Billionaire’s unofficial role in policy: Elon Musk
Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk (R) jumps on stage as he joins U.S. President Donald Trump (L) during a campaign rally at the site of the former President's first assassination attempt, in Butler, Pennsylvania on Oct. 5, 2024. (AFP Photo)
Elon Musk, a name often associated with technological breakthroughs and corporate dominance, has increasingly become a central figure in the United States’ domestic policymaking. His influence extends beyond private business and has gradually seeped into governance, regulatory decisions, and even international trade dynamics.
While business leaders have always had some degree of political sway, Musk’s position is unprecedented. His involvement goes far beyond lobbying or securing government contracts. Instead, it appears as though his corporate ambitions are now shaping policy itself. His venture, ranging from Tesla to SpaceX and Starlink, are so deeply intertwined with government agencies that they provide a dynamic where federal decisions often accommodate his business interests. The question, then, is whether this is simply a byproduct of technological advancements or a fundamental shift in how political power is exercised in the United States.
To understand the extent of this shift, it is necessary to analyze how Musk’s role has evolved and what implications it holds for governance, competition, and public interest.
Shaping policy through private interests
One of the most controversial aspects of Musk’s growing influence is how his private ventures align with policy changes. A clear example is the recent decision to reduce the workforce at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) by thousands of employees, a move that directly affects tax enforcement. The rationale given was cost-cutting, yet many critics argue that this weakens the agency’s ability to collect revenue, ultimately increasing the national deficit rather than reducing it.
If the goal were truly fiscal responsibility, such measures would seem counterproductive. The U.S. national debt is projected to exceed $50 trillion within the next decade, making revenue collection more crucial than ever. Weakening tax enforcement at this stage seems less like a strategy to cut waste and more like a political decision with long-term consequences.
At the same time, Musk’s influence extends beyond domestic tax policy. His ventures in the commercial space industry, particularly SpaceX and Starlink, have positioned him as an indispensable figure in government operations. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recently announced that it would begin incorporating Starlink technology into airspace management, sidelining major competitors in the process. While it is true that Starlink’s capabilities far exceed those of older systems, the decision raises concerns about competition, government dependence on private infrastructure, and Musk’s increasing leverage over national security assets.
Beyond U.S. borders, Musk’s presence in global markets has also led to policy shifts. The government of Vietnam recently reversed previous regulatory restrictions, paving the way for Starlink’s expansion into the country. While this may seem like a standard business negotiation, the broader concern is whether such moves are reshaping U.S. trade policy to align with the interests of one individual. When a private businessman holds enough influence to override national policies or alter diplomatic strategies, it signals a growing imbalance in decision-making processes.
The risks of overlapping influence
Musk’s supporters argue that his initiatives drive innovation and efficiency in industries that have long been stagnant. They highlight how SpaceX has significantly reduced the cost of space travel, making the U.S. a leader in commercial space exploration. They also point to Tesla’s role in accelerating the electric vehicle revolution, despite challenges in production and market competition. However, the issue at hand is not whether his companies contribute to technological progress. It is whether one individual should have such an outsized role in shaping public policy.
The intertwining of business and governance has led to growing concerns about conflicts of interest. Musk’s involvement in sectors like media, transportation, and telecommunications means that regulatory decisions affecting these industries often carry implications for his own ventures. While some level of public-private cooperation is inevitable, a structure in which policies appear to be tailored to benefit a single entity raises questions about accountability and transparency.
Perhaps the most pressing concern is the potential for Musk’s influence to extend into areas with national security implications. With Starlink already playing a crucial role in military and civilian communications, the extent to which government agencies rely on his infrastructure is expanding. This concentration of control presents risks, as it could limit competition and grant a private entity undue leverage over critical government functions.
As Musk’s reach grows, the American public is beginning to question seriously whether the nation’s democratic institutions are being shaped by elected officials or by powerful business figures operating in the background. The debate is not about whether private enterprise should play a role in governance, but about the extent to which an unelected individual should be able to dictate policy decisions.
The future trajectory of Musk’s influence will depend on how policymakers, regulatory bodies, and the public respond to this shift. If government institutions continue to accommodate his expanding role without checks and balances, the lines between corporate power and political authority will become increasingly blurred. The result may be a governance model where decision-making is driven less by public interest and more by the ambitions of those who wield economic power.
About the author: Tolga Sünhıran is a freelance writer specializing in political and global issues.
