Tesla wants to bring robotaxis to San Francisco. Here’s what’s standing in the way.

Tesla’s ambitious plans to expand its robotaxi service to San Francisco this weekend are facing significant regulatory roadblocks, even as an initial rollout commenced last month in Austin, Texas. The company reportedly intends to issue invitations to Tesla owners for testing the service.

However, depending on the specifics of Tesla’s deployment, these actions could potentially violate California state regulations, irrespective of whether a human safety driver is present in the autonomous vehicles.

California’s autonomous vehicle landscape is governed by two primary state agencies: the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). The DMV is responsible for regulating the testing and deployment of autonomous vehicles, mandating permits for all three stages: testing with a driver, testing without a driver, and full driverless deployment.

Currently, Tesla holds a permit solely for testing autonomous vehicles with a human safety operator. Crucially, it lacks permits for driverless testing or driverless deployment and, as of recent reports, had not yet applied for these additional necessary authorizations. For comparison, only Mercedes-Benz, Nuro, and Waymo currently possess driverless deployment permits in California.

Beyond the DMV, Tesla also appears to lack the requisite permits from the CPUC, which oversees the commercial aspects of ride-hailing and chartered transportation services, encompassing both human-driven and autonomous systems. While Tesla does hold a Transportation Charter Party permit, this only authorizes a human driver to operate a traditional vehicle for charter services – it is distinctly different from an autonomous vehicle permit for passenger transportation.

CPUC spokesperson Terrie Prosper confirmed that Tesla has not received approval to offer autonomous passenger service to customers—whether paid or unpaid, or with or without a driver—nor has the company applied for such authorization. Tesla also does not hold a “Drivered Pilot AV permit” from the CPUC, which would allow the use of an autonomous vehicle with a human operator for passenger service.

This means that if Tesla proceeds with deploying its robotaxis with engaged autonomous systems, even if rides are offered free of charge and a human safety operator is behind the wheel, the company would be in violation of existing state regulations.

These regulatory challenges emerge as Tesla is already embroiled in legal battles within California. The DMV is reportedly attempting to prevent Tesla from selling vehicles in the state, alleging the company misled consumers about its cars’ self-driving capabilities. Furthermore, Tesla is currently on trial in a lawsuit concerning fatalities linked to its less-capable driver assistance system, Autopilot.

The efficacy of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software in powering a reliable robotaxi network also remains unproven. The invite-only robotaxi service launched in Austin on June 22nd has been far from the expansive vision CEO Elon Musk has previously outlined. This service is largely confined to Austin’s downtown core and main thoroughfares, always includes a safety operator in the front passenger seat ready to intervene, and details regarding the number of operational vehicles or interventions are not publicly clear.

Musk has long teased a “general solution” for autonomous driving, once confidently stating a Tesla vehicle could drive itself from Los Angeles to New York—a feat yet to materialize. Despite the hurdles, Musk recently indicated Tesla’s intentions to expand its robotaxi service to Florida and Arizona. TechCrunch previously reported that Tesla has initiated the necessary certification processes to test and operate vehicles, both with and without a driver, in Arizona.