Donald Trump held accountable for fraudulent activities in his real estate transactions

Donald Trump held accountable for fraudulent activities in his real estate transactions



Donald Trump is⁤ found liable⁢ for fraud in⁤ his real-estate dealings

The purpose⁢ of a ​trial is to find facts and assign fault. But for civil lawsuits in which the evidence is unassailable, parties can ⁢ask a judge to skip the fact-finding‌ and cut to the punishment. So ⁢it was⁣ in the fraud case brought by New York’s attorney-general, Letitia ‍James, against Donald Trump in state court. On September 26th the presiding judge agreed‍ with prosecutors that for years Mr⁣ Trump had misled lenders about the value of his properties in Florida, ​New York and Scotland to secure better terms on his loans. Inaccuracies‌ of the ‌kind unearthed by prosecutors and backed up with “indisputable” evidence,⁤ wrote Arthur Engoron in ‌a withering judgment,‌ “can only be considered fraud”. This was, he ‍ruled, not a matter of “rounding errors or reasonable experts disagreeing”.

Mr Trump denies all allegations‍ and will appeal against the ruling;⁢ his lawyer called it “outrageous” and “completely disconnected from⁢ the facts”. The process of appeal will probably drag out ‌over ⁣years. But⁣ if the judgment is ultimately ‍upheld, parts of Mr‌ Trump’s business operation may be dismantled.⁣ Judge Engoron ordered the cancellation of corporate licences that enable the Trump Organisation to ⁣operate in New York. Mr Trump’s⁢ properties would​ come under⁢ the control of a receiver and “could be put up for forfeiture by‌ the state”, says Catherine Christian, a lawyer at Liston Abramson⁤ and former prosecutor in⁤ the Manhattan district-attorney’s office. The decision, seethed Mr Trump’s lawyer,‍ “seeks to nationalise one ⁢of the most successful corporate empires in⁤ the⁤ United States”.

Judge Engoron cited‌ six assets whose values Mr Trump inflated⁤ on financial disclosures. Between 2012 and 2016 he claimed that his triplex apartment at Trump Tower in Manhattan was about three times bigger ⁤than it was,‍ resulting in ‍an ⁤over-valuation of $114m-$207m. His lawyers⁤ had argued that his square-footage…

2023-09-27 16:07:59
Link from www.economist.com
rnrn

Exit mobile version