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

The SOC group, previously known as the CTW Investment group, works with pension funds sponsored by an alliance of unions that represent more than 2 million members; Many of these money are Tesla investors.

In a letter dated August 19, 2025, addressed to Eric Whitman, Deputy General Adviser and Head of Executive on the Nasdaq Stock Exchange, SOC expressed “serious concerns” about the new Musk compensation package. Specifically, SOC said it was concerned that the Tesla Board of Directors is defrauding the nasdaq narrative rules when Musk was awarded the “CEO of 2025”, which was disclosed earlier this month. The group claims that this stock prize should have required shareholders ’vote, as specified under the Nasdak rules, given that the amended compensation plans are financially.

Tesla Board of Directors approved the new stock package in MUSK under the 2019 incentive plan for the company, to a large extent compensation for its previously granted option package that was previously canceled in 2018, known as the “CEO of the 2018 CEO”. The old prize (twice) was canceled by the Dilayer Chiseri Court due to the questions related to the independence of the Board of Directors – a decision currently appealed in the Dilayer Supreme Court.

luckSean Tali stated that the new package will not apply unless it loses Musk and Tesla at the appeal in Delaware. He also pointed out that unlike the $ 56 billion prize, the latest prize of 29 billion dollars includes restrictions that protect shareholders: shares fall on the second anniversary of the grant, or early August 2027, only if Musk worked throughout the entire period as an executive head or president to develop products or their operations. Musk can only sell any of those acquired stocks after five years, or on August 3, 2030.

luckAmanda Girut said that, despite these restrictions, the package lacks the difficult performance goals of musk. Brian Den, director of the Institute for Compensation Studies at Cornell University, said, luck Experts sometimes refer to this “giving fog”. In other words: “If you are in the vicinity and have enough breathing in you for the fog of the mirror, you will get it.”

The objections that were pressed by Socoustment Group have nothing to do with any of the features of the grant. The group argues that the Tesla Council is evading the approval of the shareholders on the package, in violation of the policy of the Nasdak list.

“Investment Group, Tigl Patel, said,” luck In an interview stating that “the real issue is the fact that the original plan … was completely clear in the disclosures that the company does not intend to include Elon Musk in that plan.” She added: “It is recognized that these issues usually raise the Securities and Stock Exchange Committee:” It is Muslim that this is the first time that I have indicated something like this to Nasdak, [and that’s] Because it was a very specific list standard. “Her understanding of the Nasdak standard is that” this is exactly what was designed to avoid it. ”

The shareholders are likely to be “do not think” that they were voting to agree to a new musk package

The SOC Investment Group asserts that when Tesla shareholders agreed to the stock incentive plan for 2019, the company excluded the musk explicitly from eligibility, saying that its compensation will be exclusively linked to the extraordinary 2018 award. “When the shareholders voted for the 2019 plan, it is possible that, based on the available disclosures and research, they believed that they were voting for the property rights plan that would cover compensation for Mr. Musk,” notes the SOC letter, “specifically because of the” extraordinary nature “of the CEO of the 2018 CEO.”

SOC’s message also notes that the 2019 Tesla Agent’s statement reiterated several times that the 2019 plan was not aimed at covering the Musk Awards. Moreover, the message indicates that the major consulting companies in the agent indicate that the 2018 CEO Performance Award “aims to be the only way to compensate for Mr. Musk, depending on the company’s disclosure.”

Therefore, SOC wrote that the 2025 CEO “appears to be expanding the category of participants under the 2019 plan in a way that would be materially sufficient to require a separate vote for shareholders.”

The message also warns that the Tesla Board indicated that temporary prizes may follow, which may exceed the votes of shareholders during the Dilayer case, the so -called so -called Tornetta Field, suspended. SOC’s speech on the Nasdak Stock Exchange urges to work to “restore” the correct balance between the interests of shareholders and interests “,” prevents mitigation, and ensuring the transparency of executive compensation.

“SOC has real concerns about the independence of the manager,” Patel told “SOC who has real concerns about the independence of the manager,” luck. “This is a type of uniform board.” She said that her group is interested in issues related to the lack of independence director and the confrontation of the responsibilities of Elon Musk, and “I reached his head in the past few months.” This schedule interferes with the brief Musk sharing as a special consultant for the White House, including intensive participation with the Ministry of Government efficiency, or Doge. She said that the new compensation plan, if any, “was an opportunity for the council to focus musk on Tesla, and instead” they reached this package. She also indicated that the conditions that Musk will receive on the same salary, even if he is the head of the development of products or its operations, “no one heard of it.”

An active voice shareholder

The Socroup Group has a long and active date of communication with Tesla, with a focus on issues such as executive compensation, governance, council independence and work rights. The group has repeatedly opposed significant salaries for Musk – including leading campaigns to encourage shareholders to vote against the Musk Award for $ 56 billion and called for obtaining votes against relevant prizes, especially when you believe that appropriate shareholders ’approval procedures have not been circumvented or have not been fulfilled by governance standards.

The group also urged Tesla shareholders to vote against the re -election of some directors, such as Kimal Mousse and James Murdoch, noting concerns about the independence of the board of directors of Elon Musk and the consensus with the shareholders’ interests. Similar to her current message to Nasdak, investigations were requested by the organizers in Tesla governance practices, on the pretext that the company’s board of directors prefers musk for the interests of public shareholders. For example, the group asked SEC to investigate the Tesla plan to reduce its council in 2022.

The group also joined other investors in joint shareholders ’decisions calling on Tesla to adopt comprehensive workers’ rights policies, including the lack of conference with the organization of workers and compliance with global work standards. SOC participated in seminars and decisions to highlight the risks related to Tesla approach in unions and work issues in many countries.

Tesla publicly did not respond to the message and did not respond immediately luckRequest to comment.

For this story, luck The artificial intelligence is used to help with a preliminary draft. Check an editor of the accuracy of the information before publishing.