Elon Musk is positioning himself for a potentially groundbreaking financial achievement, aiming to be the world’s first trillionaire, although he insists his motivations extend beyond monetary gain. In recent weeks, the Tesla CEO has been advocating for expanded power within the electric vehicle manufacturer he has spearheaded for almost 20 years. Specifically, Musk is pushing for an additional 12 percent stake in Tesla, a share currently valued at approximately $190 billion. Should shareholders approve this move and Musk successfully meet the board’s ambitious targets for enhancing the company’s valuation, the total worth of his individual stake could soar to $1 trillion.
The decision on this compensation package is set to culminate during Tesla’s annual shareholder meeting on Thursday, where stakeholders will vote on whether to grant Musk increased financial incentives and governance authority—or to deny him both. This proposed package reflects a shift in Tesla’s priorities, as its recently unveiled “Master Plan IV” notably lacks any mention of forthcoming electric vehicle models. Instead, it paints a futuristic vision involving humanoid robots designed by Tesla, freeing humanity from everyday chores and envisaging a utopia of “sustainable abundance.”
In the context of corporate governance, Musk’s immense influence as the world’s richest individual and CEO of several enterprises comes with some checks and balances. Unlike many tech companies where executives maintain considerable control through special share classes—such as Mark Zuckerberg with Meta—Tesla’s structure ostensibly allows ordinary shareholders a degree of oversight. While Musk already wields considerable authority within Tesla, he does not possess a majority stake in the company. A rejection by shareholders of his proposed pay package would serve as a reminder of their governing authority.
Despite analysts’ predictions of approval, given the historical tendency of Tesla shareholders to follow Musk’s lead, dissent is emerging. Notable entities such as Norges Bank Investment Management have publicly opposed the compensation plan, arguing that a $1 trillion incentive for a single CEO is excessive. High-profile voices, including public figures like Pope Leo XIV, have expressed concern over the implications of Musk potentially becoming a trillionaire.
However, in corporate governance, powerful influences often overshadow public sentiment. Research firms like ISS and Glass Lewis play a substantial role in advising major fund providers like BlackRock and Vanguard on shareholder voting. Although many individuals invested in these firms may not vote directly, the decisions made by BlackRock and Vanguard carry significant weight in determining the outcome of the vote. Both ISS and Glass Lewis have recommended against Musk’s pay package, echoing a previous stance, although the final decision from these investment giants remains uncertain.
Tesla’s leadership is actively countering dissenting opinions, promoting a website dedicated to endorsing the pay package, and the board’s chair, Robyn Denholm, has been visibly defending the compensation proposal in recent media appearances. The stakes for Tesla’s board are high; Musk hinted last year that he might leave the company without the desired stake, which could trigger a steep decline in Tesla’s stock value.
The current board, consisting of nine members, including Musk’s brother, displays considerable trust in Musk. However, previous court rulings have raised questions about the independence of certain board members, leading Tesla to appeal. As shareholders prepare to cast their votes, the lingering question remains whether those outside Musk’s inner circle will continue to share that trust. Musk, for his part, aims to maintain a “strong influence” within the company, underscoring the delicate balance of power in Tesla’s evolving corporate governance landscape.
