Item 1. Business
Item 1 . Business (Continued)
European regulators are also starting to look beyond tailpipe CO 2 emissions with new requirements for battery EVs and life cycle assessments. For example, the EU Battery Regulation, which came into effect in 2023, introduces a range of new requirements, including that manufacturers calculate and declare the carbon footprint of their EV batteries and track their environmental performance throughout their life cycles. Maximum carbon footprint thresholds are expected to be set in 2028. The passage of secondary legislation under the EU Battery Regulation, referred to as the Battery Carbon Footprint Delegated Act, has faced significant delays due to technical issues relating to carbon footprint methodology. Compliance with regulations like these will require manufacturers to navigate complex data collection, calculation, and reporting processes.
In addition to imposing strict emissions requirements, European regulations are increasingly expanding to include broader sustainability obligations, such as reporting requirements and supply chain due diligence. Although these rules originate in European jurisdictions, they often apply to global corporations across markets and can require costly adjustments to corporate processes, policies, and strategies. This trend is also emerging beyond Europe, with country-specific sustainability reporting requirements in place in Australia and others forthcoming. For example, the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and Australia’s Sustainability Reporting Standard both require expanded sustainability-related disclosures, including how companies manage climate risks and align their strategies with global climate goals. Noncompliance can result in monetary penalties and reputational harm.
In 2023, the EU adopted the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (“CBAM”), which will subject certain imported materials (such as iron, steel, and aluminum) to a carbon levy linked to the carbon price payable on domestic goods under the European Trading Scheme. The EU CBAM is expected to increase our costs of importing such materials from 2026 onwards and/or limit our ability to import lower cost materials from non-EU countries. A similar CBAM is expected to be introduced in the United Kingdom in 2027.
Other National GHG and Fuel Economy Requirements. The Canadian federal government regulates vehicle GHG emissions under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. A majority of the U.S. EPA light-duty vehicle standards are automatically adopted in Canada by reference to the United States Code of Federal Regulations, with a few standalone administrative elements. Similarly, heavy-duty vehicle and engine GHG emissions regulations in Canada also incorporate U.S. EPA rules by reference; however, while currently aligned, model year emission targets are standalone in Canada’s heavy-duty vehicle and engine regulations and, therefore, are not automatically updated with any updates to U.S. law. Due to the anticipated changes to U.S. EPA GHG standards, the Canadian federal government will end its longstanding regulatory alignment with the United States on GHG requirements, and in February 2026, Canada announced its intention to introduce GHG emission standards for light-duty vehicles to achieve a goal of 75% EV sales by 2035 and 90% by 2040. With such GHG standards, Canada also announced it will repeal the light-duty ZEV sales requirements that would have commenced in the 2027 model year under the Electric Vehicle Availability Standard.
Simultaneously, Quebec and British Columbia are reviewing their provincial regulations, which currently mandate 100% ZEV sales by 2035. While both provinces began developing heavy-duty ZEV mandates, there were no new developments in 2025. Additionally, Quebec announced plans in September 2025 to repeal its regulation banning the sale of light-duty internal combustion engine vehicles as of 2035. Ultimately, compliance with these shifting ZEV and emissions requirements depends heavily on market conditions that drive consumer demand for EVs, including technology readiness, purchase incentives, affordability, and the availability and reliability of a charging infrastructure. The prospect of maintaining stringent Canada-specific federal GHG requirements and provincial ZEV sales mandates presents significant challenges.
Regional governments across the globe have adopted or are considering implementing, and in some cases introducing, emissions regulations that align with CAFE standards. For example, China’s Corporate Average Fuel Consumption and New Energy Vehicle (“NEV”) Credits Administrative Rules contain fuel consumption requirements as well as credit mandates for NEV passenger vehicles, i.e., plug-in hybrids, EVs, or fuel cell vehicles. The fuel consumption requirement, which is based on the WLTP, uses a weight-based approach to establish targets, with year-over-year target reductions. The credit mandates require OEMs to generate a specific amount of NEV credits each year based on a percentage of the OEM’s annual ICE vehicle production or import volume, with the percentage increasing year over year. China also imposes a national standard governing fuel consumption limits for passenger vehicles that are produced and to be sold domestically in China. An updated version of this national standard, which will impose more stringent fuel consumption limits, was implemented in January 2026. China is developing a new mandatory national standard to impose limits on fuel consumption and electric energy consumption by PHEVs, detailed proposals of which are expected to be available in the second quarter of 2026. China also released a new mandatory national standard to regulate the limits of electric energy consumption by battery EVs that was implemented in January 2026.
12
Item 1 . Business (Continued)
Australia implemented a unique fleet CO 2 standard in 2025 for light-duty and mid-size cars, SUVs, pickups, and vans, which is expected to remain in effect until 2029. Governmental reviews of national standards in Australia, New Zealand, and Saudi Arabia are expected to occur in 2026.
South American countries are implementing stricter standards for vehicle energy efficiency and sustainability as well. For example, in 2024, Brazil introduced its MOVER Program (formerly the Rota 2030 Program), which aims to significantly reduce carbon emissions from Brazil’s automotive fleet through financial incentives for investments in sustainable technologies. In addition to setting stricter fuel economy targets starting in 2027, MOVER mandates new requirements, applicable to all commercial vehicles, for recyclability and reporting for each vehicle’s carbon footprint over its full lifecycle.
As discussed above and below in Item 1A. Risk Factors under “ Ford may need to substantially modify its product plans and facilities to comply with safety, emissions, fuel economy, autonomous driving technology, environmental, and other regulations,” in addition to the rates of EV growth, production disruptions, stop ships, supply chain limitations, lower-than-planned market acceptance of our vehicles, and/or other circumstances may cause us to modify product plans or, in some cases, purchase credits in order to comply with emissions standards, fuel economy standards, or ZEV requirements.
Vehicle Safety
U.S. Requirements. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (the “Safety Act”) regulates vehicles and vehicle equipment in two primary ways. First, the Safety Act prohibits the sale in the United States of any new vehicle or equipment that does not conform to applicable vehicle safety standards established by NHTSA. Meeting or exceeding many safety standards is costly and has continued to evolve as global compliance requirements and public domain (e.g., New Car Assessment Programs (“NCAPs”), Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (“IIHS”), and the China Insurance Auto Safety Index) ratings and assessments continue to evolve, are increasing in demands, and lack harmonization globally. As we expand our business priorities to include autonomous vehicle technologies and broader mobility products and services, our financial exposure has increased. Similarly, federal and state regulatory requirements are growing as lawmakers and regulators adapt to advancements in automation, ranging from driver-assistance technologies such as automatic braking to fully autonomous vehicles. Autonomous vehicle and driver assist technologies continue to be scrutinized by the government, and actual or perceived failures or misuse of these technologies and features have led to government investigations and inquiries, including of Ford, which has responded to information requests from NHTSA and the National Transportation Safety Board about our hands-free highway driving system, BlueCruise. Ford and other OEMs are required to report to NHTSA any crashes that meet NHTSA-defined criteria and occur when certain advanced driver assistance system features are in use. Second, the Safety Act requires that defects related to motor vehicle safety be remedied through safety recall campaigns. A manufacturer is obligated to recall vehicles if it or NHTSA determines the vehicles contain a non-compliance or a defect resulting in an unreasonable risk to safety. Should we or NHTSA determine that either a safety defect or noncompliance issue exists with respect to any of our vehicles, the cost of such recall campaigns could be substantial. Ford is also subject to a consent order we entered into with NHTSA in 2024, pursuant to which we have retained an independent third party selected by NHTSA to assess the Company’s adherence to the consent order and Safety Act over the term of the consent order and to report on Ford’s progress to NHTSA.
European Requirements. The EU has established vehicle safety standards and regulations and is likely to adopt additional or more stringent requirements in the future, especially in the areas of access to in-vehicle data, artificial intelligence, and autonomous vehicle technologies.
The European General Safety Regulation (“GSR”) introduced UN-ECE regulations, which are required for the European Type Approval process. The GSR includes the mandatory introduction of multiple active and passive safety features, including cybersecurity requirements for all registrations, which began in 2024. EU regulators are focusing on active safety features, such as lane departure warning systems, electronic stability control, and automatic brake assist. EV safety continues to be an active area of regulation in the EU, with UN-ECE Regulation No. 100 establishing safety requirements for EVs and mandating certain testing of electrical powertrains. Furthermore, mobile network providers in certain EU Member States have begun shutting down their 2G and 3G networks, which form the basis for e-Call system functionality in existing vehicles. The e-Call systems in existing vehicles may need to be updated as these systems are phased out. It is also possible that the EU may mandate Member States to maintain these networks to allow for the continued functionality of existing e-Call systems.
13
Item 1 . Business (Continued)
Other National Requirements. Globally, governments generally have been adopting UN-ECE based regulations with minor variations to address local concerns. Any difference between North American and UN-ECE based regulations can add complexity and costs to the development of global platform vehicles, and we continue to support efforts to harmonize regulations to reduce vehicle design complexity while providing a common level of safety performance; we are seeking new opportunities in bilateral negotiations that can potentially contribute to this goal.
Safety and recall requirements in Brazil, China, India, South Korea, and Gulf Cooperation Council (“GCC”) countries may add substantial costs and complexity to our global recall process. Brazil has set mandatory fleet safety targets and penalties are applied if these levels are not maintained, while a tax reduction may be available for over-performance. In Canada, regulatory requirements are mostly aligned with U.S. regulations; however, under the Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the Minister of Transport has broad powers to order manufacturers to submit a notice of defect or non-compliance when the Minister considers it to be in the interest of safety. In 2021, Canada started preliminary consultations on several new proposed regulations. Final regulations for Administrative Monetary Penalties took effect in 2023. Draft regulations for Analysis of Technical Information for Vehicles and Equipment were delayed; they are now expected to be released in 2026 and will likely contain some reporting requirements unique to Canada. In China, new standards for AECS (Accident Emergency Call System) related to electronic architecture and devices are expected to take effect in July 2027. Additionally, mandatory national standards for intelligent connected vehicles governing vehicle cybersecurity, software updates, and autonomous driving data recording systems are currently under development in China and will take effect in July 2026. New mandatory national standards with an accident-driven focus, including safety requirements for driver assistance systems, are under development and are expected to take effect in January 2027. Similarly, in the Middle East and Southeast Asia, legislators are focusing on regulating driver assistance and autonomous driving technologies, as well as cyber and data security for connected vehicles. In Malaysia and South Korea, mandatory e-Call requirements are being drafted. E-Call is mandatory in the UAE for new vehicles, and, following an update to its next generation e-Call regulations, will be required in Saudi Arabia beginning with the 2027 model year. The next generation of e-Call regulations are expected to be expanded across the GCC region in the near future with efforts to draft a regional e-Call regulation commenced in 2025.
New Car Assessment Programs. Organizations around the world rate and compare motor vehicles in NCAPs to provide consumers and businesses with additional information about the safety of new vehicles. NCAPs use crash tests and other evaluations that are different and often more stringent than what is required by applicable regulations. Vehicle safety is rated using stars, with five stars awarded for the highest safety rating and one for the lowest. Achieving high NCAP ratings, which may vary by country or region, can add complexity and cost to vehicles. Similarly, environmental rating systems exist in various regions, e.g., Green NCAP in Europe. In China, updated NCAP protocols were implemented in 2024, requiring more stringent assessment methods for both passive and active safety technologies and expanding the scope of such assessments to pick-up trucks and commercial vans. In Southeast Asia and Latin America, an updated NCAP test and rating protocol is similarly forecast to be effective beginning in 2026 and is expected to put greater emphasis on assessment of driver assistance technologies. In Australia and New Zealand, the Australasian NCAP published protocols that are expected to be effective from 2026 to 2028 and harmonize with other protocols adopted in the EU, but with distinct local e-Call and child restraint specifications. These protocols impose additional requirements relating to testing, evaluation, and mandatory safety features, and compliance with them (or any subsequent updates to them) may be costly.
14
Item 1 . Business (Continued)
HUMAN CAPITAL RESOURCES
People Strategy and Governance
We strive to create an employee experience that enables an inclusive environment of excellence, focus, and collaboration among team members, allowing us to deliver short- and long-term business success. Ford maintains an Executive People Forum consisting of the CEO and top leadership team that meets monthly with a specific focus on people and organizational topics that will enable and accelerate delivery of our Ford+ plan. Key topic areas include Compensation & Retention; Organization Design; Talent Planning & Development; and Inclusion and Culture.
Our Board of Directors and Board committees provide important oversight on human capital matters, including items discussed at the Executive People Forum. The Compensation, Talent and Culture Committee maintains responsibility to review, discuss, and set strategic direction for various people-related business strategies, including: compensation and benefit programs, leadership succession planning, inclusive culture, and talent development programs. The Sustainability, Innovation and Policy Committee is responsible for discussing and advising management on maintaining and improving sustainability strategies, the implementation of which creates value consistent with the long-term preservation and enhancement of shareholder value and social wellbeing, including human rights, working conditions, and responsible sourcing. Collective recommendations to the Board and its committees are an important part of how we proactively manage our human capital and create an employee experience that allows employees and our organization to thrive.
Employee Health and Safety
Nothing is more important than the health, safety, and wellbeing of our employees, and we consistently strive to achieve world-class levels of safety through the application of sound policies and best practices. We maintain a robust safety culture designed to reduce workplace injuries, supported by effective communication, reporting, and external benchmarking.
We verify compliance with regulatory requirements as well as our internal safety standards. To prevent recurrence of workplace injuries, regular updates are provided to Company management on key safety issues, including safety key performance indicators, significant incidents, and high potential near misses. As a Company, we participate in multi-industry benchmarking groups, within and outside the automotive sector, to share safety best practices and collaborate on common health and safety concerns.
In 2025, there were zero employee fatality incidents globally. Proactive initiatives and leading safety metrics have been implemented as we strive to prevent workplace injuries and reduce risk to our employees and contractors.
Building a Diverse and Inclusive Workplace
At Ford, we are committed to supporting and sustaining a respectful, inclusive, and safe workplace for all employees. We believe this empowers every person to do their best work and ultimately achieve the Ford+ plan. We actively recruit and hire the best talent and are proud that our workforce is made up of people with different backgrounds, perspectives, and experiences so we can deliver the best products and services for our customers around the world.
Ford offers 10 global Employee Resource Groups (“ERGs”) that represent various dimensions of our employee population, including race, ethnicity, gender, religion, LGBTQ+, disability, veterans, and generation with chapters throughout the world. All ERGs are open to all employees and are instrumental in providing a voice to our global workforce, while also providing valuable insights into the employee experience and product and service development.
We work to strengthen collaboration across the organization by embedding inclusion in the leadership behaviors that support the Ford operating system. We also leverage the benefit of diversity by listening to the voices of our employees and stakeholders, which strengthens our workplace, systems, and offerings and ultimately drives value for the business.
Our workforce statistics include the following as of December 31, 2025: 27.9% of our salaried employees worldwide are women; 25.5% of our total salaried and hourly employees in the United States are women; and 36.7% of our total salaried and hourly employees in the United States are underrepresented racial and ethnic groups.
15
Item 1 . Business (Continued)
Talent Attraction, Growth, and Capability Assessment
Talent attraction at Ford is evolving with the transformation of our business. We are sourcing and attracting candidates from multiple industries and regions of the world. We continue to recruit talent from traditional industries, such as manufacturing and consulting, and have been successful in attracting talent from non-traditional industries, specifically the technology industry. This is important as we build our expertise in growth areas such as software, electrification and adjacent technologies, and integrated services.
From a capability perspective, we leverage best practices in assessments and talent management to strengthen our current capabilities and future pipeline while reinforcing a culture of excellence, focus, and collaboration. The performance management process is reviewed regularly to ensure we set clear expectations, measure individual performance, and reward appropriately. Our process includes a semi-annual review of each individual’s performance to objectives and demonstration of expected behaviors of excellence, focus, and collaboration.
Finally, the extent to which our people leaders are equipped to drive our transformation plays a vital role in our strategy, and we are committed to helping our leaders strengthen their capabilities with dedicated traditional and non-traditional learning opportunities. Our leadership strategy equips our leaders with the capabilities to deliver business results and grow the talent needed to meet our organizational needs.
Competitive Benefit Programs
We provide employees with a competitive, comprehensive, and flexible set of benefits and resources to support their financial, social, mental/emotional, physical, and professional health. Our comprehensive global benefits programs are designed to attract and retain top talent worldwide. These programs include a wide range of resources and solutions to educate, empower, and support individual and organizational goals while being tailored to local regulations and employee needs across our diverse global workforce. This comprehensive approach is integral to our total rewards strategy, addressing business and employee challenges through a multi-channel approach that provides diverse populations and global regions with flexible options to meet their specific goals.
We use data-driven insights gathered through surveys, focus groups, and claims data to understand employee challenges and prioritize our programs and resources. Our benefits are regularly reviewed and adjusted to remain competitive within our respective markets and reflect evolving employee expectations. We are committed to creating an environment where employees and People Leaders respect and value each other as we deliver Ford+.
Employee Sentiment Strategy
We gather feedback from our employees through a variety of channels throughout the year. Our approach is designed to capture sentiment and make it actionable for managers, leadership, and for the teams designing the tools, processes, and policies that impact the employee experience. We use a mix of annual and real-time surveys designed to understand employee sentiment in areas such as people leader effectiveness, job satisfaction, inclusion, wellbeing, overall satisfaction, strategy and execution, and Ford Operating System behaviors.
A critical element of measuring sentiment is ensuring the data gets to those who are best positioned to use it to drive improvements in the employee experience. We design dashboards and tools for managers to view the results from their teams, help them to generate meaningful insights, and convert those insights into guided actions. We share the results with senior executives to identify broader trends and themes and to inform larger strategic decisions across the Company.
16
Item 1 . Business (Continued)
Employment Data
The approximate number of individuals employed by us and entities that we consolidated as of December 31 was as follows (in thousands):
2024 2025
United States 87 87
Rest of World 78 76
Company excluding Ford Credit 165 163
Ford Credit 6 6
Total Company 171 169
In the United States, approximately 99% of our unionized hourly employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements and represented by the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (“UAW” or “United Auto Workers”). At December 31, 2025, approximately 56,300 hourly employees in the United States were represented by the UAW.
17
ITEM 1A. Risk Factors.
We have listed below the material risk factors applicable to us grouped into the following categories: Operational Risks; Macroeconomic, Market, and Strategic Risks; Financial Risks; and Legal and Regulatory Risks. Some of the risks and contingencies discussed herein may have previously occurred. These risk factors are not representations as to whether or not such matters have occurred in the past and instead reflect our opinions on material factors that may materially and adversely affect our business in the future. We have a global business, and conditions in our industry and the regions where we operate and sell our products and services may change quickly. Accordingly, institutional stability is crucial to businesses like Ford as we make hiring and investment decisions, as well as to the smooth functioning of financial markets on which we depend. Rapid policy change in our home market, the United States, is creating uncertainty in our operations and business outlook, and may remain a source of volatility in the future.
