Business
Defiant independence from the Federal Reserve catches Trump off guard
WASHINGTON — White House officials were caught by surprise when a post appeared Sunday night on the Federal Reserve’s official social media channel, with Jerome Powell, its chairman, delivering a plain and clear message.
President Trump was not only weaponizing the Justice Department to intimidate him, Powell said to the camera, standing before an American flag. This time, he added, it wasn’t going to work.
The lack of any warning for officials in the West Wing, confirmed to The Times, was yet another exertion of independence from a Fed chair whose stern resistance to presidential pressure has made him an outlier in Trump’s Washington.
-
Share via
Powell was responding to grand jury subpoenas delivered to the Fed on Friday related to his congressional testimony over the summer regarding construction work at the Reserve.
“The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president,” Powell said.
“This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions,” he added, “or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.”
For months, Trump and his aides have harshly criticized Powell for his decision-making on interest rates, which the president believes should be dropped faster. On various occasions, Trump has threatened to fire Powell — a move that legal experts, and Powell himself, have said would be illegal — before pulling back.
The Trump administration is currently arguing before the Supreme Court that the president should have the ability to fire the heads of independent agencies at will, despite prior rulings from the high court underscoring the unique independence of the central bank.
The decision by the Justice Department to subpoena the Fed over the construction — a $2.5-billion project to overhaul two Fed buildings, operating unrenovated since the 1930s — comes at a critical juncture for the U.S. economy, which has been issuing conflicting signals over its health.
Employers added only 50,000 jobs last month, fewer than in November, even as the unemployment rate dipped a tenth of a point to 4.4%, for its first decline since June. The figures indicate that businesses aren’t hiring much despite inflation slowing down and growth picking up.
The government reported last month that inflation dropped to an annual rate of 2.7% in November, down from 3% in September, while economic growth rose unexpectedly to an annual rate of 4.3% in the third quarter.
However, the long government shutdown interrupted data collection, lending doubt to the numbers. At the same time, there is uncertainty about the legality of $150 billion or more in tariffs imposed on China and dozens of countries through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which has been challenged and is under review by the Supreme Court.
As inflation has cooled, the Fed under Powell has incrementally cut the federal funds rate, the target interest rate at which banks lend to one another and the bank’s primary tool for influencing inflation and growth. The Fed held the rate steady at a range of 4.25% to 4.5% through August, before a series of fall cuts left it at 3.5% to 3.75%.
That hasn’t been enough for Trump, who has called for the rate to be lowered faster and to a nearly rock bottom 1%. The last time the central bank dropped the rate so low was in the dark days of the early pandemic in March 2020. It began raising rates in 2022 as inflation took off and proved stubborn despite the bank’s efforts to rein it in.
Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, said there is room to continue lowering the federal funds rate to 3%, where it should be in a “well functioning economy, neither supporting or restraining growth.”
However, muscling the Fed to lower rates and reduce or destroy its independence is another matter.
“There’s no upside to that. It’s all downside, different shades of gray and black, depending on how things unfold,” he said. “It ends in higher inflation and ultimately a much diminished economy and potentially a financial crisis.”
Zandi said much will hinge on the Supreme Court’s decision on whether Trump can remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, which he sought to do last year, citing allegations of mortgage fraud she denies.
While Powell’s term as chairman ends in May, his term as a governor — influencing interest-rate decisions — extends to January 2028. A criminal indictment over the construction project could provide Trump the legal justification he needs to remove him altogether.
“When he steps down in May, will he stay on the board or does he leave? That will make a difference,” Zandi said.
A key issue will be how much independence the Fed retains, he said, given the central bank’s role in establishing the U.S. as a safe haven for international bond investors who play a key role funding the federal deficit.
The investors rely on the bank to keep inflation under control, or they will demand the government pay more for its long term bonds — though the subpoenas had little effect so far Monday on bond prices.
“There are scenarios where the bond market says, ‘Oh my gosh, we’re going to see much higher inflation, and there’s a bond sell-off and a spike in long-term rates,” he said. “That’s a crisis.”
Zandi said that even if the worst-case scenarios don’t play out, it will take time for the Federal Reserve to reestablish its reputation as an independent bank not influenced by politics.
“I’m not sure investors will ever forget this,” he said. “Most importantly, it depends on who Trump nominates to be the next chair of the Federal Reserve — and how that person views his or her job.”
Lawmakers from both parties have questioned the motivation behind the investigation.
North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, a Republican member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, has said he plans to oppose the confirmation of any nominee for the Fed until the legal matter is “fully resolved.”
“If there were any remaining doubt whether advisers within the Trump administration are actively pushing to end the independence of the Federal Reserve, there should now be none,” Tillis wrote in a social media post.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on that committee, accused Trump of trying to “install another sock puppet to complete his corrupt takeover of America’s central bank.”
“Trump is abusing the authorities of the Department of Justice like a wannabe dictator so the Fed serves his interests, along with his billionaire friends,” Warren said in a statement.
Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.), the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, also expressed skepticism about the inquiry, which he characterized as an “unnecessary distraction.”
“The Federal Reserve is led by strong, capable individuals appointed by President Trump, and this action could undermine this and future Administrations’ ability to make sound monetary public decisions,” Hill wrote in a statement.
As Hill raised concerns about the investigation, he added he personally knew Powell to be a “person of the highest integrity.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), meanwhile, dismissed the idea that the Justice Department was being weaponized against Powell. When asked by a reporter if he thought that was the case, he said: “Of course not.”
Times staff writers Wilner and Ceballos reported from Washington and Darmiento from Los Angeles.
Business
Trump orders federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI after clash with Pentagon
President Trump on Friday directed federal agencies to stop using technology from San Francisco artificial intelligence company Anthropic, escalating a high-profile clash between the AI startup and the Pentagon over safety.
In a Friday post on the social media site Truth Social, Trump described the company as “radical left” and “woke.”
“We don’t need it, we don’t want it, and will not do business with them again!” Trump said.
The president’s harsh words mark a major escalation in the ongoing battle between some in the Trump administration and several technology companies over the use of artificial intelligence in defense tech.
Anthropic has been sparring with the Pentagon, which had threatened to end its $200-million contract with the company on Friday if it didn’t loosen restrictions on its AI model so it could be used for more military purposes. Anthropic had been asking for more guarantees that its tech wouldn’t be used for surveillance of Americans or autonomous weapons.
The tussle could hobble Anthropic’s business with the government. The Trump administration said the company was added to a sweeping national security blacklist, ordering federal agencies to immediately discontinue use of its products and barring any government contractors from maintaining ties with it.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who met with Anthropic’s Chief Executive Dario Amodei this week, criticized the tech company after Trump’s Truth Social post.
“Anthropic delivered a master class in arrogance and betrayal as well as a textbook case of how not to do business with the United States Government or the Pentagon,” he wrote Friday on social media site X.
Anthropic didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Anthropic announced a two-year agreement with the Department of Defense in July to “prototype frontier AI capabilities that advance U.S. national security.”
The company has an AI chatbot called Claude, but it also built a custom AI system for U.S. national security customers.
On Thursday, Amodei signaled the company wouldn’t cave to the Department of Defense’s demands to loosen safety restrictions on its AI models.
The government has emphasized in negotiations that it wants to use Anthropic’s technology only for legal purposes, and the safeguards Anthropic wants are already covered by the law.
Still, Amodei was worried about Washington’s commitment.
“We have never raised objections to particular military operations nor attempted to limit use of our technology in an ad hoc manner,” he said in a blog post. “However, in a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, democratic values.”
Tech workers have backed Anthropic’s stance.
Unions and worker groups representing 700,000 employees at Amazon, Google and Microsoft said this week in a joint statement that they’re urging their employers to reject these demands as well if they have additional contracts with the Pentagon.
“Our employers are already complicit in providing their technologies to power mass atrocities and war crimes; capitulating to the Pentagon’s intimidation will only further implicate our labor in violence and repression,” the statement said.
Anthropic’s standoff with the U.S. government could benefit its competitors, such as Elon Musk’s xAI or OpenAI.
Sam Altman, chief executive of OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT and one of Anthropic’s biggest competitors, told CNBC in an interview that he trusts Anthropic.
“I think they really do care about safety, and I’ve been happy that they’ve been supporting our war fighters,” he said. “I’m not sure where this is going to go.”
Anthropic has distinguished itself from its rivals by touting its concern about AI safety.
The company, valued at roughly $380 billion, is legally required to balance making money with advancing the company’s public benefit of “responsible development and maintenance of advanced AI for the long-term benefit of humanity.”
Developers, businesses, government agencies and other organizations use Anthropic’s tools. Its chatbot can generate code, write text and perform other tasks. Anthropic also offers an AI assistant for consumers and makes money from paid subscriptions as well as contracts. Unlike OpenAI, which is testing ads in ChatGPT, Anthropic has pledged not to show ads in its chatbot Claude.
The company has roughly 2,000 employees and has revenue equivalent to about $14 billion a year.
Business
Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk
new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey
February 27, 2026
Business
Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office
Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.
If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.
All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.
But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.
That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.
The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.
— Katie Martin, Financial Times
Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.
Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.
Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.
But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.
Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.
That hasn’t been the case for months.
”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”
Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.
Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.
It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.
Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”
Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”
Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.
Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.
“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”
I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.
To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.
Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.
The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.
It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.
That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.
Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts3 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Denver, CO3 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology7 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics7 days agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT