A report shared over the weekend claims that the transition team for President-elect Donald Trump is looking to create a federal framework for self-driving vehicles—and to make the sector a top priority in the upcoming term.
Trump’s transition team is looking to create federal rules for the rollout of autonomous vehicles, according to people familiar with the matter in a report from Bloomberg on Sunday. The news comes as Tesla and others are developing and deploying autonomous vehicles, and as Elon Musk has officially been named a co-leader of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) for the Trump administration.
The sources also said that autonomy laws would be a major priority for the U.S. Department of Transportation after past efforts to increase the number of available permits for self-driving vehicles have been thwarted. According to additional people familiar with the matter who spoke under the condition of anonymity, the Trump team is also actively looking to find policy leaders to help develop the guidelines.
Currently, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) lets manufacturers deploy as many as 2,500 self-driving vehicles per year under a granted exemption, though attempts to increase allowed units to 100,000 have been unsuccessful. Self-driving vehicles without a steering wheel or accelerator pedals—such as Tesla’s recently unveiled Cybercab—aren’t currently permitted to be deployed en masse, but many think that such a move from Trump could accelerate the deployment of the technology.
Tesla, Waymo, and others developing self-driving vehicles
Currently, Tesla owners can purchase and use the company’s Supervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) to access semi-autonomous driving, though drivers are expected to be attentive and prepared to retake control of the vehicle at any moment. Tesla also unveiled its two-seat Cybercab last month, expected to be based on FSD and to enter production in 2026.
Below you can see our first ride in the Cybercab from the We, Robot unveiling event.
🎥: Our FULL first ride in the @Tesla Cybercab pic.twitter.com/6gR7OgKRCz— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 11, 2024
While Tesla doesn’t currently operate a paid ride-hailing service like the Alphabet-owned Waymo, or others working toward this model, the company has teased an app based on an FSD ride-hailing service in the past. Additionally, many within the Tesla community claim that FSD will be more scalable than its competitors, due in part to its training of an AI neural network using millions of clips of real-time driving footage from FSD Supervised users.
Other companies such as Amazon-owned Zoox, General Motors-run (GM-run) Cruise, and still many others have also deployed driverless ride-hailing services to varying degrees of success. While California has been one of a few states where self-driving services have been able to start deployment in limited quantities, autonomous driving has also come under fire from regulators and authorities following a few cases of accidents and traffic violations.
Nonetheless, the development of a federal framework for autonomous vehicles could affect how this happens on a national level—and it will likely come to the benefit of Musk and Tesla, especially given the CEO’s closeness with Trump.
Tesla’s next step of dominance comes from Trump EV tax credit policy: Wedbush
Elon Musk and Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency
Musk will lead Trump’s newly created DOGE division in tandem with Vivek Ramaswamy, with the department aiming to “dismantle government bureaucracy” and cut down on government spending. The Tesla CEO initially endorsed Trump in July during his presidential campaign, later forming the political action committee (PAC) America PAC in support of the now-President-elect.
In addition to the financial support, Musk was a vocal backer of Trump’s campaign at rallies and in online media appearances, saying last month that Trump “must win to preserve the Constitution and democracy.” Many have also debated whether Trump’s removal of the federal $7,500 electric vehicle (EV) tax credit would be bad for Tesla and other EV makers, though Musk has said that it will likely only benefit Tesla.
The recent support for Trump also follows an ongoing set of feuds Musk has had with President Joe Biden during his presidency, as was sparked by Tesla not being invited to the administration’s EV summit, and by Biden claiming that GM had been the leader in EV deployment. Musk said in July that Biden is “utterly controlled” by the United Automotive Workers (UAW), following multiple criticisms of the union in the past.
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.
Former Tesla executive warns of delays to European ADAS regulations
Elon Musk
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.
ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.
The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.
Additionally, ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.
The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.