Elon Musk’s $1 Trillion Tesla Payday on the Line: Norway’s $2T Wealth Fund Says ‘No’ as Shareholders Vote

Vote is Nov. 6 (3:00 p.m. CT) in Austin with a public livestream; it’s the defining showdown over Elon Musk’s proposed $1 trillion, performance-based pay plan. ^[1]
Norway’s $2.1T sovereign wealth fund (NBIM) — one of Tesla’s biggest investors — says it will vote against the package (and against a general stock plan), citing dilution and “key person risk.” ^[2]
Proxy advisers ISS and Glass Lewis both recommend voting “no,” saying terms “warrant significant concern”; Egan‑Jones offered partial support under one policy. ^[3]
Tesla’s board warns Musk could leave if the plan fails; experts are split on whether staking the company’s future on one leader is sound governance. ^[4]
What’s actually on the table: up to 423,743,904 restricted shares for Musk in 12 equal tranches over a decade, tied to aggressive milestones that would lift Tesla’s value to ~$8.5T and create ~$7.5T in new shareholder value if fully achieved. ^[5]
TSLA stock traded around $444 today (midday) and fell roughly 5% after Norway’s fund opposed the deal; 52‑week range is $214–$489. ^[6]
Analyst snapshot: consensus 12‑month target hovers near $400 with an average “Hold” rating; near‑term options volatility is elevated into the vote. ^[7]

The vote that could reshape Tesla — and Musk’s control

Tesla’s annual meeting on Thursday, Nov. 6 will decide whether to award Elon Musk a new, decade‑long performance plan that Tesla calls the largest incentive package in corporate history. The company will stream the meeting and says seating is limited at its Austin headquarters. ^[8]

At the center is the 2025 CEO Performance Award: 423.7 million shares divided among 12 tranches that vest only if Tesla clears towering production, profitability, AI/robotics, and market‑cap hurdles. Tesla’s proxy materials state Musk must “create nearly $7.5 trillion in value for shareholders” to receive the full award — implying a path to roughly $8.5 trillion in market value. ^[9]

The package lands after a bruising legal saga. In 2024, Delaware’s Chancery Court invalidated Musk’s 2018 $56B pay plan as unfair; shareholders later re‑ratified it, but the court reaffirmed its ruling that the options remain void. Meanwhile, Tesla reincorporated in Texas after shareholders approved the move last year. ^[10]

A fresh wrinkle: Texas law now lets Musk vote his own shares on his compensation — a change from past Delaware practice — potentially giving him a decisive base of support. ^[11]

Where big investors and proxies stand

Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), which manages ~$2.1 trillion and holds a ~1.1% Tesla stake, said it will vote against Musk’s package and against Tesla’s general stock compensation plan. NBIM cited “the total size of the award, dilution, and lack of mitigation of key person risk.” The stance echoes its prior opposition to Musk’s 2018 plan. ^[12]

Powerful proxy firms have lined up, too. ISS urged a “no” vote, and Glass Lewis said the plan’s terms and dilution “warrant significant concern.” Glass Lewis also opposes putting a Tesla investment in Musk’s AI startup xAI to a shareholder vote, arguing the board should make that call. ^[13]

There is notable support. Baron Capital publicly backed the award, praising Musk as “the most extraordinary engineer on our planet” and arguing the plan aligns pay with performance and retention. ^[14]

Prediction markets, for what they’re worth, imply shareholders may approve the plan — a sentiment that can change quickly as votes are counted. ^[15]

What’s actually in the 2025 plan

Structure:12 tranches of 35,311,992 shares each, in restricted stock, vesting against a blend of financial, operational and strategic milestones. ^[16]
Ownership effect: If all 12 tranches vest (and certain option shares also become outstanding), Tesla estimates Musk’s beneficial ownership could approach ~28.8% (before any future dilution or tax‑related sales). ^[17]
Scale of ambition: Tesla’s proxy highlights that unlike 2018’s “billions,” the 2025 plan requires creating “trillions” in shareholder value to fully vest. ^[18]

Governance flashpoint: “Pay Musk or else?”

Tesla’s board has been explicit about the stakes: if the package fails, Musk might leave or redirect his attention, they have warned. In a Nov. 5 analysis, Reuters summarized the board’s pitch and quoted multiple governance experts — some supportive of pay‑for‑performance, others alarmed by concentration of power in a single leader. “The numbers are big because the goals are big,” said Harvard’s Krishna Palepu, while Delaware governance scholar Charles Elson criticized the board for being “held over the barrel by a ‘superstar CEO.’” ^[19]

Proxy advisers’ skepticism has been blistering. Glass Lewis and ISS argue dilution and terms are too generous; Tesla counters that the firms use rigid models that undervalue unique value creation. ^[20]

Another contested item: several investors and Glass Lewis question the wisdom of a Tesla investment in xAI, also slated for a vote. NBIM has voted against that authorization, according to investor briefings cited by Investopedia and Reuters. ^[21]

