SCOOP: Republicans slam General Motors for its Chinese battery deal

Lawmakers caution that General Motors is making a big mistake — and Rep. John Moolenaar dives into why.

General Motors (GM) drew sharp criticism from lawmakers and industry observers for its recent agreement with Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited (CATL) — a Chinese company and the world’s largest producer of electric vehicle batteries. The deal, which will supply batteries for GM’s next-generation Chevrolet Bolt — set to launch later this year — sparked concerns about national security and the loss of manufacturing jobs in the United States.

The deal has sparked immediate backlash on Capitol Hill. Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Select Committee on the CCP, condemned GM’s move and told the Washington Reporter that it is “disappointing to not only its customers and employees, but also to the American people who supported the company during its financial crisis.” He warned that American automakers must prioritize “secure, resilient supply chains” instead of deepening ties with “our nation’s largest adversary.”

Jeremy Hunt, a fellow at the Hudson Institute, told the Reporter that “General Motors’s decision to import batteries from CATL is going to get a lot of focus among Republicans and even Democrats who are concerned about the national security threat of China. I would expect to see oversight from the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, as this means funding and jobs for CATL — a firm connected to the Chinese Communist Party.”

Under the agreement, GM will source batteries from CATL, a company included on the Pentagon’s list of Chinese military-affiliated entities. While this designation does not prohibit civilian partnerships, it has raised alarms among U.S. officials who caution against deepening economic ties with firms linked to Beijing. Congressional investigators identified CATL as a participant in China’s “military-civil fusion” program, which integrates civilian technologies to bolster the People’s Liberation Army.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced legislation to limit Department of Energy partnerships with Chinese battery firms. “We cannot continue ceding dominance over our critical supply chains to our greatest geopolitical rival," Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R., Fla.) said when criticizing the risk of Chinese batteries.

Additionally, the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party accused CATL of potential connections to forced labor in western China, allegations the company has denied, stating it has “never engaged in military-related activities” and describing its inclusion on military lists as erroneous.

GM defended the partnership, arguing that U.S. automakers often rely on foreign suppliers for advanced battery technology to remain competitive in the affordable electric vehicle market. A GM spokesperson told the Reporter, “For several years, other U.S. automakers have depended on foreign suppliers for LFP battery sourcing and licensing. To stay competitive, GM will temporarily source these packs from similar suppliers to power our most affordable EV model. We’re proud that we sell 12 EVs in the U.S. using domestically-produced battery cells, and in 2027 we will bring LFP production to the U.S., further cementing our unique and resilient U.S.-based supply chain.”

The House Select Committee has pressed GM and other automakers to reduce dependence on Chinese suppliers, pointing to concerns about intellectual property theft, trade violations, and economic coercion by the Chinese government.

Critics argue that GM’s partnership with CATL not only risks entrenching U.S. reliance on foreign technology but also diverts potential investments in American battery production.

A Congressional source told the Reporter that “General Motors is making a huge mistake not to develop these batteries in the United States. They could get whatever tax credits and investments they need from the Trump administration. Why create jobs in China while risking our national security at the same time?”

The controversy comes at a time when Republican policymakers are pushing for greater investment in domestic energy technologies to reduce reliance on foreign adversaries and bolster American manufacturing.

As the debate over GM’s deal intensifies, lawmakers and industry leaders are calling for stronger incentives to support U.S.-based battery production and protect American workers from the economic fallout of outsourcing critical technologies.