You asked for evidence, and you got some.
...
I asked for proof, not flimsy evidence. The LaTimes played fast and loose with the meaning of subsidy.
Then it is your turn to prove that. I took your challenge and provided you proof. You now quarrel with the definitions and use ad hominem attack against the newpaper article’s author — ad hominem unless you can show what is “fast and loose”.
You can show how government contracted $5,000,000,000 with his companies as the table has turned.
Have at it.
You can also find a detailed account in National Review entitled: “Don’t Believe Elon Musk” — detailing federal energy subsidies (a part of his overall subsidy take).
You can look yourself, but you won’t take that as a suitable source either. I write this to show others what the truth is between Mr. Musk, the federal government (and states, including Nevada) and taxpayers.
I am not trying to convince you that Musk is a taxpayer subsidy vacuum. But others can examine the record themselves, both the LAT article and the National Review detailed article.