payday

Elon Musk’s $56bn pay package from Tesla should have been restored by a vote of the company’s shareholders last year, a Tesla attorney has said to the Delaware Supreme Court in the United States.

The Tesla lawyer made his arguments on Wednesday as one of the biggest corporate legal battles entered its final stage after a lower court judge had in January 2024 rescinded the Tesla CEO’s record compensation. The company is also appealing a ruling by the lower court that rejected as legally invalid a vote by shareholders to restore the pay package.

“This was the most informed stockholder vote in Delaware history,” Jeffrey Wall, an attorney for Tesla, told the justices. “Reaffirming that would resolve this case.”

The case’s outcome could have substantial consequences for the state of Delaware, its widely used corporate law, and its Court of Chancery, a once-favoured venue for business disputes that has recently been accused of hostility towards powerful entrepreneurs.

The Court of Chancery ruling striking down Musk’s pay has become a rallying cry for Delaware critics. Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick ruled that the Tesla board lacked independence from Musk when it approved the pay package in 2018 and that shareholders lacked key information when they voted overwhelmingly in favour of it. As a result, she applied a demanding legal standard and found the pay unfair to investors.

Musk did not attend the arguments, which were held in a special court to accommodate the 65 people in attendance, mostly lawyers.

The defendants, current and former Tesla directors, denied wrongdoing and said McCormick misinterpreted the facts and the law.

Dexit

Tesla argued in Dover, Delaware that the five justices on Delaware’s high court had three avenues to reverse the lower court ruling.

They could find that Musk, who owned 21.9 percent of Tesla stock in 2018, did not control the board pay negotiations and that shareholders were fully informed when they voted to approve it that year. They could determine that rescinding the pay was an improper remedy because it did not undo the work that Musk had done or the gains that shareholders had received. Or they could determine that last year’s vote demonstrated shareholders wanted to accept the pay deal, despite the legal flaws.

“Shareholders in 2024 knew exactly what they were voting for,” Wall said.

Greg Varallo, an attorney for Richard Tornetta, the small investor who brought the case in 2018, said if the court accepted ratification, it would allow a party to change the outcome after a court case had run its course. “Lawsuits would be interminable”, he told the justices.

Varallo tried to convince the justices the lower court ruling was a result of careful fact-finding and based on settled law. “There is nothing extraordinary about this trial opinion,” he said. “What makes it truly extraordinary is that it addresses the largest pay package in human history, awarded to the richest man on earth, who is also one of the most powerful men on earth.”

After the Musk pay ruling, large companies, including Tesla, Dropbox, and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, switched their legal homes to Texas or Nevada, where courts are friendlier toward directors. Delaware lawmakers responded to the corporate departures, a trend known as “Dexit,” by overhauling its corporate law.

If Musk loses the appeal, he will still reap tens of billions of dollars in stock from the electric vehicle (EV) company, which agreed in August to a replacement deal if his 2018 plan is not restored. Tesla has said the replacement plan will cost $25bn or more in accounting charges.

The company said the replacement award was meant to focus the attention of Musk, who said earlier this year that he was forming a new US political party, on transitioning Tesla to robotics and automated driving. Tesla is now incorporated in Texas, where it is far more difficult for a shareholder to challenge board decisions.

New pay plan

Tesla’s board last month proposed a $1 trillion compensation plan, highlighting confidence in Musk’s ability to steer the company in a new direction, even as Tesla loses ground to Chinese rivals in key markets amid softening EV demand.

The justices are considering the appeal of the pay ruling as well as the $345m legal fee that McCormick ordered Tesla to pay to the attorneys for Tornetta, who held just nine Tesla shares when he sued to block the pay deal. The court typically takes months to rule.

Tesla estimated in 2018 that the stock options plan would be worth $56bn if the company met operational and financial goals, which it did. Because the stock continued to appreciate, the options are currently worth closer to $120bn, by far the largest executive compensation ever. Musk is the world’s richest person with a fortune of around $480bn, according to Forbes.

The defendants have argued that McCormick erred in finding social and business ties to Musk compromised their independence, and said Tesla shareholders were informed of the economic terms of the pay deal before they approved the plan. The directors said she should have reviewed the pay package under the “business judgment” standard, which protects directors from second-guessing by courts.

