News
As OK’s anti-Tesla bill moves forward, its author believes a compromise is possible
The electric vehicle community in the United States took a collective gasp earlier this month when a proposed House Bill in Oklahoma unanimously passed a committee vote. The bill in question, HB 3994, aims to update and change parts of existing Oklahoma statutes related to the state’s auto industry. Now, this may sound harmless enough, but a look at the 70-page bill shows that companies like Tesla could lose out heavily if HB 3994 becomes law.
Tesla is already not allowed to directly sell its cars to consumers in Oklahoma, but HB 3994 could give the company even more headaches. What is particularly alarming with HB 3994’s language is the fact that it could be interpreted as a means to prevent automakers like Tesla from delivering and servicing vehicles in the state. This may result in Oklahoma-based Tesla owners being required to travel out of state just to have their vehicles serviced.
Tesla takes the bill very seriously, with the company urging owners on its Engage page to vote “No” to HB 3994. “If passed, this bill could force Tesla to close its existing locations in Oklahoma and prevent Tesla from shipping cars to anyone in the state, which would force locals to travel out-of-state to service their cars or pick up their new Tesla vehicles. Oklahoma should focus on increasing revenue and jobs in the state, not stifling competition and limiting consumer choice,” Tesla noted on its Engage page.
Oppositions and Risks
To state that Oklahoma-based Tesla owners are passionately trying to prevent HB 3994 from progressing further would be an understatement. Tesla owners are currently lobbying against the bill, with some even heading to the capitol last week to speak with the bill’s author, Representative Mike Dobrinski, who has an extensive background in the state’s auto sector. As per Dobrinski’s LinkedIn page, he was the Owner/Dealer of Dobrinski Chevrolet, Inc. until March 2017, and he was the Dealer/Owner of Dobrinski of Kingfisher, Inc., a Chevrolet-Buick-GMC dealership, until October 2018.
The Tesla owners’ talk with the Representative at the capitol last week was brief, according to information shared with Teslarati. Dobrinski highlighted the idea that HB 3994 is a way to protect Tesla owners in Oklahoma because if the EV maker refuses to cover its customers under warranty, then consumers will have no backup. Such a scenario seems unlikely, however.
It’s not just Tesla owners in the state who are against HB 3994. Oklahoma Senator Mary B. Boren, who drives a Tesla Model 3 herself, has openly criticized the bill. In a short conversation with Teslarati, Senator Boren noted that Oklahoma must let the product and the market decide if the state wants innovation to flourish. Initiatives such as HB 3994, which could result in automakers with no dealerships getting the short end of the stick, are counterproductive.
The Senator’s statements could very well ring true. Just recently, reports emerged that Tesla battery partner Panasonic has decided to acquire a factory site in the United States for the production of high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. Panasonic has reportedly shortlisted its preferred US locations to Oklahoma and Kansas. Senator Boren remarked that the presence of bills like HB 3994 could potentially discourage companies like Panasonic from investing in Oklahoma.
“If you have capitalistic laws being passed to protect a particular industry and their business model and to insulate them from the market demands that require them to adjust, then any innovative industry related to EVs will notice that — and they will notice that cronyism is at play. They will find friendlier environments,” Sen. Boren said.
Insights from HB 3994’s Author
The fact that HB 3994 unanimously passed a committee vote earlier this month shows that the bill is also seeing substantial support, despite its harsh repercussions on companies like Tesla and its local electric vehicle owners. When asked by Teslarati about the rationale behind the controversial bill, Rep. Dobrinski explained that HB 3994 is a request bill from the Oklahoma Auto Dealer Association.
“A request bill from the Oklahoma Auto Dealer Association, it seeks to strengthen the position of franchised dealers from the ever-increasing demands and requirements of their legacy manufacturers. Doing so requires addressing Direct Shippers, including Tesla, that are not currently regulated by the Oklahoma Motor Vehicle Commission like franchised dealers are. Proper legislation and regulation will ensure that existing service facilities may remain open and consumers will have additional protections,” Dobrinski noted.
Interestingly enough, the Representative admitted that while HB 3994 includes provisions that may be used to force Tesla into closing its service centers in the state, he does not expect that part of the bill to make it to HB 3994’s final iteration. “I do not expect that provision to be included in the (bill’s) final language,” Dobrinski later stated.
The Representative deserves praise for his honesty with HB 3994, though one may wonder why the controversial bill’s most heavy-handed provisions were included in the first place. When confronted by Tesla owners online, Dobrinski has maintained that HB 3994 is far from finished, but it has already opened the doors for communication among automotive businesses in the state.
“This bill, as introduced, is far from the finished product. It is forcing engagement from franchise auto dealers, legacy manufacturers, and new EV manufacturers, including Tesla. These folks are all talking now for the first time ever to work on a plan of regulation going forward that ensures competition and improves customer satisfaction under the purview of the Oklahoma Motor Vehicle Commission,” Dobrinski wrote.
A Price for Compromise?
Considering the statements of HB 3994’s author, it appears that the bill could partly be seen as a way to achieve a compromise of sorts between companies like Tesla, electric vehicle owners, and the state’s franchised auto dealerships. However, existing Tesla owners in Oklahoma fear that if HB 3994 passes into law, it could adversely affect not only their ownership experience but also their daily lives.
Cristen Winter Huber, a Tesla owner and a foster mother, is one of them. Being a foster mother, Huber is unable to take her foster children outside Oklahoma without a judge’s permission. According to Huber, the harsher portions of HB 3994 could effectively disrupt her family dynamic, and it might motivate her to leave the state.
“It’s not feasible for my family to drive out of state frequently. I’m a parent and foster parent. I have to get approval from a judge to take my foster child out of state. If I have to leave the state to service my car, I might as well move to a state that welcomes growth and innovation,” Huber said.
Jochen Hoppert, the President of the Tesla Owners Club of Oklahoma, noted that HB 3994 is not only a step in the wrong direction — it can have repercussions far beyond Tesla. The Tesla Club President also stated that so far, the EV maker’s service centers in Oklahoma City and Tulsa are proving that Tesla is serious about supporting its customers.
“Tesla is still not permitted to sell or deliver vehicles from those locations. We hope that will change in the future, yet this anti-competitive bill is clearly a step in the opposite direction. It’s worth noting that this move would not only negatively affect Tesla and the local Tesla community but other up-and-coming electric vehicle manufacturers wishing to do business in the state.
“Rep. Mike Dobrinski, the creator of this bill… has shared his perspective, which includes the notion that this bill would provide benefit to the consumer by allowing the state to manage the presence of warranty, service, and other such things for the consumer as required features of the electric vehicle marketplace. The Tesla service centers in Oklahoma City and Tulsa already demonstrate Tesla’s desire to provide its customers with such services,” Hoppert said.
Following its unanimous committee approval, House Bill 3994 has now advanced to the House Floor. But before the bill could become a law, the Oklahoma Governor would have to approve it first. With this in mind, Tesla owners and electric vehicle advocates still have some time to fight against the bill, or at least lobby for significant changes. Rep. Mike Dobrinski himself has been consistent with the idea that HB 3994 is still open for edits, so it may be a good idea for Tesla owners in the state to push their efforts even more from this point forward.
Those interested in speaking up and supporting Tesla’s efforts against Oklahoma’s HB 3994 could click here.
A copy of Oklahoma HB 3994 could be viewed below.
Hb3994 Int by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
News
Tesla Cybertruck sales bolstered by bold Musk move, report claims
If accurate, that means nearly one in every five Cybertrucks registered in the quarter was transferred internally within Musk’s business empire. The purchases, valued at more than $100 million, have continued into 2026.
A new report from Bloomberg claims Tesla Cybertruck sales were inflated by internal buyers, meaning companies owned by CEO Elon Musk, and most notably, SpaceX.
According to a new registration data analysis, a significant portion of the fourth quarter’s Cybertruck sales came from Musk companies.
