Polestar won't rejoin Australia's top auto industry body
Along with US EV brand Tesla, Polestar Australia quit the FCAI in March 2024 in protest of the body's criticism of the federal government's now-implemented New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES).
A statement from Polestar announcing its exit claimed the FCAI was attempting to "deliberately slow the car industry's contribution to Australia's emissions reduction potential".
The Chinese-owned Swedish EV-maker told media this week its view of the FCAI hasn't changed – and it is not considering rejoining its ranks, which includes most auto brands present in Australia.
Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now.
"I haven't seen the FCAI say or do anything that would indicate that they're being more progressive when it comes to the electrification of the Australian vehicle fleet," Polestar Australia managing director Scott Maynard said on a media call.
"In fact, most of the comments I've seen earlier out of the FCAI would indicate the opposite is true."
Officially commencing on January 1, 2025, the NVES is designed to reduce the carbon-dioxide (CO2) tailpipe emissions of all new cars sold in Australia, with CO2 targets lowering annually until 2029.
Automakers began accruing financial penalties for exceeding emissions targets from July 1, 2025.
The initially proposed targets were raised – meaning new vehicles could emit more CO2 – with the final figures implemented after pressure from the FCAI on the federal government.
A public statement on March 5, 2024, said the FCAI was "concerned at the rate of total battery electric vehicle sales which recorded just 5.9 per cent of total sales [in February 2025] compared with 9.6 per cent in February 2024".
Further, the FCAI was critical of the way NVES was implemented, saying: "Our grave concern has always been the rate of EV adoption and what assumptions the Government had made in its modelling around consumer demand for EVs in the NVES. This modelling remains secret."
Another FCAI statement made three months earlier said: "It is significant that the Government has recognised the need to do more to support sales of EVs in order to get anywhere near the challenge of achieving its extremely ambitious emissions reduction targets under the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES)."
These were the comments that prompted Polestar to quit the group, along with Tesla, which only joined the FCAI less than 12 months earlier.
Tesla was even more critical in public comments upon its exit, accusing the FCAI of misleading Australian consumers and engaging in anti-competitive behaviour.
"Tesla is also concerned that it is inappropriate for the FCAI to foreshadow or coordinate whether and how competitor brands implement price changes in response to environmental regulations such as the NVES," it said at the time.
The FCAI describes itself as the 'peak representative organisation for companies who distribute new passenger vehicles, light commercial vehicles and motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles in Australia'.
Essentially, it represents the interests of automakers, with membership fees based on sales volume. Non-member brands – including Polestar and Tesla, as well as Mahindra, Smart, Cadillac, Ineos and Xpeng, among others – do not supply sales figures for the FCAI's monthly VFACTS reports.
The FCAI's board includes – among others – Mazda Australia managing director Vinesh Bhindi, Mitsubishi Australia CEO Shaun Westcott, Nissan Oceania managing director Andrew Humberstone, Renault Australia general manager Glen Sealy and Mercedes-Benz Australia/Pacific's Jaime Cohen.
Many of the automakers represented by FCAI board members offer EVs in their local lineups, including Penny Ferguson from JLR, which is currently reinventing Jaguar as an electric-only brand.
Mr Maynard reiterated that his company's stance this week hasn't changed – even if Polestar's parent company, Geely, is a paid-up member.
"The fact that they're [the FCAI] so hard against the NVES and tried to water that down didn't sit with our brand or what we would consider is in the best interests of the Australian buying public or the environment or the economy.
"So at this stage, there wouldn't be any reason for us to go back.
"The FCAI does an important job of representing its brands. Those brands, too, have spoken out against things like the NVES.
"They have spoken out against things like fringe benefits tax (FBT), which continues to disproportionately serve the sale of dual cab utes – not what I would consider to be a far more progressive style of transportation, which is electric vehicles.
"So it doesn't sit with our brand to rejoin. I've always said and will continue to say if that position changes, then of course it makes sense for us to join a vehicle-based chamber that represents the industry. But at the moment, I think it represents the industry [only] in part."
MORE: Everything Polestar
MORE: What the first emissions standard means for Aussie car buyers
Content originally sourced from: CarExpert.com.au
Electric vehicle (EV) brand Polestar says it's not ready to rejoin Australia's peak automotive industry organisation, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI), because it still believes it doesn't truly represent the local auto industry.
Along with US EV brand Tesla, Polestar Australia quit the FCAI in March 2024 in protest of the body's criticism of the federal government's now-implemented New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES).
A statement from Polestar announcing its exit claimed the FCAI was attempting to "deliberately slow the car industry's contribution to Australia's emissions reduction potential".
The Chinese-owned Swedish EV-maker told media this week its view of the FCAI hasn't changed – and it is not considering rejoining its ranks, which includes most auto brands present in Australia.
Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now.
"I haven't seen the FCAI say or do anything that would indicate that they're being more progressive when it comes to the electrification of the Australian vehicle fleet," Polestar Australia managing director Scott Maynard said on a media call.
"In fact, most of the comments I've seen earlier out of the FCAI would indicate the opposite is true."
Officially commencing on January 1, 2025, the NVES is designed to reduce the carbon-dioxide (CO2) tailpipe emissions of all new cars sold in Australia, with CO2 targets lowering annually until 2029.
Automakers began accruing financial penalties for exceeding emissions targets from July 1, 2025.
The initially proposed targets were raised – meaning new vehicles could emit more CO2 – with the final figures implemented after pressure from the FCAI on the federal government.
A public statement on March 5, 2024, said the FCAI was "concerned at the rate of total battery electric vehicle sales which recorded just 5.9 per cent of total sales [in February 2025] compared with 9.6 per cent in February 2024".
Further, the FCAI was critical of the way NVES was implemented, saying: "Our grave concern has always been the rate of EV adoption and what assumptions the Government had made in its modelling around consumer demand for EVs in the NVES. This modelling remains secret."
Another FCAI statement made three months earlier said: "It is significant that the Government has recognised the need to do more to support sales of EVs in order to get anywhere near the challenge of achieving its extremely ambitious emissions reduction targets under the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES)."
These were the comments that prompted Polestar to quit the group, along with Tesla, which only joined the FCAI less than 12 months earlier.
Tesla was even more critical in public comments upon its exit, accusing the FCAI of misleading Australian consumers and engaging in anti-competitive behaviour.
"Tesla is also concerned that it is inappropriate for the FCAI to foreshadow or coordinate whether and how competitor brands implement price changes in response to environmental regulations such as the NVES," it said at the time.
The FCAI describes itself as the 'peak representative organisation for companies who distribute new passenger vehicles, light commercial vehicles and motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles in Australia'.
Essentially, it represents the interests of automakers, with membership fees based on sales volume. Non-member brands – including Polestar and Tesla, as well as Mahindra, Smart, Cadillac, Ineos and Xpeng, among others – do not supply sales figures for the FCAI's monthly VFACTS reports.
The FCAI's board includes – among others – Mazda Australia managing director Vinesh Bhindi, Mitsubishi Australia CEO Shaun Westcott, Nissan Oceania managing director Andrew Humberstone, Renault Australia general manager Glen Sealy and Mercedes-Benz Australia/Pacific's Jaime Cohen.
Many of the automakers represented by FCAI board members offer EVs in their local lineups, including Penny Ferguson from JLR, which is currently reinventing Jaguar as an electric-only brand.
Mr Maynard reiterated that his company's stance this week hasn't changed – even if Polestar's parent company, Geely, is a paid-up member.
"The fact that they're [the FCAI] so hard against the NVES and tried to water that down didn't sit with our brand or what we would consider is in the best interests of the Australian buying public or the environment or the economy.
"So at this stage, there wouldn't be any reason for us to go back.
"The FCAI does an important job of representing its brands. Those brands, too, have spoken out against things like the NVES.
"They have spoken out against things like fringe benefits tax (FBT), which continues to disproportionately serve the sale of dual cab utes – not what I would consider to be a far more progressive style of transportation, which is electric vehicles.
"So it doesn't sit with our brand to rejoin. I've always said and will continue to say if that position changes, then of course it makes sense for us to join a vehicle-based chamber that represents the industry. But at the moment, I think it represents the industry [only] in part."
MORE: Everything Polestar
MORE: What the first emissions standard means for Aussie car buyers
Content originally sourced from: CarExpert.com.au
Electric vehicle (EV) brand Polestar says it's not ready to rejoin Australia's peak automotive industry organisation, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI), because it still believes it doesn't truly represent the local auto industry.
Along with US EV brand Tesla, Polestar Australia quit the FCAI in March 2024 in protest of the body's criticism of the federal government's now-implemented New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES).
A statement from Polestar announcing its exit claimed the FCAI was attempting to "deliberately slow the car industry's contribution to Australia's emissions reduction potential".
The Chinese-owned Swedish EV-maker told media this week its view of the FCAI hasn't changed – and it is not considering rejoining its ranks, which includes most auto brands present in Australia.
Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now.
"I haven't seen the FCAI say or do anything that would indicate that they're being more progressive when it comes to the electrification of the Australian vehicle fleet," Polestar Australia managing director Scott Maynard said on a media call.
"In fact, most of the comments I've seen earlier out of the FCAI would indicate the opposite is true."
Officially commencing on January 1, 2025, the NVES is designed to reduce the carbon-dioxide (CO2) tailpipe emissions of all new cars sold in Australia, with CO2 targets lowering annually until 2029.
Automakers began accruing financial penalties for exceeding emissions targets from July 1, 2025.
The initially proposed targets were raised – meaning new vehicles could emit more CO2 – with the final figures implemented after pressure from the FCAI on the federal government.
A public statement on March 5, 2024, said the FCAI was "concerned at the rate of total battery electric vehicle sales which recorded just 5.9 per cent of total sales [in February 2025] compared with 9.6 per cent in February 2024".
Further, the FCAI was critical of the way NVES was implemented, saying: "Our grave concern has always been the rate of EV adoption and what assumptions the Government had made in its modelling around consumer demand for EVs in the NVES. This modelling remains secret."
Another FCAI statement made three months earlier said: "It is significant that the Government has recognised the need to do more to support sales of EVs in order to get anywhere near the challenge of achieving its extremely ambitious emissions reduction targets under the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES)."
These were the comments that prompted Polestar to quit the group, along with Tesla, which only joined the FCAI less than 12 months earlier.
Tesla was even more critical in public comments upon its exit, accusing the FCAI of misleading Australian consumers and engaging in anti-competitive behaviour.
"Tesla is also concerned that it is inappropriate for the FCAI to foreshadow or coordinate whether and how competitor brands implement price changes in response to environmental regulations such as the NVES," it said at the time.
The FCAI describes itself as the 'peak representative organisation for companies who distribute new passenger vehicles, light commercial vehicles and motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles in Australia'.
Essentially, it represents the interests of automakers, with membership fees based on sales volume. Non-member brands – including Polestar and Tesla, as well as Mahindra, Smart, Cadillac, Ineos and Xpeng, among others – do not supply sales figures for the FCAI's monthly VFACTS reports.
The FCAI's board includes – among others – Mazda Australia managing director Vinesh Bhindi, Mitsubishi Australia CEO Shaun Westcott, Nissan Oceania managing director Andrew Humberstone, Renault Australia general manager Glen Sealy and Mercedes-Benz Australia/Pacific's Jaime Cohen.
Many of the automakers represented by FCAI board members offer EVs in their local lineups, including Penny Ferguson from JLR, which is currently reinventing Jaguar as an electric-only brand.
Mr Maynard reiterated that his company's stance this week hasn't changed – even if Polestar's parent company, Geely, is a paid-up member.
"The fact that they're [the FCAI] so hard against the NVES and tried to water that down didn't sit with our brand or what we would consider is in the best interests of the Australian buying public or the environment or the economy.
"So at this stage, there wouldn't be any reason for us to go back.
"The FCAI does an important job of representing its brands. Those brands, too, have spoken out against things like the NVES.
"They have spoken out against things like fringe benefits tax (FBT), which continues to disproportionately serve the sale of dual cab utes – not what I would consider to be a far more progressive style of transportation, which is electric vehicles.
"So it doesn't sit with our brand to rejoin. I've always said and will continue to say if that position changes, then of course it makes sense for us to join a vehicle-based chamber that represents the industry. But at the moment, I think it represents the industry [only] in part."
MORE: Everything Polestar
MORE: What the first emissions standard means for Aussie car buyers
Content originally sourced from: CarExpert.com.au
Electric vehicle (EV) brand Polestar says it's not ready to rejoin Australia's peak automotive industry organisation, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI), because it still believes it doesn't truly represent the local auto industry.
Along with US EV brand Tesla, Polestar Australia quit the FCAI in March 2024 in protest of the body's criticism of the federal government's now-implemented New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES).
A statement from Polestar announcing its exit claimed the FCAI was attempting to "deliberately slow the car industry's contribution to Australia's emissions reduction potential".
The Chinese-owned Swedish EV-maker told media this week its view of the FCAI hasn't changed – and it is not considering rejoining its ranks, which includes most auto brands present in Australia.
Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now.
"I haven't seen the FCAI say or do anything that would indicate that they're being more progressive when it comes to the electrification of the Australian vehicle fleet," Polestar Australia managing director Scott Maynard said on a media call.
"In fact, most of the comments I've seen earlier out of the FCAI would indicate the opposite is true."
Officially commencing on January 1, 2025, the NVES is designed to reduce the carbon-dioxide (CO2) tailpipe emissions of all new cars sold in Australia, with CO2 targets lowering annually until 2029.
Automakers began accruing financial penalties for exceeding emissions targets from July 1, 2025.
The initially proposed targets were raised – meaning new vehicles could emit more CO2 – with the final figures implemented after pressure from the FCAI on the federal government.
A public statement on March 5, 2024, said the FCAI was "concerned at the rate of total battery electric vehicle sales which recorded just 5.9 per cent of total sales [in February 2025] compared with 9.6 per cent in February 2024".
Further, the FCAI was critical of the way NVES was implemented, saying: "Our grave concern has always been the rate of EV adoption and what assumptions the Government had made in its modelling around consumer demand for EVs in the NVES. This modelling remains secret."
Another FCAI statement made three months earlier said: "It is significant that the Government has recognised the need to do more to support sales of EVs in order to get anywhere near the challenge of achieving its extremely ambitious emissions reduction targets under the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES)."
These were the comments that prompted Polestar to quit the group, along with Tesla, which only joined the FCAI less than 12 months earlier.
Tesla was even more critical in public comments upon its exit, accusing the FCAI of misleading Australian consumers and engaging in anti-competitive behaviour.
"Tesla is also concerned that it is inappropriate for the FCAI to foreshadow or coordinate whether and how competitor brands implement price changes in response to environmental regulations such as the NVES," it said at the time.
The FCAI describes itself as the 'peak representative organisation for companies who distribute new passenger vehicles, light commercial vehicles and motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles in Australia'.
Essentially, it represents the interests of automakers, with membership fees based on sales volume. Non-member brands – including Polestar and Tesla, as well as Mahindra, Smart, Cadillac, Ineos and Xpeng, among others – do not supply sales figures for the FCAI's monthly VFACTS reports.
The FCAI's board includes – among others – Mazda Australia managing director Vinesh Bhindi, Mitsubishi Australia CEO Shaun Westcott, Nissan Oceania managing director Andrew Humberstone, Renault Australia general manager Glen Sealy and Mercedes-Benz Australia/Pacific's Jaime Cohen.
Many of the automakers represented by FCAI board members offer EVs in their local lineups, including Penny Ferguson from JLR, which is currently reinventing Jaguar as an electric-only brand.
Mr Maynard reiterated that his company's stance this week hasn't changed – even if Polestar's parent company, Geely, is a paid-up member.
"The fact that they're [the FCAI] so hard against the NVES and tried to water that down didn't sit with our brand or what we would consider is in the best interests of the Australian buying public or the environment or the economy.
"So at this stage, there wouldn't be any reason for us to go back.
"The FCAI does an important job of representing its brands. Those brands, too, have spoken out against things like the NVES.
"They have spoken out against things like fringe benefits tax (FBT), which continues to disproportionately serve the sale of dual cab utes – not what I would consider to be a far more progressive style of transportation, which is electric vehicles.
"So it doesn't sit with our brand to rejoin. I've always said and will continue to say if that position changes, then of course it makes sense for us to join a vehicle-based chamber that represents the industry. But at the moment, I think it represents the industry [only] in part."
MORE: Everything Polestar
MORE: What the first emissions standard means for Aussie car buyers
Content originally sourced from: CarExpert.com.au
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
2 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Penny Wong ‘softening up' the Chinese ahead of Albanese's Beijing trip
Former Labor advisor Bruce Hawker says Foreign Minister Penny Wong is 'softening up' the Chinese ahead of the Prime Minister's visit to the People's Republic of China. Penny Wong has backed Anthony Albanese's trip to China as one of great importance for Australia's relationship with the nation, as he prepares to jet off on the almost week-long trip from July 12 to July 18. 'We know that Anthony Albanese will be raising those issues – including the circumnavigation of Australia by those Chinese warships – at the highest levels whilst in Beijing,' Mr Hawker told Sky News Australia. 'They will also be talking about trade and that is a much more important issue for Australia right now, particularly at a time when the trade relations with the United States is so fraught.'
Man of Many
3 hours ago
- Man of Many
In a Curveball, Audio Brand ‘Teenage Engineering' Launches an Electric Scooter
By Dean Blake - News Published: 12 Jul 2025 |Last Updated: 10 Jul 2025 Share Copy Link Readtime: 2 min Every product is carefully selected by our editors and experts. If you buy from a link, we may earn a commission. Learn more. For more information on how we test products, click here. Teenage Engineering, the Swedish design-first audio brand that brought us the incredible OP-1 synthesiser and TP-7 personal recorder has decided to do something completely different for its latest outing: partnering with Swedish bike-brand Vässla to create the EPA-1, an electric moped. A curveball to the Teenage Engineering faithful, the EPA-1 delivers a roadworthy Class 1 or 2 vehicle, capable of hitting 45 km/h and 25km/h respectively. Each EPA-1 is calibrated before leaving Vässla's warehouse, so what you get is what you get. Vässla CEO Micke Andersson | Image: Vässla 'I have followed teenage engineering for years and am really impressed by how they constantly think innovatively, and develop and design completely unique products. Everything from small synths and speakers to, well, all sorts of things. So I called them up,' said Vässla CEO Micke Andersson. 'We started brainstorming a new moped that would be a bit more than an ordinary moped.' Vässla's EPA-1 | Image: Vässla Vässla's EPA-1 | Image: Vässla Vässla's EPA-1 | Image: Vässla Vässla's EPA-1 | Image: Vässla Vässla's EPA-1 | Image: Vässla The EPA-1 seems to be pretty customisable: with multiple battery options (30Ah will get you around 70kms range, while the 50Ah is more like 100kms), as well as attachable accessories available to build the bike out as you see fit. This is because the bike itself was designed with customisation in mind: 11 reinforced mount points across the body of the moped let Vässla-made modifications, as well as custom-designs, simply screw into place. The bike is launching with five different colourways: black, yellow, white, red and blue. For now, the EPA-1 is available only in Europe, and will set you back around 20,000 Swedish Krona (roughly AUD$4,000)—though were hoping it'll make its way down under before long.
News.com.au
4 hours ago
- News.com.au
‘Nearly impossible': Elon Musk's new political party faces massive challenges
Elon Musk's effort to break up the duopoly of American politics is extremely unlikely to succeed, for reasons we shall explore, but he could still play a crucial role as a spoiler. This past week the Tesla and SpaceX boss, who until recently was a member of President Donald Trump's inner circle and his biggest donor, said he was creating the 'America Party' as an alternative to the Democrats, and to Mr Trump's Republicans. 'When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste and graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy,' he said last Saturday. 'Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.' You can see, there, an allusion to Mr Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill', the massive piece of budget legislation that has now been signed into law by the President. It is projected to grow America's already considerable national debt by trillions of dollars. And for that reason, Mr Musk has opposed it vociferously, describing the bill as 'disgusting'. Mr Musk, who's worth hundreds of billions of dollars, does have the funds he would need to make a third party viable in America's particularly money-soaked political system. The almost $US300 million he gave to get Mr Trump elected last year barely registered as a dent on his personal wealth. But even in the United States, money is far from everything. David Smith is an Associate Professor in American Politics and Foreign Policy with the United States Studies Centre, at the University of Sydney. He outlined the various challenges Mr Musk will face with this new party, should he decide to persist with it. 'Before we even think about the peculiarities of Elon, we just need to remember how hard it is for any third party to break into American politics,' Professor Smith told 'There have been a couple of parties that have been trying for decades, the Libertarians and the Greens. They never win any seats in Congress, and they never get more than a couple of percentage points in the presidential vote. That's despite the fact there will be millions of Americans who agree with them. 'The reason is the American electoral system. Winner takes all, all the way down.' In Australia, you can vote for a Green, or a Teal, or an independent, and then preference one of the major parties. So even if your preferred minor candidate fails to win, your vote doesn't die with them; it still matters in deciding whether Labor or the Coalition takes the seat. 'We can vote for One Nation and still preference the Coalition. We can vote for the Greens and still preference Labor. If you vote for a minor party, that doesn't mean giving away your right to choose between the two parties who will actually win,' Prof Smith explained. The structure of our Senate is another factor that restrains the dominance of the major parties. 'In the Upper House, we have proportional representation, which means that if a party gets 10 per cent of the vote, generally they get 10 per cent of the seats,' he said. 'These are the ways we let minor parties into the system. There's just nothing like that in the United States.' The American system does not have preferences, and that kneecaps third-party candidates. Say you're running for Congress under Mr Musk's banner in next year's midterms. How do you convince people they wouldn't be throwing their votes away by supporting you? 'There is no way for third parties or for independents to really break into that system, because when Americans vote for a third party or an independent, they are effectively giving up their choice over whether the Democrats or the Republicans will win,' Prof Smith said. 'That's how entrenched the two-party system is. When every single race is just 'whoever gets the most votes wins', people believe it's going to be one of the big parties. They are going to be very reluctant to vote for anybody else. 'So it's nearly impossible for any third party or candidate, no matter how much money they have, to break in from outside. 'What we see in the US is that, when outsiders come in, they do it through the major parties.' One glaringly obvious example of this comes to mind: the current President, Mr Trump. When he entered politics in 2015 after flirting with the idea for decades, Mr Trump did not mount an independent campaign for the presidency. Instead he sought the Republican Party's nomination, and vanquished a field of more conventional party insiders to claim it. Fast forward a decade, and the party has become his own. He transformed American politics from within one of the major parties, not from without. 'Trump managed to win a Republican primary without having ever been in politics before,' Prof Smith noted. 'In New York, we've just seen Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, winning the Democratic primary. 'So that is how outsiders come into American politics. It's through the major parties. It's not from outside of them. 'Really, anybody would find it very difficult to bring in a new party that could do anything except sometimes act as a spoiler, which is what the Greens and Libertarians do.' In fairness to Mr Musk, his stated aim here with the America Party is not some pie in the sky fantasy like winning the presidency. Rather he has spoken of claiming a handful of congressional seats, or maybe three or four Senate seats, which would give his party huge influence over the passage of legislation. The idea is that neither major party could get anything done without Musk-backed votes. Even that goal, however, is a stretch. The structural problem, the hostility of America's system towards third parties, still lurks in the background. 'Even that is a really tall order,' Prof Smith said of Mr Musk's target. 'When you look at the records of people from outside the two major parties contesting these races, it's very rare that you see someone getting above 20 per cent. And that's really unusual. Usually it's a lot lower than that. 'When he's talking about targeting particularly close and high profile House races: those will be the races where people are most aware of the potential spoiler effect. So that could actually be a problem, targeting those races, because those might be the ones where people are particularly averse to voting for anyone other than the major parties.' Another problem: how can Mr Musk's new party attract talent, given the most ambitious among America's potential politicians will know their easiest route to prominence and power is to sign up with the Republicans or Democrats? Contrary to what you might think, watching the Democrats flail around fecklessly, and the Republicans' efforts to pioneer heretofor unthinkable levels of spinelessness, the quality of the candidate in these congressional races does matter. 'Talented candidates are going to realise that if they really want to hit the big time, they're going to need to go through a major party,' said Prof Smith. 'Elon himself has very high name recognition, which is a huge bonus when you're trying to get into politics, as it was for Trump. 'But of course, Elon himself could never run for president. He would have to find somebody else to front his party, and it wouldn't be anybody with the kind of name recognition he has.' America's Constitution bars anyone other than a natural-born citizen from becoming president. Mr Musk is a citizen, but he was born in South Africa. Which places him in the role of party founder and funder, but restricts his capacity to personally lead it. Still, he will be inescapably associated with the America Party. And that, too, could present a challenge. Or several. 'The other thing that's working against him is it's not really clear what his constituency would be,' Prof Smith said. 'I mean, Elon's supporters are generally, these days, a section of the Republican Party. Some of them might really like what Elon has to say. He wants low taxes, he wants a lot less regulation of everything. He's got this futuristic vision of a tech-led America. 'But really, most of those people are, at the end of the day, going to vote Republican. It's going to be a big concern, for them, to get Democrats out, and to do that, they vote for the Republicans, they don't vote for Elon. 'They will be conscious that if they were to vote for Elon, they might actually be taking votes away from the Republican Party. 'Elon, I suppose the party that he'd be closest to currently, apart from the Republicans, would be the Libertarians, and they've already got their own established constituency. It's really hard to see what niche he is filling in American politics.' Prof Smith did stress that, even if the America Party were to fall short of winning races, 'there are other ways' in which Mr Musk could exert his influence on politics. 'His candidates could be spoiler candidates, just siphoning a few votes off Republicans. He could, given his money and resources, he could run massive advertising campaigns. So he can definitely influence politics and exercise power, in a way, but I just don't see his party being very likely to get representation.' The other factor here of course, the other billionaire with a famously large ego in the conversation, is Mr Trump. And the President did feel the need to weigh in on Mr Musk's new party this week. 'I think it's ridiculous to start a third party,' he told reporters. 'It has always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to the confusion.' He was a touch ruder on social media, accusing Mr Musk of going 'off the rails' and 'essentially becoming a trainwreck'. 'He even wants to start a third political party, despite the fact that they have never succeeded in the United States,' Mr Trump wrote. Prof Smith said that, to be fair, 'some of the stuff' Mr Trump threw at Mr Musk this week 'is probably true'. 'The fact that Trump is spending so much time on this, though – what it shows you is Republicans, like the Democrats, they get very, very worried about potential spoilers. 'In the lead-up to the 2016, 2020 and 2024 elections, all parties spent massive efforts to try to get spoilers out of the race.' As the foremost example, he cited Robert F. Kennedy Jr, the son of former US attorney-general Robert F. Kennedy. Mr Kennedy, an environmental lawyer who gained a following as something of a conspiracy theorist on health matters – vaccines, etc – ran as an independent last year before eventually dropping out and endorsing Mr Trump. His reward was to be appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services, putting him in charge of federal health policy. Which is worth a whole other article, another time. 'In the middle of 2024, it looked like he could seriously siphon some votes away from Donald Trump, so Trump basically got him out of the race by buying him off, by promising him the Health and Human Services position,' said Prof Smith. 'So these parties will do anything to try to keep spoiler candidates out of the race. What I think you would see is Republicans mounting all kinds of efforts to try to keep Elon's party off the ballot in various states.' That leads to some complicated legal calculus. 'This is where the whole sort of localised complexity of US politics becomes a problem for Elon because every state has different requirements for parties getting on the ballot, some of which are quite onerous,' he said. 'I'm sure there will be a lot of legal challenges. Given how close some of these races are, even a spoiler candidate who gets a few thousand votes could be a real problem. 'So the thoughtfulness of Trump's reaction shows that, while Elon doesn't have a hope of winning any seats, he certainly could siphon a few vital votes away.'
