Republican Hopeful Donald Trump Threatens Ford With Tariffs Over Mexico

Cameron Aubernon
by Cameron Aubernon

Republican presidential hopeful and billionaire Donald Trump wants to bring the pain via punitive tariffs to Ford for manufacturing vehicles in Mexico.

During his announcement of his 2016 campaign Tuesday, The Detroit News says Trump vowed he would levy a 35 percent tariff on Ford parts and vehicles imported from Mexico if the automaker presses forward with a $2.5 billion investment in the nation, claiming the move would “take away thousands” of jobs from American workers.

Trump then proceeded to roleplay how he would deliver the “bad news” to “the head of Ford,” CEO Mark Fields:

Let me give you the bad news: every car, every truck and every part manufactured in this plant that comes across the border, we’re going to charge you a 35 percent tax — OK? — and that tax is going to be paid simultaneously with the transaction. They are going to take away thousands of jobs.

Announced in April, the $2.5 billion investment would add 3,800 jobs to the 11,300 already employed by Ford in Mexico, and would include new engine and transmission plants aimed toward the export market in the United States and other global markets.

Trump continued on with his roleplay, stating Ford would use lobbyist power to persuade “President Trump” to drop the tax, only for him to sandbag the automaker into submission. He added he knew Fields personally, and thought Ford was a good company overall.

In response, spokeswoman Christin Baker reiterated Ford’s investments into its home market:

We are proud that we have invested $6.2 billion in our U.S. plants since 2011 and hired nearly 25,000 U.S. employees. Overall, 80 percent of our North American investment annually is in the U.S., and 97 percent of our North American engineering is conducted in the U.S.

Of course, Trump wouldn’t be legally able to punish Ford for building its plants wherever it wanted, let alone single-out Ford with his plan without also doing the same to General Motors and FCA (how he would deal with Fiat owning Chrysler would be a whole other round of metaphors and hyperbole altogether).

At least one thing is for certain in Trump’s campaigning thus far: the dead cat on his head is actually his hair.

(Photo credit:Gage Skidmore/ Flickr/ CC BY-SA 2.0)

Cameron Aubernon
Cameron Aubernon

Seattle-based writer, blogger, and photographer for many a publication. Born in Louisville. Raised in Kansas. Where I lay my head is home.

More by Cameron Aubernon

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 67 comments
  • Turf3 Turf3 on Jun 19, 2015

    Never mind Trump, the real question here is whether free trade is the be-all end-all godsend that conventional wisdom says, or whether the emperor has no clothes on. I believe one should judge policies by their results. Of course it's impossible to prove causality, but do consider that the roughly 30 past years, during which free-trade-at-all-costs has become the policy of the US government (both parties, thank you very much) is the same time frame that has seen the reversal of a century-old trend of an expanding middle class in the US and a dramatic increase in income inequality. I would pose to you, furthermore, that the dramatic expansion of China's middle class has come about because their government actively supports wealth creating activities (primarily manufacturing() whereas our government seems to be actively attempting to kill US manufacturing. And finally, I would propose that the health and quality of a society is not determined by how well the richest, most successful members are doing, but rather by how well the weakest and poorest are doing. By that measure I would submit that in the United States our weakest and poorest are doing worse than they were 30 years ago, that one of the reasons (among many) is the diminution of manufacturing jobs, and that this does not bode well for the long term future of the US. Remember, there are only three ways to create wealth: make something, grow something, or dig something out of the ground. All else is just moving the wealth around.

  • Jimbob457 Jimbob457 on Jun 19, 2015

    I am a 100% supporter of Donald Trump for president - now and forever. But, then again, I have to be. I am his hairdresser. By the way, you are correct about the comb over.

  • Marc Muskrat only said what he needed to say to make the stock pop. These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along.
  • SCE to AUX I never believed they cancelled it. That idea was promoted by people who concluded that the stupid robotaxi idea was a replacement for the cheaper car; Tesla never said that.
  • 28-Cars-Later 2018 Toyota Auris: Pads front and back, K&N air filter and four tires @ 30K, US made Goodyears already seem inferior to JDM spec tires it came with. 36K on the clock.2004 Volvo C70: Somewhere between $6,5 to $8 in it all told, car was $3500 but with a wrecked fender, damaged hood, cracked glass headlight, and broken power window motor. Headlight was $80 from a yard, we bought a $100 door literally for the power window assembly, bodywork with fender was roughly a grand, brakes/pads, timing belt/coolant and pre-inspection was a grand. Roof later broke, parts/labor after two repair trips was probably about $1200-1500 my cost. Four 16in Cooper tires $62 apiece in 2022 from Wal Mart of all places, battery in 2021 $200, 6qts tranny fluid @ 20 is $120, maybe $200 in labor last year for tranny fluid change, oil change, and tire install. Car otherwise perfect, 43K on the clock found at 38.5K.1993 Volvo 244: Battery $65, four 15in Cooper tires @ $55 apiece, 4 alum 940 wheels @ roughly $45 apiece with shipping. Fixes for random leaks in power steering and fuel lines, don't remember. Needs rear door and further body work, rear door from yard in Gettysburg was $250 in 2022 (runs and drives fine, looks OK, I'm just a perfectionist). TMU, driven maybe 500 miles since re-acquisition in 2021.
  • 1995 SC I never hated these. Typical GM though. They put the wrong engine in it to start with, fixed it, and then killed it. I say that as a big fan of the aluminum 5.3, but for how they were marketing this it should have gotten the Corvette Motor at the start. Would be a nice cruiser though even with the little motor. The 5.3 without the convertible in a package meant to be used as a truck would have been great in my mind, but I suspect they'd have sold about 7 of them.
  • Rochester I'd rather have a slow-as-mud Plymouth Prowler than this thing. At least the Prowler looked cool.
Next