
Why is Trump unhappy with Fed Chair Jerome Powell, and what does the Federal Reserve do?
The president's gripes with his handpicked Fed chair — whom he has called a "numbskull," a "Trump Hater" and a "stubborn mule" — have largely focused on the central bank's decision to keep interest rates relatively high so far this year, part of an inflation-fighting campaign. Mr. Trump has also taken aim at Powell's handling of a Federal Reserve office renovation project.
Mr. Trump asked a group of House Republicans if he should fire Powell during a Tuesday night Oval Office meeting, sources told CBS News earlier this week. The president told reporters a day later it's "highly unlikely" he'll fire Powell, though he confirmed he spoke to lawmakers about "the concept of firing him," and "almost all of them said I should."
Powell is the chair of the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors.
Powell was first nominated as Fed chair by Mr. Trump during his first term, replacing Obama appointee Janet Yellen, and the Senate confirmed him in an 84-13 vote. Former President Joe Biden nominated him to a second term, keeping him in office until May 2026.
"He's strong, he's committed, he's smart," Mr. Trump said in a speech announcing his decision to nominate Powell in 2017, praising Powell's reputation as a "consensus-builder."
Last month, though, Mr. Trump said he initially nominated Powell because he "listened to someone that I shouldn't have listened to, and Biden shouldn't have reappointed him."
Before becoming chair, Powell had served on the central bank's Board of Governors since 2012, when he was initially nominated by former President Barack Obama.
Powell has switched between government and private-sector jobs for much of his career. He worked in investment banking in the 1980s and 1990s, interrupted by a stint as former President George H.W. Bush's undersecretary of the Treasury. For almost 20 years starting in the 1990s, he was a partner at the Carlyle Group investment firm, according to his Fed biography.
A Georgetown-educated lawyer, Powell does not have a Ph.D. in economics, unlike some other former Fed chairs.
Federal Reserve chairs serve for four-year terms, so Powell's stint as chair will end in May 2026.
Members of the Fed's seven-member Board of Governors, however, serve for 14 years, and Powell's term as a board member ends in January 2028. Yellen resigned from the board after her term as Fed chair ended, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has encouraged Powell to follow suit, though Powell's plans are unclear.
The chair and board members are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
The Federal Reserve is the United States' central bank. Made up of 12 regional Federal Reserve banks and a D.C.-based Board of Governors, its responsibilities include regulating the U.S. banking system, serving as a "lender of last resort" to banks and running an instant payment system.
But one of the Federal Reserve's highest-profile responsibilities is its role in setting monetary policy. Through its 12-person Federal Open Market Committee, which includes Powell, the Fed works independently of elected officials to influence the supply of money in the U.S. economy and the interest rates at which it's lent out, with an eye toward keeping unemployment low and prices stable.
Those two goals — maximizing employment and minimizing inflation — are known as the Fed's "dual mandate." But they're in conflict with each other. If the Fed lowers interest rates, it can boost economic growth, but it also runs the risk of overheating the economy and pushing up inflation. And if interest rates are hiked, inflation tends to cool off, but the economy slows down.
The interest rate that the Fed targets is called the Federal Funds Rate, which is what banks charge to lend money to each other overnight. But other interest rates — from mortgage rates to yields for U.S. government bonds — tend to follow closely with the Federal Funds Rate, so the Fed's decisions impact borrowing costs for average American consumers and businesses.
Picking the right balance isn't easy, and the Fed often faces criticism for its choices.
Under Powell, the Fed dropped its target interest rate to near 0% at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, with the goal of averting an economic catastrophe. But after the economy recovered and inflation soared, the central bank in 2023 hiked interest rates to their highest point in decades, aiming to get inflation under control. The Fed has taken a cautious path since then, cutting rates slightly last year as inflation fell but keeping them steady so far this year.
Last month, the Fed's rate-setting committee said it may cut rates later this year, but there are concerns that inflation — which is still above the Fed's 2%-per-year target — could worsen. Powell has also suggested the Fed is concerned Mr. Trump's tariffs could increase inflation.
"For the time being, we are well positioned to wait to learn more about the likely course of the economy before considering any adjustments to our policy stance," Powell said last month.
Mr. Trump is unhappy with the Fed's decision to leave rates stable. For months, the president has pushed the central bank to slash rates immediately, calling Powell "Mr. Too Late."
The president argued last month that inflation is already low enough to start cutting rates.
