

News
Tesla’s Elon Musk files appeal to end 2018 SEC agreement over Twitter posts
A recent filing has revealed that Tesla CEO Elon Musk will be asking the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan if it could overturn a decision by US District Judge Lewis Liman back in April. Judge Liman had previously rejected Musk’s requests to end his 2018 agreement with the Securities and Exchange Commission about his Twitter posts.
Following Musk’s “funding secured” saga in 2018, he entered an agreement with the SEC which demanded that any tweets with material information about Tesla must be vetted by a lawyer before they were posted on Twitter. Musk and the SEC have clashed several times since.
Musk has since put efforts into ending his agreement with the SEC. Earlier this year, Musk accused the SEC of undermining his constitutional right to free speech. He also accused the SEC of using the decree to launch “endless, boundless investigations of his speech.”
Musk’s efforts, however, met a roadblock in April when US District Judge Lewis Liman decreed that the Tesla CEO and the SEC’s agreement should stand as it was originally written.
“Musk cannot now seek to retract the agreement he knowingly and willingly entered by simply bemoaning that he felt like he had to agree to it at the time but now—once the specter of the litigation is a distant memory and his company has become, in his estimation, all but invincible—wishes that he had not,” Liman wrote.
With Musk’s recent appeal, the CEO and his legal team would now try to argue their points in a different courtroom. Whether this is worth a shot remains to be seen, but it does highlight the idea that Musk really wants his agreement with the SEC to end. Musk seemed to regret his decision could the matter, as he mentioned during a TED 2022 interview last April.
“I should say, originally with Tesla back in the day, funding was actually secured. I want to be clear about that. In fact, this may be a good opportunity to clarify that. If funding was indeed secured and, I should say, why do I not have respect for the SEC in that situation? And I don’t mean to blame everyone at the SEC, but certainly the San Francisco office. Because the SEC knew that the funding was secured, but they pursued an active public investigation nonetheless.
“At the time, Tesla was in a precarious financial situation. And I was told by the banks that if I did not agree to settle with the SEC that they would cease providing working capital, and we would go bankrupt immediately. So that’s like having a gun to your child’s head. So I was forced to concede to the SEC unlawfully. Those bastards. And now it makes it look like I lied when I did not, in fact, lie. I was forced to admit that I lied to save Tesla’s life. And that’s the only reason,” Musk said.
Musk’s appeal could be viewed below.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk assures Tesla investors he will enhance his security detail
Musk’s comments were posted on X in the aftermath of the slaying of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has assured TSLA investors that he would be enhancing his security detail.
Musk’s comments were posted on X in the aftermath of the slaying of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.
Aggressive critics
Kirk was slain during a speaking engagement at Utah Valley University as part of Turning Point USA’s first event on a tour of college campuses, as noted in a Politico report. Kirk was a notable voice in the conservative movement and a close ally of the Trump administration, which led to aggressive critics openly wishing him harm.
Elon Musk, due to his contributions to the Trump campaign and his later work with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has also attracted a substantial amount of vitriol from critics. Tesla owners and the company itself suffered attacks due to critics’ anger towards Musk, with several stores and cars being vandalized or victimized in arson attacks.
Despite having stepped back from his work with DOGE, Musk remains a target among critics online, with some still calling for the CEO to get the “Luigi Mangione” treatment. These sentiments were notable after Kirk’s slaying, with some users on platforms such as Reddit and Bluesky arguing that Musk or Donald Trump should be next after Kirk.
Concerns and assurances
In the aftermath of Kirk’s slaying, numerous Tesla retail investors called on the company’s Board of Directors to bolster Elon Musk’s security detail. With some social media users openly calling for Musk to be slain next, such a request made sense. This was highlighted by Tesla investor Alexandra Merz, who called on the Tesla Board to drastically increase the company’s budget for Elon Musk’s security, which currently stands at just $3.3 million annually, or about $235,000 per month.
In response to the Tesla investor’s comments, Musk responded that he would “definitely need to enhance security.” Musk’s response was well appreciated by the Tesla and electric vehicle community as a whole, with some users on X stating that the CEO must be kept safe.
Musk is a key part of Tesla, and this was highlighted in the company’s proposed 2025 CEO performance award, which outlines a path towards the company attaining a market cap of $8.5 trillion. In its filing, Tesla highlighted that Elon Musk’s leadership is a fundamental part of the company and its future.
News
This signature Tesla feature is facing a ban in one of its biggest markets
The report indicates that Chinese government agencies have concerns “about failure rates and safety issues with the flush design.”

A signature Tesla feature is under fire in one of the company’s largest markets, as regulators in one EV hot spot are mulling the potential ban of a design the automaker implemented on some of its vehicles.
Tesla pioneered the pop-out door handle on its Model S back in 2012, and CEO Elon Musk felt the self-presenting design was a great way to feel like “you’re part of the future.”
It is something that is still present on current Model S designs, while other vehicles in the Tesla lineup have a variety of handle aesthetics.
According to Chinese media outlet Mingjing Pro, the company, along with others using similar technology, is facing scrutiny on the design as regulators consider a ban on the mechanism. These restrictions would impact other companies that have utilized pop-out handles on their own designs; Tesla would not be the only company forced to make changes.
The report indicates that Chinese government agencies have concerns “about failure rates and safety issues with the flush design.”
However, EVs are designed to be as aerodynamically efficient as possible, which is the main reason for this design. It is also the reason that many EVs utilize wheel covers, and sleek and flowing shapes.
However, the Chinese government is not convinced, as they stated the aerodynamic improvements are “minimal,” and safety issues are “significantly elevated,” according to The Independent.
The issue also seems to be focused on how effective the handle design is. According to data, one EV manufacturer, which was not specified in the report, has 12 percent of its total repairs are door handle failure fixes.
There are also concerns about the handles short-circuiting, leaving passengers trapped within cars. Tesla has implemented emergency latch releases in its vehicles that would prevent passengers from getting stuck in their cars in cases of electric malfunctions or failures.
However, evidence from the Chinese Insurance Automotive Technology Research Institute (C-IASI) suggests that 33 percent of door handles using this design fail to function after a side impact.
Obviously, Tesla and other automakers could introduce an alternative design to those vehicles that are affected by the potential restrictions China intends to impose. The regulation would take effect in July 2027.
News
Tesla is bailing out Canadian automakers once again: here’s how

Tesla is bailing out Canadian automakers once again, as some companies in the country are consistently failing to reach mandated minimum sales targets for emission-free vehicles.
Many countries and regions across the world have enacted mandates that require car companies to sell a certain percentage of electric powertrains each year in an effort to make sustainable transportation more popular.
These mandates are specifically to help reduce the environmental impacts of gas-powered cars. In Canada, 20 percent of new car sales in the 2026 model year must be of an emissions-free powertrain. This number will eventually increase to 100 percent of sales by 2030, or else automakers will pay a substantial fine — $20,000 per vehicle.
There is a way companies can avoid fines, and it involves purchasing credits from companies that have a surplus of emissions-free sales.
Tesla is the only company with this surplus, so it will be bailing out a significant number of other automakers that have fallen short of reaching their emissions targets.
Brian Kingston, CEO of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association, said (via Yahoo):
“The only manufacturer that would have a surplus of credits is Tesla, because all they do is sell electric vehicles. A manufacturer has to enter into an agreement with them to purchase credits to help them meet the mandate.”
Tesla has made just over $1 billion this year alone in automotive regulatory credits, which is revenue acquired from selling these to lagging car companies. Kingstone believes Tesla could be looking at roughly $3 billion in credit purchases to comply with the global regulations.
Tesla still poised to earn $3B in ZEV credits this year: Piper Sandler
Automakers operating in Canada are not putting in a lack of effort, but their slow pace in gaining traction in the EV space is a more relevant issue. Execution is where these companies are falling short, and Tesla is a beneficiary of their slow progress.
Kingston doesn’t believe the mandates are necessarily constructive:
“We’ve seen over $40 billion in new investment into Canada since 2020 and all signs were pointing to the automotive industry thriving. Now the federal government has regulations that specifically punishes companies that have a footprint here, requiring them to purchase credits from a company that has a minimal (Canadian) footprint and an almost nonexistent employee base.”
Kingston raises a valid point, but it is hard to see how Tesla is to blame for the issue of other car companies struggling to bring attractive, high-tech, and effective electric powertrains to market.
Tesla has continued to establish itself as the most technologically advanced company in terms of EVs and its tech, as it still offers the best product and has also established the most widespread charging infrastructure globally.
This is not to say other companies do not have good products. In my personal experience, Teslas are just more user-friendly, intuitive, and convenient.
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla is overhauling its Full Self-Driving subscription for easier access
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
Elon Musk shares unbelievable Starship Flight 10 landing feat
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
Elon Musk reveals when SpaceX will perform first-ever Starship catch
-
Elon Musk1 week ago
Tesla’s next-gen Optimus prototype with Grok revealed
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
SpaceX Starship Flight 10 was so successful, it’s breaking the anti-Musk narrative
-
News5 days ago
Tesla launches new Supercharger program that business owners will love
-
Elon Musk5 days ago
Tesla Board takes firm stance on Elon Musk’s political involvement in pay package proxy
-
News1 week ago
Tesla appears to be mulling a Cyber SUV design