China Is Doubling Down on Electric Vehicle Subsidies
Electric vehicles are not a bad thing, especially in heavily polluted China. But the market should drive demand, not central planners.

When it comes to spending government money in the private sphere, China is second to none. Now, the country is doubling down on subsidies for the production of electric vehicles (E.V.s). The U.S. should make sure not to follow suit.
As Yoko Kubota and Clarence Leong wrote in The Wall Street Journal this week, China is "encouraging unprofitable carmakers to keep producing as officials try to boost economic growth, preserve jobs and expand China's role in the global electric-vehicle business." The authors detail Zhido, a shuttered Chinese E.V. manufacturer that has reentered the market. "State-backed funds and dozens of other investors pumped fresh capital into the company late last year—despite widespread signs that China has too many carmakers to serve its needs."
In fact, "China spent roughly $173 billion in subsidies to support the new energy-vehicle sector, which encompasses electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles, between 2009 and 2022," write Kubota and Leong. By 2019, there were 500 E.V. manufacturers in China. But that same year, the government started paring back those incentives, and by 2023, the number of automakers had shrunk by 80 percent.
Now, though, the country is ready to throw good money after bad: "Chinese leader Xi Jinping has called on local leaders to promote 'new productive forces'—a buzzword in Chinese policy circles for the need to promote high-value manufacturing industries." Local leaders responded by pumping money into struggling companies—in one case, giving the equivalent of $27.5 million to a company that had sold fewer than 2,000 cars in the first quarter of 2024.
"China currently has the capacity to produce some 40 million vehicles a year, though it sells only around 22 million cars domestically," the Journal authors warn. As a result, the country's largesse "is adding cars to a global market that risks becoming more oversupplied."
Of course, E.V.s are not inherently a bad idea—especially in China, whose cities have a history of such severe pollution that it lowers the nation's life expectancy. A 2023 report found that air pollution in the country had fallen 42 percent between 2013 and 2021, adding two years to the average Chinese person's life—before a separate study the same year found that since 2021, the problem was getting worse again.
But as with anything, the advent of clean-energy technology should be driven by market forces. The Chinese government spent more than a decade subsidizing the production of electric vehicles, no matter whether consumers wanted to buy them. When the spigot of free money finally shut off, and manufacturers had to stand on their own, the country saw the rise of "E.V. graveyards," in which entire fields were covered in unsold or abandoned vehicles.
America would do well to heed China's example as a cautionary tale about industrial policy. China averaged 9.8 percent annual economic growth for 35 years starting in 1978; in 2013, officials pledged to keep growth at 7.5 percent—a two-decade low for the country, even if it would have been an enviable figure for any other nation.
But much of that expansion was driven by government spending, not market forces: For much of the 21st century, China embarked upon a construction binge, building residential and commercial developments as fast as possible with no regard for whether there were any tenants to fill them.
The result was China's "ghost cities," full of high-rise apartments and shopping centers in which nobody lived. Worried about rising debt, the Chinese government finally started drawing back its building spree in 2020. Since then, the country's real estate market has cratered, and its debt load has only deepened.
China's example provides further proof of why it's important to let consumers, not central planners, steer the marketplace. "China has a long history of auto overcapacity, with more than 100 domestic brands churning out more vehicles than the country's drivers buy each year," the Journal noted.
And yet, even though China's citizens largely aren't buying the cars that its companies are building, they're still paying for it indirectly through their tax money. And the automakers have no incentive to stop, so long as the money from the government keeps flowing.
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
China is making EVs cheaper at the expense of their taxpayers? That’s not fair. They can’t sell those things here without us paying taxes too. Slap some tariffs on those puppies! Make it fair!
What do we want? Import taxes! When do we want them? Soon as Trump is elected because it doesn’t count if Biden does it!
Slave labor is cool now.
"it doesn’t count if Biden does it!"
...because Biden and the left just wants to commit more 'armed-theft' period.
Trump actually Cut domestic 'armed-theft' and made it more fair.
China still being an officially communist and therefore planned economy.
"Electric vehicles are not a bad thing, especially in heavily polluted China."
Do electric vehicles actually pollute less? Interesting that Reason doesn't bother to challenge this assumption, easier to go along with the new conventional wisdom.
Came to say that ask this about the "2023 report". It doesn't even mention EVs and effectively makes Reason's statement "As the number of pirates around the globe have dropped, (Chinese propaganda shows) temperatures have risen."
Depends on the type of pollution. Also depends on whether you are referring to pollution very narrowly or very broadly to include any negative environmental externality.
Might mean local air pollution. Not like the green "Carbon is evil" bullshit pollution.
In that instance, electric vehicles can often be far less polluting than internal combustion, especially in China. Ever seen a picture of Beijing from a decade ago? There are a lot of cities worse for particulate and photochemical smog, which is very tailpipe intensive.
As for energy used, carbon emitted, costs associated with mining rare-earth minerals, and all of that, I'll punt. Making "green" electronics contains a lot of dirty and energy-intensive steps.
which is very tailpipe intensive
This is bullshit. Even in China. *Especially* in China. Industrial manufacturing, heavy vehicle and freight shipping, and power generation all generate the majority of particulates relative to commuter traffic and have for decades, moreover and as usual, again *especially* in China, you’re just moving the emissions from the tailpipe to the smoke stack.
The idea that the US spent 70 yrs. of vehicle emissions to “do an LA” and back and China, with a rather devoted antithesis to car culture, superseded it in 20-30 yrs. is bullshit. Much less that it dug, or will dig its way out with EVs in the next 20-30.
Just utter “The central planners weren’t wrong, you plebs showing up for work are the problem. Sleep in pods, eat the bugs, own nothing.” environmentalist horseshit propaganda.
FFS – Do the offhand meta-analysis: Google for pictures of “Smog in L.A.” and what do you see? A yellow haze over 12 lanes of sitting traffic. No one wearing masks. Google for pictures of “Smog in China” and what do you see? People on foot or on mopeds, wearing masks. Why aren’t/weren’t the people in LA wearing masks? Why aren’t/weren’t the people in China driving cars? Because outside trying to asphyxiate yourself in your garage, commuter EVs as solution to the local smog emission problem is bullshit.
If the reason libertarian theory of govt subsidies is correct, theoretically it would be devastating if the US govt offered tax refunds to buyers of Chinese evs. Yes?
I'd like to see someone write some very complex models and test this theory with some of those climate computers.
Maybe throw in some variables where the CIA rabble rouses the Africans and afghanis to really squeeze the Chinese' nuts on inputs while we see who'll crack first in a war on spending money that doesn't exist.
Warfare 3.0(b) or 2.1 or whatever.
You do realize that China is a communist dictatorship?
Economy, government, and party are different things.
The Chinese economy was shit until the 80s and 90s when they allowed limited bottom-up free enterprise instead of top-down communist command economy. The freer they get the richer everyone (even us!) gets.
Their government is more authoritarian than communist. Their Communist Party is more about keeping the people in power in power than practicing anything close to communism.
..bottom-up free enterprise…
The new definition includes subsidies I guess.
"The freer they get the richer everyone gets."
Yet; here we are talking about how UN-free they are getting being forced to buy EV'S they don't want. You make as much sense here as you did on free-speech. A complete contradiction.
When it comes to spending government money in the private sphere, China is second to none.
Well, it’s even easier since there is no private sphere in China. It’s all government, all the time.
Has Joe ever even heard of the CCCP before?
Also, consider that China was willing to ‘double down’ on farming policy that literally starved millions so the idea they give a flying fuck about the people or how they spend their money is absurd at face value. They are cogs of the state and property of the state, no more and no less.
Their ‘plan’ with EV’s, as far as one can call it a plan, is to produce a ton of them at a loss and undercut the rest of the planet in order to choke off competition. I don’t know if that’ll work or not, it seems stupid for sure, but it’s how China has done business since at least Nixon.
Which, just by the way, is one of the many reasons that tariff’s exist. Tariffs might very well be the thing that makes this Chinese ‘plan’ amount to nothing outside of a bunch of EV graveyards where the rare earth minerals that China has a stranglehold over go to disappear from the market.
“Electric vehicles are not a bad thing”
As it stands currently, electric vehicles are absolutely a bad thing. Which I know some people might find to be a shocking thing to say. I think somewhere there’s a quote by Voltaire that sums it up.
Watt else is there to say?
It’s the current thing! Stop resisting!
Well, I’m amped.
Get back to work Slaves! The ‘armed-theft’ Gov-Gun packers have big ‘plans’ for your labors whether you like your P.O.S. EV or not. /s
"Electric vehicles are not a bad thing, especially in heavily polluted China..."
Where do you think the electricity comes from?