Indirectly. Tesla has to pay to transport cars. Buyers pay a destination charge. By federal law, destination charges have to be fixed, cannot be negotiated, and have to appear as a separate line item on the invoice. They are supposed to be based on the average cost to transport a car. This is done supposedly in the name of consumer protection. It does help people in Hawaii to be subsidized by people from California, and it may help the automobile industry since they can have uniform prices nationwide and it's easier for them to sell cars in remote places. But it doesn't help consumers to have to pay for something they don't get. It used to be that car buyers could go to Detroit, pick up a car, and save money. But that's no longer allowed.
When I say it could help Tesla indirectly, it's because the destination charge is fixed and computed in advance. If there's a sudden shift of people picking up their cars in Fremont, Tesla pays less but still collects the same destination charge for now. At some point, they would have to recalculate it, and that would help consumers on average, and at that point, Tesla wouldn't gain anything except in the sense that if a customer has a lower bottom line cost, they'd be more likely to buy the car. I have no idea at what point Tesla would have to recalculate anything, but if it's like anything else that's regulated, it would go by year and model.
