Trump Escalates Feud with Musk, Threatens Tesla, SpaceX Support
The feud reignited on Monday when Musk, who spent hundreds of millions on Trump's re-election, renewed his criticism of Trump's tax-cut and spending bill, which would eliminate subsidies for electric vehicle purchases that have benefited Tesla, the leading US EV maker. That bill passed the Senate by a narrow margin midday Tuesday.
"He's upset that he's losing his EV mandate and ... he's very upset about things but he can lose a lot more than that," Trump told reporters at the White House on Tuesday.
Though Musk has often said government subsidies should be eliminated, Tesla has historically benefited from billions of dollars in tax credits and other policy benefits because of its business in clean transportation and renewable energy.
The Trump administration has control over many of those programs, some of which are targeted in the tax bill, including a $7,500 consumer tax credit that has made buying or leasing EVs more attractive for consumers. Tesla shares dropped more than 5% Tuesday.
The Tesla CEO renewed threats to start a new political party and spend money to unseat lawmakers who support the tax bill, despite campaigning on limiting government spending.
Republicans have expressed concern that Musk's on-again, off-again feud with Trump could hurt their chances to protect their majority in the 2026 midterm congressional elections.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent pushed back on Musk's criticism that the bill would balloon the deficit, saying, "I'll take care of" the country's finances.
Musk spearheaded the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), aimed at cutting government spending, before he pulled back his involvement in late May. Trump on Truth Social on Tuesday suggested Musk might receive more subsidies "than any human being in history, by far," adding: "No more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE."
Trump later doubled down, telling reporters with a smile, "DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon."
In response to Trump's threats, Musk said on his own social media platform X, "I am literally saying CUT IT ALL. Now." He later added that he could escalate the exchange with Trump but said, "I will refrain for now."
CHALLENGES TO TESLA
The feud could create new challenges for Musk's business empire, particularly as the electric automaker — his primary source of wealth — bets heavily on the success of its robotaxi program currently being tested in Austin, Texas. The speed of Tesla's robotaxi expansion depends heavily on state and federal regulation of self-driving vehicles.
"The substance of Tesla's valuation right now is based on progress towards autonomy. I don't think anything is going to happen on that front, but that is the risk," said Gene Munster, managing partner at Tesla investor Deepwater Asset Management.
Analysts expect another rough quarter when the EV maker reports second-quarter delivery figures on Wednesday.
Sales in major European markets were mixed, data showed Tuesday, as Musk's embrace of hard-right politics has alienated potential buyers in several markets worldwide.
The elimination of the EV credit could hit Tesla's earnings by as much as $1.2 billion, about 17% of its 2024 operating income, J.P. Morgan analysts estimated earlier this year.
The Electrification Coalition, an EV advocacy group, on Tuesday urged the US House to revise the Senate bill.
Shares of smaller EV players Rivian and Lucid Group lost 2% and 3.8%, respectively, on Tuesday.
Gary Black, a longtime Tesla investor who manages money for the Future Fund LLC, sold his shares recently as car sales declined. He told Reuters he is considering when to reinvest and that eliminating electric vehicle credits would harm Tesla.
In a separate post on X, Black said: 'Not sure why @elonmusk didn't see this coming as a result of him speaking out against passage of President Trump's big beautiful bill.'
The US Transportation Department regulates vehicle design and will play a key role in deciding if Tesla can mass-produce robotaxis without pedals and steering wheels, while Musk's rocket firm SpaceX has about $22 billion in federal contracts.
Tesla also gets regulatory credits for selling electric vehicles, and has reaped nearly $11 billion by selling those credits to other automakers who are unable to comply with increasingly strict vehicle emissions rules.
Without those sales, the company would have posted a first-quarter loss in April. Trump had in early June threatened to cut Musk's government contracts when their relationship erupted into an all-out social media brawl over the tax-cut bill, which non-partisan analysts estimate would add about $3 trillion to the US debt.
Asked if he was going to deport Musk, a naturalized US citizen, Trump told reporters as he left the White House on Tuesday: "I don't know. We'll have to take a look."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
No peace, just pause: Iran and Israel's fragile standoff
Following President Donald Trump's announcement of a ceasefire agreement between Iran and Israel, many questions remain about the durability of such an arrangement after years of proxy conflict – culminating recently in a direct 12-day aerial exchange of fire. The nature of the agreement itself remains shrouded in ambiguity. Trump has yet to disclose the terms accepted by the Iranian and Israeli sides, and it is still unclear whether Washington and Tehran will return to the nuclear negotiation table, talks that had previously collapsed. At this stage, all involved parties share an interest in halting hostilities, suggesting that the agreement may hold – at least temporarily – until strategic calculations shift. The United States, exhausted by protracted Middle East conflicts, has little appetite for a new drawn-out war. Iran, for its part, appears more open to temporary deals due to its declining capabilities and escalating internal crises. Trump himself faced a divided political base: Between isolationists wary of foreign entanglements and pro-Israel hawks who see American and Israeli interests as inherently aligned. From Israel's perspective, continuing the war may have yielded diminishing returns, especially after achieving key strategic goals – such as depleting Iran's missile stockpiles and weakening the IRGC through targeted strikes – without triggering a full-scale confrontation. Preserving unity with Washington and avoiding embarrassment for the Trump administration were also decisive factors in accepting a truce. Tehran, meanwhile, has little desire to provoke the US and seeks to end Israeli strikes on its facilities. Continued escalation raises the risk of direct confrontation with Washington – not just Tel Aviv – at a time when Iran is facing severe domestic pressures. With each passing day of war, the risk of regime collapse – or at least conditions that could lead to it – increases. A ceasefire may reassure regional actors concerned about Iran's nuclear ambitions, though they are even more alarmed by the prospect of a devastating war to prevent them. Still, Tehran remains cautious about offering nuclear concessions without real guarantees that Israel will not resume its attacks – especially given past episodes where Trump greenlit Israeli strikes despite ongoing negotiations. Since the October 7, 2023, attack, Netanyahu's government has embraced a national security doctrine focused on regional dominance rather than peace, making any long-term deal with Iran appear unlikely. Despite suffering serious blows to its nuclear infrastructure and missile capabilities, the Iranian regime remains intact and is seeking opportunities to rebuild its military strength. While this task will be difficult and expensive, it is not impossible, given the Iranian regime's history of resilience. The region has just witnessed one of the most dangerous flashpoints in the long-standing tension between Tehran and Tel Aviv. Israel views its latest strikes as a 'relative success,' having neutralized much of Iran's air defenses and secured near-total aerial freedom over Iranian skies. Iran responded with a barrage of missiles and drones – some of which penetrated Israeli defenses – focusing on dense population centers like Tel Aviv and employing a staggered timing strategy to stretch Israeli response capabilities. However, Tehran's retaliation failed to deter further Israeli escalation. Tel Aviv describes its operations as 'preemptive strikes,' though their scope and context suggest objectives beyond halting Iran's nuclear program – possibly even undermining the regime or dismantling its high command structure. Since the Iran-Iraq war, Tehran has demonstrated political flexibility that often surprises its adversaries. Its leadership follows a strategy of 'tactical retreats' that serve broader long-term goals. The regime may concede when cornered but consistently aims to regain lost ground. While Tehran may express readiness for sanctions relief and deals with the West, it still views resistance to Western domination as the cornerstone of its ideology. Any major retreat would be interpreted as a defeat after decades of struggle. Though frequently floated as a response to Israeli or American aggression, the threat of closing the Strait of Hormuz remains largely impractical. Such a move would not serve Iran's interests – it could provoke a harsh international backlash and alienate China, Iran's largest oil customer. Alternative routes through the UAE and Oman also limit the effectiveness of such a threat. In fact, Iran itself would suffer most from the closure, as the bulk of its imports pass through the strait. Furthermore, much of the strait lies in Omani waters and spans up to 60 miles in width, making complete Iranian control virtually impossible. Overall, Israel has used successive airstrikes to dismantle Iranian defenses and maintain aerial superiority, effectively forcing Iran to divert its missile arsenal from offensive operations to defense – thus constraining Tehran's ability to take initiative. In response, Iran has embraced a policy of escalation-for-escalation, calculating that showing weakness would cost it dearly in future negotiations. Tehran also appears to be betting that such escalation will generate internal pressure on Netanyahu's government and destabilize Israel's economy through precise, intermittent strikes on populated and strategic areas. Ultimately, this ceasefire does not signal a strategic shift toward peace. Rather, it reflects a moment of 'mutual deterrence' within a fragile balance – one that could shift quickly with any change in power dynamics or political will.
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Hamas says it's open to a Gaza truce but stops short of accepting a Trump-backed proposal
CAIRO: Hamas suggested Wednesday that it was open to a ceasefire agreement with Israel, but stopped short of accepting a US-backed proposal announced by President Donald Trump hours earlier, insisting on its longstanding position that any deal bring an end to the war in Gaza. Trump said Tuesday that Israel had agreed on terms for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza and urged Hamas to accept the deal before conditions worsen. The US leader has been increasing pressure on the Israeli government and Hamas to broker a ceasefire, and hostage agreement and bring about an end to the war. Trump said the 60-day period would be used to work toward ending the war — something Israel says it won't accept until Hamas is defeated. He said that a deal might come together as soon as next week. But Hamas' response, which emphasized its demand that the war end, raised questions about whether the latest offer could materialize into an actual pause in fighting. Hamas official Taher Al-Nunu said that the militant group was 'ready and serious regarding reaching an agreement.' He said Hamas was 'ready to accept any initiative that clearly leads to the complete end to the war.' A Hamas delegation is expected to meet with Egyptian and Qatari mediators in Cairo on Wednesday to discuss the proposal, according to an Egyptian official. The official spoke on condition of anonymity, because he wasn't authorized to discuss the talks with the media. Israel and Hamas disagree on how the war should end Throughout the nearly 21-month-long war, ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas have repeatedly faltered over whether the war should end as part of any deal. Hamas has said that it's willing to free the remaining 50 hostages, less than half of whom are said to be alive, in exchange for a complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and an end to the war. Israel says it will only agree to end the war if Hamas surrenders, disarms and exiles itself, something the group refuses to do. An Israeli official said that the latest proposal calls for a 60-day deal that would include a partial Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and a surge in humanitarian aid to the territory. The mediators and the US would provide assurances about talks to end the war, but Israel isn't committing to that as part of the latest proposal, the official said. The official wasn't authorized to discuss the details of the proposed deal with the media and spoke on condition of anonymity. It wasn't clear how many hostages would be freed as part of the agreement, but previous proposals have called for the release of about 10. Israel has yet to publicly comment on Trump's announcement. On Monday, Trump is set to host Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, days after Ron Dermer, a senior Netanyahu adviser, held discussions with top US officials about Gaza, Iran and other matters. Trump issues another warning On Tuesday, Trump wrote on social media that Israel had 'agreed to the necessary conditions to finalize the 60 Day CEASEFIRE, during which time we will work with all parties to end the War.' 'I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better — IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE,' he said. Trump's warning may find a skeptical audience with Hamas. Even before the expiration of the war's longest ceasefire in March, Trump has repeatedly issued dramatic ultimatums to pressure Hamas to agree to longer pauses in the fighting that would see the release of more hostages and a return of more aid for Gaza's civilians. Still, Trump views the current moment as a potential turning point in the brutal conflict that has left more than 56,000 dead in the Palestinian territory. The Gaza Health Ministry doesn't differentiate between civilians and combatants in its death count, but says that more than half of the dead are women and children. Since dawn Wednesday, Israeli strikes killed a total of 40 people across the Gaza Strip, the Health Ministry said. Hospital officials said four children and seven women were among the dead. The Israeli military, which blames Hamas for the civilian casualties because it operates from populated areas, was looking into the reports. The war began on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas-led militants attacked southern Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking roughly 250 hostages. The war has left the coastal Palestinian territory in ruins, with much of the urban landscape flattened in the fighting. More than 90 percent of Gaza's 2.3 million population has been displaced, often multiple times. And the war has sparked a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, pushing hundreds of thousands of people toward hunger.
