Connect with us

Business

The EV market is in trouble: The latest sign is Tesla's layoffs

Published

on

The EV market is in trouble: The latest sign is Tesla's layoffs

Tesla is in trouble: Its product line is aging. Sales are stalling. Top executives are fleeing. The stock price is down. The first wave of new Cybertrucks is riddled with quality problems. The low-cost Model 2 recently promised by Chief Executive Elon Musk appears to be dead.

Some of Tesla’s most environmentally conscious buyers are signaling their disgust with the behavior of Musk by turning to other brands, even as price cut follows price cut. Those bargain basement deals are squeezing profit margins, though the company remains profitable and still sells more EVs than other automakers.

The company’s four auto factories have more car-making capacity than the company has customers.

The situation is so serious that on Monday, Musk announced that “more than 10%” of its global workforce would be laid off. How much more Musk did not say. Tesla did not respond to a request for comment for this article, but Musk said in an internal email explaining the layoffs that the company had to seek cost reductions and higher productivity.

If Tesla were the only electric car maker under pressure, that alone would send shivers through California policymakers, from Gov. Gavin Newsom on down, who in their quest to address climate change and air pollution have set strict mandates that will ban sales of new cars that run only on fossil fuels by 2035.

Advertisement

But the drive to electric vehicles has, at best, hit a rough patch, with little visibility into road conditions ahead. EV sales are still rising but at a far slower pace than the highs reached in 2022 and early 2023.

Ford, General Motors and other major automakers are pulling back on their EV ambitions, putting more of their money behind hybrid vehicles, cutting back on production, and delaying introduction of some EV models. EV startups including Rivian, Lucid and Polestar are laying off workers, as they encounter production problems or fall short of sales targets or both. The financial difficulties at Fisker, the Manhattan Beach electric vehicle startup, became so severe, its stock price so battered, that it’ll get kicked off the New York Stock Exchange on April 22, or, more formally, be “delisted.”

The big question is whether current conditions will prove to be growing pains (however agonizing) on the way to a cleaner transportation economy. And if so, how long the pain will last.

Right now EV sales growth is slowing at a time when rapid expansion is needed to reach climate goals. Across the U.S., EV sale rose only 2.6% year over year for the first quarter of 2024, while EV market share against gasoline cars declined, to 7.3%, from 2023’s 7.6% record high, according to Kelley Blue Book.

Even EV-happy California is bumping into customer resistance: In 2023, EV market share for new car sales topped 21%, far higher than any other state. While 2024 first-quarter California EV sales figures won’t be available until early May, the signs are worrisome: In the last half of 2023, new EV sales declined in California, the first negative growth ever reported.

Advertisement

“We’ve reached a threshold of market intolerance,” said Karl Brauer, auto industry analyst at iSeeCars.com. “The numbers of people who have a personal interest in, or a tolerance for, dealing with EV challenges, or have the means and lifestyle to work with an electric vehicle” appears to be hitting a wall, he said.

Temporary, or long term? Yet to be determined, he said.

His firm looked at EV penetration rates in states and cities and found that sales grew rapidly until market share hit about 8%, and then slowed dramatically or went nearly flat. California is an exception; new EV market share reached over 21% in 2023. Still, in the year’s last quarter, EV sales growth went negative, with Tesla new car sales down 10%.

The current problem for EV advocates: how to move the customer profile from early adopters to mainstream buyers.

More than 90% of EV buyers, Brauer’s research shows, are relatively affluent homeowners who have installed their own chargers and own two vehicles or more — meaning, in most cases, there’s a gasoline car available for long trips.

Advertisement

The majority of car buyers aren’t as well off, so the price difference between gasoline cars and electric cars — about $45,000 on average for gas, compared with about $55,000 for electric — is a big issue. (Even that $45,000 is high for millions of buyers, hence the strength of the used car market.)

EV drivers who live in condos or apartments must rely for the most part on public or workplace chargers.

The public charging infrastructure is notoriously unreliable, outside of Tesla’s charging network, a system the company could afford to build and maintain by maintaining a stratospheric stock price — a stock price that’s suffered mightily over the last year, down nearly 40% in the last six months.

