News
Tesla supplier Talon Metals on Manchin EV Bill, Tesla & more
Tesla supplier, Talon Metals (TLO.TO) gave Teslarati an exclusive interview and we talked about the Manchin EV Bill, Tesla and more.
I received some great feedback on one of my recent articles from Todd Malan, Chief External
Affairs Officer & Head of Climate Strategy at Talon Metals, one of Tesla’s key suppliers of nickel
and other battery minerals in the USA.
The two companies signed an offtake partnership in January of this year to supply nickel from Talon’s project in central Minnesota. Todd is based in Washington DC for Talon and therefore has a front-row seat to the wrangling among various parties regarding Senator Manchin’s new EV tax incentives in the Infrastructure Reduction Act of 2022.
As of this morning, voting was slated to begin today and the bill is expected to pass on a partisan line vote in the early morning of Monday. If the House passes it next week, it should be on President Biden’s desk by the end of the week.
Manchin’s EV tax credit proposal
Todd shared his thoughts on Manchin’s EV tax credit proposal. On one hand, it’s breathtakingly generous in that it lifts all numerical limits on EVs that are eligible for the $7500 tax credit.
Previously, 200,000 cars per year for each nameplate. On the other hand, Manchin’s proposal sets some new eligibility parameters around the cost of the EV, the income level of the buyer, and the source of the battery raw materials (sourced from the US or countries that have a Free Trade
Agreement with the US).
As I reported last week, some automakers are unhappy with Manchin’s strings on the EV credit, others like Tesla seem to be taking more of a “can do” approach when it comes to the mineral content provisions.
Todd also walked me through the comprehensive approach that Senator Manchin took to
supporting domestic mining and mineral processing across the full bill.
So, Manchin isn’t just telling automakers to buy from domestic sources of minerals and metals from domestic sources and leaving it to them. He also added significant new government support to help the supply chain get up and running on an urgent basis.
The fact that he got commitments from Democratic leaders in Congress and President Biden to reform the permitting process in the US in separate legislation (not just for mines but for solar, wind and hydrogen too) is another signal of Manchin’s holistic approach to ramping up the full battery supply chain in the US and also rely on allies that happen to be mineral powerhouses like Australia and Canada.
Todd had a very optimistic view that all of these provisions, including the EV credit, will help the U.S. address its dependency on China for batteries and scale up its capability in battery mineral production.
The core of his view is that it will take partnerships between miners, automakers,
regulators, recyclers, and other parts of the supply chain to meet the Manchin content
requirements.
Todd thinks Tesla and Ford stand out as companies leading the way in this new
approach to supply chain security.
Some automakers are not happy with Senator Manchin’s EV tax credit proposal
Todd read my article, Automakers are not too happy with Senator Manchin’s EV tax credit
proposal and pointed out that there was not a universal view among the automakers or the rest of the battery supply chain.
“Mazda and Rivian have been out-front in the media complaining about aspects of Senator
Manchin’s EV incentive proposal. I understand the concern that the timeline is very ambitious but on the other hand, Senator Manchin’s draft includes some of the world’s largest producers of battery materials: Canada, Chile, Australia, South Korea, etc.”
“Those countries that don’t have free trade agreements with the US, there is plenty of time (and now incentive) for them to negotiate agreements. Senator Manchin didn’t just confine the provision to the U.S., or even USMCA countries, but all countries that now or in the future have free trade agreements.”
“This is a balanced measure that will encourage domestic mining investment and development while also ensuring we can draw on our allies for secure supplies. It may not be the cheapest option for the automakers, but supply from this broad base of countries can be ramped up to meet the requirements.”
Todd pointed out that other parts of the auto lobby had a more nuanced approach to
Manchin’s proposal to support EV adoption. The Zero Emissions Transportation Association (ZETA), in which Tesla is a lead member, was quick to offer support for Manchin’s EV incentives.
Joe Britton, ZETA Executive Director was quoted in a number of media articles admitting that the domestic and ally content provisions would be hard to meet but that they could be met.
“If you look at the landscape as it exists today, it’s a challenge, but it’s doable,” said Joe Britton, the head of the Zero Emission Transportation Association, which advocates for EV adoption, told Bloomberg.“We can meet these metrics.”
Britton also has been praising the Manchin bill for what it will do for EV adoption. He told
News12 Westchester that he hopes the rebate can entice more people to purchase EVs. Britton said:
“In most areas of the country, especially the Northeast, it is five to six times more expensive to drive your vehicle on gasoline than it is by electricity. So, by making these vehicles more affordable on the front end, you’re really driving down that total cost of ownership”
As with most people that are involved with Tesla as suppliers, Malan was extremely careful to not speak for Tesla or speculate on their positions. But I realized that someone glancing at the headlines without reading through the article might assume that Tesla was of the same view as the legacy auto industry.
We all know Tesla prefers to speak for itself and Elon Musk shared a thought about Senator Manchin on Twitter yesterday. Although many were wondering what his tweet meant, I think it’s pretty clear he thinks Manchin is doing something right.
Thank goodness for Senator Manchin
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 5, 2022
Partnerships across the value chain will be key
Todd pointed out to the Detroit News yesterday that it will take a range of
partnerships to meet the Manchin goals. He pointed out that Tesla and Talon have explicitly described their supply relationship as a partnership. Tesla is working with its suppliers.
Todd told me that everyone will need to work together to meet these goals.
“We need everyone working together to meet these ambitious goals in the Manchin bill.
Mining is the front end of the supply chain and it takes enormous knowhow, capital, and risk tolerance to discover, delineate, permit, construct and then safely operate a mine to supply battery minerals.”
“Processing has been the Achilles heel of the supply chain in the U.S. Luckily. Congress just provided new resources to address this issue in the bipartisan infrastructure bill. Everybody’s going to have to work together. The auto manufacturers, the miners, the people that do processing, and government at state and federal level.”
“Senator Manchin and others in Congress realize that governments are going to have to focus on improving the permitting process – not to cut corners in environmental protections but to make the process more certain, efficient, and reliable.”
“Not just for mines, processing or even EV battery factories – but also solar, wind, hydro and hydrogen projects. We can not afford a disorganized, uncoordinated, and inefficient regulatory process that causes unnecessary delays in progress. We need all these projects to come online to address the climate crisis while also ensuring we protect the environment through science-based permitting.”
Talon Metals on Senator Manchin’s proposal.
I’ve seen a lot of mixed feedback on Senator Manchin’s proposal. As noted in my earlier article, many automakers like Mazda and Rivian are lobbying hard to water it down. Not as much has been heard from the companies that source raw materials like nickel and lithium in the United States. So, I asked Todd to share his take–and that of Talon Metals.
“From the standpoint of a company that’s trying to build a responsible nickel mine in
Minnesota, we think that Senator Manchin has struck a good balance in this bill. First, it provides the most generous set of incentives for EV adoption ever enacted in law.
“It also encourages auto companies to work with domestic mines and mines in allied countries like Australia, Canada, and Chile and it provides some time for projects to ramp up. It also provides time for countries that don’t have FTAs to engage with the US and negotiate. Yes, it is a stretch goal but that seems appropriate given the climate crisis and our dependency on countries like China and Russia for battery supplies.”
“This is a carefully balanced bill that does push everyone to rise to the occasion. But that is appropriate because we want to create high-quality jobs in America as part of the energy transition and we don’t want to rely on Russia and China for the supply chain of battery minerals. It’s a matter of national security.”
How can automakers better work with their suppliers?
I asked this question because if automakers truly want to “get aggressive”; as Senator Manchin challenged them to do, then perhaps they need to take a page from Tesla and other leaders’practices.
“Having a Tesla off-take agreement in place has changed the perception of our project in the community. It’s very credentializing and our employees are proud of the partnership. People clearly understand that our proposed mine has a purpose: to supply nickel for the EV battery supply chain and contribute to the energy transition. This has helped shape how people perceive the project. It has a purpose and an important one.”
“Many of the large automakers are helping supply partners apply for some of the significant new funding opportunities being made available through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. The Department of Energy is expected to give out over $1.8 billion in funding from that legislation this fall. This is another example of how the end-users can help the front end of the supply chain for battery materials.”
Todd commented that many auto companies are having a tough time adjusting to the new
reality of scarce commodities.
“They used to only focus on price and quality with a yearly focus on driving down the price. It’s a whole new game now, as they learned in the chip crisis. Some are still adjusting their mindset to scarcity and competition for supply.”
