“And that's where we feel comfortable that we -- I believe, we can get our net tariffs to lower than what they are in 2025.”

In context

“ned inventory and incentive approach that we've taken across the board. So that continues to bode pretty well for us. On the manufacturing footprint piece, we have some of those savings. If you recall, we announced an increase in the line rate in Fort Wayne, that's given us a little bit more utilization there that has flowed through. But the bulk of that is really going to be when the capital expenditures that we announced this year start to take effect in late '26, early '27 time frame. And then the third bucket is fixed cost. So I think we've done well to be disciplined there. We've seen a flattening of the curve pretty much, and I think we're maintaining that discipline. So all of those things we expect will hold into 2026 and the manufacturing footprint bucket can expand a little bit. And that's where we feel comfortable that we -- I believe, we can get our net tariffs to lower than what they are in 2025. And you're correct that there's no impact right now on any Korean changes in our guidance. We're still waiting for that to be finalized. Dan Levy: Okay. Great. As a follow-up, I wanted to ask about EVs. And wondering, you've talked about the opportunity for improving some of the EV -- reducing some of the EV losses that you have. Maybe you could just give us a sense of what you might be assuming or the parameters on whether it's improved -- reduced overhead spend, reducing some of the EV sales. And then how do we think about the EV lineup in this environment when on a true economic basis, presumably most of those vehicles have had problems or challenges on a variable profit basis, how you think about the need to sell those vehicles if you don't have the regulatory requirements out there?”