Tesla CEO Elon Musk is firmly in former President Donald Trump’s corner politically, but what a potential Trump Administration could mean for the electric vehicle maker that pays Musk billions is unclear—even to Musk himself.
During a call with financial analysts on Tuesday, Wells Fargo director Colin Langan asked Musk to explain the impact of a Trump win and the potential wipeout of a federal $7,500 tax credit for electric vehicles .
“I guess there would be some impact,” said Musk. “It would be devastating for our competitors, and it would hurt Tesla slightly.”
The CEO also noted that because Trump has promised heavy tariffs on vehicles produced in Mexico, Tesla would pull back on investing in a factory it had planned to open in Monterrey in 2026 . “If that’s going to be the case, we kind of need to see how things play out politically,” he said. Yesterday, Musk denied reports that he would pump $45 million per month into Trump’s campaign.
Speaking on CNBC before the earnings call, Wedbush Securities tech analyst Dan Ives said that a Trump presidency could be negative for the overall EV market because Trump could eliminate the Inflation Reduction Act and with it the tax credits for EVs and certain plug-in hybrids. That would mean an administration under Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic party nominee, could be a positive for the EV industry.
Yet, Trump might be better for the regulatory agenda needed to promote full-self driving and autonomy, which is a key component of Tesla’s growth strategy, said Ives.
“Musk has been background noise under the Biden Administration and in a Trump administration, is that something that will be more front and center?” said Ives. “That’s why I would say Tesla is part of that Trump trade.”
Musk dismissed the notion that regulators might balk at a fleet of Tesla-made, self-driving robotaxis without steering wheels and pedals. An analyst asked Musk to explain why regulatory risk wasn’t an issue for Tesla, when General Motors had paused production of its Origin vehicle that doesn’t have a steering wheel, in favor of its Chevrolet Bolt, in part because of regulation. The Cruise Origin autonomous vehicle would need approval from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration because it doesn't have traditional manual controls like a steering wheel and pedals, which are required by current safety regulations, and were written for cars with human drivers and not fully autonomous vehicles.
“The main reason with switching from the Origin to the Bolt is we extinguish the regulatory risk,” GM CEO Mary Barra said, according to a Reuters report.
“The real reason they canceled it is because GM can’t make it work,” said Musk, adding that the automaker’s technology “is not up to par.” He said blaming regulators was “misleading.”
Jim Cain, an executive director at GM, told Fortune Musk is flat wrong.
“All of those statements are categorically false,” said Cain, who listened to Musk’s comments during the earnings call. “The Origin vehicle faced a lot of hurdles getting certified because it doesn’t have a steering wheel, it doesn’t have a brake pedal, and it has a unique seating layout that requires a federal motor vehicle safety waiver—full stop.”
Cain said Cruise technology improves every day because of the way it leverages its data set with AI. “And so far, they have driven more than 5 million fully autonomous miles and Tesla has driven exactly zero.”
Musk has an unshakeable faith in Tesla’s power to “solve autonomy,” which he reiterated Tuesday, even as Tesla reported financial results showing net profits dropped 45%, marking its second quarter of sluggish growth and fourth straight quarter of falling quarterly earnings. Car industry data also showed that Tesla continues to lose popularity in California, where sales fell 24% in the second quarter. Meanwhile, Trump has pledged to end what he referred to as the “green new scam,” promising to abolish “the electric-vehicle mandate on day one.”
According to Ives, if autonomy is the strategic future of Tesla, it might be more beneficial for Tesla to have less regulation, which is likelier under a Trump presidency versus a Harris presidency.
“The cherry on top of what could be the sundae” for investors is how the company will impact the robotics market and its efforts on full-self driving and autonomy, said Ives. Ultimately, that’s how the company could potentially reach a $1 trillion or even $2 trillion valuation, he added.
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
Most Popular
Comments / 0