Trump's Florida Mortgages Mirror the 'Mortgage Fraud' He's Prosecuting, Investigation Finds

As of December 9, 2025, President Donald Trump is facing a fresh round of scrutiny after an investigation found that two Florida mortgages he signed in the 1990s closely resemble the very “mortgage fraud” his administration is now aggressively pursuing against political rivals. ^[1]

A joint investigation by ProPublica and USA TODAY Network, amplified by multiple national outlets, reports that Trump pledged two adjacent Palm Beach homes as his “principal residence” on separate mortgages — even though he appears never to have lived in either property and used them as rentals instead. ^[2]

The revelations are politically explosive because Trump and his housing regulators have spent months branding opponents “deceitful” and potentially criminal for doing almost exactly the same thing: declaring more than one home as a primary residence in order to secure better loan terms. ^[3]

What the ProPublica Investigation Found About Trump’s Florida Mortgages

According to documents obtained and analyzed by ProPublica, Trump took out two mortgages on neighboring houses just north of Mar-a-Lago on Woodbridge Road in Palm Beach in late 1993 and early 1994. Both loans came from Merrill Lynch, in amounts of about $525,000 and $1.2 million , respectively. ^[4]

Each mortgage contained a standard occupancy clause: Trump certified he would make the property his principal residence within roughly 60 days and live there for at least a year, unless the lender agreed otherwise or special circumstances applied. ^[5]

Investigators say the paper trail points the other way:

Legal filings and federal election records from the mid‑1990s list Trump Tower in Manhattan as Trump’s home, with no indication he relocated to either Florida house. ^[6]
A contemporary real-estate profile quoted Trump’s local broker saying the plan was to “dress [the homes] up” and lease them out — not to move in. ^[7]
Newspaper classifieds later advertised the properties as luxury rentals, including one listing offering the larger seven-bedroom home for $3,000 per day in 1997. ^[8]
A longtime Trump family real-estate associate told ProPublica that “they were rentals from the beginning” and that “President Trump never lived there.” ^[9]

Trump’s declined to walk through the details of those transactions. Instead, the White House told ProPublica that because both loans came from the same lender, “there was no defraudation,” adding that it would be “illogical to believe that the same lender would agree to defraud itself.” The statement dismissed the story as a “desperate attempt” by “left wing media” and insisted that Trump “has never, or will ever, break the law.” ^[10]

Legally, any potential criminal exposure is almost certainly over: the loans were paid off years ago, and the mid‑1990s are well beyond typical federal statutes of limitations for mortgage fraud. ^[11]

How Trump’s Own Rules Turn His Mortgages Into a Political Problem

On its own, claiming more than one primary residence in overlapping time periods is not automatically illegal. Mortgage experts note that people can move for work or family reasons, or lenders can make exceptions for wealthy clients; many such cases are treated as clerical issues, not crimes. ^[12]

What makes Trump’s situation politically radioactive is how his administration has defined “mortgage fraud” for others .

In recent months:

Trump publicly labeled one critic’s dual-residence loans “deceitful and potentially criminal,” and called another official “CROOKED” on Truth Social while urging the Justice Department to act. ^[13]
Bill Pulte, Trump’s handpicked director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), declared that if someone is “claiming two primary residences, that is not appropriate” and promised to refer such cases for criminal investigation. ^[14]

ProPublica’s legal experts say Trump’s two Florida loans “exceed the low bar” that his own administration has set. They point out that he simultaneously pledged both homes as his principal residence even though available evidence suggests they were always intended as investment rentals. ^[15]

Under widely used definitions, that kind of misstatement is close to textbook occupancy fraud — a form of mortgage fraud in which a borrower falsely claims they will live in a property full‑time in order to secure lower interest rates and better terms reserved for primary homes. ^[16]

Targets of Trump’s Mortgage-Fraud Crackdown

The Florida mortgages are drawing attention because they mirror the conduct Trump’s team is trying to criminalize in high‑profile cases against several Democrats.

Lisa Cook: A Federal Reserve Governor in the Crosshairs

Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook has been one of the central targets of this campaign:

Pulte and FHFA staff alleged that Cook obtained two mortgages — one in Michigan and one in Georgia — and improperly listed both properties as her primary residence. ^[17]
Trump announced on Truth Social that he was firing Cook over the alleged misrepresentations, accusing her of conduct that “calls into question [her] competence and trustworthiness.” ^[18]
Cook has denied wrongdoing and is suing to block her removal; the Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments on her case early next year. ^[19]

Newly surfaced documents complicate the allegations. A Reuters review of one loan file found that Cook’s Atlanta property was actually labeled a “vacation home” on a 2021 loan estimate, and she did not claim a tax exemption there — facts that appear to support her defense that any errors were minor and unintentional. ^[20]

Letitia James: Case Dismissed, Grand Jury Says No

New York Attorney General Letitia James , a longtime Trump adversary, has also been pulled into the mortgage-fraud dragnet.

A Trump‑appointed US attorney in Virginia secured a federal indictment in October, accusing James of misrepresenting a Norfolk house as her primary or second home in order to secure better terms, then turning him into a rental. ^[21]
In November, a federal judge dramatically dismissed the case , ruling that the prosecutor who brought the charges, Lindsey Halligan, had been unlawfully appointed — invalidating all actions taken in her name. ^[22]
On December 5, a grand jury rejected the Justice Department’s attempt to re-indict James, dealing another blow to the prosecution. ^[23]

James has consistently denied the accusations, calling the case a politically motivated attempt to punish her for winning a 2022 civil fraud lawsuit against Trump and his company. ^[24]

Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell

Pulte’s office has also flagged Sen. Adam Schiff and Rep. Eric Swalwell for possible mortgage fraud related to how they designated their homes, though neither has been charged. Both legislators reject the allegations as partisan retaliation. ^[25]

Watchdog Now Probing FHFA Director Bill Pulte

The Trump administration’s high‑profile focus on mortgage fraud is now under scrutiny itself.

