Tesla’s EU sales fall 49% in first two months of 2025

CC™ PersPective

By Global NewsDesk

European sales of Tesla electric cars dropped 49 percent in January-February compared with the same period a year earlier, the ACEA manufacturers’ association said Tuesday.

Aging models are one factor behind the plunge so far this year, but e-vehicle clients may also be refusing to buy in protest of Tesla’s billionaire owner Elon Musk since he became a key supporter of US President Donald Trump.

Musk has been leading a vocal and divisive cost-cutting drive at the head of the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Several Tesla dealerships around the United States have been vandalised in recent weeks and the company’s stock price has plummeted over the past month.

New Tesla registrations in the European Union fell to 19,046 in the first two months of the year, giving the company a market share of just 1.1 percent, the ACEA said.

In February alone, Tesla registrations were down 47 percent at 11,743.

The sales drop came even as overall electric vehicle sales jumped 28.4 percent over the first two months of this year to 255,489 — for an EU market share of 15.2 percent.

But for ACEA director general Sigrid de Vries, “The latest new car registration figures confirm that market demand for battery electric vehicles remains below the level needed for the transition to zero-emission mobility to progress.”

She cited a need for tax and purchasing incentives for clients and investments in recharging stations, at a time when the EU is preparing to ease emission reduction targets for struggling European automakers.

Hybrid-electric vehicles continued to be the biggest market segment in the first two months of the year, rising to 594,059 registrations — for a 35.2 percent market share.

That outpaced both petrol and diesel models, with market shares of 29.1 percent and 9.7 percent in February.

US Federal Judge Blocks DOGE From Accessing Social Security Data of Millions of Americans

CC™ PersPective

A federal judge has barred Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing sensitive systems at the Social Security Administration, saying the group appears to be on a “fishing expedition” that could jeopardize the data of millions of people.

“The DOGE Team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion,” said U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in a 137-page ruling. “It has launched a search for the proverbial needle in the haystack, without any concrete knowledge that the needle is actually in the haystack.”

Hollander, a Maryland-based appointee of President Barack Obama, ordered an immediate halt to the DOGE Social Security team’s access to any systems that contain sensitive data of Social Security recipients. She ordered Musk, DOGE and other affiliates to destroy any non-anonymized data they’ve obtained.

The Axe of DOGE: Pentagon aims to cut 50,000 to 60,000 civilian workers

CC™ PersPective

The Pentagon is working to downsize its civilian workforce by approximately 50,000 to 60,000 employees through voluntary departures, though it remains uncertain whether this target can be met without resorting to involuntary layoffs.

The Department of Defense is currently implementing a voluntary reduction initiative to achieve a 5% to 8% cut in its 878,000 civilian workforce—an adjustment that translates to around 50,000 to 60,000 positions, a senior defense official told reporters on Tuesday.

“The number sounds high, but I would focus on the percentage, a 5% to 8% reduction is not a drastic one,” the official stated, emphasizing that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth “is confident can be done without negatively impacting readiness in order to make sure that our resources are allocated in the right direction.”

So far, about 21,000 civilian employees have had their resignation requests approved under the Pentagon’s Deferred Resignation Program (DRP), which allows employees to resign while still receiving pay until the fiscal year concludes on September 30. However, the senior defense official declined to specify the total number of workers who had applied for this program.

ABC News had previously reported that under a Trump administration initiative, 31,000 civilian employees had submitted resignation requests, though some were denied.

Barbarians at the gate - How America mortgaged its future on the altar of MAGA

CC™ Editor’s Sunday Review

By Editor-in-Chief

The incoming administration of Donald J. Trump has predicated its policies on ‘cleaning the swamp’. 

Here are the facts:

1) 8 of Trump’s cabinet picks donated almost half-a-billion dollars to his (Trump’s) re-election campaign. While the influence of large campaign donors on policy making is a recurring concern across administrations, the scale of these donations with regard to the incoming Trump administration, raises valid concerns about cronyism and how these relationships might shape policymaking. 

2) Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

The establishment of the DOGE with figures like Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy underscores broader concerns about potential conflicts of interest. Tesla’s historical receipt of government funds to innovate in clean energy contrasts with any policy that undermines competitors like Rivian. Canceling Biden-era funding for Rivian, as Ramaswamy has intimated, could:

•Stifle competition in the EV market, undermining innovation.

•Harm Georgia’s economy if the promised 8,000 jobs fail to materialize.

•Reinforce perceptions of favoritism, potentially benefiting Tesla.

3) Regulation Rollbacks

A loosening of regulatory oversight, particularly in critical sectors like healthcare and aviation, could indeed have far-reaching consequences. Historical examples suggest that deregulation:

•May increase corporate profits but often at the expense of public safety or service quality.

•Risks weakening consumer protections, as seen in sectors like banking and energy following similar moves in the past.

4)  Broader Implications

My concern (and that of many well-meaning folks) is about how concentrated wealth and political influence can blur the lines between public service and personal gain. While Trump’s policies have long championed deregulation as a driver of economic growth, the balance between efficiency and accountability will ultimately define public perception of his governance.

Policy Implications for the EV Industry as a result of the possible actions of DOGE and the impact of deregulation, using the Healthcare and Aviation industries as test cases:

Policy Implications for the EV Industry

The competition between Tesla and newer players like Rivian is central to understanding the potential effects of DOGE’s decisions. Here are the key points:

1. Market Competition and Innovation

•Favoritism Risks: If Rivian loses the $6 billion promised by the Biden administration while Tesla continues benefiting from previous subsidies, the playing field could tilt significantly in Tesla’s favor. This reduces competition, which is vital for innovation and cost reduction in the EV market.

•Job Loss and Economic Impact: The proposed Rivian factory in Georgia would generate around 8,000 jobs, directly boosting the local economy. Its cancellation could harm not only the state’s workforce but also U.S. efforts to expand domestic EV manufacturing capacity.

2. Global Leadership in EVs

•Policies favoring one company over others may hinder the U.S.’s ability to compete globally, especially with countries like China, which dominates the EV supply chain and production. A diverse domestic EV ecosystem is critical to achieving energy independence and global competitiveness.

3. Public Perception and Policy Credibility

•Rolling back Rivian’s funding while Tesla remains dominant could spark accusations of bias or corruption, undermining public trust in government energy policies.

Impact of Deregulation

Deregulation in sectors like healthcare and aviation often has mixed results, with both short-term gains for businesses and long-term risks for consumers and workers.

1. Healthcare

•Impact on Safety Standards: Deregulation could loosen controls on drug approvals, hospital standards, and medical device quality. While this might accelerate innovation and reduce costs for companies, it risks patient safety if oversight is weakened.

•Access and Affordability: If deregulation leads to the consolidation of insurance companies or healthcare providers, patients may face fewer options and higher prices in the long run.

2. Aviation

•Safety Concerns: The aviation industry is highly regulated to ensure passenger safety. Reduced oversight could increase the risk of accidents or mechanical failures, as was seen in the aftermath of deregulation in the 1980s.

•Cost vs. Quality Trade-offs: While deregulation might lower ticket prices, it often comes at the cost of service quality (e.g., reduced legroom, increased fees, or overbooked flights).

With no guard rails in place for the incoming Trump administration, balancing efficiency and oversight will be a tall order as Trump will not be favorably disposed to the concept of independent watchdogs. 

Furthermore, policies that support fair competition, especially in the EV industry, through the encouragement of a diverse marketplace that engenders innovation across multiple players, will be abandoned for archaic and authoritarian policies that promote favoritism and stifle competition.

The basic premise for the creation of the DOGE was to promote  transparency around funding and policy decisions. It was supposed to help rebuild trust and reduce perceptions of corruption.

Under Trump, with Musk and Ramaswamy as the anchors, realizing that aforementioned noble premise will be at best, an illusion. 

America and Americans are in for a long and painful ride.