Operational Risks
Ford’s long-term success depends on delivering the Ford+ plan, including improving cost competitiveness. We previously announced our plan for growth and value creation – Ford+. Ford+ is our plan to thrive at the intersection of great vehicles, iconic brands, and innovative software and service, building Ford into a higher growth, higher margin, more capital efficient, and more durable company. Our Ford+ plan is designed to leverage our foundational strengths with enhanced capabilities – enriching customer experiences and deepening loyalty. As we progress this transformation of our business, we must integrate our strategic initiatives into a cohesive business model, modernize our systems, processes, and technologies, and balance competing priorities, or we will not be successful. To facilitate this transformation, we are making substantial investments, recruiting new talent, and modernizing and optimizing our business model, management and IT systems, and organization. Our strategy involves providing customers freedom of choice to select the powertrain that best suits their needs and maintaining manufacturing flexibility at Ford to meet shifting customer demand. Accordingly, maintaining discipline in our capital allocation continues to be important, as a strong core business and a balance sheet that provides the flexibility to invest in these opportunities are critical to the success of our Ford+ plan. If we are unable to optimize our capital allocation among vehicles (and propulsion systems among our vehicles), services, technology, and other calls on capital, make sufficient and timely progress to become competitive on cost and quality and ensure that progress is sustainable, or we are otherwise not successful in executing Ford+ (or are delayed for reasons outside of our control), we may not be able to realize the full benefits of our plan, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. Furthermore, if we fail to make progress on our plan at the pace that shareholders expect, it may lead to an increase in shareholder activism, which may disrupt the conduct of our business and divert management’s attention and resources. As described elsewhere herein, global political instability and volatility in government regulations and unpredictable trade policy (including tariffs) in the United States and around the world limit our ability to conduct effective long-term planning and make capital allocation decisions.
Ford’s products have been and could continue to be affected by defects that result in recall campaigns, increased warranty costs, or delays in new model launches, and the time it takes to improve the quality of our products and services and reduce the costs associated therewith could continue to have an adverse effect on our business. Government safety standards require manufacturers to remedy defects related to vehicle safety through safety recall campaigns, and a manufacturer is obligated to recall vehicles if it determines that the vehicles do not comply with a safety standard. We may also be obligated to remedy defects or potentially recall our products due to defective components provided to us by our suppliers, arising from their quality issues or otherwise.
NHTSA’s enforcement strategy has resulted in significant civil penalties being levied and the use of consent orders, including at Ford, requiring direct oversight by NHTSA of certain manufacturers’ safety processes, a strategy that could continue. For example, as part of a consent order we entered into with NHTSA in 2024, we have retained an independent third party selected by NHTSA to assess the Company’s adherence to the consent order and Safety Act over the term of the consent order and to report on Ford’s progress to NHTSA. Should we or government safety regulators determine that a safety or other defect or a noncompliance exists with respect to certain of our products prior to the start of production, the launch of such product could be delayed until such defect is remedied. The cost of recall and customer satisfaction actions to remedy defects in vehicles that have been sold could be substantial, particularly if the actions relate to global platforms or involve defects that are identified years after production. For example, NHTSA and the automotive industry are currently engaged in a study of the safety of approximately 56 million Takata desiccated airbag inflators in the United States. Of these, approximately 3.5 million of the inflators are in our vehicles. In addition, NHTSA is considering action related to 52 million vehicles containing inflators from ARC Automotive and Delphi Automotive in the United States. Ford has 2.5 million vehicles within this population. Should NHTSA determine that these inflators contain a safety defect, Ford and other manufacturers could potentially face significant incremental recall costs. Further, to the extent recall and customer satisfaction actions relate to defective components we receive from suppliers, our ability to recover from the suppliers may be limited by the suppliers’ financial condition.
18
Item 1A. Risk Factors (Continued)
Ford is also subject to environmental regulatory compliance requirements, and in many jurisdictions (including the United States), we are required to report on and correct certain emissions-related defects. Similarly, where required by regulation, we are obligated to honor certain warranties on emissions-related components, which can impose additional obligations beyond our standard warranties and increase our costs.
We accrue the estimated cost of both base warranty coverages and field service actions at the time a vehicle is sold, and we reevaluate the adequacy of our accruals on a regular basis. In addition, from time to time, we issue extended warranties at our expense, the estimated cost of which is accrued at the time of issuance. The impact of such accruals will be reflected in our results of operations for the period in which the accrual is made, which could cause variability in our financial performance, while the cash flow impact may be reflected in a later period or periods. For additional information regarding warranty and field service action costs, including our process for establishing our reserves, see “Critical Accounting Estimates” in Item 7 and Note 24 of the Notes to the Financial Statements. If warranty costs are greater than anticipated as a result of increased vehicle and component complexity, the adoption of new technologies, the time it takes to improve the quality of our products and services (or if such efforts are unsuccessful), implementation of additional remedies in the event the initial one is ineffective or parts are unavailable, or otherwise (including as a result of higher repair costs driven by inflation or other economic factors), such costs could continue to have an adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
Furthermore, launch delays, recall actions, and increased warranty costs have generated negative publicity and adversely affected and could continue to adversely affect our reputation or the public perception and market acceptance of our products and services as discussed elsewhere herein. In an effort to improve quality, we have slowed down and may continue to slow down launches, which may result in lost sales, revenue, and profits and could have an adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. From time to time, our inventory levels may be higher due to a number of different factors, including as a result of vehicles on hold for quality control, which may cause us to incur additional costs associated with those vehicles, e.g., repair costs for weather-related damage.
Ford is highly dependent on its suppliers to deliver components in accordance with Ford’s production schedule and specifications, and a shortage of or inability to timely acquire key components or raw materials has previously disrupted and may, in the future, disrupt Ford’s operations. Our products contain many components that we source globally from a complex network of suppliers, who, in turn, source components from their suppliers. If there is a shortage of a key component in our supply chain or a supplier is unable to deliver a component to us in accordance with our specifications and at the cost contracted for, because of a production issue, a disruption at a supplier’s facility (e.g., fire, explosion, equipment failure, or natural disaster), limited availability of materials, shipping problems, restrictions on transactions with certain countries or companies, implementation of tariffs, or other reason, and the component cannot be easily sourced from a different supplier, or we are unable to obtain a component on a timely basis, the shortage may disrupt our operations or increase our costs of production and our ability to recoup lost production volume may be limited. For example, in 2025, our production was disrupted by fires at one of our major aluminum suppliers, the effects of which are ongoing.
For the manufacture of our electrified products, we are dependent on the supply of batteries and the raw materials (e.g., lithium, cobalt, and nickel) used by our suppliers to produce those batteries. Some of these resources are limited, and, as a result, we may be unable to acquire raw materials needed for our products in sufficient amounts that are responsibly sourced or at reasonable prices. As described in the Liquidity and Capital Resources section in Item 7 below, and elsewhere herein, we have entered into and we may, in the future, enter into offtake agreements and other long-term purchase contracts that obligate us, subject to certain conditions such as quality or minimum output, to purchase a certain percentage or minimum amount of output from certain raw materials suppliers. In the event the supplier under those agreements or any of our or our suppliers’ raw material supply contracts is unable to deliver sufficient quantities of raw materials needed for our or our suppliers’ production operations, e.g., if a mine does not produce at expected levels, or the raw materials do not otherwise satisfy our requirements, and we or our suppliers are unable to find an alternative resource that satisfies our technical requirements and with sufficient quantities, at reasonable prices, responsibly sourced, and in a timely manner, it could impact our ability to manufacture products. Further, suppliers who fail to comply with our requirements for ethical business practices could lead us to seek alternative suppliers, which may result in delayed deliveries or increased costs.
A shortage of, or our inability to acquire or find adequate suppliers of, key components or raw materials as a result of disruptions in the supply chain, import and export bans or tariffs imposed by the U.S. or foreign governments, capacity constraints, limited availability, competition for those items within the automotive industry and other sectors, or otherwise can cause a significant disruption to our production schedule and have a substantial adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. For example, China’s restriction on the export of rare earth minerals, which we and our suppliers utilize for a number of components, has impacted (e.g., rescheduling production, changing operating patterns)
19
Item 1A. Risk Factors (Continued)
and caused disruptions in our production operations, increases the risk of future production disruptions, and has increased and may further increase costs (e.g., premium freight and expedited shipping costs to make up for delays in component availability). Moreover, as the industry evolves, suppliers of traditional or EV-specific components may face financial distress or choose to exit certain lines of business, further narrowing our sourcing options and potentially leading to higher prices or supply shortages that could have a substantial adverse effect on our results of operations and reputation.
Ford’s production, as well as Ford’s suppliers’ production, and/or the ability to deliver products to consumers could be disrupted by labor issues, public health issues, natural or man-made disasters, adverse effects of climate change, financial distress, production difficulties, capacity limitations, or other factors. A work stoppage or other limitation on production has occurred, and could in the future occur, at Ford’s facilities, at a facility in its supply chain, or at one of its logistics providers for any number of reasons, including as a result of labor issues, such as shortages of available employees, disputes under existing collective bargaining agreements with labor unions or in connection with negotiation of new collective bargaining agreements, absenteeism, public health issues (e.g., COVID), stay-at-home orders, or in response to potential restructuring actions (e.g., plant closures); as a result of supplier financial distress or other production constraints, such as limited quantities of components or raw materials, quality issues, capacity limitations, or other difficulties; as a result of a natural disaster (including climate-related physical risk); social unrest; cybersecurity incidents; or for other reasons. A suspension or substantial curtailment of our manufacturing operations could have a significant adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. The duration of a suspension of manufacturing operations and a return to our full production schedule will vary. Our Ford Blue, Ford Model e, and Ford Pro operations generally do not realize revenue while our manufacturing operations are suspended, but we continue to incur operating and non-operating expenses, resulting in a deterioration of our cash flow. Accordingly, any significant future disruption to our production schedule, regionally or globally, whether as a result of our own or a supplier’s suspension of operations, could have a substantial adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations. Moreover, our supply and distribution chains may be disrupted by supplier or dealer bankruptcies or their permanent discontinuation of operations. In addition, broader changes in the supplier landscape, including supplier consolidation and suppliers’ decisions to no longer participate in a particular line of business, pose a risk of supply shortages and/or price increases.
The limited availability of components, labor shortages, public health emergencies, and supplier operating issues have led to intermittent interruptions in our supply chain and an inconsistent production schedule at our facilities. This has exacerbated the disruption to our suppliers’ operations, which, in turn, has led to higher costs and production shortfalls. As a result of this disrupted production schedule, we have received and continue to receive claims from our supply base for reimbursement of costs beyond our original agreed terms. Upon receipt, we evaluate those claims, and, in certain circumstances, we have made payments to our suppliers, and this trend may continue.
Given the worldwide scope of our supply chain and operations, we and our suppliers face a risk of disruption or operating inefficiencies that may increase costs due to the adverse physical effects of climate change, which are predicted to increase the frequency and severity of weather and other natural events, e.g., wildfires, extended droughts, flooding, and extreme temperatures. In addition, in the event a weather-related event, strike, international conflict, or other occurrence limits the ability of freight carriers to deliver components or other materials to us, or logistics providers are unable to transport our products for an extended period of time, it may increase our costs and delay or otherwise impact our production operations and customers’ ability to receive our products.
Many components used in our products are available only from a single or limited number of suppliers and, therefore, cannot be re-sourced quickly or inexpensively to another supplier (due to long lead times, specialized tooling, rigorous validation requirements, and new contractual commitments that may be required by another supplier before ramping up to provide the components or materials, etc.). Such suppliers also could threaten to disrupt our production as leverage in negotiations. In addition, when we undertake a model changeover, significant downtime at one or more of our production facilities may be required, and our ability to return to full production may be delayed if we experience production difficulties at one of our facilities or a supplier’s facility. Moreover, as vehicles, components, and their integration become more complex, we may face an increased risk of a delay in production of new vehicles. Regardless of the cause, our ability to recoup lost production volume may be limited. Accordingly, as we have experienced in the past, and may again experience in the future, a significant disruption to our production schedule could have a substantial adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations and may impact our strategy to comply with fuel economy standards as discussed elsewhere herein.
20