Tesla Inc

Note 6 –Inventory

Our inventory consisted of the following (in millions):

(1)Finished goods inventory includes products in transit to fulfill customer orders, new vehicles available for sale, used vehicles and energy products available for sale.

We write-down inventory for any excess or obsolete inventories or when we believe that the net realizable value of inventories is less than the carrying value. During the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 we recorded write-downs of $233 million, $144 million and $106 million, respectively, in Cost of revenues in the consolidated statements of operations.

Note 7 –Solar Energy Systems, Net

Our solar energy systems, net, consisted of the following (in millions):

(1)Depreciation and amortization expense during the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 was $235 million, $235 million and $236 million, respectively.

(2)As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, there were $740 million and $802 million, respectively, of gross solar energy systems under lease pass-through fund arrangements with accumulated depreciation of $157 million and $148 million, respectively.

Note 8 –Property, Plant and Equipment, Net

Our property, plant and equipment, net, consisted of the following (in millions):

Construction in progress is primarily comprised of ongoing construction and expansion of our facilities, and equipment and tooling related to the manufacturing of our products. Completed assets are transferred to their respective asset classes and depreciation begins when an asset is ready for its intended use.

Depreciation expense during the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 was $3.33 billion, $2.42 billion and $1.91 billion, respectively.

Panasonic has partnered with us on Gigafactory Nevada with investments in the production equipment that it uses to manufacture and supply us with battery cells. Under our arrangement with Panasonic, we plan to purchase the full output from their production equipment at negotiated prices. As the terms of the arrangement convey a finance lease under ASC 842, we account for their production equipment as leased assets when production commences. We account for each lease and any non-lease components associated with that lease as a single lease component for all asset classes, except production equipment classes embedded in supply agreements. This results in us recording the cost of their production equipment within Property, plant and equipment, net, on the consolidated balance sheets with a corresponding liability recorded to debt and finance leases. Depreciation on Panasonic production equipment is computed using the units-of-production method whereby capitalized costs are amortized over the total estimated productive life of the respective assets. As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, we had cumulatively capitalized gross costs of $2.02 billion and $2.01 billion, respectively, on the consolidated balance sheets in relation to the production equipment under our Panasonic arrangement.

Note 9 –Accrued Liabilities and Other

Our accrued liabilities and other current liabilities consisted of the following (in millions):

(1)Accrued purchases primarily reflects receipts of goods and services for which we had not yet been invoiced. As we are invoiced for these goods and services, this balance will reduce and accounts payable will increase.

(2)Taxes payable includes value added tax, income tax, sales tax, property tax and use tax payables.

Note 10 –Other Long-Term Liabilities

Our other long-term liabilities consisted of the following (in millions):

Note 11 –Debt

The following is a summary of our debt and finance leases as of December 31, 2023 (in millions):

The following is a summary of our debt and finance leases as of December 31, 2022 (in millions):

(1)There are no restrictions on draw-down or use for general corporate purposes with respect to any available committed funds under our RCF Credit Agreement, except certain specified conditions prior to draw-down. Refer to the section below for the terms of the facility.

(2)There were no restrictions on draw-down or use for general corporate purposes with respect to any available committed funds under our credit facilities, except certain specified conditions prior to draw-down, including pledging to our lenders sufficient amounts of qualified receivables, inventories, leased vehicles and our interests in those leases or various other assets as described below.

Recourse debt refers to debt that is recourse to our general assets. Non-recourse debt refers to debt that is recourse to only assets of our subsidiaries. The differences between the unpaid principal balances and the net carrying values are due to debt discounts or deferred issuance costs. As of December 31, 2023, we were in material compliance with all financial debt covenants.

2024 Notes

The closing price of our common stock continued to exceed 130% of the applicable conversion price of our 2024 Notes on at least 20 of the last 30 consecutive trading days of each quarter in 2023, causing the 2024 Notes to be convertible by their holders in the subsequent quarter. As of December 31, 2023, the if-converted value of the notes exceeds the outstanding principal amount by $406 million. Upon conversion, the 2024 Notes will be settled in cash, shares of our common stock or a combination thereof, at our election.

Credit Agreement

In June 2015, we entered into a senior asset-based revolving credit agreement (as amended from time to time, the “Credit Agreement”) with a syndicate of banks. Borrowed funds bear interest, at our option, at an annual rate of (a)1% plus LIBOR or (b) the highest of (i) the federal funds rate plus 0.50%, (ii) the lenders’ “prime rate” or (iii)1% plus LIBOR. The fee for undrawn amounts is 0.25% per annum. The Credit Agreement is secured by certain of our accounts receivable, inventory and equipment. Availability under the Credit Agreement is based on the value of such assets, as reduced by certain reserves.

