When Vultron, a startup that specializes in creating AI tools for federal contractors, announced $22 million in funding round Earlier this week, it ensured to highlight a key investor: Crafts Venture Capital, which was “co-founded by White House AI consultant David Sacks.”
The announcement raises questions about conflicts of interest in the Trump administration, where sacks are both AI and Crypto Czar and maintains his role in Craft Ventures – a arrangement that critics see as a new model of government service, in which case the line between public responsibilities and private gains is already unclear.
Instead of receiving a waiver, Sacks gained two ethics that allowed him to develop federal policies while maintaining financial status in the industry he oversaw. this The firstAn 11-page document from March covers his cryptocurrency investment. this secondreleased in June, specifically targeting his AI Holdings. Together, they activated what ethical experts call unprecedented arrangements.
“It’s grafting,” Kathleen Clark, a law professor at the University of Washington, specializes in government ethics after reviewing Sacks’ cryptocurrency exemptions. “This is a lawyer Trump bids in the White House lawyer’s office to make money (sacks) while saving him from criminal liability. ”
Clark’s analysis is crucial. She noted that the exemption would discuss the percentage of sack’s total assets – for example, his stake in Craft’s overall portfolio is less than 3.8% of its total assets, but never reveals the actual dollar amount. “This interest is only 3.8% of someone’s total assets, which is the fact that you talk about a law professor. But 3.8% of this person’s assets are a lot of money,” Clark said.
Clark also believes that the exemption fails to consider any consideration of potential upside potential. Federal regulations require not only checking current value, but also requiring “potential profits or losses.” For venture capitalists like Bags, Clark noted: “Even now (if his stake is) less than 3.8% of his assets, if it is done well, it may be more than just.”
Craft Ventures did not respond to several requests from TechCrunch to discuss the story this week.
TechCrunch Events
San Francisco
|
October 27-29, 2025
Vultron Investing
The timing of the Vultron announcement illustrates the complexity. Vultron said its AI tools are “specially built to address the needs of shifting the federal procurement landscape.” The company has regulations on reducing proposal schedules “from weeks to days” and claims a Fortune 500 client now saves “more than 20 hours per user per week” of federal contract work.
Sources close to the company said Craft Ventures’ investment predated the sack’s government appointment. But the timing raises the question: The AI Tsar of the United States owns the financial interests of a company that has helped the business win federal contracts his policies will affect.
Senator Elizabeth Warren has been one of the most voiced critics of these arrangements. In a letter to the Government Ethics Office in May, a ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee asked Sachs about cryptocurrency immunity and noted that he also “co-chaired $1.5 million in cryptocurrency industry players while also shaping federal crypto policies.
“Mr. Sax also led a company to invest in cryptocurrencies while guiding U.S. crypto policy,” Warren wrote. “Generally, federal law will prohibit such clear conflicts of interest.”
Sax largely dismissed Warren’s concerns, accusing her of having “Pathological hatred For the crypto community. He said separately that before joining the White House, he sold a fortune in cryptocurrency because I didn’t even want to own it appearance conflict. ”
Indeed, Sax supporters pointed to the sacrifices he made in serving the government. Under his waiver, he and the crafts business have divested more than $200 million in digital assets, with at least $85 million directly attributed to him. He has sold stakes in a fast-growing company, including his position in Elon Musk’s Xai and has begun selling interests in about 90 venture capital funds, including the Sequoia Fund.
Sources close to sack highlighted these dives, noting that due to his administration role, craft businesses now have to go through every AI and crypto-related transaction of the White House Ethics Committee. They believe that this oversight makes investment in feed funds and smaller transactions incredible, given all the work that may be required.
Clark believes that the basic moral framework still has flaws. She believes that the exemption itself is intended to provide legal cover rather than address ethical issues. “It’s painted,” she said, complicating things further, with Saxophone only serving as a government employee for only 130 days a year (actually effective every other week) while maintaining its business activities during the holidays. In September, for example, Sachs and his co-hosts on their popular podcast will stage an annual three-day meeting where participants pay $7,500 per person to join. Although legally permitted, these activities further blurred the lines between his public and private roles.
Some observers wonder if the sack (forbes’ estimated to be a homemade billionaire) will declare victory and withdraw from government services altogether. By passing the Genius Act law, he might consider his main task: bringing cryptocurrency from the edge to the center stage.
But it may take time. Sachs used Fox News appearance yesterday to detail recent priorities after the bill was passed, highlighting the development of regulatory frameworks in three key areas, including defining market structure categories (Securities vs. Commodities vs. Digital Assets), expanding Stablecoin regulations, and evaluating potential national digital assets.
Meanwhile, critics focusing on conflicts of interest believe that precedent has been set. The rapid adoption of crypto-friendly legislation, coupled with the ongoing investment in AI companies serving the federal government, suggests that sacks and other arrangements have positioned themselves and the wider track, thus benefiting from access to their government.
Whether this is the new normal of Silicon Valley’s relationship with Washington or the distortion of future government reversals remains to be seen. It is obvious that for an era, it may be insufficient to maintain their investment activities while shaping policies that determine the future value of these investments.
For now, the arrangement continues, protected by ethical experts’ elaborate exemptions for questioning, but legally impeccable. As Clark said, “No one can sue him.”
