A multi-year investigation into the safety of Tesla’s driver assistance systems by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, is drawing near a close.
Reuters’ David Shepardson first reported on the latest developments Thursday, citing NHTSA acting administrator Ann Carlson. CNBC confirmed the report with the federal vehicle safety regulators.
A spokesperson for NHTSA declined to disclose further details, but told CNBC in an e-mail, “We confirm the comments to Reuters,” and “NHTSA’s Tesla investigations remain open, and the agency generally does not comment on open investigations.”
The agency initiated a safety probe of Tesla’s driver assistance systems — now marketed in the U.S. as Autopilot, Full Self-Driving and FSD Beta options — in 2021 after it identified a string of crashes in which Tesla drivers, thought to be using the company’s driver assistance systems, crashed into first responders’ stationary vehicles.
Despite their names, none of Tesla’s driver assistance features make their cars autonomous. Tesla cars cannot function as robotaxis like those operated by GM-owned Cruise or Alphabet‘s Waymo. Instead, Tesla vehicles require a human driver at the wheel, ready to steer or brake at any time. Tesla’s standard Autopilot and premium Full Self-Driving systems only control braking, steering and acceleration in limited circumstances.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk — who also owns and runs the social network X (formerly Twitter) — often implies Tesla cars are autonomous. For example, on July 23, an ex-Tesla employee who led the company’s AI software engineering posted on the social network about ChatGPT, and how much that generative AI tool impressed his parents when he showed it to them for the first time. Musk responded: “Same happens with Tesla FSD. I forget that most people on Earth have no idea cars can drive themselves.”
In its owners’ manuals, Tesla tells drivers who use Autopilot or FSD: “Keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times and be mindful of road conditions, surrounding traffic, and other road users (such as pedestrians and cyclists). Always be prepared to take immediate action. Failure to follow these instructions could cause damage, serious injury or death.”
The company’s cars feature a driver monitoring system which employs in-cabin cameras and sensors in the steering wheel to detect whether a driver is paying adequate attention to the road and driving task. The system will “nag” drivers with a chime and message on the car’s touchscreen to pay attention and put their hands on the wheel. But it’s not clear that this is a strong enough system to ensure safe use of Tesla’s driver assistance features.
Tesla has previously conducted voluntary recalls of its cars due to other problems with Autopilot and FSD Beta and promised to deliver over-the-air software updates that would remedy the issues. But in July, the agency required Elon Musk’s automaker to send more extensive data on the performance of their driver assistance systems to evaluate as part of its Autopilot safety investigations.
NHTSA publishes data regularly on car crashes in the U.S. that involved advanced driver assistance systems like Tesla Autopilot, Full Self Driving or FSD Beta, dubbed “level 2” under industry standards from SAE International.
The latest data from that Standing General Order crash report says there have been at least 26 incidents involving Tesla cars equipped with level 2 systems resulting in fatalities from August 1, 2019 through mid-July this year. In 23 of these incidents, the agency report says, Tesla’s driver assistance features were in use within 30 seconds of the collision. In three incidents, it’s not known whether these features were used.
Ford is the only other automaker reporting a fatal collision that involved one of its vehicles equipped with level 2 driver assistance. It was not known if the system was engaged preceding that crash, according to the NHTSA SGO report.
Tan Su Shan, chief executive officer of DBS Group Holdings Ltd., speaking at the Singapore Fintech Festival in Singapore, on Nov. 12, 2025.
Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images
SINGAPORE – Amid fears of an artificial intelligence bubble, much has been made of recent reports suggesting that AI has yet to generate returns for companies investing billions into adopting the tech.
But that’s not what the chief executive of Southeast Asia’s largest bank is seeing — she says her firm is already reaping the rewards of its AI initiatives, and it’s only just the beginning.
“It’s not hope. It’s now. It’s already happening. And it will get even better,” DBS CEO Tan Su Shan told CNBC on the sidelines of Singapore Fintech Week, when asked about the promise of AI adoption.
DBS has been working to implement artificial intelligence across its bank for over a decade, which helped prepare its internal data analytics for recent waves of generative and agentic AI.
Agentic AI is a type of artificial intelligence that relies on data to proactively make independent decisions, plan and execute tasks autonomously, with minimal human oversight.
Tan expectsAI adoption to bring DBS an overall revenue bump of more than 1 billion Singapore dollars (about $768 million) this year, compared to SG$750 million in 2024. That assessment is based on about 370 AI use cases powered by over 1,500 models throughout its business.
“The proliferation of generative AI has been transformative for us,” Tan said, adding that the company was experiencing a “snowballing effect” of benefits thanks to machine learning.
A major area in which DBS has applied AI is in its financial services to institutional clients, with AI used to collect and leverage data for clients in order to better contextualize and personalize offerings.
According to Tan, this has resulted in “faster and more resilient” teams. The CEO believes that these uses of AI have contributed to a recent uptick in the bank’s deposit growth as compared to competitors’.
The company also recently launched a newly enhanced AI-powered assistant for corporate clients known as “DBS Joy,” which assists clients with unique corporate banking queries around the clock.
ROI concerns
Despite Tan’s strong convictions about AI, recent evidence suggests that many companies are struggling to turn their AI investments into tangible profits.
MIT released a report in July that found 95% of 300 publicly disclosed AI initiatives, encompassing generative AI investments of $30–$40 billion, had failed to achieve real returns.
However, at least in the banking sector, there are signs that the tides are turning.
While DBS doesn’t differentiate spending in generative AI from other in-house investments, other major banks have recently offered this comparison.
JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon stated in an interview with Bloomberg TV last month that the bank is already breaking even on its approximately $2 billion of annual investments in AI adoption. That represents “just the tip of the iceberg,” he added.
Those expectations are shared by DBS, which plans to continue to accelerate its AI development to become an AI-powered bank.
The ultimate goal, according to Tan, is for its generative AI to develop into a trusted financial advisor for clients, including retail users who are expected to interact with personalized AI agents through the DBS banking app.
The bank already has over 100 AI algorithms that analyze users’ data to provide them with personalized “nudges,” such as alerts on incoming shortfalls, product recommendations, and other insights.
Continued AI investments
While DBS may already be reaping rewards from its AI adoption, Tan acknowledged that it will require continued investments, not only in capital, but in the time needed to reskill employees.
The company has launched several AI reskilling initiatives across departments this year and has even deployed a generative AI-powered coaching tool to support these efforts.
This will help the company automate mundane work and refocus its staff on building and maintaining human-to-human relationships with customers, rather than reducing headcount, Tan said.
“We’re not freezing hiring, but it does mean reskilling. And that’s a journey. It’s a never-ending journey … a constant evolution.”
The slump in stocks can partly be traced to a turnaround in sentiment regarding artificial intelligence. Tech behemoths such as Nvidia, Broadcom and Oracle slumped, with the last losing more than one-third in value since it rocketed 36% in September.
Investors, it seems, are growing worried over the high valuations of tech names, as well as the gigantic amount of capital expenditure they are committing to — with some, like Oracle, having to take on debt to fulfil those obligations.
Uncertainty over an interest rate cut in December is also putting a downer on Wall Street. It’s a coin toss as to whether the U.S. Federal Reserve will ease monetary policy then, according to the CME FedWatch tool. That’s a huge difference from a month ago, when traders were pricing in a 95.5% chance of a December cut.
Not having October’s employment and inflation numbers, and possibly never getting them, means the Fed lacks visibility into the state of the economy — and whether it should try to support the labor market or continue reining in inflation.
After all, flying blind makes it hard to see where you’ll land. As of now, that applies both to the Fed and investors trying to navigate the still-hazy ambitions of tech companies.
What you need to know today
And finally…
Oracle CEO Clay Magouyrk speaks at a Q&A following a tour of the OpenAI data center in Abilene, Texas, U.S., Sept. 23, 2025.
Two months ago, Oracle’s stock soared 36% to a record after the company blew away investors with its forecast for cloud infrastructure revenue. Since then, the company has lost one-third of its value, more than wiping out those gains.
The mood of late has turned, with investors questioning whether the AI market ran too far, too fast and whether OpenAI can live up to its $300 billion commitment to Oracle over five years. Of the big cloud companies in the GPU business, Oracle is expected to generate the least amount of free cash flow, said Jackson Ader, an analyst at KeyBanc Capital Markets.
Ticket reseller StubHub signage on display at the New York Stock Exchange for the company’s IPO on Sept. 17, 2025.
NYSE
StubHub shares plunged 20% in extended trading on Thursday after the company reported quarterly results for the first time since its initial public offering in September.
Here’s how the ticket vendor did in comparison with LSEG consensus:
Loss per share: $4.27
Revenue: $468.1 million vs. $452 million expected
During a conference call with investors, StubHub CEO and founder Eric Baker said the company wouldn’t provide guidance for the current quarter.
Baker said that the company takes “a long term approach,” adding that the timing of when tickets go on sale can vary, making it hard to predict consumer demand. StubHub plans to offer outlook for 2026 when it reports fourth-quarter results, he said.
“The demand for live events is phenomenal,” Baker said. “We don’t see anything with consumer demand that’s any different.”
Revenue increased 8% in its second quarter from $433.8 million a year earlier, the company said.
StubHub reported a net loss of $1.33 billion, or a loss of $4.27 per share, compared to a net loss of $45.9 million, or a loss of 15 cents per share, during the same period last year. StubHub said this reflects a one-time stock-based compensation charge of $1.4 billion stemming from its IPO.
Gross merchandise sales, which represent the total dollar value paid by ticket buyers, rose 11% year over year to $2.43 billion.
The company faced tough comparisons from a year earlier, when results were boosted by Taylor Swift’s massively popular Eras Tour. Excluding that impact, StubHub said GMS grew 24% year over year.
Founded in 2000, StubHub primarily generates revenue from connecting buyers with ticket resellers. It competes with Vivid Seats, which was taken public via a special purpose acquisition company in 2021; SeatGeek; and Ticketmaster parent Live Nation Entertainment.
“We are building a truly differentiated consumer product that improves the experience for fans while unlocking better economics for venues, teams, and artists through open distribution,” Baker said in a statement. “We’re early in that journey, but our progress so far gives us great confidence in our strategy and the long-term value we’re creating.”
StubHub raised $800 million in its long-awaited IPO on the New York Stock Exchange, which came after it delayed its debut twice. The most recent stall came in April after President Donald Trump‘s announcement of sweeping tariffs roiled markets. The company restarted the process to go public in August when it filed an updated prospectus.
On Thursday, the company’s stock closed at $18.82. Shares are now down roughly 20% from the IPO price of $23.50.
