The Biden Administration is pulling back on a proposed rule that would require automakers to build fewer combustion engine vehicles or face hefty fines.
On Tuesday, the Department of Energy decided to slow down the phase-out of existing rules that give car companies extra fuel-economy credits for the EVs they sell. The goal was to help U.S. car companies meet federal fuel efficiency standards while maintaining the ability to sell gas-powered pickups and SUVs that are big money makers.
The Biden White House decided to pull back the rules after meeting with automakers who said they could not meet the aggressive goals for a widespread EV transition.
The previous rules aimed to have 67 percent, or roughly two-thirds, of all new cars be electric by 2032. The new rules now allow for 30 to 56 percent of all new car sales to be EVs.
BREAKING
You might not own an electric vehicle by 2032, after all.
The EPA is *easing* its emissions rule ramp-up after major concerns from the car industry.
Percentage of EVs by 2032:
Previous plan: 67%
Current plan: 30-56%Dealers and consumers – how do you feel about…
— Car Dealership Guy (@GuyDealership) March 20, 2024
Last year, the U.S. EV market share was under 8 percent.
Tesla wants the U.S. to enact stricter fuel efficiency standards
The backpedaling comes as President Biden is attempting to bolster his re-election campaign. Reuters, in its report, points out that the move could be an attempt to sway some votes in his direction as the battleground state of Michigan, where General Motors and Ford, two legacy automakers, are based.
The Biden Administration’s concession comes as Donald Trump has stated that the heavy EV policies could cost millions of jobs and help Chinese EV makers dominate the growing U.S. EV sector.
The now-pulled-back proposal would have lowered “petroleum-equivalent fuel economy” ratings for EVs by 72 percent in 2027. By 2030, they would have been reduced by a total of 65 percent, giving companies more time to adjust to the strict standards.
Companies supported the announcement after they disclosed to the White House that meeting these standards would become increasingly difficult.
The Reuters report also states that GM would have faced $6.5 billion in fines, Stellantis would have been stuck with a $3 billion penalty, and Ford would have had $1 billion in fines.
The EPA also announced on Wednesday that it would implement revised standards for vehicle emissions from 2027 to 2032.
These new rules will require emissions reductions in every new car sold starting in 2027. To meet the new standards, automakers will be able to utilize cleaner technologies for gas-powered cars and add more zero-emissions EVs to their lineups.
The final rule would help the industry meet the limits of 56 percent of new vehicle sales being all-electric by 2032. It would also see at least 13 percent of new car sales be hybrid vehicles.
“Let me be clear: Our final rule delivers the same, if not more, pollution reduction than we set out in our proposal,” the EPA’s Michael Regan said, according to NBC.
“Today’s announcement will shift the trajectory of the automobile market and put us on a path to real emissions reductions, with an estimated 7.2 billion tons of global warming pollution avoided by 2055,” Steven Higashide, Director of the Clean Transportation Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said. “These rules are the strongest standards ever finalized and vital for meeting U.S. climate goals. This rule is technology-neutral and won’t mandate electric vehicles, but it will encourage this growing market. New cars sold in the coming years will be on the road for a decade or more, so it’s vital that these rules cut emissions from gasoline cars as well as encourage zero-emission electric cars.”
The new regulations are more aligned with the automotive industry’s beliefs. Dealers and the UAW saw previous plans from the EPA as unrealistic.
However, climate groups believe these standards will help eliminate emissions.
“These standards will help clean up emissions from transportation—the biggest source of global warming pollution in the U.S. To achieve their full potential, these rules must be accompanied by other investments in a cleaner, more accessible transportation system,” Higashide added.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
