News
Indiana is back with another bill to ban Tesla’s direct sales model
If a proposed Indiana House bill is passed, manufacturers of “all-electric vehicles” would be banned from selling directly to consumers. The bill does not direct any specific language to Tesla Motors, Inc., but the innovative vehicle manufacturer is clearly the target of the legislation. Add Indiana into the mix of Tesla’s long list of court cases pending in which car dealers and automakers claim that they, as intermediaries, have sole right to sell vehicles to consumers.
Indiana House Bill 1592
Indiana automakers have traditionally used an established network of dealers who negotiate with buyers and provide automotive repair services. These automakers are part of a large umbrella of politically influential groups. They argue that Tesla’s model allows the company to evade laws, which confers an unfair advantage to Tesla and provides no accountability to its buyers.
Here is the synopsis of the Indiana House Bill 1592.
Automobile sales requirements. Provides that a manufacturer may engage in sales directly to the public only if the manufacturer meets certain requirements. Provides that a manufacturer can no longer engage in sales directly to the public after the earlier of: (1) reaching 1,000 units in cumulative annual sales; or (2) six years after the initial dealer’s license is granted.
Additionally, Sec. 20. of the bill reads:
A manufacturer licensed under this article may engage in sales directly to the general public only if the manufacturer (1) has exclusively offered for sale to the general public in Indiana all-electric vehicles on a continuous basis since July 15, 2015; (2) has never offered for sale to the general public in Indiana a line make of new motor vehicles through a franchised motor vehicle dealer.
Tesla is the only vehicle manufacturer which meets these particular criteria. Tesla sells its electric vehicles directly to consumers, while other manufacturers like General Motors, Ford, Subaru, and Toyota sell through Indiana dealerships. If passed, the bill would severely limit Tesla’s ability as a manufacturer to sell to the public:
Subject to the expiration schedule under IC 9-32-11-12.5, a manufacturer can no longer sell to the public after the earlier of the following: (1) A manufacturer described in this section reaches cumulative annual sales of one thousand (1,000) units to the general public from its licensed location in Indiana.
The author of the bill, Rep. Edmond Soliday, a Republican, has authored or co-authored several transportation bills, including transportation infrastructure funding, automated traffic enforcement, vehicle excise taxes, and department of transportation property matters. He defeated Midwest Environmental Systems CEO Pamela Fish in the November, 2016 elections. House Bill 1592 will be heard by the Roads and Transportation committee.
Last year another Republican, Rep. Kevin Mahan, supported a similar bill that would have forced manufacturers to sell their vehicles through a dealership. “For the average Hoosier, purchasing an automobile can be daunting and a big investment,” Mahan said. “A greater variety of vehicles are now available and can be brought directly to consumers virtually anywhere in the country. In the event of a recall or malfunction, consumers should be protected.”
Arguments against limiting manufacturer sales
Tesla Motors, Inc.’s Vice President of Corporate and Business Development Diarmuid O’Connell testified against House Bill 1592. “Tesla does not operate through some kind of loophole in Indiana law,” O’Connell said. “The current law is explicit in Tesla’s ability to sell directly and, as written today, it is not broken.” O’Connell’s remarks point to current Indiana law in which an auto manufacturer is not allowed to open a store in direct competition with an affiliated franchised dealer. Tesla has no direct competition franchise dealers in Indiana and has always sold directly to consumers. O’Connell added that Tesla’s presence in Indiana has “brought only good to the consumer welfare without harming anyone — not even the dealers.”
At stake is more than a corporate tug-of-war between automakers. Tesla’s electric vehicles are at the heart of that vision for tomorrow’s consumer domestic transportation and will continue to flourish and change the way automakers in the U.S. and abroad have conducted business as usual.
If “you’re interested in promoting competition and free market principles … you recognize direct distribution, particularly for a company like Tesla, is critically important,” said Todd Maron, the company’s chief counsel, during remarks at a 2016 Federal Trade Commission event. “We don’t simply believe that [electric vehicles] represent a nice complement to gas powered cars. We believe that it’s imperative that they are replaced entirely by electric vehicles.” An end to franchising laws would advance that goal and place low-mileage gas-powered vehicles at risk of obsolescence.
Arguments in favor of limiting manufacturer sales
A coalition of free market groups, led by Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist, argues that ending or restricting automotive franchising would actually decrease consumer choice. Norquist believes that reducing competition among dealers selling the same car brands hurts consumers. Franchising laws were actually created by anti-trust efforts at the Federal Trade Commission and “they sustain market competition rather than undermine it.” Last year, the group accused federal regulators of ignoring evidence that would undermine proposed measures governing automotive sales that stand to enrich what they saw as a “politically-powerful company” at consumers’ expense.
Harry Tepe, owner of Tom Tepe Auto Center in Milan, Indiana, supports legislation that would further protect consumers in the auto industry. “We just want to make sure there are protections in place for the consumers,” Tepe said. “The issue at hand is that the loophole is still open that allows any manufacturer to come in and market a vehicle and sell directly to the public without having any protections in place for the consumer.” He takes the position that dealerships are responsible for being a liaison between the consumer and the manufacturer.
Lobbying on behalf of the automotive industry
Proponents and opponents of Indiana House Bill 1592 are, in many cases, influenced by a powerful automotive lobby in the U.S. Automotive industry lobbyists use a combination of strategies to gain influence. They do a lot of research, sit down with lawmakers one-on-one, deliver messages in writing, and call Congressmen and members of the administration on the phone.
“If you’re a big company, like a carmaker, and you’re lobbying lawmakers, you’re almost like a pro sports team. You want to get the big names, the most talented, most knowledgeable people,” said David Levinthal, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan research group that tracks the money spent in the U.S. political system and its effect on elections and public policy. “So, these big companies, in the major industries, hire former Congressmen and top Congressional staffers and other high-ranking government officials to be their lobbyists, because those are the folks who know who all the other major players are and they know the ways of Washington.”
Source: OpenSecrets.org
Tesla has trimmed its Model Y offerings as its Standard All-Wheel-Drive configuration has been removed from the online configurator after roughly nine months on sale. The move follows the removal of the Cybertruck, as its trims have also been minimized as that vehicle heads for total discontinuation at the end of Summer 2027.
Launched in February 2026 as a mid-tier dual-motor option between the Rear-Wheel-Drive model and the Premium trims, the Standard All-Wheel-Drive Model Y offered 294 miles of range and a 4.6-second 0-60 mph time in a stripped-down package.
🚨 Tesla has pulled the $41,990 Model Y AWD from its U.S. configurator after nine months on sale.
The cheapest AWD Model Y you can order is now the $49,990 Premium AWD, with Premium deliveries quoted for Jan–Mar 2027.
The $39,990 RWD stays, and AWD units remain in inventory. https://t.co/uROJp2lVpx
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 13, 2026
With it gone, the cheapest new AWD Model Y buyers can configure is now the Premium AWD at $49,990, with estimated deliveries pushed into January–March 2027. The $39,990 rear-wheel-drive Model Y remains available for custom orders, and some AWD units are still listed in inventory.
The move arrives days after Tesla sharply narrowed its Cybertruck lineup. New orders for the Dual Motor AWD and Premium AWD versions have been disabled, leaving only the high-performance Cyberbeast—priced around $109,990 before fees—as the sole configurable option.
Elon Musk has stated that Cybertruck production at Gigafactory Texas will wind down around the middle to late summer of 2027 to free manufacturing space for greater Cybercab output. Tesla has raised prices on remaining trims and is prioritizing higher-margin builds while working through an existing order backlog that exceeds what the line can complete before conversion.
These parallel decisions reflect a broader effort to simplify Tesla’s retail customer lineup. Lower-volume or lower-margin variants are being phased out or deprioritized in favor of core, higher-spec models that generate stronger profitability and clearer production planning.
For the Model Y, this concentrates volume on the remaining RWD and Premium configurations while Premium deliveries already stretch into 2027. For the Cybertruck, it accelerates the transition away from a stainless-steel pickup that underperformed relative to initial volume expectations.
Tesla Model Y Standard Full Review: Is it worth the lower price?
The freed capacity and reduced complexity directly support Cybercab scaling. Tesla began pilot Cybercab production at Giga Texas in early 2026, launched paid autonomous rides in Austin in September, and is preparing for substantial volume growth.
By streamlining the existing vehicle portfolio, the company is reallocating factory space, engineering attention, and supply-chain resources toward its purpose-built Robotaxi, which lacks a steering wheel or pedals and is designed exclusively for unsupervised autonomy.
The result is a leaner retail lineup today and a clearer path to high-volume Cybercab deployment tomorrow.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship is going for a catch that could change spaceflight forever
SpaceX will try to catch both Starship stages today, a first for any orbital rocket.
SpaceX is set to launch Starship Flight 15 from Starbase on Friday afternoon, and if both stages make it back to the tower, the mission will go down as the first time an orbital rocket has ever been fully recovered. The 75 minute launch window opens at 4:45 p.m. CT from Pad 2, a day after SpaceX rolled Ship 42 out to the pad and shared photos of the move on X.
The first catch comes quickly. About six and a half minutes after liftoff, Booster 22 is scheduled to fly back to Starbase and settle into the launch tower’s chopstick arms, the first catch attempt for SpaceX’s V3 Super Heavy. SpaceX has caught the booster three times before most recently in March 2025.
Ship 42 moves to the Starbase pad ahead of launch https://t.co/pMUFTHneJQ — SpaceX (@SpaceX) November 13, 2026
The second catch is the one that has never been done. Ship 42 will climb to an orbit about 275 kilometers up, deploy 26 Starlink V3 satellites and complete about 14 orbits. Three of those satellites carry cameras to inspect the ship’s heat shield before it commits to coming home. If its reentry, landing burn and tower approach systems pass their checks, the ship will fire its engines to leave orbit, fall through the atmosphere in its belly flop position, flip vertical and drop into the tower about 22 and a half hours after launch, on Saturday afternoon. SpaceX gave a preview of that maneuver in an animation during its third quarter earnings webcast.
Elon Musk described a successful double catch on that call as “the first time that an orbital launch vehicle has been fully recovered” and a “profound technology milestone,” putting the odds of catching the ship at “more likely than not.” SpaceX has called it a potential “breakthrough moment in making Starship a reliable, rapidly reusable rocket,”
Reuse is where the economics change. Falcon 9 lands its boosters routinely, but its upper stage is thrown away on every flight. Starship is designed so both stages can be refueled and flown again, which is key to cutting launch costs. That matters for Starlink, where each V3 satellite is expected to carry roughly 10 times the download capacity of the V2 Mini satellites flying today, and for Starmind, SpaceX’s planned constellation of AI compute satellites.
It matters for NASA too. Starship is the lunar lander for the Artemis program, and reaching the Moon requires refilling a ship in orbit using several tanker flights. That plan only works if Starships can fly again and again. Musk has said he expects Starship to reach a weekly launch cadence in the first half of 2027.
Investors are paying attention. Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas wrote this week that a catch of both stages would likely be “a material positive” for SpaceX stock.
The last Starship flight in September reached orbit for the first time but ended after about three hours with a splashdown in the Pacific, short of its planned 10 hours, after some engines shut down. Since then, Booster 22 has completed a full 33 engine static fire and Ship 42 a six engine firing, as Teslarati previously reported. As of Friday morning, SpaceX was still waiting on the FAA to approve a license change covering the ship’s return over land.
Elon Musk
Tesla and SpaceX merger talks hit a new stage, and one hurdle remains
Tesla and SpaceX merger talks are reportedly advancing, and a deal could arrive by December.
Tesla and SpaceX are moving closer to a combination, with a deal announcement possible as soon as December, Bloomberg reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter. The companies have also discussed a scenario in which the announcement slips into early 2027.
Boards and advisers on both sides are now working through the terms of the deal and the governance structure of the combined company, according to the report. One open item is how many SpaceX shares Tesla investors would receive. Bloomberg had previously reported that the two companies were aiming to announce a deal in the first half of next year and close it before the end of President Donald Trump’s term, so a December announcement would pull that schedule forward by months.
Tesla shares rose as much as 1.9% to $398.35 after the report, while SpaceX gained 0.6% to $140.63. SpaceX carries a market value of about $1.9 trillion following its June IPO, and Tesla is valued at about $1.55 trillion, which would make a combination the largest corporate deal on record. Neither company responded to requests for comment.
The talks became official on October 20, when Elon Musk said on SpaceX’s third quarter earnings call that both companies had formed special committees of independent directors to study a merger, as Teslarati reported. Musk said he could not take part because he is “a conflicted party” and called the process “an odd kabuki dance.” He also noted that Tesla would need approval from 50 percent of all outstanding shares, a bar the company missed in 2025 when a board declassification proposal won support from only 39.4 percent.
China remains the biggest structural problem. Bloomberg’s sources said the companies still need to work out how to isolate Tesla’s large and profitable manufacturing business in China from SpaceX’s U.S. government and defense contracts. JPMorgan analyst Rajat Gupta described those two factors last month as “key dynamics that are at odds with each other” for regulatory and shareholder approval. Musk has repeatedly said Tesla has no plans to separate its China business, a position he restated in August after ARK Invest predicted a merger announcement before the end of the year.
Washington adds another layer. Democrats took control of Congress in this month’s midterms and have pledged to investigate Musk’s business and political activities, which could bring added scrutiny to a deal involving one of the Pentagon’s most important launch and satellite contractors.
The report also lands three weeks before Tesla’s December 3 annual meeting at Giga Texas. That ballot has only three items, led by the re-election of Musk, board chair Robyn Denholm and JB Straubel, and includes no merger proposal. Any deal announced in December would likely require a separate special meeting for Tesla shareholders to vote on it.
The two companies already share a growing list of projects, including the Terafab semiconductor plant in Texas. Tesla’s next generation Roadster, which uses cold gas thrusters built on SpaceX hardware, turned up on display at SpaceX headquarters last month and has become one of the clearest public examples of that overlap.
Tesla trims Model Y offerings as All-Wheel-Drive gets the axe
SpaceX Starship is going for a catch that could change spaceflight forever
