I'd just assume they picked whatever definitions they needed to make Tesla exempt.

This is the way.

Maybe it is just a coincidence

Exactly, corruption is legal. Only your competitors will be fined.

How is it corruption? Any automaker could have chosen to build their factories here. Tesla did. Others chose not to. Shouldn’t they be lauded for that?

Apple builds phones in China, but Teslas are built in Oakland. I just find it pretty cool.

I thought "lobbying" is already a household word :)

I don't think lobbying implies your rep having a bedroom in White House.

And perhaps "state capture", which is a term I first heard from South Africans.

Edit: incidentally, only mentioning SA as academics there developed the theory around it, to the best of my knowledge.

Yep. 3 Months ago:

> The implicit justification for valuing Tesla now is not "we sell good cars", it is state capture.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43023325

Indeed I also heard it in context of South Africa. But Wikipedia also has other, earlier examples too.

That's a strange assumption to make. Most other auto OEMs are basically just final assembly plants with parts shipped in from everywhere. Tesla makes way more parts farther down their supply chain directly in their own factories. Ford, GM and the rest for example aren't designing and populating their own circuit boards.

>Tesla makes way more parts farther down their supply chain directly in their own factories.

Sure but all of the inputs and components to those parts come from other countries. I suppose it depends on how you define terms.

Interesting assumption, but unfortunately it is a wrong assumption.

Sounds like a poor assumption on an audited fact.