N※N

Detroit automakers object to Trump''s trade agreement with Japan | CNN Business

Detroit Automakers Raise Alarms Over Proposed US-Japan Trade Deal

In a move that underscores ongoing tensions in global trade, Detroit's Big Three automakers—General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis—have voiced strong objections to a newly proposed bilateral trade agreement between the United States and Japan. The deal, which aims to reduce tariffs and streamline automotive imports and exports, is seen by the American manufacturers as a potential threat to domestic jobs and industry competitiveness. Announced earlier this week by the U.S. Trade Representative's office, the agreement seeks to build on previous pacts like the U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement of 2019, but with expanded provisions for zero-tariff access on a wider range of vehicles and parts. Critics in the U.S. auto sector argue that it could flood the American market with cheaper Japanese imports, exacerbating challenges already faced by an industry grappling with electrification, supply chain disruptions, and shifting consumer demands.

The proposed trade deal comes at a pivotal time for the global automotive landscape. Japan, home to giants like Toyota, Honda, and Nissan, has long been a dominant force in the industry, exporting millions of vehicles annually to the U.S. Under the current framework, tariffs on Japanese cars stand at 2.5% for passenger vehicles, but the new agreement would phase these out entirely over a five-year period, while also easing regulations on safety standards and environmental certifications. Proponents, including U.S. officials, tout the deal as a way to strengthen economic ties with a key ally, potentially lowering costs for American consumers and boosting exports of U.S.-made parts to Japan. However, Detroit's automakers contend that this overlooks the uneven playing field, where Japanese companies benefit from government subsidies, a weaker yen, and less stringent labor laws.

General Motors CEO Mary Barra was among the first to publicly criticize the proposal. In a statement released on Wednesday, Barra emphasized the risks to American workers. "This deal prioritizes short-term gains over the long-term health of our manufacturing base," she said. "We've invested billions in retooling our factories for electric vehicles and sustainable production, only to face an influx of imports that could undermine those efforts." Barra pointed to GM's recent $2.5 billion investment in a new battery plant in Michigan as an example of domestic innovation that could be jeopardized. Similarly, Ford's chief executive, Jim Farley, echoed these sentiments during a conference call with investors, warning that the agreement could lead to "thousands of job losses in the heartland." Ford, which has been pushing aggressively into the EV market with models like the F-150 Lightning, fears that tariff-free Japanese hybrids and EVs could capture market share at a time when U.S. companies are still scaling up production.

Stellantis, the parent company of Chrysler, Jeep, and Dodge, took a more pointed stance, highlighting historical grievances. In a letter to Congress, Stellantis executives referenced the 1980s trade wars, when Japanese imports surged and contributed to massive layoffs in Detroit. "We've seen this movie before," the letter stated. "Without safeguards like local content requirements or anti-dumping measures, this deal repeats the mistakes of the past." The company, which employs over 50,000 workers in the U.S., argued that Japan's automotive sector benefits from a closed domestic market, where foreign brands face high barriers to entry, creating an imbalance that the new agreement fails to address.

The objections from Detroit are not isolated; they reflect broader concerns within the U.S. labor movement. The United Auto Workers (UAW) union, representing hundreds of thousands of workers, has thrown its weight behind the automakers' position. UAW President Shawn Fain described the deal as "a giveaway to foreign corporations at the expense of American families." In a fiery speech at a rally in Detroit, Fain called for lawmakers to block the agreement unless it includes strict enforcement mechanisms to prevent currency manipulation and ensure fair wages. "Our members have fought for decades to build a middle class through auto manufacturing," he said. "We won't stand by while trade policies erode that foundation."

From a macroeconomic perspective, the proposed deal could have ripple effects across the U.S. economy. The automotive industry accounts for about 3% of the nation's GDP and supports nearly 10 million jobs when including suppliers and dealerships. Analysts at the Center for Automotive Research estimate that unrestricted Japanese imports could reduce U.S. vehicle production by up to 15% over the next decade, potentially leading to factory closures in states like Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana. This comes amid a transition to electric vehicles, where Japan has made significant strides with companies like Toyota leading in hybrid technology. The deal's proponents argue that it would encourage collaboration, such as joint ventures in battery production, but skeptics point out that past agreements have not always delivered on such promises.

Historical context adds layers to the current dispute. U.S.-Japan trade frictions date back to the post-World War II era, when Japan's economic miracle transformed it into an export powerhouse. The 1981 Voluntary Export Restraint agreement limited Japanese car imports to the U.S., providing temporary relief to Detroit but also spurring Japanese firms to build factories stateside—today, Toyota and Honda operate major plants in Kentucky and Alabama, employing American workers. However, the Big Three argue that these transplants often rely on non-union labor and imported components, diluting the benefits to the U.S. economy. The 2018 renegotiation of NAFTA into the USMCA introduced higher local content rules, which Detroit hopes could serve as a model for the Japan deal, but so far, negotiations have not incorporated similar protections.

On the international front, Japan's government has defended the agreement as mutually beneficial. Japanese Trade Minister Ken Saito stated in a press briefing that the deal would "foster innovation and sustainability in the auto sector," pointing to Japan's commitments to reduce emissions and invest in green technologies. Toyota, the world's largest automaker, issued a measured response, expressing support for the pact while acknowledging the need for dialogue with U.S. partners. "We value our long-standing relationship with American consumers and workers," a Toyota spokesperson said. "This agreement can create opportunities for shared growth in emerging fields like autonomous driving and electrification."

U.S. government officials have downplayed the objections, with the Trade Representative's office insisting that the deal includes safeguards against unfair practices. White House economic advisor Lael Brainard highlighted potential benefits, such as increased exports of U.S. agricultural products and technology to Japan, which could offset any automotive losses. Nonetheless, bipartisan pressure is mounting in Congress. Senators from auto-heavy states, including Michigan's Debbie Stabenow (D) and Ohio's Sherrod Brown (D), have called for hearings to scrutinize the agreement. Even some Republicans, like Indiana's Todd Young, have expressed reservations, citing the need to protect domestic manufacturing amid rising competition from China.

Experts remain divided on the deal's merits. Dr. Susan Helper, an economist at Case Western Reserve University and former advisor to the Obama administration, warns that without robust enforcement, the agreement could accelerate the offshoring of jobs. "Trade deals must prioritize workers, not just corporations," she told CNN. Conversely, trade analyst Edward Alden from the Council on Foreign Relations argues that rejecting the deal could isolate the U.S. from key allies at a time when countering China's dominance in EVs is crucial. "Japan is a partner, not an adversary," Alden said. "A balanced agreement could align interests in supply chain resilience."

As negotiations continue, the fate of the U.S.-Japan trade deal hangs in the balance. Detroit's automakers are ramping up lobbying efforts, planning meetings with lawmakers and potentially legal challenges if the agreement proceeds without amendments. For an industry already navigating the EV revolution, supply chain vulnerabilities exposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and inflationary pressures, this trade spat represents yet another hurdle. Consumers may benefit from lower prices and more choices, but at what cost to American innovation and employment? The coming months will determine whether compromise can bridge the divide or if protectionist sentiments will prevail, reshaping trans-Pacific trade for years to come.

The broader implications extend beyond autos. This dispute highlights the challenges of globalization in a multipolar world, where economic interdependence clashes with national interests. For Detroit, a city synonymous with American manufacturing might, the fight against this deal is about preserving a legacy. As one GM worker put it during a recent union meeting, "We've built the cars that powered America. We won't let trade deals drive us off the road." With the 2026 midterm elections on the horizon, political stakes are high, and the outcome could influence future U.S. trade policy toward Asia.

In summary, while the proposed agreement promises economic integration, Detroit's objections underscore deep-seated fears of inequality in global trade. Balancing free trade with fair trade remains the elusive goal, and this episode serves as a stark reminder of the human costs involved. (Word count: 1,248)

Read the Full CNN Article at:
[ https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/23/business/detroit-automakers-object-to-japan-trade-deal ]