---

Delaware’s top court reinstates Elon Musk’s historic Tesla pay package, reshaping corporate governance, shareholder power, and the future of executive compensation.

---

A High-Stakes Reversal That Redefines Corporate Power

In a decision that could echo across boardrooms and courtrooms for years, Delaware’s Supreme Court has reinstated Elon Musk’s controversial 2018 Tesla compensation plan, one of the most valuable executive pay deals ever conceived. The ruling overturns a lower court judgment that had voided the package, restoring stock options once valued at $56 billion and now worth far more as Tesla’s share price has surged.

Beyond Musk’s personal fortune, the decision underscores a broader debate over shareholder authority, judicial oversight, and how far courts should go in second-guessing corporate governance decisions approved by investors.

The Pay Package That Shook Corporate America

Tesla’s 2018 compensation plan for Musk was unprecedented in both scale and structure. Instead of a traditional salary, the deal tied Musk’s rewards entirely to Tesla’s performance. If the electric vehicle maker hit aggressive market capitalization and operational milestones, Musk would earn the right to buy roughly 304 million shares at a deeply discounted price, equivalent to about 9% of Tesla’s outstanding stock at the time.

The company did meet those targets. But Musk never exercised the options. Shortly after shareholders approved the package, a lawsuit was filed by Richard Tornetta, a Tesla investor who owned just nine shares. The suit accused Tesla’s board of failing to negotiate at arm’s length and withholding key information from shareholders.

That challenge set off years of legal wrangling, and ultimately a ruling that stunned the corporate world.

Supreme Court Steps In

In 2024, following a five-day trial, Delaware Chancery Court Judge Kathaleen McCormick ruled that Tesla’s directors were conflicted and that shareholders were not fully informed when they voted on the plan. She ordered the entire compensation package rescinded, calling its scale “unfathomable.”

On Friday, Delaware’s Supreme Court reversed that decision.

In a 49-page opinion, the state’s highest court concluded that the lower court’s remedy went too far. Fully rescinding the pay package, the justices wrote, unfairly left Musk without compensation for six years of work during which Tesla dramatically increased in value. The court characterized the rescission as improper and inequitable under the circumstances.

With the ruling, Musk’s 2018 options are back on the table. Based on Tesla’s stock price at Friday’s close, the revived package is now valued at roughly $139 billion.

Tesla shares edged slightly higher in after-hours trading following the decision, rising less than 1%.

Expert Insight & Market Reaction

For Musk, the ruling is about far more than money. Analysts say the restored package accelerates his path to greater voting control at Tesla, an issue he has repeatedly flagged as critical.

“If Elon exercises all of these options, this is a win because he consolidates control much faster,” said Gene Munster, managing partner at Tesla-focused investor Deepwater Asset Management.

If fully exercised, Musk’s ownership stake would climb from about 12.4% to roughly 18.1% on an expanded share base. Tesla is also issuing new shares tied to a separate compensation plan approved by shareholders in November, though those shares remain subject to future performance goals.

Musk reacted swiftly on social media, posting that he felt “vindicated.”

Tesla declined to comment on the ruling.

Meanwhile, the attorneys who brought the original challenge signaled the fight may not be over. In a statement, they said they were evaluating next steps and emphasized that the earlier trial court decision had held Tesla’s board and its largest shareholder accountable for fiduciary breaches.

A Business Climate Under Scrutiny

The original 2024 ruling had consequences far beyond Tesla.

Musk publicly accused Delaware judges of being hostile toward tech founders and urged companies to abandon the state as their legal home. His criticism struck a nerve in Silicon Valley and beyond, where Delaware’s Court of Chancery has long been seen as the gold standard for corporate law.

In the wake of the backlash, several high-profile companies, including Dropbox, Roblox, Trade Desk, and Coinbase shifted their incorporations to Nevada or Texas. Still, Delaware remains the dominant jurisdiction for U.S. public companies, a position reinforced, at least partially by the Supreme Court’s latest decision.

Tesla itself has since reincorporated in Texas.

Why Shareholders Mattered This Time

One key factor in the Supreme Court’s reasoning appears to be shareholder support. Tesla investors overwhelmingly approved Musk’s pay package in 2018, and again endorsed a new compensation plan in November 2024.

Brian Dunn, director of the Institute for Compensation Studies at Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations, said the court may have been wary of overriding investor decisions.

“There’s a view that courts should be cautious about inserting themselves between shareholders and choices those shareholders have clearly made,” Dunn said.

That perspective reflects a broader tension in corporate law: balancing protection against conflicts of interest with respect for shareholder democracy.

What Comes Next for Tesla and Corporate Governance

The financial stakes were enormous. Had Tesla lost its appeal, the company warned it could have been forced to absorb a $26 billion hit to profits over two years to account for a replacement compensation plan, calculated at today’s much higher stock price.

Instead, Tesla now moves forward with both its reinstated 2018 package and its newly approved pay structure, while attempting to reduce future legal risk.

Under Texas law, Tesla can require investors to own at least 3% of company shares before filing certain corporate governance lawsuits. At current valuations, that threshold would amount to roughly $30 billion, an amount only Musk himself currently holds.

Critics argue the move limits shareholder oversight. Supporters counter that it prevents what they see as nuisance lawsuits from tiny stakes disrupting major corporate decisions.

A Landmark Ruling With Lasting Consequences

The restoration of Elon Musk’s Tesla pay package marks a turning point, not just for the billionaire CEO, but for how courts, shareholders, and boards interact in the age of superstar executives.

For Musk, the decision strengthens his grip on Tesla and reinforces his argument that innovation-driven companies require unconventional leadership incentives. For Delaware, it helps steady its reputation as a predictable, business-friendly legal hub after months of criticism.

And for corporate America, the message is clear: when shareholders speak loudly and decisively, courts may be increasingly reluctant to overrule them, even in cases involving eye-popping sums and powerful personalities.

 

(Disclaimer:  This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, or investment advice.)

 

ALSO READ:  U.S. Weighs Major Shift in Childhood Vaccine Policy