2006 Hyundai Sonata Gls on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai reveals CEO's pay for first time ever

Thanks to some government pressure, Hyundai's billionaire chairman, Chung Mong Koo, has revealed just how much he gets paid each year. Honestly, the amount is a bit lower than we'd expect considering he helms such a huge industrial empire. The 76-year-old chairman brought home $13 million in 2013, $5.2 million of which came from Hyundai's automotive business while both Mobis and Hyundai Steel chipped in $3.94 million, each. For reference, Ford CEO Alan Mulally netted $23.2 million in 2013, although the vast majority of that money came from stock options.
The push for Chung to reveal his pay was part of a larger effort by the South Korean government called the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act. The act forces several thousand companies to release info on annual pay, bonuses and severance for employees earning over $5 million won ($469,000), according to Bloomberg.
"With the disclosure of the executives' compensation, the pressure to deliver better profits will increase," said Heo Pil Seok, the CEO of Midas International Asset Management. It seems to be working, as Hyundai shareholders, of which Midas is one, have seen their shares increase by 6.1 percent in 2014, which includes a 1.2-percent jump as of yesterday, according to Bloomberg.

S. Korea to raise concerns about EV credits, battery sourcing in U.S. visit

SEOUL — South Korean officials will meet U.S. counterparts this week to express "concerns" about the Inflation Reduction Act, which restricts who can receive U.S. subsidies for the production of electric vehicles and where firms can source battery materials. President Joe Biden signed into law this month a $430 billion bill, seen as the biggest climate package in U.S. history. The law requires that EVs be assembled in North America to qualify for tax credits, ending subsidies for several EV models, and that a percentage of critical minerals used in batteries come from the United States or an American free-trade partner. Automakers like Hyundai Motor face short-term competitive disadvantage to manufacturers of EVs that receive tax credits in the United States, while industry sources said Korean battery makers must make changes to mineral sourcing routes, which could affect cost adversely. South Korean officials are expected to tell counterparts from the U.S. Trade Representative's office and the U.S. Treasury that the new law may violate trade norms such as the U.S.-South Korea free trade agreement and the WTO agreement, the industry ministry said. Korean automakers will consider adjusting production plans to prioritize the construction of U.S. plants for example, the ministry said, while battery makers will seek to diversify where they source minerals from. Under new rules to kick in next year, at least 40% of the monetary value of the critical minerals in batteries will need to come from the United States or an American free-trade partner, with that proportion rising to 80% by 2027. Globally, the treatment of some 58% of lithium, 64% of cobalt and 70% of graphite goes through China, according to ministry data. FALLOUT The new rules are a major complication for battery makers LG Energy Solution (LGES), SK On and Samsung SDI, battery industry sources said. South Korea's LGES supplies Tesla and General Motors, while SK On and Samsung SDI supply Ford Motor and Volkswagen among others. The three battery makers together command more than a quarter of the global EV battery market, according to SNE Research. "It's become a huge headache ... Automaker clients said they didn't expect this new law would take effect this soon," said a South Korean battery industry source.

Hyundai Sonata PHEV may be a game (and mind) changer

If you really, really want to consume volts instead of fuel on your way to work, school or shopping, you currently have just three options: pure EV, hydrogen fuel cell, or plug-in hybrid EV. Much as we love them, we all know the disadvantages of BEVs: high prices due to high battery cost (even though subsidized by their makers), limited range and long recharges. Yes, I know: six-figure (giant-battery) Teslas can deliver a couple hundred miles and Supercharge to ~80 percent in 10 minutes. But few of us can afford one of those, Tesla's high-voltage chargers are hardly as plentiful as gas stations, and even 10 minutes is a meaningful chunk out of a busy day. Also, good luck finding a Tesla dealership to fix whatever goes wrong (other than downloadable software updates) when it inevitably does. There still aren't any. Even more expensive, still rare as honest politicians, and much more challenging to refuel are FCEVs. You can lease one from Honda or Hyundai, and maybe soon Toyota, provided you live in Southern California and have ample disposable income. But you'd best limit your driving to within 100 miles or so of the small (but growing) number of hydrogen fueling stations in that state if you don't want to complete your trip on the back of a flatbed. That leaves PHEVs as the only reasonably affordable, practical choice. Yes, you can operate a conventional parallel hybrid in EV mode...for a mile or so at creep-along speeds. But if your mission is getting to work, school or the mall (and maybe back) most days without burning any fuel – while basking in the security of having a range-extender in reserve when you need it – your choices are extended-range EVs. That means the Chevrolet Volt, Cadillac ELR or a BMW i3 with the optional range-extender engine, and plug-in parallel hybrids. Regular readers know that, except for their high prices, I'm partial to EREVs. They are series hybrids whose small, fuel-efficient engines don't even start (except in certain rare, extreme conditions) until their batteries are spent. That means you can drive 30-40 (Volt, ELR) or 70-80 miles (i3) without consuming a drop of fuel. And until now, I've been fairly skeptical of plug-in versions of conventional parallel hybrids. Why?