Business
Trump’s Car Tariffs Worry Toyota and Japan’s Automakers
Before the election, Toyota Motor and other Japanese automakers thought a second Trump administration could be good for them.
President Trump had campaigned on dismantling policies aimed at swiftly accelerating the U.S. auto industry’s shift away from fossil fuels and to electric vehicles — directives that Toyota and other leading manufacturers of gasoline and hybrid gasoline-electric cars had also long opposed.
Toyota donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inauguration in January, and attendees at the company’s dealership meeting in Dallas that month said it was brimming with Trump cheer.
But as Mr. Trump’s agenda has taken shape, much of that optimism has turned to alarm.
In February, the administration signed an executive order imposing 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada, where Toyota and other Japanese companies assemble many of the cars they sell in the United States.
The administration has said that on April 2 it will announce “reciprocal tariffs” on countries that run large trade surpluses with the United States — a move widely expected to affect Japan and its cars.
Japan is one of the world’s largest automobile exporters, and the United States is the biggest market for companies like Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mazda and Subaru. So, as the tariff deadline approaches, Japan is now preparing for a blow that could be devastating not only to the profits of the nation’s automakers but to its overall economy.
With Japan’s economy already stifled by inflation, some economists estimate that if Mr. Trump’s automotive tariffs take effect as threatened, they could wipe out 40 percent of potential economic growth this year.
Mr. Trump has long had a combative relationship with Japanese car companies. In the 1980s, when he floated the possibility of a presidential run, Mr. Trump railed against auto giants from Japan, once telling Oprah Winfrey that they come to the United States and “knock the hell out of” local manufacturers.
Shortly after Mr. Trump was first elected in 2016, Toyota came forward with plans to invest $10 billion in the United States. Japan’s former prime minister Shinzo Abe — who was considered a skilled Trump whisperer — leveraged the president’s love of adulation and secured a promise not to impose additional duties on Japanese cars.
Japan’s success in fending off tariffs the first time around was part of the reason many leaders in the automotive industry were sanguine — and even hopeful — about another Trump term. The other reason, especially for Toyota, involved electric vehicles, which Mr. Trump had mostly ridiculed before recently declaring himself a fan of Tesla, the company run by his close adviser Elon Musk.
In the early 2020s, when many of its competitors rushed into electric vehicles, Toyota held firm to the hybrid gas-electric cars it had pioneered decades earlier. The company argued that the world was not fully ready for electric vehicles. They were expensive for consumers and the infrastructure needed to charge their batteries remained incomplete.
Automakers were also mostly selling electric vehicles at a loss. The prospect of Mr. Trump’s rolling back initiatives intended to rapidly spur the transition to electric cars was seen as a way for Toyota to buy time, given that it had only one mass-market electric vehicle available in the United States.
Toyota lobbied against stricter Biden-era tailpipe pollution limits and supported politicians in the United States who were against what it viewed as “mandates” to sell more electric vehicles. Much of this lobbying came via Toyota’s network of car dealerships, some of which, after being prompted by Toyota, conveyed their concerns about a swift transition to electric vehicles to elected officials, according to correspondence viewed by The New York Times.
A spokesman for Toyota said providing customers with affordable vehicles and a variety of options was the best way to reduce emissions as soon as possible, which is the company’s goal. “A consumer-driven market will bring more stability and healthy competition to the auto industry,” he said.
At the January dealership meeting in Texas, leaders of Toyota’s North America business said that they believed the company had held firm during the presidency of Joseph R. Biden Jr., and that they were now hopeful they had more “like-minded politicians” in positions of power, according to two people who attended the event who were not authorized to talk publicly.
The next month, Mr. Trump outlined plans for tariffs that could hit exports of cars from Canada, Mexico and likely Japan.
The Trump administration’s plans for tariffs have shifted often. But the prospect of new taxes on foreign-made cars is already weighing on Japanese auto companies and some of their dealerships in the United States.
In Maine, Adam Lee is the chairman of Lee Auto Malls, one of the state’s largest auto dealership groups. Lee Auto Malls sells brands including Toyota, and last month it had its worst February in terms of net profit since 2009.
As Mr. Trump has unveiled his tariff agenda over the past two months, “faith in the economy has seemed to be the lowest it has been in a long time,” Mr. Lee said. “People don’t buy cars when the world is in chaos,” he added.
Analysts expect Japan and South Korea, because of their large presence in the United States and tendency to import many of the cars they sell there, to be the automaking countries most exposed to Mr. Trump’s proposed tariffs.
Toyota made about one million of the 2.3 million cars it sold in the United States last year outside the country. Executives at Nissan and Honda have warned that Mr. Trump’s tariff plans would carve deeply into their earnings.
For Japan, whose top export is cars, a 25 percent tariff on automobile exports to the United States could reduce the country’s gross domestic product by around 0.2 percent this year, according to estimates from Japan’s Nomura Research Institute.
Given that Japan’s economy has a potential growth rate of only around 0.5 percent this year, a 0.2 percent hit to G.D.P. would represent a “considerable blow,” according to the research institute.
For now, some Japanese car companies are trying to accelerate shipments to the United States before April 2. They are also beginning preparations to ramp up production to the extent they can at the 24 manufacturing plants they operate inside the United States.
Over the past seven decades, Toyota has invested more than $50 billion in the United States, and it will continue to deepen those investments, a spokesman for the company said. Including in the United States, where it directly employs more than 49,000 people, Toyota’s philosophy has always been to “build where it sells and buy where it builds,” he said. Toyota is also fully compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement, he added.
Groups representing the automakers in Washington have also been working their contacts on Capitol Hill. They are hoping lawmakers can help make the case for how much Japanese auto manufacturers invest in the United States and how tariffs could hurt American consumers by raising prices.
So far, Japanese officials have failed to gain promises of exemptions from tariffs.
Three people involved in the lobbying efforts, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations, say they are repeatedly asked: Are there any new investments they can commit to or ones in the pipeline they can repackage as inspired by the new president?
At the moment, the people said, they do not have new large projects to show.
Most Japanese automakers do not have excess production capacity in the United States, according to Michael Robinet, a vice president at the automotive intelligence provider S&P Global Mobility. That means that if they want to manufacture more vehicles, they would have to build new factories.
But factories would take years to build and demand significant investments from companies currently facing a “highly unstable trade environment,” Mr. Robinet said. “Automakers are not going to make decisions that have lots of zeros behind them unless they know that they have a solid business case,” he said. “And right now they don’t.”
Business
Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk
new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey
February 27, 2026
Business
Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office
Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.
If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.
All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.
But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.
That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.
The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.
— Katie Martin, Financial Times
Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.
Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.
Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.
But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.
Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.
That hasn’t been the case for months.
”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”
Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.
Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.
It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.
Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”
Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”
Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.
Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.
“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”
I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.
To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.
Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.
The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.
It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.
That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.
Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.
Business
How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.
Nvidia, the chipmaker that became the world’s most valuable public company two years ago, was alone worth more than $4.75 trillion as of Thursday morning. Its value, or market capitalization, is more than double the combined worth of all the companies in the energy sector, including oil giants like Exxon Mobil and Chevron.
The chipmaker’s market cap has swelled so much recently, it is now 20 percent greater than the sum of all of the companies in the materials, utilities and real estate sectors combined.
What unifies these giant tech companies is artificial intelligence. Nvidia makes the hardware that powers it; Microsoft, Apple and others have been making big bets on products that people can use in their everyday lives.
But as worries grow over lavish spending on A.I., as well as the technology’s potential to disrupt large swaths of the economy, the outsize influence that these companies exert over markets has raised alarms. They can mask underlying risks in other parts of the index. And if a handful of these giants falter, it could mean widespread damage to investors’ portfolios and retirement funds in ways that could ripple more broadly across the economy.
The dynamic has drawn comparisons to past crises, notably the dot-com bubble. Tech companies also made up a large share of the stock index then — though not as much as today, and many were not nearly as profitable, if they made money at all.
How the current moment compares with past pre-crisis moments
To understand how abnormal and worrisome this moment might be, The New York Times analyzed data from S&P Dow Jones Indices that compiled the market values of the companies in the S&P 500 in December 1999 and August 2007. Each date was chosen roughly three months before a downturn to capture the weighted breakdown of the index before crises fully took hold and values fell.
The companies that make up the index have periodically cycled in and out, and the sectors were reclassified over the last two decades. But even after factoring in those changes, the picture that emerges is a market that is becoming increasingly one-sided.
In December 1999, the tech sector made up 26 percent of the total.
In August 2007, just before the Great Recession, it was only 14 percent.
Today, tech is worth a third of the market, as other vital sectors, such as energy and those that include manufacturing, have shrunk.
Since then, the huge growth of the internet, social media and other technologies propelled the economy.
Now, never has so much of the market been concentrated in so few companies. The top 10 make up almost 40 percent of the S&P 500.
How much of the S&P 500 is occupied by the top 10 companies
With greater concentration of wealth comes greater risk. When so much money has accumulated in just a handful of companies, stock trading can be more volatile and susceptible to large swings. One day after Nvidia posted a huge profit for its most recent quarter, its stock price paradoxically fell by 5.5 percent. So far in 2026, more than a fifth of the stocks in the S&P 500 have moved by 20 percent or more. Companies and industries that are seen as particularly prone to disruption by A.I. have been hard hit.
The volatility can be compounded as everyone reorients their businesses around A.I, or in response to it.
The artificial intelligence boom has touched every corner of the economy. As data centers proliferate to support massive computation, the utilities sector has seen huge growth, fueled by the energy demands of the grid. In 2025, companies like NextEra and Exelon saw their valuations surge.
The industrials sector, too, has undergone a notable shift. General Electric was its undisputed heavyweight in 1999 and 2007, but the recent explosion in data center construction has evened out growth in the sector. GE still leads today, but Caterpillar is a very close second. Caterpillar, which is often associated with construction, has seen a spike in sales of its turbines and power-generation equipment, which are used in data centers.
One large difference between the big tech companies now and their counterparts during the dot-com boom is that many now earn money. A lot of the well-known names in the late 1990s, including Pets.com, had soaring valuations and little revenue, which meant that when the bubble popped, many companies quickly collapsed.
Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet and others generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue each year.
And many of the biggest players in artificial intelligence these days are private companies. OpenAI, Anthropic and SpaceX are expected to go public later this year, which could further tilt the market dynamic toward tech and A.I.
Methodology
Sector values reflect the GICS code classification system of companies in the S&P 500. As changes to the GICS system took place from 1999 to now, The New York Times reclassified all companies in the index in 1999 and 2007 with current sector values. All monetary figures from 1999 and 2007 have been adjusted for inflation.
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts2 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Oklahoma1 week agoWildfires rage in Oklahoma as thousands urged to evacuate a small city
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology6 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Denver, CO2 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology6 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making