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.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
