One of the most common misunderstandings in the automotive world lately is what automakers are required or not required to do. For instance, a modern car almost certainly has to have a collapsible steering wheel and a catalytic converter. A passenger-side mirror isn’t required by the feds, nor is there any sort of federal EV mandate.
Lee Zeldin, the newest administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, tweeted yesterday that he wanted to kill “stop-start” technology. It’s just yet another intersection of politics and cars I’m going to try to tackle in The Morning Dump, though he sort of has a point. Or, at least, half a point.
That’s not all! Republicans in the House are working on both an end to the EV tax credit and the addition of deductibility of car interest. What survives and what doesn’t is all up in the air at this moment.
The economic picture is looking perhaps a bit rosier this morning as inflation estimates show that the economy is not getting cataclysmically worse, even though at least one car-related metric is trending in the wrong direction.
Nissan is also still trending in the wrong direction, so some tough decisions are going to have to be made.
‘Everyone Hates It’
Start/stop technology: where your car dies at every red light so companies get a climate participation trophy. EPA approved it, and everyone hates it, so we’re fixing it. pic.twitter.com/zFhijMyHDe
— Lee Zeldin (@epaleezeldin) May 12, 2025
Does literally “everyone” hate stop/start technology as EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin claims above? No, but it’s true that many folks haven’t been fans of the tech, even though it’s gotten better over time. I’d say, on modern cars, I bet most people don’t care about stop/start systems, which shut off the engine when stopped for long periods of time to save fuel.
Personally, I just had a car with stop/start, and it would sometimes cause an awkward drop in brake pressure when the vehicle couldn’t decide if I was stopping or not. I didn’t hate it, but I didn’t like it. The first version of it I experienced was on a Chevy Malibu, I think, and the early versions were quite bad. Additionally, almost every car with stop/start allows you to turn it off, but most make it a requirement every time you get in the car, as opposed to something you can just defeat permanently.
Why are carmakers doing it? Are the feds making them do it? Not quite. Let’s break down what’s being said here.
“Start/stop technology: where your car dies at every red light so companies get a climate participation trophy.”
The car doesn’t die, per se, but it does turn off. It can definitely be annoying! Hybrids, like my CR-V, and even mild-hybrids like BMW’s eBoost, offer a seamless experience because the vehicle can coast to a stop, which makes it less awkward. I doubt many BMW buyers even notice eBoost working.
The “participation trophy” is a reference to the fact that, while not required, automakers get credit (via the off-cycle credit program) for all sorts of things to weigh against both federal and CARB emission requirements. Some of these are legit, and others are, well, less legit.
As Jason Fenske points out in the video above, people who idle their cars often at stoplights likely see a real benefit from stop-start in fuel savings. One estimate shows that almost 10 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions are taken out of the environment every year by this requirement.
A “participation trophy” in this sense is trying to encourage automakers to do things that make cars more efficient, which is a net good thing. Stop/start is an easy target because many people do hate it for completely understandable reasons.
“EPA approved it, and everyone hates it, so we’re fixing it.”
This gets a little more complicated. Automakers like the credit because it’s a simple way to keep emissions in check, which, if California gets to maintain its waiver, is going to be important. If California loses its waiver and the government rolls back requirements, well, automakers might care a little less.
If “fixing it” just means removing the credit–and that’s the only thing it could mean–I doubt it’ll change that much automaker behavior. More and more vehicles are moving towards better mild-hybrid setups or full-hybrid setups that consumers like (or don’t even notice). Plus, most cars are designed for multiple markets these days, so the incentive to pull out stop/start probably isn’t huge.
This feels a bit like saying you’re going to regulate horseshoe technology in 1913, but for the people who still use the old-style horseshoes maybe it’s a compelling argument. This is a cautionary tale of the unintended consequences of regulation, wherein companies do something to check a box that ultimately serves its purpose while also pissing a not small number of consumers/voters off.
[Ed Note: I get why people dislike ESS; sometimes it’s unrefined, and the real-world fuel savings in terms of MPGs are often quite modest (though they can reach between 7 percent and 26 percent, per SAE, as Consumer Reports notes). To many consumers (like my parents), it’s not worth the tradeoff. Still, the concept is good, and modern 48 volt ESS systems are quite solid. -DT].
