Connect with us

Economics

How to overcome the biggest obstacle to electric vehicles

Published

on

Listen to this story.
Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.

Your browser does not support the <audio> element.

Packing ever more ions into ever smaller batteries, spangling the landscape with charging stations, lowering the cost to make electric cars and trucks: these are complex, exciting challenges that engineers, regulators and others will probably solve. The tougher problem, the one that may define the limit of the American market for electric vehicles, is much stupider. It is polarisation, the stuff that makes an EV go but in its metaphorical incarnation is cursing not only America’s politics but, increasingly, its culture and marketplace.

Three researchers who studied the adoption of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles between 2012 and 2022 discovered that fully half of them went to Americans living in the 10% of counties with the highest proportion of Democratic voters. A third went to just the top 5% of such places. The pattern held even when the researchers controlled for income and population density.

Lucas Davis, a professor at Berkeley’s Haas School of Business who was an author of the study, was startled that the correlation with ideology did not subside over the period under review, a decade during which the electric-vehicle market diversified with scores of models. “The market has matured in many ways, and I expected to see more of a broadening of EVs across the political spectrum,” he says. “I think the results suggest that it may be harder than previously believed to achieve widespread EV adoption.”

From the popularity of what the researchers called “conspicuous” EVs, they tentatively concluded that many purchases were driven by “extrinsic” motivations—a desire to advertise one’s concern about climate change. That is a signal many Republican drivers are eager not to send.

This problem has caught the attention of one of America’s most experienced Republican campaign operatives, Mike Murphy. A past devotee of internal combustion, Mr Murphy grew up in Detroit and boasts he has averaged about eight miles per gallon over the years. But when he traded in his Porsche for an electric BMW he became entranced by both the superior performance and the community of engineers and enthusiasts trying to overcome the obstacles to electrification. “It’s like the Apollo programme,” he says. “They’re full of joy. They’re solving really tough engineering problems and have a purpose to that. And that’s a bit infectious.”

Mr Murphy decided to apply his skills to knocking down the barrier that the boffins were less equipped to defeat. In January he launched an outfit, the EV Politics Project, to advise automakers on how to overcome Republican resistance and also to counter what he expects, in the 2024 campaign, to be an intensifying barrage of attacks on electrification.

Mr Murphy undertook a poll to gauge the problem. He discovered that Democrats and Republicans had similar attitudes toward car brands in general but split radically over electric-only carmakers. Democrats approved of them by a net margin of 15 points, whereas Republicans disapproved by 40 points—”an Osama bin Laden number,” Mr Murphy says. While 61% of Democrats said their friends and relatives would praise them for a “smart move” if they bought an eV, only 19% of Republicans said that.

The son of a labour lawyer and grandson of carworkers, Mr Murphy fears the American auto industry will not survive if electrification falters. “If half the American market is ruling this stuff out based on bullshit and tribalism—and on marketing that doesn’t understand that—that’s a gift to the People’s Republic of China,” he says. Mr Murphy is a Reagan Republican who advised the likes of John McCain, Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney. The toughest adversary he confronts over the politics of electrification is the same one he has been tilting against for years, unsuccessfully, over the direction of his party: Donald Trump.

Mr Trump has identified in the polarisation over electric vehicles the kind of energy that has powered his politics since 2016. “MAY THEY ROT IN HELL”, he wished of EV supporters, among others, on Christmas Day. He owned a Tesla, according to his aides, but he has claimed electric vehicles are bad for the environment, require charging every 15 minutes and will cause 40% of American auto jobs to disappear in a year or two. Some Republican-led states have begun imposing fees on EVs, restrictions on how they can be sold and even new taxes, purportedly to make up for lost fuel-tax revenue, though Republican leaders, starting with Mr Trump, do not habitually object to tax avoidance.

Yet some Republican leaders have embraced the possibilities of electrification. It has taken ridiculously long for states to begin opening new charging stations with the $7.5bn fund created by President Joe Biden’s 2021 infrastructure law. But the first governor to do so, in December, was Mike DeWine of Ohio, a Republican. Brian Kemp, the Republican governor of Georgia, is busy recruiting battery manufacturers.

The body electric

Mr Murphy sees other openings. He notes that five of the top ten states for EV investment, including Georgia and Michigan, are swing states in presidential elections. He intends to aim his pro-EV messages at them. Whereas 66% of Democrats think Elon Musk is a bad ambassador for EVs, 61% of Republicans disagree. “So is he Nixon to China?” Mr Murphy wonders.

Mr Murphy’s polling also suggests, hopefully, that regardless of party most Americans share important sentiments about EVs. They have the same anxieties about price and range, and they are drawn to some of the same advantages: never paying for petrol, cashing in on government rebates. Mr Murphy thinks carmakers need to shut up about how EVs help the environment—those who care are already sold on the vehicles—and talk instead about how they benefit their owners. “If we want to move iron, we gotta make it about cars, not about luxury opinions,” he says. There may be a lesson in there for Mr Biden’s re-election campaign, too. 

Read more from Lexington, our columnist on American politics:
Why America’s political parties are so bad at winning elections (Jan 25th)
It’s not the Trump Party quite yet (Jan 18th)
Ron DeSantis has some lessons for America’s politicians (Jan 11th)

Stay on top of American politics with Checks and Balance, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter, which examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.

Economics

The low-end consumer is about to feel the pinch as Trump restarts student loan collections

Published

on

Andersen Ross Photography Inc | Digitalvision | Getty Images

Wall Street is warning that the U.S. Department of Education’s crack down on student loan repayments may take billions of dollars out of consumers’ pockets and hit low income Americans particularly hard.

The department has restarted collections on defaulted student loans under President Donald Trump this month. For first time in around five years, borrowers who haven’t kept up with their bills could see their wages taken or face other punishments.

Using a range of interest rates and lengths of repayment plans, JPMorgan estimated that disposable personal income could be collectively cut by between $3.1 billion and $8.5 billion every month due to collections, according to Murat Tasci, senior U.S. economist at the bank and a Cleveland Federal Reserve alum.

If that all surfaced in one quarter, collections on defaulted and seriously delinquent loans alone would slash between 0.7% and 1.8% from disposable personal income year-over-year, he said.

This policy change may strain consumers who are already stressed out by Trump’s tariff plan and high prices from years of runaway inflation. These factors can help explain why closely followed consumer sentiment data compiled by the University of Michigan has been hitting some of its lowest levels in its seven-decade history in the past two months.

“You have a number of these pressure points rising,” said Jeffrey Roach, chief economist at LPL Financial. “Perhaps in aggregate, it’s enough to quash some of these spending numbers.”

Bank of America said this push to collect could particularly weigh on groups that are on more precarious financial footing. “We believe resumption of student loan payments will have knock-on effects on broader consumer finances, most especially for the subprime consumer segment,” Bank of America analyst Mihir Bhatia wrote to clients.

Economic impact

Student loans account for just 9% of all outstanding consumer debt, according to Bank of America. But when excluding mortgages, that share shoots up to 30%.

Total outstanding student loan debt sat at $1.6 trillion at the end of March, an increase of half a trillion dollars in the last decade.

The New York Fed estimates that nearly one of every four borrowers required to make payments are currently behind. When the federal government began reporting loans as delinquent in the first quarter of this year, the share of debt holders in this boat jumped up to 8% from around 0.5% in the prior three-month period.

To be sure, delinquency is not the same thing as default. Delinquency refers to any loan with a past-due payment, while defaulting is more specific and tied to not making a delayed payment with a period of time set by the provider. The latter is considered more serious and carries consequences such as wage garnishment. If seriously delinquent borrowers also defaulted, JPMorgan projected that almost 25% of all student loans would be in the latter category.

JPMorgan’s Tasci pointed out that not all borrowers have wages or Social Security earnings to take, which can mitigate the firm’s total estimates. Some borrowers may resume payments with collections beginning, though Tasci noted that would likely also eat into discretionary spending.

