&w=3840&q=100)
White House mulls inspection of Federal Reserve HQ as Trump vs Powell feud intensifies
US President Donald Trump announces Jerome Powell as his nominee to become chairman of the US Federal Reserve in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, US, November 2, 2017. File Image/Reuters
As the feud between US President Donald Trump and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell intensifies, reports are emerging that the White House is pushing for an inspection of the US Federal Reserve headquarters in Washington, DC. The move is coming at a time when Trump has suggested that the American central bank has mismanaged funds for building renovations.
Ever since coming back to the White House, Trump has been pressuring Powell to quit, demanding that he and other officials lower the interest rates. Meanwhile, Powell has argued that lowering the rates prematurely could increase inflation since Trump tariffs have already contributed significantly to raising the prices of goods.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
In response to the Fed Chair's resistance, Trump has threatened to fire Powell multiple times, with Powell stating that he will serve the post until his term ends. On Friday, Trump went on to float the idea of firing Powell to House Republicans. 'I don't rule out anything, but I think it's highly unlikely unless he has to leave for fraud," the president said at the dinner with Republican senators.
Why is the White House interested in searching the Federal Reserve headquarters?
On Thursday, the White House budget director, Russell Vought, told reporters that the administration wanted to have an on-site inspection of the Fed's troubled $2.5bn building renovations. 'I think the president was pretty clear yesterday: he's unlikely to fire the chairman, but he has substantial concerns about how he's managed the Fed,' Vought averred.
However, firing the Federal Reserve Chair would not be an easy task. The Supreme Court in the spring went out of its way to say that, while Trump can fire certain officials, like those on national labour boards, the Fed is different.
'The Federal Reserve is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States,' the court said in May. If Trump went ahead and fired Powell, he might have to undergo a complicated battle with the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, Wall Street is also not taking Trump's ambition to fire Powell very well. 'The independence of the Fed is absolutely critical,' the JPMorgan Chase CEO, Jamie Dimon, said on Tuesday. 'Not just for the current Fed chairman, who I respect, but for the next Fed chairman.'
It is pertinent to note that Powell's term is set to end in May 2026, but Trump appears to be hopeful that recent renovations at the Fed make Powell an easier target. According to The Guardian, renovations were initially slated to cost $1.9bn after it was budgeted in 2019, but costs have risen to $2.5bn.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The Fed argued that the renovations cover two buildings that have 'not been comprehensively renovated since their construction in the 1930s'. On Wednesday, Trump said that 'there may be fraud involved with the $2.5bn'. Trump also said that Powell was a ' terrible Fed chair' and that he 'was surprised he was appointed'. Interestingly, it was Trump who appointed Powell to the job in 2018. Former US President Joe Biden eventually extended his term in 2022.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
9 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Sydney Sweeney's controversial ad campaign draws Trump's attention, he says 'advertising a very funny thing'
AP US President Donald Trump was asked about the Sydney Sweeney's American Eagle's ad by Newsmax anchor Rob Finnerty The ongoing controversy surrounding Sydney Sweeney's American Eagle ad has garnered a lot of attention online. Sweeney, 27, and American Eagle faced backlash earlier this week after the blonde-haired, blue-eyed 'White Lotus' starlet appeared in a new denim ad for the popular clothing and accessories retailer. It sparked a debate over race and Western beauty President Donald Trump was asked about the Sydney Sweeney's American Eagle's ad by Newsmax anchor Rob Finnerty. Trump was asked about the highly contested advertisement in a bizarre question that ended with the president going on a rant about transgender actress Dylan Mulvaney and his own experience with advertising, reports The Irish Star. ALSO READ: Social Security eyes massive reform in US: New policy could hit 3.4 million Americans this month "Your administration has been very open about the fact that American women are not having enough babies," the Newsmax anchor began his perplexing line of questioning. "There was an ad this week. Sydney Sweeney, an actress, was in an ad for Blue Jeans. The ad is doing very well. It's very popular. The jeans are sold out," he went on before asking, "Does America need to see more ads like that? And maybe fewer ads with people like Dylan Mulvaney on the cover?" ALSO READ: Solar Eclipse on August 2 in US? What NASA has said on world going dark for 6 minutes Trump took the bait and went on a rant about the Bud Light campaign. He said, "The Dylan Mulvaney ad was perhaps the most unsuccessful ad in history. It knocked 35 million dollars off the value of a certain company. You know what I'm talking about. That was one of the great disasters of all time. I would say it was probably the most unsuccessful ad, worst ad ever." He continued, "You know, advertising is a very funny thing. I've done ads where I thought they were lousy and they turned out to be iconic, and then I've done some that I thought were beauties that were gonna be fantastic, and they weren't so good, so to each his own. But the Dylan Mulvaney ad was a total disaster." The Newsmax anchor paired the question with an onscreen banner that read, "Trump ends the era of woke."ALSO READ: 'Rage Against The Regime' protests: Over 300 US cities hosting anti-Trump demonstrations today on JD Vance's birthday. Full list American Eagle is standing by its controversial ad campaign featuring Sydney Sweeney, which includes various commercials with the tagline: 'Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans.' The campaign has been criticized for promoting eugenics with its tagline, "Sydney Sweeney has good jeans," which many interpreted as a white supremacist dog whistle. ''Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans' is and always was about the jeans,' the company said Friday in a statement obtained by The Post. 'Her jeans. Her story.' 'We'll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way,' the statement continued. 'Great jeans look good on everyone.''I have great jeans… now you can too,' the 'Euphoria' actress wrote on Instagram on July 23, alongside a video for the controversial campaign. But some social media users compared the marketing move to "Nazi propaganda". ALSO READ: Stimulus payments August 2025: These US states will receive financial benefit. Do you qualify? 'I thought it was gonna be, like, kinda bad, but wow,' one critic wrote on TikTok. 'That's gonna be in history books!' 'I will be the friend that's too woke, but those Sydney Sweeney American Eagle ads are weird,' another added. 'Like, fascist weird. Like Nazi propaganda weird.' Singers Lizzo, 37, and Doja Cat, 29, also took to social media to ridicule Sweeney and American Eagle over the controversy. 'My jeans are black…' the 'Truth Hurts' singer wrote alongside a digitally altered picture showing herself in the denim shirt and jeans that Sweeney wore for the American Eagle photo shoot. Doja Cat shared a TikTok video of herself repeating Sweeney's American Eagle campaign monologue with an exaggerated accent. American Eagle appeared to distance itself from the 'Nazi propaganda' backlash by sharing other ads from the campaign that did not feature Sweeney.'Denim on denim on denim… on denim,' the company wrote alongside the new ad on July 27. 'AE has great jeans.' Plus, American Eagle's stock rose more than 10% immediately after the new campaign kicked off on July 23.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
11 minutes ago
- Business Standard
India to keep buying Russian oil despite Trump's penalty threat: Report
India will continue to buy crude oil from Russia, despite US President Donald Trump's warning of a penalty, according to a report in Reuters, quoting two Indian government sources, who did not wish to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." The New York Times, in its report, quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy. One of the officials, in the news report, said the government had "not given any direction to oil companies" to cut back imports from Russia. The Indian authorities had, on Friday, said their energy decisions are based on national interest and market factors. Trump recently claimed India may stop purchasing oil from Russia, calling it a 'good step' if true. However, India's foreign ministry stated on Friday that no such decision has been made. Speaking to the media on Friday, Trump said, 'I understand that India is no longer going to be buying oil from Russia. That's what I heard — I don't know if that's right or not — but that would be a good step.' His comment followed the US government's announcement of a 25 per cent tariff on all goods imported from India, effective from August 1, along with an unspecified penalty. Tougher stance: 100% tariff warning In mid-July, Trump issued a stronger threat, warning of up to 100 per cent tariffs on any country that continues to buy oil from Russia unless there is a complete peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine. Earlier this week, he also criticised India's economic partnership with Russia. Posting on Truth Social, Trump said, 'I don't care what India does with Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care.' He repeated long-standing complaints about India's high tariffs, saying, 'Their tariffs are too high, among the highest in the world. The US has done very little business with India for this reason.' On Wednesday, the US officially announced a 25 per cent tariff on all Indian exports to the United States starting August 7. India defends its position Responding to the US statements, India's Ministry of External Affairs said the country decides on oil purchases based on availability, global prices, and domestic needs. 