

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.
News
Tesla robotaxi test details shared in recent report: 300 operators, safety tests, and more
Tesla has launched an initial robotaxi service for its employees in Austin and the San Francisco Bay Area.

During the Q1 2025 earnings call, Tesla executives reiterated the idea that the company will be launching a dedicated robotaxi service using its Full Self Driving (FSD) Unsupervised system this coming June.
A recent report from Insider, citing people reportedly familiar with the matter, has now provided a number of details about the preparations that Tesla has been making as it approaches its June target date.
Remote Operators
As noted by the publication, about 300 test operators have been driving through Austin city streets over the past few months using Teslas equipped with self-driving software. These efforts are reportedly part of “Project Rodeo.” Citing test drivers who are reportedly part of the program, Insider noted that Tesla’s tests involve accumulating critical miles. Test drivers are reportedly assigned to specific test routes, which include “critical” tracks where drivers are encouraged to avoid manual interventions, and “adversarial” tracks, which simulate tricky scenarios.
Tesla has launched an initial robotaxi service for its employees in Austin and the San Francisco Bay Area, though the vehicles only operate in limited areas. The vehicles also use safety drivers for now. However, Tesla has reportedly had discussions about using remote operators as safety drivers when the service goes live for consumers. Some test drivers have been moved into remote operator roles for this purpose, the publication’s sources claimed.
While Tesla is focusing on Austin and San Francisco for now, the company is reportedly also deploying test drivers in other key cities. These include Atlanta, GA, New York, NY, Seattle, WA, and Phoenix, AZ.
Safety Tests
Tesla reportedly held training events with local first responders as part of its preparations for its robotaxi service, Insider claimed, citing documents that it had obtained. As per the publication, Tesla had met with the city’s autonomous vehicle task force, which include members of the Austin Fire Department, back in December.
Back in March, Tesla reportedly participated in about six hours of testing with local first responders, which included members of the fire department and the police, at a close test track. Around 60 drivers and vehicles were reportedly used in the test to simulate real-world traffic scenarios.
Interestingly enough, a spokesperson from the Austin Police Department stated that Tesla did hold a testing day with emergency responders from Austin, Williamson County, as well as the Texas Department of Public Safety.
Reported Deadlines
While Tesla has been pretty open about its robotaxi service launching in Austin this June, the company is reportedly pursuing an aggressive June 1 deadline, at least internally. During meetings with Elon Musk, VP of AI software Ashok Elluswamy’s team reportedly informed the CEO that the company is on track to hit its internal deadline.
One of Insider’s sources, however, noted that the June 1 deadline is more aspirational or motivational. “A June 1 deadline makes a June 30 launch more likely,” the publication’s source noted.
News
Atty who refused to charge six-time Tesla vandal sparks controversy
Despite the multiple offenses, Moriarty opted to enter Adams into an adult diversion program instead.

Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, who made the decision not to charge 33-year-old vandal Dylan Bryan Adams after he keyed six Teslas around Minneapolis last month, has found herself in the middle of controversy.
The controversy came amidst her decision to press charges against a 19-year-old first-time vandal who keyed one vehicle at the White Castle in Brooklyn Park.
The Tesla Vandal
Moriarty’s decision not to charge Adams after he keyed six Teslas was met with widespread criticism. Adams’ actions resulted in more than $20,000 worth of damages, more than $10,000 of which was to a single vehicle, as noted in a New York Post report. Yet despite the multiple offenses, Moriarty opted to enter Adams into an adult diversion program instead.
The fact that Adams is a state employee who works for the Department of Human Services as a program consultant triggered allegations that his dismissal might be partly influenced by Gov. Tim Walz. Walz is a staunch critic of Musk, previously stating that the falling price of TSLA stock gives him a “boost” in the morning.
As noted in a report from The Minnesota Star Tribune, Moriarty’s decision was so controversial that she was asked about the matter on Wednesday. In response, the attorney argued that her office made the decision outside of any political consideration. “We try to make decisions without really looking at the political consequences. Can we always predict how a story will be portrayed in the media or what people will say? No,” Moriarty stated.
Actually Charged
As noted by the Tribune, Moriarty has made arguments around the fact that Adams was a first-time offender, even if he opted to deface six separate Teslas. But even this argument has become controversial since Moriarty recently charged a 19-year-old Robbinsdale woman with no criminal record with first-degree felony property damage after she allegedly keyed a co-worker’s car. The damage incurred by the 19-year-old woman was $7,000, substantially less than the over $20,000 damage that Adams’ actions have caused.
Cases surrounding felony first-degree property damage are fairly common, though they require the damage to be over $1,000. The 19-year-old’s damage to her co-worker’s car met this threshold. Adams’ damage to the six Teslas he vandalized also met this requirement.
When Moriarty was asked about her seemingly conflicting decisions, she noted that her office’s primary goal was to hold the person accountable for keying the vehicle and get restitution to the people affected. She also noted that her office tries to avoid convictions when possible since they could affect a person’s life. “Should we have treated this gentleman differently because it’s a political issue? We made this decision because it is in the best interest of public safety,” she noted.
News
Tesla faces emission credits tax in Washington state
House Bill 2077 taxes emissions credits, mainly hitting Tesla. Lawmakers expect $100M/year from the taxes.

Washington state lawmakers are advancing a bill that would tax Tesla’s emission credits, targeting profits under the state’s clean vehicle policy. Lawmakers who support the bill clarify that the Tesla credit tax is unrelated to Elon Musk.
HB 2077, introduced in mid-April, seeks to impose a 2% tax on emission credit sales and a 10% tax on banked credits. The bill primarily affects Tesla due to exemptions for companies with fewer credits.
In 2022, Washington’s Department of Ecology mandated that all new cars sold by 2035 be electric, hydrogen-fueled, or hybrids, with 35% compliance required by next year. Carmakers selling more gas-powered vehicles can buy credits from companies like Tesla, which sells only electric vehicles.
A legislative fiscal analysis projects taxes on those credits would generate $78 million in the 2025-27 biennium and $100 million annually thereafter. About 70% of the taxes will be allocated to the state’s general funds, and the rest will help expand electric car infrastructure.
HB 2077 passed the state House eight days after its introduction and awaits a Senate Ways and Means Committee vote on Friday. At a House Finance Committee hearing, supporters, including union and social service advocates, argued the tax would prevent cuts to state services.
House Majority Leader Joe Fitzgibbon emphasized its necessity amid frozen federal EV infrastructure funds. “We didn’t have a budget crisis until this year. And we didn’t have the federal government revoking huge amounts of federal dollars for EV infrastructure,” he said.
Tesla’s lobbyist, Jeff Gombosky, countered that the proposal “runs counter to the intent” of the state’s zero-emission policy. Rivian’s lobbyist, Troy Nichols, noted a “modest” impact on his company but warned it could undermine the EV mandate. Kate White Tudor of the Natural Resources Defense Council expressed concerns, stating, “We worry it sets a dubious precedent.”
Fitzgibbon defended the tax, noting Tesla’s dominant credit stockpile makes it “one outlier” that is “very profitable.” “That’s the kind of thing legislators take an interest in,” he said. “Is it serving the interest of the public for this asset to be untaxed?”
With the legislative session nearing its end, the bill remains a key focus in budget talks in Washington.
-
News5 days ago
Tesla’s Hollywood Diner is finally getting close to opening
-
Elon Musk1 week ago
Tesla doubles down on Robotaxi launch date, putting a big bet on its timeline
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla’s top investor questions ahead of the Q1 2025 earnings call
-
News2 weeks ago
Underrated Tesla safety feature recognized by China Automotive Research Institute
-
News2 weeks ago
These were the best-selling EV brands in the U.S. in Q1
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla China discontinues Model S and Model X orders amid tariff war
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla Giga Berlin sets record for free EV charging park
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla’s spring update arrives with adaptive headlights and more