Connect with us

Business

Tesla shareholder group urges probe, ‘appropriate remedial action’ from Nasdaq over Elon Musk’s $29 billion pay package

Published

on



In the latest twist in a long-running battle over Elon Musk’s compensation at Tesla, the SOC Investment Group has requested that Nasdaq formally investigate “and take appropriate remedial action” against Tesla for its recent $29 billion equity grant to the CEO. In a letter to Nasdaq, the group raised concerns about compliance with executive compensation rules and shareholder transparency.

The SOC group, formerly known as the CtW Investment Group, works with pension funds sponsored by a coalition of unions representing over two million members; many of those funds are Tesla investors.

In a letter dated August 19, 2025, addressed to Erik Wittman, deputy general counsel and head of enforcement at Nasdaq, SOC expressed “serious concerns” about Musk’s new compensation package. Specifically, SOC said it was concerned that Tesla’s board circumvented Nasdaq listing rules when awarding Musk a “2025 CEO Interim Award,” disclosed earlier this month. The group claims this equity award should have required a shareholder vote, as stipulated under Nasdaq’s rules, given that it materially amended compensation plans.

Tesla’s board approved Musk’s new equity package under the company’s 2019 Equity Incentive Plan, largely as compensation for his previously awarded—and overturned—$56 billion options package from 2018, known as the “2018 CEO Performance Award.” That older award was (twice) overturned by the Delaware Chancery Court due to questions regarding board independence—a decision currently being appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court.

Fortune‘s Shawn Tully reported that the new package will only apply if Musk and Tesla lose on appeal in Delaware. He also noted that unlike with the $56 billion award, the newer $29 billion award includes restrictions that protect shareholders: The shares vest on the second anniversary of the grant, or early August 2027, only if Musk serves for the entire period as CEO or chief of product development or operations. Musk can’t sell any of those vested shares until five years later, or Aug. 3, 2030.

Fortune‘s Amanda Gerut reported that, such restrictions notwithstanding, the package lacks hard performance targets for Musk. Brian Dunn, director of the Institute for Compensation Studies at Cornell University, told Fortune that experts sometimes refer to these as “fog-the-mirror grants.” In other words: “If you’re around and have enough breath left in you to fog the mirror, you get them.”

The objections lobbied by SOC Investment Group in its letter have nothing to do with either feature of the grants. The group argues that the Tesla board dodged shareholder approval for the package, in contravention of Nasdaq listing policy.

Shareholders likely ‘did not believe’ they were voting to approve a new Musk package

The SOC Investment Group emphasizes that when Tesla shareholders approved the 2019 Equity Incentive Plan, company disclosures explicitly excluded Musk from eligibility, stating that his compensation would be exclusively tied to the extraordinary 2018 award. “When shareholders voted on the 2019 Plan it is likely that, based on the available disclosures and research, they did not believe they were voting on an equity plan that would cover compensation to Mr. Musk,” the SOC letter writes, “precisely because of the ‘truly extraordinary’ nature of the 2018 CEO Performance Award.”

The SOC letter also notes that Tesla’s 2019 proxy statement repeated multiple times that the 2019 plan was not intended to cover awards to Musk. Furthermore, the letter mentions that major proxy advisory firms indicated that the 2018 CEO Performance Award was “intended to be the sole means of compensation for Mr. Musk, relying on the Company’s disclosures.”

Therefore, SOC writes, the 2025 CEO Interim Award “appears to expand the class of participants under the 2019 Plan in manner that would be sufficiently material to require a separate shareholder vote.”

The letter also warns that Tesla’s board has indicated further interim awards could follow, potentially bypassing shareholder votes while the Delaware case, the so-called Tornetta litigation, is pending. The SOC letter urges Nasdaq to act to “restore the rightful balance between shareholder and managements interests,” prevent dilution, and ensure executive compensation transparency.

A vocal, active shareholder

SOC Investment Group has a long and active history of engagement with Tesla, focusing on issues such as executive compensation, governance, board independence, and labor rights. The group has repeatedly opposed large pay packages for Musk—including leading campaigns to encourage shareholders to vote against Musk’s $56 billion option award and calling for votes against related awards, especially when they believe proper shareholder approval procedures were circumvented or governance standards were not met.

The group has also urged Tesla shareholders to vote against the reelection of certain directors, such as Kimbal Musk and James Murdoch, citing concerns about lack of board independence from Elon Musk and alignment with shareholders’ interests. Similar to its current letter to Nasdaq, it has requested investigations by regulators into Tesla’s governance practices, arguing that the company’s board favors Musk’s interests over those of public shareholders. For example, they asked the SEC to probe Tesla’s plan to shrink its board in 2022.

The group has also joined with other investors in co-filing shareholder resolutions calling for Tesla to adopt comprehensive labor rights policies, including non-interference with worker organizing and compliance with global labor standards. They have been involved in webinars and resolutions highlighting risks related to Tesla’s approach to unions and labor issues across several countries.

Tesla has not publicly responded to the letter and did not immediately respond to Fortune‘s request for comment.

