Small / economy car deathwatch: we've passed "peak econobox" again

[MetroMPG]

Yikes! What the heck happened to this thread? Big mess to clean up.


----


On-topic: I read a rumour that the Honda Fit is on the chopping block in the U.S. The next gen Fit/Jazz has been spotted testing (in camo) -- destined for other markets, and will be unveiled in a few weeks at the Tokyo auto show (Jalopnik link).


.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

It wouldn't surprise me if Honda simply brings the WR-V as a replacement for the Fit there.

[MetroMPG]

I didn't even know about the WRV.

The HRV is built on the Fit platform... I figure it's already the car's replacement.

Honda sold 85000 HRV's vs just 35000 Fits in the US last year.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

I didn't even know about the WRV.

The HRV is built on the Fit platform... I figure it's already the car's replacement.

Honda sold 85000 HRV's vs just 35000 Fits in the US last year.

The new Fit will be shown for the first time 23-October at the Tokyo Auto Show. Honda won't confirm whether the new car will come to the USA or not.

I suspect it comes down to the tariff situation. The current Fit and HRV are made in Mexico. Honda needs to build more HRVs at that plant to avoid Chicken Tax tariffs. The logical move would be to import the Fit from one of their other plants.

That is if they believe Trump won't decided to add tariffs to cars like he is threatening to do. Companies don't like to throw away millions of dollars tooling up a car they would have to sell at a loss.

[Xist]

I would hate to need to plan around someone as erratic as Turnip.

[redpoint5]

Are the tariffs erratic?

Tariffs aren't good, but the only way to fight them is to use them. A misuse of tariffs is to attempt to protect particular domestic industries, but the proper use is in response to a tariff enacted by another country. The whole point being to cause enough pain that both parties agree to free trade (or near to it).

[Piotrsko]

Well documented that tariffs really only affect the user/importer. The target is free to sell to other users, or shuffle around to non tariff places for export.

[redpoint5]

I'm not necessarily for the tariffs, but this has been an issue for a long time;

Wiki

As a new member, China agreed to rapidly lower import tariffs and open its markets, although many trade officials doubted it would stand by those promises.[20] China did cut tariffs after it joined the WTO, but it nonetheless continued to steal U.S. intellectual property (IP) and forced American companies to transfer technology to access the Chinese market, which were violations of WTO rules.[20]
In 2008, the WTO issued a formal ruling against China for requiring foreign automakers operating there to buy most components from local suppliers or face higher tariffs, 25 percent, instead of the normal 10 percent. The WTO agreed that it amounted to an unfair discrimination against foreign parts, a violation of global trade rules.[21] The original complaint was filed in 2006 by the European Union, the United States and Canada, by which time there had already been accusations against China for using a combination of subsidies, tax incentives and an undervalued currency to gain an unfair advantage over foreign companies operating in China.[21]
China lowered its average import tariffs to 10% by 2005 from the 40% it maintained in the 1990s.[20] In 2005 Chinese exports to the U.S. increased 31 percent, but imports from the U.S. rose only 16 percent. And while the U.S. trade deficit with China was $90.2 billion in 2001 ($130 billion in 2019 dollars), it nearly doubled by 2005.[20] In the four years after joining the WTO, China in general complied with many of its legal obligations, including passing laws and meeting deadlines. However, it was slow to enforce intellectual property rights and add transparency to its industrial rules and regulations, which made it difficult for U.S. businesses to access its market.[20] By 2019 the estimated costs to the U.S. economy from Chinese IP theft was between $225 billion and $600 billion annually.[22]
The Obama administration confronted other issues in 2010, when it opened an investigation into whether the Chinese government was subsidizing its alternative energy companies, such as solar and wind turbine, in violation of WTO guidelines that it agreed to. It was one of the first challenges of China's alleged efforts to control major growing industries.[23] As explained by Obama's Trade Representative, Ron Kirk, "Green technology will be an engine for the jobs of the future, and this administration is committed to ensuring a level playing field for American workers."[23]
United Steelworkers President Leo Gerard said that those subsidies were in "direct violation" of WTO rules.[24] Along with disallowed subsidies, Gerard pointed out that U.S. firms establishing joint ventures with Chinese companies must surrender technologies and designs as a condition of doing business:

So the whole world and the Obama administration took issue with China, and Trump did something about it. Not necessarily the right thing, as I don't expect China to cease IP theft. It's easy to steal IP compared to shoes or other physical goods China manufactures.

[freebeard]

I would hate to need to plan around someone as erratic as Turnip.

So who's erratic and who's a very stable genius?

[Xist]

I need to explain to you guys that negotiating with the POTUS is like fighting a drunk? You never know what he is going to do, nor when he will change policy.

Stable genius? I do not have any idea. Is there one in politics? I would not look for one in the current administration or most of his opposition.

Good luck us!