News
A Timeline of Nikola’s Trevor Milton: From Fictional to Fraudulent
Earlier today, it was announced that former Nikola Motor CEO Trevor Milton had been indicted on three counts of fraud by U.S. prosecutors and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) following comments and claims he made regarding the automaker he used to run. Through the years, Milton has gone from fictional to fraudulent, never bringing a truly functional product to the market or to demonstrations for that matter, and allegedly lying to investors along the way.
Established in 2014 by Milton, Nikola worked toward revolutionary new battery-electric and hydrogen fuel cell automotive powertrains for commercial and passenger vehicles. The beginning of the company’s somewhat inevitable fall was marked by the release of a shocking report from Hindenburg Research that claimed the company’s first vehicle demonstration of the Nikola One semi-truck was misleading, claiming the vehicle was not self-propelled. Nikola initially denied this but then admitted the vehicle was placed on a low-grade hill to appear to be functional. The company was not willing to put any more money into a prototype.
(Photo: Isaac Sloan/Nikola Motor)
However, Nikola’s long journey, which has culminated in the arrest of Milton with charges to be formally announced later today, started long before Hindenburg’s report.
- 2009 – Trevor Milton launches dHybrid after selling an alarm sales company for $300,000. dHybrid entered a contract with Swift, a major transportation company in the heavy trucking sector. Swift agreed to convert up to 800 trucks, securing a $16 million contract for dHybrid shortly after its establishment.
- Swift would later sue dHybrid, claiming the company’s truck did not work and some company executives “misappropriated capital for personal use,” according to the Hindenburg report.
- Hindenburg also claims that Milton reached out to dHybrid investors, claiming the contract with Swift was valued at $250 million – $300 million.
- 2014 – dHybrid acquired by Worthington for $15.9 million.
- 2016 – Nikola announces it will unveil the Nikola One electric semi, claiming that it will be fully functional at the December 1st event. Nikola claimed to have “The Holy Grail” of hydrogen tech for trucking just months before the event.
- 2017 – Nikola signs a deal with Powercell AB, a Swedish company, to supply hydrogen fuel cell stacks. Nikola also signed with Bosch, who agreed to help assist in the production of Nikola Two prototypes.
- 2018 – Nikola begins to market the Nikola One as the “largest energy consumer” in America. Targeting the Tesla Semi, Nikola filed a $2 billion lawsuit against Tesla, alleging that Tesla violated a design patent of the Nikola One. Several elements, including the wraparound windshield, mid-entry door, front fenders, and the electric truck’s aerodynamic body, were all claimed by Nikola to be taken by Tesla.
- Nikola said in November that it had refunded all 11,550 deposits for its vehicles. It did this to show that it was not operating on customer’s money
- 2019 – Nikola World event shows five zero-emission vehicles that will eventually produce and release. The company announced a partnership with Anheuser-Busch, who ordered 800 trucks from Nikola.
- Nikola offers Tesla a new design for its Cybertruck. Milton extends the pickup truck design to Tesla CEO Elon Musk, giving it to him as a “backup plan” if Cybertruck pre-orders were unsuccessful. Tesla has received over 1 million pre-orders for the Cybertruck since November 2019.
- 2020 – Nikola and GM come to a partnership to see GM handle fuel cell and battery systems in early September. The deal gives GM a $2 billion equity stake.
- Hindenburg releases its report on Nikola called, “Nikola — How to Parlay an Ocean of Lies into a Partnership with the Largest Auto OEM in America.” The report claims Nikola is “an intricate fraud” by gathering phone calls, emails, text messages, photographs, and other pieces of evidence that claim the company has been misleading shareholders. Hindenburg claims they’ve “never seen this level deception at a public company, especially of this size.”
- Nikola admits that the Nikola One was not self-propelled.
- Nikola CEO Trevor Milton steps down from his post at the helm of the company. “Nikola is truly in my blood and always will be, and the focus should be on the Company and its world-changing mission, not me,” Milton said. Stephen Girsky became the new Chairman of the Board.
- Nikola plans the next “Nikola World” event, but it is postponed as uncertainty due to its lack of executive leadership continues.
- GM reconsiders its partnership and eventually cuts back the terms of its conglomeration. NKLA stock falls 24% as GM partially backs out of the deal.
- 2021 – Nikola files a 10-K filing with the SEC following its Q4 2020 Earnings Report and admits its former frontman Milton misled shareholders by lying. The company said that several statements made by Milton were “inaccurate in whole or in part when made.”
- Today, July 29th – Trevor Milton surrenders to federal authorities on three counts of fraud for lying about “nearly all aspects” of Nikola’s business. Milton is required to forfeit all properties that are traceable to the commission of his offenses.
Milton will be presented by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York at 11 am EST today.
*LIVE EVENT*
There will be a press conference today at 11:00 a.m. to announce charges against Trevor Milton, the founder of Nikola Corporation and one-time executive chairman of the company. livestreamed on Facebook @USAOSDNY. pic.twitter.com/RPFuuUcuXq
— US Attorney SDNY (@SDNYnews) July 29, 2021
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla is going to let you guide Full Self-Driving with Grok in 3 months, CEO Elon Musk confirmed on X.
The response from Musk, which revealed Tesla plans to allow drivers to effectively control the car and its navigation more explicitly using Grok, puts the feature for about September.
A Tesla owner said that Full Self-Driving is great, but owners should be able to “converse with Grok like we can with an Uber driver.” She then used examples like, “Grok, turn right here,” and “Drop us off right here, we’ll walk due to traffic,” and finally,” Drop at entrance first, then park far away.”
Coincidentally, the final piece of dialogue would also mean features like Banish are potentially on the way soon.
This functionality will be there in about 3 months or so
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 18, 2026
Banish is also referred to as “Reverse Summon,” and would enable the car to self-park while dropping occupants off at their destination.
This would be a great way to improve the overall experience while supervising FSD. Navigation is already a major painpoint that many owners complain about. Manual overrides when a maneuver is requested or canceled (like using the turn signal stalk to override a navigation route), do not always work.
The feature could be especially useful in street parking scenarios in a city, where spots are sometimes tough to come by. Many of us who grab dinner in a more populated area will park a street or two over from wherever we’re going, because sometimes you know that’s the best you will get. If a driver using FSD could say, “Hey Grok, turn right here on Queen St. and park in that open spot on the right,” it could save a lot of confusion FSD might have on its own.
Musk teased that a similar feature was “coming” back in February:
Tesla Full Self-Driving set to get an awesome new feature, Elon Musk says
It is certainly surprising that Tesla is doing it at this point. The company’s more recent moves have been more evident of taking control and inputs away from humans and putting them in the AI’s hands more frequently. The biggest example of this was taking away Max Speed in AI4 cars, giving us Speed Profiles, and not having any input on the fastest speed the car will travel.
Of course, giving navigation preferences to Grok is availble already in Teslas, but not at the drop of a hat. Instead, you can suggest a certain route at the beginning of your drive.
Here’s an example of that from December:
🚨🏈 I am taking my parents and Fiancee to the @Ravens game next weekend and asked @Grok to help me route my @Tesla through a specific neighborhood to reach the correct Lot we will park in.
This is a great example of the new @grok nav integration with the Tesla Holiday Update: pic.twitter.com/rPp4I7q8Yv
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 13, 2025
Finally, the original post that Musk responded to mentioned a parking preference after dropping off the occupants, which describes the Banish feature that Tesla has teased for years.
We’re not sure if Musk was responding more to the ability to guide the car with Grok, or whether he also was including Banish in the three-month prediction timeframe.
Elon Musk challenges Tesla credit rating from Moody’s after SpaceX gets a higher one
Tesla faces Full Self-Driving pushback in EU over ‘speeding’