For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

What’s the top concern among billionaires? Not a financial crash or debt crisis. It’s tariffs

Published

on


Money can’t buy you love, but surely billions of dollars ought to be enough to insulate you from global uncertainty and provide some peace of mind, right? Maybe not.

According to the latest UBS Billionaire Ambitions Report, which surveyed superrich clients around the world, only 1% said, “I am not worried about any economic, market, or policy factors negatively impacting the market environment over the next 12 months.”

Meanwhile, the most widely cited concern by billionaires was tariffs, with 66% saying it will most likely harm market conditions over the coming year. Close behind was “major geopolitical conflict” at 63% and policy uncertainty at 59%.

And while Wall Street is worried about soaring U.S. debt, other sovereign borrowers, and AI hyperscalers issuing more bonds, a comparatively low 34% of billionaires flagged a debt crisis as the biggest thing keeping them up at night.

Other risks that are top-of-mind elsewhere but were lower on the list for billionaires were global recession (27%), a financial market crisis (16%), and climate change (14%).

To be sure, UBS pointed out there are regional differences in what billionaires are worried about. For example, 75% of billionaires in the Asia-Pacific region cited tariffs, compared with 70% in the Americas citing higher inflation or major geopolitical conflict.

That’s as President Donald Trump’s trade war has hit China and Southeast Asia with steep duties, while Japan and South Korea face lower but still historically high tariffs.

On the other end of the trade war, importers in the U.S. are passing along some tariff costs to American consumers, who are increasingly anxious about high prices and affordability.

In fact, Trump’s tariffs may actually cool inflation for the rest of the global economy while keeping price pressures sticky at home.

The president and the White House insist costs are lower, but the consumer price index has seen its annual rate accelerate steadily since Trump’s “Liberation Day” shocker in April.

Of course, billionaires are not as bound by international borders as most, making any regional differences among them more fluid.

The UBS report found 36% have relocated at least once, with another 9% saying they are considering it. The top reasons given were seeking a better quality of life (36%), geopolitical concerns (36%), and the ability to organize tax affairs more efficiently (35%).



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

The U.S. has over 900 billionaires and their wealth soared by 18% to $6.9 trillion this year: UBS

Published

on


The United States remains the clear leader in global wealth creation, with its billionaire population expanding and their combined fortunes soaring over the past year, according to UBS Global Wealth Management’s Billionaire Ambitions Report for 2025. It reveals that U.S. billionaires’ wealth increased by almost a fifth (18% year on year) to a staggering $6.9 trillion in 2025.

This massive surge helped lift the global billionaire population to 2,919 individuals, holding a total record wealth of $15.8 trillion. The U.S. now hosts 924 billionaires, representing nearly a third (31.7%) of the global billionaire population. The growth in the Americas region, which was led by the U.S., saw overall billionaire wealth climb 15.5% to $7.5 trillion.

The dramatic increase in U.S. wealth was largely driven by an exceptional year for innovation and rising financial asset prices, the Swiss bank concluded. The United States welcomed 109 fresh entrants to the billionaire ranks, vastly outnumbering the 18 who dropped below the threshold or passed away. The growth was heavily buoyed by self-made success, as 87 new U.S. residents became self-made billionaires, contributing $171.9 billion to the Americas’ total new wealth.

The technology sector played a crucial role in this growth, UBS added, with tech billionaires globally seeing their assets increase by 23.8% to $3 trillion. This surge in tech wealth is closely linked to the appreciating values of companies driving the artificial intelligence revolution, such as Nvidia, Oracle, and Meta.

Six U.S. tech billionaires alone saw their wealth increase by a combined $171 billion compared with the previous year. This wave of entrepreneurship means that 2025 recorded the second-highest number of self-made individuals becoming billionaires in the history of the report, behind the remarkable year for markets that was 2021, demonstrating widespread business creation across diverse sectors.

That year, 360 self-made billionaires accounted for $782 billion, an “exceptional rise [that] resulted from asset price appreciation in a period of ample financial liquidity following the COVID-19 pandemic.” The result in 2025 was more down to “widespread business creation,” UBS added. The report found the number of new billionaires minted annually increased roughly eightfold from 35 in 2022 to 287 in 2025, while their assets have grown by roughly ninefold, from $74.6 billion to $684.3 billion.

The coming transfer of wealth

While U.S. entrepreneurs are busy creating new wealth, the long-anticipated “great wealth transfer” is accelerating. Globally, at least $5.9 trillion is expected to be inherited by billionaire children over the next 15 years. Of that amount, at least $2.8 trillion will pass to U.S. heirs over this period. This calculation is likely conservative as it does not factor in future appreciation of asset values.

The report highlights that families are becoming increasingly international as the wealth transfer intensifies, yet the inheritance itself is set to be concentrated in a small number of markets, with the U.S. leading the way.

