Business

What to know about Elon Musk's contracts with the federal government

Published

1 year ago

November 15, 2024

What to know about Elon Musk's contracts with the federal government

Elon Musk is easily the world’s wealthiest man, with a net worth topping $300 billion.

But even he stands to make more money from his association with the federal government after placing a winning bet on Donald Trump’s election to the presidency.

“It’s going to be a golden era for Musk with Trump in the White House,” Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives said.

Musk’s aerospace company SpaceX has received billions of dollars in federal contracts, and could be line for more, while his five other businesses could gain from a lighter regulatory touch.

Trump has named Musk to co-head a new Department of Government Efficiency,” or DOGE — a nod to the cryptocurrency Musk adores. However, federal law bars executive branch employees, which can include unpaid consultants from participating in government matters that will affect their financial interests, unless they divest of their interests or recuse themselves.

Trump’s transition team has sought a work-around, saying he would “provide advice and guidance from outside of Government” with the work concluding by July 2026, according to a news release.

Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota Law School professor and former chief White House ethics lawyer, said that if Musk is truly working outside the government he doesn’t have to sell his assets, but that limits his influence.

“He can make recommendations, but ultimately the decisions are made by government officials,” Painter said.

Trump’s campaign and Musk’s companies didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Here’s how Musk could benefit from Trump’s presidency:

SpaceX

If there’s one Musk business that could profit the most from the incoming Trump administration, it’s SpaceX.

The company, which announced this year it was moving its headquarters from Hawthorne to Texas, already has received at least $21 billion in federal funds since its 2002 founding, according to government contracting research firm The Pulse. That includes contracts for launching military satellites, servicing the International Space Station and building a lunar lander.

However, that figure could be dwarfed by a federal initiative to fund a Mars mission, which is the stated goal of SpaceX.

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket with the Crew Dragon space capsule lifts off from Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Fla., on Friday.

(Associated Press)

“Elon Musk is wealthy, but he’s not wealthy enough to completely fund humans to Mars. It needs to be a public, private partnership, because of the tens of billions of dollars that this would cost, or even hundreds of billions dollars,” said Laura Forczyk, executive director of space industry consulting firm Astralytical.

SpaceX has already made big strides testing his Starship rocket, the most powerful ever built. NASA envisions employing the rocket in its Artemis program to return humans to the moon, but it has been designed to have enough thrust to propel a spacecraft to Mars. What’s more, Trump, during his first presidency, speculated on Twitter about why the United States was focusing on the moon instead of Mars.

Still, there are technical challenges, with SpaceX yet to complete the $4-billion Starship lunar lander, which would have to be modified for Mars. And without a pressing geopolitical threat, Congress may be unwilling to spend more on space exploration, as it did during the 1960s with the Apollo program, Forczyk said.

Should a Mars project not materialize, SpaceX could still reap rewards in the next four years. For example, the Federal Communications Commission denied SpaceX nearly $900 million in federal subsidies to provide rural broadband access through its Starlink satellite network. Under new FCC leadership, Forczyk sees that being reversed.

SpaceX also has Starlink contracts with the military, including a $70-million award from the U.S. Space Force last year, according to Space News.

Tesla

Trump’s policies could reduce the sales of electric vehicles, but with Musk’s influence, his administration’s policies could boost Tesla — though not with federal funding.

For example, Trump, who tempered criticism of electric vehicles after Musk backed him, might end a $7,500 tax credit for electric vehicles. That would hurt Tesla’s unprofitable rivals that rely more on the tax credits to lure customers.

“Tesla is the only automaker that has the scale and scope to price vehicles in a $30,000-to-$40,000 range and make significant profits,” Ives said. “It would essentially take competition out of the market.”

Trump’s Republican administration also is considering imposing tariffs on Mexico and China, which could make cars more expensive. Ives said he expects Trump to make exceptions for Tesla and Apple so they’re not hit by a tax on imported goods.

Tesla receives only a smattering of federal contracts, according to USAspending.gov, a database that tracks U.S. government spending.

This year, Tesla received at least $2.8 million from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation through a federally funded program to deploy EV charging stations.

From 2022 to 2024, Tesla and its subsidiaries were awarded at least $631,800 in federal contracts mainly to provide vehicles for the U.S. embassies in Singapore, Iceland and Thailand, the data showed.

The pioneering electric vehicle maker, which saw its stock surge after Trump’s win, has clashed with regulators over safety concerns around its self-driving software. Musk, who has vowed to cut at least $2 trillion in federal spending, could pressure regulators looking into his companies.

xAI

Musk’s startup xAI doesn’t appear to have federal government contracts, but artificial intelligence companies could benefit in other ways under Trump.

Republicans and Musk have expressed support for cutting regulation to fuel AI innovation, a crucial part of the future of tech companies.

But Musk has also warned that AI could pose a threat to humanity, and it’s unclear how Trump plans to address potential safety risks that come with technology including fraud, bias and disinformation.

Trump plans to repeal President Biden’s AI executive order that partly aimed to address AI safety concerns by directing the federal government to take steps such as enforcing consumer protection laws, according to the GOP’s MAGA platform.

Americans for Responsible Innovation, an advocacy group, wants Musk to become a strategic AI advisor to Trump, saying, “As artificial intelligence races ahead, the U.S. should lead the world in advancing AI safely and securely.”

A building with an "X" sculpture on top.

X, formerly known as Twitter, served as an online megaphone for Musk, who constantly shared his support for Trump during the election season.

The social media site, which recently relocated its San Francisco headquarters to Texas, doesn’t appear to have any federal government contracts, but X could benefit from policy changes that affect its rivals such as Meta and TikTok.

Musk, who has declared himself a “free speech absolutist,” recently shared an old Trump video with the words “YES!” In the video from 2022, Trump says he would change Section 230, a law that shields platforms from liability for user-generated content.

Platforms would qualify for immunity only if the companies “meet high standards of neutrality, transparency, fairness and nondiscrimination,” Trump said.

The Boring Co.

Fed up with Los Angeles traffic, Elon Musk launched The Boring Co. with two tweets in 2016, promising “to build a tunnel boring machine and just start digging.”

The Bastrop, Texas, company, formerly headquartered in Hawthorne, has completed a 1.7-mile loop under the Las Vegas Convention Center and is building a larger citywide loop — both without federal funding. Projects in some other cities didn’t get past the proposal stages.

However, at Trump’s urging, congressional representatives could earmark local transportation projects to the benefit of Boring Co., though the company would still have to compete to win them, said Greg Griffin, a former urban planning professor at the University of Texas at San Antonio, who studied that city’s proposed Boring Co. project.

“There could be some alignment between the specific firm’s abilities and a [congressional] delegation that could support projects that match those abilities,” he said. “The concept they were offering was not without merit.”

Local projects are typically paid for with 20% local funding and 80% federal money.

Neuralink

Controlling robotic limbs. Seeing without eyes. Those are the kinds of miraculous advances Musk’s Neuralink startup has been trying to achieve.

The Fremont, Calif., company he co-founded in 2016 doesn’t receive federal money, but its technology and clinical trails are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. The more hands-off approach favored by Trump could aid such medical device developers.

“We’re concerned that regulation in general in the FDA will be weakened under the second Trump administration, and particularly concerned about medical devices,” said Dr. Robert Steinbrook, health research group director for the consumer rights group Public Citizen.

Neuralink, which has raised more than $600 million in venture capital, has developed an implant the size of a coin with tiny wires that record brain activity. A paralyzed Arizona man became the first human to receive the implant in January and has since moved a cursor, browsed the internet and played video games with this thoughts. A second patient was implanted with the device in July.

Although the company is currently targeting people with disabilities, Musk has said the implants could be wedded with artificial intelligence to greatly magnify the intelligence of all humans — presenting its own set of thorny scientific and ethical issues.

Business

Nike to Cut 1,400 Jobs as Part of Its Turnaround Plan

Published

8 hours ago

April 23, 2026

Press Room

Nike to Cut 1,400 Jobs as Part of Its Turnaround Plan

Nike is cutting about 1,400 jobs in its operations division, mostly from its technology department, the company said Thursday.

