Photo credit: arstechnica.com
Polestar Voices Concerns Over Proposed Export Regulation
Polestar has raised significant concerns regarding the new export regulations suggested by the U.S. government in its recent public commentary. The automaker cautions that the proposed definitions within the rule are excessively vague, leading to “crippling uncertainty for businesses.” This ambiguity could hinder operational planning and clarity across the industry. Polestar advocates for a more precise and limited definition to enhance understanding and compliance.
The company argues that the proposed rule’s framework unfairly emphasizes ownership as a sole determining factor for its applicability. Polestar contends that if the majority of manufacturing and software development takes place outside a foreign adversary’s territory, ownership should not be the primary consideration for implementing the proposed restrictions. Given its unique corporate structure—Polestar is organized in the U.S. and operates as a subsidiary of a publicly traded UK firm, with its headquarters situated in Sweden—these concerns take on added significance. With production facilities in South Carolina and plans to produce the Polestar 4 in South Korea, only a small fraction of its workforce, approximately 280 out of 2,800 employees, is based in China, indicating a global operational strategy.
Polestar maintains that the presence of its key decision-makers in Sweden serves as a strong argument against significant national security risks associated with its operations. The firm urges the U.S. Commerce Department to reconsider the potential implications of the rule, emphasizing the need for a balanced approach that considers the realities of international business engagements.
While Polestar may find itself in the spotlight due to these new regulations, it is not alone. The Commerce Department has similarly notified major automakers such as Ford and General Motors that imports of specific models, namely the Lincoln Nautilus and Buick Envision—both manufactured in China—will likely need to be halted under the same regulatory umbrella. This broader scrutiny reflects a growing tension between national security interests and the complexities of global supply chains in the automotive sector.
Source
arstechnica.com