The directors have long argued the pay package performed as hoped – it focused the attention of Musk, a serial entrepreneur, and he transformed Tesla from a startup into one of the world’s most valuable companies.

On Monday, YouTube became the latest media and tech company to settle one of President Trump’s lawsuits.

The Google-owned streamer agreed to pay $24.5 million to settle a lawsuit Trump filed after his account was banned following the Jan. 6, 2021, riots at the U.S. Capitol. That brings Trump’s haul from media and tech companies to more than $90 million in the last year.

Some of these suits deal with conflicts the president has experienced with news networks such as ABC and CBS. Others confront the fallout from the attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Some of the settlement money will pay for renovations to a presidential library Trump is building on 2.6 acres of waterfront property in Miami. Other funds will go to the nonprofit Trust for the National Mall, with the intention of building a Mar-a-Lago-style ballroom, which is expected to cost $200 million overall.

Here’s a rundown of the payouts:

YouTube: $24.5 million

After the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, YouTube suspended the president’s account on the platform because of Trump’s alleged role in the insurrection. At the time, the company had cited “concerns about the ongoing potential for violence” and violation of its “policies for inciting violence.”

Trump’s lawsuit, filed in 2021 at the U.S. District Court in Northern California, argued the account’s suspension was “censorship.” Before the case was settled, YouTube had already lifted its suspension on Trump in March 2023, in light of the then-upcoming presidential race.

In court documents filed Monday, Alphabet, the parent company of YouTube and Google, did not admit any wrongdoing in the matter. The company did not agree to make any policy or product changes in the deal.

Of the $24.5 million, $22 million is going to Trump, who will contribute the money to the Trust for the National Mall, which is “dedicated to restoring, preserving, and elevating the National Mall” as well as supporting the construction of the White House State Ballroom, according to the filing.

Alphabet will also have to pay an additional $2.5 million to other plaintiffs in the case, including the American Conservative Union and writer Naomi Wolf.

Social media platforms Facebook (now Meta) and Twitter (now X) had suspended Trump’s accounts over Jan. 6, 2021. At the time, Twitter put out a statement, saying that recent tweets from his “account and the context around them — specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter” had to be suspended to avoid “the risk of further incitement of violence.”

Mark Zuckerberg of Meta also posted a statement on Facebook after banning Trump’s Meta accounts. He wrote, “We believe the risks of allowing the President to continue to use our service during this period are simply too great.”

In July of that year, Trump sued the companies for “censorship.”

By January 2023, Meta had reinstated Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts, as had X in 2022.

Shortly before Trump was going to take office for his second term, in January 2025, Meta decided to pay the incoming president $25 million to settle the lawsuit. Elon Musk, who had purchased Twitter and renamed it “X” in the interim, agreed to pay $10 million to settle its Trump case.

Paramount Global: $16 million

Paramount Global agreed to pay $16 million to resolve Trump’s legal salvo against “60 Minutes” over the editing of an interview with his 2024 opponent, then-Vice President Kamala Harris.

Trump claimed “60 Minutes” edited an interview with Harris to make her look better and bolster her chances in the election. CBS denied the claims, saying the edits were standard and the case was viewed as frivolous by 1st Amendment experts.

Trump wrote on Truth Social that CBS “did everything possible to illegally elect Kamala, including completely and corruptly changing major answers to Interview questions, but it just didn’t work for them.”

Last May, CBS offered $16 million to settle the civil suit filed in Texas. The lump sum included the president’s legal fees and an agreement that “60 Minutes” will release transcripts of interviews with future presidential candidates.

Less than a month after the settlement, the FCC approved Skydance Media’s acquisition of Paramount, which owns CBS.

Disney: $16 million

Earlier this year, ABC news anchor George Stephanopoulos appeared on the network’s “This Week” news program and asserted that Trump was found liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll. In May 2023, a jury in New York declined to find Trump liable for rape, but did find him liable for sexual abuse of Carroll.

Trump responded to the on-air comments with a defamation lawsuit filed in federal court in Florida. The lawsuit was settled by ABC News, owned by Disney, last December. Disney agreed to pay $15 million toward Trump’s presidential library and $1 million of Trump’s legal fees.

The settlement also included an editor’s note, posted on the ABC News website, expressing regret for Stephanopoulos’ comments.

Times staff writer Stephen Battaglio contributed to this report.

Just when you thought prospects for the future of the Gaza Strip could not get any bleaker, United States President Donald Trump has unveiled his 20-point “peace plan” for the Palestinian territory, starring himself as the chair of a “Board of Peace” that will serve as a transitional government in the enclave. This from the man who has been actively aiding and abetting Israel’s genocide of Palestinians since January, when he took over the US presidency from former honorary genocidaire Joe Biden.

But that is not all. Also on board for the “Board of Peace” is former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who will reportedly play a significant governing role in Gaza’s proposed makeover. To be sure, importing a Sir Tony Blair from the United Kingdom to oversee an enclave of Palestinians smacks rather hard of colonialism in a region that is already quite familiar with the phenomenon.

And yet the region is also already quite familiar with Blair himself, owing in particular to his notorious performance during the 2003 war on Iraq, led by his buddy and then-chief of the so-called war on terror, George W Bush. Swearing by the false allegations of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Blair steered the UK into a war that ultimately killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, earning him a most deserved reputation as a war criminal.

In other words, he is not a guy who should under any circumstances turn up on a “Board of Peace”.

And while Bush would subsequently retire to a quiet life of painting dogs and portraits of Russian President Vladimir Putin, Blair continued to make a name for himself as the man the Middle East just cannot get rid of – and to make a pretty penny while at it.

After resigning as prime minister in 2007, Blair was immediately reincarnated as Middle East envoy for the “Quartet” of international powers – representing the US, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations – that is ostensibly forever striving to resolve the Israel-Palestine issue.

But in this case, too, the appointment of an envoy with close relations to Israel – the unquestionable aggressor to the “conflict” – pretty much obviated any advancement in the direction of “peace”.

Furthermore, Blair’s diplomatic activity conveniently overlapped with an array of highly lucrative business dealings in the region, from providing paid advice to Arab governments to signing on as a part-time senior adviser in 2008 with the US investment bank JP Morgan. For the latter post, Blair was said to be compensated in excess of $1m per year.

As Francis Beckett, coauthor of Blair Inc: The Man Behind the Mask, told Al Jazeera in 2016 – the year after Blair stepped down as Quartet envoy – “the difficulty was that when he went to meetings in the Middle East, nobody knew which Tony Blair they were seeing – whether it was Tony Blair the Quartet envoy or Tony Blair the patron of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation or Tony Blair the principal of the consultancy firm Tony Blair Associates”.

But, hey, the point of conflicts of interest is that they pay off.

In a 2013 article for the Journal of Palestine Studies, award-winning journalist Jonathan Cook noted that, while Blair had little to show in terms of “achievements” as Quartet representative, he liked to “trumpet one in particular: his success in 2009 in securing radio frequencies from Israel to allow the creation of a second Palestinian cell phone operator, Wataniya Mobile, in the West Bank”.

There was a catch, however. As Cook details, Israel released the frequencies in exchange for an agreement from the Palestinian leadership to drop the issue at the UN of Israeli war crimes committed during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, which was launched in December 2008 and killed some 1,400 Palestinians in a matter of 22 days.

And what do you know? “Blair had private business interests in negotiating the deal,” and it so happened that “not only Wataniya but also JP Morgan stood to profit massively from the opening up of the West Bank’s airwaves.”

Now, it is hardly an exaggeration to assume that Blair will seek to capitalise on his impending governorship of Gaza, as well, as there are no doubt plenty of opportunities for the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change in, you know, changing the world to definitively screw over the Palestinians.

One focus of Trump’s 20-point plan, incidentally, is the “many thoughtful investment proposals and exciting development ideas … crafted by well-meaning international groups” that will magically produce “hope for future Gaza”. After all, why should Palestinians care about having a state and not being perennially massacred by Israel when they can have capitalism and the tyranny of foreign investors instead?

And the face of that tyranny may well be Blair, whose synonymousness with the slaughter of civilians in the Middle East has not prevented him from being once again tapped as a regional peacemaker.

This is not to say that Blair has no fans aside from Trump and the Israelis. For example, New York Times foreign affairs columnist Thomas Friedman, a fellow Orientalist and Iraq war cheerleader, once praised Blair as “one of the most important British prime ministers ever” for having decided to “throw in Britain’s lot with President Bush on the Iraq war”, thereby not only defying “the overwhelming antiwar sentiment of his own party, but public opinion in Britain generally”.

There was, it seemed, no end to Friedman’s admiration for Blair’s antidemocratic stoicism: “He had no real support group to fall back on. I’m not even sure his wife supported him on the Iraq war. (I know the feeling!)”

Now, as Gaza’s fate continues to hang at the mercy of Blair and other international war criminals, perhaps his wife should suggest that he take up painting instead.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

When DJ Wingfield picked USC in the transfer portal last January, it seemed like an ideal one-year arrangement for both parties. The Trojans desperately needed experience on the interior of their already thin offensive line. Wingfield — after two seasons at a junior college, one at New Mexico and another spent at Purdue — was seeking to raise his profile in his final season of eligibility.

USC offered him a clear path to playing time at left guard, as well as a $210,000 payday for his name, image and likeness. He just needed the NCAA to approve a waiver for him to play another season.

Neither Wingfield nor USC figured that would be a problem at the time. But the NCAA denied Wingfield’s initial request for a waiver in late March, then later denied his appeal.

So, with fall camp set to open this week, Wingfield took the only route remaining for him to play at USC: He filed a lawsuit against the NCAA, seeking injunctive relief in order to play for USC.

Wingfield is seeking to challenge the lawfulness of the NCAA’s “Five-Year Rule”, which contends that players are eligible to play four seasons of competition across five years. Both USC and Wingfield believed, according to the complaint, that his waiver would be approved, considering recent rulings in the cases of Vanderbilt’s Diego Pavia and Rutgers’ Jett Elad, each of whom won the right in court to play an additional season.

But the waiver was denied, robbing Wingfield, he claims, of what could have been a “once-in-a-lifetime” NIL payday as well as an opportunity to “enhance his career and reputation” by playing at USC.

“The effect of the NCAA’s anticompetitive conduct will be to penalize Wingfield for having attended a junior college and for the disruptions caused by the pandemic,” the complaint reads. “The NCAA’s anticompetitive conduct, coupled with its unreasonable denial of Wingfield’s meritorious request for a waiver, thus threatens him with immediate irreparable harm.”

Wingfield’s collegiate career began in 2019 at El Camino College, a junior college in Torrance. He left El Camino during the 2020 season due to the pandemic, as Wingfield was tasked with taking care of his mother.

He played at El Camino in 2021 before transferring to New Mexico in the spring of 2022. Before completing a single game with the Lobos, he tore the anterior cruciate ligament in his knee, ending his season. He returned to play in nine games in 2023 before entering the transfer portal.

Wingfield transferred to Purdue where he earned a starting job in 2024, five years after he first started his college football career.

Still, he figured the NCAA would look past that timeline, given his circumstances and the cascade of legal challenges claiming that the NCAA is violating antitrust laws by limiting athletes’ eligibility.

Now that decision — and Wingfield’s college football future — is in the hands of a federal judge.

Whatever that judge decides could have an adverse impact on the Trojans offense this season. Without Wingfield, USC would be perilously thin up front. His absence could mean sliding projected right tackle Tobias Raymond to guard, while sophomore Justin Tauanuu steps in as starting right tackle. Otherwise, USC is likely to turn to inexperienced sophomore Micah Banuelos at left guard.

Puka Nacua saw the numbers.

So, no doubt, did Rams general manager Les Snead and other team executives who handle contract negotiations.

When Garrett Wilson of the New York Jets this month signed a four-year extension that includes $90 million in guarantees, he became the latest young NFL receiver star to cash in before playing out his rookie contract.

Nacua is in the third year of his rookie deal with the Rams. He will be eligible for an extension in the offseason.

“I try to do my best to stay completely present where my feet are,” Nacua said this week after the Rams’ first practice, noting that he played in a high school All-Star game with Wilson. “It’s exciting to see guys, to push the envelope for the wide receiver game.”

Nacua, a fifth-round draft pick in 2023, will earn just over $1 million this season, according to Overthecap.com.

For the Rams, it ranks as one of the NFL’s best bargains.

Nacua, 24, became a breakout star in his first season, establishing several NFL rookie receiving records and making the Pro Bowl. Last season, despite sitting out five games because of a knee injury that he sustained during a preseason workout against the Chargers and then aggravated in the opener against the Detroit Lions, he caught 79 passes for 990 yards and three touchdowns.

