Trump Kept Trading Oil and Gas Stocks During the Iran War
Disclosure filings show President Trump's oil and gas trading carried on through the Iran war, while he publicly accused Chevron and ExxonMobil of making too much money. He owns both.
Financial disclosure filings show President Trump's oil and gas stock trades continued during the Iran war, even as he publicly accused companies including Chevron and ExxonMobil — both of which he owns shares in — of "making too much money."
President Trump's personal trading in oil and gas securities did not pause during the war with Iran, according to financial disclosure filings reviewed by CBS MoneyWatch. The filings place the president on both sides of an unusual line: an investor in energy equities and the official whose decisions on the Middle East move the price of the commodity those equities sell.
The same filings confirm that Trump holds shares of Chevron (CVX) and ExxonMobil (XOM) — the two companies he has publicly accused of "making too much money." That combination, a shareholder criticizing his own holdings while setting the policy that shapes their revenue, is the core of the disclosure story.
What the filings actually establish
Three things are documented. First, that trades in oil and gas positions occurred during the period of the Iran conflict. Second, that Trump owns shares in Chevron and ExxonMobil. Third, that his rhetoric toward large integrated oil companies has been critical, using the phrase "making too much money."
What the filings do not do is establish intent, timing advantage, or personal direction of any individual trade. U.S. disclosure regimes for senior officials are built to reveal positions and transactions after the fact, not to prove why a transaction happened. Presidents are not required to place assets in a blind trust; the practice is a norm that some administrations have observed and others have not. The result is a system that produces exactly this kind of story — a paper trail with a conflict visible in it, and no mechanism inside the filing itself to resolve that conflict.
That gap is why the disclosures matter beyond the individual holdings. Oil is the single most politically sensitive traded commodity in the world. A change in tone toward Tehran, a sanctions decision, a naval posture in the Gulf: each moves crude, and crude moves the earnings expectations embedded in Chevron and ExxonMobil shares. When the person making those calls also files transaction reports in the sector, the ordinary reader has no way to separate policy judgment from portfolio effect.
Where the two stocks stand now
Both names finished the most recent session lower even as the broad market advanced. Chevron last traded at 199.77, down 0.22% from a previous close of 200.21, with a session range of 197.82 to 200.88, as of 20:00 GMT on Thursday, August 27, 2026. ExxonMobil last traded at 156.44, down 1.11% from a previous close of 158.19, having spent the day between 156.14 and 158.19 — meaning it closed near the bottom of its range and never traded above the prior close.
The benchmarks went the other way. The S&P 500 tracker (SPY) closed at $771.10, up 0.66%; the Nasdaq 100 tracker (QQQ) closed at $721.11, up 1.37%; and the Dow tracker (DIA) closed at $535.22, up 0.19%. So on the day the filings were being read, energy majors lagged a market led by technology — a reminder that whatever geopolitical premium a Middle East conflict puts into crude, it does not translate mechanically into a bid for oil equities on any given afternoon.
Why "making too much money" cuts against the holdings
The president's criticism of the majors is a familiar political move: gasoline prices are the most visible consumer price in the country, and integrated producers are the most visible target when those prices rise. Presidents of both parties have leaned on that framing.
What is unusual is doing it as a shareholder of the companies named. It creates two readings of the same statement, and they point in opposite directions. If the criticism is sincere and translates into policy that compresses refining or production margins, the holder is arguing against his own position. If it is rhetoric with no policy behind it, then the criticism functions as cover while the position stays intact. Neither reading is flattering, and the filings do not tell us which is correct.
If the criticism is sincere and translates into policy that compresses refining or production margins, the holder is arguing against his own position.
For investors, the practical takeaway is narrower than the ethics debate. Political attacks on the majors have historically been poor predictors of actual regulatory action, and the market generally treats them as noise until something concrete — an excess-profits proposal, an export restriction, a sanctions carve-out — appears. That is the thing worth watching, not the language.
The oversight questions this leaves open
Several pressure points follow from the disclosures, and each will be tested in the coming weeks rather than settled by the filings themselves.
- Blind trust pressure. The most direct remedy — moving assets into a structure the officeholder cannot see or direct — remains voluntary at the presidential level. Expect renewed calls for it, and no legal requirement behind them.
- Congressional stock-trading bills. Proposals to restrict trading by federal officeholders have circulated for years without passing. Filings like these are the fuel such bills run on.
- Who executed the trades. Disclosure forms report transactions, not decision-makers. Whether positions were managed by an outside adviser is the single most consequential unanswered question.
- Sector-specific exposure. Energy is the sector where presidential action has the most immediate and measurable price effect. A holding in a consumer staples company raises a far weaker version of the same problem.
What to watch next
Two tracks run in parallel. On the policy side, any concrete measure aimed at Iranian crude — sanctions enforcement, shipping restrictions, or the reverse, a de-escalation that releases barrels back into the market — will move Chevron and ExxonMobil, and will be read against the filings. On the disclosure side, the next scheduled filing period will show whether the energy trading continued after the conflict and after the criticism became public.
Until then, what exists is a documented overlap between a portfolio and a policy brief, sitting inside a system that discloses the overlap without doing anything about it.
Key facts
- Chevron (CVX) last price: 199.77, -0.22%, as of 20:00 GMT Aug 27, 2026
- ExxonMobil (XOM) last price: 156.44, -1.11%, as of 20:00 GMT Aug 27, 2026
- Filings show: Trump's oil and gas stock trades continued during the Iran war
- Stated position: Trump has accused Chevron and ExxonMobil of "making too much money" while owning shares of both
Frequently asked questions
What do the filings show about Trump's trading?
Financial disclosure filings reviewed by CBS MoneyWatch show that President Trump's oil and gas stock trades continued during the war with Iran. The filings also confirm he owns shares in both Chevron and ExxonMobil, the two companies he has publicly accused of making too much money.
Is it legal for a president to trade individual stocks?
Yes. U.S. presidents are not legally required to place assets in a blind trust or to avoid individual securities. Disclosure rules require that holdings and transactions be reported after the fact, but they do not prohibit the trades themselves or reveal who directed them.
How did Chevron and ExxonMobil shares perform most recently?
Chevron last traded at 199.77, down 0.22% from a previous close of 200.21, with a session range of 197.82 to 200.88. ExxonMobil last traded at 156.44, down 1.11% from a previous close of 158.19, closing near the low of its 156.14 to 158.19 range. Figures are as of 20:00 GMT on August 27, 2026.
Did the wider market fall on the same day?
No. The S&P 500 tracker closed at $771.10, up 0.66%, the Nasdaq 100 tracker at $721.11, up 1.37%, and the Dow tracker at $535.22, up 0.19%. Both energy majors closed lower while the broad indexes advanced, led by technology.
Why is energy a particularly sensitive sector for a president to hold?
Because presidential decisions on sanctions, naval posture and Middle East diplomacy move crude oil prices almost immediately, and crude prices feed directly into the earnings expectations priced into integrated oil companies. The link between policy action and share price is more direct in energy than in most other sectors.
What would resolve the conflict-of-interest question?
A blind trust, in which the officeholder cannot see or direct the underlying holdings, is the standard remedy, but it remains voluntary at the presidential level. Congressional proposals to restrict stock trading by federal officeholders have been introduced repeatedly without becoming law.
Sources
Photo: Jakub Pabis · Pexels Licence — source
