U.S. President Donald Trump formally launched tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China over the weekend, a decision that is widely expected to have sweeping implications for Tesla, other automakers, and a broad range of other industries.
The Trump administration announced the news on Saturday, effectively establishing a 25-percent tariff on Canadian and Mexican imports as well as a 10-percent tariff on products from China. The tariffs will go into effect on Tuesday, and they have already caused ripple effects and a larger trade war with some of the companies.
Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum spoke on the phone over the weekend, and while Sheinbaum hasn’t yet formalized or disclosed plans for counter-tariffs, Trudeau announced some on Saturday evening, according to Reuters. In the announcement, the Prime Minister said that Canada with also establish a 25-percent tariff on $155 billion worth of products from the U.S.
Trudeau has said that the government will release an updated list of products and tariff details, though the initial list included products such as certain appliances, beer, wine, lumber and other goods. He also says that the government plans to start with $30 billion on Tuesday, as followed by the additional $125 billion later this month.
The Trump administration says the tariffs are aimed at “addressing an emergency situation” related to the import of illegal drugs including fentanyl, along with pointing the blame at illegal immigrants.
“President Trump is taking bold action to hold Mexico, Canada, and China accountable to their promises of halting illegal immigration and stopping poisonous fentanyl and other drugs from flowing into our country,” the White House writes on its fact sheet dedicated to the order.
You can see the full fact sheet from the White House here, or check out the full executive order here.
Tesla joins group of automakers suing EU for EV tariffs from China-built cars
READ MORE ON U.S. PRODUCTION: Tesla Texas lithium refinery produces its first spodumene
Trump follows up, auto workers weigh in on how tariffs will affect the industry
On Sunday, Trump also followed up with a post on his Truth Social account in response to criticism:
The USA has major deficits with Canada, Mexico, and China (and almost all countries!), owes 36 Trillion Dollars, and we’re not going to be the “Stupid Country” any longer. MAKE YOUR PRODUCT IN THE USA AND THERE ARE NO TARIFFS! Why should the United States lose TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN SUBSIDIZING OTHER COUNTRIES, and why should these other countries pay a small fraction of the cost of what USA citizens pay for Drugs and Pharmaceuticals, as an example? THIS WILL BE THE GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICA! WILL THERE BE SOME PAIN? YES, MAYBE (AND MAYBE NOT!). BUT WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, AND IT WILL ALL BE WORTH THE PRICE THAT MUST BE PAID.
Following a repost of Trump’s words on X, community notes pointed to a TD Economics saying that the U.S. has had a trade surplus with Canada for the last sixteen years straight when not including the energy sector, or oil, natural gas and electricity.
Multiple others have weighed in on how the tariffs could affect the industry at large, highlighting the potential for price increases for the consumer, potential layoffs, and some even saying that it will shut the auto industry down altogether.
In a report from Bloomberg on Sunday, Flavio Volpe, the President of the Canada Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association, said that he doesn’t think the country’s auto parts makers will be able to remain profitable with the tariffs in place.
“The auto sector is going to shut down within a week,” Volpe said. “At 25 percent, absolutely nobody in our business is profitable by a long shot.”
Others have warned of even more immediate effects, especially for Canadian and Mexican cities and states whose communities rely heavily on automotive manufacturing. One such city includes Windsor, Ontario, where John D’Agnolo, the union president of a local Ford factory there, says substantial numbers of layoffs could be imminent.
“We’re talking about thousands and thousands of jobs being lost,” D’Agnolo said. “We’d truly be a ghost town, here in Windsor, if we lost this type of business.”
Ontario Premier Doug Ford has also warned that it could affect as many as 500,000 jobs across the province, which is Canada’s most populated, with many of those being automotive roles.
Many also expect the increased costs to be passed onto the consumer, though it’s still unclear exactly what the repercussions of the tariffs could be. We could also see businesses absorb some or all of these costs, though some initial research seems to suggest that buyers will see higher sticker prices across the industry.
“It is going to be a lot of impact,” Aruna Anand, chief executive officer of parts supplier Continental AG’s North American business, said in an interview. “The question is who is absorbing the price and it becomes, are we able to absorb that price or is it going to be shifted to the end consumer?”
In a separate report from Reuters on Saturday, it was suggested that automakers such as General Motors (GM) and Toyota could, however, shift more production from overseas factories to those in the U.S., while major aluminum manufacturer Alcoa is considering re-routing plans that could potentially reduce tariffs. Many electric vehicle (EV) battery materials also come from metal mining operations in China, with some of these sectors just beginning to emerge domestically.
Others also report that the move could “undermine competitiveness” in the American auto industry, ultimately increasing the cost of building cars in the U.S.
“Our American automakers … should not have their competitiveness undermined by tariffs that will raise the cost of building vehicles in the United States and stymie investment in the American workforce,” says Matt Blunt, the President of the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents Stellantis, GM and Ford.
During Tesla’s Q4 earnings call last week, Chief Financial Officer Vaibhav Taneja also warned that tariffs could affect profitability for the company, since its all of its production facilities utilize parts from around the globe.
“There’s a lot of uncertainty around tariffs,” Taneja said. “Over the years, we’ve tried to localize our supply chain in every market, but we are still very reliant on parts from across the world for all our businesses. Therefore, the imposition of tariffs, which is very likely, will have an impact on our business and profitability.”
It’s still not quite clear at this time how the tariffs may affect Tesla’s prices. While Tesla has regularly advertised having the “most American-made cars” with final assembly for the market taking place at its factories in Texas and California, the company also gets a significant amount of components from Canada.
In a filing with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in October, Tesla did disclose what percentage of its vehicle parts are made in either Canada or the U.S., as compared to other countries such as Mexico and Japan. Some of the figures also don’t disclose where the remaining amounts come from, though they can give users an idea of how many components come from Mexico compared to either the U.S. or Canada.
You can see that data for Tesla’s vehicles below, though it’s also worth noting that it does not show the ratio of U.S. to Canadian parts—just a combined percentage from the two countries. You can also view the full filing from the NHTSA here.
- Cybertruck: 65 percent from U.S. and Canada; 25 percent from Mexico
- Model 3 Long Range: 75 percent from U.S. and Canada; 20 percent from Mexico
- Model 3 Performance: 70 percent from U.S. and Canada; 20 percent from Mexico
- Model Y (all trims): 70 percent from U.S. and Canada; 25 percent from Mexico
- Model S: 65 percent from U.S. and Canada; 20 percent from Mexico
- Model X: 60 percent from U.S. and Canada; 25 percent from Mexico
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.
Tesla Mexico nearshoring concerns brought up by CMIC presidential candidate
Need accessories for your Tesla? Check out the Teslarati Marketplace:
Elon Musk
X changed how everyone gets paid, and this lawsuit shows why
X sued a Bitcoin account network over fake payouts as its creator pay model shifts
Elon Musk’s X has taken a Bitcoin-focused engagement ring to court, and the case doubles as a receipt for how differently the platform pays creators today. The company filed suit in the High Court of England and Wales against Vivek Kumar Sen and Zamyang Sherpa, alleging the pair ran six accounts, including @Vivek4real_, @Bitcoin_Teddy and @TrendingBitcoin, as one coordinated operation to fake the kind of engagement that used to translate directly into money.
According to the filing, first reported by Gizmodo, the accounts posted near identical “BREAKING” crypto headlines seconds apart, in one case 11 seconds, then had three more handles like, reply to and repost the material to manufacture what X called “a false appearance of genuine, human communication and interaction.” X says the scheme pulled in at least £207,384, about $278,000, and pegs its own investigation and remediation costs at another £75,000. The accounts were suspended August 18. X general counsel James Burnham announced the case on X last weekend, writing that the company “will act forcefully to protect our platform and the earnings of genuine creators.” Musk’s own reaction, posted shortly after, was three words: “Don’t mess with 𝕏.”
Don’t mess with 𝕏 https://t.co/HSmd5hL6aQ
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 21, 2026
The timing lines up with a a recent update to how X pays its creators. The program these accounts allegedly gamed, Creator Revenue Sharing, launched in mid 2023 and paid out based on how much a post got engaged with. Originality was never part of the formula, which is exactly how the platform ended up flooded with recycled clips, copy pasted “BREAKING” posts and replies engineered purely to farm reactions from paying subscribers.
X tried patching the model more than once, including an April cut to aggregator payouts and a March regional weighting change that Musk personally paused hours after it was announced. X retired Creator Revenue Sharing for good on September 7 and opened its replacement, Original Content Rewards, the next day.
Today, we’re launching Original Content Rewards.
The reality is that Revenue Sharing had reached a point where its incentives were misaligned. Creators should be focused on bringing net new content to the platform instead of maximizing payouts. We could have kept adding more… pic.twitter.com/VJIxqlPrjm
— Allegra Jacchia (@allegrajacchia) August 7, 2026
The new math is stricter. Payouts now come only from qualified impressions, meaning unique Home Timeline views from Premium subscribers where at least half the post is visible, and replies no longer count toward eligibility at all. Copied posts, reuploaded media and reposts without meaningful changes are explicitly excluded. Allegra Jacchia, senior product manager for Creators at SpaceXAI, which now runs X’s product and AI work following xAI’s acquisition of the platform, put it bluntly, saying the goal is to reward creators who bring original ideas and perspective, “not those who have become best at gaming the system.”
Read that way, the lawsuit isn’t really about six crypto accounts. It’s X putting a dollar figure on what the old incentive structure cost, then suing to collect it right as the new one goes live. For live updates on how the case and the new rewards program shake out, follow @Teslarati on X.
