I’m seeing double as I cruise down the highway in a 2024 Lincoln Nautilus, a hybrid-powered SUV under Ford’s luxury brand. I have Apple Maps running on the center touchscreen, projecting from my iPhone via Apple CarPlay. I’m also seeing the same map mirrored right above, taking up about a quarter of a massive display that spans the length of the dashboard.
Business
Ford’s new Digital Experience brings Android and Apple into balance

That screen is the 48-inch Panoramic Display, which runs on Android Automotive OS, Google’s native vehicle platform (not to be confused with the phone projecting Android Auto). It merges what’s actually two pieces of curved glass in a mesmerizing and cinematic fashion, combining the instrument cluster with infotainment and some widgets. In the Nautilus, the whole system is called the “Lincoln Digital Experience.”
But like most modern cars, former physical controls are being sucked into the digital world of the screen. To adjust airflow, I have to do the thing that many drivers dread doing: switching out of CarPlay navigation to the car’s native interface. But to my delight, as the Lincoln’s onscreen draggable digital airflow adjustment controls take over the 11.1-inch central display, Apple Maps continues to run on the Panoramic Display above.
To my delight, Apple Maps continues to run on the Panoramic Display
I start to get it. Most cars take an either-or approach with native-vs-projected operating systems. A few vehicles, like the Polestar 2, can also project Apple Maps to its instrument cluster screen. But the Lincoln’s larger, uncrowded pano display elevates the experience to the next level.
Some automakers today are in a tug of war with Apple and Google because drivers are in love with their phones and prefer to use their mobile device’s interface over the car’s factory offering. Some manufacturers have made the controversial decision to either discontinue phone projection (GM) or never add it in the first place (Rivian and Tesla). But Ford is staking out a different position: it thinks it can do both.
And to the company’s credit, I think it works. Ford is embracing customer choice, and the new Nautilus provides what I think is the best balance of phone mirroring and built-in software that we’ve seen yet.
Three years in the making
Ford’s been working on its new infotainment system for a few years now, in a search for the optimal software provider that has taken the company from Microsoft to Blackberry — and now to Google. Ford and Google struck a six-year deal in 2021 to bring Android Automotive inside “millions” of vehicles, and the Lincoln Nautilus is the first to feature the fruits of that deal.
The partnership meant Ford would use Google as its cloud provider for its connected vehicle services, promising features like Google Assistant voice control to change climate settings, automotive-approved Android apps, and over-the-air software updates.
Android gives Ford “a chance to really have a stable platform”
In an interview on Decoder, Ford CEO Jim Farley said he’d only want his teams working on navigation software if it were better than the one on smartphones. “An Android or a Google Automotive Services gives us a chance to really have a stable platform,” Farley said.
Ford is now rolling out its new Android-based “Digital Experience” across its vehicle lineup. The company’s strategy is to go big with screens in the luxury segment and pare things back in vehicles like the 2025 Explorer — while also balancing its still-supported but comparatively slow QNX-based Sync 4 system, like in the 2024 Maverick.
The computer on wheels is a smartphone
Overall, Lincoln’s Digital Experience has me believing that automakers are finally able to deliver competent and intuitive infotainment. That said, I’m still connecting my iPhone. After all, that’s kind of the point.
I get a seamless transition from Google Maps on both the center and pano screens to Apple Maps via CarPlay. I enter and exit the vehicle multiple times, and most of the time, everything immediately connects, save for some limited blacked-out center screen delays, especially when connected wirelessly. I have similar success with my Google Pixel 8 Pro projecting to the Nautilus via Android Auto. It’s kind of funny seeing Google Maps and Assistant replacing, well, Google Maps and Assistant.
My expectations are usually low with in-car software. But the Nautilus feels more like a capable, high-end Android device — and it even has Google Play Store apps. The usual suspects like Spotify and YouTube were already preinstalled, and I try a game called Asphalt Nitro 2, which performs well on the touchscreen as I swipe an autopiloting racecar in different directions. (I didn’t try playing with a Bluetooth game controller, but it’s supported.)
