zerohedge

Federal Judge Halts Shutdown Of Voice Of America

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from dismantling Voice of America (VOA), the government-funded international news service whose 1,200 reporters and employees were placed on paid leave earlier this month.
The Voice of America building in Washington on June 15, 2020. Andrew Harnik/AP Photo

The judge, J. Paul Oetken of the Southern District of New York, on Friday issued a temporary restraining order in favor of VOA employees and their unions. The order prevents the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which oversees VOA, from shutting down the broadcasting network and its associated radio programs.

VOA employees filed the lawsuit against USAGM, its acting Director Victor Morales, and special adviser Kari Lake on March 21. The complaint accused the agency of failing to fulfill its legally mandated missions and violating both press freedom and the separation-of-powers doctrine when it took a “chainsaw” to the outlet, ordering the entire staff not to report to work, turning off the service, and locking the agency’s doors.

In his ruling, Oetken stated that VOA was likely to succeed on its claims, noting that USAGM’s actions appeared unconstitutional. He said that Lake lacked legal authority to withhold congressionally appropriated funds or terminate USAGM staff, programming, or contracts.

“By withholding the funds statutorily appropriated to fully administer USAGM, VOA, and its affiliates … the executive is usurping Congress’s power of the purse and its legislative supremacy,” he wrote.

The judge did not require VOA to resume broadcasts, but made it clear that employees must not be terminated while the court determines whether the shutdown violates the Constitution or other federal administrative laws.

Friday’s order echoed a similar ruling by another district judge earlier in the week, which granted a temporary restraining order to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, blocking its funding freeze. The Trump administration has since stated in court filings that it has resumed funding for these outlets.

President Donald Trump and his supporters have been critical of VOA for years over alleged bias against conservative Americans and in favor of America’s adversaries.

In 2020, the White House sent an email accusing VOA of spending taxpayers’ money to “speak for authoritarian regimes.” It took issue with, among other things, a VOA social media post featuring a video of a light show celebrating the end of the lockdown in Wuhan, the Chinese megapolis where the COVID-19 virus first emerged; as well as the agency’s characterization of China’s effort to control the outbreak as a “model” for other nations.

“VOA too often speaks for America’s adversaries—not its citizens,” The White House said. “Journalists should report the facts, but VOA has instead amplified Beijing’s propaganda.”

The VOA first began broadcasting in 1942 in German-occupied territories as part of the Allies’ effort to engage Axis propaganda broadcasts with counterpropaganda. In the following decades, it became a staple in the propaganda war against the Soviet Union and other communist regimes. Over time, it evolved into a global news organization, now operating in more…

University Of Michigan Guts DEI Programs

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times,

The University of Michigan said it will eliminate all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts following the Trump administration’s warning that colleges with discriminative policies could lose federal funding.

The changes, announced on Thursday, include shutting down two diversity offices and ending its “DEI 2.0 Strategic Plan.” This follows earlier steps to phase out DEI-related requirements, such as removing mandatory DEI statements in admissions, hiring, promotions, awards, and performance reviews.

The university said individuals who previously worked on DEI initiatives across various schools, colleges, and departments will now “refocus their full effort on their core responsibilities.”

“These decisions have not been made lightly,” University of Michigan President Santa Ono and three top administrators said in a joint statement. “We recognize the changes are significant and will be challenging for many of us, especially those whose lives and careers have been enriched by and dedicated to programs that are now pivoting.

“We are deeply grateful for the meaningful contributions of leaders, faculty, and staff who have advanced our ongoing efforts to create an ever-more inclusive and respectful community.”

Federal Pressure Intensifies

The changes come as the Trump administration ramped up the enforcement of federal anti-discrimination laws, including Title VI and Title IX, which prohibit discrimination based on race and sex, respectively, in education settings.

The University of Michigan specifically pointed to a “Dear Colleague” letter from the U.S. Department of Education’s civil rights division. The Feb. 14 letter warned that the 2023 Supreme Court decision that declared the use of racial preferences in college admissions unconstitutional would now extend to all university policies and programs beyond admissions.

“At its core, the test is simple: If an educational institution treats a person of one race differently than it treats another person because of that person’s race, the educational institution violates the law,” the letter stated.

Moving forward, the university said it plans to increase investments in student-facing programs, including financial aid, mental health support, academic advising and counseling, and a scholarship for students from foster care.

