Tesla has called on the Biden administration to enact stricter fuel efficiency standards through 2032 than those recently proposed by U.S. regulators.
In July, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed increasing the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) requirements for cars by 2 percent and by 4 percent for trucks and SUVs annually between 2027 and 2032. The proposal was challenged by the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which said that the move “exceeds maximum feasibility.”
Now, Tesla has responded by requesting that the White House increase the efficiency standards annually by 6 percent for cars and 8 percent for trucks and SUVs between 2027 and 2032, according to a report from Reuters. Tesla says enacting the stricter proposal would “conserve energy and address climate change.”
The result of the NHTSA’s original proposal would establish an average fleet-wide fuel efficiency of 58 miles (93 km) per gallon by 2032. The news also comes as many traditional automakers face difficulty in switching their entire lineups to fully electric models, although Tesla only produces and sells fully electric vehicles.
On Monday, an automotive group that represents General Motors (GM), Toyota, Volkswagen and most other major automakers shared harsh criticism of the NHTSA’s proposal, saying that it wasn’t reasonable and requires several revisions.
In a separate response, the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents Ford, GM and Chrysler’s parent company Stellantis, pushed the NHTSA to cut its proposed increases in half to just 2 percent for trucks and SUVs. In the statement, the council said the NHTSA’s original proposal “would disproportionately impact the truck fleet.”
Additionally, the group pointed out that roughly 83 percent of all vehicles produced by Ford, GM and Stellantis are trucks.
The NHTSA responded by saying the proposed rule “is focused on saving Americans money at the gas pump and strengthening American energy independence.” The agency expects the proposal to have combined benefits exceeding costs by over $18 billion.
Last month, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation said automakers would be held responsible for over $14 billion in non-compliance penalties between 2027 and 2032 under the current rules.
In response to the NHTSA proposal, Toyota said on Tuesday that the fines were “proof that there is insufficient technology to meet the proposed standards and that such standards have been set beyond maximum feasible.”
In separate projections, automakers GM, Stellantis and Ford have estimated that the NHTSA’s proposal would cost them $6.5 billion, $3.1 billion and $1 billion, respectively.
The automakers have also fought against the U.S. Energy Department’s proposal to make large revisions to how petroleum-equivalent fuel economy is calculated in the CAFE program, adding that doing so could “devalue the fuel economy of electric vehicles (EVs) by 72 percent.”
This is not the first time Tesla has encouraged federal agencies to take proposed fuel economy standards even further. In June, Tesla stated that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) emission limits on heavy-duty trucks, proposed in April, didn’t go far enough in encouraging the U.S. to electrify larger vehicles.
The United Auto Workers (UAW) union, representing Ford, GM and Stellantis, asked President Biden in July to reconsider proposed fuel economy standards, deeming them unfeasible.
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner in Los Angeles dominated the company’s global usage rankings after just one year, proving the concept is more than just a one-off novelty location that will fade away.
The performance could incite the company to build more locations, something that CEO Elon Musk has hinted at for some time.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner delivered 21.2 GWh of energy in its first year of operation, the company’s head of Charging, Max de Zegher, revealed on X. Of the top 10 most utilized Supercharger locations in Tesla’s global infrastructure, the Diner in Los Angeles was the most used by drivers, and it wasn’t particularly close:
Tesla Diner opened exactly 1 year ago. Inspiring that futuristic places like this exist.
It’s our highest usage Supercharger in the world: 21.2 GWh delivered in a year, 1.6k sessions/day.
Top 10 Superchargers by energy delivered: https://t.co/9YvJ8lw696 pic.twitter.com/koB3AUJHws
— Max (@MdeZegher) July 21, 2026
On its launch day one year ago, nobody was too sure what the Tesla Diner would be about. It seemed like an interesting concept, and considering it had been in the works for years, it was a highly anticipated launch that many were looking forward to.
Based on its success, we could see additional Diners with Superchargers built throughout the United States, and potentially beyond. Musk has said on several occasions that the company would be willing to bring the Diner idea to more markets.
Tesla makes major change at Supercharger Diner amid epic demand
Of the markets that Musk has mentioned, both Palo Alto and Austin have come to be perceived as ideal selections. However, there are no concrete plans as of now to build new Supercharger Diners anywhere; the location on Santa Monica Boulevard will remain the exclusive spot to pick up Tesla-inspired eats, at least for the time being.
Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.
Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to Bloomberg. Shares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.
Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.
However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.
S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.
Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.
At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner probably just secured more locations
Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings
