鴻海與Nissan的下一步？從三菱合作延伸的電動車棋局
- 前半段為文章的英文版本 (The first half is the English version)
- 後半段為中文版本 (The second half is the Mandarin version)
====
Back in May, I published an article analyzing the electric vehicle (EV) partnership between Foxconn and Mitsubishi Motors. I argued that it was more than just a Japan–Taiwan industrial collaboration—it was a strategic inflection point for Foxconn’s global EV ambitions, especially its MIH platform. Now, less than two months later, rumors are circulating that Foxconn may team up with another Japanese giant: Nissan.
This potential partnership doesn’t just expand Foxconn’s footprint. It could redefine the power structure in Japan’s auto industry and signal a broader shift toward open, platform-driven supply chains in the EV era.
🔁 From Mitsubishi to Nissan: Foxconn Deepens Its Japan Strategy
According to reports from Nikkei and other media, Nissan is considering handing over its underutilized Oppama Plant in Kanagawa Prefecture to Foxconn for EV production. The factory, once a cornerstone of Nissan’s domestic operations, is now struggling with excess capacity. If Foxconn takes over, it wouldn’t just be a win-win scenario for both parties—it would represent a deeper integration of the MIH platform into Japan’s traditionally insular manufacturing system.
This move would also build on Foxconn’s earlier partnership with Mitsubishi, which targeted commercial EVs for right-hand drive markets such as Australia and New Zealand. It’s becoming clear: Foxconn is not just entering Japan—it’s embedding itself into the core of its EV transition.
🧩 The Unfinished Chapter: Foxconn Once Tried to Invest in Nissan
This isn’t the first time the two companies have been in talks. Around 2020, Foxconn expressed interest in taking a strategic minority stake in Nissan, aiming to deepen collaboration through its EV platform and manufacturing technology. However, Nissan—still in the midst of restructuring its Renault–Nissan–Mitsubishi Alliance—was reluctant to allow outside capital in.
Foxconn was clear in its intent: “We don’t want to control carmakers—we want to be co-owners of core technology and platforms.” The failed investment was part of a broader EV ecosystem strategy: equity-light, influence-heavy.
🤝 Nissan’s Alternative Path: Merger Talks with Honda?
After rejecting Foxconn’s proposal, Nissan found itself in a different kind of headline: talks of a potential merger with Honda. The source? An internal report from Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), which proposed consolidating Japan’s carmakers to fend off foreign EV rivals like Tesla and BYD.
But the idea quickly fizzled. Honda went its own way, launching the Afeela EV brand with Sony. Nissan continued restructuring under its existing alliance, and both firms publicly denied any real merger plans. What was meant to be Japan’s “EV national team” became a symbol of fragmentation and strategic hesitation.
🐢 Why Is Nissan Falling Behind in EVs?
Ironically, Nissan was one of the first automakers to launch a mass-market EV: the Leaf in 2010. For a time, it led the global race. But when Tesla’s Model 3 arrived, Nissan had no strong successor. It failed to launch a next-gen flagship or break into the smart SUV segment.
Meanwhile, Toyota—despite starting late—built a coherent EV strategy: collaborating with BYD, pushing solid-state battery R&D, and continuing its hydrogen bets. Honda joined forces with Sony, injecting innovation and fresh brand appeal.
Nissan, by contrast, has lacked both a vision and velocity. It has no Tesla-like capital, no Huawei-level tech backing, and no standout user experience. That’s why returning to the table with Foxconn makes sense—it’s not a bold leap forward, but a realistic move to survive the transition.
⚙️ Foxconn’s “Non-Equity Playbook”: Not a Carmaker, But More Than One
Foxconn has made it clear over the past few years: it doesn’t want to own car brands—it wants to power them. From Lordstown Motors (which ultimately failed) to Stellantis (co-developing commercial platforms), to its CEER joint venture in Saudi Arabia, and upcoming plans with the Indonesian government, Foxconn is executing a three-part strategy: platform + manufacturing + ecosystem.
