Republican Hopeful Donald Trump Threatens Ford With Tariffs Over Mexico

by Cameron Aubernon

Published: June 18th, 2015

republican hopeful donald trump threatens ford with tariffs over mexico

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)

#CapitalInvestments #DonaldTrump #Ford #Mexico #NAFTA #NorthAmericanFreeTradeAgreement #POTUS2016 #PunitiveTariffs

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 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.

Like Reply
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.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

28-Cars-Later “1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in “advanced” countries....It would be better to dump the whole stinking system and take the consequences”― Theodore J. Kaczynski, Ph.D., Industrial Society and Its Future, 1995.
FreedMike "Automotive connectivity has clearly been a net negative for the end user..."Really? Here's a list of all the net negatives for me:1) Instead of lugging around a road atlas or smaller maps that do nothing but distract me from driving, and don't tell me where to go once I've reached Point B, I can now just ask my car's navigation system to navigate me there. It'll even tell me how long it will take given current traffic conditions. 2) Instead of lugging around a box of a dozen or so cassette tapes that do nothing but distract me from driving, I can now just punch up a virtually endless library of music, podcasts, or audiobooks on the screen, push a button, and play them. 3) I can tell my car, "call (insert name here)" and the call is made without taking my hands off the wheel.4) I can tell my car, "text (insert name here)" and the system takes my dictation, sends me the text, and reads off any replies. 5) I can order up food on my screen, show up at the restaurant, and they'll have it waiting for me. 6) I can pull up a weather map that allows me to see things like hailstorms in my path. 7) If I'm in trouble, I can push a "SOS" button and help will be sent. 8) Using my phone, I can locate my car on a map and navigate to it on foot, and tell it to turn on the heat, A/C, or defrosters.None of these are benefits? Sorry, not sorry...I like them all. Why wouldn't I? Consumers clearly also like this stuff, and if they didn't, none of it would be included in cars. Now, maybe Matt doesn't find these to be beneficial. Fair enough! But he should not declare these things as a "net negative" for the rest of us. That's presumption. So...given all that, what's the answer here? Matt seems to think the answer is to "unplug" and go back to paper maps, boxes of music, and all that. Again, if that's Matt's bag, then fair enough. I mean, I've been there, and honestly, I don't want to go back, but if that's his bag, then go with God, I guess. But this isn't the solution for everyone, and saying otherwise is presumption. Here's a solution that DOES work for everyone: instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, clean the bathwater. You do that very, very simply: require clear, easy-to-understand disclosure of data sharing that happens as the result of all these connected services, and an equally clear, easy-to-understand method for opting out of said data sharing. That works better than turning the clock back to those thrilling days of 1990 when you had to refer to handwritten notes to get you to your date's house, or ripping SIM cards out of your car.
Funky D What is the over-under for number of recalls in the first 5 years of ownership?
Normie Dayyum! Great White Woman!The car, I mean. I could feel kinda safe in it.
Slavuta "The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it; moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. " --- 1984