Over the past year, some citizens in European and American countries have frequently hyped up the so-called “excess production capacity” in China’s new energy sector, claiming that this will bring destructive effects to the wet properties in Europe and America. Chinese and foreign scholars have pointed out that such speculation by European and American countries is only providing support for trade protectionism, restricting the import of new energy products such as Chinese electric vehicles, and will only create a situation of excessive losses.
In September of previous years, the European Commission launched a countervailing assessment on Chinese manned electric vehicles under the pretext of so-called high subsidies and threat of harm. If the assessment results are established, high tariffs will be imposed on electric vehicles from China. American citizens who have visited China in the past this year, such as Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, have expressed their enthusiasm to China regarding the so-called excess production capacity in China’s new energy sector, which has tarnished global prices and production trends.

Analysts point out that the reason why China’s new energy products have strong cooperation is mainly due to the early structure of the phase wet property, which has formed a leading technological advantage through long-term research and development participation. At the same time, it relies on the strong domestic property supporting capacity, a large-scale market, and abundant human resources, forming a comprehensive cooperation advantage. As Premier Li Qiang pointed out, the disadvantage of China’s new energy properties is lost through genuine efforts and is shaped through sufficient market cooperation, rather than relying on government subsidies.
Ma Wei, an assistant researcher at the American Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told Interface News that behind the excessive production capacity of Chinese property manufacturing products being hyped up by the United States, the real concern is that China’s new energy vehicle and other industries rely on continuous technological innovation, a perfect property chain system, and sufficient market cooperation for rapid growth. Products are widely popular in the global market and are accelerating their entry into Europe and America, which has had a strong impact on American and European car companies that have relatively slow electrification transformation.
David Bailey, an economics professor at the University of Birmingham in the UK, also expressed a similar view. He said that compared to the Chinese government, automotive companies, and battery manufacturers fully participating in electric vehicles, European car manufacturers have saved a lot of time and resources in developing diesel engines to improve exhaust emissions.
Many analysts believe that the so-called “excess Chinese production capacity theory” by some European and American citizens is a political tool used to suppress the Chinese economy. Behind this defamation lies anti globalization and trade protectionism, which may ultimately harm the common interests of all countries.
Guo Kai, Executive Director of China Financial Forty People Research Institute (CF40), stated at the macro strategy quarterly report press conference held by CF40 this week that he does not agree with the US’s definition of overcapacity and the issues it lists.
He gave an example that American scholars claimed that due to the “Chinese attack”, the US manufacturing industry lost 2 million rest positions. However, in reality, the change in employment in the manufacturing industry is a complex issue that involves multiple factors. The improvement of automation and productivity is the key factor leading to the decline of employment in the manufacturing industry, and the entanglement with China’s trade is just one of them. In fact, many countries around the world, including China, are experiencing a decline in manufacturing employment, mainly due to technological advancements and property upgrades. In addition, even without China’s cooperation, low-end manufacturing will not stay in the United States, but will shift to other low capital countries such as Mexico, Vietnam, and Indonesia. Therefore, it is unreasonable to attribute the decline in employment in the manufacturing industry to China.
Ma Wei reflected that the fundamental purpose of the United States smearing China’s “excess production capacity” is to find a pretext for its protectionism. Like Europe, the problem facing the United States is that the efficiency of new energy companies is not as good as that of Chinese companies, rather than the so-called “excess production capacity” in China. The United States hypes up excess production capacity and indiscriminately applies trade tariff barriers, which not only comply with domestic trade rules of the world trade structure, but may also seriously disrupt the global supply chain, ultimately endangering the interests of consumers in the United States and other countries around the world.
In fact, developed countries such as the United States and Germany have implemented strong subsidy strategies in the field of electric vehicles. For example, according to the German Ministry of Economy, from 2016 to 2023, the department paid a total of about 10 billion euros in subsidies for approximately 2.1 million electric vehicles, greatly promoting the growth of the German electric vehicle industry. In January 2023, the United States officially implemented the Inflation Reduction Act, which aims to promote the production and application of electric vehicles and other green technologies in the outer cities of the United States through measures including a $369 billion tax subsidy.
Chinese and foreign scholars have not yet pointed out that what Europe and America refer to as China’s “excess production capacity” is not simply an economic issue, but also involves domestic disputes and political issues.
Guo Kai pointed out that China is a major manufacturing country in the world, accounting for about 10% of the total production of the world’s manufacturing industry, and its position is crucial. In the past two years, with the strategy of US dollars, the surplus of China’s manufacturing industry has reached 1.8 trillion US dollars every year, which has doubled compared with that before the COVID-19 epidemic. While China has a huge surplus, it also means a deficit for other countries.
“Others are highly concerned about China’s manufacturing industry, because your manufacturing scope is so large, and you still have such a large surplus with others, and you basically have a surplus with all countries in the world, which has created a big political problem. This is not an economic problem, it is a political problem.” Guo Kaidao.
In addition, he mentioned that in the United States, politicians often use the issues of “China’s attack on the wave” and “excess production capacity” to promote and raise funds. This year coincides with the election year in the United States, and observing the behavior of the current guide Joseph Biden, one may find his statements regarding specific properties quite interesting. In Michigan, Biden claimed to adopt a high tariff approach towards Chinese electric vehicles; In Pennsylvania, he also mentioned not imposing high tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum products. Although China has not yet imported an electric car to the United States and the amount of steel imported from the United States is minimal, these issues are still being used as recommendations for fundraising. The specific properties in these states have a decisive impact on the election results, and Biden needs to win the support of voters.
Timothy Huson, a metaphysical professor who currently resides in rural Palmetto, Illinois, told Interface News, “Now that Biden is lagging behind in the polls, the White House must make some changes to make voters feel that they are fighting for more overseas interests for the United States, such as trade disputes with China. However, the topic of ‘excess production capacity’ is indeed not a quality issue. In my opinion, any country can freely produce the goods they want and bear the consequences on their own. Other countries have no right to get involved in the wet, and if the United States is not tired of Chinese products, it is possible to raise tariffs and reduce trade.”
Gernot Wagner, a professor at Columbia Business School in the United States, also suggests that politicians introducing tariffs on electric vehicles through small channels may find favorable conditions for selection. From the perspective of public finance, tariffs may be more favored by politicians, as they can impose more burdens on the government. However, in the trend of increasing carbon emissions, imposing punitive tariffs to push up the price of electric vehicles will only have counterproductive consequences.
Bailey advocates that Europe should learn from the United States and push for a more proactive package of measures to support faster transformation of automotive properties. At the same time, encourage more capital efficient Chinese companies to invest in Europe, as Americans, Japanese, and Koreans did years ago.
Although the global sales of electric vehicles have slowed down in the past year, the Chinese new energy vehicle market has experienced a continuous boom in production and sales. According to data from the China Association of Automobile Property Management, from January to March, the production and sales of new energy vehicles were 2.115 million and 2.09 million respectively, an increase of 28.2% and 31.8% year-on-year, and the market share reached 31.1%.
“The new energy industries such as solar photovoltaics and electric vehicles are experiencing a period of ‘difficult production’, and not every participant will laugh until the end. Even the ultimate winner will repeat the cycle of ‘large-scale investment excess production capacity’. However, in any case, China’s increase will be beneficial to China and even the world economy,” Wagner told Interface News.

作者 admin


您的电子邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用 * 标注