Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Internal Audit Reveals FCA Found 5,000 to 6,000 Bogus Sales

      Where there is smoke, there is a possible fire. An internal audit reveals bogus sales at FCA.

    Following the news last week that Fiat Chrysler Automobiles was under investigation by both the Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission over inflated sales, Automotive News has learned from various sources that an investigation done by the company revealed misreported sales numbers.

     

    According to the sources, FCA ordered an internal review last year over their sales reporting. What the review found is "that 5,000 to 6,000 vehicles had been reported as sold by dealers and then "unwound." It is unknown the time period that was covered by the review. After the review, U.S. sales head Reid Bigland attempted to put a stop to the practice. But a source said the overstating of sales has been creeping back in this year due to increased competitive pressures on FCA's field staff. Another source says this increased pressure is causing the turnover rate of FCA's sales staff to be four times higher than the rest of the company.

     

    But why inflate the numbers in the first place? According to the sources, the inflation was to help preserve FCA's of U.S. monthly year-over-year sales increases (which currently stands at 75 months). This run is the longest streak of any automaker and has been a source of pride for them. But interestingly, Automotive News notes that FCA stopped mentioning this fact on its March sales release. This is also the same time they added this disclaimer,

     

    "FCA US reported vehicle sales represent sales of its vehicles to retail and fleet customers, as well as limited deliveries of vehicles to its officers, directors, employees and retirees. Sales from dealers to customers are reported to FCA US by dealers as sales are made on an ongoing basis through a new vehicle delivery reporting system that then compiles the reported data as of the end of each month."

     

    "Sales through dealers do not necessarily correspond to reported revenues, which are based on the sale and delivery of vehicles to the dealers. In certain limited circumstances where sales are made directly by FCA US, such sales are reported through its management reporting system."

     

    FCA declined to comment.

     

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I think the 18.3c needs to increase too if we're already having to shift money around to cover things.  And we're not even covering everything with that. The state of bridges here in PA is horrible. They just reduced traffic on a bridge here because they found serious defects. It's a major interstate artery through the city.
    • I'm glad this breakdown was in the article, because this was the first thing I thought of. I didn't think I was paying anywhere close to $250/yr worth of 18.3c gasoline tax, which I'm not, according to those numbers.  I can understand the EV tax being slightly higher due to the pretty significant weight different, but this is too much. This proposed tax should probably be cut in half, maybe more, IMO. $100/yr doesn't seem unreasonable. 
    • FYI - Using this story and my thoughts above, I wrote my House and Senate representatives on this and this is what I sent them:   Hello Suzan, Patty, Maria, Sam Graves, Republican for Montana and head of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is proposing a $250 annual charge for electric vehicles as part of an effort to shore up funding for the national highway system and other transportation projects. Graves stated that with the increase in electric, hybrid and just overall efficiency in internal combustion automobiles that the federal tax collected per mile traveled has dropped, making it a challenge to keep the Federal Highway Administration funded. With the new fees, Republicans hope to raise $50 billion in new funding over the next 10 years. The additional money would go to pay for highway repairs and additional funding for air traffic control. Republicans point out that since 2008, more than $275 billion has been shifted from the general fund to pay for road repairs.  The federal government has not raised fuel taxes, currently 18.3 cents per gallon, since October of 1993. The latest proposed fee schedule would be $250 per electric vehicle per year and $100 per hybrid-vehicle per year. An earlier proposal had the electric vehicle fee at $200 per year and also included a $20 per year fee for gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles.  The Federal fee would be on top of any state fees imposed. Many states have adopted EV fees to replace the loss in gas tax revenue at the local level. The federal fees are tied to inflation and would be recalculated each year and grow over time. The U.S. Energy Information Administration has pointed out that the proposed $250 fee would require the average EV owner to pay the equivalent 1366 gallons gas tax while hybrid owners would pay roughly the equivalent of 547 gallons of fuel tax on top of paying 18.3 cents at the pump. For an EV owner, they would be paying as much tax as someone driving 15,000 miles per year in an 11 mpg vehicle. The average amount of gas used by non-hybrid gasoline vehicles is roughly 489 gallons per year. I do not mind paying an equal share for my EV on the roads. Yet if they are going to charge me $250 then it is time to raise the gas tax equal to what Hybrid and EVs must pay. ICE = 489 gallons of gas X .183 cents per gallon = $89.49 cents per year based on the Governments only numbers. If they are to charge EVs $250, then they need to raise the Federal gas tax to .511 cents per gallon for equality and tie it into inflation so that gas tax goes up just as the Hybrid / EV tax goes up. With having to pull from the General fund $275 Billion to support the Federal Highway Administration, I find it a little odd that the estimated $50 Billion over 10 years really would make a difference compared to increasing the Federal Gas tax having everyone share in the responsibility to fund our inner state highway system. I look forward to hearing from you, Sincerely, G. David Felt   FYI 2024 according to statista.com, 134.55 billion gallons of gas were sold for the year. At .183 cents federal gas tax, that was $24,622,650,000 billion dollars collected in gas tax. At .511 center federal gas tax, that would have been $68,755,050,000 Billion collected in gas tax in addition to the Hybrid and EV fee that would be collected for our inner-state highway system.  
    • That is so true, all the shopping malls here have major charging areas that are free to the shoppers, but then pretty much anyone can pull in and plug in for an L2 charge. Most city government locations around here have free L2 chargers and Shell has many Volta free L2 charging at various tourist spots around Washington. Major work campuses have free L2 charging like Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Boeing, Paccar, to name just a few.  Fast charging locations are growing as Tesla has signed with the Kroger / QFC / Fred Meyers locations for major charging stations and EVgo / ChargePoint / Electrify America have signed on with Walmart / Safeway / Albertson for stations in their parking lots. Costco has signed on with a private Seattle company to install fast chargers for a fee on their lots. So lots of changes coming for sure. Be interesting to see when the Auto Industry start up gets more places open other than the first one they did on the East coast.
    • One, EVERYONE needs to write their House and Senate representatives on this and make sure they are aware of this very imbalanced approach to funding a government department. With that said, I do not mind paying an equal share for my EV on the roads. Yet if they are going to charge me $250 then it is time to raise the gas tax equal to what Hybrid and EVs must pay. ICE = 489 gallons of gas X .183 cents per gallon = $89.49 cents per year based on the Governments only numbers. If they are to charge EVs $250, then they need to raise the Federal gas tax to .511 cents per gallon for equality.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search