Trump businesses reportedly benefit from deregulatory actions

President Trump could stand to personally profit from the regulations he’s rolling back, according to a new report Wednesday.

Among those actions is the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal to repeal the Waters of the U.S. rule, which gives the agency the authority to prevent pollution in fresh water wetlands and streams.

{mosads}

Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) and Rick Claypool, a research director in the president’s office of the nonprofit Public Citizens, detailed six deregulatory actions Trump could financially benefit from given his refusal to fully divest from his business empire.

“In several instances, Trump’s financial interests are directly at odds with protecting the public it is his administration’s duty to serve,” Cicilline and Claypool wrote in the report.

Cicilline and Claypool charge that Trump’s multitude of property development projects, which include 12 Trump-branded golf courses in the U.S., would have likely experienced an increase in compliance costs associated with acquiring permits and limiting their use of pesticides.

The Department of Homeland Security’s decision to raise the cap on the number of foreign nationals employed in the U.S. through the H-2B Visa program from 66,000 to 81,000 is another government action the report authors say could financially benefit the president.

Cicilline and Claypool cited a Vox report detailing a request from Trump’s properties three days after asking the Labor Department to approve 76 new H-2B guest workers.

The report says Trump hotels and restaurants have already benefited from a lower court’s decision to block a Labor Department rule expanding overtime pay to people who earn up to $47,476.

“The result is the disturbing potential for Americans to be harmed by policies that are implemented partly because they offer short-term financial benefits to the president’s businesses,” according to the report.

Public Citizen has sued Trump over his two-for-one executive order, directing federal agencies to find two rules to repeal for every new rule proposed.

The consumer advocacy group claims the order “will block or force the repeal of regulations needed to protect health, safety, and the environment, across a broad range of topics—from automobile safety, to occupational health, to air pollution, to endangered species.”

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has yet to issue a ruling in the case.