Scott Bessent was confirmed as Treasury Secretary in late January 2025. As a former hedge fund manager with an estimated net worth of $600 million, he signed an ethics agreement before taking office. The agreement committed him to divesting from holdings that could create conflicts of interest.
The deadline was April 28, 2025. That is the standard 90-day timeline after Senate confirmation required by federal ethics rules.
That was a year ago.
He still hasn't fully complied.
The OGE warning letter
In early 2026, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics sent a letter to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Michael Crapo. The letter informed Crapo that Bessent "has yet to fully divest his financial assets." OGE said it "will continue to monitor the status of the secretary's compliance with his ethics agreement."
In federal ethics language, that is a warning shot.
According to reporting, Bessent is now targeting a new compliance date of December 15, 2026. That is more than 20 months after the original deadline, and nearly two years after he took office.
Source: Banking Dive
What he was supposed to sell
Two big items:
- Key Square Group, his $577 million hedge fund. He pledged to dissolve it.
- $25 million in North Dakota farmland, soybean and corn acreage. Bessent claims he divested this in December 2025, though the OGE letter suggests his overall compliance is still incomplete.
Why this matters
The Treasury Secretary sets tariffs. He oversees the IRS. He signs off on sanctions regimes. He directs U.S. policy on foreign investment, currency controls, and financial enforcement. Every one of those decisions moves markets. Every market movement is worth something to someone.
When the Treasury Secretary still has personal positions in the markets he is regulating, the line between policy and portfolio doesn't just blur. It disappears.
Bessent negotiates the White House's tariff regime. He sits in on meetings about Chinese investment. He oversees the IRS, including the IRS that Trump is personally suing for $10 billion. He is doing all of this while still legally required to sell financial holdings he has chosen not to sell.
The ethics deadline wasn't a suggestion. It was a condition of confirmation.
He ignored it. There have been no consequences. There will be none.
Source: Banking Dive
0 comments