Our legislation would ensure any sitting president who sues the U.S. government faces an 100% tax on any payout that they receive from a trial or settlement so that innocent taxpayers don’t get stuck footing the bill.
Support legislation to impose a 100% excise tax on any settlement payment received from a fund whose assets are derived from a civil suit initiated by a president against the United States, with additional penalties for evasion and reporting requirements for transparency.
Occurrences
introduced a bill to prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars for military action against Iran
Evidence
The SLUSH FUND Act would impose a 100% excise tax on any settlement payment received from a fund whose assets are derived from a civil suit initiated by a President against the United States. The legislation also imposes an additional 50% penalty on any willful attempt to avoid or evade the tax. To ensure compliance and transparency, the bill requires information reporting on payments from the fund to both the individual receiving the payment and the Secretary of the Treasury, including notice that such payments are subject to the 100% excise tax. Failure to file the required information reports would result in a $10,000 penalty per failure.
AP reported that Judge Richard Leon rejected a temporary restraining order after DOJ said acting AG Todd Blanche had told Congress the administration was scrapping the $1.776 billion fund. The judge noted no money had been paid out and that a Virginia block on the fund remained in place.
AP reported that Blanche later testified the fund would not go forward, but Senate Republicans still wanted stronger assurances before backing his confirmation because the fund was not yet effectively dead.
Assessments
The promise was to support legislation with specific features, not to guarantee enactment. Evidence shows Jimmy Panetta joined the introduction of the SLUSH FUND Act in May 2026, and the bill text described in his press release matches the promised 100% excise tax, added anti-evasion penalty, and reporting/transparency requirements. Later reporting that the underlying fund was blocked or possibly abandoned does not negate that he fulfilled the narrower promise to support the legislation.
The evidence shows Jimmy Panetta supported and helped introduce the SLUSH FUND Act, and the bill text described in the press release matches the promise very closely: a 100% excise tax on covered settlement payments, a 50% anti-evasion penalty, and reporting/transparency requirements with penalties for noncompliance. However, the record provided shows introduction and support of legislation, not enactment into law. In federal promise scoring, supporting or co-introducing a bill is meaningful progress but does not equal full delivery unless the promised policy was actually adopted. Because Panetta made a serious legislative effort on the exact policy but there is no evidence here that it passed, this is best judged as partial rather than delivered.