News
Tesla Model Y bashed by auto veteran: ‘It’s terminally ugly. I don’t know who’s gonna buy that’
The Tesla Model Y is expected to be the company’s highest-volume vehicle yet, with Elon Musk noting during the recently-held third-quarter earnings call that he expects the crossover to outsell Model S, Model X, and Model 3 combined. Former GM vice chair Bob Lutz, on the other hand, has some doubts, and a lot of that has to do with the way the Model Y looks.
The Model Y is created as the crossover version of the best-selling Model 3, and as such, the vehicle shares around 75% of the components of its sedan sibling. This makes the two vehicles look very similar, though the Y could be described as a taller, heftier 3. So similar were the two electric vehicles that even Tesla enthusiasts who took test rides in the Model Y during its unveiling event found it a bit challenging to tell the crossover apart from the Model 3.
This, according to the former GM executive, is a big mistake. In an appearance at Autoline After Hours prior to the release of Tesla’s blockbuster Q3 results, Bob Lutz talked about the electric car maker, and while he acknowledged the Model 3’s success, he was dismissive of the Model Y.
“I think we’re in a period of relative stability. The Model 3 continues to sell well. But the Model Y, I think it’s terminally ugly. I don’t know who’s gonna buy that. It’s another one of these humpback things like the Model X. It’s neither a sport utility nor a sedan, and to the extent it sells, I don’t think it’s going to break into a new segment. I think the sales will be largely substitutional to the Model 3,” he said.
When asked about Tesla’s lead in range, Lutz remarked that the electric car maker is in the same place as everyone else making EVs when it comes to battery technology. Explaining his point, Lutz argued that the only reason Tesla’s electric cars have longer range is because the company’s vehicles have larger batteries.
“When it comes to battery technology, Tesla is in exactly the same place as everybody else. They use lithium-ion and lithium-ion has a certain energy content per kWh and everybody else has the same one. So the only reason why Tesla had more range was because they had a bigger battery,” he remarked.
Lutz’s comments fail to account for the specific chemistries and energy density in Tesla’s battery cells, which continues to be improved by the electric car maker. This is one of the reasons why cars like the Model X Long Range can hit 328 miles of range per charge with a 100 kWh battery pack, while the Audi e-tron 55, a vehicle with a 95 kWh battery pack, can only go 204 miles. That’s a 124-mile difference in range from a 5 kWh difference in battery pack size.
Despite Bob Lutz’ overall dismissive stance on the Model Y and Tesla’s battery tech, the former GM executive did acknowledge the Model 3 and the Model S, which he admitted is a pretty remarkable sedan. Lutz also admitted that Elon Musk’s strategy of first attacking the top end of the market with higher-priced EVs and going from there was the right move.
Watch the former GM’s comments about Tesla in the video below.
News
Tesla Sweden strikers see tax issues over IF Metall union error
To address the issue, IF Metall is encouraging Tesla strikers to return the refunded tax amounts to the union.
A tax correction is set to return two years of income tax payments to Tesla strikers in Sweden, after authorities determined that conflict compensation during a labor dispute should not have been taxed.
The issue is caused by a decision by IF Metall to treat strike compensation for Tesla workers as taxable income during the ongoing labor dispute with Tesla Sweden. That approach has now been reversed following guidance from the Swedish Tax Agency.
Strike compensation is typically tax-free under Sweden’s Income Tax Act, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). However, two years ago, IF Metall’s board decided to classify payments to Tesla strikers as taxable.
“We did it to secure SGI, unemployment insurance and public pension. Those were the risks we saw when the strike had already dragged on,” Kent Bursjöö, financial manager at IF Metall, stated.
According to Bursjöö, the union wanted to ensure that members continued to register earned income with the tax agency, protecting benefits tied to income history. At the end of January, however, the Swedish Tax Agency informed the union that compensation during a labor dispute must be tax-free.
“Of course, we knew that it could be tax-free. But we clearly didn’t know that it couldn’t be taxable,” Bursjöö said.
Following discussions with auditors and tax authorities, IF Metall began correcting the payments. As a result, two years of paid income tax will now be credited back to the affected strikers’ tax accounts. The union will also recover previously paid employer contributions.
However, the correction creates secondary effects. Since the payments will now be treated as tax-free, pension contributions tied to those earnings will be withdrawn, potentially affecting state pension accrual and income-based benefits such as parental or sickness benefits.
To address this, IF Metall is encouraging members to return the refunded tax amounts to the union. In exchange, the union plans to pay 18.5% into occupational pensions on their behalf. “Otherwise, it will be a form of overcompensation when they get the tax paid back,” Bursjöö said.
That being said, the IF Metall officer acknowledged that the union’s legal ability to reclaim the funds from its improperly paid Tesla Sweden strikers is limited. “The legal possibilities are probably limited, from what we can see. But we assume that most people see the value of securing their pension,” Bursjöö said.
News
Tesla sues California DMV over Autopilot and FSD advertising ruling
The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla falsely promoted the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.
Tesla has filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in an effort to overturn a prior ruling that found the automaker engaged in false advertising related to its driver-assistance systems.
The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla misled customers about the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.
Tesla’s legal action follows a decision by California’s Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), which concluded that Tesla’s earlier marketing of “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving” violated state law, as noted in a CNBC report.
While the DMV opted not to suspend Tesla’s license after determining the company had updated its marketing language for its advanced driver-assistance systems, Tesla is asking the court to go further and reverse the agency’s conclusion.
In its Feb. 13 complaint, Tesla’s attorneys argued that the DMV “wrongfully and baselessly” labeled the company a “false advertiser” for its Autopilot and FSD systems. The filing argued that regulators failed to demonstrate that consumers were actually misled about the capabilities of Tesla’s systems.
According to Tesla’s complaint, the DMV “never proved consumers in the state had been confused about whether its cars were safe to drive without a human at the wheel.”
Tesla’s legal team further stated: “It was impossible to buy a Tesla equipped with either Autopilot or Full Self-Driving Capability, or to use any of their associated features, without seeing clear and repeated statements that they do not make the vehicle autonomous.”
Tesla now promotes its driver-assistance system as “Full Self-Driving (Supervised),” a name that overemphasizes the need for active driver attention.
Tesla’s autonomous driving program is a pivotal part of the company’s future, with CEO Elon Musk stating that self-driving technology will truly be the solution that will push Tesla into its full potential. The company is currently operating a Robotaxi pilot in Austin and the Bay Area, and the company recently announced that it has produced the first Cybercab from Giga Texas’ production line.
News
Tesla is making two big upgrades to the Model 3, coding shows
According to coding found in the European and Chinese configurators, Tesla is planning to make two big upgrades: Black Headliner offerings and a new 16-inch QHD display, similar to that on the Model Y Performance.
Tesla is making two big upgrades to the Model 3, one of which is widely requested by owners and fans, and another that it has already started to make on some trim levels of other models within the lineup.
The changes appear to be taking effect in the European and Chinese markets, but these are expected to come to the United States based on what Tesla has done with the Model Y.
According to coding found in the European and Chinese configurators, Tesla is planning to make two big upgrades: Black Headliner offerings and a new 16-inch QHD display, similar to that on the Model Y Performance.
These changes in the coding were spotted by X user BERKANT, who shared the findings on the social media platform this morning:
🚨 Model 3 changes spotted in Tesla backend
• New interior code: IN3PB (Interior 3 Premium Black)
• Linked to Alcantara-style black headliner
• Mapped to 2026 Model 3 Performance and Premium VINs• EPC now shows: “Display_16_QHD”
• Multiple 2026 builds marked with… pic.twitter.com/OkDM5EdbTu— BERKANT (@Tesla_NL_TR) February 23, 2026
It appears these new upgrades will roll out with the Model 3 Performance and Tesla’s Premium trim levels of the all-electric sedan.
The changes are welcome. Tesla fans have been requesting that its Model 3 and Model Y offerings receive a black headliner, as even with the black interior options, the headliner is grey.
Tesla recently upgraded Model Y vehicles to this black headliner option, even in the United States, so it seems as if the Model 3 will get the same treatment as it appears to be getting in the Eastern hemisphere.
Tesla has been basically accentuating the Model 3 and Model Y with small upgrades that owners have been wanting, and it has been a focal point of the company’s future plans as it phases out other vehicles like the Model S and Model X.
Additionally, Tesla offered an excellent 0.99% APR last week on the Model 3, hoping to push more units out the door to support a strong Q1 delivery figure at the beginning of April.
Tesla Sweden strikers see tax issues over IF Metall union error
Tesla sues California DMV over Autopilot and FSD advertising ruling
