Tesla’s board of directors has reportedly sent a message to shareholders: approve a compensation package for CEO Elon Musk that could reach $878 billion in company stock, framing the decision as a choice between paying unprecedented sums or risking Musk’s departure and a potential stock collapse.Shareholders will vote on Thursday (November 6) on the proposal, which has divided investors and corporate governance experts, a report by news agency Reuters said.The board argues that only Musk can deliver on his promises to transform Tesla into an artificial intelligence leader producing millions of self-driving robotaxis and humanoid robots. Meanwhile, critics say the package violates basic governance principles and gives one executive unchecked power over the company.

Elon Musk’s high salary: What are the proposal’s terms

If Musk achieves all performance goals within a decade, Tesla’s market value would grow to $8.5 trillion, with Musk owning approximately 25% of the stock. The compensation would exceed any other CEO’s pay by an exponential margin. Musk would collect tens of billions even if he misses most performance goals.The package includes stock vesting periods designed to ensure Musk remains with the company long-term. Under the terms, Musk must hold earned shares for five years.Some investors support the arrangement. Nancy Tengler, CEO and chief investment officer of Laffer Tengler Investments, a Tesla investor, said the potential returns justify Musk’s compensation. “If the stock is going to go up sixfold – and that’s a requirement here – then I’m going to make a lot of money. Why do I care what kind of money he makes if he’s effecting the change and the vision?,” said Tengler.

What concerns shareholders

Major shareholders and executive-pay experts have raised objections to the proposal’s size and structure. The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), the largest US public pension fund, and Norway’s sovereign wealth fund publicly opposed the compensation package.Norges Bank Investment Management has said that the proposal could dilute shareholder value and failed to address the risk of depending on a single leader. The fund said the package did not mitigate “key person risk” in staking Tesla’s future on Musk.Corporate governance experts argue the proposal violates standard principles because the board explicitly stakes the company’s future on one leader with multiple conflicts of interest.