GM is reportedly considering expanding EV production to its existing Ramos Arizpe plant in northern Mexico.
General Motors (GM) and other major American automakers have long had a presence South of the United States. Even now, vehicles like the Chevy Trax, Jeep Compass, and the ever-popular Chevy Silverado are produced en masse across the border in Mexico. Now, the most prominent American auto group is also considering expanding its EV production to Mexico.
The Mexican Economic Ministry announced that GM would be expanding EV production to the country via a tweet showing leaders from both parties discussing it yesterday.
La Sria. de Economía, Raquel Buenrostro, se reunió con General Motors. Informaron que en 2024 su complejo industrial de Ramos Arizpe, Coahuila, producirá solo vehículos eléctricos. Anunciaron el incremento de 5 mil empleos, fomentando la inclusión de género en su plantilla. pic.twitter.com/qatRlGLLwO
— Economía México (@SE_mx) January 3, 2023
The first tweet reads:
“The [Economic Minister], Raquel Buenrostro, met with General Motors. They reported that by 2024 their industrial complex in Ramos Arizpe, Coahuila, will produce only electric vehicles. They announced the increase of 5,000 jobs, promoting the inclusion of gender in their workforce.”
The second tweet clarifies, saying:
“The increase in jobs has been generated during this six-year term in the San Luis Potosí and Ramos Arizpe plants, resulting in a total of 4,500.”
According to the tweet from the Mexican Ministry, the Ramos Arizpe plant will be shifting to 100% EV production this year and aims to begin full production sometime in 2024. This follows news that GM had been increasing its workforce in Mexico by roughly 4,500, according to a clarifying tweet from the Ministry.
Mexico has become a hotspot for EV production over the past few years. Its location near the United States, cheaper labor, and its access to U.S. Federal EV incentives have made it a prime location for new EV production. This has attracted the likes of Ford and Tesla and is likely influencing brands like GM, Hyundai/Kia, and BMW, which already have significant production facilities in the country.
GM nor the Mexican Economic Ministry specified what vehicles the American auto giant would be producing at its revamped production facility, but it’s possible to make an educated prediction.
The Ramos Arizpe plant currently produces the Chevy Equinox and Chevy Blazer ICE vehicles. And coincidently, both of these vehicles will be available as electric models in the coming years. Hence, with the facility’s familiarity with the products and the production date of 2024 matching the introduction date of the two Chevy EV SUVs, it would not be surprising if they were produced at the revamped facility.
GM has not specified if existing ICE vehicle production lines would be halted. Still, with its recent hiring, one would anticipate that it is opening a new production line for strictly EVs.
It is no surprise that the General chose the Ramos Arizpe plant to produce EVs. Mear miles from Monterey, it is within a stone’s throw of the proposed location for the upcoming Tesla plant. And while GM is likely not basing its decision on its competition’s new location, both automakers have probably been lured to the site not only for the aforementioned cheaper labor and quick access to the U.S. market but also for the safety and infrastructure available in the area.
According to the U.S. State Department travel advisory site, the area of Monterey is safer than other border locations, including Baja California and the State of Tamaulipas. At the same time, the locations chosen by both manufacturers are serviced by one of the largest highways going into the United States, Mexico Route 85/U.S. Interstate 35.
It is a positive sign to see the behemoth of General Motors finally changing course toward electric vehicles. And while its recently announced products have been fantastic to hear about, announcing production changes is more concrete evidence of the change happening behind the scenes. And whatever the company decides to build at its Mexican facility, you can count me as excited to see it come to fruition.
What do you think of the article? Do you have any comments, questions, or concerns? Shoot me an email at william@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @WilliamWritin. If you have news tips, email us at tips@teslarati.com!
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
