A detailed investigation has found that the Donald Trump family, led by his sons Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., has made about $864 million in crypto-asset revenues during the first half of 2025. The bulk of this amount – over $802 million – came from token sales linked to their firm World Liberty Financial, including its governance token and a Trump-branded meme coin.
Launched in 2024, World Liberty sold governance tokens (WLFI) and a meme coin ($TRUMP) despite lacking a working product. Token-sale proceeds were heavily marketed to foreign investors who sought access to the Trump brand and its perceived influence. Even though the venture is technically lawful, ethics experts say it blurs the line between public office and private gain.
Token Sales Surge Amid Name Power
The family’s meteoric crypto earnings illustrate how branding and political proximity can dominate over utility in digital-asset markets. A UAE entity called Aqua1 Foundation declared a $100 million purchase of WLFI tokens, the largest known transaction of its kind. Analysis shows the top 50 token-holder wallets tied to World Liberty held more than $804 million, with foreign investors dominant.
World Liberty’s website describes its own offering as a “crypto-banking alternative,” though it has yet to deliver on such promises. Meanwhile, meme coins like $TRUMP generated $336 million in sales, highlighting how speculation and branding can drive value. The family reportedly receives 75% of token-sale revenue, while the venture markets its ties to the president and his network.
Policy Linkage and Governance Risks
The crypto ventures coincide with a broader easing of U.S. digital-asset regulation by the Trump administration, raising potential conflict-of-interest concerns. Since the president retains financial benefits from his businesses via a trust, the alignment between policy roles and private gain presents ethical red flags for regulators and watchdogs.
One key risk is that token-holders may have under-disclosed links to foreign capital or politically exposed persons. Meanwhile, investors reportedly saw the Trump-brand token sales as a way to gain indirect influence or access – although no formal quid-pro-quo evidence has emerged. Ethics analysts say the mismatch between regulatory oversight and token-sale marketing raises questions about transparency and enforcement.
