The post Trump Grab For Defense Firms Could Be Nightmare For Musk’s SpaceX appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Elon Musk speaks with Donald Trump as they watch the launch of the sixth test flight of SpaceX’s Starship rocket last November in Brownsville, Texas. Getty Images The U.S. government spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year with defense companies. The Trump administration seems to think it deserves something more in return than goods and services: equity. The Defense Department is considering taking ownership stakes in defense contractors, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Tuesday in an interview on CNBC. The financing of munitions acquisitions needs rethinking, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Undersecretary Stephen Feinberg “are on it,” Lutnick said. “The way it has been done has been a giveaway.” His comments, which came during a discussion on the U.S. government’s assumption of a stake in Intel, caught defense watchers by surprise. But major defense companies may be better able to fend off any government demands. For fast-moving SpaceX, allowing the government a seat at the owners’ table and inside scrutiny of how it operates might be particularly repellant for billionaire founder Elon Musk. And he may have stronger leverage than anyone to deny that. Unlike the ailing chipmaker and rare earths mine developer MP Materials, both of which gave the government equity stakes in return for badly needed funding, SpaceX and other major defense contractors have robust balance sheets. That even includes Boeing, which raised $24 billion in equity last year and has made substantial progress toward improving production of its commercial airplanes and straightening out troubled defense programs. If Trump started making eyes at companies like SpaceX or Lockheed Martin, it’s unclear that the administration has any legal authority to seize stakes “in perfectly healthy defense companies,” noted Todd Harrison, a defense analyst at the American Enterprise Institute. In June, when the president’s relationship with billionaire… The post Trump Grab For Defense Firms Could Be Nightmare For Musk’s SpaceX appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Elon Musk speaks with Donald Trump as they watch the launch of the sixth test flight of SpaceX’s Starship rocket last November in Brownsville, Texas. Getty Images The U.S. government spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year with defense companies. The Trump administration seems to think it deserves something more in return than goods and services: equity. The Defense Department is considering taking ownership stakes in defense contractors, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Tuesday in an interview on CNBC. The financing of munitions acquisitions needs rethinking, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Undersecretary Stephen Feinberg “are on it,” Lutnick said. “The way it has been done has been a giveaway.” His comments, which came during a discussion on the U.S. government’s assumption of a stake in Intel, caught defense watchers by surprise. But major defense companies may be better able to fend off any government demands. For fast-moving SpaceX, allowing the government a seat at the owners’ table and inside scrutiny of how it operates might be particularly repellant for billionaire founder Elon Musk. And he may have stronger leverage than anyone to deny that. Unlike the ailing chipmaker and rare earths mine developer MP Materials, both of which gave the government equity stakes in return for badly needed funding, SpaceX and other major defense contractors have robust balance sheets. That even includes Boeing, which raised $24 billion in equity last year and has made substantial progress toward improving production of its commercial airplanes and straightening out troubled defense programs. If Trump started making eyes at companies like SpaceX or Lockheed Martin, it’s unclear that the administration has any legal authority to seize stakes “in perfectly healthy defense companies,” noted Todd Harrison, a defense analyst at the American Enterprise Institute. In June, when the president’s relationship with billionaire…

Trump Grab For Defense Firms Could Be Nightmare For Musk’s SpaceX

5 min read

Elon Musk speaks with Donald Trump as they watch the launch of the sixth test flight of SpaceX’s Starship rocket last November in Brownsville, Texas.

Getty Images

The U.S. government spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year with defense companies. The Trump administration seems to think it deserves something more in return than goods and services: equity.

The Defense Department is considering taking ownership stakes in defense contractors, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Tuesday in an interview on CNBC.

The financing of munitions acquisitions needs rethinking, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Undersecretary Stephen Feinberg “are on it,” Lutnick said. “The way it has been done has been a giveaway.”

His comments, which came during a discussion on the U.S. government’s assumption of a stake in Intel, caught defense watchers by surprise. But major defense companies may be better able to fend off any government demands. For fast-moving SpaceX, allowing the government a seat at the owners’ table and inside scrutiny of how it operates might be particularly repellant for billionaire founder Elon Musk. And he may have stronger leverage than anyone to deny that.

