News
Tesla on hold as Texas court debates Cybertruck factory impact on taxpayers
Texas county officials where Tesla is seriously considering a Cybertruck factory are still debating over an incentive package to help bring the electric carmaker to the Lone Star State.
After two nights of discussion on the pros and cons of the move, the Travis County Commissioners Court has again postponed a vote on the matter to a date next week; however, from the recent comments, it’s clear that while many local executives and business leaders are optimistic about the economic benefits of Tesla’s presence, they have concerns about taxpayers and worker benefits.
During the Court’s session on July 7th, itself a continuation of a discussion on the matter in the prior week, several community call-ins indicated a wariness towards large employers that may not have the local taxpayers and employees’ best interest at heart.
“We are enthusiastic about companies that would like to come and take advantage of our vibrant culture and economy. With regard to Tesla, we’d like to affirm they are welcome, and that as long as they are spending their own money they are welcome to come on their own terms. If, however, they want local taxpayers to help pay for their move, the county needs to hold Tesla accountable to the same standards that it holds itself accountable to. In particular…a livable minimum wage,” commented Michael Floyd, a leader within the All Saints’ Episcopal Church in central Texas.
Jessica Wolff, deputy policy director for Workers Defense Project added, “Tesla has said that they will provide 5,000 middle skilled jobs. Our community needs more transparency. We need specifics. What types of jobs? How many will be temporary vs. permanent? What are the starting wages and benefits each will receive?”
Notably, Tesla seems to have provided fairly specific wage and benefit information in a presentation considered by the Travis County Court on June 23rd this year. Tesla’s impact on the Reno, Nevada community surrounding Gigafactory 1 could also be a positive testament to the carmaker’s potential benefit to Texas.
Manuel Quinto-Pozos, representing the UAW and himself as an employment lawyer, agreed with Wolff’s comments and requested that Tesla expands on its concerns with previously discussed building standards. Jeremy Hendricks, representing local construction labor unions, also requested complete transparency in the onboarding process to ensure minimal pay and safety for workers. On a more negative note, caller Juan Bellman was completely opposed to any incentives being offered by the community. “I wanted to oppose Tesla receiving any economic development incentives,” he said bluntly. “As mentioned, I went to Travis High School and I know that my community does not need a multi-billion [dollar] company coming and receiving those taxes that I know the community needs more than them.”
The Court reconvened on July 8th where the call-in comments were more enthusiastic about the economic prospects from Tesla’s presence.
“I’m calling to urge you to approve this deal and bring Tesla to the region,” rallied executive director Ed Latson of Austin Regional Manufacturers Association (ARMA). “We think it’s an extraordinary opportunity, a political win, a cultural win, and an economic win that we have never seen. This court has the opportunity to bring hundreds of millions of dollars of economic impact to a region that has been neglected economically…[and]…impacted negatively by the current economic conditions and really give them skills and a pathway to the middle class.”
The incentives being discussed are property tax rebates worth around $15 million dollars over the course of ten years. In addition to economic incentives from Travis County, Tesla is pursuing a school tax abatement request with the Del Valle Independent School District which would save the company around $50 million over the same ten year time period. Their application package has been submitted and approved, but the District’s Board has yet to take a vote on the matter. Tesla’s decision on whether to make the Austin area its new home may hinge on gaining these tax approvals and community resistance may also explain CEO Elon Musk’s continued consideration of Tulsa, Oklahoma as an alternative location.
The Travis County Court again postponed a vote on the incentives after the July 8th session, the judge indicating that another discussion would be held on July 14th.
Tesla made a dramatic change to the Online Design Studio to show its plans for Full Self-Driving, a major part of the company’s plans moving forward, as CEO Elon Musk has been extremely clear on the direction moving forward.
With Tesla taking a stand and removing the ability to purchase Full Self-Driving outright next month, it is already taking steps to initiate that with owners and potential buyers.
On Thursday night, the company updated its Online Design Studio to reflect that in a new move that now lists the three purchase options that are currently available: Monthly Subscription, One-Time Purchase, or Add Later:
🚨 Check out the change Tesla made to its Online Design Studio:
It now lists the Monthly Subscription as an option for Full Self-Driving
It also shows the outright purchase option as expiring on February 14 pic.twitter.com/pM6Svmyy8d
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 23, 2026
This change replaces the former option for purchasing Full Self-Driving at the time of purchase, which was a simple and single box to purchase the suite outright. Subscriptions were activated through the vehicle exclusively.
However, with Musk announcing that Tesla would soon remove the outright purchase option, it is clearer than ever that the Subscription plan is where the company is headed.
The removal of the outright purchase option has been a polarizing topic among the Tesla community, especially considering that there are many people who are concerned about potential price increases or have been saving to purchase it for $8,000.