In January 2023, we entered into a 5-year senior unsecured revolving credit facility (the “RCF Credit Agreement”) with a syndicate of banks to replace the existing Credit Agreement, which was terminated. The RCF Credit Agreement containstwo optionalone-year extensions and has a total commitment of up to $5.00 billion, which could be increased up to $7.00 billion under certain circumstances. The underlying borrowings may be used for general corporate purposes. Borrowed funds accrue interest at a variable rate equal to: (i) for dollar-denominated loans, at our election, (a) Term SOFR (the forward-looking secured overnight financing rate) plus 0.10%, or (b) an alternate base rate; (ii) for loans denominated in pounds sterling, SONIA (the sterling overnight index average reference rate); or (iii) for loans denominated in euros, an adjusted EURIBOR (euro interbank offered rate); in each case, plus an applicable margin. The applicable margin will be based on the rating assigned to our senior, unsecured long-term indebtedness (the “Credit Rating”) from time to time. The fee for undrawn amounts is variable based on the Credit Rating and is currently 0.125% per annum.

Automotive Asset-backed Notes

From time to time, we transfer receivables and/or beneficial interests related to certain vehicles (either leased or financed) into special purpose entities (“SPEs”) and issue Automotive Asset-backed Notes, backed by these automotive assets to investors. The SPEs are consolidated in the financial statements. The cash flows generated by these automotive assets are used to service the principal and interest payments on the Automotive Asset-backed Notes and satisfy the SPEs’ expenses, and any remaining cash is distributed to the owners of the SPEs. We recognize revenue earned from the associated customer lease or financing contracts in accordance with our revenue recognition policy. The SPEs’ assets and cash flows are not available to our other creditors, and the creditors of the SPEs, including the Automotive Asset-backed Note holders, have no recourse to our other assets.

In 2023, we transferred beneficial interests related to certain leased vehicles and financing receivables into SPEs and issued $3.93 billion in aggregate principal amount of Automotive Asset-backed Notes, with terms similar to our other previously issued Automotive Asset-backed Notes. The proceeds from the issuance, net of debt issuance costs, were $3.92 billion.

Cash Equity Debt

In connection with the cash equity financing deals closed in 2016, our subsidiaries issued $502 million in aggregate principal amount of debt that bears interest at fixed rates. This debt is secured by, among other things, our interests in certain financing funds and is non-recourse to our other assets.

Automotive Lease-backed Credit Facilities

In the third quarter of 2023, we terminated our Automotive Lease-backed Credit Facilities and the previously committed funds are no longer available for future borrowings.

Pledged Assets

As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, we had pledged or restricted $4.64 billion and $2.02 billion of our assets (consisting principally of operating lease vehicles, financing receivables, restricted cash, and equity interests in certain SPEs) as collateral for our outstanding debt.

Schedule of Principal Maturities of Debt

The future scheduled principal maturities of debt as of December 31, 2023 were as follows (in millions):

Note 12 –Leases

We have entered into various operating and finance lease agreements for certain of our offices, manufacturing and warehouse facilities, retail and service locations, data centers, equipment, vehicles, and solar energy systems, worldwide. We determine if an arrangement is a lease, or contains a lease, at inception and record the leases in our financial statements upon lease commencement, which is the date when the underlying asset is made available for use by the lessor.

We have lease agreements with lease and non-lease components, and have elected to utilize the practical expedient to account for lease and non-lease components together as a single combined lease component, from both a lessee and lessor perspective with the exception of direct sales-type leases and production equipment classes embedded in supply agreements. From a lessor perspective, the timing and pattern of transfer are the same for the non-lease components and associated lease component and, the lease component, if accounted for separately, would be classified as an operating lease.

We have elected not to present short-term leases on the consolidated balance sheet as these leases have a lease term of 12 months or less at lease inception and do not contain purchase options or renewal terms that we are reasonably certain to exercise. All other lease assets and lease liabilities are recognized based on the present value of lease payments over the lease term at commencement date. Because most of our leases do not provide an implicit rate of return, we used our incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at lease commencement date in determining the present value of lease payments.

Our leases, where we are the lessee, often include options to extend the lease term for up to 10 years. Some of our leases also include options to terminate the lease prior to the end of the agreed upon lease term. For purposes of calculating lease liabilities, lease terms include options to extend or terminate the lease when it is reasonably certain that we will exercise such options.

