Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software is no longer just a feature on a premium EV, it is emerging as the central bargaining chip in a looming reshuffle of who holds real power in the electric car market. If Tesla succeeds in turning FSD into a licensed platform that rivals depend on, the balance of influence could shift from whoever sells the most metal to whoever owns the most capable autonomy stack.
The stakes are rising quickly as regulators in Europe and China edge closer to approving wider use of FSD and as Tesla positions its cars as rolling AI computers rather than traditional vehicles. Whether legacy automakers choose to license that brain or keep building their own will determine if Tesla becomes the EV world’s Microsoft, or remains a dominant but isolated hardware player.
The widening FSD technology gap
The core reason FSD licensing could reorder the EV hierarchy is that Tesla appears to be pulling away on autonomy capability just as the rest of the industry confronts a long catch-up cycle. At CES, analysts argued that If Tesla remains the only provider of a scalable, functioning FSD system that improves with every mile driven, rivals could face a decade-long lag while they offer inferior driver-assist features. That kind of lead is not just about convenience on the highway, it is about who controls the data, the user experience and eventually the economics of robotaxis.
Inside the company, the autonomy push is tightly tied to its AI strategy. A recent note on Tesla highlighted how the firm’s Vision-based approach, adopted with the Model 3 and Model Y, has shifted the narrative from being a carmaker to being an autonomy platform. At CES, Lincoln Miner framed this as a win for Tesla, arguing that the company’s early bet on software-first design is now being validated just as competitors discover how hard it is to scale their own stacks.
Regulatory green lights in Europe and China
Regulation is often portrayed as a brake on autonomy, but for Tesla it is starting to look more like a moat. The company has told investors that it is targeting early 2026 for FSD approval in Europe, with the Dutch regulator RDW playing a key role in clearing the software for the wider European market. If that timeline holds, Tesla will be able to standardize its autonomy features across major regions rather than maintaining a patchwork of capabilities.
In China, Musk has said he expects FSD to win full approval in early 2026, a milestone that would open the world’s largest EV market to the company’s most advanced software. Internally, Tesla’s roadmap describes Standardizing Global Autonomy as the most significant change in 2026, with FSD moving from a North American-centric product to a global system that can operate unsupervised wherever regulators allow it. That kind of regulatory alignment would make it far easier for other automakers to plug into a single licensed platform rather than tailoring their own code to each jurisdiction.
Why legacy automakers are resisting FSD licensing
For now, most traditional carmakers are saying no. Tesla’s chief executive has reiterated that Elon Musk is willing to license FSD to other automakers, and has even singled out Ford as one of the more aggressive legacy players in exploring the idea. Yet reporting on internal industry reactions shows that when Tesla tried to sell its FSD system to rivals, it got zero takers, in part because traditional OEMs are wary of depending on a competitor’s evolving software.
There are also hard engineering and organizational frictions. A widely shared critique argued that FSD licensing is a high-friction, high-distraction exercise that would create constant touchpoints between Tesla and legacy engineering teams, potentially draining focus and talent on both sides. A companion analysis pointed out that NVIDIA is not responsible for OEM execution when it sells chips, whereas a deep software integration with FSD would tie Tesla directly to how other manufacturers implement safety-critical systems. On top of that, one community breakdown noted that Factor in the rifts in hardware version support, the need to install a Tesla computer, and the specific camera setup required, and the integration burden becomes even more daunting for cautious OEMs.
The upside for Tesla investors and EV market structure
From a capital markets perspective, the prospect of FSD licensing sits on top of an already bullish narrative about Tesla’s 2026. One investor note listed several Key Points, including production ramp-ups and the potential for wider approval of full self-driving, as reasons the stock could re-rate higher for those with a tolerance for downside risk. Another analysis projected that Tesla could solidify EV dominance in 2026 with 50% market share growth, driven by affordable next-gen Model offerings and Rob taxi initiatives, suggesting that autonomy is already baked into expectations for both volume and margins.
Autonomy also intersects with regulation in ways that could supercharge the economics. A policy proposal to raise the NHTSA Exemption Cap Increase from 2,500 to 90,000 vehicles annually would give Tesla far more room to deploy experimental autonomous fleets and convert cars into profit centers overnight. Forecasts of future demand argue that Robotaxis and lower interest rates could help Tesla’s EV sales return to growth in 2026, with unsupervised robotaxis seen as a key driver once regulators sign off. If FSD becomes a licensed product on top of that, Tesla would not just sell more cars, it would collect software revenue from competitors’ fleets as well.
From carmaker to AI platform: how licensing could flip control
Underneath the licensing debate is a deeper shift in how Tesla defines itself. One analysis of the company’s AI strategy argued that Instead of being just vehicles, Tesla’s cars will become AI-enabled revenue-generating platforms, with core value shifting from hardware to software and services sold on top. If FSD is licensed broadly, that platform logic would extend beyond Tesla’s own lineup to other brands, fundamentally altering its business model relative to other automakers.
The competitive landscape around autonomy hardware is also evolving in ways that could reinforce Tesla’s position. A new Model from NVIDIA was described with a Target level Built for Level 4 autonomy, using a Vision-language-action reasoning model trained on more than 1,700 hours of open Data, underscoring how quickly the underlying AI tools are advancing. Yet Tesla has already spent years integrating its own custom silicon and end-to-end Vision stack into production vehicles, which gives it a head start in turning those advances into real-world capability. If, as one Conclusion put it, legacy automakers are repeating the mistake of dismissing a disruptive technology almost note-for-note, then refusing to license FSD now could leave them dependent on Tesla later, on terms far less favorable than those on offer today.
More from Morning Overview