# Legal Ramifications of Trump's Twitter & Stock Trading **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [January 14, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114 "2017-01-14T16:12:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/21 "2017-01-23T21:55:21Z")
> [@wevets](#): > > More interesting is the possibility of wrongdoing where John Doe, working in Trump’s office, hears him rant about how he hates the Lockheed Martin contract and is going to rip it up. Then, before Trump does his late-night/early-morning Twitter session, Doe sells all his L-M shares, and buys them again after the tweets have come out - making cash from the sale, and still holding all the L-M stock he bought at 2% less than what it was worth that afternoon. > > This appears to be illegal under the STOCK Act, which I’m surprised no one brought up yet: Maybe no-one brought it up because it hasn’t happened yet. There are many things that are illegal which the imaginary dupes in our mind haven’t yet committed. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/22 "2017-01-23T22:15:40Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > Did you look at the post that I was responding to? It had nothing to do with “before the tweet”. Obviously not :smack: sorry. > [@](#): > > Also, any trader’s opinion on the company, positive or negative, is not “insider information”. Insider information has to be “material”. Opinions aren’t. The President-elect’s opinion on companies that rely on high profile government contracts is not _just_ opinion though is it? Regardless of the legalities it seems irresponsible for the President-elect to be commenting in such a way. ---
**Author:** ![wevets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9a140/32.png) [@wevets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wevets)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/23 "2017-01-23T22:33:31Z")
> [@Evan\_Drake](#): > > Maybe no-one brought it up because it hasn’t happened yet. The [STOCK Act was enacted in April 2012](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act) - if you don’t know which laws are relevant to the question in the OP, that’s OK. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/24 "2017-01-23T22:48:03Z")
He said nobody had violated it based on Trump information yet, not that it hadn’t been passed. ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/25 "2017-01-23T23:28:33Z")
Quite. [Thank you.] I imagine that if it turns out future Donald shoots a man in Reno, then Donald will fry. But let’s not accuse him of murder yet. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/26 "2017-01-23T23:45:32Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > The President-elect’s opinion on companies that rely on high profile government contracts is not _just_ opinion though is it? It is “just” opinion if it is not formed based on some non-public material information about the company. It is irrelevant, anyway, since Trump is not currently invested in any publicly traded companies. ---
**Author:** ![wevets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9a140/32.png) [@wevets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wevets)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/27 "2017-01-24T17:59:46Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > He said nobody had violated it based on Trump information yet, not that it hadn’t been passed. I know, I’m chiding him for both not clearly linking “it” to a noun, which opens the view that he might have been referring to the most recent proper noun in the post he was replying to, and also for continuing to reply to and bump a thread he doesn’t think should exist in the first place, making it last longer than it would have if he had ignored it. ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/28 "2017-01-24T18:20:03Z")
Who said, and where did I say, this thread shouldn’t exist ? The fact that these speculations are idle does not mean they are pointless. Well, maybe that they are grasping at straws, but even that brings happiness to people who like straws. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/29 "2017-01-24T21:48:37Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > It is “just” opinion if it is not formed based on some non-public material information about the company. > > It is irrelevant, anyway, since Trump is not currently invested in any publicly traded companies. He is tweeting about companies who have large government contracts. He is a person who may be able to affect the ability of those companies to gain or lose those contracts. If he appears to not be impressed with a company then that company may take a hit on the share market. This is not just personal opinion, it is statements by a very important client. To put it another way, his opinion itself _is_ material information. If someone knows his opinion prior to his tweet then they could easily make a few bucks by selling some shares prior to the tweet. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/30 "2017-01-24T21:59:14Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > He is tweeting about companies who have large government contracts. He is a person who may be able to affect the ability of those companies to gain or lose those contracts. If he appears to not be impressed with a company then that company may take a hit on the share market. This is not just personal opinion, it is statements by a very important client. > > To put it another way, his opinion itself _is_ material information. If someone knows his opinion prior to his tweet then they could easily make a few bucks by selling some shares prior to the tweet. 1. If someone knows his opinion prior to the tweet but does not know that he’s going to tweet it, and trades based on that opinion, that’s not insider trading. 2. If someone knows what Trump is going to tweet and trades before he tweets, that may be insider trading. Or may not be. I am not sure. It is comparable to knowing an influential analyst’s opinion before he is interviewed on TV and trading based on that, and I am not sure if that can be prosecuted as insider trading. In fact, I think that happens all he time and I have never heard of one prosecution. 3. In any case, Trump’s tweets seem to be pretty spontaneous, and I don’t think scenario (2) is something that happens. Would be pretty hard to prove even if it did. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/31 "2017-01-25T02:32:28Z")
As a small potatoes fed who is required by the STOCK Act to submit 278 financial disclosures annually and 278Ts every time I (or my spouse) buy/sell $1000, I’d like to see what type of disclosure that fucker has to submit! And if he DOESN’T have to, I’d like to know why ANYONE thinks it matters that I do! ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/32 "2017-01-25T02:50:42Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > As a small potatoes fed who is required by the STOCK Act to submit 278 financial disclosures annually and 278Ts every time I (or my spouse) buy/sell $1000, I’d like to see what type of disclosure that fucker has to submit! And if he DOESN’T have to, I’d like to know why ANYONE thinks it matters that I do! Trump has sold all his stocks. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/33 "2017-01-25T03:05:05Z")
Really? Do you have a cite for that. Genuinely curious. I know he claims he sold his stocks, but has he actually provided any documentation to verify that? ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/34 "2017-01-25T03:10:25Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > Trump has sold all his stocks. [So he says](http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/01/donald-trump-conflicts-of-interests/508382/) ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/35 "2017-01-25T03:51:08Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > Really? Do you have a cite for that. Genuinely curious. I know he claims he sold his stocks, but has he actually provided any documentation to verify that? He said he sold his stocks. I have no reason to doubt that. It was, after all, just $10M that he held in stocks. Pocket money for him. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/36 "2017-01-25T05:06:08Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > He said he sold his stocks. I have no reason to doubt that. It was, after all, just $10M that he held in stocks. Pocket money for him. Well, considering the rapidity and frequency that lies drip off his tongue, he has earned our skepticism. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/37 "2017-01-25T05:31:16Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > As a small potatoes fed who is required by the STOCK Act to submit 278 financial disclosures annually and 278Ts every time I (or my spouse) buy/sell $1000, I’d like to see what type of disclosure that fucker has to submit! And if he DOESN’T have to, I’d like to know why ANYONE thinks it matters that I do! So far as I am aware, the President is covered by the disclosure requirements of 5 USC 103 et seq. So he does have to. In fact, going by memory, he has to file online in a publicly searchable database; you might not have to do that. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114/38 "2017-01-25T19:56:46Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So far as I am aware, the President is covered by the disclosure requirements of 5 USC 103 et seq. So he does have to. In fact, going by memory, he has to file online in a publicly searchable database; you might not have to do that. No, there was an amendment removing the requirement that my financial data be posted on-line. Looking at the instructions to SF 278. “II Who must file a. Candidates for nomination or election to the office of President or Vice President” Curiously, members of Congress, or lobbyists, are not specifically identified as having to file (at least on the form I’m looking at.) I thought I understood that Congress critters did have to file, but that they had refused to define who are lobbyists. Saw [this](https://www.whitehouse.gov/public-forms/oge278) on-line. Would be interesting to see what is available on whom. Or what on-line searchable database will contain what of our President’s financial data. More from SF 278: SCHEDULE A II Property Interests and Assets A Items to Report “Interests include, but are not limited to, stocks, bonds, pension interests and annuities, futures contracts, mutual funds, IRA assets, tax shelters, beneficial interest in trusts, personal savings or other bank accounts, real estate, commercial crops, livestock, accounts or other funds receivable, and collectible items held for resale or investment.” Other sections address the requirement to report: earned and other non-investment income; investment income; gifts, reimbursements, travel expenses; liabilities; agreements or arrangements; and outside positions. So it’s a little more than just stocks. Man, I can’t imagine what Trump’s forms would look like, how many folk he has to have filling them out, or how much time some ethics officer has to spend reviewing them. Moreover, the 278T has to be filed w/in 30 days of any transaction over $1000. I suspect this is the type of obligation - as well as the desire to avoid potential conflicts of interest - which encourage so many to place their assets into blind trusts. Of course, the penalty for late (not?) filing is only $200. So I could imagine someone wealthy enough could afford to simply refuse to file. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ramifications-of-trumps-twitter-stock-trading/777114.md?page=1)