Ford CEO Jim Farley presses for USMCA changes that reward domestic vehicle production and penalize import-heavy rivals

Ford CEO Jim Farley is calling for changes to the USMCA, the North American trade agreement among the United States, Mexico and Canada, that would tilt rewards toward automakers that produce more of their vehicles domestically and impose penalties or other barriers for companies that rely heavily on imports.

Farley’s remarks come as USMCA negotiations are set to reopen, according to CNBC, and they reflect a broader push by U.S. automakers to influence how the rules of trade affect competition on both vehicle pricing and manufacturing location. Under the position he outlined, the goal is a “level playing field” for companies that largely assemble their cars and trucks in the U.S. versus those that still draw significant volume from imported vehicles.

CNBC reported Farley said automakers that produce a majority of their vehicles in the country should receive preferential treatment, while competitors with heavy import dependence should face penalties or hindrances. He framed the issue as one of competitive fairness, arguing that any new agreement should not make it easier for import-heavy strategies to outcompete domestic production.

In the same interview context, CNBC said Farley pointed specifically to automakers such as Toyota and General Motors, which, while producing some vehicles in North America, also sell large numbers of imported vehicles in the United States. The coverage cited industry data indicating that GM imported about 1.17 million vehicles, representing roughly 41% of its U.S. sales, and that Toyota imported more than 1.19 million units, or about 47% of its domestic sales.

Farley also used Ford’s own production footprint as an example. CNBC reported Ford assembled more than 2 million vehicles in the U.S. last year, and that its U.S. output included 311,000 units built for export to more than 60 international markets. That record, the comments suggest, is part of the case for a USMCA design that encourages continued domestic assembly rather than allowing imported volume to expand without consequence.

The report that circulated via Yahoo Finance similarly captured the thrust of Farley’s message, saying he urged changes to USMCA that would reward domestic vehicle production and penalize automakers relying heavily on imports. While the Yahoo-linked item does not provide additional granular details on the specific penalty mechanism, it reinforces the core policy direction: reshaping trade outcomes so that the structure of the agreement better matches where vehicles are built.

From a sector perspective, the dispute is not just about tariffs in the traditional sense. USMCA compliance typically hinges on rules that can affect eligibility for favorable treatment, including manufacturing localization requirements and other conditions that can shape which supply chains and production locations companies choose. For automakers, even modest shifts in the incentives around sourcing and assembly can lead to major changes in where parts are made, where vehicles are assembled, and how quickly companies can adjust production when demand moves.

What remains unclear is the specific form of the “penalties or hindrances” Farley is asking for, and whether Ford is pushing for a direct quantitative import disincentive, a scoring mechanism tied to production share, or a broader modification of eligibility rules. The available reporting does not outline draft language, enforcement details, or timelines for how any new terms would be implemented. It also does not indicate whether the positions extend beyond vehicle imports to how trade treatment applies to components, given that the operational reality for automakers depends on parts supply chains as much as final assembly locations.