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.”
Elon Musk
Tesla’s advertising strategy takes a drastic turn, but some are questioning it

Tesla’s advertising strategy has taken a drastic turn as the company’s upcoming Shareholder Meeting will feature perhaps the most crucial vote in its history: the approval of CEO Elon Musk’s new pay package.
For years, the issue of Tesla’s advertising and marketing strategy has been a major point of conversation for investors in fans. It seems to be split right down the middle, with half wanting Tesla to set aside some money for advertising. The other half, just the opposite.
Tesla has been transparent that the money it would spend on advertising, marketing, and public relations is better set aside for the development of future products.
However, it has recently adopted a different tone in advertising, pushing some commercials on social media platforms like X and Instagram.
For the first time, an ad was seen on streaming services like Paramount+, but it wasn’t promoting Tesla’s products directly. Instead, it was more of a message for shareholders to vote on Musk’s pay package, something Tesla feels is a necessity:
Well this is a first. Tesla is running paid ads on Paramount+ encouraging people to vote their $TSLA shares ahead of the annual shareholder meeting on November 6th.
“Tesla is on the precipice of its next wave of transformations growth, and we need your support; We urge you to… pic.twitter.com/FTo5eFQJRZ
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) October 14, 2025
“The future of Tesla is in your hands,” the ad reads at the end. It seems as if Tesla is taking whatever steps it needs to accomplish the task of getting Musk a new pay package and retaining him as its CEO.
On September 5, Tesla officially outlined its plans for a CEO Performance Award for Musk. It would require him to lift Tesla’s market capitalization to about $8.5 trillion, up from the $1.36 trillion it sits at today.
Elon Musk’s new pay plan ties trillionaire status to Tesla’s $8.5 trillion valuation
It is obvious that Tesla is really hoping to get the pay package passed and is willing to shift some of its budget to encourage shareholders to vote.
However, there are some interesting perspectives on the move, and it’s sort of strange to see Tesla not advertising its vehicles or products, but only its pay package that would get its CEO paid.
Some of those who saw the ad are questioning the strategy:
Definitely a sign of desperation for $TSLA. They wouldn’t need to beg for votes if the BOD just did their job and held Elon accountable for his actions in the past. His blatant disregard for Tesla’s brand and the actions he takes in the public eye are exactly why I voted NO.
— squawksquare (@squawksquare) October 14, 2025
Doesn’t this taste wrong to anyone else?
No ads for the business? Only for the CEOs pay package?
— Schrodinger’s Wealth (@BosCybertruck) October 14, 2025
News
Tesla begins validating Robotaxi in a new area, hinting at expansion

Tesla is validating Robotaxi in a new area, and as the company has continued to gain some additional permissions to begin testing in new states, it seems its Full Self-Driving-based ride-hailing project is moving toward a larger footprint.
Two Robotaxi units with LiDAR validation equipment were spotted in Gilbert, Arizona, recently, showing that Tesla is aiming to launch its ride-hailing service in the state soon:
TESLA ROBOTAXI SPOTTED VALIDATING IN GILBERT, AZ! :0 pic.twitter.com/kqtQEBwl8Y
— Greggertruck (@greggertruck) October 11, 2025
Another unit was spotted in Tempe, Arizona:
Spotted this one and another one behind it in Tempe, AZ. I also saw a pair driving from Mesa to Tempe. Looks like they’re validating the entire east valley. I haven’t seen any in the west valley yet. pic.twitter.com/gFWTHhmBLT
— TechCat (@elviswjr) October 12, 2025
These types of validation vehicles have been spotted in several areas ahead of their launch as a public ride-hailing service for passengers. Tesla first launched Robotaxi in Austin, Texas, back in late June, and since then, it has expanded to the Bay Area of California.
However, Tesla has continued to attempt to expand Robotaxi to other areas as well, including Nevada and Arizona. It has also been working toward approvals in other states based on job postings, as Tesla is hiring for Autopilot Vehicle Operators in New York and Florida, as well.
The expansion of the Robotaxi ride-hailing service has been an effort that Tesla has been spending a lot of time on over the past few months. CEO Elon Musk said the expansion aims to bring Robotaxi to at least half of the U.S. population by the end of the year, but there is still plenty of work to be done.
Tesla Robotaxi heads to a new major Texas city for the first time
Tesla did make its Robotaxi app public in recent months, allowing more members of the public to experience the suite for themselves, as long as they could get to Austin or the Bay Area.
In the coming months, it seems more apparent that Tesla will take a broader focus on expanding Robotaxi, especially with the fact that these validation vehicles are being spotted throughout different parts of the United States.
Elon Musk
Tesla mulls revamping $25k car, strange report claims

Tesla is reportedly mulling the potential revamp of its $25,000 vehicle project, a strange report claims.
It seems unlikely, especially since Tesla launched two new, more affordable models last week with the Model 3 and Model Y Standard trims.
However, a report from European media outlet 36kr claims Tesla has started to advance two vehicle projects, internally codenamed E41 and D50, in China.
People familiar with the matter reportedly told the outlet that “some design and verification reports of the new projects are inherited from the current Model Y and Model 3.”
Tesla axed one of the Model Y’s best features in ‘Standard’ trims: here’s why
These new simplified models would be priced between $5,000 and $5,500 cheaper than what the new ‘Standard’ trims cost. The report also claims that these vehicles would be launched only if the new ‘Standard’ models “fall short of sales expectations.”
$TSLA 🇺🇸 BREAKING 🚨 Tesla is reportedly restarting work on its NV91 and NV93 projects for models smaller than the Model Y 💥
The NV91 project refers specifically to the $25,000 vehicle that CEO Elon Musk had mentioned, a model that was halted in Feb.2024 despite being… pic.twitter.com/L8TDvzmNwm
— Ming (@tslaming) October 14, 2025
This report suggests that potentially more affordable models are being offered, but this seems unlikely, considering Tesla launched the two Standard models just last week, and the only truly affordable model it is working on will be the Cybercab.
However, there is potential for a car to launch that undercuts the newest configurations of the Model 3 and Model Y. As of now, it just seems as if it is something that is far-fetched.
When Tesla’s patent for the unboxed process was published just last month, it seemed more than obvious that the vehicle it would be used for was the Cybercab.
The language used in the patent itself was geared toward more streamlined and quality production and manufacturing, which Tesla must implement to meet the likely demand for the vehicle.
It will be easier to scale vehicles with the unboxed process, and the Cybercab has been routinely mentioned with the sub-$30,000 price tag, even by CEO Elon Musk.
He said during the Q3 2024 Earnings Call:
“I think having a regular 25K model is pointless. It would be silly. Like it would be completely at odds with what we believe…It’s fully considered cost per mile is what matters. And if you try to make a car that is essentially a hybrid, manual, or automatic car, it’s not going to be as good as a dedicated autonomous car. So, yes, Cybercab is just not going to have steering wheels and pedals.”
-
News2 weeks ago
Waymo responds to shocking video that would have gotten Tesla FSD crucified
-
News1 week ago
Tesla FSD (Supervised) V14.1 with Robotaxi-style dropoffs is here
-
News1 week ago
Tesla all but confirms that affordable Model Y is coming Tuesday
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
Elon Musk announces ‘Grokipedia’ as Wikipedia alternative from xAI
-
Elon Musk5 hours ago
SpaceX aces Starship’s 11th launch with success in every mission objective
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla Cybertruck not allowed in Germany over “significant passive safety concerns”
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla China ends Q3 with its strongest week of the quarter as Model Y L surges
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
“We Pay for Performance”: Tesla drops details of Elon Musk’s new pay plan on X