For years, President Donald Trump has been quick to brand his political adversaries as mortgage fraudsters—accusing them of deceit and even criminality for claiming more than one primary residence on their home loans. But a fresh report from ProPublica reveals that Trump himself engaged in precisely the same practice in the 1990s, raising uncomfortable questions about the former president’s own financial dealings and the standards he’s set for others.
According to documents obtained by ProPublica and reported by outlets including CNN and Newsweek, Trump signed two separate mortgages on homes in Palm Beach, Florida, within just seven weeks of each other—each time attesting that the property would be his principal residence. The catch? Trump, who was a full-time New Yorker at the time, appears never to have lived in either home, instead renting both out as investment properties adjacent to his famed Mar-a-Lago estate.
The story begins in December 1993, when Trump inked a mortgage for a so-called "Bermuda style" home in Palm Beach, pledging that it would be his primary residence. Then, in January 1994, he secured another mortgage—this time for a seven-bedroom, marble-floored mansion right next door—making the same promise. Both loans came from Merrill Lynch, totaling $525,000 and $1.2 million, respectively. The mortgage documents included a standard occupancy clause: Trump was required to make each property his principal residence within 60 days and live there for at least a year, unless the lender agreed otherwise or extenuating circumstances applied.
But as ProPublica discovered, Trump’s real estate agent at the time told the Miami Herald that the future president hired a New York design firm to "dress them up to the nines and lease them out annually." Shirley Wyner, the wife and business partner of Trump’s original agent, confirmed in an interview, "They were rentals from the beginning. President Trump never lived there." Public records and contemporaneous news accounts support this, showing that the homes were marketed as luxury rentals almost immediately after purchase. One was even listed for $3,000 per day in 1997.
So, did Trump break the law? Mortgage law experts interviewed by ProPublica say that while it’s not uncommon for people to have multiple primary-residence mortgages—sometimes due to job moves or clerical errors—intentional misrepresentation can cross into fraud territory. Kathleen Engel, a Suffolk University law professor and mortgage finance specialist, noted, "Given Trump’s position on situations like this, he’s going to either need to fire himself or refer himself to the Department of Justice. Trump has deemed that this type of misrepresentation is sufficient to preclude someone from serving the country."
The irony is hard to miss. Trump’s administration has aggressively pursued political rivals for similar conduct. New York Attorney General Letitia James, for instance, was charged by federal prosecutors for allegedly misrepresenting a Virginia house as a second home while using it as a rental property. Federal Reserve Board member Lisa Cook faced Trump’s wrath for signing two primary residence mortgages within weeks, with Trump writing, "It is inconceivable that you were not aware of your first commitment when making the second. It is potentially criminal." Both James and Cook have denied wrongdoing, and James’s case was dismissed on procedural grounds, though the Justice Department is seeking to reindict her.
Bill Pulte, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and a Trump appointee, has been outspoken: "If somebody is claiming two primary residences, that is not appropriate, and we will refer it for criminal investigation." Yet, as ProPublica points out, there’s no record that Pulte has referred any Republicans for such investigations—Trump included.
In response to the report, the White House offered a robust defense. A spokesperson told ProPublica, "President Trump’s two mortgages you are referencing are from the same lender. There was no defraudation. It is illogical to believe that the same lender would agree to defraud itself." The spokesperson went further, dismissing the story as "yet another desperate attempt by the Left wing media to disparage President Trump with false allegations… President Trump has never, or will ever, break the law."
Legal experts, however, say the issue isn’t whether the lender was defrauded, but whether Trump’s actions meet the bar his own administration has set for others. Mortgages for a main home typically offer better terms—lower interest rates, for example—than those for second homes or investment properties. The IRS, for tax purposes, requires individuals to designate a single primary residence where they spend most of their time, though short-term exceptions exist for job moves or clerical errors, according to Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor at the University of Tennessee at Martin. "Still, the accusations of federal employees committing ‘fraudulent activity’ through a vague definition of multiple primary residencies is a low bar that other officials in the administration ironically clear," Beene told Newsweek.
The political fallout has been swift. Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, quipped on social media, "But when Trump is the mortgage fraudster, it's OK! Those are the rules in the Age of Trump." Melanie D’Arrigo, executive director for the Campaign for New York Health, wrote, "Trump committed mortgage fraud, according to Trump. Somehow I doubt his DOJ will go after him the way he instructed his DOJ to go after his political enemies over this. Every Republican accusation is a confession." Progressive journalist Brian Allen summed up the mood: "He called it criminal when they did it. He called it business when he did it."
Despite the uproar, it’s unclear whether Trump will face any legal consequences. The loans in question were paid off decades ago, and the statute of limitations for mortgage fraud has long since expired. As Kevin Thompson, CEO of 9i Capital Group, told Newsweek, "Trump has skillfully desensitized the media and public where so many stories surface that it’s hard for people to tell what’s real or exaggerated. Because of that, this report likely won’t have lasting consequences beyond a few weeks of headlines, which he may even welcome as a distraction from the economy."
Ultimately, the episode highlights a recurring theme in American politics: the gap between the standards public figures set for themselves and those they demand of others. Whether this latest revelation sparks real accountability or simply fades into the background noise of political controversy remains to be seen, but the facts—unearthed by ProPublica and echoed across the media landscape—are now part of the public record.
