The duties agitated by Donald Trump push many Italian companies to create new plants in the United States. But there are problems to solve.
What if Donald Trump was right? The threat of the president to raise A wall of duties against the rest of the world Among its objectives, it also has that of reporting factories and work in the United States, pushing American and foreign companies to invest in the country to avoid rates, albeit reduced compared to the initial announcements. And some results are obtaining it. Starting from US companies: such as IBM, which has announced new investments in the USA, or Pfizer, which should transfer production from foreign plants to those already existing at home. Eli Lilly, pharmaceutical giant, and Schneider Electric, producer of electrical equipment, have also recently expressed the intention of doing the same to mitigate the impact of protectionist measures. Despite a changing picture, many foreign groups have followed the same direction. Hyundai will strengthen her metaplant in Georgia for electric and hybrid vehicles, planning a new 5.8 billion dollar steel system in Louisiana, declaring the “best way” to face the duties. Honda will move the production of the Hybrid Civic from Japan to Indiana. Volkswagen would be considering establishing production sites in the States for Audi and Porsche. Samsung is investing about 45 billion dollars in new Texas plants for the construction of chips while it should move the manufacture of refrigerators from Mexico to its plant in Tennessee.
The tendency to strengthen presence in the United States naturally also concerns Italian companies. In recent years, not only the large industrial groups but also a growing group of small and medium -sized enterprises have taken root in America. In 2022, according to Confindustria, the tricolor companies that had offices in the United States were 3,194 and gave work to just over 156 thousand people, including 75 thousand in industry and 80 thousand in services. Among the large groups that have consolidated their presence in the United States, Pirelli stands out, leader in the production of tires with plants in Georgia; Prysmian, who in the energy cables and TLC has more than a dozen plants; Stellantis, who through brands like Jeep and Chrysler operates with a vast commercial and industrial network; Ferrero, who in the food sector has a solid base in New Jersey. Brembo, Essilorluxottica, Interpump Group, Barilla, Campari, Rana, Granarolo, Mapei, Menarini, asked for pharmaceuticals, Beretta Armi, Bicgola, also produce in the USA.see in -depth analysis), just to mention the best known names. And then there are all those who export to America and fear to see sales collapse.
Some of our companies have already planned to start the overseas activity to respond To the threat of duties: according to a survey by Intesa Sanpaolo, 29 percent of our companies are evaluating the opening of production branches. This phenomenon mainly concerns the most exposed sectors such as automotive, pharmaceutical, food, production machines and textiles, which see an effective strategy in the USA in the USA to continue competing on the American market. Stellantis will invest five billion dollars in the United States including the reopening of a assembly plant in Illinois. Comer Industries will triple the surface of the Rockford (Illinois) plant, with the aim of doubled the US turnover in five years. Alessandro Riello, president of Aermec, the air conditioning company based in Bevilacqua, in Veronese, has already confirmed that “we will make the factory in the USA. The goal is to start producing from January 2028 ». While the Sila group, specialized in a car components, is in negotiations to detect a system in the Midwest. Others are more cautious, waiting for evolutions. Campari is evaluating opportunities to expand his production in the United States. On the same Lavazza and Illy line.
Even each other could move part of its business in the United States as a consequence of the Trumpian measures. The CEO of the Francesco Milleri Gangleria group said during the shareholders’ meeting that “when the situation will stabilize we will understand which type of production we can move to the United States, because it is not only a matter of times and investments, but also to find (workers with) the right skills”. Milleri touched a delicate point, that is, the lack of qualified personnel in the USA: a problem also reported by Bicgola in the interview above. And it is not the only obstacle for companies they produce in the States. THE’Economist He warns that “transferring the factories to America will be more difficult than the administration expects”. And, paradoxically, its policies will make the situation even more difficult. First, the offer of labor. Despite the average salary of an American worker is double compared to the Chinese one and almost six times the Vietnamese one, wages do not attract enough American. A fifth of the factories, according to the census Bureau, does not find the necessary workers. Second, the difficulty of building factories. The expense to create systems has doubled (net of inflation) in the last four years, also driven by subsidies for chips and green technologies. Many projects, however, are late or set aside. Solvay (chemistry) suspended a plant in Arizona; Pallidus (chip components) canceled a factory in the southern Carolina.
Third, inadequate infrastructures. Much of the electrical network, who said sixty-eighty years, is at the end of life, contributing to frequent blackouts. New connection require years. Transport infrastructures are not better: one in three bridge needs repairs. Instead of solving these problems, the US president seems destined to further complicate production in America. His attempts to repress immigration risk worsening the lack of labor in factories and construction sites. His duties increase the cost of everything, from steel for the plants to machinery, as well as making more expensive to import raw materials and components.
So, Trump is right? The impulse to “resHoring”, stimulated by duties, is real. However, an American manufacturing rebirth guided only by protectionism clashes with a complex reality. If the intent to strengthen the internal economy is understandable, the tools adopted reveal a partial vision in the face of systemic challenges that the only duties do not solve, on the contrary, they risk aggravating. “Come to America” is easy to say, a little less to do. n © reserved reproduction
