BMW is a well-known German car brand that sells a lot of luxury cars. Here, they’re being talked about because they’re selling the most in the US luxury market.
Pricing discipline means sellers aren’t cutting prices aggressively. That usually helps keep profits steadier and can keep the market from turning into a discount race.
Tata Motors is a car company. The hosts say Tata and Jaguar Land Rover want to work more closely together, even though one big joint plan is falling apart.
JLR is short for Jaguar Land Rover, a luxury car group. They’re mentioned because Tata and JLR say they’ll cooperate more, even though one big plan didn’t work out.
Inventories are how many cars are available for sale that haven’t been sold yet. If there are a lot, sellers may need to offer deals; if there are fewer, prices can stay firmer.
“Days supply” is a way to estimate how long the current stock of cars would last. If it’s around 75 days, it usually means there aren’t too many cars sitting unsold.
An electric architecture is the basic “blueprint” for an electric car. It covers how the battery and electric parts are laid out so the company can build cars more efficiently.
A platform is the shared “foundation” a company designs so multiple car models can be built using the same core parts and engineering. That helps reduce cost and speed up development.
PB Bology is identified as the CEO of JLR in this segment. He’s quoted as emphasizing cost-cutting “synergies” tied to battery production, software, and shared suppliers.
Synergies here means the company is trying to get savings by doing related things together—like sharing batteries, software, and suppliers—so it doesn’t pay for everything twice.
USMCA is a trade agreement between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. It matters to carmakers because it can affect whether parts and cars can move across borders with lower or no tariffs.
“In limbo” means the rules aren’t settled yet. When carmakers don’t know what the trade rules will be, it’s harder to decide where to build factories and plan jobs and production.
They’re breaking down what the annual review changes for car companies. The host ties it to how automakers plan factories and production across North America.
Stellantis is a big car company. Here, the hosts mention one of its factories in Canada that’s sitting idle because rules for trade aren’t settled yet.
Brampton is a city in Ontario, Canada, and it’s referenced here as the location of an automaker-owned plant. The discussion frames it as an “empty” or idle factory affected by cross-border trade rules.
GM (General Motors) is a major automaker, mentioned here as owning a site described as empty and idle. The segment uses GM’s facilities to illustrate how trade uncertainty can disrupt production planning.
Company
Ingersoll
Ingersoll is mentioned as another place/facility involved in car production. The point is that multiple sites are sitting idle because the long-term trade situation isn’t clear.
Polestar is an electric car brand. The hosts are talking about a ban that affects whether Polestar can sell in the U.S., even though the cars aren’t made in China.
Geely is a Chinese company that owns multiple car brands. Here, it’s mentioned because it owns both Volvo and Polestar, but only Volvo is said to be allowed to keep selling in the U.S.
Place
Volvo's plant in Charleston, South Carolina
Charleston, South Carolina is the location of a Volvo manufacturing plant referenced as where one Polestar-related vehicle “rolls off the line.” The point is to show that production can be outside China while authorization and trade/policy issues still affect sales.
“100% electric” means the car uses electricity from a battery to move, not gasoline. In this segment, it’s used to highlight that Polestar’s cars are fully electric compared with Volvo’s more mixed lineup.
This refers to the car factory process in South Carolina where the cars are built. The dealer is pointing out that the cars in question are made in the U.S., not China.
Internal combustion engines (ICE) burn fuel (usually gasoline or diesel) inside the engine to create power. The dealer uses this term to explain that Volvo’s U.S. sales are still heavily based on non-electric powertrains, unlike Polestar’s fully electric approach.
A hybrid uses both a gasoline engine and an electric motor. In this segment, it’s used to explain that Volvo sells mostly hybrids rather than only fully electric cars.
“ICE” means the traditional gasoline/diesel engine. When they say “ICE combination,” they mean Volvo’s cars often use the engine (sometimes with electric help), not just electricity.
