The US State Department has approved a $400 million contract for Elon Musk’s company, Tesla, even though the “Armed Tesla” vehicle for which the deal was made does not yet exist.
This amendment was made on December 13, drawing significant attention to the matter.
This development comes as another Musk-owned company, SpaceX, secured a new $38.8 million government contract on Monday, raising concerns among several stakeholders.
The contract, signed on February 10, was approved by NASA, an independent agency.
Elon Musk, who has often positioned himself as an advocate of transparency, is now under fire for receiving large government deals at a time when federal agencies are facing severe budget cuts.
Addressing the media at the Oval Office, Musk dismissed allegations of conflicts of interest, asserting that his companies submit the best bids and prioritise the public interest.
Interestingly, under Musk’s oversight, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been leading cost-cutting measures across various federal institutions.
Recently, the Trump administration shut down USAID, slashed $900 million in education contracts, and dismissed four senior financial officers at FEMA for approving $59 million in luxury hotel stays for undocumented migrants in New York.
Also, read this
Musk will pull OpenAI bid if ChatGPT maker remains non-profit, lawyers say
Musk’s $97b OpenAI bid rejected, Altman mocks with $9b X offer
Elon Musk denies ‘Hostile Takeover’ claims during White House visit
Critics argue that while essential public services face severe cutbacks, Musk’s companies continue to land lucrative government contracts.
A social media user pointed out that Medicaid and the Department of Education may also face funding cuts, while the National Institutes of Health’s cancer research budget has been frozen.
As government agencies struggle under financial constraints and multiple programmes face cancellation, SpaceX’s latest $38.8 million contract has intensified concerns.
Many are now questioning whether these deals are genuinely transparent or a case of selective favouritism.