Wide receivers Puka Nacua, right, and Devante Adams work out at training camp at Loyola Marymount University on Wednesday.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

With Nacua ascending into the No. 1 receiver, the Rams moved on from veteran Cooper Kupp and signed three-time All-Pro Davante Adams.

Quarterback Matthew Stafford will be sidelined through at least the first week of training camp because of back soreness. But on Wednesday, while working with veteran backup Jimmy Garoppolo, Nacua and Adams showed flashes of the excitement they are expected to generate for a team that will be regarded as a legitimate Super Bowl contender.

During their brief time as teammates, Nacua said he has learned about body control, elusiveness, on-field awareness and how to maximize route-running leverage from Adams.

“He explains it so well in the meeting room,” Nacua said, “so it makes it fun to watch tape and to be like, ‘OK, how can I add some of these things to my toolbox?’”

Adams’ “illusion of speed and lateral quickness” stand out, Nacua said.

“I wouldn’t say there’s a lot of people that can replicate some of the things that he can do,” Nacua said, “but trying to understand the movement so I can add it to my game.”

Rams receivers Puka Nacua, left, and Davante Adams prepare for a drill during training camp on Wednesday.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Nacua and Adams are the stars of a Rams receiving corps that also includes speedy Tutu Atwell, who is playing on a one-year $10-million contract, and second-year pro Jordan Whittington.

As Nacua navigates his third training camp, he said he would be focused on improving his “pre-practice preparation” as the Rams get ready for their Sept. 7 opener against the Houston Texans.

“I feel like I could wake up out of bed and get ready to roll and have no warmups,” Nacua said of his first two camps. “I maybe didn’t run as fast as Tutu when I woke up out of bed, but I feel like I could get out and just be ready to go. So … pre-practice preparation, so when I hit down the field, I know I can start rolling as soon as we get out here.”

The Rams are currently in negotiations with running back Kyren Williams about a possible extension. But that deal, if it gets done, will not compare with those looming in 2026 and beyond.

If Nacua remains injury free and he maintains or increases his production, he could have a potential megadeal in hand before 2026 training camp.

Defensive lineman Kobie Turner also will be eligible for an extension. Edge rusher Jared Verse is another young star on track for a potential massive payday after the 2026 season.

Nacua is not looking too far ahead as he gets his mind and body ready for the upcoming season.

“This will probably be the best that I feel for the rest of the year,” he joked. “I enjoy these moments because they won’t last too long, but I feel fantastic right now.

“Ready to roll.”

Rams offensive lineman Kevin Dotson shows off his dedication to the team at training camp on Wednesday.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Etc.

Stafford was not on the field Wednesday. The 16-year veteran was working with trainers in other areas, coach Sean McVay said. Stafford is not expected to practice until next week. “I think that’s the best thing in terms of being able to strengthen, be as strong, sturdy and feel as good as he can go,” McVay said of Stafford working away from on-field activities, “As good as he can be for the time that we get him back out here on Monday.” … Former Rams center Brian Allen is attending camp and helping with the offensive line. … The Rams are scheduled to hold a joint practice with the Dallas Cowboys on Aug. 5 in Oxnard.

TOTTENHAM stars are set for a big payday after their Europa League triumph.

Brennan Johnson created history by scoring the only goal in Bilbao to beat Manchester United.

2

2

And in doing so he pocketed some extra cash for himself and his team-mates.

The Spurs squad have earned a big bonus for winning the Europa League.

Boss Ange Postecoglou will receive £2million for his role in the famous win, report the BBC.

While the squad will be given £3m to be divided between each player.

Some stars will also earned a pay rise if they have a Champions League qualification clause in their contract.

Tottenham will compete in Europe’s elite competition next season for the first time since 2022/23.

That means there could be an extra £100m in the coffers thanks to prize money, TV revenue and additional sponsorships.

Spurs’ Europa League win saw them scoop a £10.95m cash prize from Uefa.

BEST FREE BETS AND BETTING SIGN UP OFFERS

Tottenham’s qualification mean there will be six English teams competing in the Champions League next season.

Liverpool and Arsenal have booked their place which means Manchester City, Newcastle, Chelsea, Aston Villa and Nottingham Forest will fight it out for the final three spots on Sunday.