News
Why Tesla’s road in India may end before it even starts
This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
For years, Indian citizens have pleaded with Tesla CEO Elon Musk about the possibility of the electric automaker building and delivering cars in the country. India, a large landmass that 1.366 billion people call home, has less than 1% of its 30 million cars being of an electric nature, the most sustainable way to operate a vehicle. However, Tesla aims to change that with an imminent entrance into India’s market. The problem is, Tesla’s road in India may end before it even begins, which would be a massive blow to the company and its supporters in the country, as Tesla fans have waited several years for any indication that the car company would finally make an appearance in their section of the world. But, strict regulations and inside political interests are halting the possibility, and it has people wondering whether the world’s leading electric car company will ever make it to the Indian automotive market.
Many of you who read Teslarati on a daily basis know that we have been tracking the situation in India since the early days. In fact, one of my first articles of 2021, while I was recovering from COVID-19 in January, was about the potential that Tesla had in India’s markets. Additionally, it seemed that some potential customers would be ready to order their first all-electric cars from the Silicon Valley-based electric car company by the time Q2 rolled around. However, these pieces of outlook from Musk were not met because the Indian government has shut down any attempt Tesla has made toward getting their products in the country without the hefty import duties. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem as if they will be going away soon, either, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has heavily supported the idea of local manufacturing efforts, will not be forced to leave his post or enter another election until 2024.
While local manufacturing is something Americans take a lot of pride in, especially with cars, there are undoubtedly advantages to building things domestically. First, companies must hire workers in the country that the business is stationed in. Next, the increase of manufacturing jobs not only improves the American economy, but it also provides job security for the millions of employees that are on assembly lines 40 hours (or more) a week. There are a lot of strengths in manufacturing things locally, but there is also room for foreign entities to bring their products into a market, especially if they can benefit a foreign economy like it does a domestic one.
Musk with Modi in 2015
This is something Tesla argued in its proposal letter to the Indian government a few weeks ago when it requested a reduction in import duties. The increase in Tesla imports would actually assist the country in developing a charging infrastructure, which would supply jobs to the energy sector and provide cleaner transportation options in a country where the climate and environment struggle heavily with smog and emissions. Additionally, Tesla would need a dedicated Service Center in several locations as India is a large country. Not to mention, showrooms would also provide some employment opportunities.
Musk has said that Tesla will not bring a Gigafactory to India without some sort of data that would support healthy demand, something that is obviously needed to justify building a near-billion dollar production plant in India. Doing this through imports is a tremendous idea, but 60% import taxes on sub-$40k vehicles, and 100% duties on $40,000 and up vehicles just will not get this done. Plain and simple. There needs to be some movement on the Indian government’s end.
However, the Indian politicians fail to realize that the economic and environmental advantages to having EVs in the country will be a better move long term. Instead, they fail to budge or even consider reducing import duties of any kind, at least to this point, which appears to discourage Tesla’s requests to enter the market. It would be a shame if no solution can be reached after this problem because I believe that the environmental impacts alone will be something that not only the Indian people will enjoy, but the people of the world will begin to see eventually. As the air begins to clear and the smog disperses, there could be a relative ease on the strong relationship with gas and oil India has. Sustainable energy could make its way to India within the next few years, and Tesla could see the potential for its biggest Gigafactory yet in India.
Think about the economic benefits a large-scale production facility could provide. Not only would it produce well-paying jobs, but it would also create a lot of them.
There are so many benefits for both Tesla and India if a deal can be worked out. But can it? In my opinion, Tesla may be better off delaying the India operation for another few years, when a fresh administration and new ideas can be thrown around about Tesla entering the market. It seems, for now, there won’t be much of a possibility, and Tesla may be better off expanding its efforts in the UK or elsewhere.
With that being said, I would love to hear how you feel about this issue. Is Tesla wasting its time trying to get things going in India? Should it try again in a few years? Do you feel progress can be made? Why or why not? If not India, then where should Tesla consider a new Gigafactory?
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