Massive DEI Spending Under Scrutiny

The university has been known for a sprawling and costly DEI bureaucracy. According to an analysis by UMich economics professor Mark Perry, as of January 2024, the university spent $30.7 million each year on salaries for 241 employees who work in DEI offices or have the keywords diversity, equity, or inclusion in their job titles. This figure does not account for additional staff and resources spent to support those DEI employees.

A New York Times investigation published in October 2024 further estimated that UMich spent $250 million on DEI since 2016. The Times noted that despite this enormous investment, race- and gender-based grievances on campus actually increased, with students filing more complaints than ever before.

Following the Times report, UMich published a lengthy response in which Chief Diversity Officer Tabbye Chavous accused the article of being “filled with misinformation, disinformation, and, sadly, sexism.”

Some officials agreed that the university’s massive DEI spending failed to directly benefit students. Jordan Acker, one of the six…

US Office Focused On Shipbuilding Aims To Counter China’s Maritime Dominance

Authored by Mike Fredenburg via The Epoch Times,

Creating an office of U.S. shipbuilding to facilitate America’s return to being a true maritime power is long overdue and is necessary to counter China’s growing maritime dominance.

At the end of World War II, the United States had over 100 shipyards, and its flagged fleet, the largest in the world, carried  57 percent of U.S. trade, while the majority of world trade was carried in U.S.-built ships.

Today, only about 0.2 percent of global commercial tonnage is being carried in ships built in the United States. Collectively, China, South Korea, and Japan build over 90 percent of the world’s large commercial ships. And with China building over 50 percent of the world’s gross shipping tonnage, it is by far and away the world’s largest shipbuilder, with 232 times more shipbuilding capacity than the United States.

While the lack of commercial shipbuilding capacity is not the only reason we have seen the U.S. Navy decline in size and capability, it has created an environment that makes correcting the issues plaguing the Navy very difficult. Indeed, the lack of commercial shipbuilding is arguably the root cause of our Navy’s decline in readiness, its exploding ship costs, and its inability to hold vendors accountable when they deliver underperforming ships overbudget and years behind schedule.

Examples of underperforming, overbudget ships include the Constellation-class frigate, the Littoral combat ship, the Ford-class carriers, and the massive Zumwalt destroyer. It is the failures in these key shipbuilding  programs that has led to the decline of the U.S. Navy’s size and readiness. Moreover, the vendors associated with these failed and or grossly underperforming programs have at worst received a slap on the wrist and are collectively lined up to receive many hundreds of billions more in U.S. Defense contracts over the coming decades.

Shipbuilders have been able to underdeliver with near impunity, in part due to the fact that they are the only game in town, i.e., if you cancel major defense contracts then the government-dependent companies will go out of business and there will be no shipbuilding capacity. For example, there is currently only one shipbuilder that can build and execute the Refueling and Complex Overhaul work on U.S. nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. While there are two firms that can build U.S. nuclear submarines, they are suffering from a lack of skilled labor. In the vast majority of cases, the prime contractors who build the Navy’s ships are almost wholly reliant on military contracts to survive. 

All this means that when contracts are put in place, they are not just put in place to deliver the most powerful ships at the best price, they are put in place to ensure that the company executing the contract can keep its people employed from contract to contract. Thus, contracts are strung out for many years. This makes sense, as having enough people trained up in the skills to rapidly deliver a ship or a number of ships, only…

Judge Upholds California Law Restricting 18- to 20-Year-Olds’ Access To Guns

A federal judge has upheld a California law that restricts young adults from buying guns, finding the statute fits within the nation’s historical tradition of gun regulations.

California penal code Section 27510 bars federal gun dealers from selling or otherwise giving possession of guns to people younger than 21. The law does allow 18- to 20-year-olds to buy certain types of guns if they obtain a hunting license, are serving in the military, or were honorably discharged from the armed forces.

Some young adults and gun rights groups challenged the law, arguing it violated the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment.

As Zachary Stieber reports for The Epoch Times, the case has been proceeding through the court system for years. U.S. District Judge James Lorenz said in 2020 that the law did not violate the Constitution, then an appeals court panel said it did. The appeals court later remanded the case back to Lorenz for renewed consideration following the U.S. Supreme Court ordering lower courts to figure out if gun regulations were based on the nation’s history of gun restrictions when deciding whether they are constitutional.

Lorenz on March 26 sided with California Attorney General Rob Bonta, concluding that even though 18- to 20-year-olds are part of “the people” mentioned in the Second Amendment, the young adults have faced gun restrictions throughout much of American history.

