White House for Sale: ... [For] Donald Trump

[admin]

-- White House for Sale: How Princes, Prime Ministers, and Premiers Paid Off President Trump: Staff Report by Committee on Oversight and Accountability, Democratic Staff, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member, U.S. House of Representatives

White House for Sale: How Princes, Prime Ministers, and Premiers Paid Off President Trump
Staff Report
Committee on Oversight and Accountability
Democratic Staff
Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member
U.S. House of Representatives
January 4, 2024

https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/

Dedicated to the late Congressman Elijah E. Cummings,
Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform
“The memory of the righteous is a blessing.”

FOREWORD

Congressman Jamie Raskin
Ranking Member
House Committee on Oversight and Accountability

Many reports get published in Congress every year and sink into oblivion, but this one is unlikely to disappear. The findings and conclusions presented by the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability’s Democratic staff are astounding—and they demand urgent action by the Congress and by the American people.

Drawing from actual receipts and records and using the most conservative possible accounting methodologies, White House for Sale: How Princes, Prime Ministers, and Premiers Paid Off President Trump documents how, as President, Donald Trump accepted more than $7.8 million in payments from foreign states and their leaders, including some of the world’s most unsavory regimes. By elevating his personal financial interests and the policy priorities of corrupt foreign powers over the American public interest, former President Trump violated both the clear commands of the Constitution and the careful precedent set and observed by every previous Commander-in-Chief.

Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the Constitution forbids the President to accept money payments or gifts “of any kind whatever” from foreign governments and monarchs unless he obtains “the Consent of the Congress” to do so. Yet Donald Trump, while holding the office of president, used his business entities to pocket millions of dollars from foreign states and royalty and never once went to Congress to seek its consent. This report sets forth the records showing foreign government money—and all the spoils from royals we can find—pouring into hotels and buildings that the President continued to own during his presidency, all in direct violation of the Constitutional prohibition.

To be sure, we know about only some of the payments that passed into former President Trump’s hands during just two years of his presidency from just 20 of the more than 190 nations in the world through just four of his more than 500 businesses. Despite the Constitution’s requirement that a president disclose foreign emoluments and seek Congress’s consent to keep them, it took Oversight Committee Democrats years of aggressive litigation against the former President to obtain the subset of documents from Mazars, Donald Trump’s accounting firm, that form the factual basis of this report. And then, in January 2023, Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer made the abrupt and outrageous decision to release Mazars from having to continue complying with the Committee’s subpoena and court-supervised settlement agreement. Despite Chairman Comer’s decision to bury further evidence, however, even this small slice of a picture of unknown proportions allows America to glimpse the rampant illegality and corruption of the Trump presidency. It is true that $7.8 million is almost certainly only a fraction of Trump’s harvest of unlawful foreign state money, but this figure in itself is a scandal and a decisive spur to action.

The report’s detailed findings make clear that we don’t have the laws in place to deal with a president who is willing to brazenly convert the presidency into a business for self-enrichment and wealth maximization with the collusive participation of foreign states. No other president had ever come close before to trying a rip-off like this simply based on vacuuming up foreign government money, which was the cardinal presidential offense and betrayal in the eyes of the Founders—an offense and betrayal made all the more striking here by the offender’s repeated laughable proclamations of “America First!”

This report forces us to confront fundamental questions that the Founders faced in designing American institutions: What kind of government will we have? Will it be devoted to the common good of all the people and will it actually put the interests of the people first? Or will it just be a structured opportunity for private gain and self-enrichment for schemers who excel at self-promotion and sneer at the rule of law? In answering these questions, we have one decisive advantage over the Founders: we have the Founders’ own handiwork in the Constitution which gives us precisely the principles we need to fortify democratic self-government and reject the practice of political leaders selling America out to foreign powers.

In the face of these stunning findings and conclusions, Oversight Committee Democrats are prepared to act in defense of the Constitution. We will develop a package of proposed legislative reforms to ensure that all occupants of the Oval Office abide by the Constitution’s unequivocal language commanding loyalty to the interests of the American people—not the interests of homicidal Saudi monarchs, totalitarian Chinese bureaucratic state capitalists, or other foreign actors looking to obtain policy favors and indulgences by paying off a president or his wholly owned businesses.
Supporting and defending our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, is our sworn commitment in Congress. But the defense of democracy is the work of a nation, and we hope that all the American people will participate in it.

_________________________
Jamie Raskin
Ranking Member
House Committee on Oversight and Accountability

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword .................................................................................................................................... 3
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 6
Background: The Foreign Emoluments Clause, Trump’s Businesses and Foreign Conflicts, and the Committee’s Investigation ............................................................................................ 17
Report Methodology and Document Limitations ...................................................................... 39
People’s Republic of China ....................................................................................................... 45
Saudi Arabia .............................................................................................................................. 67
Qatar ......................................................................................................................................... 83
United Arab Emirates ................................................................................................................ 93
Kuwait .................................................................................................................................... 101
India ........................................................................................................................................ 104
Philippines ............................................................................................................................... 113
Malaysia ................................................................................................................................. 117
Turkey .................................................................................................................................... 124
Democratic Republic of the Congo ......................................................................................... 132
Albania ................................................................................................................................... 140
Kosovo ................................................................................................................................... 144
Additional Emolument Spending ............................................................................................ 148
Additional Countries with Accounts at Trump-Owned Businesses ........................................ 155
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 156

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

“No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”
Constitution of the United States, Art. I, § 9, cl. 8

This report sets forth the results of a multi-year investigation into former President Donald Trump’s receipt of payments from foreign governments and foreign state-owned or state-controlled entities while in office. This systematic collection of foreign money was in direct violation of the explicit prohibition against such emoluments in the U.S. Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause. The Committee’s investigation began under the leadership of then-Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings in 2016, the year when President-elect Trump was poised to bring with him into the office of President of the United States a sprawling and debt-laden corporate empire of more than 500 businesses operating in at least 25 different countries, and yet refused to divest himself of these corporate assets and properties. Instead, he declared himself still open for business to all comers, including princes, prime ministers, premiers, and foreign governments, who became his active, albeit constitutionally forbidden, financial patrons.1

In layman’s terms, an emolument is broadly defined as an “advantage, profit, or gain received as a result of one’s employment or one’s holding of office,” financial or otherwise, received either directly or indirectly.2 Shrouded in complexity and secrecy, President Trump’s global corporate empire proved to be a magnet for emoluments from foreign governments and government-sponsored sources across the globe. His businesses encompassed luxury hotels all over the world, high-end mixed-use buildings like Trump Tower in New York City, and destination golf resorts. When he arrived in the White House, then-President Trump was determined not only to keep this well-branded global corporate empire going but also to seize a new and unprecedented opportunity to make it ever more lucrative for himself and his family. It would soon become clear that he viewed the presidency as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for self-enrichment and profit maximization, courtesy of some of the most corrupt governments in the world. The presidency became the fulfillment of a get-rich-quick campaign he reportedly described as “the greatest infomercial in political history.”3

Immediately after the 2016 election, ethics experts from across the political spectrum read the writing on the wall and urged the new President-elect to fully divest himself of his business interests and place all their proceeds in a truly independent blind trust. These bipartisan ethics experts warned that if he did not divest, the President would remain the ultimate financial beneficiary of payments made to his businesses by foreign powers seeking favorable treatment from the government of the United States—exactly the predicament feared by the Framers of the Constitution and explicitly forbidden by the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause.4

Throwing caution to the wind and the Constitution to the curb, former President Trump bluntly and cavalierly rejected all such bipartisan advice. He instead chose to place the “day-to-day” management of his businesses in the hands of his two adult sons while retaining personal ownership and control of all his businesses, as well as the ability to draw funds from them without any outside disclosure.5 He also refused to divest from his business entities, including those benefiting significantly from business with foreign governments. Instead, former President Trump merely pledged that The Trump Organization would enter into no new foreign deals.6

This transparently improper arrangement reinforced (rather than severed) his ties to his businesses and enabled him to prioritize his personal interests over those of the nation, as foreign governments and those acting on their behalf quickly began spending money at Trump properties in hopes of gaining the new President’s favor. Thus, the central constitutional ban on presidential acceptance of payments “of any kind whatever” from foreign governments was put in danger immediately.

By ignoring this fundamental constitutional command, former President Trump also threatened to obliterate a critical and defining principle of American democracy—namely, the strict separation of a president’s personal financial interests from those of the nation. In establishing the presidency, the Framers emphasized that the President was not a term-limited king but a public servant whose duty was to serve the common good rather than personal financial interests. The U.S. Constitution emphatically and unambiguously rejected the monarchical system, requiring our elected chief executive to use the office solely to advance the interests of the American people, rather than their own personal financial and business interests.

Given President Trump’s dramatic departures from the Constitution, the rule of law, and the prior unbroken history of presidential refusals to take foreign state money, as well as the repeated opportunities his business entanglements with foreign states created to use his office to advance his business dealings, Democrats on the Committee on Oversight and Accountability began a nearly seven-year long investigation, initiated by the late Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, advanced by Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, and now completed, based on available materials, by Ranking Member Jamie Raskin. As this report makes clear, it provides a significant glimpse into former President Trump’s foreign financial dealings—but far from a comprehensive account of his unprecedented efforts to use the presidency to enrich himself and his family in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.

After President Trump and the White House had refused multiple requests from the Committee to provide documents voluntarily, and after Mr. Trump’s longtime former attorney, Michael Cohen, testified before the Committee that Mr. Trump routinely prepared false financial statements, then-Chairman Cummings issued a subpoena to Mr. Trump’s accounting firm at the time, Mazars USA, LLP (Mazars). This subpoena, issued in April 2019, sought documents to help Congress fulfill its constitutional responsibility to determine whether President Trump had business interests that could impair his ability to make policy decisions in the national interest, whether he was complying with the Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses of the Constitution, and whether he made accurate financial disclosures to the Office of Government Ethics as required by law. President Trump fought hard to keep relevant financial documents secret, spending years litigating in an unsuccessful effort to block the Committee’s subpoena. In July 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its decision in Trump v. Mazars, holding that President Trump was not above the law and had to comply with the Committee’s subpoena under a new four-part test.7 President Trump continued to fight the scope of the subpoena in lower courts until September 2022, when a federal district court approved a settlement between President Trump, Mazars, and the Committee, pursuant to which the court supervised the agreement.8

However, in January 2023, upon becoming the new Chairman of the re-named Committee on Oversight and Accountability, Representative James Comer apparently decided to allow attorneys for President Trump to speak on behalf of the Committee and, acting in that wholly improper capacity, to release Mazars from its legal obligation to produce relevant records to the Committee under the court-supervised settlement. According to an email from former President Trump’s attorneys to Mazars, Chairman Comer authorized Mr. Trump’s attorneys to inform Mazars that “the Committee has no interest in forcing Mazars to complete [its production of documents] and is willing to release it from further obligations under the settlement agreement.”9 In June 2023, Mr. Trump and the Committee—under Chairman Comer’s direction—filed a joint motion for dismissal and termination of the case. The District Court granted the motion on July 5, 2023, ending the litigation and the court’s supervision of the parties’ agreement.

Despite these obstacles, Committee Democrats succeeded in obtaining a subset of documents that shine a light on the finances of at least some of the former President’s businesses, despite being incomplete and lacking in significant respects because of the Chairman’s actions and significant gaps in the records possessed by Mazars. This report presents the analysis of these documents prepared by the Committee’s Democratic staff. Critically, even this subset of documents reveals a stunning web of millions of dollars in payments made by foreign governments and their agents directly to Trump-owned businesses while President Trump was in the White House. These payments were made while these governments were promoting specific foreign policy goals with the Trump Administration and even, at times, with President Trump himself, and as they were requesting specific actions from the United States to advance their own national policy objectives.

Based on the subset of documents the Committee received from Mazars, this report concludes:

• Through entities he owned and controlled, President Trump accepted, at a minimum, millions of dollars in foreign emoluments in violation of the United States Constitution. The documents obtained from former President Trump’s accounting firm and from a federal agency demonstrate that four Trump-owned properties together collected, at the least, millions of dollars in payments from foreign governments and officials that violated the Constitution’s prohibition on emoluments “of any kind whatever” from foreign governments. These payments clearly fell within the definitions of emoluments set forth in Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution and applied by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the federal judiciary, which include payments that flow from transactional relationships with foreign governments or entities, including so-called “market” transactions.

• President Trump’s businesses received, at a minimum, $7.8 million in foreign payments from at least 20 countries during his presidency. These included payments from foreign governments and foreign government-owned or -controlled entities to properties owned by Donald Trump, including Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.; Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas; Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue in New York; and Trump World Tower at 845 United Nations Plaza in New York.

• President Trump never sought or received Congress’s approval to keep these foreign payments, as the Constitution requires. Instead of disclosing to Congress the foreign payments his businesses received during his presidency and requesting its consent to retain them pursuant to the process compelled by Article I, § 9, cl. 8—as multiple presidents before him had done—former President Trump actively concealed these payments and tried to prevent Congress from obtaining information about them. As a result, President Trump obstructed Congress’s duty under the Constitution to consider whether to permit the President to retain any of the foreign emoluments his businesses received.

• The foreign nations making payments to President Trump spanned the globe and included several of the most corrupt and authoritarian governments on Earth. They ranged from the People’s Republic of China to Saudi Arabia to the Democratic Republic of the Congo to Malaysia to Albania to Kosovo. These countries spent—often lavishly—on apartments and hotel stays at Donald Trump’s properties—personally enriching President Trump while he made foreign policy decisions connected to their policy agendas with far-reaching ramifications for the United States.

• Information available to the Committee shows that among countries patronizing Trump properties, China made the largest total payment to President Trump’s private business interests. According to the subset of documents obtained from Mazars and an additional document from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), these payments collectively included millions of dollars from China’s Embassy in the United States; the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC), a Chinese state-owned enterprise; and Hainan Airlines Holding Company, a subsidiary of Chinese company HNA Group, owned by the Hainan provincial government.

• By pocketing foreign states’ payments, President Trump repeatedly placed his personal financial interest and the interests of foreign wealth and power above the public interest, resulting in precisely the split loyalty between foreign power and the American people that the Framers sought to avoid by writing the Foreign Emoluments Clause into the Constitution. Examples include the following:

o In 2017, President Trump did not impose sanctions on ICBC—his well-paying tenant in Trump Tower in New York—even though the DOJ in 2016 filed a complaint alleging that the bank had been among Chinese financial institutions that had provided accounts to a company that had allegedly conspired with a North Korean bank to evade U.S. sanctions.

o He did not sanction ICBC even after former Republican Chairman Ed Royce of the House Foreign Affairs Committee called on President Trump to “apply maximum financial and diplomatic pressure” by “targeting more Chinese banks that do business with North Korea.”11 President Trump expressed his own personal sympathies and constitutional indifference on the matter in the 2016 campaign when he stated: “I love China! The biggest bank in the world is from China. You know where their United States headquarters is located? In this building, in Trump Tower.”12

o The documents provided to the Committee reveal that Saudi Arabia and its royal family spent at least $615,422 at Trump properties during the Trump Administration, and the total amount of the country’s expenditures is likely much higher than that. In May 2017, while Saudi Arabia was spending lavishly at properties he owned, President Trump signed an arms deal with the Saudi government worth more than $100 billion, despite reports that the country repeatedly used weapons to cause mass civilian casualties during its ongoing military intervention in Yemen.13 President Trump also cast doubt on U.S. intelligence assessments concluding that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had ordered the murder and dismemberment of Washington Post contributing journalist and Saudi regime critic Jamal Khashoggi.14 At a campaign rally in 2015, then-candidate Trump articulated what would matter most to him in any conflict between his personal financial incentives related to the Saudis and American values and policy goals: “Saudi Arabia, I get along great with all of them. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million.” He continued, “Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much!”15

o Over a seven-month period in 2017 and 2018, while the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) lobbied Trump Administration officials to support a blockade of Qatar that Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. had imposed, the U.A.E. spent tens of thousands of dollars at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., through four different stays. For many years, President Trump had business interests in Dubai, and he maintained those interests while he was in office.16 In February 2017, just after Donald Trump took office, both Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump attended the opening of a new Trump-branded golf course in the U.A.E.17

Importantly, the foreign payments to President Trump identified in this report are likely only a small fraction of the total amount of such payments he received during his presidency. This report is not able to provide a more comprehensive account of all of the foreign emoluments former President Trump’s businesses received during the time period covered by the Committee’s subpoena as a result of Chairman Comer’s successful effort, in coordination with Trump’s attorneys, to block the production of the remaining documents in discovery as soon as he became Chairman in 2023, as well as the failure of President Trump to provide to Mazars—or Mazars’s failure to retain—many key documents. Although the Supreme Court ruled in the Committee’s favor—and despite the fact that a federal judge was monitoring Mazars’s ongoing compliance with the court-approved settlement—Chairman Comer deliberately scuttled this agreement.18

Astonishingly, soon after becoming Chairman, Representative Comer claimed: “I honestly didn’t even know who or what Mazars was.” For years, President Trump aggressively litigated the case to thwart Mazars’s compliance with the Committee, but Chairman Comer has blamed Democrats for “‘investigating’ Trump for six years.” Instead of honoring the court-approved settlement, Chairman Comer made clear what he planned to do: “I know exactly what I’m investigating: money the Bidens received from China.”19 As promised, Chairman Comer halted any further document productions relating to President Trump’s receipt of foreign payments—from China or any other country—and launched an investigation of President Joseph Biden’s son, which to date has produced no evidence of any constitutional or criminal wrongdoing by President Biden.

In addition to placing his personal loyalty to Donald Trump above the institutional interests of Congress and the integrity of the Constitution, Chairman Comer worked with Donald Trump’s attorneys to bury further evidence of former President Trump’s misconduct by depriving the Committee’s Democratic staff of the ability to work with Mazars to conduct further searches for responsive records, including for any documents regarding payments potentially from Russia, South Korea, South Africa, and Brazil.

Notably, the set of documents Mazars did produce—before Chairman Comer’s shocking decision to release the company from its obligations—contained some staggering omissions. Under the terms of the September 2022 settlement agreement, Mazars was required to produce:

1. All documents from 2014 through 2018 related to any false or inaccurate information on President Trump’s public financial disclosures;

2. All documents from November 2016 through 2018 regarding the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.; and

3. All documents from 2017 through 2018 regarding any financial transactions between President Trump and any foreign or domestic state agency or government official.20

For each of these categories, however, key documents were apparently never provided to or retained by Mazars.

For example, with regard to the first category, the Committee’s Democratic staff specifically requested information regarding a $20 million loan made by Daewoo, a South Korean commercial entity, that was not reported on President Trump’s 2015, 2016, or 2017 public financial disclosures.21 Mazars responded that it had no documents related to this loan. With regard to the second category, the Committee’s Democratic staff specifically requested hotel guest ledgers covering the 2017 presidential inauguration. Although Mazars provided hotel guest ledgers for various other time periods, it responded that it did not have ledgers covering the 2017 inauguration. And with regard to the third category, the Committee’s Democratic staff specifically requested information regarding ICBC’s nearly two-million dollar a year lease in Trump Tower. Once again, Mazars represented that it had no responsive documents.

The myriad payments by foreign governments, royalty, state-owned companies, and foreign agents revealed in the documents that Mazars did produce, as well as in public records, raise two distinct yet intertwined constitutional concerns. First, President Trump’s unprecedented acceptance of these hidden foreign payments clearly violated the Constitution’s prohibition against a president’s acceptance of foreign state emoluments without Congress’s consent. Second, President Trump’s failure to comply with the Foreign Emoluments Clause and to uphold his oath of office produced the exact kinds of presidential corruption and conflicts between the President’s personal financial interests and the public interest that this constitutional provision was designed to prevent. As James Madison wrote, the Foreign Emoluments Clause was adopted due to “the necessity of preserving foreign ministers and other officers of the U.S. independent of external influence.”22 As demonstrated throughout this report, Donald Trump’s business interests provided an irresistible entry point for external influence in American foreign policy and a continuing source of corruption in Trump’s conduct of U.S. foreign policy. It is these two linked concerns that this report seeks to bring to light and begin to remedy.

The Framers assumed that future presidents would comply with the Constitution’s specific requirement to seek Congress’s consent in order to retain any and all foreign emoluments being dangled before them. Before the Trump Administration, every president had done just that. The Framers clearly never envisioned a president who would simply disregard the constitutional wall of separation between the president’s personal finances and foreign government money inducements.

The unprecedented scope and scale of Mr. Trump’s receipt of unconstitutional foreign funds—and the failure of the current statutory regime to ensure an effective and timely response to his violations of the Constitution—demonstrate the pressing need to overhaul ethics and disclosure laws to protect essential anti-corruption principles in our law and Constitution from such flagrant Executive Branch abuse.

Congress now must decide how to respond. This report urges Congress to consider adopting a new legislative disclosure regime to help Congress obtain the information it needs to perform its assigned constitutional function of evaluating—and either approving or rejecting—the acceptance of foreign government emoluments by the president and other federal officials. This report also recommends that Congress consider instituting a more formal procedure for presidents and other officials to seek Congress’s permission when they receive and want to retain such emoluments. In the meantime, this investigation will continue to inform Congress and the American people about how to prevent senior public officials from taking advantage of their positions to reap private financial windfalls from foreign states—not only during but immediately before and after taking public office. Further, while this report focuses on former President Trump’s violations of the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause, the Mazars documents also reveal a pattern of payments from domestic individuals, entities, and government agencies that raise significant potential conflicts of interest and potential violations of the Constitution’s Domestic Emoluments Clause through expenditures at Trump-owned businesses. These will be the focus of a subsequent report.

The chart below identifies spending by foreign governments and entities at Trump-owned properties, all in violation of the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause, as reflected in the limited records produced to the Committee by Mazars and identified in publicly available information:

Country / Total Spending Identified23 / Trump Businesses Patronized

China
$5,572,548
• Trump Tower
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
• Trump International Hotel (Las Vegas, NV)
Saudi Arabia
$615,422
• Trump World Tower
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Qatar
$465,744
• Trump World Tower
Kuwait
$303,372
• Trump World Tower
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
India
$282,764
• Trump World Tower
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Malaysia
$248,962
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Afghanistan
$154,750
• Trump World Tower
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Philippines
$74,810
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
United Arab Emirates
$65,225
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Democratic Republic of Congo
$25,171
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Kazakhstan
$23,772
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Thailand
$11,340
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Self-Declared Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus
$8,800
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Mongolia
$8,486
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Lebanon
$7,720
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Albania
$6,002
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Kosovo
$4,950
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Latvia
$2,739
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Turkey
$1,894
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Hungary
$1,011
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)
Cyprus
$590
• Trump International Hotel (Washington, D.C.)

In addition, records provided to the Committee by Mazars indicate that Azerbaijan, Georgia, Namibia, Romania, and Costa Rica had accounts at a Trump-owned property after Donald Trump was elected President, but Mazars did not provide any documents detailing the purposes or amounts of these countries’ expenditures.

_______________

Notes:

1 Letter From Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to Chairman Jason Chaffetz, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (Nov. 14, 2016) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... 003%29.pdf).

2 See Congressional Research Service, The Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution (Jan. 27, 2021) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11086) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary).

3 Committee on Oversight and Reform, Hearing with Michael Cohen, Former Attorney to President Donald Trump, 116th Cong, Transcript at 14, 21–22 (Feb. 27, 2019) (online at http://www.congress.gov/116/chrg/CHRG-1 ... g35230.pdf); Cohen: Trump Described His Campaign As “The Greatest Infomercial in Political History,” The Hill (Feb. 27, 2019) (online at https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4318 ... political/).

4 Bipartisan Group Urges Trump, Family to Divest from Private Business, Washington Post (Dec. 9, 2016) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post ... -business/).

5 Trump Can Quietly Draw Money from Trust Whenever He Wants, New Documents Show, Washington Post (Apr. 3, 2017) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html); Letter from Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, Committee on Oversight and Reform, to Administrator Robin Carnahan, General Services Administration (Oct. 8, 2021) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... 0Lease.pdf).

6 Donald Trump’s New York Times Interview: Full Transcript, New York Times (Nov. 23, 2016) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/23/us/po ... cript.html); Trump Drops “No New Deals” Pledge, Politico (Jan. 11, 2017) (online at http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/t ... cts-233468).

7 Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, 140 S. Ct. 2019 (2020).

8 Committee on Oversight and Reform, Press Release: Chairwoman Maloney’s Statement on Oversight Committee Securing Agreement to Obtain Former President Trump’s Financial Records (Sept. 1, 2022) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/ne ... reement-to).

9 Email from Patrick Strawbridge, Consovoy McCarthy PLLC, on behalf of Donald Trump, to Counsel for Mazars USA, LLP (Jan. 19, 2023) (on file with Committee).

10 See Order, Trump v. Committee on Oversight and Accountability of the U.S. House of Representatives, et al., Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-01136-APM (D.D.C. July 5, 2023).

11 House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Press Release: Chairman Royce Statement on North Korea (Sept. 3, 2017) (online at https://foreignaffairshouse.gov/press-r ... rth-korea/).

12 Trump’s Comments After Not Attacking Nike Raise Even More Questions, Washington Post (Sept. 5, 2018) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/poli ... questions/).

13 Trump Signs Kushner-Negotiated $100B Saudi Arms Deal, CNN (May 20, 2017) (online at http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/19/politics/ ... /indexhtml); What You Need to Know About the Crisis in Yemen, TIME (Nov. 3, 2016) (online at https://time.com/4552712/yemen-war-huma ... is-famine/).

14 Full Text: President Donald Trump’s Statement on Saudi Arabia, Khashoggi Killing, Politico (Nov. 20, 2018) (online at http://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/2 ... ng-1008219).

15 Trump Claims He Has “No Financial Interests in Saudi Arabia”—But He Makes Lots of Money from It, CNBC (Oct. 16, 2018) (online at http://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/16/trump-sa ... money.html).

16 Trump’s Business Ties in the Gulf Raise Questions About His Allegiances, New York Times (June 17, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/17/world ... ances.html).

17 Trump Sons Open Dubai Golf Club as Namesake Now US President, Seattle Times (Feb. 18, 2017) (online at http://www.seattletimes.com/business/tr ... golf-club/).

18 Email from Patrick Strawbridge, Consovoy McCarthy PLLC, on behalf of Donald Trump, to Counsel for Mazars USA LLP (Jan. 19, 2023); Letter from Ranking Member Jamie Raskin to Chairman James Comer, Committee on Oversight and Accountability (Mar. 12, 2023) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... bpoena.pdf); Comer Stymies Probe into Trump Tax Records, House Democrats Say, Washington Post (Mar. 13, 2023) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... stigation/); Order, Trump v. Committee on Oversight and Accountability of the U.S. House of Representatives, et al., Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-01136-APM (D.D.C. July 5, 2023).

19 House Republicans Quietly Halt Inquiry into Trump’s Finances, New York Times (Mar. 13, 2023) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/13/us/po ... ation.html).

20 See Stipulated Agreement, attached as Exhibit A to Order, Donald J. Trump, et al. v. Committee on Oversight and Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives, et al., Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-01136-APM (D.D.C. Sept. 11, 2022).

21 Trump Owed Hidden Debt While in Office, Forbes (Dec. 4, 2022) (online at wwwforbes.com/sites/danalexander/2022/12/04/trump-owed-hidden-debt-while-in-office/).

22 The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 389 (Max Farrand ed., 1911) (Madison’s notes) (online at https://constitution.congress.gov/brows ... F_00020473).

23 This chart reflects charges that the Mazars records and public records show were incurred by foreign nations at the Trump International Hotels in Washington, D.C., and in Las Vegas. For charges incurred by foreign nations at Trump World Tower or Trump Tower (both in New York), which all pertain to real estate owned or rented by foreign governments or entities, this report uses common charges or rent payments reflected in records produced by Mazars or in public information to estimate total payments during former President Trump’s presidency. For example, for units in Trump World Tower owned by foreign governments or entities, the Mazars records cover only charges paid in 2018. However, when public records show that the same foreign governments or entities owned these units throughout the Trump presidency, this report uses the common (base) charges paid in 2018 to estimate the total of such charges paid by the specified foreign nations during the entire Trump presidency. Similarly, a public record reflects that the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China leased property at Trump Tower, New York with an annual base rent of $1.9 million starting in 2008 and continuing at least through the expiration of the lease in October 2019. This report estimates the total rent payments from February 2017 through October 2019 based on that annual base rent.

[admin]

Part 1 of 2

BACKGROUND: THE FOREIGN EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE, TRUMP’S BUSINESSES AND FOREIGN CONFLICTS, AND THE COMMITTEE’S INVESTIGATION

At the time of his election, Mr. Trump ran numerous businesses centered in the real estate and hospitality industries alongside his three adult children—Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric—who all played prominent roles in those businesses.24 Mr. Trump refused to divest from these business interests and claimed that “the president can’t have a conflict of interest,” registering a modern echo of the royalist credo that “the king can do no wrong.”25 This decision raised immediate concern that he would be prejudiced by foreign influence and would not fulfill his oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” including the categorical requirement in the Foreign Emoluments Clause that a president seek and obtain Congress’s permission before accepting any payment from a foreign state.26

The Foreign Emoluments Clause: “Sweeping and Unqualified”

Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution provides:

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.27

For decades, the DOJ has recognized that this prohibition is “sweeping and unqualified” and “directed against every kind of influence by foreign governments upon officers of the United States, based on our historic policies as a nation.”28 It has been well understood in our history that the Foreign Emoluments Clause prevents the president from accepting any profit, advantage, gain, or benefit derived from private commercial transactions with a foreign government unless Congress consents.29

The adoption of the Foreign Emoluments Clause reflected a defining and fundamental break from monarchy. In royal society, a king’s private hereditary and commercial interests were coextensive with the wealth of his kingdom. But in American Constitutional democracy, the elected president’s job is to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” and, accordingly, he or she is limited to a fixed presidential salary and may not collect any outside payments from foreign states or royalty.30

Thus, Article II of the Constitution, which defines the powers of the Executive Branch, gave the president significantly less authority to demand advice on personal matters than the English king possessed. Whereas George III could order his subjects on the Privy Council to assist in managing his personal landholdings based on their obligation to “advise for the King’s honour” and to “serve their ‘sovereign lord,’” George Washington had no comparable authority, but could only obtain cabinet opinions on public matters “relating to the Duties of their … Offices.”31

Moreover, the Framers emphasized that because the English king ruled for life, and because his wealth was closely bound up with that of his nation, he actually had a greater stake in the long-term interests of his kingdom, and hence, was less susceptible to foreign corruption than American presidents, who held office for a limited term, did not enjoy the same access to public wealth, and would be focused on their personal interests after their terms in office ended.32 This difference, in the Framers’ view, underscored the critical need for constitutional protection against foreign emoluments and the heightened risk that presidents of the new nation would act in their own financial interests rather than those of the American people.

Viewed in this historical context, Donald Trump’s shocking treatment throughout his presidency of the Foreign Emoluments Clause as a risible suggestion, rather than a foundational requirement of our democracy, threatened to undermine the rigorous separation of personal financial interests and official duties that the Framers deliberately crafted. Through his pervasive violations of the Clause, Trump in effect sought to govern as a get-rich-quick king, rather than an elected president acting in the exclusive fiduciary interest of the people.

As one federal court has observed, the Foreign Emoluments Clause “was unquestionably adopted against a background of profound concern on the part of the Framers over possible foreign influence upon the President (and, to be sure, upon other federal officials).”33 At the end of the American Revolution, the Founders feared that foreign government influence would corrupt the fledging American political experiment. In testament to the prominence of this fear, and in rejection of the traditional gift-giving customs of eighteenth-century European diplomacy, the Articles of Confederation—not known for their restrictive nature—prohibited the receipt of any “present, emolument, office, or title of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign State.”34

A decade later, at the Constitutional Convention, the delegates were “deeply concerned that foreign interests would try to use their wealth to tempt public servants and sway the foreign policy decisions of the new government.”35 For that reason, a similar anti-foreign corruption provision was added, without noted debate, to the Constitution.36 The Constitution’s drafters provided a single exception to this categorical prohibition against foreign government emoluments for cases in which explicit congressional consent is granted to allow a president to retain them.37 The retention of the Foreign Emoluments Clause by the Framers reflected their concern about the continuing risks of foreign corruption entangling high-ranking American officials. It is notably “one of the few phrases to make the jump from the Articles of Confederation to the Federal Constitution, and it did so despite being a difficult provision to follow.”38

The carve-out allowing emoluments from foreign states only when Congress grants approval underscores both the breadth and purpose of the Foreign Emoluments Clause. By submitting an emolument for congressional approval, an officeholder “brings transparency and accountability to transactions that might otherwise remain buried, forcing federal officeholders to examine their judgments and opening the entire arrangement to probing scrutiny.” 39 Congress must validate a transaction as not influencing a federal officeholder’s judgment, or else “must accept political responsibility for unleashing foreign money, with all its corrupting and corrosive influence, into the halls of federal power.”40 Further, the Clause is intended to reach not only clear instances of quid pro quo corruption, to which Congress would never rationally consent, but all transactions, including ostensible market transactions, through which a foreign government could subtly curry favor and ingratiate itself with any person holding an “Office of Profit or Trust.”41

Throughout the history of the Republic, both the Executive and Legislative Branches have strictly adhered to the spirit and letter of the Foreign Emoluments Clause. In 1830, President Andrew Jackson petitioned Congress to keep a gold medal presented to him by Colombian President Simón Bolívar. Congress rejected his request and required that the medal be “deposited in the Department of State.”42 In 1840, President Martin Van Buren personally refused multiple gifts from the Imam of Muscat, explaining that in doing so, he was observing a “fundamental law of the Republic which forbids its servants from accepting presents from foreign States or Princes.”43 President Van Buren wrote, “I deem it my duty to lay the proposition before Congress for such disposition as they may think fit to make of it.”44 Congress instructed him to give the items to the State Department or sell the items and give the proceeds to the U.S. Treasury.45 In 1862, during the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln informed Congress that the King of Siam had personally presented him with a ceremonial sword and two elephant tusks, amongst other favors.46 As beloved as Lincoln was to the Republican-controlled Congress, it ordered him to deposit the gifts with the Department of the Interior.47

In the modern age, the treatment of honors received by Presidents John F. Kennedy and Barack Obama from foreign nations once again confirmed the broad scope of the Foreign Emoluments Clause. In 1963, the Irish Government awarded President Kennedy honorary Irish citizenship. Reiterating the conclusion that the Foreign Emoluments Clause was “directed against every kind of influence by foreign governments upon officers of the United States, based on our historic policies as a nation,” the DOJ determined that acceptance “would fall within the spirit, if not the letter” of the Clause’s prohibition.48 President Kennedy declined the honor.49 In 2009, President Obama accepted the Nobel Peace Prize only after the DOJ determined that the selection process was independent from the influence of the Norwegian government. In reaching this conclusion, however, the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) once again affirmed that the Clause applies to the President because the “President surely ‘holds an Office of Profit or Trust.’”50 President Obama promptly donated the $1.4 million Nobel Prize money to charity.51

In advisory opinions issued during the modern era, the DOJ has broadly defined “emolument” as reaching the benefits, gains, or advantages that flow from transactional business relationships with foreign governments or entities, including private transactions.52 Moreover, federal district courts that addressed this issue in cases brought against then-President Trump have likewise concluded that the Clause reaches profits arising from private or “market” transactions.53 The opinions are consistent with the expansive language of the Clause, which refers to “any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever,” and also the Framers’ intent to protect against the possibility that foreign nations would propose personal business transactions with American federal officials to obtain preferential policy treatment from them.54

Former President Trump’s shocking departure from these deeply established and long-observed principles caused significant public controversy during his Administration. Although he never sought congressional permission to keep any of the millions of dollars he collected from foreign governments and foreign government-owned companies, the American public took notice of the rampant flow of funds to his businesses from these sources. The attorneys general of the District of Columbia and Maryland, Members of Congress, several public interest groups, and others brought or supported legal actions to try to stop these violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause. Ultimately, the lawsuits were never decided on the merits because the courts dismissed them on threshold procedural grounds, including that the parties lacked legal standing to sue or that the litigation became moot after Donald Trump left office.55

As one of those courts concluded with respect to former President Trump:

[S]ole or substantial ownership of a business that receives hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars a year in revenue from one of its hotel properties where foreign and domestic governments are known to stay (often with the express purpose of cultivating the President’s good graces) most definitely raises the potential for undue influence, and would be well within the contemplation of the [Foreign and Domestic Emoluments] Clauses.56

President Trump’s refusal to divest from his expansive business empire and corresponding refusal to stop doing business with foreign governments and royalty set up the likelihood of repeated breaches of the Foreign Emoluments Clause and a clash between his business interests and his obligations to the nation that existed throughout his Administration. Both the constitutional violations and the ethical conflicts of interest came to pass in strikingly swift, vivid, and nefarious ways.

Donald Trump’s Refusal to Divest from His Businesses Upon Entering Office and Resulting Foreign Conflicts

President Trump entered office with two primary sets of business assets particularly susceptible to foreign influence: his domestic business holdings, including hotels and real estate, which were positioned to reap revenues from foreign government or state-linked customers; and his business holdings abroad, which were also positioned to reap revenues while being directly subject to the regulation and oversight of foreign governments. As one federal appellate judge explained in one of the cases brought against former President Trump under the Emoluments Clause arising out of precisely this conflict:

Governments and their diplomats perceive it as crucial to their success in diplomacy with the United States to secure the personal goodwill of the President and avoid the risk of incurring his displeasure. The President’s favor is a lucrative prize for a foreign diplomat whose visits to our country often have the purpose of seeking some favorable action from the government which the President largely controls. … In addition, the President, according to the allegations of the complaint, has announced to the world his favoritism for nations that patronize his businesses. It follows with undeniable logic that the envoys of foreign nations, who are free to choose equivalent venues, will be strongly motivated to choose the President’s establishments, so as to advance their objective of currying the President’s favor, and to avoid the risk of displeasing him by choosing his competitors.57

This concern was borne out shortly after Mr. Trump’s election in 2016, when approximately 100 foreign diplomats from a range of foreign governments gathered at a promotional event for the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. As the Washington Post reported:

“Believe me, all the delegations will go there,” said one Middle Eastern diplomat who recently toured the hotel and booked an overseas visitor. The diplomat said many stayed away from the hotel before the election for fear of a “Clinton backlash,” but that now it’s the place to be seen.

In interviews with a dozen diplomats, many of whom declined to be named because they were not authorized to speak about anything related to the next U.S. president, some said spending money at Trump’s hotel is an easy, friendly gesture to the new president.

“Why wouldn’t I stay at his hotel blocks from the White House, so I can tell the new president, ‘I love your new hotel!’ Isn’t it rude to come to his city and say, ‘I am staying at your competitor?’” said one Asian diplomat.

Guests at the Trump hotel have begun parking themselves in the lobby, ordering expensive cocktails, hoping to see one of the Trump family members or the latest Cabinet pick. One foreign official hoped Trump, famous for the personal interest he takes in his businesses, might check the guest logs himself.58

Between Mr. Trump’s election and his assumption of office, both Republican and Democratic ethics experts urged Donald Trump to divest from his business holdings and place them in an independent blind trust to avoid the appearance of divided loyalties. One letter, signed by 29 such experts, issued a blunt warning:

As long as you continue to maintain ownership of The Trump Organization, no other steps that you take will prevent the serious conflicts of interest, appearance of conflicts, and Emoluments Clause problems that will exist throughout your presidency. In these circumstances, you cannot separate the presidency from your business enterprises.59

Donald Trump cavalierly ignored this warning. Instead, before entering office, Mr. Trump transferred nearly all of his business holdings, including the four properties discussed in this report, into the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust. This trust, however, was anything but independent. It was controlled by two trustees: Donald Trump Jr. and Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg. Although this structure created the illusion of separation between Mr. Trump and his business interests, in reality, President Trump retained effective control over, and the complete financial benefit of, his businesses.60

By its own terms, the “purpose of the Trust is to hold assets for the benefit of Donald J. Trump.”61 Mr. Trump Jr. and Mr. Weisselberg managed the Trust accordingly and could “distribute net income or principal to Donald J. Trump at his request.”62 President Trump was able to quietly draw down any money from his trust whenever he wanted as well as receive reports on any profit, or loss, on his businesses.63

For example, in 2019, the Committee obtained documents and testimony showing evidence that both President Trump and the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust reimbursed Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, for illegal campaign contributions.64 This information formed the core of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s April 2023 indictment of former President Donald Trump in the Supreme Court of New York State.65 Also in 2019, Mr. Cohen testified before the Oversight Committee that Mr. Trump inflated the value of his assets in statements to banks and insurers in order to obtain more advantageous terms for loans and insurance coverage, and in addition, that Mr. Trump provided deflated valuations to lower real estate taxes on certain assets.66 Mr. Cohen’s testimony led the New York State Attorney General to open an investigation of Mr. Trump and The Trump Organization that same year, and later bring the lawsuit in which Mr. Trump was found to have defrauded banks and insurers by providing these false valuations.67

Claimed Donation of “Profits” by The Trump Organization to the U.S. Treasury Did Not Avoid Trump’s Myriad Violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause

Several months into President Trump’s term, The Trump Organization issued a pamphlet describing its “voluntary directive to donate all profits from foreign governments’ patronage at our hotels and similar businesses during President Trump’s presidential term to the U.S. Treasury.”68 This “policy,” however, clearly failed to comply with the Constitution, which imposes a total ban on the receipt of any revenue from foreign governments—not just “profits”—absent congressional approval.

Because it was limited to “profits,” and did not extend to revenues generally, this policy was insufficient on its face to comply with the Foreign Emoluments Clause. The standard legal dictionary definition of “emolument,” as well as rulings by federal courts that have addressed the issue, make clear than an emolument includes “any benefit, gain, or advantage.”69 As one of those courts observed, this definition “essentially cover[s] anything of value.”70 By its own terms, The Trump Organization’s claimed donation of “profits” to Treasury, therefore, still allowed former President Trump to retain significant emoluments in the form of revenues, which its policy excluded from the funds designated for donation.

Moreover, the policy substantially limited the scope of “profits” it covered to those (1) “generated from foreign governments’ patronage from wholly-owned Properties,” and (2) “generated from management fees earned from managed hotels and condominium-hotels attributed to foreign governments’ patronage.”71 By excluding non-wholly owned and non-hotel Trump properties, the policy omitted potentially significant sums from the already truncated category of emoluments that it covered. For example, this report identifies more than $1 million in foreign emoluments paid to Trump World Tower in New York which fall outside the scope of The Trump Organization’s policy.

The policy further reserved the right of The Trump Organization to exclude from its calculation of profit “state-owned and state-controlled entities in industries such as aerospace and defense, banking, finance, healthcare, energy and others, which may not be reasonably identifiable as foreign government entities[.]”72

Finally, the policy expressly stated that The Trump Organization would not even attempt to identify all emoluments, claiming that complying with this constitutional requirement would be “impractical” and that “a policy that requires all guests to identify themselves would impede upon personal privacy and diminish the guest experience of our brand.”73 As such, under The Trump Organization’s policy, the only “profits” reported were those volunteered by foreign governments, and Trump-owned businesses never opened their books to allow review of their treatment of these payments. It is hard to imagine a more ludicrous and half-hearted approach to the categorical prohibition in the Constitution.

The significant benefit to former President Trump from revenues generally—regardless of any profits—is demonstrated by the precarious financial condition of the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., during his presidency. As Committee Democrats have previously reported, a review of financial documents regarding the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., provided by the General Services Administration (GSA) revealed that while President Trump claimed on required financial disclosures that he made $156 million in employment income from the hotel between 2016 and 2020, the hotel in fact lost more than $73 million during this period.74 Reflecting the serious financial problems at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., annual financial statements obtained by the Committee also reveal that one of President Trump’s holding companies, DJT Holdings LLC, injected tens of millions of dollars into the Trump International Hotel as loans, the vast majority of which were never repaid and were later converted to capital contributions. The hotel’s significant losses were due in part to the hotel’s fixed costs, including general and administrative expenses, sales and marketing expenses, and property operations and maintenance.75 Given that the hotel was operating at a significant loss, foreign government revenue would have helped to cover a portion of these fixed costs, even if alleged “profits” were donated.

[admin]

Part 2 of 2

Under the Trump Administration, Federal Agencies Acquiesced to President Trump’s Receipt of Unconstitutional Foreign Emoluments

In contravention of the Constitution’s explicit prohibition on a president’s receipt of foreign emoluments, federal agencies under the Trump Administration repeatedly acquiesced to former President Trump’s desire to continue profiting from his businesses while in office. One notable instance involved the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., which is located in the Old Post Office Pavilion—an historic building that has a lease overseen by the federal GSA. The contract for the lease included a provision specifying that “no … elected official of the Government of the United States … shall be admitted to any share or part of this Lease, or to any benefit that may arise there from.”76 Despite the clear language of this provision, the agency released a statement in March 2017 explaining that the agency had found that then-President Trump was in “full compliance” with the lease because his trust was a party to the lease rather than him personally.77 Some within GSA, however, were concerned that this position violated the Foreign Emoluments Clause, the Domestic Emoluments Clause, and the plain terms of the lease prohibiting elected officials from being leaseholders.78 These concerns were merited, and the GSA Inspector General later determined that “GSA’s decision-making process” regarding this matter “included serious shortcomings.” According to GSA’s Inspector General, GSA’s lawyers understood that President Trump’s continued interest in the Trump International Hotel “was a possible violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause” but nevertheless simply decided to “punt” and “not to address the issue.” As the Inspector General’s report succinctly stated, “GSA Ignored the Constitution.”79

Similarly, in 2017, the Department of State approved leases by foreign governments at Trump World Tower in New York—thereby creating a situation in which an agency overseen by the president directly sanctioned unconstitutional emoluments flowing to the president.80 It is unclear to what extent the State Department considered the Constitution before approving these leases. It is clear, however, that the President accepted these emoluments without seeking Congress’s approval in violation of the prohibition set forth in the Constitution.81

The Ownership Structure of Trump Properties Discussed in this Report

This report focuses on foreign spending and related conflicts in connection with three Trump properties for which Mazars produced records to the Committee:

• The Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.;
• The Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada; and
• The Trump World Tower at 845 United Nations Plaza in New York, New York.

In addition, the report discusses foreign spending at the Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue in New York, New York, as reflected in publicly available information.

As of 2020, the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust owned, either directly or indirectly, a sprawling web of 558 corporate entities, which together comprised The Trump Organization. Given the number of corporate entities, the four properties discussed in this report constituted less than 1% of the businesses Donald Trump owned while he was President. The Committee did not receive from Mazars any documents regarding at least 80% of Donald Trump’s business entities. For many other entities, Mazars produced only a single document. Accordingly, the Mazars records and publicly available information shed light on only a small fraction of these companies, leaving unknown the purpose and financial activities of hundreds of opaque entities under Mr. Trump’s control.82

Based on former President Trump’s required disclosures with the Office of Government Ethics for the years 2017 through 2020, following the transfer of his assets to the Trust, the four properties discussed in this report were owned either solely by the Trust, or co-owned by the Trust with Mr. Trump’s children or a Trump business associate, through various entities wholly or partially owned by Mr. Trump.83 As the charts below demonstrate, Mr. Trump and his family members owned each of these properties through a complex web of limited liability corporations and other entities.84 And as detailed in this report, through these intricate and opaque ownership structures, former President Trump received millions of dollars from foreign governments, foreign government-owned or -controlled entities, and individuals acting on behalf of them.

[x]
Trump International Hotel Washington D.C.

[x]
Trump International Hotel Las Vegas

[x]
Trump World Tower, 845 United Nations Plaza

[x]
Trump Tower Commercial Condominium Property, New York

The Committee’s Investigation

Days after the 2016 presidential election, Representative Elijah E. Cummings, then-Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (subsequently renamed the Committee on Oversight and Reform and then the Committee on Oversight and Accountability), expressed concerns that Mr. Trump’s business entanglements could threaten the accountability and transparency of the Executive Branch and threaten U.S. national security. Ranking Member Cummings wrote to then-Chairman Jason Chaffetz:

to request that the Oversight Committee immediately begin conducting a review of President-elect Donald Trump’s financial arrangements to ensure that he does not have any actual or perceived conflicts of interest and that he and his advisors comply with all legal and regulatory ethical requirements when he assumes the presidency.85

The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is charged by the House of Representatives with legislative and oversight jurisdiction over the federal civil service, including the Office of Government Ethics, which oversees the compliance of officers and employees of the United States with federal ethics laws and rules.86 Further, “the Committee on Oversight and Accountability may at any time conduct investigations of any matter.”87 Pursuant to these authorities, the Committee has examined the adequacy of existing ethics and financial disclosure laws and agency implementation to inform Congress’s consideration of proposed ethics reforms, including reforms specifically applicable to the President.88

In April 2017, the Republican-led Committee sent a bipartisan letter to The Trump Organization requesting documents and information about its processes for identifying payments from foreign governments and entities they control. The letter noted that a “Trump Organization spokesperson on March 17 announced that the company has developed a policy to identify foreign government customers and donate profits” but expressed concern that “details of the plan to donate profits derived from foreign government payments, however, are still unclear.”89 The letter requested documents and a meeting with Trump Organization officials to determine how the President intended to comply with the Constitution’s prohibition on foreign emoluments. In response to its letter, the Committee received the approximately 40-sentence pamphlet discussed above that detailed The Trump Organization’s “voluntary directive to donate all profits from foreign governments’ patronage at our hotels and similar businesses during President Trump’s presidential term to the U.S. Treasury.”90

In its letter enclosing the pamphlet, The Trump Organization stated that for several of the Committee’s specific document requests—including, among others, the Committee’s requests for documents regarding public reporting on donations to the U.S. Treasury made by The Trump Organization, whether donations would be claimed by The Trump Organization or by President Trump as tax deductions, and the specific entities within The Trump Organization that would be donating profits—“we believe it is premature to respond at this time insofar as final determinations regarding these matters are dependent on many factors that will not be known to TTO [The Trump Organization] until after the close of this year.”91

On May 24, 2017, observing the inadequacy of this response, Ranking Member Cummings sent a letter directly to George Sorial, Executive Vice President and Chief Compliance Counsel for The Trump Organization, renewing the Committee’s request for documents. He explained:

Complying with the United States Constitution is not an optional exercise, but a requirement for serving as our nation’s President. If President Trump believes that identifying all of the prohibited foreign emoluments he is currently receiving would be too challenging or would harm his business ventures, his options are to divest his ownership or submit a proposal to Congress to ask for our consent.92

As the Committee’s investigations progressed and The Trump Organization failed to provide responsive documents, Mazars, the former President’s accounting firm, was identified as a possible custodian of documents possessing information relevant to foreign government spending at Trump properties, as well as information concerning misleading disclosures by the President and information about various items of concern involving the lease and management of Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.93 On April 15, 2019, after a negotiation and consultation process, Chairman Cummings issued a subpoena to Mazars seeking several categories of documents, including all financial statements created by Mazars for President Trump and certain of his businesses for calendar years 2011 through 2018.94

President Trump objected to the production of these records by Mazars, and in April 2019 his personal attorneys sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to block Mazars from producing responsive documents.95 The Trump Organization argued that the Committee’s subpoena violated the separation of powers and lacked a valid legislative purpose. After the court declined to issue an injunction invalidating the Mazars subpoena, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed, the Supreme Court agreed to review the Court of Appeals’ ruling and granted a petition for a writ of certiorari.96

In July 2020—after 15 months of litigation—the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision upholding the Committee’s “broad and indispensable” power to conduct oversight of the Executive Branch and the President himself.97 The Justices held that Congress’s legislative authority includes the power to issue a subpoena “directed at the President’s personal information” and affirmed that “[w]hen Congress seeks information ‘needed for intelligent legislative action,’ it ‘unquestionably’ remains ‘the duty of all citizens to cooperate.’” The Court then held that courts must perform a “careful analysis” that takes account of the separation of powers among the branches of the federal government, including “both the significant legislative interests of Congress and the ‘unique position’ of the President.” The Court set forth four factors to guide the analysis for subpoenas issued to a sitting President and remanded to the lower courts to apply these factors to the subpoena issued by the Committee to Mazars.98

The matter returned to the District Court, which again upheld the Committee’s re-issued subpoena, but narrowed its reach to encompass only certain parties and certain years.99 The Court of Appeals, similarly, upheld the Committee’s subpoena under the newly minted Mazars standard but slightly narrowed its reach.100

On August 29, 2022, after the Committee’s successive court victories, The Trump Organization, the Committee, and Mazars reached a three-way agreement for Mazars to begin producing documents under the narrowed subpoena. The documents to be produced included:101

• Accounting records, source documents, and engagement letters from 2014–2017 that reference, indicate, or discuss any undisclosed, false, or otherwise inaccurate information about President Trump’s or a Trump entity’s reported assets, liabilities, or income;

• Associated communications from 2014–2018 related to potential concerns that information in [President Trump’s financial disclosures] was incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise unsatisfactory;

• All requested documents from November 2016–2018 belonging to Trump Old Post Office LLC [the business entity created to operate the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.];

• All documents from November 2016–2018 referencing, indicating, discussing, or otherwise relating to the Old Post Office lease; and

• All documents from 2017–2018 related to financial relationships, transactions, or ties between President Trump or a Trump entity and any foreign state or foreign state agency, the United States, any federal agency, any state or any state agency, or an individual government official.

Pursuant to this agreement, Mazars began producing documents to the Committee in September 2022, beginning with documents relating to the Old Post Office building in Washington, D.C., and The Trump Organization’s lease of that property, under which it operated the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.

Chairman Comer’s Termination of the Committee’s Subpoena

As discussed above, in January 2023, almost immediately after Republicans took the majority in the House of Representatives, the Committee, apparently acting through Donald Trump’s personal attorneys, informed Mazars that it no longer needed to comply with its obligation to produce additional documents under the subpoena. On January 19, 2023, a lawyer for Donald Trump wrote to Mazars’s counsel: “I do not know the status of Mazars [sic] production, but my understanding is that the Committee has no interest in forcing Mazars to complete it and is willing to release it from further obligations under the settlement agreement.”102 In communications with Mazars’s counsel, that attorney confirmed that the Acting General Counsel of the House of Representatives, in his capacity as counsel to the Committee, had so informed him.103

Chairman Comer effectively curtailed the Committee’s investigation just four months after Mazars had begun producing documents to the Committee. Although Committee Democrats had been, for years, trying to obtain former President Trump’s financial records from Mazars as part of one of the Committee’s most high-profile and heavily reported investigations, Chairman Comer claimed: “I honestly didn’t even know who or what Mazars was.”104 Notwithstanding his termination of the investigation shortly after the Committee began to receive responsive documents from Mazars, Chairman Comer complained that Democrats had been “‘investigating’ Trump for six years.”105

Chairman Comer’s decision to release Mazars from its obligation to produce records pursuant to the Committee’s subpoena only weeks after Committee Democrats began working with counsel for Mazars to identify documents showing payments from foreign entities has severely limited the Committee’s access to highly material and relevant information.106 Further, in working with Donald Trump’s attorneys to halt the production of documents only months after it started, Chairman Comer buried further evidence of former President Trump’s misconduct by depriving the Committee’s Democratic staff of the ability to work with Mazars to conduct further searches for responsive records, including any documents relating to Russia, South Korea, South Africa, and Brazil.

In June 2023, the Committee—under Chairman Comer’s direction—and the parties to the litigation filed a joint motion for dismissal and termination of the case. The District Court granted the motion on July 5, 2023, ending the litigation and the Court’s supervision of the parties’ agreement.107 In the face of mounting evidence that foreign governments sought to influence the Trump Administration by playing to President Trump’s financial interests, Chairman Comer and President Trump’s representatives appear to have acted in coordination to bury evidence of his misconduct.108

_______________

Notes:

24 Growing Up Trump, TIME (Aug. 11, 2015) (online at https://time.com/3990496/donald-trump-children/).

25 Donald Trump’s New York Times Interview: Full Transcript, New York Times (Nov. 23, 2016) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/23/us/po ... cript.html); Donald Trump’s Complex Businesses Bring Potential Conflicts of Interest, Wall Street Journal (Nov. 15, 2016) (online at http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trum ... 1479221276); Trump Could Run Afoul of This Obscure Constitutional Clause, CNBC (Nov. 23, 2016) (online at http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/21/trump-co ... clausehtml).

26 Id.; U.S. Constitution, Article II § 1, cl. 8.

27 U.S. Constitution, Article I, § 9, cl. 8. The Constitution also contains a Domestic Emoluments Clause which mandates that the “President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.” U.S. Constitution, Article II, § 1, cl. 7. In addition to violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause, the Mazars documents reveal a pattern of payments from domestic individuals, entities, and government agencies that raise significant potential conflicts of interest and potential violations of the Domestic Emoluments Clause through expenditures at Trump businesses, which will be the focus of a subsequent report.

28 Applicability of the Emoluments Clause to Non-Government Members of ACUS, 17 Op. O.L.C. 114 (1993) (online at http://www.justice.gov/file/20456/download); Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, Proposal That the President Accept Honorary Irish Citizenship, 1 Op. O.L.C. Supp. 278 (1963) (online at http://www.justice.gov/d9/olc/opinions/ ... 0278_0.pdf).

29 See, e.g., Brief of Amici Curiae by Certain Legal Historians on Behalf of Appellants, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington et al. v. Trump, No. 18-474 (2nd Cir. 2018) (online at http://guptawessler.com/wp-content/uplo ... -brief.pdf).  

30 U.S. Constitution, Article II, § 3.

31 Akhil Reed Amar, America’s Constitution: A Biography at 187 (2005).

32 See James Madison’s Version [18 June 1787], National Archives Founders Online (online at https://founders.archives.gov/documents ... -0098-0003); Republican Government, Records of the Federal Convention [1:134; Madison, 6 June 1787] (online at https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founder ... h4s12.html); Debates Which Arose In the House of Representatives of South Carolina on the Constitution Framed for the United States at 12 (1831) (online at https://books.google.com/books?id=f06Eh ... 22&f=false).

33 Dist. of Columbia v. Trump, 315 F. Supp.3d 875, 896 (D. Md. 2018) (citing Zephyr Teachout, Corruption in America: From Benjamin Franklin’s Snuff Box to Citizens United 1-5 (2014)).

34 Articles of Confederation, art VI, ¶ 1 (online at http://www.archives.gov/milestone-docum ... transcript); Dist. of Columbia v. Trump, 315 F. Supp.3d 875, 888-89 (D. Md. 2018) (citing Zephyr Teachout, Corruption in America: From Benjamin Franklin’s Snuff Box to Citizens United 1-5 (2014)).

35 Dist. of Columbia v. Trump, 315 F. Supp.3d at 896 (quoting Zephyr Teachout, The Anti-Corruption Principle, 94 Cornell L. Rev. 341, 361 (2009)) (online at https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi ... ontext=clr).

36 See The Emoluments Clauses and the Presidency: Background and Recent Developments, Congressional Research Service, at 2 (Nov. 5, 2019 (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45992) (citing The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 389 (Max Farrand ed., 1911)).

37 Deborah S. Sills, The Foreign Emoluments Clause: Protecting Our National Security Interests, 26 Brooklyn Works, Journal of Law & Policy 63, 70–71 (2018) (online at https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol26/iss1/2/).

38 Zephyr Teachout, Gifts, Offices, and Corruption, 107 Nw. U. L. Rev. 30, 39 (2012) (online at https://scholarlycommons.lawnorthwester ... ulr_online).

39 Norman L. Eisen, Richard Painter, and Laurence H. Tribe, The Emoluments Clause: Its Text, Meaning, and Application to Donald J. Trump, at 7, Brookings Governance Studies (Dec. 16, 2016) (online at http://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/upl ... lause1.pdf).

40 Id. (citing Zephyr Teachout, Gifts, Offices, and Corruption, 107 Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy 30, 36 (2012)).

41 Id.

42 Id.; Message from the President of the United States 3 (Jan. 22, 1834), in Message from the President of the United States to the Two Houses of Congress at the Commencement of the First Session of the Twenty-Third Congress 259 (1833).

43 Zephyr Teachout, Gifts, Offices, and Corruption, 107 Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy 30, 42 (2012) (citing 14 Abridgment of the Debates of Congress from 1789 to 1856 141 (Thomas Hart Benton ed., 1860)).

44 The American Presidency Project, Martin Van Buren, Special Message to Congress (online at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/200980) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023).

45 S.J. Res. 4, 26th Cong., 5 Stat. 409 (1840) (enacted).

46 Lincoln to Thai King: Thanks but No Thanks for the Elephants, State Journal-Register (Apr. 1, 2018) (online at http://www.sj-r.com/story/news/2018/04/ ... 849296007/).

47 See J. Res. 20, 37th Cong. (1862) (“A Resolution providing for the Custody of the Letter and Gifts from the King of Siam”). U.S. Senate, Party Division (online at http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/histor ... rtydiv.htm) (accessed Dec. 12, 2023); U.S. House of Representatives, Party Divisions of the House of Representatives, 1789 to Present (online at https://historyhouse.gov/Institution/Pa ... Divisions/) (accessed Dec. 12, 2023); White House, Abraham Lincoln The 16th President Of The United States (online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white- house/presidents/abraham-lincoln/) (accessed Dec. 13, 2023).

48 Proposal That the President Accept Honorary Irish Citizenship, 1 Op. O.L.C. Supp. 278 (1963) (online at http://www.justice.gov/d9/olc/opinions/ ... 0278_0.pdf).

49 Blumenthal, Dems to Sue Trump Over Emoluments Clause, New Haven Register (June 14, 2017) (online at wwwnhregister.com/connecticut/article/Blumenthal-Dems-to-sue-Trump-over-Emoluments-11313611.php).

50 Applicability of the Emoluments Clause and the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act to the President’s Receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize, 33 Op. O.L.C. 370, 374 (2009) (online at http://www.justice.gov/d9/opinions/atta ... -nobel.pdf). President Trump did not dispute that the Foreign Emoluments Clause applied to the President in litigation challenging his receipts of foreign payments that were dismissed on standing grounds. Dist. of Columbia v. Trump, 315 F. Supp. 3d 875, 880 (D. Md. 2018) (finding the Foreign Emoluments Clause applies to the President because amicus curiae raised issue); Blumenthal v. Trump, 373 F. Supp. 3d 191, 196 n.3 (D.D.C. 2019) (“The parties do not dispute that the [Foreign Emoluments] Clause applies to the President.”).

51 The White House, Press Release: The President Donates Nobel Prize Money to Charity (Mar. 11, 2010) (online at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/th ... ey-charity).

52 Applicability of Emoluments Clause to Proposed Service of Government Employee on Comm’n of Int’l Historians, 11 Op. O.L.C. 89, 90 (1987) (online at http://www.justice.gov/d9/olc/opinions/ ... 0089_0.pdf) (The Foreign Emoluments Clause encompasses “every kind of influence by foreign governments upon officers of the United States” due to its “expansive language and underlying purpose.”); Applicability of the Emoluments Clause to Non-Government Members of ACUS, 17 Op. O.L.C. 114 (1993) (online at http://www.justice.gov/file/20456/download) (finding that the Foreign Emoluments Clause does not permit a part-time federal officer to receive income, earned in market transactions, from a private business partnership that includes earnings from a foreign government client, even where the federal officer did not represent or interact with the foreign client); Memorandum for H. Gerald Staub, Office of Chief Counsel, NASA, from Samuel A. Alito, Jr. , Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, Re. Emoluments Clause Questions raised by NASA Scientist’s Proposed Consulting Arrangement with the University of New South Wales (May 23, 1986) (online at http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000158- ... 7f60920001) (concluding summarily that a “stipend or consulting fee from a foreign government would ordinarily be considered an ‘emolument’ within the meaning of the constitutional prohibition” even when the work was performed in the employee’s private business capacity).

53 Dist. of Columbia v. Trump, 315 F. Supp. 3d 875 (D. Md. 2018); Blumenthal v. Trump, 373 F. Supp. 3d 191 (D.D.C. 2019).

54 U.S. Constitution, Article I, § 9, cl. 8.

55 See Congressional Research Service, The Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution, at 2 (Jan. 27, 2021) (citing Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. Trump, No. 17-CV-458 (S.D.N.Y.); Dist. of Columbia v. Trump, No. 17-1596 (D. Md.); and Blumenthal v. Trump, No. 17-1154 (D.D.C.)) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11086).

56 Dist. of Columbia v. Trump, 315 F. Supp. 3d 875, 899 (D. Md. 2018).

57 Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. Trump, 971 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2020).

58 For Foreign Diplomats, Trump Hotel Is Place to Be, Washington Post (Nov. 18, 2016) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... story.html).

59 Ethics Advocates Warn Trump That He Needs to Do More to Divest from Family Business, Washington Post (Jan. 2, 2017) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post ... -business/). Then-Ranking Member Cummings hosted a forum in December 2016 with bipartisan ethics experts who addressed the unprecedented conflicts faced by then-President-Elect Trump. Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Democrats, Press Release: Cummings to Host Forum with Bipartisan Ethics Experts on Trump’s Conflicts of Interest (Dec. 13, 2016) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/ne ... licts-of-0).

60 Allen Weisselberg Resigned from the Top of The Trump Organization. So Who’s Running the Company Now?, Washington Post (July 21, 2021) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... ld-ivanka/). Donald Trump’s lawyer confirmed, from the beginning of his presidency, that his most profitable real estate holdings, including Trump Tower, Mar-a-Lago, and 40 Wall Street, were transferred into the Trust. It “Falls Short in Every Respect”: Ethics Experts Pan Trump’s Conflicts Plan, New York Times (Jan. 12, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017 ... teresthtml).

61 Certification of Trustee of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, at 161 (Feb. 10, 2017) (online at http://www.gsa.gov/cdnstatic/Contractin ... ersion.pdf).

62 Id.; See, e.g., Trust Records Show Trump Is Still Closely Tied to His Empire, New York Times (Feb. 3, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/us/po ... sinesshtml).

63 Trump Can Quietly Draw Money from Trust Whenever He Wants, New Documents Show, Washington Post (Apr. 3, 2017) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html).

64 Committee on Oversight and Reform, Press Release: New Information Revealed in Oversight Hearing with Michael Cohen (Feb. 27, 2019) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/ne ... hael-cohen); Committee on Oversight and Reform, Hearing with Michael Cohen, Former Attorney to President Donald Trump, 116th Cong, Transcript at 14, 21–22 (Feb. 27, 2019) (online at http://www.congress.gov/116/chrg/CHRG-1 ... g35230.pdf).

65 The Porn Star, The Checks and The President: Trump’s Tawdry Path to Peril, Washington Post (Mar. 21, 2023) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... -payments/); Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, Press Release: District Attorney Bragg Announces 34-Count Felony Indictment of Former President Donald J. Trump (Apr. 4, 2023) (online at https://manhattanda.org/district-attorn ... d-j-trump/).

66 Committee on Oversight and Reform, Hearing with Michael Cohen, Former Attorney to President Donald Trump, 116th Cong, Transcript at 13, 19, 37–39, 160 (Feb. 27, 2019) (online at http://www.congress.gov/116/chrg/CHRG-1 ... g35230.pdf).

67 Office of the New York State Attorney General, Press Release: Attorney General James Takes Action to Force Trump Organization to Comply with Ongoing Investigation Into Financial Dealings (Aug. 4, 202) (online at https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2020/at ... ly-ongoing); Trump Committed Fraud by Inflating His Assets, Judge Rules, Forbes (Sept. 26, 2023) (online at wwwforbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/09/26/trump-committed-fraud-by-inflating-his-assets-judge-rules).

68 Letter from Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to George A. Sorial, Executive Vice President and Chief Compliance Officer, Trump Organization (May 24, 2017) (online at https://oversightdemocratshouse.gov/sit ... zation.pdf); Trump Organization, Donation of Profits from Foreign Government Patronage (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... rofits.pdf).

69 Congressional Research Service, The Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution, at 1 (Jan. 27, 2021) (emphasis added) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11086) (citing Blumenthal v. Trump, 373 F. Supp.3d 191, 207 (D.D.C. 2019); Dist. of Columbia v. Trump, 315 F. Supp.3d 875,889 (D. Md. 2018);.

70 Dist. of Columbia v. Trump, 315 F. Supp.3d 875,889 (D. Md. 2018).

71 Letter from Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to George A. Sorial, Executive Vice President and Chief Compliance Officer, Trump Organization (May 24, 2017) (online at https://oversightdemocratshouse.gov/sit ... zation.pdf); Trump Organization, Donation of Profits from Foreign Government Patronage (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... rofits.pdf).

72 Id.

73 Id.

74 Letter from Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, Committee on Oversight and Reform, to Administrator Robin Carnahan, General Services Administration (Oct. 8, 2021) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... 0Lease.pdf).

75 Id.

76 Trump Leases His D.C. Hotel from a Government Agency He’ll Soon Be in Charge of, Washington Post (Nov. 15, 2016) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/postevery ... right-now/).

77 General Services Administration, Press Release: GSA Releases Statement on Old Post Office Lease (Mar. 23, 2017) (online at http://www.gsa.gov/about-us/newsroom/ne ... e-03232017).

78 General Services Administration, Office of the Inspector General, Evaluation of GSA’s Management and Administration of the Old Post Office Building Lease (italics in original) (JE19-002, Redacted) (Jan. 16, 2019) (online at http://www.gsaig.gov/sites/default/file ... dacted.pdf).

79 Id. (italics in original)

80 Exclusive: Foreign Government Leases at Trump World Tower Stir More Emoluments Concerns, Reuters (May 2, 2019) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-emoluments-exclusive/exclusive-foreign-government-leases-at-trump-world-tower-stir-more-emoluments-concerns-idUSKCN1S80PP).

81 Id.

82 Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed June 14, 2017) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2017.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed May 15, 2018) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2018.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed May 15, 2019) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21154683/trump- oge-2019.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed July 31, 2020) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... losure.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed Jan. 15, 2021) (online at https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presidenns ... %20278.pdf); see also Decision and Order, People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump et al., Index No. 452564/2022 at 32 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Sept. 26, 2023) (“Defendants do not dispute that DJT Holdings LLC and DJT Holdings Managing Member LLC are entities that sit at the top of the Trump Organization’s organizational chart and together own many of the Trump-affiliated entities that comprise the Trump Organization. DJT Holdings LLC owns 100% of the Trump Organization and DJT Holdings LLC owns 100% of the Trump Organization LLC.”) (online at http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... ness-fraud); Trump, His Children, and 500+ Potential Conflicts of Interest, Wall Street Journal (Jan. 19, 2017) (online at http://www.wsj.com/graphics/donald-trum ... -interest/); What Trump’s Disclosure of His 500 LLCs Can and Can’t Tell Us, NBC News (May 16, 2018) (online at wwwnbcnews.com/business/taxes/what-trump-s-disclosure-his-500-llcs-can-can-t-n874391).

83 Id.; Prepared from information contained in Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Reports filed by Donald J. Trump for the years 2017–2020.

84 Source: Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed June 14, 2017) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2017.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed May 15, 2018) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2018.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed May 15, 2019) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2019.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed July 31, 2020) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... losure.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed Jan. 15, 2021) (online at https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presidenns ... %20278.pdf).

85 Letter From Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to Chairman Jason Chaffetz, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... 003%29.pdf).

86 Rules of the House of Representatives, 118th Cong. (hereinafter “House Rules”) Rule X.1(n)(1); U.S. Office of Government Ethics, What We Do (online at http://www.oge.gov/web/ogensf/about_what-we-do) (accessed Dec. 18, 2023).

87 House Rules at Rule X,4(c)(2).

88 See, e.g., H.R. 1, For the People Act, 116th Cong. (2019); H.R. 745, Executive Branch Comprehensive Ethics Enforcement Act of 2019, 116th Cong. (2019); see also H.R. 5314, Protecting Our Democracy Act, 117th Cong. (2021).

89 Letter from Chairman Jason Chaffetz and Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to Sheri A. Dillon, Partner, Morgan Lewis (Apr. 21, 2017) (online at https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/ ... s-Plan.pdf).

90 Trump Org Says Singling Out Profits from Foreign Guests Is “Impractical,” Politico (May 24, 2017) (online at http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/2 ... sts-238771); Trump Organization, Donation of Profits from Foreign Government Patronage, Politico (May 24, 2017) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... rofits.pdf).

91 Letter from George A. Sorial, Executive Vice President and Chief Compliance Counsel, The Trump Organization, to Chairman Jason Chaffetz and Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (May 11, 2017) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... dacted.pdf).

92 Letter from Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to George A. Sorial, Executive Vice President and Chief Compliance Counsel, The Trump Organization (May 24, 2017) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... zation.pdf).

93 See Memorandum from Chairman Carolyn B. Maloney, Committee on Oversight and Reform, to Members of the Committee, Update on Committee Subpoena to Mazars and Subsequent Litigation (Aug. 26, 2020) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... 0%20R3.pdf).

94 See Memorandum from Chairman Elijah E. Cummings, Committee on Oversight and Reform, to Members of the Committee, Notice of Intent to Issue Subpoena to Mazars USA LLP, (Apr. 12, 2019) (online at http://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000016a- ... 5f319d0001).

95 Trump v. Committee on Oversight & Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives, 380 F. Supp.3d 75 (D.D.C. 2019). The plaintiffs’ complaint originally named then-Chairman Cummings and the Committee’s then- Chief Investigative Counsel, and Mazars as defendants, but following discussions with the Committee, the plaintiffs consented to the Committee’s intervention as a defendant and agreed to dismiss Chairman Cummings and the Chief Investigative Counsel from the action. See Id. at 88.

96 Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, 140 S. Ct. 660 (2019).

97 Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, 140 S. Ct. 2019 (2020). When the Supreme Court granted the petition, it consolidated the matter with Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, 943 F.3d 627 (2d Cir. 2019), another case involving a congressional subpoena for the President’s financial records.

98 Mazars, 140 S. Ct. at 2035–36. The four factors to be applied are: (1) “whether the asserted legislative purpose warrants the significant step of involving the President and his papers,” including consideration of the availability of other sources that would reasonably provide the information sought; (2) whether the subpoena is “no broader than reasonably necessary to support Congress’s legislative objective”; (3) whether the subpoena “advances a valid legislative purpose”; and (4) assessment of “the burdens imposed on the President by a subpoena.” Id.

99 Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, 560 F. Supp.3d 47 (D.D.C. 2021).

100 Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, 39 F.4th 775 (D.C. Cir. 2022).

101 See Stipulated Agreement, attached as Exhibit A to Order, Donald J. Trump, et al. v. Committee on Oversight and Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives, et al., Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-01136-APM (D.D.C. Sept. 11, 2022).

102 Email from Patrick Strawbridge, Consovoy McCarthy PLLC, on behalf of Donald Trump, to Counsel for Mazars USA LLP, (Jan. 19, 2023); Letter from Ranking Member Jamie Raskin to Chairman James Comer, Committee on Oversight and Accountability (Mar. 12, 2023) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... bpoena.pdf); Comer Stymies Probe into Trump Tax Records, House Democrats Say, Washington Post (Mar. 13, 2023) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... stigation/).

103 Email from Patrick Strawbridge, Consovoy McCarthy PLLC, on behalf of Donald Trump, to Counsel for Mazars USA LLP, (Jan. 20, 2023). After receiving these communications, Minority staff repeatedly sought written confirmation from Mazars that Chairman Comer had agreed to release it from its obligations under the subpoena and court-supervised settlement agreement. See also Letter from Ranking Member Jamie Raskin to Chairman James Comer, Committee on Oversight and Accountability (Mar. 12, 2023) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... bpoena.pdf); Comer Stymies Probe Into Trump Tax Records, House Democrats Say, Washington Post (Mar. 13, 2023) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... stigation/).

104 House Republicans Quietly Halt Inquiry into Trump’s Finances, New York Times (Mar. 13, 2023) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/13/us/po ... ation.html).

105 Id.

106 For details on Chairman Comer’s efforts to obstruct inquiries into former President Trump’s conduct, see Letter from Ranking Member Jamie Raskin, Committee on Oversight and Accountability, to Chairman James Comer, Committee on Oversight and Accountability (Mar. 12, 2023) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... bpoena.pdf).

107 See Order, Trump v. Committee on Oversight and Accountability of the U.S. House of Representatives, et al., Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-01136-APM (D.D.C. July 5, 2023).

108 Letter from Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, Committee on Oversight and Reform, to Debra Steidel Wall, Acting Archivist of the United States, National Archives and Records Administration (Nov. 14, 2022) (online at https://oversightdemocratshouse.gov/sit ... 20Docs.pdf).

[admin]

Part 1 of 2

PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

The Committee’s Democratic staff has documented more than $5.5 million in spending at Trump-owned properties during former President Trump’s time in office by the government of the People’s Republic of China (P.R.C.), as well as by the state-owned Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) and Hainan Airlines Holding Company, a Chinese state-owned airline. Former President Trump violated the Constitution when the businesses he owned accepted these emoluments paid by the P.R.C. without the consent of Congress. Critically, these figures are based on the limited records from Mazars that are available to the Committee and on a public record maintained by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). As such, these emoluments represent the minimum amount of unconstitutional payments from the government of the P.R.C. and state-owned entities that Trump-owned businesses accepted during former President Trump’s term.

This report also discusses former President Trump’s recent disclosures regarding a sprawling trademark portfolio that the government of the P.R.C. enlarged during President Trump’s term. Although Mr. Trump was required to complete a financial disclosure form each year that he was in office, he “neglected to include hundreds of trademarks he owns” on these forms during his presidency.119 As Business Insider noted: “The belated disclosures mean that Americans had little insight into the scope of Trump’s foreign asset holdings during his presidency, and are only learning about them as he runs for a second term in the 2024 election.”120 Notably, if not surprisingly, the ability of Trump family businesses to secure trademarks in China improved markedly and rapidly after Trump entered office.121

Finally, the documents provided by Mazars also record expenditures at Trump-owned properties by two Chinese companies that are closely aligned with the P.R.C.: Huawei; and Hongkong Huaxin Petroleum Unlimited, a subsidiary of CEFC China Energy (CEFC). While the government of the P.R.C. has been linked with both Huawei and CEFC, given the opacity and convoluted ownership and financing arrangements of these companies, this report does not classify their expenditures among the emoluments paid by the P.R.C. to Trump-owned businesses. However, the receipt by former President Trump’s businesses of expenditures from these entities while Mr. Trump was in office created conflicts of interest.

People’s Republic of China’s Emolument Spending at Trump Properties

Date / Location / Expenditure / Amount

August 27, 2017
Trump International Hotel
(Washington, D.C.)
Embassy of China Delegation
$19,391122
November 4, 2016—January 1, 2018
Trump International Hotel
(Las Vegas, NV)
“Hainan Airlines Holding Company Li”
$195,662123
February 2017—October 31, 2019
Trump Tower
(New York, NY)
Industrial and Commercial Bank of China
$1,948,180124
(annual due from 2012 through October 31, 2019)
$5,357,495
(February 2017 through October 31, 2019)
EMOLUMENTS PAID BY P.R.C.
(2017–2020)
$5,572,548

As a candidate, Donald Trump accused China of stealing U.S. jobs, orchestrating “the greatest theft in the history of the world,” and “raping” the United States with its trade policy.125 In office, however, President Trump’s public rhetoric and engagement with the P.R.C. initially softened. While then-President Trump’s policies toward the P.R.C. were frequently inconsistent, they repeatedly deviated from the combative approach he articulated when he “made China-bashing a pillar of his 2016 campaign.”126 According to John Bolton—who served as Mr. Trump’s National Security Advisor from April 2018 through September 2019—Mr. Trump “commingled the personal and the national not just on trade questions but across the whole field of national security.”127 Axios also observed that “Trump-era China policy often featured two separate tracks: policies Trump personally led, and policies spearheaded by officials with China expertise.”128

From April through September 2017, then-President Trump engaged in meetings with the P.R.C.’s President, Xi Jinping, regarding bilateral trade and threats from North Korea. Despite the P.R.C.’s reluctance to pressure North Korea to halt its ballistic missile program and denuclearize, then-President Trump repeatedly lauded his relationship with President Xi.

Shortly after taking office, then-President Trump hosted President Xi for two days of talks in April 2017 at his Florida residence in Mar-a-Lago, where he cited “tremendous progress” in the U.S.-China relationship and characterized his personal relationship with President Xi at the time as “outstanding.”129 One commentator observed about this meeting that it seemed to be “built upon the assumption that personal chemistry would compel Xi to override his national interests.”130

In an October 2017 television interview, then-President Trump remarked about his relationship with President Xi, stating, “we have a very good relationship and that’s a positive thing.”131 President Trump’s remarks came shortly after President Xi’s opening speech at the start of his fifth term as President in which he expressed support for China moving “closer to the center stage” and expanding its economic dominance in contrast to Western values.132

From November 8 to November 10, 2017—after the Chinese Embassy had spent at least $19,391 as an advance deposit for a stay beginning in late August 2017 at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.—then-President Trump traveled to China where he lavished praise on President Xi and, notably, defended Chinese trade practices in stark contrast to his previous public pronouncements blaming China’s policies for the U.S.-China trade imbalance.133 Then-President Trump complimented President Xi, stating, “My feeling toward you is an incredibly warm one.”134 Trump also stated that he did not “blame China” for the trade deficit between the two countries, declaring, “[a]fter all, who can blame a country for being able to take advantage of another country for the benefit of its citizens? I give China great credit.”135

The next year, however, then-President Trump launched a trade war against China as part of a broad protectionist economic policy and trade strategy. According to commentators at Brookings, “Between July 2018 and August 2019, the United States announced plans to impose tariffs on more than $550 billion of Chinese products, and China retaliated by imposing tariffs on more than $185 billion worth of U.S. goods.”136 The two countries reached a “Phase One” tentative deal to reduce trade tensions in January 2020.137 Ultimately, however, according to one analyst, “China actually bought none of the additional $200 billion of exports that it promised in the agreement.”138 According to a January 2021 report from the U.S.-China Business Council, a nonpartisan association of more than 270 American companies that do business with China, “Tariff rates remain[ed] at a multi-decade high despite both countries reaching a phase one trade agreement in early 2020.”139 The report found that the trade war with China “reduced US economic growth and employment, resulting in an estimated peak loss of 245,000 jobs” and “failed to achieve major policy goals outlined by the Trump administration.”140 And yet, amid what became a tense trade conflict, Mr. Trump inexplicably took positions favorable to specific Chinese interests as discussed below.

Dismissing Concerns About Chinese Government Human Rights Abuses

During his Administration, former President Trump repeatedly dismissed concerns about the human rights abuses perpetrated by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). During a June 2019 phone call, then-President Trump reportedly promised President Xi that, while trade negotiations continued, the United States would refrain from criticizing China over its brutal police crackdown against pro-democracy, pro-independence dissenters in Hong Kong.141 Shortly thereafter, President Trump said he believed that President Xi had acted “very responsibly” with respect to the “riots” in Hong Kong—adopting the Chinese government’s dubious vernacular to describe the pro-democracy protests in that country.142

According to former National Security Advisor Bolton, in June 2019 at the G-20 Summit, President Trump told President Xi that Xi should move forward with building camps to detain Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang, “which Trump thought was exactly the right thing to do.”143

Emoluments Paid by the P.R.C. to Trump-Owned Businesses

According to a document produced to the Committee by Mazars, an “Embassy of China Delegation” made an advance deposit of $19,391 to the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., for an “Arrival” date of August 27, 2017.144 The advance deposit ledger does not specify an end date to the planned stay.145 The advance deposits recorded in the Mazars documents produced to the Committee likely comprise only a fraction of the funds ultimately expended for a stay or event. Because Chairman Comer allowed Mazars to terminate its production of responsive documents, the Committee is unable to determine the total spending by the Embassy of China Delegation for this stay or the length of its duration.

Chinese State Emolument Spending at Trump Properties: Hainan Airlines Holding Company

Hainan Airlines (also referred to as Hainan Airlines Holding Company), China’s fourth-biggest carrier, is a widely recognized Chinese state-owned enterprise.146 Hainan Airlines and its
affiliates, Grand China Air and HNA Group, are all enterprises controlled by the provincial government of Hainan through its investment arm, Hainan Development Holdings.147

In 2015, Chinese state-owned banks supplied Hainan Airlines’ affiliate HNA Group with billions of dollars in cheap loans and a $67.4 billion line of credit.148 HNA Group employed these cheap loans to embark on a Chinese government-encouraged campaign of overseas investment in Western Europe and the United States.

According to documents Mazars produced to the Committee, Hainan Airlines began what was apparently a 14-month stay at the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada, on November 4, 2016—four days before the 2016 Presidential election.149 At the time, its affiliate HNA Group, faced increasing scrutiny from U.S. federal regulators due to the Group’s opaque ownership structure and ties to the Chinese state apparatus.150

As it sought to expand its portfolio in the United States, HNA Group launched a lobbying campaign to improve its image in Washington, D.C., and secure U.S. government approval of its targeted acquisitions. After Mr. Trump won the 2016 election and began his term as President, and as HNA Group was patronizing the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas, senior executives enjoyed access to high-level Trump Administration officials. In early June 2017, HNA Group executives met with then-Vice President Mike Pence at a public dinner in Washington, D.C. On June 19, 2017, HNA Group’s then-CEO and Vice Chairman met with then-Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, the head of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), while several HNA Group acquisitions were undergoing review by CFIUS.151 HNA Group executives reportedly met with additional Treasury officials with authority over CFIUS later that month.152

These efforts, however, failed to address CFIUS’s concerns about HNA’s threat to national security, and consequently, several prospective deals fell through. HNA Group’s proposed acquisition of future Trump advisor Anthony Scaramucci’s investment firm, SkyBridge Capital, failed a review by CFIUS because HNA Group reportedly did not make sufficiently clear who owned the company during the regulatory review.153 Further, in August 2018, citing national security concerns, CFIUS ordered HNA Group to sell its controlling stake in a New York City building just blocks from Trump Tower, in part because the HNA building housed a New York Police Department precinct with officers who protected Trump Tower and then-President Trump.154

On November 12, 2020—after the 2020 Presidential election but before President Trump left office—then-President Trump issued Executive Order 13959, Addressing the Threat from Securities Investments That Finance Communist Chinese Military Companies (CCMC), which prohibited investments by U.S. citizens in companies that benefit the CCP.155 On January 14, 2021—just six days before President Trump left office—the State Department published a list of identified CCMCs, including Grand China Air, a major shareholder of Hainan Airlines alongside HNA Group.156

By the end of then-President Trump’s term, HNA Group had been directly seized by the Hainan provincial government, which initiated a restructuring plan following a debt-financed $50 billion international spending spree.157 The Chinese government reportedly restructured HNA Group’s “debt and aligned investments with state goals, established state trusteeship, and transferred assets to state investors.”158

Total Hainan Emoluments

Between November 4, 2016—four days before the 2016 presidential election—and January 1, 2018, “Hainan Airlines Holding Company Li[mited]” (Hainan Airlines) incurred $195,662 in charges at the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas for what appears to have been an astonishing 14-month stay.159

[x]
TRUMP INTERNATIONAL LAS VEGAS, NA GUEST LEDGER DETAIL

The documents in the Committee’s possession record Hainan Airlines’ arrival date, departure date, and “other charges.” They do not specify the exact services rendered to Hainan Airlines (such as food service or other services typically provided to a hotel guest) over the 14-month period of the Hainan Airlines booking—or precisely when they were provided within this time frame. Mazars confirmed to the Committee’s Democratic staff that after performing a diligent search, it had no further documentation on Hainan Airlines or HNA Group in its records, suggesting that The Trump Organization may not have turned over all of the documents associated with these charges. In any event, the charges incurred by Hainan Airlines constitute the largest single expense, by a significant amount, reflected on either of the two ledgers produced to the Committee by Mazars regarding the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas.

Chinese State Emolument Spending at Trump Properties: ICBC

ICBC is “one of China’s biggest state-owned commercial banks.”160 Prior to October 2005, ICBC was “wholly-state-owned” by the P.R.C.161 Following State Council approval on October 28, 2005, ICBC was “restructured and incorporated as a joint-stock limited company.”162 As of December 2023, the bank’s controlling shareholders are the P.R.C.’s Ministry of Finance and the Central Hujin Investment Company—an investment firm owned by China’s central bank.163

While campaigning for the presidency in 2016, then-candidate Trump repeatedly boasted of his business dealings with ICBC, whose U.S. headquarters were located in Trump Tower in New York. For example, in his June 2015 campaign announcement speech at Trump Tower, he stated: “I love China! The biggest bank in the world is from China. You know where their United States headquarters is located? In this building, in Trump Tower.”164

Similarly, in March 2016, when asked about China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea, Trump stated, “I do deals with them all the time. … The largest bank in the world, 400 million customers, is a tenant of mine in New York, in Manhattan.”165 According to Bloomberg News, ICBC was “one of Trump Tower’s largest office tenants,” with “space on three floors,” a “bank branch,” and “about 100 employees.”166 Bloomberg News also reported that, “[a]s of September 2012, ICBC paid $95.48 per square foot for its Trump Tower space, more than any other major office tenant in the tower.”167

As ICBC made significant payments to then-President Trump’s businesses in the first year of his presidency, the bank came under scrutiny for conducting financial transactions for front companies funneling money to the North Korean regime, including the country’s sanctioned nuclear program. In 2016, the DOJ alleged that ICBC, among other Chinese financial institutions, had provided bank accounts for a “Chinese company that allegedly conspired with a North Korean bank to evade U.S. sanctions.”168 In mid-2017, in the face of widespread evidence that large Chinese banks had worked with North Korean front companies, the Trump Administration reportedly weighed sanctions against several major Chinese banks that had facilitated North Korean financial activity in the United States.169

In September 2017, the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Republican Chairman, Representative Edward R. Royce, released a statement calling on the Administration to “apply maximum financial and diplomatic pressure” to stop the North Korean nuclear program, including by “targeting more Chinese banks that do business with North Korea—with or without Beijing’s cooperation.”170 Despite these pleas from members of his own party, then-President Trump and his Administration did not take any formal action against Trump Tower tenant ICBC.171

In the midst of the ongoing controversy, the bank’s lease at Trump Tower neared its expiration on October 31, 2019, and the bank was considering whether to exercise its optional renewal clause.172 In an interview at a financial conference held earlier that month, Eric Trump explained that he could not simply “kick” out this controversial tenant if they decided to exercise their five-year option to renew.173

Eric Trump and The Trump Organization provided only vague statements regarding the ICBC tenancy. Eric Trump said that while ICBC had decided to keep “a couple of floors” in Trump Tower, it had agreed to lease a much larger New York office space in another building.174 A Trump Organization spokesperson later offered that ICBC had “exited the vast majority of their space in Trump Tower,” in a transaction Forbes described as “somewhat murky.”175 However, in a notable development, earlier this year, Forbes reported that ICBC “suddenly” departed Trump Tower shortly after former President Trump left office “in the first half of 2021 and less than two years after the bank exercised what Eric Trump . . . described as a five year extension.”176

_______________

Notes:

119 Trump Waited Until After He Left Office to Disclose Trademarks He Owns in China and Russia, Business Insider (Nov. 3, 2023) (online at http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-di ... cy-2023-10). Business Insider pointed out that the countries where former President Trump “owns trademarks includes China, Venezuela, Iran, Cuba, Belarus, and other countries heavily sanctioned by the United States.” Mr. Trump amended his 2023 disclosure to remove a trademark he had listed that was issued by Saudi Arabia.  

120 Id.; Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed Aug. 14, 2023) (Part 1 online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-con ... -14-23.pdf) (Part 2 online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-con ... -14-23.pdf) (Part 3 online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-con ... -14-23.pdf) (Part 4 http://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-con ... -14-23.pdf).  

121 Donald Trump filed trademark applications in China beginning in 2006. From the time he announced his candidacy for the presidency in 2015 through 2019, roughly 200 trademark applications by Donald Trump and Ivanka Trump were pending in China. Center for American Progress, Trump’s Conflicts of Interest in China (June 14, 2017) (online at http://www.americanprogress.org/article ... est-china/); Trump Trademark Applications Spiked Around the World When He Started Running for President, CNBC (Dec. 4, 2019) (online at http://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/04/trump-ac ... sidenthtml).

122 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00021348.  

123 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027206.  

124 Securities and Exchange Commission, Free Writing Prospectus Structural and Collateral Term Sheet (Sept. 12, 2012) (online at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/ ... 90/fwp.htm).  

125 Donald Trump Calls China’s Trade Practice the “Greatest Theft in the World,” ABC News (May 2, 2016) (online at https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald- ... d=38812125).  

126 Trump Promised to Bring China to Heel. He Didn’t and the Result is a Pitched Conflict Between the World’s Two Major Powers., Washington Post (Oct. 11, 2020) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... _storyhtml).  

127 John Bolton Book: Trump Asked China for Help with 2020 Election, Offered Personal Favors to Dictators, CNBC (June 17, 2020) (online at http://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/17/john-bol ... ectionhtml).  

128 Special Report: Trump’s U.S.-China Transformation, Axios (Jan. 19, 2021) (online at http://www.axios.com/2021/01/19/trump-c ... ial-report).  

129 The White House, Remarks by President Trump After Meeting with President Xi of China (Apr. 7, 2017) (online at https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/br ... -xi-china/).  

130 Trump Promised to Bring China to Heel. He Didn’t and the Result is a Pitched Conflict Between the World’s Two Major Powers., Washington Post (Oct. 11, 2020) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... _storyhtml).  

131 President Trump: Some Call Xi Jinping the “King of China,” TIME (Oct. 26, 2017) (online at https://time.com/4998720/donald-trump-k ... i-jinping/).  

132 Xi Jinping’s Marathon Speech: Five Takeaways, New York Times (Oct. 18, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/18/world ... gress.html).  

133 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00021348. The records provided to the Committee by Mazars do not indicate the dates or total length of the stay or whether the Chinese government expended more than the amount provided in the advance deposit. See Trump China Visit: U.S. Leader Strikes Warmer Tone with Xi Jinping, BBC (Nov. 9, 2017) (online at http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-41924228); In Beijing, Trump Declines to Hit President Xi Jinping on Trade: “I Don’t Blame China,” Washington Post (Nov. 9, 2017) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post ... ween-them/).  

134 Trump Heaps Praise on “Very Special” Xi in China Visit, Reuters (Nov. 9, 2017) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/us-trump-asia-china-bromance/trump-heaps-praise-on-very-special-xi-in-china-visitidUSKBN1D91C8).  

135 Trump, Once Critical from Afar, Gives China a Pass in Trade War, NBC News (Nov. 8, 2018) (online at http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/trump ... -u-n819221).  

136 Ryan Hass and Abraham Denmark, More Pain Than Gain: How the US-China Trade War Hurt America, Brookings (Aug. 7, 2020) (online at http://www.brookings.edu/articles/more- ... t-america/).  

137 Id.  

138 China Promised Trump a Better Deal for America; It Didn’t Actually Deliver, NPR (Feb.15, 2022) (online at http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2022/ ... ly-deliver) (italics in original text).  

139 US-China Business Council, The US-China Economic Relationship a Crucial Partnership at a Critical Juncture (Jan. 2021) (online at http://www.uschina.org/sites/default/fi ... ncture.pdf); US-China Business Council, About the US-China Business Council (online at http://www.uschina.org/about) (accessed Nov. 8, 2023).  

140 US-China Business Council, The US-China Economic Relationship a Crucial Partnership at a Critical Juncture (Jan. 2021) (online at http://www.uschina.org/sites/default/fi ... ncture.pdf).

141 Trump Promised Xi U.S. Silence on Hong Kong Democracy Protests as Trade Talks Stalled, CNN (Oct. 4, 2019 (online at http://www.cnn.com/2019/10/04/politics/ ... /indexhtml). See also Council on Foreign Relations, Hong Kong’s Freedoms: What China Promised and How It’s Cracking Down (May 19, 2022) (online at http://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/hong-ko ... -title-0-5).  

142 Trump Says China’s Xi Has Acted Responsibly on Hong Kong Protests, Reuters (July 22, 2019) (online at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-t ... KCN1UH20Q/); Did the U.S. President Greenlight a Potential Chinese Crackdown in Hong Kong?, Washington Post (Aug. 6, 2019) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... hong-kong/).  

143 Bolton Book Bombshells: Trump Asked China’s Xi for Reelection Help and Told Him to Keep Building Concentration Camps, CNN (June 18, 2020) (online at http://www.cnn.com/2020/06/17/politics/ ... /indexhtml).  

144 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00021348.  

145 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008041. The Committee had not received a guest ledger for August 2017 for the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., before Chairman Comer released Mazars from producing documents responsive to the Committee’s subpoena.  

146 International Civil Aviation Organization, List of Government-Owned and Privatized Airlines (online at http://www.icao.int/sustainability/Site ... zation.pdf) (accessed Dec. 7, 2023); Hainan Airlines Says Govt Is Controlling Shareholder Now, But Change Possible, Reuters (May 17, 2018) (online at http://www.reuters.com/article/china-ha ... L3N1SO3E4/).

147 Id.; Hainan Airlines Co., Ltd., 2010 Annual Report (2010) (online at wwwhainanairlines.com/go/Annual_Report/en/2010AnnualReport_EN.pdf?v=2013.8-2); Hainan Airlines Co., Ltd., Financial Statements and Report of the Auditors for the Year Ended 31 December 2014 (2014) (online at wwwhainanairlines.com/go/Annual_Report/en/2014AnnualReport_EN.pdf?v=2013.8-2). See also Hainan Airlines, Hainan Airlines Co., Ltd., 2016 Annual Report, at Page 3 (2016) (online at wwwhnair.com/guanyuhaihang/tzzgx/cwbg/201905/P020190522481912759332.pdf) (language translates to: “Actual controller of the company/actual controller/Hainan Provincial State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission refers to Hainan Provincial Government State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission”); Hainan Airlines, Hainan Airlines Co., Ltd., 2017 Annual Report, at Page 4 (2017) (online at http://www.hnair.com/guanyuhaihang/tzzg ... 475417.pdf) (language translates to: “The actual controller of the company/actual controller/Hainan Provincial State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission refers to the Hainan Provincial Government State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission”); Hainan Airlines, Hainan Airlines Co., Ltd., 2018 Annual Report, at Page 5 (2018) (online at http://www.hnair.com/guanyuhaihang/tzzg ... 759332.pdf) (language translates to: “Actual controller of the company/actual Controller/Hainan Provincial State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission” and “Refers to the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the Hainan Provincial Government.”).  

148 Id.  

149 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE-00027206.  

150 U.S. Is Expanding Power to Block Chinese Firms. HNA Was Already No Match, New York Times (Aug. 2, 2018) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2018/08/02/business/hna-group-skybridge-scaramucci.html).  

151 See also HNA Group, Press Release: HNA Group Joins the Atlantic Council, PR Newswire (June 7, 2017) (online at http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases ... 70430.html); Department of the Treasury, Secretary Mnuchin’s Calendar February 2017 – June 2017 (online at https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/ ... -FINAL.pdf) (accessed Nov. 29, 2023).  

152 U.S. Is Expanding Power to Block Chinese Firms. HNA Was Already No Match, New York Times (Aug. 2, 2018) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2018/08/02/business/hna-group-skybridge-scaramucci.html).  

153 Id.  

154 U.S. Orders Chinese Company to Sell Manhattan Building Near Trump Tower, Wall Street Journal (Aug. 10, 2018) (online at http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-orders- ... 1533917797).  

155 Exec. Order No. 13959, 85 Fed. Reg. 73185 (Nov. 17, 2020).  

156 Department of State, Communist Chinese Military Companies Listed Under E.O. 13959 Have More Than 1,100 Subsidiaries (Jan. 14, 2021) (online at https://2017-2021.state.gov/communist-c ... sidiaries/).  

157 Chinese Officials Are Taking Control of Troubled Airline Operator HNA, CNN (Mar. 2, 2020) (online at https://cnn.com/2020/03/02/business/hna ... /indexhtml); HNA Restructuring Advances $5.7BN Airline Funding, Nikkei Asia (Sept. 28, 2021) (online at https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Market ... ne-funding).  

158 Congressional Research Service, Evergrande Group and China’s Debt Challenges (Oct. 21, 2021) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product ... /IF11953/2).

159 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027206. The estimated payments made through Hainan Airlines’ stay at Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas are derived from the charge labeled “Other Charges,” which is the sum of two charges labeled “Credit” and “Balance.” HNA may have incurred additional charges outside of the limited period for which the Committee has records.  

160 Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd.: Company Background, Nikkei Asia (online at https://asia.nikkei.com/Companies/Indus ... -China-Ltd) (accessed Dec. 7, 2023).  

161 Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Annual Report 2016 (2016) (online at http://v.icbc.com.cn/userfiles/Resource ... 170421.pdf).  

162 Id.  

163 Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, FAQs (online at http://www.icbc-ltd.com/ICBCLtd/Investo ... ices/FAQs/) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023); Congressional Research Service, China’s Sovereign Wealth Fund: Developments and Policy Implications [Archived] (Sept. 23, 2010) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R41441/2).

164 Trump’s Comments After Not Attacking Nike Raise Even More Questions, Washington Post (Sept. 5, 2018) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/poli ... questions/).  

165 When Chinese Bank’s Trump Lease Ends, Potential Conflict Begins, Bloomberg (Nov. 28, 2016) (online at http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... g-his-term).  

166 China’s Biggest Bank to Reduce Its Space at Trump Tower, Bloomberg News (Jan. 9, 2019) (online at http://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/china-s-bigg ... -1.1195744).  

167 Id.  

168 Trump Administration Weighed Sanctions Against Major Chinese Banks Tied to North Korea, Washington Post (Mar. 2, 2018) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... story.html). The DOJ brought a civil forfeiture action as to the proceeds in the relevant Chinese banks, including ICBC, but did not allege wrongdoing against those banks. See Department of Justice, Press Release: Four Chinese Nationals and China-Based Company Charged with Using Front Companies to Evade U.S. Sanctions Targeting North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons and Ballistic Missile Programs (Sept. 26, 2016) (online at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/four-chin ... s-evade-us); Complaint, United States v. All Funds in the Accounts of Blue Sea Business Co., Ltd., et al. (D.N.J. Sept. 26, 2016) (online at http://www.justice.gov/d9/press-release ... plaint.pdf); Department of Justice, Press Release: Four Chinese Nationals and Chinese Company Indicted for Conspiracy to Defraud the United States and Evade Sanctions (July 23, 2019) (online at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/four-chin ... states-and).  

169 U.S. Considered Blacklisting Two Chinese Banks Over North Korea Ties, Bloomberg (Apr. 13, 2018) (online at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... -to-punish).  

170 House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Press Release: Chairman Royce Statement on North Korea (Mar. 9, 2017) (online at https://foreignaffairshouse.gov/press-r ... rth-korea/).  

171 Ranking U.S. Lawmaker Seeks Sanctions on 12 Chinese Banks Over N. Korea, Korea Herald (Sept. 13, 2017) (online at http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20170913000909); House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Press Release: Chairman Royce Statement on North Korea (Sept. 3, 2017) (online at https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/press- ... th-korea/#). See also U.S. Lawmakers Want “Supercharged” Response to N. Korea Nuclear Tests, Reuters (Sept. 15, 2017) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/northkorea-missiles-congress/u-s-lawmakers-want-supercharged-response-to-n-korea-nuclear-tests-idUSL2N1LT0YD).  

172 Managing Under Pressure: Eric Trump: Trump Organization EVP, Yahoo! Finance (Oct. 10, 2019) (online at https://finance.yahoo.com/video/managin ... 22827.html).  

173 Id.; During the same interview, Eric Trump made the false claim that the government stayed at Trump properties “for free” or “cost for house-keeping”—a statement directly contradicted by detailed information obtained by the Committee showing that, in some instances, Trump-owned businesses charged the Secret Service far in excess of the government rate. See Letter from Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, Committee on Oversight and Reform, to Director Kimberly Cheatle, United States Secret Service (Oct. 17, 2022) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... erties.pdf).  

174 Managing Under Pressure: Eric Trump: Trump Organization EVP, Yahoo! Finance (Oct. 10, 2019) (online at https://finance.yahoo.com/video/managin ... 22827.html).  

175 Forbes Estimates China Paid Trump at Least $5.4 Million Since He Took Office, Via Mysterious Trump Tower Lease, Forbes (Oct. 23, 2020) (online at wwwforbes.com/sites/danalexander/2020/10/23/forbes-estimates-china-paid-trump-at-least-54-million-since-he-took-office-via-mysterious-trump-tower-lease/).

176 China Paid Trump Millions in Rent. Then He Left the White House, Forbes (Apr. 10, 2023) (online at www forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2023/04/10/china-paid-trump-millions-in-rent-then-he-left-the-white-house/). ICBC continued to list 725 Fifth Avenue, 20th floor, New York, NY (i.e., the address of Trump Tower) as its business address on some public facing websites for its New York branch through at least December 2023. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Welcome to ICBC New York Branch (online at http://www.icbkus.com/en/column/1438058343720960077 html) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023). Forbes reported in its April 2023 article, “Forbes did manage to connect with someone answering the phones at ICBC’s branch in Queens. That person confirmed that ICBC no longer has any space in Trump Tower.”

[admin]

Part 2 of 2

Total ICBC Emoluments Identified in Public Records

ICBC signed a lease in Trump Tower for commercial office space in 2008 and became a long-term tenant of Trump Tower Commercial Condominium Property in New York. According to a debt prospectus filed with the SEC, ICBC entered into a lease with Trump Tower Commercial LLC and agreed to pay $1,948,180 in annual rent through October 31, 2019.177 Based on this information and with the assumption of no variable adjustments, this report estimates that ICBC paid Trump Tower at least $5,357,495 between February 2017 and October 31, 2019—the date at which the lease was set to expire per the debt prospectus.178

[x]
Major Tenants

Counsel for Mazars informed the Committee that following a comprehensive search of its records, the firm identified no responsive documents in its database relating to the “Industrial and Commercial Bank of China” or “ICBC.” The absence of these records from Mazars’s files raises troubling concerns about The Trump Organization’s candor with its accounting firm.179

Apparent Quid Pro Quo: Trump Trademarks in China

Trademarks are a significant component of the business model employed by Mr. Trump’s companies, which had registered hundreds of trademarks in more than 80 countries by the time Donald Trump entered office.180 Given that trademarks are granted and can be revoked by foreign governments, and because they have value, they are potential foreign emoluments themselves.181 As of 2023, Mr. Trump had 114 trademarks registered in China—more “than in any other country by far.”182 By comparison, Trump businesses reportedly have 57 trademarks registered in the United States.183

While public reporting makes clear that the Trump family’s businesses continued to expand their trademark portfolios in China during Trump’s time in office, any visibility into this significant aspect of his finances is sharply limited, because “[u]ntil this year, the former US president’s ethics forms didn’t disclose his trademarks in foreign countries.”184

For Mr. Trump’s businesses, trademarks serve multiple purposes and cover a range of products. New York Times reported in February 2017 that “[h]is trademarks in recent years have covered all manner of potential products” across the world, from alcohol to video games and gambling.185 The Times added: “Sometimes Mr. Trump’s trademarks are markers for ventures that never materialized or construction projects underway where he is licensing his name. Other times they appear to be part of a defensive strategy to ward off trademark infringement.”186

Former President Trump first disclosed his ownership of trademarks on ethics forms he filed as a presidential candidate in 2023, which covered his finances only from November 2021. Although Mr. Trump was required to complete this same financial disclosure form each year he was in office, he “neglected to include hundreds of trademarks he owns” on these forms during his presidency. Business Insider noted: “The belated disclosures mean that Americans had little insight into the scope of Trump’s foreign asset holdings during his presidency, and are only learning about them as he runs for a second term in the 2024 election.”187

The ability of Trump family businesses to secure trademarks in China clearly improved markedly and rapidly when Trump entered office.188 For example, for a decade, Mr. Trump had been in a bureaucratic battle trying “to wrest the rights to his name back from a man named Dong Wei,” according to the Associated Press.189 The Chinese government conspicuously awarded then-President Trump a trademark shortly after he assumed office, which the Associated Press described as a “surprise win for Trump” and reported, “may well be the first foreign trademark to be handed to Trump during his presidency.”190 Moreover, it was granted mere days after then-President Trump agreed to honor China’s One-China policy—an arrangement under which the U.S. recognizes formal diplomatic relations with China but not Taiwan—during a call then-President Trump had with President Xi.191

The expansion of Trump business interests in China also included former President Trump’s daughter and White House Advisor, Ivanka Trump. The Chinese government granted Ivanka Trump’s business “first trial” approval on one trademark on May 6, 2018, and registration approval for five additional trademarks the following day.192 Within a week, on May 13, 2018, President Trump announced on Twitter that he had personally instructed the Commerce Department to reverse its decision to sanction ZTE, a Chinese telecommunications company.193

The following month, on June 7, 2018, Ivanka Trump Marks LLC received trademark registration approval for three additional trademarks in China.194

In her official role, Ms. Trump met with world leaders as a representative of the United States abroad and alongside then-President Trump. Although Ms. Trump reportedly curtailed her day-to-day involvement in her company in January 2017, she did not divest from it, and the company continued applying for trademarks abroad to license the Ivanka Trump name.195

Early in the Trump Administration, the Chinese government reportedly identified Ms. Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, as a promising channel through which to thaw relations with the new president after his abrasive campaign rhetoric regarding China.196 On March 28, 2017, IT Operations LLC, one of Ivanka Trump’s holding companies, filed 14 applications for trademarks in China.197 One day later, Ivanka Trump formally joined the Trump Administration as an Advisor to the President. The next month, in April 2017, the Chinese government preliminarily granted three trademarks for Ivanka Trump Marks LLC, another holding company owned by Ivanka Trump, to expand her brand in China. Ms. Trump received the trademark approvals the same day that then-President Trump hosted Chinese President Xi in Mar-a-Lago, Florida, along with Ivanka Trump and Mr. Kushner, who was then a Senior Advisor to President Trump.198

In mid-2018, Ivanka Trump announced she would dissolve her fashion brand.199 Despite this announcement, Ivanka Trump Marks LLC continued to retain trademarks in China. The Chinese government preliminarily granted “first-trial approval” for 16 trademarks for fashion items and other goods—including, notably, voting machines—to Ivanka Trump in 2018.200 Ivanka Trump continued to receive trademarks from the Chinese government through 2019, when Ivanka Trump Marks LLC received provisional approval for five trademarks that covered, for example, “child care centers […] brokerage, charitable fundraising and art valuation services.”201

Public reporting indicated that by April 2019, the Chinese government had granted a total of 41 trademarks to companies associated with Ivanka Trump and that her companies had received trademark approvals roughly 40% faster after Donald Trump won the 2016 U.S. presidential election than had been the case prior to the election.202

Additional Spending at Trump-Owned Properties

Chinese State Involvement in the Private Sector

China’s President Xi has overseen a policy that enmeshes the CCP into the private economy, blurring the line between state-owned enterprises and private industry.203 The Chinese economy mixes centralized control with market forces that President Xi has praised as “socialist market economic reform.”204 Further, numerous laws nominally enacted for national security purposes have placed companies under tighter government control, including measures that require telecommunications companies to give “technical support and assistance” to the government, including the national security apparatus.205 In addition, in 2018, as several major Chinese companies faced towering debts and potential defaults, the Chinese government stepped in and took over these firms to prevent further damage to their domestic economy.206

The documents provided to the Committee by Mazars record payments to Trump-owned businesses by corporate entities whose ownership structures are highly opaque but that have numerous ties to the government of the P.R.C. Given the opacity of these companies’ ownership structures and the uncertain nature of their specific ties to the government of the P.R.C.—including the CCP—this report does not classify expenditures at Trump-owned properties by these companies recorded in the documents Mazars produced to the Committee as emoluments. Nonetheless, spending by these entities at President Trump’s properties during his presidency raised potential conflicts of interest.

Additional Spending at Trump Properties: Huawei

The U.S. government has long expressed significant concerns about the national security risks posed by Huawei, a leading Chinese telecommunications equipment provider. More than a decade ago, a 2012 report by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), led by then-Chairman Republican Mike Rogers, determined that Huawei was a national security threat due to its attempts to obtain intelligence and other sensitive information through American companies. At the time, HPSCI obtained documents showing that Huawei furnished an “elite cyber-warfare unit within the People’s Liberation Army” with special network services.207

In the spring of 2017, the Department of the Treasury and the Department of Commerce reportedly had investigations underway to examine whether Huawei had violated U.S. trade controls with respect to Cuba, Iran, Sudan, North Korea, and Syria.208

While these investigations progressed, Congress included provisions in Section 1656 of the Fiscal Year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) prohibiting the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) from using Huawei technology in any nuclear control or ballistic missile defense system absent a waiver.209 President Trump signed the Fiscal Year 2018 NDAA on December 12, 2017.210 The Mazars records reveal that just a week later, on December 19, 2017, Huawei made a deposit to the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada, for a “Huawei Device USA Meeting” scheduled for January 2018 at the hotel.211

While a Trump-owned hotel was doing business with Huawei, others in the federal government continued to sound the alarm about the Chinese company. On February 13, 2018, six U.S. intelligence chiefs testified before Congress that American consumers should not buy Huawei devices and services.212

In August 2018, Congress enacted the Fiscal Year 2019 NDAA, which restricted the entire U.S. government from doing business with Huawei or entities that used Huawei equipment.213

Also in August 2018, the DOJ filed a sealed indictment alleging that Huawei undertook a multi-year criminal scheme to violate U.S. sanctions on Iran by operating “an unofficial subsidiary to obtain otherwise prohibited U.S.-origin goods, technology and services” for its Iran-based business.214 According to the DOJ, when Huawei and Huawei USA “became aware of the U.S. government’s criminal investigation” in 2017, the company “made efforts to move witnesses with knowledge” of the scheme to China “and to destroy and conceal evidence in the United States.”215 In January 2019, when announcing the indictments against Huawei and other defendants publicly, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Christopher Wray, warned that Huawei poses “a dual threat to both our economic and national security.”216 On October 24, 2022, the DOJ announced that it had charged two intelligence officers of the P.R.C. for attempting to obstruct a criminal prosecution in the Eastern District of New York against a Chinese telecommunications firm which, according to public reporting, was Huawei.217

While both Congress and officials inside the Trump Administration sought to take a hard line on Chinese companies operating in a manner contrary to U.S. national security, then-President Trump repeatedly contradicted administration officials in an apparent effort to blunt the restrictions the U.S. government was placing on Huawei.218 His seeming pushback provoked bipartisan backlash across Congress.

In May 2019, the Commerce Department placed Huawei on its Entity List—commonly known as the Commerce “blacklist”—which prevented the firm from buying American products without U.S. government approval.219 However, a little over a month after Huawei was placed on the Entity List, then-President Trump declared that after consultation with President Xi, he would lift the blacklist of Huawei, stating on Twitter:

At the request of our High Tech companies, and President Xi, I agreed to allow Chinese company Huawei to buy product from them which will not impact our National Security. Importantly, we have opened up negotiations … again with China as our relationship with them continues to be a very good one.220

Forbes reported that “Trump told reporters that ‘U.S. companies can sell their equipment to Huawei,’ as long as its [sic] ‘equipment where there’s no great national security problem.’ He suggested this was a ‘personal favor’ to Xi.”221

Lawmakers from both parties strongly condemned former President Trump’s reversal. For example, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) tweeted:

If President Trump has agreed to reverse recent sanctions against #Huawei he has made a catastrophic mistake. It will destroy the credibility of his administrations warnings about the threat posed by the company, no one will ever again take them seriously [sic].222

The reversal was, however, greeted with enthusiasm by Huawei on its Twitter account, which posted a link to the story and issued the following tweet:223

[x]
Huawei Facts
@ Huawei Facts
U-turn? Donald Trump suggests he would allow #Huawei to once again purchase U.S. Technology! #Huawei Facts

While Huawei ultimately remained on the blacklist, then-President Trump’s Administration granted Huawei six temporary general licenses, generally known as “reprieve[s],” between May 2019 and August 2020, allowing American companies to continue doing business with Huawei.224 In November 2019, the Department of Commerce announced that it would not only extend Huawei’s temporary general license, but would approve “additional, more permanent licenses” that would allow Huawei to fully resume its engagement with certain U.S. firms.225

In November 2019, a bipartisan group of 15 Senators—including Chuck Schumer, Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley, Elizabeth Warren, and Rick Scott—wrote to President Trump expressing their strong disapproval of the decision to grant Huawei reprieves and requesting he suspend the granting of licenses until he provided Congress with more information on the effect of this action on national security.226 The Trump Administration extended an additional three reprieves to Huawei despite receiving this bipartisan letter. The Department of Commerce did not fully implement the ban on Huawei until August 13, 2020—15 months after it was scheduled to go into effect.227

On June 12, 2020, the DOD published its inaugural list of entities “owned or controlled” by the Chinese military, which included Huawei.228 Later in June 2020, the Federal Communications Commission designated Huawei—as well as Chinese telecommunications firm ZTE—as threats to U.S. national security.229

Huawei’s Expenditure at Trump-Owned Property

According to ledgers that Mazars produced to the Committee, Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei made a $5,377 advance deposit at the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas on December 19, 2017, for an event labeled “Huawei Device USA Meeting” scheduled to be held from January 11 to January 15, 2018.230 Huawei may have made additional payments beyond this advance deposit, but the limited records provided by Mazars do not provide any more information on this event.231 In this instance as in so many others, Chairman Comer’s release of Mazars from its obligations to produce records under the Committee’s subpoena has prevented the Committee from determining with certainty the full amount of the payments made by Huawei to Trump-owned businesses.

Additional Spending at Trump Properties: CEFC China Energy Subsidiary

At its height, CEFC was one of the largest companies in China: an oil, coal, and financial conglomerate with an estimated $40 billion in revenue and 50,000 employees.232 CEFC financed energy projects across the globe and owned considerable property assets, including a condominium unit at Trump World Tower.

CEFC is the same entity that Hunter Biden did business with during the Trump presidency, including entering into an August 2017 consulting agreement in connection with the joint pursuit of investments, as well as a September 2017 agreement for Mr. Biden to provide legal representation to a CEFC official under federal investigation in the U.S.233

In March 2018, as CEFC’s financial situation appeared to deteriorate, state media in the P.R.C. reported that state-owned investment firm Shanghai Guosheng Group had taken over CEFC.234 In the absence of independent reporting on this event, this report has not classified CEFC as stated-owned, and therefore does not count its expenditures as emoluments. If, however, the company truly became a state enterprise in March 2018, its expenditures after that date would constitute emoluments under the standard previously discussed.

In 2012, Hong Kong Huaxin Petroleum Company Limited—a wholly owned subsidiary of CEFC—bought an apartment in Trump World Tower for $5.25 million dollars.235 Hong Kong Huaxin Petroleum Company Limited maintained this property throughout the Trump presidency.236 Records provided to the Committee by Mazars and court documents indicate that Hong Kong Huaxin Petroleum Limited paid a standard common charge of $3,177.20 every month in 2018.237 CEFC listed its apartment at Trump World Tower for sale on October 20, 2020.238 On January 26, 2022, CEFC sold the unit to an anonymous LLC named “845UN 78B LLC” for $4.625 million.239

Assuming that the base charges did not change during the four years of the Trump presidency, Hong Kong Huaxin Petroleum Limited paid Trump World Tower at least $152,505 during the four years of the Trump presidency.240

An excerpt of the Trump World Tower payment ledger for October 2018 appears below:241

[x]
TRUMP WORLD TOWER CONDOMINIUM. Status Report

Trump Organization Business Development in China

Documents produced to the Committee indicate that The Trump Organization, and the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., may have continued to solicit business in China after Mr. Trump entered office—despite Trump’s pledge not to engage in any “new foreign deals” during his time in office.242 In June 2017, Patricia Tang, the Director of Sales and Marketing at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., billed the hotel $1,950 as a reimbursable business expense for a “Hotel in China.”243

In November 2017—the same month that Mr. Trump made an official visit to China— Trump International Hotel expense reports reference a return trip to China by “Patricia,” potentially referring to Ms. Tang. In addition, a line item in a disbursement ledger indicates reimbursement for “business cards printed by [redacted] for Patricia while on China Trip in November 2017.”244 Ms. Tang’s apparent active presence in China suggests that The Trump Organization continued to solicit business from foreign countries, especially China, during Trump’s presidency.


______________-

Notes:

176 China Paid Trump Millions in Rent. Then He Left the White House, Forbes (Apr. 10, 2023) (online at wwwforbes.com/sites/danalexander/2023/04/10/china-paid-trump-millions-in-rent-then-he-left-the-white-house/). ICBC continued to list 725 Fifth Avenue, 20th floor, New York, NY (i.e., the address of Trump Tower) as its business address on some public facing websites for its New York branch through at least December 2023. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Welcome to ICBC New York Branch (online at http://www.icbkus.com/en/column/1438058343720960077html) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023). Forbes reported in its April 2023 article, “Forbes did manage to connect with someone answering the phones at ICBC’s branch in Queens. That person confirmed that ICBC no longer has any space in Trump Tower.”

177 Forbes Estimates China Paid Trump at Least $5.4 Million Since He Took Office, Via Mysterious Trump Tower Lease, Forbes (Oct. 23, 2020) (online at wwwforbes.com/sites/danalexander/2020/10/23/forbes-estimates-china-paid-trump-at-least-54-million-since-he-took-office-via-mysterious-trump-tower-lease/); Securities and Exchange Commission, Free Writing Prospectus: Structural and Collateral Term Sheet, Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2012-LC5 (Sept. 12, 2012) (online at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/ ... 490/fwphtm)

178 This figure was calculated using base annual rent for space occupied by Industrial and Commercial Bank of China at the Trump Tower Commercial Condominium Property for a 33-month period, from February 1, 2017, to October 31, 2019. Securities and Exchange Commission, Free Writing Prospectus Structural and Collateral Term Sheet (Sept. 12, 2012) (online at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/ ... 490/fwphtm).

179 State of New York Office of the Attorney General, Deposition of Donald Bender, at 69 (Apr. 18, 2023).

180 From Trump the Nationalist, a Trail of Global Trademarks, New York Times (Feb. 21, 2017) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2017/02/21/business/donald-trump-trademarks-chinahtml).

181 Trump Waited Until After He Left Office to Disclose Trademarks He Owns in China and Russia, Business Insider (Nov. 3, 2023) (online at http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-di ... cy-2023-10); Business Insider pointed out that the countries where former President Trump “owns trademarks includes China, Venezuela, Iran, Cuba, Belarus, and other countries heavily sanctioned by the United States.” Mr. Trump amended this disclosure, at which time he removed a trademark he had listed that was issued by Saudi Arabia. Id.

182 Id.

183 Id.

184 Id.

185 Id.; From Trump the Nationalist, a Trail of Global Trademarks, New York Times (Feb. 21, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/21/busin ... china.html).

186 Id.

187 Trump Waited Until After He Left Office to Disclose Trademarks He Owns in China and Russia, Business Insider (Nov. 3, 2023) (online at http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-di ... cy-2023-10); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed Aug. 14, 2023) (Part 1 online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-con ... -14-23.pdf) (Part 2 online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-con ... -14-23.pdf) (Part 3 online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-con ... -14-23.pdf) (Part 4 online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-con ... -14-23.pdf).

188 Donald Trump filed trademark applications in China beginning in 2006. From the time he announced his candidacy for the presidency in 2015 through 2019, roughly 200 trademark applications by Donald Trump and Ivanka Trump were pending in China. Center for American Progress, Trump’s Conflicts of Interest in China (June 14, 2017) (online at http://www.americanprogress.org/article ... est-china/); Trump Trademark Applications Spiked Around the World When He Started Running for President, CNBC (Dec. 4, 2019) (online at http://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/04/trump-ac ... sidenthtml).

189 China Awards Trump Valuable New Trademark, Associated Press (Feb. 16, 2017) (online at https://apnews.com/article/5870a27432b5 ... 7734eb57d5).

190 Id.

191 Id.; Trump Agrees to Support “One China” Policy in Xi Jinping Call, The Guardian (Feb. 10, 2017) (online at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/f ... xi-jinping).

192 Ivanka Trump’s Business Wins Approval for More China Trademarks, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (June 27, 2018) (online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/report ... rademarks/).

193 Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), X (formerly Twitter) (May 13, 2018) (online at https://x.com/realDonaldTrump/status/99 ... 62533?s=20); Factbox: U.S. Bans Sales to Major Chinese Telco Equipment Vendor ZTE, Reuters (Apr. 17, 2018) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/usa-china-zte-idINKBN1HO12L/.

194 State Administration for Industry and Commerce of the People’s Republic of China, Trademark Details (Ivanka Trump Marks LLC) (online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-con ... emarks.pdf) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023); Trump Strikes Deal to Save China’s ZTE as North Korea Meeting Looms, New York Times (June 7, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/07/busin ... e-dealhtml); Ivanka Trump’s Business Wins Approval for More China Trademarks, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (June 27, 2018) (online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/report ... rademarks/).

195 Ms. Trump formerly served as President, Treasurer, and Secretary of IT Operations before assuming a position in the Trump Administration in 2017. Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report (OGE Form 278e) (Ivanka Trump) (Filed June 12, 2017) (online at http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000161- ... fc5f7f0001); Ivanka Trump, Shifting Plans, Will Become a Federal Employee, New York Times (Mar. 29, 2017) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2017/03/29/us/politics/ivanka-trump-federal-employee-white-house.html); Ivanka Trump’s Business Wins Approval for 16 New Chinese Trademarks Despite Shutting Down, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (Nov. 5, 2018) (online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/report ... rademarks/).

196 China Woos Ivanka, Jared Kushner to Smooth Ties with Trump, Bloomberg (Feb. 7, 2017) (online at http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... with-trump).

197 Letter from Representative John Conyers, Jr. et al., Committee on the Judiciary, to Abigail Klem, President, IT Operations LLC, 115th Cong. (June 12, 2017) (online at https://democrats-judiciaryhouse.gov/si ... 2.2017.pdf). Ms. Trump formerly served as President, Treasurer, and Secretary of IT Operations before assuming a position in the Trump Administration in 2017. Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report (OGE Form 278e) (Ivanka Trump) (Filed June 12, 2017) (online at http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000161- ... fc5f7f0001).

198 China Defends Trademark Grants for Ivanka Trump Products, NPR (Apr. 19, 2017) (online at wwwnpr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/04/19/524765086/china-defends-trademark-grants-for-ivanka-trump-products).

199 Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Ivanka Trump’s Business Wins Approval for 16 New Chinese Trademarks Despite Shutting Down (Nov. 5, 2018) (online at http://www.citizensforethics.org/report ... rademarks/).

200 Id.; Ivanka Trump Receives 5 Trademarks from China Amid Trade Talks, CBS (Jan. 21, 2019) (online at http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ivanka-trum ... ade-talks/).

201 Ivanka Trump Receives 5 Trademarks from China Amid Trade Talks, CBS (Jan. 21, 2019) (online at http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ivanka-trum ... ade-talks/).

202 Ivanka’s Trademark Requests Were Fast-Tracked in China After Trump Was Elected, Forbes (Apr. 14, 2022) (online at http://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2 ... as-elected).

203 Congressional Research Service, China’s Recent Trade Measures and Countermeasures: Issues for Congress (Dec. 10, 2021) (online at http://www.crs.gov/reports/pdf/R46915/R46915.pdf).

204 In Xi’s China, the Business of Business Is State-Controlled, New York Times (Oct. 17, 2022) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2022/10/17/business/china-xi-jinping-business-economyhtml).

205 Library of Congress, China: New Regulation on Police Cybersecurity Supervision and Inspection Powers Issued (Nov. 13, 2018) (online at http://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-mo ... ers-issued).

206 Anbang Takeover Puts China’s Companies on Notice, Reuters (Feb. 25, 2018) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/us-china-anbang-takeover-analysis/anbang-takeover-puts-chinas-companies-on-notice-idUSKCN1G909L).

207 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Investigative Report on the U.S. National Security Issues Posed by Chinese Telecommunications Companies Huawei and ZTE (Oct. 8, 2012) (online at https://intelligence.house.gov/sites/in ... t%20(final).pdf).

208 Huawei, Chinese Technology Giant, Is Focus of Widening U.S. Investigation, New York Times (Apr. 26, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/busin ... poena.html).

209 Pub. L. No. 115-91, § 1656 (2017); Congressional Research Service, U.S. Restrictions on Huawei Technologies: National Security, Foreign Policy, and Economic Interests (Jan 5. 2022) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47012/2).

210 Id.; Department of Defense, Press Release: Trump Signs Fiscal Year 2018 Defense Authorization (Dec. 12, 2017) (online at http://www.defense.gov/News/News-Storie ... orization/).

211 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEEE-00027218.

212 Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Open Hearing on Worldwide Threats, 115th Congress, (Feb. 13, 2018) (online at http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hear ... threats-0#); Six Top US Intelligence Chiefs Caution Against Buying Huawei Phones, CNBC (Feb. 13, 2018) (online at http://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/13/chinas-h ... -away.html).

213 Pub. L. No. 115-232, § 889 (2018).

214 See Superseding Indictment, Doc. 126 (Feb. 13, 2020), United States of America v. Huawei Technologies Co., LTD., Huawei Device Co., Ltd., Huawei Device USA Inc., Futurewei Technologies, Inc., Skycom Tech Co. Ltd., Wanzhou Meng, E.D.N.Y (No. 1-18-cr-00457-AMD-CLP) (online at http://www.justice.gov/opa/press-releas ... 1/download). Huawei Chief Financial Officer Wanzhou Meng entered into a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with federal prosecutors and pursuant to the DPA, took “responsibility for her principal role in perpetrating a scheme to defraud a global financial institution.” Department of Justice, Press Release: Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou Admits to Misleading Global Financial Institution (Sept. 24, 2021) (online at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/huawei-cf ... nstitution).

215 See id.

216 Department of Justice, Press Release: Chinese Telecommunications Conglomerate Huawei and Huawei CFO Wanzhou Meng Charged with Financial Fraud (Jan. 28, 2019) (online at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-t ... -financial).

217 Department of Justice, Press Release: Two Arrested and 13 Charged in Three Separate Cases for Alleged Participation in Malign Schemes in the United States on Behalf of the Government of the People’s Republic of China (Oct. 24, 2022) (online at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-arres ... mes-united). See also U.S. Charges Two Chinese Nationals with Obstructing Huawei Case, Source Says, Reuters (Oct. 24, 2022) (online at https://reuters.com/legal/us-charges-tw ... 022-10-24/).

218 Trump’s Offer of U.S. Tech Lifeline for Huawei Prompts Fierce Political Backlash, Forbes (June 29, 2019) (online at http://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/ ... -backlash/).

219 Bureau of Industry and Security, Addition of Entities to the Entity List, 84 Fed. Reg. 22961 (May 21, 2019) (final rule).

220 Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), X (formerly Twitter) (June 29, 2019) (online at https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/sta ... 9632627712). See also White House Will Reportedly Wait on Granting Huawei Licenses as the Trade War Ramps Back Up, CNN Business (Aug 9, 2019) (online at http://www.cnn.com/2019/08/08/tech/huaw ... /indexhtml).

221 Trump’s Offer of U.S. Tech Lifeline for Huawei Prompts Fierce Political Backlash, Forbes (June 29, 2019) (online at http://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/ ... -backlash/).

222 Marco Rubio (@marcorubio), X (formerly Twitter) (June 29, 2019) (online at https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1 ... 3101593601).

223 Huawei Facts (@HuaweiFacts), X (formerly Twitter) (June 29, 2019) (online at https://twitter.com/HuaweiFacts/status/ ... 0804689921?).

224 The Department of Commerce issued the initial Temporary General License on May 22, 2019. The Temporary General License’s validity was extended on August 21, 2019, November 18, 2019, February 18, 2020, March 18, 2020, and May 18, 2020. Department of Commerce, Huawei Temporary General License Extension Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) (May 18, 2020) (online at https://bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents ... -faqs/file); Congressional Research Service, U.S. Restrictions on Huawei Technologies: National Security, Foreign Policy, and Economic Interests (Jan 5. 2022) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47012/2).

225 Letter from Senator Chuck Schumer, Senator Tom Cotton, et al., to President Donald J. Trump (Nov. 19, 2019) (online at http://www.democrats.senate.gov/ptsschhw?download).

226 Id.

227 Congressional Research Service, U.S. Restrictions on Huawei Technologies: National Security, Foreign Policy, and Economic Interests (Jan. 5, 2022) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47012/2).

228 Under federal law, the Department of Defense is required to track firms “owned or controlled” by China’s People’s Liberation Army that are active in the United States. Pub. L. No. 105-261 (1998); Department of Defense, Qualifying Entities Prepared in Response to Section 1237 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (PUBLIC LAW 105-261) (June 12, 2020) (online at https://media.defense.gov/2020/Aug/28/2 ... TITIES.PDF); Exclusive: Trump Administration Says Huawei, Hikvision Backed by Chinese Military, Reuters (June 23, 2020) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/us-usa-china-military-exclusive/exclusive-trump-administration-says-huawei-hikvision-backed-by-chinese-military-document-idUSKBN23V309/); Huawei on List of 20 Chinese Companies That Pentagon Says Are Controlled by People’s Liberation Army, TIME (June 25, 2020) (online at https://time.com/5859119/huawei-chinese ... pany-list/).  

229 Federal Communications Commission, Press Release: FCC Designates Huawei and ZTE as National Security Threats (June 30, 2020) (online at https://docsfcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-365255A1.pdf); F.C.C. Designates Huawei and ZTE as National Security Threats, New York Times (June 30, 2020) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2020/06/30/technology/fcc-huawei-zte-national-securityhtml).

230 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEEE-00027218; Exclusive: Trump Administration Says Huawei, Hikvision Backed by Chinese Military, Reuters (June 24, 2020) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/us-usa-china-military-exclusive/exclusive-trump-administration-says-huawei-hikvision-backed-by-chinese-military-idUSKBN23V309).

231 As noted in the Methodology section, advance deposits typically constitute only part of the total cost of an event.

232 The Rise and Fall of a Belt and Road Billionaire, CNN (Dec. 12, 2018) (online at http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2018/12/ ... rial-intl/).

233 Inside Hunter Biden’s Multimillion-Dollar Deals with a Chinese Energy Company, Washington Post (Mar. 30, 2022) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... na-laptop/).

234 China’s CEFC Taken Over by Shanghai Government Agency: SCMP Report, Reuters (Mar. 2, 2018) (online at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china ... SKCN1GE0X3).

235 Trump Tower CEFC Deal, Government Exhibit 2743 Trial of Patrick Ho, 17 CR 779 (online at http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... -2743.html). At the time, the contract of sale specified that the common charges for the apartment were $2,894 per month with monthly assessments of $1,623. Id., at Page 5. See also In re Shanghai Huaxin Group (Hongkong) Limited (in Liquidation), Southern District of New York, at Exhibit B (Case No.19-11482 (JLG)) (Doc. 2) (May 7, 2019) (online at http://www.chinadocket.com/wp-content/u ... ion-10.pdf).

236 New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2012030201095002 (Feb. 29, 2012) (online at https://a836-acris.nyc.gov/DS/DocumentS ... 0201095002) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2016-2017, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1342 (Jan. 5, 2016) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2017-2018, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1342 (Jan. 5, 2017) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2018-2019, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1342 (Jan. 5, 2018) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2019-2020, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1342 (Jan. 5, 2019) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2020-2021, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1342 (Jan. 5, 2020) (accessed Dec. 8, 2023).

237 Mazars provided records for Trump World Tower payments only for the year 2018. The 2018 records indicate that in addition to the standard base charge, Hongkong Huaxin Petroleum Limited incurred a standard charge titled “2017 SP ASSESS,” and varying electric utility fees. Per public reporting of apartment lease records, Hong Kong Huaxin Petroleum Limited continued to lease in the Trump World Tower at least through 2021. See StreetEasy, 845 United Nations Plaza #78B (online at https://streeteasy.com/building/trump-world-tower/78b) (accessed Nov. 29, 2023). MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027584; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027517; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027726; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027376; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027773; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027680; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027633; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027421; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027902; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027858; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027812; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027469.

238 StreetEasy, 845 United Nations Plaza #78B (online at https://streeteasy.com/building/trump-world-tower/78b) (accessed Nov. 30, 2023). 845 U.N. 78B, LLC was incorporated on October 11, 2021, roughly three months prior to CEFC’s sale of Apartment 78B. OpenGov U.S., 845 UN 78B, LLC (online at https://opengovus.com/new-york-state-co ... on/6300453) (accessed Nov. 30, 2023).

