News
Tesla Giga Berlin’s 4680 supply won’t start in Germany, and it was never supposed to
Tesla’s plans for the initial battery needs and efforts at Giga Berlin were answered in late 2020 by the automaker during the Q3 Earnings Call. While things tend to change on a somewhat regular basis as far as plans for something as large as a vehicle manufacturing plant, Tesla knew that its initial battery fulfillment plans likely wouldn’t come from the planned Giga Berlin 4680 cell production lines. Instead, Tesla will rely on its Kato Road facility in Northern California, where the development and manufacturing of a new, revolutionary electric vehicle battery is taking place. Tesla also plans to utilize strong relationships with its battery cell manufacturers to solve supply concerns during Giga Berlin’s early production dates.
Concerns regarding Tesla’s planned timeline for Giga Berlin have arisen over the past several days, especially after a German media outlet said that CEO Elon Musk was extending the beginning of the German plant’s EV production efforts to January 2022. While the Giga Berlin timeline remains uncertain as far as the exact starting date, those close to the situation, including Brandenburg Economic Minister Jörg Steinbach, told Teslarati yesterday that production should begin in late Summer or early Fall 2021.
EXCLUSIVE: Tesla Giga Berlin isn’t facing a 6-month delay: German Minister
The concerns about Tesla Giga Berlin’s initial production date started to appear around the same time that reports began to surface about Tesla adding the 4680 battery manufacturing unit plans to its application. German regulators take a deliberate and somewhat extended time for large projects, as so many different factors are considered before anything is given ultimate approval. Some indicated that this extensive regulatory process would delay the production efforts altogether. Still, local sources in Germany have clarified that this only prolongs the project altogether and doesn’t have much of an effect on the start of production. The project will just take longer to complete considering Tesla added another element to the Giga Berlin offensive.
As previously mentioned, the addition of the 4680 line to the application likely caused confusion over whether the Tesla Giga Berlin production lines would activate on time. 4680 production at Berlin will not begin before or at the same time as Tesla’s vehicle production at the German plant. However, Tesla’s plans were never to have the Berlin 4680 lines handle the initial vehicle production at the plant. Tesla originally planned for the Kato Road 4680 lines to supply Giga Berlin with cells when they are available.
Drew Baglino, Tesla’s Senior Vice President of Powertrain and Energy Engineering, said during the Q3 2020 Earnings Call:
“We will incorporate 4680 design solutions into many applications in time across both energy and vehicle, and we can use our pilot production facility in Fremont to support the new factory in Berlin as it ramps.”
Additionally, Tesla’s battery suppliers are being called upon to assist in the initial efforts at Giga Berlin.
Musk announced during the most recent Q1 2021 Earnings Call that Tesla is about 12-18 months away from volume production of 4680 cells. While Tesla may be slightly behind schedule regarding the production of the new 4680 battery, there is no indication that it will delay Giga Berlin’s production altogether. In fact, Musk also acknowledged that its suppliers, who Tesla shares “very strong partnerships” with would be called upon to supply cells “as much as they possibly can.”
Musk said:
“…It appears as though we’re about 12 — probably not more than 18 months away from volume production of the 4680. Now at the same time, we are actually trying to have our cell supply of partners ramp up their supply as much as possible. So this is not something that is to the exclusion of suppliers. It is in conjunction with suppliers. So we want to be super clear about that. This is not about replacing suppliers. It is about supplementing the suppliers. So…and we have a very strong partnership with CATL, with Panasonic and LG. And we would…our request to our strategic partners for cell supply is, please make us…please supply us with as much as you possibly can. Provided the price is affordable, we will buy everything that they can make.”
This includes CATL, a Chinese battery producer who manufactures LFP cells for the Standard Range+ Model 3 at Giga Shanghai. CATL began the construction of a cell manufacturing facility in Germany in 2019. LG Chem also started the construction of an EV battery cell manufacturing facility in Poland in 2017, which could be used to supplement Tesla’s battery efforts in Germany. These suppliers have both assisted Tesla with cells in the past, and these companies will likely supplement Tesla’s needs at Giga Berlin, as Musk requested during the Q1 2021 Earnings Call.
Tesla has been aware that the 4680 lines in Berlin will not take care of the initial production phases at the factory. Instead, it will rely on suppliers and its Kato Road 4680 lines in the United States to take care of the first months of production at Giga Berlin.
A Texas man has been arrested and charged with manslaughter after his Tesla crashed into a home last month, striking a woman inside and killing her. The driver, Michael Butler, claimed the vehicle was in self-driving mode, but information from Tesla shows that Butler overrode the system.
Butler was arrested on Wednesday and booked at the Harris County, Texas, jail. He remained in custody through Thursday and Friday; he did not enter a plea, and his next court hearing is scheduled for Monday.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
There are a handful of new clues in the case that could clear Tesla of any wrongdoing, especially as the woman who was killed’s family, the Avilas, filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Tesla and Butler, seeking at least $1 million in damages.
Charging documents from the Harris County prosecutor now show that Butler, who was working DoorDash the evening of the accident, had been using Full Self-Driving mode without incident through the duration of multiple deliveries that evening.
In the moments leading up to the crash, while in FSD and approaching a left turn, Butler pressed the accelerator pedal, overriding FSD’s speed control, and continued to push it until it reached 100 percent. This caused rapid acceleration; the brake pedal was never pressed, and there is no data to show that Butler aimed to turn away from the curb or house.
The charging documents state:
“I noted that the brake pedal was never pressed in the final minute before the crash. I also did not see any data to indicate that the driver attempted to turn away from the curb that he eventually struck. Further, I observed that no mechanical error was detected or recorded by the vehicle before BUTLER and the Tesla struck the curb.”
Additionally, a forensic analysis of Butler’s phone showed that he searched Google around the time of the crash with queries questioning why FSD was “too timid,” “not aggressive enough,” and even searched, “FSD is not aggressive enough for city driving.”
The documents outlined this:
“Investigator Veal also informed me that he had received BUTLER’s cell phone from Deputy Amad and that HDAO digital forensics team had completed a data extraction and download of the phone. Multiple Google searches related to Tesla had been made from BUTLER’s phone in the months leading up the crash. I noted multiple searches in May of 2026 indicating an apparent frustration with Tesla’s FSD mode, including the following searches: “Tesla fsd not aggressive enough 2026 model,” “Tesla fsd not [sic) aggressive enough 2026,” “FSD is not aggressive enough for city driving,” and “tesla fsd too timid.”‘
Tesla had claimed just after the crash that its internal data showed Butler had overridden the system’s speed control and pressed the accelerator completely, causing the vehicle to travel at an excessive rate of speed. Eventually, the car slammed into Avila’s house, killing her.
Butler has now been formally charged with Manslaughter, a felony.
Tesla shocked with its quarterly delivery report yesterday by reporting it delivered 480,126 vehicles in the second quarter of 2026, a 25 percent year-over-year jump that crushed Wall Street estimates of roughly 400,000–408,000 units. Production reached 451,758, with Model 3 and Model Y accounting for the vast majority.
The result ended two years of annual delivery declines and drew down inventory, signaling demand that outpaced earlier production.
Tesla bears had long warned that the expiration of the U.S. federal EV tax credit would hammer demand. Without the $7,500 incentive, they argued, American buyers would balk at higher effective prices, leading to a sharp slowdown.
Will Tesla thrive without the EV tax credit? Five reasons why they might
That narrative has not played out as predicted. While U.S. EV sales faced broader headwinds, Tesla’s global numbers held firm, underscoring the company’s ability to offset domestic pressure through other levers.
There are several plausible factors that explain Tesla’s strength during this quarter. Let’s take a look at them:
Rising Gas Prices
Rising gas prices provided a powerful tailwind, especially in the U.S.
