Tesla Has Zero Robotaxi Permits and Zero Autonomous Miles in California | Taha Abbasi

Tesla Has Zero Robotaxi Miles in California — Despite Musk’s Claims

Technology executive Taha Abbasi highlights a striking disconnect between Elon Musk’s public statements and regulatory reality: despite repeatedly suggesting that Tesla was close to receiving “regulatory permission” to launch a robotaxi service in the Bay Area, the company has yet to apply for any of the required permits and has logged exactly zero miles of autonomous test driving on California roads, according to a Reuters investigation.

This revelation is particularly significant because California is the most important market for autonomous vehicle development and deployment. Waymo, Cruise (now restructured under GM), Zoox, and numerous other AV companies have spent years accumulating millions of autonomous miles on California roads, engaging with regulators, and building the operational track record necessary for commercial permits.

The Regulatory Reality Check

California requires autonomous vehicle companies to obtain specific permits from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to test and deploy self-driving vehicles. These include testing permits (with or without a safety driver), deployment permits for commercial operations, and various reporting requirements including annual disengagement reports.

As Taha Abbasi notes, every major autonomous vehicle company operating in California has gone through this process. Waymo holds deployment permits in multiple California cities. Cruise obtained (and later surrendered) its deployment permit after a safety incident. Even startups with a fraction of Tesla’s resources have engaged meaningfully with the California DMV’s autonomous vehicle program.

Tesla, which is headquartered in Austin but maintains significant operations in California, has done none of this. Zero permit applications. Zero reported autonomous test miles. Zero disengagement reports. For a company that has staked its future valuation on robotaxis and autonomous driving, this regulatory gap is difficult to explain.

FSD Is Not the Same as Autonomous Driving — Legally

A critical distinction that often gets lost in the Tesla narrative is the difference between FSD (Full Self-Driving) Supervised and true autonomous driving. FSD Supervised, which Tesla sells for $8,000 or $99/month, is classified as a Level 2 advanced driver assistance system. It requires a human driver to remain attentive and ready to take over at all times. This classification means it doesn’t require California’s autonomous vehicle testing permits.

A robotaxi service, however, operates at Level 4 or Level 5 autonomy — no human driver required. This requires a completely different regulatory framework, including the permits Tesla hasn’t applied for. Taha Abbasi emphasizes that the technological gap between Level 2 (impressive as FSD is) and Level 4 (fully driverless commercial operation) is enormous. It’s not a software update away — it requires validation, regulatory engagement, and safety demonstration that Tesla hasn’t publicly begun in California.

Meanwhile, Waymo Keeps Expanding

The contrast with Waymo is instructive. This week alone, Waymo announced expansion to Chicago and Charlotte, bringing its total US robotaxi markets to approximately ten cities. Waymo has completed over 10 million fully autonomous miles, obtained commercial deployment permits in multiple jurisdictions, and built a track record of safe operations that regulators can evaluate.

Waymo’s approach involves years of methodical testing in each new market before launching commercial service. This builds regulatory trust, generates safety data, and allows the technology to be validated against local driving conditions. It’s not glamorous, and it’s not as headline-grabbing as Musk’s “robotaxis coming soon” announcements, but it’s the approach that has actually produced a working commercial robotaxi service.

What This Means for Tesla’s Valuation

A significant portion of Tesla’s market capitalization is predicated on the assumption that Tesla will successfully launch an autonomous robotaxi network. Analysts who assign Tesla a trillion-dollar-plus valuation typically include substantial value attributed to future autonomous ride-hailing revenue. The revelation that Tesla hasn’t even begun the California permitting process raises legitimate questions about the timeline for this revenue stream.

Taha Abbasi sees this as a crucial reality check for the market. Tesla’s FSD technology is genuinely impressive and getting better with every update. The recent FSD v14 demonstrations showing the system predicting and avoiding highway crashes are remarkable. But impressive assisted driving technology and a commercially viable robotaxi service are different products requiring different regulatory pathways, different safety standards, and different operational infrastructure.

The Path Forward

None of this means Tesla can’t eventually launch a robotaxi service. The company’s approach has always been to develop technology rapidly and engage with regulators later. Tesla may also be pursuing robotaxi launches in jurisdictions with less stringent requirements than California — Texas, for instance, has a more permissive regulatory framework for autonomous vehicles.

But for California — the largest car market in the US and the symbolic home of autonomous driving innovation — Tesla’s complete absence from the regulatory process is a notable gap. As Taha Abbasi has consistently argued, the companies that combine technological capability with regulatory engagement and public trust-building will ultimately win the autonomy race. Technology alone isn’t enough. You need permits, insurance frameworks, and public acceptance — and those take time to build.

---

About the Author: Taha Abbasi is a technology executive, CTO, and applied frontier tech builder. Read more on Grokpedia | YouTube: The Brown Cowboy | tahaabbasi.com