GM takes $6bn blow, lays off 1,200 workers as battery ambitions meet reality

General Motors has disclosed a $6 billion charge related to unwinding portions of its electric vehicle (EV) investments, marking one of the industry's starkest acknowledgements that ambitious battery-powered production forecasts have collided with market realities. The 'writedown', announced in a regulatory filing, forms part of a broader $7.1 billion fourth-quarter charge that includes a further $1.1 billion tied to restructuring the automaker's Chinese joint venture.

The numbers lay bare the manufacturing challenges confronting Detroit's largest automaker. Of the EV-related charge, $4.2 billion represents cash payments to suppliers who had tooled up and expanded capacity based on GM's earlier, more aggressive volume projections. A further $1.8 billion reflects non-cash impairments on assets that no longer align with revised production plans. This massive retraction demonstrates the tangible cost of industrial overcapacity built on demand assumptions that failed to materialise.

The scale of retreat from electric ambitions

The magnitude of GM's retrenchment becomes evident when examining the production adjustments already under way. Factory Zero, the automaker's dedicated EV assembly plant in Detroit, has shifted from two-shift to single-shift operation. The move placed approximately 1,200 workers on indefinite layoff whilst reducing output of the GMC Hummer EV, Chevrolet Silverado EV, GMC Sierra EV and Cadillac Escalade IQ. These are precisely the vehicles that were meant to demonstrate GM's manufacturing prowess in the battery-electric segment.

Battery production has faced even more dramatic curtailment. GM halted operations at its two Ultium Cells joint-venture facilities in Warren, Ohio and Spring Hill, Tennessee for a six-month period beginning in January. The Ohio plant placed 850 workers on temporary layoff whilst Tennessee affected 700 employees. These facilities, developed in partnership with LG Energy Solution, represented cornerstone investments in GM's vertical integration strategy for battery cell production. Their idling until mid-2026 signals a fundamental mismatch between installed capacity and actual market absorption.

New alliances and innovative factory upgrades for US auto industry

GM and Hyundai form a wide-ranging new partnership, and Toyota reinvents its Kentucky plant to pioneer global manufacturing standards

Ian Henry

The carmaker's Orion Assembly plant in Michigan exemplifies the strategic pivot. Originally slated for electric pickup production following a $4 billion investment that included $480 million in state grants, the facility will instead begin manufacturing the internal combustion-powered Cadillac Escalade, Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra light-duty pickups in early 2027. Battery module production will continue at the site, but the shift toward traditional powertrains reflects where management now sees sustained demand and acceptable margins.

Supplier settlements expose the real cost of strategy pivots

The $4.2 billion earmarked for supplier commercial settlements and contract cancellations represents the most immediate manufacturing impact. These payments also acknowledge a fundamental truth about automotive supply chains. Suppliers invested heavily in equipment, tooling and expanded capacity predicated on volume commitments that are no longer viable. The settlements are not penalties but rather the cost of maintaining relationships whilst extracting the industry from contracts written when the regulatory and market environment looked markedly different.

This supplier dimension deserves particular attention from a manufacturing standpoint. Component manufacturers typically operate on thin margins and make capital investments years in advance of production. When an original equipment manufacturer scales back dramatically, the ripple effects extend through multiple tiers of the supply base. Unused capacity, idle tooling and stranded investments create financial stress that can destabilise smaller suppliers. GM's decision to absorb these costs through negotiated settlements rather than protracted disputes suggests recognition that maintaining supplier viability matters for future production flexibility.

The carnmaker has indicated additional charges will emerge in 2026 as negotiations continue, though management expects these to be substantially lower than 2025's impairments. This phased approach to unwinding commitments reflects the complexity of automotive supply arrangements and the time required to renegotiate contracts across a global supplier network.

Tariffs, trade shifts, and EV turbulence: How Trump’s second term is reshaping North American auto manufacturing

North American vehicle manufacturing is undergoing major changes. These are in response to political actions, wider market factors and some interesting decisions by major vehicle companies

Production footprint undergoes dramatic transformation

Beyond the immediate financial impact, GM's manufacturing footprint is undergoing restructuring that will define its capabilities for the remainder of the decade. The elimination of a planned Michigan facility initially designated for EV production, which will now build the Escalade and full-size pickups, demonstrates how quickly strategic priorities have shifted. Factory Zero in Detroit-Hamtramck remains the sole dedicated assembly location for the Silverado EV, Sierra EV, Escalade IQ and Hummer EV, consolidating electric truck and SUV production rather than dispersing it across multiple sites as originally envisioned.

The reduction to single-shift operation at Factory Zero carries implications beyond workforce numbers. It affects throughput rates, quality metrics and the ability to achieve economies of scale. Single-shift manufacturing can actually improve certain quality parameters by allowing more thorough maintenance during off-hours, but it fundamentally alters the cost structure and makes it harder to amortise tooling and facility investments across sufficient unit volumes.

GM maintains it will continue offering roughly a dozen EV models in the United States, which remains the industry's broadest battery-electric portfolio amongst traditional automakers. The OEM stated it plans to "continue to make these models available to consumers" despite the production adjustments. This creates an interesting manufacturing dynamic where the automaker maintains model diversity whilst constraining volume, essentially operating a portfolio strategy rather than the volume-production approach that characterised earlier plans.

How Ford's even larger writedown compares

GM's $6 billion EV charge, whilst substantial, appears modest compared to the $19.5 billion writedown announced by Ford in December. Ford's charge reflected the wholesale cancellation of multiple EV programmes, including the fully electric F-150 Lightning and additional truck and van projects planned as second-generation offerings. Ford CEO Jim Farley told Reuters in a December interview that "when the market really changed over the last couple of months, that was really the impetus for us to make the call." The comparative scale of these writedowns reveals different strategic positions and degrees of exposure.

Ford's larger hit stems partly from killing entire programme generations, whilst GM appears to be moderating volumes whilst maintaining its current model range. This suggests GM may have built in more production flexibility or chosen to preserve optionality at the expense of achieving maximum scale efficiencies. The approaches reflect different manufacturing philosophies on how to navigate market uncertainty.

Both automakers now confront the reality that sales of battery-powered vehicles dropped 43% in the fourth quarter following elimination of the $7,500 federal tax credit on 30 September. Industry-wide EV sales increased just 1.2% in 2025 according to research firm Omdia, a dramatic deceleration from previous years' growth rates. Automotive data provider Edmunds expects EVs to account for approximately 6% of overall US vehicle sales in 2026, down from 7.4% in 2025. These figures frame the manufacturing environment both companies must navigate.

Battery manufacturing engineers return to Hyundai-LG site in bitter epilogue

Hyundai-LG's $7.6bn Georgia battery plant sees detained workers return amid lawsuits

Market dynamics force fundamental reassessment

The manufacturing implications extend beyond immediate production adjustments. GM had at one point planned to invest $30 billion in EVs, targeting dozens of new models and substantial battery production capacity. The company previously stated ambitions to essentially phase out internal combustion passenger cars and trucks by 2035. Whilst that target officially remains in place, recent operational decisions point toward a more measured transition timeline.

The policy environment has shifted dramatically. Elimination of consumer tax credits, relaxed emissions regulations and reduced urgency around fuel economy standards have removed much of the regulatory impetus that originally drove aggressive electrification timelines. Manufacturing strategies built on one regulatory scenario now operate under fundamentally different conditions.

Sign Up: Workforce Transformation

Analysts have noted GM's limited exposure to hybrid vehicles represents a potential vulnerability. Competitors including Toyota have maintained robust hybrid portfolios that provide fuel efficiency without requiring customers to commit fully to battery-electric powertrains. CFRA Research equity analyst Garrett Nelson observed that "GM's lack of hybrid exposure could partially reverse recent market share gains."

This creates a manufacturing challenge. Developing hybrid variants requires engineering resources and production capacity allocations that GM has thus far directed primarily toward pure electric and traditional internal combustion options.

The company's October disclosure of a $1.6 billion third-quarter charge foreshadowed the larger fourth-quarter writedown, suggesting management recognised the scale of adjustments required but needed time to complete supplier negotiations and finalise restructuring plans. The sequential disclosure approach has allowed the market to absorb the impacts incrementally rather than as a single shock.

GM's shares gained more than 50% during 2025, leading all major publicly traded automakers, though they declined approximately 2% in after-hours trading following the writedown announcement. The stock's strong annual performance reflected optimism about the OEM's operational turnaround and EV potential. The charge now introduces uncertainty about whether the core business can generate sufficient cash to offset these writedowns whilst funding future growth without additional debt or dilution.

From a financial perspective, the company will record these charges as special items in its fourth-quarter earnings, meaning they will not affect adjusted results that investors often use to evaluate ongoing operational performance. This accounting treatment acknowledges the one-time nature of the supplier settlements whilst still recognising the real cash impact on the balance sheet. Management's guidance that future EV-related charges in 2026 should be "significantly less" than 2025's impairments provides some visibility, though the continued negotiations with suppliers introduce lingering uncertainty.