Despite Coinbase departure, only 28 companies have left Delaware this year

Published

17 hours ago

November 14, 2025

admin

CEO of cryptocurrency platform Coinbase Brian Armstrong attends a reception at Buckingham Palace, in central London, on November 27, 2023 to mark the conclusion of the Global Investment Summit (GIS). (Photo by Daniel LEAL / POOL / AFP) (Photo by DANIEL LEAL/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

Daniel Leal | Afp | Getty Images

Elon Musk has been pushing hard for companies to exit Delaware and reincorporate elsewhere, following the lead of his companies Tesla and SpaceX. Coinbase became the latest to take the leap, announcing this week that it was moving its state of incorporation to Texas from Delaware.

Despite Musk’s proclamation that “Delaware continues to bleed companies,” those departing the state make up a distinct minority.

According to the Delaware secretary of state’s office, only 28 companies have deincorporated from the state this year. Meanwhile, as of the end of September, 249,214 new entities were formed in Delaware this year, an increase of 14% from the same period in 2025, the data show.

Musk’s decision to relocate his companies followed a Delaware Chancery Court ruling that ordered Tesla to rescind the CEO’s 2018 pay package, worth about $56 billion in options. Musk has asked the Delaware State Supreme Court to undo that ruling and the matter is now on appeal.

Venture firm Andreessen Horowitz, which helped finance Musk’s Twitter takeover and funded Coinbase, subsequently urged companies to incorporate outside of Delaware in a scathing critique this summer, arguing that Delaware has too much “legal uncertainty” due to recent judicial decisions. The firm incorporated in Nevada.

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and Marc Andreessen currently face a lawsuit in Delaware concerning the sale of shares in Coinbase tied to the crypto company’s public listing in 2021.

PayPal Inc. co-founder and Affirm’s CEO Max Levchin on center stage during day one of Collision 2019 at Enercare Center in Toronto, Canada.

Vaughn Ridley | Sportsfile | Getty Images

Other notable names to announce their Delaware departures this year include Dillard’s, Dropbox, Roblox and fintech company Affirm, founded by Max Levchin, who along with Musk is part of the so-called PayPal mafia.

Almost all of the companies that left Delaware reincorporated in Nevada. Coinbase and Dillard’s said they were headed to Texas, while Simon Property Group chose Indiana. President Donald Trump’s social media company, Trump Media & Technology, said it’s going to Florida, the president’s home state.

Benjamin Edwards, associate dean at the University of Nevada Las Vegas Boyd School of Law, said one reason Nevada appeals to companies is that corporate law there clearly states when executives or board members will be held liable should bad things happen on their watch.

“If you do something wrong, and you know it was wrong when you did it, that’s when you will have liability in Nevada,” Edwards said.

Still, Delaware dominates the incorporation market.

Last year, Delaware hosted over 2.1 million legal entities, saw 289,810 new business entities formed in the state, and attracted 81.4% of U.S. IPOs, up from 79% between 2022 and 2023. Edwards said he expects the Delaware number to hover around 75% this year.

Delaware’s attractiveness is due in part to what’s viewed as a flexible corporate code and expert judiciary, and the state is seen as balancing the rights of executives and shareholders.

“Our business-friendly environment has been built over decades, grounded in laws and courts that respect the good faith judgments of directors and officers, allowing efficient decision-making that accommodates the needs of modern businesses operating in a dynamic environment, while providing appropriate safeguards to investors against fraud and fiduciary overreach,” said Delaware Secretary of State Charuni Patibanda-Sanchez in an email.

Meta, which considered leaving Delaware earlier this year, stayed in the state after the legislature, encouraged by Democratic Governor Matt Meyer, rushed to enact changes to its corporate laws. The bill, SB21, was drafted by a group of scholars and attorneys with law firms that had represented Meta and Musk.

WATCH: Coinbase moves incorporation to Texas from Delaware

Coinbase moves incorporation to Texas from Delaware, following Musk’s lead

Technology

Google and Disney reach deal to restore ESPN, ABC to YouTube TV

Published

5 hours ago

November 15, 2025

admin

Google and Disney reach deal to restore ESPN, ABC to YouTube TV

Alphabet and Disney on Friday announced that they’ve reached a deal to restore content from ABC and ESPN onto Google’s YouTube TV.

The deal comes after a two-week standoff between the two companies that started on Oct. 31. The stalemate resulted in numerous live sporting events, including college football games and two Monday Night Football games, being absent from the popular streaming service.

“We’re happy to share that we’ve reached an agreement with Disney that preserves the value of our service for our subscribers and future flexibility in our offers,” YouTube said in a statement. “Subscribers should see channels including ABC, ESPN and FX returning to their service over the course of the day, as well as any recordings that were previously in their Library. We apologize for the disruption and appreciate our subscribers’ patience as we negotiated on their behalf.”

Disney Entertainment’s co-chairs Alan Bergman and Dana Walden, along with ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro, said in a statement that said the agreement reflects “how audiences choose to watch” entertainment.

“We are pleased that our networks have been restored in time for fans to enjoy the many great programming options this weekend, including college football,” they said.

More than 20 Disney-owned channels were removed from YouTube TV, which offered its subscribers $20 credits this week due to the dispute. In addition to ABC and ESPN, other networks that were unavailable included FX, NatGeo, Disney Channel and Freeform.

The main sticking point between the two companies was the rate Disney charges YouTube TV for its networks. Disney’s most valuable channel, ESPN, charges carriage of more than $10 a month per pay-TV subscriber, a higher fee than any other network in the U.S., CNBC previously reported.

It’s not the first conflict this year between YouTube and legacy media.

NBCUniversal content was nearly removed from YouTube TV before the companies reached an agreement in October, preventing shows like “Sunday Night Football” and “America’s Got Talent” from being pulled.

YouTube TV also found itself in a standoff with Fox in August that almost resulted in Fox News, Fox Sports and other Fox channels going dark on the service just before the start of the college football season. The two sides were able to strike a deal to prevent a blackout.

YouTube said it has the option for future program packages with Disney and other partners.

Disney said that access to a selection of live and on-demand programming from ESPN Unlimited, which includes content from ESPN+ and new content on its all-inclusive digital service coming later this year, will be available on YouTube TV to base plan subscribers at no additional cost by the end of 2026.

Here’s the memo that Disney executives sent to employees:

Team,

We’re pleased to share that we’ve reached a new agreement with YouTube TV, and all of our stations and networks are in the process of being restored to the service.

While this was a challenging moment, it ultimately led to a strong outcome for both consumers and for our company, with a deal that recognizes the tremendous value of the high-quality entertainment, sports, and news that fans have come to expect from Disney.

Over the past few years, we’ve led the way in creating innovative deals with key partners –
each one unique, and each designed to recognize the full value of our programming. This new agreement reflects that same creativity and commitment to doing what’s best for both our audiences and our business.

We’re proud of the work that went into this deal and grateful to everyone who helped make it happen — especially Sean Breen, Jimmy Zasowski, and the Platform Distribution team for their tireless commitment throughout this process.

Thank you all for your patience and professionalism over the past several weeks. As you all know, the media landscape continues to evolve quickly, which makes these types of negotiations complex. What hasn’t changed is our focus on the viewer. Our priority is — and will always be — delivering the best experiences and the best value to fans, and we’ll continue working closely with our partners to ensure we’re fulfilling that mission for our audiences.

We’re incredibly optimistic about what’s ahead and grateful to all of you for continuing to set the standard for entertainment around the world.

Alan, Dana & Jimmy

Disclosure: Comcast is the parent company of NBCUniversal, which owns CNBC. Versant would become the new parent company of CNBC upon Comcast’s planned spinoff of Versant.

WATCH: Google has a lot more leverage over Disney in their carriage fight: LightShed’s Rich Greenfield

Technology

We’re looking to further trim this drug stock and exit this entertainment giant

Published

13 hours ago

November 14, 2025

admin

We're looking to further trim this drug stock and exit this entertainment giant

Technology

JPMorgan Chase wins fight with fintech firms over fees to access customer data

Published

14 hours ago

November 14, 2025

admin

JPMorgan Chase wins fight with fintech firms over fees to access customer data

An exterior view of the new JPMorgan Chase global headquarters building at 270 Park Avenue on Nov. 13, 2025 in New York City.

Angela Weiss | AFP | Getty Images

JPMorgan Chase has secured deals ensuring it will get paid by the fintech firms responsible for nearly all the data requests made by third-party apps connected to customer bank accounts, CNBC has learned.

The bank has signed updated contracts with fintech middlemen that make up more than 95% of the data pulls on its systems, including Plaid, Yodlee, Morningstar and Akoya, according to JPMorgan spokesman Drew Pusateri.

“We’ve come to agreements that will make the open banking ecosystem safer and more sustainable and allow customers to continue reliably and securely accessing their favorite financial products,” Pusateri said in a statement. “The free market worked.”

The milestone is the latest twist in a long-running dispute between traditional banks and the fintech industry over access to customer accounts. For years, middlemen like Plaid paid nothing to tap bank systems when a customer wanted to use a fintech app like Robinhood to draw funds or check balances.

That dynamic appeared to be enshrined in law in late 2024 when the Biden-era Consumer Financial Protection Bureau finalized what is known as the “open-banking rule” requiring banks to share customer data with other financial firms at no cost.

But banks sued to prevent the CFPB rule from taking hold and seemed to gain the upper hand in May after the Trump administration asked a federal court to vacate the rule.

Soon after, JPMorgan — the largest U.S. bank by assets, deposits and branches — reportedly told the middlemen that it would start charging what amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars for access to its customer data.

In response, fintech, crypto and venture capital executives argued that the bank was engaging in “anti-competitive, rent-seeking behavior” that would hurt innovation and consumers’ ability to use popular apps.

After weeks of negotiations between JPMorgan and the middlemen, the bank agreed to lower pricing than it originally proposed, while the fintech middlemen won concessions regarding the servicing of data requests, according to people with knowledge of the talks.

Fintech firms preferred the certainty of locking in data-sharing rates because it is unclear whether the current CFPB, which is in the process of revising the open-banking rule, will favor banks or fintechs, according to a venture capital investor who asked for anonymity to discuss his portfolio companies.

The bank and the fintech firms declined to disclose details about their contracts, including how much the middlemen agreed to pay and how long the deals were in force.

Wider impact

The deals mark a shift in the power dynamic between banks, middlemen and the fintech apps that are increasingly threatening incumbents. More banks are likely to begin charging fintechs for access to their systems, according to industry observers.

“JPMorgan tends to be a trendsetter. They’re sort of the leader of the pack, so it’s fair to expect that the rest of the major banks will follow,” said Brian Shearer, director of competition and regulatory policy at the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator.

Shearer, who worked at the CFPB under former director Rohit Chopra, said he was worried that the development would create a barrier of entry to nascent startups and ultimately result in higher costs for consumers.

Source: Robinhood

Proponents of the 2024 CFPB rule said it gave consumers control over their financial data and encouraged competition and innovation. Banks including JPMorgan said it exposed them to fraud and unfairly saddled them with the rising costs of maintaining systems increasingly tapped by the middlemen and their clients.

When Plaid’s deal with JPMorgan was announced in September, the companies issued a dual press release emphasizing the continuity it provided for customers.

But the industry group that Plaid is a part of has harshly criticized the development, signaling that while JPMorgan has won a decisive battle, the ongoing skirmish may yet play out in courts and in the public.

“Introducing prohibitive tolls is anti-competitive, anti-innovation, and flies in the face of the plain reading of the law,” said Penny Lee, CEO of the Financial Technology Association, told CNBC in response to the JPMorgan milestone.

“These agreements are not the free market at work, but rather big banks using their market position to capitalize on regulatory uncertainty,” Lee said. “We urge the Trump Administration to uphold the law by maintaining the existing prohibition on data access fees.”