Unlike the ailing chipmaker and rare earths mine developer MP Materials, both of which gave the government equity stakes in return for badly needed funding, SpaceX and other major defense contractors have robust balance sheets. That even includes Boeing, which raised $24 billion in equity last year and has made substantial progress toward improving production of its commercial airplanes and straightening out troubled defense programs.

If Trump started making eyes at companies like SpaceX or Lockheed Martin, it’s unclear that the administration has any legal authority to seize stakes “in perfectly healthy defense companies,” noted Todd Harrison, a defense analyst at the American Enterprise Institute.

In June, when the president’s relationship with billionaire first bro Elon Musk collapsed spectacularly, former Trump adviser Steve Bannon called for him to use the Defense Production Act to take over SpaceX. If it were 1951, that might have been possible. But in 1952 the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional President Harry Truman’s attempt to use the act to nationalize steel mills, and its seizure powers were formally repealed by Congress in 2009.

Given that SpaceX is the world’s No. 1 launch provider and maker of low-Earth orbit satellites, the U.S. government has little alternative to the company for many of the roughly $13 billion in outstanding contracts it holds – and little leverage.

Musk, who comfortably controls the majority of SpaceX’s voting shares, is unlikely to give the government a stake, said Kimberly Siversen Burke, director of government affairs at the consultancy Quilty Space, for the same reason that he hasn’t taken the company public – he doesn’t need the money and he doesn’t want outside scrutiny. “The second outside shareholders — let alone Uncle Sam — get a look under the SpaceX hood, the whole game changes,” she said. “Transparency, board seats, GAO audits … Elon’s worst nightmare.”


Got a tip? Contact Jeremy Bogaisky at [email protected] or jeremy.282 on Signal.


The Defense Department declined to comment. White House spokesman Kush Desai wrote that in the wake of taking a stake in Intel, “the Administration will continue to explore other deals that ensure taxpayers reap the benefits of investments being made with their money by the federal government.”

The U.S. government has taken equity stakes and warrants in struggling companies before amid severe economic crises, rescuing banks and General Motors during the Great Recession, and airlines during the pandemic. But Trump is reaching for an unprecedented share of the spoils of corporate America’s activities. The administration extracted a “golden share” in U.S. Steel as a condition for approving its merger with Nippon Steel, and cut a deal for 15% of Nvidia’s chip sales to China. On Friday the government secured a 10% stake in Intel in return for releasing $5.7 billion in grants previously committed under the CHIPS Act and $3.2 billion from another Biden-era program.

White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett described it as a “down payment” on a sovereign wealth fund that Trump aims to establish.

If the major defense contractors cave to political pressure, equity investments could create nightmarish conflicts of interest, Jefferies analyst Sheila Kahyaoglu wrote in a note. “We can only imagine the first protest of an award that goes to a prime that the gov’t has an equity stake in over a non-government prime.”

It could also have a chilling impact on companies’ willingness to do business with the U.S. government and on the willingness of investors to put money into companies that do, said Harrison — and work against the Pentagon’s recent attempts to expand the number of companies that compete for government contracts. “VC and PE investment in defense startups could dry up if there is a perception that the government is interfering in the market and creating an unfair playing field,” he said.

MORE FROM FORBES

ForbesBefore Trump Deal, Intel Worked With Chinese Companies Sanctioned By U.S.ForbesThe U.S. Government Is Stuck With SpaceX. But Trump Can Still Hurt It.ForbesApex Wants To Bring Henry Ford-Style Mass Production To Satellites

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremybogaisky/2025/08/27/a-trump-grab-for-stakes-in-defense-firms-could-be-a-nightmare-for-musks-spacex/

Market Opportunity
OFFICIAL TRUMP Logo
OFFICIAL TRUMP Price(TRUMP)
$4.175
$4.175$4.175
+0.79%
USD
OFFICIAL TRUMP (TRUMP) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Tags:

