Fair Observer’s assistant editor Casey Hermann speaks with John Feffer, director of Foreign Policy In Focus at the Institute for Policy Studies, about US President Donald Trump’s financial activities during his second term. Feffer argues that Trump has used the presidency to enrich himself, his family and his associates on an unprecedented scale. They discuss alleged conflicts of interest, weakened legal safeguards and the consequences for the US economy and political system.

Trump turns the presidency into a business

Hermann begins with reports that Trump earned approximately $2.2 billion during one year of his presidency. Feffer says other estimates place the total above $4 billion, depending on how the gains are calculated. Although earlier US administrations suffered major corruption scandals, including Teapot Dome and Crédit Mobilier, reforms normally followed. Trump, Feffer contends, has instead disregarded rules intended to prevent presidents from profiting through public office.

Feffer divides the alleged enrichment into three categories. The first consists of Trump’s personal ventures, particularly cryptocurrency. The second involves businesses connected to his family and political associates. The third is influence peddling by foreign governments and private actors that give Trump gifts, invest in his companies or spend money at his properties in the hope of receiving favorable treatment.

Former officials have often capitalized on their reputations after leaving office. Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger built a consulting business around his international contacts, while former US President Barack and former First Lady Michelle Obama signed a production agreement with Netflix. Feffer argues that Trump has broken with this pattern by monetizing political power while serving as president.

The Trump family expands its interests

Trump’s relatives have benefited from connections forged through the government. Feffer points to Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, who helped negotiate the Abraham Accords as White House senior advisor during Trump’s first term. He later received substantial Middle Eastern investments for his private equity firm. Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, Trump’s first and second sons, respectively, assumed control of the family business and became involved in ventures including World Liberty Financial and mineral companies.

Feffer cites Vulcan Elements, a rare earth magnet company connected to the Trump family that received an accelerated Pentagon contract. He also mentions mineral arrangements involving the sons of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. These relationships, he argues, create “a clear conflict of interest” because people close to the administration can profit from government decisions.

Financial conflicts also arose during Trump’s first term. Foreign delegations stayed at Trump’s Washington hotel, while government events took place at his properties. Yet Feffer says the sums involved then generally reached hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars. During the second term, they have risen into the billions. He believes Trump and his allies are exploiting what may be their final opportunity to accumulate wealth through the presidency.

Legal checks struggle to restrain Trump

Congress and the courts have not provided an effective response. The Supreme Court granted presidents broad immunity for official acts, although Feffer notes that Trump could still face state prosecution, overseas legal action or cases involving conduct outside his constitutional duties. Congress has also investigated Trump-linked cryptocurrency dealings.

These checks move slowly. Trump can appeal adverse decisions and prolong proceedings until after leaving office. Republican control of Congress limits the likelihood that investigations will produce consequences. Proposed conflict-of-interest legislation may not apply retrospectively. Feffer says Trump therefore behaves as if presidential immunity provides a “get out of jail [free] card,” although future courts will determine its reach.

Corruption corrodes the wider economy

Wall Street is unlikely to impose accountability. Feffer describes financial markets as a casino driven by speculation, deregulation and expectations of rapidly rising profits. Trump-associated cryptocurrency illustrates the pattern: Early participants can profit from dramatic increases, while later investors absorb losses when prices collapse.

Feffer argues that this system rewards financial maneuvering while productive sectors suffer. US manufacturing and agriculture face tariffs, inflation and international competition. Ordinary Americans encounter higher prices, insecure employment and fewer opportunities to save or buy homes.

This inequality predates Trump. Feffer traces it through decades of deregulation, the decline of blue-collar employment and bank-friendly government policies. Trump, however, has intensified a system in which the wealthy resemble a casino’s house: Occasional players win, but the house retains the advantage.

Accountability will determine Trump’s legacy

The deeper danger is that Trump’s conduct becomes a model for future presidents. If he keeps his gains and avoids prosecution, other politicians may conclude that public office offers an accepted path to personal enrichment. Deregulation could also make corruption harder to identify and punish across cryptocurrency, artificial intelligence and other industries.

Feffer sees possible resistance among independent voters, young Americans and Republicans who still value meritocracy. Trump’s low economic approval ratings suggest that many voters distrust his stewardship. Anti-corruption movements led by young people have already helped topple governments elsewhere, including in Bulgaria and Bangladesh.

The United States could experience a similar pendulum swing. Feffer believes lasting reform depends on rejecting concentrated wealth and expanding executive power. If younger Americans connect their declining living standards to political corruption, they may remove Trump-aligned officials and demand stronger safeguards. Whether Trump faces consequences will therefore determine whether presidential profiteering remains an aberration or becomes embedded in American government.

[Lee Thompson-Kolar edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article/podcast are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.