This approach is especially attractive to legacy carmakers who are struggling to digitize, but wary of losing control. Foxconn’s model offers something rare: manufacturing scale and technology expertise without demanding brand dominance.
It’s not a shareholder—but it often acts like a co-pilot.
📉 Back to Foxconn: Nissan’s Realistic Option
Now that reports suggest Nissan may hand over the Oppama plant to Foxconn, it’s hard to view this as an equal partnership. It looks more like a pragmatic concession.
Nissan needs to improve capacity utilization and reduce operational stress. Without a compelling next-gen EV, the fastest route is to tap Foxconn’s proven platform and manufacturing infrastructure.
For Foxconn, this is yet another proof point: even without ownership or branding power, it can position itself at the center of next-gen auto supply chains.
🧭 Final Thoughts: Japan’s Automotive Future Hinges on Supply Chain Openness
For decades, Japan’s auto industry thrived on keiretsu-style closed ecosystems—tightly linked suppliers, in-house production, and high vertical integration. But as EVs and digitalization reshape the rules, these systems are facing their limits.
Foxconn’s entry isn’t just about contract manufacturing—it’s about unraveling and reconfiguring the Japanese value chain.
It brings agility, modularity, and global integration—capabilities most legacy automakers struggle to build internally.
From Mitsubishi to Nissan—and possibly Mazda or Suzuki next—Foxconn is steadily breaching Japan’s automotive fortress. Whether these partnerships succeed or stall, they’ll offer a blueprint for how old industrial powers coexist (or collide) with new tech platforms in the post-ICE era.
If you found this analysis useful
I regularly share deeper, behind-the-scenes insights on my LinkedIn Newsletter:
Taiwan Tech Dispatch
→ Follow & subscribe on LinkedIn
📌 Further Reading:
🔗 Foxconn and Mitsubishi: Strategic EV Collaboration in Japan (Original Article)
🔗 Nissan considers Foxconn EV output to save Oppama plant from closure, sources say
====
鴻海與Nissan的下一步？從三菱合作延伸的電動車棋局
在今年 5 月，我曾撰文分析鴻海與三菱汽車的合作案，指出這不僅是台日雙方電動車合作的重要里程碑，更是鴻海 MIH 平台全球布局的一部分。如今，不到兩個月，鴻海與日產汽車（Nissan）可能展開合作的消息再度引發市場關注，為這盤台日電動車棋局增添了新的變數。