"If he was concerned about Inflation or anything else, then all he has to do is bring the Rate down, so we can benefit on Interest Costs, and raise it in the future when and if these 'other elements' happen (which I doubt they will!)," Mr. Trump wrote.
He's not the first president to criticize the Fed for high interest rates, which make everything from car loans to mortgages more expensive and can put a damper on the economic growth that tends to make or break presidents' popularity. But Mr. Trump has been unusually vocal.
In a mid-June post on Truth Social, Mr. Trump called Powell a "Total and Complete Moron" and urged the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee to "override" him. While Powell is just one of 12 votes on the committee, the chair traditionally has an outsize role in its decisions. The last few decisions to leave interest rates stable have been unanimous.
Mr. Trump had similar issues with Powell during his first term, saying during an earlier interest rate-hiking campaign in 2018 that he was "not even a little bit happy with my selection" of Powell. When the Fed cut rates in 2020, Mr. Trump called Powell his "most improved player."
Meanwhile, members of the Trump administration have pressured Powell over a yearslong renovation to the Fed's headquarters complex. In a letter to the central banker, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought called some of the features "ostentatious," and alleged that Powell may have misled Congress about the project's scope or made changes to the plans without getting permission from the right federal bodies.
Mr. Trump has also criticized Powell over the renovations. On Wednesday, Mr. Trump said he's "highly unlikely" to fire Powell "unless he has to leave for fraud." At other points, Mr. Trump has suggested Powell should resign over the project.
Powell said last year he would not resign as chair if asked to do so.
Powell defended the Fed's handling of the project in a letter to Vought and denied allegations that it was overly lavish, saying the Fed has "taken great care to ensure the project is carefully overseen." He also said the project has been "subject to budget approval" by board members annually. Powell added the Fed has only "made a small number of design changes to scale back or eliminate certain elements," so no further government review is needed.
The Fed typically operates with a high degree of independence over its own budget, and legally has the power to buy and remodel office spaces in Washington, D.C., as it sees fit.
The structure of the Fed — with board members and chairs who serve across multiple administrations — allows it to make decisions without direct input from politicians.
Whether the president can fire Powell before his term ends is legally untested. Federal law says members of the Federal Reserve board can only be removed by the president before their terms end "for cause," and the Supreme Court found in 1935 that Congress is allowed to limit the grounds on which the president can fire members of independent federal boards.
In May, the high court did allow Mr. Trump to fire members of federal labor boards, but it exempted the Federal Reserve, which it called a "uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States."
Any attempt to fire Powell before his term ends could also roil financial markets, analysts and lawmakers from both parties have warned. Mr. Trump acknowledged this risk Wednesday, telling Just The News in an interview, "They say it would disrupt the market if I did."
At some points in the Federal Reserve's 112-year history, including during World War II, the central bank has been more beholden to the needs of the Treasury. But the Fed has operated more independently since 1951, when a public disagreement between the Fed and the Truman administration led the Treasury to agree to let the central bank set interest rates on its own.
There's nothing preventing the president from publicly expressing his views about the Fed, though, as several of Mr. Trump's predecessors have. During his campaign last year, Mr. Trump said he should have "at least [a] say" in the moves made by the central bank.
"In my case, I made a lot of money, I was very successful, and I think I have a better instinct than, in many cases, people that would be on the Federal Reserve, or the chairman," Mr. Trump said in an August 2024 press briefing.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in April that Mr. Trump "has the right to express his displeasure with the Fed, and he has the right to say he believes interest rates should be lower."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Robert Kiyosaki's Hot Take: $107K Bitcoin Is a Steal — Delusion or Visionary?
Robert Kiyosaki, whose 'Rich Dad Poor Dad' series brought him personal finance fame and fortune, knows that 'rich' and 'poor' are subjective terms, just like 'expensive' and 'inexpensive' — especially where cryptocurrency is concerned. The author and on-air personality also seems to believe that the greatest risk might be not taking one at all. On June 29, Kiyosaki announced on X that he first bought bitcoin when it was trading at $6,000. While he conceded that he was 'late' to the game, he wasn't too late. At the time of his post, BTC was selling for $107,000 per coin — and he wants anyone who's worried they missed the boat to consider that it's not too late for them, either. Is he right? Check Out: Read Next: Is $6K Expensive? How About $107K? Maybe Neither Although he could have jumped in sooner, Kiyosaki has gained 1,683.33% on his bitcoin investment — hardly the kind of returns that should make an investor regretful. However, his language wasn't regretful. It was optimistic. 'So I bought my first bitcoin at $6,000 a coin,' Kiyosaki wrote. 'It was expensive. Today I wish I had bought more at $6,000. Today bitcoin is $107,000 a coin. Again my mind says, 'That's expensive,' but I am buying more. Why? Because if and when bitcoin sells for $1 million a coin, I will once again be saying, 'I wish I had bought more.'' Learn More: Does BTC Have a Million-Dollar Future? There was a time in the not-too-distant past when many considered the $100,000 milestone a figment that existed only in the imaginations of bitcoin bulls. Yet in December 2024, BTC became a six-figure cryptocurrency. So, about Kiyosaki's seven-figure aspirations for the digital coin that started it all? To accurately predict that would require crystal-ball wizardry that could turn anyone who possessed it into the world's first trillionaire — but Kiyosaki is hardly alone. Several insiders who have more expertise on the subject than he have joined or preceded the author in projecting that bitcoin will eventually reach $1 million or more, including: ARK Invest founder and CEO Cathie Wood MicroStrategy co-founder Michael Saylor Jeff Park of Bitwise Asset Management BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes JAN3 CEO Samson Mow The only certainty is that between the time of Kiyosaki's post on June 29 and July 9, Bitcoin gained more than $2,000, jumping from $107,000 to $109,300. More From GOBankingRates 4 Affordable Car Brands You Won't Regret Buying in 2025 This article originally appeared on Robert Kiyosaki's Hot Take: $107K Bitcoin Is a Steal — Delusion or Visionary?
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Priscilla Chan's recruiting pitch? We can't pay as well as tech companies, but we've got GPUs
Mark Zuckerberg's Meta is betting on GPUs and compute power to help attract top talent. His philanthropic organization, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, is doing the same. His wife, Priscilla Chan, talked about CZI's recruitment efforts on a recent podcast episode. Compute power is a big draw for top talent, but not just in the world of AI. Priscilla Chan, Mark Zuckerberg's wife and the cofounder of the couple's philanthropic organization, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, spoke about the appeal of massive GPU clusters for biology researchers during a recent episode of Ashlee Vance's "Core Memory" podcast. "The other thing researchers really care about is access to GPUs," she said. "You're not going to make the most of someone if you don't actually have the GPUs for them to work from." Chan said, "We have that at CZI," adding that the organization has roughly 1,000 GPUs in its cluster, with plans to keep growing. In short, Chan said the pitch is: "Come work with us because we're going to have the computing power to support the research that you want to do." Another important factor is compensation, which she said is "obviously important," though she added that "we cannot compete with tech companies on this." CZI has in recent years narrowed its mission to focus on its "next phase" with a "bolder, clearer identity as a science-first philanthropy." The change marks a strategic shift, as the organization previously also supported education and other causes. "While CZI remains committed to our work in education and our local communities, we recognize that science is where our biggest investments and bets have been and will be made moving forward," Chan, a pediatrician by training, wrote in a memo to staff last year. Zuckerberg made a similar point about the importance of GPUs in recruiting on a recent episode of The Information's TITV show. Meta is spending billions to build an AI division it calls Superintelligence Labs. "Historically, when I was recruiting people to different parts of the company, people are like, 'Okay, what's my scope going to be?'" the Meta CEO said. "Here, people say, 'I want the fewest number of people reporting to me and the most GPUs.'" Meta, of course, has significantly more GPUs than CZI. Zuckerberg has said the company will have 1.3 million GPUs for AI by the end of 2025. "Having basically the most compute per researcher is definitely a strategic advantage, not just for doing the work but for attracting the best people," he said. Read the original article on Business Insider Sign in to access your portfolio

Business Insider
30 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Here are the 10 most expensive cities for the ultra-rich in 2025 — and the quiet power shift shaping the next luxury capitals
For the third year running, Singapore ranked as the world's most expensive city for high-net-worth individuals, according to the latest Global Wealth and Lifestyle Report from Julius Baer Group, a Swiss wealth management group. London moved into second place, nudging Hong Kong into third — but behind these familiar frontrunners, a quiet transformation could soon redraw the global map for the super wealthy The 2025 edition of the report, published on Monday, tracked the cost of what it called "living well" — meaning the ability to afford and regularly spend on 20 luxury goods and services that high-net-worth individuals typically enjoy. These include private school fees, luxury property, watches, fancy dinners, and business class flights. Pricing data was collected across 25 cities between November 2024 and March 2025, and each city was ranked based on the weighted-average total cost of all 20 items, converted into US dollars. To complement the price index, Julius Baer also conducted a separate Lifestyle Survey, polling 360 high-net-worth individuals across 15 countries in February and March 2025 to understand how the wealthy are spending and investing. While the methodology is robust, it does not account for geopolitical shifts that followed, including the Trump administration's April tariff announcements, and its relatively small sample size may limit broad conclusions. Still, the findings point to a clear shift in momentum: while the podium remains stable, several key cities — especially in Asia and the Middle East — are climbing fast, suggesting a broader power shift in global luxury hubs. The top 10 most expensive cities for the wealthy in 2025 Singapore. London. Hong Kong. Monaco. Zurich. Shanghai. Dubai. New York. Paris. Milan. The quiet rise of new luxury capitals Several emerging cities climbed the rankings at an unexpected pace, especially in Asia and the Middle East. Dubai jumped five spots to 7th place, edging closer to European strongholds like Monaco and Zurich. Bangkok and Tokyo both rose six positions, landing at 11th and 17th, respectively, driven by rising costs of fashion, watches, and property. Bangkok's "growing upper-middle class has had a direct impact on the expansion of the local luxury market," Rishabh Saksena, cohead of Julius Baer's global asset class specialists, told Business Insider. "Increased wealth has mechanically driven demand for luxury goods and services, allowing the development of luxury malls, fine dining, and experiences such as spas," he said. "Additionally, the city benefits from Asia's long-standing appeal as a global tourism destination." Tokyo's rise reflects a similar trend. " Tokyo, and Japan more broadly, has long been a culturally rich and influential region, with a strong luxury market, especially in areas such as fashion, fine dining, and experiences," Saksena added. "The recent global shift among HNWIs toward valuing experiences over goods has further enhanced Tokyo's attractivity and appeal." Meanwhile, Shanghai, which topped the index in 2022, fell from 4th to 6th place — a sign that its dominance may be fading So Paulo and Mexico City also dropped notably in the rankings. "Dubai is nipping at the heels of the bastion cities in the region for wealth and lifestyle — London, Monaco, and Zurich — in a trend that is likely to continue as the Emirate ups the ante on offering an attractive residence proposition for HNWIs," the report said. Behind the movements is a growing desire among the ultrawealthy for stability, wellness, and future-focused cities. The report also notes that Dubai's appeal lies in tax advantages, luxury infrastructure, and a booming property market, while Bangkok and Tokyo benefit from regional economic momentum and cultural cachet. What's driving the change? The global average cost of "living well" actually declined 2% in US dollar terms between 2024 and 2025 — a rare drop in a sector typically shielded from macroeconomic headwinds. Yet, beneath that decline are sharp regional contrasts: Business class air fares jumped 18.2% globally, driven by a shortage of jets and booming demand for premium pleasure travel. Luxury goods like handbags and jewellery fell in price, reflecting shifting consumer priorities. Private school fees soared in cities like London, where new tax rules drove up costs by over 25%. More broadly, high-net-worth individuals increasingly prioritize experiences over possessions and longevity over status. These include spending more on wellness, curated travel, and health services, especially in Asia-Pacific and the Middle East. "The main shift we've seen recently is the growing move toward aspirational consumption among HNWIs, who increasingly value experiences over physical goods," Mark Matthews, Head of Research Asia at Julius Baer, told BI. "This trend varies from one location to another. Markets with a long cultural history of luxury goods (e.g., Switzerland with watches or Germany with cars) tend to show a slower transition toward 'experience-based' spending," he added. Data from the Lifestyle Survey backs this up. While luxury spending growth has cooled in Europe — where only 36% of high-net-worth individuals reported spending more on hotels — HNWIs in Asia-Pacific, the Middle East, and Latin America continue to ramp up their spending on high-end fashion, jewellery, and watches. In APAC, 65% reported increasing spending on both hotels and watches, and 63% on women's fashion. In the Middle East, 52% spent more on hotels and 50% on fine jewellery. Across the board, travel and hospitality remain top spending priorities, with fine dining and five-star hotels leading the way. A Eurasian future? The report also hints at a broader geopolitical rebalancing in how — and where — the world's wealthy choose to live. "There is already talk of many wealthy Americans decamping to Europe for the next four years — and possibly forever," Julius Baer's report said, citing affluent individuals looking for political stability and strong institutions. Cities like London, despite Brexit and political change, remain magnets for global wealth thanks to world-class education, healthcare, and cultural capital.