European Regulators Shield Tesla FSD Safety Data as EU Approval Vote Looms — BigGo Finance

European regulators are refusing to publicly disclose safety data and testing methodologies behind the Netherlands’ approval of Tesla Inc.’s (TSLA) Full Self-Driving system, triggering a backlash from safety experts who argue the secrecy undermines public trust just months before a potential EU-wide authorization vote.

The Dutch vehicle authority RDW, which in April became the first European regulator to greenlight the driver-assistance technology, has withheld the evidence supporting its conclusion that FSD is at least as safe as competing systems. The regulator told Reuters that releasing testing details would violate Tesla’s commercial secrets, a position the automaker itself aggressively pushed in previously unreported email correspondence beginning in late 2024.

Tesla has made FSD approval central to reviving its European sales, where it faces intensifying competition from Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers and has lost market share in recent years. The system, which requires drivers to maintain constant attention, has been promoted by CEO Elon Musk as nearing full autonomy—a claim challenged by a Reuters investigation in May that found Tesla’s self-published safety statistics to be highly exaggerated.

RDW announced in April that FSD was “safer than other driver assistance systems,” then softened that language in June to “at least as safe.” The agency cited “extensive testing” under various conditions on both closed tracks and public roads, but declined to specify how it measured performance or safety. When Reuters sought documentation of the testing, RDW pointed to an “obligation to protect manufacturer-specific information” without explaining how its test methods or conclusions could reveal commercially sensitive data.

The confidentiality push began in late 2024, when Tesla started pressing RDW to keep FSD safety review documents secret. In April 2025, a Tesla representative asked the regulator to confirm it would “never” release certain documents and to detail what measures would ensure they were “withheld from public disclosure.” The employee added that Tesla could not provide additional information “until this matter is clarified.” RDW responded that manufacturers always have the option to request exemption from disclosure, but told Reuters it made its own independent decisions on trade secret protection rather than acting at Tesla’s behest.

That blanket of secrecy now extends across the continent. Regulators in six European countries—including Germany, Norway, and Denmark—told Reuters they could not release FSD testing or performance data due to trade secret concerns. The Norwegian Public Roads Administration went further, warning drivers that the safety level Tesla claims in its own statistics is higher than what European regulators have seen in their assessment materials. In emails reviewed by Reuters, the Norwegian agency told drivers that the data provided by Dutch authorities “is not the same as what Tesla publishes on its website.”

Vehicle safety experts say the opacity is unacceptable for a system seeking approval to operate on European roads. Oliver Carsten, a transportation safety professor at the University of Leeds who helped draft Europe’s automated driving regulations, said RDW’s testing details and FSD performance data are matters of broad public interest. “I don’t see any reason why that couldn’t be public,” Carsten said.

Frank Mütze, policy and project officer at the European Transport Safety Council, criticized the arrangement, stating it is insufficient for the public to simply trust that authorities “have done their homework, which of course isn’t good enough for us.”

The push for secrecy is particularly sensitive given the unconventional path Tesla is pursuing. The company is seeking a special exemption from EU motor-vehicle regulations, which currently restrict hands-free automated driving systems like FSD to highways and prohibit their use on congested urban roads. Approval requires a yes vote from representatives of 55% of member states, provided those states collectively account for at least 65% of the EU’s population. A vote could take place as early as October.

Some regulators have already signaled reservations. France’s transportation minister said last month that the country would not approve FSD in its current form, citing concerns about speeding and insufficient driver-monitoring technology. Finland’s Transport and Communications Agency acknowledged the system “has been observed to often make safer decisions than a human driver” but flagged problems with its operation on steep, winding roads and questioned whether drivers could safely retake control during sudden system errors.

Tesla has a history of seeking to shield information provided to regulators from public view. In the United States, the company routinely petitions federal safety regulators to redact basic details about crashes involving its driver-assistance systems. FSD has faced years of regulatory investigations and lawsuits over crashes in the U.S., where European regulators have historically taken a more cautious approach to automated driving, requiring pre-approval for systems like FSD.

The controversy places RDW in a delicate position as it advocates for FSD’s adoption across the EU. The Dutch regulator must convince skeptical member states of the system’s safety while refusing to share the very evidence that formed the basis of its own approval—a contradiction that safety advocates say could erode confidence in the regulatory process just as the bloc faces a landmark decision on automated driving technology.