
Harvard and White House Move Toward Potential Landmark Settlement
Negotiators for the White House and the university have made significant progress in their closed-door discussions over the past week, developing a framework for a settlement to end their monthslong battle.
The talks could still collapse, as President Trump and senior Harvard officials need to sign off on the terms of the deal. The sides are still going back and forth over important wording in for a potential agreement.
But under the framework coming together, Harvard would agree to spend $500 million on vocational and educational programs, three of the people said. That figure, currently penciled in to be paid out over years, would meet a demand from President Trump that Harvard spend more than double what Columbia University agreed last month to pay. It would also satisfy Harvard's wish that it not pay the government directly, as Columbia is doing.
Harvard would also make commitments to continue its efforts to combat antisemitism on campus, two of the people said.
In return, Harvard — one of the largest recipients in higher education of federal research money — would see its research funding restored and avoid the appointment of a monitor, a condition the school has demanded as a way to preserve its academic independence, according to two of the people.
The Trump administration would also end its widening number of investigations into the university, including ones conducted by the Justice Department and another inquiry that the Commerce Department announced on Friday. The deal would also stop attempts by the Trump administration to block Harvard from enrolling thousands of international students, according to three of the people.
The stakes for reaching a deal are high for both Harvard and the administration. A deal would allow Mr. Trump to claim that Harvard forked over $500 million amid pressure from him. For Harvard, the deal would allow the school to remain one of the most robust higher education institutions in the country.
Harvard has insisted that any settlement must not jeopardize its academic freedom, and Mr. Trump has taken a keen interest in the details.
The people with knowledge of the deliberations spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing talks that are supposed to remain confidential.
Harvard declined to comment.
Harvard has spent the last four months at the forefront of the opposition to the Trump administration's pressure campaign against higher education. It is the only school that has sued after the administration targeted it with explicitly punitive funding cuts.
A settlement between the White House and the nation's oldest and wealthiest university would reverberate throughout academia and could shape how other schools respond to Mr. Trump's tactics. Last week, the administration proposed that the University of California, Los Angeles, pay more than $1 billion to reach a settlement with the government.
Some terms in an agreement with Harvard are expected to be similar to ones included in a deal Brown University struck with the White House in late July, such as a provision intended to guard academic independence.
Brown's deal included language that barred the government from dictating curriculum or the content of academic speech. It also touched on several other issues central to the administration's attacks on higher education, including transgender athletes who play on women's teams and the treatment of Jewish students in the wake of the protests against the Gaza war.
Brown will have to ensure locker rooms and bathrooms are reserved for female athletes, perform outreach to Jewish groups and hire an external group to conduct campus climate surveys, for example.
Although Harvard officials welcomed many of the Brown deal's nonfinancial conditions, they were stunned that the university agreed to pay only $50 million over a decade as they were being pressed to cough up 10 times that sum.
But with the beginning of the school year approaching, negotiators have accepted that they will have to pay $500 million to strike a deal, and instead focused on how payments would be structured.
One potential sticking point could be the government's access to admissions data, especially numbers involving applicants' race. The administration was seeking a stipulation in the deal that would require Harvard to release detailed admissions data, including on race and gender as well as grade point averages and standardized test scores. That would be consistent with an executive action that Mr. Trump signed last week, forcing schools nationwide to give the government similarly detailed data.
Brown and Columbia, as part of their deals, both agreed to supply the administration with that information, something conservatives have sought in an effort to prove that elite schools have disregarded a recent Supreme Court decision banning affirmative action.
May Mailman, a White House adviser driving the negotiations with top universities, suggested in a recent interview that Harvard's inclination to provide data surrounding its consideration of race in admissions would be a factor in the government's willingness to sign off on a deal.
It was not clear on Monday how any agreement between the government and Harvard would resolve that demand, which the university has viewed as overly invasive. It was also not clear when Mr. Trump would be briefed on the potential agreement.
The White House and the university opened negotiations in June, each seeking an offramp from a clash that began with accusations of antisemitism and became a battle over academic independence and the specter of federal overreach.
The dispute between Harvard and the White House erupted in the spring after the Trump administration inadvertently sent the university a list of demands that would reshape student and academic life, including surveys of the student body's political ideology, audits of the curriculum and a reduction in the influence of untenured faculty. The university quickly refused them, and the administration responded hours later by starting to freeze billions of dollars in research funding.
Harvard, like other top schools, depends on that funding and has done so for decades. The university took the administration to court in April, arguing that assorted government demands threatened Harvard's constitutional rights. The school also asserted that the government had violated its own procedures when it hastily cut off research funding.
A federal judge in Boston appeared skeptical of the government's efforts when she heard arguments in the lawsuit in July. Both the administration and Harvard have asked the judge to rule in their favor without a trial, but she has not yet issued a ruling.
Harvard officials have been combative, depicting their fight against the Trump administration as a vital crusade. But behind closed doors, they have been wary of a sustained war with the White House.
Even if Harvard prevailed in court, some inside the university have argued, the administration could continue to pelt the school with investigations and subpoenas while, over time, bleeding it of research funding through more standard protocols. To them, a settlement was an unappealing but essential outcome.
Although Harvard has an endowment valued at roughly $53 billion, much of it is restricted, meaning that university officials are limited in how they may use it. And the school has shown signs of financial strain as federal research funding has evaporated.
University leaders warned last month that the blitz of actions from Washington, including an increase in the excise tax on endowments, could blow a nearly $1 billion annual hole in Harvard's budget.
Still, proponents of a possible deal have faced fierce resistance on Harvard's campus in Cambridge, Mass.
There, faculty members and students have warned that an agreement with the White House would amount to capitulation and that Mr. Trump could not be trusted to honor any arrangement over the long term. Given those concerns, Harvard's negotiators have pressed the administration in recent weeks, insisting that any resolution of their fight be structured as a legal settlement. A legal settlement would make it more difficult for the administration and Mr. Trump to change the terms after the fact.
Oliver Hart, an economics professor at Harvard who won a Nobel Prize for his work on contract theory, said in an interview last month that the university should ensure there is a clear process for resolving disputes.
'I would spell out what happens if a party feels the agreement is not being honored,' Dr. Hart said. Referring to the government, he added, 'If they have so many things up their sleeve, they're going to have those things up their sleeve once you've agreed on a deal.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fundwell Acquires EveryStreet, Uniting Payments, Cash Flow and Capital in One Platform
NEW YORK, August 13, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Fundwell, a leading fintech platform providing fast, flexible, and transparent business financing, today announced the acquisition of EveryStreet, an innovator in accounts receivable (A/R), accounts payable (A/P), and flexible payment enablement. The acquisition brings EveryStreet's team, including co-founders Logan Shedd, Scott Priddy, and Kevin Park into the Fundwell organization to strengthen its technology and product offerings to businesses around the country. EveryStreet's platform is a one-stop shop for managing, distributing, and completing invoices, powered by an embedded checkout solution with a mix of payment and financing capabilities. The platform helps reduce A/R days, improve cash flow, and increase sales conversion, while integrating seamlessly with existing ERP and financial systems to make adoption and scaling simple. The addition of EveryStreet represents a pivotal step in Fundwell's evolution from a leading funding marketplace to a full-scale business growth platform. By combining Fundwell's extensive lender network and credit products with EveryStreet's A/R and A/P management platform, businesses will have the tools to not only access capital when needed but also to proactively manage their cash flow, bridging short-term needs and long-term financial health. "This acquisition is about more than adding new technology. When I think about the most successful outcomes we've created for our customers, it's always been about helping them get control of their entire cash flow picture," said Sruli Anatian, CEO of Fundwell. "EveryStreet gives us a powerful new capability to help businesses manage their receivables, unlock working capital, and even spread out payments on their invoices over time, marking a foundational step in building an end-to-end platform that advises, equips, and finances businesses for long-term success." As part of the acquisition, EveryStreet's technology will be seamlessly integrated into Fundwell's platform, enhancing its capabilities to help businesses get paid faster, access financing more efficiently, and gain greater control over their cash flow. This integration builds on Fundwell's mission to move beyond one-time funding transactions to deliver year-round financial tools that support sustainable business growth. "We founded EveryStreet to help vendors and retailers view their cash position in real-time, providing them with the clarity needed to plan