The world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, Norway’s Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG), is flexing its financial muscle against Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s controversial $56 billion pay package. The fund, valued at a staggering $1.7 trillion, announced it will vote against ratifying the compensation plan at Tesla’s upcoming shareholder meeting. This move comes after a Delaware judge deemed the package excessive and unfair to shareholders earlier this year.

The GPFG, managed by Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), holds a significant stake in Tesla, ranking as the eighth-largest shareholder worth roughly $7.7 billion. While acknowledging the value Musk has brought to Tesla since the 2018 grant date, NBIM expressed concerns about several aspects of the pay package.

NBIM’s primary objection centers on the sheer size of the compensation. At $56 billion, it represents one of the most extensive CEO pay packages ever awarded. The fund argues that such a massive payout is difficult to justify, regardless of a CEO’s performance.

Secondly, the structure of the pay plan raises concerns. The package is heavily tied to performance targets, with a large portion awarded based on ambitious stock price and market capitalization milestones. NBIM argues that this structure can incentivize short-term decision-making that may not be in the company’s long-term interests.

Another concern is dilution. Granting Musk such a large equity-based package can dilute the ownership stake of other shareholders, including the GPFG. This reduces their proportional ownership and potential returns.

• Latest News: GameStop Stumbles Out of the Gate: Sales Slide in Early Release of First-Quarter Results

Finally, NBIM highlights the lack of “key person risk mitigation.” Musk is undeniably a driving force behind Tesla’s success. However, his dependence on the company raises concerns. Should he leave Tesla, it could significantly negatively impact the company’s performance and stock price. According to NBIM, the pay package needs to address this risk adequately.

This isn’t the first time the GPFG has voted against excessive executive compensation. The fund has a long history of advocating for responsible pay practices at companies it invests. In 2018, the GPFG voted against the same pay package for Musk, highlighting similar concerns.

The fund’s stance aligns with a growing movement among institutional investors demanding greater transparency and accountability in executive pay. Shareholders increasingly question the rationale behind excessive CEO compensation packages, mainly when they are not demonstrably linked to strong company performance.

Elon Musk is a charismatic and controversial figure. While his leadership has undoubtedly propelled Tesla’s success, his unconventional management style and outspoken nature have also attracted criticism. The size and structure of his pay package further fuel the debate about his compensation.

The GPFG’s decision to vote against the pay package adds another layer of complexity to the issue. While the fund’s holding is significant, it’s unlikely to sway the vote single-handedly. However, it does send a strong message to other shareholders and the broader business community. The vote outcome will be closely watched, with implications for executive compensation practices at Tesla and across the corporate landscape.

The debate surrounding Musk’s pay package highlights the ongoing tension between rewarding CEOs for driving company growth and ensuring fair compensation that aligns with shareholder interests.