UAW urges Congress to keep watch on Chinese automakers

The United Auto Workers (UAW) has urged congressional leaders to keep the House Select Committee on China in place when Democrats take control of the chamber, as labour and industry push for a permanent statutory ban on Chinese automakers before the year ends. The coalition is united on keeping Chinese imports out, but divided over whether Chinese companies should be allowed to build cars in the US; on that question President Trump sits on the other side of the line.

“From global overcapacity in electric vehicles (EVs), Chinese ownership of Western automakers, and continued offshoring to China, we urgently need Congress’s focused attention on these issues and their rapidly emerging downstream effects,” the UAW wrote to House Speaker Mike Johnson and Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries. “Autoworkers cannot afford any lapse in Congress’s attention on this issue.” Under Republican Representative John Moolenaar, the committee has investigated Ford’s battery partnership with CATL and the abandoned plan by a subsidiary of Gotion to build a US$2.4bn battery materials plant in Michigan.

The legislative vehicle is the Connected Vehicle Security Act, co-authored by Democratic Senator Elissa Slotkin and Republican Senator Bernie Moreno, which has cleared the Senate Commerce Committee. Moreno has recently stated he was getting “really, really close” to a deal, and hoped for a Senate vote as early as next week. A lobbying group representing GM, Toyota, Volkswagen and other major automakers continues to press lawmakers for the work to be finished this year.

As it stands, a Chinese market entry in the US is nearly impossible. A rule introduced under former President Joe Biden in early 2025 already effectively bars Chinese automakers from selling or building passenger vehicles in the US, and Washington maintains tariffs of more than 100% on Chinese EVs.

The new urgency stems from the fact that executive rules can be undone, and the president most likely to undo them is the current one. President Trump has signalled openness for years, telling Fox News in September that he would be comfortable with Chinese car companies building vehicles in the US, saying: “If they want to come in and build a plant and hire American workers, I love that.” Six industry groups representing virtually every automaker operating in the US responded with a joint letter urging him to keep “the door firmly shut” ahead of his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping that month. In this sense, a statutory ban is as much a hedge against the current White House as against any future administration.

Beyond imports, the coalition splinters: some legislative proposals would restrict brands in which Chinese entities hold more than 15% equity, and the UAW wants a blanket restriction. However, Ford has pitched to administration officials a framework requiring Chinese automakers to enter through joint ventures in which an US partner holds at least 51%, inverting the rules China long imposed on foreign carmakers.

Reports indicated that Ford has gone a great deal further than pitching the Trump administration; earlier this year it dismissed reports of a specific joint venture with Xiaomi as “false”, yet it has already agreed to build vehicles for Geely at its idle Valencia plant in Spain from 2028. Meanwhile, GM is lobbying against any joint venture framework as a route for low-cost rivals into the market.

Drawing the line on ownership is harder than it looks. The UAW’s reference to “Chinese ownership of Western automakers” points at companies already embedded in US manufacturing: Geely’s majority-owned Volvo Cars assembles vehicles in South Carolina, while fellow Geely brand Polestar will soon depart the market entirely. More complicated is that Chinese shareholders including Geely founder Li Shufu and BAIC together hold close to a fifth of Mercedes-Benz, which builds in Alabama. An equity test strict enough to satisfy the union risks catching established US employers, which is precisely where the drafting fight is likely to concentrate.

The push for permanence ultimately reads as a hedge against Trump every bit as much as one against China. Codifying the ban would strip any president of the ability to trade US market access in negotiations with Xi, and that, more than the data security case on which the existing rule rests, is why GM, Toyota and the UAW want it settled before the year is out.