Investor's Corner
Tesla under scrutiny by the SEC for failing to disclose fatal crash
Last week’s full blown spat between renown publication Fortune and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who hotly denied that the information about the death of Model S owner Joshua Brown on May 7 was in any way material to the company’s $2 billion stock sale, has reportedly prompted the SEC to investigate.
A person familiar with the matter says the inquiry is in a very early stage and may not lead to any enforcement action by regulators. “Tesla has not received any communication from the SEC regarding this issue,” a Tesla spokeswoman said. “Our blog post last week provided the relevant information about this issue.”
“The damage sustained by the Model S in the crash limited Tesla’s ability to recover data from it remotely,” a company spokesman said according to a report published by the Wall Street Journal. “During the last week of May, Tesla was able to finish its review of the logs and complete its investigation. The financing round had already taken place by that time.”
Tesla has said in previous securities filings that a successful liability claim associated with its technology, including the Autopilot feature, could harm the company’s financial condition. In its most recent quarterly report, the company said such a claim “could generate substantial negative publicity about our products and business and would have material adverse effect on our brand, business, prospects and operating results.” Tesla says the report contained “boilerplate language” that was “stating the obvious” and “had no bearing” on the fatal crash that took the life of Brown.
Experts in securities law say there is no clearly defined standard for whether the May 7 accident was “material” enough to require disclosure by the company. Adam Pritchard, a law professor at the University of Michigan and former SEC attorney, said he is “very skeptical” a court would find Tesla’s failure to disclose information about the fatal crash to be a breach of the law. He agreed with Musk that the fact Tesla’s stock price regained its value later the same day is “fairly persuasive evidence that it was not material.” He added, “This is development stage technology. There are going to be wrinkles along the way.”
Erik Gerding, a law professor at the University of Colorado in Boulder, said he believes the disclosure issue presented a “tough judgment call” for Tesla executives. “The conservative approach is just to disclose it,” he said, adding that the information could be material if it engenders skepticism about Tesla cars.
The Wall Street Journal indicates that vehicle manufacturers usually don’t disclose traffic fatalities involving their products to investors. With over 35,000 deaths in motor vehicle accidents in America every year, that would amount to over 100 disclosures a day. The difference, of course, is that this matter involves Tesla Motors and new technology. The WSJ says, “Investors have flocked to Tesla shares in part amid conviction the company is on the technological cutting edge and poised to leap ahead of more traditional auto makers.”
Even if that is true, no one has ever suggested that Autopilot would eliminate fatalities completely. Any investor who buys shares in Tesla thinking no deaths or injuries will ever occur is foolish. The fact that the SEC has begun an investigation is news, but the likelihood that any violation of securities law will be found is remote.
The unfortunate accident in which Brown was killed was the first death while Autopilot was in use and it will not be the last. Should Tesla notify the investment community every time a person is injured or killed in a Tesla automobile? The suggestion seems absurd on its face.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just filed for the IPO everyone was waiting for
SpaceX filed its public S-1, revealing $18.7 billion in revenue and billions in losses.
SpaceX publicly filed its S-1 registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2026, making its financial details available to the public for the first time ahead of what could be the largest IPO in history.
An S-1 is the formal document a company must submit to the SEC before going public. It includes audited financials, risk factors, business descriptions, and how the company plans to use the money it raises. Companies are required to file one before selling shares to the public, and it must be published at least 15 days before the investor roadshow begins. SpaceX had already submitted a confidential draft to the SEC in April, which allowed regulators to review the filing privately before it went public.
The S-1 reveals that SpaceX generated $18.7 billion in consolidated revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet division, which posted $11.4 billion in revenue, growing nearly 50% year over year. Despite that growth, the company lost about $4.9 billion in 2025 and has burned through more than $37 billion since its founding.
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
A significant portion of those losses trace back to xAI, Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, which was recently merged into SpaceX. SpaceX directed roughly 60% of its capital spending in 2025 to its AI division, totaling around $20 billion, yet that division lost billions and grew revenue by only about 22%.
SpaceX plans to list its Class A common stock on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX, with Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America leading the offering. The dual-class share structure means going public will not meaningfully reduce Musk’s control, as Class B shares he holds carry 10 votes per share compared to one vote for public Class A shares.
The company is targeting a raise of around $75 billion at a valuation of roughly $1.75 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO ever. The investor roadshow is reportedly planned for June 5.
Elon Musk
Tesla ditches India after years of broken promises
Tesla has ditched its plans to build a factory in India after years of failed negotiations.
Tesla’s long-running effort to establish a manufacturing presence in India is officially over. India’s Minister of Heavy Industries H.D. Kumaraswamy confirmed on May 19, 2026 that Tesla has informed authorities it will not proceed with a manufacturing facility in the country.
Tesla first signaled serious interest in India around 2021, when it began hiring local staff and lobbying the Indian government for lower import tariffs. The ask was straightforward: reduce duties enough for Tesla to test the market with imported vehicles before committing capital to a local factory. India’s position was equally firm, with an ask of Tesla to commit to manufacturing first, then receive tariff relief. Neither side moved, and the talks quietly collapsed.
Tesla to open first India experience center in Mumbai on July 15
India had offered a policy that would reduce import duties from 110% down to 15% on EVs priced above $35,000, provided companies committed at least $500 million toward local manufacturing investment within three years. Tesla declined to participate. The tariff standoff was only part of the problem. Analysts pointed to significant gaps in India’s local supply chain, inadequate industrial infrastructure, and a mismatch between Tesla’s premium pricing and the purchasing power of India’s automotive market as additional factors that made the investment difficult to justify.
First signs of an unraveling relationship came in April 2024, when Musk abruptly cancelled a planned trip to India where he was set to meet Prime Minister Modi and announce Tesla’s market entry. By July 2024, Fortune reported that Tesla executives had stopped contacting Indian government officials entirely. The government at that point understood Tesla had capital constraints and no plans to invest.
The more fundamental issue is that Tesla’s existing factories are currently operating at approximately 60% capacity, making a commitment to building new manufacturing capacity in a new market difficult to defend to investors. Tesla will continue selling imported Model Y vehicles through its existing showrooms in Mumbai, Delhi, Gurugram, and Bengaluru, but local production is no longer part of the plan.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon just joined forces for one reason: Starlink is winning.
America’s three largest wireless carriers, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon, announced on On May 14, 2026 that they had agreed in principle to form a joint venture aimed at pooling their spectrum resources to expand satellite-based direct-to-device (D2D) connectivity across the United States in what can be seen as a direct response to SpaceX’s Starlink initiative. D2D, in plain terms, is technology that lets a standard smartphone connect directly to a satellite in orbit, the same way it connects to a cell tower, with no extra hardware required.
The alliance is widely seen as a means to slow Starlink’s rapid expansion in the satellite internet and mobile markets. SpaceX’s Starlink Mobile service launched commercially in July 2025 through a partnership with T-Mobile, starting with messaging before expanding to broadband data. SpaceX secured access to valuable wireless spectrum through its $17 billion deal with EchoStar, paving the way for significantly faster satellite-to-phone speeds.
SpaceX was not shy about its reaction. SpaceX president and COO Gwynne Shotwell responded on X: “Weeeelllll, I guess Starlink Mobile is doing something right! It’s David and Goliath (X3) all over again — I’m bettin’ on David.” SpaceX’s VP of Satellite Policy David Goldman went further, flagging potential antitrust concerns and asking whether the DOJ would even allow three dominant competitors to coordinate in a market where a new rival is actively entering.
Weeeelllll, I guess @Starlink Mobile is doing something right! It’s David and Goliath (X3) all over again — I’m bettin’ on David 🙂 https://t.co/5GzS752mxL
— Gwynne Shotwell (@Gwynne_Shotwell) May 14, 2026
Financial analysts at LightShed Partners were blunt, saying the announcement showed the three carriers are “nervous,” and pointed to the timing: “You announce an agreement in principle when the point is the announcement, not the deal. The timing, weeks ahead of the SpaceX roadshow, was the point.”
As Teslarati reported, SpaceX’s next generation Starlink V2 satellites will deliver up to 100 times the data density of the current system, with custom silicon and phased array antennas enabling around 20 times the throughput of the first generation. The carriers’ JV, which has no definitive agreement, no financial structure, and no deployment timeline yet, will need to move quickly to matter.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX is targeting a Nasdaq listing as early as June 12, aiming for what would be the largest IPO in history. With Starlink now serving over 9 million subscribers across 155 countries, holding 59 carrier partnerships globally, and now powering Air Force One, the carriers’ joint venture announcement landed at exactly the wrong time to look like anything other than a defensive move.
Tesla Model Y becomes first-ever car to reach legendary milestone
SpaceX reveals what Anthropic will pay for massive compute deal
