SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Trump's demolition of the East Wing of the White House as pictured earlier this month.
(Photo: Getty Images via the Washington Post)
If You Think Trump's $350 Million Ballroom Won't Cost Taxpayers, You Don't Understand the Cost of Corruption
None of us should think that just because the ballroom is being bankrolled by greedy rich people seeking favor with the president that it won't have a down side for the rest of us.
Oct 31, 2025
Trump and his Republican sycophants have been busy telling us that we shouldn’t be bothered by Trump’s demolition of the East Wing and his plans for a now $350 million ballroom. (The price tag keeps rising, it had been $200 million.)
While many of us were upset about Trump’s destruction of a historic landmark with zero consultation from anyone, the consolation is supposed to be that taxpayers are not footing the bill. Trump says he is raising the money from his friends and corporate sponsors.
Apparently, we are supposed to be relieved that people seeking favors from Trump are paying for the ballroom rather than taxpayer dollars. As David Dayen pointed out in a piece in The American Prospect, these contributions are likely to prove very costly to the American people.
Dayen goes through the public list of donors (some are anonymous) and found off the bat the big tech companies, Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon. These companies have all sorts of occasion to seek government contracts and regulatory favors from a Trump administration that has openly said it favors its friends in such matters.
Naked corruption is the biggest cost to the public from Trump’s big ballroom, but it is not the only one.
The list includes many other companies looking for favors, such as Hewlitt Packard and Union Pacific, both looking for regulatory approval on major mergers. And then there are crypto folks who always want more love from Donald Trump as they expand their scams.
This naked corruption is the biggest cost to the public from Trump’s big ballroom, but it is not the only one. If we’re only concerned about the budgetary impact, it’s important to remember that taxpayers pay a price for the “generosity” of rich people. They deduct their contributions from their taxable income.
The current top tax rate is roughly 40 percent. (This includes the Medicare tax, which applies to all income of rich people.) If the full $350 million were coming from individuals, this means that we would be getting $140 million less in taxes from them because of their contributions to Trump’s mega ballroom.
From a straight budgetary perspective, the public would be better off if Trump built something more tasteful in the $100-$140 million range, using taxpayer dollars, than the mega MAGA monstrosity he is actually attaching to the White House. (What will this cost to demolish?)
In fairness, many of Trump’s contributions come from corporations who are only taxed at a 21 percent rate. Also, it’s likely that some of Trump’s contributors cheat, and don’t pay any taxes anyhow, so the deduction doesn’t mean anything to them. But none of us should think that just because the ballroom is paid for by contributions, it doesn’t cost the government anything.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Dean Baker
Dean Baker is the co-founder and the senior economist of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). He is the author of several books, including "Getting Back to Full Employment: A Better bargain for Working People," "The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive," "The United States Since 1980," "Social Security: The Phony Crisis" (with Mark Weisbrot), and "The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer." He also has a blog, "Beat the Press," where he discusses the media's coverage of economic issues.
Trump and his Republican sycophants have been busy telling us that we shouldn’t be bothered by Trump’s demolition of the East Wing and his plans for a now $350 million ballroom. (The price tag keeps rising, it had been $200 million.)
While many of us were upset about Trump’s destruction of a historic landmark with zero consultation from anyone, the consolation is supposed to be that taxpayers are not footing the bill. Trump says he is raising the money from his friends and corporate sponsors.
Apparently, we are supposed to be relieved that people seeking favors from Trump are paying for the ballroom rather than taxpayer dollars. As David Dayen pointed out in a piece in The American Prospect, these contributions are likely to prove very costly to the American people.
Dayen goes through the public list of donors (some are anonymous) and found off the bat the big tech companies, Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon. These companies have all sorts of occasion to seek government contracts and regulatory favors from a Trump administration that has openly said it favors its friends in such matters.
Naked corruption is the biggest cost to the public from Trump’s big ballroom, but it is not the only one.
The list includes many other companies looking for favors, such as Hewlitt Packard and Union Pacific, both looking for regulatory approval on major mergers. And then there are crypto folks who always want more love from Donald Trump as they expand their scams.
This naked corruption is the biggest cost to the public from Trump’s big ballroom, but it is not the only one. If we’re only concerned about the budgetary impact, it’s important to remember that taxpayers pay a price for the “generosity” of rich people. They deduct their contributions from their taxable income.
The current top tax rate is roughly 40 percent. (This includes the Medicare tax, which applies to all income of rich people.) If the full $350 million were coming from individuals, this means that we would be getting $140 million less in taxes from them because of their contributions to Trump’s mega ballroom.
From a straight budgetary perspective, the public would be better off if Trump built something more tasteful in the $100-$140 million range, using taxpayer dollars, than the mega MAGA monstrosity he is actually attaching to the White House. (What will this cost to demolish?)
In fairness, many of Trump’s contributions come from corporations who are only taxed at a 21 percent rate. Also, it’s likely that some of Trump’s contributors cheat, and don’t pay any taxes anyhow, so the deduction doesn’t mean anything to them. But none of us should think that just because the ballroom is paid for by contributions, it doesn’t cost the government anything.
Dean Baker
Dean Baker is the co-founder and the senior economist of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). He is the author of several books, including "Getting Back to Full Employment: A Better bargain for Working People," "The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive," "The United States Since 1980," "Social Security: The Phony Crisis" (with Mark Weisbrot), and "The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer." He also has a blog, "Beat the Press," where he discusses the media's coverage of economic issues.
Trump and his Republican sycophants have been busy telling us that we shouldn’t be bothered by Trump’s demolition of the East Wing and his plans for a now $350 million ballroom. (The price tag keeps rising, it had been $200 million.)
While many of us were upset about Trump’s destruction of a historic landmark with zero consultation from anyone, the consolation is supposed to be that taxpayers are not footing the bill. Trump says he is raising the money from his friends and corporate sponsors.
Apparently, we are supposed to be relieved that people seeking favors from Trump are paying for the ballroom rather than taxpayer dollars. As David Dayen pointed out in a piece in The American Prospect, these contributions are likely to prove very costly to the American people.
Dayen goes through the public list of donors (some are anonymous) and found off the bat the big tech companies, Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon. These companies have all sorts of occasion to seek government contracts and regulatory favors from a Trump administration that has openly said it favors its friends in such matters.
Naked corruption is the biggest cost to the public from Trump’s big ballroom, but it is not the only one.
The list includes many other companies looking for favors, such as Hewlitt Packard and Union Pacific, both looking for regulatory approval on major mergers. And then there are crypto folks who always want more love from Donald Trump as they expand their scams.
This naked corruption is the biggest cost to the public from Trump’s big ballroom, but it is not the only one. If we’re only concerned about the budgetary impact, it’s important to remember that taxpayers pay a price for the “generosity” of rich people. They deduct their contributions from their taxable income.
The current top tax rate is roughly 40 percent. (This includes the Medicare tax, which applies to all income of rich people.) If the full $350 million were coming from individuals, this means that we would be getting $140 million less in taxes from them because of their contributions to Trump’s mega ballroom.
From a straight budgetary perspective, the public would be better off if Trump built something more tasteful in the $100-$140 million range, using taxpayer dollars, than the mega MAGA monstrosity he is actually attaching to the White House. (What will this cost to demolish?)
In fairness, many of Trump’s contributions come from corporations who are only taxed at a 21 percent rate. Also, it’s likely that some of Trump’s contributors cheat, and don’t pay any taxes anyhow, so the deduction doesn’t mean anything to them. But none of us should think that just because the ballroom is paid for by contributions, it doesn’t cost the government anything.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.