Full List of Lawmakers Who Traded Stocks After Trump's Tariffs Announcement
Newsweek has compiled a ranking of trades made by members of Congress between April 3, the day after President Trump unveiled reciprocal tariffs on dozens of trading partners, and when these were paused on April 9.
The imposition and subsequent reversal of the president's sweeping tariff policies resulted in significant stock market volatility, with indexes crashing following the announcement and those who purchased in the interim benefitting from a boost when these were placed on hold. The high number of trades made by lawmakers during this period has again raised questions about the ethics of congressional stock trading.
Members of Congress are permitted to buy and sell stocks, provided they disclose these within 30 days of the transaction, per the 2012 Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act. However, many lawmakers, including some of those in the list below, have advocated that lawmakers be banned from stock trading altogether, given the insider knowledge they may have of market-moving events, as well as the concerns this could raise among citizens' regarding possible conflicts of interest. Surveys have also shown that overwhelming bipartisan majorities are in favor of banning stock trading by members of Congress.
Below is a list of trades made by U.S. lawmakers between April 3 and April 9, based on publicly available disclosures tracked by insiderfinance.io. The list includes both sales and purchases during this time and is ranked according to the total number.
Representative Rob Bresnahan, Republican, Pennsylvania
Total trades: 182
Representative Josh Gottheimer, Democrat, New Jersey
Total trades: 87
Representative Jefferson Shreve, Republican, Indiana
Total trades: 57
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican, Georgia
Total trades: 42
Representative Julie Johnson, Democrat, Texas
Total trades: 31
Representative Jared Moskowitz, Democrat, Florida
Total trades: 25
Senator Markwayne Mullin, Republican, Oklahoma
Total trades: 20
Representative Michael McCaul, Republican, Texas
Total trades: 18
Senator John Boozman, Republican, Arkansas
Total trades: 14
Representative Dwight Evans, Democrat, Pennsylvania
Total trades: 13
Representative April Delaney, Democrat, Maryland
Total trades: 10
Representative Bruce Westerman, Republican, Arkansas
Total trades: 7
Senator Dave McCormick, Republican, Pennsylvania
Total trades: 6
Representative Tony Wied, Republican, Wisconsin
Total trades: 5
Senator Ashley Moody, Republican, Florida
Total trades: 4
Representative Gilbert Cisneros, Democrat, California
Total trades: 3
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat, Rhode Island
Total trades: 2
Representative Mike Collins, Republican, Georgia
Total trades: 2
Representative Kevin Hern, Republican, Oklahoma
Total trades: 2
Representative Rick Larsen, Democrat, Washington
Total trades: 2
Representative Vicente Gonzalez, Democrat, Texas
Total trades: 2
Representative Gilbert Cisneros, Democrat, California
Total trades: 1
Representative Victoria Spartz, Republican, Indiana
Total trades: 1
Representative Max Miller, Republican, Ohio
Total trades: 1
Representative Donald Sternoff Beyer, Democrat, Virginia
Total trades: 1
Despite being the two most prolific traders on this list, Pennsylvania Republican Bresnahan and New Jersey Democrat Josh Gottheimer have both in the past advocated for regulations on congressional stock trading.
In 2024, Bresnahan penned an article in the Pottsville Republican Herald in which he said he would "happily co-sponsor" bipartisan legislation aimed at banning congressional stock trading. In May, following a report on his stock trades in the New York Times, Bresnahan introduced a bill entitled the Transparency in Representation through Uniform Stock Trading Ban Act, which would go into effect in 2027 and require lawmakers to place certain assets into a blind trust, an arrangement in which assets are transferred to and managed by a third party without the individual's knowledge or control. Bresnahan said he would work to move his own personal assets into a blind trust in a May 6 press release.
Gottheimer told CNBC in 2022 that he didn't believe members of Congress should not be "be directly involved in trading," and instead said hand control of their investments over to a blind trust, later cosponsoring legislation to this end. Gottheimer said that his own investments were managed by an outside party, adding: "I think that's the way it should be: Hands off, third-party, no decision-making from a member of Congress."
Newsweek has reached out to the offices of Representatives Bresnahan and Gottheimer via phone for comment.
Republican Representative Mike Lawler, in response to a chart showing the gains made by a stock purchased by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, wrote: "Just another reason why stock trading by members of Congress or their spouses should be banned. The appearance of impropriety, or worse, is too great."
Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff, in a statement following the introduction of the Ban Congressional Stock Trading Act, said: "Members of Congress should not be playing the stock market while we make Federal policy and have extraordinary access to confidential information. Stock trading by members of Congress massively erodes public confidence in Congress and creates a serious appearance of impropriety, which is why we should ban stock trading by members of Congress altogether."
President Trump's Liberation Day tariffs are still subject to the 90-day pause announced on April 9, which will expire in early July. The administration has said that this window will allow for comprehensive negotiations with America's main trading partners.
