News
Tesla could face New York store ban under this legislation
A new bill could threaten Tesla’s ability to operate in-person, direct sales stores in New York.
Tesla could be subject to new legislation in New York that seeks to revoke permits for the company’s stores, as part of a bill introduced this week that sponsors say aims to “foster competition and innovation in the marketplace.”
Democratic State Senator Patricia Fahy and Assembly Member Gabriella Romero introduced S.B. S6894 on Thursday, effectively revoking direct sales permits from five existing Tesla stores in New York, as detailed in a press release. If passed, the New York bill would keep in place a five-store limit placed on direct sales locations, but would require the state’s DMV to re-evaluate existing permits and issue new ones, excluding Tesla, which currently holds all five of the available permits.
“This legislation provides controlled growth of New York’s ZEV market by not granting indefinite privileges to early entrants—currently, all five direct sales locations are located downstate and are operated by Tesla, Inc., which limits consumer choice and prevents other manufacturers from entering the market,” Fahy’s office writes in the release. “The bill would allow new manufacturers to enter the market and ensure that there is an opportunity to expand these locations geographically.”
Fahy also told Politico that the bill intentionally aims to target Tesla CEO Elon Musk in the wake of his efforts under the recently created government efficiency division under the Trump administration.
“No matter what we do, we’ve got to take this from Elon Musk,” Fahy said. “He’s part of an effort to go backwards.”
“The bottom line is, Tesla has lost their right to promote these when they’re part of an administration that wants to go backwards. Elon Musk was handed a privilege here.”
🚨 You’ve got to be insane to think it’s better for consumers and car buyers to delegitimize direct sales
“I love going to a car dealership” -nobody ever https://t.co/GXEzktUjnG
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 10, 2025
READ MORE ON TESLA NEW YORK: Anti-Musk protests at Tesla store in New York lead to arrests
The release also highlights New York’s target of reaching 100-percent ZEV sales by 2035, as part of the state’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). The bill also says it hopes to bring zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) direct sales stores to other parts of New York, adding that limited access to direct sales models has prohibited more widespread adoption of electric vehicles (EVs).
“As New York moves toward a clean energy future, we must ensure that consumers have greater access to zero-emission vehicles while fostering competition and innovation in the marketplace,” Fahey says. “This legislation takes a measured approach to inducing the growth of direct sales and opening the door for new ZEV manufacturers to enter New York State’s market, while keeping us on track to meet our ambitious climate goals.”
Other automakers with direct sales models, such as Lucid and Rivian, would also be able to bid for the five permits, potentially giving smaller companies a chance to establish physical store locations.
New York is one of several states that have limits on how many non-dealership franchise stores, or direct sales model stores, are allowed to operate statewide. Still others include complete bans on direct sales, requiring automakers to sell vehicles through franchised dealerships, sometimes even including service locations.
At this time, New York joins eight other U.S. states that have a cap on the number of available direct sales sites, while 13 states — including Tesla’s home state of Texas — still have total or partial bans on direct sales.
Tesla has filed a petition with Wisconsin to allow direct car sales
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
