Trump administration plans to roll back Biden's stricter fuel-efficiency standards
Effort would be similar to Trump policy during first administration
Move aims to satisfy campaign promise to end EV mandate
Automakers find Biden regulations too onerous, source says
Adds analyst comment in paragraphs 13-14, context
By David Shepardson, Rachael Levy and Chris Kirkham
WASHINGTON, Nov 19 (Reuters) -President-elect Donald Trump's incoming administration plans to target federal regulations championed by President Joe Biden that aim to make automobiles more fuel-efficient and incentivize a shift toward electric vehicles, according to two sources in contact with Trump's transition team.
The move appears aimed at satisfying a Trump campaign promise to "end the EV mandate," and would mirror a similar move during the first Trump administration to dismantle Obama-era vehicle-efficiency rules.
Although no such "EV mandate" exists, the Biden administration regulations would effectively require automakers to shift at least 35% of production to EVs in order to meet 2032 requirements, and encourage a gradual phase-out of the production of vehicles that run on fossil fuels.
The incoming administration plans to weaken standards on fuel-efficiency requirements and tailpipe emissions finalized earlier this year by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, according to the sources. One of the sources said Trump is expected to formally direct those agencies to reconsider the Biden regulations.
The effort would run counter to the interests of EV maker Tesla Inc TSLA.O, run by Trump backer Elon Musk, which profits from selling regulatory credits to traditional automakers who cannot comply with stricter vehicle emissions regulations.
The Trump transition team did not respond to a request for comment.
The move to undo Biden's vehicle-efficiency rules was first reported by Bloomberg.
Last week, Reuters exclusively reported that Trump's transition team is planning to kill the $7,500 consumer tax credit for electric-vehicle purchases - another move that would likely slow an already stalling U.S. EV transition.
During the first Trump administration, it took nearly three years to overturn similar Obama-era regulations. After Trump called for a review of the rules in early 2017, NHTSA and the EPA began the formal process of rewriting the rules in 2018. It took until March 2020 for both agencies to finalize less-stringent rules.
One of the sources said the move is designed to appease automakers who have complained the Biden regulations are too onerous.
The fuel economy and vehicle emissions standards finalized by the Biden administration this year were significantly less stringent than originally proposed, after automakers lobbied for revisions.
General Motors GM.N, Ford F.N, Stellantis STLAM.MI, Tesla TSLA.O and the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a trade group representing most major automakers except Tesla, did not respond to requests for comment.
After Trump's first election victory in 2016, automakers pushed to ease the Obama-era rules, arguing they were too expensive and would hamper American job growth. The calculus is different now, said Seth Goldstein, a Morningstar Research Services analyst, as Detroit automakers "have been investing heavily" in EVs.
"They're a lot more advanced in their strategy," he said.
The move to target vehicle-efficiency standards could be a blow to Tesla, which has earned billions of dollars in recent years by selling credits to other automakers who cannot comply with federal vehicle standards and other emissions regulations in U.S. states and other markets around the world.
Because Tesla sells only electric vehicles, it overcomplies with the regulations and generates credits it can sell to others. By loosening the standards, those credits become less valuable.
Tesla CEO Musk was one of Trump's biggest backers and has become an influential adviser since the election.
During the Biden administration, Tesla pushed for far stricter vehicle emissions regulations than what the EPA ultimately passed.
Goldstein, the Morningstar analyst, said he expects Tesla will still be able to profit from selling credits to automakers who need to comply with stricter emissions rules in states like California, and in the European Union.
He said selling credits was "far more important" to Tesla's business model before the company was profitable. Now, he said, the credits are "nice to have," but no longer essential for the company to "generate profits and generate positive free cash flow."
Reporting by David Shepardson, Rachael Levy and Chris Kirkham; Additional reporting by Nora Eckert; Editing by Andrea Ricci and Stephen Coates
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
