Tesla vehicles in D.C. were vandalized with Elon Musk and anti-government graffiti.
Messages included sarcastic pro-Musk slogans caught clearly by Sentry Mode cams.
Washington police may pursue hate crime charges tied to political bias against Teslas.
It’s no secret that Tesla has become something of a cultural lightning rod, whether for its tech, its CEO, or the political baggage that now seems welded to its aluminum panels. And in the current climate, even scratching a Tesla could apparently land you in serious legal territory, at least in Washington, D.C., where the politics are as tangled as the city’s traffic circles.
Elon Musk and Tesla have grown so closely associated with the Trump-era political ecosystem that some officials in the nation’s capital are reportedly considering whether vandalism against the brand could be prosecuted as a hate crime. D.C. has long been a Democratic stronghold, but Mayor Muriel Bowser appears to be making moves in response to mounting pressure from the Trump administration, particularly after Trump’s recent threat to assert control over the District.
Last week, D.C.’s Metropolitan Police issued a press release announcing they are searching for two suspects who allegedly defaced Tesla vehicles in the district. According to the authorities, they “wrote political hate speech on to the victims’ Tesla vehicles then fled the scene.” The exterior cameras of the cars caught clear images of both suspects, although they were wearing sunglasses.
Vandalism, But Make It Political
Unlike some incidents elsewhere in the country, the Teslas weren’t torched, overturned, or otherwise wrecked. The damage was cosmetic, limited to what amounts to political graffiti. What’s perhaps the strangest thing about the whole situation is that much of the “hate speech” graffiti on the cars wasn’t even that dramatic.
According to Politico, which reviewed police reports, several sarcastic messages were left on the Teslas. These included statements like “Let’s do away with the administrative state! Buy a tesla!” while another said, “Go Doge I support Musk killing the dept of education.”
Another read, “I like what Musk is doing,” while one stated, “I Love Musk and hate the Fed Gov.t.” Possibly the most provocative was: “Ask me about my support of Nazis.” It’s a grab bag of chaotic energy, part satire, part performance art, part political Rorschach test.
Washington D.C. is one of just a few jurisdictions that describe “political affiliation,” with race, sex, and religion as categories of bias, meaning locals cannot discriminate against someone for being a Democrat or Republican. However, that doesn’t mean you can’t shun someone for their opinion.
“I would have a hard time seeing how anti-Elon Musk graffiti would constitute political affiliation discrimination,” Arizona State University law professor Michael Selmi said. “The real issue is there’s very little case law interpreting political affiliation in D.C. or in the few other jurisdictions that include it.”
Anyone who scrawls a swastika on a Tesla has obviously committed a hate crime https://t.co/EJFkYxDHrV
There are some other EV brands getting close to profits, including Xpeng and Leapmotor.
Tesla posted a 7.2 percent margin in 2024, narrowly ahead of BYD’s improving 6.4 percent.
Lucid reported a staggering -374 percent margin, leading the industry in unsustainable losses.
Electric vehicles might be the future, but profitability? That’s still a rare luxury in the EV world. An interesting study has revealed that just four EV-only brands are currently operating at a profit, while many others continue to bleed money at impressive rates. It probably won’t shock anyone that Tesla and BYD are leading the charge, but some of the other top-performing names are a bit less expected.
The study examined the operating income ratios of major EV brands and found that in 2024, Tesla reported an operating margin of 7.2%, putting it just ahead of BYD at 6.4%. However, while Tesla’s margin has declined since 2023, BYD’s has been climbing. If that trajectory holds, as many analysts expect, BYD could soon surpass Tesla in operating profitability.
Vertical Integration Pays Off
Key to the growth of both of these brands is that they are vertically integrated, helping them to scale and reach profitability sooner. The only other two brands analyzed by the study to have reached profitability are China’s Li Auto and the Series Group, which includes the Seres, Aito, and Landian brands.
While none of the other EV brands analyzed turned a profit in 2024, a few are edging closer. Zeekr, part of the Geely group, reported an operating margin of -8.5% last year. But with sales on the rise, it may soon begin delivering profits for its parent company. Xpeng and Leapmotor are also moving in the right direction, having more than halved their losses between 2023 and 2024.
Nio is another important player in China’s EV market, but not a profitable one. Its 2024 operating margin came in at over -30%, suggesting it still has a long climb ahead before it sees black ink on its balance sheet.
Tesla Stands Alone Outside China
Tesla remains the only non-Chinese EV brand to hit profitability. Polestar hasn’t crossed that threshold yet, though it did manage to reduce its losses in 2024. Similarly, Rivian also remains in the red, though like Polestar, it continues to receive substantial external funding.
At the other end of the spectrum, Lucid holds the dubious honor of running the steepest losses in the EV sector. According to data from Rho Motion, its 2024 operating margin was -374%. That’s an improvement from over -500% the year before, but still, not exactly a sign of financial health. Heavy backing from Saudi Arabia is helping Lucid stay afloat despite the massive shortfalls.
A new fire in Rome is the latest in a series of incidents targeting Tesla around the world.
High temperatures from the blaze damaged 17 EVs, and the surrounding structure.
No injuries were reported, and local authorities are currently investigating the cause of the fire.
A suspicious fire that tore through a Tesla dealership in Rome early Monday morning has left behind a scorched mess of metal and plenty of questions. At least 17 fully electric vehicles were destroyed in the blaze, marking the latest in a string of troubling incidents involving Tesla facilities around the globe.
The incident arrives amid growing backlash against Elon Musk, raising suspicions that this wasn’t just some random electrical mishap. While the exact cause remains under investigation, authorities have not ruled out arson. Fortunately, no one was injured, as the dealership was closed at the time of the fire. Still, the loss is significant, not just in property, but in what it might signal.
According to local media, emergency services were alerted around 4 a.m. on Monday, March 31. Police have since questioned the dealership’s owners and are combing through CCTV footage, Reuters reports.
The fire broke out at the Tesla store located at 48 Via Serracapriola in Rome. Drone footage shared by the YouTube channel Local Team shows the parking lot littered with charred vehicle shells. At least 16 Teslas appear to have suffered irreparable damage.
These cars were reportedly prepped and ready for delivery to customers. Furthermore, the shed covering them was also damaged by the intense heat, though the Tesla dealership’s main building seems to have escaped the worst of it.
A Brand Under Fire—Literally
The timing is hard to ignore. Just two days before the fire, the so-called “Tesla Takedown” movement organized protests outside more than 200 Tesla dealerships across Europe and North America. Most gatherings remained peaceful, but a handful of them escalated into vandalism—and now, possibly worse.
New Poll: American Voters Support Federal Investments in Electric Vehicles Broad, Bipartisan Support for EV Investments and Incentives that Lower Costs, Expand Access, and Help the U.S. Beat China in the Race for Auto Manufacturing WASHINGTON, D.C. – A new bipartisan national poll conducted by Meeting Street Insights and Hart Research finds broad public support …
With a simple tug, the Tesla saved this Ford F-150 from an area of deep snow.
Huge amounts of horsepower and torque help the EV in situations like this.
While the Tesla Cybertruck seems to be a regular target for ridicule, one example was recently able to tow out a Ford F-150 that got stuck in the snow somewhere in Canada. Although there’s a chance that the whole thing was staged, the clip does show that with a good set of rubber, the truck can put all of its electric power to good use.
These videos, shared on the Cybertruck Owners Club forum, were filmed by a group of friends who were out enjoying some snow-filled fun in both the Tesla and a Ford F-150. For reasons that are still unclear, the driver of the F-150 seemed to intentionally reverse into a snowbank just off the side of the road—promptly getting stuck, of course. Classic move.
Now, we could all roll our eyes and assume this whole thing was set up—perhaps the F-150 was driven into the snow just for the Tesla to save the day. But regardless of the setup, the video shows one thing: the Cybertruck can actually get things done when it’s not stuck itself.
Driving on snow can be difficult for any road-going vehicle, but this Cybertruck appears to have been aided by the fact that it rocks a set of Goodyear Wrangler Duratrac tires, providing it with better traction than the standard rubber. We’re not sure if it’s a dual-motor AWD version or a tri-motor Cyberbeast, but it apparently had more than enough power to pull out the Ford with ease.
Despite the occasional viral mishap, the Cybertruck’s electric motors and advanced electronics can be helpful in certain off-roading situations. For example, the Tesla has no trouble storming through some of the most difficult and famous rock-crawling areas in the United States, including ‘Hell’s Revenge’ and the ‘Hot Tub’ in Moab, Utah.
Rows of dead batteries stretch across some 30 acres of high desert, organized in piles and boxes that are covered to shield them from the western Nevada sun. This vast field is where Redwood Materials stores the batteries it harvests from electric vehicles, laptops, toothbrushes, and the litany of other gadgets powered by lithium-ion technology. They now await recycling at what is the largest such facility in the country.
Redwood was founded in 2017 by former Tesla executive JB Straubel and says it processes about three-quarters of all lithium-ion batteries recycled in the United States. It is among a growing number of operations that shred the packs that power modern life into what is called “black mass,” then recoup upwards of 95% of the lithium, cobalt, nickel, and other minerals they contain. Every ounce they recover is an ounce that doesn’t need to be dug from the ground.
Recycling could significantly reduce the need to extract virgin material, a process that is riddled with human rights and environmental concerns, such as the reliance on open pit mines in developing countries. Even beyond those worries, the Earth contains a finite source of minerals, and skyrocketing demand will squeeze supplies. The world currently extracts about 180,000 metric tons of lithium each year — and demand is expected to hit nearly 10 times that by 2050, as adoption of electric vehicles, battery storage, and other technology needed for a green transition surges. At those levels, there are only enough known reserves to last about 15 years. The projected runway for cobalt is even shorter.
Before hitting these theoretical limits, though, demand for the metals is likely to outstrip the world’s ability to economically and ethically mine them, said Beatrice Browning, an expert on battery recycling at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, which tracks the industry. “Recycling is going to plug that gap,” she told Grist.
Given these trends, the most remarkable thing about Redwood isn’t that it exists, but that it didn’t exist sooner. As the United States belatedly embraces the economic, national security, and environmental benefits that domestic battery recycling offers, it is trying to claw back market share from countries like South Korea, Japan, and especially China, which has a decades-long head start.
“There is this race in terms of EV recycling that people are trying to capitalize on,” said Brian Cunningham, program manager for battery research and development at the Department of Energy. “Everybody understands that, in the long term, developing these robust supply chains is going to be incredibly reliant on battery recycling.”
Eye on the future
Straubel’s recycling journey began while he was still the chief technology officer at Tesla, which he co-founded with Elon Musk, and three others, in 2003. One of his roles was establishing the company’s first domestic battery manufacturing facility, Gigafactory Nevada. Material for Tesla’s batteries came from mines around the world, and Straubel understood that the trend would accelerate alongside demand for EVs, which has quintupled in number in the U.S. since 2020. He also knew that, in the years ahead, a growing number of electric vehicles would reach the end of their lives. According to consulting firm Circular Energy Storage, the world’s supply of retired batteries is expected to grow tenfold by 2030.
“[We] need to be planning ahead and really keeping an eye toward what that future looks like, to be ready to recycle every one of those batteries,” Straubel said in 2023. “The worst thing we could do is go to all this destruction and trouble to mine it, refine it, build the product and then throw it away.”
JB Straubel, then-Tesla Motors chief technical officer, speaks during a ribbon cutting for a new Supercharger station outside of the Tesla Factory on August 16, 2013 in Fremont, California. (Photo by Justin Sullivan / Getty Images via Grist)
Last year, Redwood says it recycled 20 gigawatt-hours of lithium-ion batteries, or the equivalent of about a quarter-million EVs, generating $200 million in revenue. In addition to its headquarters in Carson City, Nevada, Redwood is building a campus in South Carolina. It isn’t alone in looking to expand. Ascend Elements, Cirba Solutions, Blue Whale Materials, and Li-Cycle are among a number of recyclers operating, or planning to operate, facilities in at least nine states across the country. More than 50 startups worldwide have attracted billions in investment in recent years. (Much of this outlay was driven by Biden-era legislation that Republicans are considering repealing, though it remains unclear just what such action might mean for spending already planned or underway.)
Despite the boom, the reuse revolution won’t come quickly.
Benchmark projects that recycled lithium and cobalt will account for a bit more than one-quarter of the global supply of those metals by 2040. A closed system in which battery manufacturers use only recycled material is considerably further off, because any increase in the number of old packs available to recycle will be outstripped by the need for new ones.
Global demand for EV batteries, for example, is growing by about 24% per year and won’t level off until sometime after 2040 — the point at which Benchmark’s forecast ends and growth is still forecast at 6% per year. The battery powering an EV can last well over a decade or more, so there will be a lag before the supply of recycled material catches up to demand.
Even today, the world’s recycling capacity outpaces the supply of batteries available to recycle, leaving everyone clambering to find more. That has meant waiting for EV batteries to reach the end of their lives, and attempting to recycle the small batteries in everyday gadgets that are often trashed. The dearth of material available for recycling is often attributed to the idea that only 5% of lithium batteries make it to companies like Redwood Materials. But the provenance of that number, cited everywhere from the Department of Energy and Ames National Laboratory to The New York Times and Grist, is murky.
“If you ever ask, ‘Where did that 5% number come from?’ no one can really track back to the data,” said Bryant Polzin, a process engineer at Argonne National Laboratory. Like other Department of Energy employees or affiliates quoted in this story, he spoke to Grist before President Trump was inaugurated. “I think it was just kind of a game of telephone.”
Argonne’s research pegs the recycling rate for all lithium-ion batteries originating in the U.S. at 54% — 10% domestically and 44% in China — though it notes that data reliability remains an issue. Even that number, though, falls considerably short of what’s possible: 99% of lead acid batteries, like those used to start cars, in the United States are recycled, according to the Battery Council International trade association.
Redwood works with many automakers, including Toyota, BMW and Volkswagen, to gather EV batteries, and goes into the field to collect others from automotive repair shops, salvage yards, and the like. Policy tweaks could help recyclers acquire more. In California, for example, a state working group recommended more clearly delineating when various entities in the supply chain — from the battery supplier and auto manufacturer to a dismantler or refurbisher — are responsible for ensuring a battery is recovered, reused, or recycled. This, the report said, could reduce the risk of “stranded” resources.
So far, though, this seems to be a rare occurrence. The much bigger hindrance to EV recycling in the U.S. is simply that there aren’t enough old batteries to meet the demand for new ones. As that waiting game unfolds, recycling those often discarded as household waste could help bridge the gap.
Collection is a challenge
Small lithium-ion batteries power everything from phones and electric toothbrushes to toys. By Benchmark’s estimate, about 5% of virgin lithium is used in consumer devices, but when they die, many of them are squirreled away in a drawer or trashed.
“A lot of household stuff does get chucked in the waste, and they’re not getting recycled,” said Andy Latham, the founder of Salvage Wire, a consulting firm focused on automotive battery recycling. Beyond being wasteful, dropping old batteries in the trash can be dangerous; scores of garbage trucks in cities from New York to Oregon have caught fire in recent years due to improperly disposed e-waste.
Data on just how much lithium is simply thrown away or hoarded remains elusive. But Latham says, in the short-term, batteries in portable electronics are “probably just as much, if not more of a factor” as those in EVs when it comes to advancing recycling. Redwood Materials, for one, is hoovering up as many as it can. It works with nonprofits and others to funnel them to its Nevada campus and hopes to establish drop-off locations at big-box retailers, similar to can and bottle collection in some states.
“Collection is definitely the biggest challenge,” said Alexis Georgeson, Redwood Materials’ vice president of government relations and policy. “It’s really a problem of how you get consumers to clean out their junk drawers.”
Until more people do that, recyclers count on a somewhat ironic source of material: Scraps from factories that make new batteries. One of Redwood’s primary feedstocks are the bits and pieces left over during the manufacturing process in places like Tesla’s Gigafactory, Georgeson said. Benchmark estimates that such leftovers represent about 84% of the material all battery recyclers use today.
The authors of the Argonne paper underscored how vital this material is: “If no scrap was available,” they wrote, “the development of the U.S. recycling industry might be significantly delayed.”
As more EVs hit the end of the road, consumer electronics are collected in greater numbers, and battery manufacturing yields less scrap as it grows more efficient, the composition of the material will adjust. New battery technologies could also have an impact, with emerging solid-state batteries, for example, expected to create more production waste in the short term but less in the long term. But few doubt recycling will be a thriving business that could help the country cut carbon emissions and decrease its dependency on places like China, Chile, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo for increasingly vital minerals. It’s a future that American policymakers are trying to shape, hasten, and prepare for.
Although under threat from President Donald Trump’s administration, both the Biden-era bipartisan infrastructure law and Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, explicitly aim to bring battery manufacturing to the United States. They provided billions of dollars in grants and tax credits to incentivize building out domestic capacity (often in Republican congressional districts). The consumer-facing EV tax credit also requires that manufacturers source a minimum amount of both minerals and components locally. The government has been investing hundreds of millions of dollars in battery recycling as well, including Department of Energy support for everything from collection systems for small electronics to research into improving recycling technology.
Redwood’s Tahoe Campus in Northern Nevada. (Photo courtesy of Redwood Materials)
“The work that we are funding is to really make those processes more efficient and economical,” said Jake Herb, technology development manager at the agency’s Vehicle Technologies Office. One success story is Ascend Elements, which Department of Energy funding helped grow from a Worcester Polytechnic Institute startup into a major player in the domestic industry. The department offered to loan Redwood Materials $2 billion to expand its factory, though the company declined the additional investment and says it has not accepted any federal funding. A robust domestic industry ensures that“we’re able to reclaim more materials [and] keep more of those materials domestic in the U.S.,” Herb said.
Federal role is unclear
Several challenges remain as the country sprints toward that goal.
One hurdle is figuring out when recycling is the best option. Argonne National Laboratory’s “battery material use hierarchy” puts recycling near the bottom of its list of possible outcomes. It’s better to find alternate uses for batteries, especially those from EVs, like refurbishing them for use in another car or directing them to less intensive applications, such as for energy storage.
“It would provide a much more economical solution to consumers,” said Vince Edivan, executive director of the Automotive Recyclers Association.
Still, this so-called “second life” market remains nascent in the U.S. Edivan says automakers could boost it by making it easier for salvage yards to assess a battery’s condition to determine whether it can be reused or should be recycled. They often consider that information proprietary, he said. “We’re shredding perfectly good batteries because we don’t know the state of health.”
It’s somewhat hazy who is supposed to regulate this rapidly growing industry. The Environmental Protection Agency considers lithium-ion batteries hazardous waste, which dictates how they should and shouldn’t be disposed of, but doesn’t directly address recycling. In 2021, Argonne signed on to help develop lithium recycling standards, though the status of that effort remains unclear. The task will likely fall to a patchwork of federal, state, and local authorities, which must keep the public both safe and confident in a process that will be critical to the country’s — and the climate’s — future.
Perhaps the biggest challenge to creating a full-cycle loop in the United States is that before any reclaimed material can be used in a battery, it must be refined into an intermediary product, such as cathode, which makes up approximately 40% of a battery’s value. “You can’t send lithium to a Gigafactory,” said Georgeson. “It is like sending sand to a computer factory.”
At the moment, no one is making cathode in the U.S. at scale — manufacturers are buying it from Asia. Redwood, Ascend Elements, and others are ramping up cathode facilities that should be online in the coming years (Panasonic plans to use Redwood cathode at its new battery plant in Kansas). But, for now, they are frequently selling their raw material abroad.
Georgeson sees federal policy as key to helping, or hindering, efforts to plug the cathode hole in the supply chain. One impediment has been a Treasury Department ruling that allows cathode sourced from allied countries to also qualify for the EV tax credit. That, she said, has pushed billions in business and investments to countries like South Korea instead of the United States.
It remains unclear exactly how the new administration will impact the industry, but President Trump could certainly upend it. If Congress rolls back the IRA’s investment and production tax credits, it could significantly handicap America’s burgeoning recycling buildout. On the other hand, tariffs, particularly aimed at China, could tip the economic scales toward American producers and recyclers by making imported batteries and their components more expensive.
Redwood, for one, is optimistic that its goal of onshoring both battery recycling and cathode production aligns with Trump’s goals of putting “America first.” Straubel has said that the Trump administration could do a lot to encourage a more robust domestic supply chain, including making the battery origin requirements of the EV tax credit more stringent — rather than scrapping the incentive entirely.
Getting the policy wrong, the company argues, will put the U.S. at the mercy of others in a future where battery recycling will only become more critical.
Blanca Begert contributed reporting to this story. This story is part of the Grist series Unearthed: The Mining Issue, which examines the global race to extract critical minerals for the clean energy transition.
How to get rid of your e-waste
Lithium-ion batteries can be found in laptops, phones, toothbrushes, Bluetooth speakers, and power tools, just to name a few things. But many people aren’t sure what to do with these gadgets once they die. Instead of tossing them in the trash, which can be dangerous, experts say to recycle them. Here’s how.
The nonprofit Call2Recycle operates some 16,000 sites nationwide where people can drop off their devices at no cost — at libraries, garbage dumps, and big box stores like Staples. The organization collected 5.4 million pounds of rechargeable batteries in 2023, and provides an online map to find a recycling location near you. Earth 911, Green Gadgets, and GreenCitizen also have locators.
Some cities offer curbside pickup, making recycling even easier. Call2Recycle, Electronic Recycling International, and others will take them by mail, usually for a fee. “Batteries sitting in a junk drawer or a box in the basement can accidentally cause a fire,”said Mia Roethlein, an environmental analyst at the Department of Environmental Conservation in Vermont, a national recycling leader. “Bring them to one of the free battery collection locations as soon as they are no longer usable.”
New York lawmakers are attempting to stop Tesla from selling directly to buyers in the state.
Tesla’s permits to sell directly could be offered to other EV firms, including Rivian.
The move by Democrat lawmakers is a response to CEO Elon Musk’s DOGE activities.
Some Tesla owners disgusted at CEO Elon Musk’s DOGE work for the US government, are selling their EVs, and some non-Tesla drivers are vandalizing the automaker’s EVs and property to show their displeasure. Now New York lawmakers are planning their own attack on Musk by attempting to remove Tesla’s right to sell directly to customers in the state.
Democrat senators are pushing to rescind permits granted in 2014 that allow Tesla to sell directly to consumers. Like several other US states, New York normally forbids direct sales, requiring automakers to sell through dealers. Even other EV makers such as Lucid and Rivian, which sell directly in other states, are not allowed to in New York.
State Sen. Pat Fahy is leading the charge to rip up Tesla’s right to operate at five locations, but the five permits wouldn’t disappear altogether. Instead, they could be offered to rival brands, though some lawmakers and dealer groups believe the permits should be axed because they give too much power to a small number of people.
A similar bill designed to end Tesla’s direct-sales freedoms has been introduced in Washington state, and a bill proposing sales limits be raised for direct-to-consumer outlets has stalled, Politico reports. And none of this is rooted in hatred for Tesla itself, but for the man at the head of the company.
Since President Trump moved back into the White House, Musk has focused his energy on the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), whose federal cost-cutting drive has left thousands of people unemployed. He has also caused outrage by attempting to win DOGE employees access to sensitive tax information of millions of Americans.
And restricting Tesla’s sales isn’t the only way lawmakers could hit Musk in the pocket. Fahy – an EV advocate – and other senators have written to New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, asking him to sell off Tesla shares owned by the New York State pension fund.
Tesla is preparing to launch in Saudi Arabia, which heavily supports Lucid Motors.
An event is scheduled for April 10 and a number of products will be showcased.
The company isn’t a stranger to the Middle East as it has locations in Jordan and Qatar.
Tesla is facing a number of headwinds as the company has to deal with an onslaught of Chinese competitors as well as customers who are fed up with Elon Musk. The combination has resulted in attacks in the United States as well as plummeting sales in Europe.
Amid that background, Tesla is eyeing new markets to improve its fortunes. The latest is Saudi Arabia as the company has sent out RSVPs for their opening in Riyadh.
The event takes place on April 10 and guests are invited to explore the company’s lineup and “step into a world powered by solar energy, sustained by batteries, and driven by electric vehicles.” The Cybercab and Optimus robot will apparently be in attendance, and Tesla noted employees will be on hand to answer questions about ownership, home charging, and more.
While Tesla is a newcomer to Saudi Arabia, the company already has a presence in the Middle East. In particular, there are stores and superchargers in Israel, Jordan, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.
Tesla’s entrance into the market is interesting to note as Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund has poured billions into Lucid. Part of this helped to fund a plant in the country, which has begun semi knocked-down assembly of the Air. However, it’s slated to become a fully fledged production facility “after the middle of the decade.”
That isn’t the only thing making the situation awkward as Reuters noted Musk was originally banking on Saudi money to take Tesla private. This led to his infamous “funding secured” tweet, which turned out to be nonsense.
The publication also noted EVs only account for 1% of sales in the oil-rich country. This suggests Tesla’s sales problems are far from over.
The force of the impact has ripped off one of the Model Y’s front wheels.
While the bodywork has seen better days, the Launch Edition still turns on.
This appears to be one of the first 2026 Model Y Juniper’s wrecked in the US.
The first US deliveries of the revamped Tesla Model Y ‘Juniper’ in Launch Edition trim only kicked off earlier this month, and already, one has met an untimely end in a crash. While it’s unclear whether the driver of this particular Model Y was responsible for the havoc it now finds itself in, there’s probably not much point in trying to rescue it. If anything, it might be better off as a donor car for parts.
The electric vehicle is up for sale at Copart’s Houston, Texas, facility, which suggests it may never have strayed far from its birthplace in the Lone Star State. The driver’s side of the Model Y still looks spotless, but the same can’t be said for the passenger side, which is an absolute mess.
Major Damage
One of the Tesla’s front wheels has been torn off, complete with the hub, brake caliper, and brake disc, only leaving behind some suspension arms. The front quarter panel has also been destroyed and is covered in deep dents and scratches. Additionally, the front door has been ruined, as has the wing mirror.
Listings like this never provide details about how a vehicle ended up in such a sorry state, but it’s safe to assume this Model Y took a hefty hit because ripping off a wheel and hub like this doesn’t happen in a minor fender bender. Curiously, the impact does not appear to have triggered any of the Model Y’s airbags, which is a bit of a head-scratcher.
Photos Copart
On the bright side, the cabin appears to be in decent shape, although it could do with a thorough cleaning. A look at the car’s infotainment screen reveals it has just 197 miles (317 km) under its belt and was fitted with Full Self-Driving, which comes as standard on all Launch Edition trims.
The listing also confirms that the EV still powers on, which suggests that the battery pack and electric motors might have come through the crash relatively unscathed.
So, if you had the money to pick up this wrecked Model Y, would you try your hand at fixing it and getting it back on the road, or would you strip it for parts and make some cash off the more valuable components?
So, if you had the cash to pick up this wrecked Model Y, would you attempt to repair it and get it back on the road, or would you strip it for parts and cash in on some of the pricier components? And just for kicks, how much do you think this thing is worth in its current state—keep in mind, the original MSRP was $59,990?
Up until now, the Model Y Juniper has only been available in the Launch Edition in the USA.
However, inventory of the pre-facelift Model Y is quickly dwindling, with very few still on sale.
Tesla is likely preparing to release the “normal” versions of the updated Model Y in the States.
Time is running out for anyone still holding out for the outgoing version of the Model Y—whether it’s for its looks or the eye-popping discounts that stretch to nearly $9,000. Tesla still has a few left, but as of now, there are fewer than 50 available across the US, signaling that the normal Model Y Juniper is likely just around the corner. Of course, that number’s been fluctuating since the weekend, bouncing between 40 and 190, so don’t get too comfortable yet.
Early adopters have already had a taste of the Model Y Juniper, but it’s been limited to the Launch Edition trim so far. And as you’d expect from something called “Launch Edition,” it’s not cheap. The base price of this version is $59,990. You’re paying a premium for all the extras—think special paint colors and the $7,500 Full Self-Driving option, which is bundled in at no extra charge. But hey, at least you get all the bells and whistles.
Elsewhere in the world, the “normal” versions of the updated Model Y are already on sale. In the US, though, Model Y buyers have just two options: they can pay more for the fully-loaded Juniper Launch Edition, or snap up one of the old versions still lingering in Tesla’s inventory, since orders for the pre-facelift model are no longer being accepted.
According to Tesla-Info, there are just 43 pre-facelift cars left in the country and, logically, Tesla should be getting ready to launch the “normal” Model Y Juniper. No doubt, interested buyers will be happy about the news.
The updated Model Y is significantly nipped and tucked compared to the outgoing one. The footprint is nearly identical, but the exterior styling is dramatically different. The new car takes on much the same lighting design as the Cybertruck and the curves are a touch sleeker. The cabin has also been updated with higher-quality materials, more screens, LEDs, new ventilated front seats and more.
That said, if you’re still holding out for a deal on the older version, time is running short. As of now, there are no Standard Range versions left, but there are still 10 Long Range AWD models and 33 Performance variants scattered across the country, with discounts ranging from $1,610 to $8,750.
As we’ve pointed out before, the old 470 hp Model Y Performance is incredibly fast and very practical. And, for as little as $32K—if you qualify for the $7,500 federal tax credit, plus any additional state-level EV incentives—it’s essentially a steal for what you’re getting. So, if you’re on the fence, now might be the time to snag one before they’re gone, unless you absolutely have your heart set on the Juniper.
Lancia’s European sales plummeted by 73% in January and February compared to 2024.
Tesla, Smart, and Jaguar also struggled with significant sales declines to start 2025.
Sales of gasoline and diesel vehicles continue to fall while EV and hybrid sales surge.
Tesla has been dominating headlines lately, largely due to its plummeting sales in Europe and other global markets. But here’s the thing: it’s not just Elon Musk’s electric empire in trouble. Lancia is facing its own crisis, with sales in Europe dropping by a staggering 73% so far in 2025. This steep decline makes it clear that the so-called “rebirth” of the Italian brand is going to be anything but smooth.
According to official sales data for the EU, EFTA, and UK regions provided by the ACEA (European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association), Lancia sold just 2,208 units in January and February 2025, a steep drop from 8,098 units during the same period last year. This decline is particularly striking considering the launch of a new generation of the Lancia Ypsilon supermini and the brand’s expansion outside Italy for the first time in years.
For a bit of perspective, the old Lancia Ypsilon—discontinued after 13 years—sold nearly four times more units in the first two months of last year than the all-new, shiny model did. To make matters worse, the former was only available in Italy, while the new Ypsilon has already expanded to markets like France, Spain, Belgium, and the Netherlands. A drop of that magnitude certainly raises some serious questions.
Lancia’s Price Tag Problem
So, why this massive dip in sales? Well, one of the biggest factors is likely the higher pricing on the new Ypsilon’s mild-hybrid and electric variants compared to the non-electrified predecessor – something we’ve also seen with Stellantis brands in North America as well.
For a brand that’s been absent from many European markets for so long, it’s not surprising that buyers might be reluctant to shell out more cash for a car that feels a bit… neglected. Competing with well-established supermini brands doesn’t exactly help Lancia’s case, either.
Lancia is looking to rebound by opening 70 new showrooms across Europe by the end of 2025. Whether that’ll generate any real traction for the brand remains to be seen. The Ypsilon will eventually be joined by the Gamma flagship crossover in 2026, followed by a new version of the Delta hatchback in 2028.
Other Winners And Losers
Lancia isn’t the only one with a rough start to 2025. Alongside the 72.7% drop in Lancia’s sales, Tesla is also seeing a significant slump, with a 42.6% drop. Other brands experiencing notable sales declines include Smart (-55.4%), Jaguar (-53.4%), and Mitsubishi (-35.4%). Meanwhile, Stellantis brands like DS (-30.3%), Opel/Vauxhall (-27.2%), and Fiat (-26.9%) are all struggling. Porsche isn’t immune either, down 23.2% this year.
On the flip side, some brands are clearly having a moment. Alpine, for example, has seen a massive 137.8% sales increase, largely thanks to the launch of the A290 GT hot hatch. Cupra is also having a great year, up 42.3%, with 40,869 units sold, just shy of Seat’s 42,212 sales for the same period.
For Stellantis, Alfa Romeo is a bright spot with a 29.6% boost in sales, mostly thanks to the Junior subcompact SUV, which contributed 9,788 sales in just two months. Other companies enjoying positive results include Lexus (+32.2%), SAIC (+21.2%), and Renault (+18.5%). Volkswagen also saw a healthy 12% increase in sales, reaching 216,565 units. VW is currently the only brand with a double-digit market share in the EU, EFTA, and UK regions, holding steady at 11.1%.
Overall, the VW Group leads in Europe, having sold 525,346 units, up 4.3%. Stellantis follows with 310,091 sales, down 16.1%, while Renault Group (205,005 sales / +8.2%), Hyundai Group (156,526 sales / -5.5%), and Toyota Group (151,589 sales / -4.9%) round out the top five.
Europeans Love Hybrids And BEVs
On the powertrain front, Europeans are clearly embracing electrification. In the first two months of 2025, hybrid vehicles saw a significant jump, with 687,709 units sold, a 17.6% increase. EVs also continued their upward trajectory, with 330,584 units sold, marking a 31.4% increase.
Meanwhile, more traditional gasoline-powered cars saw a sharp decline, with sales dropping by 21.9% to 562,513 units. Diesel vehicles didn’t fare much better, falling by 27.5% to just 172,758 units.
Chinese-owned brands outperformed Tesla in the European car market in February.
Tesla registered 15,700 EVs last month compared with 19,800 for Chinese brands.
BYD, Polestar and XPeng all gained ground in Europe while Tesla lost market share.
What a difference a year makes. Rewind the clock to early 2024 and Tesla’s European arm was basking in the glory of becoming the best-selling electric brand in the region for the whole of 2023, and the first company to put an EV – the Model Y – on top of the the overall sales chart.
Now, fresh sales data from 28 key markets, including the EU, the UK, Norway, and Switzerland, shows that not only are Tesla’s sales down, but the American EV brand is also being collectively outperformed by Chinese-owned automakers.
Figures from Jato Dynamics reveal Tesla sold 15,700 cars in February 2025, down from 28,100 a year earlier, a drop of 44 percent against an EV market that was up by 26 percent to 164,100 units. Chinese-owned brands clocked up 19,800 sales this February, throwing serious shade in Tesla’s direction and leaving us in no doubt that China is making serious inroads into the European car market. And it’s only just started.