Lease expense for operating leases is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term as cost of revenues or operating expenses depending on the nature of the leased asset. Certain operating leases provide for annual increases to lease payments based on an index or rate. We calculate the present value of future lease payments based on the index or rate at the lease commencement date for new leases. Differences between the calculated lease payment and actual payment are expensed as incurred. Amortization of finance lease assets is recognized over the lease term as cost of revenues or operating expenses depending on the nature of the leased asset. Interest expense on finance lease liabilities is recognized over the lease term within Interest expense in the consolidated statements of operations.

The balances for the operating and finance leases where we are the lessee are presented as follows (in millions) within our consolidated balance sheets:

The components of lease expense are as follows (in millions) within our consolidated statements of operations:

(1)Includes short-term leases and variable lease costs, which are immaterial.

Other information related to leases where we are the lessee is as follows:

Supplemental cash flow information related to leases where we are the lessee is as follows (in millions):

As of December 31, 2023, the maturities of our operating and finance lease liabilities (excluding short-term leases) are as follows (in millions):

As of December 31, 2023, we have excluded from the table above additional operating leases that have not yet commenced with aggregate rent payments of $1.53 billion. These operating leases will commence between fiscal year 2024 and 2025 with lease terms of 2 years to 20 years.

Operating Lease and Sales-type Lease Receivables

We are the lessor of certain vehicle and solar energy system arrangements as described in Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies. As of December 31, 2023, maturities of our operating lease and sales-type lease receivables from customers for each of the next five years and thereafter were as follows (in millions):

The above table does not include vehicle sales to customers or leasing partners with a resale value guarantee as the cash payments were received upfront. For our solar PPA arrangements, customers are charged solely based on actual power produced by the installed solar energy system at a predefined rate per kilowatt-hour of power produced. The future payments from such arrangements are not included in the above table as they are a function of the power generated by the related solar energy systems in the future.

Net Investment in Sales-type Leases

Net investment in sales-type leases, which is the sum of the present value of the future contractual lease payments, is presented on the consolidated balance sheets as a component of Prepaid expenses and other current assets for the current portion and as Other non-current assets for the long-term portion. Lease receivables relating to sales-type leases are presented on the consolidated balance sheets as follows (in millions):

Lease Pass-Through Financing Obligation

As of December 31, 2023, we have five transactions referred to as “lease pass-through fund arrangements.” Under these arrangements, our wholly owned subsidiaries finance the cost of solar energy systems with investors through arrangements contractually structured as master leases for an initial term ranging between 10 and 25 years. These solar energy systems are subject to lease or PPAs with customers with an initial term not exceeding 25 years.

Under a lease pass-through fund arrangement, the investor makes a large upfront payment to the lessor, which is one of our subsidiaries, and in some cases, subsequent periodic payments. As of December 31, 2023, the future minimum master lease payments to be received from investors, for each of the next five years and thereafter, were as follows (in millions):

Note 13 –Equity Incentive Plans

In June 2019, we adopted the 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2019 Plan”). The 2019 Plan provides for the grant of stock options, restricted stock, RSUs, stock appreciation rights, performance units and performance shares to our employees, directors and consultants. Stock options granted under the 2019 Plan may be either incentive stock options or nonstatutory stock options. Incentive stock options may only be granted to our employees. Nonstatutory stock options may be granted to our employees, directors and consultants. Generally, our stock options and RSUs vest over four years and our stock options are exercisable over a maximum period of 10 years from their grant dates. Vesting typically terminates when the employment or consulting relationship ends.

As of December 31, 2023,131.1 million shares were reserved and available for issuance under the 2019 Plan.

The following table summarizes our stock option and RSU activity for the year ended December 31, 2023:

The weighted-average grant date fair value of RSUs granted in the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 was $228.33, $239.85 and $261.33, respectively. The aggregate release date fair value of RSUs in the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 was $2.50 billion, $4.32 billion and $5.70 billion, respectively.

The aggregate intrinsic value of options exercised in the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021 was $1.33 billion, $1.90 billion and $26.88 billion, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2021, our CEO exercised all of the remaining vested options from the 2012 CEO Performance Award, which amounted to an intrinsic value of $23.45 billion.

ESPP

Our employees are eligible to purchase our common stock through payroll deductions of up to 15% of their eligible compensation, subject to any plan limitations. The purchase price would be 85% of the lower of the fair market value on the first and last trading days of eachsix-month offering period. During the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, under the ESPP we issued 2.1 million,1.4 million and 1.5 million shares, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, there were 97.8 million shares available for issuance under the ESPP.

Fair Value Assumptions

We use the fair value method in recognizing stock-based compensation expense. Under the fair value method, we estimate the fair value of each stock option award with service or service and performance conditions and the ESPP on the grant date generally using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The weighted-average assumptions used in the Black-Scholes model for stock options are as follows:

The fair value of RSUs with service or service and performance conditions is measured on the grant date based on the closing fair market value of our common stock. The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield for zero-coupon U.S. Treasury notes with maturities approximating each grant’s expected life. We use our historical data in estimating the expected term of our employee grants. The expected volatility is based on the average of the implied volatility of publicly traded options for our common stock and the historical volatility of our common stock.

2018 CEO Performance Award

In March 2018, our stockholders approved the Board of Directors’ grant of 304.0 million stock option awards, as adjusted to give effect to the 2020 Stock Split and the 2022 Stock Split, to our CEO (the “2018 CEO Performance Award”). The 2018 CEO Performance Award consisted of 12 vesting tranches with a vesting schedule based entirely on the attainment of both operational milestones (performance conditions) and market conditions, assuming continued employment either as the CEO or as both Executive Chairman and Chief Product Officer and service through each vesting date. Each of the 12 vesting tranches of the 2018 CEO Performance Award vested upon certification by the Board of Directors that both (i) the market capitalization milestone for such tranche, which began at $100.0 billion for the first tranche and increases by increments of $50.0 billion thereafter (based on both a six calendar month trailing average and a 30 calendar day trailing average, counting only trading days), had been achieved, and (ii) any one of the following eight operational milestones focused on total revenue or any one of theeight operational milestones focused on Adjusted EBITDA had been achieved for the four consecutive fiscal quarters on an annualized basis and subsequently reported by us in our consolidated financial statements filed with our Forms 10-Q and/or 10-K. Adjusted EBITDA was defined as net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders before interest expense, provision (benefit) for income taxes, depreciation and amortization and stock-based compensation. Upon vesting and exercise, including the payment of the exercise price of $23.34 per share as adjusted to give effect to the 2020 Stock Split and the 2022 Stock Split, our CEO must hold shares that he acquires forfive years post-exercise, other than a cashless exercise where shares are simultaneously sold to pay for the exercise price and any required tax withholding.

The achievement status of the operational milestones as of December 31, 2023 is provided below.

Stock-based compensation under the 2018 CEO Performance Award represented a non-cash expense and was recorded as a Selling, general, and administrative operating expense in our consolidated statements of operations. In each quarter since the grant of the 2018 CEO Performance Award, we had recognized expense, generally on a pro-rated basis, for only the number of tranches (up to the maximum of 12 tranches) that corresponded to the number of operational milestones that had been achieved or had been determined probable of being achieved in the future, in accordance with the following principles.

On the grant date, a Monte Carlo simulation was used to determine for each tranche (i) a fixed amount of expense for such tranche and (ii) the future time when the market capitalization milestone for such tranche was expected to be achieved, or its “expected market capitalization milestone achievement time.” Separately, based on a subjective assessment of our future financial performance each quarter, we determined whether it was probable that we would achieve each operational milestone that had not previously been achieved or deemed probable of achievement and if so, the future time when we expected to achieve that operational milestone, or its “expected operational milestone achievement time.”

As of December 31, 2022, all remaining unrecognized stock-based compensation expense under the 2018 CEO Performance Award had been recognized. For the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, we recorded stock-based compensation expense of $66 million and $910 million, respectively, related to the 2018 CEO Performance Award.

Other Performance-Based Grants

From time to time, the Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors grants certain employees performance-based RSUs and stock options.

As of December 31, 2023, we had unrecognized stock-based compensation expense of $655 million under these grants to purchase or receive an aggregate 5.3 million shares of our common stock. For awards probable of achievement, we estimate the unrecognized stock-based compensation expense of $110 million will be recognized over a weighted-average period of 4.0 years.

For the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, we recorded $57 million and $159 million, respectively, of stock-based compensation expense related to these grants, net of forfeitures.

Summary Stock-Based Compensation Information

The following table summarizes our stock-based compensation expense by line item in the consolidated statements of operations (in millions):

Our income tax benefits recognized from stock-based compensation arrangements were immaterial while we were under full valuation allowances on our U.S. deferred tax assets during the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021. With the release of the valuation allowance associated with our federal and certain state deferred tax assets in 2023, income tax benefits recognized from stock-based compensation expense were $326 million during the year ended December 31, 2023. During the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, stock-based compensation expense capitalized to our consolidated balance sheets was $199 million, $245 million and $182 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had $4.82 billion of total unrecognized stock-based compensation expense related to non-performance awards, which will be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.8 years.

Note 14 –Income Taxes

Our income before (benefit from) provision for income taxes for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 was as follows (in millions):

A (benefit from) provision for income taxes of $(5.00) billion, $1.13 billion and $699 million has been recognized for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The components of the (benefit from) provision for income taxes for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 consisted of the following (in millions):

The reconciliation of taxes at the federal statutory rate to our (benefit from) provision for income taxes for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 was as follows (in millions):

We monitor the realizability of our deferred tax assets taking into account all relevant factors at each reporting period. As of December 31, 2023, based on the relevant weight of positive and negative evidence, including the amount of our taxable income in recent years which is objective and verifiable, and consideration of our expected future taxable earnings, we concluded that it is more likely than not that our U.S. federal and certain state deferred tax assets are realizable. As such, we released $6.54 billion of our valuation allowance associated with the U.S. federal and state deferred tax assets, with the exception of our California deferred tax assets. We continue to maintain a full valuation allowance against our California deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2023, because we concluded they are not more likely than not to be realized as we expect our California deferred tax assets generation in future years to exceed our ability to use these deferred tax assets.

Deferred tax assets (liabilities) as of December 31, 2023 and 2022 consisted of the following (in millions):

As of December 31, 2023, we maintained valuation allowances of $892 million for deferred tax assets that are not more likely than not to be realized, which primarily included deferred tax assets in the state of California and certain foreign operating losses. The valuation allowance on our net deferred tax assets decreased by $6.46 billion and $1.73 billion during the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively, and increased by $6.14 billion during the year ended December 31, 2021. The valuation allowance decrease during the year ended December 31, 2023 was primarily due to the release of our valuation allowance with respect to our U.S. federal and certain state deferred tax assets. The changes in valuation allowances during the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021 were primarily due to changes in our U.S. deferred tax assets and liabilities in the respective year. Among our deferred tax assets in foreign jurisdictions, we recorded a valuation allowance on certain foreign net operating losses that are not more likely than not to be realized. The remainder of our foreign deferred tax assets are more likely than not to be realized given the expectation of future earnings in these jurisdictions.

As of December 31, 2023, we had $10.31 billion of federal and $10.36 billion of state net operating loss carry-forwards available to offset future taxable income, some of which, if not utilized, will begin to expire in 2024 for federal and state purposes. Federal and state laws can impose substantial restrictions on the utilization of net operating loss and tax credit carry-forwards in the event of an “ownership change,” as defined in Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code. We have determined that no significant limitation would be placed on the utilization of our net operating loss and tax credit carry-forwards due to prior ownership changes or expirations.

As of December 31, 2023, we had federal research and development tax credits of $1.10 billion, federal renewable energy tax credits of $605 million, and state research and development tax credits of $923 million. Most of our state research and development tax credits were in the state of California. If not utilized, some of the federal tax credits may expire in various amounts beginning in 2036. However, California research and development tax credits can be carried forward indefinitely.

The local government of Shanghai granted a beneficial corporate income tax rate of 15% to certain eligible enterprises, compared to the 25% statutory corporate income tax rate in China. Our Gigafactory Shanghai subsidiary was granted this beneficial income tax rate of 15% for 2019 through 2023. Starting in 2024, Gigafactory Shanghai is subject to 25% statutory corporate income tax rate in China.

As of December 31, 2023, we intend to indefinitely reinvest our foreign earnings and cash unless such repatriation results in no or minimal tax costs. We have recorded the taxes associated with the foreign earnings we intend to repatriate in the future. For the earnings we intend to indefinitely reinvest, no deferred tax liabilities for foreign withholding or other taxes have been recorded. The estimated amount of such unrecognized withholding tax liability associated with the indefinitely reinvested earnings is approximately $245 million.

Uncertain Tax Positions

The changes to our gross unrecognized tax benefits were as follows (in millions):

We include interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense. We recognized net interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in provision for income taxes line of our consolidated statements of operations of $17 million, $27 million and $4 million for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, and 2022, we have accrued $47 million and $31 million, respectively, related to interest and penalties on our unrecognized tax benefits. Unrecognized tax benefits of $901 million, if recognized, would affect our effective tax rate.

We file income tax returns in the U.S. and various state and foreign jurisdictions. We are currently under examination by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the years 2015 to 2018. Additional tax years within the periods 2004 to 2014 and 2019 to 2022 remain subject to examination for federal income tax purposes. All net operating losses and tax credits generated to date are subject to adjustment for U.S. federal and state income tax purposes. Our returns for 2004 and subsequent tax years remain subject to examination in U.S. state and foreign jurisdictions.

Given the uncertainty in timing and outcome of our tax examinations, an estimate of the range of the reasonably possible change in gross unrecognized tax benefits within twelve months cannot be made at this time.

Note 15 –Commitments and Contingencies

Operating Lease Arrangement in Buffalo, New York

We have an operating lease arrangement through the Research Foundation for the SUNY Foundation with respect to Gigafactory New York. Under the lease and a related research and development agreement, we are continuing to further develop the facility.

Under this agreement, we are obligated to, among other things, meet employment targets as well as specified minimum numbers of personnel in the State of New York and in Buffalo, New York and spend or incur $5.00 billion in combined capital, operational expenses, costs of goods sold and other costs in the State of New York during the 10-year period beginning April 30, 2018. On an annual basis during the initial lease term, as measured on each anniversary of such date, if we fail to meet these specified investment and job creation requirements, then we would be obligated to pay a $41 million “program payment” to the SUNY Foundation for each year that we fail to meet these requirements. Furthermore, if the arrangement is terminated due to a material breach by us, then additional amounts may become payable by us.

In 2021, an amendment was executed to extend our overall agreement to spend or incur $5.00 billion in combined capital, operational expenses, costs of goods sold and other costs in the State of New York through December 31, 2029. On February 1, 2022, we reported to the State of New York that we had met and exceeded our annual requirements for jobs and investment in Buffalo and New York State. As of December 31, 2023, we have met and expect to meet the requirements under this arrangement based on our current and anticipated level of operations. However, if our expectations as to the costs and timelines of our investment and operations at Buffalo prove incorrect, we may incur additional expenses or be required to make substantial payments to the SUNY Foundation.

Operating Lease Arrangement in Shanghai, China

We have an operating lease arrangement for an initial term of 50 years with the local government of Shanghai for land use rights where we have been constructing Gigafactory Shanghai. Under the terms of the arrangement, we are required to spend RMB 14.08 billion in capital expenditures by the end of 2023, which has been achieved in 2023, and to generate RMB 2.23 billion of annual tax revenues starting at the end of 2023. As of December 31, 2023, we have met and expect to meet the tax revenue requirements based on our current level of spend and sales.

Litigation Relating to 2018 CEO Performance Award

On June 4, 2018, a purported Tesla stockholder filed a putative class and derivative action in the Delaware Court of Chancery against Elon Musk and the members of Tesla’s board of directors as then constituted, alleging corporate waste, unjust enrichment and that such board members breached their fiduciary duties by approving the stock-based compensation plan awarded to Elon Musk in 2018. Trial was held November 14-18, 2022. Post-trial briefing and argument are now complete.

Litigation Related to Directors’ Compensation

On June 17, 2020, a purported Tesla stockholder filed a derivative action in the Delaware Court of Chancery, purportedly on behalf of Tesla, against certain of Tesla’s current and former directors regarding compensation awards granted to Tesla’s directors, other than Elon Musk, between 2017 and 2020. The suit asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, unspecified damages and other relief. Defendants filed their answer on September 17, 2020.

On July 14, 2023, the parties filed a Stipulation and Agreement of Compromise and Settlement, which does not involve an admission of any wrongdoing by any party. If the settlement is approved by the Court, this action will be fully settled and dismissed with prejudice. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, Tesla provided notice of the proposed settlement to stockholders of record as of July 14, 2023. The Court held a hearing regarding the settlement on October 13, 2023, after which it took the settlement and plaintiff counsels’ fee request under advisement. The settlement is not expected to have an adverse impact on our results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

Litigation Relating to Potential Going Private Transaction

Between August 10, 2018 and September 6, 2018, nine purported stockholder class actions were filed against Tesla and Elon Musk in connection with Mr. Musk’s August 7, 2018 Twitter post that he was considering taking Tesla private. On January 16, 2019, Plaintiffs filed their consolidated complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and added as defendants the members of Tesla’s board of directors. The consolidated complaint asserts claims for violations of the federal securities laws and seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The parties stipulated to certification of a class of stockholders, which the court granted on November 25, 2020. Trial started on January 17, 2023, and on February 3, 2023, a jury rendered a verdict in favor of the defendants on all counts. After trial, plaintiffs filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law and a motion for new trial, which the Court denied and judgement was entered in favor of defendants on July 11, 2023. On July 14, 2023, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal.

Between October 17, 2018 and March 8, 2021, seven derivative lawsuits were filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery, purportedly on behalf of Tesla, against Mr. Musk and the members of Tesla’s board of directors, as constituted at relevant times, in relation to statements made and actions connected to a potential going private transaction, with certain of the lawsuits challenging additional Twitter posts by Mr. Musk, among other things. Five of those actions were consolidated, and allseven actions have been stayed pending resolution of the appeal in the above-referenced consolidated purported stockholder class action. In addition to these cases, two derivative lawsuits were filed on October 25, 2018 and February 11, 2019 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, purportedly on behalf of Tesla, against Mr. Musk and the members of the Tesla board of directors as then constituted. Those cases have also been consolidated and stayed pending resolution of the appeal in the above-referenced consolidated purported stockholder class action.

On October 21, 2022, a lawsuit was filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery by a purported shareholder of Tesla alleging, among other things, that board members breached their fiduciary duties in connection with their oversight of the Company’s 2018 settlement with the SEC, as amended. Among other things, the plaintiff seeks reforms to the Company’s corporate governance and internal procedures, unspecified damages, and attorneys’ fees. The parties reached an agreement to stay the case until March 5, 2024.

On November 15, 2021, JPMorgan Chase Bank (“JP Morgan”) filed a lawsuit against Tesla in the Southern District of New York alleging breach of a stock warrant agreement that was entered into as part of a convertible notes offering in 2014. In 2018, JP Morgan informed Tesla that it had adjusted the strike price based upon Mr. Musk’s August 7, 2018 Twitter post that he was considering taking Tesla private. Tesla disputed JP Morgan’s adjustment as a violation of the parties’ agreement. In 2021, Tesla delivered shares to JP Morgan per the agreement, which they duly accepted. JP Morgan now alleges that it is owed approximately $162 million as the value of additional shares that it claims should have been delivered as a result of the adjustment to the strike price in 2018. On January 24, 2022, Tesla filed multiple counterclaims as part of its answer to the underlying lawsuit, asserting among other points that JP Morgan should have terminated the stock warrant agreement in 2018 rather than make an adjustment to the strike price that it should have known would lead to a commercially unreasonable result. Tesla believes that the adjustments made by JP Morgan were neither proper nor commercially reasonable, as required under the stock warrant agreements. JP Morgan filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, which Tesla opposed, and that motion is currently pending before the Court.

Litigation and Investigations Relating to Alleged Discrimination and Harassment

On October 4, 2021, in a case captioned Diaz v. Tesla, a jury in the Northern District of California returned a verdict against Tesla on claims by a former contingent worker that he was subjected to race discrimination while assigned to work at Tesla’s Fremont Factory from 2015-2016. A retrial was held starting on March 27, 2023, after which a jury returned a verdict of $3,175,000. As a result, the damages awarded against Tesla were reduced from an initial $136.9 million (October 4, 2021) down to $15 million (April 13, 2022), and then further down to $3.175 million (April 3, 2023). On November 2, 2023, the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal, and on November 16, 2023, Tesla filed a notice of cross appeal.

On February 9, 2022, shortly after the first Diaz jury verdict, the California Civil Rights Department (“CRD,” formerly “DFEH”) filed a civil complaint against Tesla in Alameda County, California Superior Court, alleging systemic race discrimination, hostile work environment and pay equity claims, among others. CRD’s amended complaint seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief. On September 22, 2022, Tesla filed a cross complaint against CRD, alleging that it violated the Administrative Procedures Act by failing to follow statutory pre-requisites prior to filing suit and that cross complaint was subject to a sustained demurrer, which Tesla later amended and refiled. The case is currently in discovery.

Additionally, on June 1, 2022 the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) issued a cause finding against Tesla that closely parallels the CRD’s allegations. On September 28, 2023, the EEOC filed a civil complaint against Tesla in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California asserting claims for race harassment and retaliation and seeking, among other things, monetary and injunctive relief. On December 18, 2023, Tesla filed a motion to stay the case. Separately, on December 26, 2023, Tesla filed a motion to dismiss the case.

On June 16, 2022, two Tesla stockholders filed separate derivative actions in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, purportedly on behalf of Tesla, against certain of Tesla’s current and former directors. Both suits assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and violation of the federal securities laws in connection with alleged race and gender discrimination and sexual harassment. Among other things, plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief, unspecified damages payable to Tesla, and attorneys’ fees. On July 22, 2022, the Court consolidated thetwo cases and on September 6, 2022, plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint. On November 7, 2022, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case and on September 15, 2023, the Court dismissed the action but granted plaintiffs leave to file an amended complaint. On November 2, 2023, plaintiff filed an amended complaint purportedly on behalf of Tesla, against Elon Musk. On December 19, 2023, the defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint.

Other Litigation Related to Our Products and Services

We are also subject to various lawsuits that seek monetary and other injunctive relief. These lawsuits include proposed class actions and other consumer claims that allege, among other things, purported defects and misrepresentations related to our products and services. For example, on September 14, 2022, a proposed class action was filed against Tesla, Inc. and related entities in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging various claims about the Company’s driver assistance technology systems under state and federal law. This case was later consolidated with several other proposed class actions, and a Consolidated Amended Complaint was filed on October 28, 2022, which seeks damages and other relief on behalf of all persons who purchased or leased from Tesla between January 1, 2016 to the present. On October 5, 2022 a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York asserting similar state and federal law claims against the same defendants. On September 30, 2023, the Court dismissed this action with leave to amend the complaint. On November 20, 2023, the plaintiff moved to amend the complaint, which Tesla opposed. On March 22, 2023, the plaintiffs in the Northern District of California consolidated action filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to order Tesla to (1) cease using the term “Full Self-Driving Capability” (FSD Capability), (2) cease the sale and activation of FSD Capability and deactivate FSD Capability on Tesla vehicles, and (3) provide certain notices to consumers about proposed court-findings about the accuracy of the use of the terms Autopilot and FSD Capability. Tesla opposed the motion. On September 30, 2023, the Court denied the request for a preliminary injunction, compelled four of five plaintiffs to arbitration, and dismissed the claims of the fifth plaintiff with leave to amend the complaint. On October 31, 2023, the remaining plaintiff in the Northern District of California action filed an amended complaint, which Tesla has moved to dismiss. On October 2, 2023, a similar proposed class action was filed in San Diego County Superior Court in California. Tesla subsequently removed the San Diego County case to federal court and on January 8, 2024, the federal court granted Tesla’s motion to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

On February 27, 2023, a proposed class action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Tesla, Inc., Elon Musk and certain current and former Company executives. The complaint alleges that the defendants made material misrepresentations and omissions about the Company’s Autopilot and FSD Capability technologies and seeks money damages and other relief on behalf of persons who purchased Tesla stock between February 19, 2019 and February 17, 2023. An amended complaint was filed on September 5, 2023, naming only Tesla, Inc. and Elon Musk as defendants. On November 6, 2023, Tesla moved to dismiss the amended complaint.

On March 14, 2023, a proposed class action was filed against Tesla, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Several similar complaints have also been filed in the same court and these cases have now all been consolidated. These complaints allege that Tesla violates federal antitrust and warranty laws through its repair, service, and maintenance practices and seeks, among other relief, damages for persons who paid Tesla for repairs services or Tesla compatible replacement parts from March 2019 to March 2023. On July 17, 2023, these plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint. On September 27, 2023, the court granted Tesla’s motion to compel arbitration as to three of the plaintiffs, and on November 17, 2023, the court granted Tesla’s motion to dismiss without prejudice. The plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Second Amended Complaint on December 12, 2023, which Tesla has moved to dismiss. Plaintiffs have also appealed the court’s arbitration order. Trial is currently set for July 7, 2025.

The Company intends to vigorously defend itself in these matters; however, we cannot predict the outcome or impact. We are unable to reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, associated with these claims, unless noted.

Certain Investigations and Other Matters

We regularly receive requests for information, including subpoenas, from regulators and governmental authorities such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the National Transportation Safety Board, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), and various local, state, federal, and international agencies. The ongoing requests for information include topics such as operations, technology (e.g., vehicle functionality, Autopilot and FSD Capability), compliance, finance, data privacy, and other matters related to Tesla’s business, its personnel, and related parties. We routinely cooperate with such formal and informal requests for information, investigations, and other inquiries. To our knowledge no government agency in any ongoing investigation has concluded that any wrongdoing occurred. We cannot predict the outcome or impact of any ongoing matters. Should the government decide to pursue an enforcement action, there exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our business, results of operation, prospects, cash flows, financial position or brand.

We are also subject to various other legal proceedings, risks and claims that arise from the normal course of business activities. For example, during the second quarter of 2023, a foreign news outlet reported that it obtained certain misappropriated data including, purportedly non-public Tesla business and personal information. Tesla has made notifications to potentially affected individuals (current and former employees) and regulatory authorities and we are working with certain law enforcement and other authorities. On August 5, 2023, a putative class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, purportedly on behalf of all U.S. individuals impacted by the data incident, followed by several additional lawsuits, that each assert claims under various state laws and seeks monetary damages and other relief. If an unfavorable ruling or development were to occur in these or other possible legal proceedings, risks and claims, there exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, prospects, cash flows, financial position or brand.

Letters of Credit

As of December 31, 2023, we had $525 million of unused letters of credit outstanding.