Tesla announced this morning that it would open some of its United States Supercharger Network to competitors in an effort to not only make some of the $7.5 billion in funds from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law available to the automaker, but also to make EV charging more available to consumers.
Tesla officially confirmed this morning that it would open select Superchargers in the U.S. to all EVs, an unprecedented move in the company’s history. In the past, Tesla has offered an exclusive strength to its owners by offering an expansive, robust, and dependable EV charging network. It has been arguably one of Tesla’s biggest advantages, and since CEO Elon Musk said in 2021 that the Supercharging Network would be opened to competitors that year, the automaker has reluctantly moved toward that goal.
EV charging to receive $7.5 billion in Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal: White House
Now, it has finally come to fruition.
This morning, The White House confirmed the plan with further details, stating:
“Tesla, for the first time, will open a portion of its U.S. Supercharger and Destination Charger network to non-Tesla EVs, making at least 7,500 chargers available for all EVs by the end of 2024. The open chargers will be distributed across the United States. They will include at least 3,500 new and existing 250 kW Superchargers along highway corridors to expand freedom of travel for all EVs, and Level 2 Destination Charging at locations like hotels and restaurants in urban and rural locations. All EV drivers will be able to access these stations using the Tesla app or website. Additionally, Tesla will more than double its full nationwide network of Superchargers, manufactured in Buffalo, New York.”
Last week, it was confirmed that Musk’s late January meeting with White House staff dealt with the potential opening of the Supercharger Network. Unsurprisingly, some Tesla fans were not super pleased with the idea. Superchargers are already relatively crowded, and the admittance of other non-Tesla brands to these chargers would only make matters worse. However, this is not always the case, as Superchargers in some areas of rural America, where EVs have yet to make a significant impact on the overall automotive market, are not always completely occupied.
While the locations that Tesla will choose are still up in the air, at least 7,500 piles of the U.S. Supercharger Network will be open to all EVs, and this is a win-win for everyone. Why?
Tesla owners will still have a distinct advantage
While 7,500 of the Superchargers will be open to other manufacturers by the end of next year, Tesla owners will still be the only ones to have the ability to utilize all of them.
This freedom gives prospective EV owners the ability to have a wide variety of options in terms of which company they will purchase from. However, Tesla will still have a significant advantage because it is the only manufacturer that will allow unlimited access to any Supercharger in the United States. It is important to emphasize this fact, because while other manufacturers will have access to some of the network, only Tesla owners will have access to all of it.
It eliminates a lot of the “There is not enough charging” argument
Even in 2023, as EVs continue to grab a more significant share of the total U.S. automotive market, we still hear that there are not enough chargers to justify an EV purchase.
While home charging is an option, those who rent or are apart of a strict Home Owners Association (HOA) may not have the ability to charge at their residence. This requires more public charging options to be available to those people, and the expansion of the charging network through Tesla’s decision to open select locations to all EVs only makes this outdated argument a lot less valid.
Even still, there are plenty of other companies out there that support the other manufactuers. Electrify America, ChargePoint, Blink, EVgo, and many others help electric vehicle owners get a charge before their drives.
Tesla’s decision shows its commitment to its mission
Tesla has always maintained that its goal is to “accelerate the transition to sustainable energy.” While the company is a business, and a for-profit business at that, Tesla has disrupted the entire automotive sector by showing EV options are sometimes more ideal than others. Because of the company’s influence on consumers, legacy automakers have been working on EVs for several years, and an influx of startups have come to light, hoping to be the next big thing.
Credit: Tesla
If Tesla was not actually committed to pushing more companies to build EVs, it likely would not make this move. As previously stated, many prospective car buyers are still under the impression that EVs are not feasible because of a lack of charging options. However, Tesla’s move to work toward expanding the Superchargers to other companies is further proof that it is more concerned with putting more EVs on the road, even if they’re not Teslas, than hoarding its robust charging infrastructure to itself.
This move is completely and entirely based on Tesla’s push to bring EVs to the mainstream, as if they were not already. However, the move is a further committment to the mentality that any EV is better than a combustion engine, and whatever the company can do to help another EV of any kind get sold is more than acceptable. But, don’t be fooled, Tesla still will take necessary steps to make its EVs more appealing than others, and that is evident with its continuous and relentless development of its vehicles, making them better and better as time goes on.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
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