In a note to employees, Venkatesh Alagirisamy, the chief operating officer of Nike, said that management was nearly done reorganizing the business for its turnaround plan, and that the goal was to operate with “more speed, simplicity and precision.”

“This is not a new direction,” Mr. Alagirisamy told employees. “It is the next phase of the work already underway.”

Nike, the world’s largest sportswear company, is trying to recover after missteps led to a prolonged sales slump, in which the brand leaned into lifestyle products and away from performance shoes and apparel. Elliott Hill, the chief executive, has worked to realign the company around sports and speed up product development to create more breakthrough innovations.

In March, Nike told investors that it expected sales to fall this year, with growth in North America offset by poor performance in Asia, where the brand is struggling to rejuvenate sales in China. Executives said at the time that more volatility brought on by the war in the Middle East and rising oil prices might continue to affect its business.

The reorganization has involved cuts across many parts of the organization, including at its headquarters in Beaverton, Ore. Nike slashed some corporate staff last year and eliminated nearly 800 jobs at distribution centers in January.

“You never want to have to go through any sort of layoffs, but to re-center the company, we’re doing some of that,” Mr. Hill said in an interview earlier this year.

Mr. Alagirisamy told employees that Nike was reshaping its technology team and centering employees at its headquarters and a tech center in Bengaluru, India. The layoffs will affect workers across North America, Europe and Asia.

The cuts will also affect staffing in Nike’s factories for Air, the company’s proprietary cushioning system. Employees who work on the supply chain for raw materials will also experience changes as staff is integrated into footwear and apparel teams.

Nike’s Converse brand, which has struggled for years to revive sales, will move some of its engineering resources closer to the factories they support, the company said.

Mr. Alagirisamy said the moves were necessary to optimize Nike’s supply chain, deploy technology faster and bolster relationships with suppliers.

Business

Senate committee kills bill mandating insurance coverage for wildfire safe homes

Published

9 hours ago

April 23, 2026

Press Room

Senate committee kills bill mandating insurance coverage for wildfire safe homes

A bill that would have required insurers to offer coverage to homeowners who take steps to reduce wildfire risk on their property died in the Legislature.

The Senate Insurance Committee on Monday voted down the measure, SB 1076, one of the most ambitious bills spurred by the devastating January 2025 wildfires.

The vote came despite fire victims and others rallying at the state Capitol in support of the measure, authored by state Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez (D-Pasadena), whose district includes the Eaton fire zone.

The Insurance Coverage for Fire-Safe Homes Act originally would have required insurers to offer and renew coverage for any home that meets wildfire-safety standards adopted by the insurance commissioner starting Jan. 1, 2028.

It also threatened insurers with a five-year ban from the sale of home or auto insurance if they did not comply, though it allowed for exceptions.

However, faced with strong opposition from the insurance industry, Pérez had agreed to amend the bill so it would have established community-wide pilot projects across the state to better understand the most effective way to limit property and insurance losses from wildfires.

Insurers would have had to offer four years of coverage to homeowners in successful pilot projects.

Denni Ritter, a vice president of the American Property Casualty Insurance Assn., told the committee that her trade group opposed the bill.

“While we appreciate the intent behind those conversations, those concepts do not remove our opposition, because they retain the same core flaw — substituting underwriting judgment and solvency safeguards with a statutory mandate to accept risk,” she said.

In voting against the bill Sen. Laura Richardson, (D-San Pedro), said: “Last I heard, in the United States, we don’t require any company to do anything. That’s the difference between capitalism and communism, frankly.”

The remarks against the measure prompted committee Chair Sen. Steve Padilla, (D-Chula Vista), to chastise committee members in opposition.

“I’m a little perturbed, and I’m a little disappointed, because you have someone who is trying to work with industry, who is trying to get facts and data,” he said.

Monday’s vote was the fourth time a bill that would have required insurers to offer coverage to so-called “fire hardened” homes failed in the Legislature since 2020, according to an analysis by insurance committee staff.

Fire hardening includes measures such as cutting back brush, installing fire resistant roofs and closing eaves to resist fire embers.

Pérez’s legislation was thought to have a better chance of passage because it followed the most catastrophic wildfires in U.S. history, which damaged or destroyed more than 18,000 structures and killed 31 people.

The bill was co-sponsored by the Los Angeles advocacy group Consumer Watchdog and Every Fire Survivor’s Network, a community group founded in Altadena after the fires formerly called the Eaton Fire Survivors Network.

But it also had broad support from groups such as the California Apartment Association, the California Nurses Association and California Environmental Voters.

Leading up to the fires, many insurers, citing heightened fire risk, had dropped policyholders in fire-prone neighorhoods. That forced them onto the California FAIR Plan, the state’s insurer of last resort, which offers limited but costly policies.

A Times analysis found that that in the Palisades and Eaton fire zones, the FAIR Plan’s rolls from 2020 to 2024 nearly doubled from 14,272 to 28,440. Mandating coverage has been seen as a way of reducing FAIR Plan enrollment.

“I’m disappointed this bill died in committee. Fire survivors deserved better,” Pérez said in a statement .

Also failing Monday in the committee was SB 982, a bill authored by Sen. Scott Wiener, (D-San Francisco). It would have authorized California’s attorney general to sue fossil fuel companies to recover losses from climate-induced disasters. It was opposed by the oil and gas industry.

Passing the committee were two other Pérez bills. SB 877 requires insurers to provide more transparency in the claims process. SB 878 imposes a penalty on insurers who don’t make claims payments on time.

Another bill, SB 1301, authored by insurance commissioner candidate Sen. Ben Allen, (D-Pacific Palisades), also passed. It protects policyholders from unexplained and abrupt policy non-renewals.

Business

How We Cover the White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Published

20 hours ago

April 23, 2026

Press Room

How We Cover the White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Times Insider explains who we are and what we do, and delivers behind-the-scenes insights into how our journalism comes together.

Politicians in Washington and the reporters who cover them have an often adversarial relationship.

But on the last Saturday in April, they gather for an irreverent celebration of press freedom and the First Amendment at the Washington Hilton Hotel: The White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

Hosted by the association, an organization that helps ensure access for media outlets covering the presidency, the dinner attracts Hollywood stars; politicians from both parties; and representatives of more than 100 networks, newspapers, magazines and wire services.

While The Times will have two reporters in the ballroom covering the event, the company no longer buys seats at the party, said Richard W. Stevenson, the Washington bureau chief. The decision goes back almost two decades; the last dinner The Times attended as an organization was in 2007.

“We made a judgment back then that the event had become too celebrity-focused and was undercutting our need to demonstrate to readers that we always seek to maintain a proper distance from the people we cover, many of whom attend as guests,” he said.

It’s a decision, he added, that “we have stuck by through both Republican and Democratic administrations, although we support the work of the White House Correspondents’ Association.”

Susan Wessling, The Times’s Standards editor, said the policy is a product of the organization’s desire to maintain editorial independence.

“We don’t want to leave readers with any questions about our independence and credibility by seeming to be overly friendly with people whose words and actions we need to report on,” she said.

The celebrity mentalist Oz Pearlman is headlining the evening, in lieu of the usual comedy set by the likes of Stephen Colbert and Hasan Minhaj, but all eyes will be on President Trump, who will make his first appearance at the dinner as president.

Mr. Trump has boycotted the event since 2011, when he was the butt of punchlines delivered by President Barack Obama and the talk show host Seth Meyers mocking his hair, his reality TV show and his preoccupation with the “birther” movement.

Last month, though, Mr. Trump, who has a contentious relationship with the media, announced his intention to attend this year’s dinner, where he will speak to a room full of the same reporters he often derides as “enemies of the people.”

Times reporters will be there to document the highs, the lows and the reactions in the room. A reporter for the Styles desk has also been assigned to cover the robust roster of after-parties around Washington.

Some off-duty reporters from The Times will also be present at this late-night circuit, though everyone remains cognizant of their roles, said Patrick Healy, The Times’s assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust.

“If they’re reporting, there’s a notebook or recorder out as usual,” he said. “If they’re not, they’re pros who know they’re always identifiable as Times journalists.”

For most of The Times’s reporters and editors, though, the evening will be experienced from home.

“The rest of us will be able to follow the coverage,” Mr. Stevenson said, “without having to don our tuxes or gowns.”