The electric vehicle market in Europe seems poised to see some substantial changes in the coming months, with the European Commission telling automakers on Wednesday that China-based EV imports could see additional tariffs of up to 38% from next month. The additional duties would be implemented on top of the current 10% tariff placed on all EVs that are produced in China.
The European Commission’s announcement came following an anti-subsidy probe, as noted in an AFP News report. The tariffs given to China-based EVs would depend on the level of state subsidies that automakers receive. With this in mind, the European Commission has ordered a provisional hike of tariffs on several Chinese automakers.
These include BYD, which is poised to receive additional tariffs of 17.4%; Geely, which will receive 20%, and SAIC, which will receive a substantial 38.1% additional tariff. All other EV companies from China that cooperated with the European Commission’s probe are expected to see an average tariff of 21%, while electric vehicle makers that did not cooperate with the probe would see an additional 38.1% duty. Tesla cooperated in the EU’s probe, and thus, its Model 3 imports to the region are poised to receive an additional 21% tariff.
The much anticipated EU EV tariffs have been announced. In 2023 just shy of half a million China made EVs were sold in the EU making up nearly one-third of the total EVs bought. ? pic.twitter.com/x1G0zs3SfK— Iola Hughes (@RhoMoIola) June 12, 2024
“The Commission has provisionally concluded that the battery electric vehicles (BEV) value chain in China benefits from unfair subsidization, which is causing a threat of economic injury to EU BEV producers. Should discussions with Chinese authorities not lead to an effective solution, these provisional countervailing duties would be introduced,” the European Commission noted.
The additional tariffs are expected to be applied starting July 4, with full implementation being rolled out from November, as noted in a Reuters report. This is, at least, unless a qualified majority of EU states decide against the system. Some members of the European Union, such as Germany, have already spoken up against the additional tariffs.
As per transport minister Volker Wissing, a trade war and market isolation are not the way. “Cars must become cheaper through more competition, open markets, and significantly better business conditions in the EU, not through trade war and market isolation,” Wissing wrote in a post on X.
#Strafzölle der EU-Kommission treffen deutsche Unternehmen und ihre Spitzenprodukte. Durch mehr Wettbewerb, offene Märkte und erheblich bessere Standortbedingungen in der EU müssen Fahrzeuge preiswerter werden, nicht durch Handelskrieg und Marktabschottung.— Volker Wissing (@Wissing) June 12, 2024
China, for its part, has criticized the European Commission’s additional tariffs, stating that such a move would “harm Europe’s own interests.” China also claimed that the additional tariffs amount to protectionism. China foreign ministry spokesman Lin Jian noted that the country would take all necessary measures to protect its EV makers’ interests.
“This anti-subsidy investigation is a typical case of protectionism… It goes against the principles of market economy and international trade rules undermines China-EU economic and trade cooperation as well as the stability of the global automobile production and supply chain. China will take all necessary measures to firmly safeguard its legitimate rights and interests,” the foreign ministry spokesman noted.
Chinese Passenger Car Association (CPCA) Secretary General Cui Dongshu shared a tempered view on the matter. “The EU’s provisional tariffs come basically within our expectations, averaging around 20%, which won’t have much of an impact on the majority of Chinese firms. Those exporting China-made EVs that include Tesla, Geely and BYD still have huge potential for development in Europe in the future,” the CPCA official noted.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
News
Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Elon Musk
Another Tesla SpaceX merger prediction by ARK Invest has Elon Musk talking
Elon Musk again denies a Tesla China split as new SpaceX merger speculation resurfaces quickly.
Elon Musk restated that Tesla has no plans to separate its China business from the rest of the company, responding to a new round of merger speculation from ARK Invest.
On the firm’s “Brainstorm” podcast, Cathie Wood’s team, including chief futurist Brett Winton and research director Nick Grous, argued a Tesla and SpaceX combination remains likely, with an announcement possible before the end of the year even if the deal itself would not close that quickly. Winton called Tesla’s Shanghai operations a “small ish wrinkle” for a merger rather than a real obstacle, since SpaceX’s national security work with the U.S. government sits uneasily next to Tesla’s manufacturing base in China.
Musk pushed back on the framing directly. “China is awesome. I strongly encourage people to visit,” he wrote on X. He also repeated language he first used in late July, when the Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla executives had been told to prepare for a possible spinoff, sale, or closure of the China business ahead of a SpaceX tie up. Musk called that report “absurdly fake news” at the time, adding that a separation had “never even come up in a discussion ever,” a line he echoed again this week.
The repeated denial has not settled the underlying question, because Shanghai’s role in Tesla’s business is exactly what makes a merger complicated. Gigafactory Shanghai still ships more than half of Tesla’s global deliveries and functions as the company’s main export hub for Europe and Asia. Teslarati previously reported on Musk’s initial denial, and the merger conversation itself has been building since SpaceX’s IPO gave it public shares to use as acquisition currency.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives has pegged the odds of a Tesla SpaceX merger at 80 to 90 percent by early 2027, and ARK’s prediction of a year end announcement adds another data point to that timeline, even as Musk keeps rejecting the specific mechanics reporters have described. Neither position rules out the other. Musk can deny a China spinoff was ever discussed while analysts still expect some form of combination to move forward, since ARK and Ives are both describing convergence at the corporate level, not necessarily the internal restructuring the Journal described in July.
For now, Tesla’s China business remains intact, and Musk’s comments this week make clear he has no interest in publicly walking that position back, no matter how often the merger question resurfaces.
