On Friday, Donald Trump asserted that he possesses nearly half a billion dollars in cash but indicated a preference to allocate these funds towards his presidential campaign rather than settling the $454 million civil fraud judgment against him in New York. The former president pledged to contest the verdict vigorously, expressing readiness to take the legal battle to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary, as New York state authorities consider seizing some of his assets if the outstanding debt remains unpaid.
Trump has been seeking relief from a state appeals court, aiming to exempt himself from the obligation of providing financial guarantees demonstrating his ability to cover the substantial sum while he appeals the unprecedented judgment.
However, Trump did not furnish any documentation to substantiate his claim regarding the cash reserve, and his legal representatives have suggested that it would be impractical to tie up such a significant amount of capital in a bond while simultaneously sustaining his business operations and fulfilling other financial commitments. Notably, financial records indicate that one of his property loans is contingent upon maintaining a minimum liquidity of $30 million.
In February, a Manhattan judge ruled that Donald Trump had consistently misrepresented his wealth on financial documents submitted to banks and other entities to secure loans and negotiate deals. As a consequence, the judge instructed him to relinquish profits derived from specific real estate transactions and any financial gains obtained through securing loans with lower interest rates. Trump maintains his innocence, vehemently denying allegations of attempting to deceive anyone.
Just last Thursday, Donald Trump’s legal team reiterated in court documents their struggles in acquiring a bond to cover the judgment. They highlighted the challenge posed by underwriters who insisted on cash, stocks, or other readily accessible assets as collateral, rather than real estate. According to Trump’s attorneys, over 30 bonding companies have rejected their appeals for assistance.
Meanwhile, Trump’s legal representatives have petitioned the state’s intermediate appeals court to overturn a previous decision mandating that he furnish a bond covering the entire judgment to halt enforcement. On the opposing side, New York Attorney General Letitia James has vehemently opposed Trump’s request, advocating for the appeals court to uphold the requirement for the full bond amount to ensure easy accessibility of funds if the verdict stands.
