The business of government versus the business of Trump: an ongoing controversy

In the aftermath of his historic election victory, Donald Trump, then the US presidentelect, announced he would be stepping away from his business interests “in total” so as to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest once he entered the White House.

Amid mounting concern from ethics groups and constitutional lawyers, he posted a series of tweets in November 2016 in which he stressed how it was “visually important, as president, to in no way have a conflict of interest with my various businesses”.

Two months later, Mr Trump returned to the theme, and said he had formally given “complete and total” control to his sons, Eric and Donald Jr, in a effort to avoid conflicts of interest. His lawyer, Sheri Dillon, said he had “isolated” himself from his businesses.

However, such measures have failed to quieten those critics who believe Mr Trump’s ongoing ownership of his business empire remains incompatible with his day job at the White House. The structuring of his companies in Scotland is a case in point.

While Eric and Donald Jr manage the New York-based trust which ultimately owns Trump Turnberry and Trump International Golf Links in Aberdeenshire, the trust itself is ultimately owned by Mr Trump alone.

The ongoing controversy about Mr Trump’s business arrangements led to the resignation last July of Walter Shaub, head of the independent Office of Government Ethics.

Mr Shaub had criticised the president for not divesting from his holdings and that he was “extremely troubled” Mr Trump had turned over his investments to his two oldest sons. Under US law, Mr Trump is exempt from the ethics statutes which prohibit federal workers from taking action on issues where they have a personal financial stake in the decision. But the US constitution prevents the president from taking “emoluments,” or gifts, from foreign governments or individual US states.