Canada can’t import its way to net-zero, or to a better trading model. It needs to build here at home.
...
For Canadian autoworkers already reeling from U.S. trade aggression, idled plants, and stalled EV investment, [the recent Canada-China EV trade] deal creates new vulnerabilities at precisely the wrong moment.
...
China ... is not a normal trading partner. Its auto industry is the product of deliberate state controls, deplorable labour conditions and structural overcapacity. Electric vehicles and their key components (e.g. battery cells) have been a strategic priority for government since at least 2013.
Chinese automakers are encouraged to produce far more vehicles than their domestic market can absorb, then export the excess.
This isn’t competition, it’s market distortion. Canadian regulators are working constantly to control the flow of low-cost Chinese imports on a range of products, like steel, guarding domestic industries against unfair practices and injury. China is among the world’s worst offenders of dumping.
...
Ottawa has tried to minimize the political blowback of this China deal, claiming the quota represents just three per cent of annual vehicle sales. That figure is misleading. It compares Chinese EV imports to total vehicle sales in Canada, including gas-powered trucks and SUVs. Measured against the EV market alone, 49,000 vehicles represent roughly 20 per cent of new EV and hybrid sales, based on 2025 sales data.
...
With EV demand weakened by a temporary rollback of consumer purchasing incentives and gaps in charging infrastructure (only recently reinstated as part of the feds’ new auto strategy), Chinese imports could soon account for as much as 30 per cent of the EV market. This ratio far exceeds other automaking regions, like Europe, where Chinese automakers have wreaked havoc on auto supply chains and local jobs, albeit accounting for only 16.5 per cent of the EV sales market. In Mexico, a Chinese vehicle import surge (that started as a trickle) forced government to safeguard its domestic auto industry by raising import tariffs to 50 per cent.
The concerns for autoworkers are even more acute. Once Chinese automakers have set in place Canadian retail and afterparts networks, they will be given clearance to supply unlimited quantities of vehicles from numerous factories outside China, at standard or even zero tariffs, sidestepping the quota altogether. Canada must establish rigorous monitoring and authentication protocols to avoid import surges, and trans-shipment of Chinese vehicles through other countries.
...
Canadian officials would be wise to contain the unintended spread of cheap Chinese EVs, or risk undoing its own auto industry strategy. If one thing is clear, its that Canada cannot import its way to a net-zero future. It must build it here at home.
...
[Edit typo.]
Do you have any numbers to foster your arguments?
I don't think you are right with your opinion, but even if so, it would then make no sense to buy Chinese cars that are even more subsidized than any Western country does and ever did. This is not economically viable (a fact that even Chinese automakers themselves admit), and there is ample evidence of forced labour across Chinese supply chains as well. Just look at the BYD plant in Brazil last year, just to name a more recent example.
The Canadian government unveiled its strategy to revive the country's auto industry just two week ago.
Currently, Canadian automobile industry and its dedicated parts suppliers directly employ 110,486 people in Canada in dealerships, assembly plants, national and regional offices, captive finance companies, and transportation and logistics facilities. In addition, there are 106,773 jobs across the country related to the automobile industry.
It is noteworthy that these numbers are relatively high, although the domestic industry has shrunk in recent decades. Last year, 1.2 million cars were made in Canada, down from more than 3 million at its peak in 1999.
It's time to revive the industry while not repeating the mistakes of the past, when Canada relied too much on the US.
@iikidd@lemmy.world
The same supply chains putting Chinese electronics in cars assembled here. But let's keep ignoring that. No, we are not making TFT screens in Oshawa.
The USA under Obama handed out $85B to Detroit automakers in 2008. BYD may be $4B, some estimates to $8B.
EV Battery Plants & Assembly (2020–2024): Total support for major EV investments was estimated by the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) to be up to $52.5 billion, with roughly $31.4 billion from the federal government and $21.1 billion from provincial governments (mostly Ontario and Quebec).
We tried to subsidize an EV industry for more than China, but ran into the classic problem of little/no scientific R&D and intellectual property in Canada, as we spend less on industrial research as %GDP than any country in the G8. We lack the expertise, and have ZERO battery or motor innovation, no IP. This is a chronic problem in Canada as "industry" is a few oxycontin addicts working a backhoe, or some CAW semi-skilled guys doing righty-tighty, while other countries use their technology in real industry with our raw materials.
If we actually made those battery plants, the technology would have been two generations outdated by the time they were running. Given we are in NORTH America, we should be researching and developing practical sodium batteries that actually work in CDN winters.
Arguably, the most successful companies in Ontario auto sector are from Japan -because they know how to design vehicles with engineers, not accountants. EVs are far simpler, and faster to design than ICE, they have hundreds of less parts and do not need expensive R&D into emissions or efficiency technology. Motor-controller-battery, that's it. They are inherently >90% efficient while ICE cars barely crack 35%.
Goddamn these numbers make the Chinese subsidies look like an utter joke. Thanks for doing the work! The sockpuppet regularly uses this argument against importing Chinese EVs. Saving this.
E: Of course the much more interesting conclusion is how much more effectively subsidies can be deployed than what we do.
What arguments? All I see is a curiosity and a desire to understand the arrangments more deeply.