Elon Musk Accuses the SEC of Leaking Information From a Federal Probe

Through his attorney, electric vehicle giant Tesla’s CEO Elon Musk, has accused the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) of leaking information about a federal investigation.

According to Musk, the SEC did this in order to retaliate against him for public criticism of the agency.

In a letter on Monday to U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan, Musk attorney Alex Spiro wrote: “It has become clearer and clearer that the Commission is out to retaliate against my clients for exercising their First Amendment rights—most recently by criticizing the Commission on the public docket and by petitioning this Court for relief.”

Musk’s attorney did not specify, or provide any evidence saying, which investigation or what type of information may have been leaked by the SEC.

It’s been years of a conflict between Musk and the SEC, which started in September of 2018 when the agency had charged the CEO with making “false and misleading” statements to investors.

The letter from Musk’s attorney comes four days after Musk initially alleged that the SEC was engaged in harassment by continually investigating him, that the agency was trying to chill his right to free speech, and had neglected their duties to remit $40 million to shareholders that Tesla and he had previously paid in fines to settle securities fraud charges.

The attorney did not specify which investigation or what type of information may have been leaked by the SEC, and to whom. In the letter, he alleged that at least one member of the SEC had leaked “certain information regarding its investigation” without providing any supporting evidence.

The SEC’s Steven Buchholz replied to the earlier allegations on Friday and said that the SEC was actually making progress on the task of disbursing the $40 million to shareholders.

Tesla disclosed in a 2021 fourth-quarter earnings report that the SEC issued a subpoena to the company in November 2021. The company’s filing said that the SEC is seeking information on its “governance processes around compliance with the SEC settlement, as amended.”

Spiro wrote in the Monday letter, “the Commission specifically demanded documents concerning my clients’ ‘compliance or non-compliance with Tesla’s disclosure controls and procedures, executive communications policy, external communications policy, other policies or procedures relating to public statements or communications by Tesla executives, or the final judgment or amended final judgment in SEC v. Musk, 1:18-cv-8865-AJN (S.D.N.Y.).’

He also said the SEC issued a separate, but similar subpoena to Musk.

Disclaimer: We have no position in any of the companies mentioned and have not been compensated for this article.