That's exactly why I don't think this should be framed as “Chinese cars collect data, therefore Chinese cars are uniquely dangerous.” American connected cars collect huge amounts of user and vehicle data too, and the auto industry has already faced serious criticism over how that data is collected, shared and monetized. If the concern is that a foreign government could gain access to sensitive vehicle data, that's a legitimate national-security question. Regulate it. But then create actual rules: what data a car may collect, where it can be stored, who can access it, what can leave the country, what remote functions manufacturers are allowed to have, and what software and hardware must be independently audited. Apply strong privacy rules to American manufacturers too. Otherwise we end up treating corporate collection of Americans' data as normal when an American company does it, while describing data collection itself as espionage when the badge happens to be Chinese. The solution is strong cybersecurity and privacy regulation, not pretending that American connected cars don't collect data.

---

Its not at all about competition or protecting the American auto industry. The US Government does not want Chinese companies (read: The chinese govt) to have millions of spy cameras videotaping every square inch of America. Their electric cars are outfitted with cameras much like most American companies. The difference is China corporations are basically arms of the chinese government itself. All the video footage china would ever need would be easily accessible and there's virtually nothing the US could do to prevent it. The only means of preventing it is to prohibit their vehicles from being allowed on our roads.

---

Keeping Chinese cars out of the US market doesn't protect car makers. It protects the banks with those car loans on their balance sheet.

---

No matter what they do. I’m not buying any cars from Detroit

---

It means they don’t have to innovate. Heck they have gone backwards from 2016-2020 and 2024 now as regulations eased so no incentive to innovate to make short term gains and metrics. Talk to people outside the USA and they will say US cars might as well be forgotten.

---

I think this is probably much closer to the core of the issue than simply comparing Chinese and American wages. A car isn't just the labor cost of the people doing final assembly. It's batteries, power electronics, semiconductors, motors, castings, software, logistics, suppliers, tooling and the speed at which all of those things can be developed and scaled. That's also why Brazil and Europe are becoming such interesting experiments. Chinese manufacturers are increasingly moving final assembly outside China. In Brazil they're taking over or reusing existing factories and hiring Brazilian workers. In Europe, BYD, Chery, Geely, Dongfeng and Leapmotor are all moving toward some form of localized production. So over the next few years we're going to get much better evidence about this. If their advantage disappears as production localizes, then Chinese labor costs and domestic industrial conditions were doing most of the work. But if much of the advantage survives, then the supplier ecosystem and manufacturing organization you're describing become much harder to ignore. E para o TurkeyBLTSandwich, eu usaria: This is the part of BYD that I think gets overlooked when the discussion becomes only about subsidies and wages. BYD isn't just taking a conventional Western automotive supply chain and paying the assembly workers less. It has built a much more vertically integrated industrial structure around batteries, electronics, powertrains and vehicle production. That doesn't mean the model is automatically superior or that its current advantage will last forever. American manufacturers can reinvest, reorganize supply chains and bring technologies back in-house. But that's exactly why I think competition matters. We're now seeing Chinese manufacturers take that manufacturing model outside China. Brazil is already getting locally produced Chinese vehicles, and Europe is moving rapidly in the same direction. Once those cars are being made by Brazilian or European workers, the wage explanation becomes easier to separate from the manufacturing-system explanation. That's the experiment I'm interested in watching.

---

That's a legitimate risk to consider, but that's also why I keep proposing local production rather than unrestricted imports. Require BYD or any other Chinese automaker entering the US to build locally, employ American workers, comply with US labor, safety and environmental rules, and make its corporate structure and subsidies subject to the applicable US trade and competition rules. Then the “they're only cheap because China subsidizes exports and pays Chinese wages” hypothesis becomes much easier to test. Brazil is already giving us an imperfect version of that experiment. Chinese companies that arrived here 15+ years ago didn't automatically succeed. Chery struggled badly in its early years but stayed, localized and eventually partnered with CAOA. JAC initially had a much stronger launch, but its passenger-car operation later shrank dramatically. Now BYD, GWM, Chery and Changan are localizing manufacturing in Brazil and employing Brazilian workers, while competing against GM, VW, Stellantis, Toyota, Hyundai and others that also manufacture here. If the business model really depends on permanently selling cars below cost, localization won't magically make that sustainable. But if Chinese manufacturers can eventually make money producing locally while still offering competitive prices, then we have to consider another explanation: maybe part of the advantage actually comes from manufacturing efficiency, batteries, vertical integration, platforms, procurement and scale. That's exactly what I want to find out. I don't want American workers flipping burgers either. I want to know which manufacturing system can employ them while producing globally competitive cars.

---

It's proven that EVs are far better when it comes to emissions over their lifetime. They're a bit worse when it comes to environmental impact directly after manufacturing but ICE cars need oil/gas processing which isn't exactly environmentally friendly either. So they actually are better for the environment if you apply the same standards to ICE cars.

---

One thing I think is missing from this discussion is that Brazil has already been through an earlier wave of Chinese automakers, and it shows that being Chinese, having lower manufacturing costs or offering more equipment does not automatically guarantee success. Chery entered Brazil in 2009, long before the current EV boom. Its first attempt was not particularly successful. The cars could offer a lot of equipment for the money, but the products, powertrains, dealer experience and overall strategy were not yet sufficiently adapted to Brazilian conditions and consumer expectations. Several early models disappeared. But Chery stayed. It built a factory, accumulated experience and eventually partnered with CAOA, a Brazilian automotive group with decades of experience in the local industry. CAOA had previously built its business through Ford dealerships, imported Hyundai vehicles and eventually manufactured Hyundai vehicles in Brazil. The result is that today's CAOA Chery is almost unrecognizable compared with the Chery that entered Brazil more than 15 years ago. And now CAOA is doing something similar with Changan. Changan is a separate Chinese automaker, but CAOA is using its Brazilian industrial and commercial infrastructure to manufacture and sell Changan products here as CAOA Changan. That is important because this competition is no longer limited to cheap imported EVs. Chinese-designed ICE, mild-hybrid, hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles are increasingly competing with traditional manufacturers too. JAC is a useful counterexample because its history went almost in the opposite direction. JAC entered Brazil in 2011 with a huge marketing campaign, quickly established a large dealer network and initially sold quite well. It promised Brazilian manufacturing, but that passenger-car factory never materialized. Over time its light-vehicle operation shrank dramatically and most of that original dealer footprint disappeared. So Brazil has already demonstrated something important: Chinese origin alone doesn't guarantee success. Chery initially struggled, stayed, learned, localized and found a strong Brazilian industrial partner. JAC had a much stronger initial launch but failed to establish the same industrial footprint and eventually became a much smaller player. Now we're watching a much larger second wave. BYD took over Ford's former industrial complex in Camaçari. GWM took over Mercedes-Benz's former factory in Iracemápolis. Renault and Geely are expanding their industrial relationship. GM itself is assembling Chinese-developed Chevrolet EVs in Ceará through products originating from its Chinese ecosystem with SAIC and Wuling. Toyota and BYD have a 50/50 EV R&D joint venture. Tesla complicates the story even further. Tesla is one of America's biggest automotive technology success stories, but its battery supply chain has always been international. Panasonic was fundamental to its early scale, while its later battery sourcing expanded to suppliers including LG Energy Solution and CATL. So the modern auto industry is already much more interconnected than “Chinese technology vs American technology” suggests. And this is why I find the comparison with Japanese and Korean automakers so interesting. Foreign manufacturers don't necessarily remain importers forever. They enter a market. Sometimes they fail. Sometimes they learn. They change products, establish dealerships, find local suppliers, partner with domestic companies, hire local engineers and workers, and eventually manufacture locally. Brazil watched Japanese and Korean companies go through versions of that process. Now we're watching Chinese companies do it. And localization gives us a much better experiment for the question this thread started with. If BYD, GWM, Changan or another Chinese manufacturer loses most of its price advantage after producing in Brazil, Europe or eventually the US with local workers and local regulations, then Chinese wages, subsidies and domestic production conditions were clearly responsible for a large part of that advantage. But if a significant advantage survives localization, then wages cannot be the whole explanation. Battery costs, vertical integration, platform architecture, supplier organization, procurement, automation, manufacturing scale, development cycles and margins all become part of the answer. That's why I don't think the most interesting experiment is simply importing millions of Chinese cars into the US. Make them manufacture there. Make them employ American workers. Make them comply with American safety, labor and environmental rules. Then compare the products. Brazil is increasingly doing exactly that experiment with Brazilian workers. And after watching what happened with Chery and JAC over the last 15+ years, I wouldn't assume the result in advance. Localization can expose weaknesses just as easily as it can expose advantages.

---

"protects manufacturers operating in the US market from a brutal price war' Also protects them from having to compete with well made cheaper cars I can refuel for free with my own solar panels.

---