June, 08 2020, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jayson O’Neill, (406) 200-8582
62% Of Big Oil, Gas, And Mining Corporations Score Small Business Bailout Funds
Trump’s small business administration releases new data underscoring sector’s success.
Helena, MT.
A new analysis by Accountable.US finds that over 62% of 'Mining' corporations that include oil and gas, and related activities have received nearly $4.5 billion in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) funds through the Trump administration's Small Business Administration (SBA).
"The PPP was supposed to help small businesses keep their doors open and their employees on payroll through the pandemic. While more than 100,000 of those small businesses have shuttered, the Trump administration has bailed out Big Oil and polluting corporations - many of which have long track records of environmental violations or worse and are compensating their CEOs millions of dollars," said Jayson O'Neill, Accountable.US spokesperson.
The new SBP report on approvals under the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) showed $4,467,023,832 going to 20,389 or 62% of the 'Mining' corporations operating in the United States, including oil and gas, and related activities. The number of private 'Mining' establishments is estimated to be 32,795 as of the 3rd quarter of 2019 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' most recently available data.
The number of corporations in the sector that had been approved for relief funds intended for small businesses nearly doubled since the last SBA report. A previous analysis by Western Values Project, an Accountable.US project, found that 34% of the sector had cashed in on some $3.9 billion from the program.
A former member of the board of governors of the Federal Reserve's recent opinion piece published in the New York Times openly questioned the Trump administration's insistence on bailing out Big Oil, coal, and other polluting industries. The piece cited a survey of more than 200 finance ministers, central bankers, and economists that unequivocally recommended investments in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The Trump administration is doing the exact opposite by handing out billions to these polluting corporations through not only PPP funds but also tax credits, royalty cuts, lease suspensions, and soon low-interest loans through the Federal Reserve. And, the Trump administration is adding insult to injury by superseding state and tribal rights, gutting regulations, and fueling unchecked natural resource development. Legislation introduced by Senate and House lawmakers that would prohibit the Trump administration from bailing out big oil corporations has been thus far ignored by leadership in both chambers.
The ongoing tracking project by Accountable.US at TrumpBailouts.org documents the billion-dollar corporations and other large corporations that have received taxpayer assistance under the CARES Act, and what advantages and assets they had going into the COVID-19 crisis that most small businesses could never access.
Previous, controversial PPP grantees include a foreign-owned uranium mining corporation with ties to the Trump administration, oil corporations that spent millions on stock buybacks, an Indiana-based coal corporation with a former Trump official as its lobbyist, at least two companies that market their ability to ship U.S. manufacturing jobs overseas, major luxury hotel chains, a fashion model agency, and even the L.A. Lakers.
Learn more about the special interests fueling the Trump administration at Accountable.US and the administration's ongoing efforts to carve out more big oil and coal bailouts at WesternValuesProject.org, an Accountable.US project focused on public lands conservation.
LATEST NEWS
'Evil and Disgusting': From Sabrina Carpenter to Franklin the Turtle, 'Violent' Memes by Trump Officials Rebuked
"This is a government that is not only full of sadists, but has elevated sadism to a place of honor in politics and policy," said one journalist.
Dec 02, 2025
Pop star Sabrina Carpenter and Kids Can Press, publisher of the popular Franklin the Turtle children's book series, are shaming President Donald Trump's administration for using their work to promote its policies of mass deportation and extrajudicial killing.
On Monday, the official White House X account posted a video showing federal agents chasing, apprehending, and detaining purported undocumented immigrants that featured Carpenter's song "Juno" as its soundtrack.
On Tuesday morning, Carpenter angrily denounced the White House for using her song in a mass deportation video.
"This video is evil and disgusting," she wrote in response. "Do not ever involve me or my music to benefit your inhumane agenda."
An administration spokesperson responded to Carpenter's message by continuing to reference her lyrics, and said that "anyone who would defend these sick monsters" that the administration is deporting "must be stupid, or is it slow," a line lifted from her hit song "Manchild."
As noted by the Guardian, Carpenter is just the latest popular artist to object to the Trump White House using their work in propaganda videos, as Beyoncé, Olivia Rodrigo, Kenny Loggins, and Foo Fighters have also attacked the White House for hijacking their songs.
Kids Can Press, meanwhile, slammed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after he posted a meme depicting Franklin the Turtle launching air-to-surface missiles at the boats of supposed "narco-terrorists" in the Caribbean.
In a statement, the publisher said that it "strongly" condemned "any denigrating, violent, or unauthorized use of Franklin’s name or image," such the one Hegseth posted on social media.
“Franklin the Turtle is a beloved Canadian icon who has inspired generations of children and stands for kindness, empathy, and inclusivity,” the published emphasized.
Hegseth posted the meme shortly after the Washington Post reported last week that US defense forces had conducted a "double-tap" strike against a suspected drug boat in September with the express purpose of killing two men who had survived the initial strike on the vessel.
Many legal scholars consider such an action to be murder or an overt war crime, and Hegseth and the Trump White House in recent days have been trying to shift responsibility for authorizing the second strike to Adm. Frank Bradley.
Writing in his Substack page on Tuesday, journalist Paul Waldman noted that Hegseth's attitude toward extrajudicial killing shouldn't be a surprise since he had previously lobbied Trump during his first term in office to pardon convicted war criminals.
"This is a government that is not only full of sadists, but has elevated sadism to a place of honor in politics and policy," he wrote. "If you’re one of Trump’s underlings and you aren’t publicly expressing glee at the prospect of punishing and abusing those with less power, then you won’t really fit in. That’s the context in which we have to view this event."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Billionaire-Funded ‘Trump Accounts’ for Kids Slammed as 'Another Tax Shelter' for the Rich
"If the White House were serious about supporting families struggling with the costs of living, it would be advocating for investments in childcare," said one children's advocate.
Dec 02, 2025
After Silicon Valley CEO Michael Dell and his wife, philanthropist Susan Dell, announced Tuesday their plan to invest $6.25 billion in seed money in individual investment accounts for 25 million American children, adding to the number of kids who would receive so-called "Trump Accounts" that were included in the Republican spending bill this year, advocates acknowledged that a direct cash investment could feasibly help some families.
But the National Women's Law Center (NWLC) was among those wondering whether the Dells' investment of $6.25 billion—a fraction of their $148 billion fortune—would ultimately benefit wealthy investors far more.
“While we support direct investments in families, the Trump Accounts being hailed by the White House are a policy solution that doesn’t meet most families’ needs,” said Amy Matsui, the vice president of income security and child care at NWLC. “As currently structured, these accounts will just become another tax shelter for the wealthiest, while the overwhelming majority of American families, who are struggling to cover basic costs like food, childcare, and housing, will be hard pressed to find the extra money that could turn the seed money into a meaningful investment."
The Dells, who are behind Dell Technologies, announced the investment plan months after President Donald Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill into law. The tax and spending law includes a provision that would start an investment account for every US citizen child born between January 2025-December 2028, with a $1,000 investment from the US government.
As Jezebel reported, the couple's contribution would got to an additional 25 million children, up to age 10, who were born prior to the 2025 cut-off date for the initial Trump Accounts.
"Around 80% of children born between 2016-2024 would theoretically qualify, although there are cutoffs based on household income: Applying families would have to live in ZIP codes where the median household income is less than $150,000 per year," wrote Jim Vorel.
In the corporate press, the Dells were applauded for making what they called the largest single private charitable donation to US children, but Vorel questioned the real-world impact of "a gift of $250, thrown vaguely in the direction of millions of American families by members of our billionaire ruling class."
"What can that money realistically do in terms of providing for a child’s future?" he wrote. "Is it the seed that is going to allow them to go to college, to buy a house some day? Does that really seem likely? Or are we primarily talking about billionaires running PR campaigns for a president who recently hit new second term lows in his overall approval numbers?"
The success of the individual investment accounts hinges on whether Americans and their employers—who can contribute up to $2,500 per year without counting it as taxable income—will be able to consistently and meaningfully invest money in the accounts until their children turn 18, considering that about a quarter of US households are living paycheck to paycheck, according to a recent poll.
"Do you know many families in 2025 that would describe themselves as having a spare $5,000 per year to immediately start investing in a government-backed investment account, even if that might be relatively sound financial strategy? Or are the families in your orbit already scraping to get by, without being able to commit much attention to investing in the future?" asked Vorel, adding that the artificial intelligence "bubble" is widely expected to soon burst and drag the stock market in which Trump is urging families to invest "into a deep pit of despair."
"As is so often the case, the families most benefited by the concept of Trump Accounts will be those ones who are already on the best financial footing, aka the wealthiest Americans," he wrote.
Jonathan Cohn of Progressive Mass was among those who said the Dells' investment only served to demonstrate how "they should pay more in taxes" to ensure all US children can benefit from public, not private, investment in education, healthcare, and other social supports.
"The government should not be funding only what can secure the sympathies of erratic rich people," said Cohn.
The NWLC argued the Trump Accounts are an example of the White House's embrace of "pronatalism"—the belief that the government should incentivize Americans to have more children—but fall short of being a policy that would actually make a measurable positive impact on families.
“In the end, this policy mirrors the rest of the law: another giveaway to the richest Americans that leaves everyone else further behind," said Matsui. "If the White House were serious about supporting families struggling with the costs of living, it would be advocating for investments in childcare, an expanded Child Tax Credit, and undoing the historic cuts to SNAP and Medicaid.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘What Is the Administration Trying to Hide?’ Dems Demand Public Testimony From Trump Budget Chief
"He has unlawfully blocked funding and created a massive affordability crisis across the country. Congress and the American people deserve answers."
Dec 02, 2025
A group of House Democrats on Tuesday called on President Donald Trump's budget chief, Russell Vought, to publicly testify on the administration's unlawful withholding of funds approved by Congress and broader economic agenda, which the lawmakers said is "driving up costs, weakening the labor market, and inflicting real economic harm on the American people."
"We remain alarmed that you persist in implementing an extreme agenda that jeopardizes the economic security of the American people and shows open disregard for Congress' constitutional power of the purse," House Budget Committee Democrats, led by Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), wrote in a letter to Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and a lead architect of the far-right Project 2025 agenda.
The lawmakers accused Vought of dodging the House Budget Committee, noting that the head of OMB typically appears before the panel shortly after the release of the president's annual budget request. Trump unveiled his budget blueprint all the way back in May.
"Not only has the committee yet to hear from OMB, you have also found time for multiple closed-door meetings with House Republicans," the Democrats wrote. "Under Democratic chairs, the public was never shut out from these important exchanges. What is the administration trying to hide?"
The letter points to Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports finding that the Trump administration has repeatedly violated federal law by withholding or delaying the disbursement of funds authorized by Congress, including National Institutes of Health research grants and money for Head Start.
The House Democrats also condemned Vought's attacks on government transparency, citing his agency's decision earlier this year to cut off public access to a database that tracks federal spending. OMB later partially restored the database after losing a court fight.
"If you fail to appear before this committee before the end of the year, this will be the only administration in the last 50 years to not send the OMB director—a basic standard you yourself met during President Trump’s first administration (appearing in both 2019 and 2020)," the lawmakers wrote on Tuesday. "If you disagree... it will make one point unmistakably clear: you know you cannot defend an extreme agenda."
We’re demanding that Russ Vought, Trump’s OMB Director and the architect of Project 2025, testify before the House Budget Committee.
He has unlawfully blocked funding and created a massive affordability crisis across the country. Congress and the American people deserve answers. pic.twitter.com/kxde5mCYs9
— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) December 2, 2025
After playing a key role in crafting the notorious Project 2025 agenda ahead of Trump's 2024 election win, Vought has emerged as one of the most powerful figures in the administration, wielding power at OMB so aggressively that ProPublica recently dubbed him "the shadow president."
"What Vought has done in the nine months since Trump took office goes much further than slashing foreign aid," the investigative outlet noted. "Relying on an expansive theory of presidential power and a willingness to test the rule of law, he has frozen vast sums of federal spending, terminated tens of thousands of federal workers and, in a few cases, brought entire agencies to a standstill."
One anonymous administration official told ProPublica that "it feels like we work for Russ Vought."
"He has centralized decision-making power to an extent that he is the commander-in-chief," the official said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular