Tesla's Musk mocks SEC as judge demands
they justify fraud settlement
Send a link to a friend
[October 05, 2018]
By Jonathan Stempel
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Tesla Inc's Elon Musk
on Thursday mocked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, just
hours after a federal judge ordered him and the regulator to justify
their securities fraud settlement, which let Musk remain chief
executive.
"Just want to [sic] that the Shortseller Enrichment Commission is doing
incredible work," Musk, a frequent critic of investors betting against
the electric car company, wrote on Twitter. "And the name change is so
on point!"
The tweet came five days after Musk settled SEC charges that he misled
investors in tweets on Aug. 7, including that there was "funding
secured" to take his Palo Alto, California-based company private at $420
per share.
Musk agreed to pay a $20 million fine, and step aside as Tesla's
chairman for three years, to settle charges that could have forced his
exit from Tesla. The company also accepted a $20 million fine, despite
not being charged with fraud.
Tesla and the SEC declined requests for comment.
Former SEC lawyers questioned the wisdom of Musk's latest tweet, but
said it was unlikely to jeopardize the settlement, which prevents Musk
from denying wrongdoing or suggesting that the regulator's allegations
were untrue.
"I don't think the SEC would look at this as a denial of the facts
alleged," said Peter Henning, a law professor at Wayne State University
in Detroit. "But you don't take gratuitous shots at the SEC. There's no
real upside."
Shares of Tesla closed down $12.97, or 4.4 percent, at $281.83, and fell
another 2.1 percent to $276 following Musk's tweet after market hours.
The tweet came less than four hours after U.S. District Judge Alison
Nathan in Manhattan ordered Musk and the SEC to explain by Oct. 11 in a
joint letter why their settlement was fair and reasonable and would not
hurt the public interest.
Nathan said it was her regular practice to request such letters.
"She may want to know why Tesla is paying a fine because the CEO doesn't
know when to shut up," said Adam Pritchard, a University of Michigan law
professor and former SEC lawyer.
Musk's tweet on Thursday received more than 2,500 responses, with some
users questioning the billionaire's judgment.
"Seriously? You know you still need their help convincing a judge that
your penalty was sufficient... Maybe a 420M fine would have been more
appropriate?" one Twitter follower said. The proposed take-private price
was $420 a share.
Musk replied, "the opposite is true."
He has used Twitter to criticize short-sellers betting against his
company.
In a separate rambling tweet, he took another shot at short-sellers and
accused BlackRock Inc of enabling them by saying, "The big funds can &
will [sic], as they’re suffering a net loss. Index managers like
Blackrock pocket [sic] make excessive profit from short lending while
pretending to charge low rates for 'passive' index tracking."
BlackRock declined to comment on Musk's tweet.
[to top of second column]
|
Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk stands on the podium as he attends a
forum on startups in Hong Kong, China January 26, 2016.
REUTERS/Bobby Yip/File Photo
DEFERENCE TO SEC
The settlement also required Tesla's board to implement procedures
for reviewing Musk's communications with investors, which include
tweets.
Thomas Gorman, a partner at Dorsey & Whitney in Washington, D.C.,
said Musk might argue that the latest tweet might be a mere
"personal lament," and not a violation of the settlement.
For her part, Nathan may have limited room to intervene, after a
federal appeals court curbed the ability of judges to reject SEC
settlements.
One such judge was Jed Rakoff, a colleague of Nathan's who objected
to the SEC policy of letting some corporate defendants settle
without admitting or denying wrongdoing, as Musk did.
But in 2014, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned
Rakoff's rejection of a $285 million SEC settlement with Citigroup
Inc, saying he should have given "significant deference" to the
regulator.
The 2nd Circuit has jurisdiction over Nathan's court, and lawyers
said Musk's settlement would likely win approval, though orders such
as Nathan's are not too common.
"In and of itself it's not an ominous sign," said Jordan Thomas, a
partner at Labaton Sucharow and former SEC lawyer. "The vast
majority of settlements like this are approved by courts."
Pritchard said before Musk's tweet that he saw no "serious chance"
for a rejection of Musk's settlement, based on 2nd Circuit
precedent. "This is just a hoop to be jumped through," he said.
The case is SEC v Musk, U.S. District Court, Southern District of
New York, No. 18-08865.
(Reporting by Joanthan Stempel in New York; Additional reporting by
Sonam Rai, Ismail Shakil and Rishika Chatterjee in Bengaluru, and
Jan Wolfe in Washington; Editing by Anil D'Silva and Lisa Shumaker)
[© 2018 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2018 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|