News
[Updated – Corrected] Tesla China denies rumored “Tesla” venture in Jinan, China
Correction:
A spokesperson from Tesla China has issued a statement about the reported joint venture. According to the Tesla China spokesperson, the venture “has nothing to do” with the Texas-based electric vehicle maker. Data from Chinese corporate registry Qichacha also showed that the “Tesla” in the filings was listed as “Tesla Motors Limited,” which is based in the UK.
Context:
This story was initially sourced from data posted in Qichacha (QCC), a data and analytics company focused on China-based private and public companies. It’s a go-to service for company registration info in the country. Notable Chinese broadsheets such as Beijing Daily, the official newspaper of the Beijing municipal committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), reported on the topic. Sina News, another news site that covered the story, also noted that the joint venture echoed a similar company established by BYD, which is also based in Jinan. The venture was also connected to the Jinan Licheng Financial Holding Group and the Jinan Licheng District Finance Bureau, both of which are close to the state.
Following is a tweet Teslarati posted when the legitimacy of this story was challenged.
We have pulled an article regarding Tesla and Annex Semiconductors being involved in a possible joint venture. We are attempting to verify the source of this article currently and will update you when we have more details. Thank you for your patience and we apologize.— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 28, 2022
**Original article is below.**
Tesla has plans to ramp its electric vehicle production by a notable degree in the coming years, and with the company’s constant innovations, it would need to secure a lot of resources, from battery raw materials to computer chips.
In this light, reports have emerged suggesting that Tesla has established a semiconductor joint venture in Jinan of eastern China’s Shandong Province. The joint venture is intended to supply automotive chip and electronics solutions. Tesla partnered with Swiss automotive semiconductor company Annex for the joint venture, which boasts a registered capital of $150 million.
As per a report from Chinese tech publication ijiwei, Tesla holds a 5% equity in the company for now, while Annex holds a 55% stake, and the Jinan Zurich Annex Equity Investment Fund Partnership holds a 40% stake. It should be noted that the Jinan Zurich fund acquired Annex this past June in a $5 billion deal, according to local reports.
Tesla has a formidable partner in Annex, as the Swiss company is among the global leaders in automotive system-on-chip (SoC), microcontroller (MCU), and processor, image sensor, and power device products. This likely provides the joint venture with the necessary technical know-how and experience to develop optimal semiconductors for the electric vehicle maker and its products.
If the recent reports from China prove accurate, it would appear that Tesla is making a serious play for the semiconductor market. Just recently, for example, reports have suggested that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSMC) would be Tesla’s supplier of choice for its next-generation FSD computer, which would reportedly be manufactured at 4 nm and 5 nm processes.
Tesla’s chip order from TSMC is reportedly substantial, so much so that it would effectively make the American electric vehicle maker one of the chipmaker’s top seven customers next year. These reports present a pretty exciting picture for Tesla next year, as the Cybertruck, the first vehicle in the company’s lineup confirmed to have a next-generation computer, would also be entering production in 2023.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
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 once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
