I hear this all the time, but I would point out that US car manufacturers are heavily subsidized as well. I’m sure other countries do their own things that effectively subsidize their automotive industries as well.

NAFTA and its successor keeps a lot of automotive production and assembly in North America.

The chicken tax protects American manufacturers from foreign competition on trucks and vans.

Tesla was started on the foundations of inexpensive loans and a “free” factory courtesy of government economic stimulus.

GM was bailed out and briefly owned by the federal government, saved by below-market rate loans.

Stellantis is also an organization that owes its existence on a bankruptcy bail-out package.

The US financially incentivizes car usage, period. They underfund transit projects, allow the gas tax rate to lag inflation, make zoning laws that require car ownership, and more. One great way to subsidize car companies is to make car ownership mandatory.

State and local governments frequently give tax incentives to major assembly plants in the name of preserving jobs for their constituents. For example, GM had a $60 million tax break to keep the Lordstown, OH plant open. Some of this was clawed back after the plant closed anyway.

CAFE standards incentivize manufacturers to build SUVs that aren’t practical or popular in many other markets, essentially enshrining America-specific car design, further separating the American market from global car designs. Companies like BYD can’t compete with American cars if they don’t sell models that resemble popular choices like the Ford F-150, which are designs which would be completely insane if sold in the Chinese, Japanese, and European markets.

Ok but we are talking about tens of billions versus tens of millions. And some good old fashioned protectionism which has limited effect on the global market which we are discussing at the moment.