Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Tariffs In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling invalidating certain tariffs previously imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). As a result of this ruling, we may be eligible for a refund of tariffs previously paid on imported goods. As the recoverability and timing of any future refund remains uncertain, we will not recognize any receivable nor corresponding offset to expense or asset until such amounts are realized or realizable. We continue to monitor these developments and their potential impact on our results of operations, including reduction of revenue for any future potential refunds to certain energy storage customers for which a contractual obligation exists. Legal Proceedings Certain Derivative Lawsuits in Delaware Before converting from a Delaware to Texas corporation on June 13, 2024, three separate derivative actions brought by purported Tesla stockholders were filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery on May 24, June 10 and June 13, 2024, purportedly on behalf of Tesla, against current and former directors regarding topics involving Elon Musk and others, X Corp. (formerly Twitter) and xAI. These suits asserted various claims, including breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract, and sought unspecified damages and other relief. On August 6, 2024, the plaintiffs in these three actions moved to consolidate the matters into a single case. The Court consolidated two of the three cases. Tesla and the directors filed motions to dismiss, and oral argument on those motions occurred on October 22, 2025. On April 2, 2026, these cases were reassigned to a different judge. On April 13, 2026, the Court granted Tesla’s motions to dismiss and dismissed the cases. In May 2026, plaintiffs in the consolidated and coordinated cases appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court the decision granting Tesla’s motion to dismiss. Litigation and Investigations Relating to Alleged Discrimination and Harassment We are also subject to various lawsuits that assert claims related to alleged discrimination and harassment. For example, on February 9, 2022, the California Civil Rights Department (“CRD,” formerly “DFEH”) filed a civil complaint against Tesla in Alameda County, California Superior Court, alleging systemic race discrimination, hostile work environment and pay equity claims, among others. CRD’s amended complaint seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief. The first phase of the trial is currently set for September 21, 2026. Additionally, on June 1, 2022, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) issued a cause finding against Tesla that closely parallels the CRD’s allegations. On September 28, 2023, the EEOC filed a civil complaint against Tesla in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California asserting claims for race harassment and retaliation and seeking, among other things, monetary and injunctive relief. The case is in discovery with no trial date set. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself in these matters; however, we cannot predict the outcome or impact. We are unable to reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, associated with these claims, unless noted. Other Litigation Related to Our Products and Services We are also subject to various lawsuits that seek monetary and other injunctive relief. These lawsuits include proposed class actions and other consumer claims that allege, among other things, purported defects and misrepresentations related to our products and services. For example, on September 14, 2022, a proposed class action was filed against Tesla, Inc. and related entities in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging various claims about the Company’s driver assistance technology systems under state and federal law. This case was later consolidated with several other proposed class actions, and a Consolidated Amended Complaint was filed on October 28, 2022, which seeks damages and other relief on behalf of all persons who purchased or leased from Tesla between January 1, 2016, to the present. On March 22, 2023, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction alleging that Tesla made certain statements regarding the capabilities of Full Self-Driving Capability and seeking various forms of injunction relief, and on September 30, 2023, the Court denied the plaintiffs’ motion, compelled four of five plaintiffs to arbitration, and dismissed the claims of the fifth plaintiff with leave to amend the complaint. On October 31, 2023, the remaining plaintiff filed an amended complaint, which Tesla moved to dismiss, and on May 15, 2024, the Court granted in part and denied in part Tesla’s motion. On May 6, 2025, the plaintiff filed a motion for class certification, which Tesla opposed, and on August 18, 2025, the Court certified a limited class comprised of California consumers who are not subject to an arbitration agreement. On September 1, 2025, Tesla filed a petition in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for permission to appeal the class certification order, and on December 18, 2025, the Ninth Circuit granted Tesla’s petition. On January 5, 2026, the district court stayed the case pending resolution of the proceedings before the Ninth Circuit. The appeal has been fully briefed by the parties, and oral argument is set for August 31, 2026. On August 4, 2025, a proposed class action was filed in the U.S. District Court Western District of Texas against Tesla, Inc., Elon Musk, and certain current and former Company executives. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws through alleged material misrepresentations in public filings regarding the effectiveness of Autopilot, Full-Self Driving (Supervised), and Robotaxi. The complaint seeks monetary damages and other relief on behalf of persons who purchased Tesla stock between April 19, 2023, and June 22, 2025. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on February 17, 2026, and Tesla moved to dismiss the amended complaint on April 20, 2026. The plaintiffs filed a response to the motion to dismiss on June 22, 2026. On June 4, 2026, a proposed class action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Tesla, Inc. and related entities. The complaint alleges that Tesla made certain statements regarding the capabilities of its driver assistance technology systems. The complaint seeks damages and other relief on behalf of certain consumers who purchased or leased a Tesla vehicle. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself in these matters; however, we cannot predict the outcome or impact. We are unable to reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, associated with these claims, unless noted. Benavides v. Tesla, Inc. On August 1, 2025, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida reached a verdict in a product liability trial relating to certain allegations regarding the use of our Autopilot technology in a 2019 accident that resulted in a fatality and injuries. The jury awarded $129 million in total compensatory damages, finding the driver 67% at fault and the Company 33% at fault. The jury also awarded $200 million in punitive damages. On September 15, 2025, the Company filed a post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law or, in the alternative, a new trial on all issues or an amended judgment to lesser compensatory and punitive damages. On February 19, 2026, the Court denied the Company’s post-trial motions, and on July 2, 2026, the Company filed its opening brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Although we believe that the facts and law do not justify the damages awarded, the Company has recorded an immaterial accrual. We have experienced, and we expect to continue to face, claims and regulatory scrutiny arising from or related to misuse or claimed failures or alleged misrepresentations of new technologies that we are pioneering. We are unable to reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, associated with these claims, unless noted. An unfavorable outcome in some or all of these proceedings could have a material adverse impact on results of operations or cash flows for a particular period. Our view of these matters is subject to inherent uncertainties and may change in the future. Certain Investigations and Other Matters We regularly receive requests for information, including subpoenas, from regulators and governmental authorities such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the National Transportation Safety Board, the SEC, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), and various local, state, federal, and international agencies. The ongoing requests for information include topics such as operations, technology (e.g., vehicle functionality, vehicle incidents, Autopilot and FSD Capability and Robotaxi), compliance, finance, data privacy, and other matters related to Tesla’s business, its personnel, and related parties. We routinely cooperate with such formal and informal requests for information, investigations, and other inquiries. To our knowledge no government agency in any ongoing investigation has concluded that any wrongdoing occurred. We cannot predict the outcome or impact of any ongoing matters. Should the government decide to pursue an enforcement action, there exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, prospects, cash flows, financial position or brand. We are also subject to various other legal proceedings, risks and claims that arise from the normal course of business activities. If an unfavorable ruling or development were to occur in these or other possible legal proceedings, risks and claims, there exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, prospects, cash flows, financial position or brand.

In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling invalidating certain tariffs previously imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). As a result of this ruling, we may be eligible for a refund of tariffs previously paid on imported goods. As the recoverability and timing of any future refund remains uncertain, we will not recognize any receivable nor corresponding offset to expense or asset until such amounts are realized or realizable. We continue to monitor these developments and their potential impact on our results of operations, including reduction of revenue for any future potential refunds to certain energy storage customers for which a contractual obligation exists.

Before converting from a Delaware to Texas corporation on June 13, 2024, three separate derivative actions brought by purported Tesla stockholders were filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery on May 24, June 10 and June 13, 2024, purportedly on behalf of Tesla, against current and former directors regarding topics involving Elon Musk and others, X Corp. (formerly Twitter) and xAI. These suits asserted various claims, including breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract, and sought unspecified damages and other relief. On August 6, 2024, the plaintiffs in these three actions moved to consolidate the matters into a single case. The Court consolidated two of the three cases. Tesla and the directors filed motions to dismiss, and oral argument on those motions occurred on October 22, 2025. On April 2, 2026, these cases were reassigned to a different judge. On April 13, 2026, the Court granted Tesla’s motions to dismiss and dismissed the cases. In May 2026, plaintiffs in the consolidated and coordinated cases appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court the decision granting Tesla’s motion to dismiss.

We are also subject to various lawsuits that assert claims related to alleged discrimination and harassment. For example, on February 9, 2022, the California Civil Rights Department (“CRD,” formerly “DFEH”) filed a civil complaint against Tesla in Alameda County, California Superior Court, alleging systemic race discrimination, hostile work environment and pay equity claims, among others. CRD’s amended complaint seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief. The first phase of the trial is currently set for September 21, 2026. Additionally, on June 1, 2022, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) issued a cause finding against Tesla that closely parallels the CRD’s allegations. On September 28, 2023, the EEOC filed a civil complaint against Tesla in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California asserting claims for race harassment and retaliation and seeking, among other things, monetary and injunctive relief. The case is in discovery with no trial date set.

We are also subject to various lawsuits that seek monetary and other injunctive relief. These lawsuits include proposed class actions and other consumer claims that allege, among other things, purported defects and misrepresentations related to our products and services. For example, on September 14, 2022, a proposed class action was filed against Tesla, Inc. and related entities in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging various claims about the Company’s driver assistance technology systems under state and federal law. This case was later consolidated with several other proposed class actions, and a Consolidated Amended Complaint was filed on October 28, 2022, which seeks damages and other relief on behalf of all persons who purchased or leased from Tesla between January 1, 2016, to the present. On March 22, 2023, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction alleging that Tesla made certain statements regarding the capabilities of Full Self-Driving Capability and seeking various forms of injunction relief, and on September 30, 2023, the Court denied the plaintiffs’ motion, compelled four of five plaintiffs to arbitration, and dismissed the claims of the fifth plaintiff with leave to amend the complaint. On October 31, 2023, the remaining plaintiff filed an amended complaint, which Tesla moved to dismiss, and on May 15, 2024, the Court granted in part and denied in part Tesla’s motion. On May 6, 2025, the plaintiff filed a motion for class certification, which Tesla opposed, and on August 18, 2025, the Court certified a limited class comprised of California consumers who are not subject to an arbitration agreement. On September 1, 2025, Tesla filed a petition in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for permission to appeal the class certification order, and on December 18, 2025, the Ninth Circuit granted Tesla’s petition. On January 5, 2026, the district court stayed the case pending resolution of the proceedings before the Ninth Circuit. The appeal has been fully briefed by the parties, and oral argument is set for August 31, 2026.

On August 4, 2025, a proposed class action was filed in the U.S. District Court Western District of Texas against Tesla, Inc., Elon Musk, and certain current and former Company executives. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws through alleged material misrepresentations in public filings regarding the effectiveness of Autopilot, Full-Self Driving (Supervised), and Robotaxi. The complaint seeks monetary damages and other relief on behalf of persons who purchased Tesla stock between April 19, 2023, and June 22, 2025. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on February 17, 2026, and Tesla moved to dismiss the amended complaint on April 20, 2026. The plaintiffs filed a response to the motion to dismiss on June 22, 2026.

On August 1, 2025, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida reached a verdict in a product liability trial relating to certain allegations regarding the use of our Autopilot technology in a 2019 accident that resulted in a fatality and injuries. The jury awarded $129 million in total compensatory damages, finding the driver 67% at fault and the Company 33% at fault. The jury also awarded $200 million in punitive damages. On September 15, 2025, the Company filed a post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law or, in the alternative, a new trial on all issues or an amended judgment to lesser compensatory and punitive damages. On February 19, 2026, the Court denied the Company’s post-trial motions, and on July 2, 2026, the Company filed its opening brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Although we believe that the facts and law do not justify the damages awarded, the Company has recorded an immaterial accrual.

We have experienced, and we expect to continue to face, claims and regulatory scrutiny arising from or related to misuse or claimed failures or alleged misrepresentations of new technologies that we are pioneering. We are unable to reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, associated with these claims, unless noted. An unfavorable outcome in some or all of these proceedings could have a material adverse impact on results of operations or cash flows for a particular period. Our view of these matters is subject to inherent uncertainties and may change in the future.

We regularly receive requests for information, including subpoenas, from regulators and governmental authorities such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the National Transportation Safety Board, the SEC, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), and various local, state, federal, and international agencies. The ongoing requests for information include topics such as operations, technology (e.g., vehicle functionality, vehicle incidents, Autopilot and FSD Capability and Robotaxi), compliance, finance, data privacy, and other matters related to Tesla’s business, its personnel, and related parties. We routinely cooperate with such formal and informal requests for information, investigations, and other inquiries. To our knowledge no government agency in any ongoing investigation has concluded that any wrongdoing occurred. We cannot predict the outcome or impact of any ongoing matters. Should the government decide to pursue an enforcement action, there exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, prospects, cash flows, financial position or brand.