Jaguar Land Rover Prepares to Pay $118 Million in Emissions Fines

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky
jaguar land rover prepares to pay 118 million in emissions fines

Jaguar Land Rover is putting 90 million pounds ($118 million) into its rainy day fund in case it’s fined by the European Union for failing to meet CO2 emission-reduction targets. Delays in launching plug-in hybrid models, stalled by WLTP efficiency estimates that didn’t quite reach a best-case scenario, have left the automaker above the allotted EU fleet average of 95 grams per kilometer.

“We are not happy that we will not be compliant in 2020, but a lot of that has been taken out of our hands,” JLR CFO Adrian Mardell said during Tuesday’s quarterly earnings call with investors.

Despite COVID-19 being a popular (and possibly accurate) scapegoat for automakers facing trouble in 2020, Jaguar Land Rover doesn’t seem to be on track to hit next year’s targets either. While Mardell said the company would be EU complaint in 2021, JLR has previously expressed concerns that it might not be able to meet similarly high targets set by the United Kingdom. According to Automotive News, analysts at PA Consulting are predicting the manufacturer will miss its target of 130.6 g/km next year, finishing 2021 closer to 135 g/km, resulting in a 93 million-euro fine.

Those numbers could be improved if it manages to launch new product with the promised efficiency metrics. However, JLR also hopes to do what it can to make them a reality in Q4.

“I believe this will be a compliance quarter and we will be in credit. We are hopeful that 90 million is the worse it gets,” Mardell said. “It depends on the release of those vehicles.”

From AN:

The rollout of the plug-in hybrid Range Rover Evoque and Discovery Sport was halted after the crossovers’ stated CO2 emissions figures rose above the original amount promised when they went on sale in April.

“Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are not yet in a position to deliver the previously communicated best-case WLTP combined figures,” Land Rover said.

Land Rover previously said the Evoque P300e’s CO2 was as low as 32 grams per km and the Discovery Sport P300e was as low as of 36 g/km.

Land Rover now says the lowest emitting model records 44 g/km and has an electric range of 43 km (27 miles), compared to 66 km previously. The automaker declined to say which model reaches those levels.

While bad news for JLR, this is hardly an anomaly within the industry. Several automakers have failed to hit government targets and are preparing to shell out payments or partnering with other firms to “pool” their fleet averages on passenger vehicles — including Fiat Chrysler Automobiles and Tesla, Toyota and Mazda, and SAIC and Volkswagen.

[Image: jax10289/Shutterstock]

Join the conversation
2 of 8 comments
  • Imagefont Imagefont on Oct 29, 2020

    I’m sure the government will put the proceeds to good use. Probably spend it towards a mass transit light rail project that will take decades to complete, exemplify government waste, experience drastic cost overruns, be delayed years, be plagued with outrageous corruption and transport a fraction of the number of people predicted in the flawed study that brought it to life in the first place. And they’ll need even more money, resulting in an individual CO2 tax for every man, woman, child and pet, just for the privilege of breathing.

  • Tstag Tstag on Oct 30, 2020

    I suspect Jaguar will go fully electric within the next few years. First the XJ, then the new J pace, then the next XF and XE followed by the F pace and F type. XE will just get dropped. This would solve the issue for JLR and maybe enable them to sell their credits. Jaguar needs to do something different and this would help it to justify the investment

  • BEPLA My own theory/question on the Mark VI:Had Lincoln used the longer sedan wheelbase on the coupe - by leaning the windshield back and pushing the dashboard & steering wheel rearward a bit - not built a sedan - and engineered the car for frameless side windows (those framed windows are clunky, look cheap, and add too many vertical lines in comparison to the previous Marks) - Would the VI have remained an attractive, aspirational object of desire?
  • VoGhost Another ICEbox? Pass. Where are you going to fill your oil addiction when all the gas stations disappear for lack of demand? I want a pickup that I can actually use for a few decades.
  • Art Vandelay Best? PCH from Ventura to somewhere near Lompoc. Most Famous? Route Irish
  • GT Ross The black wheel fad cannot die soon enough for me.
  • Brett Woods My 4-Runner had a manual with the 4-cylinder. It was acceptable but not really fun. I have thought before that auto with a six cylinder would have been smoother, more comfortable, and need less maintenance. Ditto my 4 banger manual Japanese pick-up. Nowhere near as nice as a GM with auto and six cylinders that I tried a bit later. Drove with a U.S. buddy who got one of the first C8s. He said he didn't even consider a manual. There was an article about how fewer than ten percent of buyers optioned a manual in the U.S. when they were available. Visited my English cousin who lived in a hilly suburb and she had a manual Range Rover and said she never even considered an automatic. That's culture for you.  Miata, Boxster, Mustang, Corvette and Camaro; I only want manual but I can see both sides of the argument for a Mustang, Camaro or Challenger. Once you get past a certain size and weight, cruising with automatic is a better dynamic. A dual clutch automatic is smoother, faster, probably more reliable, and still allows you to select and hold a gear. When you get these vehicles with a high performance envelope, dual-clutch automatic is what brings home the numbers.