News
Tesla hints at potential TX headquarters in Q3 2021 delivery and production report
With a production of approximately 238,000 cars and deliveries of over 240,000 vehicles, the third quarter of 2021 was undoubtedly one for Tesla’s history books. But within the company’s Q3 2021 vehicle production and delivery report came a rather interesting update — Tesla’s investor communications are no longer coming from California. They are now coming from Austin, Texas.
A look at Tesla’s Investor Relations page shows that over the years, the company’s vehicle production and delivery reports are typically issued from Palo Alto, California, which happens to be listed as the site of the company’s official headquarters. This has now been changed into Austin, Texas, in the Q3 2021 vehicle production and delivery report.
- Tesla’s Q3 2021 vehicle delivery and production report. (Credit: Tesla)
- Tesla’s Q2 2021 vehicle delivery and production report. (Credit: Tesla)
While a minor change in an investor communication is hardly a direct announcement that Tesla’s headquarters have been moved to a separate state, CEO Elon Musk has actually hinted at such a change in the past. As Tesla struggled to reopen the Fremont Factory in May 2020 due to the hesitation of Alameda County health officials, Musk announced on Twitter that Tesla would be moving its headquarters and future programs to Texas or Nevada.
“Tesla will now move its HQ and future programs to Texas/Nevada immediately. If we even retain Fremont manufacturing activity at all, it will be dependent on how Tesla is treated in the future. Tesla is the last carmaker left in CA,” Musk wrote.
Frankly, this is the final straw. Tesla will now move its HQ and future programs to Texas/Nevada immediately. If we even retain Fremont manufacturing activity at all, it will be dependen on how Tesla is treated in the future. Tesla is the last carmaker left in CA.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 9, 2020
At the time, the reopening of the Fremont Factory was supported by the Bay Area Council, the mayors of Fremont and Palo Alto, US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, US President Donald Trump, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Officials from other states like Florida, Oklahoma, and Texas also supported the reopening of the Fremont Factory.
Despite this support, Alameda County health officials refused to allow Tesla to reopen the EV plant, resulting in Musk filing legal action against the county and announcing the departure of Tesla’s HQ from California. Amidst this pressure, Alameda County officials finally opted to acknowledge Tesla’s anti-Covid-19 Return to Work Playbook, granting the company permission to operate the Fremont Factory once more.
Message received
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 11, 2020
Amidst the drama, CA Assemblywoman Lorena S. Gonzales added fuel to the fire by calling out the Tesla CEO on Twitter. In a short tweet, Gonzales posted “F*ck Elon Musk,” noting that California has “highly subsidized a company that has always disregarded worker safety & well-being, has engaged in union-busting & bullies public servants.” Musk responded to the Assemblywoman’s tweet by stating “Message received.”
Tesla has been very silent about the move of its headquarters, however. Musk has hardly mentioned the update on Twitter, though he did personally move to Texas to be closer to Starbase and Gigafactory Texas. Considering the company’s updated wording on its Q3 2021 vehicle production and delivery report, it would appear that Tesla, or at least key facilities like the company’s headquarters, may indeed be moving out of California.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Elon Musk
Brazil Supreme Court orders Elon Musk and X investigation closed
The decision was issued by Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes following a recommendation from Brazil’s Prosecutor-General Paulo Gonet.
Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court has ordered the closure of an investigation involving Elon Musk and social media platform X. The inquiry had been pending for about two years and examined whether the platform was used to coordinate attacks against members of the judiciary.
The decision was issued by Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes following a recommendation from Brazil’s Prosecutor-General Paulo Gonet.
According to a report from Agencia Brasil, the investigation conducted by the Federal Police did not find evidence that X deliberately attempted to attack the judiciary or circumvent court orders.
Prosecutor-General Paulo Gonet concluded that the irregularities identified during the probe did not indicate fraudulent intent.
Justice Moraes accepted the prosecutor’s recommendation and ruled that the investigation should be closed. Under the ruling, the case will remain closed unless new evidence emerges.
