The Mexican peso sank to another historic low on Tuesday in the wake of an unpopular gasoline price hike and US President-elect Donald Trump’s latest protectionist threats against automakers.

The Mexican currency shed 1.59 percent, trading at 22.00 pesos per dollar compared with 21.70 on Monday.

The peso has fallen since Trump won the November 8 US presidential election as investors fret over his threats to impose tariffs on companies that ship jobs to Mexico and his pledge to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Last week, US automaker Ford scrapped plans for a new $1.6 billion factory in Mexico that Trump had criticized, though the company said the decision was business-related.

The Republican property tycoon, who succeeds Democrat Barack Obama as president on January 20, threatened to impose tariffs on General Motors and Japanese rival Toyota last week.

Mexico has also been rocked by daily protests over a fuel price increase.

President Enrique Pena Nieto announced an agreement with businesses on Monday to ensure that prices of basic goods do not increase as well.

“But the heaviest is Mr. Trump, who is hitting us very hard,” said Mercedes Sanabria, analyst at the Mexican foreign exchange firm Casa de Bolsa Ve por Mas.

The central bank sold dollars last week to prop up the peso, “but it’s not enough to mitigate the dollar’s increase due to the uncertainty regarding our country,” she told AFP.

Juan Musi, analyst at CI Estrategia, said markets are also on edge on the eve of a news conference Trump will give on Wednesday.

“The market is anticipating that he will mistreat us. He could give some details about where free trade is going,” Musi told Milenio television.

TOKYO: U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has threatened Toyota Motor Corp (7203.T) over its Mexican-built cars, but the biggest risk from a punitive tariff would be for its compatriot Nissan Motor Co (7201.T), the largest automaker operating in the country.Trump has criticized U.S. companies like General Motors (G.N) and Ford Motor Co (F.N) which manufacture abroad, accusing them of costing U.S. jobs. On Thursday he took on Toyota, warning the world’s largest automaker that it would face a “big border tax” if it exported Mexico-built cars to the U.S. market.

But it is Nissan, Japan’s second-largest automaker, which would be the bigger victim of any tax punishment. Nissan built its first overseas plant in Mexico in 50 years ago and now produces more than 800,000 cars there, mainly its entry-level Versa and Sentra sedans.

Nissan’s production dwarfs that of Toyota, Honda Motor Co and Mazda Motor Corp in Mexico.

It exports roughly half of its output to the United States, where it also has production plants.

Vehicles made in Mexico comprise roughly one-quarter of Nissan’s total U.S. vehicle sales, industry experts say, compared with around 30 percent for smaller rival Mazda, but less than 10 percent for Toyota and Honda.

Japanese automakers together produced around 1.4 million vehicles in Mexico in the year ended March, nearly 40 percent of the country’s total output. According to the Japan External Trade Organization, they plan to ramp up production to 1.9 million by 2019.

Current production in Mexico is dwarfed by the number of cars they produce in the United States, their single largest market, where Japan’s top three automakers alone produced around 4 million vehicles in 2015.

Trump has said he plans to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement between the United States, Canada and Mexico, and has vowed to impose a 35 percent tariff on cars exported to the United States from Mexico.

According to JP Morgan estimates, an increase in tariffs on cars exported from Mexico to the United States to even 10 percent would hit Nissan’s consolidated operating earnings by 10.3 percent, more than 5.5 percent at Mazda.

Toyota would see a hit of 0.7 percent, while Honda 2.2 percent.

All four Japanese automakers building cars in Mexico said they have no immediate plans to change operations. But Nissan and Renault SA CEO Carlos Ghosn told Reuters he was watching the incoming Trump administration closely and would respond to whatever policies it adopts.

“I don’t want to preempt or try to guess what’s going to happen,” Ghosn said in an interview on Thursday, on the sidelines of the CES technology show in Las Vegas, Nevada.

“It’s not a question that we are afraid or not afraid, we’re dealing with 160 markets in the world, different powers, different policies, different approaches, so we are used to adapting our strategy to different policies,” he said.

One Asian auto executive told Reuters his company long ago made a strategic decision to make Mexico a production hub in North America, and that it is tough to alter its strategy overnight.

“We can’t turn back the clock on these decisions,” said the executive, who did not have clearance to speak to media and so declined to be identified.

“What we need to explain more clearly (to Trump) is that most automakers are not cutting production capacity or jobs in the United States to make Mexico an additional production hub.”

Still, analysts said automakers would likely think twice about expanding production in the country in the coming years.

“As long as this administration is in place I suspect (Nissan is) not going consider any additional capacity there,” CLSA analyst Chris Richter said.

Trump’s criticisms come just as Japanese automakers are shuffling their production portfolios to boost supply of popular, higher-margin sport utility vehicles (SUV) and trucks for the U.S. market.

Honda last year announced it would expand its U.S. production capacity to build more of its CR-V SUV, while shifting production from Mexico.

Toyota has said that its Guanajuato plant under construction in Mexico will produce the entry level Corolla sedan, a vehicle segment currently produced at its plants in Mississippi and Ontario, Canada. Demand for the cars has slumped in recent years as cheap gasoline prices has prompted drivers to buy more SUVs.

“We’re always considering ways to increase production in the United States, regardless of the political situation,” Toyota President Akio Toyoda told reporters on Thursday.

MEXICO CITY (AP) — The Mexican government says it rejects the use of threats to sway investment by foreign firms.

The Economy Department’s Friday statement said it “rejects any attempt to influence companies’ investment decisions based on fear or threats.”

It did not specify what threats it was mentioning, but was apparently referring to U.S. President-elect Donald J. Trump’s efforts to persuade companies not to move jobs to Mexico.

This week Ford Motor Co. canceled plans for a new $1.6 billion car plant in Mexico.

Trump tweeted Thursday: “Toyota Motor said will build a new plant in Baja, Mexico, to build Corolla cars for U.S. NO WAY! Build plant in U.S. or pay big border tax.”

Toyota said it did not plan to abandon plans for a plant in the central state of Guanajuato.

Ford has come under criticism from President-elect Donald Trump for its plans in relation to Mexico

Ford Motor Co. said Tuesday it is scrapping plans for a new $1.6 billion assembly plant in Mexico, instead choosing to build small cars in an existing Mexican factory, and invest $700 million in a Michigan facility that will build electric vehicles.

The move is a surprising turnaround for Ford (F) after facing criticism by President-elect Donald Trump for more than a year in relation to its Mexico plan. Last month, Chief Executive Mark Fields said it was looking to work with the incoming administration on Trump’s trade agenda, but indicated it was too late to change its specific plan to build a new factory in Mexico.

The announcement comes just hours after Trump criticized Ford rival General Motors Co. (GM) for sending some of its Chevrolet Cruze production from Mexico to U.S. dealerships and paying no taxes. Trump has used the auto industry as an example of why the North American Free Trade Agreement needs to be retooled.

In a press release, Ford said it is canceling the plan for a factory in San Luis Potosi and will instead build its Focus small car in an existing facility in Hermosillo, Mexico. The Focus is currently built in Wayne, Mich., and Ford has said new products are slated for that plant but hasn’t identified specific nameplates.

Rexnord Corp. is pressing ahead with plans to close a factory in Indianapolis and shift many of those jobs to Mexico despite a public shaming from President-elect Donald Trump.

Milwaukee-based Rexnord, a maker of ball bearings and valves, said in a notice Indiana officials received on Friday that it would begin laying off the factory’s approximately 350 employees around Feb. 13.

The layoffs are expected to continue through June, Rexnord said in a notice the company is required by law to provide to employees ahead of their termination.

A Rexnord spokeswoman said Indianapolis employees would earn extra pay if they help train workers visiting from Monterrey, Mexico, and McAllen, Texas. They aren’t required to do so, she said.

Earlier this month, Mr. Trump castigated Rexnord in a Twitter post.

He has also criticized United Technologies Corp.’s Carrier unit for plans to move jobs to Mexico, and Boeing Co. for what he said are cost overruns in building new Air Force One jets to carry the president.

“Rexnord of Indiana is moving to Mexico and rather viciously firing all of its 300 workers,” Mr. Trump wrote on Dec. 2. “This is happening all over our country. No more!”

The Rexnord spokeswoman said the company would wind down its Indianapolis operations between April and June. She said the company would retain 25 Indianapolis office jobs there and in Milwaukee. The company is adding 50 jobs in Texas, she added.

Rexnord said more than half its workforce, about 4,000 employees, are in the U.S.

“Difficult decisions are a part of today’s business environment,” Rexnord said. “To be a viable company that contributes to economic growth, we must meet customers’ needs with high-quality products at competitive prices.”

A spokeswoman for the Indiana Economic Development Corp. declined to comment.

Mr. Jones, the union leader, still hopes Rexnord might reverse the decision. “We’re still fighting the fight to keep them from moving,” Mr. Jones said.

Greg Hayes, the CEO of United Technologies, the parent company of the heating and air-conditioner manufacturer Carrier, just let slip a consequence of a deal struck to keep jobs in Indiana.

And American workers won’t like it.

Carrier said last month that it would keep more than 1,000 jobs across two locations in Indiana, following pressure from President-elect Donald Trump. The decision was touted as a win for the incoming president, who had pledged keep the jobs from moving to Mexico.

In a wide-ranging interview with CNBC’s “Mad Money with Jim Cramer” that aired Monday, Hayes set out the comparative advantages of moving to jobs to Mexico, the motivation behind his decision to keep those jobs in Indiana, and the ultimate outcome of the deal: There will be fewer manufacturing jobs in Indiana.

Before we get to that
First, Hayes was asked what’s so good about Mexico. Quite a lot, it turns out. From the transcript (emphasis added):

JIM CRAMER: What’s good about Mexico? What’s good about going there? And obviously what’s good about staying here?

GREG HAYES: So what’s good about Mexico? We have a very talented workforce in Mexico. Wages are obviously significantly lower. About 80% lower on average. But absenteeism runs about 1%. Turnover runs about 2%. Very, very dedicated workforce.

JIM CRAMER: Versus America?

GREG HAYES: Much higher.

JIM CRAMER: Much higher.

GREG HAYES: Much higher. And I think that’s just part of these — the jobs, again, are not jobs on assembly line that people really find all that attractive over the long term. Now I’ve got some very long service employees who do a wonderful job for us. And we like the fact that they’re dedicated to UTC, but I would tell you the key here, Jim, is not to be trained for the job today. Our focus is how do you train people for the jobs of tomorrow?

So Mexico has cheaper labor with a much more dedicated workforce, and these are the kinds of low-skilled jobs most people don’t find that attractive. Elsewhere in the interview, he made clear that United Technologies intended to keep engineering jobs in the US and that these higher-skilled jobs were not at risk of being moved overseas.

“The assembly lines in Indiana — I mean, great people,” Hayes said. “Great, great people. But the skill set to do those jobs is very different than what it takes to assemble a jet engine.”

Hayes was then asked why he decided to cancel the move to Mexico. From the transcript (emphasis added):

GREG HAYES: So, there was a cost as we thought about keeping the Indiana plant open. At the same time, and I’ll tell you this because you and I, we know each other, but I was born at night but not last night. I also know that about 10% of our revenue comes from the US government. And I know that a better regulatory environment, a lower tax rate can eventually help UTC of the long run.

But here’s the kicker
The result of keeping the plant in Indiana open is a $16 million investment to drive down the cost of production, so as to reduce the cost gap with operating in Mexico.

What does that mean? Automation. What does that mean? Fewer jobs, Hayes acknowledged.

From the transcript (emphasis added):

GREG HAYES: Right. Well, and again, if you think about what we talked about last week, we’re going to make a $16 million investment in that factory in Indianapolis to automate to drive the cost down so that we can continue to be competitive. Now is it as cheap as moving to Mexico with lower cost of labor? No. But we will make that plant competitive just because we’ll make the capital investments there.

JIM CRAMER: Right.

GREG HAYES: But what that ultimately means is there will be fewer jobs.

The general theme here is something we’ve been writing about a lot at Business Insider. Yes, low-skilled jobs are being lost to other countries, but they’re also being lost to technology.

Everyone from liberal, Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman to Republican Sen. Ben Sasse has noted that technological developments are a bigger threat to American workers than trade. Viktor Shvets, a strategist at Macquarie, has called it the “third industrial revolution.”

Hayes said in the same interview that United Technologies was focused on how to “train people for the jobs of tomorrow.”

In the same breath, he seems to be suggesting the jobs it is keeping in Indiana are the jobs of yesterday.

Ford will forge ahead with shifting small-car production to Mexico despite repeated criticism from president-elect Donald Trump, who has warned that companies face consequences for leaving the US.

Ford’s plan to rehouse output of the Focus compact car from Michigan to a new $US1.6 billion ($2.1bn) plant being built in ­Mexico, which isn’t expected to result in job losses, remains on track for 2018, chief executive Mark Fields said.

“We have made the decision to move the Focus out, and we’re making that investment now,” Mr Fields said. “When you look at moving the Focus out of our Mich­igan assembly plant, that’s to make room for new products — zero jobs affected, zero jobs impacted.”

The Dearborn, Michigan, carmaker is expected to replace the cars headed to Mexico with more-profitable utility trucks and sports-utility vehicles to keep the Michigan plant humming amid soaring demand for such vehicles. Unionised autoworkers would keep their jobs and potentially receive larger profit-sharing cheques should Ford’s operating profits in North America increase. Mr Field’s remarks came a day after Mr Trump took credit for United Technologies’s decision to keep open a Carrier Corporation furnace factory in Indiana and prevent about 800 jobs from moving to Mexico. In exchange, United Technologies, Carrier’s parent, will receive $US7 million in tax breaks over the next decade.

“This isn’t a Carrier situation,” Mr Fields said of Ford’s plan. He said Ford decided to produce the car in Mexico partly to keep the vehicle’s price in line with customer expectations. “In our business, it’s a long-lead investment,” he said of the Focus plan.

He added that Ford’s US investment commitments remain “as strong as ever”, pointing to the company’s commitment to invest $US9bn in its US plants over the next three years as part of a new ­labour contract struck last year with the United Auto Workers union. The investment would support or create 8500 blue-collar jobs at Ford’s US plants.

Vice-president-elect Mike Pence, currently Indiana’s governor, helped broker the Carrier deal. Carrier still plans to move 600 jobs from the factory to ­Mexico, and United Technologies intends to proceed with closing a separate plant in Huntington, Indiana, moving another 700 jobs across the southern US border.

Mr Trump has said companies going forward would no longer “leave the US anymore without consequences”. He has threatened to slap Ford and other manufacturers with a 35 per cent tariff for importing goods from countries with lower labour costs. The pledge resonated with blue-collar workers, helping Mr Trump win close election battles in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, the three decisive states that propelled him to the White House.

Mr Fields said Ford would weigh future Trump administration policies when pursuing business matters. He said Mr Trump had “an influence” on the carmaker’s decision not to move production of a Lincoln SUV from Louisville, Kentucky, to Mexico. “We had been looking at it,” Mr Fields said, adding that it “made sense” to keep the vehicle in Kentucky, given Mr Trump’s positions on tax reform and infrastructure spending.