“It requires a change in mindset. No longer can the big auto company demand ever-lower price year over year. Smart end users have changed their mindset to partnership. That means understanding their partners’ issues, helping them to maximize productivity, access newtechnology, ramp up production, improve quality, and provide support during the permittingprocess or help obtain government funding.”
“This is the future, true partnership in the supply chain, from mine to cathode to recycling. That is how we meet Senator Manchin’s challenge and strengthen the supply chain for battery production.”
Todd didn’t come out and say it directly, but it came through in the way he talked about the Tesla. Yet again, Tesla is leading the industry in terms of securing supply from the right countries to feed its factories but also leading practices in working in partnership with key suppliers.
Knowing that I love cool rocks, Todd invited me up to Minnesota to check out what Talon is doing at Tamarack and show me some beautiful nickel samples. Todd also told me about Minnesota’s famous burger concoction, The Juicy Lucy.
Disclaimer: Johnna is long Tesla.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @JohnnaCrider1
Tesla just raised Model Y prices for the first time in two years, with the largest increase being $1,000.
The move signals shifting dynamics in the competitive electric vehicle market as the company continues to work on balancing demand, profitability, and accessibility.
The new pricing affects premium trims while leaving entry-level options unchanged. The Model Y Premium Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) now starts at $45,990, a $1,000 increase.
The Model Y Premium All-Wheel Drive (AWD)—previously referred to in the post as simply “Model Y AWD”—rises to $49,990, also up $1,000. The top-tier Model Y Performance sees a more modest $500 bump, bringing its starting price to $57,990.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up:
New prices:
🚗 Model Y Premium RWD: $45,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y AWD: $49,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y Performance: $57,990 – up $500 https://t.co/e4GhQ0tj4H pic.twitter.com/TCWqr3oqiV— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) May 16, 2026
Base models remain untouched to preserve affordability. The entry-level Model Y RWD holds steady at $39,990, and the base Model Y AWD stays at $41,990. This selective approach keeps the crossover accessible for budget-conscious buyers while extracting more revenue from higher-margin configurations.
After years of aggressive price cuts to stimulate volume amid slowing EV adoption and rising competition from rivals like BYD, Ford, and GM, Tesla appears confident in underlying demand. Recent lineup refreshes for the 2026 Model Y, including refreshed styling and efficiency gains, have helped maintain its status as America’s best-selling EV.
By protecting base prices, Tesla avoids alienating price-sensitive customers while improving margins on the more popular variants.
Tesla Model Y ownership review after six months: What I love and what I don’t
For consumers, the changes are relatively modest—under 3% on affected trims—and still position the Model Y competitively against gas-powered SUVs in the same class. Federal tax credits and potential state incentives may further offset costs for eligible buyers.
This marks a subtle but notable shift from the deep discounting era that defined much of 2024 and 2025. As the EV market matures into 2026, Tesla’s pricing strategy will be closely watched for clues about production ramps, new variants like the rumored longer-wheelbase Model Y, and broader profitability goals.
In short, today’s adjustment reflects a company that remains dominant yet pragmatic—willing to test higher pricing where demand supports it. It is unlikely to deter consumers from choosing other options.
Elon Musk cannot be fired from SpaceX, and there’s a reason for that.
In a blunt post on X on Friday, Elon Musk confirmed plans to structurally shield his leadership at SpaceX, ensuring he cannot be fired while tying a potential trillion-dollar compensation package to the company’s long-term goal of establishing a self-sustaining colony on Mars.
Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!
Obviously, IF SpaceX succeeds in this absurdly difficult goal, it will be worth many orders of…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 15, 2026
The revelation stems from a Financial Times report detailing SpaceX’s intention to restructure its governance and compensation framework. The moves are designed to protect Musk’s control and align his incentives with the company’s founding mission rather than short-term financial pressures. Musk’s reply left no ambiguity:
“Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!”
He added that success in this “absurdly difficult goal” would generate value “many orders of magnitude more than the economy of Earth,” though he cautioned that the journey will not be smooth. “Don’t expect entirely smooth sailing along the way,” Musk wrote.
The strategy reflects Musk’s deep concerns about how public-market expectations could derail SpaceX’s core objective. Founded in 2002, SpaceX has repeatedly stated its purpose is to reduce the cost of space travel and ultimately make humanity a multiplanetary species.
Unlike Tesla, which went public in 2010 and has faced repeated battles over Musk’s compensation and board influence, SpaceX remains privately held. Musk has long resisted taking the rocket company public precisely to avoid the quarterly earnings treadmill that forces most CEOs to prioritize short-term stock performance over ambitious, high-risk projects.
By embedding protections against his removal and linking any outsized pay package to verifiable milestones—such as a functioning Mars colony—SpaceX aims to insulate its leadership from activist investors or board members who might demand faster profits or safer bets.
Musk has referenced past experiences, including his ouster from OpenAI and shareholder lawsuits at Tesla, as cautionary tales. In those cases, he argued, external pressures risked diluting the original vision.
Critics may view the arrangement as excessive, especially given Musk’s already substantial voting power and wealth. Supporters, however, argue it is a necessary safeguard for a company pursuing goals measured in decades rather than quarters. Achieving a Mars colony would require sustained investment in Starship development, orbital refueling, life-support systems, and in-situ resource utilization—technologies that may deliver no immediate financial return.
Musk’s post underscores a broader philosophical point: true breakthrough innovation often demands tolerance for volatility and a willingness to ignore conventional business wisdom. As SpaceX prepares for increasingly ambitious Starship test flights and eventual crewed missions, the new governance structure signals that the company’s North Star remains unchanged—humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.
Whether the trillion-dollar package materializes depends on execution, but Musk’s message is clear: SpaceX exists to reach the stars, not to chase the next earnings beat. For investors or employees who share that vision, the protections are not a perk—they are a prerequisite for success.
News
Tesla discloses two Robotaxi crashes to NHTSA
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
Tesla has disclosed information on two low-speed crashes that occurred in Austin with its Robotaxi platform. These incidents occurred with teleoperators steering the vehicle, and there were no passengers in the car at the time they happened.
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
The first crash took place in July 2025, shortly after Tesla launched its nascent Robotaxi network in Austin. The ADS reportedly struggled to move forward while stopped on a street. A teleoperator assumed control, gradually accelerating and turning left toward the roadside. The vehicle then mounted the curb and struck a metal fence.
In the second incident, in January 2026, the ADS was traveling straight when the safety monitor requested navigation support. The teleoperator took over from a stop, continued forward, and collided with a temporary construction barricade at approximately 9 mph, scraping the front-left fender and tire.
Tesla Robotaxi service in Austin achieves monumental new accomplishment
Tesla has previously told lawmakers that teleoperators are authorized to pilot vehicles remotely—but only at speeds below 10 mph, as the only maneuvers they were approved to perform were repositioning in awkward areas.
“This capability enables Tesla to promptly move a vehicle that may be in a compromising position, thereby mitigating the need to wait for a first responder or Tesla field representative to manually recover the vehicle,” the company stated in filings earlier this year.
Before this week, Tesla redacted the NHTSA reports, but they decided to reveal all 17 Robotaxi incidents recorded since the launch in Austin last Summer. Most of the other crashes involved the Tesla being struck by other road users and were not caused by the self-driving suite itself.
There were other incidents, including two additional self-caused accidents involving the ADS clipping side mirrors on parked cars. In September 2025, one Robotaxi struck a dog that darted into the roadway (the dog escaped unharmed), while another made an unprotected left turn into a parking lot and hit a metal chain.
Although Waymo and Zoox have reported more total crashes, Tesla operates at a far smaller scale. The cautious pace reflects the company’s broader safety concerns; it has been very slow with the Robotaxi rollout to ensure the suite is ready for operation.
Last month, CEO Elon Musk acknowledged that “making sure things are completely safe” remains the primary bottleneck to expanding the network, describing the company’s approach as “very cautious.”
The unredacted filings arrive amid heightened regulatory scrutiny of autonomous vehicles. NHTSA recently closed a separate probe into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software repeatedly striking parking-lot obstacles such as bollards and chains—a problem that also prompted a recall at Waymo last year.
Tesla Robotaxi has been a widely successful program in its early days of operation, and the transparency Tesla brings here is greatly appreciated. Incidents will happen, of course, but the honesty gives customers and regulators a sense of where Tesla is in terms of developing its self-driving and fully autonomous ride-hailing suite.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up for the first time in two years
Elon Musk explains why he cannot be fired from SpaceX
