Tesla Paid Nothing To Elon Musk For Several Years, Says Report. He Reacts
Last Updated:
Tesla paid Elon Musk nothing in salary for several years mainly due to a legal battle over a massive stock compensation deal from 2018.
Elon Musk did not take home a single dollar in salary from Tesla in 2024. Despite being one of the richest people in the world, his official pay as CEO was $0, according to a report. Musk was actually the lowest-paid CEO among S&P 500 companies last year.
The Wall Street Journal report revealed that Tesla paid Musk nothing in salary for several years mainly due to a legal battle over a massive stock compensation deal from 2018. Courts rejected Musk's pay package twice, calling the approval process flawed even though shareholders voted in favour of it twice.
An investor shared the article on X (formerly Twitter), writing, 'Elon Musk was the lowest-paid CEO among S&P 500 companies last year. Tesla paid him $0."
The post attracted a lot of attention, including a response from Musk himself. Replying to the post, Musk wrote, 'Zero for seven years, despite increasing the value of the company >2000%."
Zero for seven years, despite increasing the value of the company >2000% https://t.co/QNNHxpi3T2 — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 2, 2025
Among many who reacted, some questioned Musk's decision, while others came to his defence.
One user commented, 'It's not like the extra paycheck would matter to you financially. It must be nice to work for free. I could solve problems and build cool things too if my parents had given me millions to start."
Another said, 'Anyone familiar with the tax system knows that not taking a salary is about financial strategy, not morals."
A person pointed out, 'Meanwhile, CEOs of failing companies are paying themselves hundreds of millions even as their businesses struggle."
Another wrote, 'Elon took $0 and still created more wealth and innovation than any overpaid CEO. That's why people resent him."
'Musk has the vision, not just the paycheck," an individual shared.
Wall Street Journal also shared three possible options for deciding Musk's salary.
Make Musk Fully Commit to Tesla
One option is for Tesla to require Musk to be more actively involved in running the company. Alan Johnson, a paid consultant, suggests the board should make it clear Musk needs to focus on Tesla full-time. This might mean Musk spends less time on his other ventures like SpaceX.
'Why should Tesla have to pay for that? It's making some requirements about him being involved, having some succession—and starting to run it like a real company. If you stay and create value, you'll make an awful lot of money. But if you don't want to be involved or you don't create value, you won't," he told the outlet. He also recommends simplifying Musk's pay package by rewarding him based on Tesla's stock performance relative to the market rather than complicated targets.
Pay Musk Like Any Other CEO
Some experts say the board shouldn't feel pressured to give Musk a bigger ownership share just to keep him focused on Tesla. Musk currently owns about 20% but has said he might spend more time elsewhere if he can't own a quarter of the company.
Robin Ferracone, CEO of a pay consultancy, explains, 'You're paying the person to do an executive job, and you have to separate that from what kind of equity stake they have. If he wants a bigger stake in the company, go buy it."
Ferracone also suggests the board could create a co-investment plan where Tesla matches the shares Musk buys if he stays for several years.
Most pay experts agree that Musk's pay should be set like any other CEO's, by comparing him with leaders of similar companies. Scott Oberstaedt from Willis Towers Watson adds,
'The decision-making process for a compensation committee should not be different for founder pay and non-founder pay."
Pay Musk Like Everyone Else
The third option is to follow a model like Axon's CEO who ties his pay to company performance metrics shared with employees. 'I'm on the same mathematical plan as everyone else. I would love to see other companies copy that," Smith said.
The outlet mentioned that his package 'is tied to a series of targets combining share price and financial measures, with restrictions preventing shares from vesting too quickly." If Axon performs well, both Smith and employees could earn up to three times what they invested. If the company underperforms, they could get much less or nothing.
top videos
View all
'We are seeing the benefits of everyone being aligned to the same metrics," Smith said.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Axon CEO Rick Smith received a $165 million stock award in 2024.
About the Author
Buzz Staff
A team of writers at News18.com bring you stories on what's creating the buzz on the Internet while exploring science, cricket, tech, gender, Bollywood, and culture.
First Published:
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Musk Calls Trump's Tax Bill A 'Disgusting Abomination', White House Says President 'Sticking To It'
Elon Musk has hit out at President Donald Trump's signature tax and spending bill, describing it as a "disgusting abomination", in a widening rift between the two. The tech billionaire said the bill would add to the US budget deficit and saddle Americans with "crushing" debt. The comments mark his first public disagreement with Trump since leaving government, after having previously called the plan "disappointing". n18oc_world n18oc_crux
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
India's ‘Desi S-400' is Coming: Why Project Kusha Could Be A Game-Changer In Missile Defence
New Delhi: India is building a homegrown missile shield that may redefine its battlefield advantage. It has been named as Project Kusha. Designed to detect and destroy threats from drones, fighter jets, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles at ranges up to 350 km, this ambitious programme could give India a 'Made-in-India' answer to the Russian S-400 and a strong counter to both regional and global threats. While India already operates the Russian-built S-400 missile defence system, the wars of the future demand more than just foreign imports. Countries now need constant readiness and technological independence. That is where Kusha steps in. Back in May 2022, India gave the green light to a major defence initiative – one that is quietly reshaping the country's air defence game. Known named as the Extended Range Air Defence System (ERADS), it is being developed by India's DRDO in partnership with Israel Aerospace Industries. Kusha is built around three layers of long-range surface-to-air missiles – which can take down enemy threats from as far as 150 km, 250 km and even 350 km away. These missiles come packed with cutting-edge features like dual-pulse motors and thrust vectoring that allow them to home in on targets with impressive precision – whether it is a hostile missile, a stealth drone or a fast-moving jet. Reports suggest that it can take down fighter-sized targets at 250 km and large aircraft at 350 km. In single-shot scenarios, its success rate is projected to be no less than 80%, going up to 90% in salvo launches. That puts it firmly in the league of elite global air defence systems but with one difference – it is Made in India. Expected to be ready by 2028 or 2029, the Kusha system is set to become India's frontline shield in the sky. It is designed to protect the country from both traditional air attacks and emerging aerial threats like drones and cruise missiles. Once it is fully in place, India will join an elite club of nations, alongside the United States, Russia and China, that have built their own long-range air defence systems from the ground up. But it will not work in isolation. It is designed to seamlessly integrate with India's current air defence assets like the Akash, Barak-8 and even the S-400, forming a formidable and unified multi-layered air defence network. The comparison with Israel's vaunted Iron Dome is inevitable. While it can intercept short-range threats up to 70 km away, Kusha boasts a range five times greater. Even the American Patriot system, which maxes out at 110 km, falls short of Kusha's reach. The system's long-range tracking radar will spot threats 350 km away, giving Indian forces a decisive early warning and strike capability. Another huge plus? It is entirely Indian-built – enhancing national security, reducing dependency on foreign suppliers and aligning with the government's 'Atmanirbhar Bharat' (self reliant India) vision. Project Kusha's introduction may mark a paradigm shift in India's military posture. At a time when aerial warfare is evolving rapidly and threats from hostile drones, stealth fighters and hypersonic missiles are becoming the norm, it promises to be India's answer to the battlefield of tomorrow.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Mint Primer: Why India's small car is vanishing, and how to save it
Once the key driver of India's auto boom, sales of entry-level cars are sputtering. In fact, India's largest car maker, Maruti Suzuki, has sought government help to revive sales in the budget segment. Can such incentives reverse the trend? And does Japan hold any lessons? Also read: Stuck in first gear: Take a close look at what ails car sales in India What does entry-level car sales data show? According to the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (Siam), domestic sales in the mini segment (cars up to 3.6-metres in length) fell from 460,772 in FY19 to 152,262 in FY24 and 133,397 in FY25, a staggering 71% drop in the last six years. India's largest carmaker Maruti Suzuki, also the segment's dominant player, saw a drop in sales of its Alto and S-Presso to 6,776 units in May 2025 from 9,902 units a year back. Small cars accounted for 46% of FY19's passenger vehicle sales and declined to 27.7% in financial year 2024. Maruti Suzuki has now sought the government help to arrest the decline. What can revive small car sales? Government intervention is crucial to reviving small car sales. Incentives and tax benefits for first-time buyers—who want to switch from two- to four-wheelers—could improve affordability. Buyers pay third-party insurance for three years upfront at the time of purchase. While this may be okay for buyers of bigger cars, it pinches first-time and budget buyers. Automakers must innovate to offer competitive pricing and increase sales volumes while ensuring regulatory compliance, experts said. If the industry fails to address these challenges, small cars may gradually disappear from India's roads. Also read: Hybrids vs EVs: New advisory for Delhi fleet operators adds fresh fuel to fire Are there any immediate triggers to boost sales? The industry hopes that this fiscal will see a demand uptick for entry-level cars. It is banking on the budget proposal that made income up to ₹12 lakh per year (effective 1 April) tax-free to boost spending, as people have more money. Besides, the central bank cut interest rates by 25 bps in February and April and the trend remains downwards. This will reduce loan EMIs. What options do entry level car buyers have? They can opt for used cars. The ex-showroom price in New Delhi of a new Maruti Alto K10, for instance, increased from ₹3.4 lakh in 2019 to ₹4.23 lakh in 2025, a 25% jump. Used cars would allow buyers to own larger and more feature-rich cars at prices comparable to new subcompact models. For instance, in Delhi, on used car sites, a Maruti Baleno 2016 model was listed for ₹3.55 lakh and a 2021 Renault Triber at ₹4.45 lakh. Without government intervention, small cars may soon lose their foothold for first-time buyers entirely. Also read: Maruti Suzuki shares edge higher after THIS capex expansion update. Do you own? What can India learn from Japan? To help buyers upgrade from two-wheelers to cars, the government can look at how other countries are going about this. For instance, in Japan, the smallest car segment, known as the Kei, helped buyers upgrade to cars. Japanese buyers pay lower tax and insurance on them compared with bigger cars, leading to lower ownership costs. The affordability of Kei cars means that today they comprise a third of all cars sold in Japan. Small and big cars should be treated differently to address the affordability challenge, experts say.
