Tech Oligarchs Overhaul Delaware Corporate Law in Bid to Consolidate Power Over Us
As Elon Musk tries to gut federal enforcement agencies, Delaware lawmakers have just approved a law to weaken the power of shareholders to hold corporate lawbreakers accountable.
By: Natalia Renta
While Elon Musk attacks federal agencies’ ability to protect us from the worst excesses of corporate power, a little known Musk initiative sailed through the Delaware legislature this week. Delaware’s corporate law drew Musk’s ire when its well-regarded Court of Chancery sided with Tesla shareholders and tossed out his $56 billion pay package. Musk packed up his Tesla toys and moved the company’s incorporation to Texas, but his lawyers still pushed Delaware lawmakers to twist the state’s laws to suit his oligarchic interests and have more power over our lives.
The Delaware House passed Senate Bill 21 (SB 21) last night, after the Delaware Senate passed it on March 13. Governor Matt Meyer, who played a central role in the bill’s passage, promptly signed it into law.
Most companies operate under Delaware’s corporate law, with about two thirds of S&P 500 companies incorporated in the state, and most corporate lawsuits occur in Delaware’s special Court of Chancery. And as corporate interests have eroded many federal tools of corporate accountability — like federal financial, environmental, and worker safety regulations — Delaware corporate law has become one of the last mechanisms of corporate accountability, especially for shareholder lawsuits. Now, as Musk is trying to gut the agencies that enforce federal regulations altogether, state corporate law is poised to become even more important.
Regular shareholders like working peoples’ pensions can bring lawsuits challenging corporate misconduct. But corporate law gives directors and officers broad latitude to make decisions free from liability — even if they are very costly to the corporation and its stakeholders. Courts, however, look more closely at decisions by corporate insiders — including controlling shareholders like Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and private equity firms that often retain significant stakes in companies after they take them public — when there are conflicts of interest.
The case challenging Musk’s $56 billion Tesla pay package was one of those instances. Upset that a Delaware judge ruled against him in that case, Musk disparaged her and Delaware courts, reincorporated Tesla and SpaceX in Texas, and called on others to do the same.
Corporate insiders convinced Delaware legislators that they were in a hostage situation: either overhaul their state’s corporate law to give more power to Zuckerberg, private equity firms, and other corporate insiders to everyone else’s detriment by passing SB 21 immediately, or face a mass exodus of corporations and a corresponding slashing of their state budget. Delaware Rep. Madinah Wilson-Anton said: “Our budget is being held hostage and we’re supposed to just listen to the demands, but we have not been told who they’re coming from.”
However, since SB 21 would make it much harder for regular shareholders to hold insiders accountable for their self-serving actions in Delaware courts, many organizations representing regular shareholders have spoken out against the bill, saying its passage would make Delaware less attractive as a state of incorporation. Rep. Wilson-Anton noted: “When we continue to pass bills that are catering to a very small minority of companies that have lost in court and are upset they lost in court, it creates an environment where other companies say, ‘You know what, we’re just gonna stay in our home state because Delaware is just a state where the highest bidder gets to write the law.’” Meanwhile, a recent poll found that only 16 percent of Delaware voters believe that SB 21 should have passed as is and 63 percent are less likely to vote for legislators who back SB 21.
Rewriting Delaware corporate law at the behest of Musk and other corporate insiders makes no sense. Insulating the self-serving decisions of corporate insiders from challenge and gutting the federal agencies and protections that hold corporate power accountable are two sides of the same coin. Heads Big Tech oligarchs win, tails the rest of us lose. As the former head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs K. Sabeel Rahman said, “a world without government isn’t a world where we’re not being governed. It’s just we’re being governed in a super undemocratic way.”