How Elon Musk turned the Trump White House into a cash machine
Sweeping deregulation, federal contracts, and broadband policy shifts are funneling billions toward Musk’s businesses.
There are many possible explanations for why Elon Musk, once a supporter of Democratic candidates, made a sharp U-turn over the past year and became one of Donald Trump's biggest allies. Despair over the economic and political positions of the American left, radicalization fueled by social media algorithms that have surrounded him with increasingly extreme libertarian and conservative content—these are just some of the explanations that have been suggested. But by and large, the most plausible explanation is also the simplest: it's good business.
Musk saw an opportunity to gain influence that would benefit his various enterprises, and he was quick to seize it. The events in the federal government since Trump returned to the White House provide ample evidence to support this explanation. Sweeping policy changes—from budget cuts led by Musk himself through the newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), to White House-backed moves targeting regulatory agencies, to government programs seemingly tailor-made for Musk—suggest that the world’s richest man is leveraging his influence to grow even wealthier.
Musk’s business empire is vast: electric vehicle manufacturer Tesla (which also has significant battery production), space company SpaceX (which operates the Starlink satellite internet network), social platform X (formerly Twitter), artificial intelligence firm xAI, tunneling company The Boring Company, and Neuralink, which develops brain implants. Many of these companies, especially SpaceX, are deeply intertwined with the federal government—both as service providers and regulatory targets. A series of moves over the past six weeks have directly or indirectly benefited them, as well as Musk personally.
This week, reports surfaced that the administration is preparing to alter the Biden-era $42.5 billion Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program, designed to bring high-speed internet to 56 million rural homes. Under the original plan, states were responsible for implementing broadband expansion, with a strong preference for fiber-optic infrastructure—more expensive to deploy but offering superior speed and reliability. The Biden administration projected the initiative would generate 380,000 jobs and fuel over $3 trillion in economic growth.
But now, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is pushing to shift the program’s focus from fiber optics to lower-cost alternatives. Experts say this policy change would primarily benefit providers of satellite internet—particularly Musk’s Starlink, which operates 60% of the roughly 10,000 satellites orbiting Earth. Musk was openly critical of the program during the campaign, calling its budget “wasteful” and suggesting it should be “zero.” That stance will likely soften if those funds are redirected to Starlink.
Satellite internet is cheaper and easier to deploy; all it requires is a receiving station, which costs significantly less than fiber. However, fiber provides a more stable, high-speed connection at an affordable rate for consumers. Starlink’s infrastructure may be cheaper, but for end users—many of whom in these rural areas are economically disadvantaged—the costs would be significantly higher for a lower-quality service.
“The driving force behind the plan is compliance,” an analyst told The Guardian, requesting anonymity due to his role advising state governments. “Will internet service in rural Wyoming be the same as in suburban Denver? Fiber optics is critical. If the internet is the most essential infrastructure in a state, and you're relying on satellite, you're not building anything in your state. A satellite provider can turn service on and off at will.”
BEAD has faced bureaucratic and operational delays, and to date, not a single home has been connected under the program. The Trump administration will likely use this failure to justify its proposed changes, arguing that a cheaper and faster alternative is necessary. However, it remains uncertain whether state governments and their representatives in Congress—including those from Republican-led states that stand to benefit most—will support Lutnick’s revisions. The Republican Party enjoys particularly strong backing in sparsely populated rural states.
Louisiana recently became the first state to receive federal approval for its fiber-optic plan, securing $1.36 billion in funding. Construction is set to begin within three months, with expectations that the infrastructure will drive tens of billions of dollars in economic growth and create 8,000 to 10,000 jobs. One of the most significant investments tied to this project is a $10 billion Meta artificial intelligence data center in rural Richland County.
The data center’s construction depends entirely on fiber-optic infrastructure. Such facilities require ultra-fast, stable connections and cannot rely on satellite internet. Without fiber, there is no Meta data center—no $10 billion investment, no new jobs. And this is just one example. Shifting BEAD’s focus to satellite internet would almost exclusively benefit Musk while harming numerous other businesses and communities.
The BEAD changes are just the latest in a string of Trump administration moves that appear to favor Musk. In February, DOGE cut half the staff at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) unit responsible for regulating autonomous vehicles—precisely the type of vehicles produced by Musk’s Tesla. “Will this impact the federal government’s ability to assess Tesla’s safety issues? Yes, absolutely,” a former NHTSA engineer, laid off in the cuts, told The Washington Post. “There were already very few people in the government with real expertise in this area. Now, that number is close to zero.”
Yet Musk’s maneuvering may not be paying off in every way. Tesla’s stock is in its longest losing streak since its IPO 15 years ago, having fallen for seven consecutive weeks. Analysts speculate that Musk’s increasing political entanglements are contributing to the decline, alongside growing global backlash against him.
Meanwhile, The New York Times reports that, within the first month of the Trump administration, key officials from 11 federal agencies—responsible for 32 investigations, complaints, or enforcement actions against Musk’s companies—were either dismissed or resigned. Among the most affected agencies is the National Labor Relations Board, which was investigating 24 cases involving X, SpaceX, and Tesla before Trump dismissed three senior board members, effectively halting its enforcement capabilities.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which oversees hundreds of consumer complaints against Tesla related to lending and debt collection—and is set to regulate payment integration on X—has also been forced to suspend investigations under administration orders.
Other regulatory shake-ups benefiting Musk include the resignation of the head of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which fined SpaceX $283,000 last September, and the appointment of a new chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)—an agency investigating Musk’s controversial acquisition of Twitter, which he once called “a completely broken organization.”
Musk is just getting started. It would be an exaggeration to say the Trump administration is entirely captive to his business interests, but there is no doubt he is reaping the rewards of his newfound political influence. These moves could ultimately channel tens—if not hundreds—of billions of dollars in federal funds into his companies, whether through direct contracts or by neutralizing regulators. Musk has identified the administration as a cash cow, and he seems determined to milk it to the last drop.
