Ex-CFTC Chair Warns Trump’s Crypto Deals Risk Corruption

Former CFTC Chair Tim Massad has raised serious alarms over President Trump’s increasing involvement in cryptocurrency, calling out the ethical risks tied to Trump-linked crypto ventures. From meme coins to his backing of World Liberty Financial (WLFI), Trump’s activities in the digital asset space have sparked conflict-of-interest concerns just months into his second term. Massad warns that these actions could lead to corruption, especially since a sitting U.S. president is not bound by traditional ethics laws.

Unlike past presidents who placed their assets in blind trusts, Trump retained full ownership of his businesses and has now extended his influence into crypto. His public support of WLFI and the launch of a meme coin raise questions about whether policy decisions are being made for the country's benefit—or for personal gain. Trump is listed as “Chief Crypto Advocate” in WLFI’s documents, while his family reportedly controls a large portion of the platform’s revenue, shares, and tokens.

Massad believes this kind of entanglement is “unprecedented and plainly wrong.” He argues that even without an official role in WLFI’s leadership, Trump’s financial stake in its success compromises the integrity of presidential decisions. These concerns are made worse by the fact that WLFI tokens are currently non-tradable and have yet to provide any actual utility, leading Massad to describe the project as exploitative.

Critics across the crypto industry have also voiced concern. Web3 figures such as Alex Miller, Mark Cuban, and Anthony Scaramucci have all condemned Trump’s involvement, calling projects like WLFI a “pump scheme” that could damage crypto’s already fragile reputation. Massad agrees, noting that crypto regulation is more active than ever and that the President should not have direct ties to any commercial projects in the space.

Adding more controversy is TRON founder Justin Sun, who became WLFI’s biggest investor after putting tens of millions into the project. Sun, who has a history of legal issues with the SEC, later joined WLFI as an advisor. His support helped WLFI raise the funds it initially struggled to secure, but also increased suspicion about the platform’s true purpose.

Speculation grew even more intense after reports suggested the Trump family was in talks to buy a stake in Binance’s U.S. division. While Binance founder Changpeng Zhao denied the claims, observers noted the possible motivations: Zhao is currently facing legal issues and might be seeking a presidential pardon. Massad said this is exactly the type of risk that arises when a president and his inner circle are directly tied to crypto ventures.

Trump’s public support for crypto also appears to benefit his investments. After announcing a Crypto Strategic Reserve to include top cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum, the prices of those assets—and Trump-linked tokens—spiked. This led to further accusations of market manipulation, especially since Trump’s holdings increased in value shortly after his announcement.

His meme coin, TRUMP, also surged in both price and trading volume following the news, only to fall days later—classic behavior of a “pump-and-dump” scheme, according to Massad. While investors are free to make their own choices, he argues that the deeper issue is whether the President should profit from products linked to his name while in office.

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin also weighed in, warning that political meme coins cross ethical lines and could even open doors to foreign influence. He described them as tools for unchecked political fundraising that undermine public trust.

Despite all these concerns, there are few legal options for holding a sitting president accountable. Under current law, the President is largely exempt from the conflict-of-interest rules that apply to other federal officials. The Constitution bans foreign gifts but lacks broader rules about private business dealings.

Massad called this legal loophole “unfortunate,” pointing out that other presidents would face far more scrutiny for similar actions. With no real legal guardrails, pressure from the public and political opponents remains the only way to enforce ethical standards.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is one of the few in Washington raising the alarm. She sent a letter demanding answers from Trump’s crypto advisor, David Sacks, asking how the administration would prevent private profits from influencing federal policy.

Still, these efforts may not be enough. As Trump’s financial and political roles become more entangled, the risk grows—not only for U.S. policy but for the broader trust in digital assets. Without stronger ethical standards, the line between public service and personal profit continues to blur.