2026美国需要汽车产业战略（英）.pdf

itif.org America Needs an Industrial Strategy for Motor Vehicles STEPHEN EZELL AND MEGHAN OSTERTAG|MAY 2026 U.S.automotive competitiveness has severely faltered.The federal government needs a comprehensive national strategy to revitalize the industrys competitiveness,especially in the face of Chinese EVs.KEY TAKEAWAYS The motor vehicle industry is a key industry enabling American national economic power,especially against the looming threat from China.However,as a share of GDP,Chinas auto industry is 2.6 times larger than Americas,while Mexicos is 7.3 times larger.The United States needs both a coherent,analytically based strategy and a set of policies to spur innovation and production in the sector.This report lays out policy proposals in five areas:cost reduction,product development,strengthened“external economies”and industry supports,increased market scale,and roadway infrastructure.Some of these changes can be made without significant fiscal impact.But an effective policy will require significant direct and tax expenditures to support industry R&D in both product and process development and adoption.Congress should also ban both Chinese motor vehicle imports and Chinee vehicle production in the United States.INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY&INNOVATION FOUNDATION|MAY 2026 PAGE 2 CONTENTS Key Takeaways.1 Introduction.4 Key Issues for Consideration.4 Is the Industry Important?.4 Do We Need a Strategy?.5 How Focused Should the Strategy Be?.6 Institutional Capacities.7 Cost Reduction.9 Generic Policies.9 Currency.10 Productivity Improvement.10 Industry-Specific Policies.11 Product Regulation.11 Sales Regulation.12 Technical Assistance to SMM Auto Suppliers.13 Supporting SMM Integration and Digitalization Activities.13 Product Development.14 Generic Policies.14 Increase Incentives for R&D Investment.14 Industry-Focused Workforce Training.14 Sector-Specific Policies.14 Public-Private Research Support.14 EV Product Development.16 Product Regulation,Especially for Autonomous Vehicles.16 Permit Customers,Automakers,and App Developers Access to Vehicle Data.17 Strengthen Key Industry Inputs,Including Agglomeration Economies and Skills.17 Generic Policies.18 Support the Creation of Industry-Focused and-Led Industrial Colleges.18 Support Expansion of Critical Technology Degree Programs.18 Prioritize Community Colleges and Robotics Education.19 Sector-Specific Policies.19 Invest in Regional Auto Clusters.19 Market Scale.20 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY&INNOVATION FOUNDATION|MAY 2026 PAGE 3 Sector-Specific Policies.20 Ban Chinese Motor Vehicle Imports and U.S.Production.20 USMCA.22 Mexico.22 Canada.24 Tariffs.25 Domestic Market Integration.25 Roadway Infrastructure.26 Increase the Gas Tax and Use Proceeds to Expand Highway Funding.26 Prioritize Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems.27 Empower States to Expend Highway Trust Funds.28 Support the Deployment of EV Charging Infrastructure.29 Conclusion.29 Endnotes.30 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY&INNOVATION FOUNDATION|MAY 2026 PAGE 4 INTRODUCTION The competitiveness of the U.S.auto industryAmerican and foreign manufacturers and suppliers producing domesticallyhas faltered in recent years,as Information Technology and Innovation Foundation(ITIF)reports have documented.1 Americas share of global automobile production fell from 46 percent in 1965 to 20 percent in 1990 to just 14.7 percent today.The Big ThreeChrysler,Ford,and GMautomakers share of the U.S.auto market has fallen from 92 percent in 1965 to 38 percent today.From 1963 to 2023,the accumulated U.S.motor vehicles trade deficit reached$3.3 trillion in 2023 dollars.And the United States location quotient(LQ)which assesses how much an industry contributes to a nations gross domestic product(GDP)relative to how much it contributes to the global economywas only 0.54 in 2022(just 60 percent of the 1995 level),meaning the U.S.auto industry today is 46 percent smaller than the global average.2 Awareness of the competitive challenges facing the industry is not new.3 In the 1970s and 1980s,with the rising competition from Japan and Europe,Congress and various administrations were focused on the industry.But after many of the foreign automakers opened plants in the United States,the issue largely disappeared from policymakers radar.Now with the rapid rise of the Chinese electric vehicle(EV)industry and Chinas goal of dominating the global auto sector,the issue has once again attracted the attention of at least some policymakers.Its past time for the United States to articulate a comprehensive auto industry competitiveness strategy,as other nations,such as Canada,Germany,and South Korea have recently done.As such,its past time for the United States to articulate a comprehensive auto industry competitiveness strategy.This report represents an initial step in that direction,offering policy proposals across five areas:cost reduction,product development,stronger“external economies,”increased market scale,and roadway infrastructure.Most of these policies will help not only U.S.automobile sector competitiveness but also motor vehicle competitiveness writ large,including of heavy trucks,recreational vehicles,buses,and motorcycles.KEY ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION Before discussing the recommendations,its worth noting that there are three key issues underlying the idea of whether to have an auto industry competitiveness strategy and,if so,what it should look like.Is the Industry Important?The first is whether the industry is important.Some believe that all industries are the same.For instance,Michael Boskin,head of former president George H.W.Bushs Council of Economic Advisors,memorably quipped,“Potato chips,computer chips,whats the difference?”4 But as ITIF has written,manufacturing matters for many reasons,including that its a key source of high-wage jobs,its a key source of research and development(R&D)investment,its a key component of the defense industrial base,and because once an advanced-manufacturing industry is lost its very difficult to recover it.5 In other words,theres a significant difference between car production and car-rental production.INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY&INNOVATION FOUNDATION|MAY 2026 PAGE 5 The U.S.automotive ecosystem contributes over$1.2 trillion to Americas economy annually,or roughly 5 percent of U.S.gross domestic product(GDP).6 More importantly,autos represent a traded sector,meaning that a weak industry will result in a larger trade deficit,as has indeed happened.Between 1963 and 2023,the United States ran a consistent trade deficit in real terms,with the cumulative deficit over this 60-year period reaching$3.3 trillion.This has contributed to a near-term or longer-term fall in the value of the dollar,which lowers U.S.living standards as imports become more expensive.But even more importantly,the sector is what ITIF terms an“enabling industry”that makes a key contribution to national economic power vis-vis China.7 Enabling industries produce goods in the industrial commons that,while not central to power,strengthen the ecosystem for the production of dual-use and defense goods and are necessary for economic well-being.Many of these industries produce largely final consumer goods;therefore,losing these industries would not have an immediate effect on American securitythe U.S.economy would perform fine if,for example,no new cars were available,at least in the near and moderate term.However,the loss of these industries would erode U.S.production and innovation in dual-use and defense industries,as the technological advances made in industries such as motor vehicles and appliances have downstream effects on the supply chains for dual-use and defense equipment.These industries contribute to the industrial commons that dual-use and defense industries live in,which include science and engineering knowledge,university and technical training programs,professional associations,standards bodies,research institutes,and more.These industries also often share suppliers with defense and dual-use industries.The automotive sector is a perfect example of an enabling industry.It employs 47,000 engineers and invests over$26 billion in R&D annually.8 The industry plays a key role in metalworking,mechanical engineering,and machinery manufacturing ecosystems,participating in training and higher education programs and industrial standards groups.9 And it sources parts from over 5,600 specialized domestic suppliers,which provide essential components and capabilities,such as precision machining and casting,that are crucial for many dual-use and defense industries.8 Indeed,the Pentagon recently requested the industry to begin producing weapons,given the production bottlenecks in traditional defense contractors.10 Do We Need a Strategy?Even if the industry is strategic and critical to Americas future,why have a government strategy?Why not let the market work?While we lay out some reasons for a strategy,it is important to note that for most people on the other side of this debate,logic and argumentation are irrelevant.This is an ideological position coming from first principles:markets good,government bad.But nonetheless,here are some arguments.First,other nations are not letting market forces work.The Chinese massively subsidize their EV sector,limit foreign market access,and steal intellectual property(IP).11 The Canadians require U.S.firms to produce in Canada.Other nations,such as India and Brazil,have steep tariffs,while European Union tariffs on auto imports are four times higher than U.S.tariffs.Both Japan and South Korea have extensive nontariff barriers on auto imports,which is why Japanese automakers record very few sales in South Korea and South Korean automakers post very few sales in Japan.For instance,in January 2024,Japan sold just 1,961 vehicles in South Korea and for all of 2024 South Koreas Hyundai posted only 618 vehicle sales in Japan.12 Also,unlike the United States,where most consumers INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY&INNOVATION FOUNDATION|MAY 2026 PAGE 6 do what neo-classical economists assume all consumers domaximize their consumer welfareconsumers in many other countries failed or never took Econ 101.They buy cars based on national patriotism.In Germany,German cars account for around 50 percent of car sales,while French cars account for 5.4 percent.13 In France,its the opposite.French vehicles account for 34 percent of sales and German 21 percent.This has nothing to do with transport costs of the autos from the factory and everything to do with consumer nationalism.This all suggests that,absent a national strategy(or a U.S.dollar that is allowed to fall to competitive rates),the United States will produce fewer cars,exactly as we do.Second,there are a host of externalities and other market failures that suggest government involvement.One that economists have long acknowledged is the fact that companies,including car companies,dont retain all the benefits of their R&D,so they underinvest in it compared with what is socially optimal.This is why other nations have auto industry R&D programs.There are also externalities related to localization economies wherein firms are more productive and innovative if they are clustered together.Again,this is why many nations support clustering.And then there are externalities from infrastructure,which is why many nations support related infrastructure such as smart highways and vehicle charging stations.How Focused Should the Strategy Be?Once policymakers accept that the United States cannot lose its motor vehicle industry and that proactive policies are needed,the next question will be to what degree policy should try to drive the industry in a particular direction.Here it gets difficult.At one level,the answer should be to follow the industrys lead and support key innovations.For example,its clear that autonomy will be more critical to the industry going forward,so that should be an easy decision:policy should support the development of the industrys autonomous capabilities.Absent a national strategy,the United States will produce fewer cars.But it gets significantly more complicated when it comes to propulsion modes:should policy tilt in the direction of non-internal combustion engine(non-ICE)technologies(e.g.,EVs)or let the industry(and consumers)lead that decision?One can make an argument for either choice.For the former,the argument is that the rest of the world is moving to EVs,if for no other reason than governments are putting their thumb on the scale for such a transition.As such,if producers in the United States lag behind,their export market opportunities will be limited,and if EVs become more popular in the United States,then imports might increase.For the latter,its been clear that the U.S.EV market has been limited,as most consumers have not wanted to buy one.This is in part due to higher costs,range uncertainty,and difficulties in charging,especially when consumers live in urban settings.The push to EVs has led to industry losses and taken capital from other more productive areas,such as investing in radical automation.Moreover,the reality is that the U.S.auto market is very different from most others:consumers want larger vehicles and drive longer distances,on average.INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY&INNOVATION FOUNDATION|MAY 2026 PAGE 7 On this question,the right policy is one that acknowledges uncertainty.And that means an end to EV mandates but also support for EV R&D and innovation so that the industry has adequate dynamic capabilities should domestic market demand change in that direction.Box 1:Foreign Auto Industry Strategies It is noteworthy that many nations/regions with a significant automobile sector have motor vehicle sector strategies.China has its New Energy Vehicle Industry Development Plan(20212035).Among its proposed steps,it seeks to:Establish and improve the joint R&D mechanism among leading enterprises,national key laboratories and national manufacturing innovation centers,focus on weaknesses such as core processes,special materials,key components and manufacturing equipment,and actively explore different technological paths to improve the supply capacity of key common technologies.14 It also seeks coordination for vehicle software systems:“Around the automotive operating system,China will build a development and application ecosystem of in-depth cooperation among market players in the fields of vehicle,key components,basic data and software.”15 It also seeks to identify skills in short supply and the establishment of training programs to address those shortages,and focuses on data and data sharing with a“people,vehicles,roads and clouds”multi-layer data fusion and computing and processing platform,carry out demonstration applications in specific scenarios,regions and roads.”16 And of course,much more.The EU has its Industrial Action Plan for the European Automotive Sector,which has a number of proposals,including establishing at least three large-scale cross-border autonomous vebi