By on July 14, 2018

Ram HD production Saltillo assembly, Image: FCA

The U.S. Commerce Department wants automakers to whisper in its ear. And by whisper, we mean fill out a 34-page questionnaire detailing all their secrets — the nitty gritty of product planning, suppliers, and finances not already disclosed in public filings — under threat of financial penalty or imprisonment.

As one would assume, this latest chapter in the Commerce Department’s investigation into the possibility that imported autos pose a national security threat to the U.S. isn’t going over well.

“The breadth and depth of this request is invasive, requiring massive amounts of proprietary and confidential business data from global operations — all under the pretense of national security,” Gloria Bergquist, spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, told Bloomberg. The Alliance represents several unnamed automakers who received the questionnaire.

“Frankly, it’s stunning from an administration committed to getting government out of the way of business,” Bergquist said.

The Trump administration kicked off the investigation to determine whether tariffs are needed on imported vehicles and parts. Automakers protested the threatened 25-percent tariff, claiming U.S. consumers would face steep price hikes in the wake of any new import levy. Even vehicles built in the U.S., like the Toyota Camry, stand to see a not-inconsequential MSRP boost.

Many see the threats as Trump’s way of forcing the European Union to back off its own 10 percent import tariffs on foreign autos.

To automakers that received the questionnaire, however, the more immediate issue is the discomfort that comes from spilling your secrets. From Bloomberg:

The Trump administration wants such things as how much each company’s research budget goes to specific areas such as autonomous driving, electric drive, connected vehicles, and lightweight technology. The questionnaire also seeks a list of suppliers for major vehicles systems and where they’re located.

The Trump administration also wants details about company business plans from now until 2020. One section of the questionnaire asked for plans for every global plant, requiring the companies to reveal whether the plants will be expanded, contracted, modernized, or closed. The administration also asked the companies for explanations about why they manufacture in foreign trade zones.

The survey also asks if imports hurt sales, profits or margins. And it directly asks, “How has import competition affected your U.S. manufacturing operations, sales, employment, planned expansions, investments, etc. with respect to the production of passenger cars, light trucks, SUVs and vans from 2013 to Q2 2018.”

Former Commerce Department chief economist Susan Helper said that, in the past, such questionnaires usually targeted the defence industry.

“I can see both sides on this — it is burdensome for companies, but on the other hand it’s important for policy makers to understand global supply chains as they have an increasing impact on the U.S. economy,” she said.

A hearing scheduled for this coming Thursday in Washington will see 45 industry representatives testify in front of the Commerce Department. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has until February to conclude the investigation and issue a recommendation to Trump.

[Image: Fiat Chrysler Automobiles]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

66 Comments on “Feds to Big Auto: Spill It...”


  • avatar
    TwoBelugas

    With companies like Geely Volvo, GM and Toyota increasing relying on cars entirely built in and imported from places like China, Turkey, etc, the automakers can’t really say their technology and suppliers will be secure in the coming years.

  • avatar
    TW5

    Automakers don’t want NAFTA to be renegotiated. They don’t want to invest in the NAFTA zone, nor do they want their business partners to invest in the NAFTA zone. They like the trade deficit and low tariffs. It makes their products artificially cheap, and the corresponding capital account surplus bolsters their stock value.

    These people also begged taxpayers to bail them out 10 years ago. Now they are begging politicians in DC to burn political capital reforming CAFE 2025 because none of them have a viable plan to increase fuel economy by 60% in 7 years.

    Frankly, it’s stunning the administration waited this long to put their heads in a vice. I guess the admin thought automakers would come to their senses autonomously.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      TW5,
      What is of national security importance?

      The Soviets had “cultural” advisors to protect their national security.

      Irrespective of what business does if it has no impact on the running of government/society it is none of anyones business.

      Is the American family to small? Is this a national security issue? Comments negative and questioning the President, are the national security issues?

      Or, poor health, disparity, lack of retraining/education a bigger national issue?

      Trump and his goons are really going to far. This needs to stop.

      • 0 avatar
        Peter Gazis

        Big Al from Oz

        Not that much retraining is required for a worker to go from building Ford Tauruses to building Ford Explorers.

        Its not like going from building Holden Commodores to working in a mine.

      • 0 avatar
        TW5

        @ BAfO

        One thing that needs to stop is US Dollar hoarding by mercantilists in Asia and Europe. The other thing that needs to stop is your inability to understand the basics of international trade.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          TW5,
          Where did lots of this money come from?

          QE pumped $80 billion with cheap interest rates pumped trillions of dollars into the economy. Lots was invested in riskier markets, some ended up in other places.

          Oh, by the way the low interest rates and massive QE was currency manipulation by the US to make its wares more attractive for investment.

          I think you really are unable to adequately digest and comprrhend what has occurred. This is why you lash out with such bullsh!t.

          When you can’t understand something you tend to fear it.

          Are you insecure?

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            @ BAfO

            As I have explained before, the trade deficit begat the federal deficit. In fact, we were on the verge of running surpluses before China blew a hole in our current account with their aggressive currency peg.

            This is not that difficult. No matter how big the US current account deficit or how bad the US economy becomes, our trading “partners” hoard dollars and continue looting.

            There is a long standing tradition of blaming the US for their looting. First it was our oil imports. So we eliminated them. Then it was our imbecilic world wide repatriation tax. So we repealed it.

            They will always find something. The president has a bad haircut or America pollutes too much or gun rights or bad, and no matter what they say there is 100% certitude you will fall for it.

            Mercantilism destroys human society and gives rise to colonialism and territorial domination. Your love of mercantilism is as deadly as a heroine habit. Wake up.

  • avatar
    Oberkanone

    F off Feds

  • avatar
    Sub-600

    “Burdensome”? It was burdensome for the public to bail these vampires (and their ghoulish union) out too. As far as risk to their intellectual property goes, the Chicoms already have the blueprints. They’ve got 9 out 10 people driving trucks and CUVs that they don’t need, which is a license to print money, and they want to build them overseas. Fill out the forms and stop crying. They didn’t mind paperwork when Barry Hussein Obama was throwing tax money at them like birdseed.

    • 0 avatar
      TwoBelugas

      30 years after Roger and Me we finally have a president that is doing tangible things to bring car production back to the States, and of course Michael Moore hates the president.

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      Sub, W started the bailout with bridge loans to the automakers. Before the bridge loans to the Big 3, everyone, and I mean everyone, took gubmint money for hybrids. The bailouts have been debated on here ad nausea-um (sic). I think the recession would’ve have turned into a true depression w/o the bailouts. Think billions being spent by auto companies whose suppliers in return supply parts to ALL of the auto companies. A failure of one auto company would’ve caused many parts manufactures to fail. Circle back to one one parts company supplying man manufactures. You do not provide any facts on how the auto manufactures were vampires or the UAW is ghoulish. Some advice: we used to have industry insiders and, as you imply, dirty UAW members contributing in here. Baseless vitriolic like yours does not make them want to comment more. Tens if not hundreds of thousands of pages documentation go into the specifications, manufacturing logistics, and supply of building a modern automobile; not “blueprints”. You state that 90% of us are” driving trucks and CUVs that they don’t need”. I’ll go with your statistics(?). “which is a license to print money”. How odd, a company in a capitalistic country striving to make a profit. Most of the NA market trucks are made in America; apologies to DeadWeight about hecho in Mexico Silverados/Rams, they re huge profit generators for their manufacturers. Subcompacts not so much. Since Breitbart doen’t offer any course in logic, may I humbly suggest a local community college? Ford had literally mortgaged the Blue Oval on their Dearborn HQ, GM, more oft-discussed issue on here, paid back their loans, and FIAT had to buy a certain amount of Chrysler to get get it for free. Pleas feel free to correct me on that MOPAR fans. So yeah, we all look forward to your next not well thought and not very effective political rant. BTW, Obama got elected. Twice.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        you can’t argue with people like him. they’re absolutely convinced they know more about industries and other countries than the people who actually work and live there simply because they think their favorite propaganda outlets… er, I mean “news” sources… are giving them the absolute truth.

        it’s like a guy who has barely spent a few days in my state trying to tell me what things are like in Detroit because he once talked to a guy from somewhere in Oakland county.

      • 0 avatar
        Sub-600

        How odd, el scroto, companies in a capitalistic country being bailed out by a socialist ponce using taxpayer money.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    Nationalism. Hmmmmm. Big Brother?

    US freedom?

    And when they get this infomation Trump can put it on Twitter.

  • avatar
    pdog_phatpat

    Gee, if it looks like bait, reads like bait and smells like bait….
    Seriously, baiting the easy into politics and bashing each other on a car site and then complaining about having to do some housekeeping. You people deserve each other because this DEFINITELY aint no car site. Wheres that gawker media tag, its gotta be around here somewhere.
    Pathetic.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I am inclined to agree. Pray tell dear editors, why so political?

      • 0 avatar
        kvndoom

        Guaranteed clicks (and ad serves). The birther echo chamber will never miss a chance to spew their “Kenyan” “Hussein” “socialist” crap every chance they get. Anywhere their Obama Derangement Syndrome can be medicated with confirmation bias, they congregate like flies on feces.

        • 0 avatar
          pdog_phatpat

          Thats funny, because I’m seeing both sides equally spouting off the usual lies mixed with slight truths. Echo chamber huh? Ever been to a gawker media site? Might be more your speed.

          • 0 avatar
            kvndoom

            I don’t know how long you’ve been around this site but it was never as bad as it has gotten over the past 3 years or so.

            I didn’t vote for Obama either time. He’s gone, I’m over it. But somehow at least two articles every week on TTAC wind up with comments full of Obama-this and Obama-that. Once upon a time people discussed cars here. Or maybe it was my imagination.

            But when you look at the number of comments per article, it’s easy to tell which ones get the most ads served.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      The political discussion on this site used to be original.

      Now it’s 80% repetition of Fox News/Breitbart and 20% mad liberals responding repetitiously to repetition of Fox News/Breitbart.

      So I’ve pretty much stopped participating in any political topics.

  • avatar
    gmichaelj

    You know what would be “Truth”?

    Seeing the questionnaire.

    Otherwise, we are just taking the word of the Spin Doctors.

    • 0 avatar
      Funky

      gmichaelj; There’s a link to the survey in the referenced Bloomberg article. Also, some additional information regarding the agency who is conducting the survey can be found here: https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/other-areas/office-of-technology-evaluation-ote/industrial-base-assessments

      • 0 avatar
        gmichaelj

        Thank you, I’ll check it out.

      • 0 avatar
        gmichaelj

        So after looking at the questionnaire, it doesn’t look to me like anything close to onerous or invasive. The deepest look to my eyes is asking about Cost of Good Sold by Category. This is not exactly a rectal examination. No company formula of secret sauce will be exposed.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    The one thing that every American, left, right, center, independent should agree on…whomever and of whatever ideology if they care about the fundamental’structure, health and future of America (and our allies)….

    …is that the United States must create a new alliance, with Germany, Japan, South Korea, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, the UK, France, Canada, Spain, Italy, Poland, Australia, Mexico, and others, to complete undercut the ability of China to continue to steal intellectual, military, manufacturing and other proprietary technology, through its unilateral forced Joint Venture State Owned Enterprise system (forcing non-Chinese companies to take on what are essentially Chinese entities that are literal units of the Chinese Government), thus allowing easy theft of technology, processes, and other proprietary information, just to be able to access the Chinese domestic consumer and business market.

    It is imperative that this alliance also insist that China lower any and all tariffs to equivalent reciprocal levels with any trading nation, and in the case of sectors where China attempts to claim that there are national security grounds for imposing higher reciprocal tariffs and/or subsidies, in order to protect and foster domestic nascent industry, that there are legitimate grounds for doing so, from a reasonably prudent person perspective, on par with other trading partners stated cases, as adjudged by a truly independent and multinational organization that shall hear and adjudicate such claims (again, however, the mandated Chinese joint venture partner system must cease immediately and forever).

    Some will claim that what I’ve stated is antagonistic in a way that begs for an inevitable military confrontation with China.

    On the contrary, my plan is aimed at staving off any military confrontation, which is the path that global trade (and Americans trade, in particular) with China has now set us on, and which should be avoided at all costs.

    The world can no longer afford the patently unfair, one-sided, incredibly destructive trade arrangements, and imposed conditions, that China has now engaged in and insisted on, for 30 some years, to the detriment of its trade partners, which has allowed it to massively subsidize its military expansion and other infrastructure build-out, at the direct adverse cost to its trading partners.