Polestar 2 is an all-electric Polestar model. It’s one of the main cars Polestar sells, and in this discussion it’s the specific car the dealer says they’re running out of quickly.
A warranty is coverage that helps pay for certain repairs for a set time. The speaker is emphasizing that warranty support won’t disappear even if Polestar stops selling in the U.S.
Service parts are the replacement parts used to fix and maintain a car. The speaker is saying Volvo will provide those parts for Polestar, which helps ensure repairs remain possible.
Software upgrades are updates to the car’s computer systems. The speaker is saying customers keep access to those updates as part of the protection package.
A “regulatory line” is the point where government rules start applying in a specific way. The speaker is worried about which company gets targeted next and what the next rule change will be.
Joint venture ties are partnerships between companies. The speaker is saying big automakers have partnerships in China, and that could matter for how ownership rules are applied.
Ford is a major car company. The speaker mentions it because Ford also has partnerships in China, and that could affect how ownership-related rules are enforced.
NADA is a U.S. organization that represents car dealers. The speaker thinks NADA’s reaction to the ruling wasn’t as strong as it could be, partly because many of its leaders come from big Detroit brands.
AIADA is an organization for U.S. dealers that sell imported cars. The speaker says they reacted right away and are actively organizing around the trade ruling.
“International nameplates” refers to vehicle brands (name models) that are produced by non-U.S. manufacturers and sold in the U.S. market. The speaker uses the figure that 48% of cars sold in America are from international nameplates to argue that dealer associations need to recognize how global supply already is.
Chrysler is a well-known car brand. The speaker is saying people still call it “American,” but its ownership is tied to a larger international company, which matters for trade discussions.
The Commerce Department is a U.S. government agency that can make rules that affect trade and business. Here, it’s being blamed/credited for decisions that change what Volvo and Polestar can do.
Concept
manufacturing back to the United States
This phrase means bringing car production back to the U.S. The speaker says Volvo is doing that by building a plant in South Carolina and shifting production here.
A “written guarantee” is an official promise in writing. They’re saying it’s unclear how long Volvo’s promise lasts and whether it has a clear expiration date.
LIVE
Welcome to Daily Drive for Thursday, July 9th, 2026.
I'm Jake Nier in Detroit in for Kellan Walker.
Today on the show, BMW is rotting away with the US luxury sales crown, inventories are
holding steady and so is pricing discipline, and Tata and JLR are pledging to work more
closely together even as one of their biggest joint plans falls apart.
Plus, Borton Volvo CEO Shell Berg says the Polestar ban might be settled, but the question
of who gets targeted next is not.
It's also not quite clear how durable the written guarantee for Volvo to be able to
produce an import in this country, how durable that is.
Let's run through all the news you need to know to keep up in the auto industry.
US new vehicle inventories ticked up slightly to start July at just under 3 million vehicles
that's still within the range where automakers and dealers are maintaining pricing discipline.
According to data firm Catalyst IQ, that represents a 75-day supply at current selling
rates flat from June and five days below last year.
Hybrids remain the fastest turning segment at 63 days,
while EVs sit at 70 and traditional gas vehicles at 78.
BMW has a firm grip on the US luxury sales crown so far.
The German brand posted a 13% sales jump in the second quarter,
delivering more than 102,000 vehicles and stretching its lead over second place
Lexus to more than 17,000 vehicles.
Lexus dropped 7.5% in the quarter, weighed down by a redesign of its ES sedan.
Mercedes rounded out the top three.
BMW of North America EVP Sean Bugby says the automaker is ahead of its first half targets
and on track to finish 2026 ahead of last year.
And Tata Motors and its Jaguar Land Rover subsidiary are pledging a closer working relationship
even as a key platform sharing deal falls apart.
Tata shelved plans to use JLR's electric architecture for its new Avinia brand,
opting instead for a cherry platform.
But JLR CEO PB Bology, who came over from Tata Motors last year,
says synergies through battery production, software and shared suppliers
remain central to JLR's goal of cutting nearly $2.25 billion in costs by mid-2028.
And those are today's headlines.
You can find more details on all those stories at AutoNews.com.
The US has declined to renew USMCA for 16 years, putting the auto industry in limbo.
Annual reviews now run through 2036 and for an industry making decade long investment decisions
that uncertainty could cost North America production, jobs and competitiveness.
That's according to industry groups who are warning about this development.
Joining me now to talk about it is Greg Lason, digital and mobile editor of Automotive News
Canada and the host of the Automotive News Canada podcast, Greg. Welcome back to Daily Drive.
Good to be back.
All right, so tell me what this annual review actually means.
What does that mean and what does it mean in practice for an automaker that's trying
to decide right now whether to build a plant in Canada or Mexico?
What this appears to mean is we're going to go through this song and dance
every single year for a decade.
What we've been going through for the last 18 months or so now happens on an annual basis.
And so then you have to ask yourself, as the automakers are, how do we plan investment?
How do we plan product rollout?
How do we allot product and production across all three countries in North America?
It becomes really difficult to plan 357 and 10 years out
when and where you're going to build vehicles.
When you don't know if they're tariff free, you don't know if there's reciprocal tariffs
still in Canada.
You don't know if there are 232 tariffs in America.
All of that now is uncertainty, which any business, not just the auto business,
can't stand and makes it really difficult to plan, be productive, be efficient, and run
sort of as seamlessly as the North American auto industry has over the last 30 years or so.
This is a real problem for automakers.
And for politicians, it's now we have to sit down at the table every year.
You might have a different government in Canada, the United States and Mexico every time you do so.
So who knows when this gets resolved?
The crazy part is it couldn't get resolved at any moment if the United States drops 232s,
if Canada puts US liquor back on its shelves, if the Gordy Howe bridge comes to some sort of
resolution, all of these things could happen and we could be back to status quo.
Now, in the meantime, everything runs in force as is.
So it's as if nothing changed other than you don't have a long-term outlook.
And that's the difficult part.
So is there still a chance that this won't be the case?
And could we also see, as you have alluded to there, an early renewal,
like what would it take for all three countries to get there?
Well, first, it takes everyone to be a willing participant.
And I think the United States and Mexico appear to have a better relationship.
You know, I was told just yesterday that they've had about three or four meetings,
official meetings on USMCA, whereas Canada and the United States might have had one,
and it was very short.
These are from the insiders around the table that are talking to me saying,
look, the United States is just dealing better with Mexico than they are with Canada.
Now, that might be Canada's ploy.
That might be the United States ploy.
That might be their tact.
I don't know who's deciding when and where to meet.
But at any given moment, if everyone can come to terms, then yes,
it could be renewed and we could be in for a long-term stable work business auto environment.
But until then, now you're staring down these renegotiations and these tit for tat tariffs
and these other sort of irritants that everyone's putting in place to try and get what they want
at the bargaining table to renew USMCA.
And don't forget, Donald Trump and the United States, anyone for that matter,
either country, could say we're out altogether giving six months notice.
Now, that is the worst case scenario.
And I talked to Flavio Volpe of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers Association
right before July 1st when the United States decided to not renew.
And I said, I think what's flown under the radar is that the second worst scenario
is also really bad.
And we are now in that second worst scenario.
It is this time of uncertainty when, by the way, Unifor and the Detroit Three are trying
to negotiate new collective bargaining agreements here.
And then I believe it's next year that the UAW has to do the same.
So how does an automaker decide which concessions to give up,
which products to give a union and a country and a jurisdiction
when there's so much in flux?
That's the real difficult part.
Challenging for the auto industry, Greg.
A little bit of job security for you and me here in the media.
We have plenty to talk about going forward for the foreseeable future, it sounds like.
Yeah, I mean, you know, Donald Trump has kept all of us in the auto industry busy.
The topics, the stories, and the turns.
And I don't think, I mean, he's halfway through his term.
I don't think we're halfway through this mess.
I don't know when there's a solution.
I've been told probably early 2027.
Now the union, they want it now so that we can get down to brass tax in terms of contract talks.
What products go into these empty factories?
Brampton in Ontario owned by Stellantis, for example.
Cammy owned by GM and Ingersoll, both empty, both idle, both looking for product,
both in flux because there's no USMCA that is in place for the long term.
Greg, always appreciate your insights on these things.
Thanks so much for joining us today.
Really appreciate it.
Anytime.
Joining me now is Shell Berg, CEO of Borton Volvo in Golden Valley, Minnesota.
Volvo, like Polestar, is owned by China's Geely.
But Volvo was granted authorization to keep selling in the US.
Polestar was not, even though neither of the two vehicles Polestar sells here is built in China.
And one of them rolls off the line at Volvo's plant in Charleston, South Carolina.
Berg wrote a guest commentary for us at Automotive News,
arguing the decision sets a troubling precedent.
Shell Berg, welcome to Daily Drive.
Thank you very much, glad to be here.
So you're a Volvo dealer and you have real skin in the game here.
So walk us through what the Commerce Department actually ruled here as you understand it
and why you think that the Polestar decision doesn't hold up on its own terms.
So there are a couple of things to consider.
One is that the two Polestar models that we're selling in the United States
are made respectively in Korea and in South Carolina, United States,
not in China, which has been the target of the Commerce Department actions in these cases.
And Polestar, while it's affiliated with Volvo and Volvo is an investor,
it's not a subsidiary of Volvo, it's a sister company.
And what makes it different essentially is that
although Polestar's model currently offered for sale are 100% electric
and we are using essentially the same platform
as the Volvos that are built alongside on the South Carolina assembly line.
And Volvo is specifically given clearance to continue to sell
because they are made there essentially on similar terms.
So that's puzzling.
I think there are a couple of things to consider.
One is that Volvo is still in the United States primarily offering vehicles
that have internal combustion engines and mostly in a hybrid configuration,
but also fully electric.
But the bulk of our cars are still sold in a hybrid or ice combination.
And that's different from Polestar.
And the administration has shown an unwillingness to promote
new generation, new energy vehicles to the same level as in earlier administrations.
So the fact is that since Polestar is 100% electric
and a very low volume seller in the United States because it's a new brand, unlike Volvo,
Polestar is an easier target than Volvo, which has a very large presence
and in very large units in the operation count in the United States.
And describe how this would affect you and your business directly.
You are selling these two Polestar models, is that correct?
Yes, that's correct.
And we also have just a handful of the earlier model, Polestar 2,
which have been down straighters that are not being offered for sale as well.
But we're not importing, haven't been importing the Polestar 2s recently.
Since the announcement was made, sales have been absolutely terrific.
And we're depleting them very, very fast because unlike, for example, when Fisker went out of business,
Volvo is going nowhere and Volvo is the contractual service parts and warranty provider
for Polestar and will remain so after Polestar sells, quit selling products in the United States.
So you're not being orphaned in other words.
So the net effect for Polestar office in other ways that he or she will get a car
at roughly a $25,000 discount or better without giving up any of the follow on protection
for pie service warranty and software upgrades, which is also very important.
In your guest commentary for us at Automotive News, you point out, you sort of raised this
question that for Volvo and Polestar dealers seems kind of alarming, which is, and for everybody
else, who is next in this? Where will the regulatory line be drawn? Volvo has a large
Chinese shareholder in Geely. It's owned by Geely. GM and Ford have deep joint venture ties in
China. Mercedes-Benz does too. How far do you think the ownership rules that the Commerce
Department is using could actually reach? How far do those tentacles go?
