We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Can we please have more news like this exposing musk and not just news about the stupid shit he says?
The thing about billionaires dumb enough to be in the public eye, is that they will always be traceable.
also criminals they use WhatsApp you know :D
IMO, in a overhauled America, no person should be able to own more than one company. Every company's workers vote for who the leadership and their pay is, while retaining voting power for one year after being fired.
I can think of a dozen ways around that, and I'm sure a competent lawyer could find a million more.
What might work better, and something that Americans can wrap their head around, is tax implications around ownership base for publicly owned companies, and every company over $1 million in non-asset value or 50 employees becomes publicly owned. This would only be around 6-7% of companies in the United States - 96% of American companies are smaller than 50 people.
A good example is the Green Bay Packers, which is a fan-owned non-profit, and fans are the shareholders. Americans can comprehend fractional ownership like that. So you start with the lowest tax implications for modest profits per year as long as no individual holds more than 2% of stocks, and tax incentives to operate as a non-profit. So two potentially different tracks for a company to operate which is simply about employing people and doing a job well, with worker ownership fundamental to the company itself.
Then, once you get into Succession-style stock grabbing BS, taxes quickly skyrocket as the company grows. Taxes go up for the whole company if an individual owns more than 2%, 5%, 10%, etc. Once an individual is holding 51% of a company, the company gets taxed at a high rate proportionally to profits, (worker median salary-worker mean salary), and number of workers. So small and medium-sized companies don't get trashed and are incentivized to pay people better, and hire more people, before laying people off simply to make money. Then the incentives structure would grow proportionally for large companies where factors like CEO pay and CEO stock ownership or stick dividends are what trigger taxes.
I'm sure competent lawyers would also also find ways to loophole that structure, but the for-profit-only-at-all-costs business model is not sustainable or even all that beneficial anymore other than for TV drama.
No person should own any company unless they are the sole employee. Ownership should be shared with workers in equitable stakes as the company expands.
So a lawyer hires a secretary, they each get 50% of the company. Or are you cool with uneven ownership shares in your model?
Equitable != equal. Shares can and should be distributed commiserate to input. If I work 50-60 hours a week and hire you to do 10 hours of work then obviously equal share is unfair.
However, at the same time, why do you inherently value the lawyer over the secretary? Both do a full weeks work, both are essential to the companies success. You are just attached to consumerism and the idea of hierarchy; that you should be able to be “better than” people you deem as peons. Does the janitor not deserve a fair share either because you will use some bullshit framing like “unskilled labor” to dismiss their essential contributions?
There's clearly a varying degree of education, continuing professional development, risk profile between these two jobs. The two people need to be in their distinct role to make the place function.. but it doesn't mean that their work is equal.
Equitable != equal. Shares can and should be distributed commiserate to input. If I work 50-60 hours a week and hire you to do 10 hours of work then obviously equal share is unfair.
I think the word you're looking for is "commensurate." To commiserate is to feel or express sympathy for someone's suffering or unhappiness.
To point, who decides the value of input? You or them? Hours worked != value. Some people work faster and are more skilled. They're obviously providing more value. I like to work hard and go home at a reasonable hour. Some of my colleagues like to fuck around on Facebook and spend longer hours at the office. Our work is not the same. Then you have the question of different skills. You can't tell me a secretary's skills are as valuable as that of a specialised attorney with 40 years of experience.
The problem with your command economy approach is that it's impossible to dictate the value of each person's labour. That's why we leave it up to individuals and companies to reach an agreement on the value of their labour themselves. I like unions to balance negotiating power, but they're also imperfect. Ultimately it's the customer who decides the value of labour. They buy products and services they think are worth it. I know how much remuneration Tim Cook receives and yet I till buy iPhones because I think the value he provides is extremely high. I bet you also purchase products and services from companies in which executives are paid a lot. You're free to stop, but you won't, because you believe the products and services are valuable and you support the remuneration packages of their executives, even when you LARP as a communist on Lemmy.
To be fair, I bet there's some lawyers that couldn't function without a secretary.
Limited liability corporations should be abolished. The only kind of legal organization structure should be fully mutual co-operatives.
person should be able to own more than one company
This destroys the stock market (maybe that's the goal) because you would only be allowed shares in one company.
"Majority own" is more practical.
The stock market as it is currently structured, shouldn't exist. It is ripe with corruption and perverse incentives. IMO, a stock market should serve the purpose of allowing society to judge whether a company is making good moves over a medium or long timespan, which in turn allow companies to judge the practical value of partnerships or exchanges with other corporations.
I have concepts for UBI, and how income can work. Part of that is absolute caps on liquid wealth and assets, with company stocks being towards the asset cap. Ownership of stock takes away from one's capacity to have a house, car, yacht, and so forth. The idea is that people initially invest in stocks to build up their money reserves, then get rid of the stocks and invest into their personal living conditions. This shifts the stocks to younger workers, who then build up their future. Each piece of stock costs a set amount, has a guaranteed ROI provided by the company, and can't be sold off for profit until a certain time has passed. That way, people have to choose their stocks carefully, as they will be holding onto them for awhile. The more valuable a single piece of stock is, the longer it has to be held. Bigger ROI is paired with the expensive stocks, but you have to put up more money upfront, and the biggest stocks take years to mature before you can sell it on the market or return it to the company. Stocks can only be sold to citizens of the nation, to prevent foreign manipulation of the economy, and to help prevent loopholes.
Mind, if that is too complicated or can be gamed, simply banning stocks would be preferable. Corruption is the killer of civilization, if the last decade is anything to go by.
