Rivian’s CEO has explained why he and the company aren’t concerned about U.S. President Donald Trump’s electric vehicle (EV) policies, including the repeal of the $7,500 federal tax credit.
During a conversation with Automotive News at Rivian’s opening of a new Space showroom in San Francisco on Thursday, CEO RJ Scaringe said that the company plans to remain a top competitor pushing U.S. electrification, with or without the tax credit or similar battery production incentives. Scaringe highlighted that the credit would be repealed equally for all automakers under the Trump administration, noting that he didn’t start the electric vehicle (EV) maker even knowing what the future landscape for subsidies might look like.
“I don’t think we’re particularly worried about any of it because whatever happens will be equally applied to all,” Scaringe said during the opening event. “I started the company with the view of making highly compelling products and none of my decision to start Rivian had anything to do with what the policy was going to look like.”
However, the Rivian CEO did signal that legacy automakers could be more likely to fund combustion engine development when considering short-term profitability for the next two to three years, though he says this would be mistake for the industry long-term.
“I think in the end it’s sort of like there’s small speed bumps along the way and it’s on us to respond to whatever that environment is,” the CEO said. “We’re really talking about U.S. leadership in the future of technology as it pertains to transportation. This is not a political thing. It’s not like the left wants to move to electrification. It’s that the future of transportation will be electric.”
Rivian executive reveals massive cost-savings from re-tooling Illinois plant
READ MORE ON RIVIAN: Rivian CEO details ‘very intentional’ move he made to be different than Tesla
“The challenge with some of these short-term changes, for the world and for the U.S. leadership in technology, is that it will cause some manufacturers to invest less in electrification,” Scaringe notes. “And I think that’s probably good for Rivian from a competitive landscape, but bad for the world. If you’re optimizing purely for profitability in the next 2 to 3 years and you’re a traditional legacy manufacturer, you can see how you can very easily make a spreadsheet case of ‘Let’s double down on combustion or hybrids. I think that is a big miscalculation for the long term.”
The news also comes after Rivian gained a $6.6 billion commitment from the Department of Energy to help fund the construction of its upcoming factory in Georgia in November, officially closing on the loan on January 16. Amidst some speculation that the Trump administration could try to cancel the loan, Scaringe highlights that the agreement should already be set in stone, with the company subject to several conditions.
“We signed a legally binding agreement with the Department of Energy, to be clear,” Scaringe adds. “And, of course, that loan has a whole host of conditions that we negotiated over the last couple years.”
Rivian delivered 51,579 last year, marking a slight increase from 50,122 vehicles in 2023. The company also announced a major partnership and $5 billion investment deal with Volkswagen in June, and recent reports suggest that other manufacturers are also considering similar software supply deals with the EV company.
Meanwhile, Rivian and many other small EV makers are still attempting to turn production into profits, with the manufacturers still reporting substantial losses as they attempt to scale output. Many Tesla followers point out how close to bankruptcy the company came during its Model 3 ramp-up, and CEO Elon Musk has repeatedly echoed details about how difficult production is.
Similarly, however, Musk has also aired concerns about the potential for Rivian, Lucid and other growing EV makers to go bankrupt if they aren’t careful with their finances.
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.
Tesla rivals Rivian and Lucid receive harsh prediction from Elon Musk
Need accessories for your Tesla? Check out the Teslarati Marketplace:
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
