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.
How do Mar-a-Lago security costs compare to expenses for other presidential residences like Camp David?
Executive Summary
Mar‑a‑Lago’s recent security spending is substantial and episodic, driven by its status as a privately owned site requiring ad‑hoc federal and local security measures; federal contracts show over $1.4 million in Secret Service perimeter contracts between August 2024 and February 2025, and local overtime figures have been reported in the low millions for similar periods [1] [2]. By contrast, Camp David operates as a permanent, purpose‑built presidential retreat with long‑term institutional security arrangements and lower incremental per‑visit costs, meaning Mar‑a‑Lago’s per‑trip and community costs tend to outpace those for Camp David even if apples‑to‑apples totals across administrations are hard to compute [3] [4].
1. Why Mar‑a‑Lago’s security looks expensive — and where the numbers come from
Public procurement records and local government reports show that securing Mar‑a‑Lago produces large, concentrated expenditures for specific time windows when the president visits. Newsweek documented more than $1.4 million in Secret Service perimeter contracts over a seven‑month span ending February 2025, while county officials have separately reported overtime costs and local law‑enforcement burdens that could amount to millions depending on the period measured [1] [2]. These figures reflect transactional costs — temporary contracting for fencing, screening, checkpoints, airspace enforcement, and added patrols — rather than a standing budget line for a permanent facility. Analysts and local officials have repeatedly noted that such short‑term surges make Mar‑a‑Lago episodes appear costlier on a per‑visit basis than retreats with permanent security infrastructure [5] [4].
2. Camp David’s security model: built‑in, institutional, and less visible on a per‑visit basis
Camp David is a military‑run, purpose‑built presidential retreat with integrated security services, support facilities, and permanent staffing that smooths costs over time. Reporting has placed Camp David’s dedicated operational budget in the single‑digit millions annually for facilities and security support, with incremental visit costs generally lower because the site requires fewer ad‑hoc local contracts and less overtime for civilian police forces [3] [6]. The institutional model at Camp David means fewer ancillary disruptions to local businesses and aviation; security is concentrated within a site already zoned and staffed for presidential protection, so visits typically do not spawn the same level of external overtime or economic spillovers that Mar‑a‑Lago visits do [4].
3. Different accounting approaches make direct comparisons fraught
Comparing totals across residences is complicated by inconsistent accounting: federal procurement lines, Secret Service tasking, DoD support, local overtime, FAA flight restrictions, and indirect economic effects are reported in disparate places and on different timetables. Some analyses aggregate per‑trip Secret Service contracts, local overtime, and estimated economic losses to produce large totals for Mar‑a‑Lago, while Camp David costs are often embedded in broader military and executive branch budgets and not broken out per visit [7] [3]. Fact‑checking outlets and investigative reporters warn that headline totals can mislead unless one specifies which buckets — federal contracts, local overtime, lost business, or long‑term facility budgets — are being summed [8] [7].
4. Independent estimates and local impacts show a wider cost picture
Investigative reporting and local government statements highlight secondary costs that amplify Mar‑a‑Lago’s fiscal footprint: grounded private flights, airport revenue losses, and negative effects on nearby businesses during no‑fly and heightened security periods. BBC and Vanity Fair reporting from earlier terms estimated per‑trip or per‑period impacts in the millions and documented daily losses for local enterprises and taxpayer overtime burdens; these effects recur in newer reporting that cites millions in overtime and contract spending across short windows in 2024–2025 [5] [4] [1]. While such estimates vary by method and time frame, they consistently indicate that Mar‑a‑Lago’s visits produce noticeable economic and policing impacts on the Palm Beach area that Camp David’s visits generally do not.
5. Bottom line: Mar‑a‑Lago’s episodic security raises per‑visit costs; Camp David spreads costs across an institutional base
The evidence shows a clear pattern: Mar‑a‑Lago generates higher incremental and visible per‑visit security costs because it is a private facility requiring temporary federal contracts and local overtime, whereas Camp David’s permanent infrastructure and military support yield lower marginal costs for individual stays. Exact totals depend on which expense categories are included and how they’re allocated across fiscal years, which explains divergent headline figures across outlets [2] [7]. Policymakers and the public should therefore treat comparisons as context‑dependent: Mar‑a‑Lago’s visits are costlier in short windows and to surrounding communities; Camp David’s model is less disruptive and more contained, even if long‑term institutional budgets remain significant but less visible [3] [4].