Check out the Panama and Pandora papers for further details, billions of documents; Musk doubtlessly owns many more companies "discretely"
This is standard operating procedure for the uber wealthy to avoid taxes and launder dirty money
Those are just the ones we know about. He almost certainly also has more registered through Nevis, which is an Island nation that does not reveal who owns which companies are registered there. This is common practice for all billionaires, to hide the money they stole from us from taxes and protect themselves from lawsuits, etc.
there are moves to reveal the true ownership of companies globally to make it easy for governments to hold individuals to account
of course there will be tricks to avoid it but these layers of anonymity are being scrubbed away
Elon Musk is a Nazi and should have his security clearance immediately revoked and he should be imprisoned.
He should be guillotined and his money taken away and redistributed.
Well, yeah, but Trump and his mob of softcocks like Nazis.
I disagree. He should be kicked in the nuts really hard, and then they can do all those things you said.
Every person in the world should be entitled to kick Musk in the crotch once.
Me first!
Oh this is gonna be a long line
... I'm willing to wait in that line.
Same, I'll bring some snacks
He should be fired.
Out of a cannon.
Into the sun.
I would pay good money to see his lifeless corpse on the surface of Mars
If you people aren't careful, Elon might find out about these comments, and get the sense he's not as well-liked, manly, intelligent, handsome, and godlike as he programmed his millions of Twitter bot accounts to tell him he is.
This is how all of your favorite rich people live.
Property records, in particular, are public. In any luxury area, there are probably homes owned by celebrities that are registered to some LLC.
Has a shell company bought land within 20 miles of Ft. Knox Kentucky? Big acreage. Rocky. Possible dry river bed. Hmm?
Sorry I'm daft, but are you implying that musk plans on robbing fort Knox?
He also doesn't live off any income. His liquid cash comes from loans against assets which aren't taxed like income.
We need to make this kind of theft illegal when we overhaul everything
Also, this is how all rich people live.
this is how all absurdly rich people live.
The difference between a million and a billion dollars is roughly a billion dollars.
Likewise, Danny DeVito is rich enough to afford a good house and car, but not rich enough for the infinite tax free spending money hack.
The difference between a million and a billion dollars is roughly a billion dollars.
My favourite illustration of this is...
1 million seconds = 12 days
1 billion seconds = 32 years
Right. There was some finance guy that wrote this all up once and you don’t even get a call back unless you have close to half billion. But then the lines they get are like 0.5% APR. it’s nuts.
and then when they die and the loans do need to get paid back, there's all sorts of tax advantages when it gets all settled.
This is how they all do it.
The megabillionaire was tied to about 90 companies in the state, which he uses for everything from paying nannies to buying land to supporting Donald Trump’s re-election, according to a Times examination.
Listen to this article · 15:00 min Learn more
AJG Growth Fund LLC
Real Estate
Red Planet Ventures I LLC
Unknown Purpose
Bastrop Alfalfa Land Trust LLC
Real Estate
The Foundation
Nonprofit Foundation
Red Planet Ventures III LLC
Unknown Purpose
2025 Tre Trust
Real estate
CapX 1 LLC
Unknown Purpose
Ad Astra School LLC
Musk School
Horse Ranch LLC
Real Estate
Bushwhacker LLC
Unknown Purpose
BSP 2023 LLC
Real Estate
Excession LLC
Family Office
SHL Property LLC
Real Estate
Gapped Bass LLC
Real Estate
Peninsula LLC
Unknown Purpose
Elon Musk’s Secret Web of Companies in Texas - The New York Times
By Kirsten GrindSusanne Craig and Alex Klavens
Produced by Leo Dominguez
Kirsten Grind reported from Austin and Bastrop, Texas, as well as San Francisco. Susanne Craig and Alex Klavens reported from New York.
Feb. 27, 2026
In 2020, Elon Musk announced he was moving to Texas from California and embarking on a personal austerity campaign to strip his life of belongings.
“I am selling almost all physical possessions,” he posted on social media. “Will own no house.”
But in the years since, Mr. Musk, 54, has quietly built an empire of more than 90 companies and other legal entities in Texas, which have amassed a vast collection of assets, according to an examination by The New York Times.
The secretive network offers a glimpse into just how central one of the world’s richest men, who has a net worth of more than $650 billion, has made Texas to his operations and ambitions. More than 50 of his at least 90 companies there are subsidiaries or other entities affiliated with his business empire, such as the rocket company SpaceX and the electric vehicle maker Tesla, as well as his nonprofit Musk Foundation.
But The Times identified at least 37 companies that appeared to be largely for Mr. Musk’s personal use. Among them was one that owns two multimillion-dollar condominiums totaling more than 7,000 square feet in the Austin Proper Hotel, with sweeping views of downtown. Other companies managed planes that Mr. Musk uses for private travel and a portfolio of more than 1,000 acres of land, which when combined is bigger than Central Park in New York. The lines between Mr. Musk’s business and personal interests are often blurry, and some of the companies most likely served both purposes.
The Times’s examination also offers a window into how Mr. Musk used private companies to support Donald J. Trump during the 2024 election. Tapping these companies to cover the expenses of a super PAC is highly unusual, campaign finance experts said, and ended up obscuring how money was being spent because they are not subject to the disclosure requirements of super PACs.
The vehicle that Mr. Musk frequently turned to is one that many of the ultrarich use: limited liability companies, which are designed to shield owners from legal and financial risks, as well as public scrutiny. Whatever Mr. Musk’s intent, the effect of using these companies has been to disguise how he is spending his money.
Kirsten Grind is an investigative business reporter for The Times, writing stories about companies, chief executives and billionaires across Silicon Valley and the technology industry.
Susanne Craig is a Times investigative reporter and writes on a variety of topics.
[
Kirsten Craig has the BEST middle name! 👌😄
"The Foundation"? How far up his ass is he?
Thinking about it it's probably from the show. I doubt he can read books.