‘Trump Accounts’ Are the President’s Latest Promise to Hand Americans Cash, But This Time It Might Actually Happen (for Some)

Today’s announcement that Michael and Susan Dell will donate $6.25 billion to American families is, on the face of it, a rather remarkable figure–likely one of the largest donations ever made with American citizens as the direct beneficiaries. Sure, it’s only a drop in the bucket of the net worth of Dell Technologies chief executive Michael Dell, whose $148 billion valuation pegs him as the 11th richest individual in the world according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, and sure, the gift comes with the name of Donald Trump very prominently attached to it, but it’s still likely a better outcome than the traditional billionaire status quo of simply piling all the cash in the form of a massive pool of gold coins to lap swim in, Scrooge McDuck-style. This particular donation is meant to fill in some of the obvious gaps created by the Trump administration’s stated plans to institute “Trump Accounts” to aid with family investing for newborns born between 2025-2028, but it should be noted that the same caveats should apply as have applied to so many past Trump promises to cut Americans a check: The man’s natural state of being is duplicity. Whenever it’s possible to not pay someone a promised sum, Trump rarely misses an opportunity to renege. Nor does the concept of the accounts take into consideration the current economic precariousness that may make it impossible for the majority of families to contribute their own savings to help it grow.

The concept of Trump Accounts–inevitably named because Trump can only pretend to care about altruism if his name is attached, like his insistence on adding his own name to COVID stimulus checks–was first broached in a June press conference, in which Trump described the provision of the “One Big Beautiful Bill” that would establish an investment account for every U.S. citizen child born between Jan. 2025 and Jan. 2029, with a $1,000 starting contribution from the U.S. government. This would seemingly be both an attempt at an incentive to get parents to have more children among Elon Musk-fueled concerns over declining birth rate, and a PR campaign for Trump himself, given that the pilot program is structured to immediately end after the 2028 presidential election.

Still, the fact that the program actually is funded via the passage of the massive (deficit-increasing, naturally) spending bill makes it much more likely that it will actually be seen through to some kind of implementation, currently scheduled to potentially begin opening accounts in mid-2026. They would essentially operate along the following lines:

— The government’s $1,000 contribution would be present when the account is opened for a child born between Jan. 2025 and Jan. 2029, invested into a diversified, low-cost U.S. stock index fund. Further contributions must be into similar index funds tied to the S&P 500.

— Parents, guardians or private entities can contribute up to $5,000 per year in additional dollars into the Trump Accounts, payments that are made with after-tax dollars, meaning that contributions to the funds are not tax-deductible. There are various provisions for employers, etc. to potentially be able to match contributions made by parents.

— Funds cannot be withdrawn until the age of 18, at which point the account can essentially be transitioned into a traditional IRA, and withdrawing the funds will result in a substantial tax payment on investment gains.

The $6.25 billion contribution of Michael and Susan Dell, meanwhile, isn’t intended for these kids born between 2025-2029 at all. Rather, it’s intended to bring up to 25 million additional U.S. children into some semblance of the program by creating Trump Accounts for kids up to 10 years of age who were born prior to the 2025 cut-off. Similar investment accounts would be created for them; albeit with less seed money: The Dell contribution provides for $250 to be placed as an initial investment into each account. Around 80% of children born between 2016-2024 would theoretically qualify, although there are cutoffs based on household income: Applying families would have to live in ZIP codes where the median household income is less than $150,000 per year.

Which is all to say: Thanks, I guess? We run into the issue of genuine practicality at this point: We’re talking about a gift of $250, thrown vaguely in the direction of millions of American families by members of our billionaire ruling class. What can that money realistically do in terms of providing for a child’s future? Is it the seed that is going to allow them to go to college, to buy a house some day? Does that really seem likely? Or are we primarily talking about billionaires running PR campaigns for a president who recently hit new second term lows in his overall approval numbers?

pro-trump asshole trying to curry favor with the president by giving to-be-determined kids pocket change to invest in the stock market that he and his billionaire friends are getting ready to crash for the third time in 20 years. thanks michael and susan

[image or embed]

— bobby (@bobbylewis.bsky.social) Dec 2, 2025 at 8:19 AM

More than anything, the effectiveness of the Trump accounts is contingent upon whether Americans, their employers, etc., are able to continue to faithfully invest/pump money into them over the course of 18 years or more, which is a big ask. A little seed money from the government is a nice thing, but it will barely grow in any measurable way (perhaps not even keeping up with inflation) unless parents are able to continue adding funds to the account. The ease of creating said account is meant to encourage families to participate in saving, but do you know many families in 2025 that would describe themselves as having a spare $5,000 per year to immediately start investing in a government-backed investment account, even if that might be relatively sound financial strategy? Or are the families in your orbit already scraping to get by, without being able to commit much attention to investing in the future? Hell, how will those who do invest in their Trump Accounts feel when the A.I. bubble bursts and drags the stock market down into a deep pit of despair? As is so often the case, the families most benefited by the concept of Trump Accounts will be those ones who are already on the best financial footing, aka the wealthiest Americans. A more equitable system might have provided additional benefits specifically for low-income Americans, but the current blanket system was no doubt the only way to curry enough GOP support for the concept, which already has enough socialistic overtones to make traditional Republicans jumpy.

And not to be forgotten in all this is Trump’s own history of consistently invoking or outright promising direct economic hand-outs (ironically against all traditional GOP philosophy), only to then not take any steps toward actually delivering them. Remember back in February, when Trump was telling reporters that he “loved” Elon Musk’s proposal to send Americans $5,000 DOGE rebate checks, supposedly to be funded by savings generated by the Department of Government Efficiency cutting up to $2 trillion from the United States federal budget? When’s the last time you heard about that plan? Some nine months later, and with eight months left on its original charter, DOGE effectively no longer exists, its key employees having all been shuffled off to other lucrative governmental positions to continue their personal sponging while any “savings” created by the originally Elon-led agency have been impossible to quantify thanks to an almost complete lack of verifiable public disclosure. The fact that the tumult of the DOGE era ultimately resulted in an even bigger federal deficit than before should speak to the confidence level involved whenever Trump promises anything to Americans.

Most recently, that has been in the form of promising $2,000 “tariff rebate checks,” which Trump recently claimed could be distributed in mid-2026, no doubt in advance of midterm elections.

“We’ve taken in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariff money,” Trump said to reporters in late November. “We’re going to be issuing dividends … probably the middle of next year, a little bit later than that, of thousands of dollars for individuals of moderate income, middle income.”

Trump continues asking for cash from supporters while dangling $2,000 “tariff rebate checks” though his own Treas Sec AND members of his party in Congress have declared the desperate gimmick dead on arrival.

— papa2doc.bsky.social (@papa2doc.bsky.social) Nov 27, 2025 at 9:01 PM

Of course, as can often be assumed with such Trump proclamations, the math behind such an idea doesn’t really add up. Currently, according to estimates from the Tax Foundation, Trump’s tariffs are projected to raise roughly $158 billion throughout 2025, and another $207 billion in 2026 … if they aren’t capriciously raised and lowered, as the president frequently indulges in. The cost of $2,000 checks, meanwhile, would almost certainly exceed the entirety of this income: If said checks went out only to tax filers and spouses the projected cost would be $279.8 billion. So much for tariffs as a revenue-generating tool for the country; you’re now deeply in the hole, something that Congressional Republicans would no doubt despise with every fiber of their being. And even if Trump did somehow muscle said “tariff rebate checks” through Congressional approval, they could still very well backfire by contributing to another surge in inflation, as followed the three rounds of COVID relief checks in 2020-2021. It’s far easier for talk of tariff checks for Americans to simply fade away like so many other Trump proclamations, replaced by the new shiny object of the week for the MAGA faithful to latch on to.

For the sake of young American families, we can only hope that some people do ultimately feel the benefit of these government-backed investment accounts even if they do come with Trump’s name forever welded to them. It is likely that–should the program survive, and not be torpedoed by Trump and Congress at some point–usage of these accounts in the intended fashion actually could help give families the necessary incentive to actively plan savings for a child’s future, taking advantage of compounding interest … provided that the same administration’s fumbling economic policy doesn’t tank the economy so badly that those families have no funds to contribute toward savings. It’s basically a chicken-and-egg scenario: If the Trump administration gives you a nest box in which to hatch your eggs, you might as well use it, provided of course that President Fox hasn’t already paid a visit to eat his fill.