Traton SE ($8TRA)

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to TRATON's Q1 2026 Results Call. My name is Ursula Querette and I'm Head of Investor Relations at Traton SE. With me on this call is Christian Levin, our CEO, who has dialed in from Sweden; Dr. Michael Jackstein, our CFO and CHRO, is here with me in Munich. Christian will start today's presentation with the key results and highlights of the first quarter. Michael will then guide you through financial performance in more detail. As always, we will conclude the call with a Q&A session open to financial analysts, investors and media representatives. [Operator Instructions] Please note that this call, including the Q&A session, will be recorded and the replay will be made available on our website later today. You can find our 3-month interim statement, which we published this morning and the slides to this call on our IR website. Before we start, let me remind you of the disclaimer with respect to forward-looking statements on Page 3 of our presentation. And with that, I'm handing over to Christian Levin, Christian?

Thank you, Ursula, and welcome also from my side, everyone. Yes, as you saw already from our unit sales pre-release, we have a somewhat slow start of this year. You could see unit sales falling by 6%, so minus 6% to 68,600 largely coming from last year and the hesitation in the U.S. demand. which we then later saw starting to turn up, but more of that later. But the decrease is also marked by a continued difficult South American market environment with low order intake spilling over from last year. Looking at sales revenues, we saw a somewhat smaller decline with a minus 4% to EUR 10.2 billion. So keeping up compared to unit sales, mainly thanks to good growth in our services business. Operating profit and net cash flow declined overproportionately as anticipated. So our adjusted return on sales came in at 5.7%. That's at the lower end of our guidance for the full year, but still somewhat better than expected. Earnings per share were very low in Q1 due to certain items that were adjusted but fully impacting our net result. We come back later in this conference to these adjustments. The highlight of the quarter is the significant increase in order intake with an increase of 18%, as you see on the slide, up to 87,800 units. So let's turn to the next page and have some more details on the growth of order intake. We saw encouraging demand increase in all 3 of our core geographical regions, although Germany, which everyone keeps asking about, is still somewhat lagging. Also across all of them, order intake exceeded deliveries in Q1, supporting a raise in our book-to-bill ratio up to 1.3. Starting in Europe then in a year-over-year comparison, truck order intake in Europe remained stable at around 29,000 vehicles. But remember, -- this compares to a very strong start of Q1 also last year, which was before the tariff announcements from the U.S., and it was also marked by initial German market stimulus optimism. Turning to North America. Truck order intake nearly doubled, up to 18,800 units in Q1 -- and after more than 4 months of consistently strong U.S. demand, we are increasingly confident that we have passed the trough of the cycle for this time. Finally, in South America, truck demand was boosted by the so-called Move Brazil program, which provides subsidized truck financing in this unusually high interest rate environment. So strong starts in both the agriculture and the mining sector supported the higher truck order intake in Q1. And as a result, we recorded around 15,000 Trucks, 25% up despite the ongoing broader economic challenges in this region. But as explained before, while -- our group order intake grew by 18%. Global deliveries fell by 6%, which was sharply driven down by lower deliveries in both North and in South America. Meanwhile, Europe recorded a significant increase in deliveries on the back of healthy order intake starting already in Q4 last year. The group was led by [ Aman ] and especially strong in the truck segment. So before we continue, let me also clarify that the Iran war just had a minimal effect on the Q1 delivery and order intake figures that you see on this slide, fewer deliveries in the Middle East were postpone and only a few markets in a few markets, customers show hesitation while placing new orders. Let's take the next slide. So despite the this rising geopolitical challenge, we remain focused on our long-term success. Hence, we continue to drive our group-wide technology initiatives, such as the development of a unified software-defined vehicle platform that will eventually be implemented across all of our brands. In partnership with Applied intuition, this platform is scheduled for launch in the year 2028. Also, our brands continue to make good progress within their various strategic initiatives. Scania delivered the first next era trucks according to plan, in the Chinese market and started to receive first positive customer feedback. [ MAN ] launched the so-called MAN 2030 plus a program to continue to drive efficiency gains and enhance competitiveness for future vehicles based on our TRATON Modular system. International, partnered up with [ Ryder ] to launch a Level 4 autonomous truck pilot, deploying factory integrated [ farmers ] vehicles in the state of Texas. Volkswagen Truck & Bus celebrated its 45th anniversary, aiming for continued growth and success remaining true to their philosophy, less you do want more you don't need. And then finally, TRATON Financial Services expanding again into 2 new markets, this time, Belgium and Lithuania. We're now also supporting MAN, plus underlining our consistent geographical growth strategy. At the same time and turning the page, we continue to advance on our battery electric vehicle transformation journey. Total BEV unit sales rose by 38% in the first quarter to 857 units and incoming orders, orders increased even more by 45%, reaching a total of 1,252 units. In Europe, our BEV ratio therefore reached 1.9% of total European vehicle sales. Given the lack of speed in this transition at least compared to our planning, I'm pleased to report that the EU Commission finally decided on a so-called targeted amendment to the CO2 rules, acknowledging the specific needs of the truck industry ecosystem. In practice, it encourages early market adoption of heavy-duty BEVs, there were more flexible credit mechanisms in operation already from this year, while at the same time, maintaining the long-term decarbonization trajectory. Nevertheless or even more so, we need a faster rollout of judging infrastructure, and we need policymakers support to address the TCO challenge. A good initiative by our [ Mylan ] joint venture mid-April, where several heavy-duty e-trucks drew 1,000 kilometers and all electric growth from Paris to Berlin drew a lot of attention exactly to this point. With great public visibility, it highlighted the urgency for clean transport corridors and demonstrated that long-haul BEV transport is feasible. And it underscore that establishing a Europe-wide fast charging network for heavy-duty vehicles is both achievable and critical for an energy secure Europe. Meanwhile, on the operational side, MAN secured its largest electric bus order to date in Austria, underlying growing confidence of public transport operators in our BEV solutions. Also in the U.S. more explicitly California, International secured a large number of electric school bus orders. And in China, where BEV adoption is rapidly increasing. Scania continues the development of an all-electric next era truck. So in summary, our battery electric clinical transformation strategy is on track. But as is typical for emerging technologies, development risks are higher changing conditions require selective readjustments and in our case, this has led to 1 of the one-off effects, as I mentioned earlier, and which Michael will come back to in just a moment. But before handing to Michael, -- also a few words on our truck market outlook. Although there are signs of recovery, both in the European and North American truck cycles we leave our forecast range is unchanged for now as uncertainty remains elevated. In April, Scania, but now also MAN, some cases of customer hesitancy a bit slower order intake that is connected to high fuel prices and related to the uncertainty coming from the war in Iran. But so far, less than what at least I feared. So overall, though, good order intake momentum, which supports our confidence in a growing European truck market this year. At the midpoint, of our outlook. We see European trucks above 6 tons at 345,000 units, and heavy-duty trucks also well over the 300,000 unit mark in 2026. In North America, the significant order inflection since end of last year is indeed promising. But the downside risk remains, especially given conflicting signals from both manufacturing and consumer demand. Following record truck order intake in March, International is seeing healthy volumes also in April. Main reason being higher transport pricing and better balance between capacity and transport demand. The magnitude of EPA 27 prebuy within lease orders is at the moment, probably minimum, but also difficult to assess. At the midpoint of our unchanged open market outlook, we assumed a 2.5% growth, which will translate into 265,000 class 8 trucks in 2026. And with that, Michael, I hand over to you.

