– Advertisement –
Outwardly, car manufacturers celebrate electric mobility, but behind the scenes, they are fighting to keep the internal combustion engine alive for as long as possible. Together with the oil industry, they are investing millions in lobbying and PR, watering down climate regulations and sowing doubt about electric cars. As a result, aelectric cars have been portrayed for years as expensive, unproven and impractical – whilst Europe falls behind technologically and China pulls ahead.
The combustion-engine car: a business model under threat
The oil and automotive industries involve sums of money that can make your head spin. No wonder: over more than 100 years, a system has been built up in which hardly anything functioned without crude oil, petrol, diesel and combustion engines. Mobility, supply chains, urban planning, commutes, holidays – so much has been organised around this very dependence.
But this system is under pressure. The world can increasingly ill-afford its dependence on fossil fuels. New legislation is designed to accelerate the phase-out of oil and internal combustion engines and pave the way for a future based more heavily on renewable energy.
This is urgently needed for humanity. For car manufacturers and oil companies, it means that a business model which has secured them enormous profits for decades is beginning to falter. The reaction is predictably strong: billions are being poured into advertising and lobbying. The aim is to influence policy – and thereby salvage as much of the old business as possible.
Billions for the interests of ‘Big Oil’ and the automotive industry
In 2024, the automotive industry invested around 56.8 billion US dollars in advertising. Admittedly, part of this is spent on electric cars, which have long since become a major selling point in their own right.
In the US, too, it is clear just how much money flows into political lobbying. According to InsideEPA, car manufacturers and industry associations have spent more than US$183 million on lobbying since 2019, partly to water down stricter regulations proposed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A further US$44.8 million was added in the first half of 2024. A significant proportion of this lobbying was directed against regulations designed to promote electric cars.
In Europe, too, there was massive lobbying in 2024. The world’s seven largest fossil fuel companies used a network of more than 50 registered organisations, over 1,000 meetings with the European Commission and a budget of almost 64 million euros to push their interests more forcefully in Brussels.
An analysis by Transparency International reveals what these meetings often centred on: around 66 per cent of them concerned Green Deal measures – precisely those policy initiatives through which Europe aims to phase out the internal combustion engine and drive the transition to electric cars.
Why is the automotive industry lobbying against electric cars?
Car manufacturers are spending so much money because the internal combustion engine is coming under increasing political pressure. Stricter climate targets are making the old business model more difficult to sustain – so the industry is trying to protect it for as long as possible. In March 2023, the EU officially adopted regulations that would effectively ban the production of cars with internal combustion engines by 2035.
In December 2025, it became clear just how intense the pressure on the EU’s rules for new cars had already become. The original plan was that, from 2035, new passenger cars and vans would no longer be allowed to emit any CO₂ whilst in use. This meant a 100 per cent reduction in exhaust emissions compared with the previous limits.
Yet it is precisely this target that has been watered down. Instead of zero CO₂ at the tailpipe, a 90 per cent reduction is now deemed sufficient. At first glance, the difference may seem small, but politically it is significant: a 100 per cent target would have effectively spelled the end for new internal combustion engines. A 90 per cent target leaves the door open – for example, for certain internal combustion engines, plug-in hybrids or vehicles whose residual emissions are to be offset by other measures.
This change did not happen by chance. Lobbyists from the automotive industry had previously exerted targeted pressure on the European Commission and individual European governments to water down stricter requirements.
Data from the EU Transparency Register reveals just how much money is behind this lobbying. According to an analysis, the European car lobby had a lobbying budget of more than 14 million euros in 2025. The industry association ACEA alone accounted for more than 5 million euros. These sums were channelled into political lobbying surrounding key EU regulations for the car industry.
Car manufacturers and the oil industry use the media to influence public opinion
When stricter climate regulations are watered down, this does not happen solely through direct discussions with governments and authorities. Public sentiment is also a decisive factor. And this is where the media play a central role.
When high-reach media outlets and motoring magazines repeatedly portray electric cars as expensive, unproven or politically imposed, this creates a climate in which deregulation becomes easier to push through. The motoring lobby is therefore not only fighting over the wording of legislation but also, through media narratives, over the interpretation of electric mobility.
A study of British print media shows just how prevalent such narratives are in reporting. The Oxford Smith School analysed 448 articles on electric cars from the first half of 2024. According to the study, one in four articles contained at least one misleading statement about electric cars. The Times, The Telegraph and the Daily Mail were particularly notable in this regard, with electric cars being portrayed negatively more often than average in these publications.
The underlying message was always the same: demand is collapsing, the charging infrastructure isn’t working, electric cars are too expensive or pose a threat to the economy. It is precisely these kinds of doubts that play into the hands of those who want to cling to the internal combustion engine.
Opinion-shaping and smear campaigns against e-mobility
The idea that economic interests can influence media coverage is not merely a suspicion. A US study analysed newspapers between 2000 and 2014 and compared car advertisements with reports on recalls. The result: newspapers were less likely to report on recalls involving car manufacturers that regularly advertised with them. This effect was particularly pronounced in cases of serious safety defects. So, when car manufacturers are major advertising clients, this can influence how impartially the media reports on them.
German motoring magazines are also part of this problem. A study on car tests in Germany found evidence that higher advertising volumes from car manufacturers were linked to better ratings in editorial tests. Furthermore, there was a clear advantage for German brands. Added to this is a form of framing familiar from lobbying campaigns.
Just how quickly such interpretations find their way into German motoring sections is illustrated by a commentary on FOCUS online Auto. There, the phase-out of internal combustion engines was discussed under the headline ‘The ban on internal combustion engines won’t work without dumbing down the public’.
This phrasing alone shifts the debate: climate policy is portrayed not as a logical approach to reducing emissions, but as a deception of the public. Subheadings such as ‘Charging as quickly as refuelling? A complete fairy tale’ also portray electric cars primarily as an unrealistic political project. This is precisely how public sentiment is stoked against a technology that has become a threat to the old business model of the car and oil industries.
German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA): How pressure is exerted in Brussels
The German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) is the central trade association for the German automotive sector and, according to its own figures, represents more than 620 manufacturers and suppliers. The EU Transparency Register shows that the VDA’s lobbying expenditure ranges from 700,000 to 799,999 euros. It also lists 39 staff members who are at least partly involved in EU matters and lobbying.
Meetings and statements recorded by OpenLobby demonstrate that the association is actively exerting influence in Brussels. Here, the VDA’s key areas of focus include CO₂ standards, vehicle emissions targets, Euro 7, digital vehicle regulation and raw materials policy. The European Commission states that the EU Transparency Register is intended to reveal which interests are represented before the EU institutions, by whom and with what budgets.
In addition, the major German manufacturers are also active in Brussels themselves. BMW is listed as having spent around 2 to 2.25 million euros on lobbying. The group is also recorded as having held 161 high-level meetings with the European Commission and as having 19 staff members involved in EU lobbying. Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen are also represented with their own entries.
Mercedes-Benz’s lobbying expenditure is also reported as between 2 and 2.25 million euros. Volkswagen has dug a little deeper into its pockets, reporting figures of between 2.75 and just under 3 million euros. Mercedes-Benz has 15 people listed as involved in EU lobbying, whilst Volkswagen has 43. Influence is therefore exerted not only through the industry association, but also directly by the companies themselves.
Climate targets: How the car lobby is watering down EU regulations
A key concern for the VDA is so-called ‘technology neutrality’; its ten-point plan for climate-neutral mobility states:
“Brussels must respond to the changed global situation. Achieving the ambitious climate targets must be strategically linked to maintaining competitiveness […] Electric mobility must offer a clear cost advantage on balance. Reducing charging costs through greater competition and technological progress, as well as through lower taxes and levies, is of central importance.”
This ten-point plan, published in June 2025, called for a relaxation of the EU’s targets: instead of a complete (100 per cent) reduction in CO₂ emissions from new cars, the target should be adjusted to a 90 per cent reduction. Six months and dozens of meetings with the Commission later, this very demand was met.
In addition, the VDA campaigned for greater public investment in charging infrastructure, relaxed regulations for hybrid vehicles, and exemptions for ‘renewable fuels’ such as hydrogen.
Electric cars: state-funded charging points, profits for the car lobby
Whilst hydrogen represents a realistic alternative for larger vehicles such as lorries and buses, it is generally considered too expensive and inefficient for conventional passenger cars. And although hydrogen-powered vehicles emit only water (H₂O) instead of CO₂, the production of just one kilogram of hydrogen releases around 10 kilograms of CO₂ into the atmosphere.
Against this backdrop, the car industry’s call for public investment in charging infrastructure seems particularly surprising. After all, a world without internal combustion engines naturally requires a dense network of charging points, power connections and modern infrastructure. The only question is: who is going to pay for it?
A look at the figures shows that the industry itself is by no means struggling financially. In 2025, Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz and BMW together posted a net profit of around 19.7 billion euros. Looking at operating results, the total is actually just under 25 billion euros. At the same time, the global automotive market is estimated to be worth 2.75 trillion US dollars in 2025 – roughly equivalent to 2.35 trillion euros.
So when, of all sectors, one that generates such profits calls for state support for infrastructure, it is worth taking a closer look. After all, the transport transition requires investment – but the question remains as to why part of this should not come more heavily from the coffers of those corporations that have profited handsomely from the old system for decades.
Why are the markets for electric cars in the US and the EU lagging so far behind those in China?
A 2022 study by the European Investment Bank (EIB) found that almost 70 per cent of Europeans were planning to buy a fully electric car or a hybrid as their next vehicle. So why isn’t this trend taking hold to the extent predicted? A possible answer can be found by looking to China – the new frontrunner in the world of electric vehicles.
The same EIB study shows that Chinese car buyers are the most likely to purchase an electric car. The reasons for this may also explain why uptake in Europe and the US is falling short of expectations. A key problem in the West is the lack of affordable and high-performance electric cars in the entry-level segment.
Whilst China has BYD, a world-leading manufacturer, and the SAIC Motor Group, a huge domestic conglomerate, there is no real equivalent in the EU. The US, on the other hand, relies on the expensive and politically polarising company Tesla, led by the controversial Elon Musk.
Affordable vehicles and a growing charging infrastructure
Anyone buying an electric car for the first time in China can purchase a brand-new BYD Seagull – a compact city car designed specifically for the country’s 940 million city dwellers – for as little as around 8,000 euros. In Europe, you would have to budget at least 20,000 euros for a comparable model. This price difference is largely due to the fact that BYD manufactures its own batteries and semiconductors – a step that European manufacturers have not yet taken.
Furthermore, China is also well ahead in terms of infrastructure development. By March 2026, the charging infrastructure for electric vehicles in China had grown to 21.481 million charging points. This represents an increase of 46.9 per cent compared with the previous year’s figure. By way of comparison, at the end of 2024 the total number of charging points in the EU stood at around one million, with the European Commission aiming to reach the 3.5 million mark by 2030.
The European Commission is investing heavily in the roll-out of new charging stations, including through the ‘Connecting Europe’ facility. In 2024, it allocated one billion euros to create new charging points and meet its own climate targets. The European automotive industry is also investing, though nowhere near to the same extent as the EU.
One could argue that many of the criticisms raised by manufacturers – such as a lack of demand or inadequate infrastructure – could be addressed through increased investment in charging infrastructure and a greater focus on affordable models for consumers.
The VDA itself openly admits that Europe must ‘urgently catch up’ in the face of international competition; in doing so, it may also be necessary to question its own role in this competitive struggle, rather than shifting the responsibility solely onto the EU.
Trump’s loyalty was bought by US industry
The Biden administration took up the EU’s plans and set a target to halve greenhouse gas emissions from US passenger cars by 2032. This naturally required increased use of electric cars and the expansion of the relevant infrastructure. But then Donald Trump – a self-confessed ally of the oil and automotive industries – returned to power and scrapped these plans on his very first day in office.
His haste to undo everything is hardly likely to be a coincidence given the $96 million that companies in the fossil fuel industry donated to Trump’s 2024 re-election campaign. Nor is it likely to be unrelated to the $243 million that the oil sector invested in lobbying during the same election campaign to influence him and Congress, or to the approximately $5.3 million that the automotive industry contributed towards Trump’s inauguration.
USA: Sentiment against the electric vehicle transition
In the USA, too, there was a strong mobilisation against the electric vehicle transition. In the run-up to Trump’s re-election, the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) association ran a multi-million-dollar lobbying and PR campaign. The aim of the campaign was clear: to attack Biden’s plans for electric cars. Instead of discussing emission limits, it was framed as a matter of freedom.
The irony is that, in 2025, the US ranked only 15th in relevant freedom indices – with expectations that it would slip further in 2026. And this in a country, of all places, where political campaigns are particularly keen to appeal to people’s sense of freedom.
Chet Thompson, President and CEO of the AFPM, phrased the accusation rather dramatically at the time: the Biden administration was conducting a comprehensive, whole-of-government campaign to force new petrol, diesel, flex-fuel and conventional hybrid vehicles off the market. This forced electrification agenda, he argued, was bad for American families, bad for the economy and, from a US national security perspective, unjustifiable.
Thompson also claimed that Americans were clearly opposed to government measures amounting to a ban on petrol cars and mandatory electric vehicle targets. The problem, he said, was simply that most people were unaware that the Biden administration was accelerating such measures. The public must now be informed, whilst it is still possible to secure better regulations – regulations which, in the AFPM’s view, respect ‘consumer freedom’.
What electric cars can do for climate action
The EU regulations, which have been watered down under pressure from the VDA, are already expected to have an enormous impact on emissions. Analyses by ‘Transport & Environment’ show that an additional 0.5 to 1.4 gigatonnes of avoidable CO₂ could be emitted in Europe.
This represents an increase of up to 31 per cent compared with the current target. A report by the European Environment Agency on electric cars also predicts that their benefits will continue to grow over time. It states:
“It is to be expected that both the production of electric cars will become more efficient and electricity generation cleaner; by 2050, the emissions of a typical electric vehicle could be reduced by at least 73 per cent over its entire life cycle.”
Admittedly, one should certainly show understanding for the economic difficulties associated with this transition. However, such an approach could also be interpreted as prioritising financial considerations over the interests of the world’s population. Moving away from the dominance of the internal combustion engine, which has lasted for over a century, was never going to be an easy task, but scientific data shows that it is undoubtedly in the world’s best interests.
Hundreds of millions are being invested worldwide to influence governments and regulatory bodies – and at present, it looks as though the lobbyists have won. The automotive industry is an extremely profitable ally for the major players in the oil sector, so it is also in their best interests for everything to simply carry on as before. Yet the world needs change in order to survive, and these industries will have to accept temporarily lower profits to make this possible.
Post Views: 55
– Advertisement –
