Exclusive: Tesla provided deceptive safety data regarding its ‘Full Self-Driving’ system to European regulators

In its pursuit of European approval for its “Full Self-Driving” (FSD) system, Tesla has submitted self-reported safety statistics to regulators in Sweden and the Netherlands, which independent traffic-safety researchers have described as misleading marketing.

A Reuters examination published last month found that Tesla CEO Elon Musk and other leaders over the past year have increasingly cited statistics they claim demonstrate its FSD driver-assistance feature is up to 10 times safer than human drivers. However, the review conducted by the news agency identified multiple invalid data comparisons that underpinned Tesla’s statistics, which inflated its safety claims.

Tesla has submitted exaggerated safety data to certain European regulators, based on correspondence acquired by Reuters through public records requests, as the electric vehicle manufacturer aims for broader approval of its Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology in a region where it is working to recover market share.

Tesla reached out to RDW, the Dutch road regulator, in late 2024 to initiate the FSD approval process.

In a letter to RDW dated November 2024, Tesla included a link to its safety report and asserted that “increased usage” of FSD “leads to safer roads.” Tesla imposes a monthly fee for its Full Self-Driving (FSD) feature, which is capable of autonomous driving in specific situations, yet it necessitates that the human operator remain attentive.

In April, after over a year of testing and discussions with Tesla, RDW granted approval for the use of FSD in the Netherlands. The Dutch regulator is currently pursuing EU-wide approval for Tesla.

RDW chose not to address the concerns raised by Reuters regarding Tesla’s safety statistics. However, the agency stated that it “does not rely on marketing claims or external statistics” for its decision-making process and conducts its own “tests, analyses, and verifications” of the system on public roads and test tracks. The agency did not indicate if it evaluated Tesla’s safety statistics in the U.S.

RDW stated that Tesla “gathered a significant amount of data” throughout the testing process, and the agency “verified, examined, and audited all of this data.” RDW did not specify the type of data that Tesla collected or the measurements taken.

Tesla did not provide a response to the requests for comment.

SAVING 32,000 LIVES?

Soon after the Dutch announced their decision on April 10, a Tesla policy manager, Ivan Komusanac, sent an email to Swedish regulators requesting similar approval for FSD. He included a slide presentation showcasing the inflated assertion that Teslas equipped with FSD can cover over seven times the distance between crashes compared to the typical U.S. human driver.

The presentation asserted that FSD might have saved 32,000 lives and averted 1.9 million injuries.

Researchers interviewed by Reuters indicated that those figures are significantly misleading due to the unrealistic premise that every U.S. vehicle, including freight trucks and crash-prone motorcycles, would be substituted with an FSD-enabled Tesla car—and that each Tesla car is, in fact, at least seven times safer than the vehicle it replaces.

The Reuters examination also found that Tesla inflates the safety of its technology by comparing the crash rate of FSD-piloted Teslas that experienced airbag deployments to the overall U.S. crash rate for all vehicles, which includes many less severe accidents. The company also contrasts its cars with the typical U.S. vehicle, which is significantly older than the average Tesla. That skews the outcomes since car manufacturers have progressively rolled out new safety features that decrease accidents.

Anders Eriksson, an investigator at the Swedish Transport Agency, chose not to comment on the data provided by Tesla. However, he noted that Swedish regulators “look beyond headline figures” and emphasized that any evaluation of such a system would not rely “solely on aggregated safety claims but on the overall evidence presented.”

The regulator did not respond to Reuters’ inquiries regarding the additional evidence Tesla submitted.

Dudley Curtis, a spokesperson for the watchdog group European Transport Safety Council, expressed that his organization is “certainly concerned” regarding Tesla’s presentation of “unreliable safety data” from the United States to regulators in Sweden, following information shared by Reuters about the correspondence.

He stated that if Tesla intends to make safety claims, they should “provide the data to a university and have it independently verified by a qualified researcher, and then we can discuss.”

TESLA AIMS FOR FSD TO BOOST EUROPEAN RECOVERY

Tesla has stated that obtaining FSD approval in Europe is crucial for the growth of vehicle sales in that region. The electric vehicle manufacturer is continuing its efforts to recover market share following a significant decline in sales last year, which was influenced by protests related to Musk’s political engagements, including his support for far-right political parties in Europe.

Lacking approval may hinder Tesla’s ability to compete in a region where Chinese EV manufacturers are increasingly gaining ground.

In the upcoming months, representatives from 55% of member states, which account for 65% of the bloc’s population, must cast a “yes” vote for FSD to gain legal status across the EU.

Meanwhile, individual member states can approve the technology independently. A regulator in Greece, which stated last month that the country aims to approve FSD, referenced data “from the other side of the Atlantic” indicating that “this system ultimately leads to a very significant drop in accidents.”

The Greek transport ministry chose not to respond to inquiries regarding the origin of the data it referenced, specifically whether it was sourced from Tesla’s safety report.

Emails reveal that drivers referencing Tesla’s safety statistics have overwhelmed regulators in various European countries, urging them to promptly approve FSD.

Several Tesla drivers contacted Norwegian road regulators regarding Tesla’s vehicle safety report from last autumn. One contended that the technology is “considerably safer than typical manual driving,” with the capability to “decrease traffic accidents by as much as 90% and consequently save lives on Norwegian roads.”

Stein-Helge Mundal from the Norwegian Public Roads Administration addressed several Tesla enthusiasts, stating that Tesla’s figures “are self-produced,” which complicates the ability to find a correlation with the authorities’ accident statistics.