What does Musk expect in return for his generous and unprecedented support?
Trump and Musk did not always get along. As Musk has stated, he voted for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden and has previously clashed with Donald Trump. After saying that it was time for the former president to “hang up his hat and sail into the sunset” in 2022, Trump lashed out at Musk, claiming that he “could have said, ‘drop to your knees and beg,’ and he would have done it” for more government subsidies for his “self-driving cars that crash, and rockets to nowhere.”
This spat, paradoxically, reveals the first reason for Elon’s support for Trump: his businesses are deeply dependent on government contracts and subsidies to survive.
Musk understands the art of the deal with Trump: bend the knee, flatter the King, and you have the crown’s support. Trump’s open corruption is a plus for Elon, who, unshackled from being (or posing as) a liberal, can buy and flatter his way into keeping that sweet government money flowing for his businesses. Already, Trump, who has long bashed electric vehicles (EVs) and anything not based on fossil fuels, has come around to support EVs, saying, “I’m for electric cars…I have to be, you know, because [Tesla’s Elon Musk] endorsed me very strongly. So, I have no choice.” It’s yet another example of Trump’s quiet-part-loud ethos, and reminiscent of Politico’s hilarious headline: “Trump keeps flip-flopping his policy positions after meetings with rich people.” He also said he would consider Musk for a Cabinet position. Truly, a bromance for the ages.
Beyond the double-edged sword of government subsidies and contracts, Musk’s businesses are threatened by a government that is no longer prostrate before private companies. The Biden administration, unlike Obama’s, is much less deferential to private industry, instead focused on building public power. Biden’s choices to invest billions of public money into the economy, focus on reshoring manufacturing in sectors like green technologies (solar panels, EV batteries) and semiconductors, while beefing up enforcement and oversight of regulators like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and National Labor Relation Board (NLRB) is a marked shift away from neoliberal tinkering and nudging. The Biden administration is prioritizing public investments and public power in a way that no President has since LBJ’s Great Society, a pivot from decades of free-market neoliberalism first cemented into place by Reagan. Musk is likely terrified that a continuation of this trend in a Harris administration would signal the start of a new age of public power.
Musk’s businesses, aside from Tesla, start from a simple premise—privatize and monopolize what should be a public good. For example, rather than building public transportation networks, Musk’s Boring Company promises to create private versions of subway tunnels (the Hyperloop) filled with cars. The only one that exists today, a short gimmick in Vegas between the Strip and the convention center, only allows Teslas to drive in it. SpaceX and Starlink continue this ethos as both accessing the internet and space are public goods turned private. The return of a muscular public sector threatens the very concept of the new notion of private space travel, and Musk’s influence.
The military needs SpaceX, which was valued toward the end of 2023 at $180 billion; its potential competitors in Boeing or the United Launch Alliance are missing in action. But a stronger state intent on building public power could disrupt his fiefdoms and cut him down to size. Recently, the FTC successfully charged Google with creating a monopoly in the search market, and a court is exploring forcing Google to split off its Chrome browser or Android operating system as a remedy. The FTC has also sued Meta and Amazon in separate monopoly cases too. Though the suddenly revived appetite for enforcing the country’s anti-trust laws has not yet affected one of Musk’s companies, that future is far from guaranteed. More broadly, a strengthened FTC could end the tech sector’s “Wild West” phase and signal stiffer regulation across the board.
Musk’s companies are currently in 11 regulatory or legal fights with the federal government, and experts predict they could be dismissed or resolved in Musk’s favor if Trump regains the presidency.
Finally, both Biden and Harris administrations seeking to build public power strongly support unions. Labor can counterbalance capital, but it needs to be rebuilt after decades of decline. Today, the share of the labor force in unions is a measly 10.1 percent, down from nearly one in three at their height in the 1950s. It’s no coincidence that the United Auto Workers could start acting more militantly now that Biden is in office. In the last four years, the NLRB has rolled back anti-labor decisions made by Trump and expanded worker protections. Now, the UAW feels confident enough to file federal labor charges against Musk and Trump for threatening to intimidate workers on strike following remarks made during their conversation on X.
So, Musk has taken the MAGA pill because he feels Trump’s open corruption offers real access to influence policy, and Trump’s extreme Project 2025 aims to end the regulatory state altogether, saving Musk from increased FTC, SEC, and NLRB oversight. But most of all, Musk and Trump share an ethos the writer John Ganz has called “bossism” of the ruthless, unrestrained executive who can rule their businesses like a dictator. Elon and Trump have met each other in a moment of mutual desperation. Perhaps, for the right price, a deal can be made.
GET SPLINTER RIGHT IN YOUR INBOX
The Truth Hurts
