday’s close, as anxieties mount about the growing arms race between the US and China around the infrastructure that powers AI. They have also been swept into a broader market rout sparked by the escalating trade war.

Bernstein analysts on Tuesday said the H20 accounted for about $12bn of Nvidia’s $17bn in China revenue, while there was a lack of clarity at this stage on whether licences might be granted, or whether it amounted to a full “wipeout” of the product line.

The rollout of Nvidia’s newest AI chips has hit stumbling blocks as successive US administrations have sought ways to control the export of the technology.

The US is worried China will be more successful building supercomputers, which can be used for everything from the development of hypersonic weapons to modelling for nuclear weapons, to help the People’s Liberation Army.

China has repeatedly accused the US of using national security tools, such as export controls, to throttle its economic development. The Chinese embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment. 

An “AI diffusion” rule, introduced in the last days of the Biden administration, is set to come into force in May unless the Trump administration decides to unwind it. It would impose far stricter controls on where the most powerful US chips can be exported to, using a “tiered” licensing system that caps exports for all but a small number of countries.

Last week, Republican senators wrote to commerce secretary Howard Lutnick asking the administration to scrap the rule, which has faced pushback across the industry, including from Nvidia.

FT : US engaging on OECD global tax deal despite Donald Trump’s defiance

US engaging on OECD global tax deal despite Donald Trump’s defiance
Landmark deal to reform corporate tax for tech and multinationals is struggling to move forward

The US is engaging in efforts to negotiate a landmark global tax deal despite President Donald Trump’s criticism of the agreement, according to the OECD.

Secretary-general Mathias Cormann told the Financial Times the US was taking part in active discussions, including technical concerns on implementation. “We are continuing the conversation,” he said on the sidelines of the Delphi Economic Forum in Greece.

The comments show the deal to close tax loopholes for Big Tech groups and multinationals could get US backing. More than 135 countries signed up to the biggest corporate tax reform in more than a century more than four years ago, but since then half the agreement has not been enacted.

Delegates from those countries said they held ‘‘constructive’’ talks on the agreement in Cape Town, South Africa, last week. That stands in stark contrast to the hostile tone Trump struck in a memorandum signed on his first day in office in January which said the “global tax deal has no force or effect in the US”.

The president’s memo had led many observers to conclude the US had in effect pulled out of the OECD deal, but Cormann said he was ‘‘not sure’’ Trump’s comments equated to a withdrawal.

He added: “[Trump] issued a memorandum on the 20th of January and that says what it says. But we remain engaged in discussions with the United States.”

“The OECD was notified that the terms of the global tax deal agreed to by the prior administration are not acceptable,” said a Treasury spokesperson. “The Treasury continues to seek a path forward that protects American interests and US tax sovereignty.”

The first pillar of the reform — making Big Tech groups and multinationals pay more tax in the places they do business — has not been agreed, Cormann said, but he stressed conversations are ongoing. He warned failure to deliver a multilateral solution could result in a proliferation of unilateral digital services taxes around the world, a scenario he said would be damaging for global trade and growth.

Pillar one requires US backing to come into force, because countries need to change their international tax treaties including with the US, to bring it into effect.

The second pillar, the global minimum tax, came into effect from last year and has been enacted in more than 40 countries out of the 141 signatories. It does not require US backing, as nations can introduce it unilaterally. However, despite it having been enacted in some capitals, countries at the OECD are refining the details, with the organisation regularly updating guidance on the rules.

Cormann said the US had raised “specific technical concerns” on the implementation of the second pillar which introduces a global minimum 15 per cent corporate tax rate. It had raised questions including about a rule on undertaxed profits, and how research and development tax credits factor into effective tax rate calculations. However, he said these were being actively discussed.

Sandy Bhogal, partner and co-chair of tax at law firm Gibson Dunn, said he could not see the first pillar targeting Big Tech groups and multinationals happening. ‘‘I cannot see how it can be made to appease the US without fundamental reform,’’ he said.

“The Trump administration is unhappy about the undertaxed profits rule aspect of pillar two, and so that would have to change as well. I think we are a long way away from US adoption of either.”

Cormann added international tax co-operation remains essential to prevent both double taxation and no taxation. “Multinationals operate across borders — and so do tax issues. Without co-operation, everyone loses.”

“If we can’t find a satisfactory multilateral solution, then the risk grows that countries will take matters into their own hands,” he said.

Cormann also warned sweeping new tariffs risk triggering slower global growth and higher inflation, adding to the economic challenges facing policymakers.

The recent tariff announcements — if implemented as outlined — would contribute to a “further contraction in global growth and higher inflation”, he said, though he stopped short of forecasting a global recession.

While the OECD is not expected to release updated forecasts until June, he confirmed the organisation was reassessing its projections in light of developments since early April. The March forecast had cut global growth by 0.2 percentage points for this year and 0.3 percentage points for 2025.

Cormann also raised concerns about rising global fragmentation. “A trade war is in nobody’s interest,” he said. “Lower global growth leads to lower incomes and higher prices — including in the US.”

He described the current moment as a critical juncture for Europe and multilateralism more broadly. “We are committed to working with all democratically elected governments,” he said. “Multilateralism is hard — but it’s never been more essential.”

FT : Trade war fears put loan vehicles under pressure to sell riskiest debt

Trade war fears put loan vehicles under pressure to sell riskiest debt
Tariff-induced economic uncertainty prompts worries over potential defaults and downgrades

A cornerstone of demand in the $1.4tn US junk loan market is under pressure to sell very risky debt, as President Donald Trump’s trade war sparks fears of recession and ratings downgrades.

Collateralised loan obligation vehicles, which own roughly two-thirds of US riskier corporate loans, may need to slash exposure to weaker borrowers most vulnerable to tariffs and recession because of the potential threat of rating downgrades, according to analysts and investors.

The heightened pressure on CLOs is the latest sign of how fears that Trump’s tariffs could sharply slow US growth are rippling through the corporate debt market. Borrowing costs have risen sharply in recent weeks for riskier bonds and loans, while the rate of new issuance has also cooled.

“Whether it’s a recession, a mild recession, a slowdown in growth — at the minimum, we’re going to have a slowdown,” said Roberta Goss, head of Pretium’s bank loan and CLO platform. “That will have implications across the credit markets — and in leveraged finance, that’s going to result in elevated defaults and elevated downgrades over the course of the next year.”

Goldman Sachs lifted its default projections for US loan borrowers sharply last week, anticipating a 12-month trailing default rate of 8 per cent for leveraged loan issuers by the end of this year — up sharply from a previous estimate of 3.5 per cent.

CLOs package up leveraged loans — which are typically extended to borrowers with high debt burdens — into different risk categories, before selling them in slices to investors. The vehicles have held up well during previous periods of economic strain, and issuance was strong at the start of this year, signalling healthy demand for the market.

However, analysts have warned that risk mitigation mechanisms within CLOs could push managers to reduce their holdings of very low-quality loans in the near future — potentially curbing access to funding for the most highly leveraged, weakest borrowers.

“I do think [CLOs] will start selling if it becomes clear that early April’s tariff regime becomes the status quo for a long period,” said James Martin, senior credit strategist at UBS.

While Trump backed down from his “reciprocal” tariff blitz last week, announcing a 90-day hiatus for non-retaliating countries, an escalating trade war with China and erratic policy developments have put economists and investors on notice for a possible growth slowdown.

“Right now, the focus is what the rating agencies will do,” said Pratik Gupta, head of CLO research at Bank of America. While “they haven’t downgraded anything yet, I think those are coming”.

CLOs have limits on how much debt rated triple-C or below — the bottom end of the credit quality spectrum — they can hold, with a typical threshold of 7.5 per cent of all assets for CLOs that hold public-market or “broadly syndicated” loans.

While recent data from BofA showed that the average US CLO held about 6 per cent of its assets in triple-C-rated debt, well below that ceiling, Gupta anticipates that if current tariff announcements hold, an increase in ratings downgrades can push this figure to 7.7 per cent “in the near term”.

A jump above that 7.5 per cent ceiling could flip protective switches within CLOs, leading to risk assessments that might ultimately cut off cash flows to investors in the lowest-quality tranches of the CLO, known as “equity”, in order to redirect payments to investors higher up the capital structure. Such a scenario could, some market participants said, reduce the appeal of CLOs for investors in the riskiest tranches.

For now, strategists said that CLOs had a decent “cushion” and should still be able to absorb several downgrades until they reached the stage of needing to sell loans aggressively. They added that the path ahead for CLO managers would be determined to some extent by the next stages of Trump’s trade war and how far tariffs were ultimately imposed.

Still, against a backdrop of rising recession fears, some market participants said they were already seeing managers beginning to “clean up” their portfolios to avoid being stuck with overflowing triple-C buckets — reducing their holdings of loans that could be particularly vulnerable to downgrade.

“Many managers are now proactively trying to front-run by selling risky B-minus names,” said Gupta, referring to loans rated just above triple-C. “Certainly, sales have picked up quite a bit . . . I think you are seeing increased trading activity across the board from the perspective of downgrade risk.”

Pretium’s Goss added that in recent weeks the basket of US corporate borrowers whose debt was trading below 90 cents on the dollar — “representative of future triple-Cs and defaults” — had moved from 6 per cent to more than 10 per cent of the entire loan market, indicating that investors were reducing their holdings of riskier single-B-minus and triple-C-rated names.

“That is exactly why people fear that there could be increased risk around restructurings,” said Gupta, referring to the process whereby distressed companies reconfigure their debt piles, typically to the detriment of existing lenders.

FT : Europe helped teach China to make cars. Now the tables are turning

Europe helped teach China to make cars. Now the tables are turning
The EU is trading market access for expertise in key technologies, just as Beijing once did

Two decades ago, German engineers used to joke among themselves about the prototypes for new cars presented by their Chinese joint venture partners, which in at least one case were cut and pasted from advertisements of German models.

“They had no ideas of their own — they were just copying,” says a senior software executive at a German carmaker.

The same engineer was recently presented with a wish list for a future vehicle operating system his company wants to develop. Point for point, it mirrored features that have been unveiled by Chinese electric-vehicle manufacturers.

“We’ve come full circle,” says the executive, who declines to be named because of the sensitivity of the subject to the future of his company.

Rattled by the advance of Chinese companies, the EU last year imposed tariffs of up to 45 per cent on EVs from the country. But in a new approach that is being developed both by Brussels and by the auto industry, Europe is also now seeking to take advantage of Chinese expertise.

European companies are increasingly doing deals with Chinese rivals to prevent them from falling behind in the core areas — software, batteries and autonomous vehicle systems — that will drive the future of the automotive industry. Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, Stellantis and BMW have all signed agreements with Chinese groups to get access to technology.

A new EU policy framework seeks to give these companies greater leverage in their dealings with China. In an “action plan” for the industry published last month, the commission is looking to require Chinese companies entering the EU car market to enter joint ventures with European companies or license parts of their technology.


If these efforts are successful, they would represent a striking turning point in recent economic history. For the past four decades, China has tried to use the promise of access to its market as a way to get foreign companies to transfer expertise and technology to its own companies — often much to the angst of the would-be investors.

Now Europe is trying to use some of the very same tools to catch up with innovations from China.

“It’s a change in the sense that it welcomes investment from abroad in a sector that has been one of the prides of European industrial development,” says Elisabetta Cornago, senior research fellow at the Centre for European Reform think-tank.

“It’s also an acknowledgment that there is a gap between the European homegrown knowhow and what is available externally.”

Executives in the sector agree the EU’s action plan for the automotive industry is a frank admission that European carmakers need the technological expertise of companies established decades later.

“We overestimate ourselves but we definitely underestimated others,” says Robert Falck, founder and chief executive of Swedish start-up Einride, which became the first company globally to deploy a fully autonomous truck on a public road in 2019. “What we need to do is wake up to reality.”

Raymond Tsang, an automotive technology expert with Bain in Shanghai, says after losing a third of their market share in China since 2020, foreign automakers simply “have no choice” but to partner with Chinese technology companies to have even a chance of survival.

“Dig into why they are losing. Certainly the EV transition is the big thing. But they’re under-indexing on their infotainment systems and connectivity and ADAS [advanced driver assistance systems],” he says. “If they do not fix that, there’s no chance.”

European companies are reaching out to China at a time of intense turbulence in the industry. Demand for cars is stagnating in Europe, amid rising costs and regulatory pressure for cleaner vehicles, while China is grappling with overcapacity in its own car industry. And in the background, US President Donald Trump has launched a trade war against Beijing and other countries.

Some industry executives believe the EU is responsible for many of these headwinds. “Europe shot itself in the foot, then accused the Chinese of holding the gun,” one executive says, pointing to the planned phaseout of combustion engine cars, strict emissions penalties and the decision to cut itself off from cheap Russian energy.

They also warn that the EU’s imposition of tariffs on imports of Chinese-made EVs last year will make technology sharing far more challenging.

Ola Källenius, chief executive of Mercedes-Benz and president of European car industry body Acea, says Europe has the most to lose from an acceleration in protectionism because its companies have reaped the most from globalisation.

