Tag Archives: US Treasury

Nov 15 2025

U.S. and Switzerland Strike a Deal – USTR Greer Announces Free Trade Agreement to Avoid U.S. Tariffs


Posted originally on CTH on November 14, 2025 | Sundance

President Donald Trump gave U.S. Trade Representative, Ambassador Jamieson Greer, all the tools and leverage needed to bring the Swiss govt to a substantive trade agreement.  The pressure was too much to bear, so Switzerland quickly negotiated a deal.

In the background President Trump’s global trade reset has been seriously damaging for the Swiss industrial economy.  The EU overall, Germany specifically and China, have stopped purchasing precision Swiss industrial machinery.

It’s not the direct tariffs against Swiss precision machinery itself that created the pressure, but rather the tariffs against nations who purchased the Swiss precision machinery.

China was a big purchaser of the Swiss machinery, until Beijing stole enough intellectual property to develop their own precision machining capacity.  Slowly China didn’t need Switzerland.

Germany and the EU economy then began to contract as the Trump tariffs bit hard against their exports to the USA.

Simultaneously, Chinese EV production started replacing more expensive European EV production, and the tooling purchases within the auto industry began contracting within Switzerland.

As things unfolded, the forecast for the future of the Swiss economy started to become very clear; their precision industrial exports were going to continue contracting.  Something needed to change, and fast.

Ambassador Jamieson Greer announces a major free trade agreement with Switzerland {SEE HERE} and the White House provides a fact sheet {SEE HERE}. A joint statement is then released:

Today, the United States of America (United States), the Swiss Confederation (Switzerland), and the Principality of Liechtenstein (Liechtenstein) (collectively, Participants) express through this Framework their intention to negotiate an Agreement on Fair, Balanced, and Reciprocal Trade (Agreement). Through the Agreement, the Participants intend to create a dynamic and balanced trading relationship on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis, with a view toward creating good, high-paying jobs and economic growth in their markets. The Participants share a desire to make trade fairer, easier, and more substantial. The Participants further share a desire to foster secure and resilient supply chains and a conducive business environment to attract high-quality and trusted investment. Switzerland intends to take action to balance its trade with the United States, including by purchasing U.S. goods, facilitating investment in the United States, and removing tariff and non-tariff barriers for U.S. goods. The Participants intend to immediately begin negotiations of the Agreement with the aim to make significant progress, and if possible conclude the Agreement, by the first quarter of 2026, subject to their respective domestic processes.

The Participants intend for the negotiations of the Agreement to focus on the following key areas:

Investment, Commercial Considerations, and Opportunities

Switzerland and Liechtenstein support the increase of foreign direct investment by Swiss and Liechtenstein enterprises into the United States.

Switzerland intends to encourage and facilitate at least $200 billion of investment into the United States, across all 50 states, over the next five years, to create manufacturing and research and development jobs. Liechtenstein intends to encourage and facilitate at least $300 million of investment into the

United States and increase by 50 percent over the next five years the number of jobs created by its private sector in the United States. Switzerland and Liechtenstein intend to encourage and facilitate one third of these investments by the end of 2026. The United States intends to determine, in its application of reciprocal tariffs, if Switzerland and Liechtenstein have taken appropriate steps to encourage and facilitate these investments and associated job creation. If needed, the Participants intend to jointly discuss the steps taken to encourage and facilitate such investment and job creation and determine additional measures for investment promotion and facilitation.

The Participants intend to encourage their enterprises to promote and develop training and apprenticeship programs, including Registered Apprenticeship programs, for U.S. workers in key high-growth sectors in the United States, taking into account their current and future investments.

The Participants intend to cooperate on this issue.

Switzerland and Liechtenstein intend to work together with the United States on addressing potential distortions of bilateral trade and investment arising from industrial subsidies or actions of state-owned enterprises.

The Participants intend to create the best possible environment to encourage and facilitate cross-border investments and job creation.

2. Tariffs

Recognizing the Treaty of 29 March 1923 between Switzerland and Liechtenstein on Accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Swiss Customs Area, the United States intends to apply the same tariff treatment to both Switzerland and Liechtenstein.

Switzerland and Liechtenstein intend to improve market access for U.S. goods, through the application of zero duties on all U.S. industrial goods, U.S. seafood, and certain U.S. agricultural goods, and through the application of tariff rate quotas for a number of other U.S. agricultural goods.

The United States intends to apply the higher of either the U.S. most-favored-nation (MFN) tariff rate or a tariff rate of 15 percent, comprised of the MFN tariff and a reciprocal tariff, on originating goods of Switzerland and Liechtenstein and to apply only the U.S. MFN tariff rate on certain products listed in the “Potential Tariff Adjustments for Aligned Partners” Annex to Executive Order 14346 (Modifying the Scope of Reciprocal Tariffs and Establishing Procedures for Implementing Trade and Security Agreements).

The United States intends to promptly ensure that the MFN tariff and the tariff imposed pursuant to Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (Section 232) do not exceed 15 percent for originating pharmaceutical goods and semiconductors of Switzerland and Liechtenstein subject to Section 232 tariffs. The United States intends to positively consider the effect of the Agreement on national security, including when taking action under Section 232.

The Participants intend for the benefits of the Agreement to accrue predominantly to the Participants. If the Participants determine that the benefits are not accruing predominantly to the Participants, the Participants may modify the Agreement with rules of origin necessary to achieve that objective.

The Participants intend to cooperate, where relevant, on matters relating to transshipment and circumvention practices, in accordance with their respective domestic laws and regulations.

3. Non-Tariff Barriers and Related Matters

The United States and Switzerland each intend to accord to conformity assessment bodies located in the territory of the other treatment no less favorable than they accord to conformity assessment bodies located in their own respective territories. Treatment under this paragraph includes procedures, criteria, fees, and other conditions relating to accrediting, approving, licensing, or otherwise recognizing conformity assessment bodies.

The Participants intend to apply the World Trade Organization (WTO) Decision of the Technical Barriers to Trade Committee on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations (2000) to determine relevant international standards within the meaning of Articles 2 and 5 and Annex 3 of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, and intend to negotiate provisions clarifying this understanding.

With respect to automobiles, Switzerland intends to work with the United States to facilitate the recognition of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.

The Participants intend to advance cooperation in mutually agreed strategic sectors, including medical devices. Switzerland intends to facilitate the acceptance of medical devices cleared or approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The United States acknowledges the efforts made by Switzerland to facilitate trade in beef and beef products. Switzerland intends to work with the United States to address specific measures that restrict market access for U.S. poultry and poultry products, strengthening opportunities for U.S. agricultural exports in Switzerland. The United States and Switzerland intend to cooperate on streamlining sanitary requirements for labelling and certificates, particularly for beef, bison, and dairy products.

The Participants intend to discuss robust commitments related to intellectual property rights protection and enforcement, including transparent and fair treatment of geographical indications.

The Participants intend to continue to provide an open and competitive environment for service suppliers. Accordingly, Switzerland and Liechtenstein intend to consider opportunities to provide service suppliers additional access to their markets.

The Participants intend to increase their cooperation on labor-related trade issues, and work to address forced labor, including forced child labor, and the worst forms of child labor in supply chains. Switzerland and Liechtenstein intend to continue to protect internationally recognized labor rights.
Switzerland and Liechtenstein intend to continue to adopt and implement high levels of environmental protections, effectively enforce their respective environmental laws, and work together with the United States on trade-related environmental measures, including those that may affect trade between each of them and the United States.

The Participants intend to negotiate commitments on good regulatory practices to ensure greater transparency, predictability, and participation throughout the regulatory lifecycle.

With a view to achieving greater reciprocal benefits from participation in their procurement markets, the Participants reaffirm their commitments under the WTO plurilateral Agreement on Government Procurement and their other binding international procurement obligations, and intend to clarify that states that are not party to these agreements do not benefit from non-discriminatory treatment in procurement at the central governmental level covered by such agreements, including through further implementation measures in their respective national procurement frameworks, if necessary.

The United States and Switzerland intend to foster the use of technology solutions that allow for full pre-arrival processing, paperless trade, and digitalized customs procedures.

4. Digital Trade and Technology

Switzerland and Liechtenstein intend to continue to refrain from imposing digital services taxes.

The Participants intend to facilitate trusted cross-border data flows and address data localization requirements, taking into account legitimate public policy objectives.

The Participants intend to explore mechanisms that promote interoperability between their respective privacy frameworks with a view to facilitating secure cross-border transfers of data.

The Participants intend to refrain from imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions and to support the multilateral adoption of a permanent moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions at the WTO.

5. Economic Security

The Participants intend to strengthen their cooperation on economic security, including on addressing non-market policies of third countries.

The Participants recognize that the effective enforcement of economic and trade sanctions serves the Participants’ shared interests. The Participants intend to strengthen existing cooperation with regard to U.S. export controls and sanctions.

Switzerland and Liechtenstein intend to cooperate with the United States on matters related to the review of inbound investment, including on the basis of national security.

Switzerland and Liechtenstein intend to work cooperatively with the United States to secure supply chains and improve supply chain resilience in sectors of shared interest.

The Participants intend to coordinate the timing of their respective domestic processes for the entry into force and implementation of the Agreement.

This document does not constitute a legally binding instrument creating or affecting any rights or obligations under international law. {SOURCE}

Nov 10 2025

White House NEC Director Kevin Hassett Discusses Government Shutdown – Democrats Baiting Trump to Violate the Law – Video and Transcript


Posted originally on CTH on November 9, 2025 | Sundance

White House Economic Council Director, Kevin Hassett, is a straight shooter; he calls things as they are, not as many would pretend them to be.

On the issue of court orders demanding various cabinet secretaries spend money to fund the government, Director Hassett correctly reframes the issue around the law of federal spending that says money not appropriated for that expenditure cannot be spent. The Supreme Court will strike down, as they already have, any order not grounded in the law around government spending.

Hassett correctly warns that any cabinet agency who attempts to comply with a district or circuit court order, is running the risk of having a lawsuit filed against them for spending non-appropriated funds. This could be part of the reason why Democrats are purposefully not reopening government, to force the Trump administration into a catch-22 legally where they are going to violate the law either way.

Margaret Brennan stands jaw agape at the Machiavellian approach that Director Hassett outlines, “surely they would never do that” she proclaims. In response Hassett reminds Brennan that such Lawfare strategies are indeed part of the larger stop Trump movement. Video and Transcript Below.

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We begin this morning with the Director of the White House National Economic Council, Kevin Hassett. This is now the longest shutdown in American history. The treasury secretary told us two weeks ago November 15 was the hard stop for any paychecks going to US troops. Does that remain the point of exhaustion?

KEVIN HASSETT, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL: Right, I think that- that’s about the right number. And the problem is that under the law, we’re not allowed to spend money that hasn’t been appropriated. And there is a law, the Antideficiency Act, that says that if a government official spends money that isn’t appropriated by Congress, which will only happen if the Democrats vote to open up the government, then you could even have criminal penalties. And so people are very carefully studying the law and trying to get as much money out the door as is legal. And we’re very glad that we found a way to get a lot of the SNAP money out, but it’s really pushing the boundaries of the law, which is why the Supreme Court had to take that ruling from Rhode Island and put it on hold.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Until the lower court rules–

HASSETT: Until the lower court goes back and comes up with a legal justification for what they said, because there probably isn’t one, sadly, which is why we have to get this government open. I mean, the fact is Goldman Sachs, they have a top economic team, and they’re estimating that we’ve already knocked about 1.5% off of GDP. I think that number is probably low if we keep going even a couple more weeks, because there’s going to be a massive amount of air disruption, especially around the holidays. And one of these things every now and then when we’re talking economics, you and I, we talk about seasonal adjustments and things like that. But the fact is that Thanksgiving, that Thanksgiving time, is one of the hottest times of the year for the economy. It’s Black Friday, you know, and all that kind of stuff. And if people aren’t traveling at that moment, then we really could be looking at a negative quarter for the fourth quarter.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Which is significantly disruptive to the president’s agenda. But to the point you were just making about food stamps, and we saw this Friday, a temporary stay by the Supreme Court that would block full food stamp benefits pending the lower court decision. The administration’s argument, as you just referenced there, was that it would be illegal to move around funding and to tap the Section 32 account at the USDA. But why not do this as a short term patchwork solution? Because you have found ways with the military pay to stretch things out. Why prioritize in that case and not do so with food?

HASSETT: Well, the president’s job, and all of our jobs, is to uphold the law. And when- I’m not a lawyer, but when the lawyers tell us–

[CROSSTALK STARTS]

MARGARET BRENNAN: But are–

HASSETT: what we can do–

MARGARET BRENNAN: — that wasn’t done with the military.

