Tag Archives: Alternative Fuel Vehicles

GM shares surge after record earnings and new stake in lithium company


New York
CNN
 — 

General Motors reported a much stronger than expected fourth-quarter profit, lifting full-year results to record levels for the second straight year.

The largest US automaker also said Tuesday it is buying a $650 million equity stake in Lithium Americas, which will give it access to the raw material needed to build batteries to power 1 million electric vehicles a year in the first phase of production.

For the quarter, GM earned adjusted earnings of $3 billion, or $2.12 a share, up from $1.35 a share a year earlier and far better than forecasts of $1.69 a share from analysts surveyed by Refinitiv. That lifted full-year adjusted income to $11 billion, up from the $10.4 billion it earned in 2021, which had been its previous record.

The company said it expects strong earnings in 2023, though it expects it to slip a bit from the just posted levels, coming in at between $8.7 billion to $10.1 billion. But company CFO Paul Jacobson said its automotive business is expected to remain strong, with much of the decline likely to be at GM Financial. That’s due to the hit it will take from higher interest rates and the sinking value of used cars, as well as the higher interest rates resulting in an accounting hit to pension earnings.

“Actually that [guidance] is a strong statement about where we see things going, stronger than others” he told journalists on a call Tuesday.

Jacobson told journalists that GM does not expect to follow Tesla and Ford in cutting the prices for its electric vehicles.

“I don’t think there’s any surprise there’s increasing competition in the EV space,” he said. “Our customers are saying we’re priced well based on the demand that we’re seeing.”

The company’s investment in Lithium Americas is part of the company’s efforts to lock-up the supply of raw materials it will need to convert from traditional gasoline powered cars to electric vehicles. The Lithium Americas deal will not supply any lithium to the company until 2026, but Jacobson told media that “we’ve already achieved all the lithium we need through 2025.”

GM expects to build 70,000 EVs this year, a small fraction of its overall vehicle output. It sold 5.9 million vehicles in 2022, down about 6% from 2021 due to the shortage of parts needed to build all the vehicles for which there was demand.

“We continue to face some supply chain and logistics issues, but overall, things remain trending in the right direction,” said Jacobson.

But the company expects to be rapidly increasing its EV supply and offerings, with a new battery plant that opened last year, two more under construction and a fourth planned soon. GM has a target to build 400,000 EVs through the middle of 2024, and 1 million annually by 2025.

CEO Mary Barra predicted there will be more deals like the Lithium Americas one to be announced soon.

“We continue to pursue strategic supply agreements and partnerships to further secure our long-term needs,” she told investors.

GM said it will reduce its staff in 2023, part of its effort to cut $2 billion in costs over the next two years. But unlike a number of major companies that have announced layoffs in recent months, company officials stressed GM would not be shrinking through layoffs. Instead the reduction would be handled through attrition.

GM did not disclose how many jobs might be trimmed, with Jacobson saying the company would end this year “slightly lower” in headcount.

GM has 167,000 employees globally, with 124,000 in North America. That includes more than 42,000 members of the United Auto Workers union. Those workers will get profit sharing bonuses of an average of $12,750 for the year, up nearly 25% from the $10,250 they received a year earlier.

Shares of GM

(GM) soared more than 5% in pre-market trading on the results.

This story is developing and will be updated.

Read original article here

Mustang Mach-E: Ford drops the price of its Tesla competitor



CNN
 — 

Ford is boosting production of its popular Mustang Mach-E electric SUV and dropping its sticker price weeks after Tesla dropped prices of its vehicles. The move represents a substantial roll-back of price hikes Ford announced last summer on the 2023 models – but buyers may still be paying somewhat more than before the increases.

The Mustang Mach-E, a midsize electric family SUV, was the first serious electric effort for the Dearborn, Michigan-based automaker. Priced and aimed squarely at the Tesla Model Y, which has its own starting price of $53,490, the Mach-E is Ford’s bet to get new car buyers to dip their toes into the battery-powered future. it has since been joined in the electric Ford lineup by the workhorse Ford F-150 Lightning. But the company still considers the Mach-E a crucial step for the company’s electric-powered growth.

Late last year, Darren Palmer, Ford’s vice president of electric vehicle programs, told CNN Business that the Mach-E was completely sold out and the automaker was holding off on launching it in more global markets in order to catch up with US demand.

“We could sell it out at least two or three times over,” he said a the time.

The price cuts Ford announced Monday were biggest on the most expensive versions of the SUV, just as the increases had been biggest on those models. The base sticker of the Mustang Mach-E GT Extended Range, a high-performance version of the SUV, dropped to about $64,000 from $69,900 before, a decrease of $5,900. But that model had been about $62,000 before price increases last August.

When it announced those price bumps, Ford also said it was putting more standard features into the vehicles, including advanced driver assistance features.

The price of the least expensive Mach-E, the rear-wheel-drive standard range model, was cut $900, going from about $46,900 down to $46,000. The price of the extended range battery pack option, by itself, dropped from $8,600 down $7,000.

Tesla announced price cuts of as much as 20% on its electric vehicles earlier this month, after raising prices in 2022.

When Ford announced the price increases last summer, citing supply chain issues, the automakers indicated it would continue monitoring market conditions throughout the upcoming model year.

Ford announced last summer that it was increasing production of the Mach-E as it added capacity for more battery production. The automaker also announced in late August that it was reopening order banks for the Mach-E which had been closed as the company worked to meet existing orders.

Customers who complete the transaction for their Mach-E after today’s announcement will pay the new lower price, Ford said. Ford will reach out directly to Mach-E customers with a sale date after January 1, 2023 who already have their vehicles, the automaker said.

At least some versions of both models are currently eligible for federal electric vehicle tax credits, according to the Internal Revenue Service, but both are treated as cars, not SUVs, under the tax rules, unless equipped with a third row of seats.

That means that tax credits are available for the two-row only Mach-E and two-row Model Y only if the sticker price is below $55,000. For versions of the Model Y with a third row of seats, a $4,000 option, buyers may get tax credits with a sticker price up to $80,000. For the Mustang Mach-E, a third row of seats isn’t offered.

The final amount of the tax credit may depend on when the vehicle is actually delivered to the customer and, also, whether the customers themselves meet annual income requirements.

Read original article here

Elon Musk, Tesla Poised for Trial Over Tweets Proposing to Take Car Maker Private

Elon Musk

is headed to court in a securities-fraud trial over tweets from 2018 in which he floated the possibility of taking

Tesla Inc.

private, with in-person jury selection poised to begin Tuesday. 

The class-action case originates with an Aug. 7, 2018 tweet in which the Tesla chief executive said, “Am considering taking Tesla private at $420. Funding secured.” 

An investor,

Glen Littleton,

sued Tesla, Mr. Musk and members of Tesla’s board at the time, alleging that Mr. Musk’s tweets were false and cost investors billions by spurring swings in the prices for Tesla stock, options and bonds. In court filings, Mr. Musk has said he was indeed considering taking Tesla private and believed he had the support of Saudi Arabia’s sovereign-wealth fund to do so. The deal, which would have been valued around $72 billion, never materialized.

U.S. District Judge

Edward Chen,

who is overseeing the San Francisco jury trial that is scheduled to run through Feb. 1, has ruled that Mr. Musk’s tweets about taking the company private weren’t true and that he acted recklessly in making them. 

Questions for the jury include whether Mr. Musk’s tweets were material to investors and whether he knew they were untrue.

The case is unusual in that securities-fraud cases usually resolve before going to trial, such as through a settlement, said

Jill Fisch,

a securities-law professor at the University of Pennsylvania. The defendants in this case face “an uphill battle” in light of the judge’s pretrial decision about the veracity of Mr. Musk’s statements, she said.

Attorneys for the lead plaintiff didn’t respond to a request for comment, nor did an attorney for Tesla, Mr. Musk and the other board members.

Twitter has been in turmoil since Elon Musk took over. To get a sense of what’s going on behind the scenes, The Wall Street Journal spoke with former Tesla and SpaceX employees to better understand how Musk leads companies. Illustration: Ryan Trefes

Mr. Musk is expected to take the stand as early as Wednesday, some two months after he did so in Delaware in a trial over his pay package at Tesla. In 2021, he also appeared before Delaware’s business-law court to defend Tesla’s roughly $2.1 billion 2016 takeover of home-solar company SolarCity Corp. 

Also on the list of possible witnesses are Tesla board chair

Robyn Denholm,

board members

Ira Ehrenpreis,

James Murdoch

and

Kimbal Musk

—the CEO’s brother. The head of investor relations,

Martin Viecha,

also may be called.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

What do you think will be the outcome of the case over Elon Musk’s 2018 Tesla tweet? Join the conversation below.

This week’s trial comes at a busy time for Mr. Musk, who has been scrambling to turn around Twitter Inc. after buying the social-media company last fall in a deal valued at $44 billion. His rocket company SpaceX is pushing for the first orbital launch of a new rocket Mr. Musk wants to use for deep-space missions. 

Tesla, meanwhile, has slashed prices across its vehicle lineup, with some of last week’s cuts in the U.S. nearing 20%, in a bid to juice demand. The company’s stock has fallen roughly 70% since its peak in November 2021, erasing around $850 billion in market value. Mr. Musk’s personal wealth has fallen more than $200 billion in that time, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.

Court proceedings involving Mr. Musk can be feisty. In the SolarCity case, for example, Mr. Musk called opposing counsel a “bad human being.”

Tesla has reduced prices across its vehicle lineup in an effort to boost demand.



Photo:

Jay Janner/USA TODAY NETWORK/Reuters

In advance of this week’s trial, Mr. Musk asked the court to move the trial to Texas on the basis that potential jurors in San Francisco could be biased against him. Judge Chen rejected the request. 

“It isn’t that hard it seems to me to find 15 people,” he said.  

The court requires nine jurors and six alternates to proceed with the case. Roughly 190 potential jurors were asked to fill out questionnaires about their views of Mr. Musk and other issues. The court plans to bring in about 50 of them for further questioning Tuesday. 

Opening arguments could start as early as Tuesday after the jury is selected.

The lead plaintiff is seeking damages for investor losses he alleges stemmed from Mr. Musk’s and Tesla’s statements. Tesla stock closed up 11% the day Mr. Musk initially tweeted about potentially taking Tesla private, later giving back all those gains and falling further as questions emerged about the deal. 

The defendants have said the plaintiff won’t be able to prove to a jury that the statements were materially false. Mr. Musk was considering taking Tesla private, the defendants have said, even if some of his assertions about the deal may not have been literally accurate.

Defendants, in a trial brief, said Mr. Musk believed he had secured backing to take the car maker private from Saudi Arabia’s sovereign-wealth fund, the Public Investment Fund. A lawyer for the defendants said Friday that his team had chosen not to enforce subpoenas calling on fund representatives to testify. The sovereign-wealth fund didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Mr. Musk and Tesla each agreed in 2018 to pay $20 million to settle civil charges brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission over the same tweets. Mr. Musk also agreed to step down as chairman of the company, while remaining CEO. He later said in legal filings that he felt pressured to settle with the SEC. Last year, a federal judge denied Mr. Musk’s request to scrap his settlement.

Write to Rebecca Elliott at rebecca.elliott@wsj.com and Meghan Bobrowsky at meghan.bobrowsky@wsj.com

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Read original article here

Several Top Rivian Executives Depart the Electric-Vehicle Startup

Several top executives at

Rivian Automotive Inc.,

RIVN -1.02%

including the vice president overseeing body engineering and its head of supply chain, have left the EV startup in recent months, as the company exits a year in which it fell short of its production targets.

