CBS News19%

Taxes on Trump's $1.4 billion crypto income could total hundreds of millions 29%

By Michael Kaplan0%

7/2/2026, 10:10:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Appeal to Emotion, and Pessimism Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 20.1% saturation with 120 hits. Analysis detected 961 faulty-reasoning hits from 597 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 39.4% and a BS Rank of 29% (15,599 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 71.30% of the article peer group.

President Trump's recent financial disclosure finally put a dollar amount on the web of crypto ventures he's continued to pursue since returning to office. 
But the revelation he made $1.4 billion off the fledgling industry has rekindled another mystery about his finances: how much is he paying in taxes? 
The president's crypto windfall appears to be taxable. 
One accountant who specializes in cryptocurrency income said it was reasonable to believe Mr. 
Trump would have to pay at least $250 million on this income. 
Still, multiple tax experts told CBS News that Mr. 
Trump's actual bill may be far lower, but it would be hard to know because of the lack of transparency around the corporate entities holding the income. 
Unlike several past presidents, Mr. 
Trump does not make his tax returns public. 
"What we know is that he did very well for himself, but we don't know how the beneficial ownership is structured," said Omri Marian, a law professor who specializes in cryptocurrency taxation. 
"This is like looking at a black box and I can't see inside." 
The White House declined to respond to questions about any taxes Mr. 
Trump paid on the crypto income, whether it was taxed on an individual or business basis and whether any operating losses were applied to his crypto-related tax bill. 
If the entire $1.4 billion were to be taxed at a federal individual income rate, the president would owe the IRS $518 million, based on the maximum statutory rate of 37%, without accounting for potential deductions. 
According to the IRS, digital assets are subject to the same capital gains taxes as transactions of traditional securities. 
But Marian said because of the limited descriptions of the income sources on his financial disclosure, it's impossible to determine whether the money would be considered capital gains or ordinary income. 
For example, the $625 million Mr. 
Trump collected from his $TRUMP meme coin is described as a royalty from a licensing agreement with a company called Celebration Coins. 
According to the disclosure, World Liberty Financial, the crypto company he co-founded with his sons, paid him more than $590 million in proceeds from the sales of digital tokens and sale of an equity stake in the business. 
Then there is the question of whether the income is ultimately being paid to Mr. 
Trump himself or to a business associated with the president. 
The latter would command a lower corporate tax rate, but in either scenario, Mr. 
Trump could offset his gains with losses. 
"It's really, really difficult for me to say what the tax consequences are for him personally and for the entities involved, without knowing much more about them," Marian said. 
Knowing much more is likely to prove elusive. 
According to a controversial settlement agreement the Justice Department signed in May, the IRS and the Treasury Department are "FOREVER BARRED and PRECLUDED" from pursuing claims against Mr. 
Trump or his company, based on prior tax returns. 
The agreement settled a lawsuit by the president that accused the IRS of failing to protect his tax returns by allowing a government contractor to leak the documents to news outlets including the New York Times in 2020. 
The settlement included a more than $1.7 billion "anti-weaponization" fund that would offer payments to people who alleged they were victims of government "lawfare." 
The fund outraged Democrats and Republicans alike, and its creation was paused by a federal judge. 
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche subsequently told Congress the Justice Department was "not moving forward with the fund." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 1.3%Michael Kaplan: 0.3%CBS Miami: 2.2%Confirmation Bias1.3%This article: 7.2%Michael Kaplan: 5.8%CBS Miami: 0.6%Anchoring Bias7.2%This article: 2.2%Michael Kaplan: 1.8%CBS Miami: 2.5%Availability Heuristic2.2%This article: 4.5%Michael Kaplan: 1.1%CBS Miami: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic4.5%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Michael Kaplan: 8.2%CBS Miami: 6.1%Framing Effect4.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 4.5%Michael Kaplan: 1.1%CBS Miami: 0.6%Status Quo Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.3%Michael Kaplan: 0.6%CBS Miami: 1.9%Optimism Bias2.3%This article: 11.4%Michael Kaplan: 3.2%CBS Miami: 1.1%Pessimism Bias11.4%This article: 20.1%Michael Kaplan: 8.0%CBS Miami: 6.7%Negativity Bias20.1%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.5%Michael Kaplan: 1.1%CBS Miami: 1.1%Recency Bias4.5%This article: 10.4%Michael Kaplan: 2.6%CBS Miami: 0.3%Primacy Effect10.4%This article: 5.4%Michael Kaplan: 1.3%CBS Miami: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 17.4%Michael Kaplan: 4.9%CBS Miami: 4.3%Appeal to Authority17.4%This article: 10.1%Michael Kaplan: 4.0%CBS Miami: 1.1%False Dilemma10.1%This article: 1.3%Michael Kaplan: 0.3%CBS Miami: 0.4%Slippery Slope1.3%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.7%Michael Kaplan: 0.9%CBS Miami: 2.5%Hasty Generalization3.7%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 2.7%Michael Kaplan: 0.7%CBS Miami: 0.4%Bandwagon2.7%This article: 13.6%Michael Kaplan: 3.4%CBS Miami: 4.1%Appeal to Emotion13.6%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 6.4%Michael Kaplan: 1.6%CBS Miami: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.4%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 4.7%Michael Kaplan: 1.2%CBS Miami: 0.4%Burden of Proof4.7%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 6.0%Michael Kaplan: 1.5%CBS Miami: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)6.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.3%Michael Kaplan: 0.6%CBS Miami: 2.0%Unattributed Quote2.3%This article: 6.2%Michael Kaplan: 1.5%CBS Miami: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection6.2%This article: 8.7%Michael Kaplan: 3.4%CBS Miami: 1.5%Biased Writer Voice8.7%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kaplan: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

597 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers27%attributed speech434writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageCBS News • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageOmri Marian • 32 words • 0.0% coverageOmri Marian • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWhite House • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageIRS • 19 words • 0.0% coverageOmri Marian • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageOmri Marian • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Blanche • 18 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Todd Blanche

100%flagged-word coverage
18 attributed words11% of attributed speech88% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Biased Writer Voice-12.0 ptsWriter: 12.0%Todd Blanche: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-5.5 ptsWriter: 5.5%Todd Blanche: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-3.2 ptsWriter: 3.2%Todd Blanche: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.