Meanwhile, Mr. Musk has literally gotten a slap on the wrist for multiple flagrant violations of securities law. There are definitely two justice systems in the US. The ultra-rich do not play by the same rules that you and I do.
Like, there should be a middle ground between “if you’re rich enough, you get away with anything” and “it’s acceptable for a person in finance to share insider information with family members so they can profit.”
No actually, let's do pretend this family didn't violate the law here. Let's assume that allegedly means just that. We have this crazy double standard in the US, we want to assume the police are incompetent, but then when they accuse someone we assume they are guilty.
How about we assume this is a competent accusation that may or may not be factual, and leave it to the courts to decide. Whether or not we believe the court system needs reform to make it more affordable/just is a valid point, but let's assume that by reading the Cliff's Notes (press release) of this case we don't know enough to decide guilt.
Edit: Courts should be affordable and just for all. I believe paying more shouldn't get you special treatment and not being able to pay shouldn't get you harsher judgements. The difficulty is in finding that balance.
Edit 2: Well shit I was wrong, I missed the part where they agreed to the charges? Not sure how that works, beyond my limited knowledge on the law, but.... it looks like they plead guilty.
> The SEC's complaint, filed in federal court in Seattle, charges all three Bohras with violating antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. All three Bohras have consented to the entry of final judgments permanently enjoining them from further violations of the charged provisions, and ordering them to pay total disgorgement of $1,428,094, total prejudgment interest of $118,406, and total penalties of $1,106,399.
They've admitted guilt & culpability.
I would have assumed an press release wouldn't use the word alleged unless this was an ongoing case.
>” All three Bohras have consented to the entry of final judgments permanently enjoining them from further violations of the charged provisions, and ordering them to pay total disgorgement of $1,428,094, total prejudgment interest of $118,406, and total penalties of $1,106,399.”
It isn’t alleged. They pled out.
There is a parallel charge against the husband by the US Attorney in the Western District of Washington, and the court can presume innocence there.
But I’m not a juror or a judge so I don’t have to make that same assumption.
They’ve already admitted culpability:
“All three Bohras have consented to the entry of final judgments permanently enjoining them from further violations of the charged provisions, and ordering them to pay total disgorgement of $1,428,094, total prejudgment interest of $118,406, and total penalties of $1,106,399.
In a parallel action, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Washington today filed criminal charges against Viky Bohra.”
Foregoing reimbursement for private jet travel for a few years would have made actual sense, if his intent was to not punish Tesla for his actions.
His company always trades the stock.
That said it's not dumb to say that the SEC sure seems to be very selective in which laws they actually enforce with teeth versus which ones they seem to just let slide.
If any other CEO had done what Musk has done, they would have been fired by their board, and hopefully the SEC would have fined them, and prevented them from serving as an executive in a publicly traded company again. It's absurd.
Do you have any evidence to back up you assertion that the SEC would have come down on others harder?