The departures, confirmed by a Rivian spokeswoman, are the latest developments in what has been a challenging period for Rivian, which has been rolling out its first all-electric models but last year missed a critical milestone of manufacturing 25,000 vehicles. The company said it was off its goal by about 700 vehicles in part because of difficulty getting parts. 

Rivian’s stock has also tumbled since its blockbuster initial public offering in November 2021, down roughly 79% through Tuesday’s close. 

The executives who have left were some of Rivian’s longer-tenured employees. Among them is Randy Frank, vice president of body and interior engineering, and Steve Gawronski, the vice president in charge of parts purchasing. Both had departed around the beginning of this year. 

Mr. Frank joined Rivian in 2019 from

Ford Motor Co.

Mr. Gawronski joined in 2018 from the autonomous vehicle startup Zoox.

Another early employee, Patrick Hunt, a senior director in the strategy team, left the company late last year. Mr. Hunt joined Rivian in 2015.

Rivian’s general counsel, Neil Sitron, departed in September after 4½ years with the company, which was founded in 2009.

The Rivian spokeswoman said the company wants to ensure the startup has the talent and staff it needs to ramp up production. The company declined to comment on the individual circumstances of the departures. Efforts to reach the former employees weren’t immediately successful.

“We continue to attract world class talent to our company as our business needs change,” she said.

The departures mark the latest shake-up at the top of Rivian, which has brought in new executives to oversee the company’s manufacturing operations. The company’s first full year of factory production was marred by supply-chain troubles and difficulties getting the assembly line to run at full speed.

Tim Fallon, former head of

Nissan Motor Co.

’s factory in Canton, Miss., was hired in early 2022 to run Rivian’s sole factory in Normal, Ill.

In June, Rivian hired Frank Klein as chief operating officer, from contract manufacturer

Magna Steyr.

In a November email to employees reviewed by the Journal, Mr. Klein wrote that with Mr. Gawronski’s exit, the company was taking the opportunity to make some organizational changes to ensure it can support the increased complexity that the group will handle in coming years.

Mr. Klein added Rivian was reorganizing its supply-chain management, putting one vice president in charge of the supply chain and logistics, and another in charge of parts procurement.

He also announced that Rivian had hired Andreas Reutter from tool maker

Stanley Black & Decker Inc.

to oversee Rivian’s supply-chain logistics.

The changes at the top of Rivian come as it attempts to transform from an upstart looking to raise capital to a mass manufacturer with ambitions to become one of the world’s largest auto makers.

Rivian is under pressure to prove it can build its electric trucks at scale without having ramped up production before, as competition heats up from legacy auto makers. WSJ toured Rivian’s and Ford’s EV factories to see how they are pushing to meet demand. Illustration: Adam Falk/The Wall Street Journal

Its first all-electric models, the R1T pickup truck and R1S sport-utility vehicle, are relatively new. The company has only been building cars at its Illinois factory since late 2021. Before then, it had never built or sold a single vehicle for retail. 

As part of its expansion, Rivian went on a hiring spree, growing rapidly from about 1,200 workers in 2019 to around 14,000 employees by the summer of last year and has only recently begun creating positions that exist at many companies.

In April, Anisa Kamadoli Costa was hired as chief sustainability officer from jewelry maker Tiffany Inc. In October, Rivian hired a former Capital One Financial Corp. executive, Diane Lye, as its first chief information officer.

As Rivian has struggled to increase factory output, it has come under pressure to trim spending. Last summer, the company laid off around 6% of its workforce and cut spending on many of its programs. 

The company became focused on bringing production of its current set of vehicles up to speed. It also makes an electric delivery van that it sells to Amazon.com Inc. 

In an example of the young car maker’s shifting priorities, Rivian suspended negotiations with Mercedes-Benz AG over a proposed van partnership in Europe, which had been an expansion target for Chief Executive RJ Scaringe. Rivian said the decision came after re-evaluating its opportunities for growth.

The company reported a net loss of $5 billion for the first nine months of 2022, and its cash pile fell to $13.8 billion at the end of September, down from $15.46 billion in June. Rivian is scheduled to report its full-year results on Feb. 28.

Write to Sean McLain at sean.mclain@wsj.com and Nora Eckert at nora.eckert@wsj.com

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Read original article here

New 2023 EV tax incentives: How they work, which cars qualify, and where to get even more savings

Quick facts about federal incentives for electric cars:

  • The government delayed some rules for EV tax credits until March 2023.
  • Select GM
    GM,
    +2.60%
    and Tesla
    TSLA,
    +2.47%
    electric vehicles became eligible (again) for federal tax incentives in January 2023.
  • Many electric cars do not qualify, but we help you find the ones that do.

Consumers considering an electric vehicle right now may want to weigh how tax credits on zero-emissions cars work and how they could affect any upcoming buying decisions.

The Inflation Reduction Act signed in August 2022 includes electric vehicle tax credits provisions set to reshape how Americans buy electric cars and plug-in hybrids.

Read on to learn the impact. We will tell you about the new changes to federal tax incentives for electric cars. The new tax credits can help defray the cost of buying a zero-emission vehicle when combined with state and local rebates.

How the new EV tax credits work

According to Kelley Blue Book research, a new electric car’s average transaction price came in at about $65,000 in November, nearly a 9% jump from a year ago. The industrywide average that includes gas-powered vehicles and electric cars reached about $48,900 in the same timeframe.