    China can not be, and should not be stopped from being an aggressive competitor in the global economy, nor somehow prevented from growing itself wealthier and stronger, but that endeavor must be now pursued fairly, based on its meritocratic ability, and not through theft and cheating, with roughly reciprocal trade policies in place with its trade partners, and it should no longer be conferred the incredibly unfair and preferential treatment that it has enjoyed with major trade partners, especially, since the 80s and 90s.

    Also, to those foreign corporations that invested trillions in building out factories, facilities, plant and capital in China for 30-some years, they should not be allowed to cry foul in the event that trade negotiations continue to deteriorate, thus adversely impacting their Chinese operations and revenue streams; they should now be compelled to face what was a Faustian bargain that they voluntarily entered into with China, as sophisticated entities, and suffer the consequences of what might be their imprudent and unwise interjection of capital into the Chinese mainland.

    • 0 avatar
      Peter Gazis

      @DeadWeight

      I love the U.S. but Asia has really kicked our butts. From Korea to Vietnam to Afghanistan. We really haven’t had a real victory there since WWII. Maybe we should let China have it. Focus our attention on building capitalism, freedom and democracy in South America and Africa. I mean we may have put a man on the moon, but China is building a Superhighway through the middle east. Obviously they are the better nation.

    • 0 avatar
      TW5

      Our old allies are mostly useless. With a few exceptions, they have a propensity to side with our competitors and enemies.

      China can have our old useless allies. If China doesn’t reform, we need to cut off China’s access to US consumers, cut them out of BRIC, and then isolate them from global energy supplies. We aren’t going to make that happen being friends with Western Europe or mercantilists in East Asia. We need Eastern Europe, Western Asia, and the Americas.

      Australia and Canada are the former allies we need to keep in our sphere of influence. Maybe the UK can help, but they seem pretty far gone.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    p.s. -‘Who are most nations going to want to be with – a U.S. that has elections’and temporary presidents, senators and congressional reps, and still has an open society with liberal rights of speech, business, etc (on relative scale) – or a China with an oppressive regime and a newly crowned and installed Premier for life with unlimited powers?

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Or the EU?

      Don’t discount the EU since Trump has arrived more bias of democratic nations is turning that direction, not China.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        The EU is far more suspicious of China, for the same reasons the U.S. now is (and many other nations -‘Chinese government is most aggressive enabler of corporate and military espionage of any government), than of the U.S., and whatever one’s opinion of current U.S. administration, it changes every 4 to 8 years.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    p.s.’x2′ – the commie ti g/edit function on TTAC has been FUBAR for at least a week now.

    FIX IT FTLOATIH.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    …“Frankly, it’s stunning from an administration committed to getting government out of the way of business…

    They only want government out when it comes to keeping our air clean. If they can butt in to further their cause then its all ok.

  • avatar
    brn

    I call BS. We’re not getting the whole story, just sensationalist garbage to get us riled up. Some of this the feds can demand, much of it would require a court order.

  • avatar
    Zipster

    Deadwood:

    A rather persuasive proposal, it has some of the same attributes as OPEC and like OPEC, it would be subject to considerable cheating. With all the controversy, I am still looking for an analytical and comprehensive explanation of what is actually occurring with reference to the Chinese trade issues. They must be out there, but the mainstream media, including the Times does not delve into it with any depth and without a fairly through rendering, I am not certain what to believe.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    DeadWeight–I agree, we need to ally ourselves with other countries and confront China. Tariffs and trade issues can be worked out with the EU,Mexico, and Canada but not threatening others with 25% tariffs before we enter negotiations. We first should make an alliance on intellectual theft and then negotiate on tariffs. The 25% Chicken tax on trucks is one of those taxes that the EU and Asia want to see repealed but we should get tariffs from other counties lowered or eliminated. I do agree with Trump that we have gotten the worst end of trade but I don’t believe that Trump’s method of negotiations will work–maybe his methods work in business but not in the political realm. Better to go in negotiations with other countries and use threatens if those negotiations fail.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Business or politics, there’s just one way to confront bullies. So if you bring cream pie, you’d better be prepared to use it.

      But the EU can’t complain about the Chicken tax, while having a Chicken tax of their own.

      Or can they? Nothing surprises me anymore, but Trump can only trust every nation to screw the US for their own interests. Or should the US just rollover and keep taking it?

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Jeff,
      Trump had no strategy on how to execute the changes he wants. No strategy equals no plan.

      I do believe Trump has no understanding how to use Presidential authority responsibly as well.

      Most of the issues Trump is challenging are connected and required a plan with priorities. Because, as each issue is resolved would impact how to resolve the next issue.

      Trump biggest failure is his inability to collaborate with all. He doesn’t have the best minds, he’s also remove lots of experience from the Departments that advise him.

      Trump has really created a mess for the US and jobs have already been shed.

      As I pointed out the businesses and jobs lost will be taken up by other nations.

      The increase in the costs of goods will be bourne by the US tax payer and a further loss of US being competitive with exports.

      Trumps legacy will negatively affect the US for a while now. The opportunities lost are not measurable. Other nations will take time to become comfortable dealing with the US.

      I believe when Trump hit the speed bump of failure he will blame all around him. He’s a sh!t of a human and sick.

      This article shows Trump is grabbing at straws as he has failed. He failed to realise multilateralism works, which was the basis for US power and influence.

      I think its quite sad to see the US as it is now. Maybe the US will learn from Trump on what not to do.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    DenverMike–Have you ever heard of “walk softly and carry a big stick?” That is what Teddy Roosevelt said and what it means is that you don’t make a lot of noise and threaten first. Did I say to carry a cream pie? Trump makes all these threats before he even negotiates. As for the Chicken Tax it should only be brought up when negotiating for eliminating the EU Chicken Taxes. You assumed that I said that it should be eliminated before negotiations begin. You completely twisted what I stated. Maybe you should be in politics.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    You make the elimination of the Chicken Tax contingent upon the elimination of their chicken taxes and if they welsh on the agreement then the Chicken Tax will be reinstated. First off the negotiation should start with that we want to renegotiate the tariff agreements. If a country does not like our tariffs and they have higher tariffs then we will raise our tariffs to equal theirs but you do not start negotiating with a threat.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      The US is facing “tit for tat” retaliatory tariffs. It amounts to playground sand throwing, hair pulling, and “He Started it!”.

      I don’t recall Trump starting off with “threats”. He simply raised US tariffs on steal and aluminum. Europe and others immediately came in with threats following US policy changes.

      Even if Trump “started it” with threats out_of_nowhere, it doesn’t change the facts. The US shouldn’t have to be forced to accept whatever other nations “feel” is fair.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        “Even if Trump “started it” with threats out_of_nowhere, it doesn’t change the facts. The US shouldn’t have to be forced to accept whatever other nations “feel” is fair.”

        Coincidentally, I’m sure those other nations don’t feel they should have to be forced to accept whatever the US “feels” is fair.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          If a country “feels” they’re owed a prohibitive, 400% more in auto tariffs, than the reasonable amount you charge them (their automakers), for whatever reason, OK let’s hear the reason.

          And with a huge imbalance of which way autos flow, switching to a fair/balanced 2.5% in each direction should cost the EU (and EU automakers) virtually zero, no downside at the start. Or ever, depending on who you ask, especially because of various (remaining) underhanded EU non-tariff barriers.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Jeff,
      The way in which thes tariffs work is to force nations/trading blocs into FTAs.

      This is Trump’s problem, he wants to deal with countries on an individual basis. If this were to occur you would have different standards of trade between supposedly equal trading partners.

      The US or EU just can’t change their tariffs. The EU and US need a FTA.

      The chicken tax now is aimed at Asian producers. The EU really isn’t a threat to the US with pickups.

      People here still focus on tariffs when technical barriers are as big an issue.

      Many UNECE nations allow US vehicles in, but the US refuses to allow UNECE vehicles on its roads.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        @BAFO – Nope, UNECE autos are never refused from US roads, after minor/easy changes and a small tariff.
        Even cheap VWs and Fiats are imported into the US effectively and of course, profitably.

        But I agree “technical barriers” can be worse than tariffs, like taxing by engine size, fuel consumption, CO2, or consumers trained to buy diesel offerings in every segment.

        The Chicken tax was never aimed at Asian producers, but they’ve adapted perfectly and build in the US and Mexico, along with Asian autos also built in North America, yet without any kind of “Chicken tax” held against them.

        Any country can change/lower their tariffs, yes including the EU, with or without a FTA.

        So suddenly you love tariffs, as longs as they’re aimed at the US?

  • avatar
    el scotto

    The government wants the auto companies to provide information that is only known to a few, pick a number, company insiders. No, Sergio’s blatherings don’t count. Could GM legally be based in South Korea? Anyway, we know this data would go in a big government computer and those never get hacked. Right?

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      el scotto,
      The Big 3 do work for US military. So I would assume the government has all they require already.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        I mean they (GM) supplies engines for the JLTV (new HMMWV), which is built by Oskosh and Chrysler was in early on the Abrams, but it isn’t like WW2 when Ford and Willy’s were cranking out Jeeps. Outside of the GOV’s in the motorpool and supying power trains to the big Defense
        Players like GD, and some occasional work for DARPA, they aren’t really big players here anymore.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        I like you Al. You are at least generally well informed even if you and I live on opposite sides of the fence. Should you ever find yourself in Huntsville you let me know and I’ll buy you a good local brew and we can talk of cars and chickens.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          I’m heading over to Miami in 6 weeks to visit some friends and go diving in the Keys. Then I’m off to the Pacific NW to chase salmon.

          As for opposite sides of the fence? I don’t know. In the US I would vote Rep, but when your team is a fnck up you need to be heard.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        That and you seem to not give a crap about what folks think. I too feel the same and as such, you have my grudging respect.

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    IMHO, Chrysler and GM have no leg to stand on. You took Uncle Sugar’s money so… Ford and the Transplants? Id support them in telling the Govt. To pound sand.

  • avatar
    Weskyvet

    I remember a time when I could come here and read about cars without being lectured on politics and why this liberal policy was better than this conservative policy…

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Me too and I often feel the same. However go back over the course of last week and review the articles. Most were about some phenomenal cars and they capped out around 30 responses. Then look at the ones about Trump/NAFTA/NATO/etc. I don’t like it, but I’m a capatilist and they have to keep the lights on. Look at it like the Macaan and Cayenne…crap, but they keep the 911 and the Boxster line running so ya tolerate it. Welcome to 2018 where even taking a massive dump is somehow political.

      • 0 avatar
        Weskyvet

        They get those impressive numbers because they spark argument between the parties. Look above you have conservatives saying Trump is doing the right thing and then you have liberals saying he is destroying the world. Talking politics is always a recipe for huge comment numbers and a sure bet for a few verbal knife fights breaking out in the comment section.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Which begs the question…why no articles on Trump’s cars. I remember something about one of his Links on Craigslist but he was quite the Rolls enthusiast and went through a Ferrari phase if I recall. That should bring the clicks in.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Hey, be nice to each other in the comment section, keep it at least relevant and no dog whistle blowing.

    Now excuse me while I blow this dog whistle, sit back, and watch the comment section blow up.

    I almost miss Bertel at this point.

    Almost.

    • 0 avatar
      Maxb49

      What happened to this website? Where are to the original authors? Where are the original regulars? What happened to the discussions about models, mechanics, road tests?

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        Well I believe Farago has sold off a couple of websites and now owns the sort of cars the rest of us schmucks argue about on here. And I wouldn’t try to steal one given the subject matter of his last venture…He owns a lot of those as well.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Big Al–Ideally a Free Trade Agreement but if the US cannot reach one then at least have reciprocal tariffs. The US in the past has not negotiated Free Trade Agreements and has gotten the short end of the stick. I agree with Trump that these trade deals should be renegotiated but I don’t agree with his approach. It would be better to have no tariffs across the board but that most likely will never happen. Each country wants to protect their market. In the case of China it is more than just free trade, it is the theft of technology.

    Denver Mike brings up a valid point about the technical barriers especially the EU countries have on vehicles.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • markf: The comments seem to be mostly right on. 3 year subscription fits in with the lease and expected reliability....
  • David Dennis: Here in Costa Rica, the super-durable SUV is pretty much the ideal car because much of driving is done...
  • Crosley: It was to comply with CAFE nonsense. A gear swap is absurdly cheap and is how they should have come from the...
  • tankinbeans: Shows how much I know. I figured it at least ticks the impractical box. Personally I just find the...
  • DenverMike: Double Vanos. But if you can’t drive the balls off it, why do it?

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber