The director of the National Economic Council, Kevin Hasett, said Sunday that the president’s authority to say goodbye to the president of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, was “being investigated.”
When asked in an interview in “This Week” by ABC News if he believes that President Donald Trump has the authority to fire Powell, whom the president has repeatedly attacked interest rates, Hassett said: “That is something that is being analyzed.”
“But certainly if there is cause, it does,” Hassett added.
Hasset’s comments occur days after the Management Office and Budget Director, Russell Vought, criticized the renovations of the Federal Reserve headquarters, saying in a letter to Powell that Trump was “extremely concerned about his poor management of the Federal Reserve System.”
Vought sent Powell almost a dozen questions about renovations, asking for details about whether the project deviated from the plans approved by the National Capital Planning Commission, which supervises the design of federal projects.
When asked if the price of renovations could be used to say goodbye to Powell, Hasset said: “I think that the president decides to advance that way or will not depend much on the answers we receive to the questions that Russ Vought sent to the Fed.”
Trump has constantly criticized Powell for not reducing interest rates, calling the president “very stupid” and calling him “too late Powell.” Powell has said that the Federal Reserve has remained in the reduction of interest rates due to Trump tariffs, pointing out higher inflation forecasts. The president told NBC News at the end of last year, that he had no plans to shorten Powell’s mandate, which ends in May 2026.
But since then, the president has indicated that he wanted to go to Powell. He said in an April position to Truth Social that “Powell’s termination cannot be quick enough,” although days later he told reporters that he had no “intention” to say goodbye.
The Supreme Court in May allowed the President to dismiss the members of the independent federal agencies, although the Court indicated that the decision did not necessarily apply to the Federal Reserve because it is an “exclusive and quasi -private entity.”
Neither the White House nor the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve immediately responded to the requests for more comments on Hasset’s comments.
Steep tariffs in Brazil
The cervical whipper on the steep rates from country to country, now that it will enter into force on August 1, have asked questions about the state of possible trade agreements. The administration has indicated commercial deficits as a main reason for tariffs pronounced in imports from many countries, and officials have maintained that negotiations on commercial practices are ongoing.
But Trump brought the internal practices of a country to the equation last week when he announced that he would hit Brazil’s imports with a 50%tariff. In Trump’s letter detailing the rate rate, he criticized the treatment of former President Jair Bolsonaro, who faces charges for allegedly consigning a coup d’etat to maintain power after an electoral defeat of 2022. Trump said the tariff rate was “partly due to the insidious attacks of Brazil in free elections.”
“Normally, it is not necessarily a specific country, but with Brazil, it is,” said Hasett to the host of “This Week” Jonathan Karl. “His actions have shocked the president sometimes, and has made them clear about it.”
When asked about the authority under which Trump could impose tariffs based on the judicial system of a country, Hasset said: “If he believes it is an emergency of national defense, or if he believes that a threat of national security, then he has the authority under IEEPA”, referring to the international law of emergency economic powers.
Karl asked Hassett how Brazil’s management of a criminal case constituted a threat of national security, which led Hasset to say: “Well, that’s not the only thing.”
Pressing again in Trump’s letter, which was specifically addressed to Bolsonaro, Hasset turned to discuss commercial deficits.
“The conclusion is that what we are doing, absolutely, collectively, in all countries, is that we are in Setshing production in the United States to reduce national emergency, that is, we have a mass commercial deficit that puts it at risk if we need production in the United States due to a national security crisis,” said Hassett.
However, the United States had a commercial surplus of $ 7.4 billion with Brazil last year, according to the Office of the United States Commercial Representative, which Karl pointed out.
Hasset responded to Karl’s interjection about the United States commercial surplus with Brazil, saying: “If you do not have a general strategy for this, then there will be trans shipment and everything else, and will not achieve its objectives.”