Games and streaming video apps only work while parked, and in the Nautilus, it works on the center touchscreen, but not on the pano display. Lincoln is including a new “pano mode” in the 2025 Navigator where games and video can work on either side of the big screen, but this function isn’t available in the Nautilus. And not all Google Play Store apps are there; I can’t download Netflix during my testing, but Amazon’s Prime Video is available, and I watched some Shah Rukh Khan Bollywood classics. (I forgot to log out, so enjoy the free movies, Lincoln.)
I played some music from Sirius XM radio and from my phone, and the 28-speaker Revel Ultima 3D audio system sounds great. The music widget on the right of the pano display displays album art, and you can control the music with a nifty touchpad on the steering wheel (although, sometimes, your thumb can slip and select the wrong item on the onscreen grid, kind of like swiping on an Apple TV remote).
There’s also Google Assistant, which can accept voice commands to change car settings like in-cabin temperature but couldn’t accept simple navigation requests for some reason. Lincoln communications manager Anika Salceda-Wycoco later tells me that it was a mistake on their part because they used the same Google account across multiple cars in the fleet, and it disabled the function.
Tesla lets you type while driving but Ford doesn’t
Regardless, voice would be your only option to change destinations on the move, as the onscreen keyboard does not pop up unless you’re parked. Annoyed, I pulled over and manually typed the address to my second destination on this trip. I’ve gotten used to my Tesla Model 3’s interface, where my wife could type the address on the screen for me while in motion — but that’s not possible in the Nautilus. Siri worked fine in CarPlay mode, but I can’t ask it to do things like turn on my AC seats.
2024 tech most of the time
But not all is chummy between the Lincoln and the smartphone interfaces. They do sometimes abruptly snatch each other onscreen. For instance, calling up Google Assistant while CarPlay is running creates an ugly transition to the built-in Lincoln interface. Same for when you’re in the Lincoln interface and you’re suddenly back in CarPlay when a text message comes. The upside is I have little issue wirelessly switching from CarPlay to Android Auto. A quick jump into Bluetooth settings lets me switch between my iPhone 13 Mini and Pixel 8 Pro without hassle, which has not been my experience in other vehicles.
Coming from Tesla’s Autopilot, which flashes a blue screen when you’re not paying attention, activating BlueCruise was a little startling. After I swiped my thumb on the steering wheel’s left touchpad and selected the corresponding box for BlueCruise on the onscreen grid, the Lincoln’s instrument cluster went all blue — sharply out of sync with the tranquil theme elsewhere on the pano display.
Lincoln’s menus on the touchscreen, however, work like a breeze, with gorgeous animations running in Epic’s Unreal Engine and a powerful processor with capabilities that clearly match some gaming Android phones.
Even with all the processing power, Lincoln’s not doing too much. You’re not getting a super detailed interactive 3D model of the Nautilus you can spin around like Tesla does with its Cybertruck or colorful illustrations like inside a Rivian. But you get tasteful and swift transitions, a cool 3D whirlwind animation of passenger seats showing who hasn’t buckled up, and a futuristic PS5 aura-looking theme on the pano display.
It surprises me that the huge pano display isn’t too information-dense, and I never feel overwhelmed or annoyed with the placement of things like the fuel bar, speedometer, transmission mode, or remaining mileage (which, by the way, is often quite a lot — the Nautilus went almost 500 miles for me on one tank). And Lincoln put the display high enough that I find it less distracting than some heads-up displays I’ve seen. For some reason, though, when you accelerate, a wavy mana-looking bar increases horizontally, which almost feels like a challenge to go faster.
