Trump Considers Replacing Franklin on $100 Bill – Controversial $260 Proposal Explained

An unexpected political controversy is unfolding in late 2025 after a new proposal emerged to replace Benjamin Franklin’s iconic image on the $100 bill with that of President Donald Trump. The initiative, known as the Golden Age Act of 2025, has ignited strong reactions across the political spectrum, sparking debate over legality, symbolism, and the politicization of American currency.

Introduced by Texas Congressman Brandon Gill, the proposal aims to celebrate what supporters call the “modern era of American prosperity” under Trump’s leadership. However, critics describe it as overtly political, inconsistent with U.S. law, and a potential disruption to a deeply rooted national tradition.

What the Golden Age Act of 2025 Proposes

Under the provisions of the Golden Age Act of 2025, the U.S. Treasury Department would be directed to redesign the $100 bill to feature Donald Trump’s portrait in place of Benjamin Franklin, one of America’s most revered Founding Fathers.

If passed, the bill instructs the Secretary of the Treasury to begin the redesign process by the end of 2026, with newly reissued currency potentially entering circulation by 2028.

In a secondary proposal, South Carolina Congressman Joe Wilson suggested introducing a new $250 denomination to honor President Trump. While the United States has never issued a bill of that value, Wilson called it a “distinctive recognition of Trump’s transformative impact.”

Some activists have even floated the idea of a $260 bill, symbolically tying Trump’s signature real-estate slogan, “Make America Greater,” to the notion of economic expansion and strength. However, no formal legislative action has been filed regarding this denomination.

Feature	Details
Proposed Law	Golden Age Act of 2025
Objective	Replace Franklin with Trump on $100 bill
Redesign Deadline	End of 2026
Circulation Target	Before 2028
Alternate Idea	$250 or $260 bill to uniquely honor Trump
Key Sponsors	Rep. Brandon Gill (TX) and Rep. Joe Wilson (SC)

Legal and Historical Barriers

Despite the enthusiasm of supporters, the proposal faces a major legal obstacle. A long-standing U.S. law enacted in 1866 prohibits the depiction of living persons on any American coin or currency note. The restriction was designed to prevent the use of money as a political or propagandistic tool by sitting leaders or public officials.

Unless that law is amended or repealed by Congress, Donald Trump’s image cannot legally appear on any U.S. banknote while he remains alive.

Beyond legality, replacing Benjamin Franklin, a revolutionary leader and symbol of intellectual independence, carries heavy cultural implications. Franklin has appeared on the $100 bill since 1929, representing innovation, freedom of thought, and civic achievement. A redesign in favor of a living political figure would represent a break from nearly two centuries of bipartisan practice in U.S. monetary design.

The Proposal’s Political and Cultural Implications

The Trump currency proposals reveal new tensions within American political culture. Supporters claim the move reflects Trump’s influence in restoring economic vitality and national pride. They view his potential addition to U.S. currency as a deserved honor, comparing it to historical figures such as President Lincoln and President Grant who appear on U.S. bills for their national significance.

Opponents, however, argue that the initiative undermines the apolitical nature of national institutions. Critics, including several historians, view the move as politicizing a symbol meant to represent unity rather than division.

“American banknotes have always honored individuals recognized for contributions transcending partisanship,” noted Dr. Elaine Crawford, a political historian at Georgetown University. “Replacing Franklin with a still-living political figure, regardless of public popularity, risks turning national currency into a campaign banner.”

The discussions have quickly divided opinion across social media and news outlets. Key Trump allies have framed the idea as a patriotic tribute, while opponents label it an unnecessary and provocative use of government resources.

Supporters’ Arguments: Honoring Modern Leadership

Backers of the Golden Age Act frame it as recognition of Trump’s policy achievements, particularly economic growth and border reform. They note his influence on reshaping conservative politics and maintaining a “pro-America agenda” that resonated with millions of voters.

Representative Gill, introducing the bill, described Trump as “the most transformative political figure of the 21st century” and said replacing Franklin marks “a symbolic transition into an era of renewed American sovereignty and strength.”

Similarly, proponents of the $250 bill claim that a new denomination would commemorate what they call “the Golden Age of American capitalism.” They suggest that such a note, if introduced, could also serve a practical purpose in high-value financial transactions.

Critics’ Response: A Break from National Tradition

Detractors argue that the proposal undermines long-standing values tied to American identity. For many, Franklin’s role as a Founding Father, diplomat, and philosopher embodies the ideals of innovation and civic duty that transcend partisan politics.

Furthermore, analysts note that new denominations and design overhauls carry major operational costs for the Treasury and Federal Reserve. The last major U.S. currency redesign — introducing anti-counterfeiting measures — required years of testing and security integration. Adding entirely new denominations could complicate fiscal oversight and international exchange value.

Even conservative economists have warned that politicizing monetary imagery could negatively impact national perception or investor confidence.

What Happens Next?

The Golden Age Act will undergo the House Committee on Financial Services for preliminary review later this year. Given the legal requirement barring living individuals from currency and the complexity of redesign logistics, approval remains unlikely in its current form.

However, its proposal carries strong symbolic weight. It highlights how deeply personality-driven politics have permeated American institutions and how public policy discussions increasingly serve as cultural battlegrounds.

If the law were ever enacted, the redesign process would involve multiple agencies, including the Treasury Department, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and the Secret Service — a process that could take up to three years.

Broader Debate: Currency, Identity, and Politics

The 2025 discussion about the Trump $100 bill proposal extends beyond party lines. It reflects an ongoing question about who deserves representation on America’s most visible symbols of value and legacy. In the past, such debates surfaced around placing Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill or redesigning coins to commemorate diversity.

But replacing Franklin with a living political figure represents a far more transformative — and divisive — gesture.

Whether the Golden Age Act gains traction or fades as political theater, it has already achieved one thing: sparking a conversation about modern American identity and how history, politics, and symbolism intertwine in the nation’s most visible currencies.