Home / Markets / Industries / Auto Makers in Crisis
Monday, September 08, 2008
Automakers Seek $50B in Loans From Government
Associated Press
NEW YORK--Auto industry allies hope to secure up to $50 billion in government loans this month that would pay to modernize plants and help struggling car makers build more fuel-efficient vehicles.
With Congress returning this coming week from its summer break, the industry plans an aggressive lobbying campaign for the low-interest loans. The situation is growing dire after months of tumbling sales, high gasoline prices and consumers' abandoning profitable trucks and sport utility vehicles.
Lawmakers authorized $25 billion in loans in last year's energy bill to help the companies build fuel-efficient vehicles such as hybrids and electric vehicles. With credit tight, automakers and suppliers now want lawmakers to come up with the money for the program _ and expand the pool of money available to $50 billion over three years.
Industry leaders have argued that the loan guarantees are not a government bailout because it would hasten production of fuel-efficient vehicles and reduce dependence on imported oil.
"This is not about benefiting Wall Street," said Ford Motor Co.'s President of the Americas Mark Fields, referencing recent federal support for the investment firm Bear Stearns and troubled mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. "This is benefiting Main Street, the working men and women. The auto industry is part of the backbone of the U.S. economy."
The low-interest loans, at rates of about 4% to 5%, would pay for up to 30% of the cost of retooling plants to build hybrids, plug-in hybrids, electric cars and other alternatives.
Ford (F) and General Motors Corp.'s (GM) credit ratings have fallen below investment grade, making it difficult for the companies to borrow money at affordable rates. Chrysler, which has been heavily dependent upon truck sales, has been privately held since last year and faces similar problems accessing capital.
"This industry could fall down, literally, or be absorbed if they don't get something in place very soon. I think it's that severe," said Rep. Joe Knollenberg, R-Mich. "Something has to happen pretty quickly because they can't compete paying 15 to 20% (interest)."
Industry lobbyists pressed the issue at the recent presidential conventions in Denver and St. Paul, Minn., and members of Michigan's congressional delegation have talked to legislative leaders and the Bush administration about the program.
Discussions surround a three-year plan that would make $25 billion in loans available in the first year, followed by $15 billion the second year and $10 billion in the third.
To provide $50 billion in loans, Congress would need to set aside about $7.5 billion to guard against a loan default.
Automakers want to secure the money for the loans before November's election because a new president and Congress could delay the companies' ability to access the loans.
The White House said last week it was talking to members of Congress and the industry about the financing. The issue, meanwhile, has gained a foothold in the presidential campaign in states with many auto workers such as Michigan and Ohio.
Democrat Barack Obama has criticized Republican rival John McCain for not supporting the full $50 billion loan program. McCain said last week he supported fully covering the $25 billion loan program in the energy law.
Congressional leaders have said they are open to an expanded program. But the industry will face a compressed schedule in an election year when many lawmakers will push to leave Washington so they can campaign for re-election this fall.
"We're hopeful that we're making an effective case to get this done between now and the end of this session," said John Bozzella, Chrysler's vice president of external affairs and public policy.
The loans would be available to foreign automakers, but the companies are not expected to seek the money because they are in a better financial situation and priority would be given to companies with plants 20 years or older.
Fox Business Video
-
-
Helping Veterans Land Jobs
-
Jul 2, 2009
Baird on Helping Soldiers
-
-
-
President's Plans Working
-
Jul 2, 2009
Goodstein on Stimulus Success
-
-
-
Jackson Lives On
-
Jul 2, 2009
Beck on Future of Jackson
-
-
-
$20 Dollars a Gallon
-
Jul 2, 2009
Paying More to Save Economy
-
-
-
Looking for the Road to Recovery
-
Jul 2, 2009
Morris on Unemployment
-
FOX Translator
No data currently available.
No data currently available.
Sure, we know some of you are saying the term "marriage penalty" is redundant. In fact, of all the costs associated with getting married (have you seen the cost of a wedding cake lately?), the marriage penalty can be the worst.
Here's how it works: Mr. and Mrs. Right walk down the aisle in wedded bliss and suddenly they¿re a two-income household. If both make roughly the same amount of money, they can be pushed into a higher tax bracket. That's bad, since the higher the bracket, the higher the tax. So, if both were single, they'd end up writing two smaller checks to the tax man that, if combined, would add up to less than the giant check they write in a state of wedded bliss.
Is that fair? We're not touching that, but there is a flip side that few people talk about. The marriage penalty only kicks in if both members of the couple make close to the same amount of money. If there's a big disparity in pay, there's actually a tax advantage. Call it the marriage bonus.
And, it¿s important to remember that there are other financial benefits, such as lower life-insurance rates or health care premiums, that can make up for the extra tax couples pay. So don't let Uncle Sam stop you from saying, "I do."






