Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, has taken to social media to respond to critical comments made by Peter Navarro, a prominent trade adviser to former President Donald Trump. Musk’s response came after Navarro referred to Tesla as merely a “car assembler” in a television interview. This comment quickly sparked outrage from Musk, who lashed out at Navarro, calling him a “moron” and even going so far as to say that Navarro was “dumber than a sack of bricks” on his social media platform, X (formerly known as Twitter). The dispute revolves around the nature of Tesla’s manufacturing processes and the global sourcing of its parts.
The Background: Navarro’s Remarks
Navarro, who served as Trump’s trade adviser, has long been a vocal advocate of protectionist policies, including tariffs on foreign imports, to revive manufacturing in the United States. During an appearance on CNBC, Navarro discussed the state of the American automotive industry and President Trump’s tariffs. Specifically, he made the claim that Tesla is more of an “assembler” than a true manufacturer because of its reliance on foreign-made parts. Navarro’s criticism centered on Tesla’s extensive use of components from outside the U.S., a practice that is common across the global auto industry.
He emphasized that he believed the future of the U.S. auto industry should be one in which American-made parts are used, and that tariffs would help bring back manufacturing jobs to the U.S. In his view, Tesla’s use of foreign-made parts undermines the argument that it is a fully American-made car company. Navarro’s broader message was consistent with Trump’s trade policy, which sought to reduce dependence on foreign manufacturing by imposing tariffs on imports from countries like China.
Musk’s Response: Defending Tesla’s Manufacturing
Musk was quick to hit back at Navarro’s criticism, accusing the former Trump adviser of making claims that were “demonstrably false.” In his response on X, Musk posted a link to an article from Kelley Blue Book, which quoted findings from Car.com that Tesla had the highest percentage of U.S.-made parts of any major automaker. Musk used this data to support his argument that Tesla is not just an assembler, but a fully integrated auto manufacturer that produces a significant portion of its components domestically.
In his follow-up post, Musk stated, “By any definition whatsoever, Tesla is the most vertically integrated auto manufacturer in America with the highest percentage of US content.” He further emphasized that Tesla’s manufacturing processes are far more American than Navarro’s comments suggested, and he rejected the idea that the company’s reliance on foreign parts could diminish its status as a true manufacturer.
Tesla has long been recognized for its innovative approach to manufacturing, including its ability to produce large amounts of its components in-house rather than relying heavily on third-party suppliers. This has allowed the company to maintain a high level of control over its production processes and quality control. Musk’s counter-argument was intended to highlight Tesla’s leadership in American manufacturing, despite Navarro’s claims.
The Debate Over Tariffs and Global Supply Chains
Navarro’s comments about Tesla were made in the context of a broader conversation about the impact of tariffs on the American economy and manufacturing sector. Under Trump’s administration, a series of tariffs were imposed on imports, particularly from China, as part of a strategy to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. The goal was to reduce the trade deficit and encourage companies to build more products domestically. This policy has been controversial, with critics arguing that it disrupts global supply chains and increases costs for consumers.
Musk, who has frequently expressed his skepticism about the efficacy of tariffs, acknowledged in a post that even Tesla would not be immune to the disruptions caused by such policies. He noted that while Tesla has managed to maintain a global supply chain and stay competitive in the electric vehicle (EV) market, tariffs could ultimately lead to higher costs for the company and its customers.
In fact, industry analysts, such as Dan Ives, have pointed out that Tesla is less exposed to tariffs than traditional U.S. automakers like General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis. However, Ives also highlighted that Tesla sources a significant portion of its parts from abroad, including China, which could make the company vulnerable to tariffs in the long run.
Musk himself has warned that if tariffs continue to increase or if they are implemented more broadly, the effects on global supply chains could be disruptive not only for Tesla but for other businesses as well. In a post from March 2025, Musk cautioned that tariffs could lead to “major global economic disruption” and harm both U.S. manufacturers and consumers.
Bill Ackman and the Call for a Tariff Pause
Musk was not alone in his concerns about the potential economic damage caused by tariffs. Billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman, another supporter of Trump’s policies, has also voiced opposition to the continuation of the current tariff strategy. In a post on X, Ackman called for a pause in the tariff policy to prevent unnecessary harm to the global economy.
Ackman argued that the tariffs, while intended to protect American jobs and industries, were creating significant uncertainty and disruption in the global marketplace. He stressed that the immediate economic fallout from the tariffs was likely to outweigh any long-term benefits, as companies around the world adjusted to the new realities of the global supply chain.
The Role of Peter Navarro
Peter Navarro, for his part, remains a staunch supporter of Trump’s protectionist policies and continues to advocate for tariffs as a tool to reshape the U.S. economy. Navarro’s controversial views on trade and manufacturing have often placed him at odds with other business leaders, including Musk. However, his position on tariffs and the need to bring manufacturing jobs back to America has made him a key figure in the debate over U.S. trade policy.
Navarro’s role in shaping the Trump administration’s tariff strategy has earned him both praise and criticism. While some view him as a defender of American manufacturing, others see his policies as overly aggressive and potentially damaging to U.S. industries that rely on global supply chains.
In addition to his trade policy work, Navarro is also known for his involvement in the investigation into the 2020 presidential election, particularly in connection with efforts to overturn the results. He was later jailed for contempt of Congress after refusing to comply with a subpoena from the House committee investigating the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Conclusion
The exchange between Musk and Navarro highlights the ongoing debate over the role of tariffs and the future of American manufacturing. While Musk defends Tesla’s status as a leader in U.S. manufacturing, Navarro remains a strong proponent of policies that prioritize American-made products, even if that means higher tariffs and disruptions to global trade.
As the U.S. grapples with the complexities of global supply chains and trade policy, it remains to be seen how Tesla and other companies will navigate the challenges posed by tariffs and protectionist measures. The outcome of this debate will likely have long-term implications for the U.S. economy, the automotive industry, and global trade relations.
