On October 30, the EU decided to impose additional tariffs on electric vehicles imported from China. On the basis of the original 10% tariff, BYD was levied 17.0%, Geely was levied 18.8%, and SAIC faced a 35.3% tariff. Other partner companies will be subject to a 20.7% tariff, wh

On October 30, the European Union decided to impose additional tariffs on electric vehicles imported from China.

On the basis of the original 10% tariff, BYD was levied 17.0%, Geely was levied 18.8%, and SAIC faced a 35.3% tariff. Other partner companies will be charged a 20.7% tariff, while and Tesla will be charged a 7.8% rate after filing a separate review request. All other non-cooperating companies will be subject to a 35.3% tariff.

On the surface, this seems to be the EU's intention to protect the local automobile industry, but in fact it may trigger a series of vicious chain reactions, and the final result will inevitably be to shoot itself in the foot.

A ridiculous excuse that doesn’t hold water

First of all, one thing needs to be clear, that is, the EU’s excuse for imposing sanctions on Chinese electric vehicles is completely untenable. The argument put forward by the European Commission turned out to be that Chinese car companies, under the protection of "illegal" government subsidies, created "cheap" electric cars to impact the European car market, constituting so-called unfair competition. Based on this, they claimed that in order to maintain market fairness, it was necessary to impose sanctions on Chinese cars by imposing additional tariffs.

However, this argument completely ignores the objective laws of the market and the real choices of consumers. The successful entry of Chinese electric vehicles into the European market did not rely on any "illegal" subsidies, but completely followed the objective laws of the market economy. This is a choice made by European consumers based on their actual purchasing behavior after careful comparison and deliberation.

Why don’t European people favor European local electric vehicles?

The answer is simple. With its excellent cost performance and continuous technological innovation, Chinese electric vehicles are gradually winning the love and trust of more and more consumers. In the emerging field of new energy vehicles, China has not only made significant progress in battery technology, electronic control and charging technology, but also leads the world in intelligent network technology. Compared with its foreign counterparts, China has achieved "far ahead" in these key technological fields.

According to data, China's new energy vehicle production will reach 9.587 million units in 2023, a year-on-year increase of 35.8%; sales volume will reach 9.495 million units, a year-on-year increase of 37.9%. In overseas markets, China's new energy vehicle exports also reached 1.203 million units, a year-on-year increase of 77.2%. This series of data not only demonstrates the strong growth momentum of China's new energy vehicle industry, but also further consolidates China's leading position and voice in the global new energy vehicle market.

Therefore, the so-called " countervailing duties " imposed by the EU on Chinese cars are nothing more than a carefully crafted excuse for Europe to "reverse" and engage in "trade protectionism."

A trade trap that harms others and harms itself

The EU’s approach to trade protection is undoubtedly a blatant challenge to market rules and a huge obstacle to economic development. The latest "Global Economic Prospects" report released by the World Bank reveals the negative impact of trade protectionism with authoritative data and in-depth analysis. The report pointed out that global economic growth is expected to slow down for the third consecutive year in 2024, and the rise of trade protectionism is one of the important factors leading to this trend. The increase in trade barriers has caused the cost of international trade to continue to rise and the trade volume to decline, which in turn has had a serious impact on the economic development of various countries.

Of course, some people try to defend trade protectionism, believing that it is a necessary means to protect local industries and safeguard national interests. However, history and reality have repeatedly proven how short-sighted and wrong this view is. Trade protectionism not only fails to bring expected benefits, but is a trap that harms others, ourselves and the world.

Take the United States in 2018 as an example. In order to so-called "protect domestic industry and national security", the U.S. government imposed tariffs of up to 25% and 10% respectively on imported steel and aluminum products. At that time, the reason given by the U.S. government was that imported steel and aluminum products seriously damaged U.S. domestic industries and even threatened national security. However, the actual effect of this policy is very different from the original intention, and can even be said to run counter to it. The imposition of tariffs did not save the decline of the U.S. steel and aluminum industries as the U.S. government expected. Instead, it triggered a global trade backlash. Major trading partners of the United States, including China, the European Union, and Japan, have expressed their opposition and taken corresponding countermeasures. These countermeasures have caused a sharp increase in the cost of U.S. steel imports, and the prices of domestic steel and aluminum products have also increased. As a result, the downstream manufacturing industry has been under tremendous cost pressure, and many companies have had to reduce production scale or even lay off employees to cope with the pressure of rising costs.

In this way, the policy that originally hoped to protect domestic industries through tariffs has caused greater harm to the U.S. economy. Rising unemployment, declining corporate profits, and weakening consumer purchasing power... This series of chain reactions has forced the U.S. government to re-examine its trade policy. However, the negative consequences of trade protectionism have undoubtedly emerged, and it will be difficult to recover losses at this time.