In the fourth quarter of 2025, 7,071 Cybertrucks were registered in the United States. SpaceX, Musk’s rocket and satellite company, accounted for 1,279 of those vehicles—more than 18 percent of the total. Musk’s additional ventures, including xAI, the Boring Company, and Neuralink, acquired another 60 trucks during the same period.
Tesla Cybertruck just won a rare and elusive crash safety honor
If accurate, that means nearly one in every five Cybertrucks registered in the quarter was transferred internally within Musk’s business empire. The purchases, valued at more than $100 million, have continued into 2026.
These internal sales supplemented the Cybertruck’s overall performance for the quarter, as without them, sales would have plunged 51 percent. The vehicle, which has repeatedly been called “the best product Tesla has ever made,” has fallen short of expectations due to pricing.
When first unveiled back in 2019, Tesla had a $39,990, $49,990, and $69,990 configuration for sale. Those prices inflated significantly as the truck was not released to customers until 2023. Those who had placed orders for affordable configurations were priced out.
Sam Fiorani, VP of Global Vehicle Forecasting at AutoForecast Solutions, said, “Tesla is running out of buyers for the Cybertruck.” In reality, there are probably a lot of buyers, but they simply cannot afford the truck at its current price point.
The Cybertruck was supposed to broaden Tesla’s appeal beyond its core lineup of sleek sedans and SUVs. While it has done a lot for brand notoriety, it has not lived up to its monumental expectations, and it’s simply because the truck has not been as available as most had thought.
The truck is still the best-selling electric pickup in the country, outpacing rivals like the Ford F-150 Lightning and Chevrolet Silverado EV. It is also not uncommon for companies to use their own vehicles for internal operations, like Ford using its own Transit van for Mobile Service.
However, this much inventory of Cybertrucks being purchased by Musk’s companies is not what you love to see as a fan or investor.
News
Tesla Signature Model S, X owners get hit with crazy no-resale clause
With production of the Model S and X winding down to focus on next-generation projects like the Optimus robot, Tesla is building just 250 units of each model. Priced at $159,420, these exclusive vehicles come loaded with bespoke features and the full Luxe Package—but buyers must sign a binding contract before delivery that bars resale for one full year.
Tesla Signature Model S and X owners got hit with a crazy no-resale clause by the company, a move that has been used before to limit the immediate resale of a vehicle to obtain a sizeable profit.
Tesla has introduced a strict “No Resale Agreement” for its ultra-limited Signature Edition Model S and Model X Plaid vehicles, signaling the automaker’s determination to keep these final flagship models in the hands of genuine enthusiasts rather than speculators.
With production of the Model S and X winding down to focus on next-generation projects like the Optimus robot, Tesla is building just 250 units of each model. Priced at $159,420, these exclusive vehicles come loaded with bespoke features and the full Luxe Package—but buyers must sign a binding contract before delivery that bars resale for one full year.
Signature Edition Model S/X orders contain a No Resale Agreement.
Here is the document.
Additionally, here is the resale clause which states the Luxe Package does not transfer (this is not new) pic.twitter.com/CGB5QBJIL6
— The Cybertruck Guy (@cybrtrkguy) April 12, 2026
Purchasers promise they “will not sell or otherwise attempt to sell the vehicle within the first year following your vehicle’s delivery date.”
Violators face steep consequences: Tesla can pursue liquidated damages equal to $50,000 or the full amount received from any sale or transfer, whichever is greater. The company also reserves the right to refuse future vehicle sales to anyone who breaches the clause. Orders are account-specific, requiring buyers to log in with their personal Tesla account, which further complicates any informal transfers.
The restrictions extend beyond the one-year lockout. Even after the prohibition period ends, key elements of the Signature Edition’s appeal do not transfer with the car. The Luxe Package—bundling lifetime Full Self-Driving (Supervised), free lifetime Supercharging, and permanent Premium Connectivity—terminates upon any change in ownership.