Thank you very much, Christian, and good morning, good day, warm welcome from my side as well. As already mentioned, unit sales dropped minus 6% in the first quarter, while the decline in revenues was less pronounced mainly due to a growing vehicle services business. MAN delivered a strong top line performance, especially in European truck sales, which increased by 31% year-over-year in the first quarter. German truck sales were up 14% at MAN. Scania with a different customer and product mix still lagged European growth in the first quarter. This, combined with significant declines in North and South America, prevented a positive group top line performance in Q1. But as Christian showed before, the order book is developing well, resulting in a book-to-bill ratio of 1.3 in Q1 and last seen during the post COVID catchup. These orders will translate into unit sales and sales revenue in upcoming quarters, helping us to recover from the slow start. And let's not forget Traton Financial services are constantly delivering on their growth strategy. The next slide shows that more factors than declining volumes contributed to our lower operating results. While revenue decreased by 4%, the adjusted operating result declined by 10%, resulting in a 0.4 percentage points lower return on sales of 5.7%. That is at the lower end of our guidance range, yet somewhat better than expected. It was clear that U.S. tariff costs would hurt our Q1 results especially with Section 232 U.S. content approval still pending. Section 232 and IEEPA tariffs totaled EUR 110 million in the first quarter compared to EUR 6 million basic import tariffs a year before. Higher foreign currency headwinds, mainly from the Swedish krona and the U.S. dollar negatively impacted our year-over-year results by EUR 84 million and increased R&D needs also led to higher expenses. Although, they were partially offset to capitalization. Positive effects came from a better price/mix and improved fixed cost absorption. Scania's China plant was roughly cost neutral vis-a-vis last year's first quarter. In addition to the just mentioned effects, our profitability was burdened by certain items. -- which were adjusted and sum up to EUR 521 million. So TRATON Group's unadjusted operating result was EUR 60 million in the first quarter corresponding to an operating return on sales of 0.6%. The 4 main adjustment items were: first, write-offs and supplier claims following adjustments to individual e-mobility projects; second, impairments and labor expenses in connection with the sale of international Springfield site. Third, expenses for civil lawsuits in connection with the EU truck cases consistent with previous quarters. Fourth, provisions for the announced restructuring at International. These items are nonoperational in nature and do not change our underlying long-term view on the business. Therefore, let's concentrate again on the adjusted return on sales and how each of our 4 brands performed on the page you see now. As in Q4, MAN with its strong focus on Europe was the only brand to see a year-over-year increase in sales revenue. The 8% revenue growth in the first quarter contributed to a 2.9 percentage point higher adjusted return on sales, reaching 7.2%. This result was supported by ongoing cost management measures and a solid vehicle services business. Scania saw lower sales in Brazil, but stable units in Europe. Revenue decreased by 4% in the first quarter, while the margin remained nearly stable at 11% with lower fixed costs year-over-year and a higher vehicle services business. As anticipated, international reported a negative margin, decreasing by 5.6 percentage points to minus 4%, while sales revenue declined by 19%. Although fixed cost absorption was reduced due to the low production volumes, the recent restructuring of central functions contributed to lower absolute fixed costs. Volkswagen Truck & Bus also recorded a severe revenue decline of 18% year-over-year. At the same time, the adjusted return on sales fell by 2.8 percentage points to 10.2% in Q1. TRATON Financial Services delivered a 9% return on equity, while sales revenue increased by 13% with the ramp-up of the business. The weak early year operating performance also weighed on our cash flow and Section 232 tariffs even more heavily as we paid the full 25% amount until a U.S. content agreement is reached. At the same time, the negative working capital performance in Q1 reflects typical seasonality. The investing cash flow is half influenced by CapEx and capitalized R&D. The position -- other changes in cash flow includes net proceeds of EUR 170 million from the sale of [indiscernible] truck shares in January. So while net cash flow at TRATON operations was negative EUR 240 million, overall, we managed to achieve a slight reduction of our net debt by EUR 10 million at the end of the first quarter. Looking ahead now, we have 9 months remaining to deliver on our 2026 full year outlook. I reiterate that the second half is expected to show a stronger performance than the first half of the year as the higher book-to-bill ratio clearly indicates increasing top line performance, especially at international. Scania and Volkswagen Truck & Bus will benefit from the so-called Move Brazil orders converting into revenue. And there is good order momentum in Europe except for Germany, where we are still waiting for the anticipated demand recovery. Discussions regarding our U.S. content rate with the U.S. administration are still ongoing. So second quarter will still be affected by higher tariff costs with our prudent accounting approach. The economic impact of the Iran war is yet difficult to assess. Also, we already plan for higher input costs taken effect towards midyear. While unexpected geopolitical effects are excluded from our full year guidance, nevertheless, at this point, we feel confident with our full year guidance, which is based on broader forecast branches. So we maintain our unit sales and sales revenue outlook between minus 5% and plus 7% and -- we still see an adjusted operating return on sales for the TRATON group between 5.3% and 7.3%, where the midpoint is at last year's level. and TRATON operations net cash flow is expected between EUR 900 million and EUR 1.7 billion. And with that, happy to hand it back to you, Ursula, to moderate the Q&A session.

Thank you, Christian and Michael. [Operator Instructions]. Now let us take the first question, which comes from Nicolai Kempf from Deutsche Bank. Nicolai?

Okay. Great. So first question on the U.S. market. International Motors holding up better than expected. And given the high orders you've seen and comments from peers, do we expect to return to the positive territory on earnings already in Q2? And then my second question also on the U.S. market. How long do you think until you're kind of sold out for this year? I mean the orders, I think, already probably cover Q2 and you have some good visibility into Q3. But you said only some slots for Q4 are left? Or how much more visibility you have for this year?

I think, Michael, you'll take at least the earnings question.

Yes. Happy to do so. Nicolai thanks for the question. I mean you know the development of the margin last year were, unfortunately, due to the tariffs. We saw a negative margin in Q4. You're fully right. It's a little bit better, also the Q1 margin than we thought it could be. And as we mentioned during the presentation, certainly, the order intake momentum that basically started in December and continued in the first quarter is promising for the remainder of the year. With regards to the second quarter, I cannot really say if we see positive margin or still a negative margin there. But what I clearly can say with regards to the full year, as we said also during our annual press conference, -- we want to see a better margin for the full year than the breakeven margin we have seen in 2025. And certainly, again, coming back to what we said during the presentation, the order intake momentum there should support us with regards to the top line, especially then in the second half of the year. And you also know we have the tariff effect here. We talked about this at our annual press conference, both with regards to the P&L and especially to the cash flow, we expect a better second half of the year than the first half. So tough to say with regards to the second quarter, but I'm positive for the second half of the year.

Christian, will you take the capacity question, international slots open. .

Yes. Yes. So we're not sold out, Nicolai. We are still taking in orders now for -- after summer in Q3 and of course, it's really positive to see this order momentum coming in. Our principle in the U.S. is the same as in Europe that we're happy when we manage a lead time in the range of, let's say, up to 3 months or perhaps even 6 weeks up to months. So we're, at the same time, a little bit cautious, of course, to increase too much production given that big uncertainties that we see not just in the U.S. but globally. But we're, of course, also keeping an eye on the negotiations ongoing in Washington for us about the 232 and specifically related to our production in Mexico. So -- but yes, there are plenty of more orders to bring in before we are sold out for this year.

Thanks, Christian. Next question then would come from Klas Bergelind from Citi.

So I just want to kick off on cost inflation. It's been a bit of a theme this result season in trucks. Peers of you are talking about slightly better gross margin through the year as build rates improve, but that we also need to consider the inflation from energy, steel, aluminum, other raw mats going higher as a sort of result of the conflict. Truck pricing has had to move higher because of EPA 27 might go higher because of Section 232, and now we have raw materials on top. So it feels like quite a big price increases here are necessary at the time when the recovery is still fragile. Can you please talk through about timing, like in magnitude, how much more pricing do you need to put through to offset this higher cost inflation, I'll start here.

Thank you, Klas. Maybe I can start a little bit on the cost side. And then Christian can complement on the pricing side, where we can do it like this. So on the cost side, I mean I can confirm basically what you are saying and what you picked up here, obviously, from others who have pretty much the same view. What I can also say, I mean, typically, when we talk about suppliers, suppliers supply contracts typically have a duration something big 3 to 6 months. so that we don't expect immediate effects, let's say, in the upcoming weeks or months. But from the mid of the year, -- and then especially in the second half of the year, we expect the effects that you are mentioning linked to the Iran war, we have done an internal risk assessment and you mentioned a couple of the commodities here steel, aluminum, a couple of these aspects. Also copper, we can mention some products where oil is needed linked to the Iran war we can expect that we see higher prices here. Our internal assessment at this point comes to a low triple-digit impact, triple-digit million impact here. So this is what I can say and where I can give you maybe a little bit more insights how we assess this. We could add potentially energy costs from our point of view, when we talk about energy costs -- also with regards to our factories, we believe that the effect is significantly lower, potentially only a low double-digit million impact. So energy costs will play, to some extent, a role. But the much more significant effect, we certainly see on the commodity side. So .

And that is a gross number, right? You said low triple digit, Michael. That was gross, not on net. Sorry, Christian, I don't want to -- because you're going to talk about the net effect with the on pricing, so that is not a concern Yes. .

Yes. As you know, Klas, it's been a bit tougher price-wise in the environment, particularly in the U.S. but also in Europe. So price increases have not been easy to push through. Lately, we see that necessity goes up, but that also eases a bit resistance, let's say. So what we do is that -- or what we have done already, we have already launched price increases in Europe. And then as always, you need to wait a little bit before you see how much of that increase that sticks, but we're pretty dedicated this time that it needs to stick, and it's not is not a huge price increase. It's in the normal range that we increase prices every year, but just with more dedication. In the U.S., it's been very particular on the price side, -- we were early out, as you remember, last year, tried to compensate for the 232 through pricing didn't manage as the market didn't follow. Now the sentiment has changed as there is a big appetite for placing orders. And at least in our case, we managed to get the pricing through that we need. So a much better development in the U.S. I will not be able to give you a number and translate that into how many double or triple-digit millions it represents that you have to assess for yourself. But but it is a better environment to operate in, and particularly in the U.S. .I stop there.

My second one -- that's very helpful. My second question and final 1 is on the European order trends. It seems like April was holding the same level as in March and then March seems to be stronger than Jan and Feb. But at the pre-close call, we learned that there was some hesitation among some smaller carriers in Europe. Is that still the case? Or have sort of sentiment improved the last couple of weeks, it's obviously very fluid at the moment. I mean, 1 of your key peers recently upgraded is European outlook. So it seems like a bit of a mixed signal by country would be very useful. .

I can give it a try, Christian here. So it is tricky, of course, to read the situation in Europe. January good, February, very good. March, good again, April. We see some hesitation particularly, we see it with smaller holes and in countries where the transport contracts are not typically containing fuel clauses. So if you take perhaps U.K. as the most developed market in Europe from a financial point of view, basically 100% of all calls run with a fuel clause in the transport contract, meaning that they are not directly affected or not at all. Let's see how the economy moves long term, but not at all affected by the increasing fuel prices, that's all transferred over to the transport buyer. But if you take them on the eastern side of Europe and especially Southeast side of Europe, a lot of smaller customers don't have this protection and that they then need to negotiate. And that's where we see a bit of buying hesitation. That's also where we see a bit of trying to push forward vehicles that are in the delivery pipeline and negotiating conditions with our financial services companies to postpone a couple of weeks to really say where this is going. And that's, of course, because their cash flow is hurt by the fuel prices. So I'm expecting nonetheless, a relatively good April. What we see so far is a continued good market, not perhaps on the same level as we have seen on average in the first quarter, but nonetheless, keeping up be very. So not a scenario from last year. I mean I thought we would see the same movie as we saw when Trump announced the tariffs where we had such a good first couple of months on the dramatic fall. We don't see that at all so far. Then of course, all depends where the situation in the Middle East is going. So to be honest, I'm a little bit positively surprised that we're keeping up as well as we are doing in Europe on ordering. .

Yes. Thank you, Christian. Very helpful. Next question comes from Daniela Costa from Goldman Sachs. .

Two questions. First, I just wanted to ask if in North America, you have seen any benefits, I guess, from the cost actions you had been doing centralized development costs et cetera. And or if we're still to see a run rate of savings from that? And then maybe second question, actually following up on the P&L impact in China. I think before you had mentioned EUR 400 million. How much have we seen in 1Q? And then how should Scania dilution from China evolve in the rest of the year?

Michael, I think both for you .

Yes, I'm happy to start. Daniela. Well, to start in North America before I move to China, I can say -- I mean, yes, we see positive impacts on the cost side. which is 1 aspect of the better-than-expected development at international, I would say, -- you know that we started to take action already last year. We took out a second shift in Escobedo, in Mexico, and we continued the work taking into account especially the headwinds coming from the tariffs. You know, we mentioned that at our annual press conference that we did some sort of adjustments, restructuring at International, where we took out roughly 300 people and really talking about, let's say, top and high management positions here. And as we said before, I mean you know since we are in the cyclical industry, we have the playbook. -- if we are in stormy waters. So we apply all the aspects to work on the cost side and to be as sensitive as possible here. And again, we see the positive effects from this cost work in the P&L, and we will continue to do so. I'm quite confident because -- as I said, this is a focused topic for us working really on the cost side. You also mentioned or asked if there is any effect from the centralizing of our development efforts, it's starting, but at the very early stage. We did a so-called carve-out first of July last year. But this is starting point. also to look into further efficiencies. So we are certainly on this journey, but you don't see that effect in the P&L yet. I would say -- that's pretty much it when we talk about here in North America linked to your first question. Second question, moving to China. You asked about the P&L effect. -- we said that we plan to invest roughly EUR 2 billion into China. In the end, we invested a little bit less roughly EUR 1.7 billion until the end of last year. We also said when we look at the investment last year, roughly EUR 800 million that we spent again, around 50%, so talking about EUR 400 million. And what we can say for the full year 2026, that you should expect a very comparable P&L effect in 2026. There are slightly different aspects to this. Of course, last year, it was about investing and ramping up the China factory. This year, we are in a different situation, depreciation starts. We, of course, are investing less, but we are ramping up now the sales efforts in China. And this is why we are talking about a comparable amount but with different cost aspects. .