  • Extends $7,500 tax credit. The Inflation Reduction Act extends the current incentives of up to $7,500 in tax credits for select electric cars, plug-in hybrids, and hydrogen-powered vehicles that meet its qualifications. The federal government continues to update the list of qualifying vehicles.
  • Discount up front. In the future, it’s possible you can qualify to get your EV tax credit at the time of purchase on new vehicles, though if the dealership does not offer it immediately, you can still request the credit on your taxes.
  • Caps EV price tags. The new incentives restrict qualifying vehicles to low-emissions trucks, SUVs, and vans with manufacturer’s suggested retail prices of up to $80,000 and cars up to $55,000.
  • No limits for manufacturers. As of Jan. 1, 2023, manufacturers like GM and Tesla were no longer limited on incentives to the first 200,000 EVs sold, which was the case under the old tax credits.
  • Used electric vehicle rebate. Anyone considering a used electric car under $25,000 could obtain a new $4,000 tax credit, subject to income and other limits. To qualify, used cars must be two model years old. The vehicle also must be purchased at a dealership. The vehicle also only qualifies once in its lifetime. Purchasers of used vehicles can only qualify for one credit every three years, and to qualify, individuals must make $75,000 or less, or $112,500 for heads of households and $150,000 for joint return filers. The credit ends in 2032.
  • Income caps to qualify. The rebates are limited to individuals reporting adjusted gross incomes of $150,000 or less on taxes, $225,000 for those filing as head of household, and $300,000 for joint filers.
  • Ineligible cars become eligible. Additionally, the measure allows carmakers like Tesla and General Motors, which had run out of available credits under the old plan, to be eligible for them again in January 2023. However, many of their products would still not qualify due to car price caps.
  • New rules on manufacturing locations. To qualify for the subsidy, electric car batteries must be manufactured in the U.S., Canada, or Mexico, while the batteries’ minerals and parts must also come from North America to qualify. Cars with Chinese-made battery components would be ineligible. These rules render many current EVs ineligible. This requirement phases in over time. That means some cars eligible now could become ineligible over time unless manufacturers change their supply chains. However, the U.S. Treasury Department delayed until March the regulations that govern where battery minerals and parts must be sourced.
  • Some leased vehicles may qualify.
  • Hydrogen fuel-cell cars remain eligible. The $7,500 credit also applies to hydrogen fuel-cell cars like the Toyota Mirai or Hyundai Nexo. However, those make sense only for buyers who live near one of America’s few hydrogen refueling stations. Those stations are mostly concentrated in California. 

Learn more: What is EV, BEV, HEV, PHEV? Here’s your guide to types of electric cars

What the old EV tax credits provided

Before the Inflation Reduction Act, buyers could claim a tax credit on just the first 200,000 electric cars a manufacturer sold. That meant that the most popular models lost the credit. The incentive did not restrict income or purchase prices.

The old tax credits also applied to plug-in hybrids and fuel cell vehicles, but not used vehicles.

President Biden signed the act into law on Aug. 1, 2022. Most of its provisions kicked in on Jan. 1, 2023. That created a brief window when the law required qualifying cars to be built in North America, but the 200,000-car-per-manufacturer limit still applied. If you bought an electric car between Aug. 16, 2022, and Jan. 1, 2023, it qualified for a credit only if it was built in North America by a manufacturer that hadn’t sold 200,000 or more qualifying cars.

Tesla and General Motors’ electric car tax credits were reinstated in January. So if you have your heart set on a Tesla Model 3 or perhaps a Cadillac Lyriq, now is the time to act.

Also see: 2.1 million EVs and plug-in hybrids on U.S. roads, and here’s how much gas they’ve saved

List of 2023 electric vehicles that qualify

According to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, this is the latest list of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles that qualify if purchased after Jan. 1, 2023. The site notes that several manufacturers had yet to submit information on specific eligible makes and models and for users to check back for updated information.

Vehicle MSRP Limit
Audi Q5 TFSI e Quattro PHEV $80,000
BMW
BMW,
+0.07%
330e
$55,000
BMW X5 eDrive 45e $80,000
Ford
F,
+2.69%
Escape PHEV
$80,000
Ford E-Transit $80,000
Ford F-150 Lightning $80,000
Ford Mustang Mach-E $55,000
Lincoln Aviator Grand Touring $80,000
Lincoln Corsair Grand Touring $55,000
Chevrolet Bolt EV $55,000
Chevrolet Bolt EUV $55,000
Cadillac Lyriq $55,000
Nissan
NSANY,
+2.85%
Leaf
$55,000
Rivian
RIVN,
-0.97%
R1S
$80,000
Rivian R1T $80,000
Chrysler Pacifica PHEV $80,000
Jeep Wrangler 4xe $80,000
Jeep Grand Cherokee 4xe $80,000
Tesla Model 3 $55,000
Tesla Model Y 7-Seat Variant $80,000
Volkswagen
VWAGY,
+2.00%
ID.4
$55,000
Volvo
VLVLY,
+3.20%
S60 T8 Recharge PHEV
$55,000
State and local incentives near you

Though the federal government’s effort makes up the lion’s share of government EV discounts, some states and local governments offer incentive programs to help new car buyers afford something more efficient. These can be tax credits, rebates, reduced vehicle taxes, single-occupant carpool-lane access stickers, and exemptions from registration or inspection fees.

States like California and Connecticut offer broad support for electric vehicle buyers. However, Idaho, Kentucky, and Wyoming are among the states offering no support to individual EV buyers. The U.S. Department of Energy maintains an interactive list of state-level incentives, while Plug In America posts an interactive map of EV incentives.

Also read: What California’s ban on gas cars could mean for you—even if you don’t live there

Your electric utility may help

Lastly, it’s not just governments that can help you with the cost of a new EV. Some local electric utilities provide incentive programs to help buyers get into electric vehicles. After all, they’re among the ones that benefit when you turn your fuel dollars into electricity dollars.

Read: 3 reasons the Hyundai Ioniq 6 makes the Tesla Model 3 seem a bit boring

Some offer rebates on cars. Others offer discounts on chargers or install them free when you sign up for off-peak charging programs.

For example, the Nebraska Public Power District offers a $4,000 rebate to customers who purchase a new electric car.

This story originally ran on KBB.com

Read original article here

Tesla is not alone: 18 (and a half) other big stocks are headed for their worst year on record

In the worst year for stocks since the Great Recession, several big names are headed for their worst year on record with just one trading day left in 2022.

The S&P 500 index
SPX,
+1.75%
and Dow Jones Industrial Average
DJIA,
+1.05%
are both headed for their worst year since 2008, with declines of 20.6% and 9.5% respectively through Thursday. But at least 19 big-name stocks — and half of another — are headed for a more ignominious title for 2022, according to Dow Jones Market Data: Worst year ever.

Tesla Inc.
TSLA,
+8.08%
is having the worst year among the group of S&P 1500 constituents with a market capitalization of $30 billion or higher headed for record annual percentage declines. Tesla shares have declined 65.4% so far this year, which would be easily the worst year on record for the popular stock, which has only had one previous negative year since going public in 2010, an 11% decline in 2016.

Tesla may not be the worst decliner on the list by the time 2023 arrives, however, as another Silicon Valley company is right on its heels. Meta Platforms Inc.
META,
+4.01%,
the parent company of Facebook, has fallen 64.2% so far this year, as Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg has stuck to spending billions to develop the “metaverse” even as the online-advertising industry that provides the bulk of his revenue has stagnated. It would also only be the second year in Facebook’s history that the stock has declined, after a 25.7% drop in 2018, though shares did end Facebook’s IPO year of 2012 30% lower than the original IPO price.

Only one other stock could contend with Tesla and Meta’s record declines this year, and Tesla CEO Elon Musk has some familiarity with that company as well. PayPal Holdings Inc.
PYPL,
+4.46%,
where Musk first found fame during the dot-com boom, has declined 63.2% so far this year as executives have refocused the company on attracting and retaining high-value users instead of trying to get as many users as possible on the payments platform. It would be the second consecutive down year for PayPal, which had not experienced that before 2021 since spinning off from eBay Inc.
EBAY,
+4.76%
in 2015.

None of the other companies headed for their worst year yet stand to lose more than half their value this year, though Charter Communications Inc.
CHTR,
+1.99%
is close. The telecommunications company’s stock has declined 48.2% so far, as investors worry about plans to spend big in 2023 in an attempt to turn around declining internet-subscriber numbers.

In addition to the list below, Alphabet Inc.’s class C shares
GOOG,
+2.88%
are having their worst year on record with a 38.4% decline. MarketWatch is not including that on the list, however, as Alphabet’s class A shares
GOOGL,
+2.82%
fell 55.5% in 2008; the separate class of nonvoting shares was created in 2012 to allow the company — then still called Google — to continue issuing shares to employees without diluting the control of co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page.

Apart from that portion of Alphabet’s shares, here are the 19 large stocks headed for their worst year ever, based on Thursday’s closing prices.

Company % decline in 2022
Tesla Inc.
TSLA,
+8.08%
65.4%
Meta Platforms Inc.
META,
+4.01%
64.2%
PayPal Holdings Inc.
PYPL,
+4.46%
62.6%
Charter Communications Inc. 48.0%
Edwards Lifesciences Corp.
EW,
+2.87%
41.9%
ServiceNow Inc.
NOW,
+3.67%
39.9%
Zoetis Inc.
ZTS,
+3.00%
39.3%
Fidelity National Information Services Inc.
FIS,
+2.03%
37.8%
Accenture PLC
ACN,
+2.00%
35.3%
Fortinet Inc.
FTNT,
+2.82%
31.5%
Estee Lauder Cos. Inc.
EL,
+1.52%
32.5%
Moderna Inc.
MRNA,
+1.34%
29.6%
Iqvia Holdings Inc.
IQV,
+2.94%
26.3%
Carrier Global Corp.
CARR,
+2.17%
22.8%
Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
HLT,
+1.63%
19.2%
Broadcom Inc.
AVGO,
+2.37%
16.2%
Arista Networks Inc.
ANET,
+2.27%
15.2%
Dow Inc.
DOW,
+1.32%
10.7%
Otis Worldwide Corp.
OTIS,
+2.16%
9.2%

Read original article here

Rising Power Prices in Europe Are Making EV Ownership More Expensive

BERLIN—Rocketing electricity prices are increasing the cost of driving electric vehicles in Europe, in some cases making them more expensive to run than gas-powered models—a change that could threaten the continent’s electric transition.  

Electricity prices have soared in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, in some cases eliminating the cost advantage at the pump that EVs have enjoyed. In some cases, the cost difference between driving both types of cars 100 miles has become negligible. In others, EVs have become more expensive to fuel than equivalent gasoline-powered cars.

The price rises for power, which economists expect to last for years, remove a powerful incentive for consumers who were contemplating a switch to EVs, which used to be much cheaper to run than combustion engines. 

Coming just as some governments are removing subsidies for EV buyers, this change could slow down EV sales, threaten the region’s greenhouse-gas emission targets, and make it hard for European car makers to recoup the high costs of their electric transition.

In Germany,

Tesla

has raised supercharger prices several times this year, most recently to 0.71 euros in September before falling somewhat, according to reports from Tesla owners on industry forums. There is no public source to track prices on Tesla superchargers. 

At that price, drivers of Tesla’s Model 3, the most efficient all-electric vehicle in the Environment Protection Agency’s fuel guide in the midsize vehicle category, would pay €18.46 at a Tesla supercharger station in Europe for a charge sufficient to drive 100 miles. 

By comparison, drivers in Germany would pay €18.31 for gasoline to drive the same distance in a Honda Civic 4-door, the equivalent combustion-engine model in the EPA’s ranking. 

