Did Trump Make the U.S. “Hundreds of Billions” on Stocks? What the Government’s Holdings Actually Show

Not from publicly documented stock profits. President Donald Trump is correct that several federal corporate holdings have increased dramatically in value, led overwhelmingly by the government’s Intel position. But available records do not substantiate hundreds of billions of dollars in realized stock profits—or hundreds of billions in publicly traded federal stock holdings.

At Intel’s September 9, 2026 closing price of $106.24, the government’s full 433.3-million-share contractual position would have a quoted value of about $46.0 billion, compared with approximately $8.87 billion of associated federal funding. That produces roughly $37.2 billion in paper appreciation under the broadest simple calculation. Intel’s own filings complicate that figure, however, because 143 million of those shares were still held in escrow at the company’s latest detailed disclosure.

There is, however, another federal holding that could explain Trump’s much larger number. Six days before Trump’s September 6 post, the White House announced that the United States had obtained rights to a 35% stake in North American Blue Energy Partners, or NABEP, a private oil company tied to newly awarded Venezuelan oil concessions. The White House said that interest could represent “up to hundreds of billions in value and dividends.” No independent public valuation reviewed by sherafy.com establishes that figure.

The strongest conclusion the evidence supports is therefore narrower than either “Trump made hundreds of billions” or “Trump made nothing”:

The federal government has accumulated very large corporate assets, and Intel alone has generated tens of billions of dollars in observable paper appreciation. Public evidence does not establish hundreds of billions in realized stock profit. The only disclosed federal corporate interest carrying a valuation on that scale is NABEP, and that valuation currently comes from the administration itself rather than a reproducible market or independent appraisal.

What exactly did Trump claim?

On September 6, Trump wrote on Truth Social that he had made “Hundreds of Billions of Dollars on Stocks” and “many other type Holdings” for the United States. The accompanying image highlighted Intel with screens showing approximately $20 as the purchase price and $95 as the then-current price. Trump did not provide a portfolio statement, calculation or list of assets behind the larger figure.

That wording matters. Trump did not limit his claim to publicly traded stocks. He expressly referred to stocks and other holdings.

A fact-check that looks only at Intel therefore answers part of the question but not all of it.

The central accounting problem is instead: What does “made” mean?

A paper gain is not the same thing as cash profit

There are at least three economically different things that can be described informally as the government “making” money.

Those distinctions are especially important because the federal portfolio now contains common shares, convertible preferred stock, warrants, project-level economic interests, private-company stakes and securities whose ultimate ownership depends partly on future federal disbursements.

Commerce’s own accounting provides unusually clear confirmation of the difference. In its fiscal 2025 financial report, the department recorded a $3.53 billion valuation adjustment on its Intel holdings and explicitly called it an “unrealized gain.” The department’s investment balance increased because Intel stock became more valuable; it did not report $3.53 billion of Intel stock-sale proceeds arriving in cash.

That same distinction applies as Intel’s price has risen much further.

Intel really has produced an extraordinary taxpayer paper gain

The Intel transaction is real and unusually lucrative on paper.

Under the August 2025 agreement, approximately $8.87 billion of federal funding was associated with up to 433.323 million Intel shares. Intel initially issued roughly 275 million shares and placed another approximately 159 million shares in escrow to be released as Secure Enclave funding was disbursed. The agreement also gave Commerce a separate warrant covering as many as roughly 241 million additional shares if Intel ever ceased to own at least 51% of its foundry business.

At Intel’s September 9 closing price of $106.24, the arithmetic for the full 433.323-million-share position is:

That is a remarkable increase. GAO independently documented the same phenomenon earlier this summer: at Intel’s July 15 price of $102.99, GAO valued Commerce’s Intel equity at approximately $44.6 billion.

So there is little room for serious dispute over the basic point: the Intel position has become much more valuable.

The harder question is exactly how much of the 433.3-million-share figure should be treated as presently unconditional.

Why the simple 433.3-million-share calculation needs a caveat

Intel’s June 27, 2026 quarterly filing says 143 million escrowed shares had not yet been released.

Of those, approximately 71 million were considered non-contingently issuable under the agreement, while another roughly 71 million remained contingent on Commerce making Secure Enclave disbursements. Intel reported the fair value of its escrow-share derivative liability at $15.6 billion at that date.

That means there are two useful ways to describe the Intel gain.

A conservative calculation using only the roughly 290.3 million shares that had been released from escrow by Intel’s latest detailed disclosure produces a September 9 quoted value of about $30.8 billion. The federal funding corresponding approximately to those released shares was about $6.0 billion, implying around $24.8 billion in simple paper appreciation.

The broader calculation marks the government’s entire 433.3-million-share contractual position at Intel’s current stock price, producing about $37.2 billion of appreciation.

Neither number should be described as $25 billion or $37 billion sitting in a government bank account. They are ways of estimating the increased value of securities and contractual equity interests.

The additional Intel warrant should not be counted as current profit

The Intel agreement also provides the government with warrants to acquire as many as approximately 241 million additional shares at $20 each.

At today’s Intel price, the hypothetical value of such an option would be enormous.

But there is an important condition: the warrant becomes exercisable only if Intel ceases to directly or indirectly own at least 51% of its foundry business. Intel’s latest filing says the warrants were neither currently nor expected to become exercisable.

Adding their hypothetical value to a current government portfolio total would therefore be misleading. They are a contingent economic right, not another 241 million ordinary Intel shares the government can currently sell.

What about all the other stocks the government owns?

Intel is no longer an isolated experiment.

A Council on Foreign Relations tracker counted $27.7 billion across 39 announced equity and quasi-equity deals as of July 30, spanning Commerce, Defense, Energy and the Development Finance Corporation. That $27.7 billion figure represents announced investments under CFR’s methodology, not their present market value or investment profit.

Several additional transactions have since become definitive, including new quantum-computing deals signed in September.

Using September 9 closing prices and a deliberately broad approach—marking the full Intel contractual share block and including GlobalFoundries shares covered by a definitive agreement even though its filing says they “will issue” rather than confirming completed settlement—the major directly quoted common-share positions look approximately like this:

*GlobalFoundries entered a definitive agreement to issue the shares; its September filing did not itself establish that settlement had already occurred.

Share quantities are drawn from the companies’ SEC disclosures. D-Wave issued Commerce 7,095,721 shares; Rigetti’s agreement covers 7,739,938 shares; Quantinuum reported Commerce received 2,369,528 shares; and GlobalFoundries agreed to issue 9,907,399 shares. September 9 prices are a market snapshot and will change.

This $47.1 billion figure is not a true government net asset value. It deliberately uses generous counting rules to demonstrate the scale involved. Intel escrow restrictions remain relevant, GlobalFoundries settlement requires confirmation, and some quantum shares are tied to federal award money that has not all been disbursed.

Even under those broad assumptions, the directly quoted common-share positions do not approach hundreds of billions of dollars.

The new quantum stakes are more conditional than the headlines imply

On September 8, Commerce finalized $100 million quantum R&D awards involving D-Wave, Rigetti and Quantinuum.

D-Wave actually issued 7,095,721 shares at $14.093 per share.

Rigetti’s agreement provides for 7,739,938 shares at an implied $12.92 issuance price. But the agreement limits how many shares Commerce can transfer based on the award money actually disbursed and retained. If Commerce terminates the underlying award, Rigetti can repurchase for an aggregate $1 the shares corresponding to award money that was never disbursed or was returned.

Quantinuum similarly reported that Commerce received 2,369,528 shares in connection with an award of up to $100 million. Only $56 million was scheduled to become initially available, with later payments dependent on project milestones.

The important point is not that these securities lack value. They plainly have value.

It is that “number of shares announced” and “unconditional taxpayer asset available for sale today” are not always the same thing.

That distinction becomes essential when attempting to calculate the government’s portfolio rather than merely list deals.

MP Materials and Lithium Americas add value—but do not solve the hundreds-of-billions gap

Some of the government’s most significant corporate investments do not appear in the common-share table because their structures are different.

In MP Materials, the Department of War invested $400 million in convertible preferred stock, while also receiving a ten-year warrant for up to 11,201,659 common shares at $30.03 per share. The preferred securities themselves can convert into common stock under their terms and carry their own dividend economics. MP Materials reported that none of the warrant shares had been issued as of June 30.

With MP shares closing at $54.30 on September 9, those conversion and warrant rights have substantial economic value. But their proper valuation is not simply “number of possible shares × today’s stock price,” because the preferred security and warrant have different rights, exercise mechanics and time value.

Lithium Americas is another example. The Department of Energy holds a penny warrant for 18,268,687 Lithium Americas shares and a separate warrant representing a 5% economic interest in the Thacker Pass joint venture. The project-level interest cannot honestly be valued by multiplying it by Lithium Americas’ stock price.

These investments make the federal portfolio larger than the simple common-share table. They still provide no visible path from approximately $47 billion of quoted common shares to several hundred billion dollars.

So where could Trump’s “hundreds of billions” number come from?

The strongest clue is not another semiconductor or mining stock.

It is Venezuelan oil.

On August 31, the White House announced an agreement involving privately held North American Blue Energy Partners. According to the administration, NABEP received concessions covering 17 Venezuelan oil fields with approximately 65 billion barrels of proved reserves.

The White House also said NABEP granted the Department of War’s Office of Strategic Capital a 35% equity stake in its corporate parent, describing the stake as representing “up to hundreds of billions in value and dividends.”

Reuters subsequently reported, citing a U.S. official, that Washington’s position was structured through “penny warrants” designed to protect the government’s percentage ownership from dilution as NABEP raises capital. Such warrants give the government the right to acquire the equity for a nominal exercise price rather than representing an ordinary stock purchase at current fair value.

The chronology is notable.

The White House used the phrase “hundreds of billions” for NABEP on August 31.

Trump then claimed on September 6 that he had made hundreds of billions on stocks and other holdings.

What can reasonably be inferred?

There is no direct evidence that Trump added NABEP to Intel and other holdings to produce his September 6 figure. He has not published his calculation.

But NABEP is the clearest publicly disclosed candidate for explaining the order of magnitude. None of the readily priceable federal stock positions comes close.

It is therefore reasonable to infer that the administration’s own asserted NABEP valuation could be part of the logic behind Trump’s statement.

That remains inference, not verified fact.

Is the government’s NABEP stake actually worth hundreds of billions?

That cannot currently be established from public evidence.

The White House’s fact sheet is strong evidence for what the administration says it obtained. It is not an independent valuation of an asset obtained by that same administration.

Sherafy.com could not locate a publicly disclosed independent appraisal, capitalization table, discounted-cash-flow valuation or other reproducible analysis demonstrating that the 35% NABEP position currently has a fair value of $100 billion or more.

NABEP itself says the agreement is expected to involve nearly $100 billion in investment to commercialize the Venezuelan reserves. That underscores why the reserves cannot be treated as immediately monetizable assets.

The White House also projects approximately $200 billion in Venezuelan royalty and tax payments over the first 25 years. Those payments would go to Venezuela, not directly to the U.S. shareholder, and would represent one of many costs and claims on production economics.

A private company’s potential future value is not the same thing as a realized government profit.

Why you cannot simply multiply 65 billion barrels by the price of oil

The most misleading possible calculation would be:

65 billion barrels × today’s oil price × 35%.

That is not how petroleum assets are valued.

Proved reserves are underground resources expected to be commercially recoverable under specified economic and operating assumptions. Turning those reserves into cash requires wells, pipelines, processing, transportation, labor, financing and years or decades of production.

The value of NABEP’s equity therefore depends on factors including development costs, production rates, recovery profiles, royalties, taxes, financing, oil quality, operating expenses, contract duration, political risk, legal enforceability and the time value of future cash flows.

The administration itself says the project may require nearly $100 billion in investment. Independent reporting has likewise emphasized the deteriorated infrastructure and enormous capital requirements associated with expanding Venezuelan production.

The oil may ultimately prove extremely valuable.

The publicly available evidence does not allow that value to be converted responsibly into a present $100-billion-plus federal profit figure.

There is also a major 25-year versus 100-year discrepancy

The duration of the Venezuela arrangement is not even described consistently by the two governments.

The White House says NABEP received 100-year concessions for the 17 fields.

Venezuela’s interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, publicly said the U.S.-Venezuela energy agreement would remain in force for 25 years, with a target of more than 1.5 million barrels of daily production. Reuters and EFE separately reported her statement.

Those descriptions may eventually prove reconcilable. A broader bilateral agreement could have one term while particular concession rights have another, for example.

But the underlying agreements needed to resolve that question have not been publicly disclosed in sufficient detail.

That uncertainty matters because a secure 100-year economic right and a 25-year operating agreement do not necessarily have the same present value.

The legal mechanism for the Pentagon’s NABEP stake also remains unclear

The White House says the NABEP interest belongs to the Department of War’s Office of Strategic Capital.

Federal law gives OSC broad duties involving capital strategies and eligible investments, but its statutory definition of “capital assistance” identifies loans, loan guarantees and technical assistance. Its pilot-program provisions expressly authorize loans and loan guarantees rather than conventional equity purchases.

Even before the final NABEP structure was announced, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told The Washington Post that OSC could not take an ownership stake in private companies and that its role was limited to loans, loan guarantees and technical assistance. Three days later, the White House announced a 35% NABEP interest held through OSC.

Reuters then reported that the interest was structured as warrants rather than an outright stock purchase. That may be legally significant, and additional statutory or contractual authority may explain the structure.

The currently available record therefore supports an unresolved legal-authority question, not a conclusion that the transaction is necessarily unlawful.

For valuation purposes, the missing documents matter for another reason: the exact rights attached to a private warrant can materially affect what it is worth.

Has the United States actually realized hundreds of billions in investment profit?

No public record reviewed for this article substantiates that claim.

That conclusion is intentionally phrased as “not substantiated,” rather than asserting that the federal government has realized exactly zero dollars.

There is no single government portfolio statement consolidating every federal shareholding, warrant, preferred security, dividend, asset sale and project interest. Fortune reported in July that the government’s equity interests were scattered across multiple agencies and that Treasury said agencies account for them differently depending on the governing authority.

But the evidence that is available points consistently in one direction.

Commerce itself labels Intel’s appreciation unrealized. GAO values Intel by marking the shares to market rather than reporting proceeds from a sale. The newest quantum positions were only finalized this month. MP Materials’ government package remains largely in preferred securities and unexercised warrants. Lithium Americas’ DOE position remains in warrants. NABEP is a private interest whose administration-supplied valuation cannot currently be reproduced from public data.

That is not evidence of hundreds of billions in realized government investment income.

The answer depends on what “made” means

The evidence can be summarized cleanly:

So, did Trump really make the United States “hundreds of billions” on stocks?

The public evidence does not support that statement if “made” means realized stock profits or even the current quoted value of the government’s publicly traded shares.

It does support something substantial: the government’s Intel position has become an extraordinary paper winner. Depending on how its escrowed shares are treated, Intel alone reflects roughly $25 billion to $37 billion in simple paper appreciation at the September 9 market price.

Washington also possesses a growing collection of preferred shares, warrants, project interests and public-company equity that adds billions more in economic value.

But the disclosed stock portfolio still does not reach the “hundreds of billions” scale.

The most plausible public explanation for that larger number is the administration’s valuation of the government’s new 35% economic interest in NABEP. The White House explicitly says that position could represent “up to hundreds of billions in value and dividends.”

That statement establishes the administration’s valuation claim. It does not establish that the government has already earned that amount, that the stake can currently be sold for that amount, or that an independent valuation would reach the same conclusion.

Until the administration publishes Trump’s underlying calculation and the financial terms necessary to value NABEP independently, “hundreds of billions” remains an unsubstantiated aggregate claim built on top of some very real—and very large—government investment gains.

How sherafy.com calculated the portfolio

For publicly traded common shares, sherafy.com uses disclosed share quantities and a common market-date closing price.

Shares that remain in escrow, securities tied to future award disbursements, unexercised warrants, convertible preferred shares and private-company interests are identified separately rather than automatically treated as unrestricted common stock.

The government funding attached to a transaction is also not always treated as the conventional “purchase price” of a stock. Many of these arrangements exchange equity rights for grants, loans, amended financing terms or other government commitments. The economic basis can therefore differ from the simple headline value of the federal program.

Private assets are not assigned speculative values when no reproducible market or financial model is publicly available.

This methodology intentionally sacrifices the appeal of a single giant portfolio number in exchange for a figure that can be audited against the underlying documents.

Market values in this article are snapshots as of September 9, 2026 and will change with share prices. Transaction terms and federal holdings may also change after publication.

Frequently asked questions

How much has the U.S. government made on Intel stock?

At Intel’s September 9 price of $106.24, the full 433.323-million-share contractual position was worth roughly $46.0 billion, compared with approximately $8.87 billion of associated federal funding. That produces about $37.2 billion of simple unrealized appreciation under the broad calculation.

Because 143 million shares remained in escrow in Intel’s latest detailed filing, a calculation using only shares already released produces a lower estimate of roughly $24.8 billion in paper appreciation.

How many Intel shares does the U.S. government own?

The federal agreement provides for up to approximately 433.3 million shares. Intel reported that 143 million escrowed shares had not yet been released as of June 27, 2026. Some of those were already considered non-contingently issuable, while others remained dependent on Secure Enclave disbursements.

Does the U.S. government own stocks besides Intel?

