GM Profit Shrinks After $1.1 Billion Tariff Hit

Tuesday, July 22, 2025

General Motors' net income plummeted 35% in the second quarter compared with the same quarter in 2024 as increased costs and industry uncertainty stemming from President Donald Trump's ongoing automotive tariffs cost the company $1.1 billion.

Posted by reinheitsgebot at 09:33 PM | 55 COMMENTS | permalink

Trump tariffs take a $1 billion bite out of GM earnings; shares fall reut.rs/44KubCY

[image or embed]
-- Reuters (@reuters.com) Jul 22, 2025 at 8:05 AM

Comments

Why won't Joe Biden just leave things alone?

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2025-07-22 09:58 AM

And Stellantis has over $2B losses this year, though not all from tariffs.

Stellantis has announced its preliminary financial results for the first half of 2025 " and it's not looking good. The automaker, known for brands like Jeep and Dodge (among many others) reported a net loss of 2.3 billion (approximately $2.7 billion) for the period. That compares to a 5.5 billion ($6.4 billion) profit for all of 2024, which itself marked a 70% drop from the previous year.
carbuzz.com

#2 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-22 10:40 AM

$5 billion on China Joint Ventures
$3.5 billon on Cruise
$2.5 billion on EVs
$2.4 billion on North American ops EBIT shrinkage

If they dump robotaxis and EVs, or China operations, they'd be very profitable.

#3 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-07-22 11:37 AM

Uh oh. Looks like Stephen Colbert is not the only one losing money and in danger of getting "canceled".

#4 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-07-22 11:48 AM

President Pedo is actively destroying this country.

#5 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-07-22 09:50 PM

That makes him a traitor.

#6 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-07-22 09:50 PM

BYD crushes Tesla. No competition.

#7 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-07-22 09:51 PM

That's why they're not available here.

#8 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-07-22 09:51 PM

My car is old, Bavarian, and paid for. I think it will last me for as long as I can insert and extract myself from it. GEE EM who?

#9 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2025-07-23 07:15 AM

So much winning.

#10 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-07-23 07:25 AM

There is incompetence that costs those of us at the bottom our food, our housing, our medical, but there is incompetence that costs the rich of the major corporate boardrooms millions...and that is an enemy Trump does not want to have.
Might be significant to point out that the Republicans under Nixon "opened China to the West" so those same boardrooms could make stuff for cheap in countries that outlawed unions, and then sell that stuff to us for a lot of money, and now that same Republican Party is pretending they really care about the American worker.

#11 | Posted by Hughmass at 2025-07-23 08:37 AM

"In a letter to shareholders, GM CEO Mary Barra emphasized the $4 billion investment in U.S. manufacturing GM announced in the quarter, a change that adds 300,000 units of capacity for profitable light-duty pickups, full-size SUVs and crossovers currently made in other countries."

I wonder if -------- read any of the attached article before posting this.

I wonder if anybody read the attached article before posting.

Isn't the response from GM exactly what we would hope for as a result of implement tariffs? They are going to move manufacturing operations currently overseas back to the US.

I'm no expert in tariffs nor am I an economist....but this article makes it look like the tariffs are working precisely as intended.

The only consequence is a bunch of trust fund babies GM dividend checks are going to suffer for a little while.

#12 | Posted by eberly at 2025-07-23 09:34 AM

Clarification ... ... it's not the only consequence but it's an obvious one.

#13 | Posted by eberly at 2025-07-23 09:38 AM

Damn, GM hit hard by Reps this time. They got hit hard by Dems up to 2008 when they deregulated banks, thus requiring a bailout. I wonder if Trump is going to follow suit and provide bailout for his stupid decisions.

I know DR lib kids weren't alive in 2008 and won't accept anything bad that their party does but that doesn't make it any less true.

#14 | Posted by humtake at 2025-07-23 11:19 AM

GM profit shrinks despite stronger sales
Automaker warns tariff impact will be greater next quarter

www.foxbusiness.com

NOTE: This was posted on 22 July - prior to the Trump Tariffs announcement, so how about you quit posting phony info about the tariffs being the problem.

#15 | Posted by MSgt at 2025-07-23 11:23 AM

#14

HumWhataboutisms don't address the current situation.

#16 | Posted by Corky at 2025-07-23 11:23 AM

The first instance of significant tariffs hitting the auto industry this year occurred on April 3rd, when a 25% tariff was applied to imported vehicles. This was followed by tariffs on imported auto parts, which began on May 3rd.

#17 | Posted by YAV at 2025-07-23 11:31 AM

#16 I don't expect you to understand this Corky but it's from the article.
'Still, GM does not expect to raise prices based on the current projections of tariff impacts. GM leaders opted to keep pricing stable in the past few months as its competitors raced to offer discounts to attract buyers wary of tariff costs. As a result, GM kept those profits and grew its U.S. market share in the U.S. to 17.3% in the first half of the year, up from 14.5% in 2021, and "more than double the gain of our closest competitor," Jacobson said.

#18 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-07-23 11:33 AM

They got hit hard by Dems up to 2008 when they deregulated banks

Sounds like another maga maroon lie. Got any supporting evidence or are you just blabbering Trumpified nonsense again?

Dems (who have always supported regulation of banks) suddenly deregulated banks in 2008? Yeah. Not likely.

Can you provide any supporting evidence for this or is it just another blatant maga lie slipped into the conversation while hoping no one would notice or care?

#19 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-07-23 11:36 AM

#18 - Bessant was on Morning Joe this morning and lied his ass off - beautifully obfuscating through misdirection. He was asked directly about who pays the tariffs, and isn't it us?

He said "No, a lot of companies are paying the tariffs, and so the customers aren't seeing any price increase." He ignored that the companies are US companies, and like GM, and *some* are paying the tariffs, or part of them, and this is eating into their profit margins. WE are paying them, no matter what - because only WE can pay them. So if a manufacturer or supplier wants to lower the price, let it cut into their margins - that tariff still has to be paid and it's paid by us.

We are paying for the tariffs, no matter how the product price is manipulated to hide that.

#20 | Posted by YAV at 2025-07-23 11:52 AM

FishyP buh-lieves whatever his Corporate Masters tell him to believe... even when they are posturing for Investors.

#21 | Posted by Corky at 2025-07-23 12:02 PM

We are paying for the tariffs, no matter how the product price is manipulated to hide that.

#20 | Posted by YAV at 2025-07-23 11:52 AM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

Importers are paying them in most cases. You screamed that shelves would be empty, inflation would go through the roof. That didn't happen. You have zero credibility.

#22 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-07-23 01:54 PM

FishyP buh-lieves whatever his Corporate Masters tell him to believe... even when they are posturing for Investors.
#21 | Posted by Corky at 2025-07-23 12:02 PM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

My quote was directly from the article that you call gospel.

#23 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-07-23 01:55 PM

Addressed in #20.

#24 | Posted by YAV at 2025-07-23 01:57 PM

#24 In some cases the cost will be passed on but in just as many cases the importer eats the cost. Simple example for you: Two pairs of flip flops are on the store shelf. One is made here and costs $6, the other comes from China and costs $5. We put a $1.50 tariff on the chinese pair. Are they going to raise the cost of the chinese pair to $6.50? No, they will eat the #1.50 and still sell their flip flops for $5. They still make money but not as much.

#25 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-07-23 02:09 PM

#24 In some cases the cost will be passed on but in just as many cases the importer eats the cost.
#25 | Posted by fishpaw

Oh so when it doesn't create inflation it cuts into profits.

Why is this such a win for Republicans?

#26 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-23 02:13 PM

Who is the importer, Fishpaw? What country does that importer live in? The tariff HAS to paid, just like DUTY is paid, by the person that lives in the United States. Your example of the Chinese flip flop? That tariff is still paid by the person in the United States. So what the tariff does is, if the manufacturer in China decides to lower the price, they eat that cost, AND the person in the United States pays the tariff. A tax on the import.

#27 | Posted by YAV at 2025-07-23 02:21 PM

Oh so when it doesn't create inflation it cuts into profits.
Exacly - and only for as long as the manufacturer chooses to eat whatever amount they warrant.
That's why we can't get electronic components for our industry. The manufacturers have decided to sell what would be going to us to other markets rather than lower the costs in low-margin components.

#28 | Posted by YAV at 2025-07-23 02:23 PM

GM has decided that moving forward they can't add the tariff tax and remain competitive.

the alternative is to move the manufacturing to the US (at a marginally higher production cost) but compared to the higher tariff cost....this is the better deal of the 2.

At least that's what I'm concluding from the attached article.

#29 | Posted by eberly at 2025-07-23 02:27 PM

"At least that's what I'm concluding from the attached article."

Are you also concluding these tariffs will be inflationary?

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-23 02:29 PM

The manufacturers have decided to sell what would be going to us to other markets rather than lower the costs in low-margin components.
#28 | Posted by YAV

^
Republicans have fully bought into their own mythology where any tax can just get passed along to the customer with no consequences.

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-23 02:32 PM

-Are you also concluding these tariffs will be inflationary?

Are you saying that a pickup made in another country for $30K will now be $34K with a tariff attached to it?

#32 | Posted by eberly at 2025-07-23 02:32 PM

"GM has decided that moving forward they can't add the tariff tax and remain competitive."

GM can't retool in 3.5 years kid.

#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-23 02:33 PM

Are you saying that a pickup made in another country for $30K will now be $34K with a tariff attached to it?
#32 | Posted by eberly

Which pickup is this?

Also, the chicken tax is still in place.

To answer your question: It will probably be a combination of raised prices and lowered profits.

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-23 02:37 PM

Is that what you mean by "inflationary"?

#35 | Posted by eberly at 2025-07-23 02:39 PM

"Are you saying that a pickup made in another country for $30K will now be $34K with a tariff attached to it?"

I don't GAF about the specifics, I'm saying tariffs are taxes, and asking you if you believe these new tariffs are inflationary.

It's a first semester Econ 101 question.

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-23 02:39 PM

"Is that what you mean by "inflationary"?"

I mean "Is it going to cost me more than it would've cost without the tariff?"

If so, that's inflationary. Do you agree or disagree?

#37 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-23 02:41 PM

-It's a first semester Econ 101 question.

and I'm sure you did really well in that class....LOL

The most basic econ class I took was Econ 301 and that wasn't a question in that class.

if you understand your question then you'll understand the "specifics".

Unless you really don't understand your question....but pretending you do.

#38 | Posted by eberly at 2025-07-23 02:43 PM

Thank you....yes, it's inflationary.

#39 | Posted by eberly at 2025-07-23 02:44 PM

"It will probably be a combination of raised prices and lowered profits."

So American consumers pay more, while businesses have to accept lower profits ...

... all to raise regressive taxes.

Any historians out there, to remind us why the income tax was enacted in 1913? Something about tariffs, mostly falling on the middle and lower classes, which were choking off the economy???

Anybody?

#40 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-23 02:46 PM

Honestly, if corporations are NOT passing the full cost of tariffs through to consumers, I'd say they're proving to all of us that the inflation of the last few years was simply driven by greed. If they hold down prices as they pay tariffs, they're protecting Trumps policies instead of their shareholders.

#41 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2025-07-23 02:48 PM

"I'm sure you did really well in that class....LOL"

After my first class as a freshman, the teacher asked me to be the TA.

I never told him I'd just finished a much harder Econ class at prep school.

#42 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-23 02:50 PM

-After my first class as a freshman, the teacher asked me to be the TA.

Because you were a brown noser.......-:)

#43 | Posted by eberly at 2025-07-23 02:52 PM

"The most basic econ class I took was Econ 301 and that wasn't a question in that class."

That's because you're supposed to learn how the macro dials turn in 101.

#44 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-23 02:54 PM

Any historians out there, to remind us why the income tax was enacted in 1913? Something about tariffs, mostly falling on the middle and lower classes, which were choking off the economy???
Anybody?
#40 | Posted by Danforth

Can we also just point out that the Founders knew that those are Regressive Taxes.
They specifically forbade in the Constitution a Per Capita tax that could employ graduated rates and thus be a Progressive Tax.

It is still hard for most Americans to fathom that the rich white men slave owners who founded this country never really gave two ----- about anyone but themselves, in terms of the taxation policies they enacted for this country.

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-23 05:46 PM

I wonder how all of the people who wave flags and demand that people buy American products and who overwhelmingly support Donald Trump are gonna blame this on immigrants and trans people.

#46 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2025-07-24 08:07 AM

Which pickup is this?

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-23 02:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ford Maverick. Hencho en Mexico. Hermosillo Assembly Plant. 2025 XL, new, $27890 base MSRP. 2026 is estimated at mid $29k. The % of USA made parts on it is between 1/5 and 1/4 of the vehicle. Price increases are half of what tariffs would suggest, while also making hybrid standard on the vehicle and adding more features to the XL trim level year over year along with body style changes.

#47 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-07-24 09:12 AM

Tariffs have had little impact on automotive parts pricing.

I and many other industry experts thought it would, and we've so far been quite wrong.

#48 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-07-24 09:22 AM

and the root cause of being wrong: Trump settles for far, far less than he promises.

#49 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-07-24 09:23 AM

"The % of USA made parts on it is between 1/5 and 1/4 of the vehicle."

It's funny that my Subaru has substantially more American parts than a Ford.

#50 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-24 09:28 AM

"Tariffs have had little impact on automotive parts pricing."

Have the tariffs kicked in yet? I thought it wasn't happening until August 1.

#51 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-24 09:29 AM

Also ever since Liberation Day my Subaru Dealer keeps making lowball offers on buying back my car. So I think they're anticipating that eventually the tariff costs will get baked in.

Is it possible companies moved away from lean, mean, Just In Time supply chains after those failed during COVID? Surplus parts would help explain why tariffs haven't impacted prices.

#52 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-07-24 09:46 AM

25% tariffs on cars from Mexico went into effect last month. Sheet metal parts prices are up a little. It didn't effect plastics. Many items just had customs codes changed. The great disruption to the parts supply chain Trump promised has not materialized and isn't projected to.

JIT hasn't changed. OEM to Dealer programs are what's been changing principally with GM. Whenever they take losses they try to soak their franchises.

#53 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-07-24 10:28 AM

and while this is going on, Morgan Stanley has advice for GM:

"You can't make money on EVs and you're losing your ass. You need to make humanoid robots".

...

#54 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-07-24 11:31 AM

"A thesis changer"

Gotta love MBAs.

#55 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-07-24 11:31 AM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Trump to Sign Unconstitutional EO to Mandate Voter ID (89 comments)

Epstein Victims: Release the Files (61 comments)