News
SpaceX lends Starlink to Washington emergency services as Elon Musk talks IPO
SpaceX has provided Washington’s Emergency Management department access to Starlink satellite internet service in a bid to support the state’s emergency response to dangerous wildfires.
Though the customer is technically a military department, this is the first public announcement of the internet constellation’s use in a civil service-oriented role. In the case of Malden, WA, a tiny eastern town with roughly 200 residents, a wildfire broke out in the first week of September and all but destroyed every building in a matter of hours. No fatalities have been recorded but the town and all its critical services effectively ceased to exist by the time the first passed through.
Given the sheer scale of fire damage Washington state has suffered this summer, Malden – without power or many other utilities after the fire passed through – is likely being held together with the support of emergency services departments like WA Emergency Management. Now, with SpaceX’s help, that likely includes the ability to provide some limited internet service – perhaps in a communal center or shelter – without spending an unreasonable portion of the precious little resources most emergency response agencies have to work with.
While still firmly in the development and prototype phase, SpaceX has begun to gradually expand the scope of its beta testing as the Starlink constellation expands, building off of an already strong relationship with the US military. That helps explain why, of so many possible civil recipients, WA Emergency Management – a military department – has received access to Starlink internet services first.
As SpaceX has made sure to reiterate during its many Starlink launch webcasts, the constellation’s main target demographics are those in regions that either completely or practically lack access to reliable internet. With a low Earth orbit (LEO) constellation like Starlink, SpaceX could feasibly deliver reliable, uninterrupted internet almost anywhere on Earth, so long as a prospective user has access to enough power to run their user terminal (antenna/router). According to SpaceX’s FCC application for said terminal, A/C power input requirements should never climb above 2.5 amps from a normal 100-240v outlet.
Ultimately, the second planned phase of Starlink will see the constellation grow to a point that SpaceX can seriously begin competing with ground-based ISPs – even in densely-populated areas. For now, though, the company has made it clear that the first phase – at least several thousand satellites -will primarily focus on connecting the unconnected and substantially upgrading the capabilities of emergency responders around the world.
Confirming President/COO Gwynne Shotwell’s February 2020 comments on a possible Starlink IPO, CEO Elon Musk reiterated that SpaceX may eventually spin off Starlink and make the company public, “but only several years in the future.” This is far from surprising, as Musk has consistently expressed disdain for the challenge of running Tesla as a public company, going so far as getting himself in hot legal water in an ill-fated attempt to take the company private in 2018.
Going public is possibly the single worst thing SpaceX or any SpaceX spin-off could do, given that shareholders generally have a single goal in mind: reliable profit and reliable growth. That attitude is generally the death knell for high-uncertainty R&D programs pursuing the first low Earth orbit Internet satellite constellation, reusable orbital-class rockets, 100-person Starships, or bases on the Moon and Mars. As such, Musk notes that SpaceX will consider taking Starlink public – but if and only if Starlink reaches a point where “revenue growth is smooth & predictable.” Shotwell and Musk, in other words, are on the same page.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Energy
Tesla Megapack Megafactory in Texas advances with major property sale
Stream Realty Partners announced the sale of Buildings 9 and 10 at the Empire West industrial park, which total 1,655,523 square feet.
Tesla’s planned Megapack factory in Brookshire, Texas has taken a significant step forward, as two massive industrial buildings fully leased to the company were sold to an institutional investor.
In a press release, Stream Realty Partners announced the sale of Buildings 9 and 10 at the Empire West industrial park, which total 1,655,523 square feet. The properties are 100% leased to Tesla under a long-term agreement and were acquired by BGO on behalf of an institutional investor.
The two facilities, located at 100 Empire Boulevard in Brookshire, Texas, will serve as Tesla’s new Megafactory dedicated to manufacturing Megapack battery systems.
According to local filings previously reported, Tesla plans to invest nearly $200 million into the site. The investment includes approximately $44 million in facility upgrades such as electrical, utility, and HVAC improvements, along with roughly $150 million in manufacturing equipment.
Building 9, spanning roughly 1 million square feet, will function as the primary manufacturing floor where Megapacks are assembled. Building 10, covering approximately 600,000 square feet, will be dedicated to warehousing and logistics operations, supporting storage and distribution of completed battery systems.