239 New York Department of Finance, CFRN: 2022012800663001 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 2800663001) (accessed Nov. 30, 2023).

240 Trump World Tower records for all four years of Mr. Trump’s presidency would be helpful to enable calculation of the total common charges paid for this apartment, but the Committee’s Minority staff is unable to review these records because Chairman Comer released Mazars from its obligations under the Committee’s subpoena before all responsive documents could be produced.

241 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027858.

242 Would This Violate Trump’s No-New-Foreign-Deals Pledge?, CBS News (Feb. 10, 2017) (online at http://www.cbsnews.com/news/would-this- ... ls-pledge/).

243 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008260.

244 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008644.
 

[admin]

QATAR

The documents provided to the Committee by Mazars show that, in 2018, Qatar paid more than $130,000 in emoluments for units in Trump World Tower in New York.333 Prior to President Trump’s election as President, Qatar already owned three units in Trump World Tower. In January 2018—after Saudi Arabia’s blockade of Qatar had been underway for more than six months—Qatar bought an additional unit in Trump World Tower.334 Later in 2018, Qatar sold one of the units it already owned which had incurred lower monthly charges than the unit it purchased earlier that year. As a result of these transactions, the monthly charges Qatar paid to Trump World Tower increased from $8,592 before its 2018 purchase and subsequent sale to settle at $9,540 in late 2018. Accounting for the country’s 2018 purchase and sale, this report estimates that Qatar paid $465,744 to the Trump World Tower for the properties it owned during President Trump’s term in office.335

The documents provided by Mazars also record an extended stay at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., from January through March 2018 that frequently encompassed multiple rooms booked under the names of the “Sheikh Al Thani family” or “Khalid Al Thani.” Al Thani is the name of Qatar’s ruling family.336 In November 2022, after then-Committee Chairwoman Maloney sent a letter to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) identifying the Al Thani family stay at the Trump International Hotel as an expenditure by the government of Qatar, Qatar’s Ambassador wrote to the Committee asserting that this extended stay involved only “private citizens.”337 However, numerous questions regarding this stay remain unanswered. Notably, on a couple of days, the Al Thani stay at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., overlapped with a stay by Saudi government officials at a time when each government sought to curry then-President Trump’s favor in their ongoing dispute. Given the assertions of the Qatari Ambassador, and despite significant indications that the Al Thani family stay in fact involved members of Qatar’s royal family, out of an abundance of caution, this report does not include the stay at the Trump International Hotel by the Al Thani family in the total sum of the emoluments paid by Qatar to former President Trump through his businesses.

Qatar’s Emolument Spending at Trump Properties

Date / Location / Expenditure / Amount

January 2018–December 2018
Trump World Tower
845 United Nations Plaza
(New York, NY)
The Permanent Mission of the State of Qatar to the United Nations
$133,634338
(2018)
Estimated Total Emolument for 4 Years:
$465,744
(2017–2020)
ESTIMATED EMOLUMENTS PAID BY QATAR
(2017–2020)
$465,744

According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), in recent decades, Qatar has “fostered a close security partnership with the United States.” Qatar hosts the U.S. military’s Al Udeid Air Base, which is the “regional headquarters for the U.S. Central Command,” and the command post from which the U.S. has overseen air operations in Iraq and other locations.339 The U.S. Air Force significantly increased its forces at the base as part of the response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the government of Qatar has reportedly invested billions of dollars to build out the base’s infrastructure.340

In May 2017, while he was in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, for his first overseas trip, then-President Trump also met the Emir of Qatar, Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, among other foreign leaders.341 Before the meeting with Qatar’s leader, President Trump said, “One of the things that we will discuss is the purchase of lots of beautiful military equipment because nobody makes it like the United States.”342

As previously discussed, in early June 2017, Saudi Arabia and its allies imposed a blockade on Qatar.343 Then-President Trump issued statements that favored the Saudi position in the dispute.344 A few weeks later, the Saudi-led coalition demanded that Qatar meet 13 conditions within ten days to have the blockade lifted.345

According to the New York Times, after Qatar “was besieged by a Middle East embargo and President Trump all but accused Qatar of fomenting terror,” the country began a “charm offensive with the Trump administration.”
346 This “charm offensive” occurred as Qatar was paying the common charges and related expenses on its Trump World Tower units.

In mid-July 2017, shortly after Saudi Arabia’s blockade of Qatar began, then-Secretary of State Tillerson traveled to Qatar. On July 11, 2017, Secretary Tillerson and the Qatari Foreign Minister, Mohammed Al Thani, “signed a memorandum of understanding on fighting terrorism.” Secretary Tillerson stated, “I think Qatar has been quite clear in its positions and I think very reasonable and we want to talk now (about) how do we take things forward.” Secretary Tillerson added, “Together, the US and Qatar will do more to track down funding sources, collaborate and share information and do more to keep the region and our homeland safe.”347

In addition to signing the agreement on the fight against terrorism, Qatar took other steps intended to improve its relations with the United States, including agreeing to disclose more financial information on its national airline and announcing that it “would upgrade living quarters for United States military personnel stationed at al-Udeid Air Base.” It also hired numerous lobbyists to represent its interests before the U.S. government.348

In the fall of 2017, then-President Trump publicly expressed support for the actions Qatar had taken against terrorism. According to Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E., Qatar’s support for terrorism had been a central concern prompting the blockade. On September 20, 2017, then-President Trump met with the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Al Thani, on the sidelines of the United Nations (U.N.) General Assembly.349 According to the White House release regarding this meeting:

The President stressed the importance of resolving Qatar’s ongoing dispute with its neighbors, restoring unity in the region with partners of the United States, enabling those countries to promote regional stability and counter the threat of Iran together. President Trump acknowledged the progress displayed by Qatar through the implementation of the United States-Qatar bilateral memorandum of understanding on counterterrorism cooperation, and stressed the importance of taking additional steps to ensure that the commitments made at the Riyadh Summit in Saudi Arabia to cut off funding for terrorists, discredit extremist ideology, and defeat terrorist groups come to fruition.350

On April 10, 2018—three months after the Qataris purchased an additional unit in Trump World Tower increasing their total monthly charges and fees due, and after the extended stay by the Al Thani family at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.—then-President Trump met the Emir of Qatar at the White House. President Trump again praised Qatar’s record on combatting terrorism and referred to the Emir as a “great gentleman.” He continued, “We have a gentleman on my right who buys a lot of equipment from us, a lot of purchases in the United States, and a lot of military airplanes missiles—lots of different things, but they’ve been great friends in so many different ways.”351

Two weeks later, then-Secretary of State Pompeo traveled to Saudi Arabia where he reportedly urged his Saudi counterpart to terminate the blockade of Qatar.352 However, as discussed, the blockade remained in effect until January 5, 2021, when “Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt agreed to lift the blockade and restore ties.”353

Emoluments Paid by Qatar to Trump-Owned Businesses

Qatar and its ruling family spent heavily at Trump-owned properties during the Trump presidency. When Donald Trump was inaugurated, the Qatari Permanent Mission to the United Nations owned three units in Trump World Tower at 845 United Nations Plaza. The mission purchased one unit in 2004 and the remaining two units in 2012.354 On January 17, 2018—after President Trump had met with the Emir of Qatar at the U.N. General Assembly in September 2017 and before he met the Emir again at the White House in April 2018—the Qatari Mission bought a fourth unit at Trump World Tower for $6.5 million.355 Then, as noted, in October 2018, Qatar sold a unit in Trump World Tower that incurred a lower monthly base charge than the unit it had purchased in January 2018—leaving Qatar with three units that each incurred a monthly base charge of $3,180 in 2018.356

Records provided to the Committee by Mazars show that, in January 2018, prior to Qatar’s purchase of the fourth unit, Qatar had paid $8,592 in base charges for the three properties it owned. From February 2018 through the sale in October 2018, Qatar paid $11,773 monthly in base charges for its four units in Trump World Tower. Following Qatar’s sale of its unit in October 2018, the country paid $9,540 per month in base charges to Trump World Tower for the remainder of 2018.

In 2018—the only year for which Mazars provided records for Trump World Tower—Qatar incurred monthly base charges totaling $133,634.357 Assuming that these charges did not change during the four years of the Trump presidency, the Qatari-owned properties would have accrued a total of $465,744 in base charges after accounting for Qatar’s property purchase and sale. Of note, the properties also incurred additional charges above the monthly base charges—including utilities, special assessments, and maintenance fees—in 2018 totaling $20,767.358

While a Qatari representative stated regarding the January 2018 purchase that, “[t]hese apartments, plus the recent unit, were all purchased due to their location, nothing more,” the timing of the purchase in relation to Qatari policy objectives, and the sale of a previously purchased apartment that had been less costly for the Qatari government, raise numerous questions regarding the true motivations behind these actions.359

One week after purchasing the new Trump World Tower unit, on January 24, 2018, an unknown individual(s) identified by the name “Al Thani”—the name of the Qatari royal family—booked multiple rooms at Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., through March 9, 2018. The Al Thani family reportedly dominates Qatari government ministries and receives a significant share of state revenue.360 It is unclear from the Mazars records who stayed in the hotel in the rooms booked under the Al Thani name during this period. Though the rooms were booked at times under the name “Al-Thani, Khalid,” several prominent members of the family appear to have this name. All charges for “Al-Thani, Khalid” appear to have ultimately been refunded, and then, subsequently, amounts equal to those refunded were later charged to an account labeled “Sheikh Al Thani Family Extended Stay.” The charges incurred by the Al Thani family total more than $283,000.361 A page from the records provided to the Committee by Mazars showing charges associated with this “Sheikh Al Thani Family Extended Stay” appears below.362

[x]
Guest Ledger - Charges. 10/29/2018 20:34. 1100 Pensylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 200004 Phone 202 695 1100 TrumpHotels.com

As noted, in a letter dated November 14, 2022, then-Committee Chairwoman Maloney wrote to NARA “to request presidential records […] to determine whether former President Trump distorted U.S. foreign policy to serve his own financial interests at the expense of the American people and in violation of his oath of office.”363 In that letter, then-Chairwoman Maloney explained that the records provided to the Committee from Mazars showed that the Sheikh Al Thani Family had booked an extended stay at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.; she identified the expenditures associated with this stay as expenditures by “the Qatari government.”364

In a letter dated November 22, 2022, the Ambassador of the State of Qatar, Meshal Al- Thani, responded to then-Chairwoman Maloney: “I have investigated this matter and confirmed that no representative of the Embassy of Qatar, and no other government official of the State of Qatar, was a guest at the Trump International Hotel during the time periods described in your letter.” The Ambassador added, “With respect to the guest ledger excerpted in your letter which refers to the ‘Sheikh Al Thani Family Extended Stay,’ I can further confirm that these guests are private citizens who were not engaged in any government business.” The Ambassador did not identify the private citizens who booked the stays identified in the ledgers provided by Mazars to the Committee, nor did he provide the basis for his statement that private citizens were responsible for these stays. He also did not explain whether these individuals were members of the Qatari royal family.
365

Regardless of whether the stay labeled as the Sheikh Al Thani Family Extended Stay involved only private citizens, it would be reasonable to infer that the booking of a prolonged hotel stay—which ultimately yielded hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to a Trump-owned business—using the name of the Qatari royal family was intended to signal to The Trump Organization and to then-President Trump the country’s financial support of the President’s business at a time when Qatar was seeking then-President Trump’s support in a conflict that constituted a crisis to Qatar. This is one more expenditure highlighting how then-President Trump’s continued ownership of private businesses created a magnet for foreign countries seeking to influence the foreign policy of the United States through payments to the President and his businesses. This is precisely the kind of self-dealing that the U.S. Constitution seeks to prevent by prohibiting a President from receiving emoluments “of any kind whatever” from foreign governments absent congressional consent. However, despite numerous indications that this expensive stay involved members of Qatar’s royal family, given the Ambassador’s representations to the Committee, this report does not include the expenditures at the Trump International Hotel by the Sheikh Al Thani Family among the total emoluments paid by Qatar to Trump-owned businesses.

It is notable that on a couple of days, the Sheikh al Thani family’s stay at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., overlapped with a stay by officials from the “Royal Saudi Embassy – Misnitry [sic] of Defence.” If the stay by the Sheikh Al Thani family at the Trump International Hotel involved any government officials—or members of the royal family—then the Trump International Hotel would have been simultaneously receiving emoluments from both Qatar and Saudi Arabia—two countries that were in conflict and that were both seeking to curry then-President Trump’s support. Further, both stays occurred shortly before leaders from each of Qatar and Saudi Arabia met separately with then-President Trump at the White House. Below is a single page from the Trump International Hotel Guest Ledger for March 9, 2018, showing rooms booked to both the “Sheikh Al Thani Family Extended Stay” and the “Royal Saudi Embassy – Misnitry [sic] of Defence Delegation” on the same day.366

[x]
Guest Ledger - Charges.

Potential Conflicts Relating to Jared Kushner and the Kushner Companies

On February 11 and February 12, 2018, during the extended stay at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., under the Al Thani family name, a room at the hotel was booked under the name “Ivanka & Jared Kushner.”367 Shortly thereafter, on February 14, 2018, Jared Kushner’s father, Charles Kushner, contacted Brookfield Asset Management—a company in which Qatar has invested significant funds—seeking a bailout for his financially troubled property at 666 Fifth Avenue in New York. Two months later, President Trump met with the Emir of Qatar at the White House. The Kushner Companies and Brookfield finalized a deal in August 2018 in which Brookfield Asset Management leased 666 Fifth Avenue and paid 99 years of rent—totaling approximately $1.1 billion—in advance.368

Just as he did with Saudi Arabia, former Senior Advisor Jared Kushner cultivated highly lucrative business ties with Qatar after President Trump left office. After leaving the White House in 2021, Mr. Kushner embarked on a tour of Persian Gulf states, including Qatar and the U.A.E., to pitch those countries’ sovereign wealth funds on investing in his private equity fund. Initially, Qatari officials reportedly declined to invest based on its view of Mr. Kushner as an opponent during the Trump Administration, but they also feared retaliation if they rejected Mr. Kushner’s solicitation to invest in the event that Mr. Trump returned to power.369 According to reports, a Qatari sovereign wealth fund ultimately agreed to invest $200 million in Mr. Kushner’s fund.370

________________

Notes:

333 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027357 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027885.

334 Qatar bought the unit from an entity called 61-02 81st Street LLC. The Committee’s Democratic staff does not know who the beneficial owner of this entity is. See New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2018012900694001 (Jan. 17, 2018) (online https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 2900694001) (accessed Dec. 7, 2023).

335 Id.; Trump Set to Benefit as Qatar Buys $6.5m Apartment in New York Tower, The Guardian (May 4, 2018) (online at http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018 ... york-tower); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2004030501059003 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 0501059003) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2012112901543003 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 2901543003) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2012120301328001 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 0301328001) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2018100500569001 (Oct. 3, 2018) (online https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 0500569001) (accessed Dec. 7, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2018012900694001 (Jan. 17, 2018) (online https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 2900694001) (accessed Dec. 7, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2016-2017, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1214 (Jan. 5, 2016) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2017-2018, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1214 (Jan. 5, 2017) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2018-2019, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1214 (Jan. 5, 2018) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2019-2020, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1214 (Jan. 5, 2019) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2020-2021, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1214 (Jan. 5, 2020) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2021-2022, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1214 (Jan. 5, 2021) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2018-2019, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1217 (Jan. 5, 2018) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2019-2020, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1217 (Jan. 5, 2019) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2020-2021, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1217 (Jan. 5, 2020) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2021-2022, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1217 (Jan. 5, 2021) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2016-2017, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1011 (Jan. 5, 2016) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2017-2018, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1011 (Jan. 5, 2017) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2016-2017, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1220 (Jan. 5, 2016) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2017-2018, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1220 (Jan. 5, 2017) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2018-2019, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1220 (Jan. 5, 2018) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2019-2020, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1220 (Jan. 5, 2019) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2020-2021, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1220 (Jan. 5, 2020) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2021-2022, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1220 (Jan. 5, 2021) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023).

336 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00028964 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00029461; Congressional Research Service, Qatar: Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy, (Apr. 11, 2022) (R44533) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44533).

337 Letter from Meshal Al-Thani, Ambassador of the State of Qatar, to Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, Committee on Oversight and Reform (Nov. 22, 2022) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... %20OPO.pdf).

338 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027357 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027885.

339 Congressional Research Service, Qatar: Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy, (Apr. 11, 2022) (R44533) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44533); Trump Team’s Shifts Jolt Some Allies and Soothe Others, New York Times (June 9, 2017) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2017/06/09/world/middleeast/rex-tillerson-calls-for-calm-in-middle-east-standoff-with-qatarhtml).

340 Forrest L. Marion, Building USAF ‘Expeditionary Bases’ for Operation ENDURING FREEDOM-AFGHANISTAN, 2001-2002, Air Force University Chronicles Online Journal, (Nov. 18, 2005) (online at http://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals ... marion.pdf); US Forces Monitor Mideast Skies at Qatar Base Amid World Cup, Air Force Times/The Associated Press (Dec. 2, 2022) (online at http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your- ... world-cup/).

341 U.S. Department of State (@StateDept), X (formerly Twitter) (May 21, 2017) (online at https://twitter.com/StateDept/status/866267018365812736).

342 Trump Trip: President Meets with Egypt, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, NBC News (May 21, 2017) (online at http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/trump- ... in-n762641).

343 Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Other Arab Nations Cut Diplomatic Ties with Qatar, NPR (June 5, 2017) (online at http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/ ... with-qatar).

344 Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), X (formerly Twitter) (June 6, 2017) (online at https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 85792?s=20); Tweets of June 6, 2017, The American Presidency Project, University of California, Santa Barbara (online at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/document ... une-6-2017); Trump Appears to Take Credit for Gulf Nations’ Move Against Qatar, CNN (June 6, 2017) (online at http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/06/politics/ ... index.html).

345 Qatar Given 10 Days to Meet 13 Sweeping Demands by Saudi Arabia, The Guardian (June 23, 2017) (online at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/j ... d-blockade).

346 In Charm Offensive, Qatar Pushes for a Comeback in Washington, New York Times (Feb. 9, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/us/po ... bargo.html).

347 US and Qatar Broker Counterterrorism Agreement, CNN (July 11, 2017) (online at http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/11/politics/ ... index.html).

348 In Charm Offensive, Qatar Pushes for a Comeback in Washington, New York Times (Feb. 9, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/us/po ... bargo.html).

349 Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Other Arab Nations Cut Diplomatic Ties with Qatar, NPR (June 5, 2017) (online at http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/ ... with-qatar); The White House, Press Release: President Trump Meets with Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani of Qatar (Sept. 20, 2017) (online at https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/ar ... ani-qatar/).

350 The White House: Press Release: President Trump Meets with Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani of Qatar (Sept. 20, 2017) (online at https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/ar ... ani-qatar/).

351 President Trump Meeting with Emir of Qatar, C-SPAN (Apr. 10, 2018) (online at http://www.c- span.org/video/?443832-1/president-trump-meets-emir-qatar).

352 Pompeo’s Message to Saudis? Enough is Enough: Stop Qatar Blockade, New York Times (Apr. 28, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/28/world ... ockadehtml).

353 Congressional Research Service, Qatar: Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy, (Apr. 11, 2022) (R44533) (online at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44533).

354 New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2004030501059003 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 0501059003) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2018100500569001 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 0500569001) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2012112901543003 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 2901543003) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2012112901543003 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 2901543003) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2012120301328001 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 0301328001) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023).

355 Trump Set to Benefit as Qatar Buys $6.5m Apartment in New York Tower, The Guardian (May 4, 2018) (online at http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018 ... york-tower).

356 New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2018100500569001(online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 0500569001) (accessed Aug. 23, 2023).

357 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027357 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027885. Of note, in some instances, the Trump World Tower Condominium Status Report refers to “Quatar.”

358 Id.

359 Trump Set to Benefit as Qatar Buys $6.5m Apartment in New York Tower, The Guardian (May 4, 2018) (online at http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018 ... york-tower).

360 Harvard Divinity School, Al-Thani Family (online at https://rpl.hdsharvard.edu/faq/al-thani-family) (accessed Nov. 1, 2023).

361 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00028964 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00029461.

362 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00029021.

363 Letter from Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, Committee on Oversight and Reform, to Ms. Debra Steidel Wall, Acting Archivist of the United States, National Archives and Records Administration (Nov. 14, 2022) (online at https://oversightdemocratshouse.gov/sit ... 20Docs.pdf).

364 Id.

365 Letter from Meshal Al-Thani, Ambassador of the State of Qatar, to Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, Committee on Oversight and Reform (Nov. 22, 2022) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... %20OPO.pdf).

366 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE 00029268.

367 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00029068; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00029080.

368 Deal Gives Kushners Cash Infusion on 666 Fifth Avenue, New York Times (Aug. 3, 2018) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2018/08/03/nyregion/kushners-building-fifth-avenue-brookfield-leasehtml); Letter from Chairman Ron Wyden, Senate Committee on Finance, and Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, House Committee on Oversight and Reform, to Secretary Lloyd J. Austin, III, Department of Defense (Dec. 6, 2022) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... 281%29.pdf).

369 Seeking Backers for New Fund, Jared Kushner Turns to Middle East, New York Times (Nov. 26, 2021) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/26/us/po ... e-easthtml).

370 Kushner Firm Got Hundreds of Millions from 2 Persian Gulf Nations, New York Times (Mar. 30, 2023) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/30/us/po ... rates.html); Letter from Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney, Committee on Oversight and Reform, to Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III, Department of Defense (Dec. 6, 2022) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... 281%29.pdf); Letter from Ranking Member Jamie Raskin, Committee on Oversight and Accountability, to Jared Kushner, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, A Fin Management LLC (Feb. 15, 2023) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... a.fnl_.pdf); Letter from Ranking Member Jamie Raskin to Chairman James Comer, Committee on Oversight and Accountability (Aug. 31, 2023) (online at https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... bpoena.pdf).

[admin]

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

According to the records provided to the Committee by Mazars, on four occasions between October 2017 and May 2018, the government of the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) booked rooms at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., at a cost of $65,225.371

The first U.A.E. stay occurred in October 2017, just days after Mr. Elliott Broidy, a former Trump fundraiser who would later plead guilty to violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), reportedly had personally appealed to then-President Trump on October 6, 2017, on behalf of the U.A.E.372 In addition to other issues of concern to the country, Broidy reportedly urged President Trump to fire then-Secretary of State Tillerson, who had pressed Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. to ease their blockade of Qatar.373 Mr. Broidy himself had stayed at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., from October 1, 2017, through October 6, 2017—one of his many stays at the hotel.374 President Trump pardoned Mr. Broidy shortly before leaving office.375

Additional U.A.E. stays occurred in November 2017, March 2018, and May 2018. The U.A.E. delegation’s stay at the Trump International Hotel in March 2018 overlapped with a stay by a delegation from Saudi Arabia, a close ally of the U.A.E. Delegations of both countries were staying at the hotel on March 13, 2018, the day on which then-President Trump made public his decision to fire Secretary of State Tillerson.376

U.A.E.’s Emolument Spending at Trump Properties

Date / Location / Expenditures / Amount

October 21–23, 2017
Trump International Hotel
(Washington, D.C.)
“Embassy, United Arab Emirates” hotel stay
$2,625377
November 10, 2017
Trump International Hotel
(Washington, D.C.)
“E-United Arab Emirates” hotel stay (37 rooms)
$33,512378
March 8–16, 2018
Trump International Hotel
(Washington, D.C.)
“Embassy of the UAE Military Delegation” hotel stay
$26,168379
May 1–3, 2018
Trump International Hotel
(Washington, D.C.)
“Embassy of the UAE Military Delegation—May” hotel stay
$2,920380
EMOLUMENTS PAID BY U.A.E.
(2017–2018)
$65,225

The U.A.E. “is a federation of seven principalities or ‘emirates,’” including Abu Dhabi (the capital) and Dubai (a commercial center). Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan (commonly known as M.B.Z.), the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, has “effectively been ruling the Emirates since 2014.”381

U.A.E. and Saudi Arabia have maintained “closely aligned” foreign policies. The two countries have “cooperated on various regional endeavors, such as the blockade of Qatar (2017–2021), the ongoing war in Yemen (2015–present), and support to counter Muslim Brotherhood and Islamist-affiliated movements.”382

U.A.E. Cultivation of Trump Administration and Qatar Blockade

According to the New York Times, M.B.Z. “worked assiduously before the presidential election to crack Mr. Trump’s inner circle, and secured a secret meeting during the transition period with the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.”383

Then-President Trump met with M.B.Z. at the White House on May 15, 2017. During an Oval Office photo opportunity, President Trump said that M.B.Z. was a “very special person, highly respected” and noted, “I think [he] loves the United States, which to us is very important.”384 This visit occurred less than a week before President Trump traveled to Saudi Arabia for the first overseas trip of his presidency.385

As discussed previously, in early June 2017, U.A.E. joined Saudi Arabia and other allied nations in blockading Qatar.386 On June 8, 2017, then-Secretary of State Tillerson stated, “The emir of Qatar has made progress in halting financial support and expelling terrorist elements from his country, but he must do more and he must do it more quickly.” Secretary Tillerson called on the U.A.E., Saudi Arabia, and their regional allies to “ease the blockade against Qatar.” That same day, however, then-President Trump took a harsher stance than his Secretary of State, stating: “The nation of Qatar unfortunately has historically been a funder of terrorism at a very high level.”387 The Ambassador of the U.A.E. to the United States commented approvingly: “The UAE welcomes President Trump’s leadership in challenging Qatar’s troubling support for extremism. The next step is for Qatar to acknowledge these concerns and commit to re-examine its regional policies.”388

On March 13, 2018, then-President Trump made public his decision to fire Secretary Tillerson by tweeting that “Mike Pompeo, Director of the CIA, will become our new Secretary of State.”389 The New York Times called Tillerson’s dismissal the end of “a rocky tenure for a former oil executive who never meshed with the president,” and noted that Secretary Tillerson repeatedly disagreed with the White House and “broke publicly with Mr. Trump on issues ranging from the dispute between Saudi Arabia and Qatar to the American response to Russia’s cyber aggression.”390

During the Trump Administration, the U.A.E. reportedly continued “to exploit the vulnerabilities in American governance, including its reliance on campaign contributions, susceptibility to powerful lobbying firms and lax enforcement of disclosure laws” in order “to steer U.S. foreign policy in ways favorable to the Arab autocracy.”391 These efforts were so concerning to the U.S. intelligence community that U.S. agencies reportedly compiled a classified report detailing the U.A.E. government’s systematic efforts to manipulate U.S. foreign policy in its favor.392

The U.A.E. reportedly engaged George Nader—a businessman, informal adviser to President Trump, and “mediator and back-channel diplomat in Middle Eastern affairs”—to help the country influence U.S. foreign policy.393 According to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report into foreign interference in the 2016 election, Mr. Nader worked for the U.A.E. as an advisor to M.B.Z.394 According to the New York Times, “Mr. Nader also held himself out as intermediary for Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman.”395 The New York Times reported:

Mr. Nader, 58, made frequent trips to the White House during the early months of the Trump administration, meeting with Stephen K. Bannon and Jared Kushner to discuss American policy toward the Persian Gulf states in advance of Mr. Trump’s trip to Saudi Arabia in May 2017, according to people familiar with the meetings.396

During the early days of the Trump Administration, Mr. Nader reportedly connected Mr. Broidy with M.B.Z., and eventually, Mr. Broidy’s company entered into contracts with the U.A.E. worth several hundred million dollars.397 Mr. Broidy took numerous actions intended to advance the U.A.E.’s policy objectives—and oppose Qatar’s interests—such as lobbying Members of Congress and “persuad[ing] an American think tank, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, to stage an anti-Qatar conference,” among other actions.398

Public reporting also indicates that Mr. Broidy met with then-President Trump at the White House on October 6, 2017. According to the New York Times, in advance of Mr. Broidy’s meeting with President Trump, Mr. Nader conveyed to Mr. Broidy the policy positions the U.A.E. wanted him to advocate.399

After meeting with then-President Trump, Mr. Broidy reported back to Mr. Nader “recounting his advocacy on the U.A.E.’s behalf during the meeting with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office amid an afternoon of stops throughout the White House.”400 In addition to raising other issues of priority to the U.A.E., Mr. Broidy reportedly “lobbied the president to meet privately ‘in an informal setting’ with the Emirates’ military commander and de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan; to back the U.A.E.’s hawkish policies in the region; and to fire Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson.”401

In 2019, the DOJ indicted Mr. Nader, Mr. Ahmad “Andy” Khawaja, and other co-conspirators for illegally funneling Emirati money to the inaugural committee of President-elect Trump, among other political action committees and party organizations, as well as to the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton prior to Mr. Trump’s electoral victory.402 Mr. Nader, who was already serving a sentence for a prior conviction, was given “an additional year and eight months in prison for his role in funneling at least $3.5 million in unlawful contributions from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to unwitting political committees in the United States.”403

In October 2020, Elliott Broidy pled guilty to acting as an unregistered foreign agent for Malaysian interests. Mr. Broidy also admitted to lobbying the U.S. government “to deport a critic of the Chinese Communist Party.”404 President Trump pardoned Mr. Broidy for these offenses shortly before leaving office.405

Emoluments Paid by U.A.E. to Trump-Owned Businesses

As noted above, the U.A.E. spent more than $65,000 on stays at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., from October 2017 through May 2018. On the nights of October 21 to October 23, 2017, the Embassy of the U.A.E. paid $2,625 for rooms rented at the hotel.406 This was the first of four stays by the Embassy of the U.A.E. recorded in the documents produced by Mazars to the Committee.

The guest ledger for the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., shows that on the night of November 10, 2017, the “E[mbassy of the]-United Arab Emirates” rented 37 rooms. According to the hotel ledger dated July 29, 2018, its organization account for the night of November 10, 2017, was marked “Closed” with total charges of $33,512.407

In March 2018, an “Embassy of the UAE Military Delegation” rented 11 rooms at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., paying $26,168. The bill for this stay states that the delegation arrived on March 8, 2018, and departed on March 16, 2018 (with some food and beverage charges incurred on March 17 and additional charges apparently applied to the bill after that date). However, based on the records, charges do not appear to have begun accruing until March 10, 2018.408 Notably, both the U.A.E. and Saudi delegations were staying at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., the day that Secretary of State Tillerson was fired.

Officials from the Embassy of the U.A.E. stayed at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., again in May 2018, paying $2,920.409

Lobbyist Spending

Elliott Broidy, who would later plead guilty to violating FARA, stayed at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., on October 6, 2017—the same day he reportedly lobbied President Trump on behalf of the U.A.E.410 For his stay that night and the five preceding nights, he spent at least $2,970.411 From October 22 to 24, 2017, Mr. Broidy stayed at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., spending at least $2,820 during that period.412 This stay partially overlapped with a stay by the U.A.E. Embassy.413 It is unclear whether Mr. Broidy stayed at the hotel as part of lobbying efforts on behalf of the U.A.E. or whether his stays were paid for by the U.A.E. As a result, these sums are not included in the emolument totals in this report.

Trump Business Interests in U.A.E.

Former President Trump has had extensive business interests in Dubai for many years. According to the New York Times, in 2013 and again in 2014, Trump agreed to work with Hussain Sajwani, a developer who was reportedly known as the “Donald of Dubai,” to develop two golf courses.414 In February 2017, shortly after Donald Trump took office, both Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump attended the opening of one of those golf courses.415

On May 16, 2017—just one day before then-President Trump met with M.B.Z.—Donald Trump Jr. appears to have met with Mr. Sajwani in the U.A.E.416 On August 5, 2017, The Trump Organization tweeted “the launch of The Trump Estates Park Residences, a collection luxury villas [sic] with exclusive access to @TrumpGolfDubai.”417 This venture was undertaken by The Trump Organization in partnership with Hussain Sajwani’s DAMAC firm.418 President Trump’s ethics disclosure covering his finances for 2017 show that he claimed $141,433 in income from “DT DUBAI GOLF MANAGER LLC,” an entity through which former President Trump conducted business for the Trump International Golf Club, Dubai.419 The company generated even more income for then-President Trump during the rest of his time in office. He reported earning over $300,000 in income from the company in 2018 and 2019, and $458,000 from it in 2020.420

The Trump family’s significant business activities in the U.A.E. during Mr. Trump’s presidency raise the persistent question of whether he conducted American foreign policy in the Middle East to further his business interests rather than U.S. interests.

U.A.E. Investment in Kushner Fund

Shortly after leaving the White House, during his 2021 fundraising tour of Gulf States for his private equity firm, Affinity Partners, Jared Kushner solicited an investment from the U.A.E. Despite reported concerns by Emirati rulers about Mr. Kushner’s lack of business experience, an Emirati fund ultimately agreed to invest $200 million in the fund.421

_______________

Notes:


371 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT-COMMITTEE-00018630; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018642; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018649; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018805; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018806; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00014770; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008096 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008119; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008120.

372 How 2 Gulf Monarchies Sought to Influence the White House, New York Times (Mar. 21, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/21/us/po ... uence.html).

373 Saudi Arabia Planned to Invade Qatar Last Summer. Rex Tillerson’s Efforts to Stop It May Have Cost Him His Job, The Intercept (Aug. 1, 2018) (online at https://theintercept.com/2018/08/01/rex ... saudi-uae/); Trump Seems to Undercut Tillerson’s Remarks on Qatar, Washington Post (June 9, 2017) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/ara ... _storyhtml).

374 Emails Show UAE-Linked Effort Against Tillerson, BBC News (Mar. 5, 2018) (online at http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43281519); MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018457; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018466; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018478; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018487; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018494; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018501.

375 With Hours Left in Office, Trump Grants Clemency to Bannon and Other Allies, New York Times (May 5, 2021) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/20/us/po ... ardonshtml).

376 Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), X (formerly Twitter) (Mar. 13, 2018) (online at https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 6656623616).

377 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT-COMMITTEE-00018630; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018642; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018649.

378 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018805; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE- 00018806; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00014770.

379 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008096 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008119.

380 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008120.

381 Congressional Research Service, The United Arab Emirates (UAE): Issues for U.S. Policy (Jan. 30, 2023) (online at http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RS21852); Embassy of the United Arab Emirates, About UAE President Sheikh Mohamed Bin Zayed (accessed Nov. 1, 2023) (online at http://www.uae-embassy.org/discover-uae ... -bin-zayed); Mohammed bin Zayed, an Ambitious U.S. Partner, Rises to Lead the U.A.E., New York Times (May 16, 2022) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2022/05/14/world/middleeast/mohammed-bin-zayed-elected-uae-leader.html).

382 Congressional Research Service, The United Arab Emirates (UAE): Issues for U.S. Policy (Jan. 30, 2023) (online at http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RS21852).

383 The Most Powerful Arab Ruler Isn’t M.B.S. It’s M.B.Z., New York Times (June 2, 2019) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2019/06/02/world/middleeast/crown-prince-mohammed-bin-zayedhtml).

384 Trump Meets with Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi as He Looks to Muslim World, USA Today (May 15, 2017) (online at http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli ... 101721138/).

385 Saudis Welcome Trump’s Rebuff of Obama’s Mideast Views, New York Times (May 20, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/20/world ... rabia.html).

386 Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Other Arab Nations Cut Diplomatic Ties with Qatar, NPR (June 5, 2017) (online at http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/ ... with-qatar).

387 Trump Scolds Qatar as Tillerson Seeks to Ease Crisis, Reuters (June 8, 2017) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/us-gulf-qatar-sanctions/trump-scolds-qatar-as-tillerson-seeks-to-ease-crisis-idUSKBN18Z2ZU).

388 Gulf Crisis: Trump Escalates Row by Accusing Qatar of Sponsoring Terror, The Guardian (June 9, 2017) (online at http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017 ... iddle-east).

389 Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), X (formerly Twitter) (Mar. 13, 2018) (online at https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 6656623616).

390 Trump Fires Rex Tillerson and Will Replace Him with C.I.A. Chief Pompeo, New York Times (Mar. 13, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/13/us/po ... ompeo.html).

391 U.S. Intelligence Report Says Key Gulf Ally Meddled in American Politics, Washington Post (Nov. 12, 2022) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/national- ... el-report/).

392 Id.

393 George Nader, One of the Trump-Russia Investigation’s Most Mysterious Figures, Explained, Vox (Mar. 28, 2018) (online at http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/ ... ity-russia).

394 Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III, Report on The Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election (Mar. 2019) (online at http://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/fil ... 6/download).

395 How 2 Gulf Monarchies Sought to Influence the White House, New York Times (Mar. 21, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/21/us/po ... uence.html).

396 Mueller’s Focus on Adviser to Emirates Suggests Broader Investigation, New York Times (Mar. 3, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/03/us/po ... irateshtml).

397 Id.

398 The Princes, the President and the Fortune Seekers, Associated Press (May 21, 2018) (online at https://apnews.com/article/a3521859cf8d ... 567abd2b71).

399 How 2 Gulf Monarchies Sought to Influence the White House, New York Times (Mar. 21, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/21/us/po ... uence.html).

400 Mueller’s Focus on Adviser to Emirates Suggests Broader Investigation, New York Times (Mar. 3, 2018) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/03/us/po ... irateshtml).

401 Id.

402 United States v. Khawaja, et al., No. 1:19-cr-374 (D.D.C.) (online at https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/12/ ... 2.3.19.pdf); Indictment Details How Emirates Sought Influence in 2016 Campaign, New York Times (Dec. 5, 2019) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2019/12/05/us/politics/indictment-uae-influence.html).

403 Department of Justice, Press Release: Man Pleads Guilty to Child Exploitation Crimes (Jan. 13, 2020) (online at http://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/man ... ion-crimes); Mueller Probe Witness Gets 10-year Sentence on Child Porn, Abuse Charges, Politico (June 26, 2020) (online at http://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/26 ... nce-341624); Department of Justice, Press Release: Businessman Sentenced for $3.5M Foreign Conduit Contribution Scheme (July 18, 2023) (online at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/businessm ... ion-scheme).

404 Elliott Broidy Pleads Guilty in Foreign Lobbying Case, New York Times (Oct. 20, 2020) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2020/10/20/us/politics/elliott-broidy-foreign-lobbying.html); Department of Justice, Press Release: Elliott Broidy Pleads Guilty for Back-Channel Lobbying Campaign to Drop 1MDB Investigation and Remove a Chinese Foreign National (Oct. 20, 2020) (online at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/elliott-b ... gation-and).

405 With Hours Left in Office, Trump Grants Clemency to Bannon and Other Allies, New York Times (May 5, 2021) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/20/us/po ... ardonshtml).

406 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT-COMMITTEE-00018630; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018642; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018649.

407 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018805; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018806; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00014770.

408 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008096 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008119.

409 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008120. The bill states that the arrival date was May 1, 2018, and the departure date was May 31, 2018; however, charges were incurred only on May 1, May 2, and May 3, 2018, by four individuals.

410 Department of Justice, Press Release: Elliott Broidy Pleads Guilty for Back-Channel Lobbying Campaign to Drop 1MDB Investigation and Remove a Chinese Foreign National (Oct. 20, 2020) (online at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/elliott-b ... gation-and).

411 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018457; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018466; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018478; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018487; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018494; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018501.

412 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018642; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018643; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018649; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018657.

413 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018642; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00018649.

414 Trump’s Business Ties in the Gulf Raise Questions About His Allegiances, New York Times (June 17, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/17/world ... ances.html).

415 Trump Sons Open Dubai Golf Club as Namesake Now US President¸ Seattle Times (Feb. 18, 2017) (online at http://www.seattletimes.com/business/tr ... golf-club/).

416 Trump’s Business Ties in the Gulf Raise Questions About His Allegiances, New York Times (June 17, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/17/world ... ances.html); Hussain Sajwani, Instagram (May 16, 2017) (online at http://www.instagram.com/p/BUJwB2HlnMB/).

417 The Trump Organization (@Trump), X (formerly Twitter) (Aug. 5, 2017) (online at https://twitter.com/trump/status/893841118328172544).

418 Trump’s Interests vs. America’s, Dubai Edition, The Atlantic (Aug. 9, 2017) (online at http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... ts/508382/).

419 Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed May 15, 2018) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2018.pdf); ProPublica, Trump’s 10 Troubling Deals with Foreign Power-Players (Jan. 19, 2017) (online at https://projects.propublica.org/trump-conflicts/); DAMAC Properties, Press Release: DAMAC Properties to Develop Championship Trump International Golf Course in Dubai (May 5, 2013) (accessed via Nexis).

420 Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed May 15, 2018) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2018.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed May 15, 2019) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2019.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed July 31, 2020) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... losure.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed Jan. 15, 2021) (online at https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presidenns ... %20278.pdf); ProPublica, Trump’s 10 Troubling Deals with Foreign Power-Players (Jan. 19, 2017) (online at https://projects.propublica.org/trump-conflicts/); DAMAC Properties, Press Release: DAMAC Properties to Develop Championship Trump International Golf Course in Dubai (May 5, 2013) (accessed via Nexis).

421 Kushner Firm Got Hundreds of Millions From 2 Persian Gulf Nations, New York Times (Mar. 30, 2023) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/30/us/po ... rates.html); Seeking Backers for New Fund, Jared Kushner Turns to Middle East, New York Times (Nov. 26, 2021) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2021/11/26/us/politics/kushner-investment-middle-east.html).

[admin]

KUWAIT

The records produced to the Committee by Mazars reveal that the State of Kuwait paid emoluments to then-President Trump’s businesses totaling $303,372. Just over $150,000 of this amount was paid by the Embassy of Kuwait to the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., for banquets held in 2017 and 2018. According to public reporting, Kuwait also held a banquet at the hotel in 2019.422 However, because Mazars did not produce any records associated with the 2019 banquet, the Committee is unable to determine the amount that the Embassy paid for the event. The remainder of the emoluments that Kuwait paid to then-President Trump’s businesses consists of charges for a property at the Trump World Tower in New York, which was owned by Kuwait throughout President Trump’s term.423

Kuwait’s Emolument Spending at Trump Properties

Date / Location / Expenditure / Amount

February 22, 2017
Trump International Hotel
(Washington, D.C.)
“Embassy of Kuwait National Day -2017”
$77,456424
February 26, 2018
Trump International Hotel
(Washington, D.C.)
Embassy of Kuwait Banquet (2018)
$73,252425
January 2018– December 2018
Trump World Tower
845 United Nations Plaza
(New York, NY)
The Mission of the State of Kuwait
$38,166426
(2018)

Estimated Total Emolument for 4 Years:
$152,664
(2017–2020)
ESTIMATED EMOLUMENTS PAID BY KUWAIT
(2017–2020)
$303,372

On November 18, 2016—just days after Donald Trump was declared the winner of the 2016 presidential election—the then-Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States, H.E. Salem Al-Sabah, reportedly and abruptly switched the venue for the “Embassy of Kuwait National Day” event from the Four Seasons Hotel in Washington, D.C., to the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.427 The Ambassador signed a “Catering Event Agreement” with the Trump International Hotel, in Washington, D.C., for the event at a cost of $82,713. Among the items that the Embassy ordered for the occasion were a “Sushi Station” for $12,000 and a “Little Italy Display” for $10,800.428 The records provided by Mazars to the Committee include a copy of a March 1, 2017, check from the “Embassy of the State of Kuwait” made out to the “Trump International Hotel – Washington, D.C.” in the amount of $77,456; written in the memo section of the check is “Event Date: 02/22/2017.”429 The check is reproduced below.

[x]
EMBASSY OF THE STATE OF KUWAIT, To Trump International Hotel - Washington, DC, $77,456.00

The former Ambassador’s sudden change of plan was particularly notable in light of a December 2016 Politico article, which reported that he “had a tentative ‘save-the-date’ understanding with the Four Seasons” for the National Day event, but “he’d never signed a formal contract” with that hotel. Politico further reported that “Al-Sabah acknowledged that he’d decided to hold the gathering at Trump’s hotel after the Republican won the presidency on Nov. 8.” According to a release on the Kuwaiti Embassy’s website, Kuwait’s 2017 National Day celebration was attended by Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin, among other luminary guests.430

In 2018 and 2019, the Embassy returned to the Trump International Hotel for its national day event.431 Mazars produced to the Committee an email from a member of “Mazars Real Estate Group” to Michael Levchuck, the Area Director of Finance for the Trump International Hotels in New York and Washington, D.C., indicating that Kuwait paid $73,252 for the 2018 event.432 Mazars did not produce any financial records to the Committee for Kuwait’s 2019 national day event, but the Embassy of Kuwait issued a press release reporting that it drew a number of senior Trump Administration officials back to its favorite venue:

The Kuwaiti Embassy in Washington DC held Tuesday evening a reception at the Trump International Hotel to mark the country’s 58th National Day and 28th Liberation Day.

The reception was attended by top senior officials, including Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson, Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency Andrew R. Wheeler and Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway.433

The Permanent Mission of the State of Kuwait to the United Nations also owned a unit in Trump World Tower in New York City that was purchased in 2012 for $4.15 million.434 Kuwait paid $38,166 in base charges to Trump World Tower for the unit for 2018—the only year for which Mazars produced records. Assuming that these charges were unchanged throughout President Trump’s time in office, this report estimates that Kuwait paid President Trump’s business $152,664 for this property over those four years.435

_______________

Notes:

422 Embassy of the State of Kuwait in Washington, Press Release: Kuwait Embassy in Washington Marks Nat’l Celebrations (Feb. 27, 2019) (online at wwwkuwaitembassy.us/in-the-news/kuwait-embassy-in-washington-marks-natl-celebrations#slideshow-2).

423 New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2012112001019004 (Nov. 16, 2012) (online at https://a836-acris.nyc.gov/DS/DocumentS ... 2001019004) (accessed Dec. 7, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2016-2017, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1201 (Jan. 5, 2016) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2017-2018, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1201 (Jan. 5, 2017) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2018-2019, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1201 (Jan. 5, 2018) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2019-2020, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1201 (Jan. 5, 2019) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2020-2021, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1201 (Jan. 5, 2020) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2021-2022, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1201 (Jan. 5, 2021) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023)

424 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027307.

425 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027271.

426 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027355; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027401; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027448; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027496; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027554; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027612; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027706; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027660; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027752; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027795; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027838; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027883.

427 Kuwait Envoy: Trump Aides Didn’t Push Me to Book His Hotel, Politico (Dec. 20, 2016) (online at http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/k ... tel-232866).

428 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027303 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027306.

429 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027307.

430 Embassy of the State of Kuwait in Washington, Press Release: The Embassy Celebrates Kuwait’s National Day (Feb. 23, 2017) (online at http://www.kuwaitembassy.us/in-the-news ... tional-day).

431 Critics Question Undisclosed Flow of Money from Foreign Governments to Trump Properties, ABC News (Feb. 28, 2018) (online at https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/critics ... d=53413228).

432 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027271.

433 Embassy of the State of Kuwait in Washington, Press Release: Kuwait Embassy in Washington Marks Nat’l Celebrations (Feb. 27, 2019) (online at wwwkuwaitembassy.us/in-the-news/kuwait-embassy-in-washington-marks-natl-celebrations#slideshow-2).

434 New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2012112001019003 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 2001019003) (accessed Aug. 29, 2023).

435 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027355; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027401; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027448; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027496; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027554; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027612; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027706; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027660; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027752; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027795; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027838; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027883.

[admin]

INDIA

India is home to the largest number of Trump-owned business projects outside of the United States—this was the case when Mr. Trump first took office and appears to remain so as of the writing of this report.436 Former President Trump’s numerous foreign business entanglements in India and his direction of U.S. foreign policy during his presidency repeatedly intersected, creating conspicuous conflicts of interest. Indeed, Politico observed in February 2020 that “nowhere are the lines more blurred between Trump the statesman and Trump the salesman than in India.”437

It was through his business ventures that Mr. Trump laid the groundwork for his uniquely warm relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In fact, while visiting the White House during President Trump’s Administration, Prime Minister Modi explicitly remarked that Mr. Trump had been “full of very warm remarks and observations for me” when Mr. Trump had previously been in India promoting his business interests prior to his presidency.438

During the Trump Administration, the Indian government spent at least $282,764 at Trump properties in New York City and Washington, D.C. This spending encompassed the costs incurred by the Indian government for two units in Trump World Tower, which they owned throughout the Trump presidency, as well as multiple stays at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., by officials from the Indian Embassy in the United States.439

At the same time, The Trump Organization, led by Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, was moving ahead on multiple projects in India while their father was President. In 2019, OpenSecrets described the importance of the Indian market for Mr. Trump’s business, noting, “The Trump Organization covets perhaps no other foreign country more than India.”440 Together, India’s emolument spending at Trump properties and Mr. Trump’s deep business ties to India enriched Donald Trump by potentially millions of dollars while he was in office.441

India’s Emolument Spending at Trump Properties

Date / Location / Expenditure / Amount

2017–2020
Trump World Tower
845 United Nations Plaza
(New York, NY)
Permanent Mission of India
$66,046442
(2018)
Estimated Total Emolument for 4 Years:
$264,184
(2017–2020)
February 18–19, 2017; February 21–24, 2017; March 5–18, 2017
Trump International Hotel
(Washington, D.C.)
Stays by Indian Diplomats
$18,580443
ESTIMATED EMOLUMENTS PAID BY INDIA
(2017–2020)
$282,764

Mr. Trump had been conducting business in India for over a decade before he took office and had five projects underway at various stages of development when he was sworn in as President.444 He partnered with influential businesspeople in the country, many of whom were well-connected politically, but whose business practices have been called into question. For example, Mr. Trump entered into business with several individuals implicated in investigations by Indian authorities involving accusations of fraud and other financial misconduct.445 Some of those companies continued to face investigations during Mr. Trump’s presidency.446

Mr. Trump reportedly made a positive first impression on Mr. Modi years before he was elected president. In August 2014, shortly after Mr. Modi was elected as India’s Prime Minister, Mr. Trump traveled to Mumbai to promote a Trump-branded project. During that business trip, Trump praised Prime Minister Modi, who was a political ally of Mr. Trump’s business partner on the Mumbai project, Mangal Prabhat Lodha. In addition to being one of India’s wealthiest businessmen, Mr. Lodha is also reportedly a “powerful,” long-serving state legislator and leader in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Mr. Modi’s political party.447 In 2013, when Trump’s Mumbai Tower deal was announced, several of Mr. Lodha’s companies had reportedly been under investigation by Indian officials for corrupt practices and tax evasion, and the Mumbai development was not “a sure thing.” The project’s prospects improved, however, after Mr. Modi took office. Under the Modi government, the investigations into Mr. Lodha’s companies began to wind down, with several investigators alleging that they were forced to end their cases prematurely at the urging of “loyalists” to Prime Minister Modi, according to reporting from the New Republic. 448

During his 2014 visit to India, Mr. Trump said that he was looking forward to doing business under the Modi Administration, stating: “I do see India as a great place to invest, and I think the election made that even better.” Mr. Trump also commented, “People are coming into India now that maybe would not have prior to the election.” He promised, “We will make investments in India, substantial investments in India. It’s a great place to invest.”449 Mr. Trump reportedly “gave more than a dozen interviews to the local media, repeatedly praising Modi for doing a ‘spectacular job’ and improving the country’s image around the world.”450

Ahead of Mr. Trump’s presidential inauguration, public reporting observed that his significant business ventures in India created a “potentially serious ethical hazard for a United States president who is also a real estate mogul.”451 As the New York Times explained in November 2016:

Several of Mr. Trump’s real estate ventures in India—where he has more projects underway than in any location outside North America—are being built through companies with family ties to India’s most important political party. This makes it more likely that Indian government officials will do special favors benefiting Mr. Trump’s projects, including pressuring state-owned banks to extend favorable loans.452

Even as he was preparing to take office, Mr. Trump made time to meet with several of his Indian business partners. The week after his election, President-elect Trump met at Trump Tower in New York with three of the Indian businessmen with whom he worked on a real estate development project in the country. Mr. Trump reportedly discussed both his business ventures in India as well as politics—including his affinity for Prime Minister Modi—at this meeting.453

Also in November 2016, India’s foreign secretary, S. Jaishankar, reportedly met with “very senior” members of President-elect Trump’s transition team during a visit to the United States, doing so “[a]midst reports that efforts are on to fix an early meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Donald Trump.”454

Mr. Modi would not forget Mr. Trump’s kind words, nor his record as a businessman. According to OpenSecrets, during his official visit to the White House in June 2017, the Prime Minister “reminisced over Trump’s kind comments made during his 2014 trip to India.”455 The translated comments of the Prime Minister included the following statement: “I do remember very well that when President Trump, when he was not even President, visited India. And when in a media interview, he was asked about me. He was full of very warm remarks and observations for me. I still remember them today.”456

Prime Minister Modi also lauded Mr. Trump’s “vast and successful” business experience, which the Prime Minister “predicted would galvanize relations between the United States and India,” according to the New York Times.457 The Wall Street Journal reported that Prime Minister Modi’s visit to the White House came “amid differences between Messrs. Modi and Trump on issues such as trade, climate change and immigration” but that “the two men papered over their differences as they worked to establish a rapport in discussions set over approximately four hours, including a private dinner at the White House. They hugged after their public statements.”458

Continued Promotion of Trump Businesses During the Trump Presidency

Just one month after the June 2017 visit of Prime Minister Modi to the White House, the Wall Street Journal reported that “[p]romotional material for the Trump Tower in Mumbai improperly featured a reference to President Donald Trump, showing how difficult it is to separate the president from a brand whose value is based on his name.” The material reportedly stated: “The world’s glitterati have always chosen a unique landmark: Trump,” and included the words: “Donald Trump. The Man. The Icon.” In addition, “an accompanying email did refer to Mr. Trump as POTUS—short for President of the United States—and cited a tweet in which he called the project ‘incredible.’” After being contacted by the press, “the Trump Organization and an Indian development firm marketing the project said the materials had been sent out by a broker without their authorization, and won’t be used again.”459 The invocation of then-President Trump in this marketing campaign nevertheless reflects both how active Mr. Trump’s business in India remained during his presidency as well as how President Trump and his Indian business stood to profit from his presidency.

In the months that followed Prime Minister Modi’s visit to the White House, Ivanka Trump, as a White House official, and Donald Trump Jr., as the head of The Trump Organization, would each make working trips to India.460 In November 2017, Ms. Trump led the U.S. delegation to the Global Entrepreneurship Summit in Hyderabad, India, at the invitation of Prime Minister Modi, who accompanied her at the event.461

Weeks before Ms. Trump’s visit, the Washington Post reported that Donald Trump Jr. was expected to travel to India to launch Trump Organization residential projects planned for Kolkata, in the Indian state of West Bengal, and in Gurgaon, a suburb of New Delhi. Both projects had been “inked” prior to Mr. Trump’s election and continued “the family’s promotion of the Trump empire despite concerns over the president’s potential conflicts of interest with foreign governments.”462

The New Republic reported that “clearances for the Gurgaon Trump Towers went through in ‘no time,’ based on directives from BJP party leaders in New Delhi” shortly after Ms. Trump’s November 2017 visit to the country for the Global Entrepreneurship Summit.463

Mr. Trump Jr. eventually flew to India in February 2018, where he promoted The Trump Organization’s real estate projects on a multi-city tour that alarmed ethics experts. While in New Delhi to publicize the Trump-branded residential building in Gurgaon, major Indian newspapers carried front-page ads featuring photos of Mr. Trump Jr., asking, “TRUMP HAS ARRIVED. HAVE YOU?” and “TRUMP IS HERE. ARE YOU INVITED?” According to Politico, “His trip net[ted] $15 million in real estate sales for the Trump Towers in Gurgaon.” Notably, Mr. Trump Jr. also had a closed-door meeting with Prime Minister Modi while on this business trip.464

Donald Trump Jr. continued to personally promote the Trump-branded projects in India throughout his father’s presidency. In 2019, he reportedly met with the buyers of residences in Trump Towers Delhi who had been flown to New York City as part of a promotional effort intended “to generate interest in the properties in India.” They “stayed at Trump Tower and dined with Trump Jr. at Trump Ferry Point.” Politico reported that “at least one buyer gushed about meeting the son of the president.”465 One attendee told the Telegraph India, “It’s a dream come true, shaking hands with the son of the U.S. president. I am ready to buy one more flat if they give it me [sic] at the old price. I am ready to make a single shot payment right now.”466

OpenSecrets reported that, “The Trump Organization’s successes in India have coincided largely with Trump’s November 2016 election win,” and these projects were indeed lucrative for Mr. Trump during his time in office. Trump Towers Mumbai earned then-President Trump between $1 million and $5 million in licensing fees in 2017 alone—even before occupants had been able to move into the building.467 Then-President Trump disclosed that he earned between $100,001 to $1 million from the project during each of the remaining years of his presidency. 468 Similarly, he disclosed earning between $100,001 and $1 million in annual income from DT Tower Kolkata LLC, his licensing entity for Trump Tower Kolkata, on his financial disclosures covering the first three years of his presidency. Mr. Trump disclosed that during his last year in office, he earned between $50,001 and $100,000 from that venture.469

With Mr. Trump’s businesses running smoothly in India during his presidency, Mr. Trump and Mr. Modi continued to publicly support one another and maintain a strong personal relationship. In September 2019, then-President Trump again hosted Mr. Modi in the United States—this time “in Houston, Texas, at ‘Howdy, Modi!’-a mega-rally attended by some 50,000 Indian Americans.”470 Months later, in February 2020, Prime Minister Modi hosted a “Namaste, Trump!” rally in the city of Ahmedabad “at the opening of the world’s largest cricket stadium.”471 At this rally, which occurred during President Trump’s first and only visit as President to India, Modi and Trump—who was accompanied by First Lady Melania Trump, his daughter and Advisor Ivanka Trump, and his son-in-law and Senior Advisor Jared Kushner—spoke to “a cheering crowd of more than 100,000.”472

Before becoming Prime Minister, Modi had been chief minister of the state of Gujarat, where Ahmedabad is located. In 2002, during Modi’s tenure as Gujarat’s chief minister, a train carrying Hindu pilgrims from a religious site was set on fire near Ahmedabad, unleashing sectarian violence in which, reportedly, “the official death toll was more than 1,000, including 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus,” although “the real numbers are believed to be much higher.”473

At the 2020 rally in India, then-President Trump praised the “special relationship” that the United States had with India, stating, “We think we’re at a point where our relationship is so special with India. It has never been as good as it is right now, and I think that’s because of the two leaders of each country—really we feel very strongly about each other.”474

Elsewhere during his visit to India, then-President Trump defended Prime Minister Modi as a proponent of religious freedom, even as violent protests broke out over a controversial citizenship law championed by the Prime Minister that was widely perceived as anti-Muslim.475 At a news conference during his visit, President Trump said, “We did talk about religious freedom, and I will say that the prime minister was incredible in what he told me. He wants people to have religious freedom and very strongly.”476

After leaving office, Mr. Trump spoke again of the importance of the special relationship he developed with India as President. He stated in a 2023 interview, “I think India has never had a better friend than me. […] And that’s one of the relationships that, you know, I’ve formed. But India has never had a better friend as President than me.”477

Emoluments Paid by India to Trump-Owned Businesses

According to documents produced by Mazars to the Committee, the Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations owned two units in Trump World Tower in New York which incurred combined common charges in 2018 of $66,046. Assuming that these charges did not change over the course of the Trump presidency, this report estimates that India paid at least $264,184 to Trump World Tower during the Trump Administration for these units. This estimated total does not include additional charges paid by India in 2018 beyond the baseline common fees—such as charges for electricity as well as special assessments—and is therefore almost certainly an underestimate. In 2018—the only year for which Mazars provided records pertaining to these units—in addition to the $66,046 in common charges, India also paid $13,983 in additional charges and fees.478

In addition to the emoluments recorded in the Mazars records, according to a public disclosure made by the Indian government following a records request from a journalist, eight Indian diplomats spent $18,580 at Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., in February and March 2017.479 Mr. Modi’s first and only visit to the White House during Trump’s presidency occurred in June 2017.480 A document provided to the Committee by Mazars shows the “Embassy of India” had an account at a Trump-owned property with a start date of “03/07/2017,” but the document does not show the dates or charges for stay(s) associated with this account (or even the property where the stay(s) occurred).481 Given that documentation from the Indian government confirming expenditures by India at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., is publicly available—and that an account for the Embassy of India is noted in a document produced to the Committee by Mazars—this report includes the sum disclosed by the Indian government in the total amount of the emoluments paid by India to then-President Trump.

_______________

Notes:

436 Potential Conflicts Around the Globe for Trump, the Businessman President, New York Times (Nov. 26, 2016) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/26/us/po ... iness.html); Half-A-Dozen Trump Towers Are Set to Come Up in India, Business Today (Dec. 13, 2022) (online at http://www.businesstoday.in/latest/econ ... 2022-12-13); Proud to be the Largest Developer of Trump Properties in the World: Kalpesh Mehta, Tribeca Developers, Financial Express (Sept. 5, 2023) (online at wwwfinancialexpress.com/money/proud-to-be-the-largest-developer-of-trump-properties-in-the-world-kalpesh-mehta-tribeca-developers-3233478/).

437 Trump Visits a Big Foreign Market—for the U.S. and for Trump Org, Politico (Feb. 22, 2020) (online at http://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/22 ... ess-116322).

438 The American Presidency Project, Donald J. Trump, Remarks Prior to a Meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India (June 26, 2017) (online at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/document ... modi-india).

439 New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2004030900483001 (Mar. 5, 2004) (online at https://a836-acris.nyc.gov/DS/DocumentS ... 0900483001) (accessed Dec. 7, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2004030900469001 (Mar. 5, 2004) (online at https://a836-acris.nyc.gov/DS/DocumentS ... 0900469001) (accessed Dec. 7, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2016-2017, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1199 (Jan. 5, 2016) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2017-2018, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1199 (Jan. 5, 2017) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2018-2019, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1199 (Jan. 5, 2018) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2019-2020, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1199 (Jan. 5, 2019) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2020-2021, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1199 (Jan. 5, 2020) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2021-2022, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1199 (Jan. 5, 2021) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2016-2017, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1233 (Jan. 5, 2016) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2017-2018, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1233 (Jan. 5, 2017) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Assessment Roll 2018-2019, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1233 (Jan. 5, 2018) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2019-2020, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1233 (Jan. 5, 2019) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2020-2021, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1233 (Jan. 5, 2020) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023); New York City Department of Finance, Final Assessment Roll 2021-2022, Borough: Manhattan, Block: 1340, Lot: 1233 (Jan. 5, 2021) (accessed Dec. 6, 2023).

440 OpenSecrets, World of Influence: A Guide to Trump’s Foreign Business Interests (June 4, 2019) (online at http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/06 ... interests/).

441 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027355 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027886; Trump’s D.C. Hotel Hosted Diplomats from These 33 Countries, Forbes (Oct. 10, 2021) (online at wwwforbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2021/10/10/trumps-dc-hotel-hosted-foreign-officials-from-these-33-countries-while-he-was-in-office/); Aroon Deep @AroonDeep, X (formerly Twitter) (Feb. 18, 2018) (online at https://twitter.com/AroonDeep/status/966853259041308673). Mr. Deep’s post on X states that the total amount of the stays by the Indian diplomats at the Trump International Hotel was $18,650; however, the document provided in the X post records expenditures totaling only $18,580 and that is the figure provided in this report. MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008041; OpenSecrets, World of Influence: A Guide to Trump’s Foreign Business Interests (June 4, 2019) (online at http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/06 ... interests/).

442 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027355 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027886.

443 Trump’s D.C. Hotel Hosted Diplomats from These 33 Countries, Forbes (Oct. 10, 2021) (online at wwwforbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2021/10/10/trumps-dc-hotel-hosted-foreign-officials-from-these-33-countries-while-he-was-in-office/); Aroon Deep @AroonDeep, X (formerly Twitter) (Feb. 18, 2018) (online at https://twitter.com/AroonDeep/status/966853259041308673). Mr. Deep’s post on X states that the total amount of the stay by the Indian diplomats at the Trump International Hotel was $18,650; however, the document provided in the X post records expenditures totaling only $18,580, which is the figure provided in this report. MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008041.

444 Potential Conflicts Around the Globe for Trump, the Businessman President, New York Times (Nov. 26, 2016) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/26/us/po ... iness.html).

445 Id.; The Many Red Flags of Trump’s Partners in India—‘Trump, Inc.’ Podcast, ProPublica (Mar. 28, 2018) (online at http://www.propublica.org/article/trump ... -red-flags).

446 Political Corruption and the Art of the Deal, New Republic (Mar. 21, 2018) (online at https://newrepublic.com/article/147351/ ... n-art-deal); Trump’s 10 Troubling Deals with Foreign Power-Players, ProPublica (Jan. 19, 2017) (online at https://projects.propublica.org/trump-conflicts/).

447 Trumps Set to Launch Two Real Estate Projects in India, Despite Conflict-Of-Interest Concerns, Washington Post (Oct. 28, 2017) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asi ... _storyhtml); Political Corruption and the Art of the Deal, New Republic (Mar. 21, 2018) (online at https://newrepublic.com/article/147351/ ... n-art-deal).

448 Donald Trump Back in Mumbai, This Time with Lodha Group, Business Standard (Sept. 17, 2013) (online at http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 640_1.html); Political Corruption and the Art of the Deal, New Republic (Mar. 21, 2018) (online at https://newrepublic.com/article/147351/ ... n-art-deal); OpenSecrets, World of Influence: A Guide to Trump’s Foreign Business Interests (June 4, 2019) (online at http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/06 ... interests/).

449 Donald Trump Plans Investment in India, CNBC (Aug. 12, 2014) (online at http://www.cnbc.com/2014/08/12/donald-t ... -indiahtml).

450 Political Corruption and the Art of the Deal, New Republic (Mar. 21, 2018) (online at https://newrepublic.com/article/147351/ ... n-art-deal).

451 Potential Conflicts Around the Globe for Trump, the Businessman President, New York Times (Nov. 26, 2016) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/26/us/po ... iness.html).

452 Id.

453 Donald Trump Meeting Suggests He Is Keeping Up His Business Ties, New York Times (Nov. 19, 2016) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2016/11/20/us/politics/donald-trump-pauses-transition-work-to-meet-with-indian-business-partners.html).

454 FS Jaishankar Meets Trump’s Transition Team During US Visit, Economic Times (Nov. 24, 2016) (online at https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 605894.cms).

455 OpenSecrets, World of Influence: A Guide to Trump’s Foreign Business Interests (June 4, 2019) (online at http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/06 ... interests/); Trump Meets India’s Leader, A Fellow Nationalist Battling China for His Favor, New York Times (June 26, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/26/us/po ... -indiahtml).

456 The American Presidency Project, Donald J. Trump, Remarks Prior to a Meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India (June 26, 2017) (online at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/document ... modi-india).

457 Trump Meets India’s Leader, a Fellow Nationalist Battling China for His Favor, New York Times (June 26, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/26/us/po ... india.html).

458 Trump and Indian Prime Minister Modi Move to Bridge Divisions, Wall Street Journal (June 26, 2017) (online at http://www.wsj.com/articles/president-t ... 1498511769).

459 Pitch for Trump Tower Mumbai Plays Up Connection to Donald Trump, Wall Street Journal (July 26, 2017) (online at http://www.wsj.com/articles/pitch-for-t ... 1501061401).

460 Luxury Property Ad Blitz Heralds Trump Son’s Visit to India, Washington Post (Feb. 20, 2018) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... _storyhtml).

461 The White House, Ivanka Trump Advisor to the President (accessed Sept. 7, 2023) (online at https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/pe ... nka-trump/); Ivanka Trump’s India Visit Raises Questions About Her Brand, CNBC (Nov. 28, 2017) (online at http://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/28/ivanka-t ... brand.html).

462 Trumps Set to Launch Two Real Estate Projects in India, Despite Conflict-of-Interest Concerns, Washington Post (Oct. 28, 2017) (online at online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asi ... _storyhtml).

463 Political Corruption and the Art of the Deal, New Republic (Mar. 21, 2018) (online at https://newrepublic.com/article/147351/ ... n-art-deal).

464 Trump Visits a Big Foreign Market—for the U.S. and for Trump Org, Politico (Feb. 22, 2020) (online at http://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/22 ... ess-116322).

465 Id.

466 Brand Trumps Downturn Blues, Telegraph India (Sept. 19, 2022) (online at http://www.telegraphindia.com/business/ ... id/1706834).

467 OpenSecrets, World of Influence: A Guide to Trump’s Foreign Business Interests (June 4, 2019) (online at http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/06 ... interests/).

468 Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed May 15, 2018) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2018.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed May 15, 2019) (online at https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... e-2019.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed July 31, 2020) (online https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... losure.pdf); Office of Government Ethics, Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosures (OGE Form 278e) (Donald J. Trump) (Filed Jan. 15, 2021) (online at https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presidenns ... %20278.pdf); What We Know About Trump's Business Empire Trump Tower Mumbai Worli, CNN (2018) (online at http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2018/pol ... /?asset=56).

469 Id.; What We Know About Trump’s Business Empire Trump DT Tower Kolkata LLC, CNN (2018) (online at http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2018/pol ... ?asset=124); Trump Visits a Big Foreign Market—for the U.S. and for Trump Org, Politico (Feb. 22, 2020) (online at http://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/22 ... ess-116322).

470 League of Nationalists; How Trump and Modi Refashioned the U.S.-Indian Relationship, Foreign Affairs (Aug. 2020) (online at wwwforeignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-08-11/modi-india-league-nationalists).

471 ‘Namaste Trump’: Modi Holds Huge Rally for President’s Visit, Reuters (Feb. 23, 2020) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/us-india-usa-trump/namaste-trump-modi-holds-huge-rally-for-presidents-visit-idUSKCN20I0B6).

472 India Set to Welcome Trump, Whose 1st Stop Will Be in Modi’s Home State Of Gujarat, NPR (Feb. 23, 2020) (online at http://www.npr.org/2020/02/23/807481509 ... e-of-gujar); ‘Namaste Trump!’ India’s Modi Welcomes U.S. Leader With an Epic Party, NPR (Feb. 24, 2020) (online at http://www.npr.org/2020/02/24/808096104 ... olicy-aims); Department of State Office of the Historian, Presidential Trips to India (online at https://history.state.gov/departmenthis ... dent/india) (accessed Oct. 3, 2023); Trump Tours India on 36-hour Visit, USA Today (Feb. 24, 2020) (online at http://www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery ... 856153002/).

473 Id.

474 The White House, Remarks by President Trump and Prime Minister Modi of India in Joint Press Statement (Feb. 25, 2020) (online at https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/br ... atement-2/).

475 Protests in New Delhi Against India’s Citizenship Law Ahead of Trump Visit, Reuters (Feb. 23, 2020) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/us-india-citizenship-protests/protests-in-new-delhi-against-indias-citizenship-law-ahead-of-trump-visit-idUSKCN20H0M2); Trump Praises Modi’s Record on Religious Tolerance as Violence Erupts Over India’s Treatment of Muslims, Washington Post (Feb. 25, 2020) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html). The citizenship law—“which grants citizenship for refugees of every major South Asian religion except Muslims”—was “seen by opponents as discriminating against Muslims” and “undermining India’s secular traditions.” Delhi Rocked by Deadly Protests During Donald Trump’s India Visit, The Guardian (Feb. 25, 2020) (online at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/f ... ndia-visit).

476 Trump Praises Modi’s Record on Religious Tolerance as Violence Erupts Over India’s Treatment of Muslims, Washington Post (Feb. 25, 2020) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html).

477 PM Narendra Modi ‘Doing A Terrific Job’, Says Former US president Donald Trump, Economic Times (Sept. 8, 2022) (online at https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 081255.cms).

478 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027355 to MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027886; New York City Department of Finance, Document ID: 2003010601397001 (online at https://a836-acrisnyc.gov/DS/DocumentSe ... 0601397001) (accessed Oct. 2, 2023).

479 Trump’s D.C. Hotel Hosted Diplomats from These 33 Countries, Forbes (Oct. 10, 2021) (online at http://www.forbes.com/sites/zacheverson ... in-office/); Aroon Deep @AroonDeep, X (Feb. 18, 2018) (online at https://twitter.com/AroonDeep/status/966853259041308673). Mr. Deep’s post on X states that the total amount of the stay by the Indian diplomats at the Trump International Hotel was $18,650; however, the document provided in the X post records expenditures totaling only $18,580 and that is the figure provided in this report.

480 Trump and Modi Reaffirm Indian-US Relations with a Hug, CNN (June 27, 2017) (online at http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/27/politics/ ... index.html); Department of State Office of the Historian, Visits by Foreign Leaders of India (online at https://history.state.gov/departmenthis ... sits/india) (accessed Oct. 3, 2023).

481 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008041.

[admin]

PHILIPPINES

In June 2018, while the President of the Philippines was seeking a free-trade deal with the United States, the country’s Embassy held its National Day Reception at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. The Embassy of the Philippines paid nearly $75,000 for the reception—a move that the Philippine Ambassador to the United States acknowledged had “political undertones.”482

At the time, then-President Trump showed his eagerness to foster a friendly relationship with the then-President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte. President Trump repeatedly praised Duterte, even as the authoritarian ruler was accused of orchestrating the extrajudicial killings of thousands of Filipino citizens.483

In addition, Mr. Trump maintained a financial stake in a Trump-branded apartment complex in Manila that earned him millions of dollars while he was President.484

Philippines’ Emolument Spending at Trump Properties

Date / Location / Expenditure / Amount

June 12, 2018
Trump International Hotel
(Washington, D.C.)
“Embassy of the Philippines National Day Reception”
$74,810485

Trade Negotiations with the Philippines

In the days before Mr. Trump’s election in November 2016, then-Philippine President Duterte selected an individual with close ties to Mr. Trump, Jose E.B. Antonio—a real estate developer and “Trump’s business partner in Manila”—as his trade envoy to Washington. At the time, Mr. Antonio’s company was building a Trump-branded apartment complex in Manila, which would generate significant income for Mr. Trump during his time in office.486

Then-President Duterte hoped to negotiate a free-trade agreement with the United States that would have allowed the Philippines to expand the markets for its exports. This proposed deal was intended to build on the existing trade relationship between the countries, whose two-way trade totaled $27 billion in 2016. At the time, approximately 75% of exports from the Philippines already entered the United States duty-free.487

In November 2017, then-President Duterte spoke directly with then-President Trump about a potential free-trade agreement during a private meeting in Manila while Mr. Trump was in the Philippines for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit.488 A spokesperson for then-President Duterte said: “The Philippine side expressed their hope that an FTA or free trade agreement must be concluded between the Philippines and the United States.”489 A joint statement from Mr. Trump and Mr. Duterte confirmed that both leaders discussed their interests in a possible free-trade agreement: “The United States welcomed the Philippines’ interest in a bilateral free trade agreement and both sides agreed to discuss the matter further through the United States-Philippines [Trade and Investment Framework Agreement].”490 Mr. Antonio was also present during this discussion.491

Human Rights Violations

While then-President Trump was discussing a possible trade deal with the Philippines, then-President Duterte was being widely condemned on the world stage for human rights violations, particularly his violent crackdown on illegal drugs that involved the extrajudicial and arbitrary killings of thousands of alleged drug suspects. Mr. Trump not only failed to condemn the authoritarian ruler for his brutal practices, but actually “congratulat[ed] Mr. Duterte for the government-sanctioned attacks on drug suspects.”492 During an April 2017 phone call, Mr. Trump told Mr. Duterte that he was doing an “unbelievable job on the drug problem” and invited him to the White House—making a powerful gesture to the authoritarian ruler that reportedly stunned even Mr. Trump’s own aides.493 Following his November 2017 meeting with Mr. Duterte in Manila, during which the leaders discussed trade policy, then-President Trump told reporters that he and the Philippine president had a “great relationship,” while avoiding questions from the press about Mr. Duterte’s record of human rights abuses.494

Emoluments Paid by the Philippines to Trump-Owned Businesses

In April 2018, amid then-President Duterte’s continued push for a free-trade agreement, the Philippines announced that it would hold its Independence Day reception at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., in June of that year.495 According to a receipt produced to the Committee by Mazars, the Embassy of the Philippines paid $74,810 for the reception.496 The Philippine Ambassador to the United States, Jose Manuel Romualdez, explicitly acknowledged that then-President Trump’s ownership of the hotel factored into his decision to hold the event at the hotel:

The Trump hotel may have some political undertones because it is associated with the U.S. president, but since several other embassies have also held their national day celebrations at the Trump hotel which were well attended—I decided—why not do it there, too.497

On July 12, 2018, one month to the day after the Philippines’ June 12, 2018, reception at Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., Mr. Romualdez announced that the Philippines would begin negotiating a proposed free trade deal with the United States in September 2018, which he said could take years to complete.498 The Trump Administration ultimately did not enter into a free-trade agreement with the Philippines.499

Trump Business Entanglements in the Philippines

In addition to the emolument from the Philippines’ government for its Independence Day event, then-President Trump received millions of dollars during his presidency from the Trump Tower Manila apartment building, which opened in 2017.500

Precisely how much Mr. Trump earned from the project while he was President is not clear. As the New York Times found in 2020, it appears that then-President Trump underreported his income from the Manila apartment complex in his financial disclosures. The low end of former President Trump’s disclosed income for the project was $4.1 million, but this was “less than half of the $9.3 million he actually made,” according to the publication’s analysis of tax documents it had obtained exclusively. The New York Times also reported that in 2017 and 2018 alone, he earned $3 million from the development.501

Another troubling aspect of the project was when then-President Trump’s image was used to promote the Manila tower project after he took office despite assurances from The Trump Organization that such overseas marketing campaigns would be halted during his presidency. According to the Washington Post, a video advertisement that included images of the President playing golf—and also featured Ivanka Trump, then a White House Advisor—promising that residents would “live and breathe” luxury at the Manila Tower remained available on a YouTube account tied to the project’s developer as of May 2017. Promotional materials “that featured pictures of and a quote from Trump, as well as photographs of Ivanka Trump” were “on hand” at the development company’s sales center in Manila at this time. As the Washington Post observed, “The Trump Tower Manila shows why Trump can never truly separate himself from his brand.”502 This disturbing episode followed a similar marketing campaign for a Trump project in India. Both demonstrated Donald Trump’s unabashed willingness to do business as president.

_______________

Notes:

482 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008504; Jose Manuel Romualdez, Our Special 120th Independence Day DC Celebration, Philippine Star (Apr. 22, 2018) (online at http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2018/04 ... elebration).

483 Trump Praises Duterte for Philippine Drug Crackdown in Call Transcript, New York Times (May 23, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/us/po ... ckdownhtml).

484 Long-Concealed Records Show Trump’s Chronic Losses and Years of Tax Avoidance, New York Times (Sept. 27, 2020) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020 ... taxes.html).

485 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008504; MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00027271.

486 Trump Business Partner is Philippines’ New Trade Envoy to U.S., New York Times (Nov. 9, 2016) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/world ... ntoniohtml).

487 Philippines, U.S. to Start Free Trade Talks in September, Reuters (July 12, 2018) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/uk-philippines-usa-trade/philippines-u-s-to-start-free-trade-talks-in-september-idUKKBN1K20XW).

488 Id.

489 Office of the President of the Philippines Presidential Communications Office, Press Release: Duterte, Trump Talk About Free Trade, Illegal Drugs, Marawi Aid (Nov. 13, 2017) (online at https://pco.gov.ph/news_releases/dutert ... arawi-aid/).

490 The American Presidency Project, Joint Statement by President Trump and President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines (Nov. 13, 2017) (online at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/document ... hilippines).

491 Trump Lauds ‘Great Relationship’ with Duterte in Manila, New York Times (Nov. 13, 2017) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2017/11/13/world/asia/trump-duterte-philippineshtml).

492 Trump Praises Duterte for Philippine Drug Crackdown in Call Transcript, New York Times (May 23, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/us/po ... ckdownhtml).

493 Id.; Trump’s ‘Very Friendly’ Talk with Duterte Stuns Aides and Critics Alike, New York Times (Apr. 30, 2017) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/30/us/po ... utertehtml).

494 Trump Lauds ‘Great Relationship’ with Duterte in Manila, New York Times (Nov. 13, 2017) (online at wwwnytimes.com/2017/11/13/world/asia/trump-duterte-philippineshtml).

495 Philippines Latest Foreign Country to Book Trump’s DC Hotel, Associated Press (Apr. 18, 2018) (online at https://apnews.com/article/philippines- ... b1a943501e). While Democratic criticism was aimed at the Generalized System of Preference governing U.S. trade with the Philippines, rather than the FTA sought by Duterte, it was nonetheless applicable to consideration of liberalizing trade with the Philippines given the country’s human rights record at the time.

496 MAZARS-OVERSIGHT_COMMITTEE-00008504.

497 Jose Manuel Romualdez, Our Special 120th Independence Day DC Celebration, Philippine Star (Apr. 22, 2018) (online at http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2018/04 ... elebration); Checking In at Trump Hotels, for Kinship (and Maybe Some Sway), New York Times (Sept. 7, 2019) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/07/us/po ... hotel.html).

498 Philippines, U.S. to Start Free Trade Talks in September, Reuters (July 12, 2018) (online at wwwreuters.com/article/uk-philippines-usa-trade/philippines-u-s-to-start-free-trade-talks-in-september-idUKKBN1K20XW).

499 See Free Trade Agreements, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (accessed Sept. 18, 2023) (online at https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements).

500 Long-Concealed Records Show Trump’s Chronic Losses and Years of Tax Avoidance, New York Times (Sept. 27, 2020) (online at http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020 ... taxes.html); Trump’s 10 Troubling Deals with Foreign Power-Players, ProPublica and USA Today (Jan. 19, 2017) (online at https://projects.propublica.org/trump-conflicts/).

501 Id.

502 The Trump Tower Manila Shows Why Trump Can Never Truly Separate Himself from His Brand, Washington Post (June 13, 2017) (online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asi ... story.html); Pitch for Trump Tower Mumbai Plays Up Connection to Donald Trump, Wall Street Journal (July 26, 2017) (online at http://www.wsj.com/articles/pitch-for-t ... 1501061401).