You May Also Like

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

The post Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with a recent controversy surrounding a bold OpenVPP partnership claim. This week, OpenVPP (OVPP) announced what it presented as a significant collaboration with the U.S. government in the innovative field of energy tokenization. However, this claim quickly drew the sharp eye of on-chain analyst ZachXBT, who highlighted a swift and official rebuttal that has sent ripples through the digital asset community. What Sparked the OpenVPP Partnership Claim Controversy? The core of the issue revolves around OpenVPP’s assertion of a U.S. government partnership. This kind of collaboration would typically be a monumental endorsement for any private cryptocurrency project, especially given the current regulatory climate. Such a partnership could signify a new era of mainstream adoption and legitimacy for energy tokenization initiatives. OpenVPP initially claimed cooperation with the U.S. government. This alleged partnership was said to be in the domain of energy tokenization. The announcement generated considerable interest and discussion online. ZachXBT, known for his diligent on-chain investigations, was quick to flag the development. He brought attention to the fact that U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce had directly addressed the OpenVPP partnership claim. Her response, delivered within hours, was unequivocal and starkly contradicted OpenVPP’s narrative. How Did Regulatory Authorities Respond to the OpenVPP Partnership Claim? Commissioner Hester Peirce’s statement was a crucial turning point in this unfolding story. She clearly stated that the SEC, as an agency, does not engage in partnerships with private cryptocurrency projects. This response effectively dismantled the credibility of OpenVPP’s initial announcement regarding their supposed government collaboration. Peirce’s swift clarification underscores a fundamental principle of regulatory bodies: maintaining impartiality and avoiding endorsements of private entities. Her statement serves as a vital reminder to the crypto community about the official stance of government agencies concerning private ventures. Moreover, ZachXBT’s analysis…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:13
United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August

United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August

The post United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Information on these pages contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Markets and instruments profiled on this page are for informational purposes only and should not in any way come across as a recommendation to buy or sell in these assets. You should do your own thorough research before making any investment decisions. FXStreet does not in any way guarantee that this information is free from mistakes, errors, or material misstatements. It also does not guarantee that this information is of a timely nature. Investing in Open Markets involves a great deal of risk, including the loss of all or a portion of your investment, as well as emotional distress. All risks, losses and costs associated with investing, including total loss of principal, are your responsibility. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of FXStreet nor its advertisers. The author will not be held responsible for information that is found at the end of links posted on this page. If not otherwise explicitly mentioned in the body of the article, at the time of writing, the author has no position in any stock mentioned in this article and no business relationship with any company mentioned. The author has not received compensation for writing this article, other than from FXStreet. FXStreet and the author do not provide personalized recommendations. The author makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of this information. FXStreet and the author will not be liable for any errors, omissions or any losses, injuries or damages arising from this information and its display or use. Errors and omissions excepted. The author and FXStreet are not registered investment advisors and nothing in this article is intended…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:20
CME Group to launch Solana and XRP futures options in October

CME Group to launch Solana and XRP futures options in October

The post CME Group to launch Solana and XRP futures options in October appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. CME Group is preparing to launch options on SOL and XRP futures next month, giving traders new ways to manage exposure to the two assets.  The contracts are set to go live on October 13, pending regulatory approval, and will come in both standard and micro sizes with expiries offered daily, monthly and quarterly. The new listings mark a major step for CME, which first brought bitcoin futures to market in 2017 and added ether contracts in 2021. Solana and XRP futures have quickly gained traction since their debut earlier this year. CME says more than 540,000 Solana contracts (worth about $22.3 billion), and 370,000 XRP contracts (worth $16.2 billion), have already been traded. Both products hit record trading activity and open interest in August. Market makers including Cumberland and FalconX plan to support the new contracts, arguing that institutional investors want hedging tools beyond bitcoin and ether. CME’s move also highlights the growing demand for regulated ways to access a broader set of digital assets. The launch, which still needs the green light from regulators, follows the end of XRP’s years-long legal fight with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. A federal court ruling in 2023 found that institutional sales of XRP violated securities laws, but programmatic exchange sales did not. The case officially closed in August 2025 after Ripple agreed to pay a $125 million fine, removing one of the biggest uncertainties hanging over the token. This is a developing story. This article was generated with the assistance of AI and reviewed by editor Jeffrey Albus before publication. Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters: Source: https://blockworks.co/news/cme-group-solana-xrp-futures
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/17 23:55