Beyond the screen
The real reason anyone should look at the Nautilus is the amazing pano display. The future of cars is certainly all in the software, and it feels like Ford has a good thing going, striking the best balance yet between in-car infotainment and the popular phone-based systems that most people prefer. I was pretty much sold as soon as I opened the door and it introduced me to a full Nautilus intro animation on the pano display, with waves animating to the sides and timely light streaks on the door.
The screens work well enough, but not everyone wants them. Surveys have shown growing customer dissatisfaction with in-car tech, especially touchscreen software. People are overwhelmed, and Ford’s response seems to be to add more screens, which is not a guarantee for success. I have personally owned a 2014 Lincoln MKZ hybrid and consider myself tech-savvy. Longtime Lincoln fans who appreciate more physical controls (or at least dedicated touch buttons) on previous generation models, however, could find the digital experience too overwhelming for their taste.
But if they’re not, and Lincoln customers go gaga over the new screens, Ford could have stumbled on the right formula to make it, Apple, and Google all equal winners in the race to control the in-car experience.
Business
Trump Says US Banks Can’t Do Business in Canada. It’s Not That Simple.

Hours after imposing steep tariffs on Canada, President Trump raised an issue that even the American lenders whose cause he’s championing find perplexing: the access, or lack thereof, of U.S. banks to the Canadian market.
On Tuesday, Mr. Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social, “Canada doesn’t allow American Banks to do business in Canada, but their banks flood the American Market.” He added sarcastically, “Oh, that seems fair to me, doesn’t it?”
While this issue doesn’t often come up in conversations with prominent American bank executives, it appears to be increasingly on the president’s mind.
Mr. Trump mentioned the Canada banking issue early last month as part of a broader criticism against what he views as the unequal economic balance between the United States and its northern neighbor. Writing on Truth Social, Mr. Trump said Canada “doesn’t even allow U.S. Banks to open or do business.”
Here is the actual state of play for U.S. banks in Canada:
Can U.S. banks operate in Canada?
Canada’s banking sector is dominated by the “Big Six,” the half-dozen institutions including the Royal Bank of Canada and TD Bank. They are permitted to take deposits, extend mortgages and advise corporate clients — all the core activities for banks. And Canadian customers disproportionately still prefer to do their banking in person, as opposed to online, meaning it would require a major physical presence for any entrant to attempt to enter the market.
Additionally, U.S. banks are restricted in what they can do in Canada.
Foreign banks, including American ones, must either work with a Canadian middleman, establish a Canadian subsidiary or receive special government permission to do business. Unless they agree to follow Canada’s stringent banking rules that include holding a hefty sum of cash-like assets in reserve at all times, they cannot operate retail branches that take deposits under around $100,000.
Given how dominant Canada’s homegrown banks are, any international bank that tries to compete faces “an additional regulatory burden for what would begin as a small prize,” said James R. Thompson, associate professor of finance at the University of Waterloo.
The upshot is that U.S. banks have minimal operations in Canada. The largest American lender, JPMorgan Chase, says it has roughly 600 employees in Canada, out of more than 300,000 worldwide. Many international banks limit themselves to areas that don’t involve lending, such as offering investment advice to wealthy Canadians or local companies.
So Mr. Trump is incorrect in asserting that American banks cannot do any business in Canada, but it is true that they are hamstrung in their activities.
Why is Canada so restrictive?
While there are more than 4,000 banks in the United States, Canada has just a few dozen, and more than three-quarters of deposits are held by the Big Six.
For decades, Canadian political leaders have crowed about that restrictive financial regulatory model. They argue that fending off foreign entrants in the country’s mortgage market helped the country largely avoid the 2008 collapse south of its border.
In light of Mr. Trump’s criticism, Maggie Cheung, a spokeswoman for the Canadian Bankers Association, was quick to point out on Tuesday that foreign banks were an integral part of the banking landscape. She said 16 U.S. banks were operating to some degree in Canada, with a cumulative of nearly $79 billion in assets — a statistic that the nation’s prime minister, Justin Trudeau, also cited on Tuesday.
