Back on March 23 of this year, I wrote that the EV experiment had already topped $100 billion in losses, write-downs, restructuring charges and strategic retreats. Since then, the meter has not stopped. In fact, if this thing had a dashboard, the “check wallet” light would be flashing.
The cleanest way to update the story is to avoid speculation and stick to what the companies themselves have reported since then. Using only newly reported first-quarter numbers from Ford, General Motors, Rivian and Lucid, the tally adds at least another $3.3 billion in losses or EV-related charges. That does not include every cash-flow hit, every incentive, every plant delay, or every future loss already projected. It is simply the new, verifiable money that has shown up since the last story.
Ford is still the easiest place to see the problem because the company reports its EV business separately as Ford Model e. According to Ford’s first-quarter filing, Model e lost $777 million in the first quarter of 2026. That was actually a $72 million improvement from the same quarter a year ago, which tells you how rough the math has been. Ford also says it still expects Model e to lose $4 billion to $4.5 billion for full-year 2026. In other words, the EV business is improving, but it is still improving from “ouch” to “slightly less ouch.”
The contrast inside Ford is dramatic. Ford Blue, which includes traditional gas-powered and hybrid vehicles, posted nearly $1.9 billion in EBIT in the quarter, while Ford Pro made about $1.7 billion. The trucks, SUVs and commercial vehicles are paying the bills while Model e continues to absorb capital. That is not opinion; that is Ford’s own reporting.
General Motors is also still cleaning up the EV side of the house. GM reported a solid first quarter overall, including $43.6 billion in revenue and $2.6 billion in net income attributable to stockholders. But buried in the reconciliations was a $1.077 billion adjustment labeled “EV strategic realignment,” tied to EV capacity and manufacturing footprint, including Ultium. GM’s free-cash-flow reconciliation also included a $2.232 billion EV strategic realignment adjustment. Those are not the same number and should not be double-counted, but both point to the same reality: the EV reset is still moving through GM’s financial statements.
The effects are also showing up outside the accounting department. Reuters reported in late May that the Ultium Cells battery plant in Warren, Ohio, jointly owned by GM and LG Energy Solution, delayed the return of hundreds of temporarily laid-off workers from June until August because of weak EV demand. Reuters also reported that the plant had previously announced 850 temporary layoffs and 480 permanent job cuts. That is where the glossy EV press conference meets the factory parking lot.
Stellantis is a slightly different case because its giant EV-related reset was announced before my March 23 story, but its first-quarter report shows the aftermath is still being paid for. Stellantis returned to profitability in the first quarter, but reported negative industrial free cash flow of roughly 1.9 billion euros, including about 700 million euros of cash outflows related to its second-half 2025 charges. The company’s own guidance also references about 2 billion euros in 2026 cash payments related to those earlier charges. Translation: even when the big write-down is announced, the bills do not instantly disappear.
Then there are the EV startups, which continue to prove that building cars is harder than building excitement.
Rivian reported a first-quarter net loss of $416 million. The company also reported negative free cash flow of $1.075 billion for the quarter. Rivian’s automotive segment itself had a gross profit loss of $62 million, while its software and services side carried the consolidated gross profit. Rivian still has its believers, especially with the smaller R2 SUV, but Reuters reported in June that Rivian is laying off less than 2% of its workforce as part of its push toward profitability.
Lucid’s numbers were even tougher. Lucid reported first-quarter revenue of $282.5 million, but a net loss of $1.028 billion. Its net loss attributable to common stockholders was $1.134 billion, adjusted EBITDA was negative $780.6 million, and free cash flow was negative $1.439 billion. Lucid also announced more than $1 billion in new capital and additional liquidity support, which is another way of saying the company still needs a lot of money to keep moving forward.
The market backdrop explains why this is happening. According to Cox Automotive’s Kelley Blue Book, U.S. EV sales fell 27% year over year in the first quarter of 2026 to 216,399 vehicles. EVs accounted for 5.8% of new-vehicle sales, unchanged from the fourth quarter of 2025 and far below the 10.6% peak reached in the third quarter of 2025. Cox Automotive said the U.S. EV market has entered a new chapter without government support, and that the next phase will depend more on affordability, pricing, product and charging infrastructure.
That is the key point. This is not a story about whether EVs are good or bad. Some people love them and for the right person, in the right situation, they can work very well. This is a story about forced timing, unrealistic volume assumptions and automakers spending as though consumers were moving faster than they actually were.
Consumers are not rejecting every EV. They are rejecting expensive EVs that do not fit their lives, their budgets, their driving habits or their comfort level. Meanwhile, hybrids keep gaining traction because they give buyers better fuel economy without asking them to change how they live.
So where does the tally stand now? Conservatively, the update adds at least another $3.3 billion in newly reported first-quarter losses or EV-related charges from just Ford, GM, Rivian and Lucid. If you also look at cash burn, plant delays, layoffs and future projected EV losses, the number gets larger quickly, but I am not going to count the same dollar twice just to make the number scarier. Frankly, it is scary enough on its own.
The EV experiment is not over. Automakers are still building EVs, still investing, and still trying to find the right price point. But since March, the story has become even clearer: the all-EV future many executives promised is being replaced by something much more practical and much more consumer-driven.
Choice is back. Hybrids are hot. Gas-powered trucks and SUVs are still printing money. And the EV bill, like a dinner check at a steakhouse when somebody else ordered the wine, keeps getting passed around the table.