Latest news with #AdvancedCleanCarsII
Miami Herald
16-06-2025
- Automotive
- Miami Herald
Stellantis still on the hook for California EV rules, despite relief for competitors
WASHINGTON - Even after lawmakers and President Donald Trump canceled California's strictest-in-the-nation automotive emissions standards, Stellantis NV remains on the hook for electric vehicle sales requirements that will be difficult to meet. That's because the transatlantic automaker signed a settlement agreement in 2024 promising to comply with future Golden State policies, regardless of any "judicial or federal action" preventing its latest rules from taking effect. The deal, inked under embattled former CEO Carlos Tavares, was made in exchange for California forgiving past regulatory compliance shortfalls, and helped avoid potentially lengthy litigation between the two sides. But now the company behind the Jeep, Dodge and Ram brands - long known for their brawny, gas-guzzling offerings - will need to hit aggressive state milestones requiring more than half of new vehicles sold by model year 2028 to be electric. That figure rises to 68% by 2030, the final year of the settlement agreement. That's a tall order for any legacy automaker, and especially for EV-light Stellantis as it delays some electric offerings amid waning demand. It also comes just as the carmaker's competition appears set to face looser regulations in the nation's largest new vehicle market. Both Stellantis and the California Air Resources Board said in emails to The Detroit News that they would abide by last year's settlement. Said company spokesperson Jodi Tinson: "Stellantis continues to honor its agreement with CARB." CARB spokesperson John Swanton provided a similar response: "Yes, the agreement remains in place, and we fully expect Stellantis to comply." He added that CARB has been in "normal contact" with the company since Congress acted in May to revoke California's permission to enforce its latest set of regulations. Those regulations, known as Advanced Clean Cars II, would have required automakers in California and participating states to achieve 100% zero-emission vehicle sales for new models by 2035. The standards defined ZEVs as fully battery-electric vehicles or hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, which remain a barely available technology. The auto industry successfully lobbied against those standards. On Thursday, President Donald Trump signed legislation blocking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency waivers that let California set several of its own influential emissions policies. The deal But Stellantis, according to its agreement with California, is still subject to the rules through the 2030 model year. That means the company will need to quickly boost its electric offerings in a key state representing about 13% of the U.S. auto market. The rules for model year 2026 - some three months away for most automakers - will require 35% ZEV sales. That number will climb to 43% the following year and 68% in 2030. "The idea that Stellantis will have enough EVs on the market by 2030 to reach that level is a problem, because the company itself has redirected its products according to market conditions," said Sam Fiorani, vice president of the research firm AutoForecast Solutions. "And so they'll have fewer EVs out there," he added. "But so will everybody else." Last year, Stellantis offered only one fully electric model in the United States, the Fiat 500e, and it sold only 531 of them nationwide. At the start of this year, it began selling two more EVs: the Jeep Wagoneer S and the Dodge Charger Daytona. But those additions only brought the automaker's total fully electric vehicle sales to about 5,000 for the first quarter, less than 2% of its overall sales. The California standards include a partial allowance for plug-in hybrid models, and Stellantis sells lots of them - more than 103,000 nationwide in 2024. But that still only made up less than 8% of its total sales volume for the year. The settlement agreement, notably, does not bind Stellantis to meet California's EV requirements in other states that pledged to adopt the stringent standards. The company merely committed "to put forth its best efforts to sell as many ZEVs as reasonably possible" in those states. Stellantis agreed to the deal in the first place because it was struggling to comply with California's prior emissions requirements. The company said it was at a competitive disadvantage because the state had previously cut more flexible emissions deals with five other automakers: Ford Motor Co., BMW AG, Honda Motor Co. Ltd., Volkswagen AG and AB Volvo. Stellantis argued at the time, in a petition filed against CARB, that it had been excluded from seeking a similar arrangement. It also stated that the state's stricter requirements would contribute to layoffs at two major plants in Detroit and Toledo. The two parties eventually reached the settlement which included the company's commitment to cut more than 10 million additional tons of greenhouse gas emissions through the 2026 model year, hitting the state's increasingly ambitious EV milestones until 2030, participating in various EV awareness campaigns, and spending $10 million to install public chargers in parks. The automaker agreed not to "challenge or seek to undermine" the agreement. Michael Buschbacher, a partner at the law firm Boyden Gray PLLC, said California is known for pursuing such deals: "It uses whatever levers it can to make people come and do what they want. That's their classic M.O." Extra credits? The deal essentially helped Stellantis get a more favorable short-term compliance