Tesla’s Entry Into India Delayed Indefinitely




Tesla Model 3

Tesla is no longer expanding into India due to a sourcing condition that may not exist?

Three months ago we reported that Elon Musk hoped to expand into India by the summer of 2017.  He Tweeted this out back in February.

Since then, there has obviously been some confusion. Musk seems to think that there is a stipulation requiring that 30 percent of parts are locally sourced, although he did say he may have been misinformed. Clearly India still wants Tesla as soon as possible, and industry officials with knowledge of the country’s policies don’t believe that the sourcing concern applies to automakers (yet we know that Tesla is often not seen as a traditional automaker).

Many people were in a fury over the “Make in India” policy, which states that foreign companies must follow the 30 percent local sourcing protocol. The country has a massive market potential and many Tesla Model 3 reservation holders. Reports claimed that people flooded the government with requests to make an exemption for Tesla since it’s a green-friendly company. However, it turns out that they were wasting their words because the policy truly doesn’t apply to the automotive market.

There is still no official word from Musk as to whether the Silicon Valley electric automaker plans to reconsider.

Source: The Times of India

Category: Tesla

Tags: , ,

15 responses to "Tesla’s Entry Into India Delayed Indefinitely"
  1. SparkEV says:

    This shows why India, despite being the biggest democracy in the universe (yes, universe!) is such poor country. They make it almost impossible to do business there! I doubt even Elon Musk with billions of dollars would’ve been able to make Tesla if he started in India.

    This also shows democracy doesn’t necessarily mean prosperity, but free market does.

    1. Mikael says:

      Free market means prosperity for some on the cost of the many.

      A properly regulated market on the other hand…

    2. super390 says:

      Free-market theologian Milton Friedman, who advised the Pinochet neoliberal junta, put out an article late in life damning democracy for getting in the way of free market prosperity, and pointed to the success of South Korea, still ruled by the brutal Chun junta that carried out the Kwangju Massacre against dissidents in 1981 with Reagan’s OK, possibly involving tens of thousands of deaths. And that prosperity meant that Korean autoworkers made $2 an hour, making crappy cars. Prosperity for whom?

      Not surprisingly, the labor unions joined the student movement in the massive protests that finally forced the junta to surrender to democracy some years later. The auto workers now make far more money, and the Korean carmakers finally broke into the US market with competitive products. S. Korea now has more advanced broadband than the US, and an electronics industry making advanced products never made in America. It also has a public capable of forcing a right-wing president to quickly resign merely for having a single corrupt crony, as opposed to the all-criminal White House we currently have.

      So maybe the problem isn’t democracy, the problem is having a public that lets corporations rule under the guise of “free markets” while making the 99%’s lives progressively worse until you get a one-man corporation like Trump who takes the hypocrisy to its ultimate. Prosperity for whom?

  2. Ron M says:

    India commits to selling only EV cars by 2030.

  3. Michael Will says:

    Misleading headline, the truth is in ‘There is still no official word from Musk as to whether the Silicon Valley electric automaker plans to reconsider.’ so assume negotiations are still going on.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Thank you, Mr. Will.

      Your post appears to be a better assessment of the situation than this article.

  4. floydboy says:

    It’s not a free market. It’s a regulated market with various controls and agreed upon protections, by the private and governmental entities with influence. The drug trade would be considered a ‘free’ market. Also, no, a capital driven market doesn’t necessarily mean prosperity for the larger society.

    1. SparkEV says:

      Drug trade is most regulated; making drugs don’t cost much, but all the extra money is needed to circumvent the regulations. I’m talking about both legal and illegal drugs. In case of India, they are poor, because they try to treat _everything_ like we treat drugs in US.

      Fact is, free market economy ALWAYS bring prosperity as a whole. This is why the poor in US is top 1% compared to the world.

      1. super390 says:

        Saying the American poor are in the world’s top 1% is bulls*** unless you take into consideration cost of living.

        Somalia? Free markets, since there’s no effective government. Dominican Republic? Free markets. Haiti? Free markets.

        And then there’s Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama, and other states that let businessmen poison the poor and discriminate against Blacks and gays in the name of free markets but have no oil to hide their stark inequality. Even Texas went broke after the Bush Crash and got its pension fund bailed out by the Feds – while its governor was damning California for its socialism!

  5. Ron M says:

    India is committed to renewable energy plans to have 175 Gw of renewable by 2022. 100 GW Solar 60 Gw wind and the rest in hydro and bio.

  6. DJ says:

    Stupid Tesla and their compliance cars.


  7. Driverguy01 says:

    Steven, Elon’s latest tweet says otherwise: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/with_replies

  8. GSP says:

    The clarifications from “Made in India” seem to still require Tesla to have 30% India content in their cars, or to sell through third parties. Tesla is unlikely to consider selling through third party, given their fight to sell retail (direct to consumers) in the US.

    See the last requirement for retail sales in India the goods must be 30% local content:

    It does look like Tesla does have a way to sell retail without 30% India content, by building their cars in India.

    This may make sense when Tesla considers where to build future plants, but without being allowed to sell cars in smaller numbers to start it will be a risky bet to build a plant to serve the India market.


  9. David says:

    Well that’s as clear as mud!