Tesla didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

The change has been particularly notable in Germany, Europe’s largest car market, where household electricity cost €0.43 per kWh on average in December. This puts it well ahead of France, where consumers paid €0.21 per kWh in the first half of the year, but behind Denmark, where a kWh cost €0.46, according to the German statistics office.

Would you choose an electric car that charges faster even if it meant a more-limited driving range? WSJ tech columnist Christopher Mims joins host Zoe Thomas to discuss the latest research into fast-charging EV batteries and the trade-offs they may come with. Plus, we visit a high-performance EV race to see what these kinds of batteries can really do. Photo: ABB FIA Formula E World Championship

The cost of electricity isn’t the only factor that can make an EV cheaper or more expensive to run than a gas-powered car. The price of the car, including potential subsidies, the cost of insurance and the price of maintenance all play a role in the cost equation over a car’s lifetime. 

Maria Bengtsson, a partner at Ernst & Young responsible for the company’s EV business in the U.K., said studies of the total cost of owning an EV now show that with much higher electricity prices, it will take longer for EVs to become more affordable than conventional vehicles.

“When we looked at this before the energy crisis, we were looking at a tipping point of around 2023 to 2024. But if you assume you have a tariff going forward of $0.55, the tipping point then moves to 2026.”

If costs for operating EVs rise again, the tipping point would be pushed even further into the future, she said.

So far, there is no sign that the higher costs to charge electric cars has affected EV sales. Sales of all-electric cars totaled 259,449 vehicles in the three months to the end of September, up 11% from the previous quarter and 22% from the year earlier, according to the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association. In the third quarter, all-electric cars accounted for 11.9% of total new vehicle sales in the EU. 

There is no relief in sight for EV users. In Germany, power prices have risen by a third from €0.33 per kWh in the first half of this year, according to Germany’s federal statistics office, and some power companies have announced prices will increase to more than €0.50 per kWh in January.  

The German government’s independent panel of economic experts forecast that in the medium term these prices are likely to decline but won’t return to precrisis levels, meaning that higher costs for EV owners are here to stay. 

Rheinenergie, a municipal utility in Cologne, said in November that it would raise its prices to €0.55 per kWh in January. In October, EnBW, a Stuttgart-based regional power company, raised its prices for a kWh of electricity to €0.37, up 37% from the previous month. 

The most expensive way to charge an EV in Europe is on one of the fast-charging networks. Operators such as Tesla, Allego and Ionity have built roadside charging stations along major highways, where EV owners can drive up, plug in, and charge their batteries in as little as 15 minutes.

Fuel-economy estimates calculated by the EPA and current charging and gas prices in Europe show that some conventional vehicles are now cheaper to fuel with gasoline than equivalent electric models using fast-charging stations.

In the subcompact segment of the EPA’s 2023 Fuel Economy Guide, the Mini Cooper Hardtop was the most efficient model among EVs and gasoline-powered cars. 

A 100-mile ride cost the Mini EV owner €26.35 at the Allego fast-charging network, which charges €0.85 per kWh. The conventional Mini cost €20.35 to pump enough fuel to accomplish the same journey. 

Mini and its owner,

Bayerische Motoren Werke AG

, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. 

In the small two-door SUV category, the gasoline-powered Nissan Rogue handily beats the Hyundai Kona Electric, at a cost difference of €19.97 to €22.95. The Subaru Ascent standard SUV with four-wheel drive costs less to drive 100 miles than the Tesla Model X.

If an EV owner only charges their vehicle at home, they are generally still paying less for driving than conventional car users, although this gap has narrowed considerably. 

Analysts say about 80% of EV charging takes place at home or at work, so if an electric vehicle is only used close to home it generally remains the least expensive option. But once the vehicle is used for longer road trips, drivers are more likely to use fast-charging stations because other options would take too long to charge the battery.

Charging a Tesla on 120V AC power—the power that comes from a standard U.S. wall socket—would take days. In Europe, 230V is the AC standard, according to Germany’s ZVEI electronics-industry association. European chargers installed on street corners, at supermarkets, places of work and in home garages can charge a powered down Tesla battery overnight. 

The supercharger networks run on DC power, requiring at least 480 volts of power, and can charge up to around 200 miles of range within 15 minutes. 

Write to William Boston at william.boston@wsj.com

Corrections & Amplifications
Standard household power is 120 volts in the U.S. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said 120 volts is the standard in Europe. (Corrected on Dec. 25)

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Read original article here

Elon Musk’s Finances Complicated by Declining Wealth, Twitter Pressures

Elon Musk

‘s immense wealth and borrowing power are now being tested as the

Tesla Inc.

TSLA -1.76%

shares that have fueled his fortune have sharply declined while he rushes to stabilize his massive personal investment in Twitter Inc.

The auto maker’s share value has nosedived 18% this week alone and more than 60% since he announced his plan to buy Twitter. 

His ability to use his shares at Tesla to raise money, by selling or borrowing against them, has been complicated by their rapid downdraft in recent months.

Historically, Mr. Musk has been a cash-poor billionaire, depending upon so-called margin loans—borrowing backed up by his shares—for his personal expenses and business investments while holding on to his Tesla shares and benefiting from their rising value. 

But Tesla’s market value has fallen by about $700 billion this year, sinking his personal wealth along the way. The decline in Tesla’s valuation comes after years of growth that has allowed him to easily borrow money without having to cash out his shares. 

Shares in Tesla have fallen around 65% in 2022, dinged, in part, by the higher interest-rate environment. Another issue relates to the reason he may need cash: Twitter. Tesla investors have been concerned that Mr. Musk’s attention is divided following his October takeover of the social-media company. 

Late last year, just as Tesla’s stock price peaked, he began selling Tesla shares, totaling more than $39 billion including $3.5 billion last week. What his liquidity is like is unknown after what he said would be a more than $11 billion tax bill for 2021 and putting up roughly $25 billion in cash as part of buying Twitter. 

Mr. Musk’s current Tesla holdings, not including exercisable options, total 424 million shares worth about $52 billion at Friday’s closing price of $123.15 a share. 

Simply put, if he could tap all of those shares as collateral under Tesla’s rules, he would be allowed to borrow about $13 billion. That is only a bit more than he planned to borrow in April as part of the original Twitter deal using just 40% of his shares as collateral, underscoring how his borrowing power has shrunk with the collapse of the car company’s share price. He later scrapped those proposed margin loans to fund the deal amid investor concerns over the risk.

A Tesla launch in Bangkok earlier this month.



Photo:

Vachira Vachira/Zuma Press

Mr. Musk and Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment. 

Tesla shares aren’t his only asset or only avenue to raise money. He also holds shares in Space Exploration and Technologies Corp., or SpaceX, and has ownership in startups such as the Boring Co. His level of personal indebtedness isn’t clear. 

Mr. Musk is facing questions about whether Tesla, where he is also chief executive, is ready for a recession as he separately tries to stem losses at Twitter, cutting thousands of workers from his newly acquired social-media platform. Late Tuesday, he said drastic spending cuts at Twitter were required as the company was on track to bleed billions of dollars. His team had been seeking additional investment dollars for Twitter. 

“We have an emergency fire drill on our hands,” Mr. Musk said during a public talk on Twitter Spaces. After taking those drastic efforts, he said, Twitter could break even next year. 

While Twitter has rarely been profitable in the past decade, its finances were made more challenging by the debt Mr. Musk took on to fund his acquisition and by a decline in spending by advertisers worried about the erratic changes occurring under his leadership. Analysts estimate the debt expenses alone have added more than $1 billion in cost annually to a company that last year generated $5 billion in sales, mostly from ads. 

Mr. Musk has been here before—mired in debt and burning cash as the global economy teeters—and emerged successfully.

Those successes and investor enthusiasm for his ventures made him rank as the world’s richest person for a time. The drop in Tesla’s value this year sent Mr. Musk’s ranking as the world’s richest man to No. 2 behind

Bernard Arnault,

the chairman and chief executive of luxury conglomerate LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton. Mr. Musk’s fortune fell to an estimated $140 billion as of Thursday from a high of $340 billion a little more than a year ago, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. 

If he needs cash, Mr. Musk could always sell more Tesla shares, as he did recently. But, in the past, Mr. Musk, Tesla’s largest individual shareholder, has been reluctant to sell. At Tesla, Mr. Musk lacks the kind of dual class of stock ownership that gives founders at

Meta Platforms Inc.

or

Alphabet Inc.

controlling power. Instead, Mr. Musk’s large stake in Tesla, in the past, has effectively given him veto power over shareholder proposals thanks to the company’s supermajority vote requirement. 

On Thursday, Mr. Musk said he sold some stock to make sure he had “powder dry…for a worst-case scenario” and said that he was done selling until probably 2025, though he’s made similar statements like that this year only to sell more. 

“I’m somewhat paranoid having gone through two really intense recessions,” Mr. Musk said. 

While he had used margin loans before, the idea of borrowing billions off the backs of Tesla shares to help Twitter carries risks. 

Tesla’s board of directors has limited his borrowing power to essentially 25 cents on every dollar of share value, according to regulatory filings. As the shares fall in value, he must comply with the 25% limit. The risk to Tesla shareholders, as the company describes in its regulatory filings, is that he may have to unload a lot of shares at once to generate cash. He has never disclosed at what price he would need to pony up more collateral.

In recent days, Mr. Musk has swatted down the idea of margin loans altogether. In a tweet, Mr. Musk cautioned that such a move was unwise in this market. “When there are macroeconomic risks, it is generally wise to avoid using margin loans on any company, as stocks may move in ways that are decoupled from their long-term potential,” he wrote on Dec. 8. 

As of the most recent public filing, Mr. Musk had pledged as collateral more than half of his Tesla holdings, excluding options he could exercise.

Pledging doesn’t necessarily indicate that actual borrowing against those shares has occurred, the filing said. 

Write to Tim Higgins at tim.higgins@wsj.com

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Read original article here

Tesla, GM Among Car Makers Facing Senate Inquiry Into Possible Links to Uyghur Forced Labor

WASHINGTON—The Senate Finance Committee has opened an inquiry into whether auto makers including

Tesla Inc.

and

General Motors Co.

are using parts and materials made with forced labor in China’s Xinjiang region.

In a letter sent Thursday, the committee asked the chief executives of eight car manufacturers to provide detailed information on their supply chains to help determine any links to Xinjiang, where the U.S. government has alleged the use of forced labor involving the Uyghur ethnic minority and others.

The U.S. bans most imports from the region under the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act. The letter to car companies cited a recent report from the U.K.’s Sheffield Hallam University that found evidence that global auto makers were using metals, batteries, wiring and wheels made in Xinjiang, or sourcing from companies that used Uyghur workers elsewhere in China.

According to that report, some car manufacturers “are unwittingly sourcing metals from the Uyghur region.” It said some of the greatest exposure comes from steel and aluminum parts as metals producers shift work to Xinjiang to take advantage of Chinese government subsidies and other incentives.

The U.S. ban on products linked to Xinjiang has already caused disruptions in the import of solar panels made there.

China has called Washington’s claim baseless. It disputes claims by human-rights groups that it mistreats Uyghurs by confining them in internment camps, with Beijing saying its efforts are aimed at fighting terrorism and providing vocational education.

Besides

Tesla

and GM, the letter signed by Finance Committee Chairman

Ron Wyden

(D., Ore.), was sent to

Ford Motor Co.

,

Mercedes-Benz Group AG

,

Honda Motor Co.

,

Toyota Motor Corp.

,

Volkswagen AG

and

Stellantis

NV, whose brands include Chrysler and Jeep.

GM said its policy prohibits any form of forced or involuntary labor, abusive treatment of employees or corrupt business practices in its supply chain.

“We actively monitor our global supply chain and conduct extensive due diligence, particularly where we identify or are made aware of potential violations of the law, our agreements, or our policies,“ the company said.

A Volkswagen spokesman said the company investigates any alleged violation of its policy, saying “serious violations such as forced labor could result in termination of the contract with the supplier.” A Stellantis spokesperson said the company is reviewing the letter and the claims made in the Sheffield Hallam study.

Other companies didn’t immediately provide comments.

“I recognize automobiles contain numerous parts sourced across the world and are subject to complex supply chains. However, this recognition cannot cause the United States to compromise its fundamental commitment to upholding human rights and U.S. law,” Mr. Wyden wrote.

The information requested includes supply-chain mapping and analysis of raw materials, mining, processing and parts manufacturing to determine links to Xinjiang, including manufacturing conducted in third countries such as Mexico and Canada. 

General Motors says its policy prohibits forced or involuntary labor, abusive treatment of employees or corrupt business practices in its supply chain.



Photo:

mandel ngan/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

The lawmakers are also asking the auto makers if they had ever terminated, or threatened to terminate, relations with suppliers over possible links to Xinjiang, and if so, provide details of the cases.

The committee’s action comes as the Biden administration and bipartisan lawmakers increase their focus on alleged forced-labor practices in China as a key component of their confrontation with Beijing over its economic policy. The United Auto Workers has called on the auto industry to “shift its entire supply chain out of the region.” 

The State Department has said more than one million Uyghurs and other minorities are held in as many as 1,200 state-run internment camps in Xinjiang. Chinese authorities “use threats of physical violence” and other methods to force detainees to work in adjacent or off-site factories, according to the department.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection investigated 2,398 entries with a total value of $466 million during the fiscal year ended September, up from 1,469 entries in the previous year and 314 cases in fiscal 2000.

Analysts expect the CBP’s enforcement activity to further increase this year, with a strong bipartisan push for a tougher stance on the forced-labor issue.  

The researchers at Sheffield Hallam University found that more than 96 mining, processing, or manufacturing companies relevant to the auto sector are operating in Xinjiang. The researchers used publicly available sources, including corporate annual reports, websites, government directives, state media and customs records.

Write to Yuka Hayashi at Yuka.Hayashi@wsj.com

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Read original article here

Elon Musk Seeks Additional Funds for Twitter

Elon Musk’s

team has reached out for potential fresh investment for Twitter Inc. at the same price as the original $44 billion deal, according to one shareholder who said he was contacted about the proposal.

Ross Gerber,

president and CEO at Gerber Kawasaki Wealth & Investment Management, said a representative for Mr. Musk contacted him about offering more shares Thursday.

Mr. Gerber said his firm had previously put up less than $1 million to back Mr. Musk’s takeover of Twitter, which was completed in late October at a price of $54.20 per share.

Semafor earlier reported the new outreach to investors.

Elon Musk has warned of dire financial challenges facing Twitter, the social media company he took over for $44 billion in October. WSJ’s Mark Maurer explains how the company is trying to fix its finances and avoid a potential bankruptcy. Photo Illustration: Laura Kammermann

Twitter didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. 

Additional equity investments would likely dilute existing Twitter shareholders. The potential extent of the dilution from the latest fundraising effort couldn’t immediately be determined.

Mr. Musk this week sold more than $3.5 billion worth of

Tesla Inc.

TSLA -4.72%

stock. It was his second round of sales since buying Twitter Inc. Mr. Musk sold nearly 22 million Tesla shares over a three-day period ended Dec. 14, according to a regulatory disclosure made public Wednesday.

Mr. Musk’s ownership of Twitter has gotten off to a tumultuous start. Last month, Mr. Musk said Twitter had suffered “a massive drop in revenue” and was losing $4 million a day. He later invoked the specter of bankruptcy.

As part of the acquisition, Twitter took on around $13 billion in debt. That could leave the social-media company owing annual interest payments of more than $1 billion, analysts have estimated, compared with around $51 million in 2021.

Mr. Musk’s focus on Twitter has irritated some Tesla investors as the company tracks for its worst annual stock-price performance on record.

Mr. Gerber said he was reviewing the proposal, but had some questions about how Twitter was being run. Those include how long Mr. Musk intended to act as chief executive and any transition plan, he added. 

Last month, Mr. Musk said he expects to find someone else to run Twitter, without giving a specific timeline for when the appointment might happen. 

Twitter has been in turmoil since Elon Musk took over. To get a sense of what’s going on behind the scenes, The Wall Street Journal spoke with former Tesla and SpaceX employees to better understand how Musk leads companies. Illustration: Ryan Trefes

Mr. Gerber, who also is an investor in Mr. Musk-run electric car maker Tesla Inc., said he wasn’t concerned about how Twitter is doing so far, but said he wanted more communication. “I think they just need to be clear with everybody about what’s going on. Not just with Twitter, but Tesla,” he said.

Several Tesla investors, including Mr. Gerber, have expressed frustration recently that Mr. Musk’s involvement in Twitter might be to the detriment of the auto maker. Tesla’s stock is down more than 57% this year. 

Mr. Musk on Friday tweeted that “Tesla is executing better than ever” and that he had earlier that day gone over production progress at the company’s plant in Texas.

Write to Alexa Corse at alexa.corse@wsj.com

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Appeared in the December 17, 2022, print edition as ‘Musk Seeks Additional Funds for Twitter.’

Read original article here