path in California for greenhouse gas emissions, similar to the five other automakers who had reached framework agreements several years earlier, said Dan Sperling, a professor of civil engineering and environmental science and policy. Sperling teaches at the University of California, Davis and is a former member of CARB. He said the deal helped Stellantis avoid buying large amounts of zero-emission vehicle credits, which then-CEO Tavares didn't want to do any longer. But in return, the automaker agreed to comply in advance with future regulations. "They got a short-term great deal, but now they're in an awkward situation," Sperling said of Stellantis. It is unclear whether Stellantis will be able to purchase credits to meet its obligations in California, a common practice among automakers to meet federal and state targets. "I think that without ACC II being enforced, the credit model probably does go away," said David Pettit, a California-based attorney and clean transportation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. He continued: "They'd need to, I guess, open up the dispute resolution mechanism in the deal and go to CARB and say, 'Hey, what are we supposed to do? We'd like to acquire some more credits, but the market has gone away. No fault of ours." If California does allow credit trading, the solution could be inexpensive for Stellantis thanks to a credit market collapse. Buschbacher, who represents clients seeking to block pro-EV regulations, said that manufacturers who previously accrued credits with the state will have no other use for them. "They are basically going to be worthless, except for potentially selling them to people like Stellantis," he said. "It's a complicated situation. But I suspect that there's enough out there that Stellantis can probably pay its way to this without changing its behavior too much." What comes next Stellantis dealers in the Golden State are figuring out their next move, now that they could face a competitive disadvantage against other brands. Sean Hogan, the vice president of Sierra Auto Group in Southern California, which includes Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep and Ram stores, said dealers didn't initially realize what was in the contract after it was signed. The automaker's top brass at the time portrayed it as a big win. But once they looked over the details, he said, the retailers realized "it was not a great thing." "We're all nervous," he said of Stellantis dealers in the state. "If it doesn't get resolved, then business could be very difficult for us, and the consumer." Hogan said he doesn't see Stellantis meeting CARB's EV sales milestones in the coming years in large part because charging infrastructure still isn't sufficient in certain areas. EVs, he noted, still seem to sell mostly to people who are wealthier and own their homes. California, according to the climate attorney Pettit, will have discretion over how strongly it pursues regulatory compliance from the company. He also suggested that Stellantis will not be able to evade the contract. "No," he said. "That's a rare direct answer from a lawyer. If they don't meet the goals, then CARB can sue them in state court in California." Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, for his part, has said he will vigorously defend California's ability to set tailpipe emission standards. He signed an executive action on June 12 affirming the state's commitment to ZEV adoption, directing CARB to maintain public data about automakers that most faithfully follow the now-defunct ACC II rules, and ordering the regulator to develop next-generation ACC III standards for the future. "We won't let this illegal action by Trump and Republicans in the pockets of polluters stand in the way of commonsense policy to clean our air, protect the health of our kids and compete on the global stage," the governor said. "I'm signing an executive order to keep California on track with our world-leading transition to cleaner cars." But Buschbacher, who was influential in promoting that action, was more bullish on Stellantis being able to reap the rewards of regulatory rollbacks in Washington. "It sure seems to me like California is attempting to enforce a standard for which it doesn't have a waiver," he said of the agreement. "And the Clean Air Act says you can't do that. It's very explicit about that." For now, the situation remains in flux for a company that has lagged behind crosstown competitors on EVs and sought a quick solution to regulatory woes. Sperling, the former CARB member, summarized Stellantis' position: "They doubled down on risk." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
'Trump Blocks California's Electric Vehicle Mandates: What It Means'
President Donald Trump signed three congressional resolutions Thursday that block California's electric vehicle mandates and emissions standards, effectively preventing the state from setting nationwide environmental regulations for cars and trucks. The measures overturn Environmental Protection Agency waivers that had allowed California to implement its Advanced Clean Cars II, Advanced Clean Trucks, and Omnibus Low NOX programs. Trump called the resolutions 'bipartisan measures' that 'prevent California's attempt to impose a nationwide electric vehicle mandate and to regulate national fuel economy by regulating carbon emissions.' The president argued that vehicle emissions standards should be set at the federal level, not by individual states. 'Our Constitution does not allow one State special status to create standards that limit consumer choice and impose an electric vehicle mandate upon the entire Nation,' Trump said. Under the Congressional Review Act, the EPA is now prohibited from approving future waivers that are 'substantially the same' as those overturned. This effectively bars California from using Clean Air Act provisions to regulate greenhouse gas emissions or mandate electric vehicles in the future. Trump emphasized that Section 209 of the Clean Air Act was designed to address 'only compelling and extraordinary localized issues.' He stated it 'can never again be misused to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, which inherently do not have localized effects.' The resolutions block California from implementing programs that would have phased out new gasoline-powered vehicle sales and imposed stricter emissions standards for diesel trucks and buses. By signing the measures, Trump declared he had ended 'the electric vehicle mandate for good.' The move represents a significant rollback of state-level climate policies that had influenced automaker strategies nationwide.
Los Angeles Times
12-06-2025
- Automotive
- Los Angeles Times
Trump signs laws to kill California auto emission standards. California AG sues
President Donald Trump signed legislation seeking to rescind California's ambitious auto emission standards, including a landmark rule that would've eventually barred sales of new gas-only cars in California by 2035. In a bill signing ceremony in the East Room of the White House on Thursday, Trump slammed California's planned zero-emission requirements for new car sales as 'a disaster for our country.' During a meandering 50-minute speech, he argued that California's regulations would raise car prices, hobble American car companies and place an incredible strain on electrical grids across the country. 'We officially rescue the U.S. auto industry from destruction by terminating the California electric vehicle mandate, once and for all,' Trump said to applause from a room filled with conservative legislators and business representatives. 'This horrible scheme would effectively abolish the internal combustion engine, which most people prefer,' Trump continued. Trump boasted the legislation would 'kill the California mandates forever,' declaring it would dash progressive plans to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles. 'They can't take us to court,' he said. 'They can't do any of the things they can do with the executive orders, and it's permanent.' But moments after he signed the three bills into law, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta led a coalition of 10 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit to challenge Trump's laws, which had been approved by Congress in May. Bonta argued Congress unlawfully acted to upend California's emission rules by invoking the Congressional Review Act, a law designed to allow legislators to rescind major federal rules adopted toward the end of a presidential administration. California and several congressional rules experts have said the Congressional Review Act could not be used to overturn federal waivers that enable California to enforce its auto emission standards. 'We're doing this to ensure future generations inherit a livable planet with breathable air,' Bonta said at a news conference Thursday morning. 'Meanwhile, the president's divisive, partisan agenda is jeopardizing our lives, our economy and our environment. It's reckless, it's illegal, and because of it, we'll be seeing the Trump administration in court again for the 26th time.' By signing these three bills into law, Trump invalidated some of the most innovative regulations adopted by California environmental rule makers and undercut California's long-standing authority to set more rigorous vehicle emission standards: In his second term, Trump has repeatedly attacked California's ambitious auto emission rules, including the Advanced Clean Cars II regulation, which he has incorrectly described as an electric vehicle mandate. The rule does not block the sale of used gas-only cars or other zero-emission vehicles, like hydrogen-powered cars. Because of its historically bad air quality, California is the only state that has been given permission to adopt auto emission standards that are stricter than federal standards. Many other Democratic states adhere to California's auto emission rules, which has put pressure on auto companies to comply with the state's progressive rules. That has irked a number of Republicans, including Trump, who believe there should be a unified slate of auto standards set by the federal government. 'It's had us tied up in knots for years,' Trump said in his remarks Thursday morning. 'They'd pass these crazy rules in California, and 17 states would go by them. The automakers didn't know what to do because they're really building cars for two countries.' But California needs a federal waiver from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for its pace-setting auto emission standards to be enforceable. Michael Regan, the former U.S. EPA administrator under Biden, granted several California waivers, including two in December 2024. The Senate controversially voted to overturn California auto emission rules by using the Congressional Review Act, a law that allows legislators to review and potentially block federal rules adopted toward the end of a presidential administration. However, the Senate parliamentarian and Government Accountability Office had previously determined these federal waivers are not rules, they are administrative orders, and are not subject to the Congressional Review Act. Despite those rulings, the Senate moved ahead with the vote and advanced the bill to Trump's desk with a simple majority vote.
