London, 26 July 2026 — EBM Weekend Read — By Brad Adams
In February 2026, SpaceX bought xAI in the largest corporate merger ever recorded, valuing the combined company at $1.25 trillion. The buyer and the seller had the same controlling shareholder. He set the price on both sides, closed the deal, and then told his investors it had happened. There was no independent auction, no rival bidder, and because both companies were private, no obligation to justify the number to anyone
This is not a one-off. It is the fourth time in a decade that one Musk-controlled company has bought another, and the pattern is always the same. Value moves between entities he controls, at valuations he is uniquely placed to set, and the shareholders furthest from his direct ownership tend to carry the risk. For anyone holding Tesla stock — including, indirectly, millions of European pension savers whose funds track the S&P 500 — it is worth understanding how the machine actually works. This is the anatomy of a circular empire.
Join The European Business Briefing
New subscribers this quarter are entered into a draw to win a Rolex Submariner. Join 40,000+ founders, investors and executives who read EBM every day.
SubscribeWho owns what
Start with the pieces, because they are not held equally.
Tesla is the only public company in the group. Musk owns about 13 per cent. It has ordinary shareholders, a stock price, quarterly earnings and fiduciary duties to outside investors. It is also the one having a hard year: deliveries fell 16 per cent year on year in early 2026, and 2025 was the first annual revenue decline on record.
SpaceX is private. Musk owns around 42 to 43 per cent and, through super-voting shares, controls roughly 79 per cent of the votes. He owns less than half and commands almost four-fifths of the decisions. It is the crown jewel now, worth more than half his paper fortune.
xAI was his AI startup, three years old, burning cash at extraordinary speed — roughly $9.5 billion in the first nine months of 2025 alone. As of February it is a subsidiary of SpaceX.
X, the former Twitter, sits inside xAI. Musk took it private in 2022 for $44 billion, loaded it with $12 billion of debt, and watched its value collapse.
The ownership gradient is the whole story. Musk owns least of the public company and most of the private ones. So value that moves out of Tesla and into the private entities moves toward the pocket where his stake is largest. Keep that in mind, because everything below runs in that direction.
The X trick: from $9 billion to $45 billion in five months
The clearest illustration is what happened to Twitter.
By October 2024, X was a wreck. Revenue had roughly halved under Musk. Fidelity, one of his co-investors, had marked its stake down 65 per cent. The platform was valued at around $9 to $10 billion, down from the $44 billion Musk paid.
Then, in March 2025, xAI acquired X in an all-stock deal that valued it at $33 billion, or $45 billion including the debt. Overnight, a $9 billion asset was worth $45 billion again.
Nothing had changed at X to justify it. The number did not come from improved financials. It came from Musk deciding that xAI would “pay” $45 billion in its own shares — shares in a private company whose value he also sets. As one analyst noted at the time, the $45 billion figure was exactly $1 billion above the original Twitter price, which let Musk tell his Twitter co-investors they had been made whole. The people bailed out were his own private backers. The currency was equity in another company he controls.
Musk barely hid it. “xAI and X’s futures are intertwined,” he wrote, announcing that he had sold one of his companies to another of his companies at a price he chose.
Tesla’s balance sheet enters the loop
Here is where public shareholders come in, and where it stops being an internal private matter.
In 2025, Tesla sold about $430 million of Megapacks — its grid batteries — to xAI, to power xAI’s data centres. That is a real commercial sale, but it is a sale from the public company to the private one, on terms set within Musk’s own ecosystem.
Then, in January 2026, Tesla invested $2 billion directly into xAI. A public company put shareholder money into Musk’s private AI venture. Saudi Arabia’s state-backed Humain put in $3 billion at the same time; SpaceX had already committed $2 billion the previous July. Between them, SpaceX and Tesla covered more than half of xAI’s spending over nine months. The cash-burning startup was being funded, in large part, by the other companies Musk controls.
Tesla shareholders sued, alleging breach of fiduciary duty — that Musk was using the public company’s balance sheet to prop up his private one. That case is live. And its logic only sharpens with what came next, because a month after Tesla put its $2 billion in, SpaceX acquired xAI outright — a deal that pointedly did not include Tesla. The public company had helped fund an asset it did not get to own. xAI has separately told investors it will build AI for Tesla’s Optimus robots, which means Tesla shareholders may have paid to develop technology now housed in a company they don’t control.
Why doing it private is the point
None of this is illegal on its face, and it is worth being precise about that. Delaware courts have looked at Musk self-dealing before and not always sided with shareholders. When Tesla bought SolarCity in 2016 — another company Musk controlled, which shareholders called a bailout — a court ultimately ruled the deal “fair,” though other directors settled for $60 million without admitting fault.
But the SolarCity fight is exactly why the current structure is so cleverly built. As one governance commentary put it, by completing the SpaceX–xAI merger while both companies were private, Musk could set the relative valuations, negotiate with himself, close the deal, and only then inform investors — without the disclosure obligations and procedural checks that a public-company merger drags along. The scrutiny doesn’t disappear. It gets deferred to the IPO, when regulators and new investors will finally have to ask how the pieces were priced.
The contrast with Tesla is instructive. When the Delaware Court of Chancery rescinded Musk’s $51.4 billion Tesla pay package in the Tornetta case, it did so precisely because the approval process was not independent or arm’s-length. That is the friction a public company carries. Move the action inside the private entities and the friction largely vanishes. You cannot rescind a related-party deal that the public never got to vote on.
This is the same lesson EBM has kept running into from the other direction. We wrote that Rolex’s foundation ownership is its sharpest competitive weapon and that Aldi and Lidl win by answering to no shareholder. Private control confers enormous freedom. The Musk empire shows the shadow side of the same coin: when the controller also runs a public company alongside the private ones, that freedom can be exercised at the public shareholders’ expense.
The IPO is where the reckoning waits
The combined SpaceX-xAI entity is reportedly preparing a mid-2026 IPO at a valuation as high as $1.75 trillion, aiming to raise up to $50 billion. On reported revenue of around $18.7 billion and a net loss near $4.9 billion, those are extraordinary multiples — SpaceX trades at roughly 400 times estimated earnings against Tesla’s 200.
And the biggest self-deal may still be coming. Analysts put the odds of an eventual SpaceX–Tesla merger high; Wedbush’s Dan Ives has floated 80 to 90 per cent. If that happens, Musk would be valuing a struggling public automaker against a private rocket-and-AI conglomerate, setting the terms on both sides, with his ownership vastly larger on the private side. The $2 billion xAI lawsuit would look, as one observer put it, like a warm-up act.
The verdict
Vertical integration is the official story, and there is something real in it. Rockets, satellites, data, compute and a social platform under one roof is a coherent industrial idea, and Musk has a record of making coherent industrial ideas work.
But strip away the mission language and a simpler mechanism is visible. Assets move between entities Musk controls, at prices Musk is uniquely positioned to set, in a direction that consistently favours the holdings where he owns the most. When the asset is a private company selling to another private company, outside investors can only watch. When the asset is Tesla — public, and owned by pension funds, index trackers and ordinary savers across Europe and America — those investors are participants whether they chose to be or not.
The genius of the structure is that it keeps the most contestable decisions inside the private walls, where there is no vote to lose and no disclosure to file. The risk is that the reckoning is not cancelled, only postponed to the IPO. Anyone with Tesla in their pension should understand that they are already, quietly, inside the loop.
Related Analysis
