German manufacturing on life support as industrial output falls

Germany’s industrial core has been jolted awake by a crisis that, for many companies, arrived without warning — and yet it was the result of long-standing choices. When Volkswagen paused Golf production at its Wolfsburg plant this fall because a steady supply of inexpensive chips from abroad dried up, the headlines were about halted assembly lines. The deeper story is about how Germany’s factories came to rely so heavily on global supply chains they no longer control.

The disruption exposed vulnerabilities that reach well beyond a single model or manufacturer. What started as a dispute over semiconductor exports quickly illuminated wider weaknesses: concentration of critical materials and components in one country, policy decisions that reshaped domestic energy and industrial strategy, and business leaders who failed to demand a different path.

How a semiconductor dispute stopped Volkswagen and rattled supply chains

The immediate flashpoint involved a midstream chip maker whose ownership and export permissions became entangled in geopolitics. A firm producing basic semiconductors — tied through ownership to a Chinese parent and operating in Europe — faced intervention by Dutch authorities on national-security grounds. Beijing responded by curbing exports of those chips and the inputs used to make them, leaving companies that had come to depend on that supply scrambling.

Manufacturers at the top of long, outsourced supply chains were the visible victims. But the episode revealed a structural problem: many European industries have outsourced large parts of the electronics and materials stack to low-cost producers, and when those external suppliers are constrained for political or commercial reasons, production lines in Germany and elsewhere can grind to a halt. Although some export controls were later eased, the crisis served as a warning: short-term efficiencies have left critical industries exposed to political shifts far beyond their control.

China’s domination of critical inputs and what that means for German industry

China controls an outsized share of certain raw materials and processing capabilities that modern industry needs:

• Rare-earth elements: A significant majority of global production and the lion’s share of processing capacity are located in China, giving it leverage over supply and pricing for magnets, batteries, and more.
• Semiconductor components: While the cutting-edge nodes remain concentrated in a few countries, many “basic” chips that go into cars and appliances are mass-produced in Asia.
• Manufacturing scale: Large-scale, low-cost production of electronics and components has moved to places where energy and labor costs are lower, shifting the center of gravity for industrial supply chains.

For years this trade pattern was framed as globalization’s payoff: Western economies outsourced heavy, dirty, or low-margin production and profited from services, high-end manufacturing, and innovation. But outsourcing core inputs without securing alternative supply or onshoring critical capacity left Germany dependent on imports for the very foundations of its manufacturing sector.

Deindustrialization by the numbers: what the data show

Signs of structural decline are measurable and growing:

• Manufacturing’s share of GDP has dropped to under 20 percent, a fall of more than five percentage points over the past decade.
• Industrial employment is shrinking rapidly; last year alone around 114,000 manufacturing jobs disappeared.
• Nearly two out of five industrial companies report plans to reduce investment in Germany.

These figures aren’t abstract. They point to shrinking industrial capacity, fewer domestic investment projects, and a workforce that faces long-term insecurity. The automotive sector — once a flagship of German engineering — is particularly exposed as global competition in electric vehicles intensifies, with Chinese automakers gaining ground on price and scale.

Energy policy choices that reshaped Germany’s competitive edge

Energy costs and availability are central to industry competitiveness. Political decisions over the last decade changed Germany’s energy mix in ways that have real economic consequences:

• Exit from nuclear power: After the Fukushima disaster in 2011, German policymakers moved decisively to phase out nuclear reactors. That choice reduced domestic baseload capacity at a time when the economy still needed reliable, low-carbon power for heavy industry.
• Rapid shift to intermittent renewables: The push for wind and solar expanded renewable generation but also increased system complexity and reliance on costly balancing measures and imports when weather conditions are unfavorable.
• High industrial electricity prices: German power costs are among the highest in the European Union, prompting energy-intensive firms to relocate or consider production abroad.

A striking symbol of these choices was the dismantling of a major Bavarian nuclear plant that once supplied a large share of regional electricity. Independent analyses suggested that, if kept online, it could have met the needs of tens of millions of households — a stark contrast with the narrative that closure would not impair industrial competitiveness.

Politics and business: shared responsibility for a fragile ecosystem

The structural issues now visible in Germany stem from a mix of political decisions and corporate strategy. Several themes stand out:

• Export-first economic strategy: For years, policymakers and companies alike leaned on strong export demand — especially from China — combined with a weak euro and cheap Russian gas, to power growth. That model obscured risks tied to concentrated external markets and energy sources.
• Policy blindness to industrial foundations: Choices that prioritized climate signaling and short-term political gains over long-term industrial resilience have eroded competitive advantages in some sectors.
• Corporate acquiescence: Business leaders often accepted the shift of production offshore and the political decisions that made it possible, rather than lobbying for diversified supply chains or domestic capacity.

When policymakers and company boards fail to anticipate geopolitical shifts, the market reassigns costs through lost jobs, closed plants, and weakened industrial ecosystems. The VW halt was only the most visible symptom of a wider malaise.

What policymakers and industry leaders are wrestling with now

Public debate in Germany has shifted from denial to urgent questions about how to rebuild industrial resilience. Key issues under discussion include:

• Whether to incentivize domestic or European semiconductor and rare-earth processing capacity;
• How to balance decarbonization goals with the need for affordable, stable power for manufacturers;
• Strategies for diversifying supply chains and reducing single-country exposure for critical inputs;
• Investment policies that revive industrial research, apprenticeships, and capital spending at home.

Different political camps offer competing visions — some prioritize speed on climate targets regardless of cost, others argue for a pragmatic mix of renewables, nuclear reconsideration, and targeted subsidies to keep energy-intensive industry anchored in Germany. The debate is intensifying at a time when competitors abroad are scaling up quickly and vying for the very industries Germany hopes to protect.

Short-term fixes and long-term trade-offs

Decision-makers face trade-offs between immediate measures to prevent more plant closures and structural reforms that could take years:

• Short-term: securing emergency supplies, negotiating export relief, and deploying targeted financial aid to firms facing temporary shocks.
• Long-term: building domestic capacity for chips and critical materials, stabilizing energy policy to reduce price volatility, and aligning industrial strategy with national security concerns.

Each path carries political costs and requires coordinated action across governments, industry, and Europe-wide institutions. The choices made now will determine whether recent disruptions become temporary setbacks or the start of a deeper industrial decline.

Sabine Beppler-Spahl is a correspondent covering Germany and European industrial policy.

You might also like:

• UK net zero policies threaten heavy industry and manufacturing jobs
• Samsung profit sharing deal with workers taps $1 trillion AI market
• Huawei and Xiaomi lead China’s rapid semiconductor advance, challenging U.S. tech dominance
• UK economy: how climate policy obsession hurt growth and jobs
• Ed Miliband poll: voters prefer anyone else, new survey finds

Robert Johnson

Robert Johnson is a dedicated columnist focusing on political and social debates. With twelve years in editorial writing, he provides nuanced, well‑argued perspectives. His commentaries invite you to form your own views and engage in critical issues.