“When we came to China . . . there was a call upon us by the policymakers to ‘industrialise here if you want to come to the market’ and from my understanding, European policymakers have said the same vis-à-vis the Chinese,” he says.

“But that means that you would actually open up markets, create as much as possible a level playing field, and then let the best market actor win.”

No country captures the reversal of the global automotive order better than Germany.

The wealth of Europe’s largest economy was built in large part on exports to China as the country grew rapidly following its economic opening-up in the 1980s.

Germany’s automotive giants — Volkswagen, BMW and Mercedes-Benz — were in the vanguard and spent decades earning a significant share of their revenue and profit in China.


Volkswagen was one of the first western companies to enter the country, after rival Toyota famously snubbed an offer from Beijing and chose instead to produce cars in Taiwan.

The company formed a joint venture with Shanghai-owned SAIC in 1984 to build its Santana sedans for the local market. This early willingness to work with Chinese partners, a requirement for market access that was only recently lifted, paid off handsomely. VW’s position as China’s best-selling brand was only overturned last year when it was dethroned by BYD — a domestic rival that only began making its own cars in 2005.

For decades, German executives returning from the biennial Shanghai Auto Show would trade stories about local brands clumsily trying to imitate their best-selling models.

But the mocking stopped in 2023 — the first show held since the pandemic — as it became clear just how far Chinese EV makers had leapt ahead in software and battery technology during the years that the country was under strict lockdown and closed off.

In July of that year, Volkswagen announced a $700mn investment in Chinese EV maker Xpeng, giving it a 5 per cent stake and a seat as an “observer” on its board. The following year, the two companies said they would jointly develop “intelligent connected vehicles” for the Chinese market.

Hundreds of VW engineers have been working with Xpeng in Guangzhou and Hefei, learning first-hand from the Chinese group’s expertise in developing smart driving architecture.

The project is one of a flurry of similar tech-focused tie-ups and joint ventures, including between Mercedes-Benz and Hesai, a developer of laser-based object detection systems, Stellantis and Leapmotor, Tencent and Toyota and BMW has with Huawei.

Despite the ventures and the clear evidence of China’s advances, one European executive based in the country says “old tropes” of western technological superiority still linger in some quarters.

“Many have difficulty adjusting to the new reality of innovation in China,” the person says, adding that it may be due to “a form of arrogance or naivety” or a “belief in the assumption that only liberal societies can produce true innovation.” 

Christoph Weber, who leads the China business of Swiss engineering software group AutoForm, says that “when it comes to developing competitive software, [western brands] tried and basically failed”. But they have not “emotionally accepted” China’s ascendance.

“Some people want to believe that we can still kick the can down the road,” he adds, “ignoring that EV technology is absolutely superior, and the software-defined vehicle is coming.”

John Lawler, vice-chair and former chief financial officer at Ford, says the EU is being realistic in seeking technology transfer from Chinese companies that want to form battery joint ventures in the continent.

“I would say they had a focus [on electrification] before the rest of the world because they didn’t have a dominant position in internal combustion engines,” he says. “And so here we sit now. They’re leaders in electromobility and they’re leaders in battery technology.” 

“There are things to learn. So it’s a pragmatic approach to understand that you can’t just step back and refuse to look at what the reality is.” 

But critics such as T&E, an environmental campaign group, say the change in the EU’s industrial strategy has come too late. It contends that member states have used government subsidies to attract investment by companies such as CATL and Gotion to secure battery supply in the near term, without a regulatory framework for knowledge sharing and the transfer of intellectual property.

“Without European content requirements, we just won’t learn. We’ll just be an assembly plant,” says T&E senior director Julia Poliscanova. While the new requirements in the EU’s action plan are welcome, she adds that “timelines are not clear, despite the urgency”.

The pressure for more collaboration between Europe and China has become stronger since the Trump administration unleashed sweeping tariffs against America’s global trading partners, roiling financial markets and jeopardising deeply interconnected supply chains. 

Top EU officials fear the US levies will be a double blow for Europe’s carmakers — reducing their exports to the US and leaving them vulnerable to a surge in Chinese vehicle exports to Europe in the face of overcapacity in China.

But Brussels is also partly responsible for the industry’s travails. Its imposition of sanctions on Russia after the invasion of Ukraine left European industry without access to cheap gas and facing soaring energy prices.


In the early 2020s, as Covid-19 ravaged supply chains and reduced demand, the EU formulated and implemented rules setting out an ambitious emissions reduction road map culminating in a ban on new combustion engine car sales by 2035.

