- The Washington Post says that SpaceX and Tesla have received billions in government funding over the years.
- It points out the very real and clear conflicts of interest between that and Elon Musk’s current role in the government.
Over the past twenty-plus years, companies led by Elon Musk have received at least $38 billion in government funding. That’s the headline-grabbing takeaway from a new Washington Post feature, which highlights how “government infusions at key moments helped Tesla and SpaceX flourish.”
The details are pretty clear. These brands, and Musk himself, likely wouldn’t be where they are today without such support. At the same time, none of this should surprise anyone.
Read: Trump Admin’s Denial Of $400M Tesla Deal Contradicted By New Docs
The piece outlines how Elon Musk’s brands benefited greatly over the years. Sometimes, without government funding in the form of loans, subsidies, contracts, or tax credits, it’s suggested that either one could’ve failed. Musk reportedly leveraged several different agencies including the EPA, NASA, and others to keep the cash flowing. Of course, it also makes clear that nearly two-thirds of the $38 billion promised to Tesla and SpaceX came in the last five years, mostly under the Biden administration.
Of course, it’s also worth noting in all of this that Musk’s companies taking advantage of government programs are all perfectly legal and above board. What people appear to be upset about is that Musk would be open to calling out overspending by the government and somewhat recklessly cutting jobs and positions from federal agencies while accepting funding from it at the same time. These same folks appear not to understand that the two things are not mutually exclusive.
In fact, the US government hands out money to all sorts of car companies every year regardless of political leanings. In 2024, it gave Ford a $9.6 billion dollar loan (more than to Tesla and SpaceX combined last year) to build EV battery plants. The government of Michigan itself dropped $7 billion on GM in 2022 and we haven’t even discussed the cash dolled out during the 2008 financial crisis.
Strangely, the piece also calls out Tesla’s profits as a result of selling regulatory credits, something that it’s able to do because it meets or exceeds certain standards. In fact, to go further, it can only sell those credits because other automakers fail miserably to meet those same standards.
If anything, this could be viewed as proof that Musk genuinely believes in his work (over personal gain) so much that according to WaPo, he’s “sought to cut staff, slash budgets or cut contracts at all seven of the agencies where Musk’s companies have ongoing contracts.”
Ultimately, it’s clear that there are real tangible questions surrounding conflicts of interest and hypocrisy here. Musk is reportedly the one who decides where those conflicts are and then recuses himself from dealings with those activities within Doge.
Frankly, though, conflicts of interest and hypocrisy have been a main feature of basically every government ever. Regardless of his intentions, desires, or future actions, this entire situation does prove that landscapes can change quickly. Perhaps that’s no more evident than in the political landscape.
