Trump municipal bond portfolio valued at up to $1 billion

President Donald Trump is a creditor to hundreds of cities, hospitals, schools, utilities and other public institutions across the country — many of which are directly affected by decisions made by his own administration.

And that financial exposure is growing.

Trump ended 2025 with 807 municipal bond positions worth $240.7 million to $797.6 million, according to a CNBC analysis of his financial disclosures filed since he returned to the White House. He has since disclosed at least 243 purchases in 2026 worth between $68.2 million and $233.8 million. Among those are 48 new purchases Trump disclosed Sept. 22 when his financial report for July became public. Unlike his stock holdings, which have been actively traded during this presidency, Trump reports purchasing bonds but not selling them.

Taken together, the holdings total more than 1,000 positions valued at between $300 million and $1 billion, CNBC calculated. The exact current values are obscured because federal filings use broad ranges and exclude subsequent market moves.

“The scale of [Trump’s] municipal bond exposure is unprecedented to my knowledge,” said Justin Marlowe, director of the Center for Municipal Finance at the University of Chicago. “Even $100 million is large for an individual investor, and a portfolio near $1 billion functions more like an institutional fund.”

In some instances, Trump held bonds tied to an issuer or facility before his administration took action affecting it. In others, his accounts bought the debt after the federal government had executed regulatory or funding actions involving the very same borrower or project.

It’s the latest example of a hallmark of Trump’s tenure: the fusion of executive power and personal wealth. Federal grants, regulations and healthcare funding decisions can affect the finances of issuers whose debt sits in Trump’s portfolio, ethics and financial experts told CNBC.

CNBC found no evidence that Trump or his investment managers traded on advance knowledge of administration decisions, that his financial interests explicitly shaped those policies or that he directed any individual transaction.

The White House and the Trump Organization said Trump’s investments are held in discretionary accounts managed by independent financial institutions.

White House spokesman Davis Ingle said neither Trump nor his family has “any ability to direct, influence, or provide input” on how the portfolio is invested or when securities are bought or sold.

A Trump Organization spokesperson similarly said the outside managers have “sole and exclusive authority” over investment decisions, including asset allocation and trading.

But outside management does not inherently eliminate questions created by holding debt from specific local governments and projects, Marlowe said. Investors seeking municipal bond exposure routinely use exchange-traded funds and other indexed products to avoid picking individual debt.

“There are lots of different ways that you can get into the market without having to pick and choose individual bonds,” thereby avoiding questions about “how federal policy affects specific holdings in your portfolio,” Marlowe told CNBC.

It is unclear why Trump’s accounts have bought so many municipal bonds, or what role individual issuers play in the broader investment strategy. Neither the White House nor the Trump Organization provided an explanation in response to CNBC’s detailed questions about the bond purchases.

Often, wealthy investors use municipal bonds to diversify their portfolios while generating interest income that is often exempt from federal income taxes.

Trump’s holdings include bonds tied to three coal-fired power plants that received relief from stricter federal pollution requirements.

In February 2025, the president’s accounts bought between $50,001 and $100,000 in pollution-control bonds tied to Georgia Power’s Plant Bowen. Fifty-seven days later, Trump signed a proclamation exempting dozens of coal plants — including all four Bowen units — from stricter EPA limits on toxic air pollution for two years.

Following the exemption, Trump’s accounts bought up to $200,000 more in debt tied to two other covered facilities: Georgia Power’s Plant Scherer and Alabama Power’s James M. Barry Plant.

“The credit supporting a pollution-control bond is often dependent on the regulations governing that power plant,” said Richard Painter, the former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush and now a corporate law professor at the University of Minnesota. “If, as it seems here, a federal policy delays compliance, it swings the economics of the facility.”

Trump’s proclamation would have delayed compliance with the tougher standards from 2027 until 2029, though EPA ultimately repealed them in February.

“President Trump’s energy secretary wouldn’t be allowed to hold this type of bond, in my opinion, but because presidents are exempt from typical conflict-of-interest laws, [Trump] has,” Painter told CNBC.

Trump’s energy bond holdings extend beyond coal.

In July 2025, Trump signed an executive order to expedite construction and permitting for data centers as well as the infrastructure needed to power them. Four months later, his accounts began buying Omaha Public Power District electric revenue bonds, purchasing between $750,002 and $1.5 million in November and December.

S&P Global Ratings said in a November report that data centers are expected to drive the bulk of the utility’s electricity-demand growth over the next three years. S&P also said continued data center expansion was integral to the utility’s strategy for meeting rising debt-service obligations.

“There’s a lot of power demand for data centers, and many local utilities are having to invest heavily in additional generation capacity for these data centers,” said Nora Wittstruck, managing director and chief analytical officer for governments at S&P Global Ratings.

CNBC found no evidence that Trump’s executive order targeted the utility or a particular project in its service territory. Still, federal policy can shape the broader conditions affecting municipal borrowers, Marlowe said.

One instance lies with Trump’s bonds in healthcare. His accounts ended 2025 with 72 municipal bond positions tied to hospitals and health systems, worth roughly $24.2 million to $76.3 million, according to CNBC’s analysis.

Many of those institutions depend on Medicaid spending, which the 2025 tax cuts and spending package known as the “big beautiful bill” is projected to cut by about $900 billion over a decade, according to KFF, a nonpartisan nonprofit health policy organization.

S&P has warned that lower Medicaid enrollment and limits on provider payments could pressure some hospital credits by reducing reimbursement and increasing uncompensated care, particularly at financially vulnerable institutions.

Trump’s accounts nevertheless continued buying hospital-related debt after the law was enacted, including bonds tied to UPMC, a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit health system, and Memorial Hermann, a nonprofit health system serving the Houston area.

The president’s financial disclosure covering July includes five additional purchases tied to healthcare facilities or systems.

Ethics experts note that while municipal debt generally presents a more remote conflict of interest than corporate stock, concerns sharpen when federal action directly targets an issuer.

“If the issuer is a direct beneficiary as a specific party, that is the most direct conflict of interest,” said Virginia Canter, chief counsel at Democracy Defenders Action, a left-leaning nonpartisan nonprofit organization focused on government ethics and anti-corruption.

Some of Trump’s bond holdings don’t always point in his financial favor. His accounts have bought debt from governments facing federal funding restrictions or added costs tied to his administration.

On March 12, Trump’s accounts bought $250,001 to $500,000 of Minnesota state debt. Fifteen days earlier, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services deferred $259.5 million in quarterly federal Medicaid funding to the state, citing a review of unsupported or potentially fraudulent claims. Minnesota filed a lawsuit over most of the money that remains pending.

The state purchase came on the heels of another buy in Minneapolis. On Dec. 11, Trump’s accounts bought $500,001 to $1 million in Minneapolis Public Schools debt, 10 days after the start of a massive and monthslong immigration crackdown in Minnesota that left two protesters dead. Minneapolis officials estimated the crackdown’s economic cost at nearly $700 million.

The school district later reported serving nearly 441,000 fewer meals and snacks from January through March and spending $253,000 on technology for temporary online learning during the operation while students and their parents were afraid to leave their homes.

Less than two weeks after the Minnesota state-bond purchase, the president’s accounts acquired two Illinois state bonds worth $1 million to $5 million each.

Earlier that year, the Department of Health and Human Services had attempted to freeze certain child-care and family-assistance funding for Illinois and four other states over alleged fraud allegations. A federal judge blocked the freeze within days, issuing a preliminary injunction in February.

Trump’s bond buying has coincided with a historic boom in the municipal debt market, as states, cities and public authorities borrow heavily to finance airports, schools, hospitals, utilities and other infrastructure.

Municipal issuers sold a record $580 billion in bonds in 2025, up 13% from 2024, with the increase driven largely by new borrowing and tax-exempt issuance rather than refinancing older debt, according to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.

The borrowing spree has continued this year. Municipal issuers sold $408.5 billion through August, up 4% from the same period last year, while the amount of municipal debt outstanding reached roughly $4.5 trillion in the first quarter, up 4.8% year over year, according to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association.

“Given the uncertainty around Iran and AI, investors have been looking for ways to reduce risk, and munis offer a degree of certainty,” said Tom Kozlik, head of public policy and municipal strategy at HilltopSecurities.

Higher interest rates have also made the bonds more attractive, particularly for wealthy investors, because interest on most municipal debt is exempt from federal income taxes, Kozlik told CNBC.

J.P. Morgan Private Bank estimates that a 4% tax-free municipal yield can provide roughly the same after-tax income as a taxable bond yielding 6.75% for an investor in the top tax bracket. Both corporate bonds and U.S. Treasurys are taxable.

That advantage remained intact under Trump’s own tax legislation. The 2025 tax cuts and spending law preserved the federal tax exemption for municipal bonds, including qualified private-activity bonds, a type of municipal bonds used to finance private or nonprofit projects with a public benefit.