In early 2025, we are witnessing a major shift in how the U.S. government operates. President Donald Trump's second term has brought a business-style approach to running the country, with tech billionaire Elon Musk playing an unusually powerful role. This partnership demonstrates a new way of governing where business tactics and tech influence are fundamentally changing American democracy (Zuboff, 2019; Varoufakis, 2021).

Donald Trump built his reputation as a businessman before entering politics. Now back in the White House, he has quickly implemented his vision of running government like one of his companies. He has placed business executives in charge of important government departments, including Treasury, Commerce and Labour. These appointees often have extensive corporate experience but little background in public service (Citizens for Ethics, n.d.).

The President has created a "Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)", led by billionaire Elon Musk, which reviews government programmes and recommends cuts based mainly on cost rather than public benefit. Government agencies now are said to operate with quarterly performance reviews focused on cutting expenses, similar to how corporations report to shareholders (Corporate Watch, n.d.).

Trump has also reduced many regulations, especially those protecting the environment, consumers and workers, calling them "obstacles to business growth" (Citizens for Ethics, n.d.). During Trump’s first tenure as President, Jared Kushner, leading the Office of American Innovation, referred to American citizens as "customers", reflecting a business-oriented approach to government services.

During this second Trump administration, Elon Musk has become extraordinarily influential despite not holding any official position in the Trump Cabinet. It is being reported that he now maintains an office in the White House and regularly attends high-level meetings that would normally be restricted to elected officials and appointed advisors (Zuboff, 2019).

Elon Musk wields significant influence across various government functions. Through SpaceX's close collaboration with NASA, he helps shape national priorities for space exploration. His companies are key players in artificial intelligence and his perspectives contribute to discussions on AI regulations. In transportation, his advocacy for electric vehicles and hyperloop technology aligns with the interests of his businesses, influencing infrastructure policy. While he does not set these policies directly, his role as an industry leader ensures that his vision carries considerable weight in shaping the regulatory landscape.

Elon Musk exerts considerable influence on energy policy, particularly in promoting renewable technologies that align with his companies' products and services. Through ventures like SolarCity and Tesla, he has been instrumental in advancing solar energy adoption and electric vehicles, thereby shaping public perceptions and influencing global energy policies. In the realm of international relations, Musk's business interests often intersect with diplomatic engagements. For instance, he has sought to establish a foothold in Lesotho through his Starlink satellite internet service, meeting with the country's Prime Minister to discuss improving digital connectivity. Additionally, Musk has been strategically fostering relationships with world leaders, such as Argentina's Javier Milei and India's Narendra Modi, to advance both his political interests and business ventures, particularly Tesla and SpaceX.

This level of private sector influence across so many domains of public policy is unprecedented in modern American governance.

Crony Capitalism in Action

What we are witnessing is a textbook example of "crony capitalism" - a system where business success depends less on fair competition and more on close relationships with government officials. In the current Trump administration, this takes several forms (Corporate Watch, n.d.; Financial Times, 2025).

Government contracts increasingly go to companies with personal connections to administration officials. For example, SpaceX has received billions in contracts with limited competition, while companies connected to former Trump businesses are securing favourable deals for everything from construction to technology services (Citizens for Ethics, n.d.; Government Technology, 2025).

Companies friendly to the administration receive special regulatory treatment. When these companies face potential violations, enforcement is often delayed or penalties reduced. Tax policies under the Trump administration have been strategically structured to favour industries closely linked to the president's inner circle, particularly real estate, energy and technology. The real estate sector has benefited significantly from continued tax advantages, such as the preservation of 1031 like-kind exchanges, the carried interest loophole and bonus depreciation, all of which provide substantial tax breaks to property developers and investors, including those with direct ties to Trump-affiliated businesses. The energy industry, particularly fossil fuel companies, has seen deregulation efforts paired with tax incentives, such as the repeal of the methane fee from the Inflation Reduction Act, allowing oil and gas firms to operate with fewer environmental restrictions and lower costs. Meanwhile, the technology sector has reaped rewards through reduced regulatory oversight and favourable government contracts, with figures like Elon Musk securing lucrative deals for SpaceX, Starlink and Tesla Energy, aligning government spending with private industry priorities. These policies exemplify a governance model where economic advantages are disproportionately allocated to industries with close political connections, reinforcing concerns over crony capitalism and regulatory capture. The "revolving door" between government and business spins faster than ever. Executives from Musk's companies now hold positions in the agencies that regulate their former employers.

Former Trump Organization executives have been placed in key positions overseeing industries where Trump has maintained significant business interests, raising concerns about conflicts of interest and regulatory favouritism. During his administration, Trump appointed at least 13 billionaires to top government roles, including individuals from the real estate and finance sectors, industries in which he had extensive personal and business stakes. Notably, in December 2024, Trump nominated Steve Feinberg, co-founder of Cerberus Capital Management, as Deputy Secretary of Defence, despite his firm's substantial investments in defence-related companies - prompting concerns about potential conflicts of interest. These appointments exemplify the administration’s pattern of aligning business and governance, blurring the lines between private financial interests and public service.

Perhaps most troubling is the information advantage given to connected businesses. These companies receive early notification about upcoming policy changes, allowing them to position themselves advantageously in the market. They get privileged access to government data and decision-making processes that their competitors cannot access. This creates an uneven playing field where political connections matter more than product quality or business efficiency.

Technofeudalism: A New Power System

The relationship between Trump and Musk represents something beyond traditional crony capitalism. Some observers call it "technofeudalism" - a system where powerful tech leaders gain political influence that rivals or exceeds traditional government authority.

In feudal systems of old, lords-controlled land and resources. In technofeudalism, the new "lords" control technology platforms, data and essential infrastructure. Elon Musk, for instance, controls access to space through SpaceX, a growing share of energy production through Tesla Energy and is developing brain-computer interfaces through Neuralink - all with government support and minimal oversight.

This concentration of power means that tech billionaires like Musk can shape policy in ways that benefit their companies while facing limited accountability to voters. Their companies increasingly provide services that were once government responsibilities.

SpaceX has secured substantial contracts for national security space missions, indicating a significant role in this domain:​

• In October 2024, the U.S. Space Force awarded SpaceX task orders worth $733.6 million to launch spacecraft for the Space Development Agency (SDA) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). These launches are scheduled for late 2025 and 2026.

• The U.S. Space Force's Space Systems Command announced the first two task orders under a revamped five-year program, both awarded to SpaceX. This highlights SpaceX's prominent position in national security launches.

Tesla's energy products are being integrated into utility infrastructures, aiming to stabilize grids and support renewable energy integration:

• Tesla's Megapack is a utility-scale battery designed to provide reliable energy storage, stabilize the grid and prevent outages, thereby supporting a cleaner and more resilient energy infrastructure.

• Tesla has partnered with Intersect Power to supply 15.3 GWh of Megapacks for solar and storage projects, marking one of the largest energy storage deployments globally.

In this new system, personal data has become extremely valuable, similar to how land was the primary resource in feudal times. Tech companies collect vast amounts of information about citizens, which they use to develop products and services. The government increasingly relies on these private platforms to gather information about citizens. Algorithms developed by private companies now determine who qualifies for certain public services, with little transparency about how these decisions are made.

Private Solutions for Public Problems

Under the Trump-Musk partnership, the administration is moving toward a model where private companies play a larger role in addressing national challenges. Policies are being shaped to potentially shift more responsibility for human spaceflight to SpaceX, rather than expanding NASA’s role. In healthcare, there is growing advocacy for private healthcare platforms over strengthening public insurance programs. Infrastructure plans increasingly favour corporate-led development with guaranteed profit mechanisms, which could reduce reliance on traditional public works projects. While these changes are still unfolding, the administration’s approach signals a significant shift toward privatization in key sectors. This approach reflects a belief that private companies inherently work better than government. While private solutions can sometimes be more efficient, they also prioritise profit over public good. Services may improve for those who can afford them whilst declining for everyone else. Democratic oversight becomes difficult when essential functions move from public agencies to private boardrooms.

What This Means for Regular Americans

This shift toward business-style governance affects every day Americans in numerous ways. Supporters claim the approach brings more efficient government operations with less bureaucracy and paperwork. They point to faster implementation of certain infrastructure projects and access to cutting-edge services previously unavailable through government channels.

However, critics raise serious concerns. Democratic accountability mechanisms are weakened when decisions move from elected officials to corporate boardrooms. Public interests often take a back seat to corporate profit motives. The gap grows wider between tech-connected elites and everyone else. Government operations become less transparent when shielded by claims of "proprietary information" and business confidentiality.

Workers may lose protections when profit becomes the primary goal of government policy. Consumers face fewer safeguards against dangerous products or unfair practices. Conflicts of interest become common in regulatory decisions when regulators come from the very industries they oversee. People without technological access risk being left behind entirely as services move to digital platform.

As this new model of governance takes shape, Americans face important questions about the proper balance between business efficiency and democratic values. The fusion of presidential authority with tech billionaire influence represents a significant experiment in how the US government functions.

The Trump-Musk partnership has effectively created a business empire approach to governance where political connections and corporate interests shape policy more than voter preferences or public needs. Whether described as crony capitalism or technofeudalism, this system fundamentally changes the relationship between citizens and their government.

Whether this approach creates real benefits for most Americans or mainly helps well-connected insiders remains to be seen. What's becoming increasingly clear is that the traditional boundaries between government authority, corporate power, and personal influence have fundamentally blurred, creating a new political reality that will reshape American democracy for years to come.

References

Citizens for Ethics. (n.d.). Tracking ethics issues in government and corporate influence. Retrieved from https://www.citizensforethics.org

Corporate Watch. (n.d.). Research on corporate power and its effects on society and governance. Retrieved from https://www.corporatewatch.org

Damalion. (2025, January 21). The real estate landscape in Trump's second term. Retrieved from https://www.damalion.com/2025/01/21/the-real-estate-landscape-in-trumps-second-term/

Financial Times. (2025). Analysis of corporate-government relations in Trump's administration. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/4a09e73d-069f-42c1-bc4c-1d8537c0f00c

Government Technology. (2025). New national security launch awards go to SpaceX. Retrieved from https://www.govtech.com/products/new-national-security-launch-awards-go-to-spacex

Intersect Power. (2025). Tesla provides Intersect Power with 15.3 GWh of Megapacks for solar storage projects. Retrieved from https://www.intersectpower.com/tesla-provides-intersect-power-with-15-3-gwh-of-megapacks-for-solar-storage-projects/

Varoufakis, Y. (2021). Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism. Bodley Head.

Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. Public Affairs.

(Published on 20 March 2025)

(Rishiraj Khound is a writer from Assam, who combines his background in media and social work to explore various societal themes. After completing his Bachelor's in Journalism and Mass Communication at Amity University, Noida, he pursued a Master's in Social Work from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, strengthening his understanding of social issues. Through his writing, Rishiraj examines topics ranging from philosophical discourse to political analysis, with a particular interest in investigating conspiracy theories. His work reflects his curiosity about complex social phenomena and alternative perspectives on contemporary issues.)