The irony is, if Trump were president, many of the perks he is used to might be illegal for him to use. I haven't researched it in detail, but federal law prohibits, generally, "supplementation" of appropriated funds with private resources. It's called the "anti-deficiency act". As a government official, also, he would be required to give up control of Trump enterprises to avoid conflicts of interest. CRS Report for Congress: The Use of Blind Trusts By Federal Officials
Quote
For elected federal officials, that is, Members of Congress, the President and Vice President, public financial disclosure and the attendant publicity is the principal method of conflict of interest regulation, as such constitutional officers are not required by statute to disqualify or recuse themselves from the performance of their constitutional duties.
Just ask Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld how that felt. Considering how adverse he is about disclosing his tax returns, how will he react to having to disclose all of his finances? (Especially since he routinely lies about their value -inflating or deflating them- depending on who is asking.)

A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich