Hey everybody. Welcome back to the Elon Musk
podcast. This is a show.
Where we discuss the critical crossroads, the shape SpaceX.
Tesla X, The Boring Company and Neurolink.
I'm your host, Will Walden. Tesla spent $2.4 million last
year on Elon Musk's personal security, according to the
company's most recent filing. Now that figure puts Musk in the
same thing as other high profile CE OS Who's protection is
required 24/7, but also raises a bigger question, how much of
Tesla shareholder money should go toward safeguarding Elon
Musk? The company disclosed the
spending in a proxy filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission. Tesla frame.
The cost is necessary given Musk's role and public
visibility. His presence on social media,
polarizing comments, and also his political leanings and
global recognition make him a security risk in ways that other
business leaders do not face now.
The company has repeatedly said this level of protection is
essential and not optional now. The $2.4 million figure marked a
slight increase from 2.2 million reported in 2022 from Tesla.
And by comparison, Meta spent nearly 14,000,000 on security
for Mark Zuckerberg in 2023, and Amazon spent over $1,000,000 to
protect Andy Jassy. Now, these figures show that
shareholder backed security spending is common across the
tech sector, though Musk falls closer to kind of the middle of
the pack here. Now, Tesla's disclosure places a
spotlight on the financial balancing act between personal
protection and corporate governance.
Shareholders accept these expenses because ACEO, like
Musk, carries both enormous influence and also elevated
risks. A Musk's outspoken presence on
X, his role in multiple companies, and his near
celebrity status combined to make him a huge target the few
businesses could ignore. Now, corporate boards typically
justify these costs as necessary for business continuity.
Now, if Musk were unable to perform his duties because of a
security failure, Tesla would face consequences far more
costly than just a bill of protection.
That logic makes the security spending easier to defend, but
also sparks debate about how far companies should go in paying
for executive safety. Should these executives pay for
it themselves, or should the company pay for it now?
Tesla's filing did not break down the spending in detail,
though, but past disclosures from other companies suggest the
bulk goes toward private security staff and secure
travel. Know Mark Zuckerberg's expenses,
for example, cover residential security and personal protection
while traveling. Musk's globe spanning schedule
from factory visits to space launches at Star Base, Texas,
likely demands a similar complex arrangement.
Now. One factor that sets Musk apart
from his peers is the way his personal brand overlaps with
Tesla's public image. Musk doesn't operate in the
background. He tweets, jokes around
political commentary, argues with a lot of people in front of
millions of people on Twitter, making himself inseparable from
the company's identity. Now, that constant exposure
multiplies the security risks, which may explain why Tesla sees
his protection as a core business expense rather than a
perk. The regulators.
Have occasionally pressed companies to clarify how the
security arrangements are justified.
The SEC requires firms to disclose when personal security
is treated as a business expense rather than taxable
compensation. And now, by categorizing Musk's
protection is necessary for his role, Tesla avoids listing.
It is a additional pay, which could draw shareholder
criticism. Now, the costs also reflect the
broader reality of modern corporate leadership.
Executives who double as public figures face threats that extend
beyond financial concerns, and boards have to weigh those risks
against shareholder expectations.
Musk, more than most, embodies this tension because his
influence stretches across Tesla, Space XX and XAI.
Any disruption to him directly effects multiple multi billion
dollar enterprises. Now, of course, shareholders
will ultimately decide whether these expenses align with her
expectations for Tesla's governance.
The vote on it. But for now, $2.4 million looks
like a relatively modest price for protecting the person who's
defined the company's trajectory for around 20 years.
Hey, thank you so much for listening today.
I really do appreciate your support.
If you could take a second and hit the subscribe or the follow
button on whatever podcast platform that you're listening
on right now, I greatly appreciate it.
It helps out the show tremendously and you'll never
miss an episode. And each episode is about 10
minutes or less to get you caught up quickly.
And please, if you want to support the show even more, go
to atreoncom. Stage 0.
And please take care of yourselves and each other, and
I'll see you tomorrow.