Waller County Commissioners have approved a 10-year tax abatement agreement with Tesla, offering up to a 60% property-tax reduction if the company meets hiring and investment targets. Tesla has committed to employing at least 375 people by the end of 2026, increasing to 1,500 by the end of 2028, as noted in an Austin County News Online report.
The Brookshire Megafactory will complement Tesla’s Lathrop Megafactory in California and expand U.S. production capacity for the utility-scale energy storage unit. Megapacks are designed to support grid stabilization and renewable-energy integration, a segment that has become one of Tesla’s fastest-growing businesses.
News
Tesla Sweden strikers see tax issues over IF Metall union error
To address the issue, IF Metall is encouraging Tesla strikers to return the refunded tax amounts to the union.
A tax correction is set to return two years of income tax payments to Tesla strikers in Sweden, after authorities determined that conflict compensation during a labor dispute should not have been taxed.
The issue is caused by a decision by IF Metall to treat strike compensation for Tesla workers as taxable income during the ongoing labor dispute with Tesla Sweden. That approach has now been reversed following guidance from the Swedish Tax Agency.
Strike compensation is typically tax-free under Sweden’s Income Tax Act, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). However, two years ago, IF Metall’s board decided to classify payments to Tesla strikers as taxable.
“We did it to secure SGI, unemployment insurance and public pension. Those were the risks we saw when the strike had already dragged on,” Kent Bursjöö, financial manager at IF Metall, stated.
According to Bursjöö, the union wanted to ensure that members continued to register earned income with the tax agency, protecting benefits tied to income history. At the end of January, however, the Swedish Tax Agency informed the union that compensation during a labor dispute must be tax-free.
“Of course, we knew that it could be tax-free. But we clearly didn’t know that it couldn’t be taxable,” Bursjöö said.
Following discussions with auditors and tax authorities, IF Metall began correcting the payments. As a result, two years of paid income tax will now be credited back to the affected strikers’ tax accounts. The union will also recover previously paid employer contributions.
However, the correction creates secondary effects. Since the payments will now be treated as tax-free, pension contributions tied to those earnings will be withdrawn, potentially affecting state pension accrual and income-based benefits such as parental or sickness benefits.
To address this, IF Metall is encouraging members to return the refunded tax amounts to the union. In exchange, the union plans to pay 18.5% into occupational pensions on their behalf. “Otherwise, it will be a form of overcompensation when they get the tax paid back,” Bursjöö said.
That being said, the IF Metall officer acknowledged that the union’s legal ability to reclaim the funds from its improperly paid Tesla Sweden strikers is limited. “The legal possibilities are probably limited, from what we can see. But we assume that most people see the value of securing their pension,” Bursjöö said.
News
Tesla sues California DMV over Autopilot and FSD advertising ruling
The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla falsely promoted the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.
Tesla has filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in an effort to overturn a prior ruling that found the automaker engaged in false advertising related to its driver-assistance systems.
The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla misled customers about the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.
Tesla’s legal action follows a decision by California’s Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), which concluded that Tesla’s earlier marketing of “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving” violated state law, as noted in a CNBC report.
While the DMV opted not to suspend Tesla’s license after determining the company had updated its marketing language for its advanced driver-assistance systems, Tesla is asking the court to go further and reverse the agency’s conclusion.
In its Feb. 13 complaint, Tesla’s attorneys argued that the DMV “wrongfully and baselessly” labeled the company a “false advertiser” for its Autopilot and FSD systems. The filing argued that regulators failed to demonstrate that consumers were actually misled about the capabilities of Tesla’s systems.
According to Tesla’s complaint, the DMV “never proved consumers in the state had been confused about whether its cars were safe to drive without a human at the wheel.”
Tesla’s legal team further stated: “It was impossible to buy a Tesla equipped with either Autopilot or Full Self-Driving Capability, or to use any of their associated features, without seeing clear and repeated statements that they do not make the vehicle autonomous.”
Tesla now promotes its driver-assistance system as “Full Self-Driving (Supervised),” a name that overemphasizes the need for active driver attention.
Tesla’s autonomous driving program is a pivotal part of the company’s future, with CEO Elon Musk stating that self-driving technology will truly be the solution that will push Tesla into its full potential. The company is currently operating a Robotaxi pilot in Austin and the Bay Area, and the company recently announced that it has produced the first Cybercab from Giga Texas’ production line.
Tesla Megapack Megafactory in Texas advances with major property sale
Tesla Sweden strikers see tax issues over IF Metall union error