HASSETT: But, but, but yeah, I think that the military is different because of the commander-in-chief stuff. But the legal analysis suggests that we’re doing everything by the book, and then stretching things as much as we can, and basically trying to keep people from committing crimes. Which you know, you know about- in the season of lawfare, if you are a cabinet secretary and you spend money that’s not appropriated for that purpose in your cabinet, then they can come back and they can take you to court.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But you’re also making a political bet that Democrats aren’t going to challenge paying the military. Do you really think Democrats would challenge and take to court paying people for their food stamp benefits?

HASSETT: Let’s just say that we’ve seen Democrats–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –if, if Congress is going to fund it, when the shut- shutdown ends?

HASSETT: We- we’ve seen Democrats take to court people that- on really, really poor charges, and so I think they’re likely to do anything.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, it seems a political calculation is the point.

HASSETT: Well, we, we don’t have a political calculation. Our calculation is to get the government open, to get the food stamps to people, and to get people to be paid, 750,000 government workers aren’t getting paid right now. I know you’re talking to the Governor of Maryland in a minute. I’m sure his people are really hurting. Let’s just get the government open, and then let’s talk about things like the healthcare premiums, but do that through regular order.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, it sounds like you are saying the position is the same, open the government, then we’ll talk about healthcare. But the president, just in the past 36 hours, has put out a number of social media posts. It sounds sort of like he’s proposing something in regard to health insurance payments. He said, I’m recommended- to Senate Republicans that hundreds of billions of dollars currently being sent to money-sucking insurance companies to save bad healthcare provided by Obamacare now be sent to the people so they can purchase their own much better healthcare. He also said they should terminate Obamacare. What does this alternative system look like? Because the entire standoff is about healthcare right now.

HASSETT: Right. Well, the president is, you know, a beautiful tactician, a beautiful negotiator–

MARGARET BRENNAN: This is an off–

HASSETT: –And this is- you know, what he said, he’s brainstorming and trying to help the Senate come up with a deal that can get the government open. And one of the things you could do is conservatives believe that they don’t want the government to micromanage people’s lives. And you know, everybody believes that people should have healthcare, and so why not take the people who have higher healthcare premiums and just mail them a check and let them decide? The reason why it could have an effect is that there are multiple tiers under the Affordable Care Act of different types of insurance, and it could be that people would rather have the money and go from like, you know, this kind of plan to that kind of plan and save themselves a little bit. And so that’s, that’s, you know, basically giving the people an opportunity to make more choices than the government usually lets them.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Is this the Senator Cassidy proposal?

HASSETT: I’m sure that Senator Cassidy and President Trump talked about it, but whether he agrees with everything that Cassidy- I haven’t talked to him about it yet.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, does the Republican leader in the Senate accept–

HASSETT: –The president–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –this proposal?–

HASSETT: — the president started this idea yesterday, I don’t think that it’s been discussed widely in the Senate yet.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So the president–

HASSETT: It’s the weekend.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –The Senate’s in session this weekend–

HASSETT: –Yes, the Senate is in session this weekend and we are–

MARGARET BRENNAN: because they’re trying to end the shutdown–

HASSETT: –And here I am.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But this is not the Republican Party’s position.

HASSETT: As of right now, it’s not the Senate position, but the president thought it was something they should think about.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, he seems to be negotiating before the government’s open.

HASSETT: He’s talking to his colleagues in the Senate on the Republican side.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But you would agree that there does need to be a deal on healthcare, that healthcare costs are too high.

HASSETT: Well, I think that if you look at the Affordable Care Act, these premiums weren’t made permanent by the Democrats during the COVID emergency because they’re worried about the budgetary costs. And so if you look at the premium increases, they don’t affect most people below two times the poverty line, three times the poverty line. But there are a lot of senior citizens that are above, like, around four times the poverty level, which with a husband and wife team would be about 120,000, that are seeing really big premium increases. And I think that everybody’s going to want to think about what the next step for that would be, because are seeing- again most people aren’t seeing much of an increase at all, but the maximum increases you’re seeing could be up to about $500 a month for seniors who have really costly plans.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The president has also been talking about affordability, and our CBS polling shows the president’s approval rating on the economy has dipped to 38%, the lowest of this term. 75% of those polled say he’s not focusing enough on lowering prices, but the president said this week Democrats are making it up and quote, “every price is down.” I’m sure you know the Consumer Price Index showed grocery prices are up nearly 3%, in September from a year ago.

HASSETT: –well–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –Do you dispute that?

HASSETT: Well, actually, let’s go through the facts, right? Inflation went up about 5% under President Biden. In President Trump’s first eight or nine months, depending where we get the last number, it’s up 2.7%. One of the big things that’s hurting affordability is mortgages. The interest rate went up by about 4%.

MARGARET BRENNAN: This is grocery prices–

HASSETT: –No, grocery prices are actually down significantly under Trump. But here’s the thing–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –but depends on which–

HASSETT: Let me– I’ll just make a point.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay.

HASSETT: That if you look at the real reduction in spending power for Americans under Joe Biden, then it went down about $3,000 because we had up to 9% inflation, and then they went to the grocery store, they couldn’t buy the things they’re used to buying. The real spending power, adjusted for inflation, under President Trump has gone up about $1,200 so far this year. $1,200 is not $3,000, and so people are right to feel stretched, but we’re making progress. And if you look at all the positive things about the economy, industrial production just about at an all time high, capital spending about at an all time high, GDP growth right now about 4%, then that shows that the income growth that we need to get more affordability is on the path to happening. And the bottom line is that the last Consumer Price Index surprised down. It was lower than expected, and it would have been even lower because there was a refinery shutdown that caused it to go slightly higher. So we see inflation under control and the economy booming, but we understand 100% why people are still hurting, because we haven’t made up all the room that was lost under Joe Biden.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So are you comfortable with 3% inflation?

HASSETT: I’m comfortable with 2% inflation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So no, you’re not happy where things are now.

HASSETT: Well, they got to go down a little bit more, but there- but the point is that inflation is like the Queen Mary, my friend Alan Greenspan used to say, so when you go from almost 4% that we had in January down to the mid twos, then that’s a trajectory that usually has momentum.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So the St. Louis Fed found tariffs account for half a percentage point of the annual inflation rate. How much do you think the tariffs are hiking prices?

HASSETT: You know, there’s a couple of papers out there that say that prices went up by between two tenths and five tenths. And the thing to remember, if those papers are true, is that that’s a level adjust, because the tariff goes in, and then the tariff is just there, so it doesn’t affect inflation in the future. It would be a one time level adjust. Our estimates at CEA are much closer to zero, and it’s all based on modeling and assumptions about elasticities and things. But for the most part, the one way you can see it is you could look at the price of imported goods, and the price of imported goods, CEA put a report out, has actually been declining under tariffs. Because what happens is that the Chinese want to sell us lots of stuff, and there’s a tariff, so they cut their prices so that they can still have a larger market share in the US.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Kevin Hassett, always good to have you here. Of course, we have to leave it there for now. We’ll be right back in a minute. Stay with us.

[END TRANSCRIPT]

Nov 10 2025

Sunday Talks: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent vs George Stephanopoulos – Video and Transcript


Posted originally on CTH on November 9, 2025 | Sundance 

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears on ABC This Week to combat the narrative engineering of DNC transcriptionist George Stephanopoulos.

Sometimes it’s worth watching Stephanopoulos, Bill Clinton’s former Chief of Staff, because he frames the political position, current and future, for the Democrat party. Video and Transcript Below:

[Transcript] STEPHANOPOULOS: And we’re joined now by the Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent.

Mr. Bessent, thank you for joining us this morning.

We’ve just heard about all these impacts from the shutdown — government shutdown right now. Are we starting to see — see a permanent impact on the economy?

TREASURY SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Sure, George.

And good to be with you.

And we’ve seen an impact on the economy from day one, but it’s getting worse and worse. We had a fantastic economy under President Trump the past two quarters. And now there are estimates that the economy, economic growth for this quarter, could be cut by as much as half if the shutdown continues.

And what your correspondent didn’t talk about there, George, was there’s, of course, the human cost, and we’re going to have the busiest travel day of the year, the day after Thanksgiving. And, you know, Americans should look to five Democratic senators to come across the aisle to open that. But on the other side, there’s also, cargo is being slowed down. So, you know, we could end up with shortages, whether it’s in our supply chains, whether it’s for the holidays.

So, you know, cargo and people are both being slowed down here. And that’s for safety’s sake, George.

STEPHANOPOULOS: The president continues to post about ending the filibuster. Is that — is that the best way to end the shutdown right now? Is that what the administration’s position is?

BESSENT: No, George, the best — the best way to do it — and look, you were involved in a lot of these in the ’90s. And, you know, you basically called the Republicans terrorists and, you know, you said that it is not the responsible party that keeps the government closed.

And so, what we need is five brave, moderate Democratic senators to cross the aisle because right now it is 52 to three, 52 to three, five Democrats can cross the aisle and reopen the government. That’s the best way to do it, George.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I can disagree with you about the history there, but we don’t do history lesson right now.

BESSENT: No, George —

(CROSSTALK)

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let’s talk — let’s talk about — let’s talk about —

BESSENT: No, no, no. George, George, George —

(CROSSTALK)

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let’s talk — sir, let’s talk about what’s happening right now. I asked you a question —

BESSENT: If you want, I’ve got all your quotes here. I got all your quotes here, George.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I am sure — I am — I’m sure you do. But let’s talk about the situation right now —

(CROSSTALK)

BESSENT: And I went back and read your book. So, you got one — one purchase on Amazon this week. And that’s very much what you said.

STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s — it’s a mis — mischaracterization of history. But I do want to talk about right now, is the best way to end the — to end the shutdown right now to end the filibuster?

BESSENT: The best way is for five Democratic senators to come across the aisle. The — what are we on? Vote 13, 14, 15. Mike Johnson got the reopening out of the House very quickly.

And you know what — what’s changed since the spring, George, is — you know, is Chuck Schumer’s poll numbers. He had a clean continuing resolution in the spring.

And why are Democrats doing this now, George? Again, you’ve been involved with this. The — you know, explain what’s changed.

You know, Senator Chris Murphy gave the game away this week when he said, “Well, you know, now it’s to our advantage to keep the government closed.” They have turned the American people into pawns.

STEPHANOPOULOS: The president has also come forward with a new proposal overnight saying it’s time instead to do away with Obamacare, instead to have the money go directly to the people.

Do you have a formal proposal to do that?

BESSENT: We don’t have a formal proposal, but you know, what I have noticed over time is that the Democrats give all these bills the Orwellian names, the Affordable Care Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and we end up with just the opposite. You know, the Affordable Care Act has become unaffordable, and the Inflation Reduction Act set off the greatest inflation in 50 years.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, I’m a little confused because the president been posting about that overnight and into this morning, but you’re not proposing that to the Senate right now?

BESSENT: We’re not proposing it to the Senate right now. No.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Then why is the president posting about it?

BESSENT: George, you know, the president’s posting about it, but again, we have got to get the government reopen before, you know, we do this. We are not going to negotiate with the Democrats until they reopen the government.

It’s very simple. Reopen the government, then we can have a discussion.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let’s talk about affordability and inflation. That was one of the key concerns that voters said was on their minds as they were voting this Tuesday. It appeared to be the driving force in the elections. But President Trump is still insisting that prices are way down even though last month’s report showed inflation stuck at about 3 percent.

Are Americans worried about inflation just wrong?

BESSENT: Well, George, I can tell you, the — what we’re not going to do is what happened the — under the Biden administration where, you know, the administration and the media gaslit everyone and said, “Oh, you know, there’s a vibe session. You don’t understand how good you had — had it.”

And what happened then was we had the worst inflation, 40 or 50 years — you know, 22, 23 percent, but the basket of goods and services for working Americans was up more than 30 percent.

And what we’re seeing is we had to stop the increase first. Now we are starting to see prices level off, come down. You know, gasoline is down, interest rates are down, so mortgages are down. And I think we are making substantial progress on that.

And I think over the coming months and the next year, prices are going to come down.

STEPHANOPOULOS: The president says though, he just had posted this morning that there’s almost no inflation. The consumer price index is higher than it was in the beginning of the year. Electricity rates are rising, so are prices for coffee, beef, vegetables, televisions.

And it’s not just me. It’s not just economists are saying that. Your own Republican members of Congress are saying that, including Marjorie Taylor Greene. Let’s look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): I go to the grocery store myself. Grocery prices remain high. Energy prices are high. My electricity bills are higher here in Washington, D.C., at my apartment, and they’re also higher at my house in Rome, Georgia. Higher than they were a year ago. So — so, affordability is a problem.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHANOPOULOS: How do you respond to Congresswoman Greene?

BESSENT: Well, George, what I — what I would respond to is electricity prices are a state problem. And you know, I was very interested to see in the earlier clip where the governor — the governor-elect of New Jersey said, “Well, I’m going to bring down energy prices.” Well, it was her predecessor, Phil Murphy, who took them up.

So, you know, look, there are things that the federal government can control. Local electricity prices are not one of them. But, you know, energy prices, gasoline prices, are way down. And, you know, we — we are doing what we can every day. I think we’re on a very good path to bringing prices down.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let’s talk about tariffs and the Supreme Court. The president is also posting about tariffs this morning. He’s saying, “people that are against tariffs are fools. We’re taking in trillions of dollars.” Is that true?

BESSENT: We have taken — over the course of the next few years, we could take in trillions of dollars, George. But the real — the real goal of the tariffs is to re-balance trade and make it more fair.

You know, over time, the president’s goal is to bring back manufacturing to the U.S. You know, for the past two, three, four decades we have seen our manufacturing sector gutted. So, what would happen over time is we would take insubstantial money, as factories come back to the U.S., as we’re seeing now. I was just down in South Carolina at a rare earth magnet plant and a Boeing plant on Friday. And, you know, that’s the, I believe, 1,500 total new jobs. Tariff income will be substantial, but then that will rebalance.

The goal here, George, is to re-balance trade. So, tariff income will be substantial at the beginning. It will come down. And then domestic tax revenues will climb as corporate taxes go up and all of these high-paying jobs are created.

STEPHANOPOULOS: The president’s main argument, though, seems to be that we’re — it’s about taking in the revenue. And he also promised this morning a dividend —

BESSENT: No, no, no, George. Stop right — no.

STEPHANOPOULOS: A dividend of at least $2,000 a person, not including high-income people. How is he going to pay that dividend of $2,000 a person?

BESSENT: Yes, George, it’s not about taking in the revenue, it’s about re-balancing. And the revenue occurs early on. And then as we rebalance and the jobs come home, then it becomes domestic tax revenue.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Are you worried that the president’s focus on revenue, though, which is what he’s been focusing on in his public statements, is going to hurt your argument in the Supreme Court?

BESSENT: Not at all. It’s completely consistent that the revenues come in at the beginning, then, as we rebalance, which is the goal of this, bring back high-paid manufacturing jobs to the U.S., then it will then morph into domestic tax revenues.

You know, President Trump has consistently fought for the American worker, and we are seeing trillions of investments in the U.S. that would not have occurred without the tariffs.

The other thing, too, is, you know, the authority that he uses is called IEEPA. It is an emergency authority. And he used that emergency authority. He got the Chinese to the table to negotiate on stopping the precursors for fentanyl drugs. You know, fentanyl, hundreds of thousands of Americans dying every year is not an emergency, what is? On October 8th, Chinese threatened to put export controls on rare earth materials. He was able to threaten 100 percent tariffs, and we were able to negotiate that away.

And then, finally, in terms of the general tariffs, we are doing these trial deals that would not be possible. We were at a tipping point in terms of the economy, in terms of our trade balance, and we are re-balancing successfully.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you have a proposal, a formal proposal, to give a $2,000 dividend to every American?

BESSENT: I haven’t spoken to the president about this yet, but, you know, it could — the $2,000 dividend could come in lots of forms, in lots of ways, George. You know, it could be just the tax decreases that we are seeing on the president’s agenda. You know, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security. Deductibility of auto loans. So, you know, those are substantial deductions that, you know, are being financed in the tax bill.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Secretary, thanks for your time this morning.

Oct 31 2025

Secretary Scott Bessent Provides Background on Trump/Xi Discussions and Agreement


Posted originally on CTH on October 30, 2025 | Sundance |

Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the Asia tour by President Trump and the trade delegation that culminated with a lengthy meeting between President Trump and Chairman Xi Jinping.

By locking down trade agreements with Australia, Malaysia, Cambodia, Vietnam, Philippines, Thailand, Japan and South Korea in advance of the meeting with Xi, President Trump had effectively boxed out the maneuvers of Beijing and isolated any contravening strategy.

Chairman Xi was facing a U.S. strategic trade reset with multiple options for replacement of Chinese goods and resources.  As a result, the Beijing trade delegation recognized President Trump had effectively neutered the scale of their economic power and influence over the U.S. economy.  Instead, the best play for big panda was to shake hands and come to agreeable terms.  WATCH:

.

Playing into President Trump’s hands was/is the strains currently ongoing within the Chinese domestic economy.  Further friction against the USA would have weakened Chairman Xi domestically.

The missing piece of the puzzle is now Russia.