News
Swedish unions, transportation agency comment on anti-Tesla strike efforts
Labor efforts continue against Tesla in Sweden, as the company faces strikes and sympathy strikes from multiple of the country’s largest unions that have now lasted well over a year. In recent months, these strikes have prevented Tesla’s buyers in the country from receiving their license plates directly from the transportation agency, along with stopping newly built Supercharger stations from being energized.
Tesla has been pursuing legal action for both of these issues, though Sweden’s long-standing history with a highly unionized workforce has some union and government officials scratching their heads as to why the company won’t sign a collective bargaining agreement. Originally approved by IF Metall, the country’s largest automotive and metalworkers union, the strikes have rippled into other major unions, including the government worker-focused Fackförbundet ST, and the Svenska Elektrikerförbundet (SEF) union, otherwise known as the Electricians’ Association.
In recent correspondence with Teslarati, Fackförbundet ST and the Transport Agency have shared their comments on the situation, after it was reported this week that the Electricians’ Association is under review from the Energy Market Inspectorate for its sympathy strike, and following Tesla’s latest appeal to an administrative court in hopes to force the Transport Agency to stop withholding license plates from the company.
🚨 UPDATE: IF Metall has contacted @Teslarati and said this regarding the strikes:
“When Tesla Sweden signs the collective agreement, the strike and sympathy strike ends immediately.” https://t.co/kAMxTvHdjV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 6, 2025
Fackförbundet ST: Tesla Sweden’s anti-union efforts are ‘remarkable,’ subject customers to ‘considerable inconvenience’
Sweden’s unions represent nine out of ten workers across the country, according to IF Metall, with that union’s membership alone representing about 300,000 employees in the metalworking industry. Fackförbundet ST called Tesla Sweden’s continued efforts to resist a collective bargaining agreement “remarkable,” highlighting that it believes the company should adhere to the country’s structures.
“It is remarkable that a well-established company like Tesla chooses to invest both time and significant resources, while also subjecting its customers to considerable inconvenience, simply to avoid implementing the highly effective regulatory framework (collective agreement) that has been carefully nurtured and appreciated by the social partners in Sweden for a long time,” wrote Anders Maxson, Fackförbundet ST Press and Opinion Manager, Communications and Impact, in an email to Teslarati.
“This is an example of a conflict between the Swedish system and a global company, and we do not believe it is too much to ask for large international companies to make certain adjustments to the systems of different countries.”
In response to the union, Tesla Sweden has said that it offers workers terms that are as good, if not better, than those that can be offered by the country’s unions.
Sweden’s Transport Agency: Why it dismissed Tesla’s demand, and company’s right to another appeal
After Tesla demanded that the Swedish Transport Agency resume providing license plates to the company in a way other than via postal delivery direct-to-consumer, it also urged the Karlstad administrative court this week to force mail provider PostNord to resume these deliveries.
Following the news, the Transport Agency explained why it dismissed Tesla’s demand to Teslarati, adding that the company also has a right to file such an appeal despite having been turned down by multiple other courts in the country throughout last year.
“The Swedish Transport Agency has received a demand from Tesla that license plates should be provided to the company in a way other than via postal delivery,” wrote Anna Berggrund, Department Vehicle Information Director. “However, the Swedish Transport Agency is of the opinion that it’s not possible for Tesla to make such a demand, since the question at hand emanates from the implementation of a task set upon the agency and not from an appealable decision. Therefore we have dismissed Tesla’s demand.
“Now Tesla has appealed against our dismissal to the Administrative Court, which is their right. The issue will now be examined by the Administrative Court. We await the outcome and do not want to make any further comments on the issue.”
Sweden’s Energy Market Inspectorate: Electricians’ Association grid operators ‘obligated’ to connect facilities, except under ‘special’ circumstances
Earlier this month, Tesla Director of Charging Max de Zegher said that over 100 Supercharger stalls that had been built over the winter were waiting to be energized due to the strike efforts, as they were being prevented from connecting to the country’s grid. The situation has resulted in an investigation from the Energy Market Inspectorate, which defended the Electricians’ Association in its right to participate in a sympathy strike in recent statements but said that the circumstances were currently under review.
“The Electricians’ Association as such does not commit any crime by taking sympathy measures,” said Jerker Sidén, Energy Market Inspectorate Analyst, in a statement to Teslarati. “This is because we don’t really have any supervisory responsibility towards them. On the other hand, the electricity network companies in Sweden are covered by regulations that fall under our supervisory responsibility.
“One of these provisions is that the grid companies have an obligation to connect facilities to their electricity grids upon request unless there are special reasons. There are also provisions that the connection must take place within a reasonable time.”
In particular, the government agency is looking into whether or not the union has eligible “special reasons” for failing to fulfill its obligation to connecting the chargers to the grid, though the analyst also admits that there is little precedent as to what qualifies for the exception.
“However, there is relatively little guidance as to what this type of special reason could be and we have not previously decided a similar issue, which means that we cannot currently answer whether the regulations are followed or not,” Sidén added.
IF Metall: Collective agreements ‘one of the cornerstones of a functioning labor market model’
IF Metall also commented on the situation, echoing previous statements it made to Teslarati about the fact that it thinks Tesla Sweden signing a collective bargaining agreement is the only way to end the sympathy strikes.
“IF Metall has requested sympathy measures for its endeavor to sign a collective agreement for its members at Tesla’s company in Sweden,” says Mikael Pettersson, the union’s Head of Negotiations. “The Swedish Electricians’ Union organizes the installation industry for electricians and works daily with signing collective agreements with employers who employ electricians. It is one of the cornerstones of a functioning labor market model, which has been in place since 1906.
“The hope is that Tesla’s Swedish company signs a collective agreement with IF Metall as soon as possible.”
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.
Court rules against Tesla Sweden in license plate withholding suit
Need accessories for your Tesla? Check out the Teslarati Marketplace:
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
