News
Tesla and NIO sales suffer in China as bumpy economic conditions continue
It’s no secret that the tensions between the US and China are high, but now it appears to be affecting the rapidly-growing country’s EV market. Don’t get me wrong, China’s EV sales still put the US to shame, more than 45,197 all-electric vehicles in sold April alone. But the more notable portion of that news? Pure EV sales fell 4% compared to the stellar 2018 sales (I’m excluding plug-in hybrids on purpose).
There are a couple of reasons for the speed bump in EV sales growth. First, are the massive changes happening to Chinese NEV (new energy vehicles, which includes plug-in hybrids) subsidies. Second, as mentioned above, the macroeconomic effects from US-Chinese relations. The system for Chinese NEV subsidies is incredibly complex, and I’m not going to pretend to know all the system’s ins and outs. But it’s worth pointing out a few differences from more traditional tax rebates or credits. Tesla doesn’t currently earn any subsidies from their sales in China, their future Chinese-built Model 3s would be eligible for subsidies.*
Only cars made in China are eligible for these subsidies. Tesla has never had access to them.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 3, 2019
One of the major differences between the US’ federal tax rebate system and Chinese subsidies lies with the redemption process, or lack thereof. Rather than putting the responsibility on consumers, the Chinese government requires all manufacturers to factor in subsidies into sales prices, then request payment from the government. This process is incredibly beneficial to consumers, allowing them to realize the price reduction immediately, but causes many automotive companies troubles. The subsidy request process in China can take up to a year for automakers to be reimbursed, straining their balance sheets and hurting their cash flow.
Stay ahead of the curve, the most important EV trends every week.
We give our take on the biggest news stories of the week and everything you need to know as a Teslarati Superfan.
This subsidy request process doesn’t cause a huge threat to large established companies, who have strong cash flows from their ICE sales (see, BYD). But for small companies like Tesla and NIO, these sort of subsidy structures can put them at a disadvantage compared to their peers. In fact, NIO’s VP of Quality, Feng Shen, recently told me that he believed that the reduction of subsidies will help NIO in the long term. Tesla’s Musk has echoed this premise with US subsidies (ZEV credits and consumer tax credits)— allowing all companies to compete on a more equal playing field.
While Shen might be right, NIO and Tesla’s sales appear to be taking a hit in part to subsidy reductions. NIO reported only 1,124 sales of the ES8 in April, with a total of 5,113 in the first four months of 2019. However, NIO stated that the ES8 has outsold the Tesla Model X 2:1 in the same four months, indicating ~2,500 sales (foreign-built vehicles aren’t required to report sales figures). While Tesla doesn’t report regional sales figures, NIO’s statements about the ES8’s lead over the Model X hints at the increasing competition in China’s premium all-electric SUV segment.
It’s nearly impossible to tell if macroeconomic conditions or subsidies are playing a bigger role here, but I’d say its safe to assume its a mix of the two are hurting NIO’s sales (Tesla’s US-built vehicles aren’t eligible for subsidies). I wouldn’t say this slump in EV sales is an indicator of long-term demand in the world’s largest automotive market, but both Tesla and NIO have placed large bets on huge demand. Tesla’s Shanghai Gigafactory is well under construction and the company is expecting huge demand for their lower-cost Model 3, which is priced at RMB 328,000 (~$47,400).
But for NIO, the company is feeling the pressure. Unlike Tesla, China is the company’s sole market and they are burning cash quickly ($390M in Q1). To cut their cash burn NIO has been remarkably reactive, cutting costs by an impressive (obviously not to some) 25% in Q1 and focusing on launching their second (lower-cost) vehicle, the ES6. The company isn’t ready to revise its 2019 guidance (35-40K vehicles) yet, but is cautiously watching the Chinese market.
With the world’s largest auto market hitting a speed bump, the entire industry is on pins and needles, watching and waiting for a recovery. When do you think the Chinese EV market will bounce back? Do you think Tesla and NIO are over-investing in China?
*Update: An earlier version of this article indicated that Tesla’s vehicles were eligible for China’s NEV subsidies. Only NEVs built in China are eligible for these subsidies and Tesla may benefit from them in the future with their Chinese-built Model 3.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