Yes. Federal agencies now hold or have contractual rights involving multiple companies, including MP Materials, USA Rare Earth, Lithium Americas, D-Wave, Rigetti, Quantinuum and others. The instruments range from ordinary shares to convertible preferred stock, warrants and project-level economic interests. CFR counted 39 announced equity or quasi-equity deals through July 30, before several newer transactions were finalized.

Does the United States own 35% of NABEP?

The White House says the Office of Strategic Capital holds a 35% equity interest in NABEP’s corporate parent. Reuters independently reported that the position was structured through penny warrants giving the government rights to acquire the equity for a nominal exercise price while protecting the position from dilution.

Is the NABEP stake really worth hundreds of billions of dollars?

The White House says it could represent up to hundreds of billions in value and dividends, but sherafy.com found no publicly available independent valuation sufficient to reproduce that estimate. The company is private, the full contractual terms are not public, and developing the underlying Venezuelan oil assets is expected to require enormous capital expenditures.

Has the Treasury received hundreds of billions in cash from these investments?

No public documentation reviewed for this article establishes hundreds of billions of dollars in realized investment proceeds. Commerce expressly accounts for Intel’s rising value as an unrealized gain rather than as cash profit.

References and Further Reading

Primary federal and government records

Donald Trump’s September 6, 2026 Truth Social post — Original statement in which Trump claimed hundreds of billions from stocks and other holdings.

White House Fact Sheet on the NABEP–Venezuela Oil Agreement — Primary source for the administration’s 35% NABEP interest, 65-billion-barrel reserve figure, 100-year concession claim and “hundreds of billions” valuation.

U.S. Department of Commerce FY2025 Agency Financial Report — Federal financial statements explicitly describing Commerce’s Intel valuation increase as an unrealized gain.

GAO: Semiconductors — Commerce Needs Plan to Meet CHIPS for America R&D Requirements — Independent government review that valued Commerce’s Intel equity at approximately $44.6 billion on July 15, 2026.

10 U.S.C. §149 — Office of Strategic Capital — Current statutory framework defining OSC’s duties, eligible investments and capital-assistance authorities.

Corporate and SEC filings

Intel June 27, 2026 Form 10-Q — Latest detailed disclosure reviewed on Intel’s unreleased escrow shares and contingent foundry warrants.

D-Wave September 2026 SEC Filing on Commerce Equity — Confirms issuance of 7,095,721 shares to Commerce at $14.093 per share.

Rigetti September 2026 Form 8-K — Confirms the 7,739,938-share Commerce transaction and its implied issuance price.

Quantinuum September 8, 2026 Form 8-K — Confirms Commerce received 2,369,528 Quantinuum shares and explains the $100 million award structure.

GlobalFoundries September 2026 Securities Issuance Agreement Filing — Documents the agreement to issue 9,907,399 ordinary shares to Commerce at $37.85.

MP Materials June 30, 2026 Form 10-Q — Documents the government’s MP Materials warrant and related preferred-equity structure.

USA Rare Earth June 30, 2026 Form 10-Q — Documents Commerce’s issued common shares, warrant and funding arrangement.

Lithium Americas June 30, 2026 Form 10-Q — Documents DOE’s Lithium Americas warrant and separate 5% economic interest in the Thacker Pass joint venture.

Independent reporting and portfolio context

Reuters: U.S. Structured Venezuela Oil Position to Protect It From Dilution — Independent reporting that the federal NABEP position uses penny warrants rather than an ordinary cash equity purchase.

Reuters: Venezuela Says U.S. Energy Deal Will Last 25 Years — Corroborates the Venezuelan government’s 25-year description, which conflicts with the White House’s 100-year concession description.

Washington Post: Trump Says He Secured a Vast U.S. Stake in Venezuelan Oil — Reports the Pentagon’s pre-announcement statement that OSC could not take ownership stakes and describes the infrastructure and financing challenges.

Council on Foreign Relations: Washington’s Growing Portfolio — Tracking U.S. Government Investments — Broad tracker of federal equity and quasi-equity arrangements and their agencies.

The Detail: Trump Says He Made “Hundreds of Billions” for America — Useful independent comparison that also identified Intel’s large paper gain and NABEP’s relevance to the larger claim.

Editorial currency note: Government equity agreements, award disbursements, warrant status, private-company terms and stock prices can change rapidly. Figures in this article reflect public records and market data available through September 9, 2026. Future filings may alter the value or status of individual positions.