The fraud case against Trump brought by New York attorney general Letitia James is ongoing. It is projected to end in about three months. Giving it some extra time, the question addresses whether Trump will actually lose the ability to do business in NY as a result of the trial.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ41 | |
| 2 | Ṁ20 | |
| 3 | Ṁ19 | |
| 4 | Ṁ13 | |
| 5 | Ṁ4 |
@benshindel Hmmm, this market seems potentially underdefined to me. Did this definitely happen?
The verdict significantly curtails the Trump Organization's ability to do business in New York. He has personally been banned from holding any directorships for three years and his company cannot secure loans with financial institutions registered with the city during that time either.
He has been hit with an enormous financial penalty of $355m (£282m; €329m) - which jumps to more than $450m once interest is included - that far exceeds how much cash he has to hand. His business will continue to be be watched by an independent monitor, with a separate independent director of compliance also signing off on major business decisions.
In perhaps the only bright spot for the former president and Republican frontrunner, the Trump empire was spared from the equivalent of the corporate death penalty - the cancellation of its business licences.
A New York judge on Friday spared the ex-president that worst case punishment as he ruled in a civil case alleging Trump fraudulently misrepresented financial figures to get cheaper loans and other benefits.
Still, Trump got slammed hard, facing big cash penalties, outside supervision of his companies and restrictions on his borrowing.
In a pretrial ruling last year, the same judge threatened to shut down much of the Republican presidential front-runner’s business by calling for the “dissolution” of corporate entities that hold many of his marquee properties. That raised the specter of possible fire sales of Trump Tower, a Wall Street skyscraper and other properties.
@NathanpmYoung Hmmmm, okay after some more googling I do find Bloomberg using the exact phrase so I think that is probably enough for a NO resolution.
