Envoy Witkoff Under Congressional Scrutiny Over Crypto Stakes

Eight Democratic senators, led by Adam Schiff of California, have formally asked Steve Witkoff—the U. S. Special Envoy to the Middle East—for detailed explanations regarding his continued involvement with crypto assets tied to World Liberty Financial, a venture he co-founded with the family of Donald Trump. The lawmakers’ letter highlights potential conflicts of interest stemming from Witkoff’s dual role as a diplomat and investor.

Their concerns centre on Witkoff’s asset disclosures, which indicate he still holds stakes in entities tied to World Liberty and other crypto businesses as of his 13 August 2025 financial report. The senators press him to clarify whether he has divested these holdings, whether he has obtained ethics waivers, and whether his official capacities have overlapped with personal financial interests.

World Liberty Financial launched the stable-coin USD1, and in May 2025 a firm linked to the Abu Dhabi sovereign investment arm reportedly committed around US$2 billion to the venture. The same Gulf-state entity is connected to high-level U. S. export approvals of advanced semiconductor chips, a situation that lawmakers see as raising grave ethical questions.

Witkoff, a New York real-estate magnate and longtime Trump associate, was appointed envoy in early 2025 despite limited experience in diplomacy. While his defenders say he has taken steps to divest and comply with regulation, critics say he remains financially tied to ventures that stand to benefit from his government role. The administration has signalled it is reviewing his disclosures and ethics compliance.

In their letter, the senators request responses to seven key questions by 31 October 2025. They ask how Witkoff could sell off a real-estate holding of about US$120 million while retaining crypto interests; whether he or his family hold additional digital assets beyond those disclosed; when he divested, if at all; whether he holds any interests in Trump-family business ventures; whether he has obtained ethics guidance from the U. S. Office of Government Ethics; and whether any waiver was granted allowing him to participate in matters in which he had a financial interest.

Separately, lawmakers highlight the chronology of events: after World Liberty received the Gulf-state investment commitment, the White House approved export of advanced U. S. chips to the United Arab Emirates—raising the appearance of intertwined public and private interests. Ethics experts say this conflation of diplomacy and private profit may run afoul of federal rules under 18 U. S. C. § 208 and the constitutional emoluments clause, which bars public officials from participating in matters in which they have a financial interest.