Elon Musk's Fiery Response to Delaware Court Ruling: Tesla's Future and Musk's Influence Hang in the Balance

Musk $55.8 billion compensation package rescinded

Not a Tesla App

In the wake of the Delaware Chancery Court's landmark decision to rescind his $55.8 billion compensation package, Elon Musk did not hold back on expressing his views. Taking to X, Musk's posts resonated with a blend of frustration, defiance, and contemplation of Tesla's future.

This is insulting to shareholders

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 31, 2024

Musk called the decision "insulting to shareholders." Furthermore, Musk's suggestion to avoid incorporation in Delaware and his query about relocating Tesla's incorporation to Texas echo his discontent and hint at a potential strategic shift.

Unfathomable Compensation and Controlled Mindset

The 201 page Delaware Court's decision, as articulated by Judge Kathaleen St. J. McCormick, delved deep into the complexities of Musk's compensation package and the process behind its approval. The judge described the package as an "unfathomable sum," highlighting its sheer magnitude and deviation from standard executive compensation practices.

Central to the court's ruling was the notion that Musk exerted undue influence over Tesla's board of directors. The court found that Musk's control over the board and his relationships with its members significantly compromised their ability to act independently. According to the ruling, this control resulted in a compensation negotiation process that lacked objectivity and transparency.

In her ruling, McCormick noted, "Musk had extensive ties with the persons tasked with negotiating on Tesla’s behalf." She pointed out the conflicts inherent in this arrangement, emphasizing the need for a more rigorous standard in such situations. "The process leading to the approval of Musk’s compensation plan was deeply flawed," she wrote, highlighting the controlled mindset of the board and its failure to recognize the conflict of interest.

Shareholder Disenfranchisement and Material Omissions

Another critical aspect of the court's decision was the inadequate information provided to shareholders during the vote on Musk's compensation. The ruling emphasized the omission of material information about potential conflicts of interest and the overall negotiation process, which were crucial for shareholders to make an informed decision.

"The record establishes that the Proxy failed to disclose the Compensation Committee members’ potential conflicts and omitted material information concerning the process," the court observed. This lack of transparency was seen as a significant factor in the decision to overturn the package, indicating that Tesla shareholders were not equipped with all the necessary information to make an informed choice.

Musk's compensation was initially perceived as a step toward a "good future for humanity," including ambitions like colonizing Mars, but the judgment stated, “Some might question whether colonizing Mars is the logical next step. But, in all events, that “get” had no relation to Tesla’s goals with the compensation plan.” The court's analysis highlighted that the package's extraordinary size was disconnected from the automaker's objectives.

Stepping back to 2017

The court's narrative begins with Musk's own words, extracted from a 2017 email, where he expressed confidence that Tesla shareholders would be "super happy" with the compensation plan. Musk believed that the package would be perceived positively, projecting an "ultra-bullish view of the future" and symbolizing his commitment to ensuring a "good future for humanity." This ambition, while laudable, was disconnected from the immediate operational goals of Tesla, according to the court.

Emails from Musk during the compensation discussions in 2017 reveal his desire for a significant increase in Tesla ownership upon reaching a $550 billion valuation. He suggested a structure that would effectively boost his ownership stake, considering future dilutions, to around 25% over a decade, underscoring his long-term vision for Tesla. It also underscores the lack of a succession plan that exists to this day.

Testimonies from key Tesla figures like Ira Ehrenpreis and Antonio Gracias provided insight into the compensation committee's approach. They emphasized a subjective sense of fairness and collaboration with Musk, rather than objective market data or arm's length negotiations. This approach was echoed by Todd Maron, Tesla's general counsel, who described the process as cooperative and collaborative, lacking a recognized conflict of interest.

Musk's Recent Compensation Discussion

Two weeks before the court's decision, Musk discussed on X his engagement with Tesla and future compensation plans. An X user expressed concerns about Musk's apparent lack of a new incentive plan since completing his 2018 compensation milestones. In response, Musk's four-word reply, "That would be nice," hinted at his openness to discussing future compensation aligned with his contributions and ambitions in AI, automation, and space exploration.

Musk later elaborated on his desire for approximately 25% voting control within Tesla, which he believes is substantial yet not overwhelming. This statement came amidst Musk's concerns over his influence in the company, especially in growing Tesla as a leader in AI and robotics. On the same day as the ruling Musk posted an update on Tesla’s robot.

Going for a walk with Optimus pic.twitter.com/6mLJCUp30F

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 31, 2024

Musk & Tesla's Future and Potential Move to Texas

Musk's suggestion of moving Tesla's incorporation to Texas, where its physical headquarters are located, has stirred discussions about the company's future corporate structure. Relating to Texas, known for its business-friendly environment, could be a strategic response to the legal and corporate challenges Tesla faces in Delaware.

Should Tesla change its state of incorporation to Texas, home of its physical headquarters?

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 31, 2024

This potential move raises questions about the implications for Tesla's governance, legal framework, and operational strategy. A shift to Texas could signal a new chapter for Tesla as it navigates through the fallout of the court's decision and reevaluates its position in the corporate landscape.

Despite focusing on voting control and compensation, Musk's vision for Tesla extends beyond financial incentives. He is keen on advancing significant developments in AI and robotics, aiming to position Tesla at the forefront of technological innovation. This aligns with his broader goals of advancing human progress through technology.

Follow

Follow

Follow

Tesla Updates Robotaxi App: Adds Adjustable Pick Up Locations, Shows Wait Time and More [VIDEO]

Nic Cruz Patane

Tesla is rolling out a fairly big update for its iOS and early-access-only Robotaxi app, delivering a suite of improvements that address user feedback from the initial launch last month. The update improves the user experience with increased flexibility, more information, and overall design polish.

The most prominent feature in this update is that Tesla now allows you to adjust your pickup location. Once a Robotaxi arrives at your pickup location, you have 15 minutes to start the ride. The app will now display the remaining time your Robotaxi will wait for you, counting down from 15:00. The wait time is also shown in the iOS Live Activity if your phone is on the lock screen.

How Adjustable Pickups Work

We previously speculated that Tesla had predetermined pickup locations, as the pickup location wasn’t always where the user was. Now, with the ability to adjust the pickup location, we can clearly see that Tesla has specific locations where users can be picked up.

Rather than allowing users to drop a pin anywhere on the map, the new feature works by having the user drag the map to their desired area. The app then presents a list of nearby, predetermined locations to choose from. Once a user selects a spot from this curated list, they hit “Confirm.” The pickup site can also be changed while the vehicle is en route.

This specific implementation raises an interesting question: Why limit users to predetermined spots? The answer likely lies in how Tesla utilizes fleet data to improve its service.

Here is the new Tesla Robotaxi pickup location adjustment feature.

There are already predetermined pickup points in the area you hover over. pic.twitter.com/X5ki1EAP8X

— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) July 3, 2025

Release Notes

While the app is still only available on iOS through Apple’s TestFlight program, invited users can download and update the app.

Tesla included these release notes in update 25.7.0 of the Robotaxi app:

• You can now adjust pickup location

• Display the remaining wait time at pickup in the app and Live Activity

• Design improvements

• Bug fixes and stability improvements

Nic Cruz Patane

Why Predetermined Pick Up Spots?

The use of predetermined pickup points is less of a limitation and more of a feature. These curated locations are almost certainly spots that Tesla’s fleet data has identified as optimal and safe for an autonomous vehicle to perform a pickup or drop-off.

This suggests that Tesla is methodically “mapping” its service area not just for calibration and validation of FSD builds but also to help perform the first and last 50-foot interactions that are critical to a safe and smooth ride-hailing experience.

An optimal pickup point likely has several key characteristics identified by the fleet, including:

• A safe and clear pull-away area away from traffic

• Good visibility for cameras, free of obstructions

• Easy entry and exit paths for an autonomous vehicle

This change to pick-up locations reveals how Tesla’s Robotaxi Network is more than just Unsupervised FSD. There are a lot of moving parts, many of which Tesla recently implemented, and others that likely still need to be implemented, such as automated charging.

Frequent Updates

This latest update delivers a much-needed feature for adjusting pickup locations, but it also gives us a view into exactly what Tesla is doing with all the data it is collecting with its validation vehicles rolling around Austin, alongside its Robotaxi fleet.

Tesla is quickly iterating on its app and presumably the vehicle’s software to build a reliable and predictable network, using data to perfect every aspect of the experience, from the moment you hail the ride to the moment you step out of the car.

Follow

Follow

Follow

Tesla Will Face $2 Billion in Lost Profit as 'Big Beautiful Bill' Kills EV Credits

Not a Tesla App

The massive legislative effort titled the "Big Beautiful Bill" is taking direct aim at what has become one of Tesla’s most critical and profitable revenue streams: the sale of US regulatory credits. The bill could eliminate billions of dollars from Tesla’s bottom line each year and will slow down the transition to electric vehicles in the US.

The financial stakes for Tesla are absolutely immense. In 2024, Tesla generated $2.76 billion from selling these credits. This high-margin revenue was the sole reason Tesla posted a profit in Q1 2025; without the $595 million from regulatory credits, Tesla’s reported $409 million in profit would have been a $189 million loss.

How the ZEV Credit System Works

Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) credits are part of state-level programs, led by California, designed to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles. Each year, automakers are required to hold a certain number of ZEV credits, with the amount based on their total vehicle sales within that state. Under this system, automakers that fail to sell a certain percentage of zero-emission vehicles must either pay a significant fine or purchase credits from a company that exceeds the mandate.

Automakers who fail to sell enough EVs to meet their quota have a deficit and face two choices: pay a hefty fine to the state government for each missing credit (for example, $5,000 per credit in California) or buy credits from a company with a surplus.

As an all-EV company, Tesla generates a massive surplus of these credits. It can then turn around and sell them to legacy automakers at prices cheaper than the fine, creating a win-win scenario: the legacy automaker avoids a larger penalty, and Tesla gains a lucrative, near-pure-profit revenue stream. 

This new bill will dismantle this by eliminating the financial penalties for non-compliance, which would effectively make Tesla’s credits worthless. While the ZEV program is a state law, the Big Beautiful Bill will fully eliminate the penalties at a federal level.

A Multi-Billion Dollar Impact

The removal of US ZEGV credits would be a severe blow to Tesla’s financials. One JPMorgan analyst estimated that the move could reduce Tesla’s earnings by over 50%, representing a potential annual loss of $2 billion. While Tesla also earns similar credits in Europe and China, analysts suggest that 80-90% of its credit revenue in Q1 2025 came from US programs. 

Why the Program Exists

While the impact on Tesla would be direct and immediate, the credit system has a wider purpose. It creates a strong financial incentive for legacy automakers to develop and accelerate their zero-emission vehicle programs, whether it’s hydrogen, electric, or another alternative.

Eliminating the need for these credits would remove that financial pressure. This could allow traditional automakers to slow their EV transition in the US without the fear of a financial penalty, potentially leading to fewer EV choices for consumers and a slower path to vehicle electrification in the country.

Big, But Not Beautiful

On Sunday Morning TV, Elon Musk was asked his thoughts on the Big Beautiful Bill. They were pretty simple. A bill could be big, or it could be beautiful - I don’t know if it can be both, Musk stated.

Elon Musk in new interview: "I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit and undermines the work the DOGE team is doing. I think a bill could be big, or it could be beautiful—I don't know if it can be both." pic.twitter.com/DnyjHN7xCY

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) May 28, 2025

The bill poses a threat to Tesla’s bottom line and to the adoption of EVs in the US market, where automakers will no longer have a financial incentive to transition to cleaner vehicles, a market they’ve regularly struggled in when competing against Tesla.

Tesla will have to work carefully in the future to cut expenses to remain profitable after the elimination of these regulatory credits.

Follow

Follow

Follow