ahead, control expenses, and maximize their profits," said Logan Shedd, Founder of EveryStreet. "For most businesses, cash flow isn't just a metric; it's survival, and by becoming part of Fundwell, we're making it simpler to understand and easier to act on." The acquisition also brings proven leadership and technical depth to Fundwell. Co-founder and CEO Logan Shedd has built a career at the intersection of payments and embedded finance, holding senior roles in lending, operations, and revenue strategy at companies like Octane Lending, ChargeAfter, and LendingClub. Scott Priddy, co-founder and CTO, is a veteran technologist with decades of experience leading architecture and engineering at fintech and payments leaders, including PayPal, Visa, Mastercard, Ally, Vyze, and BGenerous. Kevin Park, co-founder and CPO, combines product management expertise with a finance background from Wharton, having shaped and implemented strategy and market expansion for high-growth startups and Fortune 500 institutions, including Capital One and JPMorgan Chase & Co. Together with their engineering team in the U.S. and Europe, they strengthen Fundwell's ability to accelerate innovation and scale. Sruli Anatian emphasized that the move is not just about technology, but it's about expanding Fundwell's role in the financial lives of its business owners. "Businesses shouldn't only come to Fundwell when they're in urgent need of capital. They should be plugged into our platform year-round, getting insights on where their cash is coming in, where it's going out, and how to bridge the gaps before they become crises," he said. With the acquisition of EveryStreet, Fundwell is advancing toward its vision of becoming the go-to growth partner for businesses by providing the tools, funding, and guidance they need to not only survive cash flow challenges but to thrive well beyond them. The deal closed on August 11, 2025, and integration is already underway. The first phase of the combined platform is set to debut later this year, marking the beginning of a new chapter in how businesses control, optimize, and grow their financial futures. About Fundwell Fundwell is on a mission to redefine business financing with integrity and innovation. By leveraging proprietary AI decisioning and a curated network of lender partners, Fundwell delivers transparent funding options that move at the speed your business demands. Since inception, Fundwell has supported thousands of businesses nationwide, providing over $1 billion in capital to fuel their growth. Learn more at: View source version on Contacts David JosephHead of MarketingDirect: +1-646-290-7187Email: david@
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This Woman Is Going Viral For Hilariously Explaining The Brutal Truth About The US's Student Loan Crisis
I doubt it'll come as a surprise to anyone under 45, but according to nearly "one in six adult Americans" has federal student loan debt, and the New York Times reports that millennials hold the bulk of that debt. Back in May, President Trump resumed collections on previously defaulted student loans, which had been paused since 2020. Combined with the government allowing loan servicers to report late payments to credit bureaus again (which had also been on pause), the New York Times said that millions of people have seen their credit scores drop, and "a record number of borrowers are [now] at risk of defaulting by the end of the year." Student loans have continued to be a point of contention politically as well, with many conservatives arguing against student loan forgiveness, saying it's akin to getting something for free. However, younger people contend that the loans are predatory, unaffordable, and feel impossible to pay off, sometimes even after they've been making regular payments for years. Zoë Tyler, aka thezolyspirit, recently went viral in a video where she jokingly laid out exactly what the student loan crisis looks like in reality. Zoë started out the video satirically, in a perfect mid-Atlantic accent, with a text overlay that says, "What boomers think the student loan crisis is...": "Oh, yes," she said, "Well, I, I know I said I would pay back those student loans, but I... I've decided I don't want to," she said with a smile. "I don't ever want to grow up. I want to stay a child forever." @thezolyspirit / Via Then, she switched immediately back to her normal speaking voice with a text overlay that says "What it actually is..." as she began imitating a one-sided phone call. "Hi, yes, um — so, I have my student loan pulled up here — I've been making the minimum payment on time for 10 years, and I now owe more than I took out. So I just… I was wondering what's that about?" she asked. @thezolyspirit / Via "The interest accrues faster than you can pay it off? Oh, that's…that's you guys are able to do that." "What is the interest, by the way? I can't… It's 13%? Okay. That makes sense, that…that it would be that." Then, Zoë begins a new conversation. "Hi! I just graduated, and I noticed that my student loans are way more than I originally took out. It was accruing interest while I was at school? Uh. Hmm. But it says the principle is more than I took [out]..." @thezolyspirit / Via "When I graduated, you combined the accruing interest