Elon Musk
Why automakers keep turning down Elon Musk’s Tesla Full Self-Driving offer
Elon Musk confirms no automaker has ever accepted Tesla’s offer to license Full Self-Driving software.
Elon Musk gave a brief answer on X Monday that confirmed that Tesla’s standing offer to license Full Self-Driving to other automakers still has zero takers. Sawyer Merritt wrote that “Tesla has for years openly invited other automakers to license FSD. None of them have accepted,” responding to a prediction from Boom Supersonic founder Blake Scholl that Tesla would eventually open FSD the way it opened its Supercharger network to rival brands. Musk’s reply to Merritt was one word: “Exactly.”
It is not the first time Musk has made this point. He said something similar in November, when he called legacy automakers reluctance to adopt FSD “crazy,” and Tesla has floated the offer publicly since at least 2021. Scholl’s prediction touches on something real. Once NACS became the de facto charging standard, adoption from Ford, GM, Rivian and others followed within about a year. FSD licensing was supposed to work the same way once Tesla built enough of a lead that switching made sense for everyone.
Tesla has for years openly invited other automakers to license FSD. None of them have accepted. https://t.co/kgz4idpoUM
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 22, 2026
The case for licensing now is stronger than it was two years ago. Waymo and Zoox are logging hundreds of thousands of unsupervised autonomous miles, along with Tesla’s own Robotaxi fleet. Every automaker still selling driver assist systems that lag FSD has given the robotaxi conversation to Tesla, Waymo and Zoox by default. Licensing FSD would let a GM or a Ford compete on the same field without spending a decade and billions of dollars building a stack from scratch, the same argument Tesla made when it opened the Supercharger network to bring more EVs onto its chargers.
But FSD is not a connector standard. As one reply to Musk’s post pointed out, licensing FSD is not a software license the way NACS was a plug spec. It requires adopting Tesla’s eight camera layout and its onboard compute architecture, meaning a licensee’s cars would effectively become Tesla hardware wearing someone else’s badge. That is the visible obstacle. The less visible one is data. A licensed FSD stack would report back the same telemetry Tesla collects from its own fleet, giving Tesla a continuous read on how a competitor’s cars are actually driven, where they struggle, and how often drivers intervene. For an automaker trying to build its own autonomy program, or simply trying to keep its build quality and safety record private, handing Tesla that visibility could be a bigger cost than the hardware bill. It is the reason the Supercharger comparison only goes so far. Opening a charging plug cost Tesla very little. Opening FSD would cost a rival something it cannot get back.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk drops a surprise update on Boring Company’s next big dig
Musk says Boring Company could shrink the Austin to San Antonio drive to just minutes.
Elon Musk says The Boring Company is working on what he called “a simple, precursor Hyperloop” tunnel connecting Austin and San Antonio, targeting speeds above 200 mph and cutting a drive that can take up to two and a half hours down to a consistent under 30 minutes. Musk posted the idea on X Sunday, in a reply to a repost of an AI generated video imagining a science fiction future with human colonies on other worlds, which he shared with the line “This is the future we shall bring into being.”
This is the future we shall bring into being pic.twitter.com/8aD0w8MDVc
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 20, 2026
The Boring Company’s own account picked up the idea in the same thread, adding a detail about how the trip would actually work: “Because Loop/Hyperloop is express (i.e. no intermediate stops), one could travel from an Austin parking lot to a favorite San Antonio restaurant in about 30 minutes. As long as they both have Loop stations.” That framing ties the proposed intercity link to the same station model the company already runs in Las Vegas, where riders enter the tunnel network through small, garage style stops rather than one central terminal.
This is not the company’s first run at the Austin to San Antonio corridor. Boring Company floated tunnels between the two cities as far back as 2021, and later competed for a separate San Antonio Loop project tied to the airport before that specific bid stalled. Pitches for tunnels in Chicago, Los Angeles, and a New York to Washington corridor have followed a similar pattern of big announcement without a shovel in the ground.
What is different this time is the balance sheet, especially since The Boring Company closed a 3 billion dollar funding round led by investors in the United Arab Emirates earlier this month at a valuation near 23 billion dollars, giving the tunneling company more capital to chase speculative projects than it had during its earlier Texas pitches. The company is also mid-build on two other intercity systems it has actually broken ground on, inc;luding a Nashville tunnel linking downtown to the airport, where a second boring machine finished commissioning in June, and its Las Vegas network, where the station count keeps climbing on paper faster than tunnels get dug.
That gap between announcement and execution is the reason to treat Sunday’s post as an opening bid rather than a project. A tunnel spanning roughly 80 miles between two metro areas, running at speeds Boring Company has not demonstrated over any real distance, would dwarf anything the company has built. For now, the Austin to San Antonio Hyperloop exists as a caption under an AI generated space video.
Tesla integrates Grok Bot into its vehicles for the ultimate personal assistant
X changed how everyone gets paid, and this lawsuit shows why