Geopolitical tensions tied to the Iran conflict pushed fuel costs higher earlier in the year, amplifying the lifetime savings of electric vehicles. Even as oil prices later moderated, the psychological and financial impact lingered, encouraging fleet operators and private buyers to accelerate EV purchases. European sales rebounded sharply, helping drive the quarter’s outperformance.
Full Self-Driving Adoption
Advances in Full Self-Driving (FSD) supervised software also appear to have boosted appeal. Tesla expanded FSD availability in select European markets and continued refining the system.
No complaints from me because I finally got to enjoy this drive on FSD; I usually like to manually drive down this mountain https://t.co/RBFniRPSR0 pic.twitter.com/XQ5sOpN1Yg
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 26, 2026
For tech-oriented buyers, the promise of future autonomy and enhanced driver-assistance features adds perceived value beyond the car itself. This differentiation helps Tesla stand out in a crowded market where competitors focus primarily on hardware and basic range.
Pricing Strategy, Affordable Configurations
Tesla’s offerings and its pricing strategy during Q2 further stimulated demand. Tesla introduced lower-cost versions of the Model 3 and Model Y, widening accessibility without sacrificing core margins.
These moves countered affordability concerns and attracted buyers who had been waiting on the sidelines. Combined with attractive financing and leasing options, the pricing strategy converted interest into actual orders more effectively than many analysts expected.
Broad European Recovery
Supported by government incentives, corporate fleet electrification, and easing political headwinds around CEO Elon Musk, Tesla was supplied additional momentum through stronger registration numbers throughout Europe.
Strong exports from the Shanghai Gigafactory and a production ramp at Giga Berlin ensured supply met this resurgent demand. Corporate buyers, in particular, accelerated transitions to EVs to meet sustainability targets, providing a steady volume base.
These elements created a virtuous cycle that delivered the strong deliveries report. While bears correctly flagged the loss of the U.S. tax credit as a risk, Tesla’s diversified playbook demonstrated that it could remain resilient against those headwinds. The Q2 beat suggests the company remains adept at navigating shifting market conditions, even as competition intensifies.
A Tesla Semi was involved in a fatal collision on U.S. Highway 50 in Dayton, Nevada, on Sunday, June 28, 2026, marking the first known fatal crash involving the electric Class 8 truck. The incident occurred around 7:20 a.m. at the intersection with Traditions Parkway, approximately 40 miles east of Reno and close to Tesla’s Gigafactory Nevada.
According to the Lyon County Sheriff’s Office and the Nevada State Police Highway Patrol, a semi-truck struck two passenger vehicles stopped at a traffic signal. The truck hit the vehicles from behind. Two people were pronounced dead at the scene, and a third person suffered life-threatening injuries and was flown to a hospital, Forbes reported.
Preliminary statements gathered at the scene by the Lyon County Sheriff’s Office suggested the truck driver may have fallen asleep at the wheel. However, the Nevada Highway Patrol, which is leading the investigation, stated that the official cause has not yet been determined.
Additional information is expected to be released early the following week. The truck was seized for evidence as part of the ongoing probe.
Responders at the scene included deputies from the Lyon County Sheriff’s Office, personnel from the Nevada Highway Patrol, Central Lyon County Fire Department, and the Nevada Department of Transportation. The crash led to the temporary closure of U.S. 50 in both directions.
The Tesla Semi is Tesla’s battery-electric heavy-duty truck, produced at the nearby Gigafactory in Nevada. Authorities initially described the vehicle as a semi-truck; its make was subsequently confirmed through reporting and scene identification; an interesting bit of information here, as the Semi is not yet available publicly and many do not know that Tesla builds electric trucks.
The investigation remains active, with no further official details on contributing factors or vehicle systems released as of early July 2026.
This incident highlights ongoing scrutiny of commercial vehicle safety on Nevada highways, particularly involving fatigue. Law enforcement continues to gather evidence and witness statements.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Tesla’s strong Q2 deliveries: Four key drivers behind the surprise