Tesla is beginning to open up its charging network to other carmakers, in part to qualify for federal subsidies.

While EV sales growth is slowing, hybrid cars are blasting off, benefiting companies such as Toyota and Honda.

Advertisement

The Tesla news is reverberating through the auto world. For more than a decade, it was the EV industry. Regulators pointed to Tesla as evidence that customers would buy electric cars if the industry would craft desirable vehicles instead of the glorified golf carts they were producing, weak tea attempts at meeting government regulations. Under pressure from California and 12 other allied states, from regulators in Europe, and a burgeoning EV industry in China, automakers globally are now investing hundreds of billions in electric vehicles.

If California and the world are going to meet their lofty climate goals, policymakers and automakers, including Tesla, have a lot of work still to do.

Business

Contributor: ICE raids and migrant pay cuts are devastating California economies

Published

on

Contributor: ICE raids and migrant pay cuts are devastating California economies

Along the southern stretch of California’s Central Coast, President Trump’s crusade against immigrants has left a visceral mark. It seems these days that almost everyone there has seen or felt the aftermath of an immigration raid: cars with shattered windows left idling and businesses emptied of their usual employees and patrons. The human toll is stark. Raids around Christmas removed at least 100 people from our communities, leaving children without parents and families without primary earners — creating crises that cascade far beyond the moment of enforcement.

The economic consequences of Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids are equally severe. Recent farmer surveys have shown that immigration raids and the fear they generate have caused farmworker shortages, particularly in labor-intensive crops such as strawberries — the region’s most valuable agricultural commodity — where fruit rots on the plant without the immigrant workers who pick it.

Early research quantifying the economic impact of ICE raids in Oxnard estimates direct crop losses of $3 billion to $7 billion with significant spillover into other sectors of the economy. As families lose income to raids — whether through the direct loss of a working family member or in the form of lost business production or sales — they spend less in the local economy. The ripple effect means that the total economic impact of ICE raids is much greater than unpicked crops, with harm most concentrated among the most vulnerable: farmworkers.

Recent changes to a foreign worker program threaten to deepen the wound. The federal program, known as H-2A, allows growers and farm labor contractors to recruit temporary foreign workers to meet seasonal labor demand. It has become the fastest-growing work visa system in U.S. agriculture. It carries with it a welldocumented history of wage theft, abuse and trafficking enabled, in part, by H-2A workers’ relative isolation and inability to seek other employment while in the United States.

Advertisement

Until October 2025, the wages paid to H-2A workers were, although low, not so low as to distort the labor market and drag down the wages paid to domestic farmworkers. In October, the Trump administration delivered a huge pay cut to H-2A workers and, in doing so, undercut wages for farmworkers across America regardless of visa status. Trump’s changes include both a direct wage cut as well as new provisions allowing employers to charge housing fees of up to $3 per hour worked.

Estimates of the pay that farmworkers will lose because of these changes range from $4.4 billion to $5.4 billion, or 10% to 12% of farmworkers’ annual wages. Given these figures, the losses suffered by farmworkers in Santa Barbara County alone — where I conduct research — could range from $126 million to $152 million annually, with subsequent decreases in spending and tax revenue reverberating through the region.

With H-2A labor now cheaper relative to domestic farmworkers, visa holders are likely to fill at least one-fifth of all agricultural jobs in Santa Barbara County. This exceeds the program’s 2023 peak in the county, when 18.1% of all agriculture jobs were filled by H-2A, before wage increases caused many growers to drop out of the program in 2024 and 2025. Including housing deductions, employers can now pay H-2A workers $13.90 an hour, significantly below California’s minimum wage of $16.90 an hour. Growers have a strong incentive to substitute resident workers for lower-cost H-2A labor, resulting in local farmworkers losing jobs and income. In addition, because of decreased income and employment, more farmworker families will be forced to rely on benefit programs such as CalFresh, increasing government expenditures.

The tax and budget consequences of expanded H-2A use should be a serious concern for local and state governments. Not only have Trump’s changes significantly reduced farmworkers’ taxable income, but H-2A workers themselves generate less local tax revenue and economic activity than resident workers would.

H-2A employers and employees are exempt from key payroll taxes, including Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance. At the same time, the program’s temporary structure — averaging about six months — means workers remit a larger share of their earnings abroad to support families they cannot bring with them, further limiting local spending and the sales tax base.

Advertisement

Elected officials are not powerless in the face of these changes. A range of policy levers could help stabilize a labor market under mounting strain, particularly those that reinforce a meaningful wage floor and limit further downward pressure on earnings. This could include raising the agricultural minimum wage, increasing the California Employment Development Department’s program oversight capacity, and bolstering legal protections for undocumented farmworkers organizing for better working conditions.

The United Farm Workers are currently challenging the Trump administration’s pay rate and housing deduction in court, arguing they constitute one of the largest wealth transfers from workers to employers in the history of American agriculture. Meanwhile, Assemblymember Maggy Krell (D–Sacramento) has introduced legislation to raise the minimum hourly wage for certain agricultural workers to $19.75 — effectively restoring the previous H-2A rate. But that fix, while essential, would not take effect until 2027 and still needs to be passed. In the interim, the state and local governments must act decisively to enforce the existing wage floor, ensuring employers cannot use expanded housing deductions to push workers’ pay below the legal minimum.

These are not radical steps; they are basic protections. The alternative is to accept a race to the bottom — on wages, on working conditions and on the economic stability of the region itself.

Matt Kinsella-Walsh is a graduate researcher with the UC Santa Barbara Community Labor Center and the Organizing Knowledges Project. He researches agricultural economics and labor in the North American strawberry industry.

Advertisement

Insights

L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.

Viewpoint
This article generally aligns with a Center Left point of view. Learn more about this AI-generated analysis
Perspectives

The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.

Ideas expressed in the piece

  • The article argues that federal immigration enforcement has inflicted severe economic damage across California communities[1, 3, 7]

  • ICE raids created critical farmworker shortages in labor-intensive crops such as strawberries, with early research estimating direct crop losses of $3 billion to $7 billion in the Oxnard region[1, 14]

  • Immigration enforcement has generated widespread economic ripple effects, as families losing income have curtailed consumer spending, thereby harming local businesses and reducing municipal tax revenues[1, 3, 7]

  • Trump administration modifications to the H-2A visa program, including wage reductions and housing deduction provisions, will compound economic harms, with farmworkers losing an estimated $4.4 billion to $5.4 billion annually, or 10-12% of their yearly wages[1, 4]

  • These wage cuts will suppress domestic farmworker wages across all visa statuses[4, 8], decrease local tax revenue, and contract economic activity in agricultural communities

  • State and local governments should strengthen wage protections by raising agricultural minimum wages, increasing regulatory enforcement capacity, and bolstering legal protections for farmworkers to avert further economic deterioration

Different views on the topic

  • Agricultural industry representatives argue that labor costs have risen substantially over decades, placing significant financial strain on farm operations[2, 6]

  • Growers contend that without policy changes facilitating lower labor costs, some farms may face serious economic viability challenges[2, 6]

  • Industry representatives emphasize that farms operate on narrow profit margins[1], suggesting cost reductions are necessary for agricultural sector sustainability

  • Agricultural representatives highlight persistent labor shortages in the sector, pointing to historical difficulties attracting sufficient domestic workers to meet production demands, particularly in labor-intensive crops[2, 6, 8]

  • The industry maintains that access to temporary foreign workers through programs like H-2A remains essential to address longstanding workforce gaps and maintain agricultural production[2, 6, 8]

Continue Reading

Business

Devin Nunes Departs Trump Media After 4 Years as C.E.O.

Published

on

Devin Nunes Departs Trump Media After 4 Years as C.E.O.

President Trump’s social media company, which has consistently lost money and struggled with a flagging share price, announced Tuesday that it was replacing Devin Nunes as its chief executive officer.

The announcement offered no reason for the sudden departure of Mr. Nunes, a former Republican congressman from California. Mr. Trump had tapped him to run the company, Trump Media & Technology, in late 2021.

The announcement was made in a news release by the president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., who is a company board member and oversees a trust that controls his father’s 115-million-share stake in Trump Media. President Trump is not an officer or director of the company.

Mr. Nunes said in a statement on Truth Social, which is Trump Media’s flagship product, that it was an “appropriate time” for a new leader with experience in media and mergers to “steer Trump Media through its current transition phase.”

Trump Media has incurred hundreds of millions in losses, and its shares have performed poorly since the company went public by completing a merger with a cash-rich special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, in March 2024. The stock, which ended its first day of trading around $58 a share, closed Tuesday at $9.82.

Advertisement

Shares of Trump Media trade under the symbol DJT, which are President Trump’s initials. Truth Social has emerged as the main social media platform for Mr. Trump to communicate his policy decisions and opinions to the world.

Last year, Trump Media took in $3.7 million in revenue and recorded a $712 million net loss.

In December, Trump Media announced a plan to merge with TAE Technologies, a fusion power company. The all-stock deal, which was valued at $6 billion at the time, would create one of the first publicly traded nuclear fusion companies.

Trump Media said in February that it was considering spinning off its Truth Social platform in a merger with another cash-rich SPAC, Texas Ventures Acquisition III Corp.

Mr. Nunes is being replaced on an interim basis by Kevin McGurn, who has been an adviser to Trump Media since the end of 2024. Mr. McGurn, a former executive at Hulu, the streaming service, was listed in a recent regulatory filing as the chief executive of Texas Ventures.

Advertisement

The Trump Media release announcing the management change provided no update on the merger with TAE Technologies or the proposed SPAC deal for Truth Social.

Continue Reading

Business

Netflix plans to buy historic Radford Studio Center

Published

on

Netflix plans to buy historic Radford Studio Center

Streaming entertainment giant Netflix is in negotiations to buy the historic Radford Studio Center lot in Studio City.

Netflix plans to purchase the Los Angeles studio that has been home to generations of landmark television shows, including “Gunsmoke” and “Seinfeld,” according to two people with knowledge of the pending deal who were not authorized to speak about it publicly.

The studio’s previous operator, Hackman Capital Partners, defaulted on a $1.1-billion mortgage in January. Investment bank Goldman Sachs took over the property and is in talks with Netflix to sell it for between $330 million and $400 million.

Representatives for Hackman and Netflix declined to comment on the planned sale.

Advertisement

Culver City-based Hackman Capital Partners and Square Mile Capital Management teamed up to buy the Radford Avenue property from ViacomCBS in 2021 with a winning bid of $1.85 billion, after a competitive battle for the 55-acre studio beloved by the television industry.

At the time, the staggering price tag underscored the value — and scarcity — of TV soundstages in Los Angeles as content producers scrambled for space to shoot TV shows and movies to stock their streaming services. It was one of the largest-ever real estate transactions for a TV studio complex in Los Angeles.

Since then, production has substantially declined in Southern California. L.A. continues to battle the loss of production to other states and countries, as well as the lingering effects on the industry of the pandemic and the 2023 dual writers’ and actors’ strikes. Cutbacks in spending at the major studios after a surge in streaming-fueled TV production have further damped film activity in the region.

Founded by silent film comedy legend Mack Sennett in 1928, the lot became known as “Hit City” in the decades after World War II as popular TV shows such as “Leave It to Beaver,” “Gilligan’s Island,” “The Mary Tyler Moore Show,” “The Bob Newhart Show” and “Will & Grace” were made there. The storied lot gave the Studio City neighborhood its name,

Netflix, which has a market cap of about $455 billion — more than double that of Walt Disney Co. — has maintained its dominance in the global streaming business with more than 325 million subscribers.

Advertisement

The Los Gatos-based company has production offices worldwide, including facilities in Albuquerque, Brooklyn, London, Madrid and Toronto.

Netflix had secured an $82.7-billion deal to buy Warner Bros. studios and streaming services in December, but withdrew from the bidding war in late February after Paramount Skydance offered $31 a share. As part of the switch, Netflix was paid a $2.8-billion termination fee.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending