U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy sent Ford CEO Jim Farley a formal letter on September 8, 2026, warning that Ford’s battery-technology licensing deal with Chinese manufacturer CATL, its joint vehicle venture with Geely in Spain, and its talks with BYD over hybrid components “creates a structural national security liability,” according to Tech Times’ report on the letter. Ford pushed back publicly within a day, calling the letter “wrongheaded.”

What Duffy Said

Duffy’s letter zeroed in on Ford’s use of licensed CATL battery technology at its BlueOval Battery Park in Marshall, Michigan, arguing that China’s National Intelligence Law compels CATL to cooperate with Beijing’s intelligence services regardless of the specific contract terms Ford has negotiated. “When a company intentionally chooses to deepen operational dependencies on strategic competitors, it fails to act as the reliable partner the American public and this DOT require,” Duffy wrote, according to Tech Times’ coverage of the letter’s text. Separately, Just Auto reported Duffy’s letter went further, stating “the company’s recent strategic decisions paint a troubling picture of a foundational American brand actively intertwining its future with Chinese state-backed enterprises.” The letter also flagged Ford’s joint venture with Geely in Valencia, Spain, and the delayed reshoring of Lincoln Nautilus production, now pushed to 2030.

The criticism lands against a backdrop in which seven Chinese companies, led by CATL alone at nearly 40%, control 72.8% of the global EV battery market from January through July 2026, a figure Tech Times cited as context for why the Trump administration is pressing automakers on Chinese battery dependencies specifically.

Key Points

• Duffy’s September 8 letter calls Ford’s CATL, Geely, and BYD ties a “structural national security liability.”
• Ford’s chief communications officer Mark Truby called the letter “a wrongheaded capture-headlines attempt.”
• Ford says the CATL arrangement is “a limited technology-licensing and services agreement, not a joint venture.”
• Ford’s BlueOval Battery Park in Marshall, Michigan represents billions of dollars in investment and roughly 1,700 American jobs, per Ford’s own figures.

Ford’s Response

Ford posted its rebuttal publicly on X and its own site Wednesday evening. Truby called the letter “a wrongheaded capture-headlines attempt at the expense of a company that has done more for American manufacturing than virtually any other in the nation’s history,” according to Yahoo Finance’s report on Ford’s statement. Ford disputed characterizing the CATL deal as a joint venture at all, framing it instead as a licensing and services arrangement in which the Marshall plant remains “Ford-owned and Ford-operated.” The company also denied that Farley had proposed facilitating new Chinese joint ventures in the U.S., a claim Duffy’s letter reportedly raised, and called that specific accusation misguided, per Yahoo Finance’s reporting.

What’s Affected

The dispute puts a spotlight on how deeply Chinese battery technology is embedded in supposedly domestic U.S. EV manufacturing even at plants staffed entirely by American workers. Ford’s position is that Chinese battery licensing and Chinese battery imports are not the same national security risk, since the Marshall plant produces cells on U.S. soil under Ford’s operational control rather than shipping finished Chinese-made batteries into American vehicles. Duffy’s office argues the distinction does not remove the underlying dependency on Chinese technology and intellectual property.

What Comes Next

Neither side has signaled a change in course. Ford has given no indication it will unwind the CATL licensing deal or the Geely joint venture, and Duffy’s letter did not carry any regulatory or funding consequence beyond public criticism. Buyers and dealers watching the exchange should expect it to remain a political and public-relations fight for now rather than one that changes near-term availability or pricing of Ford’s battery-electric lineup.