Connect with us

News

What does Elon Musk’s China trip mean for Tesla?

Published

on

What does Elon Musk’s China trip mean for Tesla?

Elon Musk appears to be on the cusp of deploying Tesla’s “full self-driving” system in the world’s biggest car market.

Musk flew out of Beijing on Monday after meeting China’s premier, Li Qiang, on Sunday and sealing a deal with Chinese tech giant Baidu to use the group’s mapping and navigation systems. Hours earlier, a Chinese industry group said Tesla’s EVs were among more than 70 cars that had been successfully tested for data security compliance.

Taken together, Musk appears to have smoothed the path for the US company’s semi-autonomous driving technology to be rolled out in China. Tesla’s share price closed 15.3 per cent higher on Monday at $194.05 on reports of the Baidu deal but remains at half of its 2022 peak.

Here is what the billionaire’s trip to China means for Tesla and the government in Beijing.

How much is Chinese approval worth to Tesla?

As sales fall and competition grows fiercer, Tesla has increasingly talked up the commercial opportunities that its self-driving technology offers.

Advertisement

“Going balls to the wall on autonomy is a blindingly obvious move,” Musk wrote on X, his social media platform, this month.

Tom Narayan, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets, said income from autonomous driving accounted for a fifth of his share price target for Tesla. The carmaker charges US drivers $99 a month to activate “full self-driving”, a partially autonomous system that ostensibly chauffeurs drivers but still requires motorists to pay attention.

Being allowed to offer the same service in China, where the company has about 1.6mn cars on the road, “would unlock a significant fleet of Tesla vehicles able to charge subscription fees”, said Narayan.

The move into China would also “push Tesla further to be an industry standard for software,” he added, and encourage other carmakers to license its technology.

Dan Ives, an analyst at Wedbush, said Musk’s trip resulted in the “long-awaited FSD approval”, which amounted to a “watershed moment” for the company. Tesla’s long-term valuation “hinges” on income from autonomy, he said, and China had been a “missing piece of the puzzle”.

Advertisement

“This is a key moment for Musk as well as Beijing at a time that Tesla has faced massive domestic EV competition in China along with softer demand,” he added.

Will new technology turn around slowing sales growth at Tesla? 

Tesla has put significant stock in the value of globalising its self-driving technology as its core EV line-up ages compared with newer products from its Chinese rivals.

While arch-rival BYD aims to launch cars within 18 months of conception, it has been four years since Tesla released the Model Y, its best-selling car. The company announced the Roadster sports car in 2017 but has yet to begin production.

Musk last week promised that a new lower-cost model was coming next year. But despite a “refreshed” Model 3 entering production this year, the company is still nurturing a product offering that is significantly older than that of its competitors.

“The Tesla range is looking quite old,” said one former Tesla executive. “The [battery] tech is fine, but there are others out there, especially the Chinese, who are arguably better. The question [if he deploys FSD], is how much longer does he have a technology advantage on that?”

Advertisement

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Expansion in China will be a test of how Tesla’s self-driving technology stacks up against local rivals. “They are betting it is the tech that makes or breaks a purchase decision,” said the former executive. 

But it is not clear how confident consumers outside of urban areas are in the technology. “FSD works in Silicon Valley but not in Illinois,” added the former executive. “For the mass market it is still witchcraft.”

Why is helping Tesla important to China?

Under President Xi Jinping, many experts believe China has prioritised security over economic growth and domestic technology independence over integration with the outside world.

Angela Zhang, a professor of law at the University of Hong Kong and author of two books on Chinese technology regulation, said there were signs that Beijing was “easing” its approach as it needed foreign investment to shore up an economy in “deep trouble”.

Chinese EV producers want to dominate global markets and Beijing has a “strong incentive” to show the world that data security issues are not a barrier to international trade for Chinese EVs, she said.

Advertisement

Feng Chucheng, a partner at China-focused Hutong Research, said allowing Tesla’s self-driving technology had “strategic value” to Beijing.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

The Cyberspace Administration of China has for several years been rolling out a sweeping legal framework for how businesses collect and use data, with strict rules on cross-border data flows and data viewed as a risk to Chinese security or citizens.

Despite western concerns about “over-securitisation”, the recent development of China’s data rules has been more “pro-growth”, Feng said. Beijing has been aligning its rules on outbound data transfer in line with the CPTPP and DEPA, two key regional trade pacts.

“Tesla’s rollout in China will be much desired for Beijing to prove that its data regulatory regime is gaining traction,” he said.

Can Tesla win back the Chinese market?

China is Tesla’s biggest market outside the US, a vital part of the supply chain for its electric vehicles and of growing importance as a regional export hub. Musk’s decision in 2018 to build a multibillion-dollar factory in Shanghai is credited with helping to spearhead the rapid growth of China’s EV industry.

Advertisement

But since then, the Chinese EV industry has stormed ahead. Tesla’s share of new electric vehicle sales stands at 7.5 per cent compared with 33 per cent for Warren Buffett-backed BYD. A core complaint from Chinese consumers has been the dearth of new Tesla models and high-tech features.

Despite the share price jump on Monday, analysts in China voiced caution.

Tom Nunlist, an expert in Chinese technology regulation with Beijing-based consultancy Trivium, said China’s regulatory environment was “still emerging”. “The folks that are overseeing the safety of automatic driving on highways are highly professional. They’re not going to relax their standards because of this [Musk’s visit],” he said.

Tu Le, founder of the Sino Auto Insights consultancy, said local rivals including Xpeng, Nio and Li Auto had their own self-driving systems and would drop their prices “the second” they thought consumers favoured Tesla’s technology. “Western analysts think Tesla automatically wins,” he said. “There are no guarantees.”

Advertisement

News

Video: F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

Published

on

Video: F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

new video loaded: F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

transcript

transcript

F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

The National Transportation Safety Board said that a “multitude of errors” led to the collision between a military helicopter and a commercial jet, killing 67 people last January.

“I imagine there will be some difficult moments today for all of us as we try to provide answers to how a multitude of errors led to this tragedy.” “We have an entire tower who took it upon themselves to try to raise concerns over and over and over and over again, only to get squashed by management and everybody above them within F.A.A. Were they set up for failure?” “They were not adequately prepared to do the jobs they were assigned to do.”

Advertisement
The National Transportation Safety Board said that a “multitude of errors” led to the collision between a military helicopter and a commercial jet, killing 67 people last January.

By Meg Felling

January 27, 2026

Continue Reading

News

Families of killed men file first U.S. federal lawsuit over drug boat strikes

Published

on

Families of killed men file first U.S. federal lawsuit over drug boat strikes

President Trump speaks as U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth looks on during a meeting of his Cabinet at the White House in December 2025.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Relatives of two Trinidadian men killed in an airstrike last October are suing the U.S. government for wrongful death and for carrying out extrajudicial killings.

The case, filed in Massachusetts, is the first lawsuit over the strikes to land in a U.S. federal court since the Trump administration launched a campaign to target vessels off the coast of Venezuela. The American government has carried out three dozen such strikes since September, killing more than 100 people.

Among them are Chad Joseph, 26, and Rishi Samaroo, 41, who relatives say died in what President Trump described as “a lethal kinetic strike” on Oct. 14, 2025. The president posted a short video that day on social media that shows a missile targeting a ship, which erupts in flame.

Advertisement

“This is killing for sport, it’s killing for theater and it’s utterly lawless,” said Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “We need a court of law to rein in this administration and provide some accountability to the families.”

The White House and Pentagon justify the strikes as part of a broader push to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. The Pentagon declined to comment on the lawsuit, saying it doesn’t comment on ongoing litigation.

But the new lawsuit described Joseph and Samaroo as fishermen doing farm work in Venezuela, with no ties to the drug trade. Court papers said they were headed home to family members when the strike occurred and now are presumed dead.

Neither man “presented a concrete, specific, and imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to the United States or anyone at all, and means other than lethal force could have reasonably been employed to neutralize any lesser threat,” according to the lawsuit.

Advertisement

Lenore Burnley, the mother of Chad Joseph, and Sallycar Korasingh, the sister of Rishi Samaroo, are the plaintiffs in the case.

Their court papers allege violations of the Death on the High Seas Act, a 1920 law that makes the U.S. government liable if its agents engage in negligence that results in wrongful death more than 3 miles off American shores. A second claim alleges violations of the Alien Tort Statute, which allows foreign citizens to sue over human rights violations such as deaths that occurred outside an armed conflict, with no judicial process.

The American Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Jonathan Hafetz at Seton Hall University School of Law are representing the plaintiffs.

“In seeking justice for the senseless killing of their loved ones, our clients are bravely demanding accountability for their devastating losses and standing up against the administration’s assault on the rule of law,” said Brett Max Kaufman, senior counsel at the ACLU.

U.S. lawmakers have raised questions about the legal basis for the strikes for months but the administration has persisted.

Advertisement

—NPR’s Quil Lawrence contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

News

Video: New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti

Published

on

Video: New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti

new video loaded: New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti

A frame-by-frame assessment of actions by Alex Pretti and the two officers who fired 10 times shows how lethal force came to be used against a target who didn’t pose a threat.

By Devon Lum, Haley Willis, Alexander Cardia, Dmitriy Khavin and Ainara Tiefenthäler

January 26, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending