Friday, February 20, 2026

‘Catholic’ Karoline Leavitt Insults Vatican on First Day of Lent

Sarah Ewall-Wice
Wed, February 18, 2026 


White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt—a cradle Catholic—put the Vatican on blast after it said it won’t participate in Donald Trump’s so-called “Board of Peace.”

The Vatican’s top diplomatic official, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, said on Tuesday that the Vatican believes such crisis situations should be handled by the United Nations, in response to the president’s January invitation for Pope Leo to join his initiative.

“I think it’s deeply unfortunate. I don’t think that peace should be partisan or political or controversial,” Leavitt fired back on Wednesday, the first day of Lent.

Leavitt—an enthusiastic crucifix wearer—was baptized a Catholic and went to a Catholic college, but was married to her 60-year-old husband outside the church after the birth of their child, and posted her attendance at a non-denominational in Easter 2025.



The White House press secretary insisted that the administration wants those invited to join the “Board of Peace,” which is set to oversee the rebuilding of Gaza, with Trump as its chairman.

“The ‘Board of Peace’ is overseeing the reconstruction of a territory that has been plagued with violence, with bloodshed, with poverty for far too long,” Leavitt said. “This president has a very bold and ambitious plan and vision to rebuild and reconstruct Gaza.”

She went on to claim it was a legitimate organization with “tens of member countries from around the world.”

Her response to a question at the White House briefing came after Parolin told reporters one of the Vatican’s concerns is that at the international level, “it should above all be the UN that manages these crisis situations,” according to Reuters.

In recent months, Chicago-born Pope Leo has not shied away from criticizing Trump’s foreign policy and violent immigration crackdown in the U.S.

Trump announced the “Board of Peace” with him at its helm last year as part of his multi-step plan to end the war in Gaza.

But he quickly made clear that the scope of the initiative would be much wider as the president desperately tries to cement himself as the “peace president” and boasts about ending wars.

Trump formally unveiled his “Board of Peace” last month with a ceremony held alongside the World Economic Forum in Davos, but his effort was snubbed by a series of Western allies who’ve raised concerns.

There has been harsh criticism that a U.S. president would oversee the reconstruction of a foreign region, as well as the board not including a Palestinian.


President Trump launched his

At the same time, the president confirmed last month that he even invited Russian President Vladimir Putin to join the initiative, despite Putin’s invasion and ongoing war in Ukraine.

The “Board of Peace” will hold its first official meeting on Thursday at the Institute of Peace, another building in Washington, DC, which the president slapped his own name on.

During the meeting, Leavitt revealed that Trump will announce that the board’s member states have pledged $5 billion toward Gaza reconstruction efforts and thousands of troops to maintain peace and security there.

The press secretary did not provide a breakdown of which countries had pledged money or support but said it would be made available. She indicated more than 20 countries would be participating in the meeting.

Asked who would control the $5 billion, Leavitt insisted it would be the “Board of Peace,” with the president as its chairman, and suggested member nations would get to vote on how the money is used.

The U.S.’s closest allies skipped Trump’s “Board of Peace” ceremony last month in Switzerland altogether. The drab event was instead attended by a group of strongmen and leaders of smaller nations.

When asked by the Daily Beast for further details on who would be in attendance for Thursday’s meeting, a senior administration official sent a list of 48 countries that span the globe, including from the Middle East, Europe, Asia, North America, and South America.

Speakers for the event will include the president, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz and others.

But the White House did not specifically address which countries had made pledges to the $5 billion being announced on Thursday.

“Since the President and his world-class team ended the war between Israel and Hamas last October, we have maintained the ceasefire, delivered historic amounts of humanitarian aid, and freed every single living and dead hostage. The Board of Peace will continue this historic success and prove itself to be the most consequential international body in history,” said spokesperson Anna Kelly in a statement about the event.

Karoline Leavitt says Truth Social posts are straight from Trump – week after staffer blamed for ‘Obama ape’ video

Andrew Feinberg
Wed, February 18, 2026 

Just weeks after the White House — and the president himself — blamed a staffer for a blatantly racist post that appeared on his Truth Social account, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt assured reporters that anything on Trump’s social media site is “straight from the horse’s mouth.”

Leavitt made the startling admission during a press briefing on Wednesday in response to a question about a message Trump had posted moments earlier on the social media site where he criticized plans for a U.K. land deal. The president’s afternoon missive was the latest in a series of abrupt and largely inexplicable reversals regarding the British government’s decision to cede control of the Chagos Islands and came just weeks after Trump had walked back previous criticism of the deal by describing the agreement as “the best” the Labour leader could strike.

Asked whether the president's latest Truth represented an official shift in American policy against the Chagos deal, Leavitt told reporters that Trump's post "should be taken as the policy of the Trump administration” because it had come “straight from the horse's mouth.”

“When you see it on Truth Social, you know it's directly from President Trump,” she said.

But Leavitt’s defense of the president’s latest social media activity directly contradicts what White House officials and Trump were saying just days ago after he posted a video to social media that showed Barack and Michelle Obama’s faces superimposed onto apes in a jungle, swaying side to side and smiling as the song “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” played in the background.


Karoline Leavitt said that any Truth Social post is ‘directly’ from President Donald Trump. But weeks ago the White House blamed a staffer for a post that many called racist (AP)

The video prompted criticism even from some of Trump’s most loyal supporters in Congress, and amid the uproar, a White House official told The Independent that a staff member — not Trump himself — had “erroneously made the post.”

A number of GOP officeholders and prominent supporters of the president publicly called for the unnamed staffer who’d been blamed for the incident to be fired. But thus far, no one at the White House has been ousted over the incident.

Although the White House has an extensive digital communications team that manages the administration's official social media accounts on X and other platforms, access to Trump's own Truth Social account is limited to the president himself plus a tight circle of close aides.

Officials did not name the staffer who posted the Obama video to his account.

And, he told reporters on Air Force One after the post ws taken down that he had given the link to someone else to post and had not watched it all the way through. “I gave it to the people, generally they’d look at the whole thing but I guess somebody didn’t,” he told reporters, deflecting to an unnamed staffer.

Trump has long been known to do much of his own posting dating back to his early years on Twitter, when he would opine on just about any subject and wasn't shy about mixing it up with rank-and-file platform users.


Trump posted a video depicting the Obamas as apes, triggering widespread criticism (@realDonaldTrump/Truth Social)

During his early years as a candidate and his first term as president, much of his online activity was managed by Daniel Scavino, a longtime confidant of the president who has worked for him in one capacity or another since he was a teenage golf caddy at Trump's Bedminster, New Jersey club.

Scavino, who returned to the White House with Trump last year with the rank of Assistant to the President and Deputy White House Chief of Staff, is understood to still be one of those few aides trusted with access to Trump's personal social media megaphone.

But with the 50-year-old taking on a broader range of responsibilities in Trump's second term — including running the White House Personnel Office, The Independent understands that the task of managing the president's Truth Social output on a day-to-day basis often rests on the shoulders of Natalie Harp, an ex-One America News Network personality who serves as a personal assistant to Trump and works just outside the Oval Office.

The Independent further understands that Harp is often the person to whom Trump dictates the text of Truth Social posts — when he is not posting himself. The scope of her involvement in the Obama post is unknown, however, and she has not been accused of making it. Harp did not respond to a previous email from The Independent.

A former White House and campaign staffer from Trump's first term told The Independent that the president's late-night posting-and-reposting sprees were often his own doing.
Trump Dumps Remains of WH East Wing in Local Park

Erkki Forster
Thu, February 19, 2026 


Chip Somodevilla/Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

Donald Trump is dumping the wreckage of his East Wing teardown onto a public park in D.C.—and locals are fuming.

Since reducing the White House’s historic East Wing to nothing but mangled metal and rubble to make way for his gigantic $400 million ballroom, the 79-year-old president has been piling the debris onto East Potomac Park, where he plans to build a luxury golf complex.


An excavator works to clear rubble after the East Wing of the White House was demolished on October 23, 2025. / Eric Lee/Getty Images

According to The New York Times, a National Park Service memo estimated that Trump will end up offloading some 30,000 cubic yards of soil, or around 2,000 truckloads, onto the park, which is already home to an affordable public golf course.

Locals fear Trump’s plan to transform East Potomac Park's golf course into a championship-level complex would price out everyday golfers. / Tim Sloan/Getty Images

East Potomac Golf Links was managed by a nonprofit, National Links Trust, until Trump terminated its 50-year lease soon after he began destroying the East Wing in October.

The billionaire president, a golf course developer, told reporters last month that he would turn the links into “a beautiful world-class U.S. Open-caliber course,” yet another piece of his tacky makeover of the nation’s capital.

“Ideally, we’re going to have major tournaments there and everything else. It’s going to bring a lot of business into Washington,” he said.

But locals fear Trump’s plan to transform the course into a championship-level complex would price out everyday golfers, who now pay just $42 for 18 holes, a rare bargain. At Trump’s Miami golf course, the cheapest round costs $215, according to The Times. A hot dog goes for $24.


White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers called the golf course “decrepit” and said Trump was restoring “glamour and prestige.” / Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

“It’ll be a real loss for a lot of people in the city,” Bryan King, a 68-year-old mural painter from Arlington, Virginia, told The Times while playing at the course. “I’m not happy about it.

“There’s plenty of very expensive country clubs in this area already,” his son Eamon King said. “This has always been kind of, like, the people’s course.”

But when reached for comment by the Daily Beast, White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers called the golf course “decrepit” and said Trump was restoring “glamour and prestige.”

“President Trump promised to make D.C. safe and beautiful again for all its residents and visitors by removing violent criminals from the streets, cleaning up the parks, and making long-overdue renovations to public lands,” Rogers said in a statement.

“As a private citizen, President Trump built some of the greatest golf courses in the world, and he is now extending his unmatched design skills and excellent eye for detail to D.C.’s public golf courses. The President and his extraordinary team will redevelop these decrepit golf courses in our nation’s capital to restore glamour and prestige.”



Vietnam War vets sue Trump over his beloved arch and claim he skipped congressional approval

Ariana Baio
Fri, February 20, 2026 


Three Vietnam War veterans and an architectural historian have sued President Donald Trump to stop the construction of his proposed 250-foot triumphal arch in Washington, D.C., claiming it would obstruct a historically significant view between Arlington House and the Lincoln Memorial.

Three Vietnam War veterans and an architectural historian have sued President Donald Trump to stop the construction of his 250-foot triumphal arch in Washington, D.C., claiming the president had not sought proper approval for it.

The veterans and historian, represented by the nonprofit progressive advocacy group Public Citizen, say the proposed arch would stand in Memorial Circle and obstruct the “historically significant view” between Arlington House at Arlington National Cemetery and the Lincoln Memorial.

“The President’s planned arch will be a continuous visual affront to this principle and a personal affront to people, like me, who have fought for this Nation and devoted their careers to serving it,” Michael Lemmon, the lead plaintiff in the case and a U.S. Army veteran who served in the Vietnam War, said in a statement.

The arch, referred to as “Independence Arch,” is still in the planning stages. But its location would have it stand between the Arlington House and the Lincoln Memorial, which stand on opposite sides of the Potomac River to symbolize the national reconciliation of the nation after the Civil War.

The plaintiffs say that, as a commemorative work in the nation’s capital, the arch requires approval by Congress, the Secretary of the Interior, the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commission.



Trump's new construction pursuit has been nicknamed 'Arch de Trump.’ Now a veterans group is suing over its planned construction (Getty Images)

It does not appear that the design plans have been submitted to any of the named commissions or consulted with the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission. However, it’s unclear if the president has approved design plans to go before the commissions.

“The Triumphal Arch in Memorial Circle is going to be one of the most iconic landmarks not only in Washington, D.C., but throughout the world. It will enhance the visitor experience at Arlington National Cemetery for veterans, the families of the fallen, and all Americans alike, serving as a visual reminder of the noble sacrifices borne by so many American heroes throughout our 250 year history so we can enjoy our freedoms today,” White House Spokesperson Davis Ingle said in a statement.

“President Trump will continue to honor our veterans and give the greatest Nation on earth — America — the glory it deserves.”

Trump has reportedly favored the largest proposed design of the arch at 250 feet – seeing it as a symbol of national pride ahead of America’s 250th anniversary.

Shaun Byrnes, one of the plaintiffs and a U.S. Navy veteran who served in the Vietnam War, said in a statement: “I fear this massive expression of domination will overshadow the values and spirit of those who valiantly served our country and lie in Arlington National Cemetery: duty, honor, sacrifice and love of country.”

Jon Gundersen, also a plaintiff and veteran of the U.S. Army who served in the Vietnam War, said Arlington National Cemetery and the view to Lincoln Memorial “should not be desecrated by the planned Arch.”

The new lawsuit seeking to intervene in Trump’s latest construction project plan is similar to another, brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, seeking to stop the president from building his 90,000-square-foot ballroom attached to the White House.

In addition to the proposed ‘Independence Arch,’ Trump has sought to build a massive ballroom attached to the White House, add his name to various transportation hubs, embellish the Oval Office with gilded features and pave-over the White House Rose Garden (AFP via Getty Images)More

Since returning to the White House last year, Trump has prioritized putting his personal design preferences in and on federal buildings.

In the lawsuit over the ballroom, a federal judge asked the Trump administration to uphold its promise to submit design plans to the Commission of Fine Arts and National Capital Planning Commission before construction begins.

Trump fired all six members of the Commission of Fine Arts in October and installed seven allies. The group, which includes a 26-year-old White House staffer and Trump’s former White House ballroom architect, approved the proposed ballroom designs Thursday.


Trump picks his 26-year-old ‘receptionist’ assistant to sit on review panel for his White House ballroom plan

Ariana Baio
Wed, February 18, 2026

President Donald Trump has tapped a 26-year-old with no known art expertise to serve on the federal arts commission that will will review his White House ballroom plans.

Chamberlain Harris, who serves as the executive assistant to the president and deputy director of Oval Office operations, appears to be the youngest member on the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts currently.

The commission, comprised of seven members with “expertise in the arts,” is tasked with reviewing the “design and aesthetic” of all construction projects within Washington, D.C and approving buildings attached to the White House.

The commission will approve Trump’s new $400 million White House ballroom plan as well as his Arc de Triomphe-style arch. In October, the president fired all previous members of the Commission of Fine Arts to make room for his own appointments.

Among those the president has chosen to help push through his new plan is Harris. But the 26-year-old, who also served as the “Receptionist of the United States” during the first Trump administration, also appears to have limited arts experience, The Washington Post reports.


Harris, 26, appears to be the youngest member of the US Commission of Fine Arts – tasked with reviewing the president's $400 million ballroom plans (Commission of Fine Arts)

According to the Commission of Fine Arts, Harris managed Trump’s presidential portrait project alongside the National Portrait Gallery and White House Historical Association after he left the White House in 2021. She has a Bachelor of Arts in political science from SUNY Albany.

“President Trump has an incredible eye for the arts, and only selects the most talented people possible,” Davis Ingle, a White House spokesperson, said.

In addition to Harris, Trump has tapped his former ballroom architect, James C. McCrery II, to serve on the commission. McCrery has stepped down as the primary architect on Trump’s project and recused himself from the Commission of Fine Arts’ review of the ballroom to prevent a conflict of interest.

Rodney Mims Cook Jr., the founder of the National Monuments Foundation, is currently serving as the chairman of the commission. Other members include Mary Anne Carter, the chairperson of the National Endowment for the Arts; Roger Kimball, a conservative arts critic; Pam Patenaude, the former deputy secretary of Housing and Urban Development during the first Trump administration; and Matthew Taylor, a film director.

In addition to the Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning Commission is also tasked with reviewing Trump’s ballroom plans. The president has also installed allies on the National Capital Planning Commission.


A rendering of President Donald Trump's 'New East Wing' at the White House, including his nearly 90,000 square foot ballroom (The White House)

Trump’s demolition of the East Wing caused uproar (Getty Images)

The new White House ballroom, which could be named for Trump, will be a 89,000 square foot entertaining space for the president and first lady to host state dinners and other events. While the president has raved about the new constructions, it’s been subject to controversy.

Initially, Trump said the addition would not interfere with the current structure of the White House, but later tore down the historic East Wing to make room for it. White House officials said the East Wing needed to be removed to make the structure sounder.

Trump also initially believed the ballroom would only cost $200 million, but the price has increased to $400 million. Trump has sought private donations to help cover the costs, also raising concern about the ethical implications of major corporations giving money for the ballroom.
Stephen Miller Fuels Fresh MAGA Civil War With Secret Spy Power Push

Will Neal
Thu, February 19, 2026 





Stephen Miller is pushing to extend a surveillance program used by the U.S. government to spy on noncitizens abroad.

Donald Trump’s deputy chief of staff is leading a concerted White House effort to prolong Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) into at least 2027, Politico reports, citing five anonymous sources with knowledge of the situation.


The measures, which empower the administration to gather data on non-U.S. nationals in foreign countries without a warrant, are currently set to expire on April 20.

It was under the framework of FISA that the FBI investigated allegations of Russian election interference. / Kyle Mazza/Anadolu via Getty Images

Trump has publicly railed against FISA in the past. It was under this framework the FBI pursued aspects of its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, which the president has long decried as a “hoax.”

It also remains a highly divisive issue among ranking Republican Party members.


Congressman Jim Jordan has qualms about the measures but is

Some MAGA loyalists reportedly feel anxious about any measures permitting the administration to carry out intelligence operations without a warrant. Others, that Section 702 is instrumental to protecting U.S. interests from a variety of threats, from narcotrafficking and cyberattacks to arms smuggling and terrorism.

Those divisions, along with a present lack of clarity over the president’s own position, pose a significant obstacle to Miller’s reported efforts to push an extension through Congress before the measures expire in two months’ time.

“April 20 is the deadline, so we’ve got to work fast,” GOP Rep. Rick Crawford, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, told Politico.

“Obviously the White House has vested interest in retaining 702 authority. It’s a national security issue,” he added. “So, you know, it’s very important to them.”

The exact format of any extension, and any strategy for getting it passed, remains under discussion.

Crawford has reportedly spoken with Congressman Jim Jordan, chair of the Judiciary Committee, about possible compromises to address the latter’s concerns about a present lack of guardrails on how Section 702 is used.

“We know 702 is important,” Jordan told Politico. “We know it needs to get reauthorized. We’re committed to getting that done.”

“We just want to do it in the best way possible so that you can get the bad guys, know what the bad guys are doing overseas, but also protect Americans,” he added. “I’m confident we’ll get there.”

The Daily Beast has contacted the White House for comment on this story.
Trump administration plans to take Homan’s Minneapolis immigration playbook nationwide

Priscilla Alvarez, CNN
Fri, February 20, 2026 


White House border czar Tom Homan departs following a news conference at the Bishop Whipple federal building, on January 29, 2026, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. - Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP

The Trump administration plans to double down on targeted immigration enforcement, taking Tom Homan’s playbook in Minneapolis and applying it to multiple cities nationwide, according to current and former Homeland Security officials.

It’s a marked departure from the highly visible and aggressive tactics employed by top Border Patrol official Gregory Bovino. That approach, documented in Hollywood-style social media videos and touted by senior Trump officials at the time, is being tabled, for now, following the scenes that unfolded in Minneapolis, including the shooting deaths of two American citizens.

“No more Bovino bullsh*t. That show is shut down,” a Homeland Security official told CNN.

The return to ICE’s typical immigration enforcement tactics, which include identifying targets ahead of time, instead of broad sweeps in areas trafficked by immigrants, comes amid waning public support for how the administration has been conducting immigration arrests.

The protests and images coming out of Minneapolis late last month prompted concerns from some Trump administration officials over the optics of the immigration crackdown. That included President Donald Trump, who privately expressed frustration that his immigration messaging was getting lost. The debate over federal immigration enforcement has also sparked a partial government shutdown affecting portions of DHS, as Democrats have pushed for ICE reforms in exchange for supporting funding for the department.

“Targeting public safety threats is nothing new. … Under Secretary Noem’s leadership, nearly 70% of ICE arrests are of illegal aliens charged or convicted of a crime in the U.S.,” a Homeland Security spokesperson said in a statement, citing more than 700,000 deportations under the Trump administration.



Protestors march during a "Nationwide Shutdown" demonstration against ICE enforcement on January 30, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. - Stephen Maturen/Getty Images

While the administration has said it is prioritizing people with serious criminal records, many of those detained over the last year do not fall in that category. DHS also issued a recent memo stating that immigration authorities should detain refugees who have not yet obtained a green card and detain them for additional screening.

Sources told CNN that late last year, agents had been more focused on developing targets rather than only relying on street encounters. But that changed with an unprecedented surge of thousands of federal agents to Minneapolis over a welfare-fraud scandal that ensnared the Somali community.

Two Americans — Renee Good and Alex Pretti — were shot and killed by federal agents. And two other officers are under investigation over their accounts about what unfolded in an operation where one of the officers shot a Venezuelan man in the leg.

Homan announced a federal drawdown in Minneapolis last week, citing agreements with local officials allowing additional cooperation.

Current and former Homeland Security officials stressed that the latest move toward a more targeted enforcement approach doesn’t mean that the crackdown is softening, as some cities may still see larger footprints of ICE agents. The turbocharged sweeps are less likely, though officials cautioned that plans are subject to change. The administration has also escalated efforts to expand immigration detention — an indicator of plans to continue ramped up arrests.

“What they were doing was hoping that high visibility enforcement operations would scare enough illegal aliens to increase self-deportation. I think that’s part of what they were thinking,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for limited immigration.

“What they didn’t take into account is that people, even though they still back deportation of illegal aliens, they want to see less of the militarized type of action,” he added.

After Trump dispatched Homan to Minneapolis, Bovino was sidelined and returned to his post as chief patrol agent of the El Centro sector. He’s since confirmed on X that he was recently at Mammoth Mountain, the California ski resort, saying in a reply to a user: “Katie, the powder was excellent, and some shredding did take place!! Mammoth is an excellent mountain and looking forward to going back!!!! In the meantime, on the lookout for illegal aliens!!”


US Customs and Border Protection top official Gregory Bovino with his security team while a group of citizens opposed to the country's immigration policies protest against him in Minnesota on January 21, 2026. - Lokman Vural Elibol/Anadolu/Getty ImagesMore

Bovino’s bravado and heavy-handed arrest tactics in Los Angeles, Chicago, Charlotte, New Orleans and Minneapolis captured the administration’s aggressive approach to its mass deportation pledge — and penchant for public sparring with critics over controversial actions.

It also marked a pivot from the way enforcement responsibilities are generally divided between Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, with the latter charged with interior immigration arrests.

Bovino’s enforcement style had been backed by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. The pivot to Homan’s approach is a rebuke of that style and reveals the ongoing tensions between different factions in the administration over how to tackle the president’s immigration agenda, officials said.

Homan has generally taken a more stringent approach to immigration enforcement, wanting to focus on public safety and national security threats, as well as so-called “collaterals,” meaning undocumented immigrants that may be in the vicinity of a targeted operation.

“ICE has been doing interior enforcement before Bovino got involved. They prefer to conduct their ops without the optics,” another Homeland Security official told CNN. “(Border Patrol) never wanted anything to do with these interior ops and will go back to focusing on the border.”

The change also means “there’s less characters in this play and less storylines,” a former Trump official told CNN. “That’s where they think they’ve set the course,” the official added, referring to the White House.

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told CNN in a statement, “The President’s entire team is working together to implement his immigration enforcement agenda – which has always focused on prioritizing the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens. The successful deportations, dropping crime rates, and historically secure border prove that. As always, anyone in the country illegally is eligible to be deported.”

Homan acknowledged the issues on the ground in Minneapolis, including officer misconduct, almost immediately after arriving and since then.


People walk by signs memorializing Renee Good and Alex Pretti on February 12, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. - Stephen Maturen/Getty Images

In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union,” Homan said he increased the presence of internal affairs officers in Minnesota since arriving in the Twin Cities to address misconduct allegations among immigration enforcement officers.

“In any instance where there have been allegations of misconduct or working outside the policy, it has been referred to internal affairs,” he said.

Within the Trump administration, there has been infighting between factions who back Homan and those who back Noem. Homan and Noem have rarely spoken to each other in recent months, according to US officials.

Homan said Sunday he doesn’t agree with Noem “on everything,” but added that the pair regularly have discussions, and he described the administration’s efforts as “one team one fight.”

“We have discussions and different opinions. That’s what makes it a strong team. We bring different ideas to the table and then agree on a mission,” Homan said.

For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com

HISTORICAL REVISIONISM

US Vice President Vance's office deletes post referring to 'Armenian genocide'

By Kevin Lamarque and Trevor Hunnicutt
Tue, February 10, 2026 
REUTERS

U.S. Vice President JD Vance speaks to the media before boarding Air Force Two upon departure for Azerbaijan, at Zvartnots International Airport in Yerevan, Armenia, February 10, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/Pool

YEREVAN, Feb 10 (Reuters) - The White House on Tuesday deleted a social media post from Vice President JD Vance's account that commemorated massacres of Armenians as a "genocide," saying the message, which contradicts the stance of U.S.-allied Turkey, was posted in error.

Vance, who was on a two-day ‌trip to Armenia, visited the Tsitsernakaberd Armenian Genocide Memorial in the capital Yerevan during the first visit by a U.S. vice president to the South Caucasus republic.

Vance's official ‌account on X described the visit as intended "to honor the victims of the 1915 Armenian genocide," and then deleted the post. A Vance aide who declined to be named said the message was posted in error by staff ​who were not part of the traveling delegation.

The incident marked the second time in days that the Trump administration has deleted a social media post. Late last week, the White House defended, and then deleted, a post to President Donald Trump's Truth Social account that included a racist depiction of former President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama as apes. Trump later told reporters he had not watched the entire video before a White House aide posted it to his account.

The social media post on Tuesday reflected Vance and his wife Usha's participation in a ceremonial laying of ‌a wreath of carnations, chrysanthemums and roses at the memorial site, ⁠which honors the 1.5 million Armenians who lost their lives in the final years of the Turkish-led Ottoman Empire.

"This is an account managed by staff that primarily exists to share photos and videos of the vice president's activities," said a spokesperson for Vance, adding that his views were ⁠best described by his own remarks to reporters. In those remarks, the Republican politician did not use the word "genocide."

TRUMP'S TIES TO TURKEY


Turkey accepts that many Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire were killed in clashes with Ottoman forces during World War One, but contests the figures and denies the killings were systematically orchestrated and constitute a genocide.

Although the U.S. Congress and Trump's predecessor, Joe Biden, have both recognized the ​1915 ​massacres as a genocide, Trump did not use that language in his own statement on the killings ​last year.

Turkey is a NATO ally of the United States and President ‌Tayyip Erdogan has maintained close ties with Trump, including supporting the U.S. diplomatic initiative on Gaza.

The Turkish foreign ministry and the Armenian embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment.

The White House said there had been "no change of policy at this time" since Trump's 2025 statement on the historical incident, which did not include the word "genocide."

Spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt, asked whether the White House had a broader problem with its social media protocols, said "no."

The White House's handling of the situation drew criticism from some Democratic lawmakers and members of the Armenian diaspora in the United States.

"Vance is a coward for deleting this post," said Alex Galitsky, policy director for the Armenian National Committee of America, an advocacy group, on X, adding that it ‌was an "insult to the memory" of those who had died.

VANCE'S VISIT TO ARMENIA AND AZERBAIJAN


In Armenia, Vance ​signed a deal with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan that could pave the way for the U.S. to build a ​nuclear power plant there.

Asked by a reporter whether his visit to the memorial was ​intended to recognize a genocide, Vance said: "Obviously, it's a very terrible thing that happened little over 100 years ago, and something that was just ‌very, very important to them culturally.

"So I thought out of a sign ​of respect, both for the victims, but also ​for the Armenian government that's been a very important partner for us in the region, to Prime Minister Pashinyan, I wanted to go and pay a visit and pay my respects."

Vance's visit was aimed at promoting agreements the Trump administration struck with Armenia and Azerbaijan to build towards peace after nearly 40 years of war between the ​Caucasus rivals. Trump has presented those diplomatic efforts as among the chief ‌accomplishments of his time in office.

On Tuesday, Vance traveled to Azerbaijan and signed a strategic partnership deal encompassing economic and security cooperation, as Washington seeks to expand ​its influence in a region where Russia was once the main power broker.

(Reporting by Kevin Lamarque in Yerevan, Armenia, and Trevor Hunnicutt in Washington; Additional ​reporting by Tuvan Gumrukcu in Ankara; Editing by Colleen Jenkins, Mark Heinrich, Edmund Klamann, Rod Nickel)
Supreme Court strikes down Trump’s sweeping tariffs, upending central plank of economic agenda


LINDSAY WHITEHURST
Fri, February 20, 2026

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump's far-reaching global tariffs on Friday, handing him a significant loss on an issue crucial to his economic agenda.

The 6-3 decision centers on tariffs imposed under an emergency powers law, including the sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs he levied on nearly every other country.

It's the first major piece of Trump's broad agenda to come squarely before the nation's highest court, which he helped shape with the appointments of three conservative jurists in his first term.

The majority found that the Constitution “very clearly” gives Congress the power to impose taxes, which include tariffs. “The Framers did not vest any part of the taxing power in the Executive Branch,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

“The tariffs at issue here may or may not be wise policy. But as a matter of text, history, and precedent, they are clearly lawful,” Kavanaugh wrote in the dissent.

The majority did not address whether companies could get refunded for the billions they have collectively paid in tariffs. Many companies, including the big-box warehouse chain Costco, have already lined up for refunds in court, and Kavanaugh noted the process could be complicated.

“The Court says nothing today about whether, and if so how, the Government should go about returning the billions of dollars that it has collected from importers. But that process is likely to be a ‘mess,’ as was acknowledged at oral argument,” he wrote.

The tariffs decision doesn’t stop Trump from imposing duties under other laws. While those have more limitations on the speed and severity of Trump’s actions, top administration officials have said they expect to keep the tariff framework in place under other authorities.

The Supreme Court ruling comes despite a series of short-term wins on the court’s emergency docket that have allowed Trump to push ahead with extraordinary flexes of executive power on issues ranging from high-profile firings to major federal funding cuts.

The Republican president has been vocal about the case, calling it one of the most important in U.S. history and saying a ruling against him would be an economic body blow to the country. But legal opposition crossed the political spectrum, including libertarian and pro-business groups that are typically aligned with the GOP. Polling has found tariffs aren't broadly popular with the public, amid wider voter concern about affordability.

The Constitution gives Congress the power to levy tariffs. But the Trump administration argued that a 1977 law allowing the president to regulate importation during emergencies also allows him to set tariffs. Other presidents have used the law dozens of times, often to impose sanctions, but Trump was the first president to invoke it for import taxes.

Karoline Leavitt says Truth Social posts are straight from Trump – week after staffer blamed for ‘Obama ape’ video

Trump set what he called "reciprocal" tariffs on most countries in April 2025 to address trade deficits that he declared a national emergency. Those came after he imposed duties on Canada, China and Mexico, ostensibly to address a drug trafficking emergency.

A series of lawsuits followed, including a case from a dozen largely Democratic-leaning states and others from small businesses selling everything from plumbing supplies to educational toys to women’s cycling apparel.

The challengers argued the emergency powers law doesn’t even mention tariffs and Trump's use of it fails several legal tests, including one that doomed then-President Joe Biden's $500 billion student loan forgiveness program.

The economic impact of Trump's tariffs has been estimated at some $3 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The Treasury has collected more than $133 billion from the import taxes the president has imposed under the emergency powers law, federal data from December shows.



Supreme Court strikes down Trump’s blanket tariffs


Ben Werschkul, Washington Correspondent
Updated Fri, February 20, 2026 

The Supreme Court struck down President Trump's tariffs, ruling that he did not have the authority to impose them under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

The US Supreme Court scrambled the trade landscape Friday with a decision striking down the centerpiece of President Trump’s second-term tariff program.

The 6-3 ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump appears set to immediately halt a massive section of Trump’s tariffs announced last year on “Liberation Day” using a 1977 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The law gives the president the ability to declare an economic emergency and take action but doesn't specify tariffs as a remedy.

“IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs," read the decision by Chief Justice John Roberts.

It was a complex ruling with varied opinions and dissents stretching to 170 pages. Roberts captured the central legal issue, writing that Trump had asserted "the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope."

The text of the law, he added, “cannot bear such weight."

The Yale Budget Lab quickly offered an analysis that without these tariffs, the new overall average effective tariff rate will fall to 9.1% across the US economy, after a 16.9% rate before the ruling.

The majority decision does not appear to address the question of eligibility for tariff refunds, which is likely to lead to a complex legal or regulatory process for companies.


President Donald Trump gives a speech about the economy at the Coosa Steel Corporation factory in Rome, Georgia on Thursday. (SAUL LOEB / AFP via Getty Images)(SAUL LOEB via Getty Images)More

The ruling upholds two lower courts — including the US Court of International Trade — that previously found Trump did not have the authority to impose global tariffs under IEEPA.

Joining Roberts in the majority were Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, who also wrote concurring opinions, alongside liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Elena Kagan.

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh offered dissenting opinions after a conservative push to uphold Trump’s tariffs.

President Trump reacted by reportedly calling the decision a "disgrace" but the decision was immediately welcomed by an array of Trump's opponents and critics of his tariffs with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer saying that "this is a win for the wallets of every American consumer."

'An imposition of taxes on Americans'

The central question for the court was whether the law implicitly empowers the president to impose tariffs or whether Trump’s action was an illegal usurpation of “the power of the purse” that is the responsibility of Congress as laid out in the Constitution.

During oral arguments last November, key justices struck a skeptical tone on the administration's position, with Roberts asking perhaps the most pointed questions.

He posited that regardless of why a president makes his moves, "the vehicle is an imposition of taxes on Americans, and that has always been the core power of Congress."

Friday's ruling made similar points and was a striking blow for Trump and his team, who have long promised to replace the tariffs using other powers if they are struck down.

“Had Congress intended to convey the distinct and extraordinary power to impose tariffs, it would have done so expressly, as it consistently has in other tariff statutes,” Roberts wrote in the opinion.

President Donald Trump greets Chief Justice John Roberts before Trump delivered his address to a joint session of Congress in 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)(Tom Williams via Getty Images)More

Trump and his team had seized on the law to declare a variety of economic emergencies over issues ranging from fentanyl to trade imbalances, and impose blanket tariffs in response.

Trump set the stage for the decision with weeks of comments playing up the consequences of the ruling. On Thursday, during a stop in Georgia, the president proclaimed that, "without tariffs, you know what, everybody would be bankrupt, the whole country would be bankrupt."
Open question on tariff refunds

Companies have been preparing for refunds since the arguments in November, even amid uncertainty about the result. At stake is more than $175 billion in revenue that has been collected under this law, according to the Penn-Wharton Budget Model in a new analysis for Reuters.

Costco (COSTmade headlines when it became the biggest name to join the ranks of businesses pre-emptively suing the Trump administration to ensure future eligibility for refunds.

The lawsuit called Trump's IEEPA tariffs "unlawfully collected."

The US Chamber of Commerce on Friday immediately called for "swift refunds of the impermissible tariffs" in a statement, saying that getting money back "will be meaningful for the more than 200,000 small business importers in this country and will help support stronger economic growth this year."

Scott Lincicome of the CATO Institute likewise called for immediate refunds and said that a refund process could be done easily. However, "it appears more likely that more litigation and paperwork will be required," calling it "a particularly unfair burden for smaller importers."

The Supreme Court arguments featured a discussion of what possible refunds could entail.

"It seems to me like it could be a mess," Justice Amy Coney Barrett said.

Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance.
___

MAGA Goon Threatens Researchers Over Ugly Trump Tariff Numbers

Tamilore Oshikanlu
Wed, February 18, 2026 

President Donald Trump’s op economic adviser is lashing out at Federal Reserve researchers after a new study undercut one of the administration’s core talking points on tariffs.

Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, went on a tirade Wednesday morning during an appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box, blasting a Federal Reserve Bank of New York paper that found Americans—not foreign exporters—are footing the overwhelming cost of Trump’s tariffs.

“The paper is an embarrassment,” Hassett, 63, said of the study. He went further, calling it “the worst paper I’ve ever seen in the history of the Federal Reserve system” and suggesting that the authors behind it should be “disciplined” for their findings.


Kevin Hassett appeared on CNBC 'Squawk Box' defending Trump's tariffs. / CNBC Squawk Box

The study, published Feb. 12 by the New York Fed, examined whether tariffs imposed at the start of Trump’s second term were successfully forcing foreign exporters to lower prices. Instead, researchers found the opposite: roughly 90 percent of tariff costs are being passed on to U.S. consumers and businesses.

That conclusion directly contradicts Trump’s repeated claims that tariffs strengthen the economy without hurting Americans. The president, 79, has touted the policy as both an economic and national security win, writing in a recent Truth Social rant that “TARIFFS have given us Economic and National Security.”

Reached for comment, White House spokesperson Kush Desai blasted the analysis.

“Kevin Hassett is right: the New York Fed’s tariff report is the latest ‘study’ that does not match reality or hold up to any scrutiny. The average American tariff has increased nearly sevenfold in the past year, while inflation cooled, real wages increased, and economic growth accelerated – the exact opposite of what the ‘experts’ and a growing body of ‘studies’ said would happen. More pointless reports are not going to change the fact that President Trump was right and the Panican experts were, and remain, wrong."

When questioned by Squawk Box host Joe Kernen, 70, on American consumers eating the cost of tariffs, Hassett dismissed the Fed’s analysis as politically motivated. He argued the findings had fueled “highly partisan” coverage and claimed the paper relied on flawed assumptions that “wouldn’t be accepted in a first semester econ class.”

Pressed on who actually bears the burden of tariffs, Hassett insisted the study was too narrow—faulting it for focusing primarily on price changes while ignoring broader economic dynamics like supply and demand interactions and shifts in consumer and producer behavior.

Instead, he offered a far rosier picture of the administration’s policy, claiming tariffs have ultimately benefited Americans. “Real wages were up $1,400 on average last year,” Hassett said, arguing that American consumers are “better off” despite rising import costs.

The New York Fed declined to comment on Hassett’s remarks.


Kevin Hassett stands firm behind President Donald Trump on his tariff policies. / Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images

Trump has made tariffs a cornerstone of his second term, dramatically increasing duties on imports from countries including China, Mexico, and Canada. Since last year, average tariff rates have jumped from roughly 2.6 percent to about 13 percent, according to the study.

But the policy has triggered a cascade of consequences—both economic and political.

Canada, one of the countries hit by the tariffs, has already responded with retaliatory measures, including pulling U.S. alcohol from shelves in Ontario’s government-run liquor stores. The escalating trade tensions have added strain to relations between the two longtime allies.


Tensions between Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney and U.S. President Donald Trump have heightened over tariff disputes. / BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / AFP via Getty Images

Back in Washington, Trump is also facing mounting resistance from within his own party. In a notable rebuke last Tuesday, six House Republicans joined Democrats in voting to end the emergency tariffs imposed on Canada.

The vote marked an unusual crack in GOP unity on one of Trump’s signature policies—and the president did not take it lightly.

In a fiery Truth Social post, Trump warned that Republicans who opposed him could face consequences in upcoming midterm elections, signaling he’s prepared to punish within his own ranks.

Even within the Trump administration, there are signs that officials may be quietly reconsidering parts of the tariff strategy.

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, 46, suggested Tuesday during an interview on Squawk Box that some tariffs—particularly on steel and aluminum—could be adjusted for companies struggling to comply with the steep duties.

Meanwhile, Canadian officials are gearing up for what could be a contentious round of negotiations. Prime Minister Mark Carney, 60, announced on Monday that veteran diplomat Janice Charette will serve as the country’s chief trade negotiator in upcoming free-trade agreement talks with the United States.

Trump's top economic advisor says Fed researchers should be punished for their recent views on tariffs


Naomi Buchanan
Wed, February 18, 2026 




Trump's top economic advisor said Fed economists behind a recent report on tariffs should be "disciplined."


The report from the New York Fed found that Americans bear 90% the economic burden of tariffs.


Economists voiced worries about the comments and what they mean for Fed independence.

Donald Trump's economic advisor said that Federal Reserve writers behind a report claiming that Americans bear the brunt of tariffs should be "disciplined."

Kevin Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council, criticized the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's economic analysis of the impact of tariffs published last week, calling for the authors to be punished for their findings.

"The paper is an embarrassment. It's, I think, the worst paper I've ever seen in the history of the Federal Reserve system. The people associated with this paper should presumably be disciplined because what they've done is put out a conclusion which has created a lot of news that's highly partisan based on analysis that wouldn't be accepted in a first semester econ class," Hassett told CNBC.

The economists found that 90% of the economic burden of higher tariffs fell on US firms and consumers. The average tariff rate climbed to 13% from 2.6% in 2025 as part of Trump's sweeping trade policy unveiled last April.

"While importers pay the duty, the 'economic burden' of the tariff can be shifted onto exporters if they lower their export prices," the report reads. "There is 100 percent pass-through from tariffs to import prices, and therefore on U.S. consumers and firms," the economists explained in the write.

Hassett defended the tariffs in his comments to CNBC.

"The basic theory of President Trump's tariffs is that, sure we're importing stuff from China, but we've got producers in the US that make the same stuff, maybe at a slightly higher price. If we bring the stuff home, create the demand at home, then that will hurt China and drive up wages in the US and American consumers be better off."

Hassett's remarks come as Fed independence is in focus. The Trump administration is in the midst of criminal investigations into Fed Chair Jerome Powell and Fed governor Lisa Cook.

Claudia Sahm, a former Fed economist who is known for creating the Sahm rule, a popular recession indicator, said the comments, specifically Hassett calling for the paper's authors to be disciplined, are "deeply disturbing."

She added that Kevin Warsh, Trump's nominee to replace Jerome Powell as Fed chair, "must" be asked about Hassett's comments at his confirmation hearing.


"The Fed Chair has the ability to suppress research from the Fed. Will he if it disagrees with White House?" Sahm wrote.

Steve Sosnick, chief strategist at Interactive Brokers, told Business Insider that Hassett's comments are "distressing."

"At best it's an angry outburst instead of a reasoned response, and at worst it is meant to chill speech and curb central bank independence," he added.

Kashkari Rips Hassett Criticism of NY Fed Tariff Analysis



Catarina Saraiva
Thu, February 19, 2026 

Bloomberg

(Bloomberg) -- Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis President Neel Kashkari said recent comments by National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett critical of a New York Fed study on tariffs undermine the central bank’s independence.

“This is just another step to try to compromise the Fed’s independence,” Kashkari said Thursday at an event in Fargo, North Dakota, of Hassett’s remarks. “Over the last year we’ve seen multiple attempts to try to compromise the Fed’s independence.” He added, “It’s really about monetary policy.”

 Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis President Neel Kashkari criticizes National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett’s comments about a New York Fed study on tariffs.
Source: Bloomberg

Hassett on Wednesday said the New York Fed economists’ study, which found US companies bear most of the burden from President Donald Trump’s tariff hikes, was “an embarrassment” and that the researchers associated with it should be “disciplined.”

Kashkari said research conducted by Fed district banks reflect efforts “to get better and learn about the economy — by having this breadth of opinions.”


“We are doing our very best to make the best assessment of the economy based on data and analysis,” the Minneapolis Fed chief said.

‘Hug the Mast’

Kashkari also pointed to the current Justice Department investigation of the Fed over building renovations as evidence of Trump administration pressure. Chair Jerome Powell in January said, when served subpoenas, that the reasons for the investigation were a pretext to punish him for not cutting interest rates quickly enough. Trump has repeatedly said the Fed should cut rates aggressively.

“The louder the noise gets turned up, the more we hug the mast of what is our mission,” Kashkari said, citing the Fed’s mandate to achieve price stability and maximum employment.

The Minneapolis Fed chief was also asked about Kevin Warsh, whom Trump has said he’ll nominate to be the next Fed chair. Powell’s term expires in May. Warsh has repeatedly criticized various elements of the Fed and said he wants to revamp the institution.


“I look forward to working with him and hearing his ideas,” said Kashkari, who worked with Warsh during the financial crisis. “We can always do better. If we’ve got good ideas on how to improve things, let’s go take them forward.”

Balance Sheet

Warsh has said he wants to reduce the Fed’s balance sheet, which surged in size during both the financial crisis and the pandemic, when the Fed was buying assets to shore up the economy. Kashkari argued there are many technical reasons why the balance sheet — currently at $6.6 trillion — is much bigger today than it was before those crises, including foreign demand for US currency and the amount of reserves banks have to maintain at the Fed for liquidity purposes.


“We’ve shrunk our balance sheet quite a bit in the last few years, and I’m not sure that we can shrink it much further from here without making some other fundamental changes to the way the financial system operates,” he said.

On interest rates, Kashkari said the Fed’s benchmark is currently likely close to “neutral” — the point where they’re neither restricting the economy nor stimulating it. The Fed held rates unchanged at its January meeting, a decision Kashkari supported, after cutting them three consecutive times in the last few months of 2025.

--With assistance from Matt Shirley.

Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek




Tariffs paid by midsize US companies tripled last year, a JPMorganChase Institute study shows

President Donald Trump visits Coosa Steel Corporation in Rome, Ga., Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein) · Associated Press Finance · ASSOCIATED PRESS
JOSH BOAK

Thu, February 19, 2026 at 4:16 AM MST 4 min read

WASHINGTON (AP) — Tariffs paid by midsize U.S. businesses tripled over the course of past year, new research tied to one of America’s leading banks showed on Thursday — more evidence that President Donald Trump 's push to charge higher taxes on imports is causing economic disruption.

The additional taxes have meant that companies that employ a combined 48 million people in the U.S. — the kinds of businesses that Trump had promised to revive — have had to find ways to absorb the new expense, by passing it along to customers in the form of higher prices, employing fewer workers or accepting lower profits.

“That’s a big change in their cost of doing business,” said Chi Mac, business research director of the JPMorganChase Institute, which published the analysis Thursday. “We also see some indications that they may be shifting away from transacting with China and maybe toward some other regions in Asia.”

The research does not say how the additional costs are flowing through the economy, but it indicates that tariffs are being paid by U.S. companies. The study is part of a growing body of economic analyses that counter the administration's claims that foreigners pay the tariffs.

The JPMorganChase Institute report used payments data to look at businesses that might lack the pricing power of large multinational companies to offset tariffs, but may be small enough to quickly change supply chains to minimize exposure to the tax increases. The companies tended to have revenues between $10 million and $1 billion with fewer than 500 employees, a category known as “middle market.”

The analysis suggests that the Trump administration’s goal of becoming less directly reliant on Chinese manufacturers has been occurring. Payments to China by these companies were 20% below their October 2024 levels, but it’s unclear whether that means China is simply routing its goods through other countries or if supply chains have moved.

The authors of the analysis emphasized in an interview that companies are still adjusting to the tariffs and said they plan to continue studying the issue.

White House spokesman Kush Desai called the analysis “pointless” and said it didn't “change the fact that President Trump was right.” The study showed that U.S. companies are paying tariffs that the president had previously claimed would be paid by foreign entities.

Trump defended his tariffs during a trip to Georgia on Thursday while touring Coosa Steel, a company involved in steel processing and distribution. The president said he couldn’t believe the Supreme Court would soon decide on the legality of some of his tariffs, given his belief that the taxes were helping U.S. manufacturers.

“The tariffs are the greatest thing to happen to this country,” Trump said.

The president imposed a series of tariffs last year for the ostensible goal of reducing the U.S. trade imbalance with other countries, so that America was not longer importing more than it exports. But trade data published Thursday by the Census Bureau showed that the trade deficit climbed last year by $25.5 billion to $1.24 trillion. The president on Wednesday posted on social media that he expected there would be a trade surplus “during this year.”

The Trump administration has been adamant that the tariffs are a boon for the economy, businesses, and workers. Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, lashed out on Wednesday at research by the New York Federal Reserve showing that nearly 90% of the burden for Trump's tariffs fell on U.S. companies and consumers.

“The paper is an embarrassment,” Hassett told CNBC. “It’s, I think, the worst paper I’ve ever seen in the history of the Federal Reserve system. The people associated with this paper should presumably be disciplined.”

Trump increased the average tariff rate to 13% from 2.6% last year, according to the New York Fed researchers. He declared that tariffs on some items such as steel, kitchen cabinets and bathroom vanities were in the national security interest of the country. He also declared an economic emergency to bypass Congress and impose a baseline tax on goods from much of the world in April 2025 at an event he called “Liberation Day.”

The high rates provoked a financial market panic, prompting Trump to walk back his rates and then engage in talks with multiple countries that led to a set of new trade frameworks. The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on whether Trump surpassed his legal authority by declaring an economic emergency.

Trump was elected in 2024 on his promise to tame inflation, but his tariffs have contributed to voter frustration over affordability. While inflation has not spiked during Trump's term thus far, hiring slowed sharply and a team of academic economists estimate that consumer prices were roughly 0.8 percentage points higher than they would otherwise be.



A year in, it’s official: Americans, not foreigners, are paying for Trump’s tariffs

Analysis by Allison Morrow, CNN
February 12, 2026


Nearly 90% of the cost of Trump's tariffs have been borne by American consumers and businesses, according to the New York Federal Reserve. - Nam Y. Huh/AP

A new report from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York confirms what economists have long warned about: The burden of tariffs is borne almost entirely by the people living in the country that imposes them.

That simple fact — now learned experientially in 21st century America — is an Econ 101 lesson as foundational as supply and demand. ’Twas ever thus!

US businesses and consumers last year paid for nearly 90% of 2025’s import taxes, the Fed branch found. That’s hardly surprising: The National Bureau of Economic Research and the Congressional Budget Office recently found roughly the same thing.

And while the New York Fed report didn’t parse the split between businesses and consumers, the CBO report, published Wednesday, estimated businesses would continue shrinking their margins slightly to offset the extra costs, while passing on the bulk of the levies — 70% — to consumers. (As for those foreign exporters President Donald Trump has long claimed would foot the bill? They’re taking on about 5%, the CBO estimates.)

In real dollar terms, the tariffs amounted to an average tax increase of $1,000 per household in 2025, according to the non-partisan Tax Foundation.

Now, on one hand, these are just your standard academic mumbo-jumbo papers published by a bunch of nerds, for a bunch of nerds. The collective wisdom of economists has never much mattered to Trump when it comes to “the most beautiful word to me in the dictionary,” as he once described tariffs.

But the CBO and New York Fed reports landed just as tariff fatigue is hitting hard in DC.

In a rare rebuke of Trump’s signature economic agenda, six House Republicans joined with Democrats on Wednesday in a vote that would effectively repeal his tariffs on Canada. The tariffs won’t get repealed, mind you, because even if it passed the Senate, Trump would just veto it. But the brushback from Trump’s own party members didn’t go over well in the West Wing, as one might have guessed. Shortly after the vote, Trump responded with a threat of “consequences” for “any Republican” in Congress who votes against tariffs.

Meanwhile, a Supreme Court ruling on the legality of Trump’s tariffs is due any day, potentially tossing his whole agenda into upheaval.

In a statement, White House spokesman Kush Desai defended the tariff agenda, noting inflation had cooled and corporate profits have gone up even as “America’s average tariff rate has increased nearly sevenfold.”

“The reality is that President Trump’s economic agenda of tax cuts, deregulation, tariffs, and energy abundance are reducing costs and accelerating economic growth,” he said.

Of course, all of that is happening as everyday Americans seethe over the cost of living and increasingly hold Trump and the Republicans responsible. Trump’s campaign message of lowering prices on “day one” simply hasn’t happened. (Except on a few items like eggs — we can give him the W on that one, largely because farmers worked really hard to snuff out the bird flu that was crimping egg supplies and driving up prices.)

On paper, the US economy is humming along nicely. That’s largely because the economy is measured in averages and aggregates.

Take, for example, the January jobs report released Wednesday. On the whole, it looked surprisingly strong, with 130,000 jobs added, nearly double what economists had expected. But if you zoom in, almost all of the gains came from one sector, health care. Zoom in a little more, and virtually every other sector showed either weak gains or losses. In fact, for all of 2025, health care and social assistance accounted for 97% of all the job growth.

That is a prime example of what economist Diane Swonk of KPMG has called the “one-legged stools” holding up the entire economy. Two other one-legged stools: Rich people doing shopping sprees, and giant tech companies shelling out hundreds of billions on AI infrastructure.

For more CNN.com


90% of Trump’s tariffs are paid for by American consumers and companies, New York Fed says

President Donald Trump has said foreign exporters will pay for his tariffs, but new New York Fed data indicates the contrary is happening. · Fortune · Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc—Getty Images

Sasha Rogelberg
Fri, February 13, 202

Despite President Donald Trump insisting it’s foreign businesses paying for his raft of tariffs, mounting data indicates that, actually, American households and businesses are footing the bill for his import taxes.

A Federal Reserve Bank of New York report released Thursday, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau and Foreign Trade Statistics through November 2025, found Americans paid for nearly 90% of the tariffs in 2025, including 94% of the levies from January to August of last year, 92% from September to October, and 86% in November.

“Our results show that the bulk of the tariff incidence continues to fall on U.S. firms and consumers,” the economists wrote. Americans “continue to bear the bulk of the economic burden of the high tariffs imposed in 2025.”

The report authors—Mary Amiti, Chris Flanagan, Sebastian Heise, and David E. Weinstein—explained in their report that over the course of 2025, average tariff rates quintupled from 2.6% to 13%. If foreign firms were the ones paying for the levies, it would be reflected in those companies having to lower prices in order for them to remain the same on American soil once the taxes were applied. Instead, their data reflects that companies exporting to the U.S. have only modestly decreased their prices, leaving it to domestic companies to absorb the increased costs or pass them down to consumers.

Trump has repeatedly asserted other countries looking to export goods to the U.S. are the ones paying for the tariffs. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed last month, Trump said: “The data shows that the burden, or ‘incidence,’ of the tariffs has fallen overwhelmingly on foreign producers and middlemen, including large corporations that are not from the U.S.”

The president’s declaration on the tariffs’ success comes as his trade policy undergoes increased scrutiny. On Wednesday, the House of Representatives passed a resolution, with the support of three Republicans, to overturn the tariffs imposed on Canada out of economic concern. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is awaiting an imminent ruling from the Supreme Court, which will determine the legality of the tariffs on the basis of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

Americans have taken note of higher prices as a result of tariffs, and last month, consumer confidence sank to its lowest level in more than 11 years, with survey respondents citing tariffs as one reason for this anxiety.

“Consumers’ write-in responses on factors affecting the economy continued to skew towards pessimism,” Conference Board Chief Economist Dana Peterson said in a statement. “References to prices and inflation, oil and gas prices, and food and grocery prices remained elevated. Mentions of tariffs and trade, politics, and the labor market also rose in January, and references to health/insurance and war edged higher.”

“America’s average tariff rate has increased nearly sevenfold in the past year–yet inflation has cooled and corporate profits have increased,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement to Fortune. “The reality is that President Trump’s economic agenda of tax cuts, deregulation, tariffs, and energy abundance are reducing costs and accelerating economic growth.”

Writing on the wall

The tariffs’ impact on American businesses and consumers follows a pattern seen in the tariff impact from Trump’s first term. A 2019 study from the Journal of Economic Perspectives found Americans were paying the full incidence, or cost, of tariffs through 2018, which amounted to an estimated reduction of $1.4 billion per month in aggregate U.S. real income through 2018.

The New York Fed report this week similarly mirrors data from myriad sources, including from the Harvard Business School’s Tariff Tracker, which found that through October 2025, the levies added 0.76% to the Consumer Price Index, or U.S. inflation. The Kiel Institute likewise found foreign exports were absorbing only 4% of the tariff burden, leaving 96% to be eaten by U.S. buyers.

U.S. business leaders have been sounding the alarm on tariffs for months for this exact reason, claiming it would be domestic businesses making the call to either absorb costs at the expense of their own margins, or pass down costs to customers.

Procter & Gamble announced in July 2025 it would raise prices on some of its household products like diapers and skincare due to tariffs. General Motors reported the same month a $1.1 billion profit hit as a result of the levies.

“There’s not much you can do,” Bernstein senior analyst Daniel Roeska told Fortune in July. “If the policy is to put tariffs on cars, then that will increase the cost of cars, and ultimately, that will likely increase the price of cars.”

Taken together, the burden of these levies have outweighed the benefits Trump has claimed the taxes will fund, according to some economists. The president has claimed tariff revenue will pay off the country’s staggering $38 trillion national debt and the administration will be able to dole out $2,000 rebate checks to Americans and provide tax cuts.

Nonpartisan think tank the Tax Foundation found earlier this month the costs of tariffs for U.S. households exceed the benefit of a tax break. The group previously estimated Trump’s tax cut would increase the average return by $1,000 from last year, but calculated that the tariff burden for Americans would swell to $1,300 in 2026, wiping out any benefit from the cuts.

“Tariffs are really holding back the potential of the new tax law, both to deliver relief to taxpayers and to grow the economy,” Erica York, vice president of federal tax policy at the Tax Foundation, told Fortune.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com