'We look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation,' said foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal during a press briefing on Friday. Russia remains India's top oil supplier Russia continues to be India's leading crude oil supplier, accounting for about 35 per cent of total oil imports. From January to June 2025, India imported around 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil — slightly higher than the same period last year, Reuters reported. Other key suppliers include Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. India is the world's third-largest importer and consumer of oil. US Senator Marco Rubio calls India's Russia ties a concern US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also expressed concern over India's oil purchases from Russia, saying it is 'most certainly a point of irritation' in the US-India relationship. Speaking to Fox Radio on Thursday, Rubio noted that even among allies, it is normal to disagree on some foreign policy matters. 'India is a strategic partner. Like anything in foreign policy, you're not going to align 100 per cent of the time,' he said. (With agency inputs)
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
11 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump's tariff threat: For India, no deal is better than a bad one
Trade deals aren't T20s—they're Test matches, needing years of diplomacy, while President Trump wants them wrapped up in days read more America is India's largest trading partner. Still, the world is larger than the US, and India is a sovereign global power. File Image/Reuters The President of the United States, Donald Trump, issues policy decisions and administrative orders from golf courses, aboard Air Force One, on his social media platform Truth Social, and occasionally from the White House in the form of Executive Orders. For President Trump, 'tariff' is the most beautiful word in the dictionary. Once again, on July 31, 2025, Trump disrupted the global trade order, sending markets into turmoil with a sweeping revision of ad valorem duties on imports from nearly 200 countries. His latest Executive Order was issued just a day before his extended deadline to the world expired on August 1, 2025. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India, along with Brazil, Canada, and Switzerland, has been hit particularly hard. I'll examine the implications for India shortly. Extreme Break, and the Cost to US Consumers First, what do these new tariff orders signify? Indisputably, they add more confusion to an already uncertain global trade environment. More critically, they represent a sharp departure from over a century of US trade policy. According to the Budget Lab at Yale University, the new tariffs will lead to an overall effective tariff rate of 18.3 per cent— the highest since 1934. They estimate this will cost the average American household around $2,400 in 2025 alone. Markets in a Tizzy The new trade policy, effective August 7, impacts nearly every country and marks a decisive break from decades of free trade. The result? Markets tumbled on both sides of the Atlantic. After an early-day sell-off in Asian markets, Europe's Stoxx 600 fell nearly 2 per cent, the UK's FTSE 100 declined by 0.8 per cent, and Wall Street closed lower, with the Dow Jones and S&P 500 down over 1 per cent, and the Nasdaq dropping more than 2 per cent. The market drop was worsened by weaker-than-expected US job data. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Why So Much Uncertainty? First, the second Executive Order (dated July 31) came just months after the original April 2 order — a one-two punch for global markets. Second, there is no assurance that we've seen the worst of Trump's tariff campaign. Decoding the New Tariff Regime The revised tariffs impact nearly every country and signify a hard pivot toward protectionism. Here's how the new structure breaks down: 10 per cent Tariff: Imposed on countries with whom the US has a trade surplus (ie, countries that import more from the US than they export to it). 15 per cent Tariff: Set as a minimum for about 40 countries where the US runs a trade deficit. For some, this is lower than the April 2 'reciprocal' tariffs; for others, it's higher. Above 15 per cent: Over two dozen countries now face tariffs higher than 15 per cent, either due to agreed frameworks or unilateral decisions by Trump — mostly those with large trade deficits with the US. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trans-shipment Penalty: An additional 40 per cent tariff may be imposed on goods Washington deems as 'trans-shipped' through another country — a move primarily targeting Chinese goods. Winners and Losers The new tariff framework has created a jarring set of winners and losers. Losers: Brazil: Hit hardest with a 50 per cent tariff, including a vague 'free speech' penalty. India: Faces a 25 per cent tariff, plus an unspecified penalty for purchasing Russian energy and military hardware — potentially as high as 200 per cent. Syria: 41 per cent tariff — second highest after Brazil. Myanmar and Laos: 40 per cent each. Switzerland: Slapped with a 39 per cent tariff, the highest for any European nation outside the EU. Iraq and Serbia: 35 per cent each. Canada: Tariff raised to 35 per cent, but goods compliant with the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) are exempt. South Africa, Algeria, Libya: 30 per cent each — the highest in Africa. Moldova, Mexico, Brunei, Tunisia, Kazakhstan: All face a 25 per cent tariff — same as India, though India has the added Russia penalty. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Winners: Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Vietnam: Each now faces a 20 per cent tariff, down sharply from April's rates (46 per cent for Vietnam, 44 per cent Sri Lanka, 37 per cent Bangladesh, 31per cent Taiwan). Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand: Tariffs lowered to 19 per cent, from as high as 49 per cent (Cambodia) and 32 per cent (Indonesia) in April. This comparison puts India at a clear disadvantage among its Asian peers. Trump had initially imposed tariffs up to 27 per cent on Indian goods in April, later paused. Since then, multiple rounds of trade talks have taken place. There's More Beyond general import tariffs, targeted levies now affect specific industries: Steel & Aluminium: 50 per cent (effective June 4) Copper: 50 per cent (effective August 1) Automobiles & Car Parts: 25 per cent (from April 3 and May 3) Though not yet implemented, Trump has threatened 200 per cent tariffs on pharmaceuticals and semiconductors, citing national security. Ninety Deals in Ninety Days? On April 2 — what Trump dubbed Liberation Day — he introduced his first round of 'reciprocal' tariffs. Days later, he paused them, giving trading partners 90 days to negotiate deals with the US. Trump ambitiously aimed for 90 deals in 90 days. According to Kevin Hassett, Director of the National Economic Council, over 50 countries began talks. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Arm-Twisting, Not Diplomacy Despite his optimism, Trump has little to show beyond coercive deals: UK: A deal allowing 100,000 cars to be exported to the US at 10 per cent tariff (down from 25 per cent). EU: 15 per cent flat tariff — less than the threatened 30 per cent. Japan: 15 per cent tariff, plus $550 billion investment in US infrastructure and agricultural market access. Philippines: Reduced from 20 per cent to 19 per cent. China: Tariff reduced from 145 per cent to 30 per cent; China reciprocated with a cut from 125 per cent to 10 per cent. South Korea: Tariff set at 15 per cent (down from 25 per cent); Korea pledged $350 billion investment and $100 billion in US energy purchases. These are not carefully negotiated, mutually beneficial agreements — they are outcomes of arm-twisting. Trade Deals Aren't White-Ball Cricket Trump's 90-deal ambition was destined to falter. Trade deals aren't T20 matches — they're Test cricket. They require years of diplomacy and legislative buy-in. The global average to finalise a trade deal is 2.5 years. Trump wants them done in days. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India's Trade Talks – Derailed Again India has held five rounds of talks with the Trump administration — predating the April 2 tariffs. Trump repeatedly claimed a 'great deal' with India was coming. Then, out of nowhere, he delivered a bouncer. Despite ongoing talks, he branded India a 'tariff king' and an 'abuser of trade ties', imposing a 25 per cent tariff — significantly higher than most Asian peers — plus an unspecified Russia-related penalty. The most alarming scenario? Trump enforces his earlier threat of a 100 per cent secondary tariff on Russian energy buyers. This would make Indian goods prohibitively expensive in the US. The Logic? There Often Isn't One Trump's justification? High Indian tariffs, non-monetary barriers, and India's defense trade with Russia. Here's what he posted on Truth Social on July 30: 'Remember, while India is our friend, we have, over the years, done relatively little business with them because their Tariffs are far too high… Also, they have always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia… INDIA WILL THEREFORE BE PAYING A TARIFF OF 25% PLUS A PENALTY… STARTING ON AUGUST FIRST. THANK YOU… MAGA!' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The next day, Trump doubled down: 'I don't care what India does with Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care…' Consequences of No Deal In just three days, Trump reversed course — from promising a 'great deal' to dismissing India's economy altogether. The 25 per cent tariff took effect on August 1. A last-minute mini deal India and the US had been negotiating since February has now collapsed. A comprehensive trade deal looks even more unlikely. Time for Bharat First If the new tariffs and the Russia penalty persist, India's GDP could take a 0.2-0.4 per cent hit, especially affecting export sectors like marine products, textiles, leather, automobiles, and pharmaceuticals. But it's time to hold the line. As the government rightly states, India must take all necessary steps to protect its national interest — as seen in recent trade pacts like the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the UK. America is India's largest trading partner. Still, the world is larger than the US, and India is a sovereign global power. India must refuse any trade agreement that is inequitable or detrimental to its farmers, entrepreneurs, and Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSMEs). No deal is better than a bad deal. The author is a multi-disciplinary thought leader with Action Bias and an India based impact consultant. He is a keen watcher of changing national and international scenarios. He works as President Advisory Services of Consulting Company BARSYL. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
