SEC Sues Musk Over Stealth Twitter Stock Grab, Years Too Late
from the slow-rolling-the-rule-of-law dept
In what is almost certainly a case of too little, too late, the SEC on Tuesday sued Elon Musk for failing to file a public announcement about his secretive Twitter equity position. The lawsuit, coming nearly three years after Musk’s alleged violations, highlights the billionaire’s brazen flouting of disclosure rules and the SEC’s glacial pace in holding him accountable. It was widely reported on at the time that Elon Musk waited until he had nearly 10% of Twitter’s equity before publicly revealing his stake. That’s a problem because, by law, you have to file something publicly when you have 5%.
As the SEC notes, keeping his growing stake hidden allowed Musk to save many millions of dollars:
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that it has filed an action against Elon Musk alleging that he failed to timely file a beneficial ownership report with the Commission after acquiring beneficial ownership of more than five percent of the outstanding shares of Twitter, Inc. common stock, in violation of the beneficial ownership reporting requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). According to the SEC’s complaint, Musk saved at least $150 million at the expense of Twitter shareholders by failing to timely file the beneficial ownership report.
Congress enacted the beneficial ownership reporting requirements to, among other things, help investors make informed investment decisions by providing information about accumulations of certain classes of equity securities by persons who have the potential to change or influence control of the issuer companies.
According to the SEC’s complaint, after Musk failed to timely file a beneficial ownership report by March 24, 2022, he purchased more than $500 million worth of Twitter common stock between March 25, 2022 and April 1, 2022. As alleged, because Musk failed to timely file a beneficial ownership report with the SEC, he was able to make these purchases of Twitter common stock at artificially low prices from the unsuspecting public, who had not yet priced in the undisclosed material information of Musk’s beneficial ownership of more than five percent of Twitter common stock and investment purpose. According to the SEC’s complaint, Musk underpaid by at least $150 million for his purchases of Twitter common stock in this period. The complaint further alleges that, due to Musk’s failure to timely file a beneficial ownership report with the SEC, investors that sold Twitter common stock between March 25, 2022 and April 1, 2022 did so at artificially low prices, thereby suffering substantial economic harm.
The SEC’s complaint is pretty straightforward because this is a clear-cut case. The law unambiguously says you have to make a filing if you own 5% of a company and Musk did not. His failure to do so allowed him to buy up far more shares without the market realizing that he was angling to take over Twitter (or at least take on a large enough share to have a strong say in the business).
What’s particularly crazy is that this has been a straightforward case for almost three years. Musk’s skirting of the disclosure rules had been widely discussed at the time. And, yes, Elon stonewalled the SEC and tried to ignore their investigation, but that seems like a pretty poor excuse to wait nearly three years to bring this case.
And, of course, we’re mere days away from Donald Trump being inaugurated, and many people (including, potentially, Elon Musk) fully expect that he’ll instruct various parts of the government that might have been investigating Musk to stand down. So there’s a significant chance this case disappears in a week.
Yes, the apparent theme of the incoming Trump administration (led by the convicted felon Donald Trump) is that there shall be no consequences for anything supporters of Donald Trump (up to and including Donald Trump himself) do that might violate the law. So it seems unlikely that this case is going to matter much, even as it seems like one of the most straightforward and obvious violations of law.
The law is not subtle on this. There aren’t things to debate. It says:
Any person who, after acquiring directly or indirectly the beneficial ownership of any equity security of a class which is specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this section, is directly or indirectly the beneficial owner of more than five percent of the class shall, within five business days after the date of the acquisition, file with the Commission, a statement containing the information required…
That wasn’t done. Thus there’s a blatant violation.
You could claim this isn’t a huge deal, but I imagine it was a pretty big deal to the Twitter shareholders who sold him their shares without knowing he was involved in a surreptitious takeover attempt.
So the fate of the case will be at least a quick litmus test for just how lawless the Trump administration will allow its loyalists to be based on what happens and how quickly.
Filed Under: disclosures, donald trump, elon musk, sec
Companies: twitter, x


Comments on “SEC Sues Musk Over Stealth Twitter Stock Grab, Years Too Late”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Voter Nullification
In the age of Lawfare, where show trials of political opponents are common, the majority of the good folks in America see right through the ruse. Particularly when Biden hands out pardons as if they were candy. The phony moral outrage schtick isn’t working anymore.
Re:
Yeah. We were all there for the Benghazi gaslighting
Re: Re:
Republicans have been doing this for a long time. That way, when they actually get caught doing something wrong, they can scream about false equivalences.
Re:
Isn’t this a story about Biden failing to prosecute the crimes of the piggybank of his political opponents? I can’t keep track of the narrative anymore.
Re: Re:
Of course you cannot. There are enough whatabouts to go around for everybody to get high on confusion, and if there still is some shortage, making more up is quite acceptable these days. Pizzagate for everyone.
Re: Re:
You’re expecting continuity and consistency from an ideology that implicitly rejects those things.
Re: Re:
“I can’t keep track of the narrative anymore.”
Let me guess, you voted for Trump. Few of the rubes that voted for him can keep track of the narrative, which is what Trump was/is aiming for.
Re:
Notably lacking is any argument or proof that any of those trials are show trials. The evidence is incontrovertible.
Re:
Koby.
You are the final link of a human centipede of right wing propaganda.
Re:
Donald Trump promised to pardon pretty much everyone arrested for/convicted of crimes related to the attack on Congress on the 6th of January 2021, which would amount to more than a thousand pardons if he follows through on that promise. I bet you’ll never complain about those politically motivated pardons, though.
Re:
Yes it is, actually. Hence all the attacks against refugees who’ve never done anything wrong to anyone.
Trump will kill this prosecution for his new boss. It wasn’t going anywhere anyway. The rich get away with just about anything and everything, and Musk will get away with this.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
yawns
So you don’t think Trump will find a way to provide such a test sooner than anyone can get to this case, upon taking office?
It’s a huge deal. Anyone else who did this would’ve been sued into the ground, and rightfully so. The different treatment simply because it is Musk is incompatible with rule of law.
Re:
Any other billionaire would be getting the same treatment. With rare exception, the people we elect to serve in Congress and the White House will side with billionaires over the working class on almost everything. Donald Trump, for example, will make overtures to respecting and wanting the best for the working class—right before he signs another tax break for wealthy people into law and enacts a bunch of tariffs that will raise prices on numerous consumer goods across the country.
Re: Re:
I also want to point out that those tariffs didn’t have a snowballs chance in hell of doing what was claimed. and it was obvious. Yet some people ate it up anyway.
Yes, the apparent theme of the incoming Trump administration (led by the convicted felon Donald Trump)
That’s convicted felon, rapist, pedophile, traitor, and pantshitter Donald Trump for those of you playing along at home.
Re: One correction
Trump shits into adult diapers, not his pants, FYI.
That depends on the penalty.
If the penalty is surrendering the portion of stocks over 5% to the SEC, I imagine that Musk would be screaming his head off to any Senator that will listen.
Which, given his relationship with The Poorly Tanned Muppet, could be a lot of them.
'And let that be a lesson to- oh we can't do anything? Such a pity.'
Talk about a performative hand-slap. They’ve had three years to do something about this and refused to do so, waiting until it’s a moot point like this positively screams of wanting to give the appearance of upholding the law without actually having to do so.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
I would maybe care if...
Hunter Biden hadn’t taken 20 million in bribes, which yes, his father was directly involved in (that’s why he pardoned him just before pre-sentencing discovery, btw) and if they hadn’t tried very hard to let him walk on that, tax evasion and gun charges. (without having to pardon him) and that nearly worked until someone simply asked “this isn’t normal, right?”
Oh, and Pelosi is very definitely engaging in insider trading (as are many others including republicans, but none as well) and Fauci very definitely commited perjury, many times. And about a billion other things.
And while it is fairly clear cut breaking the declaration rules is most definitely “not a big deal”, by comparison.
Oh, almost forgot that they bypassed the 1st amendment, bulling FB (Zuck has now directly said so), Twitter, Amazon and just about every other platform you could think of. Which you STILL lie about.
So no, not a big deal.
Re: It's truely magnificent
How many time you jerked off to that pic of Hunters Hawg?
I mean why else would you bring it up bro ?
Re:
What’s your source for your claims? Meth?
Re:
Prove it.
Then prove it.
Then prove it.
Prove it.
Speaking of “years too late”, did you know that the last (reportedly flawed) audit of the contents of Fort Know was in 1974? We’ve had a NUMBER of criminals in the White House since then, so I would be completely unsurprised to learn that all those troops have been guarding an EMPTY BUILDING for all these years.
Re:
What’s Fort Know? And I know you didn’t mean Fort Knox because “W” and “X” are two whole rows apart from each other on the keyboard.
Re: Re: Fort Know
Looks like typical not-so-smart-phone auto-correct combined with “Preview/proofread? Nobody gots time fo’ dat shit!”
Re: Re: Re:
I think the second sentence makes it clear AC was joking.
Re: Re: Re: still borken
Especially since preview is still broken on the (no longer very) new platform. A shame, since it worked on the old platform.
Under the new administration this will die faster than a Cybertruck in a carwash.
Wait a minute here…..
(clicking keys of pre-computer analog adding machine, doing old-school arithmetic)
Am I correct that Elmo spent $44B on only 90% of Twitter? And that somehow that saved him millions/billions that he didn’t have to spend on 5 more percent of the total assets?
Aside from the lawful requirement to report such ownership dealings, I don’t see how the SEC is going to do much more than piss and moan and gnash their teeth. I mean, what are they actually going to accomplish, make Elmo give his purchase back to Jack Dorsey?
Nor can they dress Elmo in such bad press that he’d have to duck and cover for an extended period of time. Seems quite likely that they’ve forgotten that an out-sized shit-show is on the immediate horizon, thanks to the Neanderthals living among us.
Musk broke the rules, no doubt, but what’s the point of enforcing them 3 years later? The shareholders already got played. I think the SEC just wants to make it look like they’re doing something now.