
Sen. Elizabeth Warren gave President Trump until July 23 to update his financial disclosure, citing $1.4 billion in crypto income and a conflict-of-interest debate over the Clarity Act.
Senator Elizabeth Warren asked President Trump to voluntarily update his financial disclosure by July 23, 2026, after a report showed roughly $1.4 billion in crypto-related income for 2025.
The disclosure, filed earlier this year, showed that Trump’s crypto earnings more than doubled from the prior year and now make up the bulk of his income. The document also detailed family involvement: Trump family members hold a 30% ownership stake in DT Marks Defi LLC, a company that generated over $590 million in 2025 and owns a major interest in World Liberty Financial, the crypto platform Trump and his sons founded.
Warren’s letter, addressed to Trump, said the updated filing would inform Senate debate on the Clarity Act. That legislation would assign regulatory authority over digital assets between the SEC and the CFTC, setting rules for custody, trading, and stablecoins. The bill has moved through committee but faces a floor vote later this year.
Warren wrote that the disclosure raises questions about the appropriateness of senior officials profiting from the crypto industry while Congress considers market structure rules that could boost the value of those holdings. She asked that the updated report cover the period through July 15, 2026, and be released by July 23.
The request adds pressure on the White House as the Senate prepares to take up the Clarity Act. Trump has not publicly commented on the letter. World Liberty Financial did not respond to a request for comment.
If Trump complies, the updated filing would give lawmakers a clearer picture of his current crypto holdings and any changes since the original report. If he does not, Warren and other critics are likely to push for subpoenas or ethics inquiries.
The disclosure itself has already fueled debate over conflicts of interest in digital asset policy. Several Democratic senators have called for hearings on the issue. The Clarity Act’s supporters argue that clear rules are needed regardless of who holds office.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.