This would bring an end to the ability to pay for it once and never have to pay for it again. With the Subscription strategy, things are definitely going to change, and if people are paying for their cars monthly, it will essentially add $100 per month to their payment, pricing some people out. The price will increase as well, as Musk said on Thursday, as it improves in functionality.
I should also mention that the $99/month for supervised FSD will rise as FSD’s capabilities improve.
The massive value jump is when you can be on your phone or sleeping for the entire ride (unsupervised FSD). https://t.co/YDKhXN3aaG
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 23, 2026
Those skeptics have grown concerned that this will actually lower the take rate of Full Self-Driving. While it is understandable that FSD would increase in price as the capabilities improve, there are arguments for a tiered system that would allow owners to pay for features that they appreciate and can afford, which would help with data accumulation for the company.
Musk’s new compensation package also would require Tesla to have 10 million active FSD subscriptions, but people are not sure if this will move the needle in the correct direction. If Tesla can potentially offer a cheaper alternative that is not quite unsupervised, things could improve in terms of the number of owners who pay for it.
News
Tesla Model S completes first ever FSD Cannonball Run with zero interventions
The coast-to-coast drive marked the first time Tesla’s FSD system completed the iconic, 3,000-mile route end to end with no interventions.
A Tesla Model S has completed the first-ever full Cannonball Run using Full Self-Driving (FSD), traveling from Los Angeles to New York with zero interventions. The coast-to-coast drive marked the first time Tesla’s FSD system completed the iconic, 3,000-mile route end to end, fulfilling a long-discussed benchmark for autonomy.
A full FSD Cannonball Run
As per a report from The Drive, a 2024 Tesla Model S with AI4 and FSD v14.2.2.3 completed the 3,081-mile trip from Redondo Beach in Los Angeles to midtown Manhattan in New York City. The drive was completed by Alex Roy, a former automotive journalist and investor, along with a small team of autonomy experts.
Roy said FSD handled all driving tasks for the entirety of the route, including highway cruising, lane changes, navigation, and adverse weather conditions. The trip took a total of 58 hours and 22 minutes at an average speed of 64 mph, and about 10 hours were spent charging the vehicle. In later comments, Roy noted that he and his team cleaned out the Model S’ cameras during their stops to keep FSD’s performance optimal.Â
History made
The historic trip was quite impressive, considering that the journey was in the middle of winter. This meant that FSD didn’t just deal with other cars on the road. The vehicle also had to handle extreme cold, snow, ice, slush, and rain.
As per Roy in a post on X, FSD performed so well during the trip that the journey would have been completed faster if the Model S did not have people onboard. “Elon Musk was right. Once an autonomous vehicle is mature, most human input is error. A comedy of human errors added hours and hundreds of miles, but FSD stunned us with its consistent and comfortable behavior,” Roy wrote in a post on X.
Roy’s comments are quite notable as he has previously attempted Cannonball Runs using FSD on December 2024 and February 2025. Neither were zero intervention drives.
Elon Musk
Tesla removes Autopilot as standard, receives criticism online
The move leaves only Traffic Aware Cruise Control as standard equipment on new Tesla orders.
Tesla removed its basic Autopilot package as a standard feature in the United States. The move leaves only Traffic Aware Cruise Control as standard equipment on new Tesla orders, and shifts the company’s strategy towards paid Full Self-Driving subscriptions.
Tesla removes Autopilot
As per observations from the electric vehicle community on social media, Tesla no longer lists Autopilot as standard in its vehicles in the U.S. This suggests that features such as lane-centering and Autosteer have been removed as standard equipment. Previously, most Tesla vehicles came with Autopilot by default, which offers Traffic-Aware Cruise Control and Autosteer.
The change resulted in backlash from some Tesla owners and EV observers, particularly as competing automakers, including mainstream players like Toyota, offer features like lane-centering as standard on many models, including budget vehicles.
That being said, the removal of Autopilot suggests that Tesla is concentrating its autonomy roadmap around FSD subscriptions rather than bundled driver-assistance features. It would be interesting to see how Tesla manages its vehicles’ standard safety features, as it seems out of character for Tesla to make its cars less safe over time.
Musk announces FSD price increases
Following the Autopilot changes, Elon Musk stated on X that Tesla is planning to raise subscription prices for FSD as its capabilities improve. In a post on X, Musk stated that the current $99-per-month price for supervised FSD would increase over time, especially as the system itself becomes more robust.
“I should also mention that the $99/month for supervised FSD will rise as FSD’s capabilities improve. The massive value jump is when you can be on your phone or sleeping for the entire ride (Unsupervised FSD),” Musk wrote.
At the time of his recent post, Tesla still offers FSD as a one-time purchase for $8,000, but Elon Musk has confirmed that this option will be discontinued on February 14, leaving subscriptions as the only way to access the system.
Tesla makes big Full Self-Driving change to reflect future plans
Tesla Model S completes first ever FSD Cannonball Run with zero interventions