Tesla’s Market Share Takes a Hit
Tesla’s poor performance cut its market share to 9.6 percent, its worst February showing for five years, and the automaker’s year-to-date market share is down from 18.4 percent to 7.7 percent compared with 2024’s numbers. One partial explanation for that is the arrival of the facelifted Model Y ‘Juniper,’ which was revealed in January of this year, but wasn’t immediately available in Europe. It’s only natural that buyers would want to wait for the new-look SUV.
Model Y sales fell 56 percent to 8,800 units, while Model 3 sales fell by a less extreme (but still worrying) 14 percent to 6,800 units, which Jato says indicates Tesla’s overall slide is less to do with anti-Elon Musk sentiment than the imminent arrival of the the new Y.
EV Sales by Brand, Feb 25
#
Brand
Sales Feb-25
VS Feb-24
1
Volkswagen
19,565
+180%
2
Tesla
15,737
-44%
3
BMW
13,475
+20%
4
Audi
9,868
+70%
5
Renault
9,387
+96%
6
Kia
8,153
+56%
7
Mercedes
7,363
+5%
8
Peugeot
7,200
+1%
9
Skoda
6,922
+63%
10
Volvo
6,656
-30%
11
Hyundai
6,528
+47%
12
Citroen
6,202
+190%
13
Cupra
5,861
+179%
14
Mini
5,123
+804%
15
BYD
4,436
+94%
16
Opel/Vauxhall
3,772
+57%
17
Ford
3,339
+146%
18
Dacia
2,934
+7%
19
Toyota
2,566
+52%
20
Porsche
2,521
+459%
21
Polestar
2,405
+84%
22
MG
2,260
-67%
23
Nissan
2,205
+24%
24
Fiat
2,013
-47%
25
Xpeng
1,034
+259%
Data: Jato Dynamics
SWIPE
VW, Chinese Brands, and the New Wave
Whether the new model can fully reverse the slide remains to be seen, but we doubt it. The Juniper changes aren’t that comprehensive and Chinese brands (and legacy Western ones) are only increasing their attack on Tesla. BYD’s sales grew 94 percent to 4,436, Polestar was up 84 percent to 2,405, and newcomer XPeng logged 1,034 sales, representing an increase of 259 percent from February 2024.
The best-performing brand in terms of EV sales, however, was VW, whose registrations boomed 180 percent to 19,600. The German brand’s ID.4 was the third-best-selling EV behind the Model 3 and Model Y, and VW,’s ID.7 and ID.3 were in fifth and sixth spot, separated from the ID.4 by Renault’s Car of the Year-winning 5.
The FBI has issued an alert related to attacks on Tesla cars and dealerships.
Warning instructs Americans to be vigilant, especially near the brand’s showrooms.
The attacks are rooted in the vandals’ upset at CEO Elon Musk’s DOGE activities.
In a sign of how serious attacks on Tesla vehicles and Tesla-related property has now got, the FBI has waded into the furore. The Bureau this week issued a public alert over the violence, which the government says counts as domestic terrorism.
In an announcement titled ‘Individuals Target Tesla Vehicles and Dealerships Nationwide with Arson, Gunfire, and Vandalism,’ the FBI warns the American public about recent incidents that have occurred in at least nine states these past few months.
“These incidents have involved arson, gunfire, and vandalism, including graffiti expressing grievances against those the perpetrators perceive to be racists, fascists, or political opponents,” the alert says. “These criminal actions appear to have been conducted by lone offenders, and all known incidents occurred at night.”
The bureau gives no weight to Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s claim that the attackers are being funded by leftist organizations and says the vandals are operating alone, not in coordinated groups. It warns members of the public to ‘exercise vigilance’ and be on the lookout for suspicious activity in areas where Tesla dealerships or facilities, such as depots, charging stations, and plants, are located. The alert asks anyone aware of a threat against Tesla to contact their local FBI field office.
For the past two months, we’ve become used to seeing and hearing media coverage of people spraying graffiti on Tesla cars, shooting them, and setting them on fire. Some of the automaker’s dealerships have also come in for similar treatment.
The attacks aren’t specifically related to Tesla itself but are the result of anger at CEO Elon Musk’s work for the new Trump administration. As head of the newly-created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Musk has been responsible for thousands of federal employees losing their jobs.
Last week US Attorney General Pam Bondi announced charges against three people for the “violent destruction of Tesla properties” using Molotov cocktails. Around the same time, Musk revealed that Tesla was activating the camera-based Sentry Mode security system on all its parked cars in an effort to identify vandals.
A record number of Tesla owners are reportedly trading in their vehicles for something else.
The percent of trade-ins climbed from 0.4% to 1.4% in a year and could go higher.
Tesla owners have faced insults and attacks in the wake of Elon Musk’s ascension to power.
Tesla owners are feeling the wrath of many people over Elon Musk’s political transformation and it appears a number of them have had enough. That’s according to new data, which has shown a surge in trade-ins.
Citing Edmunds data, Reutersis reporting that “Tesla cars from model year 2017 or newer accounted for 1.4% of all the vehicles traded in until March 15.” That’s up from 0.4% last year and marks a significant increase.
CNBC noted this is a record level of Tesla trade-ins towards vehicles from other brands. So what’s behind the increase? There’s likely a variety of factors at play, including new competitors in the EV space.
Of course, there’s little doubt that Musk’s close association to President Trump and his status as de facto leader of the Department of Government Efficiency is also playing a role. Sheryl Crow famously ditched her Tesla and said “There comes a time when you have to decide who you are willing to align with.”
Attacks on Tesla dealerships have been grabbing headlines and U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi recently stated that “If you join this wave of domestic terrorism against Tesla properties, the Department of Justice will put you behind bars.” However, Tesla owners have also been targeted by hate.
Multiple owners have reported being flipped off or sworn at, while other cases are far more serious. These involve actual vandalism, which can range from vehicles getting keyed to set on fire.
Regardless of what’s behind the shift, Edmunds’ Jessica Caldwell said the change in “Tesla consumer sentiment could create an opportunity for legacy automakers and EV startups to gain ground.” In essence, those turned off by Musk could replace their EVs with models from competitors – which might be good news for the latter, but obviously not for Tesla which is not in the best of shapes when it comes to sales lately.
Tesla’s website still contains a reservation page for the vaporware Roadster.
The two-door EV can be reserved for $50k, but there’s still no official launch date.
Elon Musk revealed the Roadster in 2017, claiming it would be available in 2020.
This year, there’s hope we’ll get a look at Tesla’s long-awaited affordable EV, which some sources claim will be a “shorter” Model Y, costing at least 20 percent less to build and promising to shake up the industry all over again.You won’t find any trace of it on the automaker’s website right now, but at the same time they’re more than happy to take $50,000 off you to reserve another mythical EV that’s been even longer in the making.
That car is the second-generation Roadster, which Elon Musk unveiled way back in November 2017. Almost eight years on Tesla is still taking deposits even though the website contains no information on when reservation holders might expect to have their sports cars delivered.
Production Deadlines Keep Slipping
Musk originally claimed it would enter production in 2020, but that date slipped to 2021, then 2022, 2023, and now 2024. You can see a pattern here, right? Last fall, some months after suggesting a 2025 build date, Musk thanked Roadster deposit holders for their patience and said the company was close to finalizing the design, but warned that mainstream models would always take priority in terms of development.
