News
Tesla Model 3 invasion in Europe becomes imminent as cargo ship arrives in Belgium
After conquering the United States’s luxury car market in 2018, the Tesla Model 3 is now heading to foreign territories. In Elon Musk’s letter to employees last month, the CEO noted that the Model 3’s push in Europe and China this first quarter would be critical to the company’s profitability, particularly since deliveries in these territories would start with higher-priced variants like the Long Range AWD and the Performance variant. Amidst the anticipation of the Model 3’s worldwide distribution, reports have now emerged indicating that the first large batch of electric sedans has safely arrived at the port of Zeebrugge in Belgium.
Tesla has not shared details of the first Model 3 shipment that recently arrived in European shores. That said, reports from local media outlets back in December noted that Tesla would be shipping around 3,000 Model 3 to the Zeebrugge port every week. Reports also pointed out that the electric sedans would be shipped quickly, with the vehicles being loaded on RoRo (roll-on, roll-off) ships to facilitate quick loading and unloading. As another way to optimize the deliveries of Model 3 to the region, the transportation of the cars from the United States to Zeebrugge will reportedly take only about 15 days, considering that the cargo ships carrying the vehicles would be passing through the Panama Canal.
The first of these Model 3-filled cargo ships — the Glovis Captain — has been tracked religiously by the Tesla community from its departure in the United States to its arrival at the Belgian port. As noted by a number of dedicated Tesla enthusiasts who have been tracking the ship’s whereabouts, Glovis Captain has recently docked at Zeebrugge. With this, it would likely be just a matter of time before Tesla starts delivering the Model 3 to the first batch of reservation holders in the region. Following are pictures of the cargo ship in the Belgian port as shared by members of the Tesla community.
-
- (Photo: Ulric Dabe/Twitter)
-
- (Photo: Ulric Dabe/Twitter)
-
- (Photo: Ulric Dabe/Twitter)
-
- (Photo: Ulric Dabe/Twitter)
-
- (Photo: Kristof Lambrecht/Twitter)
The Glovis Captain arrives at the port of Zeebrugge. (Photos: Ulric Dabe and Kristof Lambrecht/Twitter)
With the arrival of the Model 3 in Europe, the disruption of the auto industry that the vehicle started in the United States could very well extend to the European region. In 2018, the Model 3 all but shook the US auto market, becoming such a force that it started closing in on mainstream passenger sedans like the Honda Accord and the Toyota Camry. By the end of 2018, the Model 3 was also hailed as a best-selling car in the US’ luxury auto market, selling more than 145,000 units during the year. It should be noted that the Model 3 accomplished these feats in the US despite Tesla’s production issues with the vehicle.
In a way, the true potential of the Model 3 might actually be seen in the vehicle’s performance in the European market, considering that passenger cars are an active, lucrative segment in the region. Compared to the United States, which largely favors SUVs and pickup trucks, Europe is far friendlier to sedans. In the company’s Q3 2018 Update Letter, Tesla noted that the mid-sized premium sedan market in Europe is “more than twice as big as the same segment in the US. In the recently released Q4 2018 letter, the company reiterated this point, stating that “the market opportunity for Model 3 in Europe and China exceeds North America based on the most recent sales of mid-sized premium sedans.”
Over the past months, the pieces have fallen in place for the Model 3’s European invasion. In January, it was confirmed that the electric sedan had achieved homologation approval, paving the way for a seamless rollout of the vehicles in the region. Test drive programs for the Model 3 have also begun in select European areas, giving reservation holders and potential customers a taste of what the electric sedan has to offer.
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
