1969 Toyota Land Cruiser on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Japan may aid carmakers facing U.S. tariff threat

TOKYO — Japan is considering giving carmakers fiscal support including tax breaks to offset the impact from trade frictions with the United States and a sales-tax hike planned for next year, government sources told Reuters on Wednesday. Going into a second round of trade talks with the United States on Sept. 21, Japan is hoping to avert steep tariffs on its car exports and fend off U.S. demands for a bilateral free trade agreement that could put it under pressure to open politically sensitive markets, like agriculture. "If the trade talks pile pressure on Japan's car exports, we would need to consider measures to support the auto industry," a ruling party official said on condition of anonymity because of sensitivity of the matter. The auto industry accounts for about 20 percent of Japan's overall output and around 60-70 percent of the country's trade surplus with the United States, making it vulnerable to U.S. action against Japanese exports. Japan's biggest automakers and components suppliers fear they could take a significant hit if Washington follows through on proposals to hike tariffs on autos and auto parts to 25 percent. Policymakers also worry that an increase in the sales tax from 8 percent to 10 percent planned for October 2019, could cause a slump in sales of big-ticket items such as cars and home. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has twice postponed the tax hike after the last increase from 5 percent in 2014 dealt a blow to private consumption, which accounts for about 60 percent of the economy. To prevent a pullback in demand after the tax hike, the government may consider large fiscal spending later when it draws up its budget for next year, government sources said. "One option may be to greatly reduce or abolish the automobile purchase tax," one of the government sources said. The government is also considering cuts in the automobile tax and automobile weight tax to help car buyers, the source added. Reporting by Izumi Nakagawa and Tetsushi KajimotoRelated Video: Image Credit: Getty Government/Legal Isuzu Mazda Mitsubishi Nissan Subaru Suzuki Toyota Trump Trump tariffs trade

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.

The ugly economics of green vehicles

It's fair to say that most consumers would prefer a green vehicle, one that has a lower impact on the environment and goes easy on costly fuel (in all senses of the term). The problem is that most people can't – or won't – pay the price premium or put up with the compromises today's green cars demand. We're not all "cashed-up greenies." In 2013, the average selling price of a new vehicle was $32,086. The truth is that most Americans can't afford a new car, green or not. In 2013, the average selling price of a new vehicle was $32,086. According to a recent Federal Reserve study, the median income for American families was $46,700 in 2013, a five-percent decline from $49,000 in 2010. While $32,000 for a car may not sound like a lot to some, it's about $630 a month financing for 48 months, assuming the buyer can come up with a $6,400 down payment. And that doesn't include gas, insurance, taxes, maintenance and all the rest. It's no wonder that a recent study showed that the average family could afford a new car in only one of 25 major US cities. AutoTrader conducted a recent survey of 1,900 millennials (those born between 1980 and 2000) about their new and used car buying habits. Isabelle Helms, AutoTrader's vice president of research, said millennials are "big on small" vehicles, which tend to be more affordable. Millennials also yearn for alternative-powered vehicles, but "they generally can't afford them." When it comes to the actual behavior of consumers, the operative word is "affordable," not "green." In 2012, US new car sales rose to 14.5 million. But according to Manheim Research, at 40.5 million units, used car sales were almost three times as great. While the days of the smoke-belching beater are mostly gone, it's a safe bet that the used cars are far less green in terms of gas mileage, emissions, new technology, etc., than new ones. Who Pays the Freight? Green cars, particularly alternative-fuel green cars, cost more than their conventional gas-powered siblings. A previous article discussed how escalating costs and limited utility drove me away from leasing a hydrogen fuel cell-powered Hyundai Tucson, which at $50,000, was nearly twice the cost of the equivalent gas-powered version. In Hyundai's defense, it's fair to ask who should pay the costs of developing and implementing new technology vehicles and the infrastructure to support them.