Elon Musk Faces Major Pushback: Norway’s Wealth Fund Rejects His $1 Trillion Tesla Pay Package

Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, one of Tesla’s largest shareholders, has voted against Elon Musk’s proposed $1 trillion compensation plan, raising questions about corporate governance and Tesla’s heavy reliance on its CEO.

Elon Musk Faces Growing Resistance Inside Tesla’s Own Walls

While Elon Musk remains the driving force behind Tesla’s meteoric rise, his proposed $1 trillion pay package has sparked sharp backlash among global investors. On November 4, Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) — Norway’s $1.9 trillion sovereign wealth fund — announced that it would vote against the massive compensation plan in Tesla’s upcoming annual shareholder meeting on November 6.

The decision marks the first public rejection from a major institutional investor, sending shockwaves through Wall Street and the corporate governance community.

In its official statement, NBIM said:

“We acknowledge the significant value created under Mr. Musk’s leadership. However, the total size of the award, potential share dilution, and lack of safeguards to mitigate key-person risk raise serious concerns.”

Following the announcement, Tesla shares fell more than 5% in intraday trading on November 4, reflecting investors’ growing unease over the controversial pay proposal.

A Record-Breaking Reward: 12% More Shares if Tesla Hits $8.5 Trillion Valuation

Under the proposed plan, Elon Musk would receive an additional 12% ownership stake in Tesla if the company’s market capitalization reaches $8.5 trillion within the next decade — roughly eight times its current value.

If all targets are achieved, the total reward would exceed $1 trillion, making it the largest executive pay package in corporate history.

However, analysts note that the accompanying performance goals are extremely ambitious. In addition to the market cap requirement, Musk must lead Tesla to achieve:

20 million annual vehicle deliveries,

1 million operating robotaxis, and

10 million paid Full Self-Driving (FSD) subscribers.

While consistent with Musk’s long-term vision, these goals are viewed as overly optimistic amid slowing EV demand, intensifying competition in China, and shrinking profit margins.

NBIM: “This Is About Governance, Not Elon Musk”

NBIM stressed that its decision was not personal but grounded in principles of corporate accountability and responsible governance.

Holding about 1.2% of Tesla’s total shares, the Norwegian fund ranks as the company’s sixth-largest institutional shareholder, trailing only Vanguard and BlackRock. Its public stance could influence other shareholders to reconsider their votes.

Proxy advisory giants Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis have also urged investors to vote against the plan, arguing that the payout is disproportionately large and lacks adequate risk-mitigation measures to protect existing shareholders from dilution.

But Musk Still Has His Allies

Despite the criticism, Elon Musk continues to enjoy strong backing from several major investors.

Funds such as Morgan Stanley’s Counterpoint Global, the Florida public pension fund, and Charles Schwab Corp. have all announced plans to vote in favor of the proposal.

Charles Schwab stated:

“We believe this plan aligns executive and shareholder interests, ensuring the best long-term outcomes for all stakeholders.”

Still, the growing divide among Tesla’s shareholders underscores an emerging shift in investor sentiment — one that favors more balanced governance over personality-driven leadership.

A Test of Trust: Can Tesla Thrive Beyond Its Visionary Founder?

Few deny that Elon Musk’s leadership has transformed Tesla from a niche EV startup into one of the world’s most valuable companies. From pioneering electric mobility to spearheading AI-powered automation, Musk has repeatedly pushed the boundaries of innovation.

Yet the question remains: Is Tesla too dependent on one man?

As Musk divides his time among multiple ventures — including SpaceX, X (formerly Twitter), Neuralink, and xAI — some investors worry that his attention to Tesla is diminishing just as the company faces mounting competition and operational headwinds.

Granting Musk an additional $1 trillion worth of shares without stronger oversight, critics argue, could erode investor confidence in Tesla’s commitment to transparency and good governance — especially as it transitions from a growth-driven disruptor to a mature global corporation.

A Historic Precedent — and a Governance Turning Point

This is not Musk’s first brush with controversy over executive pay. Back in 2018, Tesla shareholders approved another massive incentive plan with 72% support, but the Delaware Court of Chancery later invalidated the package, citing procedural flaws and conflicts of interest.

Tesla has appealed that ruling to the Delaware Supreme Court, and the new proposal represents, in many ways, a second test of Tesla’s governance model — and of Musk’s ability to command shareholder trust after years of dominance.

For Musk, who famously claims to “take no salary” and rely solely on performance-based rewards, the outcome of this vote could determine not just his personal wealth, but his long-term role at Tesla.

Potential Impact on Tesla’s Stock and Reputation

If shareholders reject the proposal, Tesla could face:

Leadership uncertainty, as Musk has hinted he might reconsider his position if investors “no longer believe in him.”

Market volatility, with potential downward pressure on Tesla’s stock.

Greater scrutiny from regulators and institutional investors over the company’s governance practices.

Conversely, if the plan is approved, Musk would tighten his control over Tesla, but the company may face heightened criticism for its governance culture and growing concentration of power.

Either way, analysts agree the vote will shape the narrative around Tesla’s identity — whether it remains a “founder-driven revolution” or evolves into a more traditional, balanced corporation.

Conclusion

The upcoming shareholder vote on November 6 is not just about whether Elon Musk receives a trillion-dollar payout — it is a litmus test for corporate governance in America’s most influential companies.

At stake is more than money: it’s a question of trust, accountability, and balance of power between visionary leaders and the institutions that finance them.

Regardless of the outcome, one thing is clear — Tesla’s next chapter will redefine the limits of leadership, ownership, and transparency in the modern corporate era.

FAQs

1. Why is Norway’s wealth fund opposing Elon Musk’s pay plan?
NBIM believes the proposed package is excessively large, could dilute shareholder value, and lacks mechanisms to reduce the company’s reliance on Musk.

2. What does the $1 trillion pay package include?
Musk would earn an additional 12% equity stake if Tesla’s valuation reaches $8.5 trillion within ten years and achieves key performance milestones such as 20 million vehicle deliveries, 1 million robotaxis, and 10 million paid FSD users.

3. Who supports and who opposes the plan?
NBIM, ISS, and Glass Lewis have voiced opposition, while Morgan Stanley’s Counterpoint Global, Florida’s pension fund, and Charles Schwab have expressed support.

4. What’s at stake for Tesla in this vote?
The decision could reshape Tesla’s leadership dynamics, influence investor confidence, and set a precedent for how far corporate America is willing to go to reward its most powerful executives.