News
Tesla Model Y police cruiser draws criticism from taxpayers
The Tesla Model Y police cruiser, which joined the Hastings on Hudson, New York Police Department in late December, is receiving criticism from taxpayers. Unfortunately, many of those who have expressed their concerns about the vehicle’s cost are not fully aware of the long-term savings that the Model Y will give taxpayers and the police department.
The Hastings on Hudson PD posted a video of their new Model Y crossover, equipped with flashing red and blue lights and the necessary equipment for an officer of the law. It was the first-ever Model Y to be used as a police cruiser, and the Department indicated that the all-electric crossover would serve “as the police car assigned to the Detective Division.”
Despite the environmental and long-term cost-effectiveness of the Tesla, many Social Media users were critical of the Department’s choice to purchase the car in place of the traditional Dodge Charger cruiser that many forces across the country have utilized for transportation. The widespread idea that Teslas are only affordable by the rich and famous is still presently being used as an argument based on what Twitter users are saying, even though the automaker has been able to release the Model 3 and Model Y at price points that are affordable for many people. The price alone, along with the industry-leading battery tech and performance of Tesla’s cars, is what has made them the most popular EVs in the United States and China.
One Twitter user gained over 46,000 Retweets and over 172,000 Likes by stating, “This is gonna be parked outside of a public school with a paper shortage, old textbooks, and one computer per classroom.”
A user on Facebook replied to the Hastings on Hudson PD’s Facebook post directly, saying, “DEFUND THE POLICE! Why is this needed?”
The problem with making statements like those above is that the price comparison of the Model Y to a traditional Dodge Charger is not all that different. When factoring in the maintenance and fuel savings that the Department will have in the coming years, the Tesla will be substantially less expensive than the Charger, which will require regular oil changes and maintenance that is more likely to be needed when dealing with a gas car that has so many moving parts.
The cost-effectiveness of driving a Tesla instead of a Charger has already been proven by the Bargersville, Indiana Police Department, who purchased a Model 3 for a cruiser in August 2019. In the first 13 months, the Department saved $6,755 in fuel alone. A Charger, which the Bargersville PD maintained while also operating the Model 3, had a yearly cost of $7,580 for gas and maintenance. The Model 3’s annual cost was only $825.
Actual numbers for 1 year of Tesla model 3 police car pic.twitter.com/lGESk0LgIR
— Todd Bertram (@ToddBertram1) September 29, 2020
Meanwhile, the Dodge Charger Scat Pack, which is a frequently-purchased variant of the vehicle for Police Departments, had an MSRP of $40,500. The Model Y’s Long Range AWD variant starts at just $49,990. Based on the Bargersville PD’s figures, the $9,490 difference would be canceled out in about a year and a half.
While there is plenty of criticism floating around social media because of the Police Department’s choice to purchase a Tesla, the real issue is the consistently spread misinformation. The environmental advantages of driving a Tesla over a powerful, gas-thirsty Charger are enough to convince some, but the long-term savings of going with the EV option are enough to sway even the most critical of skeptics.
What do you think? Leave a comment down below. Got a tip? Email us at tips@teslarati.com or reach out to me at joey@teslarati.com.
H/t: Business Insider
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
Elon Musk says this part of Tesla ‘makes no sense’
