Both? These government organizations really have taken a partisan turn. It is really disheartening to see this level of political motivation to target "companies/persona non grata".
“ Tesla lawyers and board members scrutinized the project after employees became concerned about how the company planned to use millions of dollars in specialized glass that it had ordered.”
And
“ SEC rules require public companies to disclose transactions above $120,000 in which a related party, such as an executive officer, has a material interest.”
If it’s really a matter of spending corporate money on a personal benefit project, then it must be declared and agreed upon by board and or shareholders. Otherwise it is misappropriation.
I’m no lawyer, so my terms may be inaccurate; but that’s the gist of why this is probably worthy of investigation.
DOJ has broad powers and a broad mandate. Of course it _could_ be used for political reasons, both to go after someone/company or to suppress investigations. We've seen both before.
But we've also seen a lot of DOJ efforts ostensibly toward protecting citizens from bad corporate behavior, especially where monopolistic activites are concerned.
Eh? Regulators are investigating a potential issue. This really is kind of a case of "an honest [company] has nothing to fear from the police" (which is, of course, far less generally true when actual police are involved); there are rules, and if they have not broken them, _there is no problem_. If they have broken them, then this should be corrected.
An SEC investigation isn't some sort of weird exceptional event; given their rate of enforcement actions (https://www.sec.gov/page/litigation) they presumably start small ones every day. You just don't hear about them because they rarely involve irritating internet celebrities.
It is almost unheard of for the DOJ to be involved in this type of investigation unless it involves massive fraud or other associate crimes. If it CEO caused a huge amount of money to be wired to accounts under his control, etc. Otherwise it would be SEC and then IRS for the improper benefit.
10 comments
[ 6.3 ms ] story [ 41.3 ms ] thread“ Tesla lawyers and board members scrutinized the project after employees became concerned about how the company planned to use millions of dollars in specialized glass that it had ordered.”
And
“ SEC rules require public companies to disclose transactions above $120,000 in which a related party, such as an executive officer, has a material interest.”
If it’s really a matter of spending corporate money on a personal benefit project, then it must be declared and agreed upon by board and or shareholders. Otherwise it is misappropriation.
I’m no lawyer, so my terms may be inaccurate; but that’s the gist of why this is probably worthy of investigation.
But we've also seen a lot of DOJ efforts ostensibly toward protecting citizens from bad corporate behavior, especially where monopolistic activites are concerned.
An SEC investigation isn't some sort of weird exceptional event; given their rate of enforcement actions (https://www.sec.gov/page/litigation) they presumably start small ones every day. You just don't hear about them because they rarely involve irritating internet celebrities.