Is the Trump White House immune to the construction crisis?

This week, Americans woke up images of the partially collapsed, splintered rear of the White House. As it is The Washington Post It was first reported that construction has begun on President Trump’s upcoming event space: a 90,000-square-foot ballroom that will seat up to 999 guests and nearly double the building’s footprint. It is already full of misconceptions and conflicts: construction has begun without approval from the National Capitol Planning Commission, which reviews major federal projects. Additionally, while Trump once claimed the addition would not “disrupt” the East Room — which is often used for entertaining — The New York Times reported that the entire wing will be demolished to accommodate the ballroom. As well as other Trump updates from the White House, including paving the famous rose gardenthe project received criticism from politiciansthe American Institute of Architectsthe National Trust for Historic Preservationand others.

But the biggest questions are about the cost of the project. President Trump has said the renovations will cost $250 million — up from the original $200 million listed earlier this year — and has made clear it will be covered entirely by private donations. The Hill published list of confirmed and likely funders, which includes Google, management consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton, Lockheed Martin and Trump himself. While some will be relieved that the bills are being footed by private donors instead of US taxpayers, the funding strategy highlights the disparities between a sluggish construction industry and what appears to be a lavish vanity project. As construction material costs (inflated by Trump’s international tariffs) and labor shortage influence much needed housing and commercial events across the country, the ballroom illustrates how corporate fidelity can ensure the expeditious completion of a project. Maybe tariffs matter less when Lockheed Martin is paying for your home renovation?

The ballroom is certainly not the first renovation that touched the White House: according to Architectural DigestTrump’s event space is just one of 11 major construction projects, including additions and renovations, throughout the building’s 225-year history. This latest addition, designed by DC McCreary Architectsthe firm, which has built a portfolio characterized by neoclassical and religious projects, is second to none President Truman’s gut renovation in the early 1950s. According to Truman Library Institutethe renovation was necessary to “repair the dangerous structural condition of the executive mansion.” The cost of renovating and stabilizing a large part of the building? Fifty million dollars today, according to the Institute, less than Trump’s ballroom allowance of $250 million.

This difference highlights the enormous cost of construction today, exacerbated recent tariffs on the necessary construction material. A ballroom addition is unlikely to prosper without the use of imported materials; MSC, a transport and logistics company, of the state that construction materials imported from around the world accounted for nearly 32 percent of the materials used in US residential, commercial and infrastructure projects. Construction management platform Archdesk describes how these tariffs affected broader project feasibility: Rising costs of steel, aluminum, copper, and lumber—all of which affect structures, plumbing, electricity, and more—are causing project delays and cost overruns. “A survey by the Associated General Contractors of America shows that over 60 percent of construction companies are experiencing project delays or interruptions due to the rising cost of materials,” they write. Still, the White House seems confident it won’t fall victim to the delay; in the July announcementofficials claimed the ballroom should be completed “well before” Trump’s 2028 term.

Perhaps this confidence stems from their funding strategy. The The New York Times reported at a dinner hosted by the Trump administration earlier this month that brought together “dozens of corporate executives who have agreed to help finance the construction of the ballroom.” Private donors could avoid creating a taxpayer-funded money pit, but there is a question of transparency: as a public building, the idea that private donors would contribute to a construction project, potentially offsetting cost uncertainty with an unknown future quid pro quos, seems dubious. Legal Reporting Substack Love Dork, who first reported the demolition of the East Winghe called it “another example of Trump using his office to get people to give him money.” Now it’s startlingly clear who can buy their way out of the construction (and housing) crisis. All that is needed to afford the global gypsum market is the financial support of a major arms manufacturer.

Top photo by Andrew Harnick/Getty Images.

Related reading: