Which specific Trump properties and entities claimed the largest losses or conservation easement deductions in the 2015–2020 returns?
Executive summary
The most prominent conservation-easement deductions tied to Donald Trump’s returns in the 2015–2020 reporting window were a $21.1 million deduction for the Seven Springs estate in New York, a roughly $25 million deduction tied to a driving-range easement at a Trump National Golf Club near Los Angeles, and a $5.7 million easement claim at Mar‑a‑Lago; those items drew regulatory and press scrutiny and appear among the largest single easement deductions reported in the public reporting on his returns [1] [2] [3].
1. The headline easements — Seven Springs, California driving range, and Mar‑a‑Lago
The Seven Springs estate in Westchester County is the best-documented large easement: reporting shows a $21.1 million charitable deduction for a 2015 conservation easement that limited development on part of the property, a deduction that prompted inquiry by New York authorities and attracted detailed coverage from the Times and financial press [1] [2] [4]. Separately, reporting identified an approximately $25 million deduction tied to donated development rights for a driving range at the Trump National Golf Course near Los Angeles — another large easement specifically flagged by Reuters and other outlets [2] [5]. Mar‑a‑Lago likewise appears in the record for a multi‑million easement deduction: local reporting and aggregated returns analyses identify a $5.7 million claim connected to the Palm Beach estate [3].
2. Aggregate picture and entity-level totals
Public coverage and related disclosures suggest that conservation easements formed a large share of Trump-related charitable claims: a compiled list cited in Forbes tallied total conservation-easement entries at roughly $63.8 million on a broader disclosure of Trump charitable contributions — indicating multiple large easement claims across several properties and entities rather than a single outlier [6]. The returns examined by the Times and summarized by analysts show such easements were claimed through the pass‑through entities that hold Trump properties, the conventional legal structure for reporting real-estate income and deductions [1] [7].
3. Other large deductions and loss items within the 2015–2020 window
Beyond conservation easements, reporting highlights other significant deductions in the 2015–2020 timeframe: historic preservation tax credits tied to the Old Post Office development were reported at about $9.7 million on returns examined by the Times, a non‑easement write‑off that materially reduced tax liability in specific years [7]. Broader narratives about “large losses” derive from aggregated business losses, deferred debts and NOL carrybacks/carryforwards that feature in the Times’ returns reporting, but the public reporting most consistently quantifies the largest single property‑level charitable deductions as the conservation easements named above [1].
4. Disputes, scrutiny, and alternative interpretations
These easement claims have been the subject of official scrutiny and sharp debate: New York authorities and the IRS have examined whether valuations were inflated and whether the public benefit justified the claimed charitable deductions [2] [8]. At the same time, some tax commentators have defended specific easements as plausible conservation transactions — for example, a Forbes analysis argued the Seven Springs valuation might be reasonable in context, illustrating that expert opinion is divided and that valuation disputes hinge on complex appraisal mechanics [4]. Conservation‑policy analysts and the Tax Policy Center note broader systemic concerns about golf-course easements and large deductions, which is why the transactions drew outsized attention beyond this taxpayer [9] [10].
5. What the public record does not fully show
Available reporting establishes which properties hosted the largest reported easement deductions (Seven Springs, the Los Angeles driving range, Mar‑a‑Lago) and aggregates that easements accounted for tens of millions in claimed deductions [1] [2] [3] [6], but it does not provide complete, line‑by‑line tax returns for every year 2015–2020 in the public corpus cited here. That limits the ability to produce an exhaustive ranked list of every deduction and every entity loss within that date range; the summarized and investigative reporting nevertheless identifies the above properties and the approximate magnitudes as the largest, most consequential claims covered in the public record [1] [2] [6].