Fact-checking Trump’s false claim about his real estate case and land grabs in ‘communist countries’

Former President Donald Trump compared a civil fraud judgment against him and possible plans by the New York attorney general to seize some of his property with the actions of communist dictators. 

"I did nothing wrong!" Trump wrote March 22 in a Truth Social post that criticized Judge Arthur Engoron and Attorney General Letitia James. "This is simply a ‘taking.’ Much like what is done in communist countries."

Trump’s campaign spokesperson didn’t answer our request for comment. 

Experts told us the civil fraud case and potential property seizure against Trump is not the same as what happens in communist countries.

Daniel Shaviro, a taxation professor at New York University School of Law, called Trump’s comparison "ludicrous" in an email to PolitiFact.

"He was fined as the consequence of a legal proceeding for fraud," Shaviro said.

James filed a fraud case against Trump in 2022, giving Trump "loads of time to plan for this scenario," Shaviro said. After a trial that lasted more than two months, Engoron ruled Feb. 16 that Trump had inflated the value of many of his real estate holdings to get more favorable loan and insurance terms.

The judgment was predicated on extensively documented misrepresentations by Trump, Shaviro said.

The court decision "involved legitimately adversarial legal proceedings and the rule of law (not to mention extensive evidence that was presented by the plaintiff)," Shaviro said, which makes it different from expropriations in communist countries. 

James’ office filed paperwork to begin taking Trump’s assets in Westchester County, New York — where his golf course and private estate Seven Springs are — if Trump does not pay the bond.

Trump had faced a March 25 deadline to secure a bond to cover the $454 million judgment and interest as he appeals the ruling. But an appeals court on March 25 lowered that amount to $175 million and gave Trump 10 days to pay it. 

Trump wrote March 25 on Truth Social, "We will abide by the decision of the Appellate Division, and post either a bond, equivalent securities, or cash."

Trump’s case is "not comparable to property seizures by a totalitarian regime, not by a long shot," said Sebastian Arcos, associate director of the Cuban Research Institute at Florida International University.

Ted Henken, a sociologist at Baruch College, City University of New York and a Cuban culture expert, said in communist countries, seizures or nationalizations of property are often focused on foreign-owned properties and are "as much assertions of economic sovereignty over key industries as they are punishments for illegal behavior." When the government seizes property owned by local residents, it does so via executive decrees that lack supporting legal procedures, a chance of defense or public transparency. 

Featured Fact-check

Instagram posts

stated on October 23, 2024 in a video

Kamala Harris imprisoned a woman for three years for praying.

In Trump’s case, Henken said "the seizures are the result of a long and public legal procedure where he has had the ability to make his case before the law and the public."

Jorge Duany, director of Florida International University’s Cuban Research Institute, said in communist regimes "expropriation is a common strategy to ‘collectivize’ the means of production and reduce the power of independent private businesses in the transition to socialism."

In 1959, the Cuban government began to confiscate private properties, initially targeting those belonging to former dictator Fulgencio Batista and his closest allies, Duany said.

All properties in Cuba owned by U.S. residents or companies, including 21 sugar mills, utility companies and banks, were nationalized beginning in July 1960. A December 1961 law authorized the nationalization of private property belonging to all Cubans who fled the country. The expropriation process culminated in the nationalization of nearly 57,000 small private businesses on the island in 1968. 

Beyond Cuba, China and the former Soviet Union enacted large-scale nationalizations of private enterprise shortly after national revolutions, Henken said. Mao Zedong, chairman of the People’s Republic of China, nationalized all private assets in the early 1950s and restricted private ownership. 

The former Soviet Union enacted extensive nationalizations starting in 1918. Some were tempered in 1922 under head of government Vladimir Lenin's New Economic Policy. 

The right to own private property was eliminated and replaced with state ownership.

"The context of what (Attorney General) James is doing with Trump is completely different, narrowly targeted, and not part of any general move against the capitalist notion or right of private property," Henken said.

Trump said the New York civil fraud judgment against him and a plan to seize Trump-owned property "is simply a 'taking.' Much like what is done in communist countries."

Trump’s comparison is ridiculous.

The judge’s ruling followed a public trial that lasted more than two months; Trump had legal representation and due process. James’ plan to seize some of Trump’s property follows that.  

People whose property was seized by communist regimes did not get a public trial, a chance of defense or due process. Their homes or businesses were seized as part of a widespread government effort to take over ownership of private property.

We rate this statement False.

PolitiFact Copy Chief Matthew Crowley and Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this fact-check.

CORRECTION, March 26, 2024: A previous version of this story incorrectly referred to the judgment against Trump, which is a bond. The story has been updated. 

RELATED: Fact-check: Trump calls his fraud case ‘a form of Navalny.’ That distorts the cases.