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
Tesla ditches India after years of broken promises
Tesla has ditched its plans to build a factory in India after years of failed negotiations.
Tesla’s long-running effort to establish a manufacturing presence in India is officially over. India’s Minister of Heavy Industries H.D. Kumaraswamy confirmed on May 19, 2026 that Tesla has informed authorities it will not proceed with a manufacturing facility in the country.
Tesla first signaled serious interest in India around 2021, when it began hiring local staff and lobbying the Indian government for lower import tariffs. The ask was straightforward: reduce duties enough for Tesla to test the market with imported vehicles before committing capital to a local factory. India’s position was equally firm, with an ask of Tesla to commit to manufacturing first, then receive tariff relief. Neither side moved, and the talks quietly collapsed.
Tesla to open first India experience center in Mumbai on July 15
India had offered a policy that would reduce import duties from 110% down to 15% on EVs priced above $35,000, provided companies committed at least $500 million toward local manufacturing investment within three years. Tesla declined to participate. The tariff standoff was only part of the problem. Analysts pointed to significant gaps in India’s local supply chain, inadequate industrial infrastructure, and a mismatch between Tesla’s premium pricing and the purchasing power of India’s automotive market as additional factors that made the investment difficult to justify.
First signs of an unraveling relationship came in April 2024, when Musk abruptly cancelled a planned trip to India where he was set to meet Prime Minister Modi and announce Tesla’s market entry. By July 2024, Fortune reported that Tesla executives had stopped contacting Indian government officials entirely. The government at that point understood Tesla had capital constraints and no plans to invest.
The more fundamental issue is that Tesla’s existing factories are currently operating at approximately 60% capacity, making a commitment to building new manufacturing capacity in a new market difficult to defend to investors. Tesla will continue selling imported Model Y vehicles through its existing showrooms in Mumbai, Delhi, Gurugram, and Bengaluru, but local production is no longer part of the plan.
Elon Musk broke his silence regarding the jury decision to throw out the case against OpenAI and Sam Altman. The Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI frontman has already indicated that an appeal will be filed regarding the decision, which went against him yesterday.
A Federal jury dismissed this high-profile lawsuit after less than two hours of deliberation due to a statute-of-limitations issue.
In a strongly worded post on X on May 18, Musk addressed the federal jury’s dismissal of his high-profile lawsuit against OpenAI, vowing to appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision, according to Musk, was centered not on the substantive claims but on a statute-of-limitations technicality.
Musk’s lawsuit, filed in 2024, accused OpenAI co-founders Sam Altman and Greg Brockman of breaching the organization’s original nonprofit mission. OpenAI was established in 2015 as a non-profit dedicated to developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of all humanity, with Musk as a key early donor and co-founder before departing in 2018.
Musk alleged that Altman and Brockman improperly shifted the company toward a for-profit model, enriched themselves through massive valuations and partnerships (including with Microsoft), and betrayed founding agreements.
In his post, Musk emphasized that the judge and jury “never actually ruled on the merits of the case, just on a calendar technicality.” He stated unequivocally: “There is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is WHEN they did it!”
Regarding the OpenAI case, the judge & jury never actually ruled on the merits of the case, just on a calendar technicality.
There is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 18, 2026
Musk argued that allowing such actions to stand without review sets a dangerous precedent. “I will be filing an appeal with the Ninth Circuit, because creating a precedent to loot charities is incredibly destructive to charitable giving in America,” he wrote. He reiterated OpenAI’s founding purpose: “OpenAI was founded to benefit all of humanity.”
The jury’s unanimous advisory verdict found that Musk’s claims of breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment were filed outside California’s three-year statute of limitations. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers adopted the finding and dismissed the case. OpenAI hailed the outcome as vindication, while Musk’s legal team immediately signaled plans to appeal.
The trial, which featured testimony from Musk, Altman, Brockman, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, and others, exposed deep rifts in Silicon Valley over AI’s direction.
Musk has long warned that profit-driven AI development, especially with closed models and powerful corporate ties, risks endangering humanity—contrasting it with OpenAI’s original open, safety-focused charter. OpenAI countered that the suit stemmed from business rivalry and that Musk himself had explored for-profit paths earlier.
Musk’s appeal could prolong the saga, potentially affecting OpenAI’s valuation (reportedly over $800 billion) and IPO ambitions. Supporters view his stance as defending nonprofit integrity, while critics see it as sour grapes from a competitor whose own xAI is racing in the AI arena.
Regardless of the legal outcome, the case has spotlighted critical questions about trust, governance, and mission drift in the rapidly evolving AI industry. Musk’s willingness to fight on suggests this chapter is far from closed, with broader implications for how charitable organizations—and the tech giants born from them—operate in the future.
Elon Musk
NASA updated Artemis III and SpaceX’s role just got more complicated
SpaceX’s Starship is the key to NASA’s Moon plan and the timeline is already slipping.
SpaceX has been at the center of NASA’s Moon ambitions for five years, and the updated Artemis III plan recently released by NASA makes that relationship more visible than ever. In April 2021, NASA awarded SpaceX a $2.89 billion contract to develop the Starship Human Landing System, selecting it as the sole provider to land astronauts on the Moon under Artemis III. Blue Origin filed legal protests, lost, and eventually received its own contract, but SpaceX was always the program’s primary lander contractor.
The original plan called for Starship to land two astronauts on the lunar south pole. That mission slipped as Starship development ran behind schedule, and in February 2026, NASA officially revised the Artemis III architecture entirely. The mission will now remain in low Earth orbit and serve as a crewed rendezvous and docking test between the Orion spacecraft and both the SpaceX Starship HLS pathfinder and Blue Origin’s Blue Moon Mark 2 pathfinder, with the actual Moon landing pushed to Artemis IV in 2028.
What makes SpaceX’s position particularly significant is the direct line between this week’s Starship V3 launch and the Artemis timeline. The Starship HLS is essentially a modified version of the V3 upper stage, meaning SpaceX cannot realistically prepare a lander for a 2027 docking test until it has demonstrated that the base vehicle flies reliably at scale. Flight 12, targeting this week, is the first data point in that sequence.
NASA has spent nearly $7 billion on Human Landing System development since awarding contracts to SpaceX and Blue Origin in 2021 and 2023, and NASA administrator Jared Isaacman has indicated a desire to drive down costs going forward. As Teslarati reported, before Starship HLS can put anyone on the Moon it has to solve a problem no rocket has demonstrated at scale, which is refueling in orbit, requiring approximately ten tanker launches worth of propellant loaded into a depot before the lander has enough fuel to reach the lunar surface.
The Artemis III mission described by NASA is essentially a stress test for every system that needs to work before any of that happens.
SpaceX has gone from a launch contractor to the single most critical hardware provider in America’s return-to-the-Moon program. With an IPO targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation and Elon Musk’s compensation tied directly to Mars colonization, the pressure on every Starship milestone between now and 2028 has never been higher.
Tesla ditches India after years of broken promises
SpaceX reveals date for maiden Starship v3 launch
