Trump Says U.S. Took In More Than $13 Billion From Venezuelan Oil, Then Warns Iran Could Be Next

President Donald Trump turned a question about Venezuela’s missing oil revenue into a warning aimed directly at Iran.

Speaking with reporters aboard Air Force One on Monday, Trump said the United States had collected more than $13 billion from Venezuelan oil sales. He then suggested Washington could use Iranian money in a similar way, including to cover damage linked to the continuing conflict in the Middle East.

The remarks were bold, but they also opened a much larger question. Venezuela’s oil belongs to Venezuela, and the Trump administration’s own executive order describes the revenue held in U.S. Treasury accounts as Venezuelan sovereign property under American custody.

That distinction matters. Trump spoke as though the money had become a financial return on the January military operation that removed Nicolás Maduro, while official documents describe the funds as protected assets intended for governmental, diplomatic and public purposes.

A $13 billion question with no simple answer

A Financial Times analysis estimated that Venezuelan oil sold under the U.S.-controlled system has generated more than $13 billion since Washington took control of the country’s exports in January. The estimate was based on shipment data and market prices for several grades of Venezuelan crude.

When a reporter mentioned the figure, Trump suggested the total could be even higher.

“Thirteen billion from Venezuela? I think even more than that,” Trump said. He added that the operation had been paid for “many times” through the oil revenue.

The president did not provide an accounting showing how much money had entered Treasury-controlled accounts, how much had been transferred to Venezuela or what expenses had been deducted.

When pressed on where the funds were going, Trump repeatedly said they were being used for “running the country.” He did not clearly identify whether he meant Venezuela, the United States or costs associated with the American operation.

That ambiguity sits at the center of the controversy.

The White House’s January executive order says Venezuelan oil proceeds placed in designated Treasury accounts remain the property of Venezuela. It also says the United States holds the money in a custodial capacity and that the funds cannot be used for ordinary commercial activity in America. Trump’s description sounded considerably different.

Trump frames Venezuelan oil as repayment

Trump connected the money to the cost of the January 3 operation that captured Maduro and removed him from power. He presented the oil revenue as evidence that the United States had financially recovered the cost of its intervention.

“Venezuela, we paid for that war many times over,” Trump said, before adding that the same could happen with Iran.

The comment reflects a broader feature of Trump’s foreign policy language. Military action is often described through the vocabulary of profit, reimbursement and leverage.

Yet national resources collected after a military intervention are not the same as income earned by the U.S. government. Venezuela’s oil proceeds remain subject to legal, diplomatic and congressional questions, particularly because Washington has not published a detailed public ledger showing how the money has been managed.

The administration has said the system gives Washington leverage over Venezuela’s transitional authorities. Energy Secretary Chris Wright previously explained that oil revenue would be released when Venezuelan leaders pursued changes that benefited both Americans and the Venezuelan population.

That arrangement leaves the United States with enormous influence over Venezuela’s largest source of national income.

Venezuela’s money remains difficult to trace

The Trump administration has provided several explanations for the funds. The White House says the accounts protect Venezuelan revenue from private claims and preserve it for public and governmental purposes. Administration officials have also said portions of the money are being returned to support government operations, economic stability and reconstruction.

However, public records have not offered a complete picture.

The Financial Times found that Venezuela’s revenue-tracking website showed only one recorded transfer of $300 million as of its report. U.S. officials have referred to larger disbursements, but neither the White House nor the Treasury Department has released a transaction-by-transaction breakdown.

A Council on Foreign Relations analysis also found that the administration had not publicly disclosed the total value of the oil sold, the full amount collected or exactly how all the proceeds were used. Some details had been shared with Congress, but significant gaps remained.

Those questions have become more urgent as Venezuela struggles to rebuild its economy and repair damaged infrastructure.

Its refining network has deteriorated after decades of poor maintenance and limited investment. Recent earthquakes have added new pressure to a country that holds enormous oil reserves but lacks the functioning infrastructure needed to turn that wealth into reliable prosperity.

Iran receives the warning

Trump did not stop with Venezuela.

He said Washington could apply a similar approach to Iran, suggesting Iranian assets under U.S. control could be used to cover damage caused during the conflict.

“We’re going to use Iran’s money to pay for the damage they did,” Trump said. He did not specify how much Iranian money the United States currently controls, where it is held or what legal authority would allow the administration to spend it.

Trump also said Venezuelan revenue could potentially support the military, although he acknowledged that Congress would need to authorize military spending.

“It can’t go to the military. Congress has to approve it,” he said. He then criticized lawmakers for resisting some Pentagon funding requests.

The comments arrived as the cost of the Iran conflict continued to climb. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told lawmakers in July that the war had already cost the United States approximately $37.5 billion, while the administration sought additional Pentagon funding.

Oil markets have also reacted sharply to the continuing violence. Prices surged again Wednesday as strikes, tanker attacks and disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz renewed concerns about global energy supplies.

Against that backdrop, Trump’s promise to recover money from Iran appears designed to reassure Americans worried about the financial cost of the conflict. Still, a political promise is not the same as a legal mechanism.

The real battle may be over accountability

Trump’s remarks transformed Venezuela’s oil revenue from a foreign-policy issue into a public accounting dispute.

The administration says American control protects the money, prevents corruption and gives Washington the power to pressure Venezuela’s new leadership. Critics argue that the same concentration of power creates serious risks when the public cannot see where billions of dollars are going.

There is also a fundamental difference between controlling a country’s revenue and owning it.

The administration’s executive order recognizes that difference. Trump’s language appeared to blur it by presenting the oil income as payment for an American military campaign and a model that could be repeated elsewhere.

For Venezuelans, the argument is more than a debate over bookkeeping. It concerns money generated by their country’s most valuable natural resource while communities continue to face economic hardship, damaged infrastructure and an uncertain political transition.

For Americans, the episode raises another question: How much power should any president have to control foreign sovereign assets, decide where they flow and invoke them as repayment for military action?

Trump has offered a forceful answer. The missing financial records may ultimately matter more.