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 are the estimated taxpayer security and travel costs for presidential trips to private clubs versus government resorts?
Executive summary
Available reporting shows wide, case-by-case estimates rather than a single, settled figure: the GAO estimated four Mar‑a‑Lago trips cost about $13.6 million (~$3.4 million per visit) [1] and a GAO product similarly lists $13.6 million for those four trips with breakdowns [2]. Other watchdogs and analysts give a range of per‑trip estimates from roughly $1 million to $3–4 million depending on scope and what is counted [3] [2] [1].
1. Presidential travel is paid by the government when trips are “official”
The Congressional Research Service summary that reporting cites explains that when travel is for official functions the government pays associated costs — per diem, lodging, car rentals and similar incidentals — and that mixed trips are prorated by activity to determine what the government covers [4]. That policy is the baseline for why taxpayers absorb security, aircraft and support costs when presidents travel.
2. Government Accountability Office (GAO) provides the most concrete trip-by-trip accounting
The GAO examined four Mar‑a‑Lago visits in early 2017 and estimated federal agencies incurred about $13.6 million in costs for those four trips — roughly $3.4 million per trip — including about $10.6 million for aircraft and boats and $3.0 million for temporary duty costs such as transportation, lodging, meals and incidentals [2]. The same $13.6 million per‑four‑trip figure has been repeatedly cited in subsequent coverage [1].
3. Other estimates vary because they include different line items and timeframes
Advocacy groups and researchers use different methods. Judicial Watch and others have estimated some Mar‑a‑Lago trips at about $1 million each [3]. Media analyses and commentators that extrapolate from GAO case studies produce higher aggregate totals (for example, claims of tens of millions or higher across multiple years), because they sum many trips and sometimes include broader categories like campaign‑era security, staff time, and opportunity costs [5] [6]. These methodological differences explain why per‑trip and cumulative totals range from about $1 million to several million per visit.
4. Private clubs vs. government resorts: accounting and appearance differ
When a president visits an official government retreat such as Camp David, some security and facility costs are fixed and already part of government operations, which proponents say lowers incremental taxpayer exposure [7]. When the president visits a private club or owned resort, taxpayers still pay for aircraft, Secret Service, local law enforcement coordination and other federal support; GAO and congressional critics have cited both the monetary cost and the ethical appearance that public funds flow to private businesses [2] [8] [9]. The Independent’s reporting noted government payments to Trump properties for stays and services, while the company said it charged only cost (not profit) for government customers — a point that reflects a contested explanation of how money moved [9].
5. High‑profile single trips show variation in line items
Congressional Democrats’ oversight reporting on a 2018 Turnberry trip in Scotland counted more than $1.1 million in taxpayer costs for a weekend stopover, including about $466,000 in rental car costs and more than $230,000 in State Department spending; that report urged reimbursement to the Treasury [8]. The GAO case study of Mar‑a‑Lago emphasized aircraft and operational costs as the bulk of trip expenses [2]. Different line items (airlift, motorcades, rentals, State Department support) explain why single trip totals diverge.
6. Aggregates and projections are sensitive to counting rules
Some commentators and watchdog tallies — including extrapolations to multi‑year totals such as $81 million for Florida trips or even nine‑figure aggregates — rely on multiplying per‑trip figures or adding many trips across years; those totals depend on whether analysts include staff salaries, pensioned personnel already on payroll, classified costs that GAO excluded, or only incremental outlays [6] [2] [10]. PolitiFact and others have noted the challenge of separating “personal lifestyle” costs from official duties and that GAO has not produced a routine “lifestyle” tabulation [7].
7. What reporting agrees and where disagreements lie
Reporting agrees that: (a) the government pays significant incremental costs for presidential travel, and (b) GAO’s audited, trip‑level figures are the most authoritative publicly available accounting for specific trips [4] [2]. Disagreements are over scope and interpretation: watchdogs and media differ on whether to treat visits to private properties as primarily personal (and thus properly chargeable to the president) or as mixed official travel to be funded in part by taxpayers; analysts also vary on which costs should be prorated or attributed [7] [9].
8. Bottom line for readers
If you want a defensible, cited per‑trip number use GAO’s trip audits (e.g., ~$3.4 million per Mar‑a‑Lago trip in the GAO sample) [2] [1]. Expect other estimates (around $1 million to several million per trip, or much larger multi‑year aggregates) when commentators include different line items, more trips, or broader ethical arguments about private‑club visits [3] [6] [8]. Available sources do not mention a single standard federal formula that publicly lists every category for “private club vs government resort” comparisons beyond the trip‑level GAO and CRS descriptions [4] [2].