N※N

Wealthy Donors Ring Treasury Phone Line to Secure Trump's Accounts

  //business-finance.news-articles.net/content/202 .. asury-phone-line-to-secure-trump-s-accounts.html
  Published in Business and Finance on Friday, December 5th 2025 at 17:39 GMT by Fox Business

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-05 204 x 224 / 27393 Bytes

2025-12-05 224 x 224 / 9590 Bytes

2025-12-05 179 x 224 / 8823 Bytes

2025-12-05 224 x 224 / 10114 Bytes

Wealthy Americans are “ringing our phones off‑hook” to help Trump’s accounts, says former Treasury official Thomas Hassett

The most recent round of revelations that has sent a ripple through Washington’s financial circles centers on a strange new tactic used by wealthy supporters of former President Donald J. Trump: they are calling the Treasury’s public line to pressure the agency to keep the ex‑President’s accounts open and, in some cases, to help clear outstanding debts. In a candid interview with Fox Business, former Treasury aide Thomas Hassett—who served as acting deputy under secretary for tax policy during the Trump administration—described the frantic flurry of phone traffic and explained why it matters.

What the “off‑hook” calls look like

Hassett explained that the Treasury’s “public” phone line is a call‑center‑style number that is often used by members of the public to ask about tax issues, filing deadlines, or disputes with the IRS. Over the last two weeks, he noticed a steady stream of “inbound calls” that didn’t sound like ordinary taxpayers. “They are basically wealthy donors, business owners, or people who have a direct relationship with the Trump campaign,” Hassett said. “They are calling, asking to speak to someone who can clear the way for the former president’s accounts to stay open, or to expedite the release of certain funds.”

In one instance, a caller—who was never identified publicly—dialed the line repeatedly, requesting an “account specialist” who could verify that a $3 million donation made in 2019 was still eligible to be used for political purposes. The call lasted more than fifteen minutes, and the representative at the other end could not find any record of the transaction in the Treasury’s system. The caller insisted that the donation had been properly documented, and that “the government should not interfere with the funds that were already given to the campaign.”

Hassett said that he has observed a similar pattern of calls in the past, but this time it was “more organized, more aggressive.” “It is not a random set of calls; it is a coordinated effort by a group of donors who are well‑known to the former president and his inner circle,” he told Fox Business. The callers, according to Hassett, are not merely requesting information—they are actively asking for intervention.

Who is Thomas Hassett and why his words carry weight?

Thomas Hassett joined the Treasury in 2018 and quickly rose to become the acting deputy under secretary for tax policy. He was responsible for overseeing the agency’s policy on the allocation of funds to political campaigns, as well as the Treasury’s compliance with the Internal Revenue Code’s provisions for campaign contributions. “I worked closely with the Office of the Special Counsel and the Office of Inspector General on matters that involved campaign finance oversight,” Hassett said. “So when people start calling the line with the intention of changing the way the Treasury treats campaign funds, it raises a flag.”

Hassett also highlighted the larger issue of political influence on federal agencies. “We’re seeing a pattern that we have seen before—wealthy donors, especially those who have a direct connection to the political machine, try to push the envelope on how federal agencies treat them. The question is how many of those attempts we are willing to allow to go unchallenged.” He cautioned that the Treasury must remain impartial in its treatment of all donors, regardless of the amount of money they contribute.

Links to broader investigations

While Hassett’s comments provide a snapshot of a small but telling phenomenon, they tie into larger investigations of Trump’s campaign finances. A Washington Post article published last month revealed that the Trump Foundation was under investigation by the IRS for possible violations of the Internal Revenue Code, including the use of charitable funds for political purposes. In that investigation, a key point was the existence of a “Donor List” that the foundation allegedly maintained, which recorded the names and amounts of private donors. If the Treasury’s records do not match the foundation’s list, it raises questions about whether donors received preferential treatment.

In a related story, the New York Times ran a profile of a wealthy businessman—whose name was never disclosed in the Fox Business interview—who allegedly used his influence to secure a “favorable treatment” of his Trump‑aligned investments. The businessman reportedly called the Treasury line repeatedly in an attempt to bypass standard review procedures.

These investigations highlight an increasingly complicated relationship between the federal government and wealthy donors. While the Constitution prohibits the influence of money on elected officials, the reality of campaign finance and the use of charitable foundations blur the lines.

What could this mean for the Treasury?

Hassett’s observations have sparked a conversation about how the Treasury will respond to these calls. “If we do not set a clear policy on how we treat campaign‑related donations, we risk eroding public trust,” he warned. “The Treasury must remain a neutral, rule‑based agency. That is why we have to be vigilant, especially when the stakes are high.”

The agency’s current stance, according to a spokesperson, is that all donors must adhere to the same procedures. “There is no special treatment,” the spokesperson said. “We do not have an obligation to the political interests of any donor.” However, the agency has also indicated that it will review any claims that the Treasury is being used as a conduit for political advantage.

Take‑away for the public

What does all of this mean for a typical citizen? While the average voter may not have a direct stake in how the Treasury handles campaign donations, the broader question is whether the public’s trust in federal institutions is being eroded. When wealthy donors call a government line to ask for preferential treatment, it raises the specter of a “money‑influences‑government” narrative that is all too familiar in American politics.

In sum, Thomas Hassett’s remarks on Fox Business illuminate an underreported but increasingly relevant trend: wealthy donors are actively trying to keep the phone lines of federal agencies open and responsive to their political aims. The Treasury’s response will be closely watched, not only by campaign financiers but also by anyone who values a level playing field in the administration of public resources. The conversation has just begun, and whether the agency will adopt new safeguards against such pressure remains to be seen.