AP’s review of nearly 150 cases since New York’s “repeated fraud” statute was passed showed that nearly every previous time a company was taken away, victims and losses were key factors.

"Within days, Donald Trump could potentially have his sprawling real estate business empire ordered ‘dissolved’ for repeated misrepresentations on financial statements to lenders, adding him to a short list of scam marketers, con artists and others who have been hit with the ultimate punishment for violating New York’s powerful anti-fraud law,” the AP reports.

“An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of civil cases under the law showed that such a penalty has only been imposed a dozen previous times, and Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.”

  • Brokkr
    3•10 months ago

    The loan seems to be between himself and one of his companies, so a bank didn’t forget about the loan. The significance is that not accounting for this loan correctly may have allowed him to evade taxes because it changed the valuation of his assets.

    Another way of thinking about possible victims is that the banks probably would have loaned that money to someone. If it was an honest person or company (or rather more honest), then that money may have been used to generate more taxes than we’re paid, more public benefit, or both. Of course the bank gets their profits, but they are in theory supposed to benefit everyone so long as the system is working (I know there are many ways in which it is not) but when someone cheats the system they take an undue amount of that benefit for themselves.

    • @Boddhisatva
      10•10 months ago

      The loan seems to be between himself and one of his companies, so a bank didn’t forget about the loan.

      No, this was an actual lender forgiving $48 million in debt according to this article.

      During his maneuvering, Trump convinced one of the entities funding that project—a financial firm called Fortress—to cut him a deal on the slightly less than $100 million they’d loaned him for the project. As prior reports show, Fortress eventually agreed to cancel half that original amount in 2012, forgiving Trump a total of $48 million.

      The bank forgave the $48 million dollar loan. When a bank forgives a loan, it has to be reported as income. Trump instead reported that his Chicago Unit Acquisition LLC actually loaned him $48 million and that he paid off the loan with it. Essentially, he claimed that the debt went from Fortress to Chicago Unit Acquisition and he still had the debt. He didn’t though, it had been forgiven. That’s tax fraud.

      Edit: forgiving, not forging.

      • Brokkr
        4•10 months ago

        Thanks, I didn’t see that in the initial reporting