Sorry, just following up back on the centralized development costs, sort of so the impacts, I guess, we should expect them maybe more into '27. But sort of what's the magnitude of those? If you can remind us?

I cannot give you a precise magnitude, but I can say, of course, coming back to the efficiencies we talked about in light with the trade modular system. We clearly stated here that we see efficiency gains of roughly 25%, moving into the trade modular system. This is partly linked to the fact that we don't develop chassis, a cab, and electric electronic architecture twice or 3 times anymore, but just once. And then, of course, we differentiate with what we call performance steps. So we will certainly not create the same products here, but we make use in a smart way of the synergies or scale effects. That's 1 aspect. And the other aspect is coming from simply using, for example, same IT tools to give a very simple example and to align on processes. The fact that we decided on working together in a group R&D setup, can unleash even more potential, but this is a little bit too soon to assess, but I can assure you that we are looking into this right now since we started, again, first of July last year. And there might be even further potential that we are exploring at this point in time going forward. And if there is further potential then gradually, you should indeed -- you could see some effect, '27 onwards, but let me come back to the 25% also efficiencies from the TMS. You recall what we mentioned in previous calls, there are 2 aspects, how we can deal with that black or white. The 1 is that you see lower R&D spending, thanks to the efficiencies, but this is not what you're going to see because we are in the transformation. And of course, we want to make sure that we have the right products for our customers in the future, and this is why we will use these efficiencies to invest into autonomous driving, digitalization electrification of our products. This is why you should expect a constant, let's say, a significant level of R&D spend in the future. because this is clearly linked to our strategy, transforming transportation together for sustainable world.

Okay. Then we come to Harry Martin from Bernstein.

So the questions that I have left related to the U.S. The first one, if I could ask your crystal ball when it comes to demand and orders. If the uplift that we've had in recent months has very little prebuy in there and there's underlying demand, then would you expect orders to continue at similar levels in the coming months. And then when we think about next year, can we think about 2027 being a strong year of growth for the market despite the EPA change? And then the second question I had on the international and the new engine -- could you give an update on the penetration rates for the captive powertrain there? And also on your discussions with customers around the attractiveness of that engine in the post EPA 2027 regulation world?

Christian, do you want to start .

Yes, there was a lot of questions. I can start and then help me to remember. But Yes. U.S. orders will continue. I mean we remain a little bit cautious, although we must admit that we have perhaps been overly cautious here in the in the view of the first quarter. And again, April coming along strong. So I wouldn't be surprised if the association again posts a total market order intake on a high level. At the same time, as I said on the previous question, there are so many unsecurities around both U.S. and the world economy that yes, it's really hard to do a conclusion. But it seems that the combination of -- that capacity has been taken out of the market that we see way more than 20% increase in spot rate pricing. We see also a higher and higher refusal rates on full track loads, meaning that capacity is kind of missing and volumes can increase pricing. We see rental fleets ordering and then, of course, we have the potential prebuy for the EPA. So a lot of this coming together is creating a strong demand. There's the data about it. It's very hard to assess 1 is what. What we know is that there are very few customers especially amongst the big ones, the 1 we talk directly to that explicitly talks about prebuy. They more talk about that they have the capacity constraints and they need to increase or they need to replace and renew because the trucks are getting old. And if that's the case, and we see a bit less price sensitivity than you could very well see that this is the start of a new cycle. And in that case, typically, that cycle will continue into 2027. I think that was your second question. So despite. But of course, that depends on the price increases that will be announced, I guess, with a short in the market because that will, of course, then brother fuel demand for '26 if it's high. If it's not that high, I guess it will have less impact than I guess the 1 could expect also 2027 to be in the U.S. on a continued good level to fill the replacement need and to fulfill the higher demand. So super hard to read. I don't have a crystal ball, as you know. You were into the attractiveness of the EPA 27 engine. I mean, we are more or less ready with our engines. We are still not fully ready with the EPA way forward here. We thought it was 100% clear. We must say that it's again not 100% clear. How this is going to be implemented. And I guess that's also why you don't see any announcements yet the price increases or pricing of the EPA 27 platforms. But we still believe that we have a very competitive from a technology point of view engine based on the newest platform in the market based on the fact that we have developed this platform with good knowledge of what EPA 27 and Euro 7 would require. So I think we're in a good place. But again, that will be known within quite short, I assume. And then I think your last sub-question was on the penetration rate of our so-called 13. And we reached in Class 8, we reached 44% during the full year of last year. And we are, so far, Q1 a bit higher. So we continue to increase by around 47% in the first quarter. And we think that as we have launched this on more truck variants also outside the pure tractor units, we believe that, that could go yet a bit higher throughout the year. And we have an internal forecast or goal, if you'd like to come up towards 50%, very close to 50% of the Class 8 trucks. If you translate that, including our total sales, where we don't put this engine in Class 6, 7 or school buses, we're aiming at 20% of the overall volume. I hope I covered help me there Ursula if I have got some part of the question.

No, that -- I think that covered everything. Harry, are you happy? Then the next question comes from Alexander Jones from Bank of America. .

Great. Two, if I can. Maybe first just on the tariff costs. If you could split for us the EUR 110 million between Section 232 and i.e., purchase to understand sort of the flatness quarter-on-quarter? And should we expect that sort of run rate to continue in Q2 as well? And then secondly, just picking up 1 of your peer comments overnight on aftermarket. How you're seeing that developing the service sales in North America and Europe since the start of the Iran war and whether there's been any impact given higher fuel costs for fleets.

Michael?

Yes. Alexander, thanks for your question. Let me start with the tariff question. And let me say 1 more time what we said multiple times also last year. Obviously, this is a highly volatile environment with a lot of back and forth. What we have seen last year, tariffs that have been announced increased decreased -- so there was quite some back and forth. You can say in a way, the newest chapter is then the Supreme Court ruling end of February regarding the IEEPA tariffs. New tariffs were announced immediately with a lower rate, which are now effective for 150 days, and then potentially new tariffs will be announced. So again, a highly dynamic environment. And this is why, in general, I would like to come back to what I said a couple of times last year. We could mention a couple of numbers about tariff effects impact there is a good chance that each and every number that we are giving is wrong because, as I said before, the landscape here is changing constantly. But to give you some sort of a reference point, maybe let me come back to what we said end of -- let's say, the full year 2025, roughly a month ago, if we take the fourth quarter and extrapolate just the fourth quarter, not knowing about potential changes back and forth also this year. But if we extrapolate the fourth quarter into the full year 2026, and then I'm happy to translate that a little bit into what we have seen in the Q1. So basically, what we said at the annual press conference is that -- 2 months last year, only 2 months were affected by the 232 section tariffs, both months each with a net amount of EUR 20 million. so that you can multiply EUR 20 million, and then you end up at a rough figure of EUR 250 million for Section 232 tariffs, if they say, let's say, as we know them from the fourth quarter. With regards to IEEPA and steel aluminum tariffs, we said that we accounted EUR 50 million per quarter here, but we also mentioned that in the fourth quarter, the volumes were not that high. If that trend changes, and we are hoping for that based on the order intake momentum that we have seen in the first quarter -- then if you want to make a calculation, you should potentially add something to the EUR 50 million per quarter and multiply it with 4. So we said, based on these effects, the rough ballpark figure is in the ballpark of roughly EUR 500 million per year. So -- but again, the tariffs in a way, changing, and we see quite a back and fourth year. If we look now at the first quarter and compare it with the fourth quarter last year, then we see pretty much the same amount, meaning EUR 110 million. And your question here, this was linked to the 232 section tariffs as well as to partially IEEPA tariffs until they were stopped linked to the Supreme Court ruling. So there is a slight effect from last IEEPA tariffs included. There is, of course, a higher effect for 232 section tariffs because they are included now for 3 months and not only for 2 months, like in the fourth quarter. and we don't see a higher rate linked to the volume, which is the main driver also for the margin at international, while the margin is negative because the volume in the Q1 was not that high linked to the low order intake momentum last year. So this is, I would say, the guidance that I can give here so that you can maybe get a better grip around the tariff situation.

Christian, do you want to say something about aftermarket service sales .

Yes, sure. But that question was in relation to the Iran war.

Yes.

Yes. No, we don't see an immediate effect on the service business. Service business is holding up very well in Europe, and we count on continued growth. But I'd say that in general, due to good job done on the contract sales penetration, but also on an aging vehicle population. In the U.S., unfortunately, our service sales are moving backwards. -- as we lack the rolling flit of proprietary drivelines that we are currently building with the S13 and the connected components. So there, we have more work to do, but we're doing, I think, a great job to advance on our strategy to capture the also U.S. market from a services point of view. But nothing particular because of due to connected to directly to Iran.

Okay. Thank you. Then the last 1 in the queue is Christina Amann from Thomson Reuters media question.

You have already answered quite a bit of my questions. I have 2 left. Mr. Jackstein, you said it's for the full year, about EUR 500 million tariff impact, how much of that is IEEPA tariffs? And how much refunds do you expect from that? Goldman -- General Motors has talked about EUR 500 million yesterday, I assume it's a little bit less for TRATON, but how much do you expect to get back? And the second question relates to the competition situation in Europe. Mr. Levin how do you view the competition situation in Europe, especially regarding new entrants like the Chinese companies coming with electric trucks right now. Is that a serious concern? Or is that still some time ahead? .

Yes. Thank you very much for your question. Maybe I'll start with the first 1 and maybe let me say there is a different step between what you're referring to, the passenger cars and the truck industry. So in our case, the effect completely different one, I'd say, -- with regards to the Supreme Court ruling, we are at this stage that we will follow here the refund process and continue to monitor the situation. But in our case, as I was into, the IEEPA effects don't play that kind of significant role for us, the 232 sections. As I indicated before, when extrapolating based on, let's say, the Q4 into the 2026 full year amount of roughly EUR 500 million -- you see here that roughly 50% of this amount is linked to 232 section tariffs and the other 50% are linked to IEEPA and steel and aluminum tariffs. So I hope that gives you a little bit more clarity here.

Yes.

Should I continue with the competition in Europe?

Yes, please. .

Okay. Then yes, competition in Europe remains, of course, tight amongst the incumbents. We are, of course, expecting Chinese entrants into Europe as this remains also an open market to anyone as we do expect perhaps 1 American player to win here in Europe. And so far, as you say, it's a bit early days, but we see a couple of startups with food battery electric vehicle trucks entering the European market and we also see -- some of the more traditional Chinese OEMs establishing themselves and BYD, you can discuss whether that's a start-up or whether that's an incumbent, but they're also building industrial capacity in Europe. So I think it's a fact that we will see Chinese competitors entering into the deals where we are today active -- we should, of course, watch them carefully. They come as we know, with a lot of good advanced technology with extremely low cost levels and therefore, quite low pricing. So from our point of view, it's nothing new in a way. We have to continue to stay super close to our customers, develop our products, keep costs under control innovate and the best partner to our customers own competitiveness. One trough card we have in the TRATON group is that we are now, since short, active in the Chinese market. So we have an R&D organization of roughly 800 engineers located in China. And being that embedded into the Chinese ecosystem of researchers, universities, but of course, suppliers. And in direct competition with all of these Chinese brands on their home market. And I think that's the best trading camp or the best fitness center that you can have if we find out that we cannot be competitive in China, we will, of course, have a huge problem around the world. And now you pointed to Europe, in, but we, of course, have Chinese competition all over Africa, Middle East, they are showing up strongly in Latin America. And I expect, of course, to see them all over perhaps except for the United States. So -- so yes, they should be watched closely. They should be respected, and we should stay close, but we should certainly also learn whatever is possible and that you do best inside of China. And there, I think we have a good position to do so. The question of when remains, of course, open, I don't know. But so far, we don't see much in Europe in the ongoing deals. But that's just the question of time. I stop there. I hope that answered your question.

Yes.

Thank you.

Okay. Then I see no more questions in the queue. With this then, we are concluding our event. Thank you for joining us today. And for any further questions, please contact the Investor Relations team. Enjoy the rest of the day. Goodbye.

Thank you.

Thanks. Bye-bye.