Trump’s Second Term and the New Paradigm of Corruption

The selection of Trump National Doral as the host site for the upcoming 2026 G20 summit serves as a stark illustration of the current administration’s approach to presidential profiteering. While the G20—an assembly of approximately 20 leaders from the world’s largest economies—is a significant diplomatic event, the choice of venue reflects a broader shift in the intersection of political power and personal branding.

This decision stands in sharp contrast to events from 2019. Seven years ago, the Trump administration announced plans to hold the 2020 G7 summit at the Doral resort in Florida. That announcement triggered fierce backlash from the public and members of the Republican Party. At the time, then-Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney attempted to dismiss the concerns with the phrase Get over it.

The 2019 backlash proved effective, as the event was moved to Camp David two days later, though it was eventually canceled due to COVID-19. However, the 2026 G20 announcement has not met with a similar level of resistance. According to reporting from The Washington Post on April 23, 2026, the president also intends to invite Russian President Vladimir Putin to the meeting.

A Shift in Public Perception

The differing receptions of these two summits suggest a case study in the evolution of the American public’s relationship with the presidency. In 2019, neither the press nor the general public had become accustomed to a president using his office to openly enrich himself. By April 2026, New York magazine observed that the public has become fatigued by the news cycle and numb to outrage.

The announcement regarding the G20 location, made in early September 2025, was largely overshadowed by other major stories, including the release of the Epstein files and the assassination of Charlie Kirk. This atmosphere of fatigue has allowed the administration to proceed with its plans with less friction than in previous years. The administration has already disinvited South Africa from the summit, citing alleged offenses against Afrikaners.

From Nickel-and-Diming to Billions

The current scale of profiteering has evolved beyond the smaller-scale conflicts of the first Trump term. Previous controversies included the president’s refusal to financially disentangle from his companies, the diversion of Mike Pence to an Irish resort, and the charging of exorbitant rates to the Secret Service for stays at Mar-a-Lago. His Washington, D.C. Hotel was also highlighted as a violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clause.

In the second term, the financial stakes have increased significantly. The government has approved large payouts to former aides, including $1.25 million for Michael Flynn, who had previously pleaded guilty in his case, and $1.25 million for Carter Page, despite courts dismissing his lawsuit twice. There are also indications that the president has granted clemency to individuals who donated to his campaign or other efforts.

If one death is a tragedy and 1 million deaths are a statistic, perhaps it is also true that charging the Secret Service thousands of dollars on hotel rooms is corruption, but raking in billions is simply a new paradigm.

The Atlantic Daily

The financial magnitude of this profiteering has been tracked by David Kirkpatrick of The New Yorker. In the summer of 2025, Kirkpatrick estimated that the president and his immediate family had made approximately $3.4 billion off the presidency. By late January 2026, that estimate rose to $4 billion.

Global Branding and Conflicts of Interest

The Trump Organization continues to sign lucrative deals in international cities where the administration is simultaneously conducting foreign policy. This pattern extends to Jared Kushner, who has been making business deals in countries with which he is negotiating on behalf of the president, despite holding no official government role.

Other conflicts of interest include the president’s media company’s entry into prediction markets and cryptocurrency, sectors directly impacted by federal policy. The New York Times reported that a Syrian billionaire sought to have sanctions removed from his country through a charm offensive that included an offer to open a Trump-branded golf course. While sanctions were eventually removed, the Trump Organization has stated that no deal for a golf course is currently planned.

Further complicating the administration’s financial landscape, the president is currently suing his own government. He is seeking $230 million from the Justice Department for his investigation and $10 billion from the IRS for the mishandling of his tax information.