Opponents of the US auto bailout – specifically that of "Government Motors" – should have a field day with this information. According to data compiled by Automotive News from the Government Services Administration, General Motors became the largest supplier of new cars to the US Government; overtaking Ford for the first time since 2009. Before the bailout, GM had held this lead dating back to at least 2005.

For fiscal year 2012, GM sold 19,404 units worth $409.2 million to the government, while Ford's sales to the feds dropped by 43 percent to 10,734 units worth $241.3 million. While some might want to attribute this finding to favoritism toward GM, GSA says that the majority of vehicle purchases, with "only a few exceptions," are driven solely by price. The report says that GM's vehicle prices climbed just 1.9 percent, and Ford's prices have risen by 12 percent. The overall top-selling car purchased by GSA? The Chevrolet Malibu. Although it has a retail price of $21,995, GSA acquired the cars for an average price of just $15,778. Other vehicles among the top 10 to be purchased by the government include the Grand Caravan, Ram 1500, Tahoe, F-150. And as we previously reported, the Hyundai Sonata Hybrid was the top hybrid model purchased by GSA.

GSA spending has also dropped in recent years with last year's $1.3 billion down from $1.36 billion in 2011 and $1.55 billion in 2010. Vehicle purchases were also down 8.6 percent from the previous year with overall purchases totaling 50,114 units.

GM had previously stated that it was going to buy back 200 million shares of its own stock by the end of the year, but we have yet to hear any confirmation on such a deal, which would be worth an estimated $5.5 billion.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 67 Comments
      Tourian
      • 1 Year Ago
      Smart move. I betcha Japan's government buys a lot of Toyotas and Germany buys a lot of M-B's. Next story please.
      garryangel
      • 1 Year Ago
      Am I supposed to be suprised about this news?
      ccdae5
      • 1 Year Ago
      GM builds better cars, the new Fords are too difficult and expensive to maintain.
      desinerd1
      • 1 Year Ago
      I have always wondered - why are almost all the government cars American brands. Wouldn't they be better off buying cars based on cost of ownership over a time period - depreciation, fuel economy, maintenance costs etc. Why don't the local police departments use Camry or Highlander? The only exception I have seen is my county's permit department. Their building inspectors drive Hyundai Accent.
        mbukukanyau
        • 1 Year Ago
        @desinerd1
        Sorry, Theres is absolutely not a single reason I can think off as to why my tax dollars should be used to buy foreign stuff while we have Americans making the same stuff here. After all this is a country with borders and citizens. If we did not make the stuff, I could see your point, but right now I do not.
        juststeve35
        • 1 Year Ago
        @desinerd1
        What makes you think the Camry is better? Educate yourself fool... For example: 2010 Ford Fusion has lower operating costs, higher resale value, higher retained value, higher fuel economy AND a lower purchase price than the Camry.
      Daniel D
      • 1 Year Ago
      And if they ignored GM cars and didn't buy any, the same people would complain about that. Really it makes absolute sense to support the company by buying their cars. The sooner their revenues increase, the sooner the government can divest itself of GM.
        B N
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Daniel D
        "The sooner their revenues increase, the sooner the government can divest itself of GM." You do realize how stupid that concept is, right? Imagine this: You loan a buddy $100 to star a lemonade stand and he'll pay you back once he's made a profit. He makes bad lemonade, so he's only raised $50 in profits. So, to get the other half of your money back, you go out and buy $100 worth of lemonade from him when you could get the same quality lemonade for $75! So, your buddy pays you back the $100. Except now you've actually spent $200. Even assuming you needed that much lemonade, you've wasted $25 on uncompetitive products. Moral of the story: if you invest in a bad business, it makes zero sense to throw money at their products. Instead, you should help them with their marketing to sell their products to people stupider than you.
      Richard
      • 1 Year Ago
      Bclwestcoast...what planet do you live on ..you moron...break even for us the tax payer is somewhere around 54.00 per share...not to motion the favored tax breaks for GM that Ford doesn't get.....oh yah and the issue about moving more jobs off shore...are you Liberals really that ignorant of the facts , stupid, pathological liars or all the above
        Matt
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Richard
        GM has been bringing jobs back to the US, not taking them away. As a global company, they can't build everything in North America, but there is no truth that NA jobs have been moved out of the continent. Mexico and Canada have lost GM manufacturing jobs that have been shipped back to the US in the last few years.
      Johnny Ventura
      • 1 Year Ago
      I would walk or ride a bike than buy a GM product
      maa2626
      • 1 Year Ago
      if you beleive govt unemployment numbers, then you beleive this article. have another kool-aid. GM deserved to go the interstate brands (hostess twinkie) route and UAW should have been tossed out on their gold plated a--
      ebn.hahn
      • 1 Year Ago
      Surprise Surprise!. What is new here. Nothing. It is just a normal Inter-Deparmental cooperation... "Government Motors" gest the lion share from the "Government"..
      zapdog4
      • 1 Year Ago
      We bailed out GM with the Official Bailout, then with more tax dollars buying cars from the Govt FOR the Govt. The Cycle of BS from DC is disgusting..
      gidupgo
      • 1 Year Ago
      I admire Ford for not taking a government bailout. And I agree with Scott!!!!!!!! about Obama illegally firing GM's president and naming his own choice for president. He has no business interfering with free enterprise that way! I would have hoped the government would reward Ford with a contract instead of rewarding GM for taking a bailout. I have been driving Ford products for quite some time now. I started out with GM products, but they got sloppy in manufacturing and I switched to Ford about 20 years ago. The Lincoln is much better than Cadillac as far as I am concerned. I will continue to drive Ford/Lincoln products until they let me down, then I might go "foreign". I have always wanted a MB or Jag, might have the chance to do that soon.
      autonimous
      • 1 Year Ago
      If GM cars are so great, why is the government subsidizing the Volt? GM is loosing money on this, but Obamas green agenda forces their hand. What a joke.
        Craig Taylor
        • 1 Year Ago
        @autonimous
        How is it subsidizing the Volt? Through tax incentives? Because those tax incentives are being given to quite a few plugin cars, including those Ford makes. The green agenda pails in comparison to the agenda and subsidies handed out to oil companies.
        Z. Kesh
        • 1 Year Ago
        @autonimous
        I testdrove the VOLT today (Jan. 12). It's simply an AMAZING car. Simply amazing. I don't understand the hate towards the Volt.
        jabaileydc
        • 1 Year Ago
        @autonimous
        Y*A*W*N
    • Load More Comments