Feds Audit Tesla Over FSD Crashes — What Owners Should Know

Tesla Crash Reports Trigger Audit

The U.S. auto-safety regulator has opened an audit into Tesla after finding the company filed crash reports months late for incidents involving Autopilot and Full Self-Driving. Federal rules say those reports should arrive within one to five days of a company learning about a crash. Tesla told regulators a data-collection glitch caused the backlog and says it’s fixed. The agency now wants to know why the delays happened, whether any reports are missing, and if the submitted data were complete.

Why This Matters Beyond Paperwork

Crash reporting is the early-warning system that helps investigators spot patterns fast—things like lane-keeping confusion, low-visibility issues, or weak driver engagement. That’s why NHTSA created a Standing General Order in 2021 and tightened it again this year. Miss the five-day clock on qualifying incidents and the civil penalties stack up. The latest amendment took effect in June 2025 and keeps the tight deadlines in place.

Where Tesla Stands Today

The audit lands while other Tesla reviews are still live. NHTSA closed its long Autopilot crash probe last year by launching a “recall-effectiveness” check to see if Tesla’s December 2023 software changes really cut misuse and mode confusion. There’s also a separate review looking at FSD performance in poor visibility after several collisions, including a fatal case. In short: Tesla deficiencies in compliance culture and product behavior are both under the microscope.

If You Own (or Will Soon Own) a Tesla

Near term, your car isn’t getting bricked and Autopilot isn’t going dark. The audit is about reporting discipline. But this can still touch owners in practical ways:

• Software changes: Expect more guardrails via over-the-air updates—firmer hands-on-wheel checks, clearer handover prompts, or more conservative behaviour in bad weather. Those are the kinds of tweaks regulators watch for when they ask whether a recall fix “sticks.”
• Feature rollouts: Big promises—wider FSD availability, robotaxi demos—get harder if reporting stays messy. Cities and states pay attention to federal probes when they decide who gets to operate driverless services on their streets.
• Insurance and resale: Headlines about safety audits don’t help premiums or residual values. Clean governance and timely reporting tend to support both; sloppy paperwork does the opposite. (Insurers read the same filings you do.)

What Good Looks Like

There’s a proven playbook for getting out from under an audit cloud: independent compliance oversight, a one-click pipeline from crash alert to filed report, proactive updates when anomalies pop, and product changes that address known risks. When GM’s Cruise failed to fully disclose a high-profile pedestrian-dragging incident, it paid a penalty and accepted a long compliance plan before attempting a relaunch. Transparency bought it a second chance; anything less would have kept the cars parked.

Bottom Line

Tesla wants to win on software, scale, and bold timelines. That’s consistently their hype. But the regulator’s message is a lot simpler: if your system is strong enough to steer a two-ton car, your reporting needs to be strong enough to show what happens when it goes wrong. For owners, that likely means more sensible OTA guardrails rather than dramatic feature removals. For shoppers, it’s a reminder to judge not just the demo reel but the discipline behind it. For autotaxi passengers, it means choose your ride based on brand responsibility. If Tesla files on time and shows its fixes work, the autonomy road opens up. If it doesn’t, expect delays—and more scrutiny—before the next big rollout.