Trade Policy · Affordability · Consumer Rights
May 30, 2026
Congress wants to ban Chinese cars from American roads. The proposed Protecting America from Chinese Cars Act would make it official. But the truth is the ban is already here. It just does not have that name yet. The tariffs currently imposed on Chinese electric vehicles exceed 100 percent. That is not a trade policy. That is a prohibition with a price tag attached.
I am against it. And I want to explain why.
You Are Already Driving a "Chinese" Car and Do Not Know It
Volvo is owned by Geely a Chinese company. Most Americans think of Volvo as a Swedish brand. They buy Volvos because they are safe, reliable and well designed. They did not buy a Chinese car. They bought a Swedish car that happens to be owned by a Chinese company. The world did not end. National security was not compromised. Life went on.
Just days ago Volvo had to go to the Trump administration and negotiate a special exemption just to keep selling cars in the United States. Without that exemption Volvo faced being banned from the American market entirely. Not because of anything it did. Because of who owns it.
Volvo got its exemption. Polestar did not. Not yet.
Polestar is an electric vehicle brand spun out of Volvo. It is headquartered in Sweden. It manufactures vehicles in South Carolina. And it is currently in legal limbo, unable to confirm whether it will be allowed to continue selling cars in the United States, because it is also controlled by Geely. A Swedish EV brand. Built in America. In danger of being banned. Because of corporate ownership.
This is what the ban looks like in practice. And it has not even passed yet.
Where I Actually Stand
Let me be direct. I am not calling for unlimited, unregulated importation of Chinese vehicles. A reasonable quota system, similar to what we have long maintained with Japanese automakers is sensible policy. Competition with Japanese cars made American car companies better. Competition with Chinese car companies will do the same. In the long run that is better for American manufacturers, better for American consumers, and better for the environment.
What I am against is a total ban. A prohibition so sweeping that no other serious democracy on earth has seen fit to impose it. Canada is not doing this. The European Union is not doing this. Australia is not doing this. South America is not doing this. Chinese cars are sold in Europe. They are sold in South America. These are not countries that are naive about Chinese trade practices. They have simply concluded that a total ban serves no one except the legacy automakers lobbying for it.
The Needs of the Many
Mr. Spock said it plainly in Star Trek. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
Apply that here. We are talking about millions of American families, working people, middle class households, who are being priced out of the electric vehicle market entirely. People spending years, sometimes a decade, paying off high interest auto loans. The emergence of affordable Chinese EVs could change that equation. Congress wants to make sure it never happens.
Not having millions of Americans spend years paying off high loans is more important and better for the economy than banning Chinese cars to protect a handful of manufacturers from competition. That is not a close call.
A Lesson That Was Already Written
In his novel Congo, Michael Crichton made a quiet observation about the American auto industry. He wrote that for a long time, protecting domestic automakers and their workers was treated as a vital national priority. But priorities shift. What eventually mattered most to the American consumer and to the American economy was simply being able to get an affordable, reliable car. Where it was built became secondary to what it cost and what it was worth.
We are at that same inflection point today. The question is no longer whether American companies build cars. The question is whether American families can afford to drive one. Congress is answering that question in entirely the wrong direction.
The Big Three Are Not What They Were
Here is something most Americans do not know. One of the so called Big Three American automakers is owned by a foreign company. Most people still call them American. The world did not end. The economy was not destroyed. The industry did not collapse. Life went on, because what matters to consumers is not a corporate family tree. It is the product, the price, and the value. Chrysler has been foreign owned since 2014. It is currently owned by Stellantis.
The narrative that Chinese automakers represent an existential threat to the American auto industry is the same argument deployed against Japanese automakers decades ago. Everyone knows how that ended. American cars got better because they had to compete. Chinese competition will produce the same result, but only if we allow it.
The Connected Vehicle Security Act includes a 15 percent ownership threshold for foreign adversary influence. Under that standard, Volvo, Polestar, Lotus, and other brands with Chinese ownership ties all face scrutiny. Brands that most Americans would never think of as Chinese. That is how far-reaching and poorly thought through this ban actually is.
The National Security Argument Does Not Hold
The claim that Chinese vehicles are a national security threat because they can photograph sensitive areas is not a serious argument. Every Tesla on American roads has cameras recording constantly. China does not ban Teslas. It restricts them from certain sensitive locations. That is the rational, proportionate response and it is exactly what we should do with Chinese EVs.
Restrict them from military bases and classified facilities. Require that data stays on American servers. Mandate independent security audits. All of that is reasonable policy. None of it requires banning the sale of a car to a family in Seattle or Bellevue who just wants an affordable way to commute to work.
The national security framing is a label. The actual product underneath is market protection for the Big Three. And here is the proof. The Trump administration just granted Volvo a specific authorization to keep selling in the United States. The government looked at Volvo, evaluated the actual risk and decided it was acceptable. That is exactly the approach I have been arguing for. If the government can do it for Volvo, it can do it for Chinese EVs. The question is whether it is willing to or whether the goal was never really about security at all.
"Affordable" Is the Word Politicians Use When They Mean Something Else
Every politician in America right now is talking about affordability. Affordable housing. Affordable healthcare. Affordable groceries. It is the buzzword of this election cycle.
And yet here stands Congress preparing to make electric vehicles, already out of reach for millions of Americans. Even more expensive by blocking the only manufacturers currently producing them at a price point ordinary families can realistically consider.
The 100 percent plus tariffs already in place are not making EVs more affordable. They are doing the opposite. This is not a national security policy. It is market protection for the Big Three, done in the name of national security. The Protecting America from Chinese Cars Act would take that further and make the unofficial ban official.
American automakers are not switching to manufacturing only electric vehicles anytime soon. They are not making enough affordable EVs to meet demand. In that gap, millions of American families are making do. Driving older cars, taking on debt they cannot sustain or going without. Chinese manufacturers are prepared to fill that gap at a price that works. Polestar, a Swedish brand built in South Carolina, cannot even get clarity on whether it will be allowed to keep operating. Congress is preparing to make that situation permanent.
The Sensible Solution Is Already Being Used
The White House just proved that a smarter approach is possible. They evaluated Volvo individually, determined the risk was manageable and issued an authorization. That is not a ban. That is governance.
Apply that same logic more broadly. Evaluate Chinese vehicles on a case by case basis. Restrict them from sensitive federal locations. Require data protections. Set ownership thresholds with a real review process. Use quotas the way we do with Japanese automakers. None of that requires a total ban. All of it is more honest than what Congress is currently proposing.
This Is the TikTok Argument All Over Again
We all knew that banning TikTok on national security grounds was political theater. Trump and Congress could not explain exactly how TikTok was a threat. They could not point to a specific incident. They could not demonstrate concrete harm. They just said "China" and expected everyone to stop asking questions. Most Americans saw through it.
The Chinese car ban is the same argument wearing a different costume. Chinese electric vehicles are no more a genuine threat to national security than TikTok was. The same playbook. The same vague warnings. The same refusal to pursue the targeted, proportionate response that would actually address any legitimate concern.
And consider who benefits most from this ban. Not working families. Not the environment. Not national security. The single biggest beneficiary of banning Chinese EVs is Elon Musk. A total ban on Chinese electric vehicles would guarantee Tesla's dominance in the American EV market for years. No serious competition on price. No pressure to innovate faster. No reason to bring costs down for ordinary consumers. Congress is handing Elon Musk a monopoly and calling it patriotism.
There is one more thing worth pointing out. Many Chinese electric vehicles have more advanced autonomous driving software than Tesla. Banning those vehicles does not just hurt affordability. It locks American consumers into older, less capable technology. It means millions of Americans will be driving cars with inferior safety systems compared to what is available in the rest of the world. A ban sold as protecting Americans may actually be making American roads less safe.
You Cannot Even Buy One in Canada and Bring It Home
Under the new laws, an American will not be able to buy a Chinese EV in Canada and bring it across the border. A Canadian visiting the United States will not be able to drive here in a Chinese EV. Canada allows Chinese cars. Canada just reduced tariffs on tens of thousands of Chinese vehicles. But an American driving home from Vancouver in a legally purchased, Canadian registered Chinese electric vehicle would be in violation of U.S. law.
That is not a national security policy. That is a wall built around American consumers to keep affordable options out. It has nothing to do with spying. It has everything to do with protecting market share.
What I Support
I support a quota system for Chinese vehicles, structured the way we handle Japanese automakers. That introduces competitive pressure. Benefits American consumers and gives domestic manufacturers the incentive they need to compete on price and quality. Without handing them a blank check to ignore the market.
What I oppose is a total ban, whether through legislation or through tariffs so punishing they function as one. I oppose it because it is bad for American consumers, bad for the environment, bad for the long term competitiveness of the American auto industry. And fundamentally inconsistent with the free market values politicians claim to hold.
The government is sacrificing the needs of millions of Americans to have affordable electric vehicles for purely political reasons. Competition made the American auto industry better once before. It will again. But only if we let it.
Americans have been a slave to the price of oil for many generations. Congress is working hard to keep future generations as slaves for as long as possible.
Kincaid is a Democratic candidate for Congress in Washington's 1st Congressional District.
Paid for by Kincaid for Congress.
Comments
Post a Comment