Tesla’s vote wasn’t about pay. It was about who really runs the company

What we drew from this source

The claims Via News extracted from this document. We point to the source; we don't replace it.

• Proxy advisory tools are increasingly misaligned with the realities of the modern economy and cannot meaningfully assess companies operating at the frontier of technological transformation

  80% confidence

• Even excluding shares held by Elon Musk, the proposals passed by over 70%, well over the required majority threshold

  80% confidence

• Tesla operates across artificial intelligence, robotics, autonomous solutions, energy systems, semiconductor development, and advanced manufacturing

  80% confidence

• Tesla's compensation plan is excessive and unconventional

  80% confidence

• Derivative lawsuits are too often exploited as vehicles for opportunistic litigation, enriching plaintiff lawyers at the expense of shareholders

  80% confidence

• Tesla shareholders voted according to what they believed was in their financial interest and would create long-term value, exercising independent judgment rather than following proxy advisory firms

  80% confidence

• Shareholders have affirmed the substance of the 2018 CEO Performance Award on three separate occasions, each with support exceeding 75% of votes cast

  80% confidence

• The days of blind deference to advisory firms that fail to appreciate the complexities of modern-day businesses are coming to an end

  80% confidence

• The 2025 CEO Performance Award has no salary, no cash bonus, and no payout unless extraordinary milestones are reached

  80% confidence