In recent developments surrounding World Liberty Financial, it has been observed that more than half a billion dollars had been raised by the organization, with a significant portion of the funds being directed toward the family of former President Donald Trump. This outcome was made possible through governance terms that, according to several industry specialists, appeared to be structured in a manner that heavily benefited insiders.
World Liberty Financial had been launched in the previous fall with an ambitious objective: to provide access to financial services using cryptocurrencies, eliminating the need for traditional financial intermediaries such as banks. This approach, commonly referred to as decentralized finance or DeFi, was promoted as a way to democratize financial participation. However, despite these aims, it was revealed through a detailed review of the project that a public platform had yet to be launched, and that only a limited staff had been reported.
It had been announced by the organization in mid-March that approximately $550 million had been secured through the sale of governance tokens, known by the symbol $WLFI. Based on calculations by Reuters, the majority of these sales had taken place following the electoral victory of Donald Trump in November. The tokens had been designed to offer holders the ability to vote on updates to the project’s underlying code and to express opinions on its strategic direction, though these tokens had not been made available for trading.
According to an examination of alterations made to the company’s official website, it had been disclosed in January that control of the enterprise had been transferred to the Trump family. This control had been assumed from two of the co-founders—Zak Folkman and Chase Herro—who had initially established the project. The control had been passed to an entity in which the Trump family held a 60% stake, significantly altering the leadership and ownership structure of World Liberty Financial. These changes had not been previously reported by any major outlets.
As a result of the revised structure, the Trump family had come to possess a claim on 75% of the net revenues derived from the token sales, as well as 60% of the revenues from operations once the core business began functioning. Based on these figures, it had been estimated that approximately $400 million in fees were now owed to the Trump family. Once the co-founders had received their respective shares, the organization itself had been left with just 5% of the $550 million raised to support the development of the platform.
Such arrangements, including the non-tradeable status of the governance tokens and the concentration of revenue control within the Trump family, had been noted by experts as making World Liberty highly centralized—an unusual characteristic in the decentralized finance space. These findings were supported by a survey of the top five DeFi lending platforms and through conversations with four academic professionals in the United States who specialize in the field of cryptocurrency.
It was observed by Jim Angel, an associate professor at Georgetown University who has written extensively on DeFi regulation, that it would be difficult to identify any substantial economic benefit for the holders of these governance tokens. This sentiment was echoed by David Krause, a seasoned finance professor from Marquette University in Milwaukee, who had recently published a study on the structure of World Liberty. He indicated that the organization’s model had effectively excluded the general public and token holders from any meaningful financial involvement.
When inquiries regarding World Liberty were directed to the White House, it was indicated by a spokesperson that all questions should be referred to the Trump Organization. However, the chief legal officer of the Trump Organization, along with the former president’s two eldest sons—both of whom serve as executives within the company—chose not to provide any comments in response to requests for clarification.
This evolving situation has raised significant questions about transparency, governance, and the true decentralization of ventures that operate under the DeFi banner. While World Liberty had been introduced with the language of openness and innovation, the financial and organizational details now emerging suggest that centralized control and exclusive benefits have played a more dominant role in its operations than originally portrayed.
