> Then the exact same discussion will come up with a different number

No?

The point is there is no reason for the number 85 other than benefiting Tesla. The metacognitive question should be how one should estimate that variable in a way which balances disruption with incentivising the desired outcome.

Explain how the number 90 would be different than the number 85?

Provide source for any claims you make.

> Explain how the number 90 would be different than the number 85?

Qualitatively? Tesla wouldn’t qualify.

Practically? It isn’t. The same way there isn’t a difference between 85 and 80 other than keeping out Ford.

There is no methodology presented for how 85 was estimated. There probably wasn’t one, given the track record with the tariff rates.

You got it!