The relationship between Ford and some Chinese companies opened a new front of discussion in the United States. The administration of Donald Trump looks with concern at the agreements the automakerins or studies with Chinese companies, while the manufacturer assures its decisions respond to a concrete need to maintain competitiveness, production and jobs.
Jeep recalls more than 328,000 Grand Cherokee for sensitive fault
The questioning came from the hand of Sean Duffy, U.S. Transport Secretary, who put under the lupa the dependence that Ford could be developing against technology and Chinese companies. Its concern focuses especially on sectors considered strategic for the automotive industry, such as batteries and electric vehicles.
Honda raises off-road capacity of the Passport TrailSport 2027
Ford responded by defending his strategy and rejecting the accusations. The company claims that it continues to have a significant weight in U.S. production, exports and industrial employment. He also denied that his moves were designed to boost new Chinese joint ventures within the country.
One of the agreements that fueled the discussion is far from the United States. Ford and Geely are working on a project to keep the Almussafes plant in Valencia, Spain, an important facility for the brand’s European operations, active.
The deal stipulates that Ford will retain 66% of the company, while Geely will have 34%. To make this participation, the Chinese group contributed $259 million, equivalent to the 221 million euros originally envisaged.
The project envisages the arrival of five new models from 2028.There is also the expectation to increase the plant, which currently runs 4,100 workers.
The Valencian factory has the capacity to produce about 500,000 vehicles a year when it works at full capacity. For Ford, the participation of Geely represents an opportunity to make better use of facilities, share costs and gain efficiency in a European market that is undergoing strong transformation.
There, Ford develops a battery plant that uses CATL technology, one of the leading Chinese manufacturers of this component.
The automaker insists that the operation does not imply that CATL controls the installation. Ford will own the plant and the link with the Asian company will be related to a technology license and associated services.
The project envisages approximately 1,700 jobs in the United States, a data Ford uses to defend the economic impact of the operation and remarks that the ownership of the facility will be in U.S. hands.
There were also doubts about the talks held with BYD, another of the great Chinese names of electric mobility. Ford, however, denied that those contacts represent an attempt to establish new Chinese companies within the United States.
The discussion reflects a difficulty that increasingly weighs more on traditional manufacturers. China has a dominant position in battery production, mineral processing and several key components for electric vehicles.
For Ford, resorting to specialized companies can help reduce costs and accelerate projects that would be much more complex if you had to develop all that technology from scratch. For Washington, on the other hand, there is the risk that that strategy will eventually increase China’s dependence on areas considered fundamental for the U.S. industry.
Therefore, the confrontation is not limited to a company and its partners. The expansion of the electric vehicle could lead other Western automakers to make similar decisions, with pressure to remain competitive without being too exposed to suppliers, technology or capital from China.