EV Tax Credit Dead (Maybe), Car Loan Interest Deductible (Maybe)
Now that tariffs are, slightly, on the sidelines, President Trump is working on his single big bill to codify many of his ambitions, including the continuation of his tax policy from his first term. Just to make it simple, I’ll refer to it as the tax bill.
In theory, via the Byrd Rule, any changes to the federal budget have to balance out in order to reduce the deficit. This rarely happens, but it’s a legislative hurdle. Again, in theory, most Republicans and Democrats want a balanced budget, even if in practice no party seems to have any sort of discipline in this regard when they’re in power.
Any continuation of tax cuts will have to be paid for, and one way to partially do that is to eliminate the EV tax credit and any EV manufacturing stimulus put forth by the Biden Administration.
Unsurprisingly, according to Reuters (via AN), that’s what Republicans want to do:
The proposal, set for a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on May 13, would repeal a $7,500 new-vehicle tax credit and a $4,000 used-vehicle credit on Dec. 31, although it would maintain the new-vehicle credit for an additional year for automakers that have not yet sold 200,000 EVs.
The president of the Electric Drive Transportation Association, Genevieve Cullen, criticized the proposal, saying that plans “to abandon U.S. leadership in energy innovation by gutting federal investment in electrification are catastrophically short-sighted.”
Hey, good news for Slate, as under this plan, the first 200,000 customers would get the tax credit. I’m open to the argument that there should be a cap on tax credits, as, once automakers are established as EV automakers, do they really need the discount? I’d make the number closer to 800,000 vehicles, given just how hard it is to make cars.
This would offset about $2 billion a year, which isn’t all that much compared to the scale of the federal budget, but it’s not nothing.
There’s another piece of this, though:
House Republicans also propose to kill a loan program that supports the manufacture of certain advanced technology vehicles. It would rescind any unobligated funding and rescind corporate average fuel economy standards and greenhouse gas emission rules for 2027 and beyond. That portion will be taken up by the Energy and Commerce Committee.
Among outstanding loans finalized in President Joe Biden’s last weeks in office are $9.63 billion to a joint venture of Ford and South Korean battery maker SK On for construction of three battery manufacturing plants in Tennessee and Kentucky; $7.54 billion to a joint venture of Stellantis and Samsung for two EV lithium-ion battery plants in Indiana; and $6.57 billion to Rivian for a plant in Georgia to begin building smaller, less expensive EVs in 2028.
Again, making cars is hard and expensive, and pulling potential plants that are already in the process of being established seems like a bad precedent.
This isn’t the only action, however, as one Michigan Congressman is putting forward the idea of making car loan interest deductible on America-built cars, as USA Today reports:
Huizenga, R-Holland Township, proposed the so-called Made in America Motors Act on May 7, saying it would allow consumers to deduct up to $2,500 in interest paid on a motor vehicle loan in a given year as long as the vehicle was assembled in the U.S.
No deduction would be allowed for any vehicle loan which is already granted a deduction, but the new deduction would be available to taxpayers whether or not they itemize on their annual tax forms. If approved as proposed, the deduction — which could potentially help spur auto sales of U.S.-assembled vehicles — would be allowed for vehicles purchased in calendar year 2025 or later.
This is obviously a way bigger deal for people who buy expensive trucks and other vehicles, as to get to $2,500 annually, you’d need to buy an $80,000 car with $0 down for a 60-month payment at a 5% interest rate, for example. Some people do that, but most do not. It’s good that this is outside the standard deduction, otherwise, it wouldn’t help anyone but the richest taxpayers.
Ultimately, though, you’re not getting $2,500 back; you’re just taking that off your taxes. Estimates show that most people can only expect to save under $150 a year, unless you’re in the top 1%, then you might save $500 a year.
Inflation Was Mild, But Car Insurance Went Up
For all of my talk about a potential recession, my longstanding hope is that this doesn’t happen and that a little bit of flexibility on tariffs can keep our otherwise resiliant economy afloat. The walking back of yesterday’s Chinese tariffs was a good sign that the current administration isn’t entirely inflexible.
The latest Consumer Price Index Summary from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that inflation remains neither great nor terrible. It’s as Mild as Taco Bell hot sauce.
Here’s where inflation went up, according to the BLS:
The index for all items less food and energy rose 2.8 percent over the past 12 months. The shelter index increased 4.0 percent over the last year. Other indexes with notable increases over the last year include medical care (+2.7 percent), motor vehicle insurance (+6.4 percent), education (+3.8 percent), and recreation (+1.6 percent).
Oof. Car insurance sucks right now and I don’t see cars getting any cheaper to fix, which just makes this number harder to bring down. There’s a way to look at this and see companies reluctant to raise prices with a huge tax bill floating out there. For instance, could Jeff Bezos stall price increases at Amazon in order to get a tax credit for 400,000 Slate EVs? It’s not impossible.
Nissan Increases Layoffs To 20,000
There’s no use building a bunch of copies of unprofitable cars, so Nissan is doubling its planned layoffs, according to the company. This is part of the “Re:Nissan” plan to fix what’s wrong with Nissan, and the aggressiveness is the point. One of the biggest critiques of the previous Nissan CEO was that he was slow to recognize the scale of the problem.
The new guy, Ivan Espinosa, clearly recognized the scale of the problem and had this to say:
“In the face of challenging FY24 performance and rising variable costs, compounded by an uncertain environment, we must prioritize self-improvement with greater urgency and speed, aiming for profitability that relies less on volume. As new management, we are taking a prudent approach to reassess our targets and actively seek every possible opportunity to implement and ensure a robust recovery. Re:Nissan is an action-based recovery plan clearly outlines what we need to do now. All employees are committed to working together as a team to implement this plan, with the goal of returning to profitability by fiscal year 2026.”
Practically, this means closing plants and cutting about 20,000 jobs, which is more than the 11,000 the company was previously planning. Additionally, the number of plants will be reduced from 17 to 10 as the company aims to hit positive operating profitability by FY 2026.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
This has come up before, but I think we’re all sleeping on Vanessa Carlton. She plays piano… on a truck! I love pianos. And trucks! Her parents have a sweet Taurus! Please enjoy “A Thousand Miles.”
The Big Question
Tell me all your feelings about stop/start. Do you love it? Do you hate it?
Top photo: Stellantis
I’d say stop/start is a mixed bag, in my experience. The first time in a rental F-type, it was definitely disconcerting, but adjusting to it wasn’t that hard.
I will say going from a Silverado without it to an F150 with it, I’m no longer annoyed at seeing the mpg tick down a little at every stop light. The 6.2 V8 was surprisingly decent on gas on the highway, but idling could get thirsty. It has taken a little adjustment to use the brake pedal pressure to hint to it whether it should shut off or not, and it doesn’t always get it right, but it hasn’t been a serious issue. It also won’t do it until the engine’s warmed up and the cabin’s hit the target temperature.
While stop-start can have some benefits, it has been a pain for my family.
Father has a ram that has the “e-torque” setup and those oversized motor/generators have heavy transverse loads on the rear bearings of this alternator. This alternator/generator (MGU) starts the engine in stop-start events.Fast forward to a lot of them failing because arguably undersized bearings are used and stellantis dealers can’t keep replacement MGUs on the shelf.
Quoted 6 month wait due to part backorder because you are not allowed to simply replace that bearing, you have to replace the whole MGU.
While we eventually did just press in a new bearing at home, it seems that part availability is going to be painful with these one model / motor parts that do not interchange. (this MGU is only found on the 5.7l e-torque setups, not even interchangeable with the e-torque pentastars).
What happens when the small 48v battery pack or it’s cooling system bites the bullet? Can we find replacements, or is this truck destined for the scrap yard over this “participation trophy” tech.
“get to $2,500 annually, you’d need to buy an $80,000 car with $0 down for a 60-month payment at a 5% interest rate, for example.”
How about a $20,000,000 truck with $0 down for a 10,000-month loan? Because I’m pretty sure that’s where the folks behind this stupid idea want vehicle pricing and debt slavery to go – priced impossibly high to buy with cash and the debt serviced as long as possible.
Disabling iStop is the second button I press after the start/stop button in my 2019 Mazda 3
Stop start doesn’t bother me at all. And surely the major benefit isn’t mpg but reducing the number of cars sat running at intersections and the effects they have on local environment.
Another thing making stop/start almost unnoticeable in hybrids is that there’s a nice big electric motor turning the engine over easily and silently.
The Auto-Stop is the only thing about my TourX that I actively hate. I’ve gotten to the point, that I can now do the last 0.1 MPH to 0 in a stop so slowly and smoothly that the Auto-Stop won’t trigger.
But, come on! Let me just turn the damn thing off. I’ve already changed enough starters in my lifetime, the fact that this one is being used about 10X more than any other I’ve ever owned just grates at me, as I know it’s going to go kaput at least once while I own it.
That s assuming vehicles with start/stop don’t nave beefier starters to compensate for the extra useage.
I pay no mind to the star/stop in the GLI, it doesn’t even register to me. But my wife has to mash the button every time she drives because she “hates it.”
I went from a car that mostly predates start-stop to an extended-range EV (2007 Saturn Ion to 2017 Chevy Volt). Even when the battery is “empty”, the electric motor is the thing pushing the car and the gas generator just keep it at that minimum level. So yeah, when in Hold mode or when the battery is run down, the “engine” shuts off at red lights and starts up again afterward, but it’s not directly connected to the drive wheels so there’s no impact on performance, no lag or anything. I’ll take it.
I hate it so much on my current, soon to be former, vehicle that I bought a device that just plugs into the on/off button and remembers what you have it set to so you don’t have the hit the button every time. My reason for hating it is that it didn’t really do any good since it kept turning back on to run the HVAC and repeated off/on got annoying fast when sitting at a light.
Short answer – Maybe. I was very upset about this technology from renting cars with the feature. Once I bought my 21 Wrangler, I learned to love it. On the Wrangler, it works flawlessly. It is fully started between when my foot leaves the brake and touches the accelerator. After a few months of owning the Jeep, I noticed that during my commutes, I would crave the calming effect of stopping at a light and feeling the car stop. Weird, but very Zen.
I bought a Mustang for my wife over the summer and don’t like the feature at all on that car. The system on that car stops the engine a lot, and there is a lag to it starting again. Push the pedal and there is an annoying lag before motion happens. Counter productive in a performance car.
I think car manufacturers should minimize adding feature that a majority of their customers find unappealing.
My newest vehicle is a 2008, no stop/start to deal with. Still gets 30+mpg highway and averages high 20’s with my normal driving.
Stop/Start is in the same boat as infotainment for me, no interest in buying a vehicle that has it so I never have to worry about replacing or repairing it.
I’ve only driven one car with stop/start, which was a manual diesel Vauxhall van. I thought it was fine.
Come to a stop, handbrake on, put it in neutral, and the engine goes off 95% of the time. Put your foot on the clutch and it comes back on (100% of the time). What’s not to like?
So, devils advocate here, if the engine stops, doesn’t that cause the catalytic converter to cool down, thereby defeating the point of saving gas? Just because cars are “cleaner ” today, umm..look at 1970s Hondas getting 30+ mpg. Diesel mpg is way down, yet cleaner emissions, most trucks, suv’s get mid to high teens, maybe 20 on a good day. More fuel = lower emissions. You think the oil refineries have catalytic converters? Ever seen a flare on an oil rig? I actually have no idea, someone above my pay grade should extrapolate
Since emissions are checked – you can bet the emissions of a car without start/stop would be worse than with. It is easy to measure on a simple emissions test cycle.
Note that idling isn’t great – combustion temps are low, combustion isn’t perfect and it just uses fuel for no reason other than turning the alternator so it can power the electric system in the car (e.g. A/C).
Especially in busy traffic / traffic lights etc, start/stop is ideal for 95% of the population. For me .. no .. I’d turn it off even if it would work 99% seamlessly. I hate it. But for 95% of the regular people out there ; start/stop just works for them to save fuel and wreck nature a little less.
Best would be to just get an EV, because creating electricity at single point (powerplant, or perhaps a wind turbine, hydro or solar) is just more efficient.
Even with the whole “battery is bad” – thingy, EVs are better for nature (and especially you wallet) than ICE or Hybrids. If range is a thing .. sure, you might be in the 5% who ‘needs 1000 miles of range per day’ and then sure .. buy an ICE.
To the refineries ; burning volatile fumes might be close to ZERO impact compared to the thousands, millions of vehicles driving every day and burning fuels.
Note ; powerplants DO have emission filters and of course it is MUCH easier to change those, even when they’re big, than in the millions of cars.
Unless you’re sitting at a red light for a long time, in a snowstorm (real conditions that do happen!) a catalytic converter is not going to cool down enough to be a problem. They can run between 500-1600 degrees F, which takes several hours to cool down.
Oil refineries do burn off gasses, but many newer refineries have ways to either capture the gas (it’s still a useful fuel) or have scrubbers fitted to clean the emissions from smokestacks. We use a lot of hydrocarbons (in the form of solvents, still fossil fuel products) at my job, and we are required to have “conservation vents” (fancy vents with springs in them, some can be fitted with filters as well) on our tanks to prevent excess evaporation, as well as lids on all of our mixing equipment. Plus, it’s expensive to vent off a bunch of useful raw materials. Like AMGx2 said, it’s a lot easier to control emissions on something that doesn’t have a size/weight limit because it just sits there, as opposed to something that moves around like a car or bus.
Nissan, do you want me back yet?
I was once informed that the most stressful thing for an engine was original start up. Is it true? Hey Autopian answer that. If it is is it harder on the car shutting down and restarting every traffic light? I would think it would be easier to judge.
Startup is tough on an engine because everything is cold. Engine start/stop doesn’t leave it off long enough for all the oil to cool and drain back down, so it’s really no big deal.
The starter takes a beating but between mild hybrid setups and years of experience they’ve made that much more robust as well.
I agree, all the years i worked at a bmw dealership ive replaced countless starters on vehicles without start/stop. And not one on a vehicle with start/stop.
That’s a question I’ve been asking. I keep hearing people saying that stop/start is going to kill starters… but how much of a wear item are modern starters? In 30 years of owning cars (albeit only 4 years with start/stop) I have yet to have to replace a starter.
The starters are built to handle way more cycles, and the engines themselves are actually smart enough now to stop the crank in a specific position that enables immediate restart with very little starter input. So engine start stop probably actually improved starter reliability dramatically on the whole.
Oil pressure takes a while to drop to zero (as in hours), not the 1-2 minutes your ESS has the engine off at a traffic light.
Hot oil does not take hours to drain back to the pan. I know for a fact it drains out of the pan into my bucket in minutes.
Still doesn’t leave your bearings dry, the moment the oil pump starts turning oil pressure is nominal, unlike morning starts when it takes a few seconds.
As of this writing there are 4.5 pages of comments about auto start/stop, and not one about the imminent demise of Nissan.
That probably tells you everything you need to know about how the enthusiast community feels about a once-great manufacturer and their current products. Shut ’em down, they’re done.
I was about to comment on this juxtaposition:
All employees working together as a team, hoping the f*** that it’s another member of the team they’re working together with whose neck is on the chopping block.
Yeah, it’s a real bummer. I still really want a 400z, but I just don’t see excitement about anything else they sell. I live near the US headquarters, so I don’t want to see folks around here losing employment, but the company just does not seem interested in righting the ship.
Start/Stop in my manual Mustang was super weird to potentially dangerous… but in a Ford, you can permanently turn it off… it has not magically turned back on in 5 years.
The Start/Stop in my Frontier, resets every time you turn the car off/on however it’s not a bad transition unless you’re trying to jump from a light… On then Go is a rough transition in the transmission.
As long as there’s a defeat switch, start/stop doesn’t bother me. Hitting the switch every time I get in the car takes less work than buckling up. I can’t believe people whine about pushing a button. Start/stop cars usually come with AGM batteries and better starters.
My old CRV had a button on the dash to turn the cruise control on and off, with the buttons on the steering wheel handling the set/cancel/speed up/slow down. The button on the dash always stayed in the on position, and engaging the cruise always worked as it should, right out of the gate.
Every car since I have/had to turn the stupid cruise on every flipping time I start the car, which usually happens after I’ve mindlessly tried to set the speed and it didn’t engage. Pisses me off a little every single time.
Of course it doesn’t help that every manufacturer seems to use a different means of enabling the function, so I first have to go through a little mental gymnastics to figure out how to turn it on in the car I’m currently driving. That’s another little peeve of mine.
My Buick Envision does that. The cruise control will stay on even after restarting. Handy.