💰
Campaign Receipts
← Back to directory
Donald John Trump (2016-cycle)
President · NY · 2017–2021 termUpdated May 17, 2026

Donald John Trump

Republican · NYAge 79· Populist RepublicanBook-sourced · SEALED Press

Trump's 2016 cycle — the campaign promises made between 2015 and Nov 8, 2016 — were graded against his 2017-2021 first term by SEALED Press. The book documents 145 distinct promises with paper-trail receipts on every verdict. Final published tally: 36 KEPT, 42 PARTIAL, 48 BROKEN, 19 YOU_DECIDE. This directory page surfaces 81 of those promises (the chapter overviews + individual h4-level pledges from the book). For the remaining 64 sub-promises that appear in book prose without their own header — and for the full case-study receipts on every verdict — read the book at sealed2016.com.

Viewing the 2016-cycle final scorecard (2017–2021 term)See the 2024 live tracker →
The receipt · Trump’s tenureWho funds them · what they voted · broken promises

Donald Trump made 81 graded campaign promises during his 2016 run. He kept roughly one in three.

His biggest broken promises: He pledged to drain the swamp and overhaul healthcare, but neither materialized as promised. He said he would impose term limits on Congress, refuse special interest money and self-fund his campaign, release his tax returns, keep Goldman Sachs employees out of government, appoint a special prosecutor for Clinton, and divest from his business interests. None of those happened.

He kept 28 promises against 22 broken ones, with 25 partial—meaning about one-third of his stated commitments came through.

We don't yet have donor data or vote-by-vote alignment for this cycle, so we cannot yet show which industries or donors shaped his decisions in office.

Narrated from FEC + Congress.gov receipts. Every figure traces to our data.

RCPT-DJT-2016-SCORECARD

2017–2021 term scorecard

As of 2026-05-17
Promises graded81
Kept28 (34.6%)
Partial25 (30.9%)
Broken22 (27.2%)
You decide6 (7.4%)
Headline number34.6%
35% kept

Trump kept 35% of 81 promises tracked for the 2017–2021 term. Each verdict is term-scoped, primary-sourced, and reviewed by three sequential reviewers (neutral · conservative · progressive).

Cite as: RCPT-DJT-2016-SCORECARDcampaignreceipts.com

Sourced from the SEALED Press 2016 case study (145-promise audit, paper-trail citations on every claim).

↓ Share strip · PNG
Share
Viral Pack · for creators
RCPT-STRIP-DONALD-TRUMP-2016
Member alert

Be first to know when money moves behind Donald John Trump.

The data is free. Members get the one money trail that matters each Friday — explained, with a tap straight into the map. $9/mo, cancel anytime.

Become a member →
Free updates · the announcement list

Track this politician's donors.

We email you when new donors show up or a vote moves with their money.

Occasional free updates · Unsubscribe in one click · We never sell your address

Notify me on updates

Track Donald John Trump.

Email me when a verdict on Donald John Trump's scorecard changes, a new receipt is added, or a major bill vote lands. One short email at a time, never bundled with the rest of the list.

Compared to the immediate predecessor
This profile
Donald John Trump (2016-cycle)
Donald John Trump
20172021 · R · President
35%kept · 81 graded
Predecessor
Barack Hussein Obama II
Barack Hussein Obama II
20092017 · D · President
50%kept · 12 graded
Donor profilemixedView funders →
The deeper view

More on Trump

Everything here is free. Tap a card to see the donors, the votes, and the alerts we track for Trump.

The promises that define the record

4 chapter-defining promises.

Each promise below has its own Receipt — verdict, primary-source quotes, paper-trail pointers, and a case study. Linkable individually by Receipt ID for citation.

RCPT-DJT-2016-001

Trade — He actually tore it up

Promise #1
CategoryChapter overview
Why this gradeOn trade, the campaign promise translated into named instruments: TPP withdrawal (Jan 23, 2017 executive memorandum), NAFTA renegotiated into USMCA (signed Nov 30, 2018, in force Jul 1, 2020), and Section 301 tariff rounds on Chinese imports beginning 2018. The "worst trade deal ever signed" language matched the policy direction. Grade: KEPT — the instruments fit the campaign characterization, even if economists dispute the outcomes. (Outcomes are graded separately under Jobs.)
Kept
Cite as: RCPT-DJT-2016-001campaignreceipts.com
Primary-source receipts (3)
  • "NAFTA is the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere, but certainly ever signed in this country."

    The original campaign rhetoric on NAFTA. Compare to USMCA agreement text (USTR archives) and TPP withdrawal memorandum (Jan 23, 2017).

  • "They are devaluing their currency, and there is nobody in our government to fight them… They are using our country as a piggy bank to rebuild China."

    Campaign frame on China currency manipulation. Compare to Treasury currency-manipulator designation (Aug 2019) and USTR Section 301 dockets (2018 onward).

  • "Presidential Memorandum Regarding Withdrawal of the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations and Agreement."

    The instrument that delivered the TPP withdrawal pledge, three days after inauguration. Federal Register document 2017-02281.

Read the full case study
The trade plank of the 2016 campaign was unusually specific: NAFTA was "the worst trade deal maybe ever signed," TPP would not be ratified, China was "using our country as a piggy bank," and Section 301 was the named lever for currency manipulation. Each of those rhetorical anchors maps to a documentable instrument in the post-2017 record. On TPP, the campaign promise was a withdrawal from the agreement, not a renegotiation. Three days after inauguration — January 23, 2017 — the President signed a memorandum withdrawing the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The instrument matched the pledge exactly: withdrawal, not modification. TPP went on to be implemented by the other 11 signatories as CPTPP without U.S. participation. On NAFTA, the promise was renegotiation. The USMCA was signed November 30, 2018 and entered into force July 1, 2020. Whether USMCA materially improves on NAFTA is a policy debate readers can have on the merits; the campaign characterization — that NAFTA would be renegotiated — produced a renegotiated agreement with a different name. The instrument matched. On China and currency, the 2018 Section 301 investigation produced multiple tariff rounds (Lists 1-4) on Chinese imports, with rates rising to 25% on roughly $250 billion in goods by mid-2019. Treasury formally labeled China a currency manipulator in August 2019. The campaign frame — "fight them" through tariffs and currency designation — became the literal regulatory playbook. We grade this chapter KEPT because the question is whether the campaign promise was delivered in the form pledged. It was. Whether the economic results justified the instruments is a different question we grade in the Jobs chapter (verdict: PARTIAL).
Sources cited in this case study
  1. Commission on Presidential Debates — first general election debate (Hofstra) · 2016-09-26"NAFTA is the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere, but certainly ever signed in this country."
  2. Commission on Presidential Debates — first general election debate (Hofstra) · 2016-09-26"They are devaluing their currency, and there is nobody in our government to fight them… They are using our country as a piggy bank to rebuil…"
  3. Federal Register — Presidential Memorandum · 2017-01-23"Presidential Memorandum Regarding Withdrawal of the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations and Agreement."
campaignreceipts.com/politician/donald-trump-2016#rcpt-djt-2016-001
RCPT-DJT-2016-002

Drain the Swamp — Who really got served

Promise #2
CategoryChapter overview
Why this gradeThe "drain the swamp" promise had two operational sub-pledges that are independently verifiable: (1) a five-year ban on executive officials becoming lobbyists, and (2) a lifetime ban on lobbying for foreign governments. Executive Order 13770 (Jan 28, 2017) imposed the five-year ban — but was rescinded by Executive Order 13983 (Jan 20, 2021) in the final hours of the term, freeing covered officials from the restriction. Multiple senior administration officials registered as lobbyists or foreign agents within the five-year window. Grade: BROKEN on the promise as Fayetteville listeners would have understood it.
Broken
Cite as: RCPT-DJT-2016-002campaignreceipts.com
Primary-source receipts (3)
  • "Politicians are almost completely controlled by lobbyists, donors and the special interests… We will change Washington together and defeat the special interests."

    Launch-stage anti-insider frame. The swamp metaphor hardened later; the original claim was literal — control via lobbyists and donors.

  • "Ethics reform will be a crucial part of our 100 day plan as well… I will impose a five year ban on executive branch officials becoming lobbyists and a lifetime ban on officials becoming lobbyists for a foreign government."

    The operational version of the promise — two specific time-bounded bans. Compare to Executive Order 13770 (Jan 28, 2017) and its rescission by EO 13983 (Jan 20, 2021).

  • "Executive Order 13983 — Revocation of Executive Order on Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Appointees. EO 13770 is hereby revoked."

    Signed in the final hours of the term. Released every covered appointee from both the five-year lobbying ban and the lifetime foreign-agent ban. This is the receipt that turns the campaign pledge into a broken promise.

Read the full case study
The "drain the swamp" promise pre-dates the slogan. At the Trump Tower launch on June 16, 2015, the frame was already in place: "Politicians are almost completely controlled by lobbyists, donors and the special interests… We will change Washington together and defeat the special interests." By the Fayetteville thank-you rally on December 6, 2016, the pledge had hardened into a specific instrument: a five-year ban on executive branch officials becoming lobbyists, and a lifetime ban on lobbying for foreign governments. The instrument arrived on January 28, 2017 as Executive Order 13770. Section 1 of the order imposed both bans as a condition of appointment for every covered executive branch appointee. On its face, the campaign pledge had become regulation. What broke the promise was not the order itself but its termination. On January 20, 2021, in the final hours of the term, Executive Order 13983 rescinded EO 13770 and released every covered appointee from the five-year ban. The lifetime foreign-agent restriction went with it. Officials who had signed pledges expecting a five-year cooling-off period were, by the close of business that day, eligible to register as lobbyists immediately. Senate LD-2 filings and FARA registrations in the months that followed show that this was not theoretical. Multiple senior administration officials registered as lobbyists or foreign agents well inside what would have been the five-year window. The promise made to a Fayetteville listener — "exit government, do not lobby" — did not survive contact with the end of the term. We grade BROKEN because the instrument that implemented the promise was rescinded by the same administration that signed it, before the cooling-off period had elapsed for any covered official.
Sources cited in this case study
  1. CBS News — launch transcript (Trump Tower, NY) · 2015-06-16"Politicians are almost completely controlled by lobbyists, donors and the special interests… We will change Washington together and defeat t…"
  2. CNN — Anderson Cooper 360° rush transcript (Fayetteville, NC post-election rally) · 2016-12-06"Ethics reform will be a crucial part of our 100 day plan as well… I will impose a five year ban on executive branch officials becoming lobby…"
  3. Federal Register — Executive Order 13983 · 2021-01-20"Executive Order 13983 — Revocation of Executive Order on Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Appointees. EO 13770 is hereby revoked."
campaignreceipts.com/politician/donald-trump-2016#rcpt-djt-2016-002
RCPT-DJT-2016-003

Jobs — Carrier, Ford, and the tax cut

Promise #3
CategoryChapter overview
Why this gradeJobs split. Carrier: 1,400 jobs threatened became roughly 800 retained in Indianapolis after a state incentive package; the remainder moved to Mexico (verifiable in Carrier press releases + BLS Indiana QCEW data). Ford: small-car production did move to Mexico, but Ford retained Michigan investment in EV and truck lines. TCJA (Dec 2017) cut the corporate rate from 35% to 21% — not the 15% promised on the debate stage. Job creation in 2018-2019 was strong but pre-pandemic trend-consistent rather than a Reagan-scale break. Grade: PARTIAL.
Partial
Cite as: RCPT-DJT-2016-003campaignreceipts.com
Primary-source receipts (3)
  • "All you have to do is take a look at Carrier air conditioning in Indianapolis. They left—fired 1,400 people. They are going to Mexico."

    The Carrier promise as it was made. Compare to the November 2016 Indiana Economic Development Corporation incentive deal — roughly 800 jobs retained, the remainder moved as planned. BLS QCEW data for Marion County, IN shows the partial outcome.

  • "Under my plan, I will be reducing taxes tremendously, from 35 percent to 15 percent for companies… That is going to be a job creator like we have not seen since Ronald Reagan."

    Campaign-stage tax pledge: 35% to 15%. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (Dec 22, 2017) cut the corporate rate from 35% to 21%, not 15%. Job growth in 2018-2019 was consistent with late-2010s trend; BLS CES series shows no Reagan-scale discontinuity before the pandemic.

  • "H.R.1 — An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018."

    The instrument that delivered the corporate rate cut. Final rate: 21%. The bill as enacted differed from the campaign pledge on rate, on permanence (individual cuts sunset, corporate cuts do not), and on scoring. CBO scored TCJA as adding $1.9T to deficits over 11 years.

Read the full case study
The 2016 jobs promise was unusually concrete: Carrier in Indianapolis, Ford's small car division, a corporate tax cut from 35% to 15%, and job creation "like we haven't seen since Ronald Reagan." Each clause is independently checkable. Carrier. In November 2016, between the election and inauguration, Carrier announced a deal with the State of Indiana that retained approximately 800 of the 1,400 jobs originally announced for relocation to Mexico. The remainder moved as planned. The Indiana Economic Development Corporation provided roughly $7 million in incentives over ten years. The debate-stage claim was a full reversal; the outcome was a partial retention. Indianapolis BLS county employment data shows the net effect was visible but small relative to the metro's manufacturing base. Ford. Ford did move small-car production (the Focus and C-Max lines) to Mexico, but cancelled a planned $1.6 billion San Luis Potosí plant in January 2017 and instead expanded Michigan investment in EV and truck production. The "thousands of jobs leaving Michigan" framing did not pan out at the magnitude claimed, but Ford's small-car production did leave the United States. A reader grading "stop our companies from leaving" against Ford specifically gets a split answer. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Signed December 22, 2017, TCJA cut the corporate rate from 35% to 21% — a substantial cut, but not the 15% promised on the debate stage. Job growth in 2018-2019 was strong (averaging ~200k/month), but BLS data shows the trajectory was consistent with the late-2010s pre-pandemic trend, not a discontinuous Reagan-scale break. We grade PARTIAL: the named companies got named outcomes that partially honored the debate-stage promise, and the tax-cut instrument arrived at a different rate than promised. The job-creation rhetoric — "like we haven't seen since Reagan" — did not materialize in the BLS series before the pandemic interrupted comparison.
Sources cited in this case study
  1. Commission on Presidential Debates — first general election debate (Hofstra) · 2016-09-26"All you have to do is take a look at Carrier air conditioning in Indianapolis. They left—fired 1,400 people. They are going to Mexico."
  2. Commission on Presidential Debates — first general election debate (Hofstra) · 2016-09-26"Under my plan, I will be reducing taxes tremendously, from 35 percent to 15 percent for companies… That is going to be a job creator like we…"
  3. Congress.gov — Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) · 2017-12-22"H.R.1 — An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018."
campaignreceipts.com/politician/donald-trump-2016#rcpt-djt-2016-003
RCPT-DJT-2016-004

Healthcare — The biggest broken promise

Promise #4
CategoryChapter overview
Why this gradeThe "repeal and replace" pledge had three independently verifiable sub-promises: full repeal, full replacement, and cost reduction ("much less expensive"). On July 28, 2017, the Senate "skinny repeal" amendment (HR 1628) failed 49-51 — three Republican senators (McCain, Collins, Murkowski) joining Democrats. The ACA was not repealed. No replacement bill became law. CMS data shows marketplace premiums rose, not fell, in subsequent years. Grade: BROKEN on all three sub-promises.
Broken
Cite as: RCPT-DJT-2016-004campaignreceipts.com
Primary-source receipts (3)
  • "We have to repeal it and replace it with something absolutely much less expensive and something that works, where your plan can actually be tailored."

    The clearest single-source version of the repeal-and-replace pledge. Three testable sub-promises: full repeal, full replacement, cost reduction. Compare to Congress.gov H.R. 1628 vote record.

  • "When I watch what is happening with some horrible things like Obamacare, where your health insurance and health care is going up by numbers that are astronomical, 68 percent, 59 percent, 71 percent…"

    The premium-pain numbers are rhetorical anchors. Check against CMS rate review data and state insurance commissioner filings for 2016-2017 benchmark plans. The campaign claim was that the next administration would reverse this; CMS marketplace data through 2020 shows premiums rose then flattened, not fell.

  • "Senate Amendment 667 to H.R.1628 — Health Care Freedom Act. Failed: 49-51. McCain (R-AZ), Collins (R-ME), Murkowski (R-AK) voted Nay with all Democrats."

    The single point of failure on repeal. The "skinny repeal" was the narrowest possible instrument that could have honored the pledge; it failed by two votes. No replacement bill became law during the term.

Read the full case study
Of all the 2016 promises, "repeal and replace" was repeated most often. It appeared in every debate, at virtually every rally, and in the post-election Day-One agenda. At the second presidential debate (October 9, 2016, Washington University in St. Louis), the pledge took its clearest form: "We have to repeal it and replace it with something absolutely much less expensive and something that works." Three claims, each testable: full repeal, full replacement, lower cost. Repeal. The legislative effort in the Senate culminated in the July 28, 2017 vote on the so-called "skinny repeal" amendment to HR 1628. The amendment failed 49-51, with Republican Senators McCain, Collins, and Murkowski joining all Democrats in voting no. Earlier efforts (the BCRA and the AHCA) had also failed to clear procedural hurdles. The ACA was not repealed. The individual mandate penalty was zeroed out by TCJA at the end of 2017, but the statute itself remained in force. Replace. No replacement bill became law during the term. CMS continued administering the ACA marketplaces, Medicaid expansion in expansion states, and the essential health benefits framework throughout the term. Cost. CMS rate review filings and KFF marketplace tracker compilations show that benchmark marketplace premiums rose in 2017 and 2018, then flattened, then rose modestly through 2020. State-level filings (the data the campaign rhetoric pointed to — "68 percent, 59 percent, 71 percent") continued to show rate increases. Premiums did not fall. We grade BROKEN on all three sub-promises. The legislative vote on July 28, 2017 is the cleanest single point of failure, but the verdict also reflects the absence of any replacement bill and the trajectory of premiums after the term began. The journalist's test — "did the instrument match the campaign claim" — produces three negative answers in a row.
Sources cited in this case study
  1. Commission on Presidential Debates — second presidential debate (St. Louis) · 2016-10-09"We have to repeal it and replace it with something absolutely much less expensive and something that works, where your plan can actually be …"
  2. Commission on Presidential Debates — second presidential debate (St. Louis) · 2016-10-09"When I watch what is happening with some horrible things like Obamacare, where your health insurance and health care is going up by numbers …"
  3. Congress.gov — H.R. 1628 roll-call record · 2017-07-28"Senate Amendment 667 to H.R.1628 — Health Care Freedom Act. Failed: 49-51. McCain (R-AZ), Collins (R-ME), Murkowski (R-AK) voted Nay with al…"
campaignreceipts.com/politician/donald-trump-2016#rcpt-djt-2016-004
The rest is in the book

77 more promises. All graded.

See who he kept his word to — and who he didn't. All 145, in the book.

Get the receipts as they land

Email me when Trump's record updates.

One short email when a new verdict lands, when a major roll-call vote contradicts or fulfills a promise, or when the donor profile shifts. Free. Unsubscribe in one click.

Who funds Donald John Trump?

Donald John Trump's biggest donor industries are Individual / Retired ($6,600). Every dollar is tied to an FEC filing.

See Donald John Trump's full donor breakdown →