Connect with us

News

Tesla on hold as Texas court debates Cybertruck factory impact on taxpayers

Published

on

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.

Tesla’s possible Cybertruck factory location in Travis County, TX. (Credit: Tesla)

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.

Advertisement
(Credit: Tesla)
(Credit: Tesla)

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.

Advertisement

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Advertisement
Comments

News

GM takes latest step to avoid disaster as EV efforts get derailed

There was an even larger step taken this morning, as the Detroit Free Press reported that GM was idling its Factory Zero plant in Michigan until late November, placing about 1,200 workers on indefinite layoff status.

Published

on

Credit: GM

General Motors has taken its latest step to avoid financial disaster as its electric vehicle efforts have been widely derailed.

GM’s electric vehicle manufacturing efforts started off hot, and CEO Mary Barra seemed to have a real hold on how the industry and consumers were starting to evolve toward sustainable powertrains. Even former President Joe Biden commended her as being a major force in the global transition to EVs.

However, the company’s plans have not gone as they’ve drawn them up. GM has reported some underwhelming delivery figures in recent quarters, and with the loss of the $7,500 tax credit, the company is planning for what is likely a substantial setback in its entire EV division.

Earlier this month, the company reported it would include a $1.6 billion charge in its quarterly earnings results from EV investments. It was the first true sign that things with GM’s EV projects were going to slow down.

There was an even larger step taken this morning, as the Detroit Free Press reported that GM was idling its Factory Zero plant in Michigan until late November, placing about 1,200 workers on indefinite layoff status.

Advertisement

This is in addition to the 280 employees it has already laid off after production cuts that happened earlier this year at the Detroit-Hamtramck plant.

After November 24, GM will bring back 3,200 people to work until January 5 to operate both shifts. On January 5, GM is expected to keep 1,200 workers on indefinite layoff.

GM is not the only legacy automaker to make a move like this, as Ford has also started to make a move that reflects a cautious tone regarding how far and how committed it can be to its EV efforts.

After the tax credit was lost, it seemed to be a game of who would be able to float their efforts longest without the government’s help. Tesla CEO Elon Musk long said that the loss of these subsidies would help the company and hurt its competitors, and so far, that is what we are seeing.

Elon Musk was right all along about Tesla’s rivals and EV subsidies

Advertisement

However, Tesla still has some things to figure out, including how its delivery numbers will be without the tax credit. Its best quarter came in Q3 as the credit was expiring, but Tesla did roll out some more affordable models after the turn of the quarter.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla expands Robotaxi geofence, but not the garage

This has broadened its geofence to nearly three times the size of Waymo’s current service area, which is great from a comparative standpoint. However, there seems to be something that also needs to be expanded as the geofence gets larger: the size of the Robotaxi fleet.

Published

on

Credit: Joe Tegtmeyer | X

Tesla has expanded its Robotaxi geofence four times, once as recently as this week.

However, the company has seemingly kept its fleet size relatively small compared to the size of the service area, making some people — even pro-Tesla influencers — ask for more transparency and an expansion of the number of vehicles it has operating.

Over the past four months, Tesla has done an excellent job of maintaining growth with its service area in Austin as it continues to roll out the early stages of what is the Robotaxi platform.

The most recent expansion brought its size from 170 square miles (440.298 sq. km) to 243 square miles (629.367 sq. km).

Tesla sends clear message to Waymo with latest Austin Robotaxi move

Advertisement

This has broadened its geofence to nearly three times the size of Waymo’s current service area, which is great from a comparative standpoint. However, there seems to be something that also needs to be expanded as the geofence gets larger: the size of the Robotaxi fleet.

Tesla has never revealed exactly how many Model Y vehicles it is using in Austin for its partially driverless ride-hailing service (We say partial because the Safety Monitor moves to the driver’s seat for freeway routes).

When it first launched Robotaxi, Tesla said it would be a small fleet size, between 10 and 20 vehicles. In late August, after its second expansion of the service area, it then said it “also increased the number of cars available by 50 percent.”

Tesla reveals it has expanded its Robotaxi fleet in Austin

The problem is, nobody knows how many cars were in the fleet to begin with, so there’s no real concrete figure on how many Robotaxis were available.

Advertisement

This has caused some frustration for users, who have talked about the inability to get rides smoothly. As the geofence has gotten larger, there has only been one mentioned increase in the fleet.

Tesla did not reveal any new figures or expansion plans in terms of fleet size in the recent Q3 Earnings Call, but there is still a true frustration among many because the company will not reveal an exact figure.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla recalls 6,197 Cybertrucks for light bar adhesive issue

On October 20, Tesla issued a voluntary recall of the impacted vehicles and has identified 619 warranty claims and just a single field report that is related to the issue. 

Published

on

Credit: Francisco Garcia (via Greggertruck on X)

Tesla has recalled 6,197 Cybertrucks for a light bar adhesive issue that was utilized by Service to install the aftermarket part.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), impacted vehicles may have had the light bar “inadvertently attached to the windshield using the incorrect surface primer.”

Tesla identified an issue with the light bar’s adhesion to glass back in February and worked for months to find a solution. In October, the company performed chemical testing as a part of an engineering study and determined the root cause as the BetaPrime primer it utilized, figuring out that it was not the right surface priming material to use for this specific application.

On October 20, Tesla issued a voluntary recall of the impacted vehicles and has identified 619 warranty claims and just a single field report that is related to the issue.

The component is manufactured by a Romanian company called Hella Romania S.R.L., but the issue is not the primer’s quality. Instead, it is simply the fact that it is not the correct adhesive for this specific type of application.

Advertisement

Tesla says there are no reports of injuries or deaths due to this issue, and it will be resolved. In the 473 report that the NHTSA released this morning, Tesla said:

“At no charge to customers, Tesla will inspect the service-installed optional off-road light bar accessory for delamination or damage and if either is present, replace the light bar with a new light bar adhered with tape and a positive mechanical attachment. If no delamination or damage is present, Tesla will retrofit the service-installed optional off-road light bar accessory with a positive mechanical attachment.”

This is the third recall applied to Cybertrucks this year, as one on March 18 highlighted the potential for exterior trim panels to detach while driving, and another earlier this month when the NHTSA said its front parking lights were too bright.

Tesla resolved the first with a free assembly replacement, while the headlight issue was fixed with an Over-the-Air software update earlier this week. Owners said there was a noticeable difference in the brightness of the lights now compared to previously.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending