63 publicly-traded U.S. firms have completed, voted on, or scheduled a state-of-incorporation change since the Tesla vote — predominantly Delaware-outbound, plus eight non-Delaware-source counterflow and comparator rows.
The Reincorporation Index: where public companies are moving their legal homes. Since Tornetta v. Musk, 310 A.3d 430 (Del. Ch. 2024), rev'd sub nom.In re Tesla, Inc. Derivative Litig., Nos. 534, 2024; 10, 2025; 11, 2025; 12, 2025 (Del. Dec. 19, 2025) (per curiam) (reversing the rescission remedy and replacing the Court of Chancery's fee award with a quantum-meruit award reportedly approximately $54 million; final fee amount pending remand for fee-dispute proceedings), and the 2025 Texas corporate-law reforms (S.B. 29, S.B. 1057, H.B. 40, S.B. 2337, and S.B. 2411), — public companies in the current source-linked cohort have announced or completed state-of-incorporation changes, with destinations in Texas, Nevada, and selected comparator jurisdictions. This tracker follows each transaction from first SEC disclosure through vote outcome and legal effectiveness — with source-linked filings on every row. Maintained by SMU CGI.
Scope: the core sample is Delaware-outbound moves to Texas or Nevada. The tracker also labels selected non-Delaware outbound moves to Texas or Nevada (e.g., NY→TX, MT→TX, MI→NV) and comparator rows separately. Completed means a legal effective date is identified from a primary filing or charter document; holder-approved means shareholders or written-consent holders approved the proposal; rejected means holders did not approve.
Aggregate is the sum of market_cap_usdmm across the cohort as of 2026-05-27. LTRPA contributes $0 (merged into Tripadvisor); IOT ($20.4B) and AIEV ($13M) are imputed point-in-time anchors.
Scope note. The cohort is … publicly-traded U.S. issuers with documented state-of-incorporation changes announced since June 2024 — predominantly Delaware-source moves to Texas or Nevada, plus a small number of counterflows (NL Industries NJ→DE, LQR House NV→DE), two non-TX/NV destinations within the cohort (Forian Inc. DE→MD; Galecto, Inc. DE→Cayman), and non-Delaware sources (CO→TX, MT→TX, MI→NV, NY→TX, Ireland→TX) retained for empirical comparability. The data.json file additionally carries … Texas-incumbent reference rows used as the within-state control panel for §21.552 adopter analysis; these are not part of the migrator count. Sub-cohort splits (public-cohort …, multi-spec-ready …, outcome-day-ready …) are documented on the cohort event-study page.
Loading headline finding…
Source → destination flow
Where the …-firm cohort came from and where they went (… ribbons rendered; firms with a MERGED destination tag are excluded by design). Ribbon thickness = number of firms on that arc.
Computed from from_state → to_state on the …-firm migrator cohort, excluding firms tagged as merged. Aggregate-market-value mode sums market_cap_usdmm per arc and is dominated by Tesla (DE→TX) and ExxonMobil (NJ→TX, approved May 27, 2026; pending certificate-of-merger effectiveness).
Headline market reaction — two flagship event studies
How investors reacted on the day each move was announced and on the day each vote was held.
Academic. Day-0 abnormal returns (announcement and outcome) with placebo-rank 95% CI (red band) and 80%-power minimum detectable effect (gray band). Red dot is the realized point estimate.
What this shows. For each event, the red dot is the stock’s actual move on the day, the red band is the range of moves we’d expect by chance, and the gray band is the smallest move this test could reliably detect. Dot inside the bands = the move can’t be distinguished from a normal trading day.
ExxonMobil — announcement day
March 10, 2026 · synthetic-control inference
When ExxonMobil announced its Texas move on March 10, 2026, the stock moved +0.02% — not statistically distinguishable from zero. Translation: the market neither cheered nor punished the announcement; any real reaction was smaller than this test can detect. XOM detail →Day-0 AR = +0.02% (95% placebo-rank CI [−1.48%, +1.53%]; not statistically distinguishable from zero). 80%-power MDE ±2.09%. XOM page →
On vote day (May 27, 2026), ExxonMobil’s stock moved roughly 0%. Translation: shareholders had already priced in approval before they cast their ballots. We’ll refresh once the company files its official Form 8-K with the final tally.Outcome-day estimate populates after the vote closes. MDE band: ±2.09% (synthetic-control) · ±3.11% (oil-augmented market model).
Southwest Airlines — announcement day
May 19, 2025 (8-K filed) · T0 = May 20, 2025
When Southwest Airlines announced its Texas reincorporation in May 2025, the stock barely moved (+0.09%). Translation: investors treated this as ordinary corporate housekeeping rather than a value-changing event. Southwest detail →Day-0 AR = +0.09% (Patell-z p = 0.96; not statistically distinguishable from zero). Southwest case study →
Southwest Airlines — 12-month BHAR
SPY-only headline spec
Over the full year after Southwest’s reincorporation, the stock tracked both the broader market and the airline-industry index. Translation: no detectable shareholder gain or loss attributable to the move itself, one year out. Cohort detail →12-month BHAR statistically indistinguishable from zero. SPY+JETS robustness narrows MDE to ±4.68%. Cohort event study →
Bottom line. Neither announcement nor outcome day produced a stock move large enough for these tests to flag as “real” reaction. With only one firm in each test, only big moves are statistically detectable; smaller real effects could still exist. For the full picture combining every firm in the cohort, see the cohort event study.
Under the reported single-firm specifications, the estimated announcement-window abnormal returns are not statistically distinguishable from zero; the tests cannot rule out effects smaller than the reported minimum detectable effects. Caveat: single-firm tests; cohort-wide aggregation, synthetic-control inference, and bootstrapped CI in cohort event study.
Four monotone-increasing step lines show how the …-firm migrator cohort matures: Announced → Voted → Approved → Legally Effective. The gap between Approved and Effective is the statutory-filing/closing latency.
What you're looking at. Every firm in the tracker travels through four life-cycle stages: (1) the board announces the proposal to shareholders, (2) shareholders vote (or sign written consents), (3) the proposal is approved, and (4) the new state-of-incorporation becomes legally effective after the certificate of conversion is filed.
Why the lines step up over time. Each step represents one more firm reaching that stage. The dark blue line (Announced) leads, and the red line (Effective) trails — that gap is just paperwork latency.
What the dashed vertical markers mean. Those are the 7 legal/policy shocks that triggered the wave: Tornetta I (Jan 2024), Tesla redomestication (June 2024), SB 29 (May 2025), HB 40 (Sept 2025), Tornetta reversal (Dec 2025), and the ExxonMobil vote (May 2026).
Example. Tesla announced June 13, 2024; voted same day; approved same day; effective same day (the "step" jumps once vertically on the right edge of the Tesla marker).
Construction. For each firm i, four event dates are extracted from EDGAR: announcement_date_iso (first 8-K Item 8.01 / DEF 14A or PRE 14A filing date), vote_date_iso (Item 5.07 disclosed meeting date or written-consent execution date), approval_date_iso (vote_result ∈ {APPROVED, APPROVED_BY_WRITTEN_CONSENT}), and effective_date_iso (charter-conversion certificate filing per e.g. DGCL § 266 or TBOC § 10.108).
Monotonicity invariant. The cumulative count Nt(stage) satisfies announced ≥ voted ≥ approved ≥ effective ∀t by construction. Violations indicate definitional drift (e.g. counting vote_result=SCHEDULED placeholders as "voted"). The build pipeline asserts this invariant pre-deploy; see build_public_firms.pyderive_summary().
Selection bias. The Apr '23–Apr '24 plateau reflects the pre-Tornetta baseline (only Tesla announced its move during this window). Post-Tornetta acceleration is consistent with Babchuk & Hamdani (2002) jurisdictional-competition predictions.
