A massive $5.8 billion battery plant in Glendale, Kentucky, is sitting idle just months after it opened — and 1,600 workers are paying the price.
Ford and South Korean battery manufacturer SK On launched the sprawling 1,500-acre facility in the summer of 2025, but by December, the companies ended their joint venture. Ford announced it would idle the plant for roughly 18 months while pivoting production toward energy storage systems instead of car batteries.
Kentucky's Democratic governor, Andy Beshear, blamed President Donald Trump's policies for the job losses, while some displaced workers pointed to a mix of federal policy changes and Ford's own strategic missteps.
The issue has sparked sharp debate over who bears responsibility — the federal government for pulling back EV incentives, or Ford for making a multibillion-dollar bet on a market that never materialized at the scale analysts once predicted. The answer, as is often the case, likely involves both bad policy and bad corporate planning.
When Ford and SK On opened their BlueOval SK joint venture in Glendale during the summer of 2025, it was billed as a cornerstone of America's electric vehicle future. The 1,500-acre site represented one of the largest domestic investments in EV battery manufacturing. Expectations were sky-high.
But the honeymoon didn't last. By December, the two companies dissolved their partnership at the site. Ford then said it would idle the facility for approximately 18 months, shifting its focus toward energy storage systems rather than automotive batteries.
A Ford spokesperson told the Daily Mail that "BlueOval SK was originally intended to be a long-term endeavor," but added that "the realities of customer demand and the regulatory environment have evolved, particularly in the US." That's corporate-speak for: the math stopped working.
The human cost is real. Derek Dougherty, 28, had just signed a lease near the site when he learned he would be laid off. "I've been homeless for years, and this was supposed to be the grounding moment," Dougherty said. "We just started renting our apartment over here because of this job. Now that job's not there."
Joe Morgan, a maintenance technician who left a 24-year career to take a $38-an-hour position at the plant, offered a more nuanced take on what went wrong. "Taking away the tax credits did play a little bit of a role in not selling EVs," Morgan said.
"But honestly, I think Ford made a bad decision when they came out with an F-150 they wanted to make all electric." Morgan's critique cuts to a deeper issue — automakers raced to electrify their lineups based on projections that now look wildly optimistic.
In 2023, analysts projected that EVs could make up 45 percent of U.S. auto sales by 2030. That estimate has since been revised sharply downward to between 9 and 18 percent. Meanwhile, Tesla still commands roughly half of the domestic EV market share, leaving competitors like Ford fighting over a shrinking slice of an already smaller-than-expected pie.
On Tuesday, Ford announced its biggest annual loss since before the 2008 financial crisis. The company has signaled that displaced BlueOval SK employees will have the opportunity to apply for jobs at a new Ford subsidiary, which is expected to employ more than 2,100 workers when it opens in late 2026 or early 2027. Whether those jobs fully materialize remains to be seen.
Governor Beshear placed the blame squarely on the White House. "Those are 1,600 Kentuckians that lost their jobs solely because of Donald Trump pushing that big, ugly bill, eliminating the credits that had people interested and excited to buy EVs," Beshear said. He added: "I bet many, if not most, of them voted for him, and he basically fired them."
During his presidency, Trump weakened national vehicle emissions standards and tried to block California from setting stricter clean-car rules. He has also vowed to scrap a federal tax credit that knocked as much as $7,500 off each EV purchase and to cut government support for charging infrastructure. These moves have undeniably cooled consumer enthusiasm for going electric.
Separately, U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced that states receiving federal funds for EV charging infrastructure would now be required to install chargers made entirely with U.S.-produced components — up from a previous 55 percent domestic-content requirement. "Doing so will unleash American manufacturing, protect our national security, and prevent taxpayer dollars from subsidizing our foreign adversaries," Duffy said.
There's a reasonable free-market argument that subsidies distort capital allocation and lead to exactly the kind of malinvestment on display in Glendale. A $5.8 billion facility that can't survive without government tax credits raises serious questions about whether the underlying economics ever justified the project. When businesses build factories on the assumption that political incentives will persist indefinitely, they are building on sand — and workers are the ones who get buried when the tide shifts.
For corporations, it's a reminder that chasing government-subsidized demand rather than organic consumer appetite carries enormous risk. For policymakers, abruptly pulling incentives after billions have been deployed creates real-world disruption that falls hardest on working families.
For investors watching the EV space, the key takeaway is straightforward: follow actual demand signals, not political promises.
The gap between the 45 percent EV adoption forecast and the revised 9-to-18 percent range represents billions in misallocated capital across the sector. Skepticism toward grand industrial-policy projections remains a sound investment principle — whether those projections come from Washington or Detroit.