Congress Introduces Bill To Permanently Block Chinese Vehicles From US (caranddriver.com) 118
Longtime Slashdot reader sinij shares a report from Car and Driver: A group of Michigan lawmakers has introduced a bill in Congress that would effectively place a permanent ban on Chinese connected vehicles from being sold in the United States. While an executive order signed by Joe Biden in early 2025 already imposed heavy restrictions, the new bill would codify and expand on the ban, as first reported by Autoweek and explained in a release by the House of Representatives Select Committee on China.
The bill, titled the Connected Vehicle Security Act, was co-signed by John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican, and Debbie Dingell, a Michigan Democrat. It joins a companion version of the same Connected Vehicle Security Act introduced last month to the Senate by Sen. Bernie Moreno, an Ohio Republican, and Sen. Elissa Slotkin, a Michigan Democrat. While the wording is similar to that found in former President Biden's January 2025 executive order, the new bill would codify the language into law, as well as determine rules for compliance and enforcement.
Specifically, the new bill would restrict Chinese automakers from selling passenger cars in the United States if those vehicles contain any China-developed connectivity software. Officially, the bill covers the sale of vehicles from states deemed "foreign adversary countries," which include China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. The proposed legislation arrives as Chinese automakers including Chery, Geely, and BYD (maker of the 2026 BYD Dolphin Surf, shown above), continue to rise in prominence in foreign markets around the world. "Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons," comments sinij. "Connected cars that spy on consumers are not a uniquely Chinese problem and should be addressed for all vehicles."
The bill, titled the Connected Vehicle Security Act, was co-signed by John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican, and Debbie Dingell, a Michigan Democrat. It joins a companion version of the same Connected Vehicle Security Act introduced last month to the Senate by Sen. Bernie Moreno, an Ohio Republican, and Sen. Elissa Slotkin, a Michigan Democrat. While the wording is similar to that found in former President Biden's January 2025 executive order, the new bill would codify the language into law, as well as determine rules for compliance and enforcement.
Specifically, the new bill would restrict Chinese automakers from selling passenger cars in the United States if those vehicles contain any China-developed connectivity software. Officially, the bill covers the sale of vehicles from states deemed "foreign adversary countries," which include China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. The proposed legislation arrives as Chinese automakers including Chery, Geely, and BYD (maker of the 2026 BYD Dolphin Surf, shown above), continue to rise in prominence in foreign markets around the world. "Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons," comments sinij. "Connected cars that spy on consumers are not a uniquely Chinese problem and should be addressed for all vehicles."
US connected cars too? (Score:5, Insightful)
You've identified a real issue with connected cars. Please ban all the tracking and BS, tell GM, Ford, and others too.
Re:US connected cars too? (Score:4, Insightful)
The difference is those guys hand of the telemetry the US government without a warrant. The Chinese cars only do that for the Chinese government,
What abou the components? (Score:2)
If it's a full vehicle that is banned, when will they ban all the connected components so that your Ford F150's transmission computer module does not get taken over by a remote attacker?
Flock cameras, cars reporting telemetry, and other tracking are allowing mass tracking of government vehicles throughout the country,
Re:US connected cars too? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have been arguing that on Rivian forums for months and fanboys have their heads up their asses. People have to realize that security should be in the hands of the owners. Privacy options should not be trust based on a slider to disable tracking in the infotainment system. It should be able to be verified secure with true zero trust configs available to owner in a way that DOESN'T brick the ability to use the car, nav etc.. There should be regulatory oversight that guarantees that manufacturers of connected things must provide a way for owners to audit communications in a way that does not allow the manufacturer to change the behavior because it knows its being watched. Such as the ability to load owner provided security certs for an authorized man in the middle audit. And for security, especially for EV's owners should have the ability to completely lock down communications unless there is a documented need. These things are connected to infrastructure for Gods sake. Having them full time connected to the internet is just one secuirty breach from state hackers having control of an entire companies fleet of EV's. Just simply commanding all of the ones currently connected to start charging at the same time would absolutely destroy the grid. We HAVE to allowed to use industry standard zero trust configurations on our things.