Ford never intended to close the factory or cut jobs, but rather ramp up production of another hot-selling SUV, rendering it a largely symbolic move. Mr Trump two weeks ago took credit on ­Twitter for Ford’s decision, but overstated the move, suggesting Ford would no longer relocate the factory to Mexico.

LONDON- BP PLC plans to press ahead with a major deep water project in the Gulf of Mexico—the latest evidence oil companies are tentatively wading back into big-ticket projects amid signs a two-year crude-market slump is ending.

The project to expand production from the Mad Dog oil field off the coast of Louisiana has faced years of delays. BP and its partners struggled to bring down costs, contending first with high industry inflation in the boom years before 2014, and then with a catastrophic slump in oil prices.

The oil giant said it had reduced the cost of Mad Dog phase 2—as the project is known—to $9 billion, compared with $20 billion in 2013. Oil companies such as Royal Dutch Shell PLC have said recently they have successfully cut back to make even historically expensive deep water projects work at lower oil prices.

“Some people say that deep water is finished,” BP’s head of exploration and production Bernard Looney said in a presentation this summer. “We have a very different view.”

The decision to move ahead with Mad Dog phase 2 came a day after the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries said its members would curb oil output. Crude prices have soared over 14% since the deal, with Brent crude, the international benchmark, hitting $54.50 in London trading Thursday afternoon.

The OPEC deal has added fresh confidence to an industry that has tentatively begun to invest again, signaling a gradual recovery after companies slashed their budgets in response to low oil prices.

Oil companies had cut $1 trillion from their planned global spending on exploration and production for the period between 2015 and 2020 in response to the price slump, according to a June report by Edinburgh-based consultancy Wood Mackenzie.

The project also comes as BP embarks on a plan to raise its production of oil and gas by 800,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day over the next four years.

The second phase of Mad Dog would add the capacity to pump an extra 140,000 barrels a day to a project currently producing about 80,000 barrels a day of oil and about 60 million gross cubic feet of natural gas. The project involves installing a floating production facility about six miles from the existing platform.

The project is expected to begin production in late 2021, but it still needs approval from BP’s partners, BHP Billiton Ltd. and Chevron Corp. unit Union Oil Company of California.

Chevron spokeswoman Brenda Cosola said the company is reviewing the plans for the project and will announce its decision “at an appropriate time.”

BHP Billiton declined to comment. The company has previously said it expects to make a final investment decision in the first quarter of 2017.

MEXICO CITY (AP) ” Mexico’s central bank decided Thursday to raise its interbank interest rate by one-half percent to 5.25 percent, citing “a more complex world economic panorama, caused among other things by the U.S. elections.”

The decision was the second time in as many months the Bank of Mexico has raised the rate.

In September, it raised the rate a half-point to 4.75 percent, seeking to shore up a weak peso.

The volatile peso has depreciated significantly against the U.S. dollar.

Some analysts had been expecting a larger increase, given uncertainty surrounding the U.S. presidential election of Donald Trump.

Trump has pledged to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, deport millions of migrants and build a border wall.

The peso’s interbank exchange rate weakened from 20.34 to $1 to 20.41.

Financial consulting firm Banco Base said Thursday it is unlikely that the peso stabilizes in coming days due to expected changes un U.S. monetary policy and uncertainty about the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump.

Ford won’t be changing its plan to move small-car production from the U.S. to Mexico, despite Donald Trump winning the 2016 presidential election.

Speaking to the FOX Business Network on Tuesday, Ford CEO Mark Fields doubled down on the strategy, even though Trump, while on the campaign trail, said he would put a 35% tax on the company’s vehicles made in Mexico and sold in the United States.

“We’re just implementing our business plan,” Fields said. “And just like we’re making investments in Mexico and moving our focus down there, our plans haven’t changed to introduce two very important products into the plant that the focus is moving out of.”

The decision by Ford, one of the “Big Three” automakers in the U.S., will have “zero impact” on jobs, according to Fields.