Earlier this week, a report was released that revealed Tesla’s margins for the Model Y crossover in Shanghai. Guosen Securities, a Shenzen-based financial firm, found that Tesla holds a nearly 30% marginal rate on every unit. As the Model Y just recently began production and has become available for Chinese citizens to order, Tesla is already winning in 2021 as demand for the all-electric crossover is expected to be higher than the already-popular Model 3.
Peeking at the margins, it was reminiscent of the astronomical margins Tesla held early on with the Model 3 in Shanghai: 39.37%.
Breaking down the math for you all, an article I wrote earlier this week on the topic describes the price for manufacturing the vehicle and then compares it to the Made-in-Shanghai Model Y price for consumers.
“According to the Shenzhen, China-based financial firm, Tesla’s China Model Y only costs ¥237,930 (USD 36,852) to produce. However, its selling point gives Tesla a 29.4% gross margin with a price of ¥339,900 (USD 52,646.25). Due to the current demand for the all-electric crossover that just started being produced at Giga Shanghai, Tesla has plenty of room to come down. The company will likely do this after the demand is sustained for several months because the automaker did the same thing with the Model 3 after its initial gross margin was also turning Tesla a tasty profit.”
As a $TSLA investor, the margins made me feel great. Tesla is turning a sizeable profit on Model Y builds early on, and the margins are significantly higher than the automotive industry average, which sets around 8-10%. Holding 30% margins on any product, let alone a $52,000 car, is everything investors want. It means the company is pricing their vehicles to be competitive in a market where EVs are thriving, but it also means that Tesla is able to sell their car at a higher price while still being able to keep demand sustained.
This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
But it got me to thinking, does this mean that Tesla could technically drop the price of the Model Y in the future? The company would have the ability to still turn a profit and have a great margin that is higher than the auto industry average, but it would also create even more buzz for the car because it would be priced even lower than it already is. It is no secret that Tesla leads the industry in many ways, and a cheaper price tag for a Tesla EV would likely do a number of things that could be looked at positively: 1) Make a car more affordable, inching closer to price parity, and 2) Increase the number of vehicles on the road that dawn the Tesla T.
From an investor’s standpoint, it is tough to see an argument where lower margins are a good thing. We want competitive pricing, but why would we want it to be lower if the sales are there? Demand is healthy, there is no questioning that. Tesla showrooms in China were filled over the weekend with people looking to get a glimpse of the Model Y. Rumors have indicated that Tesla has already sold out of the car, showing that the vehicle was highly-anticipated and regardless of the price, people would buy.
Tesla showrooms get volunteer help amid Made-in-China Model Y launch
So what’s the big deal? Why would anyone want to decrease the cost of the cars?
From a consumer standpoint, lower prices are always better. Of course, wherever we can stand to save a few hundred, or even a couple thousand dollars on a car, we are going to do it. Of course, Tesla did away with price negotiations for cars (which is by far the most stressful part of buying a vehicle), so it’s not like owners can save money by wiggling down salespeople.
But looking at it from this point of view, Tesla has room to come down, and they’ve done it before. The Model 3, at the time of its release in China last year, was giving Tesla a massive 39.37% margin, and the price of the car was decreased five times in 2020. Based on estimations, Tesla could have margins around 25% on the Model 3 now, a nearly 15% decrease compared to the earliest projections.
There was wiggle room: Tesla did it once to reach the price point for government incentives, and others because production costs had gone down due to vertical integration. Grace Tao says there are probably no more price reductions in the future on the Model 3, but who knows what could happen.
The Model Y is a highly appealing vehicle due to its body style. Crossovers are some of the most popular cars on the market, and Tesla knows that. Elon Musk once said that the Y would overcome the 3 and be Tesla’s biggest seller. After the company released the Standard Range RWD variant on Thursday night, it is a good possibility to happen this year.
I think it is safe to assume that the Model Y will be a popular car in China just like the Model 3 has been. I think it is safe to assume that Tesla will really only battle with GM’s Wuling HongGuang Mini EV in that market this year. I also think it is safe to assume that Tesla isn’t going to adjust the price of the Model Y soon, considering the car just came out.
Moving forward, I think that consumers can assume that the Model Y will drop in price. Tesla will confirm that demand is healthy, and the company will continue to integrate parts of the car locally to save costs. This will bring the cost of the vehicle down anyway, so the price to the consumer will likely be adjusted accordingly.
There are advantages to keeping the margins high, especially with Tesla, because it is such a young company. Profitability will only increase, and Tesla will likely extend its consecutive quarter streak because of it. Tesla will make more money, sales will likely remain as demand is healthy, and shareholders will keep their smiles because the stock price will go up.
There are also advantages to cutting the cost: Tesla will move closer to parity with gas cars by adjusting the price, it will still have considerably higher margins than the auto industry average, and it will still make Tesla money, even if it is less.
I would love to hear your thoughts on the matter. I spoke to other investors, and they saw both sides as well, but of course, they felt the higher margins were more advantageous as their money is funneled into the company. I also feel that the high margins benefit me personally, but I would also like to see price decreases in the future to make the EVs more affordable.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
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
