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.
Cybertruck
Tesla drops latest hint that new Cybertruck trim is selling like hotcakes
According to Tesla’s Online Design Studio, the new All-Wheel-Drive Cybertruck will now be delivered in April 2027. Earlier orders are still slated for early this Summer, but orders from here on forward are now officially pushed into next year:
Tesla’s new Cybertruck offering has had its delivery date pushed back once again. This is now the second time, and deliveries for the newest orders are now pushed well into 2027.
According to Tesla’s Online Design Studio, the new All-Wheel-Drive Cybertruck will now be delivered in April 2027. Earlier orders are still slated for early this Summer, but orders from here on forward are now officially pushed into next year:
🚨 Tesla has updated the $59,990 Cybertruck Dual Motor AWD’s estimated delivery date to April 2027.
First deliveries are still slated for June, but if you order it now, you’ll be waiting over a year.
Demand appears to be off the charts for the new Cybertruck and consumers are… pic.twitter.com/raDCCeC0zP
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 26, 2026
Just three days ago, the initial delivery date of June 2026 was pushed back to early Fall, and now, that date has officially moved to April 2027.
The fact that Tesla has had to push back deliveries once again proves one of two things: either Tesla has slow production plans for the new Cybertruck trim, or demand is off the charts.
Judging by how Tesla is already planning to raise the price based on demand in just a few days, it seems like the company knows it is giving a tremendous deal on this spec of Cybertruck, and units are moving quickly.
That points more toward demand and not necessarily to slower production plans, but it is not confirmed.
Tesla Cybertruck’s newest trim will undergo massive change in ten days, Musk says
Tesla is set to hike the price on March 1, so tomorrow will be the final day to grab the new Cybertruck trim for just $59,990.
It features:
- Dual Motor AWD w/ est. 325 mi of range
- Powered tonneau cover
- Bed outlets (2x 120V + 1x 240V) & Powershare capability
- Coil springs w/ adaptive damping
- Heated first-row seats w/ textile material that is easy to clean
- Steer-by-wire & Four Wheel Steering
- 6’ x 4’ composite bed
- Towing capacity of up to 7,500 lbs
- Powered frunk
Interestingly, the price offering is fairly close to what Tesla unveiled back in late 2019.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk outlines plan for first Starship tower catch attempt
Musk confirmed that Starship V3 Ship 1 (SN1) is headed for ground tests and expressed strong confidence in the updated vehicle design.
Elon Musk has clarified when SpaceX will first attempt to catch Starship’s upper stage with its launch tower. The CEO’s update provides the clearest teaser yet for the spacecraft’s recovery roadmap.
Musk shared the details in recent posts on X. In his initial post, Musk confirmed that Starship V3 Ship 1 (SN1) is headed for ground tests and expressed strong confidence in the updated vehicle design.
“Starship V3 SN1 headed for ground tests. I am highly confident that the V3 design will achieve full reusability,” Musk wrote.
In a follow-up post, Musk addressed when SpaceX would attempt to catch the upper stage using the launch tower’s robotic arms.
“Should note that SpaceX will only try to catch the ship with the tower after two perfect soft landings in the ocean. The risk of the ship breaking up over land needs to be very low,” Musk clarified.
His remarks suggest that SpaceX is deliberately reducing risk before attempting a tower catch of Starship’s upper stage. Such a milestone would mark a major step towards the full reuse of the Starship system.
SpaceX is currently targeting the first Starship V3 flight of 2026 this coming March. The spacecraft’s V3 iteration is widely viewed as a key milestone in SpaceX’s long-term strategy to make Starship fully reusable.
Starship V3 features a number of key upgrades over its previous iterations. The vehicle is equipped with SpaceX’s Raptor V3 engines, which are designed to deliver significantly higher thrust than earlier versions while reducing cost and weight.
The V3 design is also expected to be optimized for manufacturability, a critical step if SpaceX intends to scale the spacecraft’s production toward frequent launches for Starlink, lunar missions, and eventually Mars.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) could be approved in the Netherlands next month: Musk
Musk shared the update during a recent interview at Giga Berlin.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk shared that Full Self-Driving (FSD) could receive regulatory approval in the Netherlands as soon as March 20, potentially marking a major step forward for Tesla’s advanced driver-assistance rollout in Europe.
Musk shared the update during a recent interview at Giga Berlin, noting that the date was provided by local authorities.
“Tesla has the most advanced real-world AI, and hopefully, it will be approved soon in Europe. We’re told by the authorities that March 20th, it’ll be approved in the Netherlands,’ what I was told,” Musk stated.
“Hopefully, that date remains the same. But I think people in Europe are going to be pretty blown away by how good the Tesla car AI is in being able to drive.”
Tesla’s FSD system relies on vision-based neural networks trained on real-world driving data, allowing vehicles to navigate using cameras and AI rather than traditional sensor-heavy solutions.
The performance of FSD Supervised has so far been impressive. As per Tesla’s safety report, Full Self-Driving Supervised has already traveled 8.3 billion miles. So far, vehicles operating with FSD Supervised engaged recorded one major collision every 5,300,676 miles.
In comparison, Teslas driven manually with Active Safety systems recorded one major collision every 2,175,763 miles, while Teslas driven manually without Active Safety recorded one major collision every 855,132 miles. The U.S. average during the same period was one major collision every 660,164 miles.
If approval is granted on March 20, the Netherlands could become the first European market to greenlight Tesla’s latest supervised FSD (Supervised) software under updated regulatory frameworks. Tesla has been working to secure expanded FSD access across Europe, where regulatory standards differ significantly from those in the United States. Approval in the Netherlands would likely serve as a foundation for broader EU adoption, though additional country-level clearances may still be required.

