Youngkin Nixes Ford Electric Vehicle Plant Over Anti-China Paranoia
The factory may have been a bad deal for Virginia, but tying the decision to Chinese aggression is the wrong move.

As the automobile market shifts toward electric vehicles, the industry is experiencing a correlated boom in manufacturing. Automakers have pledged tens of billions of dollars toward new domestic factories that can build electric cars and batteries. But while many states would likely welcome the infusion of capital, all too often, state governments use taxpayer money to incentivize developments.
In that sense, it's encouraging to see that Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, turned down an offer from Ford Motor Co. to build a battery plant in Virginia—except Youngkin nixed it not over the state tax incentives it had requested but over misplaced concerns about China.
Last month, Bloomberg reported that Ford wished to build a battery manufacturing facility in partnership with Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Ltd. (CATL), a Chinese battery manufacturer. The companies were considering Michigan, Ford's home state, and Virginia. Days later, the Daily Caller reported that Youngkin had removed his state from consideration, citing "CATL's connection to the Chinese government" as a "major concern." In remarks to reporters after his State of the Commonwealth address last week, Youngkin confirmed the reports, saying "We felt that the right thing to do was to not recruit Ford as a front for China to America."
While there are plenty of good reasons not to sign off on a particular development deal, fears over Chinese hegemony rank low on the list.
Last month, Youngkin also banned TikTok and WeChat, social media apps based in China, from state-owned devices. The impulse to ban TikTok is a bipartisan one, based on (so far unproven) fears that the app is funneling user data to the Chinese government and its dominant political entity, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). But the fear over the Ford/CATL plant stems from its ownership structure: While Ford would own 100 percent of the facility and its equipment, CATL would operate the plant and own the battery cell technology. Youngkin's legal counsel told The Washington Post that the arrangement constituted "national security risk-type technology."
But even if CATL did share its technology with the Chinese government, it's not clear how that constitutes a national security risk to the United States. After all, battery cells made by private companies are not state secrets. And plenty of other automakers already manufacture electric cars, meaning that China can't have a monopoly on battery technology. Besides, if Americans are able to buy cars that don't have to use gasoline, what does it matter who manufactured them?
More than anything, Youngkin's decision feels like good old-fashioned economic protectionism, favoring domestic companies over foreign firms no matter the impact on the end consumer. In the State of the Commonwealth address, Youngkin also called for the General Assembly to "send me a bill to prohibit dangerous foreign entities tied to the CCP from purchasing Virginia farmland." This is a similarly bipartisan proposition: In last year's Georgia gubernatorial debate, Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams complained about "the rise of Chinese Communist Party-backed companies purchasing American farmland." Notably, in each case, neither China nor the state government is seizing anyone's land; Chinese entities are purchasing land at rates Americans are willing to accept.
In keeping with many years' worth of doomsaying, Youngkin called the CCP "a dictatorial political party that only has one goal: global dominance at the expense of the United States." But China has so far proven a bit of a failure as a hegemony. And fearmongering over the country's industrial influence is ultimately antithetical to an ethos of free trade.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I miss the days when Republicans were economically literate.
I don't miss the days when sarc made sense. They never existed.
Once upon a time libertarians and conservatives shared similar views on economics, and that was the foundation of their tenuous alliance.
Libertarians haven't changed. But the alliance has.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,300 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,300 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link—————————————>>> http://Www.SmartJob1.Com
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.SALARYBEZ.COM
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
https://WWW.APPRICHS.com
Leave China alone! Leave Big Tech alone!
Here I thought the libertarian approach to economics was for government to be the referee rather than the chooser of winners and losers.
Silly me.
You probably do favor government as referees, you sham libertarian. You are wrong.
People are the referees, using markets.
People are the players. Government is the guys enforcing the rules. Things like property rights and contracts. But otherwise not involved. The referee.
Edit: Markets are the game. We are the players. Government's only role should be enforcing the rules.
No. Markets enforce the rules. You are a statist.
ETA Let me put it this way: markets predate governments because markets are as natural as gravity.
What good is a market without governments to enforce property rights and contracts? You want to physically carry your goods to market because there is no government to discourage theft? What good is a contract without a court?
Tony thinks I’m an anarchist. You think I’m a statist. You’re both suffer from the same delusion.
Edit: Yes markets are natural. They are what naturally arises from property rights and contracts which need enforcement.
Edit edit: This is a good read, or listen, or whatever.
https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/161017156X/reasonmagazinea-20/
Guns deter theft. Markets enforce contracts.
Courts arbitrate disagreements.
This is 101 shit.
“You are a statist.”
lol. Are you mentally retarded or unable to read? To call me that means everything of mine presented to you was a jumble of letters, or that you lack the mental capacity to understand what I have written.
Which is it? Illiterate or retarded?
Edit: If it's neither then the only explanation left is dishonesty.
I can only see those three options. Do you have anything better?
Doesn't Reason realize that you can't charge an electric car with a wind farm ?
https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2022/07/he-also-doesnt-believe-in.html
I miss the days when people were, by and large literate and Joe Lancaster saying "Youngkin nixing Ford EV plant is protectionism" would garner a good, hearty, "WTF is wrong with you? That doesn't even make sense. Are you having stroke?"
Lol at pretending his stated reason bears any relation to reality.
Ironically enough, PRC just launched a new naval vessel named Paranoia. It’s a big destroyer.
There’s a red under his bed.
I heard it was built on a Low Budget.
The launch was delayed several times due to flaws in the design. Eventually they got The Kinks out f it.
Lou Reed is a prolific stowaway
Its screws turn velvetly quietly with help from Toshiba.
>>on a Low Budget
what's that you say?
I'm an Apeman.
Why do I suddenly want to listen to the Village Green Preservation Society?
Because it is an awesome album.
He should have just said electric cars are stupid at this point a be done with it.
Or call them what they are: coal and natural gas powered vehicles.
There are a battery of reasons for them to have avoided this.
It’s shocking, really.
It is watt gets folks amped up.
I’m not paying any extra charges!
This is a bad ohmen.
Resistance is futile!
Are you positive?
Thus deal is terminal.
It's too early for the Friday Short Circuit.
Don’t be so negative.
I don’t even think those idiots in Washington understand what truly separates us from China. Let me try to explain it to them: A SEA, DC!!!!
I'm recyling that.
stop being a pain in my anode.
If "Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Ltd. (CATL)" was going to share its technology with the CCP (I have no doubt they are doing that now), what difference does it make? I mean, it's their technology... Unless, of course, Youngkin is afraid the Chinese might learn how to build a Ford Focus....
As long as the Chinese don’t get their hands on Mustang technology.
Except the new Gelding. China can have that Mustang.
https://cdn.carbuzz.com/gallery-images/1600/579000/600/579606.jpg
The “Mustangs” that aren’t really Mustangs. Still not as bad as 1980s Mustangs, though.
When I was younger, I restored a black 66 Mustang with pony interior. Just weeks after I finished the job, someone rear-ended me on the Harbor Freeway and totaled it.
I like my Mustang. It's a Colt. Can't afford a Ford.
Does it have a .380 in it?
There's a shallow spot in the river half a mile to the east.
Butt what happened to the car?
Don't like Fords anyway. Fix or repair daily. Had one where the fuel pump would last a year. Gave out every October. Once while crossing traffic. That was fun. Not on my shopping list.
First On Race Day.
Found on road dead.
*snort*
I for one don’t care if the Chinese learn how to build a Ford Focus. I just wish someone would teach them how to DRIVE one!
Someone needs to. The only sedan Ford is selling in the U.S. these days is the Mustang.
And who can aFord that these days?
(Look, someone had to do it. I actually waited…)
Two boos for Youngkin, he did the right thing for the wrong reasons, the bastard. Next he'll speak out against throwing tax money around like a drunken sailor because it might put somebody's eye out, despite the fact that currency-related eye injuries are at a 27-year low.
LOL.... Best Comment yet...
No mention of Uighur slavery. Do they not have children too?
How does this effect them? Seriously.
I see that trotted out a lot. As if someone who does business with anyone in China somehow hates an oppressed minority group. I'm sure that argument fits into a logical fallacy, but I'm too lazy to figure out which one.
What puzzles me is why conservatives defend the Uighur, being that they're mostly Muslims.
Uhhhh .... you approve of governments enslaving people? Would you have done business with the CSA?
Aight Lizzy Warren. You win.
"Besides, if Americans are able to buy cars that don't have to use gasoline, what does it matter who manufactured them?"
LOL. You're dumb.
Notice how he says "You're dumb" instead of "What you said is dumb."
He's not arguing the point. He's arguing the person.
So are you.
More than anything, Youngkin's decision feels like good old-fashioned economic protectionism, favoring domestic companies over foreign firms no matter the impact on the end consumer.
Wait, what the holy shit?
So if he'd given tax breaks to Ford to have a Chinese company build a battery factory in Virginia, it wouldn't have been protectionist (just crony capitalist), but because he didn't give a tax break to an American company to have a Chinese company build a factory in Virginia, he's a protectionist?
Joe, if you really want to make the citizens of VA build a Chinese battery factory, run for office. Until then, you're a moron that makes Youngkin look intelligent and scrupulous. Either way, you should quit the libertarian game, you aren't intelligent enough to maintain the lie.
If Youngkin had tried to get the plant built then Reason writers would be criticizing him for making sweetheart deals with companies.
Youngkin will be criticized by Reason writers until a Democrat replaces him. Then Reason writers will miraculously lose interest in talking about the governor of Virginia again.
if he nixed it because electric cars are fucking stupid I'd be happy too. Red Barchetta!
Yep. Because China is so straightforward in their business dealings, and would never ever use them for political goals.
What’s the purpose of partnering with the CCP?
Can’t Ford make batteries without the CCP or import whatever they want from the CCP?
If the USA doesn't offer itself to the CCP at a price is that protectionism?
Frankly; It should be the job of the National Government Affairs to address these types of concerns. Yet they're too busy robbing the people ... because the weather changes of course, counterfeiting for 'poor' 'discriminated' voters, controlling the press and education of children to be concerning will silly issues like an invasion and why US Companies need to partnership with the CCP.
At some point it makes moral sense to say no to China regardless of any other considerations.
In a paper bag.
Dear Colt 45,
I am writing to thank you for being in my life.
When I was in middle school, and times were rough, you comforted me. Then in high school, when my friends stopped hanging out with me, you stuck around. After I got my GED, and those old friends moved on to bigger and better things such as getting a job and waking up before noon, you never left my side.
I have a request. While I like your product in the 40 ounce bottles, I only have two hands. Sometimes I get so shitfaced that I can’t find my way back to the fridge. Please consider making an 80 ounce bottle.
Your friend,
- Sarc
Could be both.
The focus was on ideas and not events.