Tesla’s robotaxi plans have the attention of federal investigators

Tech Crunch - May 12th, 2025

Federal safety investigators have intensified their scrutiny on Tesla's upcoming robotaxi service by sending a comprehensive list of questions regarding the company's 'Full Self-Driving (Supervised)' software. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is particularly interested in understanding how this software operates under low-visibility conditions, a concern that emerged following reports of four crashes. The investigation, first initiated in October, gains urgency as Tesla plans to launch its paid ride-hailing service using its vehicle fleet in Austin, Texas, by June. A post by Tesla in April highlighted early testing in Austin and the San Francisco Bay Area, which has drawn federal attention.

The inquiry is crucial as Tesla intends to utilize an 'unsupervised' version of its Full Self-Driving software for its robotaxis, a claim made by CEO Elon Musk. The NHTSA's probing focuses on whether the new automated driving system is akin to the existing FSD Supervised product and how Tesla aims to assure safety in adverse visibility conditions such as fog or rain. This investigation underscores the broader implications of deploying autonomous technologies on public roads, raising significant questions about regulatory oversight and technological readiness as Tesla pushes forward with its ambitious autonomous vehicle agenda.

Elon Musk Tesla Nhtsa Autonomous Vehicles Robotaxi Full Self Driving Austin Safety Investigation

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.8

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a timely and relevant overview of the NHTSA's investigation into Tesla's Full Self-Driving software and the company's robotaxi plans. It accurately presents the regulatory concerns and Tesla's ambitions, making it a valuable piece for readers interested in autonomous vehicle technology and public safety. However, the article would benefit from more balanced reporting by including Tesla's perspective or responses to the NHTSA's inquiries. Additionally, incorporating expert opinions or independent analyses could enhance the source quality and depth of the article. Overall, the article is clear and engaging but could improve in transparency and balance to provide a more comprehensive view of the situation.

Accuracy

The article accurately reports that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is investigating Tesla's Full Self-Driving (FSD) software, focusing on its performance in low-visibility conditions. This aligns with available information. The mention of Tesla's plans to launch a robotaxi service in Austin, Texas, using its fleet is also consistent with Tesla's announcements. However, the article could benefit from more specific details about the investigation's findings or Tesla's responses, which are not provided. The claim about the NHTSA sending a detailed list of questions to Tesla is supported by the text, but the article does not specify whether Tesla has responded, leaving a gap in the information.

Balance

The article presents a balanced view by discussing both the regulatory concerns and Tesla's plans for its robotaxi service. However, it primarily focuses on the NHTSA's investigation without providing Tesla's perspective or responses to the inquiries. This could lead to a perception of bias against Tesla, as the company's viewpoint or defense is not adequately represented. Including Tesla's side of the story or any public statements would enhance the balance of the article.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and clearly presents the key points about the NHTSA's investigation and Tesla's robotaxi plans. The language is straightforward, making it easy for readers to follow the narrative. However, some technical details about the FSD software and the nature of the investigation could be further simplified or explained for a general audience.

Source quality

The article cites information from the NHTSA and Tesla, which are credible sources for this topic. However, it does not mention any additional expert opinions or independent analyses that could provide a broader context or verification of the claims. The reliance on a single source of information could limit the depth and reliability of the reporting. Including insights from industry experts or safety analysts would improve the source quality.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency in terms of how the information was obtained and the methodology behind the investigation. It does not disclose whether the journalist attempted to contact Tesla for comments or how the NHTSA's letter was accessed. Providing this context would help readers understand the basis of the claims and the potential limitations of the information presented.