Progress towards adoption of electric cars has been slow because of their high upfront cost and consumer concerns about charging infrastructure. The rules were eased last month to give carmakers more flexibility in meeting overall emissions targets in the coming three years.

Chinese-made cars are cheaper, but Brussels has imposed a 45 per cent tariff on them, arguing that Chinese manufacturers have benefited unfairly from generous state subsidies.

In response, BYD and Chery have announced plans to build factories at sites in Hungary and Spain, while Leapmotor has partnered with Stellantis — owner of Peugeot, Fiat, Opel and other brands — to expand sales in Europe.

Beijing has always denied providing unfair or illegal support for its industries, but China’s economic planners have long viewed transport electrification as a key means to reduce dependence on imported oil and gas.

Ilaria Mazzocco, an expert on Chinese industry with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a US think-tank, wrote in a recent policy brief that “it is difficult to distinguish where subsidies end and innovation begins”. She added that “even outside of China, the state is beginning to play a far more active role in supporting strategic industries”.

The CSIS estimates official state support for the EV industry at $230.9bn between 2009 and 2023. Though experts caution that subsidies are notoriously difficult to calculate given the many forms of implicit support for companies.

Falck, the Einride founder, believes China is in some ways “fiercely more market liberal” than Europe due to the vigorous competition between domestic players. More than 60 companies are fighting for a share of the Chinese EV market, although almost 80 per cent of sales are soaked up by 10 Chinese companies — including around 27 per cent by BYD.

“Europe tends to see China as the big red machine that controls everything,” he says. “But the most successful companies coming out of China are built by entrepreneurs.”

He adds that while Europe has the technology to compete in areas such as autonomous vehicles, it also has many structures and processes in place that make it difficult for companies to deploy and scale the technology as quickly as their Chinese competitors.

Western companies that once worried about intellectual property theft when doing business in China are now finding that their counterparties have similar concerns.

Executives in the sector say Beijing is pushing for assurances that technology developed in China will not make its way to Europe as a result of co-operation deals. Two people familiar with the matter told the FT last month that Chinese officials are also delaying approval for a BYD manufacturing plant in Mexico amid concerns that the company’s smart car technology could leak across the border to the US.

There is also a risk that Chinese-made components, systems and software within European-made cars could cause issues if those vehicles are then exported to the US.

Elisa Hoerhager, Beijing-based chief representative in China for the Federation of German Industries (BDI), says the US-China “decoupling saga” could ultimately mean western companies are forced to choose between access to the US market and their research and development efforts in China. “That is definitely a squeeze that German companies are feeling,” she says.

Despite the rising geopolitical temperature, industry executives say Brussels and Beijing will need to find a way to work with each other, given that the Europeans need to improve their competitiveness and the Chinese need new markets to soak up their domestic overcapacity.

Stefan Borgas, chief executive of London-listed RHI Magnesita, the world’s biggest producer of the industrial ceramics widely used in vehicle supply chains, says industry “suffered more in Europe than in the US and therefore, the realisation [for the need to work with China] is faster.”

FT : Carmakers and parts suppliers fight over punitive tariff costs

Carmakers and parts suppliers fight over punitive tariff costs
Clash comes as car companies hold crunch talks with Trump to head off 25% import tariffs

Global auto parts suppliers have entered a bruising pricing battle with carmakers as they seek to survive prohibitive tariffs that could wipe out thousands of smaller players from the $1tn industry. 

The clash comes as car manufacturers are also holding crunch talks with Donald Trump to dissuade him from pushing ahead with 25 per cent tariffs on the majority of imported car parts from May 3.

The US president signalled on Monday that there would be “help” for the industry but details remain unclear on how the parts tariffs will be implemented.

Jean-Louis Pech, head of French trade body Fiev representing car parts suppliers, said its members were “bracing themselves for tough negotiations with carmakers who are also under pressure”, adding: “It’s going to be a terrible fight.”

French car parts supplier Valeo earlier this month said it had successfully agreed to pass on the extra costs from tariffs to half of its customers, but one global car company said it was standing firm against price increase requests from its 150 suppliers, among whom asked for a contractual pause known as “force majeure”.

“We’re not against each other, but we’re both in tough spots,” a senior executive at the car company said.

Executives warn that carmakers will probably resist attempts by many parts suppliers, already operating on thin margins below 5 per cent, to pass on the tariff costs amid concerns about a possible recession and sluggish vehicle demand.

Most parts supply contracts do not automatically allow car parts contractors to pass on costs to clients, with more than half of those surveyed by EU trade body Clepa and McKinsey saying they would have to renegotiate contracts to adapt to the tariffs.

In Europe, the industry had already been under severe financial pressure long before the trade war broke out due to slowing vehicle demand. Job losses more than doubled last year while several German suppliers, including seat producer Recaro and luxury car part maker Walter Klein, went bankrupt.

To support the industry, Pech called for Brussels to put in place more local content rules on car parts, subsidies for EV purchases and an investment programme akin to Joe Biden’s IRA.

“We risk losing half of the existing [French] industry if nothing is done in the next five years,” said Pech, adding that France had 56,000 jobs linked to car parts.

The impact of the tariff shock on the sector could be worse than during the pandemic, warn executives. The relationship between suppliers and their clients then became strained, as carmakers refused to fully absorb the soaring costs of securing components, especially semiconductors, which were in extremely short supply.

Most suppliers struggled with squeezed profit margins, while carmakers — especially premium brands such as Mercedes-Benz and BMW — raised prices and expanded their margins during the period.

“We can’t absorb the costs again,” one executive at a German supplier said.

“If things stay as they are now, [bankruptcies] will be part of the picture: suppliers can either absorb the cost or lose market share,” said Benjamin Krieger, Clepa’s secretary-general. 

French car parts maker OPmobility has been hit by recent decisions by Stellantis and other carmakers to suspend production at sites such as Mexico and Canada to import cars to the US.

“When a client like Stellantis stops, we have no choice but to stop,” chief executive Laurent Favre said.

Compared with Europe, automotive experts say consolidation among Japan’s parts contractors has been held back by the corporate keiretsu network founded on cross-shareholdings with the likes of Toyota and Honda at the centre.

Toyota has informed suppliers that it will shoulder the extra cost of tariffs, according to two people familiar with the matter, although some parts suppliers question how long the group can continue providing the support.

Japanese auto parts suppliers are under pressure with bankruptcies hitting an 11-year high of 36 companies in 2024, according to data from Tokyo Shoko Research.

Hideki Takamiya, president of mobility solutions at Starlite, an Osaka-based grille supplier to Mazda, Nissan and Mitsubishi Motors, highlighted the fears rippling through supplier ranks. 

He forecast a 10 per cent drop in sales from the tariffs on finished cars alone and a potential “double punch” from a stronger yen for Japanese exports.

“I want to say that we can turn this risk into an opportunity but there’s no opportunities here, just risks,” he said. “If we don’t strike new balanced partnerships between car and parts makers, then we won’t survive.”

>>> US After Hours Summary: UAL +5.7% higher on earnings; IBKR -6.3% lower on ea

After Hours Summary: UAL +5.7% higher on earnings; IBKR -6.3% lower on earnings despite 4-for-1 split and dividend hike; ICAD +73.1% to be acquired; CVGW +2.7% as CEO bought shares

After Hours Gainers:

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: TTGT +7.5%, UAL +5.7% (also reducing flight schedule), FULT +2.6%, HWC +0.6%

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to news: ICAD +73.1% (RDNT to acquire ICAD), CVGW +2.7% (CEO bought 21070 shares at $23.73 worth ~$500K), DGNX +2.3% (forms strategic alliance with AIKYA to launch diginexESG in Malaysia), ARWR +1% (names new CFO), NPWR +0.6% (COO and CFO to leave company; names new COO), CRDF +0.3% (completes enrollment in Phase 2 CRDF-004 Trial), CPB +0.2% (names new President of Snacks division), LAD +0.1% (COO to leave co)

After Hours Losers:

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: IBKR -6.3% (also announces 4-for-1 stock split; also increases dividend), JBHT -5.5%, OMC -3.4%

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to news: TARA -4.1% (names new CMO), SMLR -4.1% (files $500 mln mixed shelf securities offering), NVDA -3.7% (expects Q1 results to include up to $5.5 bln of charges associated with H20 products), CALM -2.8% (files for 6,322,470 share offering by selling shareholders; also secondary offering by founder's family and concurrent share repurchase of up to $50 mln), NUTX -2.5% (files for offering by selling shareholders; relates to warrants), RDNT -2% (RDNT to acquire ICAD), CYH -0.8% (to sell ownership interest in Texas medical center for $460 mln), IPG -0.7% (names first-ever Global Chief AI Officer), AAPL -0.4% (VP of western Europe to leave, according to Bloomberg)