EXPERTS CHALLENGE TRUMP’S ETHICS PLAN

There is a common thread in the ethics plan outlined by President-elect Trump: His pledge to separate his private interests from public policy depends almost entirely on him and his team following their own rules with almost a total absence of public disclosure, outside oversight or independent verification.

Under his plan, President-elect Trump will put his holdings into a trust run by his adult sons and another executive. But this is not a blind trust. And it’s clear that Trump is maintaining a financial interest in the Trump Organization, which means he could still enrich himself through official actions that benefit the company. According to ethics experts, Trump’s plan does nothing to prevent him from profiting off the presidency. The President of the Campaign Legal Center (Trevor Potter) believes that ‘having Trump’s adult children lead the operational control of his business, while he still retains full ownership is not acceptable’ and his decision has created a direct path by which U.S. and foreign interests, including foreign governments, can exert influence over him through his companies or holdings’

Trump promised to restrict the information he received about his company to overall profit and loss. But critics doubted Trump could reasonably avoid talking shop with his own sons, and the public will have no way of knowing. Trump claims he’ll only learn about his business from the newspapers, but it’s hard to believe that family dinner conversations will be restricted to the weather.

Trump promised to appoint an ethics adviser to vet new transactions that could create conflicts of interest. But in addition to the credibility of the person who’s chosen, it will be important to establish who appoints and oversees the ethics adviser. In any case, the ethics adviser won’t be accountable to the public.

The plan also failed to address existing overseas investments, which could still be magnets for tax or regulatory favors from foreign governments. In order to avoid a constitutional prohibition on receiving payments from foreign governments, Trump promised to donate the profits from such payments to the U.S. Treasury. But that doesn’t satisfy most legal experts’ interpretation of the provision, known as the Emolument Clause. They say, Trump needs to forfeit the entire payments, not just profits. Trump also needs to clarify how the Trump Organization would account for identifying profits from foreign governments. The idea of giving up only profits, not all revenue from foreign business and only from hotels is not an acceptable answer to the emoluments clause according to legal experts.

Trump also faces emoluments concerns at his D.C. hotel, which has already become a favored haunt for foreign diplomats. In addition, Trump leases the property from the federal government presenting a clear and immediate conflict of interest from being both landlord and tenant. Furthermore, a line in the contract says it can’t benefit an elected official.

According to the Office of Government Ethics, President-elect Trump should divest himself of his vast business interests while in the White House. Transferring operational control of his business to his children won’t constitute the establishment of a qualified blind trust, nor will it eliminate conflicts of interest under federal statutes governing conflicts of interest. Nothing short of divestiture will resolve these conflicts.