Trump civil fraud case: Judge fines Trump $354 million, says frauds 'shock the conscience'

The former president was found to have defrauded lenders.

Former President Donald Trump has been fined $354.8 million plus approximately $100 million in interest in a civil fraud lawsuit that could alter the personal fortune and real estate empire that helped propel him to the White House. In the decision, Judge Arthur Engoron excoriated Trump, saying the president's credibility was "severely compromised," that the frauds "shock the conscience" and that Trump and his co-defendants showed a "complete lack of contrition and remorse" that he said "borders on pathological."

Engoron also hit Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump with $4 million fines and barred all three from helming New York companies for years. New York Attorney General Letitia James accused Trump and his adult sons of engaging in a decade-long scheme in which they used "numerous acts of fraud and misrepresentation" to inflate Trump's net worth in order get more favorable loan terms. The former president has denied all wrongdoing and has said he will appeal.


Summary of penalties

Donald Trump and his adult sons were hit with millions in fines in the civil fraud trial and barred for years from being officers in New York companies. The judge said the frauds "shock the conscience."

Donald Trump: $354 million fine + approx. $100 million in interest
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
Donald Trump Jr.: $4 million fine
+ barred for 2 years from serving as officer of NY company
Eric Trump: $4 million fine
+ barred for 2 years from serving as officer of NY company
Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg: $1 million fine
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
+ barred for life from financial management role in NY company
Former Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney:
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
+ barred for life from financial management role in NY company


0

Eric Trump, leaving court, criticizes case against his family

Standing in the courthouse hallway where his father earlier railed against his civil trial, Eric Trump echoed his father's attacks on the New York attorney general and the case levied against his family, following the adjournment of court for the day.

"We have an unbelievable company. We have some of the best assets anywhere in the world. We've never had a default. We've never missed a payment," Eric Trump said of the Trump Organization.

Like his father, he described the case as politically motivated and decried the involvement of his family.

"They've dragged Don and I and Ivanka into it as collateral damage," he said.

Later, addressing reporters on the courthouse steps, he said that the state's efforts should be focused elsewhere.

"Let's get the murderers off the street. Let's take care of the crime. Let's rebuild our infrastructure. Everywhere you drive in New York, you hit a pothole and your car gets destroyed," he said.


Court adjourned for the day, with Trump on deck for Monday

Judge Engoron adjourned court until Monday, when the state plans to call former President Trump to the stand.

"We will reconvene on Monday at 10 a.m., and the first witness will be...?" Engoron asked state attorney Andrew Amer.

"The only witness will be Donald J. Trump," Amer said.


Eric Trump pressed on Mar-a-Lago valuation

Eric Trump has stepped down from the witness stand after facing an hour of questions from state attorney Andrew Amer.

Amer concluded his questioning by directly asking Eric Trump about the $2 million severance agreement between the Trump Organization and its former CFO, Allen Weisselberg.

"Did you participate in the business agreement to enter into this business decision with Mr. Weisselberg?" Amer asked.

"Yes," Eric Trump said.

"Did your father direct you to enter into this agreement with Mr. Weisselberg?" Amer asked.

"No, he did not," Eric Trump replied. He reiterated, "I did this agreement with Mr. Weisselberg."

Pressed on the value of Trump's Mar-A-Lago property, Eric Trump denied knowing that the club was valued for tax purposes as a commercial property used as a social club.

"It is very clear that Mar-a-Lago is not a club, it is a private residence. I don't see anything wrong with that. 100 percent," Eric Trump said.

Previous testimony and documents in evidence demonstrated that despite the property being restricted by deed to club usage, Donald Trump continued to overvalue the property as if it could be sold as a private residence. Judge Engoron already found that the club was overvalued by 2,300%.

"Mar-a-Lago is a residence that could be sold to a private individual," Eric Trump insisted.


Eric Trump testifies that he signed financial certifications

Eric Trump said that he signed three financial certifications to lenders that relied on his father's statements of financial condition, which are at the heart of the attorney general's case.

"I certified something I believed was accurate. My lawyers told me was accurate, and our financial people told me was accurate," Eric Trump said.

While Eric Trump did not certify his father's financial statements themselves, like his brother Donald Trump Jr., the attorney general has alleged that these certifications to lenders are similarly fraudulent.

Eric Trump said that he did not personally review the methodologies or supporting data for the financial statements themselves, instead relying on lawyers and accountants to verify the documents for him.

"I wouldn't sign something that I thought was inaccurate," he said multiple times.


Defense expert says Mar-a-Lago was worth $1.2 billion

Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club was worth more than $1.2 billion in 2021 -- roughly double the value listed in Trump's statement of financial condition -- according to defense expert Lawrence Moens.

Describing Mar-a-Lago as a castle nestled on 17.6 acres of waterfront property, Moens said he determined the value by considering nearby properties and adding the total value of the club's 500 memberships, which in 2021 cost $350,000 each.

Between 2011 and 2021, Moens' analysis found that Trump undervalued Mar-a-Lago in his statements of financial condition -- but his analysis appeared to be based on Trump being able to sell the property to an individual to use it as a private residence, which the New York attorney general says Trump is prohibited from doing based on a 2002 deed he signed that would "forever extinguish their right to develop or use the Property for any purpose other than club use."

Judge Engoron only qualified Moens as an expert on the value of residential real estate.

Moens spoke with confidence about his ability to value real estate in Palm Beach, saying that he has sold billions of dollars of real estate since his first sale as a broker in 1982. Asked if any broker has sold more Palm Beach real estate than he has, Moens replied, "They don't exist."

"I am on the front lines everyday of selling properties, and I have a pretty good handle of what is going on currently in the market," Moens said. He later added, "My numbers are usually right."

Moens also put together a seven-minute promotional video about Mar-a-Lago, which was played during his testimony. Set to relaxing music, the video included high-resolution drone shots and dramatic panning shots of the property's amenities. After the video played, Moens highlighted details such as hand-carved stones, gold decorations that cost millions to construct, and other details that required years of work from tradesmen.

"I invited the attorney general's office to come see it anytime. The offer still stands," Moens said. "I will make sure he is not there when you come," he said of Trump.

Engoron appeared attentive to Moen's testimony -- but once Moens left the courtroom, he indicated that he wasn't as concerned about Mar-a-Lago's specific value as he was about whether it was misrepresented.

"I see this case about the documents -- whether the defendants used false documents when transacting business," Engoron said. "I am not trying to figure out what the value is ... I don't necessarily consider it relevant."