(NEXSTAR) – After years of anticipation, the payments in a $725 million class action lawsuit against Facebook have finally started to go out, the company in charge of issuing them says.

The social media giant agreed to pay millions of users directly to settle claims it violated people’s privacy by sharing their data with third parties. The settlement was granted final approval in 2023, but payouts have been delayed by objectors and appeals.

But the wait is almost over. Angeion, the company handling the settlement’s administration, who originally said the payments would begin in August, has now confirmed the distribution of payments has begun as of Wednesday, Sept. 3.

Some of the 28 million people who filed claims have started to receive emails that their claim had been approved and payment was coming soon.

If you didn’t receive notice, there’s no need to panic yet. Payments are expected to be issued in batches over the next 10 weeks.

How big will the Facebook settlement payments be per person?

Before we get into any math equations, let’s make one thing clear: This class action lawsuit isn’t going to make you a millionaire. (Unless you’re one of the lawyers in the case. They’re getting $181 million.)

While the size of the fund is inarguably huge, the number of people who filed claims was also really high. Two years ago, Angeion confirmed it had already validated at least 17 million of the 28 million claims filed. That means you’ll have to share the settlement fund with at least 17 million people.

So after legal and administrative fees, what’s left is being divided among all the people whose claims were validated. But it’s not being split equally. There’s a point system in place, with one point awarded for every month you had a Facebook account between May 2007 and December 2022. The more points you have, the bigger your payment.

That makes it hard to say exactly how much any individual will get, but lawyers said in 2023 they estimated the median payment to be $30.

Eight members of the settlement class – the named plaintiffs who represented all Facebook users in the case – will get $15,000 each.

Tesla put forward a new proposal Friday that could make Elon Musk a trillionaire, as the electric vehicle maker seeks to keep its CEO focused on the firm as the artificial intelligence (AI) race heats up.

The proposal would give the world’s richest man some 423 million shares in the company if Tesla meets a series of milestones in the next 10 years, including growing the firm’s market capitalization to an ambitious $8.5 trillion.  

Under these conditions, the pay package would be worth about $1 trillion, boosting Musk from multibillionaire to the world’s first trillionaire. 

The proposal, which still requires the approval of Tesla shareholders, comes as some have worried in recent months about Musk’s focus on the company. 

The tech mogul, who also owns X, SpaceX, Neuralink and The Boring Company, added politics to his already packed portfolio earlier this year, when he briefly took on a role in the Trump administration leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).  

The move proved particularly costly for Tesla, which saw its share price and earnings tank as the EV maker became a political symbol for Musk and his cost-cutting push at DOGE. 

The company continued to feel the effects of Musk’s political endeavors even after he left the White House to focus on his companies again. The Tesla CEO engaged in a very public feud with President Trump, who threatened to target Musk’s government contracts and subsidies.  

The Tesla board argued Friday that it is “imperative for Tesla’s continued success and transformative growth that Mr. Musk be retained and highly incentivized to focus a significant amount of his time and efforts towards achieving his vision for Tesla.” 

Meanwhile, his previous pay package, initially worth about $56 billion, has remained tied up in court since it was struck down by a federal judge in Delaware last year. 

This appears to have been a point of contention amid negotiations with the board over his role at the company, as Musk pushed for assurances that “he would be compensated for his past services in accordance” with the 2018 package. He also sought a 25 percent voting stake in Tesla. 

“Mr. Musk also raised the possibility that he may pursue other interests that may afford him greater influence if he did not receive such assurances,” the board noted. 

The latest pay package would provide Musk with about 12 percent of Tesla shares, bringing his voting power to around 25 percent, as requested.  

Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives described this as essential to keeping Musk at the helm at a critical time for the firm. 

“We believe this was the smart move by the Board as the biggest asset for Tesla is Musk…and with the AI Revolution this is a crucial time for Tesla ahead with autonomous and robotics front and center,” he wrote in a note Friday. 

AI, as Ives underscored, also appears to have been key to the board’s push to keep Musk on board. Despite being an EV maker, Tesla has increasingly focused on AI and robotics, in the form of autonomous vehicles and humanoid robots. 

As tech firms race to develop AI, this has resulted in a fierce competition to attract top talent, occasionally with multimillion-dollar paychecks. 

“Given this backdrop, the Special Committee determined that the failure to retain and incentivize Mr. Musk could put Tesla at risk of losing not only its CEO and leader in the AI field, but also the AI talent that would likely be inclined to leave in the absence of his leadership, as Mr. Musk’s leadership is a significant factor in attracting highly skilled talent to Tesla,” the board added. 

The Justice Department has reversed its stance in its defense of its prosecution of Peter Navarro — but the Trump aide said he feels entitled to an explanation.

After serving four months in prison in 2024 for defying a subpoena from the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, riots, Navarro has continued to appeal his conviction.

The Trump Justice Department last month delivered what would typically be welcome news to those fighting their case, moving to strike an earlier brief and telling the judge that “it is no longer taking the same position as the prior administration in this case.” It did not, however, provide any legal reasoning for the reversal.

In a late Sunday filing, Navarro said the Justice Department needs to explain why it’s abandoning its prior arguments.

“When the Executive Branch abandons the positions it has aggressively advanced, the interests of candor, transparency, and fairness demand that it explain why. Without such an explanation, the Court and the Appellant are left to speculate whether the decision rests on principled legal grounds or on other, less appropriate, considerations,” Navarro’s attorneys wrote.

In Navarro’s view, simply dropping the case wouldn’t acknowledge his prior arguments — that he was covered by executive privilege when he refused to comply with the committee’s subpoena and that the House overextended its reach in seeking to speak with a senior aide.

The Jan. 6 committee did not wish to speak with Navarro about his then-White House role but rather a three-part report in which the aide alleged there had been widespread election fraud — a false claim President Trump relied on as he challenged his 2020 election loss.

Navarro has a coming book about his experience, “I Went to Prison So You Won’t Have To,” which he describes about his experience “refus[ing] to kneel before the Democrats’ rigged J6 witch hunt.”

Navarro was one of several Trump allies prosecuted and convicted for contempt of Congress after refusing to comply with subpoenas from the panel, a group that also includes Steve Bannon.

In its Aug. 29 filing, the Justice Department did not explain its rationale for seeking to drop the case, but asked that if Navarro’s fight continues, an amicus curiae, or “friend of the court” be appointed to represent the opposing side.