핵심요약

• 2027년 이후 미국에서 폴스타 신차 판매 중단
• 연결된 차량 규칙에 따른 인가 거부
• 볼보는 인가 획득, 폴스타는 차별화된 처리
• 폴스타 3는 미국 사우스캐롤라이나, 폴스타 4는 한국 부산에서 생산

도입

이 기사는 중국 소유의 자동차 브랜드가 미국 시장에서 직면하는 규제 위험을 명확히 보여줍니다. 특히 지리 자동차의 자회사인 폴스타와 볼보의 다른 운명을 비교함으로써, 미국 정부가 중국의 기술적 접근을 어떻게 제한하는지 이해하는 데 중요한 통찰을 제공합니다. 이 결정은 전기차 시장의 지리정치적 복잡성을 강조하며, 글로벌 자동차 기업의 전략적 위치를 재고하도록 만듭니다.

본문 1: 연결된 차량 규칙의 적용 범위

연결된 차량 규칙은 2025년 1월에 최종화되었으며, 2027년부터 소프트웨어 금지와 2030년부터 하드웨어 제한을 시행합니다. 이 규칙은 차량의 생산 장소가 아닌 소유권에 기반하여 적용됩니다. 폴스타는 지리 자동차의 majority-owned 브랜드로, 이 규칙의 주요 대상입니다. 반면, 볼보는 별도로 상장된 더 큰 미국 시장 기반을 가지고 있어 인가를 획득할 수 있었습니다. 이는 미국 정부가 중국과의 연결성을 평가할 때 브랜드의 독립성과 시장 기반을 고려한다는 점을 보여줍니다.

본문 2: 폴스타와 볼보의 차별화된 처리

폴스타와 볼보의 다른 운명은 미국 정부의 규제 적용 방식의 복잡성을 드러냅니다. 폴스타는 지리 자동차와의 밀접한 연관성과 공유 플랫폼 및 소프트웨어로 인해 더 큰 규제 위험에 노출되었습니다. 반면, 볼보는 더 큰 미국 시장 기반과 독립적인 운영 구조로 인해 인가를 획득할 수 있었습니다. 이는 중국 소유의 자동차 브랜드가 미국 시장에서 성공하기 위해서는 독립적인 운영 구조와 강력한 시장 기반이 필요함을 시사합니다.

본문 3: 글로벌 자동차 시장의 지리정치적 위험

이 결정은 글로벌 자동차 시장에서 지리정치적 위험이 증가하고 있음을 보여줍니다. 중국 소유의 자동차 브랜드는 미국 시장에서 규제 위험에 노출될 수 있으며, 이는 글로벌 공급망과 기술적 접근성에 대한 제한을 의미합니다. 이는 자동차 기업이 글로벌 시장에서 운영할 때 지리정치적 요소를 고려해야 함을 강조하며, 특히 중국과 미국의 관계에 대한 감시를 강화해야 합니다.

결론

폴스타의 미국 시장 철수는 중국 소유의 자동차 브랜드가 직면하는 규제 위험을 명확히 보여줍니다. 이 결정은 미국 정부가 중국과의 연결성을 어떻게 제한하는지 이해하는 데 중요한 통찰을 제공하며, 글로벌 자동차 기업이 지리정치적 요소를 고려해야 함을 강조합니다. 향후 미국 정부의 규제 동향과 중국 소유 브랜드의 대응 전략이 주목됩니다.

---

원문 링크: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMifkFVX3lxTE94aHMzQ0NaYVpjS1cyWVo3eFYwdUlKOWZwb1oyZ2UtZGlrRDE0SGk1OGVuTEVIcVkyLWNaN21sbHp5d2VWb2IwSEZweXJPUFNJa1ZvZTdxUTl1YzBDYnBweU5mQXBqS3ZjNXB4MkpKcjZZb0FENFU4bFNEeUVadw?oc=5

Polestar barred from US over the Chinese connected vehicle rule, a dangerous precedent - Electrek

Polestar is pulling new vehicles out of the US market starting with model year 2027 after the Commerce Department declined to grant it authorization under the Connected Vehicle Rule, the company confirmed today.

The decision effectively ends new-car sales in the US for the Geely-owned Swedish EV brand — even though one of its models is assembled in South Carolina.

The Bureau of Industry and Security, part of the US Department of Commerce, declined to grant Polestar (Nasdaq: PSNY) an authorization to sell vehicles in the US from model year 2027 onward under the current Connected Vehicle Rule.

