Treasury Secretary Sean Duffy Discloses Trump Vehicle Policy, Welcomes Chinese Vehicles

January 25, 2026

Print This Article Share it With Friends

by Bob Kozak* (Advanced Biofuels USA) Public Policy Day at the 2026 Washington DC Auto Show 22 January 2026: A Look to the Future of the US Vehicle Industry -- As a kick-off for the annual Auto Show in Washington DC, held at the DC Convention Center, the show organizers put on something they call Public Policy Day. Because of its close proximity to Congress and the headquarters of key transportation agencies such as the Departments of Transportation (DOT) and Energy (DOE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Policy Day has always been a good chance to catch up with current governmental directives. It was no different this year.

From the Congressional side, Representative Debbie Dingell (D-Michigan 6th) and Bob Latta (R-Ohio 5th) offered their perspectives while the Executive Branch was represented by DOE Under Secretary Alex Fitzsimmons and DOT Secretary Sean Duffy.

The topics of 2026 were different than in the past. CO₂ was not mentioned. Tariffs and markets were. Safety was the hot topic. Vehicle efficiency wasn’t. And, a new policy on China was quietly revealed. Also, it was really disappointing that no questions were taken from the audience. This was always a great feature of Policy Day. This year it was five hours of being talked at.

What EVs? Focus on Highway Safety and Autonomous Vehicles

I was looking forward to hearing from Representatives Dingell and Latta. Two years ago, 2024 Policy Day was highlighted by a fiery debate between Members of the House over the government’s role in subsidizing EVs (electric vehicles) to reduce CO₂ emissions. Instead, this year both Representatives focused on a bipartisan call for improving highway safety. While there are a number of relatively fast and inexpensive ways to improve driving safety; improved seat belt enforcement, stricter driving tests, and enhanced drinking/drug enforcement come to mind, these were not discussed. Instead, the focus was expanding self-driving, or autonomous technology, legislative requirements.

It was hard to understand why they were calling for this given the current state of the US vehicle market.

First, the US vehicle fleet is replaced quite slowly. The 16 million new vehicles sold in 2025 translates into only about 12% of American households buying a new vehicle every year. This means at a minimum new autonomous technology would take a minimum of about 8.5 years to be in most vehicles. However, it would actually take much longer. The US vehicle market is extremely bifurcated. A relatively small portion of the US population can afford to frequently buy new vehicles which now cost $50,000. The majority cannot. Hence while some people always have vehicles less than 5 years old and are driving sales, the reported average age of a vehicle owned in the US is now about 12 years. So, even if Congress passes legislation requiring autonomous vehicle technology, it would be a long time, probably over 15 years and multiple resales before vehicles with the technology trickled down to most of the population.

Second, autonomous vehicle technology is not cheap. It requires at a minimum flat plane array radar and hardware/software (everyone was saying AI would make it great) systems to control vehicle functions. $5,000 is probably the minimum price increase to add systems. What would that do to vehicle sales?

When autonomous vehicles were first being pushed, primarily by Tesla, over 10 years ago as the “next new thing,” they seemed to be a technology in search of a problem. No meaningful market was created by that marketing buzz. Now, it seems like “Safety” is being used to try to resurrect that expensive, and I suspect profitable, technology.

John Bozzella, Alliance for Automotive Innovation (L),
interviews US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy

On to Government Controls and Markets.

Secretary of Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy was the keynote speaker. He opened up with a justification for the Trump Administration’s attempt to greatly reduce vehicle mileage and emission requirements. By doing this, he explained, American consumers would be able to “Choose the kind of vehicle they want.”

How would this be accomplished? “Markets should dictate,” solutions. While this sounds straightforward, this Administration is taking a rather convoluted approach to achieving it.

Instead of having EPA change vehicle emission standards, which, if done properly, can change CO₂ emissions and fuel economy, the Administration is instead changing the basis for something called the Corporate Annual Fuel Economy (CAFE) which is administered by the Department of Transportation. Why? As Secretary Duffy said, following this approach eliminates the emission reduction benefits EVs bring which would probably end most EV production in the short term.

How will this work?

Since US consumers, despite the $7,500 tax credit, never really took to EVs, something Secretary Duffy is correct in saying, manufacturers instead treated small numbers of EVs as a “relief valve” to meet EPA and CAFE emission standards.

Manufacturers added up the average emissions of their liquid fueled internal combustion powered vehicles and calculated how many “Zero CO₂ emission” vehicles would have to be sold to get their average emissions below the CAFE standards. Since the numbers of EVs needed to accomplish this were not that high, many manufacturers limited EVs to high priced SUVs and pick-up trucks. That way they could maximize EVs profits and still base most of their sales on relatively low-mileage SUVs and trucks.

Cynical? Yes, but because the EV market did not develop, it was also necessary to meet CAFE standards.

Will the Trump Administration be successful in eliminating EV emissions from CAFE standards which would eliminate the need to manufacture them? Hard to say, but consider the following: Secretary Duffy said at Policy Day that the CAFE standards only applied to internal combustion (IC) engine vehicles and so EVs emissions could be eliminated.

However, remember what CAFE means. Corporate Annual Fuel Economy. It would seem that Corporate means all vehicles produced by a manufacturer company. Furthermore, even though CAFE rules were originally developed under the 1970 Clean Air Act (yes Nixon pushed them through) some vehicles at that time were fueled with compressed natural gas (CNG) or gasoline with 10% ethanol (Gasohol). To accommodate them, EPA devised equations to convert the emissions of these vehicles to a baseline which was 100% gasoline. EPA continued with this approach for EVs and hydrogen fueled vehicles. It should also be noted that the Supreme Court has accepted this approach.

Therefore, even if the Administration is able to reduce CAFE mileage requirements for internal combustion engine vehicles, they still may be required to add in all EV emissions which would continue to give vehicle manufacturers flexibility on internal combustion vehicle mileage.

And so, while Secretary Duffy talks about markets driving buying and selling decisions, it seems that this CAFE strategy in some ways doesn’t really trust markets. Instead, it seems to want to rig the US vehicle market by removing incentives to build fuel efficient vehicles.

Duffy seemed to add another idea against pure market control. He somewhat wistfully called for an interesting approach to innovation and regulation. He thought they should move forward at a Goldilocks rate - not too slow and not too fast. So much for rushing innovations to market as soon as they’re discovered!

Now, On to the Real Blockbuster: China

Secretary Duffy was asked pointblank about Chinese vehicles entering the US market. He at first waffled. He said protecting some forms of US manufacturing from China which had “100 engineers to our 5,” was important; but he did not specify which ones.

Then he stated that if “non-government” Chinese firms wanted to sell vehicles in the US, that would be OK. He further went on to say Chinese manufacturing investments would be acceptable under certain terms.

I was stunned. I thought we were clashing with China on trade related issues. Then I looked at the next day’s Politico headlines.

Pentagon no longer views China threat as top priority says a new National Defense Strategy, and How the TikTok deal could tighten Trump’s cultural grip “(a)s Trump friendly billionaires take control,” (with 20% Chinese ownership).

I guess Secretary Duffy was just giving us an advanced view on what the US vehicle market could look like in 2028: China undercutting lower priced Korean and Japanese manufacturers while US manufacturers build low-mileage, autonomous, heavy weight pick-ups, SUVs, vans, and maybe, station wagons?

But don’t worry about fuel prices for lower mileage vehicles. We’re entering a period of “Energy Abundance” and leaving a period of “Mineral Scarcity” according to Alex Fitzsimmons, Under Secretary of Department Energy who also spoke at Policy Day.

*Bob Kozak is the founder and President of Atlantic Biomass, LLC, and a co-founder and board member of Advanced Biofuels USA. After working in the transportation, energy, environmental, and government relations industries, he is now focusing on the development of integrated end-to-end biomass-to-fuel systems that do not require pretreatment. He can be reached at atlanticbiomass @ aol.com

photos by Bob Kozak

Related articles

Excerpt from Detroit News: Ford Motor Co.’s top executive spoke to senior Trump administration officials about a potential framework in which Chinese automakers could build cars in America while offering some protection for domestic companies, according to people familiar with the discussions.

The idea discussed by Ford Chief Executive Officer Jim Farley and Trump cabinet members last month involved Chinese carmakers partnering with U.S. companies through joint ventures in which the American company holds a controlling stake, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the discussions were private. The ventures would be structured so that both the Chinese and U.S. partners would share profits and technology in the JV, the people said.

No decision has been made on the matter and the discussion was characterized by the people as informal and preliminary. Such a setup would be a mirror image of what China required of western automakers three decades ago when they had to partner with Chinese carmakers in order to set up factories in that country.

...

Farley discussed the matter with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin when they visited the Detroit Auto Show last month, the people said. The discussion took place days after President Donald Trump indicated that he’d be open to allowing Chinese automakers into the U.S. if they built plants and hired Americans, saying “let China come in” during a Jan. 13 speech at the Detroit Economic Club. READ MORE

Excerpt from Politico Pro: Americans will soon catch a glimpse of something North American politicians once tried to keep far away: cheap Chinese electric vehicles.

As Canada begins importing the EVs, U.S. residents in border cities like Detroit and Buffalo, New York, may see their northern neighbors at the wheel. Or American tourists visiting Canada may experience brands like Xiaomi, Leapmotor and BYD when taking a ride-share.

It's a situation that the U.S. and Canada sought to avoid for years, worried that the introduction of China's low-cost, high-tech EVs would undermine domestic automakers and lead to Chinese surveillance. But President Donald Trump's 25 percent tariff on Canadian autos and auto parts has scrambled the North American auto market.

Canada is diversifying from its once-reliable, now-unpredictable American partner and seeking a new global role as a maker and exporter of EVs. That could provide China with a beachhead that will familiarize Chinese automakers with American tastes — and help them enter the only major global market they haven’t yet cracked. READ MORE

Excerpt from E&E News Energywire: The walls that once kept Chinese electric vehicles out of the western economies are quickly developing some major cracks.

That’s made the U.S. auto industry and lawmakers nervous that President Donald Trump’s trip to Beijing for a Thursday (May 14, 2026) summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping could accelerate the entry of cheap EVs, wiping out the nascent U.S. EV sector at a time when fuel costs are soaring because of the U.S. war against Iran and rising car prices are souring public sentiment.

“The only thing that terrifies me is BYD,” Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), whose family built a car dealership company before he entered Congress, said last week at an event in Washington. “The fact that it’s so inexpensive would destroy every other car company’s investment in electric vehicles.”

For now, the U.S. market is off limits to Chinese EVs due to a combination of national security regulations and a 100 percent tariff. A flurry of new legislation backed by the top auto lobbying organization and manufacturers along with bipartisan warnings from Congress to Trump to avoid deals are evidence that U.S. automakers are in a panic over the potential entry of Chinese EVs or manufacturing investment.

“They’re absolutely more than worried — they’re scared stiff,” said Michael Dunne, chief executive officer of Dunne Insights, an automotive consultancy. “Imagine if the Chinese come in with a $25,000 EV. That could catch like wildfire.”

While Cabinet officials insist protecting the auto sector is non-negotiable in the talks at this week’s summit, Trump himself has opened the door to Chinese investment.

“If they want to come in and build the plant and hire you and hire your friends and your neighbors, that’s great,” Trump told the Detroit Economic Club in January. “I love that. Let China come in, let Japan come in. They are, and they’ll be building plants, but they’re using our labor.”

Lawmakers have focused on national security concerns to dissuade Americans from fantasizing about Chinese vehicles they can’t buy. They also have championed protecting the nation’s industrial core and the jobs they represent, pointing to European struggles to save auto jobs from Chinese competitors.

Michigan Reps. Debbie Dingell, a Democrat, and John Moolenaar, a Republican, co-sponsored legislation Monday to codify bans on Chinese models because of software and hardware that collect personal information like location data. Democratic Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin and Republican Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno — who also made his fortune from car dealerships — introduced a version in the Senate, S. 2040, last month.

“I think we all understand the desire for a cheap car, just like I understand my nieces and nephews wanting to use TikTok and not caring that their data goes back to Beijing,” Slotkin said at a recent Washington event. “We have to care as leaders, even when people are laser-focused just on cost.”

Unpredictable Trump

Trump’s proclivity for splashy trade announcements and his previous stance on the Chinese car companies could set the stage for the U.S. to lower the barriers that have so far closed the country off to their EVs. For China, there is no bigger prize than accessing the U.S. market — a goal that could come into play in Trump’s long pursuit of an elusive trade deal with the world’s second-largest economy.

That backdrop has raised anxiety in the U.S. automotive sector that customers could be drawn to the cheaper Chinese vehicles, particularly as U.S. drivers contend with gasoline prices at four-year highs and Republicans’ repeal of buyers’ incentives last year.

Chinese EV-maker BYD markets its Seagull model at $7,800 in China, far less than the $29,000 Chevy Bolt, the cheapest EV available in the United States. Praise from mainstream news outlets like The Wall Street Journal has also helped dispel the perception that Chinese models are cheap knock-offs, and videos on TikTok are fanning the flames by appealing directly to American consumers.

...

The U.K. experience may be instructive for Trump. In a sign of the political ramifications of an open-door policy, the increasingly common sight of a BYD or Jaecoo (the U.K.’s best-selling car in March) on British streets has sparked a backlash among Trump-aligned, right-wing opposition to Starmer’s Labour Party.

Nigel Farage’s Reform U.K. party, currently topping opinion polls, has threatened to erect trade barriers to protect domestic manufacturing.

“British car makers currently don’t stand a chance against unfair Chinese competition,” Reform’s economy spokesperson Robert Jenrick said last month, raising the prospect of tariffs and quotas should his party win power.

A U.K. government spokesperson said the country was “open to global investment into the sector, including from China” and that ministers would “continue to engage closely with industry to ensure our approach reflects the sector’s and the U.K.’s national interests.” The spokesperson responded anonymously as per typical U.K. government procedure when asked for comment.

Automakers look for lessons abroad

U.S. automakers and their allies have warned of European automakers’ struggles to beat cut-rate Chinese pricing. They have claimed Chinese promises to invest in manufacturing are vaporware, arguing they would cut out U.S. suppliers to source from supply chains that rely on lower-cost foreign labor.

A U.S. auto executive who was granted anonymity to discuss private conversations said three senior administration officials insisted the auto sector would not be on the negotiating table for Trump’s visit. That the U.S. industry and its boosters have rallied their Washington allies for this week’s summit is an indication that they are anxious about any unscripted dialogue between Trump and Xi.

“I hope it isn’t on the agenda. But we are also doing everything we possibly can to keep it off the agenda,” said Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, a coalition of U.S.-based companies. “There’s a great deal of concern about this one.”

...

Imports are not the biggest concern, the person said, rather, it’s the promise of investment in U.S. states that could bring jobs and, in Trump’s mind, votes. Such a deal would likely see financial markets ding Western companies because it would raise the prospects of future investment, even if it doesn’t materialize before Trump leaves office.

...

“The Chinese are very good at infiltrating, influencing and persuasion,” said Rachel McCleery, executive director of the Coalition for Reimagined Mobility at Securing America’s Future Energy, a nonprofit. “They’re doing what they do best when it comes to getting people on board with the product they have to offer that they don’t currently have market access to offer.”

For the allies of the U.S. carmakers, though, the message to Trump is simple: “Find something else to give on,” Slotkin said. “Don’t give away the farm just to make a deal.” READ MORE