alt Hacker NewsI'm not from US, but China is certainly subsidize a lot of its manufacturers to capture global markets while not giving access to it's local market to western companies.
US is able to produce cars on its soil and there is no reason to give up this industry to foreign country.
It's pretty sane policy.
PRC gave/gives way more managed market access to US/west than vice versa, they just historically limit to JVs where foreign partners capped at 50/50% ownership. Almost every western product that's not export controlled, PRC buys, i.e. there's way more western cars / tech in PRC market via JV tax than vice versa. Versus western approach to PRC competitive goods is functionally structural exclusion. EU on open to JVs even if they're incapable of providing same we do all the work you collect cheques value add that PRC offered, but they have audacity to ask for tier1 PRC crown jewel tech while PRC took tier2 legacy western tech, and EU wants 51% lol while not being able to allocate land, build factories, mobilize 10000s workforce on a dime like PRC. Hence PRC not biting.
The difference is PRC has confidence they can indigenize tech/processes and compete, so giving western companies broader access to even strategic sectors long term worthwhile, especially sectors they're behind in. West either doesn't have that confidence or understands they'll get stomped even in PRC parity/fair JV arrangement and better to lock in with protectionism that now surpass PRC protectionism, or have retarded JV asks.
Which is a pretty sane policy until PRC moves past parity and extend gap despite mountains of ineffective western subsidies.