IN Brief:
- Ford will increase US Lincoln production from 2030 and phase out China-built vehicles for the domestic market.
- The China-built Lincoln Nautilus currently faces a 52.5% US import tariff, while connected vehicle restrictions add a separate compliance pressure.
- Ford has not disclosed the future US production location or the extent to which supplier content will change.
Ford Motor Company will increase Lincoln production in the United States from 2030 and phase out imports of Lincoln vehicles from China for the US market, turning a model-sourcing decision into a longer-term change in the brand’s manufacturing footprint. Ford has not disclosed which US plant will receive the additional production.
The Lincoln Nautilus is the main vehicle Ford currently imports from China. Ford confirmed that the model is subject to a 52.5% US tariff, while chief executive Jim Farley said tariffs were the main driver of the production decision. Restrictions under the US Connected Vehicle Rule also influenced the move, adding a regulatory issue alongside the direct customs cost.
The rule begins restricting most Chinese-developed and maintained connected vehicle software from model year 2027, with separate hardware restrictions taking effect for model year 2030. Ford had previously sought Commerce Department authorisation to continue importing the China-built Nautilus because its US-developed software is installed in China. By the time the production decision was announced, the company said discussions with Commerce had established that the Nautilus no longer required that authorisation.
The 2030 production move does not remove the wider compliance pressure from Ford’s sourcing plans. The hardware restrictions affect the origin and control of connected vehicle equipment, while tariffs change the landed cost of assembling a vehicle in China for sale in the United States. Moving final assembly to the US places the Lincoln programme inside its principal domestic sales market, but it does not determine where every component, electronic module, or software function will come from.
Ford already assembles two Lincoln models domestically. The Navigator is built at Kentucky Truck Plant in Louisville, and the Aviator at Chicago Assembly Plant, with both exported to markets including Canada, Mexico, and the Middle East. The company expects the expanded US Lincoln programme to generate thousands of direct and indirect jobs, although it has not yet attached a plant, investment figure, or detailed model allocation to the 2030 expansion.
The timetable leaves several years for those manufacturing decisions. Plant allocation is only one part of an automotive production transfer: tooling, supplier nomination, validation, logistics routes, production sequencing, and capacity have to be aligned before serial production moves. Components tied to connectivity rules can also require engineering and compliance work reaching beyond the tier-one supplier.
Ford’s existing US scale gives it several manufacturing options without making the transfer straightforward. The company says it assembled more than two million vehicles in the United States in 2025 and employs about 56,300 hourly manufacturing workers there. Additional Lincoln production will have to fit around other product programmes and plant investments rather than being added to an empty manufacturing system.
The sourcing question is broader than whether an individual part is made in China. Connected vehicles combine hardware, embedded software, communications modules, and supplier relationships that can cross several countries before final assembly. Compliance with restrictions on Chinese-linked technology consequently requires visibility beyond the finished vehicle and can force manufacturers to examine sub-tier suppliers, software provenance, and the ownership or control of technology providers.
Tariffs create a different but overlapping pressure. A 52.5% import duty changes the economics of the Nautilus immediately, while a production transfer involves capital and operating decisions that unfold over years. Ford’s plan replaces an established China-to-US manufacturing route with a future domestic production programme whose supplier content and logistics network have yet to be disclosed.
The decision follows a similar move by General Motors, which has said it will move production of the Buick Envision from China to the United States from 2028. The two programmes do not establish a uniform industry strategy, but they show how tariffs and connected vehicle controls can reach into model allocation decisions previously shaped more heavily by plant utilisation, production cost, and market demand.
Lincoln’s 2030 timetable also coincides with the year in which the connected vehicle hardware restrictions become effective. Automotive suppliers will have to work ahead of that deadline because qualification, tooling, testing, and production ramp-up can take years, particularly where electronics or safety-related systems are involved.
Ford has set the direction of the production shift while leaving much of the industrial detail open. The next disclosures that will define the supply chain are the US assembly location, the models included, the capital committed, and the supplier content attached to the programme. Until those are known, the confirmed change is substantial enough: Lincoln’s US-market production is being moved away from China under a combination of tariff cost and connected vehicle regulation.
