A bicycle, pencil sharpener, 300lb of raw meat: US presidential gifts and the rules governing them
Reports that Donald Trump's administration is preparing to accept a luxury plane from the Qatari royal family have set off a storm of criticism, as ethics experts say such a gift would violate rules within the constitution that seek to guard against bribery and corruption.
There is a long history of US presidents accepting gifts from foreign powers. The very desk from which Trump has signed a record number of executive order was given to the US by Queen Victoria in 1880. The 'Resolute Desk' was given to President Rutherford B Hayes and is made from the oak timbers of the British ship HMS Resolute.
Related: Trump says planned gift of luxury plane from Qatar is a very 'transparent' deal
Clothes, antiques – and even animals – have all in the past been presented to US presidents. Most often these gifts are then disposed of through a complicated bureaucratic process enshrined in the constitution.
During George W Bush's administration, a puppy given to the president by the leader of Bulgaria was sent directly to the National Archives which preserves government and historical records. The puppy was then placed with a family.
Bush was unable to keep the dog because under the constitution's emoluments clause, government office holders are banned from accepting gifts from any 'king, prince, or foreign state', without the approval of Congress. Trump officials reportedly believe the president might be able to keep the luxury plane because it will be transferred to his presidential library at the end of his term. Sources say they arrived at that conclusion after determining that the gift was not conditioned on any official act and therefore was not bribery.
Under US law, foreign gifts valued at less than $480 can be retained by federal employees. Anything over that amount is considered a gift to the 'people of the United States' and must be logged and then disposed of by the White House Gift Unit. Most gifts are transferred to the national archives or the presidents future presidential library which acts as an archive of the leader's administration.
Like other presidents, Barack Obama's presidential library contains thousands of gifts, given to the former presidents, including silver cufflinks, Christmas ornaments and a double decker bus pencil sharpener.
If a gift does take the president's particular fancy, they can retain it, as long as they pay a fair market value for it.
In 2023, the US House oversight committee reported 100 items given to Trump from foreign nations in his first term were missing, after the White House failed to log them. They included a lifesize painting of the president given by the president of El Salvador and golf clubs from the prime minister of Japan that were valued at more than $250,000 in total. A spokesperson for Trump said many of the items 'were received either before or after the administration'.
The New York Times has reported that at an estimated value of $400m, the Boeing jet offer currently making headlines would probably be the most expensive gift from a foreign government in US history. It has been reported that the president would use the plane as the new Air Force One until shortly before the conclusion of his second Oval Office stint, at which point it could be transferred to his presidential library foundation, raising the prospect that Trump would have use of the plane even after his presidency ends.
In a statement, the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said: 'Any gift given by a foreign government is always accepted in full compliance with all applicable laws. President Trump's administration is committed to full transparency.
Despite the ethical concerns, foreign leaders use gifts as an important tool to strengthen relationships and break the diplomatic ice.
In 1997, President Heydar Aliyev of Azerbaijan gave Bill Clinton and first lady Hillary Clinton a 6ft by 5ft rug with their faces on it, which was woven in just weeks, after the president accepted an invitation to the White House. Twelve women worked around the clock in eight-hours shifts to produce the carpet, a process that normally takes months.
In 2008, Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert gave Bush a bicycle after it was reported that the then president was unable to jog because of an injury to his knee.
Other members of the administration are governed by the same rules of gift giving and receiving. In 2005, vice-president Dick Cheney's log of gifts was double that of president George W Bush's. That year Cheney, an avid hunter, received four guns including one worth more than $6,000. For his part, Bush's most eye-opening gift in 2005 might have been 300 pounds (136kg) of raw lamb from Argentina – a gift that was likely destroyed by the secret service due to official White House rules on food and drink gifts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
17 minutes ago
- Fox News
Tariff fight escalates as Trump appeals second court loss
The Trump administration is fighting to pause a second court ruling that blocked President Donald Trump's sweeping and so-called reciprocal tariffs, the signature economic policy of his second term. The administration's new appeal, filed Monday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, comes less than a week after a very similar court challenge played out in the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) in New York, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington. At issue in both cases is Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to enact his sweeping "Liberation Day" tariff plan. The plan, which Trump announced on April 2, invokes IEEPA for both his 10% baseline tariff on most U.S. trading partners and a so-called "reciprocal tariff" against other countries. Trump's use of the emergency law to invoke widespread tariffs was struck down unanimously last week by the three-judge CIT panel, which said the statute does not give Trump "unbounded" power to implement tariffs. However, the decision was almost immediately stayed by the U.S. Court of Appeals, allowing Trump's tariffs to continue. But in a lesser-discussed ruling on the very same day, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras, an Obama appointee, determined that Trump's tariffs were unlawful under IEEPA. Since the case before him had more limited reach than the case heard by the CIT – plaintiffs in the suit focused on harm to two small businesses, versus harm from the broader tariff plan – it went almost unnoticed in news headlines. But that changed on Monday. Lawyers for the Justice Department asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit – a Washington-based but still separate court than the Federal Court of Appeals – to immediately stay the judge's ruling. They argued in their appeal that the judge's ruling against Trump's use of IEEPA undercuts his ability to use tariffs as a "credible threat" in trade talks, at a time when such negotiations "currently stand at a delicate juncture." "By holding the tariffs invalid, the district court's ruling usurps the President's authority and threatens to disrupt sensitive, ongoing negotiations with virtually every trading partner by undercutting the premise of those negotiations – that the tariffs are a credible threat," Trump lawyers said in the filing. Economists also seemed to share this view that the steep tariffs were more a negotiating tactic than an espousal of actual policy, which they noted in a series of interviews last week with Fox News Digital. The bottom line for the Trump administration "is that they need to get back to a place [where] they are using these huge reciprocal tariffs and all of that as a negotiating tactic," William Cline, an economist and senior fellow emeritus at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said in an interview. Cline noted that this was the framework previously laid out by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who had embraced the tariffs as more of an opening salvo for future trade talks, including between the U.S. and China. "I think the thing to keep in mind there is that Trump and Vance have this view that tariffs are beautiful because they will restore America's Rust Belt jobs and that they'll collect money while they're doing it, which will contribute to fiscal growth," said Cline, the former deputy managing director and chief economist of the Institute of International Finance. "Those are both fantasies." What comes next in the case remains to be seen. The White House said it will take its tariff fight to the Supreme Court if necessary. Counsel for the plaintiffs echoed that view in an interview with Fox News. But it's unclear if the Supreme Court would choose to take up the case, which comes at a time when Trump's relationship with the judiciary has come under increasing strain. In the 20 weeks since the start of his second White House term, lawyers for the Trump administration have filed 18 emergency appeals to the high court, indicating both the pace and breadth of the tense court battles.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate Begins Putting Its Stamp on Giant Trump Tax, Debt Limit Bill
(Bloomberg) -- Significant changes are in store for President Donald Trump's signature $3.9 trillion tax-cut bill as the Senate begins closed-door talks this week on legislation that squeaked through the House by a single vote. Billionaire Steve Cohen Wants NY to Expand Taxpayer-Backed Ferry Where the Wild Children's Museums Are The Economic Benefits of Paying Workers to Move Now With Colorful Blocks, Tirana's Pyramid Represents a Changing Albania At London's New Design Museum, Visitors Get Hands-On Access Senate Republican leaders are aiming to make permanent many of the temporary tax cuts in the House bill, a move that would increase the bill's more than $2.5 trillion deficit impact. But doing so risks alienating fiscal hawks already at war with party moderates over the bill's safety-net cuts. It amounts to a game of chess further complicated by the top Senate rules-keeper, who will decide whether some key provisions violate the chamber's strict rules. Jettisoning those provisions — which include gun silencer regulations and artificial intelligence policy — could sink the bill in the House. House Republicans' top tax writer, Representative Jason Smith, on Friday said that senators need to leave most of the bill untouched in order to ensure it can pass the House in the end. 'I would encourage my counterparts, don't be too drastic, be very balanced,' he said. Trump worked the phone as Republican senators returned to work in Washington Monday after a one-week holiday break. Josh Hawley of Missouri said in a mid-afternoon social media post that he 'just had a great talk' with the president on the legislation and they agreed no Medicaid benefits would be cut. Hawley, who has been a vocal supporter of preserving Medicaid benefits, didn't specify if he believes the House bill — projected to cut health care coverage coverage for about 7.7 million people by changing eligibility requirements — reduces benefits. GOP wrangling imperils Republicans' goal of sending the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' to Trump's desk by July 4. But the real deadline is sometime in August or September, when the Treasury Department estimates the US will run out of borrowing authority. The House bill would raise the government's legal debt ceiling by $4 trillion, which the Senate wants to increase to $5 trillion in order to push off the next fiscal cliff until after the 2026 congressional elections. That's just one of the major changes the Senate will weigh in the coming weeks. Here are others: Permanent Business Breaks Senate Finance Chairman Mike Crapo's top priority is making permanent the temporary business tax cuts that the House bill sunsets after 2029. These are the research and development tax deduction, the ability to use depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) as the basis for interest expensing, and 100% bonus depreciation of certain property, including most machinery and factories. Senate Republicans plan to use a budget gimmick that counts the extension of the individual provisions in the 2017 Trump tax bill as having no cost. That gives them room to make the additional business tax cuts and possibly extend some of the new four-year individual cuts in the House bill like those on tips and overtime. Deficit hawks could demand new offsets, however, either in the form of spending cuts or ending tax breaks like one on carried interest used by private equity. SALT The House expanded the state and local tax deduction limit from $10,000 to $40,000 to get blue-state Republicans behind the bill. But SALT isn't an issue in the Senate, where high-tax states like California, New York and New Jersey are represented by Democrats. 'I can't think of any Senate Republicans who think more than $10,000 is needed and I can think of several who think the number should be zero,' said Rohit Kumar, a former top Senate staffer now with PWC. That includes deficit hawks like Louisiana's John Kennedy, who has balked at the House's SALT boost. Senators could propose keeping the current $10,000 SALT cap as a low-ball counter, forcing the House to settle from something in the ballpark of a $30,000 cap, Kumar said. The Senate could also change new limits on the abilities of passthrough service businesses to claim SALT deductions. Green Energy Moderate Republicans in the Senate are pushing back on provisions in the House bill that gut tax credits for solar, wind, battery makers and several other clean energy sectors. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said she's seeking to soften aggressive phaseouts of tax credits for clean electricity production and nuclear power. She has the backing of at least three other Republicans, giving her enough leverage to make demands in a chamber where opposition from four GOP senators would kill the bill. Their demands will run headlong into ultraconservatives, who already think the House bill doesn't get rid of tax benefits for clean energy fast enough. Medicaid, Food Stamps Senators Rand Paul of Kentucky, Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin say they're willing to sink the bill if it doesn't cut more spending. 'I think we have enough to stop the process until the president gets serious about reductions,' Johnson said recently on CNN. They haven't made specific demands yet, but they could start off where the House Freedom Caucus fell short — cutting the federal matching payment for Medicaid for those enrolled under Obamacare and further limiting federal reimbursement for Medicaid provider taxes charged by states. Conservatives' demands are in stark contrast to Republican senators already uncomfortable with the new Medicaid co-pays and state cost-sharing for Medicaid and food stamps in the House bill. Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Jim Justice and Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia and Hawley join Murkowski in this camp. Boosting their case is Trump, who told the Freedom Caucus to stop 'grandstanding' on more Medicaid cuts. Regulatory Matters There's an extensive list of regulatory matters in the House bill that could be struck if they are found to break Senate rules for averting a filibuster and passing the legislation by a simple majority. Provisions likely to be challenged for not being primarily budgetary in nature include a repeal of gun silencer regulations, preemption of state artificial intelligence regulations, staffing regulations for nursing homes and abolishing the Direct File program at the Internal Revenue Service. The House bill's provisions limiting the ability of federal judges to hold administration officials in contempt, ending funding for Planned Parenthood, requiring congressional review of new regulations and easing permitting of fossil fuel projects are also vulnerable. The biggest Senate rules fight will be over using the 'current policy' budget gimmick to lower the cost of the bill. Senate Republican leaders could explore bypassing rules keeper Elizabeth MacDonough if she finds the accounting move breaks the rules. Battles over these provisions could take weeks. 'I think it would be very difficult to get it out of the Senate quickly,' said Bill Hoagland, a former top Republican Senate budget staffer now with the Bipartisan Policy Center. Spectrum Sales A major auction of government radio spectrum that would generate an estimated $88 billion in revenue is another unresolved fight. Ted Cruz of Texas, the Senate Commerce chair, backs the spectrum sale but Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota has vowed to protect the Defense Department, which has warned auctioning off its spectrum would degrade its capabilities and cost hundreds of billions for retrofits. The proposal would free up key spectrum for wireless broadband giants like Verizon and Elon Musk's Starlink. Estate Tax Majority Leader John Thune and 46 other Republican senators back a total repeal of the estate tax, which would likely cost several hundred billion dollars over a decade, benefiting the heirs of the richest 0.1%. That could make it too pricey for the Senate to include. The House bill permanently increases the estate tax exemption to $15 million for individuals and $30 million for married couples, with future increases tied to inflation. --With assistance from Emily Birnbaum. (Updates with Trump phone call to Hawle in sixth paragraph.) YouTube Is Swallowing TV Whole, and It's Coming for the Sitcom Millions of Americans Are Obsessed With This Japanese Barbecue Sauce Mark Zuckerberg Loves MAGA Now. Will MAGA Ever Love Him Back? Will Small Business Owners Knock Down Trump's Mighty Tariffs? Trump Considers Deporting Migrants to Rwanda After the UK Decides Not To ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
List of ‘sanctuary jurisdictions' removed from DHS website after law enforcement outcry, questions about accuracy
The Department of Homeland Security removed a list of hundreds of so-called sanctuary jurisdictions that it published on its website Thursday following questions about its accuracy and pointed criticism from a major group representing law enforcement. DHS had described it as 'comprehensive list of sanctuary jurisdictions including cities, counties, and states that are deliberately obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws and endangering American citizens,' according to an archived version of the since-deleted webpage. The agency added that each jurisdiction 'will receive formal notification of its non-compliance and all potential violations of federal criminal statutes.' President Donald Trump has vowed to punish jurisdictions that do not cooperate with federal authorities' immigration enforcement as part of his administration's efforts to increase deportations. There's no specific or legal definition of what constitutes a 'sanctuary jurisdiction.' The term is often used to refer to law enforcement agencies, states or communities that don't cooperate with immigration enforcement. Asked by CNN why the list was removed, a senior DHS official said in a statement Monday that the list 'is being constantly reviewed and can be changed at any time and will be updated regularly.' The statement did not respond to specific questions about how the list was created or who identified jurisdictions that would be included. 'Designation of a sanctuary jurisdiction is based on the evaluation of numerous factors, including self-identification as a Sanctuary Jurisdiction, noncompliance with Federal law enforcement in enforcing immigration laws, restrictions on information sharing, and legal protections for illegal aliens,' the statement said. But several jurisdictions on the DHS list said it does not accurately describe their policies. The city of Las Vegas said in a statement on X that it has never been a sanctuary city and is 'not sure why DHS has classified Las Vegas in the manner it has.' Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott said while his city is 'welcoming,' it is not a sanctuary city. Several city officials in San Diego County said they were confused about being on the list — including one mayor who told local media that officers are allowed to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement in certain cases. The president of the National Sheriffs' Association, which represents more than 3,000 sheriffs nationwide, also criticized the list in a statement Saturday. The group's president, Kieran Donahue, demanded an apology and that the list be removed, said the list was published 'in a manner that lacks transparency and accountability,' and accused DHS of doing 'a terrible disservice to President Trump and the Sheriffs of this country.' Donahue said that in a meeting between his association and members of DHS, 'no political appointee for the administration could explain who compiled, proofed, and verified the list before publication.' 'This decision by DHS could create a vacuum of trust that may take years to overcome,' said Donahue, the sheriff of Canyon County, Idaho. Trump signed an executive order in April directing the DHS secretary and the attorney general to publish a list of sanctuary jurisdictions considered to be obstructing federal immigration laws. The order directs federal agencies to identify funding that could be withheld from such jurisdictions. Donahue, the sheriffs' association president whose statement criticized the now-removed list, was in the Oval Office when Trump signed that executive order. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