How markets are reacting

Price check: Tesla shares traded around $444 intraday on Nov. 5, down roughly 5% after Norway’s fund declared its opposition. Over the past year, TSLA has ranged from $214 to $489. (Prices intraday; may update during trading.) ^[22]

Volatility: Options markets reflect elevated uncertainty into the vote; 30‑day implied volatility ~56 sits toward the higher end of the past year (but below peak event levels). ^[23]

Wall Street view: Aggregators show a consensus “Hold” with an average 12‑month target near $400 — below today’s price — underscoring the split between long‑term AI/robotics optimism and near‑term margin/demand concerns. (Methodologies vary.) ^[24]

Scenarios: What a “yes” or “no” could mean

If shareholders approve:

Clarity on leadership & strategy. Backers say approval reduces key‑man uncertainty and aligns Musk to hit multi‑year AI, robotaxi, energy and robotics goals that the company says could justify multi‑trillion valuations. ^[25]
Dilution overhang. Even partial vesting means material issuance; Tesla’s own modeling shows Musk’s stake could near ~29% at full vesting (before dilution effects). Expect debate over the cost of that dilution versus potential value creation. ^[26]
Governance precedent. A win may embolden boards to propose more bespoke mega‑awards for “founder‑CEOs,” while critics warn of entrenchment risks. ^[27]

If shareholders reject:

Leadership risk in focus. The board has raised the possibility Musk could deprioritize Tesla; some experts argue the board should be prepared for succession planning instead of conceding leverage. ^[28]
Policy questions in Texas. Post‑Delaware, Tesla’s Texas domicile — and the ability for Musk to vote his shares on comp — will remain contested terrain for investors probing shareholder rights. ^[29]
Next steps. Tesla could revisit structure and size, or pursue alternative retention mechanisms. Proxy advisers have signaled willingness to engage but remain opposed to the current scale. ^[30]

Expert voices, in their own words

Glass Lewis on the plan: The terms “warrant significant concern.” ^[31]
Harvard’s Krishna Palepu: “The numbers are big because the goals are big” — supportive of tying outsized pay to outsized performance and long holding periods. ^[32]
Charles Elson (Univ. of Delaware): Boards shouldn’t be “held over the barrel by a ‘superstar CEO.’” ^[33]
NBIM (Norway fund): Opposes due to size, dilution, and lack of mitigation of key person risk. ^[34]
Baron Capital (supporting): The plan “aligns with shareholder interests” and is “right for the company, right for shareholders.” ^[35]

(All quotes ≤25 words.)

The backstory that brought Tesla here

Jan.–Dec. 2024: Delaware’s Chancery Court voids Musk’s 2018 package; later reaffirms that the options remain invalid despite a re‑vote. The ruling criticized process and fairness. ^[36]
June 2024: Shareholders approve reincorporation to Texas and re‑ratify Musk’s 2018 award; Tesla confirms it is now a Texas corporation. ^[37]
2025 proxy season: Tesla proposes the 2025 CEO Performance Award with 12 tranches/423.7M shares and “trillions” of value creation targets; proxy advisors push back; Norway’s fund goes public with a “no.” ^[38]

TSLA: price and forecast (not investment advice)

Live snapshot: ~$444 intraday today; shares fell about 5% following NBIM’s opposition. 52‑week range $214–$489. ^[39]
Street consensus: Average 12‑month target around $400 and “Hold.” Bulls (e.g., some brokers) point to AI/robotaxi optionality; skeptics cite margins, competition, and governance risk. ^[40]
Event risk: Options markets imply elevated volatility into and shortly after the vote (~56 IV on 30‑day tenor). Big swings either way are possible as details and vote tallies emerge. ^[41]

What to watch on Thursday

Final headcount: Will large passive funds (BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street) disclose or sway the outcome? ^[42]
xAI investment item: Whether shareholders authorize a Tesla investment in Musk’s AI company — and how that’s interpreted for conflicts oversight. ^[43]
Board elections & stock plans: NBIM says it’s voting against parts of Tesla’s equity program and certain directors on comp committees. ^[44]
Post‑vote guidance: If approved, expect questions on dilution pacing and milestone transparency; if rejected, questions on succession and retention. ^[45]

Sources & further reading

NBIM and major‑investor opposition: Reuters, AP, Guardian. ^[46]
Proxy‑advisor views (ISS/Glass Lewis) & xAI vote: Reuters. ^[47]
Tesla’s proxy & plan details: SEC‑filed 2025 Proxy Statement (PDF). ^[48]
Meeting logistics: Tesla investor site. ^[49]
Price/volatility & analyst snapshot: Live price feed; MarketWatch estimates; StreetInsider options note. ^[50]
Expert commentary & governance debate: Reuters analysis, Nov. 5. ^[51]