Of course, this doesn’t even scratch the surface of the more colorful claims made over the years. We’re talking about promises of sub-one-second 0-60 mph times and a SpaceX-branded option package featuring ten rocket thrusters allegedly capable of improving acceleration, top speed, braking, cornering, and maybe even allowing the thing to fly At this point, it feels like the only limit is the imagination… or physics.
Although the Roadster doesn’t appear on the website alongside cars like the Model 3, Model Y and Cybertruck in Tesla’s drop-down menu when you click the ‘vehicles’ tab, it is listed in a separate menu to the right, along with the Semi electric commercial truck.
$50,000 For A Placeholder
Click that link and a page opens up containing various CGI images of a red Roadster both with and without its targa top in place, as well as a video of the presentation Elon Musk made years ago. Text on the page promises zero to 60 mph (96 km/h) in 1.9 seconds, an 8.8-second quarter mile (400 m) time, 250+ mph (402 km/h) top speed and 620-mile range. It also says the Roadster will be all-wheel drive and, unlike most rivals, have seating for four.
A ‘Reserve Now’ button takes you to a simple reservation page on the Tesla US website that features a single profile image of a red Roadster and offers no configuration, color or trim options. Tesla doesn’t even give a ballpark estimate on price, though years earlier it listed the EV at $200,000-250,000.
But Tesla fans not put off by the lack of concrete info are invited to place an initial $5,000 deposit using a credit card, and are told they’ll need to send an additional $45,000 the brand’s way via wire transfer in 10 days’ time. It also warns that reservations are not confirmed until the hefty wire transfer part of the deal has been completed.
It’s now almost eight years since we first saw the Roadster, an entire life cycle in car terms, so it’s unknown whether when the car does finally arrive this year or the next (or the year after that…) it will be the same one that was promised in 2017 – and what’s still promised on the retail website.
That being said, do you think the Roadster would still make a splash if it debuted with that design and those specs, or is it now looking a bit stale? Leave a comment and let us know.
Disused parking lots in Canada are filled with rows of brand new Tesla EVs.
The cars appeared after 8,600 were registered in four locations one weekend.
The unusual spike occurred just before Canada put a hold on iZEV subsidies.
Tesla was accused by the Canadian Automobile Dealers Association (CADA) of cheating legitimate car dealers and buyers in Canada out of iZEV subsidies earlier this month. Critics have now grown even more suspicious after footage emerged of hundreds of new Tesla EVs left in disused parking lots.
Canadian media discovered huge fleets of brand new Model 3s and Model Ys languishing in the lot of an old strip mall in Toronto, conveniently located across the street from a Tesla dealership. Hundreds of miles away in Laval, Quebec, reporters founds scores more Teslas jammed into parking bays in another lot.
A staggering 8,600 cars were registered in just three days at four Tesla retail outlets in Canada, which breaks down as one car every minute, 24 hours a day for three straight days, even when the stores were closed. That kind of activity is highly unusual, but what really raised eyebrows was the timing of the sales flurry.
The sales came during a period when demand for Teslas in Canada had tanked, in part due to CEO Elon Musk’s association with President Trump, who has threatened to impose significant import tariffs and repeatedly suggested that Canada could become the USA’s 51st state. But the sales also occurred right before the country paused its iZEV electric vehicle subsidy program, leading some to suggests Tesla had gamed the system.
Tesla filed for C$43.1 million (US$30M) in rebates, which represented more than half of the remaining C$71.8 million (US$50M) allocated for EV rebates, and has left many Canadian car dealers out of pocket. They had fronted the discount themselves for each car they’d sold on the understanding that they’d be able to recoup the money from the Canadian government, but that might not now happen.
One dealer CTV News spoke to said he was C$400k ($279k) down because Tesla’s sales rush meant he hadn’t had chance to claim before the program was shut down.
Tesla better hope the vandals behind recent attacks on its cars and showrooms don’t watch the news, because hundreds of Model 3s and Model Ys parked up together sounds like a dream come true for protestors. We’ve asked Tesla—who famously disbanded its press team in the US—about the lots full of cars, but so far, we haven’t received a response.
A Tesla owner just repeated Mark Rober’s fake road wall test.
In some tests, they achieved the same result and in others, not.
The differences appears to be due to newer versions of FSD.
Earlier this week, Mark Rober sparked off a giant online battle by testing autonomous driving tech. In a long video, titled Can You Fool A Self Driving Car?, he set lidar against optical systems like the ones Tesla uses. The result? Instant backlash, praise, confusion—basically, the whole internet lost its mind. Now, someone else has re-run the same test, and, unsurprisingly, the results are both familiar and a little bit different.
In short, lidar tends to see more clearly, and more accurately, in certain situations compared to optical systems. That shouldn’t be much of a surprise, as after all, it’s a high-definition radar system that can sense objects in complete darkness.
Nevertheless, when Rober’s video highlighted Tesla’s failure to detect a wall that looked like a real road, fans of the brand came out with their pitchforks, so to speak. To their credit, Rober’s test didn’t use Full Self-Driving (Supervised) but rather Autopilot.
That’s where Kyle Paul, a Tesla owner himself, comes into play. He decided to rerun the same test with the same general parameters, but this time using FSD rather than Autopilot. He printed out his own wall that looked just like the real road it sat on and drove his Model Y up to it multiple times.
In every test, the Tesla failed to see the wall until he was literally inches away from it. As Rober suggested in an interview, it’s plausible that the ultrasonic parking sensors noticed the wall rather than the autonomous driving tech.
That said, Paul then switched things up by bringing in a Cybertruck to run the same test. Interestingly, it passed the test with flying colors by stopping on its own every time it began to approach the wall. What’s the difference? Other than the obvious fact that FSD is more advanced than Autopilot, the Cybertruck was on Tesla’s latest FSD hardware called HW4. The Model Y, a 2022 year model edition, wasn’t as it was running HW3.
The Missing Pieces
Notably, some in the comment section pointed out the tests that Paul didn’t do. For instance, he didn’t test FSD with a mannequin or in the rain—two factors that could offer a more realistic sense of how the system performs in everyday conditions.
Nevertheless, this should at least help calm the noise around Rober’s video. There’s clearly some truth to the criticisms, and those who continue to challenge Tesla’s approach to autonomous driving aren’t entirely off the mark.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick advised the public to buy Tesla stock during an interview.
Lutnick’s ties to Tesla, and the office he holds, have raised questions from Rep. Connolly.
Calls for Musk to step down as Tesla CEO continue to grow louder every single day.
Tesla stock is down some 35 percent, protests against the company appear to be heating up, and vandals continue to target the EV maker’s showrooms and products. Meanwhile, as questions are raised about Elon Musk’s suitability as CEO of the firm, a political tug-of-war is attempting to right the ship in the background.
Now, the U.S. representative for Virginia has openly called for an investigation into how the Trump administration is “using taxpayer money to enrich the President’s inner circle,” as Rep. Gerry Connolly claims that there has been an ethics violation.
Buy, Buy, Buy?
The statement under scrutiny was uttered earlier this week when Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick made a reasonably pointed recommendation to the public: advising Americans to buy Tesla stock, likening its current share price to a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. This remark was made during an appearance on Jesse Watters Primetime on Fox News, where he was asked about the ongoing attacks on Tesla, including those targeting dealerships, charging stations, and even private cars.
“I think if you want to learn something on this show tonight, buy Tesla. It’s unbelievable that this guy’s stock is this cheap. It’ll never be this cheap again,” Lutnick said in a Wednesday interview on Fox News. He added: “I mean, who wouldn’t invest in Elon Musk? You gotta be kidding me.”
However, one problem with his recommendation is that Lutnick may stand to benefit. According to a report from Yahoo Finance, Lutnick’s former firm, Cantor Fitzgerald, upgraded Tesla stock the same day and has invested heavily in the company. Though Lutnick has officially divested from the firm, his sons now occupy senior roles there, and Cantor maintains a $425 price target on Tesla following a visit to the automaker’s AI data center and production line.
While some high-profile Republicans have rallied to Musk’s defense — Trump himself showcased Teslas at the White House and purchased two models — others are beginning to call for a leadership shift. Ross Gerber, a longtime Tesla investor and CEO of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth Management, is now urging Musk to step down. “He is not running Tesla,” Gerber told Sky News. “The business has been neglected for too long.”
Calls For An Investigation
But now, Lutnick’s endorsement is drawing scrutiny of its own. Representative Gerry Connolly, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, has formally requested an investigation into Lutnick’s comments, arguing that a sitting Commerce Secretary encouraging the public to invest in a specific company—especially one tied so closely to the administration—crosses a clear ethical line.
“This is just the latest example of the Trump Administration using taxpayer resources to enrich the President’s inner circle,” Connolly wrote in a letter to the Department of Commerce’s acting general counsel, reported on by The Hill. He demanded Lutnick’s financial disclosures and internal communications related to the Fox interview, including emails with the White House, Office of Government Ethics, and other oversight bodies.
The investigation request follows a string of recent moves by the Trump administration to oust independent agency watchdogs and cut regulatory staffing—efforts Musk’s DOGE department has reportedly supported. Connolly accused Musk of using his dual role in government and the private sector to push through mass firings and deregulation while profiting handsomely from the chaos.
“Tesla is owned by an individual who has been given license by the President to slash and burn his way through the federal government,” Connolly wrote. “These ongoing violations of law require a response befitting of the level of abuse to deter further lawlessness and to ensure the American people that members of this Administration seek to serve all people rather than to enrich a select few.”
As the political spotlight burns brighter and ethical questions pile up, the Tesla-Musk narrative grows more complicated. What started as a revolutionary car company is now entangled in partisan warfare, federal investigations, and allegations of self-enrichment at the highest levels. Whether Tesla can steer through this storm or becomes collateral damage in a much larger conflict remains to be seen.
Sentry Mode uses a Tesla’s exterior cameras to record what’s happening around.
While the system is handy, it has been criticized for draining the EV’s battery pack.
More than 80 Tesla models were recently damaged at a facility in Canada.
Tesla has made it clear that it’s taking a firm stance against vandalism at its facilities across the United States and it’s rolling out a new strategy: activating Sentry Mode on all cars at its showrooms. This move comes as incidents of targeted attacks on Tesla vehicles have been escalating, both in the States and internationally. With this added layer of surveillance, the company hopes to catch troublemakers in the act.
Just yesterday, a well-known Tesla investor and supporter suggested that the company should step up security by employing 24-hour security guards at all of its showrooms and service centers across the U.S. and Canada—at least until things calm down. Elon Musk quickly responded, announcing that Tesla had “ramped up security” and enabled Sentry Mode on all vehicles at its locations.
The Benefits of Sentry Mode
While he avoided elaborating on what additional security measures Tesla is taking, activating Sentry Mode seems like a smart move. This system uses the exterior cameras found on all Tesla models to continuously record what’s happening around the vehicle. It’s proven hugely beneficial for owners of the years, catching vandals and thieves in plain view. Anyone heading to a Tesla site with the intention of damaging cars could be unknowingly filmed in the act.
However, in true Musk fashion, the public announcement may have been a double-edged sword. Now that vandals know what Tesla is up to, they might take precautions, like covering their faces to avoid being identified. Perhaps it would’ve been more effective to keep this security change under wraps until the system caught a few culprits.
Tesla has ramped up security and activated Sentry Mode on all vehicles at stores https://t.co/3HwUgE8ZoF
While Sentry Mode can certainly be a deterrent, it’s not without its flaws. One of the primary concerns is the system’s impact on battery life. Tesla has never officially released figures on how much battery is consumed by Sentry Mode, but independent tests suggest it could drain between 10-15% of the battery each day. This means that Tesla will need to ensure that the vehicles in their care are regularly charged, especially if the goal is to keep the security system running round-the-clock.
Fortunately, Tesla recently introduced an update that reportedly reduces the battery drain by about 40%, which could help alleviate some of the strain on its service centers to keep cars charged.
The announcement of this new measure follows an incident in Hamilton, Ontario, where over 80 Tesla vehicles were damaged at a dealership. Reports say that the cars were scratched and had their tires punctured, further highlighting the increasing need for security at Tesla locations.
The Department of Justice is targeting those behind Molotov cocktail attacks on Tesla.
Three individuals face charges and could face up to 20 years in prison for the attacks.
Attorney General Pamela Bondi recently called attacks on Tesla “domestic terrorism.”
Attacks on Teslas have become a common occurrence and now the federal government is getting heavily involved. As part of this effort, U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi has announced charges against three people for the “violent destruction of Tesla properties” using Molotov cocktails.
While the Department of Justice didn’t release many specifics, one of the defendants was involved in an attack on a Tesla dealership in Salem, Oregon. The government says this person was armed with a suppressed AR-15 rifle and was arrested after throwing approximately eight Molotov cocktails.
The second individual was arrested in Loveland, Colorado after allegedly attempting to light Teslas on fire with Molotov cocktails. The government also claimed the “defendant was later found in possession of materials used to produce additional incendiary weapons”.
Lastly, a person in Charleston, South Carolina allegedly wrote “profane messages against President Trump” around Tesla charging stations. They then lit the chargers ablaze with Molotov cocktails.
Salem Police
Attorney General’s Statement
Attorney General Bondi was direct in her response to the situation, stating: “The days of committing crimes without consequence have ended. Let this be a warning: if you join this wave of domestic terrorism against Tesla properties, the Department of Justice will put you behind bars.” Her office added they’re “committed to ending all acts of violence and arson directed at Tesla properties and otherwise.”
The news comes two days after Bondi released another statement saying that “The swarm of violent attacks on Tesla property is nothing short of domestic terrorism. The Department of Justice has already charged several perpetrators with that in mind, including in cases that involve charges with five-year mandatory minimum sentences.”
As for the three people charged in this latest round, they now face prison sentences ranging from five to 20 years, depending on the specifics of their actions.
Login
