Connect with us

News

A Timeline of Nikola’s Trevor Milton: From Fictional to Fraudulent

Nikola showcases the Nikola Two. (Photo: Dacia Ferris/Teslarati)

Published

on

Earlier today, it was announced that former Nikola Motor CEO Trevor Milton had been indicted on three counts of fraud by U.S. prosecutors and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) following comments and claims he made regarding the automaker he used to run. Through the years, Milton has gone from fictional to fraudulent, never bringing a truly functional product to the market or to demonstrations for that matter, and allegedly lying to investors along the way.

Established in 2014 by Milton, Nikola worked toward revolutionary new battery-electric and hydrogen fuel cell automotive powertrains for commercial and passenger vehicles. The beginning of the company’s somewhat inevitable fall was marked by the release of a shocking report from Hindenburg Research that claimed the company’s first vehicle demonstration of the Nikola One semi-truck was misleading, claiming the vehicle was not self-propelled. Nikola initially denied this but then admitted the vehicle was placed on a low-grade hill to appear to be functional. The company was not willing to put any more money into a prototype.

(Photo: Isaac Sloan/Nikola Motor)

However, Nikola’s long journey, which has culminated in the arrest of Milton with charges to be formally announced later today, started long before Hindenburg’s report.

  • 2009 –  Trevor Milton launches dHybrid after selling an alarm sales company for $300,000. dHybrid entered a contract with Swift, a major transportation company in the heavy trucking sector. Swift agreed to convert up to 800 trucks, securing a $16 million contract for dHybrid shortly after its establishment.
    • Swift would later sue dHybrid, claiming the company’s truck did not work and some company executives “misappropriated capital for personal use,” according to the Hindenburg report.
    • Hindenburg also claims that Milton reached out to dHybrid investors, claiming the contract with Swift was valued at $250 million – $300 million.
  • 2014 – dHybrid acquired by Worthington for $15.9 million.
  • 2016 – Nikola announces it will unveil the Nikola One electric semi, claiming that it will be fully functional at the December 1st event. Nikola claimed to have “The Holy Grail” of hydrogen tech for trucking just months before the event.
  • 2017 – Nikola signs a deal with Powercell AB, a Swedish company, to supply hydrogen fuel cell stacks. Nikola also signed with Bosch, who agreed to help assist in the production of Nikola Two prototypes.
  • 2018 – Nikola begins to market the Nikola One as the “largest energy consumer” in America. Targeting the Tesla Semi, Nikola filed a $2 billion lawsuit against Tesla, alleging that Tesla violated a design patent of the Nikola One. Several elements, including the wraparound windshield, mid-entry door, front fenders, and the electric truck’s aerodynamic body, were all claimed by Nikola to be taken by Tesla.
  • 2019 – Nikola World event shows five zero-emission vehicles that will eventually produce and release. The company announced a partnership with Anheuser-Busch, who ordered 800 trucks from Nikola.
    • Nikola offers Tesla a new design for its Cybertruck. Milton extends the pickup truck design to Tesla CEO Elon Musk, giving it to him as a “backup plan” if Cybertruck pre-orders were unsuccessful. Tesla has received over 1 million pre-orders for the Cybertruck since November 2019.
  • 2020 – Nikola and GM come to a partnership to see GM handle fuel cell and battery systems in early September. The deal gives GM a $2 billion equity stake.
    • Hindenburg releases its report on Nikola called, “Nikola — How to Parlay an Ocean of Lies into a Partnership with the Largest Auto OEM in America.” The report claims Nikola is “an intricate fraud” by gathering phone calls, emails, text messages, photographs, and other pieces of evidence that claim the company has been misleading shareholders. Hindenburg claims they’ve “never seen this level deception at a public company, especially of this size.”
    • Nikola admits that the Nikola One was not self-propelled.
    • Nikola CEO Trevor Milton steps down from his post at the helm of the company. “Nikola is truly in my blood and always will be, and the focus should be on the Company and its world-changing mission, not me,” Milton said. Stephen Girsky became the new Chairman of the Board.
    • Nikola plans the next “Nikola World” event, but it is postponed as uncertainty due to its lack of executive leadership continues.
    • GM reconsiders its partnership and eventually cuts back the terms of its conglomeration. NKLA stock falls 24% as GM partially backs out of the deal.
  • 2021 – Nikola files a 10-K filing with the SEC following its Q4 2020 Earnings Report and admits its former frontman Milton misled shareholders by lying. The company said that several statements made by Milton were “inaccurate in whole or in part when made.”
    • Today, July 29th – Trevor Milton surrenders to federal authorities on three counts of fraud for lying about “nearly all aspects” of Nikola’s business. Milton is required to forfeit all properties that are traceable to the commission of his offenses.

Milton will be presented by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York at 11 am EST today.

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling

ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.

Published

on

By

ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.

The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.

Additionally,  ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.

SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise

Advertisement

The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.

The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise

Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.

Published

on

elon-musk-jim-farley-tesla-ford

Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.

The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.

Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):

“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”

Advertisement

Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.

Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:

“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”

Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.

Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges

Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.

Advertisement

Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.

Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch

NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.

Published

on

By

NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.

Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.

Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.

SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket

Advertisement

Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.

The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.

The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.

Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.

Advertisement

The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.

Continue Reading