The Hill
12-06-2025
- Automotive
- The Hill
California, coalition of states sue Trump over move to revoke EV mandate
California officials on Thursday filed their 26th lawsuit against the Trump administration, after the president signed resolutions overturning the Golden State's landmark electric vehicle (EV) mandate. 'We made a promise that if the president attempted to illegally interfere with our clean air standards, we'd hold him accountable in court,' California Attorney General Rob Bonta said at a press conference announcing the lawsuit. 'Today, we are making good on that promise,' he added. Bonta submitted the complaint in the Northern District of California together with his colleagues in Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. He said he filed the lawsuit moments after Trump signed three congressional resolutions, which California regulations that had aimed to phase out gas-powered cars by 2035 — and then prompted 11 other states to follow suit. Rather than directly overturning the rules, the resolutions revoked the Biden administration's authorization of the Golden State's policy. This action occurred via the Congressional Review Act (CRA), which enables the repeal of recently approved regulations with a simple majority. 'We refuse to let this unprecedented and illegal use of the CRA undermine the Clean Air Act waivers that give California the authority to enforce our own mission standards,' Bonta said. The attorney general was referring to California's unique ability to set stronger-than-federal standards through a 1970 Clean Air Act clause, written amid historic smog conditions in the Los Angeles area. To do so, however, the Golden State must first apply to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a waiver for each proposed rule — and only following that approval can other states adopt similar such thresholds. The waiver targeted by Congress and the Trump administration through the CRA received the EPA's approval in December under then-President Biden and enabled the implementation of several key California regulations. Among the rules repealed as a result of the resolutions is California's Advanced Clean Cars II rule, which required that 35 percent of cars sold in the state in 2026 to be zero-emissions, 68 percent in 2030 and 100 percent in 2035. A second rule was the Golden State's 'Omnibus regulation,' which sought to cut heavy-duty nitrogen oxide emissions by 90 percent, revamp engine testing procedures and further extend engine warranties. A third was the Advanced Clean Trucks rule — a regulation that has focused on accelerating the state's transition to less-polluting trucks and would have required 7.5 percent of these vehicles to be emissions-free by 2035. 'Trump's all-out assault on California continues – and this time he's destroying our clean air and America's global competitiveness in the process,' Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) said in a statement on Thursday. 'We are suing to stop this latest illegal action by a President who is a wholly-owned subsidiary of big polluters.' Bonta, meanwhile, emphasized that no federal administration, Democrat or Republican, has ever voiced disapproval of California's emissions waivers. 'The federal government's actions are not only unlawful, they're irrational and wildly partisan,' he said. 'They come at the direct expense of the health and the well-being of our people, of Californians.' Accusing Trump of adhering to a 'divisive, partisan agenda' that is endangering the economy, the environment and American lives, Bonta emphasized California's commitment to ensuring that 'future generations inherit a livable planet with breathable air.' 'We don't expect the president's barrage of unlawful, chaotic and disruptive executive orders and actions to slow down, which means neither will our work ahead,' he added.
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Opinion - Governors should end California's ludicrous and harmful electric vehicle mandate
In the Biden administration's waning days, the Environmental Protection Agency granted California permission to implement an electric vehicle mandate that several other states adopted, despite the economic turmoil it would create for American consumers and businesses. In granting a waiver to implement California's Advanced Clean Cars II regulations, the EPA attempted to clear the road for other states to go beyond existing federal regulations and sign on to California's pledge to meet escalating annual electric vehicle sales quotas that effectively ban gas-powered and conventional hybrid cars by forcing zero-emissions vehicles to comprise 100 percent of all new car sales by 2035. Twelve states and the District of Columbia have hitched their wagons to California's regulations. In response, Congress recently passed a Congressional Review Act measure to revoke the EPA waiver that gave California effective permission to ban new gas and hybrid power vehicles. Notably, 35 House Democrats and Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) joined with Republicans in voting to repeal the waiver. President Trump should waste no time in signing the Congressional Review Act resolution into law, despite California's promise to challenge Congress's authority to rescind the waiver in court. Legal challenges aside, when it comes to electric vehicles, reality is proving to be a stubborn obstacle to politicians' zeal and environmentalists' wishful thinking. Traditional cars with gas engines and newer hybrid engines are widely popular because they are budget-friendly. In addition, the market conditions and infrastructure capabilities are nowhere near ready for the fantastical transition demanded by the new mandates — one that will be massively expensive for American families and taxpayers. A recent national survey showed that 65 percent of America's middle class struggles financially. Forty percent of all Americans are unable to plan beyond their next paycheck. Factor in inflation and the costs and effects of Trump's tariffs, and consumers agree the future looks bleak. Out of all their wallet worries, electricity prices are an extra-sore spot for consumers, with already spiking rates expected to increase as much as 30 percent for more than 65 million Americans. Consumers' grim economic outlook, shaky purchasing power and genuine infrastructure concerns are reflected in zero-emissions vehicles' lackluster national sales. Even the more ambitious forecasts have sales falling short, recognizing that national electric vehicle sales may reach only 16 percent in 2028 — the same year California's and the others states' rules would require electric vehicles to account for a whopping 51 percent of new vehicle sales. Some of these states have electric vehicle sales rates in single digits. Even California, where electric vehicles account for a relatively high 25 percent of new car sales, is lagging far behind its own requirements. Electric vehicles currently make sense for affluent early adopters with large amounts of disposable income and lifestyle habits to transition ahead of others — not so much for those in less fortunate economic positions. Even groups pushing for more adoption of electric and hybrid vehicles admit that 'electric cars still cost 25 percent more' than other vehicles. Electric vehicle owners in more privileged situations also face challenges. Some are stranded in 'charging deserts,' far from public infrastructure, and thus face a lose-lose proposition: They have to choose between installing a $1,000-$2,500 at-home charger or overload their circuits and run up electricity bills by plugging into existing outlets. If drivers are fortunate enough to live a reasonable distance from one of the 64,000 public electric vehicles chargers, data shows one in five simply don't work. New Jersey was quick to hitch itself to California's electric vehicles mandate, and businesses in the state have been sounding the alarm. The New Jersey Business and Industry Association recently urged Gov. Phil Murphy (D) to stop this rule taking effect, which they said 'will significantly add costs for both consumers and businesses during a severe affordability crisis.' In contrast, governors in Maryland, Delaware, New York and Massachusetts — all Democrats — have taken recent executive actions to steer their states away from onerous and unworkable sales quotas by delaying or withdrawing the associated penalties. Too many Americans are worried their families' income will not be enough to afford high housing, grocery and electricity prices, as well as price hikes from tariffs. Instead of adding to that burden by leaving Sacramento in the driver's seat, governors of all these states should give their constituents a reprieve from California's impractical and economically back-breaking mandate by delaying enforcement or withdrawing entirely. Mario H. Lopez is the president of the Hispanic Leadership Fund, a public policy advocacy organization that promotes liberty, opportunity and prosperity for all. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