European car companies whose future has been cut off

Currently, the global automobile industry is accelerating the transformation from fuel-driven to new energy. This trend is not only driven by economic interests, but also stems from deep concern for environmental protection. It provides us with a new way to escape the energy crisis and achieve sustainable development. . You know, compared with traditional fuel vehicles, the cost of using electric vehicles can be reduced by more than 50%, and their environmental pollution is greatly reduced.

Therefore, in Europe with strong environmental awareness, new energy vehicles have undoubtedly become the best choice. However, before this, the price of European electric vehicles was often tens of thousands of yuan higher than that of equivalent fuel vehicles. They were "high-tech products" that were beyond the reach of many people, and their price-performance ratio pales in comparison to Chinese cars.

So, the rise of China's electric vehicles in the global market is no accident. We have a strong manufacturing foundation and a complete industrial chain. On this basis, it is difficult to replace the three electrical systems (battery, motor, electronic control) of automobiles developed and produced in China. The reason is not only the leading technology, but also the effective control of costs in China. Taking BYD Qin as an example, its 99,800 yuan The price is beyond the reach of foreign counterparts!

Europe, which has a worrying development situation of new energy vehicles, has now chosen to build trade barriers with China and shut out China’s new energy vehicle supply chain. This means that the price of electric vehicles in Europe will be nothing compared to that of fuel vehicles. Without competitiveness, how can consumers pay for it? Without consumers to buy, how can car companies raise funds for development? This will lead to a vicious cycle.

In addition, a closed market environment will, due to the lack of pressure from foreign competitors, cause local car companies to most likely "rest on their laurels". European companies will continue to indulge in the "brilliance" of traditional fuel vehicles and be unable to extricate themselves, reducing the need for technological innovation or innovation. Improving production efficiency to maintain the competitiveness of new energy vehicles will lead to a decline in the innovation power of the entire industry. This will hinder the upgrading and iteration of the industry and make Europe completely fall behind in the transformation of new energy vehicles.

Obviously, the EU’s sanctions on Chinese electric vehicles are a game without a winner. In the context of global economic integration, trade protectionism will only put all parties in trouble. As German Chancellor Scholz said, the rise of China's electric vehicles is a general trend. Rather than trying to block it, it is better to actively embrace it. We still advise the EU to abandon the short-sighted approach of trade protectionism as soon as possible and end this farce of "shooting stones to smash feet" as soon as possible.

On October 30, the European Union decided to impose additional tariffs on electric vehicles imported from China.

On the basis of the original 10% tariff, BYD was levied 17.0%, Geely was levied 18.8%, and SAIC faced a 35.3% tariff. Other partner companies will be charged a 20.7% tariff, while and Tesla will be charged a 7.8% rate after filing a separate review request. All other non-cooperating companies will be subject to a 35.3% tariff.

On the surface, this seems to be the EU's intention to protect the local automobile industry, but in fact it may trigger a series of vicious chain reactions, and the final result will inevitably be to shoot itself in the foot.

A ridiculous excuse that doesn’t hold water

First of all, one thing needs to be clear, that is, the EU’s excuse for imposing sanctions on Chinese electric vehicles is completely untenable. The argument put forward by the European Commission turned out to be that Chinese car companies, under the protection of "illegal" government subsidies, created "cheap" electric cars to impact the European car market, constituting so-called unfair competition. Based on this, they claimed that in order to maintain market fairness, it was necessary to impose sanctions on Chinese cars by imposing additional tariffs.

However, this argument completely ignores the objective laws of the market and the real choices of consumers. The successful entry of Chinese electric vehicles into the European market did not rely on any "illegal" subsidies, but completely followed the objective laws of the market economy. This is a choice made by European consumers based on their actual purchasing behavior after careful comparison and deliberation.

Why don’t European people favor European local electric vehicles?

The answer is simple. With its excellent cost performance and continuous technological innovation, Chinese electric vehicles are gradually winning the love and trust of more and more consumers. In the emerging field of new energy vehicles, China has not only made significant progress in battery technology, electronic control and charging technology, but also leads the world in intelligent network technology. Compared with its foreign counterparts, China has achieved "far ahead" in these key technological fields.

According to data, China's new energy vehicle production will reach 9.587 million units in 2023, a year-on-year increase of 35.8%; sales volume will reach 9.495 million units, a year-on-year increase of 37.9%. In overseas markets, China's new energy vehicle exports also reached 1.203 million units, a year-on-year increase of 77.2%. This series of data not only demonstrates the strong growth momentum of China's new energy vehicle industry, but also further consolidates China's leading position and voice in the global new energy vehicle market.

