Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What was the history of Trump Model Management founded by Donald Trump?
Executive summary
Trump Model Management (originally T Models) was founded in 1999 and operated in New York for about 18 years before reports in April 2017 said it was shutting down after senior staff and models defected; Donald Trump reportedly owned about 85% of the company [1] [2] [3]. The agency faced lawsuits and allegations — including an H‑1B/visa/pay dispute and claims models were charged large “expenses” — and a putative class action was later dismissed by a federal judge [1] [4] [5].
1. Origins and ownership: a side project from a pageant empire
Trump Model Management began as T Models in 1999, launched soon after Donald Trump’s acquisition of the Miss Universe pageant, and later operated under the Trump name [1] [3]. Reporting at the time cited that Trump owned the vast majority of the company — commonly reported as 85% — which tied the agency directly to his broader, high‑profile business brand [2].
2. Business footprint: modest influence, niche roster
The agency never produced a runaway supermodel star but placed models in runway shows and represented former Miss Universe contestants and other clients; it also maintained a roster for “Legends” (older talent) and recruited international models, sometimes seeking visas for them [3] [6]. In 2015 reporting, Trump Model Management and related entities had requested visas for almost 250 international models, underscoring an international hiring footprint [1].
3. Allegations from models: pay, fees and working conditions
Multiple models raised complaints that the agency deducted large “expenses” and charged high housing or fee costs, with one lawsuit (Alexia Palmer) alleging that as much as 80% of wages were taken for expenses and that she was paid under $4,000 over two years [1]. Media interviews with models described cramped living quarters, “sky‑high” rent and many fees, and some claimed the company employed foreign models without correct work visas [2].
4. Legal pushback and litigation outcome
Plaintiffs brought claims under wage and immigration statutes, asserting that models recruited on H‑1B visas were underpaid after deductions; one legal analysis and later reporting noted a putative class action alleging underpayment through expense deductions [5] [4]. That class action was dismissed by Judge Torres in the Southern District of New York, as reported by legal commentators [5]. Available sources do not specify every legal theory addressed in the dismissal beyond noting the core allegations [5].
5. Staff departures, defections and the role of politics
Beginning in 2016 and accelerating after the 2016 election, senior staff and bookers left to form new agencies — notably Gabriel Ruas Santos-Rocha founding ANTI Management and Patty Sicular moving to Iconic Focus — and several models publicly announced departures, some explicitly citing discomfort with Trump’s politics [1] [3] [7]. Industry outlets and Vogue suggested that the Trump family association and Donald Trump’s statements about women and immigration made the agency a harder sell to talent and clients [6] [3].
6. Closure: timing and motives reported
Leaked internal emails and multiple outlets reported in April 2017 that the Trump Organization was phasing out its modeling business; the president of the agency reportedly told staff the parent company would wind down the segment to focus on golf, hospitality and real estate, and the agency was said to be closing after 18 years [6] [3] [8]. Coverage differed on emphasis: some outlets stressed business realities and staff departures, others foregrounded the political symbolism of a president owning a modeling agency [6] [3] [7].
7. Competing narratives and limitations in reporting
Contemporaneous coverage presented two overlapping explanations: one business‑centered — loss of staff, competitive industry pressures and reduced bookings — and one political — talent distancing themselves because of Trump’s politics and public statements [6] [3] [7]. Legal reporting shows allegations of visa and wage violations were serious enough to be litigated, yet the putative class action was dismissed in federal court, complicating any simple conclusion that the agency was legally culpable [4] [5]. Available sources do not detail every internal financial statement or provide a comprehensive audit of payroll and visa filings, so definitive conclusions on systemic lawbreaking beyond reported allegations and the court’s dismissal are not found in current reporting [4] [5].
8. Aftermath and industry impact
Former Trump Models staff and talent rapidly reconstituted into new agencies, and fashion outlets tracked how the departures reshaped niches such as representation for older talent; Vogue and others framed the closure as part cautionary tale about politics entering fashion and part natural churn in an overcrowded market [6] [3]. The story remains a compact case study in how brand associations, labor claims and legal outcomes intersect in talent industries; for deeper, documentary proof on wages or visa compliance, available sources do not supply detailed government or company files here [5] [4].
If you want, I can compile a timeline of key dates and the primary media/legal sources cited above to make the sequence clearer.