Connecting: 216.73.216.216
Forwarded: 216.73.216.216, 104.23.197.117:64928
One ‘Big Beautiful Bill’, one ugly social media spat | Trustnet Skip to the content

One ‘Big Beautiful Bill’, one ugly social media spat

06 June 2025

How the relationship between Donald Trump and Elon Musk has soured.

By Jonathan Jones,

Editor, Trustnet

Seemingly almost overnight, a rift of intergalactic proportions has emerged and no, it was not emperor Palpatine disbanding the galactic senate.

Far closer to home, Donald Trump and Elon Musk got into a social media back-and-forth last night, with Tesla and SpaceX chief Musk taking aim at the US president’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’.

He took to his social media platform X, calling it a “big ugly spending bill” and retweeted videos that were negative about the proposed legislation.

The disconnect is clear. Musk was brought into the newly created department of government expenditure (DOGE) at the start of the year to make savings in an effort to bring down the country’s budget deficit – something the outspoken tech billionaire has been vocal about in the past.

He left the DOGE office recently, with Trump explaining that Musk was “asked to leave” from his position as he was “wearing thin”, a claim he made via his preferred social media site: Truth Social.

The president also said Musk “went crazy” after Trump removed the electric vehicle mandate that “forced everyone to buy electric cars that no one else wanted” and suggested removing the tech CEO’s government subsidies.

Among other posts on X, Musk hit back with a poll suggesting a new political party was needed, claimed Trump would not have won without his support and said Trump was named in the Jeffrey Epstein files, suggesting this is the reason these documents have yet to be released. There is no evidence provided, however, to back this up.

He also suggested he would begin decommissioning SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft, which have been used to bring astronauts back from space, a claim he seemingly walked back later in the night.

This was enough, however, to prompt Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist, to suggest Trump should seize control of SpaceX through nationalisation. He also said the president should look into Musk’s immigration status.

It is an ugly end to what had been a ‘bromance’ between the pair and brings into question what happens when the sitting US president and world’s richest man get into a war of words.

Whether it will turn into action remains to be seen, but it is clear that both are volatile characters. Although both will believe they have much to gain, in reality, I suspect there is far more to lose.

Markets overall have been muted so far, but shareholders in Tesla are already feeling the repercussions of the spat. Shares in the electric vehicle maker dropped 14.3% yesterday, although they are up 5% in pre-market trading this morning.

But it highlights the growing concerns that investors should (in my view) rightly feel about the state of the US government – and in particular its president.

Many have been vocal about moving away from US assets as the risk associated with the White House make investing in the country much more difficult and volatile.

At the very least, diversifying some of your portfolio away from the US might be a smart move. Although many of the tech giants remain on good terms with the Trump administration (or are, at the very least, not in the crosshairs in the same way Musk is), this latest chapter shows that relationships can sour this quickly.

How long might it be before the US government takes aim at others, particularly if other chief executives say anything perceived as remotely negative about the president?

Editor's Picks

Loading...

Videos from BNY Mellon Investment Management

Loading...

Data provided by FE fundinfo. Care has been taken to ensure that the information is correct, but FE fundinfo neither warrants, represents nor guarantees the contents of information, nor does it accept any responsibility for errors, inaccuracies, omissions or any inconsistencies herein. Past performance does not predict future performance, it should not be the main or sole reason for making an investment decision. The value of investments and any income from them can fall as well as rise.