The law “is consistent with the Founding Era common law that curtailed commercial firearm purchases by individuals aged 18 to 20,” Lorenz wrote in a 23-page decision.

He also said the law is constitutional because the young adults can buy guns that are not handguns or semiautomatic centerfire rifles if they receive a hunting license or are in the U.S. military. Tens of thousands of young adults have obtained guns under the exceptions in recent years, including 5,431 in 2022.

The young adults can also acquire guns as gifts from family members, the ruling noted.

“Defendants’ evidence supports a reasonable inference that Section 27510 is a commercial restriction that does not meaningfully impair 18-to-20-year-olds’ access to firearms and is therefore not covered by the Second Amendment’s plain text,” the judge said.

The summary judgment ruling means the case is over, unless the plaintiffs appeal.

The Second Amendment Foundation, one of the plaintiffs, said on social media platform X that it is reviewing the opinion.

Bonta, a Democrat, said in a statement that the ruling represents a victory in the fight against gun violence.

“This commonsense regulation will continue to protect our young and vulnerable communities from preventable gun violence,“ he said. ”I am proud of the countless hours my team has put in to defend this law and we know the fight is not over. We will continue to lead efforts to defend commonsense gun-safety laws and protect our communities from senseless violence.”

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 23:00…

This Is The Income Needed To Be Middle Class In Every US State

How much do you need to make to be considered middle class in the U.S.? According to research by SmartAsset, that can range from $36,000 to $200,000, depending on where you live.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, illustrates the income needed to be considered middle class in every U.S. state. Middle class in this graphic is defined as earning between two-thirds and double the median household income. SmartAsset compiled the data as of February 2025.

To Be Middle Class

The median household income in the U.S. is approximately $75,000, with half of Americans earning less. States with high urbanization and economic activity, like California and New York, tend to have much higher income requirements to count as middle class, while rural states with lower costs, like West Virginia and Arkansas, have lower thresholds.

In Massachusetts, a household needs to earn between $67,000 and $200,000 to be considered middle class. The state has a high cost of living due to expensive housing, high taxes, and strong demand for services. Its economy is driven by industries like technology, healthcare, and education, attracting well-paid professionals and increasing competition for housing, especially in cities like Boston.

State
Lower bound on middle class income
Upper bound on middle class income
Massachusetts
$66,565
$199,716
New Jersey
$66,514
$199,562
Maryland
$65,779
$197,356
New Hampshire
$64,552
$193,676
California
$63,674
$191,042
Hawaii
$63,542
$190,644
Washington
$63,064
$189,210
Utah
$62,274
$186,842
Colorado
$61,934
$185,822
Connecticut
$61,104
$183,330
Virginia
$59,948
$179,862
Alaska
$57,748
$173,262
Minnesota
$56,718
$170,172
Rhode Island
$56,642
$169,944
New York
$54,725
$164,190
Delaware
$54,235
$162,722
Vermont
$54,135
$162,422
Illinois
$53,532
$160,612
Oregon
$53,435
$160,320
Arizona
$51,538
$154,630
North Dakota
$51,012
$153,050
Nevada
$50,904
$152,728
Texas
$50,515
$151,560
Idaho
$49,956
$149,884
Georgia
$49,750
$149,264
Wisconsin
$49,749
$149,262
Nebraska
$49,722
$149,180
Pennsylvania
$49,211
$147,648
Maine
$49,150
$147,466
Florida
$48,869
$146,622
Wyoming
$48,272
$144,830
South Dakota
$47,869
$143,620
Iowa
$47,617
$142,866
Montana
$47,198
$141,608
North Carolina
$47,198
$141,608
Kansas
$46,884
$140,666
Indiana
$46,313
$138,954
Michigan
$46,117
$138,366
Missouri
$45,692
$137,090
South Carolina
$45,198
$135,608
Ohio
$45,175
$135,538
Tennessee
$45,083
$135,262
New Mexico
$41,508
$124,536
Alabama
$41,471
$124,424
Oklahoma
$41,421
$124,276
Kentucky
$40,741
$122,236
Arkansas
$39,129
$117,400
Louisiana
$38,815
$116,458
West Virginia
$37,295
$111,896
Mississippi
$36,132
$108,406
Meanwhile, in Mississippi, the minimum household income to be considered middle class is $36,162. Mississippi is one of the cheapest states to live in due to its low housing costs, lower-than-average wages, and relatively low taxes. The cost of goods and services, including groceries, healthcare, and transportation, is also lower than the national average. Additionally, Mississippi has a lower population density and is less of an economic hub compared to wealthier states.

If you enjoyed this post, be sure to check out this graphic, which ranks the income a family needs to live comfortably in every U.S. state.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 18:00…

Israel Parliament Passes Bill Bringing Judicial Appointments Under Political Control

Via Middle East Eye

Israel’s Knesset has passed a bill enabling greater political control over the appointment of judges, effectively diminishing the Supreme Court’s power.

The measure, which will come into effect after the October 2026 general elections, marks the first time in Israel’s history that the selection process for judges will be controlled by politicians.
Via Reuters

It will change the composition of the nine-member committee that selects judges, comprising judges, lawmakers, and bar association representatives, overseen by the justice minister.

The bill will see representatives of the Israeli Bar Association replaced with lawyers appointed by the ruling coalition and the opposition, and give politicians veto power over lower court appointments. It will also remove any influence of the three judges who sit on the committee overseeing appointments to the Supreme Court.

The committee is currently handling petitions against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s dismissal of Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar, and the reappointment of Itamar Ben Gvir as national security minister.

The bill was passed almost unanimously after the opposition boycotted the vote, with 67-1 in favor of the legislation.

Justice Minister Yariv Levin will bar the committee from naming new judges until the law comes into effect, leaving the country with only 11 supreme court justices – short of the full complement of 15.

Knesset opposition leaders condemned the legislation, saying that its sole aim is “to ensure judges are subjected to the will of politicians”.

“This is happening while 59 hostages are still held in Gaza. Instead of focusing all efforts on bringing them home and healing the divisions in the nation, this government is once again engaging in the very legislation that divided the public before October 7,” they added.

A ‘dangerous direction’

A flurry of petitions against the bill were filed by opposition parties and a government watchdog to the High Court of Justice shortly after its approval. In one of them, opposition leader Yair Lapid’s Yesh Atid Party stated that the law’s approval “is not an amendment, but the eradication of an entire system”.

National Unity party chairman, and former member of the war cabinet, Benny Gantz, warned lawmakers ahead of the vote that the nation was headed in a “dangerous direction”.

Meanwhile, thousands of Israelis gathered outside the Knesset to protest the legislation.Before October 2023, the Netanyahu government pushed a package of bills seeking to overhaul the judicial system, sparking mass protests across the country.

On January 1, 2024, the Supreme Court nullified controversial legislation passed by the government in July 2023 that eliminated the court’s ability to overturn government decisions.

The legislation eliminated the Supreme Court’s reasonableness clause, a power given to the court to overturn government rulings deemed unreasonable.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political party, Likud, called the court’s decision unfortunate and said it opposed “the will of the people for unity, especially during wartime”. Netanyahu is currently on trial for corruption. Since being indicted in 2019, he has railed publicly against the justice system, calling it biased against him.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 06:30…

White House Withdraws Stefanik Nomination To UN Ambassador

Authored by Jackson Richman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump has withdrawn the nomination of Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on her nomination to be ambassador to the United Nations, on Capitol Hill in Washington on Jan. 21, 2025. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images

Trump announced the move on Truth Social on March 27, citing the narrow majority the GOP has in the House.

“As we advance our America First Agenda, it is essential that we maintain EVERY Republican Seat in Congress. We must be unified to accomplish our Mission, and Elise Stefanik has been a vital part of our efforts from the very beginning,” he wrote.

“I have asked Elise, as one of my biggest Allies, to remain in Congress to help me deliver Historic Tax Cuts, GREAT Jobs, Record Economic Growth, a Secure Border, Energy Dominance, Peace Through Strength, and much more, so we can MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.

“With a very tight Majority, I don’t want to take a chance on anyone else running for Elise’s seat.”

Trump said Stefanik will join his administration “in the future.”

The GOP has a narrow majority in the House as it looks to pass Trump’s legislative agenda.

The Epoch Times has reached out to Stefanik’s office for comment.

Stefanik served as the House GOP conference chairwoman. She stepped down from the role due to Trump nominating her to be ambassador to the U.N. She was succeeded by Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.). Trump said Stefanik will rejoin House GOP leadership. It is unclear which role she would be in.

The Epoch Times has reached out to McClain for comment.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Stefanik will be invited to rejoin House GOP leadership. What the role will be is unclear.

“It is well known Republicans have a razor-thin House majority, and Elise’s agreement to withdraw her nomination will allow us to keep one of the toughest, most resolute members of our Conference in place to help drive forward President Trump’s America First policies,” he wrote in a post on social media platform X.

“There is no doubt she would have served with distinction as our ambassador to the United Nations, but we are grateful for her willingness to sacrifice that position and remain in Congress to help us save the country. I will invite her to return to the leadership table immediately.”

During her nomination hearing, Stefanik denounced what she said is the “anti-Semitic rot” at the U.N., given its stance toward Israel.

“The U.S. is the largest contributor to the U.N. by far,” she said. “Our tax dollars should not be complicit in propping up entities that are counter to American interests, anti-Semitic, or engaging in fraud, corruption, or terrorism.”

The committee advanced her nomination to the Senate floor by voice vote on Jan. 30.

Stefanik has been one of Trump’s staunchest allies in Congress. She was the first member of Congress to endorse his 2024 campaign.

She was first…

“This Is Existential”: Billionaire Cancer Researcher Says Covid & Vaccine Likely Causing Surge In Aggressive Cancers

Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong – a transplant surgeon-turned-biotech billionaire renowned for inventing the cancer drug Abraxane – has issued a startling warning in a new in-depth interview with Tucker Carlson.

Soon-Shiong, founder of ImmunityBio ($IBRX) and owner of the Los Angeles Times, claims that the COVID-19 pandemic, and the very vaccines developed to fight it, may be contributing to a global surge in “terrifyingly aggressive” cancers. In the nearly two-hour conversation, the Los Angeles Times owner leveraged his decades of clinical and scientific experience to outline why he suspects an unprecedented cancer epidemic is unfolding. This report examines Dr. Soon-Shiong’s background and assertions, the scientific responses for and against his claims, new data on post-COVID health trends, and the far-reaching implications if his alarming hypothesis proves true.

Dr. Soon-Shiong’s Claims

Soon-Shiong is a veteran surgeon and immunologist who has spent a career studying the human immune system’s fight against cancer. He pioneered novel immunotherapies and even worked on a T-cell based COVID vaccine booster during the pandemic. In the interview, he draws on this background to voice deep concern over rising cancer cases, especially among younger people – something he describes as a “non-infectious pandemic” of cancer. He tells Carlson that in 50 years of medical practice, it was extraordinarily rare to see cancers like pancreatic tumors in children or young adults, yet recently such cases are appearing. For instance, Soon-Shiong was alarmed by seeing a 13-year-old with metastatic pancreatic cancer, a scenario virtually unheard of in his prior experience. 

“I never saw pancreatic cancer in children… the greatest surprise to me was a 13-year-old with metastatic pancreatic cancer,” Soon-Shiong told Carlson, adding that he’s seen examples of very young patients (even children under 11 with colon cancer) and unusual surges in aggressive diseases like ovarian cancer in women in their 30s. These personal observations of more frequent, aggressive cancers in youth led him to probe what might have changed in recent years.

“We’re clearly seeing an increase in certain types of cancer, like pancreatic cancer, ovarian cancer… colon cancer… in younger people.”
— Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong

According Soon-Shiong, the COVID era is the obvious change – and suggests that both the SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and the widespread vaccination campaigns could be key drivers behind this cancer spike. He emphasizes the massive scale of human exposure to the virus and its spike protein (via infection or vaccination).

“I don’t know how to say that without saying it. It scares the pants off me because I think what we may be, I don’ think it’s virus versus man now, this is existential. I think when I talk about the largest non-infectious pandemic that we’re afraid of, this is it.”

“Billions of people – literally billions – had the COVID virus. Over a billion got the spike protein vaccine. … Now you understand what keeps me awake at night,” he told Carlson, suggesting that exposure to both is silently undermining the immune system’s natural defenses against cancer…

WTF Headline Of The Day: Convicted Pakistani Pedo Avoids Deportation From UK Because He’s An Alcoholic

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

A convicted pedophile has escaped deportation from the UK to his native country of Pakistan after a judge ruled that he would face “inhuman or degrading treatment” there for being an alcoholic.

Yes, really.

Come again? https://t.co/BlNMoZH0m0
— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) March 26, 2025
The man was released from prison after serving sentences for sex offences, but was subsequently charged again after assaulting a teenage girl.

The Home Office issued a deportation order, however, the guy successfully appealed it using the European Convention on Human Rights whilst serving another one year sentence in prison.

His legal representatives argued that without proper treatment for his addiction in Pakistan, his “uncontrollable” alcoholism could worsen and potentially lead to “further suffering.”

Respondents on X expressed disbelief at the UK justice system, with many pointing out that there are people currently serving longer prison sentences for spicy tweets.

What happens to him in his own country is his own problem.
Deport, deport, deport.
— Rupert Lowe MP (@RupertLowe10) March 26, 2025

This is Britain in 2025: A convicted paedophile wins the right to stay because deportation would be too inhumane, for him. Not his victims, not the British public, but for a repeat sex offender who openly admits he’d struggle without access to booze.
How utterly insane has this…
— Kalopsia (@Kalopsiac1984) March 26, 2025

What is going on. Are we collecting all the world’s nonces? Nonce Island.
— David (@TrueBritVoice) March 26, 2025

More telling about the culture in Pakistan that being an alcoholic is unacceptable, but being a pedophile is perfectly fine
Why are they allowed in Britain again?
— Studibakre (@Studibakre) March 26, 2025

This is a perversion of ‘justice’.
It seems to me that, every-single-time you hear of a similar such case the rights of the foreign-criminal-perpetrator are put before the safety of UK citizens.
Where is the deterrent for other forign-sex-child sex attackers?!
Come to the UK…
— Bob Huffa (@BobHuffa) March 26, 2025
This case follows similar incidents, including one just last month where another Pakistani pedo was permitted to remain in the UK with a judge ruling that deportation would be “unduly harsh” owing to the fact that his family in Pakistan took a “dim view” of his crimes.

Conservative MP Sir Alec Shelbrooke urged that “The Government needs to stop dangerous criminals being allowed to stay in this country.”

*  *  *

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden
Thu, 03/27/2025 – 06:30…

Japanese Carmakers Face Catastrophic Profit Hit From Trump’s Auto Tariffs

As the fallout from Trump’s tariff plans comes into relief, a harsh truth is emerging for the automotive industry: there are lots of losers and not many winners. But foreign automakers, those without US facilities, will be hit especially hard. 

As Bloomberg notes, from South Korea’s Hyundai to Germany’s Volkswagen, and to a lesser extent America’s own General Motors, many of the world’s most prominent carmakers will soon face higher costs from Trump’s new levies on auto imports and key components. That’s because about 46% of all new cars sold in the US are imported.

“There are very few winners,” Sam Fiorani, vice president of global vehicle forecasting for AutoForecast Solutions, said in a phone interview. “Consumers will be losers because they will have reduced choice and higher prices.”

One notable winner in the tariff chaos is Elon Musk. His Tesla, which has large factories in California and Texas, churns out all the electric vehicles it sells in the US, although as Elon noted late on Wednesday, the company will also not remain unscathed.

Important to note that Tesla is NOT unscathed here. The tariff impact on Tesla is still significant.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 27, 2025

Ford could also face a less-severe impact than some rivals, with about 80% of the cars it sells in the US being built domestically.

Others will be less lucky: starting April 2, the new 25% tariffs will apply to all imported passenger vehicles and light trucks, as well as key parts like engines, transmissions. 

Not surprisingly, the tariffs give automakers that heavily source parts in the US an edge, and Trump also allowed an exemption: the new levies will only apply to the non-US share of vehicles and parts imported under a free-trade agreement with Canada and Mexico. That may soften the blow for vehicles whose supply lines zig-zag across the continent. 

Tariffs on parts from Canada and Mexico that comply with the trade deal also won’t take effect until the US sets up a process to collect those levies. The US neighbors could use that window to try to stave off full implementation, even if it’s a long shot.

And while NAFTA, pardon USMCA, nations will do everything in their power to be loopholed out, foreign brands heavily reliant on imported vehicles are fresh out of luck. South Korea’s auto giant Hyundai risks being among the hardest hit: although the carmaker and its affiliate Kia have plants in Alabama and Georgia, and just yesterday announced a $21 billion US expansion plan, it imported more than a million vehicles to the US last year, accounting for more than half of its sales in the country, according to figures from Global Data. 

Hyundai “remains committed to the long-term growth of the US automotive industry through localized production and innovation,” the company said in a statement, noting it employs 570,000 people in the US. Unfortunately, according to Trump, it should employ many more, and if the company – which imports almost 60% of the cars it sells in the US -…