Trump’s promise to reduce taxes on overtime and tips, if successful, could also help erase some effects of wage garnishment on poorer Americans.

Still, the expected hit to discretionary income is worrisome as Wall Street wonders if the economy can skirt a recession. Much hope has been placed on the ability of consumers to keep spending even if higher tariffs push product prices higher or if the labor market weakens.

LPL’s Roach sees this as less of an issue. He said the postpandemic economy has largely been propped up by high-income earners, who have done the bulk of the spending. This means the tide-change for student loan holders may not hurt the macroeconomic picture too much, he said.

“It’s hard to say if there’s a consensus view on this yet,” Roach said. “But I would say the student loan story is not as important as perhaps some of the other stories, just because those who hold student loans are not necessarily the drivers of the overall economy.”

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Continue Reading

Economics

Consumer sentiment falls in May as Americans’ inflation expectations jump after tariffs

Published

on

A woman walks in an aisle of a Walmart supermarket in Houston, Texas, on May 15, 2025.

Ronaldo Schemidt | Afp | Getty Images

U.S. consumers are becoming increasingly worried that tariffs will lead to higher inflation, according to a University of Michigan survey released Friday.

The index of consumer sentiment dropped to 50.8, down from 52.2 in April, in the preliminary reading for May. That is the second-lowest reading on record, behind June 2022.

The outlook for price changes also moved in the wrong direction. Year-ahead inflation expectations rose to 7.3% from 6.5% last month, while long-term inflation expectations ticked up to 4.6% from 4.4%.

However, the majority of the survey was completed before the U.S. and China announced a 90-day pause on most tariffs between the two countries. The trade situation appears to be a key factor weighing on consumer sentiment.

“Tariffs were spontaneously mentioned by nearly three-quarters of consumers, up from almost 60% in April; uncertainty over trade policy continues to dominate consumers’ thinking about the economy,” Surveys of Consumers director Joanne Hsu said in the release.

Inflation expectations are closely watched by investors and policymakers. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has said the central bank wants to make sure long-term inflation expectations do not rise because of tariffs before resuming rate cuts.

A final consumer sentiment index for the month is slated to be released on May 30, and will likely be closely watched to see if the tariff pause led to an improvement in sentiment.

This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.

Continue Reading

Economics

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon says recession is still on the table for U.S.

Published

on

Jamie Dimon, chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase & Co., speaks during the 2025 National Retirement Summit in Washington, DC, US, on Wednesday, March 12, 2025.

Al Drago | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Wall Street titan Jamie Dimon said Thursday that a recession is still a serious possibility for the United States, even after the recent rollback of tariffs on China.

“If there’s a recession, I don’t know how big it will be or how long it will last. Hopefully we’ll avoid it, but I wouldn’t take it off the table at this point,” the JPMorgan Chase CEO said in an interview with Bloomberg Television.

Specifically, Dimon said he would defer to his bank’s economists, who put recession odds at close to a toss-up. Michael Feroli, the firm’s chief U.S. economist, said in a note to clients on Tuesday that the recession outlook is “still elevated, but now below 50%.”

Dimon’s comments come less than a week after the U.S. and China announced that they were sharply reducing tariffs on one another for 90 days. The U.S. has also implemented a 90-day pause for many tariffs on other nations.

Thursday’s comments mark a change for Dimon, who said last month before the China truce that a recession was likely.

He also said there is still “uncertainty” on the tariff front but the pauses are a positive for the economy and market.

“I think the right thing to do is to back off some of that stuff and engage in conversation,” Dimon said.

However, even with the tariff pauses, the import taxes on goods entering the United States are now sharply higher than they were last year and could cause economic damage, according to Dimon.

“Even at this level, you see people holding back on investment and thinking through what they want to do,” Dimon said.

— CNBC’s Michael Bloom contributed reporting.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Continue Reading

Trending