Last week, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) — Congress’s nonpartisan watchdog — agreed to investigate whether FHFA Director Bill Pulte abused his authority by targeting Trump’s perceived political opponents for criminal referral. The probe followed a formal request from Senate Banking Committee and Judiciary Committee Democrats. ^[26]

Industry publications report that legislators have specifically asked GAO to examine:

Whether Pulte or his staff selectively singled out Democrats for investigation while ignoring similar discrepancies in the records of Trump-aligned officials. ^[27]
Whether FHFA mishandled borrower data or violated privacy rules while building cases against targets like Cook and James. ^[28]

ProPublica previously found that at least three Trump Cabinet members and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had themselves claimed multiple homes as primary residences on mortgage documents — behavior similar to that being investigated when committed by Democrats. All have denied wrongdoing, and Pulte has not referred any Republican officials for prosecution. ^[29]

Legal Experts: Hypocrisy vs. Criminal Liability

So does Trump’s Florida arrangement actually qualify as mortgage fraud?

The answer from legal specialists is nuanced:

Mortgage fraud , under federal law, generally requires a material misrepresentation to a lender made with intent to secure credit or better terms that would not otherwise be available. ^[30]
Occupancy fraud — misrepresenting a property’s intended use as a primary residence rather than a rental or second home — is a recognized subtype. It can carry serious penalties but is often under‑enforced, especially for older or ambiguous cases. ^[31]

Experts interviewed by ProPublica stressed that occupying clauses are sometimes bent or waived in practice, particularly for wealthy borrowers with long-standing relationships at private banks. In Trump’s case, the loans were portfolio mortgages held by Merrill Lynch and not sold to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, giving the lender broad discretion. ^[32]

At the same time, those experts were blunt about the optics: under the standards the Trump administration itself is applying to others , Trump appears to have done exactly what his team is calling criminal elsewhere — and arguably more egregiously, because he pledged primary residence status to properties that functioned as high-end rentals from day one. ^[33]

How Primary-Residence Rules Work for Ordinary Homeowners

Beyond the politics, the story has millions of homeowners asking: What actually counts as mortgage fraud?

Here’s how the rules typically work:

Primary residence
For most conventional, FHA, VA, and USDA loans, borrowers must intend to move into their primary home within about 60 days of closing and usually agree to live there for at least one year . ^[34]
Second home vs. investment property
A second home (like a vacation house) is generally for the owner’s personal use, not for full‑time tenants; an investment property is purchased primarily to rent out. Lenders charge higher rates and often require larger down payments on investment properties because they are riskier. ^[35]
Where fraud comes in
When a borrower knowingly misrepresents their intent — for example, telling a bank “I’ll live here full‑time” to get a cheaper owner‑occupied loan while planning from the outset to run the property as a rental — regulators call that occupancy or mortgage fraud. It’s a crime, though most borderline cases are handled with loan modifications or civil penalties, not prison. ^[36]

Consumer regulators emphasize that honest mistakes or life changes (like an unexpected job transfer or family emergency) rarely lead to prosecution, especially if borrowers work with lenders to correct the paperwork. The controversy here centers on whether Trump and his team are applying an unusually harsh standard to rivals that they are unwilling to apply to Trump himself. ^[37]

December 9, 2025: Media and Political Fallout

Since ProPublica and USA TODAY published their findings on December 8, coverage has exploded across the political media ecosystem.

Mainstream outlets such as MPR News, Talking Points Memo, and USA TODAY re‑upped the investigation under the headline “Trump’s Own Mortgages Match His Description of Mortgage Fraud, Records Reveal,” underscoring the apparent contradiction between Trump’s rhetoric and his past financial dealings. ^[38]
Opinion and analysis pieces in New York Magazine , The New Republic , and The Daily Beast framed the story more bluntly, arguing that Trump is “guilty of mortgage fraud, according to Trump” and that his loans “reek of fraud under his own definition.” ^[39]
Aggregator and fact-checking sites highlighted how almost all current coverage of the story is coming from center and left-leaning outlets, with little response so far from right-leaning media, reinforcing debates over media polarization. ^[40]

On Capitol Hill, Democrats are using the story to bolster calls for hearings on Pulte’s conduct and the broader pattern of Trump administration prosecutions hinging on technical mortgage discrepancies. Meanwhile, the Justice Department — already under fire over invalid appointments of prosecutors like Lindsey Halligan and Alina Habba — is facing new questions about selective enforcement after multiple courts tossed out or blocked high‑profile mortgage‑fraud cases against Trump critics. ^[41]

The White House, for its part, has reported no change of course. Officials continue to insist that Trump’s loans were proper, that critics are engaging in partisan “lawfare,” and that the administration will press ahead with investigations into alleged mortgage fraud by political opponents.

What Happens Next

From a legal perspective, Trump’s 1990s Florida mortgages are unlikely to land him in criminal court. The loans are old, paid off, and protected by the statute of limitations. ^[42]

Politically, however, the story is far from over:

The GAO investigation into Bill Pulte is just beginning and could lead to hearings, document requests, and recommendations on how FHFA handles alleged fraud. ^[43]
Courts will continue to test the limits of Trump’s power to install loyal prosecutors and fire independent officials like Lisa Cook, with outcomes that may shape executive-branch oversight of financial regulators for years. ^[44]
For voters, the episode adds another data point to long‑running questions about double standards — both in how white-collar crime is policed in general and in how Trump applies the rules to his enemies versus himself.

References

Trump’s Florida Mortgages Mirror the ‘Mortgage Fraud’ He’s Prosecuting, Investigation Finds