News
Tesla delivers its 200,000th car, triggering the EV tax credit phase-out period
Tesla has delivered its 200,000th vehicle this month, triggering the phase-out period of the $7,500 federal tax credit for electric vehicles offered in the United States.
As seen on Tesla’s official Electric Vehicle Incentives page, the phase-out period for the $7,500 federal tax credit is in effect for all Model S, Model X and Model 3 vehicles delivered on or before December 31, 2018, while buyers taking delivery in 2019 will only be eligible for a subset of that original $7,500 credit. Customers taking delivery between January 1 to June 30, 2019 will be eligible for a $3,750 federal tax credit, or half of the full amount before phase-out. Those taking delivery in the second half of 2019, between July 1 to December 31, 2019 will be eligible for a $1,875 federal tax credit.
The federal credit applied to new electric vehicles, dubbed by the IRS as the Plug-In Electric Drive Vehicle Credit (IRC 30D), affects all EVs that were acquired after December 31, 2009. The credit, which took effect during the previous administration as a means to encourage drivers to adopt zero-emissions vehicles, featured a tiered credit, starting at $2,500 and going all the way up to $7,500 depending on the battery capacity of an electric car. The IRS’ official website describes how the sale of a manufacturer’s 200,000th electric car triggers the tax credit phase-out period.
“The qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle credit phases out for a manufacturer’s vehicles over the one-year period beginning with the second calendar quarter after the calendar quarter in which at least 200,000 qualifying vehicles manufactured by that manufacturer have been sold for use in the United States (determined on a cumulative basis for sales after December 31, 2009) (‘phase-out period’).”
Tesla actually played its cards cleverly with regards to the $7,500 tax credit phase-out. Being a car company that exclusively manufactures electric cars, it was inevitable that the company would be the first automaker to hit the 200,000 mark. By reaching this milestone shortly after the second quarter, Tesla actually gave itself, as well as its customers, an additional 18 months to obtain any sort of credit. the $7,500 credit remains in effect for the whole quarter in which the 200,000th vehicle was delivered, as well as the quarter after.
After this point, the credit gets reduced by 50% to $3,750 for two quarters. In Tesla’s case, this corresponds to Q1 and Q2 2019. From Q3 and Q4 2019, Tesla’s vehicles will still be eligible for a tax credit, though it would be reduced to $1,875 by this time. Tesla’s electric cars produced from January 2020 moving forward will not be eligible for tax credits anymore.
In a way, Tesla’s timing for hitting the 200,000 mark appears to be strategic. The company, after all, just recently managed to attain its goal of producing 5,000 Model 3 per week by the end of Q2 2018. Signs from the company, such as test drives for the Model 3, massive batches of new VINs filed one after another, and a new 5-minute Sign & Drive delivery system, all seem designed to deliver as many of the electric cars to customers as fast as possible.
If there is a group of reservation holders that would feel the effect of the credit phase-out, however, it would be those holding out for the Standard Range RWD Model 3, which starts at $35,000. In a Twitter update, Elon Musk stated that Tesla would likely start the production of the base Model 3’s smaller battery pack by the end of 2018. From there, Musk noted that volume production for the vehicle would probably begin in Q1 2019.
In a meeting with investors and analysts this past Tuesday, Tesla’s Senior Director of Investor Relations Aaron Chew reportedly stated that the company is aiming to sustain its 5,000 per week pace for Q3 2018, increasing output to 7,000 cars per week for Q4 2018. By mid-2019, Tesla expects to produce 10,000 Model 3 per week, which corresponds to an output of 500,000 vehicles per year.
If Tesla manages to sustain its 5,000 Model 3 per week rate from August to September 2018, and achieve a steady rate of 7,000 vehicles per week from October 2018 to June 2019 (assuming no production ramps happen within these months), the company would be able to produce 292,000 Model 3. With a 10,000 per week rate from July to December 2019, Tesla would be able to deliver an additional 240,000 more. Thus, if Tesla plays its cards right and ramps the Model 3 in a manner that is careful and precise, it could deliver as many as 532,000 cars that are still eligible for federal credit (albeit the $3,750 and $1,875 credit). Considering that the backlog of 420,000 remaining Model 3 orders are from customers across the globe, there is a good chance that all present reservation holders in the United States would be able to get a credit for their vehicle.
Investor's Corner
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
New drone footage shows Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory steel frame nearing completion at Giga Texas.
Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory at Gigafactory Texas is closing in on a finished steel frame, according to drone footage posted Thursday afternoon by longtime site observer Joe Tegtmeyer. In the video, Tegtmeyer said structural steel assembly is now about five column grids away from reaching the building’s north perimeter beam, putting the primary skeleton in its final stretch roughly six months after Tesla broke ground on the North Campus site in late March.
The Giga Texas Optimus Factory latest update … construction keeps moving fast!
Steel assembly is now only about 5 column grids from the north perimeter beam. Concrete is going in on the three upper floors, rebar is still being laid for more pours, and footing / grade-beam work… pic.twitter.com/qvFPvwnYzW
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) September 17, 2026
Tegtmeyer’s footage shows concrete already going in on three upper floors while crews continue laying rebar and pouring grade beam footings at ground level. That kind of parallel work, steel rising at one end of the site while concrete sets at the other, is a scheduling approach Tesla used at the original Giga Texas building and appears to be repeating here to save time before the plant’s targeted 2027 production start.
Teslarati has tracked the building’s progress since Tesla confirmed construction was officially underway in May, when the first steel structure went up on what was then bare, reclaimed land. The facility is part of a more than 5.2 million square foot expansion of Giga Texas’s North Campus that Tesla has said will eventually run nearly the length of the existing vehicle factory, over 4,000 feet, while sitting somewhat narrower. Musk has pegged the long term output target at 10 million Optimus units a year once the line is running at full capacity, a volume that would dwarf the one million unit pilot line Tesla is standing up separately at its Fremont, California factory.
Tesla Giga Texas to feature massive Optimus V4 production line
The Texas facility sits alongside another major buildout on the same campus. Terafab, the joint Tesla and SpaceX chip fabrication plant that will eventually supply the silicon running Optimus units in the field. Housing robot assembly and chip production on the same grounds is a deliberate supply chain decision, cutting down on the shipping and lead time that would otherwise sit between the two.
Tesla has not given an updated timeline beyond its previously stated goal of bringing high volume Optimus production online at the site in the summer of 2027. Fremont’s smaller pilot line began mass producing the current Gen 3 robot in January, with that plant expected to build tens of thousands of units this year primarily to generate the real world data Tesla needs to refine the robot’s software before Giga Texas ramps up. Six months of visible construction progress, tracked almost entirely through Tegtmeyer’s recurring drone flights, gives the clearest outside look yet at how seriously Tesla is treating that 2027 deadline.
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.
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