Comparable figure. See Fig. 3 of Daines (2001) 62 J. Fin. Econ. 525 for the Daines/Delaware market-value premium event study using the same cumulative-event-count form.
Timeline events (matches numbered pins on chart)
1June 13, 2024 · Tesla shareholders vote to move to Texas The demonstration vote that opened the post-Tornetta cohort.
2Sept. 1, 2024 · Texas Business Court opens Specialized statewide trial court for complex business disputes begins operations.
3May 14, 2025 · Texas overhauls its corporate law Statutory reforms designed to attract reincorporations from Delaware.
4May 27, 2026Most recent · ExxonMobil shareholders approve Texas move The S&P 100 anchor event of the cohort; New Jersey → Texas redomestication.
AnnouncedVoted (meeting or written consent)ApprovedLegally effective
Dec 19, 2025 · Tornetta reversal — In re Tesla Derivative Litig., Nos. 534, 2024; 10-12, 2025 (Del. Dec. 19, 2025) (per curiam): reversal of the rescission remedy; fee award replaced with a quantum-meruit award of approximately $54 million (final amount pending remand for fee-dispute proceedings).
May 27, 2026 · ExxonMobil shareholder vote — the only S&P 100 issuer in the post-SB 29 redomiciliation cohort as of dataset v6-rev99 (tear-sheet).
Drawn from the …-firm migrator cohort as of 2026-05-30. Reconciles to: Approved tile (… meeting-vote) + Vote Outcomes panel (… incl. written consent) + Destinations panel (… jurisdictions).
Vote outcomes
Where shareholder votes have landed
What you're looking at. The four bars show every firm in the cohort sorted by what happened at the shareholder vote: Approved, Rejected, Scheduled (not yet voted), or Pending (vote done, awaiting Item 5.07 8-K filing).
Why the numbers must add to the cohort total. Every firm is in exactly one bucket, so Approved + Rejected + Scheduled + Pending = total cohort. If they don't, something is mislabeled.
Example. Texas Capital (TCBI) is in the "Rejected" bar — shareholders voted no on the DE→TX move in April 2026.
Construction. Counts derive from vote_result ∈ {APPROVED, APPROVED_BY_WRITTEN_CONSENT, REJECTED, SCHEDULED, NULL}. The four-bar partition is exhaustive and mutually exclusive across the panel-B mover cohort (panel_b_dexit_mover == 1).
Note on "Approved" definitions.summary.approved includes written-consent rows (DGCL § 228 / TBOC § 6.202); summary.approved_strict excludes them. The KPI tile uses the strict definition for direct shareholder-meeting comparability.
Comparable figure. See Tab. 2 of Bebchuk & Hamdani (2009) Texas L. Rev. 1063 on shareholder vote outcomes in charter amendments.
Denominator: …-firm migrator cohort. LTRPA = COMPARATOR_ONLY (merged into Tripadvisor); BNZI = REFUTED_NOT_A_REINCORPORATION (Apr 2026 was reverse split, not a NV move). Both retained for audit trail.
By destination
Destination state distribution
What you're looking at. Where the cohort firms are moving TO. Nevada and Texas dominate; everything else (Cayman, Delaware-counterflow, Florida, Maryland, Indiana, British Columbia) is a handful of edge cases or comparator rows kept for empirical contrast.
Why MERGED is missing. MERGED is a tag for firms that disappeared into a merger before completing the reincorporation (e.g. Liberty TripAdvisor → Tripadvisor); it's an outcome, not a jurisdiction. We count it on the cohort but exclude it from the "destinations" bars.
Example. Coinbase (DE→TX), Datadog (DE→NV), and Tesla (DE→TX) are the three biggest flag-firms in this panel.
Construction.to_state on the panel-B mover cohort, grouped and counted. Non-jurisdictional outcome tags ({MERGED, WITHDRAWN, UNKNOWN}) excluded; destinations_jurisdictional_count excludes them, destinations_count retains for audit-trail.
Why Nevada dominates. Post-2024 Nevada activity reflects NRS 78.138 (business-judgment-rule statutory codification) and the broader controlled-firm migration documented in Subramanian (2022) 110 Cal. L. Rev. 1.
Comparable figure. See Tab. 1 of Bebchuk & Cohen (2003) 46 J. Law & Econ. 383 (destination-state distribution of corporate charters).
Vote margins
Approval-percentage distribution by destination state. Each tick = one firm; dashed line at simple majority (50%).
What you're looking at. Each tick is one firm's "yes %" at the shareholder vote. The further right the tick, the more shareholders said yes. The dashed line at 50% is the legal majority threshold.
Why Texas votes cluster lower than Nevada votes. Texas moves are more contested (TCBI lost 45%); Nevada moves tend to pass overwhelmingly because most are controlled firms with majority insider blocks (Tesla 84%, Affirm 84%, Roblox 99%).
Example. Tesla → TX passed with ~63% (relatively narrow for a controlled firm). Texas Capital → TX failed with 45%.
Construction.approval_pct field on panel-B movers with vote_result ∈ {APPROVED, REJECTED}. Rows binned by destination state; median plotted as vertical bar per row. Sparse single-tick rows (n=1) reflect incomplete vote-tally collection from Form 8-K Item 5.07 exhibits.
Why bin by destination. Destination state correlates with shareholder type (Texas attracts industrial/legacy issuers with retail-heavy registers; Nevada attracts tech/controlled-firm structures with insider supermajorities) per Eldar & Magnolfi (2020) 12 J. Legal Analysis 1.
Comparable figure. See Fig. 4 of Listokin (2010) 119 Yale L.J. 1184 (margin distributions in proxy contests).
Awaiting vote dataApproval percentages populate after each issuer files its Form 8-K Item 5.07.
Source: approval_pct field on the migrator cohort. Single-tick rows reflect sparse vote-tally collection; full distribution is reported in the cohort event study.
The complete universe — 148 firms, every one accounted for
The headline cohort (80 movers, $2.9T aggregate market value) is the most-visible slice of a broader canonical universe. Every firm in the master database is classified into exactly ONE of seven row classes below — none silently dropped, none invisible. The taxonomy is deterministic (see methodology); contradictions block the deploy via the pre-deploy integrity gate.
Why a seven-class taxonomy. Cohort-definition choices are the largest source of analytical disagreement among reincorporation researchers. We make ours visible.
Priority order (first-match wins, deterministic). A firm with multiple matching conditions is assigned to the highest-priority class only.
INBOUND_TO_DE — counter-flow comparators moving INTO Delaware (e.g., NL Industries NJ→DE). Counted for empirical contrast, excluded from the "Delaware-outbound" headline.
WATCHLIST_PRIVATE — pre-IPO private firms with documented reincorporation intent (e.g., SpaceX). Tracked because public-firm cohort definitions miss them; surfaced separately because they have no market cap.
EXCLUDED_BY_SCOPE — firms with documented scope-exclusion rationale in the audit trail (e.g., BNZI pending primary-source verification). Visible by design so future reviewers can audit the call.
WITHDRAWN — proposals that were filed and then withdrawn, or filings later determined not to be reincorporations.
INCUMBENT — Texas-incumbent reference firms (Panel A; TX-incorporated before June 2024). Used as denominator on the §21.552 adopter analysis.
MOVER — the canonical post-Tornetta Delaware-outbound cohort. What the headline charts use.
OUTSIDE_SCOPE — analytical comparators retained for empirical context (e.g., Cayman Islands-to-Cayman migrations) that are neither headline movers nor incumbents.
Mover
77
Post-Tornetta DE-outbound to TX, NV, or other destination (public, has ticker)
Incumbent (Panel A)
63
TX-incorporated reference firms predating June 2024; §21.552 adopter denominator
Pre-IPO private firms with documented reincorporation intent (SpaceX)
Excluded by scope
1
Documented scope-exclusion in audit trail; surfaced for future review (BNZI)
Outside scope
3
Analytical comparators retained for empirical context (HYOR, ZICX, CBAT)
Source: summary.by_row_class from the canonical reincorporation database. Deterministic 7-class classifier (rev104 SCHEMA #767); every firm matches exactly one class via first-match priority order. Reconciliation: 77+63+3+1+1+3 = 148 total. The headline "80 movers" includes 77 pure DE-outbound + 2 INBOUND_TO_DE that retain panel_b=1 for counter-flow analysis + 1 WATCHLIST_PRIVATE (SpaceX, pre-IPO). See methodology for full taxonomy definitions.
Complete firm registry
Sorted with the most-imminent upcoming meeting first · then chronologically through future meetings · then past meetings most-recent first · IR = investor relations · EDGAR = SEC filings · ⏰ UPCOMING = vote within 30 days
↗ Click any company name to open its full detail page — vote breakdown (For / Against / Abstain), event-study CARs across multiple specifications, source filings, proxy-advisor recommendations, press coverage, and audit trail.
Try Texas Capital — one of the cohort's 2 rejected proposals — for a complete case study.
Announcement Date
Meeting / Vote Date
Vote Result
Company
Move
Market Cap
Industry
Status
Detail
Links
Data source. Generated from the canonical reincorporation database (current: v6-rev96) via the data-export pipeline. The active cohort is the …-firm panel of publicly-traded U.S. issuers with documented state-of-incorporation changes announced since June 2024 — predominantly Delaware-source moves to Texas or Nevada, plus a small number of counterflows (e.g., NL Industries NJ→DE, LQR House NV→DE) and non-Delaware sources retained for empirical comparability. Bucket classifications, panel eligibility, audit status, effective dates, and primary-source links all flow from the database. The full payload also contains a …-firm Texas-incumbent universe used as the §21.552 adopter denominator on the Texas page.
Methodology
How we classify each row, the bucket taxonomy (A, B1, B2, C, D, X, Y, Z — see methodology page for full definitions), the source-confidence tiers, and the public-Tracker-vs-research-Panels distinction.
Bluebook: Shane Goodwin, The Reincorporation Index (v6-rev96), SMU Corp. Governance Initiative (2026-05-27), https://reincorporation-tracker.pages.dev/ (last visited [date of access]).
APA: Goodwin, S. (2026). The Reincorporation Index (v6-rev96) [Dataset]. SMU Corporate Governance Initiative. https://reincorporation-tracker.pages.dev/
Dataset (Bluebook): Shane Goodwin, The Reincorporation Index Dataset (v6-rev96), SMU Corp. Governance Initiative (2026-05-27), https://reincorporation-tracker.pages.dev/data.json (last visited [date of access]).
BibTeX:
@misc{goodwin2026reincorptracker,
author = {Shane Goodwin},
title = {The Reincorporation Index},
year = {2026},
version = {v6-rev96},
publisher = {SMU Corporate Governance Initiative},
howpublished = {\url{https://reincorporation-tracker.pages.dev/}},
note = {Accessed [date of access]}
}
For the underlying database (Excel), the change log, or a CSL-JSON / Zotero export, contact sgoodwin@smu.edu.
Data source. This page reads the canonical reincorporation database (current: v6-rev96) via the data-export pipeline. The active cohort is the …-firm panel of publicly-traded U.S. issuers with documented state-of-incorporation changes announced since June 2024 — predominantly Delaware-source moves to Texas or Nevada, plus counterflows and non-Delaware sources retained for empirical comparability. Bucket classifications, panel eligibility, audit status, effective dates, and primary-source links all flow from the database. See methodology.