While four years of Premium Service, tire, and windshield protection plans do transfer, the high-value software and charging perks effectively vanish for the second owner. This non-transferability has long been Tesla’s policy for Luxe-equipped vehicles, but it carries extra weight on a nearly $160,000 limited-run model.
Tesla’s move is a direct response to past flipping of rare editions. By tying the car to the original buyer’s account and imposing financial penalties, the company aims to curb gray-market speculation that could drive prices far above MSRP.
Critics of the no-resale clause argue that the agreement limits personal property rights and could complicate legitimate life events like relocation or financial hardship.
For now, the policy appears ironclad. Deliveries of the Signature Editions are expected to begin in May 2026, complete with Garnet Red paint, gold-accented badging, Alcantara interiors, yoke steering, and unique numbered plaques.
In an era when limited-edition vehicles often become instant investment pieces, Tesla is betting that true fans will embrace the rules. Whether the No Resale Agreement successfully protects the final chapter of the Model S and X legacy remains to be seen—but one thing is clear: these will be among the most tightly controlled Teslas ever sold.
News
Tesla just tipped its hand on a major Cybercab feature as production hits Plaid Mode
Tesla has delivered a clear signal that its Robotaxi ambitions are shifting into high gear. On April 17, longtime factory observer and drone pilot Joe Tegtmeyer captured drone footage and still images showing approximately 14 freshly built Cybercabs parked in the outbound lot—each one conspicuously lacking a steering wheel.
Tesla just tipped its hand on a major Cybercab feature as it is putting production into Plaid Mode, but a clear indication of what the company plans to do with the vehicle is now apparent.
Tesla has delivered a clear signal that its Robotaxi ambitions are shifting into high gear, and it’s doing it with full autonomy in mind.
On April 17, longtime factory observer and drone pilot Joe Tegtmeyer captured drone footage and still images showing approximately 14 newly built Cybercabs parked in the outbound lot, each conspicuously lacking a steering wheel, and potentially pedals.
Tegtmeyer’s post highlighted the significance of this development: The images and video reveal sleek, two-seat Cybercabs in their final production form: no driver controls, no side mirrors, and the minimalist interior first unveiled at Tesla’s “We Robot” event in October 2024.
Something big has changed at Giga Texas with Cybercab production … ~ 14 in the outbound lot WITHOUT STEERING WHEELS!
Earlier this week, the production line has begun what we are all waiting for and I would expect to see many more starting on Monday, 4/20 🤠
A big step… pic.twitter.com/K17ZzBlQ8k
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) April 17, 2026
These units contrast with earlier test vehicles spotted at the factory’s crash-test area, which carried temporary steering wheels and pedals to meet current federal regulations during data-collection phases.
The outbound-lot vehicles appear complete, with production wheels, tire stickers, and the signature Cybercab styling ready for deployment.
This sighting represents a pivotal transition. Tesla designed the Cybercab from the ground up as a purpose-built robotaxi, engineered for unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) operation. Removing manual controls eliminates cost, complexity, and weight while maximizing interior space and range.
The move also signals that Tesla has cleared initial validation hurdles and is now building vehicles to the exact specification intended for commercial robotaxi service.
Industry watchers note the timing aligns with Tesla’s broader rollout plans. Production of early Cybercabs began in late 2025 and early 2026, primarily for internal testing and regulatory compliance.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards currently limit vehicles without steering wheels to 2,500 units per year without exemption, a cap that Tesla is navigating through ongoing filings.
Tesla Cybercab spotted next to Model Y shows size comparison
The appearance of steering-wheel-free units in the outbound lot suggests the company is preparing a small initial fleet—likely for Austin pilot operations or further validation—while pushing for regulatory relief to scale output.
The development comes as Tesla ramps its dedicated Cybercab line at Gigafactory Texas. If the Monday surge materializes as predicted, observers expect dozens more units to accumulate rapidly.
With unsupervised FSD advancing and regulatory conversations ongoing, these wheel-less Cybercabs parked under the Texas sun represent more than hardware—they embody Tesla’s bet that autonomous mobility is no longer a prototype dream but an imminent reality.