Re: (Score:2)
"There should be regulatory oversight that guarantees that manufacturers of connected things must provide a way for owners to audit communications in a way that does not allow the manufacturer to change the behavior because it knows its being watched"
I agree but I don't know how you'll manage that in the USA.
Re:US connected cars too? (Score:4, Interesting)
And now in 2027, cars will be REQUIRED to have computer vision to track you and make sure you're not drunk/sleepy. Yea I'm sure that won't have any false positives or leave people stranded in the middle of nowhere.
BUY OLD CARS. Fuck this dystopian surveillance-scape.
Re: (Score:2)
That dashboard camera is a convenient place for me to hang my hat while I'm driving.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: US connected cars too? (Score:2)
I had a Kia that would tell me to pull over and take a break when I drove on bad roads.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Call for a tow to the dealer. I'm sure this is something covered under warranty.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who caused the vehicle to not start? They pay for repairs and towing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:US connected cars too? (Score:5, Interesting)
GM sells our data, but at least you can do certain things to the current GM EV's like I have done to mine and it still functions. I have an Equinox EV and I have the cellular connection resistor terminated at the telematics module. I then use my own cellular setup which is a miniPC with sim card slot and wifi running PFsense to stand up my own mobile full UTM firewall that run in whitelist mode. I open communications to only bare minimum sites to keep nav and streaming audio/video so I can watch and listen to things while charging. All GM and onstar sites are blocked by default because it is in whitelist only mode. Yea Google still has my data by handling it this way, but it is much much much harder for them to correlate to the vehicle in any way that ties their data to a real humans name since I don't run the vehicle on my normal Google accounts. I also just periodically reset it and start a new one account as well.
Re:US connected cars too? (Score:4, Interesting)
I really don't understand GM. They can make an incredible performing car like the Corvette for 1/3 the price of an Italian supercar but the rest of their stuff is garbage.
Re: (Score:2)
Despite my gripes with the data collection that I have worked around as detailed above, my wifes Equinox EV is actually the best bang for the buck vehicle that we have ever owned and it really isn't even close. I think for the vehicle itself even the infotainment center once you have blocked their tracking, they hit it out of the park. We don't 3 second 0 to 60, so why would we pay for that? And despite the hype, the new guys like Rivian and Tesla are still playing catch up for just general fit and finish o
Re: (Score:2)
Not just Corvettes.
Cadillacs have been as good as any German performance sedan for a long time
Re: US connected cars too? (Score:1)
Yeah, especially with the Northstar V8, then they were just as unreliable and expensive to repair
Re: (Score:2)
Disabling 'safety' systems is a great way to become uninsured when facing any sort of claim.
Any insurance company worth a dime has contractual requirements that you agree to turn over all telematics data. If it's 'blank' or missing....good luck paying that medical bill from the other driver.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: US connected cars too? (Score:2)
Be mindful in the voting booth. While neither party is perfect, one is far more likely to promote heavy handed regulation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yea I'm sure that won't have any false positives or leave people stranded in the middle of nowhere.
Don't worry about that. We all know the tech isn't designed to keep drunks off the road.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:US connected cars too? (Score:5, Insightful)
Opt outs are never good enough. That requires trust. They deserve none. There has to be government guaranteed ability for owners of connected things to institute industry standard zero trust configurations on connected things and if the owner chooses, force lock out manufacturers with guarantees that the manufacturer can't punitively brick basic features if they choose to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but it is proven over and over that opt outs are completely and utterly useless because it is still trust based. Not a single company that has offered or responded to trust based opt outs has ever been 100% onboard. Every single case in history at some level is still being abused and justified as necessary by the company completely or partially ignoring the opt out. A no that means no with 100% verifiable cut off only comes when it happens forcefully.
Re: (Score:2)
(From the politicians point of view) the issue isn't that vehicles spy on you, it's who they spy for.
It's not about protecting consumers, it's about stifling the competition.
Re: (Score:2)
It should be possible to buy a car that has NO network connectivity of any kind, NO GPS or satnav (maps on your phone connected through Android Auto or Apple CarPlay is better than in-built satnav on basically any car anyway), and NO data harvesting (so nothing for the insurance companies to use against you)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not only US. Almost all new cars today, from any country (US, Japan, Germany, France...), are connected. And very probably, all have some Chinese software.
I've changed my thinking on this (Score:1)
No wonder (Score:5, Informative)
China is a generation ahead in terms of EV and self driving technology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
They're driving a $30,000 car and it navigates around scooters and pedestrians with ease. The traffic signals broadcast their status and countdown the seconds in real time on the vehicle display. Skip ahead to the trade show and you'll see batteries taken out of service that ran for 800,000km and they're still at 80% life. Check out the polymer batteries without a liquid electrolyte. They have a working sodium battery sitting at -50c and charging just fine. Oh and if you still think this is all a joke watch the safety testing at the end.
The USA is cooked.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh and if you still think this is all a joke watch the safety testing at the end.
The USA is cooked.
Politicians have to come up with some excuse to protect their auto industry donors and voters. Spying is simply the peripheral issue that lets them come up with a catchy soundbite while enacting protectionist measures. While such monitoring is an issue, this doesn't really address the core problem that your car phones home and stores a lot of data about what you have done and where.
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians have to come up with some excuse to protect their auto industry donors and voters. Spying is simply the peripheral issue that lets them come up with a catchy soundbite while enacting protectionist measures. While such monitoring is an issue, this doesn't really address the core problem that your car phones home and stores a lot of data about what you have done and where.
All newer vehicles "spy" on their owners and that capability is apparently a bitch to disable, if it even can be. So instead of Chinese auto companies, we're stuck with all the other ones doing it. I feel so much better. /s Thankfully, my 2001 Civic (135k miles) and 2002 CR-V (62k miles) - both manuals - are still in great shape and don't have that crap.
Ironically, the U.S. government seems okay with all the cellphones, tablets, etc..., many foreign made, "spying" on (almost literally) everyone.
Re: No wonder (Score:2)
Cost (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Cost (Score:4, Insightful)
Like the US doesnt have heavily subsidized industries?
Re: (Score:2)
Like the US doesnt have heavily subsidized industries?
How to know someone has done no research at all into the situation. You're just a reflexive US hater.
Re: (Score:2)
*gestures wildly at the corn industry*
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
US car manufacturers are already subsidized, and their cars are still not cheap.
Apparently, the government giving money to U.S. companies seems to help their executives and shareholders, not their customers and consumers or even their rank-and-file employees. Go figure. /s
Re: (Score:2)
That's exactly what the Bretton-Woods agreement was supposed to do - make US exports artificially cheap to try and put everyone else out of business.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1. Absolutely everything is subsidized
The EU analysed this in detail and established that government subsidies amounted to around 15% of the price of a typical Chinese EV. They then applied variable tariffs per company based on a supply chain analysis which took into account subsidies. End result: Chinese cars are still cheap.
2. There is no support infrastructure set up - no service centers, no parts distribution warehouses, no support network at all
Chinese cars are cheap in Europe and yet all of those things are in place.
Re: (Score:2)
The EU analysed this in detail and established that government subsidies amounted to around 15% of the price of a typical Chinese EV.
17 to 35% actually https://www.bruegel.org/analys... [bruegel.org]
The EU didn't include the cost of weak environmental protections or slave labor: https://www.thebureauinvestiga... [thebureaui...igates.com]
Re: No wonder (Score:2)
Dude you're getting excited over one-off's when the hard part with batteries is producing them at scale. None of this even sounds that spectacular. Here's a great example of why:
https://insideevs.com/news/771... [insideevs.com]
I don't know why you think sodium ion is great for EVs given its theoretical maximum energy density is lower than what we're already getting out of lithium, and they haven't even reached that yet.
I believe Tesla is already well ahead of them on dry-cells, which they're already producing at scale and
Re: (Score:3)
What you obviously don't understand about EV batteries is they spend most of their lives between 80 and 90 percent of the original capacity. Even with very little use, they'll lose more than the first 10% within the first year.
The important takeaway from this is that modern EVs will retain 85%+ of their battery capacity thru DECADES of normal use. The vehicle will physically wear out and rot away before the battery wears down. Even when they are old enough to trickle down to average-poor people they will be sufficient for everyday use.
Re: (Score:2)
China is a generation ahead in terms of EV and self driving technology. ... ...
They're driving a $30,000 car and it navigates around scooters and pedestrians with ease.
Yup. And some charge lightning fast, or support automated battery swapping, though the U.S. doesn't have those infrastructures. I know it's anecdotal, but I've read several articles and reviews that say some Chinese EVs are way, way ahead. Of course, banning them will protect other manufacturers from having to compete. They can stick their collective heads in the sand, like domestic auto companies did when Honda and Toyota started selling in the U.S. -- that turned out so well for them. U.S. consumers
Re: (Score:2)
China is a generation ahead in terms of EV and self driving technology. https://www.youtube.com/watch [youtube.com]?... [youtube.com]
The entire problem of self-driving technology is edge cases. Every self-driving car can make a great demo video, and that's been true since the 90s.
To compare and see which one is actually better, you need to look at data, and that's something we've had trouble getting from American manufacturers AND Chinese manufacturers. So don't even start saying which one is better.
Re: (Score:2)
Watching various mechanics on YouTube, American cars now have the same problem, no parts availability along with shit manufacturing with plastic parts. Even simple stuff like tranny fluid is not available or on back order. Things like trannies no longer having dip sticks too, want to check the level, hope you have access to a lift. Of course this stuff is supposed to be good for the life of the vehicle which is now maybe 5 years.
Nothing is permanent (Score:3)
In the current make-up and structure of the US government.
Sure, this bill may pass and be signed by la presidenta, but the next administration might likely pass another bill to weaken it or repeal it.
Of course, they could try to make it constitutional amendment to make it harder to water down or repeal.
This of course leads is to what I think may be the Achilles Heel of the United States government. Each new administration and and each new congress can't seem to come up with a sensible plan, then leave it alone for the long term across election cycles.
The way we are going, we are probably going to become an authoritarian regime. When this happens, then maybe there will be some long term planning which might stick, but at what human cost?
Re: (Score:2)
It would take more than a change to the Presidential administration to roll back such a bill.
Re: (Score:2)
In the current make-up and structure of the US government.
Sure, this bill may pass and be signed by la presidenta, but the next administration might likely pass another bill to weaken it or repeal it.
Very true.
Of course, they could try to make it constitutional amendment to make it harder to water down or repeal.
Won't happen. Constitutional amendments need either 2/3rds of both House and Senate or 2/3rds of state legislatures to even propose one. To ratify a proposed amendment requires 3/4ths of state legislatures or state ratifying conventions.
This of course leads is to what I think may be the Achilles Heel of the United States government. Each new administration and and each new congress can't seem to come up with a sensible plan, then leave it alone for the long term across election cycles.
Also very true.
The way we are going, we are probably going to become an authoritarian regime. When this happens, then maybe there will be some long term planning which might stick, but at what human cost?
Become? We're pretty much there already. And there will be no long term planning from this current circus.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, maybe gridlock is permanent?
I'm So Proud (Score:1)
So they want us to... (Score:2)
..continue to pay for old technology while the future is being built somewhere else.
We need access to the best stuff in the world
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, but that is only part of the picture. Despite their lead in technology implementation, it is all state controlled. Every vehicle that comes over is a potential spying device and even allowing access to source code does not stop it just having the information passes information that state level spying can use against the US. TikTok for example is one case where people never realize how it is used to spy. It has been proven that TikTok application, even when verified free of true malware allows informati
What about all the Smart Home devices ? (Score:2)
We should demand that all devices can be wholly locally hosted and will not send any data outside the local network without explicit permission.
Re: (Score:2)
Given the FCCs stance towards home routers, it won't be long before those devices go on the chopping block.
The US double standard (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
China has thousands of these automated battery swap stations up and running. https://www.npr.org/2026/04/18... [npr.org]
I've watched the videos and people have driven their cars. Their technology is cheaper and better. See for yourself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
The company owns the batteries. They’re selling you a service. Took all of 10 seconds of googling.
Re: (Score:2)
Part of the innovation process, is the ability to bring down the cost of new technology. It's not just about new technology per se.
The US has failed to bring down the cost of EVs so far. They are *way* out of my price range. The Chinese sticker price, is significantly more affordable.
Re: (Score:2)
necessary (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I love you Angle-Westerns, you're all so obtuse!
(That made your whining sound particularly dumb.)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't recall a British western.
