Rollback Road: EVs vs. the New GOP Energy Doctrine

Heritage Foundation''s Kevin Roberts

The Trump Administration's systematic dismantling of federal EV support - from repealing tax credits and stalling charger networks to embracing fossil fuel subsidies - marks a sharp turn in U.S. energy and transportation policy. Underpinning it is Project 2025, a conservative roadmap aiming to curtail government climate action and reassert oil and gas dominance. This paper evaluates the political and economic logic behind this shift, its alignment with voter sentiment, and its ramifications for American competitiveness.

Political Rationale: Voter Appeal Through Simplicity

“Freedom of choice” is the cornerstone of the Trump EV rollback. Positioning mandates and EV incentives as infringements on consumer liberty and economic fairness, the administration is tapping into cultural resistance to change and the high sticker price of electric vehicles. Politically, this energizes rural and working-class voters skeptical of government-led transitions—especially in swing states where automotive jobs still revolve around gasoline engines.

Economic Strategy: Fossil Fuel Loyalty

The administration’s energy policy prioritizes domestic oil and gas—an industry tied to millions of U.S. jobs and long-standing geopolitical leverage. Trump’s 2025 energy plan explicitly calls for rolling back Biden-era EV incentives and “restoring American energy dominance.” Short-term, this means lower regulatory burdens and increased oil drilling, but long-term it could lead to weakened U.S. positioning in the global clean tech race.

Enter Project 2025

Developed by The Heritage Foundation and endorsed by Trump allies, Project 2025 proposes eliminating the Department of Energy’s clean energy offices, repealing EV-related provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act, and revoking EPA authority over vehicle emissions. Its goal: dismantle environmental “bureaucracy” and centralize executive power. The result is a policy platform structurally hostile to EVs, despite mounting global investment in electrification.

U.S. Automakers: Caught in the Crossfire

For legacy automakers like GM and Ford, the uncertainty is damaging. On one hand, relaxed fuel standards lower compliance costs. On the other, the rollback of tax credits and charger investments undermines the business case for EVs and confuses consumers. Meanwhile, startups and battery suppliers who built operations around the IRA’s stable incentives now face funding cliffs and investor pullbacks.

Consumers: Fewer Choices, Higher Costs

Without the $7,500 federal EV credit or reliable charging infrastructure rollout, electric vehicles become financially inaccessible for many Americans. At the same time, gas prices remain volatile. The result is a paradox: a consumer market discouraged from electrification, even as the long-term fuel savings and environmental benefits become clearer. The rollback makes it harder, not easier, for families to afford next-generation mobility.

Global Risk: Falling Behind China

While the U.S. debates EV subsidies, China is already dominating the supply chain. BYD and other Chinese brands are scaling globally with support from over $230 billion in domestic clean tech subsidies. Even with tariffs in place, their cost advantage and production speed are unmatched. A U.S. withdrawal from clean mobility investment hands Beijing a strategic and economic edge in an industry set to define the next century.

Conclusion: Ideology vs. Innovation

The Trump Administration’s rollback is ideologically clear: small government, fossil fuel loyalty, and populist framing. But its economic implications are less certain. By retreating from EV leadership, the U.S. risks ceding ground in innovation, jobs, and global influence. Project 2025 provides the blueprint—but it’s American workers, automakers, and consumers who will live the consequences.

Views:69