Therefore, the so-called " countervailing duties " imposed by the EU on Chinese cars are nothing more than a carefully crafted excuse for Europe to "reverse" and engage in "trade protectionism."

A trade trap that harms others and harms itself

The EU’s approach to trade protection is undoubtedly a blatant challenge to market rules and a huge obstacle to economic development. The latest "Global Economic Prospects" report released by the World Bank reveals the negative impact of trade protectionism with authoritative data and in-depth analysis. The report pointed out that global economic growth is expected to slow down for the third consecutive year in 2024, and the rise of trade protectionism is one of the important factors leading to this trend. The increase in trade barriers has caused the cost of international trade to continue to rise and the trade volume to decline, which in turn has had a serious impact on the economic development of various countries.

Of course, some people try to defend trade protectionism, believing that it is a necessary means to protect local industries and safeguard national interests. However, history and reality have repeatedly proven how short-sighted and wrong this view is. Trade protectionism not only fails to bring expected benefits, but is a trap that harms others, ourselves and the world.

Take the United States in 2018 as an example. In order to so-called "protect domestic industry and national security", the U.S. government imposed tariffs of up to 25% and 10% respectively on imported steel and aluminum products. At that time, the reason given by the U.S. government was that imported steel and aluminum products seriously damaged U.S. domestic industries and even threatened national security. However, the actual effect of this policy is very different from the original intention, and can even be said to run counter to it. The imposition of tariffs did not save the decline of the U.S. steel and aluminum industries as the U.S. government expected. Instead, it triggered a global trade backlash. Major trading partners of the United States, including China, the European Union, and Japan, have expressed their opposition and taken corresponding countermeasures. These countermeasures have caused a sharp increase in the cost of U.S. steel imports, and the prices of domestic steel and aluminum products have also increased. As a result, the downstream manufacturing industry has been under tremendous cost pressure, and many companies have had to reduce production scale or even lay off employees to cope with the pressure of rising costs.

In this way, the policy that originally hoped to protect domestic industries through tariffs has caused greater harm to the U.S. economy. Rising unemployment, declining corporate profits, and weakening consumer purchasing power... This series of chain reactions has forced the U.S. government to re-examine its trade policy. However, the negative consequences of trade protectionism have undoubtedly emerged, and it will be difficult to recover losses at this time.

European car companies whose future has been cut off

Currently, the global automobile industry is accelerating the transformation from fuel-driven to new energy. This trend is not only driven by economic interests, but also stems from deep concern for environmental protection. It provides us with a new way to escape the energy crisis and achieve sustainable development. . You know, compared with traditional fuel vehicles, the cost of using electric vehicles can be reduced by more than 50%, and their environmental pollution is greatly reduced.

Therefore, in Europe with strong environmental awareness, new energy vehicles have undoubtedly become the best choice. However, before this, the price of European electric vehicles was often tens of thousands of yuan higher than that of equivalent fuel vehicles. They were "high-tech products" that were beyond the reach of many people, and their price-performance ratio pales in comparison to Chinese cars.

So, the rise of China's electric vehicles in the global market is no accident. We have a strong manufacturing foundation and a complete industrial chain. On this basis, it is difficult to replace the three electrical systems (battery, motor, electronic control) of automobiles developed and produced in China. The reason is not only the leading technology, but also the effective control of costs in China. Taking BYD Qin as an example, its 99,800 yuan The price is beyond the reach of foreign counterparts!

Europe, which has a worrying development situation of new energy vehicles, has now chosen to build trade barriers with China and shut out China’s new energy vehicle supply chain. This means that the price of electric vehicles in Europe will be nothing compared to that of fuel vehicles. Without competitiveness, how can consumers pay for it? Without consumers to buy, how can car companies raise funds for development? This will lead to a vicious cycle.

In addition, a closed market environment will, due to the lack of pressure from foreign competitors, cause local car companies to most likely "rest on their laurels". European companies will continue to indulge in the "brilliance" of traditional fuel vehicles and be unable to extricate themselves, reducing the need for technological innovation or innovation. Improving production efficiency to maintain the competitiveness of new energy vehicles will lead to a decline in the innovation power of the entire industry. This will hinder the upgrading and iteration of the industry and make Europe completely fall behind in the transformation of new energy vehicles.

Obviously, the EU’s sanctions on Chinese electric vehicles are a game without a winner. In the context of global economic integration, trade protectionism will only put all parties in trouble. As German Chancellor Scholz said, the rise of China's electric vehicles is a general trend. Rather than trying to block it, it is better to actively embrace it. We still advise the EU to abandon the short-sighted approach of trade protectionism as soon as possible and end this farce of "shooting stones to smash feet" as soon as possible.