News

Cupra Pushes for EU Tariff Relief on Chinese-Built Tavascan

By the time Cupra decided to build the all-electric Tavascan in China, it looked like a straightforward business case. Europe didn’t have the spare factory capacity, the numbers worked, and tariffs weren’t even a talking point. Fast-forward to today, and the coupe-SUV has become a rolling test case for how flexible—or stubborn—the European Union plans to be as Chinese-built EVs flood the continent.

Now, there’s a hint of a thaw.

Cupra’s Chinese-assembled Tavascan is at the center of a growing political and industrial debate over the EU’s punitive import duties. Currently, the car is hit with a 20.7 percent “countervailing duty” on top of the standard 10 percent tariff, a surcharge designed to counter alleged state subsidies for Chinese EV manufacturing. But pressure is building for an exemption—or at least a compromise—and not just from within the Volkswagen Group.

At the official opening of Cupra’s new battery plant in Barcelona, Catalonia’s president Salvador Illa I Roca publicly urged Brussels to rethink the levy. Calling the tariff “unfair” and damaging to “strategic investments,” Illa signaled that both regional and Spanish governments are ready to work toward its removal. The message was clear: this isn’t just about one car—it’s about Europe’s broader industrial future.

Behind the scenes, Cupra has been lobbying hard. The proposal on the table reportedly involves an annual import quota and a minimum import price, conditions that would allow the brand to avoid the additional 20.7 percent surcharge without opening the floodgates to cheap imports. According to Seat-Cupra CEO Markus Haupt, talks with EU officials are progressing well. A decision could arrive within a month or two.

Don’t expect a sudden price slash if the deal goes through. Cupra chose not to pass the tariff hit on to customers when it was introduced, absorbing the cost instead. In Spain, the Tavascan starts at €44,010; in the UK, it opens at £47,350, where only the standard 10 percent duty applies. Any tariff relief would mainly boost Cupra’s margins rather than transform the showroom sticker.

As a product, the Tavascan makes a solid case for itself regardless of politics. The rear-wheel-drive V1 version packs a 77-kWh battery, delivers up to 337 miles of range, and sends 282 horsepower to the rear axle. The result is a 0–62 mph time of 6.8 seconds—respectable pace for a style-led electric SUV that leans more toward design flair than outright performance.

But the real significance of a tariff relaxation goes far beyond Cupra.

A long list of European brands build EVs in China and ship them back west: Volvo, Polestar, Lotus, Dacia, and MINI among them. Each case would have to be assessed individually by the EU, especially where Chinese ownership or joint ventures complicate the picture. That’s where things get messy.

MINI, for example, could be a bellwether for the UK. BMW has already paused plans to build the electric MINI hatch at Plant Oxford, opting instead to produce the Electric and Aceman models in China through Spotlight Automotive, a 50:50 joint venture with Great Wall Motors. Like the Tavascan, these cars are subject to the additional 20.7 percent duty. If MINI were to secure similar tariff relief, it could improve margins on Chinese imports—but possibly at the cost of continued delays to UK production.

Other brands have taken more drastic action. Geely-owned Volvo shifted EX30 production to Ghent, Belgium, specifically to dodge tariffs. Dacia plans to move assembly of the next-generation Spring EV from Wuhan to Slovenia by 2026. It’s a costly workaround, but one that guarantees certainty in an unpredictable regulatory climate.

Cupra doesn’t have that option. Volkswagen Group says Europe simply couldn’t accommodate Tavascan production, pushing the model into a joint venture with JAC Motors in China, where it’s also sold domestically as the ID.UNYX. And moving production back now? That’s off the table.

“We already invested the money there,” Haupt explains. “Reinvesting in the same product is probably not the best solution.” For Cupra, negotiating with Brussels isn’t just preferable—it’s the only viable path forward.

If the EU does soften its stance, the Tavascan could become the precedent that reshapes how Europe treats its own brands building cars in China. If it doesn’t, expect more production shifts, more factory reshuffles, and more strategic gymnastics as automakers try to stay one step ahead of tariffs that can turn a profitable EV into a financial headache overnight.

Either way, the Tavascan’s most important role may not be on the road—but at the negotiating table.

Source: Cupra

News

The £0.03 Question: Britain’s Pay-Per-Mile EV Tax Is Coming—and It Changes the Math

For years, electric cars have enjoyed a near-mythical status in the cost-of-ownership conversation. Cheap to run, cheap to tax, and—if you played the charging game right—almost smugly inexpensive per mile. That advantage is about to shrink.

From April 2028, the UK government plans to introduce a pay-per-mile road tax for electrified vehicles, officially known as eVED (Electric Vehicle Excise Duty). In simple terms, it means EV and plug-in hybrid drivers will start paying for how far they drive, not just what they drive. In practice, it could add £200–£300 a year to the cost of running an electric car—and that’s before standard road tax is factored in.

This isn’t just a new line item on a spreadsheet. It’s a philosophical shift in how EVs are taxed, and one that arrives at a delicate moment in Britain’s electric transition.

How It Works (At Least on Paper)

Under current proposals, fully electric cars will be charged three pence per mile, while plug-in hybrids will pay one and a half pence per mile. Both rates will rise annually in line with inflation. The charge sits on top of regular Vehicle Excise Duty, which currently stands at £195 per year and is unlikely to be frozen until 2028.

Mileage won’t be tracked digitally. Instead, odometer readings will be logged annually—via the MoT for cars over three years old, or through accredited mileage checks for newer vehicles. Once a year, drivers will log into the DVLA system, estimate their annual mileage (much like an insurance declaration), and choose whether to pay in one go or spread the cost over 12 months. Drive more than expected? You’ll get a bill. Drive less? A rebate lands back in your account.

Simple, relatively low-tech, and deliberately light on surveillance. The downside is equally simple: you pay for every mile, including those driven outside the UK.

EVs vs ICE: The Numbers Still Favour Electric—For Now

One of the strongest arguments for EVs has always been running costs, and eVED doesn’t completely undo that. But it does blur the lines.

Take a Volkswagen Golf and its electric cousin, the ID.3. Charged at home on an off-peak tariff—around eight pence per kWh—the ID.3 works out at roughly two pence per mile for electricity, plus three pence per mile in tax. That’s still comfortably cheaper than a petrol Golf at roughly 12 pence per mile, or a diesel at around 10 pence.

The picture changes quickly, though. Charge at the energy price cap of 26p per kWh, and the ID.3 climbs to around nine pence per mile all-in, effectively matching the cost of running an ICE Golf. Rely on public rapid charging at up to 90p per kWh, and the electric option becomes decisively more expensive per mile than petrol.

The conclusion is unavoidable: where and how you charge now matters more than ever. The mileage tax doesn’t kill the EV cost advantage, but it makes it fragile.

Why the Government Is Doing This

The motivation isn’t subtle. As fuel duty revenue collapses with the rise of EVs, the Treasury is staring at a growing hole in the public finances. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, eVED could raise up to £1.4 billion per year by 2029–30.

But there’s a catch. The same OBR estimates that by 2031, around 440,000 fewer EVs will be sold than would otherwise have been the case, as buyers react to higher ownership costs. That’s a remarkable admission: the tax raises money, but actively slows adoption.

Which leads to the central question—is this the right tax at the wrong time?

Industry Pushback—and Consumer Doubt

Reaction has been predictably mixed. A survey of readers found 37 percent consider the charge fair, while 23 percent see it as an unjust penalty on EV drivers. Another 32 percent believe it’s poorly timed and risks stalling momentum just as EVs approach the mainstream.

Industry voices have been sharper. Ford UK described the policy as “a confusing message at a critical moment,” warning that investment in charging and purchase incentives can’t offset the damage of a new usage tax. Charging providers echo that concern, arguing that reduced EV uptake weakens the business case for expanding rapid-charging networks—exactly the infrastructure the transition depends on.

Even organisations broadly supportive of fair road pricing, like the AA, stress the need for safeguards. Rural drivers, carers, and others who depend heavily on their cars could be disproportionately affected by a flat per-mile charge.

A Transition at a Crossroads

The government has attempted some damage control. From April 2026, the Expensive Vehicle Supplement threshold for EVs will rise to £50,000, easing the blow for higher-end electric cars. It helps—but it doesn’t change the broader message.

For the first time, EVs are being treated not as a special case, but as just another way of moving down the road. In one sense, that’s a sign of maturity. In another, it risks undermining the very incentives that helped electric cars gain traction in the first place.

Come 2028, the honeymoon is officially over. Electric cars will still make sense—often financial sense—but no longer by default. Every mile will count, literally. And for a government betting heavily on electrification targets, that may prove to be a risky recalculation.

Source: Auto Express

News

Why the EU’s Emissions U-Turn Could Reshape the Road to 2035

For nearly a decade, Europe’s automotive future has seemed pre-written: the internal-combustion engine would be legislated into extinction, with 2035 marking the end of the road for new petrol and diesel cars. Now, that script may be getting a major rewrite—and the aftershocks would be felt from Stuttgart to Turin.

According to Manfred Weber, president of the European People’s Party—the largest bloc in the European Parliament—the EU is considering dropping the outright ban on combustion engines in favor of a less absolutist, emissions-based approach. Speaking to German newspaper Bild, Weber said that from 2035 onward, manufacturers would be required to cut fleet CO₂ emissions by 90 percent, not 100 percent.

In regulatory terms, that 10 percent gap is enormous.

“We will not have a 100 percent target from 2040 either,” Weber added, making it clear that a blanket ban on combustion engines would be taken “off the table.” If adopted, this shift would allow existing engine technologies—at least in highly optimized or electrified forms—to survive well into the next decade.

A Direct Contradiction—or Political Course Correction?

The comments clash with recent claims from Tim Tozer, former UK head of Vauxhall, who suggested the EU was instead planning to delay the ban by five years, pushing the zero-emissions deadline to 2040. Under that scenario, all new vehicles sold from January 1, 2040, would need to be fully electric.

Weber’s statement suggests something far less binary: no fixed end date for combustion engines, but emissions targets strict enough to dramatically limit what survives.

In practice, a 90 percent CO₂ reduction opens the door to advanced plug-in hybrids, ultra-efficient combustion engines, and synthetic-fuel-compatible powertrains—alongside full battery-electric vehicles. It’s not a rollback of climate ambition so much as a recognition that the market hasn’t moved at the speed policymakers once expected.

The Market Reality Check

Several automakers have quietly welcomed the idea of a more flexible framework. While electrification remains the industry’s long-term direction, the transition has proven uneven across Europe.

Citroën CEO Xavier Chardon recently summed up the issue bluntly: electrification isn’t failing, but expectations were set on outdated assumptions. Markets like Norway are nearly fully electric, but others—Croatia, Italy, Spain, Poland—are still seeing single-digit EV penetration.

That disparity makes a one-size-fits-all mandate politically and economically fraught. Manufacturers are being asked to hit aggressive electric sales targets in regions where charging infrastructure, incentives, and consumer confidence remain underdeveloped.

Not everyone is convinced. Volvo CEO Håkan Samuelsson has criticized the idea of slowing regulatory pressure, arguing that it undermines momentum and long-term investment certainty. For brands that have already bet heavily on full electrification, regulatory hesitation risks rewarding slower adopters.

The UK: Out of Step or Holding Firm?

The biggest question mark now hangs over the UK. The current Labour government has reinstated a 2030 ban on new petrol and diesel cars, with a requirement that all new vehicles sold from 2035 onward be fully zero-emission. If Brussels softens its stance, London may find itself enforcing one of the toughest automotive timelines in the developed world—alone.

That’s a risky position, especially as electric vehicle sales growth begins to cool. While EV registrations are still up 26 percent year-to-date in 2025, momentum has slowed sharply, with November sales rising just 3.6 percent over last year.

Meanwhile, manufacturers are struggling to meet ZEV mandate targets: 28 percent zero-emission sales in 2025, rising to 33 percent in 2026. Miss those targets, and the fines are severe.

Incentives In, Costs Coming

Part of the slowdown may be traced to mixed policy signals. The UK’s £3,750 Electric Car Grant—now extended to March 2030—offers a clear incentive. But looming over it is the proposed eVED pay-per-mile tax, which would see EV and plug-in hybrid drivers paying more than ICE owners on top of standard road tax.

For consumers already wary of charging access, resale values, and upfront costs, the message is anything but clear.

The Bigger Picture

If the EU does formally abandon a total combustion-engine ban, it won’t mark a retreat from electrification—but it will signal a pivot toward pragmatism. The industry’s transformation is still underway, just not at the uniform pace regulators once envisioned.

Whether this flexibility accelerates innovation or simply delays the inevitable remains to be seen. What’s clear is that Europe’s road to zero emissions is no longer a straight line—and the internal-combustion engine may yet have a few more chapters left to write.

Source: Auto Express

Cars and catalogues