Female billionaires made notable progress in 2025, according to the report. While there are only 374 female billionaires globally, compared with 2,545 male, their average wealth grew by 8.4% to $5.2 billion in 2025, more than twice the 3.2% average growth rate for men. This is part of a trend, with the average wealth of female billionaires rising at a faster rate for each of the four years since 2022. In part, this is driven by inheritance, with more women becoming billionaires through inheritance than any other way in 2025. Of the 43 women who became billionaires in the year, UBS found that 27 inherited while 16 were self-made.

Despite the vast sums set for inheritance, surveyed billionaires expressed a strong desire for their children to achieve success independently. More than eight in 10 (82%) of those surveyed hope their children will develop the necessary skills and values to succeed without relying solely on the inherited fortune. Over half (55%) also want their heirs to use their wealth to make a positive impact on the world.

Furthermore, billionaires are highly mobile, with 36% of those surveyed having relocated at least once, and a further 9% considering a move. The top three reasons for relocation are linked to better quality of life (36%), geopolitical concerns (36%), and organizing tax affairs more efficiently (35%). This high level of mobility could potentially alter the geographic picture of where wealth is ultimately transferred.

The report was generated in part through an online survey of 87 billionaire clients as well as in-depth interviews which took place over several weeks in September and October.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

‘This isn’t what Walt and Roy would have wanted’: Disney fans with disabilities sue over new ride restrictions

Published

on



Changes that Disney made to a popular program that lets qualifying disabled people skip long lines at its California and Florida theme parks are too restrictive, disabled fans contend in a federal lawsuit and shareholder proposal that seek to expand eligibility.

The battle over who can skip long lines on popular rides because of their disabilities marks the latest struggle by Disney to accommodate disabled visitors while cracking down on past abuses. But some Disney fans say the company has gone too far and has no right to determine who is disabled.

“This isn’t right. This isn’t what Walt and Roy would have wanted,” said Shannon Bonadurer, referring to the Disney brothers who founded the entertainment empire. Despite being unable to wait for long periods of time in the heat because she uses an ileostomy bag, Bonadurer was denied a pass for the disability program.

In a statement, Disney said it was committed to providing a great experience to all visitors, particularly those with disabilities who may require special accommodations.

Here’s a look at changes to Disney parks’ policies for disabled visitors.

What is the disability program?

The Disability Access Service, or DAS, program allows pass-holders and their immediate family members to make an online reservation for a ride while in the park and then get into an expedited line that typically takes about 10 minutes when it’s their time to go on the ride. DAS guests never have to wait in normal standby lines, which on the most popular attractions can be two hours or more.

The DAS program started in 2013 in response to past abuses by disabled “tour guides” who charged money, sometimes hundreds of dollars, to accompany able-bodied guests, enabling such guests to go to the front of lines. Disney says the DAS program needed changing because it had grown fourfold. Before last year’s changes, the percentage of guests having DAS passes jumped from around 5% to 20% over the past dozen years “and showed no signs of slowing,” the company said in court papers.

Disney parks make other accommodations for disabled visitors, including maps in Braille, a device that helps transfer visitors from wheelchairs to ride seats, quiet break locations and American Sign Language interpreters for some live shows. The parks permit some service animals on rides and allow some disabled guests to leave a line and rejoin their party before boarding a ride.

Who qualifies now?

Disney narrowed the scope from people with a wider range of disabilities to mostly guests who “due to a developmental disability such as autism or similar” have difficulties waiting in a long line. Under the changes, guests seeking a DAS pass must be interviewed via video chat by a Disney worker and a contracted medical professional who determine if the person is eligible. Visitors found to have lied can be barred from the parks.

Some people with disabilities who have been denied say the new policy is too restrictive. Not only was Bonadurer denied a pass, but so was her 25-year-old son, who is blind and has cerebral palsy and autism.

“They are making a determination about whether you’re disabled enough,” said Bonadurer, a professional travel adviser from Michigan. “I would love to wait in line with everyone else, and so would my son, since that would mean he has a normal life. But we don’t, and unfortunately for us, we need adaptations to how we wait.”

Disney says the Americans with Disabilities Act doesn’t require equal treatment of people with varying disabilities. The company accommodates those visitors who don’t meet the new DAS criteria with alternatives, Disney said in court filings responding to a federal lawsuit in California.

“For example, in a crowded movie theater, a person using a wheelchair may be entitled to priority seating even if they arrive shortly before the movie starts, while a deaf person may only be entitled to a seat with closed captioning,” the company said.

At Disney’s main theme park rival, Universal, disabled visitors can get shorter lines if they have a card issued by an international board that certifies venues for their accessibility.

What’s next?

A shareholder proposal submitted on behalf of DAS Defenders, an advocacy group of Disney fans opposed to the DAS changes, calls on the company next year to commission an independent review of its disability policies and publicly release the findings. The shareholder proposal claims the change to the DAS program has contributed to lower park attendance.

Disney’s attorneys told the Securities and Exchange Commission in a November letter that it intends to block the proposal ahead of the company’s 2026 shareholder meeting, saying it was false and misleading about the reasons for an attendance decline, which the company attributed to hurricanes. The company also argued the shareholder proposal amounts to micromanaging day-to-day operations.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.