WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump expressed openness to federal government ownership of Spirit Airlines, provided the arrangement could be framed as a profitable venture for what has become a growing collection of taxpayer-funded business investments.
However, the low-cost airline shut down operations Saturday following failed negotiations with an administration that increasingly views government as an active investor shaping America’s economic direction.
Despite Trump’s frequent criticism of Democrats and political rivals as communists — contrary to the free-market principles that helped establish America as a global superpower — he has embraced government ownership of certain production assets since returning to office.
Trump identifies opportunities in preserving established American brands like Intel while potentially generating profits for the federal treasury. The Republican president considers these investments essential for economic security and representative of his negotiation expertise, abandoning traditional GOP principles that government should avoid choosing market winners and losers.
Regarding Spirit, a financially struggling discount airline facing increased fuel expenses due to the Iran conflict, Trump informed reporters Friday that government would purchase company shares “only if it’s a good deal.” His opposition to a bailout stemmed from financial concerns rather than ideological objections.
“If we can help them, we will,” Trump stated. “But we have to come first.” Trump has not yet commented on the carrier’s closure.
He drew parallels to his earlier decision to acquire Intel shares. Trump has closely monitored the semiconductor company’s stock performance. “I’m very proud of that Company in that I am responsible for making the United States of America over 30 Billion Dollars in the last 90 days on that stock alone,” Trump wrote on social media recently.
Communist ideology maintains significant influence in nations like China, Vietnam, North Korea and Cuba, where governments play central roles in delivering goods and services. The philosophy has evolved from requiring government ownership of all property to systems where government might own or control major corporations.
In America, significant government intervention in private enterprise has been uncommon except during economic downturns. Trump advisors argue his interventions are essential to compete with China’s industrial strength, though the president has frequently connected corporate America to his administration.
He has utilized tariffs to encourage foreign investment and claimed control over spending decisions. The government maintains a “golden share” restricting Japan’s Nippon Steel’s actions after purchasing U.S. Steel. His administration negotiated an agreement taking a portion of computer chip sales to China by Nvidia and AMD.
During Trump’s tenure, the government has invested in rare earth minerals company MP Materials to challenge China’s dominance of metallic elements required for smartphones, automobiles and other technologies. Additional agreements include stakes in Lithium America, Trilogy Metals and Vulcan Elements, plus favorable financing for Westinghouse and ReElement Technologies.
The administration chose not to end government control of mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Trump claims they have increased in value because he retained ownership rather than privatizing the companies during his first presidency. “If I would have sold it, I would have felt like a schmuck,” he remarked Friday.
He maintains regular contact with CEOs through frequent phone conversations while demanding their support for his policies. He has instructed Walmart not to increase prices due to his tariffs and indicated he would favorably “remember” companies that decline seeking refunds after the Supreme Court declared his tariffs illegal.
Critics view Trump’s desire to fund and maintain ownership stakes in private businesses as reflecting an unchecked ego.
“This is entirely a reflection of a transactional-minded president who wants unilateral control of the economy,” stated Tad DeHaven, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute, a libertarian research organization. “At the end of the day, it is about power, it is about leverage and it is about control.”
Others recognize logic in competing against Chinese manufacturers that can operate without profit concerns, undermining factories in other developed nations and threatening America’s position as a military and technological leader.
The Intel investment represented “a strategic move, necessitated by the growth of China as an economic peer and rival,” said Sujai Shivakumar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington research institute.
“The key point is that we should not sacrifice our national economic and industrial framework in the name of ‘free markets’ or other ideologies,” he explained. “Pragmatism, in various forms of industrial and innovation policy, have always been a feature of our economic system since the very beginning of our republic.”
Throughout the 2024 campaign, Trump characterized Democrat Joe Biden’s administration as communist and socialist.
“We will cast out the communists,” Trump declared during an April 13, 2024, Pennsylvania speech. “We will liberate our country from these tyrants and villains once and for all.”
Biden frequently emphasized his faith in free markets to benefit the middle class and believed raising corporate tax rates would achieve that goal. “I’m a capitalist,” he said during his final State of the Union address, stating he supported company profits. “That’s great — just pay your fair share in taxes,” he added.
The Biden administration provided loans and grants to semiconductor manufacturers and sought to maximize government’s role as a purchaser of American products. However, a crucial distinction was that investments were based on Congressional legislation.
Trump’s independent approach offers more flexibility, his White House contends, noting that funding for his investments comes from previously Congressional-approved sources.
Trump specifically converted loans and grants from Biden’s 2022 CHIPS and Science Act into an $11.1 billion Intel stock purchase. During his 2025 Congressional address, Trump called the CHIPS Act a “horrible, horrible thing” and suggested Republican majorities recover funding to reduce the budget deficit.
With Spirit Airlines in Chapter 11 bankruptcy, his administration had considered a $500 million agreement that would have provided government ownership in the Florida-based discount airline. Other budget carriers have expressed interest in similar arrangements.
This possibility prompted objections from Republicans including Senators Ted Cruz of Texas and Tom Cotton of Arkansas. Trump told Oval Office reporters he wanted to preserve Spirit Airlines jobs and that “when the prices of oil goes down, we’ll sell it for a profit.”
Government investment can help balance competition for American companies facing subsidized foreign competitors, said Monica Gorman, a managing director at Crowell Global Advisors who led manufacturing and industrial policy in the Biden White House.
However, Gorman questioned whether the Trump administration fully understood the risks of “making some bad bets.” She emphasized the importance of establishing formal processes through legislation rather than depending on Trump’s preferences.
“Congress really needs to step in and design a legislative framework for U.S. industrial policy that governs equity stakes as well as other mechanisms such as loans and grants,” she stated. “All of these are important tools in the U.S. industrial policy toolkit, but we need more guidance on when and how to use them.”
