The matter of national identity has been muddled ever since 1982 when, in Marysville, Ohio, the Honda Accord became the first Japanese-branded vehicle to be built in the United States. Some competitors and critics labeled Honda's factory a “transplant” built to avoid import tariffs and taxes that might otherwise apply. Nonetheless, the marque has expanded its U.S. operations to the point that 80 percent of the Hondas and Acuras sold in the U.S. are now built here.
The Accord also contains 80% U.S. parts content, which – in the eyes of the Feds – makes it as American as prom night. More so, in fact, than the Chevrolet Cruze, which is composed of a mere 45% American parts content. Likewise, the Mitsubishi Eclipse (coupes and convertibles with 80% U.S. parts) eclipses – no pun intended – both the Ford Expedition and the Lincoln Navigator SUV twins, which, physically speaking, are only half American. The Chevrolet Aveo, by far the least American car to carry an American badge, is made in Mexico, and just 2 percent of its part content comes from the U.S. The average deck of cards contains more jokers.
Ultimately, for all the talk and statistics about place of manufacture and international borders and tax breaks, for the car-buying public, it comes down to one question: what difference does it make?
For a long time, a car’s country of origin made all the difference in the world. Fords and Chevys of the ’60s weren’t just transportation, they were baseball and hot dogs and the Beach Boys. For loyal Englishmen, Aston Martins and Bentleys were on a continuum with the Battle of Britain and stiff upper lips – they were what England was all about. Italians, for their part, saw Ferraris and Alfa Romeos as something transcendent: “The car, she is like a woman.” For Germans the element that defined the post-WWII lifestyle was the Autobahn, where speed limits were more a matter of horsepower and nerve than law.
How could anyone replicate these ineffables in a plant thousands of miles away from home? The Japanese showed how; unencumbered by myth and tradition, it stood to reason that the Japanese would be the first to begin full-scale manufacturing in the States. By 1986, what was once unthinkable – a foreign carmaker manufacturing on US soil – had become a phenomenon, a trend memorialized in the 1986 movie “Gung Ho.” It depicted the conflict of cultures that arose when a Japanese automaker took over a car factory in Pennsylvania; Michael Keaton had to explain American culture to his new Japanese bosses, and vice versa. The stereotypes were familiar: the Japanese were depicted as rigid and team-oriented while the Americans were fun-loving individualists. Nevertheless, it must have hit close to home because Toyota used the movie as a primer on how not to manage Americans. Other Japanese carmakers joining Honda and Toyota in the move to America were Mazda, Mitsubishi, and Subaru, and Suzuki, with the South Koreans – Hyundai and Kia – not far behind.
Presumably another standard applied to more upscale markets; conventional wisdom held that luxury car buyers wouldn’t buy a car made anywhere but its homeland – pedigree was part of the package. The paradigm shifted when, in 1994, BMW began building the 318i sedan in a plant in Spartanburg, South Carolina. This was no mere transplant; rather, says Kenn Sparks, BMW Business Communications Manager, it was a “world plant” intended to build cars for a global market. Since then the Spartanburg factory has become the world’s sole source for the Z4, X5, and X6 models with the X3 soon to come. Meanwhile, Mercedes-Benz followed the Bavarians’ incursion into the States in 1997, and Audi announced tentative plans to begin manufacturing stateside in 2015.
In a sense, the proliferation of foreign-owned plants across America is the law of unintended consequences at work. Originally the transplants were the Japanese carmakers’ response to the jingo-ism of the late 1970s; by opening factories in the states, they reckoned, they could stave off talk of protectionism and mandating American parts in foreign cars. Content laws never got very far, but other reasons for setting up shop in the states became clear. Building cars closer to the consumer produced savings in transportation, labor costs were lower, currency exchange rates were more favorable, and tax breaks abounded.
True, one vestige of protectionism remains – the 1994 American Automobile Labeling Act. This was intended to enable patriotic car buyers to Buy American by displaying the percentage of parts made in the USA.
It may have the opposite effect, though, as numerous foreign cars have higher ratings than their American competitors. What's more shocking is that neither General Motors (69%), nor Ford (64%), nor Chrysler (60%) meet the basic 75% “Made in America” criterion.
If it’s any consolation, neither does any other automaker. With foreign plants proliferating across the U.S., it seems inevitable that European and Asian cars will become more American, and American cars more European or Asian. No doubt this cross-pollination will produce improved cars and trucks, the kind the public wants and needs. It would be nice, too, if sometime in the future, the most popular cars made in America’s plants could be American.
But meanwhile, according to Cars.com's “American Made Index,” they’re Japanese.
The "Hummingbird" has created quite a buzz. Since unveiling the single-seat Colibri electric vehicle, Innovative Mobility Automobile GmbH (IMA) has collected more than 700 pre-orders, according to the company. If those prospective customers make good, Colibri will sell out of the vehicle in 2015, the model's first year …
If you love the LFA, then you should love this little nugget of information regarding the lovable supercars future. The LF-LC concept — yes, that sexy thing we saw back in 2012 — could live on in production form as the LFA’s successor. Please and thank you, Lexus. Speaking with Autocar in a recent interview, [...]
- US government sells off last remaining shares in GM Jeremy Korzeniewski
According to a report from CNBC, the US government has sold off the last of its remaining shares in General Motors. Secretary Jack Lew reports that $39 billion of the $49.5 billion investment in GM was recovered, meaning that the investment, on paper, cost taxpayers a total of $10 billion. GM CEO Dan Akerson said in a statement, …