Related Articles
Donald Trump Issues Next Trade Deal Update After ChinaTrump Tariffs Face Delay as White House Struggles To Meet 90 Deals DeadlineTrump Says Trade Deal With China 'Done'Retail Layoffs Soar Nearly 300% So Far This Year
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Your kid is getting a ‘Trump account.' Should you put your money in it?
Republicans' 'big, beautiful bill' includes a gift to millions of families: $1,000 in an investment account for every eligible newborn. The new savings vehicles, akin to Individual Retirement Accounts, are designated for children who are U.S. citizens born from 2025 through 2028. In addition to the one-time government contribution, parents and others can chip in as much as $5,000 a year to the accounts, which beneficiaries can access at 18, with some constraints. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. The seed money is a boon for recipients and will grow tax-deferred. Financial planners say parents and guardians might do better putting their money into existing investment vehicles such as a 529 plan, a savings plan designed to cover college expenses. But 529s are limited to education, while backers say the new accounts can help their recipients beyond college. Republican lawmakers call the accounts 'Trump accounts,' though the Senate's plan to officially name them after the president did not make it to the final version of the legislation, which was signed Friday. They deliver on an idea that both Democrats and Republicans have floated for years: to invest money for all children at birth. Withdrawals from a 529 are not subject to state or federal taxes as long as the funds go toward qualified education expenses - a feature the new investment accounts don't share. And in the new accounts, parents' deposits don't qualify for a tax deduction, notes Greg Leiserson, a senior fellow at the Tax Law Center at New York University. 'You have this very slight or minimal-to-nonexistent tax benefit,' he said. 'What is the point here?' Financial adviser Amy Spalding of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, said she will continue to steer her clients to 529s. 'It's better from a tax standpoint,' Spalding said. 'And there are more investment options. And then there's a higher contribution limit.' (For 2025, a single person can deposit as much as $19,000 a year into a beneficiary's 529, while married couples can contribute as much $38,000.) Jeremiah Barlow, a financial planner in Santa Barbara, California, said the new accounts could benefit a family that has hit the maximum on their child's 529 and wants to save more, or who like the idea of setting up a fund for their child's first home or as an economic safety net. 'It would likely appeal to our families who want more flexibility for more general-purpose savings for their child's future,' Barlow said. 'You shouldn't rush to just use it because it's out there.' Leiserson cautioned that account holders should understand the tax implications, noting that withdrawals will be taxed at typical income rates, not at the capital gains rate of a taxable brokerage account. 'For most people, this is going to be worse than what they could do in a taxable account,' he said. Though parents don't get a tax deduction when they contribute to a new account, employers can claim a tax break for contributions on behalf of their workers' children or their teenage employees. Nonprofits also can contribute to they accounts. The law requires the new investment accounts to track a U.S. stock index, which means account holders have fewer options than they would in a brokerage account or a 529 plan, which generally offer a range of investment options with varying levels of risk, including stocks, bonds and mutual funds. Leiserson noted that all-stock portfolios come with their own risks, because they're tethered to market conditions. 'If you're saying, 'Okay, I'm going to start school in the fall' - if the market falls over the summer, the planning you were doing about how you were going to pay for college is totally messed up, because the money you thought would be there, isn't." The White House said the accounts 'will afford a generation of children the chance to experience the miracle of compounded growth and set them on a course for prosperity from the very beginning.' While some experts appreciate the premise of the accounts, they also see flaws in the design, such as the requirement that parents opt-in to the account on their tax return, which means people who don't know this might miss out. In addition, the law includes a penalty of at least $500 if a parent mistakenly claims an account, which could scare off some parents. During the grinding process of crafting the massive tax and spending legislation, the accounts changed both superficially - they were renamed from MAGA accounts to Trump accounts to a yet-to-be-determined name - and in substance. Legislators dropped plans to give account withdrawals favorable tax treatment similar to a brokerage account. Account withdrawals will be taxed at ordinary income tax rates, not capital gains rates. Congress also discarded rules that would have prescribed how beneficiaries could spend the money - on college at 18, on starting a business at 25, on buying a house at 30. Instead, account holders cannot touch the funds until they turn 18. After that, the rules are the same as those of an individual retirement account - withdrawals are taxed like income, plus an additional 10 percent tax penalty on any withdrawals before age 59½ except for certain qualified uses. Those uses include paying for college, supporting themselves if they become disabled, or recovering from domestic abuse or a natural disaster. Beneficiaries also can withdraw as much as $10,000 to buy their first home, and up to $5,000 when they have a new baby themselves. Even one of the Trump accounts' biggest proponents in Congress, Rep. Blake Moore (R-Utah), said in an interview that for many parents, the new account design offers more benefits for retirement than for college expenses. 'I would argue that the tax implications of a 529 are far more favorable,' he said, but noted that most families don't have the disposable income to invest in a 529, and the new accounts' $1,000 from the government can benefit people at all income levels. If the account saw a 6 percent rate of return for 18 years, it would be worth $2,854; if the stock market does well, it could be worth even more. 'The most beneficial thing in my opinion about these is that … you're investing from birth into an IRA,' Moore said. 'Most people start investing in an IRA at 30 …. We're talking at birth or at 30. The benefits of investing early into that IRA are significant.' Moore has four sons, and while none will qualify for the government's $1,000 seed money contribution for newborns, the law allows him to open a Trump account as a parent. He says he'll be putting money in it: 'I want my kids having a Trump account so they can take it out when they're 50 or 60 years old.' - - - Jacob Bogage contributed to this report. Related Content Arthur Ashe's knack for reinvention led him to history at Wimbledon Newlywed detained by ICE freed after 141 days and two deportation attempts The Met opens a dazzling wing of non-European art Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk says he's formed the 'America Party.' Mark Cuban and Anthony Scaramucci are interested.
Elon Musk said on X that he's forming a new political party amid a feud with President Donald Trump. He said it would be called the "America Party." Musk has publicly criticized Trump's spending bill, which the president signed on July 4. Elon Musk declared on X the formation of a new political party amid his ongoing feud with President Donald Trump over the "Big Beautiful Bill." "Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom," Musk wrote in an X post on Saturday afternoon. The Tesla CEO had said Friday on his social media platform that one way the new party could work is to focus on winning just a handful of Senate seats and House districts that could serve as the "deciding vote" on "contentious laws," given the "razor-thin legislative margins" in Congress. Fellow billionaire Mark Cuban appeared — not for the first time — to support the idea of a new party, replying to Musk's Saturday announcement with a series of fireworks and fire emojis. He added in a separate post: "I work with @voterchoice. They will help you get on ballots. That is their mission." SkyBridge Capital founder Anthony Scaramucci, who briefly served as White House communications director under Trump in 2017, also appeared interested in the party. "I would like to meet to discuss. My DMs are open," he replied to Musk. Musk's "America Party" announcement came after he conducted a July 4 poll, asking X users if they want "independence" from the two-party system. About 65% of the 1.25 million participants voted "Yes." Musk, who was a staunch supporter of Trump's 2024 reelection bid, has been publicly critical of the president's "Big Beautiful Bill," a sweeping domestic policy bill that includes extensive tax cuts and could add more than $3 trillion to the national debt, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Musk has characterized the bill on X as a form of "debt slavery." Just days after stepping away from his work at the White House DOGE Office, which was tasked with cutting spending and reducing the deficit, Musk in June called the legislation a "massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill." Musk then proposed the idea of forming a new political party that represents the "80% in the middle." Musk's repeated attacks on the bill led to a spectacular public fallout between him and the president. Trump even suggested that his office would look into possibly deporting Musk, a South African immigrant. Musk's July 4 poll on X came the same day Trump signed the bill into law. Musk and a White House spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. Musk's back-and-forth regarding his involvement in political affairs has been followed by volatile times for the CEO of Tesla, his EV company. Wall Street analysts, including Tesla bull Dan Ives, have said that Musk's politics could lead the company astray if the chief executive doesn't snap back into focus. Earlier in June, Baird analysts downgraded the Tesla stock, noting that the Musk-Trump spat adds "uncertainty to TSLA's outlook. Read the original article on Business Insider


Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Tariffs return to April rates on August 1 without deals, Bessent says
Countries that don't make trade deals with the U.S. by August 1 can expect tariff rates to return to the levels announced in April, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sunday. Why it matters: It's effectively a new deadline for the biggest U.S. trading partners to negotiate an alternative to President Trump 's sweeping global tariffs — even as Bessent insists nothing had changed. Catch up quick: On Friday, Trump said about a dozen countries would receive letters Monday unilaterally setting a tariff rate, with more to come in the following days. Trump has said he preferred those letters to negotiations, after a three-month pause on his most sweeping tariffs netted three deals, rather than the 90 his administration promised. That pause expires this coming Wednesday. What they're saying: Bessent, in an interview with CNN's "State of the Union," said the letters would make clear that absent a deal, the rates would return to the levels Trump announced April 2. "It's not a new deadline. We are saying, this is when it's happening, if you want to speed things up, have at it, if you want to go back to the old rate, that's your choice," he said. The intrigue: Even with the new date in play, Bessent said there will be significant activity in the coming hours, as countries scramble to get something done before the original deadline. "We are close to several deals. As always, there's a lot of foot-dragging on the other side," he said. "I would expect to see several big announcements over the next couple of days." What to watch: Trump's letter threat risks re-igniting the tariff chaos that crushed CEO and consumer confidence earlier this year and sent financial markets plunging.