Why Judges Cannot Agree On How Much Trump’s Fraud Should Cost Him

It’s difficult to measure the impact of lies. Just ask the justice who called out Trump for fraud Thursday, while handing him a $500 million gift.

Judges in two courts have now found that the president of the United States took part in a yearslong fraud that deceived financial institutions about his net worth. They differed, however, on how much Trump should pay as a penalty. Judge Arthur Engoron concluded in February last year that Trump owed about a half-billion dollars. Appellate justice Peter Moulton, in an opinion issued Thursday, threw out that penalty, dropping the figure to zero.

Neither did much math to arrive at those numbers

The trial judge, Engoron, attempted to gauge how much Trump’s lies saved the now-president in interest on his loans. But he relied on a sloppy calculation. Michiel McCarty, an investment banker that the State of New York called to testify, noted that Trump secured lower interest rates after offering personal guarantees on loans. McCarty then compared those rates to higher ones lenders told Trump he would pay if he did not personally guarantee his loans. He used the difference to estimate the amount of interest Trump saved across four loans spanning 10 years, getting $168 million.