Automakers scale back EV production as incentives end, but new deals hint at rebound

Skye Jacobs

Posts: 1,912   +58
Staff
The big picture: With federal incentives ended, EV automakers are monitoring demand, recalibrating production, and weighing further adjustments amid shifting policies and renewed global competition. At the same time, newly forged trade agreements and planned industry investment suggest that some of the current downsizing may be reversed as markets adjust and manufacturers launch new models.

Electric vehicle sales surged in the United States during the third quarter, but with the expiration of federal incentives, automakers have abruptly adjusted their operations in response to changing policy and market conditions. However, industry analysts note that the mounting cutbacks in the sector may prove temporary as new models and consumer incentives change in the coming year.

General Motors, the country's second-largest seller of battery-powered vehicles behind Tesla, began paring back output at its Detroit Factory Zero plant, which produces flagship EV models such as the GMC Hummer EV, Chevrolet Silverado EV, GMC Sierra EV, and Cadillac Escalade IQ.

The assembly line, previously running around the clock on three shifts, was idled for a month and is expected to restart operations next year with only one shift – a move that will leave 1,200 assembly workers without jobs indefinitely. Additional temporary layoffs will affect a further 1,670 workers at GM's battery and components plants in Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee, with the automaker citing evolving market conditions and regulatory shifts for the changes.

GM's joint venture with LG Energy Solution, Ultium Cells, will also pause production at its battery factories in Warren, Ohio, and Spring Hill, Tennessee, resulting in 550 indefinite layoffs and 1,550 temporary layoffs. Earlier this month, GM reported a $1.6 billion charge to reflect the declining value of its EV plants and to cover the costs of layoffs and canceled supplier contracts.

Rivian, the electric truck and SUV manufacturer, has undergone a series of workforce reductions in response to an anticipated sales slowdown. The company recently announced layoffs affecting approximately 600 employees, or around 4.5% of its total workforce.

This follows a smaller round of job cuts one month prior as the company prepares to introduce a new midsize SUV, the R2, expected to start at around $45,000. Rivian reported vehicle sales of 13,201 units in the third quarter, marking a 32% increase year-over-year, but narrowed its delivery guidance for the year from a previous forecast of 46,000 vehicles to a revised range of 41,500 to 43,500 units.

The company lost $1.1 billion in the second quarter but maintains that it has sufficient capital to launch the R2 SUV, anticipating stronger demand for the new vehicle than its current models – the R1T pickup and R1S SUV – which start at $70,990 and $76,900, respectively.

One factor that could help make these cutbacks temporary is the recent trade agreement between the United States and South Korea, which introduces new opportunities and more favorable conditions for EV automakers and suppliers across the global supply chain.

Under the new arrangement, tariffs on Korean autos and auto parts will be reduced from 25% to 15% in exchange for a $350 billion investment commitment from South Korea, structured to avoid destabilizing its currency by capping annual injections at $20 billion over two decades. Of the total, $150 billion will be directed toward American shipbuilding. This deal levels the playing field for South Korean automakers and suppliers, such as Hyundai, LG Energy Solution, and SK, whose business interests in North America depend on fair market access.

Industry analyst Loren McDonald also believes that current disruptions may prove temporary. He notes that nearly half of the workers affected by GM's layoffs at Ultium battery plants are projected to be rehired by mid-2026, as new EV models hit the market and the industry adjusts to the end of federal credits.

Permalink to story:

 
Produce more $30-40k Ev commuters with utilitarian hatchback design, and less $100k monstrosities, and you wont see a pullback from buyers.

I already have a big old pickup truck. I cannot afford a $100k EV truck. I paid $26k for my car brand new. There is nothing in my price bracket for EVs today. If I wanted one, and could charge one, where would I go?
 
When you have to have the GOVERNMENT give you "rebates" to buy an EV, you know it isn't worth it.
Pretty much anyone that really wanted an EV, has one. There are a TON of used EV's that people have gotten rid of due to range issues, cold/hot weather issues, lack of charging stations and time required to recharge.
If an EV is what you want, fine, but not everyone wants one, and judging from the lack of sales, that would tend to be a lot of people.
 
I always like the idea of electric vehicles.

But EVs in the West have one glaring problem. US and European automakers are unable to produce a small, reliable, DIY friendly car that gets 500 mile range, charges in 5 minutes, and costs around $25k. Something that you can rebuild yourself in your garage when it's 20 years old. Like a base model IC Civic or Impreza.

China makes small, inexpensive EVs right now but they are tariffed out of the market in Europe and the US.

And even the Chinese EVs are not DYI friendly, get 500 mile range, or charge in 5 minutes. Chinese EVs are like cellphones, designed to throw away after a few years.

Honestly, I think ICs are still the best choice.
 
We need more $30,000 - $50,000 EV models. These things depreciate fast and the leasing schedules ensure that every 3 years we'll be flooded with depreciated EV which are still perfectly fine to use.
The bottom line: EV are being proliferated and the day of the ICE car is nearing its end.
 
"incentives" of any kind simply distort the market and everyone loses orientation, which results in plenty of awfully wrong decisions and misallocated investments. That's why "incentives" should not exist.

Now that the distortion is gone, the market will painfully re-calibrate, which will cost a lot and may be fatal to some. This could have been avoided altogether, had the government not messed around.

Climate lunacy did a tremendous amount of damage already, and should be stopped immediately. The current administration has taken some steps in the right direction, but is not acting fast enough.
EVs are cool tech and will keep improving and gaining market share without propping them for the wrong reasons.
 
When you have to have the GOVERNMENT give you "rebates" to buy an EV, you know it isn't worth it.
If I asked you to check in to how many subsidies the gubment give to the oil industry, and how much they cost us, would you look it up?
Until you do, your comment isn't worth it.

"incentives" of any kind simply distort the market and everyone loses orientation, which results in plenty of awfully wrong decisions and misallocated investments. That's why "incentives" should not exist.
You too good sir.

I cant resist getting started:
"A report from Oil Change International published in September 2025 found that the U.S. federal government spends $35 billion per year on handouts to the fossil fuel industry."

Moving on. See any big advantages for either team?

The U.S. government has issued $2 billion in advance point-of-sale consumer electric vehicle (EV) tax credit payments since Jan. 1 covering more than 300,000 vehicles, the Treasury said on Tuesday.

We pay all that cash for subsidies to one of the most profitable industries on the planet.
But people like these 2 gents get puckered because a citizen gets $3000-$7500 incentives.

And all facts in those 2 articles are sourced and MAGA proof.
And there are many more for verification. Just ask.
 
Last edited:
If I asked you to check in to how many subsidies the gubment give to the oil industry, and how much they cost us, would you look it up?
Until you do, your comment isn't worth it.


You too good sir.

I cant resist getting started:
"A report from Oil Change International published in September 2025 found that the U.S. federal government spends $35 billion per year on handouts to the fossil fuel industry."

Moving on. See any big advantages for either team?
The U.S. government has issued $2 billion in advance point-of-sale consumer electric vehicle (EV) tax credit payments since Jan. 1 covering more than 300,000 vehicles, the Treasury said on Tuesday.

All facts are sourced and MAGAt proof.
Are you then rationalizing how much of that subsidy is going to the production of gasoline and diesel, versus the hundreds of thousands of other uses for petroleum products? Are you also factoring in, if you were to remove subsidies for energy, how much more expensive your EVs would be to fuel, given that almost 43%of your electricity comes from natural gas, and another 16% from coal?

Or are we doing the typical internet thing of going "whel ackshually" with half statements because we're foaming at the mouth to scream about MAGA? Because if so, your comment isnt worth reading.

Oh yeah, dotn forget to either remove the sales tax on gasoline from the equation, or include the $200 state + $200 federal registration fee on EVs to cover the fact you dont pay road tax on fuel.
We need more $30,000 - $50,000 EV models. These things depreciate fast and the leasing schedules ensure that every 3 years we'll be flooded with depreciated EV which are still perfectly fine to use.
The bottom line: EV are being proliferated and the day of the ICE car is nearing its end.
ICE still has a long way to go for cars. It will take the better part of 50 years to push gas cars out of circulation for most drivers, and the longer we wait on infrastructure, the further that will get pushed out.
"incentives" of any kind simply distort the market and everyone loses orientation, which results in plenty of awfully wrong decisions and misallocated investments. That's why "incentives" should not exist.

Now that the distortion is gone, the market will painfully re-calibrate, which will cost a lot and may be fatal to some. This could have been avoided altogether, had the government not messed around.

Climate lunacy did a tremendous amount of damage already, and should be stopped immediately. The current administration has taken some steps in the right direction, but is not acting fast enough.
EVs are cool tech and will keep improving and gaining market share without propping them for the wrong reasons.
The incentives were horribly misplaced. That is evident by the fact most EV car companies went and lowered their prices the moment those EV subsidies ended. Turns out that was just cream on top for the corporations to gobble up.

What should have been done, all that money should have been put into expanding nuclear energy to replace fossil fuels and building out the necessary infrastructure to allow widespread EV charging the way we do gas cars today. 35% of americans rent, the vast majority do not have garages to charge EVs in. Most households will also have multiple vehicles. In major cities, this number climbs to 46% This closely follows the rate of homes without access to a garage, which in the northeast is over 50%.

This is what was done in norway and sweeden, which helped bolster EV adoption and made them viable for those even in rural regions.
 
Last edited:
I always like the idea of electric vehicles.

But EVs in the West have one glaring problem. US and European automakers are unable to produce a small, reliable, DIY friendly car that gets 500 mile range, charges in 5 minutes, and costs around $25k. Something that you can rebuild yourself in your garage when it's 20 years old. Like a base model IC Civic or Impreza.

China makes small, inexpensive EVs right now but they are tariffed out of the market in Europe and the US.

And even the Chinese EVs are not DYI friendly, get 500 mile range, or charge in 5 minutes. Chinese EVs are like cellphones, designed to throw away after a few years.

Honestly, I think ICs are still the best choice.
EVs without proper infrastructure is putting the horse before the cart—obvious, but often ignored. EVs are superior to internal combustion vehicles in many ways, except for the very things that made IC engines revolutionary in the first place: convenience, range, and repairability.

I was an early Tesla investor because I saw the tech for what it was—a true disruption. It was amazing how few people could see that coming. But even then, I wasn’t about to buy one without the infrastructure to support it. I saw the writing on the wall when early adopters were celebrating the charging network. I thought: just wait until everyone owns one—then that “awesome techno-wagon” becomes a waiting line on four wheels.

I’m still driving an ICE and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future or until the new wave of automobiles is an actual upgrade to my lifestyle and not just an, “ooh, shiny!” so my neighbor thinks I’m cool.

I’m all-in on the technology itself. But there’s this barrier called convenience that still sinks the ship. Donald Dufus ain’t no Eisenhower—and until we have leadership that’s mentally and politically capable of building real national infrastructure for a high-tech future, we’ll keep being the world’s most expensive, second-rate tech country: full of potential, but short on execution.
 
Are you then rationalizing how much of that subsidy is going to the production of gasoline and diesel, versus the hundreds of thousands of other uses for petroleum products? Are you also factoring in, if you were to remove subsidies for energy, how much more expensive your EVs would be to fuel, given that almost 43%of your electricity comes from natural gas, and another 16% from coal?
Yes, of course, but really, I didn't say any of that.
I'm making fun of anyone that thinks subsidies are only bad for things they don't like.
Sorry, man, but it really is that easy.

Or are we doing the typical internet thing of going "whel ackshually" with half statements because we're foaming at the mouth to scream about MAGA? Because if so, your comment isnt worth reading.
And lies are. Dont forget, we have "talked" before. I know where you come from and it aint facts.

Oh yeah, dotn forget to either remove the sales tax on gasoline from the equation, or include the $200 state + $200 federal registration fee on EVs to cover the fact you dont pay road tax on fuel.
If you are looking for an apology, forget it. Though registrations are going up to compensate.
At least thats the talk.

The incentives were horribly misplaced. That is evident by the fact most EV car companies went and lowered their prices the moment those EV subsidies ended. Turns out that was just cream on top for the corporations to gobble up.
Yes, to work on and improve the tech. Why are the oil companies still getting bathed in cash from the gubment?

What should have been done, all that money should have been put into expanding nuclear energy to replace fossil fuels and building out the necessary infrastructure to allow widespread EV charging the way we do gas cars today. 35% of americans rent, the vast majority do not have garages to charge EVs in. Most households will also have multiple vehicles. In major cities, this number climbs to 46% This closely follows the rate of homes without access to a garage, which in the northeast is over 50%.
Honestly, after initial help the time is coming for EV makers to sink or swim with their own devices. I believe the help EVs get (and they WILL get them again) should only last as long as cash gifts to the fossil fuel industry. But then of course..........

I was an early Tesla investor because I saw the tech for what it was—a true disruption. It was amazing how few people could see that coming. But even then, I wasn’t about to buy one without the infrastructure to support it.
I was exactly the same. But I took the plunge in 2021.
It was just with a Focus EV toy to get acclimated. Got hooked man.

I saw the writing on the wall when early adopters were celebrating the charging network. I thought: just wait until everyone owns one—then that “awesome techno-wagon” becomes a waiting line on four wheels.
Man, you really missed the boat with that one.
I don't think I have ever waited in a line to charge, but I will admit I charge at home and I have not needed to charge on the road more than a few times.

I’m still driving an ICE and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future or until the new wave of automobiles is an actual upgrade to my lifestyle and not just an, “ooh, shiny!” so my neighbor thinks I’m cool.
Well sure, I mean, EVERYONE thought EVs were cool back in the late 2000s. Please.
But I do have a full on smoke pump. It's a 2022 Ram 2500.
Though, I'm going to go with the Ram that uses a gasoline engine to charge the batteries and isn't even connected to the drivetrain. It is of course also a plugin.

I’m all-in on the technology itself. But there’s this barrier called convenience that still sinks the ship.
Are you serious? I mean there are a few, but the convenience of "refueling" at home while I sleep won me over as with most others. So did 44000 miles with no drivetrain maintenance, each 100 miles driven costing a little under $3.50, and almost never needing to wait to recharge.
THAT is convenience. Familiarity is not a qualification for convenience.
 
Last edited:
EVs without proper infrastructure is putting the horse before the cart—obvious, but often ignored. EVs are superior to internal combustion vehicles in many ways, except for the very things that made IC engines revolutionary in the first place: convenience, range, and repairability.

Too often I see wealthy pro green people who are 100% blind and deaf to the issue like repairability, what it means for millions of people driving their aging cars. To be able to repair their old cars for many means the very ability to drive, to go to work school and other places.
I would label this behavior selfishness if I were not aware that each person lives in their own reality.

At the end of the day, it matters. Either batteries get a lot cheaper while lasting a lot longer, or they evolve to having such modularity that they can be replaced easily.
 
With EV costing that much, I'd rather use that money for other things like house renovations, down payment, etc. Unless you plan to spend close to 100K and live in your car, then ok.
 
I always like the idea of electric vehicles.

But EVs in the West have one glaring problem. US and European automakers are unable to produce a small, reliable, DIY friendly car that gets 500 mile range, charges in 5 minutes, and costs around $25k. Something that you can rebuild yourself in your garage when it's 20 years old. Like a base model IC Civic or Impreza.
You’re smart for buying an affordable car, but most Americans buying new cars don’t want something boring. The vast majority of new cars do not sell for $25,000. The ones that do can’t quite get 500 miles of range either; they’re spec’d to get 450 miles of range. 10 years ago, and they were getting closer to 350-400 miles of range instead. Fuel efficiency improvements bumped range.
 
Funny that they can quickly make a plan now to lower prices and what not, but not before the incentives stopped. ALL these businesses are crooked!
 
Buying an EV in America can feel a bit premature since the country still doesn’t have the infrastructure fully in place to support electric vehicles from widespread charging stations to consistent grid reliability. But honestly, once you actually drive one, it’s hard to go back. The driving experience in an EV is smoother, quieter, and far more responsive than most traditional cars. So even with the current limitations, it’s easy to see why so many people are making the switch.
 
Good. Gas burns. Batteries stay forever. Case closed. Duh.
Batteries DO NOT stay forever. They get recycled, just like 12v car batteries, for decades.
Gasoline does burn, and goes through your lungs.
Case closed, but by facts. Doy! :confused:

Buying an EV in America can feel a bit premature since the country still doesn’t have the infrastructure fully in place to support electric vehicles from widespread charging stations to consistent grid reliability.
When did that happen? EV owners missed it somehow.
We can file that whole thing under bullshit that didn't happen.
 
Last edited:
Batteries DO NOT stay forever. They get recycled, just like 12v car batteries, for decades.
Gasoline does burn, and goes through your lungs.
Case closed, but by facts. Doy! :confused:


When did that happen? EV owners missed it somehow.
We can file that whole thing under bullshit that didn't happen.
So you think 20% is, like, revolutionary or what?
 
So you think 20% is, like, revolutionary or what?
First off, do not try to twist what I said.
But honestly, the lesson here is anything you say might NOT reliable.
I said batteries are recycled and they are.
The 20% thing is all yours

And, it's 24% now.

24% of our power now coming from renewables just since 2008 is extremely impressive.

But being so far off on things must be depressing, so I will help lift your spirits :D:
industry-metallurgical-plant-dawn-smoke-600nw-1721153281.jpg
 
Last edited:
At this point the American car industry is an anomaly. I'm sure it'll return back to form, but by that time both the EU and the Chinese will be far ahead.
 
Back