The French Ministry of the Economy has found that Tesla violated the law in several ways related to “deceptive business practices,” and has ordered the company to comply in 4 months or face a fine for every day it does not.

The investigation started in 2023, in response to several reports through France’s consumer complaint service SignalConso.

It concluded today, and French authorities from the DGCCRF (Directorate-General for Competition, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Prevention) division of the Ministry of the Economy found several examples of ways that Tesla had misled customers or otherwise failed to comply with French consumer protection laws.

A summary of the ruling in French is available here, and here are the bullet points via browser translation:

Advertisement – scroll for more content

• Sales contracts without date or deadline or place of delivery of the vehicle and not mentioning payment on credit;
• Payments required before the end of the withdrawal period enjoyed by the consumer when he finances his purchase with an assigned credit;
• Absence of receipt valid in the event of partial cash payment;
• Misleading business practices regarding the fully autonomous driving capacity of TESLA vehicles, the availability of certain options and vehicle trade-in offers;
• Failure to refund within the deadlines of orders for which consumers have exercised their right of withdrawal;
• Lack of prior information on delivery methods and in particular its place;

France has given Tesla 4 months to comply with its order. If it doesn’t, France will fine the company 50,000 euros ($58k USD) per day.

Most of these bullet points deal with the ordering and delivery process, and it seems that French authorities took issue with the haphazard nature in which Tesla vehicle deliveries can often happen. They took issue with Tesla’s incomplete sales contracts, sudden and/or repeatedly changing delivery times or locations (and the value of trade-in offers), and failure to refund deposits in a timely manner.

But the meatiest bullet point there is the one about “misleading business practices,” especially given this weekend’s news of Tesla’s Robotaxi launch in Austin.

France finds that Tesla lied about FSD

French authorities found that Tesla had misled customers “regarding the fully autonomous driving capacity of TESLA vehicles.”

Since 2015, Tesla has sold some sort of partial automation to the public. This started in the form of Autopilot, which was released in the US in late 2015 and focused on highway driving only (though it came later to France than the US). More recently, Tesla’s focus has been on Full Self-Driving, or FSD, which is more capable than Autopilot and works on surface streets as well as highways.

Tesla has sold FSD software for various prices over the years, as high as $15,000. It currently sells “Capacité de conduite entirément autonome” in France for 7,500 Euros.

The problem is: this software does not, in fact, drive you entirely autonomously. It is, at the moment, a “level 2” driver assist function, which still requires a driver in the driver’s seat to take full responsibility for the vehicle. Higher levels, 3 and above, could be considered “self-driving,” where the car takes responsibility at certain times, and above level 4, there’s no requirement for a driver to even be in the driver’s seat.

Another wrinkle is that even the driver-assist version of FSD is currently not active in France. There has been a long process to bring FSD to Europe (here’s a recent report about how Tesla used a Dutch loophole to approve Autopilot in the first place), but it’s still not complete.

So, everyone who has bought the system in France has not yet been able to use it. Even if they could use the version that the US has, it would still not qualify as fully self driving.

In addition to this, Tesla has made several statements over the years suggesting FSD’s capabilities will be greater than they currently are. For example, in 2019, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said “if you buy a Tesla today, I believe you are buying an appreciating asset – not a depreciating asset.” He said this on the premise that FSD software would be so valuable that the price of cars that had it would skyrocket. In fact, he said it wouldn’t even be worth it for Tesla to sell cars anymore, because they’d be more valuable to use to make money as autonomous taxis.

Musk even promised that you, the customer, would be able to send out your car as an autonomous taxi to make you money, something that Tesla is now doing, but still not allowing customers to do. He has continued making the same promise, as recently as a few hours before this weekend’s Robotaxi launch.

Elsewhere in France, Tesla is also facing a lawsuit by a group of French Tesla owners who want to get out of their leases early due to Musk’s recent unwise political activity turning their vehicles into “far-right totems.”

Electrek’s Take

The complaints should not be particularly surprising to those who have followed Tesla for some time.

Mostly, they reflect the haphazard nature of Tesla’s vehicle ordering and delivery process which we have come to… love? hate? let’s go with “understand” over the years.

While Tesla does eschew dealerships and has made the vehicle ordering process much simpler in many ways, it’s also true that if there’s ever any reason for deviation from the plan, it’s pretty easy for customers to fall through the cracks and have little recourse. So, the reports of incomplete paperwork, rapidly-changing delivery times and so on should sound familiar to those of us who’ve been around for a while.

Same goes for failure to refund – Tesla has long tied a “reservation fee” to new vehicle announcements, which is often said to be fully refundable at any time. Some customers have had difficulty getting those refunds in a timely manner or at all.

The most interesting part about this order is how sweeping it is. Rather than finding fault in a single practice, it dings Tesla for a litany of issues that have been issues for a long time. Unlike the feckless enforcement that we often see in the US, France seems serious.

The fine is also substantial, but for one of the largest companies in the world (by market cap, anyway), it does seem absorbable. While ~$5 million per quarter is a fair chunk of change, it’s nothing compared to Tesla’s Q1 revenue of $19.3 billion or profit of $409 million.

But, given drastically falling sales in France, maybe it’s enough compared to the profits Tesla gets out of that territory. At a current sales rate of a few thousand cars per quarter, and given Tesla’s current ~2% profit margin and assuming an average selling price of somewhere around ~$60k, a fine of $5 million per quarter would basically eliminate any profits for the company from France.

Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*

Kemi Badenoch has offered Conservative support, in order to help the government pass its controversial welfare changes.

The Tory leader told Sky News she would be asking for three commitments from Sir Keir Starmer, if he wants to use Conservative votes to pass the reforms to disability benefits, which have triggered an unprecedented rebellion of more than 100 Labour MPs.

Ms Badenoch said: “I’m just making it very clear to Keir Starmer that if he will make commitments at the despatch box to meet our conditions which are to reduce the welfare budget, to get people into work and not to have tax rises, then we can support his bill.

“The bill is a bit of a mess. It needs some work. It looks like it’s been rushed for Rachel [Reeves] to fix other problems that they’ve got. But our welfare budget is far too high, and we really need to bring it down.”

PM warns UK must prepare for war at home – follow latest

The prospect of the bill passing on Conservative votes would outrage Labour MPs.

An amendment they have tabled says they cannot support the bill because it would drive disabled people into poverty, and they are concerned about whether people losing benefits would find work.

Around 119 Labour MPs have now signed the amendment, while Sadiq Khan has become the most senior Labour figure to call for a “rethink”. The mayor of London has warned that the proposed cuts would “destroy [the] financial safety net” for “too many disabled Londonders”.

Welfare Secretary Liz Kendall has tried to reassure Labour MPs about the changes. But the rebels are hoping the government will water down their proposals in order to get Labour support.

The prime minister, speaking at a NATO summit in The Hague on Tuesday, insisted the government would press ahead.

Keir Starmer told Sky News: “We’ve got to get on and make that reform because the options are: leave the system as it is, trusting people and not helping them, that’s not a Labour option. The Labour option is to reform it and make it fit for the future. So we’re going to press ahead with these reforms.”

A vote is looming next Tuesday with Labour MPs deeply concerned about the changes which will see 370,000 current PIP claimants lose benefit, and affect 3 million people in total.

The rebels hope the government will climb down.

One of them, Neil Duncan-Jordan, the MP for Poole, told Sky News that relying on Conservative votes “is not a good look for any government”.

He added: “If you can’t rely on your own party, I think you’re in a serious place.”

Responding to Ms Badenoch’s offer, a Labour spokesperson said the government was “elected to deliver change” and that it’s “prepared to take on the challenges holding the UK back”.

They added: “We’re fixing the abysmal mess the Tories left behind, and MPs can either vote to keep a broken failed welfare system that writes people off, or they can vote to start fixing it.

“Next week’s bill is a test for the leader of the opposition as to whether her party has learned anything at all by being roundly rejected by Britain.”