2013 Fiat 500 Sport on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Here's why GM is giving Marchionne the cold shoulder

What's funny about an Automotive News story titled Why Won't GM Play Ball with Marchionne? is that few people outside of the Fiat CEO and his confidants understands why General Motors would play ball with the Italian company. Marchionne has said the combined entity could increase its annual earnings by $5 billion, but even an outside analyst that agreed with the number only conditionally agreed, saying, "If you assume some synergies and peak US cycle market conditions then, yes, they could get to 30 billion." However, that same analyst described Fiat Chrysler Automobiles as "probably the most challenged within the global industry." Not US industry – global. And before that revenue goal could be reached, the merged companies would need to wade through a bureaucratic swamp. Plus the executive, manufacturing, financial, platform, procurement, and international labor swamps, among a few others. This AN piece can be viewed as GM's response to Marchionne's assertions and offers of various "hugs." It lays out numerous reasons why a more focused and disciplined GM - one almost done with a major crisis and able to focus on its priorities - believes Fiat would be the desperate housewife in such a scenario. On the other hand, while AN doesn't have Marchionne's numbers, to get a better sense of where the Italian is coming from you should read more of the "Industry on Trial" special report. Not that it justifies the creation of a GM-FCA, but it shows that the capital expenditures considering the amount of automaker development overlap are, to the outside eye, staggering. Related Video: News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Bill Pugliano/Getty Images Earnings/Financials Fiat GM Sergio Marchionne

Fiat Chrysler to pay $800M in Jeep, Ram emissions cheating case

WASHINGTON — Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV has agreed to a settlement worth about $800 million to resolve claims from the U.S. Justice Department and state of California that it used illegal software that produced false results on diesel-emissions tests, but still faces an ongoing criminal probe. The hefty penalty is the latest fallout from the U.S. government's stepped-up enforcement of vehicle emissions rules after Volkswagen AG admitted in September 2015 to intentionally evading emissions rules. The Fiat Chrysler settlement includes $311 million in total civil penalties to U.S. and California regulators, up to $280 million to resolve claims from diesel owners, and extended warranties worth $105 million. It covers 104,000 Fiat Chrysler 2014-16 Ram 1500 and Jeep Grand Cherokee diesels, the Justice Department said. Regulators said Fiat Chrysler used "defeat devices" to cheat emissions tests in real-world driving. Fiat Chrysler said in a statement that "the settlements do not change the Company's position that it did not engage in any deliberate scheme to install defeat devices to cheat emissions tests." The company did not admit liability. "You wouldn't pay $311 million total dollars to the federal government in civil penalties if there were not a serious problem," U.S. assistant attorney general Jeff Clark told a news conference. The settlement also includes $72.5 million for state civil penalties, and $33.5 million in payments to California to offset excess emissions and consumer claims. German auto supplier Robert Bosch GmbH, which provided the emissions control software for the vehicles, also agreed to pay $27.5 million to resolve claims from diesel owners. Owners will receive an average of $2,800 to obtain software updates as part of the emissions recall, Fiat Chrysler said. Elizabeth Cabraser, a lawyer for the owners, said the "substantial cash compensation" will ensure that consumers get the recall fix. Bosch, which also provided diesel emissions software to Volkswagen, also agreed to pay $103.5 million to settle claims with 47 U.S. states that said the supplier "enabled" the cheating and should have known its customers would use the software improperly, the New York Attorney General's Office said.

At meeting with automakers, Trump launches new attack on NAFTA

WASHINGTON — Ten American and foreign automakers went to the White House on Friday to push for a weakening of U.S. fuel efficiency standards through 2025, while President Donald Trump used the occasion to launch a fresh attack on the North American Free Trade Agreement that has benefited the companies. A draft proposal circulated by the U.S. Transportation Department would freeze fuel efficiency requirements at 2020 levels through 2026, rather than allowing them to increase as previously planned. Trump's administration is expected to formally unveil the proposal later this month or in June. "We're working on CAFE standards, environmental controls," Trump told reporters at the top of the meeting, referring to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for cars and light trucks in the United States. Trump said he wants automakers to build more vehicles in the United States and export more vehicles. But much of the hour-long meeting focused on NAFTA. Trump blasted the pact involving the United States, Canada and Mexico as "terrible" and noted that negotiations to make changes sought by his administration were ongoing. "NAFTA has been a horrible, horrible disaster for this country and we'll see if we can make it reasonable," Trump said. Automakers have called NAFTA a success, allowing them to integrate production throughout North America and make production competitive with Asia and Europe, and have noted the increase in auto production over the past two decades with the deal in place. They have warned that changing NAFTA too much could prompt some companies to move production out of the United States. The chief executives of General Motors Co, Ford Motor Co, Fiat Chrysler, along with senior U.S. executives from Toyota Motor Corp, Volkswagen AG, Hyundai Motor Co, Nissan Motor Co, Honda Motor Co , BMW AG and Daimler AG met with Trump, as did the chief executives of two auto trade groups. Major automakers reiterated this week they do not support freezing fuel efficiency requirements but said they want new flexibility and rule changes to address lower gasoline prices and the shift in U.S. consumer preferences to bigger, less fuel-efficient vehicles.