Musk's Tesla to Texas threat: What investors need to know

In This Article:

Tesla (TSLA) CEO Elon Musk recently expressed his intention to move his company's incorporation from Delaware to Texas, weeks after the Delaware Chancery Court rejected his pay package. Columbia Law Professor John Coffee joins Yahoo Finance Live to discuss the implications.

Coffee urges Tesla shareholders to understand Musk "may have different interests than their own." He notes some CEOs seek states with "very little judicial oversight," which can harm shareholders in the long run.

For more expert insight and the latest market action, click here to watch this full episode of Yahoo Finance Live.

Editor's note: This video has been edited to remove a statement representing that a shareholder lawsuit against Tripadvisor had reached the Delaware Supreme Court. The case remains pending in Delaware Chancery Court.

This article was written by Angel Smith

Video Transcript

RACHELLE AKUFFO: "Move your company out of Delaware before they lock the doors." That's what Elon Musk posted to his social-media platform X. This comes as the Tesla CEO continues his campaign to reincorporate Tesla in Texas instead of Delaware.

Now two weeks ago, a Delaware judge invalidated the $56-billion compensation package that Musk earned as CEO of the EV company. Now, Musk then vowed to move immediately to hold a shareholder vote on Texas incorporation. The vote hasn't been scheduled, but if it is, what do Tesla investors need to know?

Well, joining us now on this is John Coffee, Columbia Law School professor and director of the Center on Corporate Governance, and our very own legal reporter Alexis Keenan. A big welcome to you here, John.

So first, for people who are trying to get up to speed here, what is it that shareholders need to know when they're being asked about reincorporating in Texas?

JOHN COFFEE: Well, they need to know, first of all, that the CEO or the controlling shareholder may have interests different than their own, and Delaware will put them under some degree of scrutiny. Other jurisdictions like Nevada are advertising that there will be very little judicial oversight, and that's what some CEOs want.

Institutional investors, however, often hold the majority of the stock. The cases where we're seeing this kind of migration to the new jurisdiction are cases in which the controlling shareholder has the vote locked up. Either he owns 50% or he has de facto control because many shareholders do not vote and a 40% block is actually a de facto controlling shareholder.

ALEXIS KEENAN: John, now there's a broader issue here, though, at play in that a controlling shareholder-- if you argue that Musk is, in fact, a controlling shareholder in this instance-- that they are electing the independent board members and therefore can-- whether it's Delaware's court, whether it's another business court in another state, can those independent directors really protect the minority shareholders?