Ford CEO Jim Farley went on national television Monday and delivered a blunt message about Chinese cars: keep them out of the United States. Appearing on Fox News' "Fox & Friends," Farley called for maintaining the current 100% tariffs on Chinese-made vehicles and urged Washington not to open the door to competitors he says are backed by an unfair system and pose a direct national security risk.
"We should not let them into our country," Farley told the Fox News audience.
The warning comes as Chinese automakers, led by BYD, which dethroned Tesla as the world's largest electric vehicle seller last year, expand aggressively across global markets. With President Trump scheduled to visit Beijing next month for a summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping, the question of whether those tariffs hold or soften has real stakes for American manufacturing, American workers, and the broader trade architecture between the US, Canada, and Mexico.
Farley did not mince words about what he sees at stake. He framed the issue in terms that should resonate with anyone who still believes a country that makes things is a country that endures.
"Manufacturing is the heart and soul of our country and for us to lose that to those exports would be devastating to our country."
He went further, raising the surveillance dimension of Chinese-made vehicles. "All of these vehicles have 10 cameras," Farley said. "They can collect a lot of data." In an era when data is currency and Beijing has shown no reluctance to harvest it, that is not a hypothetical concern. It is an operational one.
Ford itself has been navigating serious financial headwinds. The company reported massive losses amid its EV strategy pivot, a backdrop that makes Farley's alarm about a flood of subsidized Chinese competition all the more urgent.
Farley summed up the competitive landscape in six words: "There is no way this is a fair fight." He pointed to BYD's dominance in Mexico, where the Chinese brand now accounts for seven out of every 10 electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles sold. Canada, meanwhile, recently signed a deal with China to import 49,000 cars annually.
"I sure hope we don't allow them to come across the border," Farley said, a line that applies to more than just cars.
Beyond simply keeping Chinese vehicles off American roads, Farley has floated a more specific framework. Bloomberg reported that the Ford CEO spoke with White House officials and argued Chinese companies should be required to form joint ventures with US automakers, and hand over controlling stakes, in order to sell vehicles in this country.
That model flips Beijing's own playbook. For decades, China required foreign automakers to enter joint ventures with domestic partners as a condition of market access. Farley's proposal would apply the same logic in reverse, ensuring that if Chinese brands want access to the world's most lucrative consumer market, American companies and American workers get the controlling share of the benefit.
Ford's broader financial picture adds context to the urgency. The automaker has faced significant earnings setbacks that make the prospect of competing against state-subsidized Chinese manufacturers even more daunting.
Farley also said keeping Chinese cars out of the US should have a "big impact" on the upcoming talks to rework the trade deal between the US, Canada, and Mexico. If Mexico is already a staging ground for BYD, seven out of 10 EVs sold there carry the brand, then any trade deal that does not address Chinese vehicles assembled or routed through North American neighbors is a deal with a gaping hole in it.
When the New York Post asked the White House on Tuesday whether the administration plans to lower tariffs on Chinese automakers, the response was notable for what it did not say. Spokesman Kush Desai praised the president's record but did not directly address the tariff question.
"No president has done more to revive the American auto industry than President Trump, who has championed an aggressive agenda of auto tariffs, rapid deregulation, tax cuts, and even a new tax deduction on interest payments for Made-in-USA autos."
Desai added that the administration "will continue to prioritize America's national and economic security." That is a reassuring line. But it is not a commitment to hold the 100% tariff wall in place.
The ambiguity matters because Trump himself, speaking at the Detroit Economic Club in January, said he would be willing to "let China come in", provided Chinese companies build factories in the US and hire American workers. That is a different posture from Farley's outright exclusion, and it leaves room for negotiation heading into the Beijing summit.
Farley's warnings land differently when you look at what Chinese automakers are actually producing. BYD has been churning out vehicles with 5-minute charging that delivers 250 miles of range and an assisted driving system it calls "God's Eye." These are not cheap knockoffs. They are technologically advanced products backed by enormous state subsidies and sold at prices American manufacturers cannot match on a level playing field.
Meanwhile, domestic challenges compound the pressure. Ford's $5.8 billion Kentucky battery plant recently idled, displacing 1,600 workers, a reminder that the American EV supply chain is still fragile even without a flood of Chinese imports.
Brands like Xiaomi are also racing ahead in global markets with affordable, high-tech cars. The 100% tariff is the only thing standing between these products and American showrooms. If that wall cracks, the consequences for Detroit and every American auto worker downstream would be severe.
Tesla, for its part, has been struggling with an aging vehicle lineup and tough global competition. The company was unseated by BYD as the world's top EV seller last year. In the first two months of 2026, Tesla's China sales regained some traction while BYD dipped, but the broader trend favors Beijing's champions, not Silicon Valley's.
Investors have also grown concerned that Elon Musk's focus on robotics and AI products, along with brand damage tied to his involvement with the Department of Government Efficiency, has pulled attention from Tesla's core vehicle business.
The question now is whether Washington will hold firm. The 100% tariff on Chinese automakers is the single most effective barrier protecting what remains of America's competitive position in vehicle manufacturing. Farley is right that this is not a fair fight, and it never will be, as long as Chinese companies operate with state backing, subsidized inputs, and no meaningful labor or environmental costs.
The policy debate surrounding Ford's Kentucky plant closure showed how quickly manufacturing setbacks become political flashpoints. Letting Chinese cars into the American market would multiply those flashpoints a hundredfold.
Farley's joint-venture idea deserves serious consideration. If Beijing spent decades forcing American companies to hand over technology and control as the price of market access, there is nothing unfair about requiring the same terms in reverse. The alternative, dropping tariffs or carving out exceptions in a trade deal, would hand China exactly what it wants: access to American consumers without meaningful American benefit.
Ford has also dealt with quality challenges of its own, including a recent recall of more than 412,000 Explorers over a suspension defect. American automakers need to compete on quality and innovation. But they cannot do that if Washington opens the gates to competitors playing by a completely different set of rules.
The Beijing summit next month will tell us whether the administration treats the 100% tariff as a permanent fixture or a bargaining chip. American auto workers, and every taxpayer who subsidized the EV transition, deserve to know the answer before it is too late to change course.
When the CEO of Ford says the fight is not fair, Washington should listen. When he says losing American manufacturing would be devastating, Washington should act. The one thing it should not do is negotiate away the only wall that is working.