News
Tesla revenue from NZ EV rebates hint at potential IRA benefits [Feature]
Tesla doubled its revenue after New Zealand’s Clean Car policy introduced rebates to decarbonize its fleet. Tesla New Zealand’s revenue hints at the potential benefits of the United States Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
According to the company’s financial records, Tesla New Zealand’s (NZ) revenue for the 2022 calendar year was $499.5 million (USD$303.3), double the company’s $230.7 million (USD$140.1) revenue in 2021. New Zealand’s acting Transport Minister Kieran McAnulty believes the government’s Clean Car policy helped Tesla’s revenues double.
“With over 100,000 rebates granted since the scheme came into effect in 2021, we have one of the fastest uptakes of EVs in the world,” McAnulty said.
Tesla New Zealand’s revenues in the past show an increase in EV adoption. Tesla NZ’s revenue in 2020 was $66 million (USD$40 million) and increased to $230.7 million (USD$ 140.1 million) in 2021. Tesla Giga Shanghai definitely factors into the company’s increased revenues in New Zealand and Australia between 2020 and 2021. However, the New Zealand government’s EV rebates might have aided Tesla’s leap from $230.7 million to $499.5 million between 2021 and 2022.
“The cost of EVs has reduced significantly over the past couple of years. Several popular models are now available for $50,000 to $60,000, whereas previously EVs tended to be closer to $80,000. Rebates for used-import EVs will rise from $3450 to $3507.50 – as the supply of used-import EVs remains restricted. The increased rebates will encourage suppliers to continue to focus on securing supply for New Zealanders,” McAnulty commented.
The New Zealand Herald analyzed data that revealed Tesla benefited significantly from Clean Car policy rebates. Since 2021 when the policy began, 9,730 Teslas were purchased for a total of $83 million (USD$ 50.4 million) rebates paid to the people who bought the electric vehicles (EVs).
New Zealand’s government plans to update its Clean Car policy this year. The update will reduce rebates offered for new zero-emission vehicles—described as electric vehicles by the government—from $8,625 (USD$5238) to $7,015 (USD$4,260). New Zealand also changed rebates offered for used imports and disability vehicles while applying charges for specific emissions. New Zealand’s Clean Car Policy changes will apply from July 1, 2023.
The Inflation Reduction Act’s Potential Impact
New Zealand’s Clean Car Policy hints that people are willing to transition to electric vehicles for the right price. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) might yield the same results for Tesla and other EV manufacturers in the United States.
Elon Musk and the Tesla board seem well aware of the IRA’s potential impact on the electric vehicle and global auto market.
“The regulations here are still in flux and there continues to be updates, so this is just our best understanding at the moment. But we think on the order of $150 million to $250 million per quarter this year and growing over the course of the year as our volumes grow,” said Tesla’s Chief Financial Officer Zachary Kirkhorn at the Q4 2022 earnings call.
The IRA doesn’t just affect local automakers and their suppliers either. Companies worldwide involved in EV manufacturing or its supply chain have started investing in the United States to reap the benefits of the IRA. For instance, South Korean battery supplier LG Energy Solutions (LGES) has partnered with a few automakers to build cell manufacturing plants in the United States. LGES has battery plant agreements with Hyundai, Honda, and Ford. Tesla is prepared to take advantage of the IRA’s incentives as well.
“And part of the work we’re doing here, which is part of what this incentive package is trying to incentivize, is, as Elon mentioned, to move more manufacturing onshore in the United States, which is Tesla’s plans anyways. And so, I think we’re pretty well positioned over the coming years to take advantage of this.
“But then also part of what the goal of this incentive package is, is to improve adoption from our customers. And so, we also want to use these incentives to improve affordability as we think about what the price points are in our products going forward,” stated Kirkhorn.
The Teslarati team would appreciate hearing from you. If you have any tips, contact me at maria@teslarati.com or via Twitter @Writer_01001101.
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
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 to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
