JPMorgan and Tesla settle legal battle over stock warrants: here’s why

Tesla and JPMorgan Chase have resolved a contentious legal battle over stock warrants that dates back to 2014.

This lawsuit, which saw allegations and countersuits from both sides, has ended with the two companies agreeing to drop their respective claims, as revealed in a joint court filing in Manhattan.

The terms of the settlement remain undisclosed, sparking speculation about what led to the resolution.

JPMorgan sought $162.2 million in damages

JPMorgan first filed the lawsuit against Tesla in November 2021, seeking $162.2 million in damages.

The case revolved around a 2014 contract where Tesla issued stock warrants to the bank.

Stock warrants provide the holder the right to purchase a company’s stock at a predetermined “strike” price by a specific date.

JPMorgan alleged that Tesla “flagrantly” breached the agreement following events triggered by a now-infamous tweet from Tesla’s CEO, Elon Musk, in 2018.

On August 7, 2018, Musk tweeted that he was considering taking Tesla private at $420 per share and claimed he had “funding secured.”

The tweet caused significant market volatility, forcing JPMorgan to adjust the strike price of the Tesla warrants to maintain their fair market value.

Musk later abandoned the privatization plan 17 days after the tweet, further contributing to fluctuations in Tesla’s stock price.

JPMorgan contended that these adjustments made the warrants more valuable and alleged that Tesla failed to make required payments.

Tesla accused JPMorgan of attempting to exploit the situation

Tesla, however, denied the accusations and filed a countersuit in January 2023.

The electric vehicle maker accused JPMorgan of attempting to exploit the situation for financial gain, calling the bank’s repricing of the warrants an effort to secure a “windfall.”

The legal battle attracted considerable attention due to Musk’s history with regulatory bodies.

In 2018, Musk reached an agreement with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requiring pre-approval of certain tweets by Tesla’s legal team.

This arrangement stemmed from the same “funding secured” tweet at the heart of the JPMorgan lawsuit.

While the details of the settlement remain confidential, the resolution marks the end of a years-long conflict between two major players in the financial and automotive industries.

Both JPMorgan and Tesla declined to comment on the settlement when contacted by Reuters, leaving industry observers to speculate on the motivations behind the decision to settle.

For Tesla, this could signify a strategic move to focus on its core business operations amid increasing competition in the electric vehicle sector.

For JPMorgan, the decision might reflect a desire to avoid prolonged litigation and the associated costs.

The settlement also underscores the broader implications of volatile corporate communication and the financial instruments tied to such companies.

Investors and analysts alike will likely scrutinize how this resolution affects Tesla’s legal and financial standing moving forward.

As Tesla’s stock continues to be a focal point for the market, the closure of this case eliminates one potential source of uncertainty, allowing both companies to turn their attention to future opportunities.

The post JPMorgan and Tesla settle legal battle over stock warrants: here's why appeared first on Invezz