This article strictly follows authoritative sources, with over 80oming from official media, and integrates the latest developments alongside historical data, maintaining a neutral stance throughout. References are provided at the end.
On June 30, 2025, Elon Musk posted a bold statement on social media, declaring, “If the Senate passes this reckless spending bill, I will form a new party that truly cares about the people the very next day!” His remark was directly aimed at former President Trump, whom Musk had previously supported with a staggering $275 million.
The trigger was the Republican-backed “Build Back Better” bill — a massive legislation that Musk warned would push the U.S. debt ceiling to an unprecedented $50 trillion, effectively turning America into a “one-party state.”
展开剩余92%Just one month earlier, Musk had launched a poll on his platform asking whether a new party should be created, which drew participation from over 5.6 million people, with 80.4% voting in favor. At that time, he revealed his plan: the new party would be called the “American Party,” representing 80% of centrist voters.
Few anticipated that this tech titan, once gifted the White House “golden key” by Trump, would suddenly turn against the Republican Party and become its most formidable “rebel leader.”
The breaking point of their political alliance was a sprawling 940-page bill. On the surface, the “Build Back Better” bill seemed to focus on three pillars: tax cuts, welfare cuts, and increased military spending.
However, Musk quickly identified the real danger — the Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill would add $3.8 trillion to the national debt over ten years, while the actual increase could surpass $4 trillion, with interest payments soaring by $551 billion.
Even more severe for Musk personally, the bill aimed directly at his core business by eliminating electric vehicle tax credits, which would cost Tesla $1.2 billion annually in lost subsidies.
Section 899 of the bill contained what Musk dubbed a “global time bomb”: authorizing the U.S. government to impose retaliatory tariffs of up to 20% on countries that levy digital taxes. When European nations impose digital service taxes on companies like Google and Amazon, the U.S. would gain a legal “tit-for-tat” weapon.
George Saravelos, a foreign exchange expert at Deutsche Bank, exposed the risk plainly: “This effectively escalates a trade war into a capital war.”
Musk’s heightened sensitivity to political risk is rooted in the painful lesson during his tenure at the Office of the Government Efficiency (DOGE), when Tesla’s market value plummeted by $700 billion.
This time, Musk openly declared war on Republican lawmakers: “Every congressman who promised to cut spending but supports this bill should lose in the primaries! If this is the last thing I do in my life, I will make it happen.”
House freshmen lawmakers grew particularly uneasy, knowing their small constituencies could be swayed by Musk’s financial firepower.
When Trump handed Musk the White House “golden key,” neither probably expected the rift to come so quickly.
That key symbolized Musk’s apex in the Trump administration — he headed the Government Efficiency Office, attempting to infuse Silicon Valley’s innovation into the bureaucracy.
Yet the harsh glare of politics scorched his business: Tesla’s market cap shrank by $700 billion during his tenure, European sales halved, and the board secretly sought successors.
Musk’s political pivot is regarded as a textbook example of “cutting losses.” In May this year, he abruptly announced scaling back political activities and returning full-time to Tesla, pledging to “defend the company for five years.”
But his businessman’s instincts prevented him from fully abandoning the power game. When the “Build Back Better” bill threatened his core interests, he flipped the table.
Musk’s confidence to found a new party stemmed from the massive poll a month earlier, where 5.6 million voters expressed their support. The 80.4pproval rate reflected the widespread frustration among American centrists exhausted by the two-party conflict.
However, a practical obstacle remains: Musk cannot run for president himself, as he was born in South Africa, and the U.S. Constitution requires presidents to be natural-born citizens. This means even if the “American Party” forms, Musk can only be a kingmaker, not the king.
Musk’s most trenchant critique of the “Build Back Better” bill lies in its forecasted explosion of a “record $50 trillion national debt.”
Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers issued a professional warning: when accounting for interest compounding, the actual debt increase far exceeds Congress’s $2.4 trillion estimate and could “undermine the dollar’s global dominance.”
Three intertwined crises are squeezing U.S. finances:
An aging population tsunami: the Social Security fund is projected to be depleted by 2029;
Uncontrolled medical inflation: government healthcare spending grows twice as fast as the economy;
Interest expense black hole: with 30-year Treasury yields surpassing 5%, debt servicing costs have outpaced military spending.
The bill’s twin expansions in tax cuts and military spending are akin to injecting adrenaline into a dying patient. Goldman Sachs’ model suggests the tariff provisions alone could increase core inflation by 1.2 percentage points, escalating risks reminiscent of the 2008 financial crisis.
Section 899, dubbed the “global capital sniper rifle,” permits the U.S. to impose escalating retaliatory tariffs on countries implementing digital taxes, starting at 5nd rising by 5nnually up to 20%.
The European Union stands to be hit first — Germany plans a 10 igital tax on tech giants like Google and Facebook, and France has already introduced similar levies.
Yet the bullets may ricochet back on the shooter. Italy’s UBI Bank warned that foreign holdings of U.S. debt have more than doubled over the past decade.
If a capital war erupts, foreign investors may dump dollar assets, “shaking the dollar’s status as a safe-haven currency.” The Chatham House research institute bluntly stated this would “fundamentally undermine global confidence in America’s open market.”
Musk’s fury centers on page 317 of the bill — the removal of a $7,500 tax credit per electric vehicle.
For Tesla, this translates to an annual loss of $1.2 billion. Musk blasted the move as “handouts to dying industries that severely damage the future economy.”
From a business perspective, Musk’s grievances are not baseless. Tesla heavily relies on policy incentives, while the Republican Party’s traditional energy preferences are shifting the industry’s direction.
The irony is sharp: Musk once invested $275 million backing Trump’s election, yet now watches his political investment turn into a commercial liability.
When Musk vowed to establish a new party “the day after the bill passes,” he held three key advantages:
Financial might: as the world’s richest man, he can bankroll a nationwide campaign;
Media dominance: his platform serves as a free publicity machine;
Centrist void: 80% of voters are weary of the bipartisan gridlock.
Yet challenges remain stark: besides his inability to run for president, while small congressional districts favor his targeted attacks, statewide Senate races demand massive funding. More importantly, politics differs from business — voter loyalty is far harder to buy than customer allegiance.
Meanwhile, Democrats quietly rejoice. Minority leader Chuck Schumer has initiated a “reading filibuster” strategy — intending to read the 940-page bill aloud word by word to delay voting past the July 4 deadline. Musk’s internal conflict with the GOP hands opponents a decisive edge.
Trump’s dismissive reply was, “Musk is a great guy, but his recent behavior is inappropriate.” The subtext is clear — a businessman hurt financially is acting out. The honeymoon between patrons and politicians has ended.
Musk’s new party declaration is less a political ideal and more a fierce backlash of capital against policy.
When 5.6 million voters clicked “support” on his platform, they might not have realized that America’s true political divide isn’t simply left versus right, but inside versus outside the institutional walls.
Tech oligarchs, wielding popular will, challenge party machines in a high-stakes gamble whose stakes go far beyond the $50 trillion national debt.
Reference source: Musk’s renewed threat: If “Build Back Better” bill passes, immediate launch of “American Party”
发布于：天津市睿迎网提示：文章来自网络，不代表本站观点。
