Only 6k Miles Mulliner Navi Heated Seats Parking Sensors Keyless Go Pristine on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Audi CEO's Dieselgate arrest threatens fragile truce among VW stakeholders

FRANKFURT — The arrest and detention of Audi's chief executive forces Volkswagen Group's competing stakeholders to renegotiate the delicate balance of power that has helped keep Audi CEO Rupert Stadler in office. Volkswagen's directors are discussing how to run Audi, its most profitable division, following the arrest of the brand's long-time boss on Monday as part of Germany's investigations into the carmaker's emissions cheating scandal. The supervisory board of Audi, meanwhile, has suspended Stadler and appointed Dutchman Bram Schot as an interim replacement, a source familiar with the matter said on Tuesday. Schot joined the Volkswagen Group in 2011 after having worked as president and CEO of Mercedes-Benz Italia. He has been Audi's board member for sales and marketing since last September. The discussions risk reigniting tensions among VW's controlling Piech and Porsche families, its powerful labor representatives and its home region of Lower Saxony. VW has insisted the development of illegal software, also known as "defeat devices," installed in millions of cars was the work of low-level employees, and that no management board members were involved. U.S. prosecutors have challenged this by indicting VW's former chief executive Martin Winterkorn. Stadler's arrest raises further questions. Audi and VW said on Monday that Stadler was presumed innocent unless proved otherwise. Munich prosecutors detained Stadler to prevent him from obstructing a probe into Audi's emissions cheating, they said on Monday. Stadler is being investigated for suspected fraud and false advertising. Here are the main factors deciding the fate of Audi. Background: Audi's role in Dieselgate Volkswagen Group was plunged into crisis in 2015 after U.S. regulators found Europe's biggest carmaker had equipped cars with software to cheat emissions tests on diesel engines. The technique of using software to detect a pollution test procedure, and to increase the effectiveness of emissions filters to mask pollution levels only during tests, was first developed at Audi. "In designing the defeat device, VW engineers borrowed the original concept of the dual-mode, emissions cycle-beating software from Audi," VW said in its plea agreement with U.S. authorities in January 2017, in which the company agreed to pay a $4.3 billion fine to reach a settlement with U.S. regulators.

U.S. issues new tariff threat, this time against British-built cars

WASHINGTON — Britain is the United States' closest ally but their long friendship may be sorely tested as the two countries try to forge a new trade agreement after Britain's exit from the European Union. U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Saturday in London that he was optimistic that a bilateral deal with Britain could be reached as soon as this year. But Mnuchin gave up no ground after a second meeting with his UK counterpart, Sajid Javid. Javid has insisted that Britain will proceed with a unilateral digital services tax, despite a U.S. threat to levy retaliatory tariffs on British-made autos. Mnuchin told reporters after Saturday's meeting that such taxes would discriminate against big U.S. tech companies like Alphabet Inc's Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon. The UK Treasury declined to comment on the private meeting. The divide highlights the challenges ahead as the Trump administration seeks a new bilateral agreement with Britain, part of a broader push to rebalance relations with nearly all its major trading partners. The stakes are high — British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has pegged the trade deal with United States as a way to ease the pain of breaking with Europe, Britain's largest trade partner. U.S. President Donald Trump, has promised a "massive" trade deal to support Brexit, the product of a populist movement similar to his "America First" agenda. The goodwill and special relationship the two countries have enjoyed for decades may not count for much, experts say. "Trump is not going to be doing Johnson any favors," said Amanda Sloat, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution in Washington. "He's not going to give him a trade deal without major concessions." Even before the digital tax issue arose, the Trump administration threatened to tax foreign car imports, which could hit British-made Jaguar, Land Rover, Mini, and Honda Civic hatchback cars. Stiff U.S. trade demands include increased access for U.S. farm goods, concessions that will be difficult for Britain's entrenched natural food culture to swallow. The United States also wants Britain to change the way its National Health Service prices drugs and allow in more U.S. pharmaceuticals, which could prove politically unpopular for Johnson's government. Washington's demand that London block Chinese telecoms equipment maker Huawei Technologies Co Ltd for national security reasons could also cloud talks.

Bentley designer calls Lincoln Continental concept a Flying Spur 'copy' [w/poll]

When you first laid eyes on the new Lincoln Continental concept, we'd wager you were likely impressed, because it's an impressive design. But if you also thought it looked familiar, you're in good company. According to Car Design News, design chief Luc Donckerwolke over at Bentley thinks the Lincoln concept bears more than a passing resemblance to another Continental: Bentley's own Flying Spur. "This behavior is not respectable. Building a copy like this is giving a bad name to the car design world," Donckerwolke told CDN, after posting some disparaging comments on Facebook and offering in jest to send over the tooling. "It is very disappointing, especially for an exclusive brand like Lincoln," added Sangyup Lee, his deputy for exterior design. The irony is further entrenched by the name, which Bentley only dropped from its Flying Spur in its latest iteration but still uses for the coupe and convertible models. Both automakers have a deeply routed history with the nameplate, but Lincoln's stretches back further, having first used the handle in 1939 before Bentley did in 1952. However it's not the nameplate that's the subject of controversy here, rather the design of the vehicle to which it's applied. So what do you think, did Lincoln borrow too heavily from its British counterpart? Related Video: