Polestar Objects to Proposed Rule Barring Chinese Vehicle Technology

Polestar Objects to Proposed Rule Barring Chinese Vehicle Technology

Polestar, an automaker owned by China’s Geely, expressed concerns about a proposed Biden administration rule that would prohibit the use of Chinese vehicle hardware and software. Polestar claims that this rule would effectively prevent it from selling vehicles in the United States, including those manufactured in its South Carolina facility. The automaker emphasized that a significant portion of its operations are outside China, with only 280 of its 2,800 employees based there.

Polestar’s Global Reach and Workforce

Polestar’s global operations and workforce reflect its international presence. Seven of its ten directors hail from Europe or the United States, and its CEO is German. The company maintains a global presence, with the majority of its employees working outside of China. Polestar argued that the proposed rule fails to consider the company’s substantial U.S. investments and its international affiliations.

Polestar’s Plea to Commerce Department

Polestar urged the Commerce Department to reconsider the rule, questioning its effectiveness in addressing national security concerns. The company argued that the rule could harm legitimate U.S. companies with significant investment and employment in the United States. Polestar emphasized the need for a balanced approach that protects national security without unnecessarily burdening businesses.

Commerce Department’s Response

The Commerce Department declined to comment on Polestar’s concerns. However, Reuters previously reported that the department informed General Motors and Ford Motor that they would be required to cease importing vehicles from China under the proposed rule.

Ford’s Interpretation of Proposed Rule

Ford Motor expressed concerns that the proposed rule could be interpreted to prohibit the sale of connected vehicles assembled in countries designated as foreign adversaries. The automaker urged the Commerce Department to clarify that the import prohibition should not focus on the location of final assembly, but rather on adherence to software and hardware requirements.