🔁 從三菱到日產：鴻海日本布局再下一城？
根據日經新聞與多家媒體報導，日產正考慮將旗下神奈川縣的追濱工廠（Oppama Plant）委由鴻海生產電動車（EV）。該工廠因產能利用率偏低，一度傳出可能關閉。若鴻海能進駐代工，將不僅協助日產活化閒置資源，也讓自家的 MIH 電動車平台落腳日本本土，深化其在右駕車市場的供應鏈優勢。
這與先前與三菱合作生產電動商用車（包括計畫進軍澳洲和紐西蘭市場）相呼應，反映鴻海策略性深耕日本 EV 產業的決心與速度。
🧩 過去的未竟之局：鴻海曾有意入股Nissan
事實上，這並非鴻海與日產首次傳出合作消息。早在 2020 年左右，鴻海便表明有意策略性入股日產汽車，希望以技術平台與小額資本參與的方式深化合作。然而這項提議最終並未獲得日產接受。彼時的日產仍處於 Renault–Nissan–Mitsubishi 聯盟架構重整期，對外部資本相對保守。
鴻海當時的主張非常明確：「我們不做控股車廠，但願意成為關鍵技術與平台的共同擁有者。」這種策略性小股入主，是鴻海推動 EV 生態系整合的一環。
🤝 Nissan的另一條路：轉向與Honda討論合併？
在未接受鴻海提議之後，市場一度傳出日產可能與本田（Honda）合併。消息來源來自日本經濟產業省內部文件，建議日本應整合車廠資源、打造國內「EV 國家隊」，以對抗特斯拉、比亞迪等海外競爭者。
不過此案並未落實。Honda 與 Sony 成立 Afeela 品牌獨立發展電動車，日產則持續在聯盟架構中尋求重整突破。雙方皆否認有實質合併計畫。這段未竟的「國產整併夢」，反而更凸顯出日本車廠在 EV 時代缺乏一致戰略的分裂與遲滯。
🐢 Nissan為何在電動車轉型中走得比Toyota更慢？
值得注意的是，日產其實是全球最早推出量產純電車款的車廠之一。早在 2010 年，Leaf 電動車就曾風靡全球。然而進入 Model 3 時代後，Nissan 並未成功推出下一代戰略車型，也無法在電動 SUV 或智慧座艙上取得領先。
反觀 Toyota 雖起步晚，但透過與 BYD 合作推出 bZ 系列、強化固態電池研發與氫能布局，逐步建構出清晰戰略。而 Honda 更是另闢蹊徑，與 Sony 強強聯手，在品牌形象與軟體體驗上賦予新意。
**對照之下，日產的 EV 戰略缺乏亮點，也缺乏速度。**它既無資本資源如 Tesla，也無科技後援如華為、百度，更無消費者體驗上的突破。這使得「回頭尋求鴻海代工與技術支持」成為一種理性但現實的選項。
⚙️ 鴻海的「不入股式合作」戰略：不當車廠，勝似車廠
回顧鴻海這幾年的布局，不難看出其核心策略不是去「控股車廠」，而是創造一種 「無需股權卻能深度介入」 的新型商業合作模式。
包括與美國的 Lordstown Motors（最終雖破局）、Stellantis 的合作開發商用車平台、與沙烏地阿拉伯合資成立 CEER 品牌，甚至即將與印尼政府合作建設 EV 工廠，都是鴻海「平台＋代工＋生態」的三位一體戰略落地。
這種輕資本、高彈性、不干預車廠品牌與經營的合作方式，對於面臨轉型焦慮、又不想被外部主導的傳統車廠而言，具有極大吸引力。它不像投資，卻比投資還有影響力；它不是股東，卻像共同操盤者。
📉 回頭找Foxconn：Nissan的現實選擇
如今傳出日產將追濱工廠交由鴻海代工生產電動車的消息，與其說是「合作」，不如說是一場「現實主義的妥協」。
一方面，日產確實需要提升產能利用率、減少營運壓力；另一方面，在缺乏新一代 EV 產品支持的前提下，導入外部平台與代工技術，是短期內能夠實現的可行選項。
對鴻海來說，這不僅是技術與製造能力的再一次驗證，更是一個關鍵指標：即使未入股、未參與品牌經營，依然能成為下一代汽車供應鏈的中心節點。
🧭 結語：日本汽車產業的下半場，關鍵在「供應鏈開放」
長期以來，日本汽車產業以封閉的 Keiretsu（企業集團）供應體系著稱，從上游零件到下游通路幾乎自給自足。然而在電動車與數位轉型的浪潮下，這套系統正在遭遇效率與創新的極限。
鴻海的介入，不只是代工而已，而是對這套體系的一次「供應鏈解構」與「價值鏈重組」。
它帶來的是外部製造彈性、全球供應鏈整合力、模組化設計邏輯，這些都是傳統車廠難以內建的能力。
從三菱到日產，再到可能未來的 Mazda 或 Suzuki，鴻海正一步步打開日本汽車產業的防線。而這場合作的成敗，也將成為全球汽車產業觀察「舊體制能否與新平台共存」的最佳樣本。
如果這篇分析對你有幫助，
我會在 LinkedIn Newsletter 《Taiwan Tech Dispatch》
分享更多沒有寫在文章裡的觀察與判斷。
→ 追蹤並訂閱（LinkedIn）
📌 延伸閱讀：
🔗 鴻海與三菱汽車合作案分析：日本電動車戰略再佈局
🔗 Nissan considers Foxconn EV output to save Oppama plant from closure, sources say
4 thoughts on “From Mitsubishi to Nissan: Foxconn’s Quiet Takeover of Japan’s EV Landscape”