Tesla has presented self-published safety statistics to regulators in Sweden and the Netherlands as part of its push to secure European approval for its “Full Self-Driving” (FSD) system, even as independent researchers and safety experts have raised concerns that the data may be misleading.
A Reuters examination published last month found Tesla CEO Elon Musk and other executives have increasingly cited figures claiming the driver-assistance system is up to 10 times safer than human drivers. However, the review identified flawed comparisons and methodological gaps that, according to safety researchers, inflate the system’s apparent performance.
According to correspondence obtained by Reuters through public records requests, Tesla shared the disputed safety data with European regulators as it seeks broader authorization for FSD in markets where it is attempting to regain share in the electric vehicle sector. Tesla first approached the Dutch road authority, RDW, in late 2024 to begin the approval process.
In a November 2024 letter to RDW, Tesla linked to its safety report and argued that increased use of FSD improves road safety. The system, available via subscription, can perform driving tasks under certain conditions but requires continuous driver supervision.
After more than a year of testing and discussions, RDW approved FSD for use in the Netherlands in April and is now pursuing broader EU-level authorization.
The Dutch regulator said it does not rely on external marketing claims when evaluating technologies and conducts its own testing and analysis on public roads and controlled environments. It did not address specific concerns raised about Tesla’s U.S.-based safety statistics.
Tesla did not respond to requests for comment.
Following the Dutch approval, a Tesla policy manager sent a similar submission to Swedish regulators, including a presentation claiming vehicles using FSD can travel more than seven times farther between crashes than the average U.S. driver. The materials also suggested the system could have prevented tens of thousands of deaths and millions of injuries.
Researchers interviewed by Reuters said those estimates rely on hypothetical assumptions that every U.S. vehicle would be replaced by an FSD-equipped Tesla and that the system’s performance would uniformly exceed human driving by wide margins.
The Reuters review also found Tesla’s comparisons may be skewed by contrasting airbag-deployment crash data with broader U.S. accident statistics that include minor collisions, and by benchmarking against an older average vehicle fleet lacking newer safety technologies.
Swedish Transport Agency investigator Anders Eriksson declined to comment on Tesla’s specific submissions but said regulators consider a broad range of evidence beyond headline figures when assessing automated driving systems.
The European Transport Safety Council said it was concerned about the use of unverified safety claims, urging independent academic validation of such data before regulatory reliance.
Tesla has said European approval of FSD is central to its growth strategy in the region, as it faces increasing competition from established and Chinese EV manufacturers.
The approval process requires support from a majority of EU member states representing at least 65% of the bloc’s population.
Several national regulators, including in Greece and Norway, have also reviewed Tesla-related safety claims, with officials emphasizing that company-generated data must be interpreted cautiously and compared against independent accident statistics.