into the principle, so now… I took out $55,000, and it's saying that it accrued $20,000 while I was at school. So now, instead of taking the 10% interest off of $55,000, you're taking 10% interest off of $75,000? Wow!" @thezolyspirit / Via The video ended with Zoë signing off the call. "All right, well, uh, thank you. What was your name, sir? One more time? Beelzebub? Okay, thank you." People in the comments were quick to back Zoë up, pointing out that they'd had similar experiences with their own loans. "I borrowed $17k and they want $60k back. They need to be fr lmao," said one person. "My husband, after paying for 13 years, checked his student loan breakdown. Turns out, of the 350$ a month he has been paying on time for 13+ years, only .16 CENTS a month goes toward the principle balance." "atp my student loans are an issue between the government and god." Others pointed out how much costs have changed since the baby boomers were in school. "Tuitions and Fees have gone up 133% since the 80s." U.S. News & World Report confirms this statistic, with the qualifier that it is in regard to in-state tuition and fees at public national universities, and is not adjusted for inflation. "My FIL [father-in-law] paid for his college and his living expenses for the entire year by working an entry level construction job in the summer. No way anyone could do that now-a-days. A summer job wouldn't even cover books and fees." The conversation made its way over to Twitter (X) as well, when the video was shared with the comment, "A TikTok that explains the student-loan crisis better than any politician or journalist can, in 93 seconds." Quoting a response to the original tweet, they also said, "This is not 'basic finance,' these are exploitative non-negotiable terms which makes this a form of predatory lending." "If you get a 7-year car loan and make the minimum payment every month, the loan will be paid off in 7 years... It's literally only student loans that are like this." Unsurprisingly, there were commenters who felt that borrowers were the ones responsible for their debt. "Crying about being responsible for your choices just shows how out of touch that generation is," said one person. "What this tik tok explains really well is that people didn't learn the right things in college." "Do not sign don't understand. Especially don't do that and then try to make it other people's problem." But others pushed back, pointing out that people took these loans out when they were still teenagers, usually with a promise that going to college would help them earn more money later. "Worst part is people will see this and say 'well you as a 17/18 y/o should have realized how predatory it was.'" "Telling 18 year olds that they have to go to college to be successful and not fully explaining to them what loans are like is diabolical." "a lot of us were just shuffled through a line and told to sign a sheet of paper so we could go to school, all with minimal explanation of any of it." And finally, this commenter summed it up best: "But make sure you pay them off whilst also buying a house, paying for a wedding, and having children all whilst earning proportionally less than they ever did because wages are stagnant, ok? You can do it if you just cancel your Netflix." You can see Zoë's full video below: @thezolyspirit / Via And now I have to know: What do you think? Are you still paying off student loans? Do you feel they should be forgiven, or at least reduced after a decade of payments? Let us know in the comments. And if you'd like to remain anonymous, you can use the form below.
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Jefferies Lowers Monday.com (MNDY) PT to $330, Cites Revenue Raise, AI Fears
Ltd. (NASDAQ:MNDY) is one of the best upside stocks to invest in now. On August 12, Jefferies analyst Brent Thill lowered the firm's price target on to $330 from $360, while keeping a Buy rating on the shares. Although the company's Q2 2025 results were robust, the analyst's sentiment was driven by the small FY25 revenue raise and AI fears. reported a strong 27% year-over-year revenue increase in Q2, which reached $299 million. The company's non-GAAP operating income also grew to $45.1 million, up from $38.4 million in the same quarter of the previous year. Additionally, net cash from operating activities increased to $66.8 million from $55.8 million year-over-year. Software engineers collaborating on a project while seated in a shared workspace. Monday CRM product reached $100 million in Annual Recurring Revenue/ARR within 3 years of its launch. The company also introduced new AI-powered features, including Monday Magic, Monday Vibe, and Monday Sidekick. For Q3, expects total revenue to be between $311 and $313 million, with a non-GAAP operating income projected to be between $34 and $36 million. Ltd. (NASDAQ:MNDY) develops software applications internationally. The company provides Work Operating System/OS, which is a cloud-based visual work OS that consists of modular building blocks used and assembled to create software applications and work management tools. While we acknowledge the potential of MNDY as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the . READ NEXT: and . Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data