Al Arabiya
3 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
Analysis Shows Trump's Tariffs Would Cost US Employers $82.3 Billion
An analysis finds that a critical group of US employers would face a direct cost of 82.3 billion dollars from President Donald Trump's current tariff plans–a sum that could be potentially managed through price hikes, layoffs, hiring freezes, or lower profit margins. The analysis by the JPMorgan Chase Institute is among the first to measure the direct costs created by the import taxes on businesses with 10 million to 1 billion dollars in revenue–a category that includes roughly a third of private-sector US workers. These companies are more dependent than other businesses on imports from China, India, and Thailand–and the retail and wholesale sectors would be especially vulnerable to the import taxes being levied by the Republican president. The findings show clear trade-offs from Trump's import taxes, contradicting his claims that foreign manufacturers would absorb the costs of the tariffs instead of US companies that rely on imports. While the tariffs launched under Trump have yet to boost overall inflation, large companies such as Amazon, Costco, Walmart, and Williams-Sonoma delayed the potential reckoning by building up their inventories before the taxes could be imposed. The analysis comes just ahead of the July 9 deadline by Trump to formally set the tariff rates on goods from dozens of countries. Trump imposed that deadline after the financial markets panicked in response to his April tariff announcements, prompting him to instead schedule a 90-day negotiating period when most imports faced a 10 percent baseline tariff. China, Mexico, and Canada face higher rates, and there are separate 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum. Had the initial April 2 tariffs stayed in place, the companies in the JPMorgan Chase Institute analysis would have faced additional direct costs of 187.6 billion dollars. Under the current rates, the 82.3 billion dollars would be equivalent on average to 2,080 dollars per employee or 3.1 percent of the average annual payroll. Those averages include firms that don't import goods and those that do. Asked Tuesday how trade talks are faring, Trump said simply: 'Everything's going well.' The president has indicated that he will set tariff rates given the logistical challenge of negotiating with so many nations. As the 90-day period comes to a close, only the UK has signed a trade framework with the Trump administration. India and Vietnam have signaled that they're close to a trade framework. There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that more inflation could surface. The investment bank Goldman Sachs said in a report that it expects companies to pass along 60 percent of their tariff costs onto consumers. The Atlanta Federal Reserve has used its survey of businesses' inflation expectations to say that companies could on average pass along roughly half their costs from a 10 percent tariff or a 25 percent tariff without reducing consumer demand. The JPMorgan Chase Institute findings suggest that the tariffs could cause some domestic manufacturers to strengthen their roles as suppliers of goods. But it noted that companies need to plan for a range of possible outcomes and that wholesalers and retailers already operate on such low profit margins that they might need to spread the tariffs' costs to their customers. The outlook for tariffs remains highly uncertain. Trump had stopped negotiations with Canada only to restart them after the country dropped its plan to tax digital services. He similarly on Monday threatened more tariffs on Japan unless it buys more rice from the US. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a Tuesday interview that the concessions from the trade talks have impressed career officials at the Office of the US Trade Representative and other agencies. 'People who have been at Treasury, at Commerce, at USTR for 20 years are saying that these are deals like they've never seen before,' Bessent said on Fox News Channel's 'Fox & Friends.' The treasury secretary said the Trump administration plans to discuss the contours of trade deals next week, prioritizing the tax cuts package passed on Tuesday by the Republican majority in the Senate. Trump has set a Friday deadline for passage of the multitrillion-dollar package, the costs of which the president hopes to offset with tariff revenues.
