US senators Elizabeth Warren and Adam Schiff have asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to examine Trump Media’s plan to sell trading firms faster access to posts published on Truth Social. Their request focuses on whether the paid service creates legal or ethical problems when it distributes statements from President Donald Trump before other market participants receive them.
Trump Media & Technology Group introduced the licensed data service, called Truth API, in July. The company says subscribers will receive the fastest available access to posts from 10 influential Truth Social accounts, including Trump’s. The product is scheduled to launch on August 1, and the company says customers have already signed up, although it has not identified them.
Why faster access could matter to markets
Speed is valuable to trading firms because political announcements can move share prices, currencies and other assets within seconds. Reports indicate that Trump Media has discussed charging as much as $100,000 a month for the feed. Firms able to process a post before the wider public could potentially adjust their positions earlier than ordinary investors.
Warren and Schiff raised those concerns in a July 28 letter to SEC Chair Paul Atkins. They argued that the arrangement could weaken confidence that markets operate on equal terms and asked regulators to consider whether the product complies with securities law. Their letter also pointed to previous Truth Social posts in which Trump supported companies including Citigroup, Intel and Palantir.
The senators’ argument is not simply that a technology platform is charging for data. Commercial data feeds routinely offer clients faster delivery of information that is already public. The unusual issue, they said, is that Trump’s posts can contain information connected to his role as president, while the company selling accelerated access is a business in which he retains a substantial financial interest.
Company rejects the senators’ concerns
Trump Media disputed the allegations. A company spokesperson said the senators were confusing public and nonpublic information and criticised what the company described as ideological opposition to free markets. The spokesperson also rejected the suggestion that providing quicker access to public posts creates a new form of insider trading.
The SEC confirmed that Atkins had received the letter but did not comment on whether the agency would open an investigation. The White House directed questions to Trump Media. That leaves the immediate regulatory status of Truth API unresolved ahead of its planned launch.
Lawyers cited in reporting on the service noted that technology companies are generally permitted to sell faster data delivery, even when some market participants gain an advantage. Ethics specialists have argued that the circumstances may differ when the information comes from a president and could be viewed as government-related communication that should be made broadly available at the same time.
Ownership adds to the conflict debate
Trump owns about 41% of Trump Media through a trust overseen by his children, meaning a successful subscription product could increase the value of an enterprise tied to his family. Warren and Schiff described that connection as part of a broader concern about the boundary between presidential activity and private business.
The senators also referred to Trump’s other commercial interests. According to a financial disclosure cited in their argument, he reported more than $1.4bn in income from family cryptocurrency projects during the previous year. Critics have separately questioned whether those ventures allow people seeking influence to direct money toward businesses associated with the president.
The SEC will now decide whether the letter warrants a formal review, a request for additional information or no enforcement action. Until the regulator responds, the central question remains whether Truth API is an ordinary premium data product or whether the president’s dual political and financial roles require different safeguards.
Related coverage: Trump’s legal disputes continue before the Supreme Court.
Related coverage:
No comments yet. Start the discussion.