Experts are casting serious doubt on the Trump Organization’s claim that its new smartphone, marketed as being entirely made in the United States, can realistically be built domestically. Industry professionals argue that it is currently “virtually impossible” for such a product to be wholly manufactured in the US, especially on the scale required for commercial launch.
The proposed smartphone, which is gold in color and priced at $499 (approximately £367.50), has triggered skepticism from analysts and critics alike. One analyst conveyed to the BBC that the phone’s production claim is largely implausible under present technological and economic circumstances. Furthermore, concerns have arisen about the ethical implications of what appears to be another business initiative leveraging President Donald Trump’s name.
Meghan Faulkner, communications director for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, openly criticized the venture, stating, “It’s unbelievable that the Trump family has created yet another way for President Trump to personally profit while in office.”
In addition to the handset, the initiative includes a new mobile service that will carry a monthly fee of $47.45—a figure that symbolically references Trump’s roles as both the 45th and 47th President of the United States. Trump has publicly stated that he has placed his business ventures into a trust overseen by his children, while the White House has consistently maintained that he makes decisions in the best interest of the American public.
However, Faulkner noted that this new business project introduces familiar ethical dilemmas. These include the possibility that individuals or entities might subscribe in hopes of currying favor with the president, as well as potential conflicts of interest as Trump may influence regulations in the very industry where his family now holds a commercial stake.
Despite declaring the phone will be manufactured in the US, the Trump family has not disclosed which company will be responsible for the production. During an interview on “The Benny Show” podcast, Eric Trump implied that full domestic manufacturing may not be in place for the initial August release, saying, “Eventually, all the phones can be built in the United States of America.”
This ambiguous claim has led technology experts to question the feasibility of such production plans. Many argue that manufacturing smartphones entirely from scratch in the US is not currently viable. Professor Tinglong Dai of Johns Hopkins’ Carey Business School expressed serious skepticism, saying, “They don’t even have a working prototype. It’s extremely unlikely.” He further elaborated, “You would have to have a miracle. You would need to have economies of scale. You would need to have sustainable demand for this kind of product.”
The smartphone initiative also aligns with Trump’s recent public efforts to persuade Apple CEO Tim Cook to move iPhone production for American consumers back to the US. Just last month, Trump threatened to impose a 25% import tax—or more—on iPhones not manufactured within American borders.
Leo Gebbie, an analyst at CCS Insight, noted the logistical challenges involved in making smartphones entirely in the United States, saying that the country “simply does not have the high-tech supply chain” needed for smartphone assembly. This makes a full US-based production timeline by August highly unlikely. However, he allowed for a partial possibility, stating, “It’s possible that the device could be assembled in the US with parts imported from abroad. This might be the most likely outcome that lets the T1 claim American sovereignty.”
Details about the business partner responsible for managing the mobile service and licensing the Trump brand remain scarce. The Trump Organization did not respond to the BBC’s inquiries regarding its business collaborators, ethical criticisms, or specifics behind the “built in the United States” assertion.
In announcing the project, the Trump Organization stated, “Hard-working Americans deserve a wireless service that’s affordable, reflects their values, and delivers reliable quality they can count on.” The plan promises “discounted” international calling for families with members serving abroad in the military. The mobile service also pledges US-based customer support and currently offers the gold-colored handset for pre-order.
This new venture is a continuation of Trump’s longstanding business strategy of licensing his name in exchange for royalties and fees, something he engaged in well before his entry into politics. However, since stepping onto the political stage a decade ago, opportunities to monetize his brand have grown exponentially.
According to his most recent financial disclosure, Trump reported earnings exceeding $600 million last year. These earnings include profits from an array of Trump-branded products such as Bibles, watches, sneakers, and fragrances. Forbes estimated in March that Trump’s net worth had more than doubled from the previous year, now totaling around $5.1 billion. This surge in wealth is partially attributed to his loyal base of supporters, who have boosted the valuation of Truth Social, Trump’s social media platform. Forbes noted that Truth Social accounted for about half of Trump’s total net worth in the past year.
Public reaction to the Trump-branded smartphone has been mixed, especially on social media. While some potential buyers expressed enthusiasm, others ridiculed the concept. One user on X (formerly Twitter) asked, “Where do I have to wait in line to buy the new Trump phone?” In contrast, critics mocked the design and made humorous references to Trump’s personal communication style, joking that all texts from the phone might appear in capital letters.
Meanwhile, Trump has also faced protest from critics accusing him of corruption, particularly as he hosts events such as cryptocurrency galas that raise additional concerns about conflicts of interest. The broader debate over Trump’s financial entanglements continues to attract attention, particularly in light of his growing wealth and expanding business ventures.
In terms of the mobile industry landscape, the US market is primarily dominated by three major carriers: AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile, all of which offer monthly service plans starting below $40. A number of smaller mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) also exist, leasing capacity from the big players to serve niche customer segments with either lower prices or customized plans.
According to a 2024 report by the Federal Communications Commission, the largest of these MVNOs have fewer than 10 million subscribers. One notable example is Mint Mobile, which was once backed by actor Ryan Reynolds. T-Mobile acquired Mint Mobile in 2023 for $1.35 billion, with Reynolds reportedly owning a 25% stake. That share may have netted the actor as much as $300 million from the sale.
As Trump continues to expand his branding empire, questions over the practicality, legality, and ethics of such endeavors remain unresolved. Whether this new smartphone project proves to be a commercial success or another political flashpoint remains to be seen.