News
Tesla gets boost from China’s regulations as Europe sees influx of Model 3 registrations
Tesla’s push into the international market with its Model 3 electric sedan could see a notable boost, thanks in part to some unexpected support from Chinese regulations and what appears to be widespread support for EVs in the European region. With the Model 3 about to saturate the right-hand-drive markets, it appears that Tesla’s ramp of the vehicle is entering its later stages.
A recent update from Beijing stands to benefit the countries’ largest local electric car companies and Tesla, which is currently building a wholly-owned factory in Shanghai. In an announcement on Friday, China’s Ministry of Finance announced that it would be extending a sales tax break for battery-powered and hybrid vehicles. A change was expected to go into effect on Monday, but with the update in place, battery-powered and hybrid vehicles will still be exempt from a 10% sales tax until the end of 2020.
With the extension of the tax break, analysts from China have noted that strong brands in the EV sector, such as Tesla and local companies like Geely Automobile Holdings, SAIC Motor, NIO, and Xpeng Motors, would likely see benefits from the government’s adjustment. Tax break or not, the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers expect New Energy Vehicle (NEV) sales in the country to increase by 27%, which would translate to around 1.6 million units over the course of 2019. If these forecasts prove accurate, China will set another sales record for its NEV initiative this year.
If Tesla starts producing the Model 3 at Gigafactory 3 later this year, the company could tap into the country’s growing NEV market. Tesla, after all, is considered a premium brand in the country, holding a reputation that is not too far from Apple. Tesla’s vehicles like the Model X have been considered as status symbols in the past, and this could ultimately benefit the Model 3, which offers a more affordable entry point into the Tesla ecosystem.
Apart from a potential boost thanks to China’s regulations, Tesla’s push into the European market also appears to be bearing fruit. Tesla conducted a massive end-of-quarter push in Europe last month, as part of its attempt to meet or even break its record in Q4 2018, when it delivered over 90,000 vehicles in one quarter. Data from Europe’s car sales in June 2019 show that Tesla’s delivery push might have paid off.
June’s sales from the European region are currently trickling in, and based on data from countries such as Norway and the Netherlands, where registrations surpassed 2,500 for the first time, Tesla appears to be increasing its reach. Denmark also saw 426 Tesla registrations, which is more than four times the total for all of 2018. In line with the company’s end-of-quarter push, almost a third of Denmark’s Tesla registrations were submitted in the last week of June. This influx of registrations is likely due to the Model 3, which is currently being shipped to the region.
Bloomberg Intelligence global autos analyst Kevin Tynan believes that Europe’s momentum could help the company, particularly as the company’s expansion in the US “stalls.” The analyst also expects Tesla to meet competition in Europe and China, as the company will have to challenge established local competitors. “Tesla’s global push will deliver expansion as the US stalls, but at great expense to margin. And dominance of the battery-electric vehicle market may not come as easily in China and Europe, as the company faces established hometown — and government — favorites there,” Tynan wrote.
Tesla’s Model 3 ramp has been the focus of the company for over a year. As Tesla starts its push into the RHD territories this quarter, and as the company prepares to manufacture the Model 3 in China, the later stages of Elon Musk’s play into the mass market could finally be at hand. Once the Model 3 ramp reaches its full fruition, Tesla could start its next, more ambitious push into the mainstream: the Model Y, which will compete in the competitive and lucrative crossover SUV market.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
