News
Tesla updates Supercharger pricing structure, rolls out in-car payment feature
Tesla has updated the pricing structure for its Supercharger network, including terms for its existing idle fee policy. The idle fee update will impact all Model S, Model X, and Model 3 drivers that utilize the company’s high-powered, global charging network, regardless of whether they are enrolled in free unlimited Supercharging or not.
Supercharger idle fees, first introduced in late 2016 as a means to deter vehicle owners from occupying a charging stall when the vehicle has already met its intended state of charge, have been updated to further encourage owners to move their vehicles from stalls and improve the Supercharging experience for all drivers. Tesla has updated the flat idle fee of $0.40/minute to take into account station occupancy, as follows:
Supercharger Idle Fee
(updated September 19, 2018)
- Supercharger 50% occupied: $0.50/minute idle fee
- Supercharger 100% occupied: $1.00/minute idle fee
Tesla notes in its Supercharger FAQ that drivers will be granted a 5-minute grace period during which time a fee will not be incurred. Once this grace period passes, the driver will be charged for the 5-minutes and each additional minute after that. Vehicle owners will continue to receive reminders through Tesla’s app when the vehicle is nearing its intended state of charge.
In-car Payment
Additionally, Tesla has begun to roll out an over-the-air software update (not Version 9) that will include a new in-car payment feature. The new functionality will provide Model S, Model X, and Model 3 owners who leverage pay-per-use Supercharging with the ability to pay from within their vehicle, by inputting credit card information directly into the center touchscreen. The feature will also enable drivers to pay for any incurred idle fees.
The in-car payment functionality is an extension of the credit card section within an owner’s Tesla Account page, or previously known as the MyTesla page. Credit card information entered through the in-car payment feature will automatically be registered to the vehicle owner’s Tesla account and also serve as payment for any incurred idle fees or Supercharger use fees.
Also introduced in today’s Supercharger pricing structure update is a $50.00 cap wherein Supercharger access will automatically be disabled if there’s an outstanding balance due for Supercharger fees, either incurred through idle fees or Pay Per Use, and when a credit card is not on file. Supercharger access will instantly re-enable once the balance is paid. Tesla will also have the ability to grant Supercharger access to a vehicle, remotely, in the event of an emergency.
The pricing update and software release are being implemented in North America first, followed by a global rollout.
It’s About the Greater Good
Although the latest Supercharger update may be unwelcomed by some Tesla owners that have previously benefitted from the company’s good faith gesture to extend its charging network, largely unenforced, to its drivers, the change is an improvement to its policy that has a significant benefit to the overall community.
When the Silicon Valley-based electric carmaker first created its Supercharger network, the intention was to make long-distance travel an enjoyable and seamless experience for all drivers. But as Supercharger abuse became more rampant, combined with a massive increase in the number of Model S, Model X and Model 3 on the roads, being able to institute some sort of Supercharger fair-use enforcement policy became desperately needed. This is in spite of Tesla’s continued global scale out of its Supercharger and Destination charging network.
A Model X spotted occupying three Supercharger stalls at the Newark, DE Supercharger station went viral in 2016 after sparking outrage across the Tesla community.
Related: Calling all Tesla Supercharger abusers: Don’t ruin it for the rest of us
Today’s update to Tesla’s Supercharger policy will undoubtedly be one of many in the years to come, as the company continues to adjust and iterate toward a customer experience-focused model that’s also financially feasible.
A Tesla spokesperson tells Teslarati, “Based on feedback from the Tesla owner community, we are adjusting the idle fees associated with our Supercharging program to continue providing the best Supercharging experience as the size of our fleet grows. As has always been the case, our Supercharging and associated fees charged on the network are not meant to be a profit center for Tesla, and we hope to never need to bill for idle fees.”
More information can be found on Tesla’s Supercharger page.
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