The rule, finalized in January 2025, bans connected vehicles with a “sufficient nexus” to China or Russia from the US market, with the software prohibitions taking effect for model year 2027 and hardware restrictions following in 2030. It covers telematics, cameras, microphones, GPS, Bluetooth, cellular modules, and automated driving software across gas, hybrid, and electric vehicles alike.

Polestar’s problem is ownership, not where the cars are built. The brand is majority-owned by Geely, the Chinese automotive group that also controls Volvo Cars. That nexus is what triggers the rule, regardless of the factory location — a dynamic that traces back to the Biden administration’s 2024 warning that Chinese-connected vehicles could harvest US driver data .

It’s a notable outcome given the geography of Polestar’s lineup. The Polestar 3 is built at Volvo’s plant in Charleston, South Carolina, while the Polestar 4 is assembled in Busan, South Korea — neither is made in China.

Here’s the catch: Volvo, also owned by Geely, was granted authorization to keep selling connected vehicles in the US.

Same parent company, opposite outcome. Volvo operates as a separately listed, more established automaker with a larger US footprint, while Polestar is more tightly entangled with Geely’s broader structure and shares vehicle platforms and software with Geely brands. Whatever the precise reasoning, the result is that one Geely brand stays and the other goes.

Polestar says it will continue to sell existing stock of the Polestar 3 and Polestar 4 in the US and will keep supporting current owners through its service network. But the Polestar 4 that only went on sale in the US this month now has a hard expiration date on new sales.

Polestar is responding by leaning into the region where it already does most of its business. Europe accounts for close to 80% of the company’s retail volumes, and 94% of its Q1 2026 retail sales came from outside the US.

The company plans to expand its European sales network and localize manufacturing, with production of the upcoming Polestar 7 compact SUV planned in Europe. It also flagged growth markets including Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Canada.

“The automotive industry is entering a new phase, based on regional dynamics,” CEO Michael Lohscheller said, calling Europe the company’s “largest growth engine.”

The backdrop is a company that has been growing volume but bleeding margin. Polestar posted a record 2025 with more than 60,000 cars sold and revenue above $3 billion, and a record first quarter of 13,126 deliveries in Q1 2026, up 7% . But gross margin swung to negative 3.2% in Q1, down from a positive 10.3% a year earlier, on pricing pressure, tariffs, and product mix.

This ruling makes absolutely no sense. They approved sister company Volvo (who produces their vehicles in the exact same factories) but not Polestar? It also doesn’t seem like Polestar has even contested the ruling. They just accepted it. I would expect a company like Geely to sue the administration in federal court. I suspect they would likely at least get a temporary injunction, but who knows. The Supreme Court would likely just say Trump can do whatever he wants. Maybe that’s why they didn’t bother. Polestar’s cars are honestly not that great, so it won’t be a huge miss, but I want as many car choices as possible.

Losing the US stings less than it would for almost any other automaker, because the US was never where Polestar’s volume lived. With 94% of Q1 sales already coming from outside the US, this is a pruning, not an amputation — and the company’s Europe-first messaging is a reasonable read of where it actually has momentum.

But the precedent is what matters here. The Connected Vehicle Rule just demonstrated it can wall off a Swedish-branded, partly US-built EV purely on the basis of Chinese ownership upstream. That’s a clear signal to every automaker with Chinese capital or a Chinese tech stack in its supply chain, and it lands while the US is simultaneously trying to expand domestic EV production. The Volvo-yes, Polestar-no split also shows how much discretion sits inside this rule — corporate structure and software sourcing, not assembly address, decide who gets in.

Now, hopefully, China doesn’t hit back at US automakers with similar sanctions. I doubt this administration even thought that far ahead.

One cost you can actually control is how you charge your EV — and home solar is the cheapest way to fuel an EV long term. With electricity rates climbing nearly 10% last year, home solar protects you against future rate increases. And with lease and PPA options, you can go solar with zero upfront cost and start saving immediately. If you want to find the best deal, check out EnergySage . It’s a free service with hundreds of pre-vetted installers competing for your business, so you save 20 to 30% compared to going it alone. No sales calls until you pick an installer. Get your free quotes here .

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Source: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMifkFVX3lxTE94aHMzQ0NaYVpjS1cyWVo3eFYwdUlKOWZwb1oyZ2UtZGlrRDE0SGk1OGVuTEVIcVkyLWNaN21sbHp5d2VWb2IwSEZweXJPUFNJa1ZvZTdxUTl1YzBDYnBweU5mQXBqS3ZjNXB4MkpKcjZZb0FENFU4bFNEeUVadw?oc=5