The inquiry stemmed from concerns that content on X may have enabled online attacks against Supreme Court justices or violated rulings requiring the suspension of certain accounts under investigation.
Justice Moraes had previously taken several enforcement actions related to the platform during the broader dispute involving social media regulation in Brazil.
These included ordering a nationwide block of the platform, freezing Starlink accounts, and imposing fines on X totaling about $5.2 million. Authorities also froze financial assets linked to X and SpaceX through Starlink to collect unpaid penalties and seized roughly $3.3 million from the companies’ accounts.
Moraes also imposed daily fines of up to R$5 million, about $920,000, for alleged evasion of the X ban and established penalties of R$50,000 per day for VPN users who attempted to bypass the restriction.
Brazil remains an important market for X, with roughly 17 million users, making it one of the platform’s larger user bases globally.
The country is also a major market for Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet service, which has surpassed one million subscribers in Brazil.
Elon Musk
FCC chair criticizes Amazon over opposition to SpaceX satellite plan
Carr made the remarks in a post on social media platform X.
U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr criticized Amazon after the company opposed SpaceX’s proposal to launch a large satellite constellation that could function as an orbital data center network.
Carr made the remarks in a post on social media platform X.
Amazon recently urged the FCC to reject SpaceX’s application to deploy a constellation of up to 1 million low Earth orbit satellites that could serve as artificial intelligence data centers in space.
The company described the proposal as a “lofty ambition rather than a real plan,” arguing that SpaceX had not provided sufficient details about how the system would operate.
Carr responded by pointing to Amazon’s own satellite deployment progress.
“Amazon should focus on the fact that it will fall roughly 1,000 satellites short of meeting its upcoming deployment milestone, rather than spending their time and resources filing petitions against companies that are putting thousands of satellites in orbit,” Carr wrote on X.
Amazon has declined to comment on the statement.
Amazon has been working to deploy its Project Kuiper satellite network, which is intended to compete with SpaceX’s Starlink service. The company has invested more than $10 billion in the program and has launched more than 200 satellites since April of last year.
Amazon has also asked the FCC for a 24-month extension, until July 2028, to meet a requirement to deploy roughly 1,600 satellites by July 2026, as noted in a CNBC report.
SpaceX’s Starlink network currently has nearly 10,000 satellites in orbit and serves roughly 10 million customers. The FCC has also authorized SpaceX to deploy 7,500 additional satellites as the company continues expanding its global satellite internet network.
Energy
Tesla Energy gains UK license to sell electricity to homes and businesses
The license was granted to Tesla Energy Ventures Ltd. by UK energy regulator Ofgem after a seven-month review process.
Tesla Energy has received a license to supply electricity in the United Kingdom, opening the door for the company to serve homes and businesses in the country.
The license was granted to Tesla Energy Ventures Ltd. by UK energy regulator Ofgem after a seven-month review process.
According to Ofgem, the license took effect at 6 p.m. local time on Wednesday and applies to Great Britain.
The approval allows Tesla’s energy business to sell electricity directly to customers in the region, as noted in a Bloomberg News report.
Tesla has already expanded similar services in the United States. In Texas, the company offers electricity plans that allow Tesla owners to charge their vehicles at a lower cost while also feeding excess electricity back into the grid.
Tesla already has a sizable presence in the UK market. According to price comparison website U-switch, there are more than 250,000 Tesla electric vehicles in the country and thousands of Tesla home energy storage systems.
Ofgem also noted that Tesla Motors Ltd., a separate entity incorporated in England and Wales, received an electricity generation license in June 2020.
The new UK license arrives as Tesla continues expanding its global energy business.
Last year, Tesla Energy retained the top position in the global battery energy storage system (BESS) integrator market for the second consecutive year. According to Wood Mackenzie’s latest rankings, Tesla held about 15% of global market share in 2024.
The company also maintained a dominant position in North America, where it captured roughly 39% market share in the region.
At the same time, competition in the energy storage sector is increasing. Chinese companies such as Sungrow have been expanding their presence globally, particularly in Europe.