“American banks are alive and well and prospering in Canada,” Mr. Trudeau said.
But in relative terms, their successes are small. U.S. bank assets represent 1 to 2 percent of the $6.5 trillion held by banks operating in Canada writ large.
“The major impediment faced by U.S. banks,” said Laurence Booth, professor of finance at the University of Toronto, “is simply they can’t compete with the Canadian banks as they don’t have the scale, while they can’t take any of them over as there are restrictions on foreign ownership.”
Do Canadian banks ‘flood’ the U.S.?
International banks — including Canadian ones — are largely free to establish U.S. arms. The United States is a more attractive target for international banks than Canada, both because it is a hub for world finance and because its market permits more exotic, higher-profit lending activities like 30-year mortgages. (The most common mortgage in Canada carries a five-year term.)
The largest Canadian bank in America, TD Bank, operates more than 1,000 U.S. branches through a Delaware subsidiary. That size puts it in line with well-known regional lenders like Citizens and Fifth Third.
The Canadian Bankers Association said the six largest Canadian lenders held less than 3.5 percent of U.S. bank assets.
Is this even an issue for Wall Street?
Big U.S. banks had plenty of hopes that Mr. Trump would decrease regulations, encourage merger activity and slash taxes. Expanding their presence in Canada was not on the list.
A U.S. banking industry trade group, the Bank Policy Institute, said Tuesday that it had released no statements on the matter, and no bank chief executive has taken up the rallying cry.
More pressing for the global banking industry are Mr. Trump’s tariffs, which have helped push the industry’s stocks down 8 percent over the past month, according to the KBW Nasdaq Bank Index.
Business
Trump’s New Tariffs Could Strain Collection of Customs Fees

The sweeping tariffs on Canadian, Mexican and Chinese products that President Trump imposed on Tuesday could strain the system that collects import duties and the government agencies that enforce those fees, trade and legal experts said.
Collecting import duties is usually a routine task, but the new tariffs are being imposed on Mexican and Canadian goods, many of which have been imported into the United States duty-free for many years. Adding to the challenge is the sheer volume of goods subject to the new tariffs — U.S. imports from China, Mexico and Canada totaled over $1.3 trillion last year, or about two-fifths of all imports.
The tariffs apply a 25 percent duty on goods from Mexico and Canada and an additional 10 percent on imports from China.
Importers typically employ customs brokers to calculate and pay tariffs to the government agency that collects them, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Adam Lewis, a co-founder and the president of Clearit, a customs broker, said that it would not be hard to tweak software to collect the new tariffs, but that a crucial part of the tariffs payment system might need significant adjustments. Importers must buy a “customs bond,” a type of insurance that guarantees the duties will be paid. Mr. Lewis said some customers might have to increase the size of their bonds to cover the extra tariff payments.
“Many of their products were coming in duty-free, and all of a sudden there’s going to be a 25 percent increase,” he said. “It’s quite large.”
In addition, policing importers for tariff evasion will now become a much bigger task for Customs and Border Protection and the Department of Justice. Some importers may try to avoid tariffs by understating the cost of goods in customs declarations or by falsely claiming they were imported from countries not subject to tariffs.
“The greater the breadth and severity of these new tariffs, the greater the likelihood that at least some potential importers may want to misrepresent the value or the origin of their goods,” said Kirti Vaidya Reddy, a former federal prosecutor who is now a partner at the law firm Quarles.
If the government finds that an importer has not paid duties, customs officials are likely to demand that the importer pay what is owed and a penalty that can double or even triple the amount due.
In a statement, a customs agency spokeswoman said: “The dynamic nature of our mission, along with evolving threats and challenges, requires C.B.P. to remain flexible and adapt quickly while ensuring seamless operations and mission resilience. These tariffs will help maintain America’s global competitiveness and protect American industries from unfair trade practices.”
Some evasion cases have become the subject of criminal prosecutions. Last year, a Miami importer pleaded guilty to participating in an import scheme involving Chinese truck tires that the Justice Department said had cost the United States more than $1.9 million in forgone tariff revenue.
But stepping up enforcement efforts is likely to require that the Justice Department devote significantly more staff to pursuing tariff evasion cases, which, lawyers said, can take time to build.
“The Department of Justice has the personnel and infrastructure to do it, but these cases are complex, transnational and document-heavy,” said Artie McConnell, a former federal prosecutor who is a partner at the law firm BakerHostetler. “You can’t rush it, and prosecutions likely won’t come quickly.”
Business
China Retaliates Against Trump, Imposing Tariffs and Blacklisting U.S. Companies

Minutes after President Trump’s latest tariffs took effect, the Chinese government said on Tuesday that it was imposing its own broad tariffs on food imported from the United States and would essentially halt sales to 15 American companies.
China’s Ministry of Finance put tariffs of 15 percent on imports of American chicken, wheat, corn and cotton and 10 percent tariffs on other foods, ranging from soybeans to dairy products. In addition, the Ministry of Commerce said 15 U.S. companies would no longer be allowed to buy products from China except with special permission, including Skydio, which is the largest American maker of drones and a supplier to the U.S. military and emergency services.
Lou Qinjian, a spokesman for China’s National People’s Congress, chastised the United States for violating the World Trade Organization’s free trade rules. “By imposing unilateral tariffs, the U.S. has violated W.T.O. rules and disrupted the security and stability of the global industrial and supply chains,” he said.
President Trump has contended his tariffs are essential to stopping the flow into the United States of fentanyl, a synthetic opioid that has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths through overdoses.
But the U.S. imposition of tariffs “will deal a heavy blow to counternarcotics dialogue and cooperation,” Lin Jian, a spokesman for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said at a news briefing.
Mr. Trump has now tagged almost all goods from China with an extra 20 percent in tariffs since taking office in January. He announced 10 percent tariffs on Feb. 4 and another round on Tuesday. Mr. Trump also moved ahead on 25 percent tariffs on Mexico and Canada on Tuesday, after a monthlong delay.
China had responded to the February tariffs by immediately announcing that it would start collecting, six days later, additional tariffs on liquefied natural gas, coal and farm machinery from the United States. But those tariffs combined hit only about a tenth of American exports to China, making them much narrower than Mr. Trump’s comprehensive tariffs.
China’s action on Tuesday was much broader. China is the top overseas market for American farmers, wielding considerable influence over prices and demand in the commodities markets of the Midwest.
By targeting imports of food, Beijing repeated its response to tariffs that Mr. Trump imposed during his first term. China put tariffs on American soybeans in 2018 and shifted much of its purchasing to Brazil.
But the strategy backfired then: Mr. Trump responded by placing more tariffs on Chinese goods. Because China sells much more to the United States than it buys, it quickly ran out of American goods to impose tariffs on. And American farmers had some success in finding other markets for their crops.
China’s tariffs in 2018 also had less of a political impact in the United States than Beijing’s leaders had hoped. In 2018 Senate elections in three of the top soybean-exporting states, voters gave little evidence they held the Chinese action against Mr. Trump or the Republican Party. All three states saw Democratic senators replaced with Republicans that year, as social issues proved more compelling for many voters than trade disputes.
Yet China has potential trade weapons that go beyond tariffs on food. In early February, Beijing implemented restrictions on exports to the United States of certain critical minerals, which are used in the production of some semiconductors and other technology products.
Blocking key materials from reaching the United States, a tactic known as supply chain warfare, carries considerable risks for China. Beijing is struggling to attract foreign investment. China’s leaders have also stated that attempting to bolster the country’s domestic economy, weighed down by the fallout of a devastating real estate slowdown, is a priority.
Beijing could make it even harder for American companies to do business in China, but that could also hurt foreign investment. In addition to effectively preventing 15 companies from buying Chinese goods, China’s Ministry of Commerce added another 10 American companies on Tuesday to what it calls an “unreliable entities list,” preventing them from doing any business in China.
Many of the companies that China penalized on Tuesday are military contractors. But the Ministry of Commerce also blocked imports from the biotech firm Illumina. It accused Illumina, which is based in San Diego, of violating market transaction rules and discriminating against Chinese companies.
Chinese market regulators said in early February, after Mr. Trump imposed tariffs, that they had launched an antimonopoly investigation into Google. Google has been blocked from China’s internet for more than a decade, but the move could disrupt the company’s dealings with Chinese companies.
Mr. Lou, the National People’s Congress spokesman, signaled his country’s emerging strategy in dealing with Mr. Trump’s tariffs by calling for closer trade relations with Europe.
“China and Europe can complement each other’s strengths and achieve mutual benefit in many areas of cooperation,” he said at a news conference ahead of the opening on Wednesday of the annual weeklong session of China’s legislature.
But Europe has its own trade disputes with China, notably over electric vehicles. European politicians and business leaders have voiced concern about how to cope with an expected further flood of exports this year from China, which has embarked on a far-reaching factory construction program.
China’s rapid rise since 2000 to global pre-eminence in manufacturing, with a third of the world’s output, has come to a considerable extent at the expense of the American share of global industrial production, according to United Nations data. European nations have been wary of closing factories and relying on low-cost imports from China.
Mr. Trump has moved much faster on China tariffs during his second term than he did in his first. In 2018 and 2019, he imposed tariffs of up to 25 percent, in stages, on imports worth about $300 billion a year. He then concluded a trade agreement with China in January 2020, leaving in place 25 percent tariffs on many industrial goods while cutting 15 percent tariffs on some consumer products to 7.5 percent and canceling a few other tariffs.
By contrast, Mr. Trump has now imposed 20 percent tariffs on all goods that the United States imports from China, worth about $440 billion a year. That includes some products, like smartphones, that he omitted during his first term.
Mr. Trump’s actions this year have raised average tariffs on the affected Chinese imports to 39 percent — compared with just 3 percent before he took office in 2017. Apart from China, Canada and Mexico, the United States imposes tariffs averaging about 3 percent on most trading partners.
China’s average tariffs on goods from most of the world are twice as high, and much higher on imports from the United States.
In Mr. Trump’s first term, the Chinese government reduced taxes that it charges the country’s exporters. That gave them room to cut prices and offset at least part of the tariffs for their customers, which include many small American businesses as well as big retailers like Walmart, Amazon and Home Depot.
As another way around tariffs, some Chinese exporters shifted the final assembly of their products to countries like Vietnam, Thailand or Mexico, while keeping the production of core components in China. Mr. Trump is now trying to stop some of the trade through Mexico, which critics of Chinese exports see as a backdoor into the U.S. market.
Many Chinese exporters resorted to using the so-called de minimis exception to tariffs: dividing shipments into many packages, each with a value of less than $800. Each shipment is then exempt from tariffs and customs processing fees and mostly omitted from customs inspections and American imports data.
At least $1 of every $6 worth of American imports from China is now arriving through these de minimis shipments.
In early February, Mr. Trump issued an order briefly halting the de minimis tariff exemption for goods from China, Mexico and Canada. After packages quickly accumulated at American airports, he delayed the order for shipments from China until procedures could be developed to handle them, and postponed for a month his order for de minimis imports from Canada and Mexico. On Sunday, he again delayed action on those imports from Canada and Mexico.
Wu Xinbo, dean of the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai, said that by retaliating now, “China sends a strong signal to the Trump administration that a unilateral tariff doesn’t work — you have to sit down to talk to us and to negotiate with us.”
Alexandra Stevenson contributed reporting from Beijing, and Chris Buckley and Amy Chang Chien from Taipei. Li You contributed research.