Ivanka Trump will get at least $1.5 million a year from the family business even as she serves in the White House under her father’s administration.
President Donald Trump’s eldest daughter is entangled in countless potential conflicts of interest that violate federal law and ethics standards while serving as a special assistant to the president, reported McClatchy.
Both she and her father have been accused of violating the U.S. Constitution’s emoluments clause by accepting gifts from foreign governments without the approval of Congress.
Ivanka Trump is believed to still have only an interim security clearance due to the complex finances of her husband, Jared Kushner, who also serves in the White House.
She was expected to receive $1.5 million each year from three companies affiliated with the Trump Organization, and she will get even more from other Trump Organization businesses.
Those companies are involved in at least five projects that have drawn scrutiny, including a residential development in Dubai, a road project in Bali, a tourist destination in Indonesia, luxury housing projects in India and the Trump International Hotel Washington D.C.
Those developments involve a Chinese construction company, the Saudi Arabian and South Korean governments, local governments and individual foreign officials.
Ivanka Trump resigned from various vice president positions within Trump Organization after her father’s inauguration, but her financial disclosure forms show she planned to receive money from its businesses.
“When Ms. Trump became a federal employee, she transitioned from being an active investor and manager to being merely a passive investor,” said Peter Mirijanian, a spokesman for the Kushner and Ivanka Trump’s attorney. “She did this as a result of ethics advice she received, and has followed that advice.”
Federal employees applying for a security clearance are not required to sell overseas investments, but they can be forced to divest larger stakes and resign from corporate positions.
Security clearances can be denied for officials who have “substantial” overseas business interests to avoid “a heightened risk of foreign influence or exploitation.”