Investor's Corner
Tesla’s Model 3 safety claims and the NHTSA’s scrutiny: A look at an old (revived) story
Multiple reports have recently emerged about the US National Highway Traffic Administration scrutinizing Tesla and the company’s claims that the Model 3 has the lowest probability of injury among vehicles tested by the agency. It should be noted that the NHTSA’s scrutiny, which involved a cease-and-desist letter to Tesla and a prompt response from the automaker, transpired last October, following the agency’s release of the Model 3’s 5-Star Safety Rating.
The NHTSA’s reaction to Tesla recently came to fore due to documents shared by staunch TSLA critic and transparency group Plainsite, which was able to access both the NHTSA’s cease-and-desist letter to Tesla as well as the electric car maker’s response to the agency thanks to a Freedom of Information Act request. What’s quite peculiar about the new string of reports, including those from Bloomberg and Reuters, is that they highlight the NHTSA’s allegations about the company’s alleged misleading claims about the Model 3, but not Tesla’s response arguing that it used the agency’s own data to arrive at its conclusions.
To get an accurate picture of this story, one must look at the full cease-and-desist letter sent by the NHTSA to Tesla, as well as the entire contents of the electric car maker’s response. A copy of each letter will be embedded in this article, to provide a full account of the two parties’ correspondence.
Following Tesla’s release of its blog post stating that the Model 3 has the lowest probability of injury among the vehicles tested by the NHTSA, the agency sent the Silicon Valley-based company a cease-and-desist letter. Addressed to Elon Musk, the letter claimed that Tesla had “issued a number of misleading statements regarding the recent Government 5-Star Ratings of the Tesla Model 3.” NHTSA Chief Counsel Jonathan Morrison, who sent the letter, further argued that statements such as “lowest probability of injury in all cars” are inaccurate and not in the best interests of consumers.
The NHSTA’s cease-and-desist letter to Tesla could be accessed below.
Tesla Model 3 Safety Claims… by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
Tesla disagreed with the NHTSA’s allegations in its response to the cease-and-desist letter. The electric car maker argued that its statements about the Model 3’s safety were neither untrue nor misleading, especially since the company used the NHTSA’s own data (which could be accessed here) when it stated that the electric sedan, as well as its largest siblings, the Model S and Model X, have the lowest probability of injury among vehicles tested by the agency. Tesla also noted that the Model 3’s achievement is “exactly what NHTSA intended with the NCAP — to encourage manufacturers to continuously immprove safety.” With this in mind, Tesla noted that there was no reason to discontinue its blog post highlighting the Model 3’s safety.
Tesla’s full response to the NHTSA could be read below.
Tesla Model 3 Safety Claims… by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
It should be noted that the NHTSA has not doubled down on its allgetations against Tesla’s statements about the Model 3. The electric car maker’s blog post explaining the Model 3’s stellar safety scores is still active today. Contrary to Plainsite’s statements that Tesla was “referred to the FTC for repeatedly lying about the safety of their vehicles,” it appears that the NHTSA opted to back down from its allegations once the electric car maker explained the rationale behind its statements about the Model 3.
The Model 3 has since gained perfect 5-Star Safety Ratings from the Euro-NCAP and the ANCAP, with both safety agencies lauding the vehicle for being one of the safest cars on the road. Following the vehicle’s crash tests, Matthew Avery, head of research at Thatcham Research, which conducts the crash tests with the Euro NCAP, noted that “Tesla has done a great job of playing the structural benefits of an electric vehicle to its advantage. The Tesla Model 3 achieved one of the highest Safety Assist scores we have seen to date.” These sentiments were echoed by ANCAP Chief Executive Officer James Goodwin, who noted that it was “great to see electric vehicles continuing to prioritize safety. It is encouraging to see Tesla give equal attention to the active safety systems and technologies on board as well as the safety fundamentals through the structure and restraints.”
H/T to Vladimir Grinshpun.
Elon Musk
Tesla stock gets latest synopsis from Jim Cramer: ‘It’s actually a robotics company’
“Turns out it’s actually a robotics and Cybercab company, and I want to buy, buy, buy. Yes, Tesla’s the paper that turned into scissors in one session,” Cramer said.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) got its latest synopsis from Wall Street analyst Jim Cramer, who finally realized something that many fans of the company have known all along: it’s not a car company. Instead, it’s a robotics company.
In a recent note that was released after Tesla reported Earnings in late January, Cramer seemed to recognize that the underwhelming financials and overall performance of the automotive division were not representative of the current state of affairs.
Instead, we’re seeing a company transition itself away from its early identity, essentially evolving like a caterpillar into a butterfly.
The narrative of the Earnings Call was simple: We’re not a car company, at least not from a birds-eye view. We’re an AI and Robotics company, and we are transitioning to this quicker than most people realize.
Tesla stock gets another analysis from Jim Cramer, and investors will like it
Tesla’s Q4 Earnings Call featured plenty of analysis from CEO Elon Musk and others, and some of the more minor details of the call were even indicative of a company that is moving toward AI instead of its cars. For example, the Model S and Model X will be no more after Q2, as Musk said that they serve relatively no purpose for the future.
Instead, Tesla is shifting its focus to the vehicles catered for autonomy and its Robotaxi and self-driving efforts.
Cramer recognizes this:
“…we got results from Tesla, which actually beat numbers, but nobody cares about the numbers here, as electric vehicles are the past. And according to CEO Elon Musk, the future of this company comes down to Cybercabs and humanoid robots. Stock fell more than 3% the next day. That may be because their capital expenditures budget was higher than expected, or maybe people wanted more details from the new businesses. At this point, I think Musk acolytes might be more excited about SpaceX, which is planning to come public later this year.”
He continued, highlighting the company’s true transition away from vehicles to its Cybercab, Optimus, and AI ambitions:
“I know it’s hard to believe how quickly this market can change its attitude. Last night, I heard a disastrous car company speak. Turns out it’s actually a robotics and Cybercab company, and I want to buy, buy, buy. Yes, Tesla’s the paper that turned into scissors in one session. I didn’t like it as a car company. Boy, I love it as a Cybercab and humanoid robot juggernaut. Call me a buyer and give me five robots while I’m at it.”
Cramer’s narrative seems to fit that of the most bullish Tesla investors. Anyone who is labeled a “permabull” has been echoing a similar sentiment over the past several years: Tesla is not a car company any longer.
Instead, the true focus is on the future and the potential that AI and Robotics bring to the company. It is truly difficult to put Tesla shares in the same group as companies like Ford, General Motors, and others.
Tesla shares are down less than half a percent at the time of publishing, trading at $423.69.
There are a lot of Tesla bulls out there who have astronomical expectations for the company, especially as its arm of reach has gone well past automotive and energy and entered artificial intelligence and robotics.
However, some of the most bullish Tesla investors believe the company could become worth $100 trillion, and CEO Elon Musk does not believe that number is completely out of the question, even if it sounds almost ridiculous.
To put that number into perspective, the top ten most valuable companies in the world — NVIDIA, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, TSMC, Meta, Saudi Aramco, Broadcom, and Tesla — are worth roughly $26 trillion.
Will Tesla join the fold? Predicting a triple merger with SpaceX and xAI
Cathie Wood of ARK Invest believes the number is reasonable considering Tesla’s long-reaching industry ambitions:
“…in the world of AI, what do you have to have to win? You have to have proprietary data, and think about all the proprietary data he has, different kinds of proprietary data. Tesla, the language of the road; Neuralink, multiomics data; nobody else has that data. X, nobody else has that data either. I could see $100 trillion. I think it’s going to happen because of convergence. I think Tesla is the leading candidate [for $100 trillion] for the reason I just said.”
Musk said late last year that all of his companies seem to be “heading toward convergence,” and it’s started to come to fruition. Tesla invested in xAI, as revealed in its Q4 Earnings Shareholder Deck, and SpaceX recently acquired xAI, marking the first step in the potential for a massive umbrella of companies under Musk’s watch.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
Now that it is happening, it seems Musk is even more enthusiastic about a massive valuation that would swell to nearly four-times the value of the top ten most valuable companies in the world currently, as he said on X, the idea of a $100 trillion valuation is “not impossible.”
It’s not impossible
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 6, 2026
Tesla is not just a car company. With its many projects, including the launch of Robotaxi, the progress of the Optimus robot, and its AI ambitions, it has the potential to continue gaining value at an accelerating rate.
Musk’s comments show his confidence in Tesla’s numerous projects, especially as some begin to mature and some head toward their initial stages.
Elon Musk
Tesla director pay lawsuit sees lawyer fees slashed by $100 million
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
The Delaware Supreme Court has cut more than $100 million from a legal fee award tied to a shareholder lawsuit challenging compensation paid to Tesla directors between 2017 and 2020.
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
Delaware Supreme Court trims legal fees
As noted in a Bloomberg Law report, the case targeted pay granted to Tesla directors, including CEO Elon Musk, Oracle founder Larry Ellison, Kimbal Musk, and Rupert Murdoch. The Delaware Chancery Court had awarded $176 million to the plaintiffs. Tesla’s board must also return stock options and forego years worth of pay.
As per Chief Justice Collins J. Seitz Jr. in an opinion for the Delaware Supreme Court’s full five-member panel, however, the decision of the Delaware Chancery Court to award $176 million to a pension fund’s law firm “erred by including in its financial benefit analysis the intrinsic value” of options being returned by Tesla’s board.
The justices then reduced the fee award from $176 million to $70.9 million. “As we measure it, $71 million reflects a reasonable fee for counsel’s efforts and does not result in a windfall,” Chief Justice Seitz wrote.
Other settlement terms still intact
The Supreme Court upheld the settlement itself, which requires Tesla’s board to return stock and options valued at up to $735 million and to forgo three years of additional compensation worth about $184 million.
Tesla argued during oral arguments that a fee award closer to $70 million would be appropriate. Interestingly enough, back in October, Justice Karen L. Valihura noted that the $176 award was $60 million more than the Delaware judiciary’s budget from the previous year. This was quite interesting as the case was “settled midstream.”
The lawsuit was brought by a pension fund on behalf of Tesla shareholders and focused exclusively on director pay during the 2017–2020 period. The case is separate from other high-profile compensation disputes involving Elon Musk.
Musk bankers looking to trim xAI debt after SpaceX merger: report
SpaceX launches Crew-12 on Falcon 9, lands first booster at new LZ-40 pad
