800億ドルの降伏：デトロイトは中国に世紀をどのように譲渡したか

Key Takeaways

• The Numbers: Ford, GM, and Stellantis have now recognized over $80 billion in cumulative EV losses and write-downs since 2022, with Stellantis announcing the largest single charge ($26.5 billion) on February 6, 2026.
• The Contrast: While Detroit retreats, China sold 13 million Electric Vehicles (EVs) in 2025, capturing 64% of the global market. BYD alone outsold every American automaker combined.
• The Trap: By pivoting to high-margin trucks, Detroit is sacrificing long-term global market access for short-term profits. By 2030, they will be locked out of Europe and Asia.
• The Precedent: This is the 1970s Japan playbook repeating. Detroit dismissed fuel-efficient imports as “cheap junk” and lost the next two decades. History is rhyming with Chinese EVs.

Stellantis Writes the Epitaph

On February 6, 2026, Stellantis CEO Antonio Filosa stood before investors and delivered the largest admission of defeat in automotive history: €22.2 billion ($26.5 billion) in write-downs tied to the company’s failed EV strategy.

The charge covered cancelled EV programs (including the Chrysler Airflow and electric Ram 1500), broken supplier contracts, and the restructuring of “Dare Forward 2030,” Stellantis’s now-abandoned plan to sell 100% EVs in Europe by decade’s end.

Shares crashed 25%. The company suspended its dividend. Emergency bonds worth €5 billion were issued to plug the hole. Meaningful profitability, Filosa warned, would not return until 2027.

Stellantis is not alone. When combined with Ford’s cumulative EV operating losses and forecasted $19.5 billion write-down, plus General Motors’ $6 billion write-down announced in January, the three largest American automakers have collectively recognized:

$$\text{Total Detroit Impact} \approx \$80 \text{ billion}$$

This is not a market correction. This is a capitulation.

The Global Picture Detroit Ignores

While Stellantis blamed “overestimating the pace of the energy transition,” the rest of the world disagrees. In 2025:

Metric	Value	Source
Global EV Sales	20.7-21.5 million units (+20% YoY)	Benchmark Minerals, SNE Research
China EV Sales	12.9-13.8 million units	SNE Research
China Global Share	64%	SNE Research
BYD Sales	4.12 million units (#1 global EV maker)	CPCA
US EV Market Share (Q4 2025)	5.8%	Cox Automotive
China EV Exports	3.4 million units (+70% YoY)	CPCA

The United States is not the world. It is an outlier. American EV sales fell 2% in 2025, with Q4 market share collapsing to 5.8% after the federal tax credit expired in September 2025. But globally, EV sales grew 20%. Europe grew 33%. Emerging markets exploded by 48%.

Detroit looked at the American dip and concluded EVs are a failure. The rest of the planet looked at the same data and saw a market temporarily catching its breath before the next leg up.

The Battery Cost Cliff They Refuse to See

The write-downs are dressed up as “prudent capital allocation.” The reality is darker: Detroit is retreating precisely as the economics flip in favor of EVs.

According to the Volta Foundation’s 2025 Battery Report:

Region	Battery Cost (2025)	Change Since 2022
Global Average	$117/kWh	-31% YoY
China	$63/kWh	-70% since 2022
Europe	$120/kWh	-28% YoY

Industry consensus points to price parity between EVs and Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles once battery costs fall below $100/kWh. According to PwC, that milestone arrives in the US by 2028-2029. Volvo’s CEO claims EVs will be cheaper to manufacture than gas cars within five years.

At $63/kWh, China is already there.

This is why BYD can sell a capable EV for under $15,000 while Ford cannot make money on a $50,000 Lightning. The cost structure is inverted. Detroit is optimizing for the economics of 2023 while Beijing operates in 2028.

The Truck Margin Trap: Corporate Addiction

Why would rational executives abandon the future? Because Wall Street rewards them in the current quarter.

Consider the profit margins:

Vehicle Type	Gross Margin	Capex Intensity
ICE Trucks (F-150, Silverado)	25-35%	Low (amortized platforms)
EVs (Lightning, Silverado EV)	0-5%	High (new plants, batteries, software)

The truck is the crack pipe of the American auto industry. It delivers immediate dopamine hits to quarterly earnings. But every quarter spent chasing truck margins is a quarter not spent building the supply chains, manufacturing expertise, and software stacks that will define the next century.

GM’s $6 billion write-down came with layoffs at three battery plants: 850 workers in Ohio, 700 in Tennessee, and 1,200 at Factory Zero in Detroit. These are not just job losses. They are the unbuilding of American battery manufacturing capacity. Every idled line is a gift to CATL and BYD.

As one industry analyst put it: “They are chasing short-term profits like addicts chasing a high. It feels good now. It is destroying the future.”

The 1970s Playbook: History Does Rhyme

This pattern has played out before.

In the 1970s, American automakers dismissed Japanese imports as “cheap, unreliable junk.” Detroit prioritized high-margin muscle cars and land yachts while Toyota and Honda perfected fuel-efficient compacts.

Then came the 1973 oil crisis.

Suddenly, the “junk” was what consumers wanted. By the 1980s, Japanese automakers had captured significant US market share. By 1990, Japanese production exceeded American output. Detroit’s response? Blame unions, blame regulations, and rebadge Japanese cars (Chrysler sold the Mitsubishi Starion as the “Conquest”).

The parallels are uncomfortable:

1970s-1980s	2020s-2030s
Detroit dismissed Japanese compacts as “cheap junk”	Detroit dismisses Chinese EVs as “cheap junk”
Detroit prioritized high-margin gas guzzlers	Detroit prioritizes high-margin trucks
Oil crisis exposed the vulnerability	Battery cost collapse exposes the vulnerability
Japan captured the compact car market	China captures the global EV market
Detroit became domestically focused	Detroit becoming domestically trapped

The lesson was clear then: technological transitions reward those who invest before the inflection point, not after. Detroit learned nothing.

The Toyota Counterargument (and Why It Is a Trap)

Bulls will point to Toyota. The Japanese giant bet on hybrids, dismissed the EV rush, and is now being vindicated as US hybrid sales surge.

Toyota plans to boost hybrid production 30% to 6.7 million units by 2028. The Camry hybrid was January 2026’s best-seller. Toyota holds 58% of the global hybrid market.

The counterargument writes itself: See? Patience pays. EVs were overhyped. Hybrids are the bridge.

Here is the problem: Toyota is Japanese. They have access to global markets. They sell hybrids in Europe, Asia, Latin America, everywhere. When the S-curve goes vertical and EVs become cheaper than hybrids, Toyota can pivot. They have the engineering talent, the battery partnerships with Panasonic, and the global distribution to make the switch.

Detroit does not.

By retreating to US truck sales, American automakers are abandoning the global supply chains they will need when parity hits. They are not “waiting patiently” like Toyota. They are digging a grave.

The European Lock-Out

Europe has not abandoned its 2035 ICE ban. It has merely softened it.

The revised EU regulation requires a 90% average CO₂ emission reduction compared to 2021 levels. Pure ICE vehicles will be effectively prohibited for new sales. The remaining 10% can be offset by e-fuels, biofuels, or manufacturing low-carbon steel in the EU.

The critical detail: “Made in the EU” conditionality. Super credits, carbon pooling benefits, and fiscal incentives only apply to vehicles manufactured within the European Union.

If Detroit pivots to trucks and hybrids, they lose access to:

• EU carbon pooling (no credits to sell)
• State aid under the Clean Industrial Deal
• The world’s second-largest auto market

By 2035, Ford’s European business becomes a stranded asset. The trucks they sell in Texas cannot be sold in Berlin.

The Second-Order Effect: The Battery Exodus

The write-downs trigger something worse than quarterly losses. They trigger a supply chain exodus.

GM’s Ultium Cells plants in Ohio and Tennessee are idled through mid-2026. LG Energy Solution, their partner, pulls back US investments. Samsung SDI, Stellantis’s partner, faces renegotiated contracts.

Meanwhile, China produces 77% of the world’s lithium-ion batteries. CATL alone controls 37% of the global market. BYD’s new Blade batteries are vertically integrated from lithium mines to finished cells.

Every month that American battery plants sit idle, China’s cost advantages compound. Every engineer laid off in Detroit finds work in Shenzhen. The supply chain cannot be rebuilt on a whim; it takes a decade to develop the institutional knowledge, the supplier networks, and the manufacturing precision.

Detroit is not just losing the EV race. They are unqualifying themselves from future competition.

The Inevitable Math

Here is the fundamental calculation Detroit refuses to make:

$$\text{US EV Share (Q4 2025)} = 5.8\% \quad \text{vs.} \quad \text{China EV Share} = 54\%$$ $$\text{Detroit Impact} \approx \$80\text{B} \quad \text{vs.} \quad \text{BYD 2025 Sales} = 4.12\text{M units}$$

BYD sold more EVs in 2025 than Ford, GM, and Stellantis sold of any vehicle type in China.

EVs are not “failing” globally. They are failing in America, in a policy environment deliberately hostile to electrification: subsidies killed, tariffs raised, and emissions standards rolled back. The Trump administration’s subsidy rollback caused Korean EV exports to the US to plunge sharply in 2025.

But electricity prices do not obey executive orders. Battery costs do not care about tariffs. Physics does not negotiate with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

When the crossover comes, and it will come by 2030, American consumers will face a choice: overpriced Detroit trucks or affordable Chinese EVs (likely built in Mexico under USMCA terms). The tariff wall that protects Detroit in 2026 will crumble under the weight of consumer self-interest.

What Comes Next

Short-Term (2026-2027)

• Detroit stabilizes with truck and hybrid sales
• Stock prices recover as write-downs are “in the rear-view mirror”
• Battery plants remain idled
• China captures >70% of global EV sales

Medium-Term (2028-2030)

• Battery costs fall below $80/kWh globally
• EV price parity achieved in Europe and China
• Chinese automakers establish Mexican factories
• Detroit faces margin compression as cheap EVs reach US borders

Long-Term (2030+)

• Europe locks out non-EV vehicles
• Chinese automakers dominate emerging markets (Latin America, Africa, Southeast Asia)
• Detroit becomes a domestic-only manufacturer
• The US loses automotive export capacity permanently

The Verdict

The $80 billion write-down is not a correction. It is a confession.

Detroit is admitting they cannot compete in the technology that will define the next century of transportation. Rather than fight, they are retreating to the trucks and hybrids that deliver quarterly profits, surrendering global markets to BYD, CATL, and the Chinese state.

This is not “prudent capital allocation.” This is the slow-motion repeat of the 1970s, when complacent American executives dismissed foreign competition until it was too late. The only difference is the scale: this time, Detroit is not just losing the compact car market. They are losing the entire future of mobility.

The executives who signed off on these write-downs will be long retired by the time the consequences hit. The factory workers being laid off at Ultium Cells will not be. The suppliers going bankrupt will not be. The American industrial base that took a century to build will not be.

For a detailed analysis of why the hybrid pivot is a technological dead end, see: Detroit’s Capitulation: Why Hybrids Are a Death Spiral. For the physics of why pure EV trucks struggle, see: The 700-Mile Solution: Why Ford Killed the Electric F-150.

The capitulation is complete. The rest is just paperwork.