Ray Winstone, John Hurt and Emily Watson starred in the Australian film, The Proposition. does that count?
The best ones are filmed in Spain by Italian directors.
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese products are in the American market because American consumers demanded it! Quality is low because American consumers demand it. Given the choice between one decent-quality good at a high price and low-cost, low-quality goods, American consumers will pick the low-cost ones every time. If you want to change that you need to persuade them to your point of view, rather than ramming taxes down their throats. But the problem is deeper than that. American companies produce low-quality goods too. Anyt
Re: (Score:2)
No, Chinese products are on the market because American manufacturers moved their production overseas ages ago, and China took advantage of the situation. American consumers generally don't care where their stuff is made so long as it meets their needs. The real winner has never been the American consumer but rather the importer.
Re: (Score:2)
Correct. American consumers care about cheap goods more than anything else. That's exactly what I said and what is driving everything! Manufacturers off shored their goods because they know that cheaper goods sell and that was the easiest way to lower their costs and jack up their profits. Again, though, it's all driven by the consumer. Consumers could (and sometimes do) punish American companies who offshore their production, but generally do not.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:necessary (Score:4, Insightful)
Coal canning?
Free trade (Score:1)
Real reason is to protect defense production (Score:2)
Palmer Luckey explained it well in this interview [outkick.com]. In any real war, we'll have to outsource a lot of production of weapons to our automotive sector like we did in WWII. The MIC is FUBAR that they're talking literal years before we can replace the interceptors we've spammed on Russia and Iran. In a real war with China, we'd need to replace that in a few weeks.
Re: (Score:2)
same in Europe, ‘Anything but autos’: Can defense save Europe’s ailing car industry? https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/0... [cnbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Even understanding this, it seems evident to me that:
1) This is not the reason why this bill is being proposed.
2) Pure and simple protectionism is not the best way to deal with the situation.
The side effect of this attitude will possibly only be to dissociate US industry from the rest of the world, setting it back technologically.
In my view, it is necessary to define very clear objectives, create the necessary conditions, and demand strategic alignment from companies in order to promote a return on public i
Re: Real reason is to protect defense production (Score:1)
The current administration is not only not interested in that, the mission is obviously to destroy things only.
But prior administrations weren't interested in change either, it's been status quo or worse for decades.
This is stupid (Score:2)
These people need 0) a pay cut, 1) term limits, and 3) adult supervision.
Our Legislature is dysfunctional and impotent. Term limits should be priority 0, before all else.
My next car will be Chinese :) (Score:3, Insightful)
That way I can guarantee that it won't be "connected."
And here we go into the Soviet system (Score:2)
We're going to be banning all the best electric cars then. We will be driving the Yugos of EVs guys. I know the Yugo is Eastern Block, but it's infamous and recognizable.
And our batteries will suck, because we're also not researching that like the Chinese. In fact, the current administration appears actively hostile to technologies of this sort. The NSF is probably trying to claw money back from it.
So good luck with the Fortress America strategy. The Soviets tried it and their economy became a joke. At leas
Bipartisan? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And yet Tesla's owner has been in China this week as part of a US presidential visit.
This sends a message that they want China to buy American vehicles but that it's one way traffic.
Re: Bipartisan? (Score:2)
Yeah but he only went because it was his first chance to hang out with the guy he said was a pedo
Re: (Score:2)
How about this guy? https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/14... [cnn.com]
Plus all the ball gargling CEOs who accompanied him. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2026/... [cnbc.com]
Only hurt your own citizens (Score:2)
If you can't (Score:2)
What is a "connected vehicle"? (Score:2)
As though the US is trustworthy (Score:2)
From an outside perspective China is no less trustworthy than the USA.....the USA now has a history of screwing over its allies...
I'm all for it. (Score:2)
Cars connected to China should be banned. Those cables running to the ocean are creating a nuisance.
I drive a Chinese connected car! (Score:2)
I drive a Polestar. Ostensibly it's a Volvo, but it was produced in China and it's got Google Android Automotive as it's primary OS.
I'm more concerned about what happens when the connected stuff goes away? It knows the availability of public charging infrastructure near me in Seattle, as well as the state of traffic. What happens when none of that works anymore?
Re: (Score:2)
Just use an app on your phone for that ?