Elon Musk and his companies faced at least $2.37 billion in potential federal fines and penalties the day President Trump took office, according to a congressional report released Monday that highlights the possible conflicts of interest posed by the billionaire’s cost-cutting work in government.

The 43-page memo by the minority staff of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, led by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), is the most exhaustive attempt yet to detail Musk’s alleged conflicts as an advisor to Trump and chief promoter of his team called the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE.

Based on publicly available documents, media reports and the committee’s own calculations, the memo found that as of Jan. 20, Musk and his companies were “subject to at least 65 actual or potential actions by 11 different federal agencies” and that 40 of those created $2.37 billion in potential liabilities.

“Mr. Musk has taken a chainsaw to the federal government with no apparent regard for the law or for the people who depend on the programs and agencies he so blithely destroys,” the memo stated. “The through line connecting many of Mr. Musk’s decisions appears to be self-enrichment and avoiding what he perceives as obstacles to advancing his interests.”

The memo notes that Musk’s companies have received more than $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits going back more than 20 years. And it notes that SpaceX, as of Friday, had $10.1 billion in federal contracts.

“President Trump could not have chosen a person more prone to conflicts of interest,” states the memo, which calls on the president, executive departments and regulatory agencies to “take coordinated action to address Elon Musk’s threat to the integrity of federal governance.”

In a statement, White House Communications Director Steven Cheung said the claims were baseless.

“Mr. Musk has never used his position for personal or financial gain, and any assertion otherwise is completely false and defamatory. Dick is clearly suffering from a debilitating and uncurable case of Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Cheung said.

Blumenthal signed letters sent Sunday to Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, The Boring Co. and x.AI Corp. — Musk’s artificial intelligence company, which acquired his social media platform X Corp. — demanding more information about any federal investigations, litigation and regulatory actions involving each company.

The letters also requested to know what measures they had taken to deal with any possible conflict of interest involving Musk, who has majority stakes or controlling interests in the companies.

None of the companies immediately responded to emails for comment, nor did DOGE.

Musk has previously stated in a joint interview with President Trump on Fox News, that he would “recuse myself if it is a conflict,” while the president said, “He won’t be involved.”

Last week, Musk also said during a Tesla earnings call that he was stepping back from DOGE to focus on his electric car maker, though he would remain involved with the cost-cutting effort likely through Trump’s entire term.

The once-cutting-edge Austin, Texas, company has seen its profit and share price plunge amid Trump’s looming tariffs that Musk has opposed and a brand crisis precipitated by his prominent role in the administration.

The committee’s memo found that Tesla created most of the potential penalties for Musk — a cumulative $1.89 billion — due to investigations, lawsuits and other issues involving eight agencies.

The largest single liability was a potential $1.19-billion fine due to a reported criminal investigation opened by the Department of Justice into allegedly false or misleading statements made by Musk and the company about its Autopilot and Full-Self Driving Features since as early as 2016.

The Times previously reported the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is probing the Full-Self Driving technology after reports of four collisions in low-visibility conditions, including one in which a pedestrian was killed.

However, doubts have been raised about the Justice Department’s commitment to any prosecution. The memo notes that in February the department dismissed a lawsuit it filed against SpaceX for allegedly discouraging asylum seekers and refugees from applying for jobs or hiring them because of their citizenship status. It calculated the lawsuit could have exposed SpaceX to $46.1 million in liabilities.

The second single largest liability of $462 million facing Musk also involved Tesla. It arose out of a 2023 lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for the company’s alleged toleration of widespread racial harassment of Black employees at its Fremont, Calif., factory. Tesla has denied the allegations. In January, Trump fired two Democratic commissioners and the agency’s general counsel.

A third major potential liability of nearly $240 million involving the company stemmed from a media report that the company was subject to a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation due to a whistleblower claim that it didn’t disclose fire risks posed by its solar panel systems.

The other large potential liability, according to the memo, involved Neuralink, a company developing a brain-computer interface that allows paralyzed people to communicate via their thoughts or brain waves.

The memo notes the SEC opened an investigation into the Fremont, Calif., company after Musk allegedly overstated the safety of its implants while raising some $240 million from investors. A physician’s group filed a complaint that the implants had caused the deaths of at least 12 monkeys.

Neuralink has said it is committed to treating test animals humanely.

Another major alleged liability noted in the report involves a complaint the SEC filed against Musk accusing him of failing to make a timely disclosure in 2022 that he had acquired a 5% stake in Twitter.

The agency estimated Musk saved an estimated $150 million from unsuspecting investors unaware of this as he built up his stake in the company he ultimately acquired and renamed X. Musk has criticized the lawsuit, which is pending.

Other potential liabilities faced by Musk’s companies include a $633,000 fine the Federal Aviation Administration levied against SpaceX in September for alleged license violations during two Florida launches of its rockets. The agency said the case remains open.

Three of Musk’s companies also face allegations they violated Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations, including 26 violations contested by Tesla creating $583,000 in liabilities, according to the memo.

With Republicans in control of the Senate, the Democrats on the investigations committee have minimal power, since they can’t hold hearings or subpoena witnesses. The committee has previously requested information from Musk’s companies on potential conflicts of interests, but Blumenthal said it hasn’t gotten a satisfactory response.

This memo calls on Trump and his administration to respond to congressional information requests regarding Musk’s “federal entanglements,” conduct reviews to ensure “appropriate measures were/are in place to prevent undue influence” and “initiate independent audits of major contracts and awards to Musk-affiliated companies, particularly those with Department of Defense and NASA.”

“No one individual, no matter how prominent or wealthy, is above the law. Anything less than decisive, immediate, and collective action risks America becoming a bystander to the surrender to modern oligarchy — public power in private hands,” the memo concludes.

Dear Liz: I lived in a house for 45 years. During that time, my daughter and her family moved in due to the 2008 financial crisis. I have not charged her rent. However, I moved out five years ago, and her family is still there rent-free. I understand that when I sell, I will owe capital gains tax because it is no longer my primary residence. Are there any hardship rules that may help me?

Answer: Unfortunately, the IRS doesn’t consider freeloading relatives as one of the hardships that can modify the home sales exclusion rules.

Your capital gain will be calculated by subtracting your tax basis in the home from the sales proceeds, minus selling costs. Your tax basis is generally what you paid for the house, plus the cost of qualifying upgrades.

You can exclude up to $250,000 of home sale capital gains (or $500,000 if married filing jointly), but only if you’ve owned and lived in the property as your primary residence for at least two of the past five years. There is a partial exclusion for people who fall short of the two-year mark because of certain reasons, such as a work- or health-related move.

Dear Liz: My mother recently passed and my sister is handling all the legalities. At one point, my sister mentioned our mother had a sizable savings account plus two retirement accounts valued at $400,000, and that I would receive something. Now she is simply saying, “I don’t know where the money has gone.” She handled all my mother’s finances for years before her death. How is this possible? I can’t hire an attorney, nor do I want to alienate my sister or seem greedy. What should I do?

Answer: If your sister handled your mother’s finances for years and she’s settling the estate, then she almost certainly knows where the money went. Why she won’t tell you is the mystery.

Your mother’s money may have been eaten up by long-term care expenses, which can be breathtakingly expensive. That’s especially true if there was a long gap between your sister’s disclosure about the accounts and your mother’s death.

If that were the case, though, your sister could just say so.

There are many other possibilities. Your mother could have been scammed, or gambled away the money, or been the victim of financial elder abuse. Abusers are often people the elders know, including relatives and caregivers.

Perhaps your sister didn’t help herself during your mother’s lifetime, but arranged to be the beneficiary of all the accounts, either with or without your mother’s consent.

You don’t have many options if you aren’t willing or able to consult an attorney, but you wouldn’t be greedy to ask for some clarity from your sister.

Dear Liz: I read your column about the parent who unexpectedly had to take over for their incapacitated son. You suggested every adult have a power of attorney and healthcare proxy. Excellent advice! However, as I discovered in dealing with my father’s illness and estate, these general documents are not always recognized by the very institutions they were designed for. His bank, mortgage company and health insurance company would only recognize their versions of these documents.

Fortunately, while he was still able to, I was able to procure each of these documents with his signatures on them but it was very stressful at a difficult time for all of us. I would suggest you amend your advice to people to check to see if their banks and so on also require their specific forms.

Answer: Financial institutions are supposed to accept properly drafted powers of attorney, but some of them insist on their own forms, agrees Burton Mitchell, an estate planning attorney in Los Angeles.

“Sometimes one can get around these rules by appealing to higher ups in the organization, but it is unnecessarily difficult, time-consuming and complicated,” Mitchell says.

Checking with your financial institutions now could avoid hassles later.

Liz Weston, Certified Financial Planner®, is a personal finance columnist. Questions may be sent to her at 3940 Laurel Canyon, No. 238, Studio City, CA 91604, or by using the “Contact” form at asklizweston.com.