A new congressional investigation in the United States has placed World Liberty Financial (WLFI), the crypto firm linked to the Trump family, under intense scrutiny. The inquiry, led by Representative Ro Khanna, aims to clarify the nature of a stake in World Liberty Financial acquired by an Abu Dhabi entity for a staggering $500 million.
According to presented reports, this transaction granted Aryam Investment 1, a vehicle tied to Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed, a 49% participation in the company. The deal, signed just days before the 2025 presidential inauguration, has raised significant concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest and national security risks involving critical technological policies and foreign influence.
The USD1 Stablecoin and Its Role in Multibillion-Dollar Investments
The core of the legislative inquiry focuses on the use of USD1, the stablecoin launched by the project, to settle a $2 billion investment in the Binance exchange. Investigators are demanding documents detailing how this asset was selected and whether the stake in World Liberty Financial influenced the decision to use a currency controlled by the President’s family.
On the other hand, the House has requested detailed records on capital flows, following reports that $187 million allegedly ended up in entities controlled by the Trump family. This situation raises doubts about whether the blockchain was used as a tool to channel foreign sovereign funds, evading traditional financial controls through the use of recently created digital assets with opaque ownership structures.
Furthermore, it is being investigated whether company personnel participated in discussions related to the subsequent presidential pardon of Changpeng Zhao, founder of Binance. Thus, Congress is attempting to determine if a connection existed between the adoption of USD1 and high-level foreign policy or judicial decisions, which is why the preservation of all internal communications has been ordered.
Does This Foreign Investment Represent a Threat to Technological Sovereignty?
Lawmakers’ concerns transcend financial matters, focusing on the coincidence between the WLFI deal and the approval of AI chip exports to the United Arab Emirates. Since the project’s investors lead key tech firms in Abu Dhabi, the stake in World Liberty Financial could have served as a pressure mechanism, undermining national security restrictions previously imposed by defense authorities on sensitive high-tech hardware.
Moreover, the committee demands to know the board’s composition and the compliance policies that WLFI applied during these international negotiations. By involving a nation with close technological ties to China, lawmakers fear the platform could serve as a bridge for technology transfer, facilitating foreign powers’ access to strategic U.S. developments through opaque crypto-ownership structures and governance tokens.
Ultimately, World Liberty Financial has until March 1 to deliver the documentation required by the House of Representatives panel. The outcome of this investigation will define the firm’s operational transparency and could set a precedent for the ethical scrutiny that private projects of public figures will face in the dynamic decentralized finance sector.
