What Would Elon Musk’s Tesla Gain—and Lose—From a Trump Presidency?

When Tesla’s CEO, Elon Musk, endorsed former President Donald Trump, financially supported his reelection campaign, and even attended rallies in swing states, he upended a lot of the politics around electric vehicles (EVs). It used to be quite an easy distinction to make: Climate-conscious Democrats would buy EVs and Democratic Party policies supported EV uptake, while Republicans were against EVs. (As recently as 2023, a Gallup poll found that about 71 percent of Republicans would not consider buying an EV, compared with 17 percent of Democrats.) However, the political landscape and rhetoric around EVs is beginning to shift.

Since Musk’s endorsement, Trump has softened his tone, stating, “I’m for electric cars. I have to be, because Elon endorsed me very strongly.” In the past, Trump has been openly opposed to EVs and federal support for the industry and incentives, saying he would roll back supportive policies such as the tax credit program for EV purchases of up to $7,500 for new cars. That program has been in place since 2008 as part of the Energy Improvement and Extension Act under President George W. Bush; the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 modified and extended this credit.

Musk has repeatedly stated he is anti-subsidies, though Tesla has received $2.8 billion in state and federal government subsidies in the form of grants and tax credits since it delivered its first car in 2008. Tesla also earned nearly $9 billion from carbon credit sales since 2009, trading these regulatory credits to other automakers that need to comply with emissions standards set by regulators.

Despite its strong position as the American EV industry leader—Tesla’s U.S. market share in the third quarter of 2024 was 48 percent, followed by General Motors with 9.3 percent and Ford with 8.6 percent—removing federal incentives for EVs would still impact Tesla’s sales, especially among price-sensitive consumers. EV adoption will remain reliant on subsidies to bridge the cost gap with conventional vehicles.

In fact, there is direct evidence from Europe that removing the incentives for consumers too early, before the market is developed, will result in a drop in EV purchases. Because of federal budget constraints, Germany cut the national EV subsidy in December 2023, and sales numbers keep dropping: by 37 percent in July 2024 and 69 percent in August. Most other U.S. manufacturers, such as Ford, GM, and Rivian (which received an investment of up to $5 billion from German carmaker Volkswagen), would likely face significantly tougher challenges in maintaining their EV offerings without such incentives. But even industry leader Tesla would not be immune to these policy changes.

If you were looking to crush Tesla’s competition through federal action, first on the chopping block would be policies put in place by the Biden administration to support established automotive component manufacturers to shift to EVs. During a visit to Detroit in May 2024, Vice President Kamala Harris announced an investment for a $100 million fund for small- and medium-size component manufacturers to upgrade facilities that can then produce components needed for EVs. (Most of the smaller suppliers only have production facilities for internal combustion engine vehicles.) More importantly, there is a new $2 billion Domestic Automotive Manufacturing Conversion Grants program from the U.S. Department of Energy for domestic automotive manufacturing in areas such as Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and other swing states. This will be at risk of shutting down if those factories cannot make that transition to EV manufacturing. The fund is meant to support those small manufacturers and their workers and will run from this year through September 2031.

Trump has vowed on day one to remove the so-called EV mandate, referring to the Environmental Protection Agency’s clean car emissions standards and the Biden administration’s goal that half of new car sales be electric by 2030. While these measures are not legally binding, removing emissions standards would have negative effects on EV development, because investment uncertainty would result, EV production by established automakers would slow down, and consumers would receive the signal to keep buying gas cars.

If Trump gets reelected, he has agreed to let Musk take on a government advisory role. When he unveiled his economic plans in September, Trump also announced the creation of a government efficiency commission that Musk would head. This equates to many potential conflicts of interest as Musk’s companies—Tesla, and also and SpaceX—are involved in at least 20 recent investigations or reviews from various U.S. government departments and various U.S. agencies, including the departments of transportation, justice, labor, and interior.

---

Apart from issues that would potentially distort domestic competition, the other factor at play is the competition from Chinese EV makers such as BYD, which already outsold Tesla in the final quarter of 2023, 526,000 to 484,000. There is a 100 percent tariff on Chinese EVs coming into the United States, introduced by the Biden administration in May 2024, and Trump would no doubt keep up these tariffs to keep BYD out of the U.S. market. There is a good chance Trump will even increase them, as there is a bipartisan agreement that domestic industries and the U.S. battery industry need to be protected. By contrast, Musk criticized the tariffs on Chinese EVs (“I’m in favor of no tariffs,” he said at a conference) when they were introduced, advocating instead for free markets with minimal government interference.

Both Democrats’ and Republicans’ China policy would keep out Chinese EV manufacturing from the United States. This is in contrast to what is happening in Europe—where BYD is building a production plant in Hungary to avoid European Union tariffs.

China would probably retaliate by imposing higher tariffs on imports, and China is Tesla’s second-largest market. As Beijing fosters and grows its own EV industry, Tesla could face barriers to expanding there if United States-China relations worsen, potentially losing even more ground to Chinese EV companies such as BYD or Xiaomi.

A return to aggressive tariffs on Chinese goods under a Trump administration could impede not only sales but also Tesla’s supply chain, as many of its components and raw materials such as batteries are sourced or refined in China. Nearly 40 percent of the suppliers for materials used in Tesla’s batteries are Chinese companies. Higher tariffs on battery components from China would force Tesla to pass on costs to consumers or cut into profit margins.

EU countries are already preparing for a high-stakes trade war with Trump if he wins a second term. The EU is likely to respond strongly to Trump’s announcement of a universal 20 percent tariff, as such tariffs would hurt some of Europe’s largest companies, including carmakers. Trump already threated to impose tariffs on EU auto exports during his first presidency.

In retaliation, the EU would impose tariffs on American goods, potentially targeting key U.S. industries or sectors including companies that are gaining ground in Europe’s EV market, such as Tesla. If the EU enacted counter-tariffs on United States-based automakers, Tesla could face increased costs or restrictions when selling vehicles in the EU. Retaliatory tariffs could complicate Tesla’s European supply chain, increasing production costs or delaying expansions in key markets, including the expansion of Tesla’s Gigafactory in Germany. In a scenario where the EU shifts incentives to favor local manufacturers, Tesla’s European growth strategy could be directly affected, posing challenges to its long-term market positioning.

For these reasons, a Trump presidency might not be a slam dunk for Tesla. Two of Musk’s other businesses, SpaceX and Starlink, maintain critical government partnerships, with SpaceX, in particular, becoming integral to U.S. national security and space exploration. But while the impact of a second Trump term on these critical technologies is unclear, it would almost certainly weaken federal support for EVs, potentially slowing market growth and infrastructure expansion critical for their rapid uptake—all of which is urgently needed to reduce transport emissions and mitigate climate change.