So I think it essentially depends on how the administration views the level of cooperation
from the countries involved. The Chinese government, for example, does not own Geely,
does not own Polestar, but there are enterprises in other fields, such as aviation in the United
States, where the Chinese government actually owns the enterprise. And they're not being touched
by this. And the irony, as I said, is that we're hurting our own self-interest here in the sense
that there's no particular reason to believe that our trading partners would feel obligated to keep
buying American products if we buy them from our markets. That's a huge concern for a number of
industries that I have heard from already since this hit the waves. In your commentary, you
mentioned NADA and AIADA. I'm curious what you are hoping to hear from those organizations or see
them do in this situation. Have you heard anything from them since this ruling came down?
Yeah, I heard back from AIADA immediately, and they're quite concerned and are making this a
centerpiece, as I understand it, with an export meeting, interest of full disclosure on the former
AIADA chairman. But I also contacted a recent NADA chairman, who's a friend of mine who recently
finished his term on the board of NADA, who was equally concerned. He owns a number of brands
that could potentially be affected. And he asked the leadership at NADA to respond and
respond then without putting either one of them as targets here. I just say that I thought that
the response from the organization was weak. NADA is in a different position than AIADA, because
NADA has historically been part of a domestic manufacturer and retailer organization.
And, of course, the reality now is that 48% of cars sold in America are made by international
nameplates. I'm not sure that NADA has woken up to that reality 100% yet, because I think that a
lot of their board members still are very large Detroit-based manufacturers. And there are many
folks that think that Chrysler or Stellantis is still an American company, which, of course,
it is not. But they get thrown into the same category as being domestic, which they're not.
Now, again, you're a Volvo dealer who sells Polestar's. I'm curious what you make of the...
I guess you can call it a disconnect here in the way that the government is treating Volvo
and its Chinese associations and ties compared to Polestar. That was one of the first things we
heard when we published the story was, why does Volvo get the pass here and Polestar doesn't?
It doesn't seem to make intuitive sense. What do you make of that?
No, and I would agree with that. Obviously, I'm relieved that that's the case. And while I haven't
seen the ruling from the Commerce Department and writing, so I'm not given to be very specific
in my comment on that. But what I will say is that the Volvo situation is different than it says
that it potentially affects millions of people instead of 40,000 Polestar owners in the United
States. And the fact is that when we opened up the... Or the groundbreaking for the factory in
South Carolina happened to be a guest. And among the two guests, that trusting was
Trump's first United Nations ambassador, Nikki Ely, who was the sitting governor at the time,
and senior Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. They're both there enthusiastically
welcoming the Volvo plant. But of course, the Polestar, while it doesn't own a part of the plant,
it does produce there in smaller volume. And my understanding of the Commerce Department
is that their wish is for international lane plate manufacturers, or for that matter,
Detroit based manufacturers, to bring manufacturing back to the United States.
That makes sense. You know, every government should have as its first obligation to look
after its own country. All countries are elected, their leadership is elected to do that. So I'm
fine with that. But the point is that that's exactly what Volvo is doing. And in having built
the plant, that's the 1.3 billion so far in South Carolina. And with having moved over this sourcing
for the Polestar for production to the United States, that's now the only place in the world
where it will be built having we're doing exactly what the Commerce Department intended for us to
do. So again, little unclear on why Volvo is favored, Polestar is not, and it's also not quite
clear how durable the written guarantee for Volvo to be able to produce and import in this country.
How durable that is, because I haven't seen it, and I don't know if it has a date certain,
I think it's born open, then the one that essentially says if you comply with the following
terms, and you agree not to use electronics, which are potentially harmful to the interest
of the United States from the point of, of foreign intelligence and so forth, then presumably we will
be allowed to continue to import and to produce in this country. But I haven't seen it, so I can't
speak to that with certainty. Have you already started thinking of contingencies or anything that,
I mean, what would you do in the event that Volvo loses its certification?
So two things. First of all, at the age of 80, I haven't learned how to spell retire yet. I had
little plans to retire, but because we are to be fairly direct but truthful, we're one of the
more profitable and largest and five oldest Volvo dealers in North America. And as a result,
I have a constant stream of potential buyers that contact me, both brokers and individual
dealer groups and individuals, to include two yesterday. And my answer is always the same.
I'm not planning to sell big caveat to that. You have to put an asterisk on it because I have a
man with substantial holdings is that my level of trust in my government in terms of predictability
and acting as a rational actor is substantially diminished from what it has been in earlier
decades. Is there anything else that you want other dealers, anyone else in our audience of
industry insiders to know about what you think could be the bigger implications of all this?
Well, let's take a couple. I mentioned in my commentary a Boeing, for example, in South Carolina.
I chose that because that's where the Volvo plant is located, which produces both Volvo and
Polestar as I said. And to my understanding, the very bulk of the Boeing Dreamliners, the only
product they produce there are for export sales. And I checked to see who the users of those planes
were. And as of last year, there were 11 domestic carriers in China that bought and flew Boeing
Dreamliners. So when it's time for them to expand or to replace their existing fleet as it gets
older, my guess is that the next fall call is going to be hello Airbus. We would like to talk to
you about buying 400 long-haul jets from you. One example. There are other examples that can backfire
on us. Because of NATO, the F-35 joint strike for test fighter, which is the Generation 5
fighter plane, and I believe to be the best in the world, NATO is promoting that and America is
obviously promoting that as the strike force fighter of choice. And given the kind of treatment
that we're giving our top trading partners these days, we're already seeing cracks in the wall of
people are saying, okay, I'll raise my hand for X number of F-35 fighters. Canada is on that list.
They are thinking about putting another brand in there other than the American made jet. Brazil
just took delivery of their first non-American jets instead of F-35s. And they're quite a few
European countries are looking at the same thing. Long line is the same. If you see the
polls in Europe, I happen to be going to Europe tonight and I have friends all over Europe. I
speak several European languages. So I talk about this all the time and I listen and they all say,
we no longer trust America to be a reliable partner. So Norway where I come from, which has
bought 54 F-35s, for example, recently signed the pact to be under the nuclear umbrella France,
because they weren't sure that they could rely on the American nuclear NATO umbrella for protection.
So that's far off the field of automobiles. But since you asked what other fields could be
implicated, that's as far ranging as the answer can go. Sure. Well, Shelberg, I really appreciate
you taking the time. Great guest commentary and the pages of automotive news this week. And you
can find it at AutoNews.com. Thanks again for joining us today on Daily Drive. Thank you very
much, Jake. Pleasure. That's Daily Drive for today. I'm Jake Nier. Thanks to our own Larry
Veliquette and Jack Wallsworth for their reporting for today's show. We also had reporting from
Greg Lason and Nick Gibbs of our sibling publications, Automotive News Canada and Automotive News
Europe. You can get the latest news on the Polestar ban, USMCA trade negotiations and everything
happening in the auto industry at AutoNews.com. Come back tomorrow for a conversation with Cox
at the show and the topics we covered today. Send us an email at dailydrive at autonews.com
or leave us a voicemail at 313-444-2774. And if you enjoy the podcast, remember to like,
leave a review and subscribe so you never miss an episode.
About this episode
BMW keeps its grip on US luxury sales with disciplined pricing and rising inventory levels, while hybrids and EVs show faster turns than gas. Tata and JLR promise deeper collaboration even as a major electric platform-sharing plan for Tata’s Avinia brand falls apart. The bigger uncertainty is trade: the USMCA renewal process is now locked into annual reviews through 2036, complicating 10-year plant and product planning across North America. Dealers also react to a Commerce Department Polestar ban—Volvo’s CEO argues it’s a troubling precedent since Polestar models are built outside China and asks who gets targeted next.
