
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.

Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Taylor Farms’ repeated connection to major outbreaks and recalls warrants a closer look at whether these are unrelated incidents or signs of recurring weaknesses."
An agricultural industry watchdog on Tuesday released a report examining how corporate consolidation enabled this summer's widespread outbreak of Cyclosporiasis, a foodborne illness that causes explosive diarrhea.
The report, published by Farm Action, argues that the wide reach of produce giant Taylor Farms, which is the source of the outbreak, spread food contaminated by the Cyclospora parasite far and wide before an issue was detected.
One problem with Taylor Farms' reach, the report states, is that it is often hidden, leaving people unaware of the source of certain products.
"Taylor Farms produces 40% of the salad kits sold in the country and grows about one-quarter of its own vegetables, sourcing the rest through partner farms," the report says. "That makes it a major link between farms and some of the nation’s largest food buyers."
The company's produce is used at popular fast-food chains such as Taco Bell, McDonald's, and Chipotle, and is sold at big-name grocery stories including Whole Foods, Target, Safeway, and Costco.
Beyond that, its produce is bought by foodservice distribution giants Sysco and US Foods, who send it to assorted schools, hospitals, and hotels.
The report says that the consolidation of the produce production industry was itself enabled by the industry consolidation of grocery stores, restaurant chains, and foodservice distributors, which found it more efficient to buy from conglomerates such as Taylor Farms, which the report categorizes as "grower-shipper-packers (GSPs)."
"Like other large GSPs, Taylor Farms sources produce through regional and international networks rather than relying primarily on nearby farms," writes Farm Action. "That helps explain why investigators traced lettuce implicated in the 2026 Cyclospora outbreak to Mexico, even in the middle of summer when much of the US is capable of growing lettuce."
Because Taylor distributes its produce to so many places under so many different brands, the report continues, consumers have a hard time avoiding them even if they are actively trying.
What's more, the 2026 Cyclospora outbreak isn't the first time Taylor has been linked to a food safety event, as Farm Action found that it was connected to "the 2026 Salmonella outbreak linked to jalapeño products, previous Cyclospora outbreaks, the 2024 E. coli outbreak linked to McDonald’s onions, the 2021 E. coli cluster involving romaine lettuce, and numerous recalls for allergens, labeling errors, contamination risks, and processing defects."
"These incidents do not by themselves prove a pattern of systemic problems," the report adds. "But Taylor Farms’ repeated connection to major outbreaks and recalls warrants a closer look at whether these are unrelated incidents or signs of recurring weaknesses."
The report concludes by recommending stronger enforcement of US antitrust laws to break up big distributors, as well as stronger food safety and traceability policies.
Sarah Carden, senior director of research and policy at Farm Action, said the report on Taylor Farms should be a wakeup call to food safety regulators about the dangers of corporate centralization.
"Taylor Farms has extraordinary reach across the produce supply chain, a history of connections to major food safety events, significant political spending and access, and a workplace record that raises serious questions," said Carden. "Its growth also shows how consolidation has left farmers with fewer buyers and made our food supply increasingly dependent on a small number of powerful companies."
Lending apps are offering credit to consumers struggling to afford basic necessities, including electricity, broadband, groceries, and more as prices rise.
Companies that provide "buy now, pay later" loans are increasingly offering their products to Americans struggling to afford utilities and other necessities as costs rise across the US economy, with President Donald Trump's illegal war on Iran pushing up energy prices while wage growth slows.
The New York Times reported Monday that "the lending apps Flex and Zip allow customers to take out loans to pay for their broadband, electricity, health insurance, mobile phone service, mortgage, and water bills," while Affirm "has started providing some tenants loans to extend their monthly rent payment for a few weeks." On the homepage of its website, Affirm is currently promoting its product for school supplies as prices for basic items surge.
Despite Trump's pledge to cut household electricity costs in half and "bring down the prices of all goods," federal data shows electricity prices are up 18% since the start of the president's second White House term. On Monday, the average price for a gallon of gas in the US reached $4.06—the highest ever recorded for mid-August.
Recent polling by Data for Progress shows that 38% of "buy now, pay later" users have turned to the product to cover gasoline costs. Nearly half—46%—have used it for groceries, 42% for medical or dental care, 39% for utility bills, and 22% for childcare.
Last month, the advocacy group Protect Borrowers released a detailed report showing that buy now, pay later lenders are "touting shiny and oftentimes deceptive offers of zero-interest, fee-free installment loans to millions of Americans struggling with the rapidly rising costs of groceries, rent, utility bills, takeout, new clothes, medical care, and more."
"Leading BNPL lenders currently include Affirm, Klarna, Afterpay, PayPal, Synchrony, Splitit, Sezzle, and Zip, but more are popping up by the day, largely funded by private equity firms and venture capitalists looking to cash in on families’ financial desperation," the report states. "BNPL loans are packed to the brim with financing fees, late fees, and other junk fees. Many BNPL loans feature late fees of $7 to $8 per missed payment, up to an aggregate cap of 25% of the purchase price. Additional fees may be charged for financing, if the user does not set a bank account as the default method of payment, reschedules an upcoming payment, or has non-sufficient funds or a bounced payment."
The Times pointed to June Federal Reserve research showing that Americans collectively spent $160 billion through buy now, pay later programs last year, nearly twice what US consumers spent in 2023.
"That’s still a fraction of the more than $3 trillion US shoppers spend annually on consumer credit cards," the Times noted. "But the industry continues to expand by double-digit rates each year."
Jennifer Zhang, a policy analyst at Protect Borrowers, has called on the US Congress to enact "sweeping protections" that "end deceptive pricing, bring down the cost of BNPL debt, ban predatory practices that harm consumers, and empower Americans to enforce their rights under the law."
"BNPL loans are expensive and risky, and often worsen financial outcomes for borrowers who come to rely on them to make ends meet. However, millions of Americans are being driven into these debt products just as they’re trying to get by. Prices are soaring and show no signs of coming down anytime soon," Zhang wrote. "Americans need help."
"This is an extraordinary concentration of tax benefits among some of the biggest and most profitable companies in the world," said an ITEP senior fellow.
As with the GOP's 2017 tax legislation, experts warned that big businesses and ultrarich individuals would benefit from President Donald Trump signing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year, while everyday Americans would suffer, and a Monday analysis identifies some of the companies now paying billions of dollars less in taxes.
The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) "has tracked $204 billion in federal tax breaks disclosed by publicly traded US companies so far for 2025," the report says. "But those benefits were not spread evenly across the corporate sector: Six companies alone accounted for $83 billion of them."
The publication points out that "the stunning size of the federal income tax breaks corporations claimed this year dwarfs past corporate tax breaks, themselves sizeable. Microsoft received $18.7 billion in federal income tax breaks, a record high for single-year federal tax breaks for one publicly traded company. Alphabet claimed a staggering $18.4 billion, and Amazon walked away with $17.4 billion in tax breaks. Meta received $13.7 billion, JPMorgan Chase received $8.3 billion, and Nvidia received $6.8 billion."

To put that $83 billion into context, the report highlights that it "represents nearly 18%, or almost $1 out of ever $5, of total federal corporation tax collections according to the Congressional Budget Office." It also "exceeds the entire annual discretionary budget of the US Department of Education," which Trump is notably aiming to eliminate as part of a broader mission to gut the federal government in his second term.
"This is an extraordinary concentration of tax benefits among some of the biggest and most profitable companies in the world," report co-author and ITEP senior fellow Matthew Gardner said in a statement. "When six companies can collect tax breaks equal to nearly one-fifth of what the federal government raises from the corporate income tax altogether, policymakers should be asking whether these provisions are serving the public interest or simply rewarding companies that are already enormously profitable and politically influential."
Gardner and his co-author, ITEP intern Sarah Buttikofer, emphasized that the top four firms featured in their analysis are tech giants: "Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, and Meta collectively received $68 billion in federal income tax breaks—which represents roughly 33% of the overall total."
"These figures show what Americans intuitively know: Corporate profits and economic power are increasingly concentrated among a relatively small number of extremely large companies," the pair wrote. "The presence of half a dozen tech CEOs at Donald Trump's January 2025 inauguration was a stark reminder that the economic leverage these companies are gaining is being translated into political power as well. That makes the tax treatment of these companies especially important."
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg were among the Big Tech executives with prime seating at the inauguration. There was also the world's richest man, Elon Musk, who went on to help Trump rip apart the federal workforce as the de facto leader of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.
To put these enormous tax breaks in context, the largest single-year tax break we've documented for any corporation before 2025 was J.P. Morgan’s $5.2 billion haul in 2024.itep.org/six-companie...
[image or embed]
— ITEP (@itep.org) August 14, 2026 at 12:18 PM
Musk leads various businesses, including Tesla, which was among 88 companies that paid no federal income tax last year, despite making almost $5.7 billion, according to an April analysis from ITEP. The others range from airlines and banks to energy, entertainment, and tech companies, such as Citigroup, Edison International, Palantir, United, and Walt Disney.
Meanwhile, near the end of last year, as Trump dismissed affordability concerns, an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that only 31% of voters approved of Trump's handling of the economy, the survey's lowest figure for his two terms.
Then, a January analysis by Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee revealed that the average American family paid $1,625 in higher costs last year as his policies drove up prices.
That was followed by a February warning from the Economic Policy Institute that Trump's economic agenda "will make ordinary families reliably poorer in the future." EPI's chief economist, Josh Bivens, pointed to the president's anti-labor policies, cuts to federal spending and jobs, mass deportation efforts, and tariffs—as well as the OBBBA, which gave tax breaks to the rich while stripping healthcare and food assistance from Americans in need.
With the US now enduring the consequences of Trump's war of choice on Iran, inflation remains high. Americans are struggling with the cost of gasoline, groceries, healthcare, housing, and more. After the latest figures were released last week, Alex Jacquez, a former Obama administration official who is now senior vice president of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, said that "prices started climbing again in July, and Trump's catastrophic mismanagement of our economy means more spikes in the months ahead."
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said on Sunday that Americans distrust Big Tech because they "always suspect that we are cooking up some new way to screw them over."
Opposition to artificial intelligence data centers has exploded across the US in 2026, as a recent Annenberg Public Policy Center poll showed that more than 60% of Americans say they are against building AI facilities in their areas.
However, a new survey highlighted by Futurism on Sunday shows that the AI industry has bigger problems than just the unpopularity of data centers.
As Futurism noted, the poll by CNBC found widespread distrust of artificial intelligence CEOs among Americans between the ages of 18 and 34.
In fact, more than two-thirds of respondents said they did not trust Palantir CEO Alex Karp, Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, or SpaceX CEO Elon Musk to responsibly expand the use of AI.
"Those are some appalling approval ratings," commented Futurism, "reflecting the massive swing in popularity the tech industry has experienced over the last decade, driven by concerns around data privacy, the purposeful decay of once-useful platforms, and the erosion of democracy."
The survey comes amid signs that the AI industry knows it faces a significant deficit in public opinion.
Anthropic boss Amodei wrote a social media post on Sunday acknowledging that "the public has a negative view of AI," which he said was "fundamentally a crisis of trust."
"I think that ordinary people don't trust companies, governments, or the tech industry and always suspect that we are cooking up some new way to screw them over," wrote Amodei. "The causes of this go back decades and AI is just the latest iteration of it."
The Anthropic CEO added that he didn't think any positive public relations campaign could turn around people's perception of the industry, and he said that one of the few ways it could gain trust was "actually curing cancer."
The rapid expansion of AI data centers, pushed by President Donald Trump, has provoked grassroots campaigns in communities across the country, with people loudly opposing the facilities that have been linked to high household electricity bills, massive water consumption, and few, if any, long-term job opportunities.
Amodei's musings about AI's unpopularity came days after Zuckerberg published a 6,500-word manifesto, in which he pushed back on AI developers who believe the technology will "eliminate most jobs and much of humanity's relevance," while insisting that Meta would develop "personal superintelligence for everyone" that would put "power in people's hands" rather than taking it away.
However, Zuckerberg's promises of a benevolent AI future drew skepticism from TechCrunch AI editor Russell Brandom, who argued in an essay published last week that the Meta chief's manifesto would fall on deaf ears given his own toxic reputation. Meta was recently ordered to pay nearly $1 billion in fines due to its products' harms to children and teens.
"Suffice it to say, Facebook as a product and Zuckerberg as a person are both unpopular with the US public," wrote Brandom. "A recent survey found that 64% of Americans believe social media has been harmful to democracy and a similar percentage believe it should be more heavily regulated, numbers that cut evenly across partisan lines."
People's own past experience with social media, Brandom continued, is a big reason why they are revolting against Big Tech's ambitions to use AI to remake society.
"The public does not trust tech executives to make sure new technologies like this have a positive impact on society," Brandom explained. "Instead of acknowledging that and trying to win back their trust, this essay demonstrates over and over again how the trust was lost in the first place."
Brandom cited Zuckerberg's discussion of human lawyers eventually being replaced by AI as particularly problematic, given that enabling chatbots to engage in litigation could result in a wave of nuisance lawsuits that would clog up the legal system.
"It’s hard to feel calm about any of this stuff," commented Brandom, "and the fact that Zuckerberg isn’t worried makes me more worried."
"Trump's right. His economy is a win for Wall Street. Meanwhile, while the rich get richer, millions of Americans cannot afford the basic necessities of life."
President Donald Trump on Friday said that the US economy is "doing unbelievably from the standpoint of Wall Street," bragging about record equity prices as job and wage growth remain stagnant and millions of Americans struggle to afford groceries.
In remarks to reporters, Trump hailed what he described as "the best market in history" as the S&P 500 index notched its third consecutive week of gains and hovered near its all-time high. The president, a prolific trader who has personally profited from the stock market's performance, said surging equities are "good for 401(k)s"—retirement accounts that a growing share of Americans are tapping to cover emergency expenses amid a worsening cost-of-living crisis.
"Trump's right. His economy is a win for Wall Street," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in response to the president. "Meanwhile, while the rich get richer, millions of Americans cannot afford the basic necessities of life—food, housing, healthcare, and a decent retirement."
The Alliance for Retired Americans, an advocacy group with more than 4 million members across the US, expressed astonishment at Trump's rosy and narrow assessment of the economy, which the White House posted on its official YouTube page.
"Can't make it up," the group wrote on social media. "We don't live on Wall Street. How is the economy working for you?"
Trump's comments came the same day that new data showed US consumer sentiment has fallen in August after two consecutive months of improvement, with Americans' outlook on the nation's economic conditions worsening across the political spectrum.
Last week, the Labor Department published figures showing that the US economy shed 23,000 jobs in July, wage growth decelerated, and the unemployment rate fell slightly as more people left the workforce.
Despite Trump's promise to bring them down, prices remain elevated across the economy, driven in part by the president's illegal war against Iran. Research published last month by the Urban Institute found that American families are increasingly relying on savings and credit—including buy now, pay later programs—to meet their grocery needs.
Americans are also facing what The Century Foundation and Protect Borrowers describe as "a worsening utility debt crisis."
"Energy bills have increased three times faster than the rate of inflation while Trump has been president," the groups wrote in an analysis published last month. "The national average monthly utility bill reached $280 in early 2026, a 12% increase since the end of 2024, just before the second Trump administration took office."
Meanwhile, corporate profits are booming under Trump, with the pharmaceutical industry, Big Oil, and other sectors posting banner earnings.
"Second quarter earnings for S&P 500 companies are on pace to rise 50% year over year, the highest growth rate since the second quarter of 2021," Yahoo Finance reported.
“Hiding the consumer narratives and concealing the wrongdoing of corporations and powerful interests—that’s what you do if you’re afraid of the truth,” said one advocate.
Consumer complaints against financial companies have skyrocketed over the past three years, and the trend drove President Donald Trump's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to take action Friday—but not against the firms that have been accused of charging unfair fees, failing to resolve disputed credit card charges, attempting to wrongly collect debts, and other offenses.
Instead, the CFPB announced that it would no longer be publishing complaint "narratives"—the written description by a complainant of their interaction with the financial company—or data visualizations in the database of complaints, hiding from public view consumers' remarks on the institutions' business practices.
“Hiding the consumer narratives and concealing the wrongdoing of corporations and powerful interests—that’s what you do if you’re afraid of the truth,” said Diane Thompson, deputy director and chief advocacy officer at the National Consumer Law Center, in response to the bureau's announcement. “Nothing could be a clearer sign of the Trump CFPB’s choice to stand against ordinary people and for corporate power and predation.”
The CFPB asserted that "the utility" of the public database of complaint narratives has proven "minimal" since the bureau began publishing the complaints in 2015, four years after it began allowing consumers to submit the complaints, as required by law.
"By their very nature, complaint narratives reflect negative consumer experiences and present only one side of an issue," said the CFPB.
Christine Hines, senior policy director at the National Association of Consumer Advocates, suggested that presenting "only one side" of an interaction that a consumer has with a financial institution is the point of the database.
"Nearly 6 million consumers who have filed with the CFPB have received some kind of relief, such as getting money back or getting a mistake on a credit report fixed. That’s a real, tangible benefit the public database makes possible."
“As it shuts down narratives in the complaint database, this CFPB is disregarding its obligation to make the marketplace fair and transparent for everyday consumers, and instead, is helping big banks, lenders, debt collectors, credit bureaus, and others to evade public scrutiny and accountability,” said Hines.
Companies have 15 days to respond to a complaint before the CFPB makes the consumers' comments public. The bureau has published more than 17 million complaints that have been made since 2011, and in each of the last three years, the complaints have doubled annually.
The bureau received 6.6. million complaints in 2025, up from 3.2 million in 2024 and 1.6 million in 2023.
Erie Meyer, who served as chief technologist at the CFPB and helped build the complaint database, accused the Trump administration of "inventing excuses to hide credit reporting and Wall Street abuses from the public."
"More than 17 million people have filed complaints with the CFPB about their credit report, mortgage provider, student loan servicer, payment app, or bank account—and the CFPB in turn has worked diligently to resolve these problems, even saving people’s homes from foreclosure and cars from repossession," said Meyer. "Taking down this data doesn’t protect consumers from confusion, but it does protect companies from public transparency and scrutiny."
Meyer also pushed back against the administration's claim that the database is rife with "confusing or misleading information" submitted by complainants.
"The CFPB complaint database and its narratives are the earliest warning system we have for what’s breaking in the economy," said Meyer. "Before a single story is published, the CFPB confirms the person is a real customer of that company. The company gets two weeks to respond, on the record, in public. That’s not an anonymous internet review—that’s closer to due process than most Americans get anywhere else in their financial lives. Burying this information is an intentional decision to make corporate misconduct harder to see.”
The new rule was announced two months after former CFPB acting Director Russell Vought purged the bureau's backlog of complaints and made other changes that, the administration said, were aimed at eliminating artificial intelligence-generated and duplicative complaints.
The database, said Public Interest Research Network consumer campaign director Mike Litt, ensures that "companies have an incentive to respond to and fix problems precisely because complaints are made public."
“Hiding the ‘narratives’ or any other part of the CFPB’s Consumer Complaint Database would truly hurt consumers. Americans deserve user-friendly, searchable access to details about these issues, so they can make educated purchasing decisions," said Litt. "Nearly 6 million consumers who have filed with the CFPB have received some kind of relief, such as getting money back or getting a mistake on a credit report fixed. That’s a real, tangible benefit the public database makes possible."
Adam Rust, director of financial services at the Consumer Federation of America, added that law enforcement agencies, Congress, and the press have all been informed by complaint narratives "on what problems are occurring in their communities."
“These narratives, all published with consumer consent, convey the emotional hurt caused when companies act without regard for the law," said Rust. "It’s wrong, especially at a time when so many people are struggling to make ends meet, to blunt their voices.”
Seattle's City Council used a budget surplus to enact Wilson's proposal to provide free breakfast and lunch to 49,000 public school students.
Seattle's public school students will be eating for free this year after the City Council approved $3.6 million in funding for school breakfast and lunch this week.
It was the realization of a proposal made in April by Seattle's democratic socialist mayor, Katie Wilson, to expand the city's targeted school lunch program to cover all students.
The council had rejected the proposal earlier this summer in favor of an approach that delayed the school lunch program by a year and narrowly focused on expanding access for only the lowest-income students, which opponents argued still left many hungry kids with nothing.
That plan was met with immediate backlash, and the council swiftly changed course. On Tuesday, it voted unanimously to reallocate surplus funds from an affordable housing redevelopment project to fund a universal school meal program.
In addition to providing free breakfast and lunch to Seattle's roughly 49,000 public school students beginning next month, the new program will also provide more support to low-income students during weekends and school vacations.
The program is expected to extend well into the future, with funding in 2027-28 coming from an education levy voters approved in November. After that, Washington's new "high-earners" tax is expected to kick in, and students across the entire state will enjoy free meals, though that tax still faces legal challenges.
Wilson called the plan "a tremendous victory for families across our city that will make Seattle more affordable."
The plan fulfills a key campaign promise for Wilson, who came into office in November on the same wave of progressive enthusiasm as New York City's democratic socialist mayor, Zohran Mamdani.
Also on Tuesday, the City Council approved Wilson's legislation banning rental junk fees—including administrative service fees, pet rent, and package fees.
The AFL-CIO report also points out that "a majority of S&P 500 CEOs made more in one day than the median US worker made in one year."
"Failed trillionaire" Elon Musk's $158 billion pay package at Tesla was so high that it "broke the CEO pay curve," as the nation's largest federation of labor unions underscored on Thursday in its annual report about chief executive pay.
"Including Musk, S&P 500 CEOs received $340.1 million on average in 2025, about a 1,700% increase over the previous year," explains the AFL-CIO's latest "Executive Paywatch" report. "Excluding Musk's Tesla pay package, the average CEO pay at S&P 500 companies increased 21%, from $18.9 million in 2024 to $22.8 million in 2025."
"The average CEO-to-worker pay ratio across S&P 500 Index companies was 5,387-to-1 in 2025. Musk's total compensation at Tesla was 2,522,203 times the median Tesla employee's pay in 2025," the publication continues. "Excluding Musk, the average pay ratio of S&P 500 companies increased from 285-to-1 in 2024 to 312-to-1 in 2025."
Musk became the world's first trillionaire in June, after another company for which he serves as CEO, SpaceX, went public—but as of Thursday afternoon, his net worth was estimated at around $880 billion, according to the Bloomberg and Forbes billionaire lists.
The AFL-CIO report spotlights the wealth of the world's richest man, noting that last year "Elon Musk received the median Tesla worker's pay every 4.23 seconds—less time than it takes to read this sentence," but it also stresses that he's far from alone in making exorbitant amounts of money compared with the wages of workers at the companies he leads.
"As shown in our latest Paywatch report, executive compensation has reached a new, shameful high," said AFL-CIO secretary-treasurer Fred Redmond in a statement. The report points out that "a majority of S&P 500 CEOs made more in one day than the median US worker made in one year."
"Excessive CEO compensation contributes to growing economic inequality," the document says. "It creates the risk that CEOs will make short-term decisions to maximize their pay, even if it hurts the company's long-term health. And it's simply unfair to the workers whose labor generates the profit these CEOs capitalize on."
Our new Executive Paywatch report is here, and - spoiler alert - greedy CEOs are making even MORE.Top CEOs made 312x what workers make and took home an average of $22.8 MILLION per YEAR in total compensation.Read our full Paywatch report here: Aflcio.org/paywatch
[image or embed]
— AFL-CIO (@aflcio.org) August 13, 2026 at 12:35 PM
AFL-CIO found that the biggest ratio for executive v. worker pay was in manufacturing: Average executive compensation—which often includes not only a salary but also a bonus, stock, a retirement plan, and more—topped $696 million a year, while the typical worker made just over $93,000.
By sector, the second-highest was in arts, entertainment, and recreation, where executives were paid over $24 million while the median worker got just $24,850 annually. In educational services, average executive pay was around $50 million while workers were paid under $58,000.
The report emphasizes that like the CEOs, "2025 also was a very good year" for President Donald Trump, who returned to office in January and, according to recent federal disclosure forms, pocketed at least $2.2 billion last year—which, as the AFL-CIO found, was "a nearly 254% increase from what he received in 2024."
"Trump's 2025 receipts included $1.4 billion from the sale of $TRUMP memecoins and World Liberty Financial, his family's cryptocurrency business," the report says. "The median US worker would need to work 43,154 years to earn what Trump received in 2025."
16% of adults can’t pay all their bills in full.26% skipped medical care due to cost.23% of renters fell behind on rent in the last year.Meanwhile, CEO pay is exploding. Let’s call this what it is: greed.Learn more in our Executive Paywatch report: Aflcio.org/paywatch
[image or embed]
— AFL-CIO (@aflcio.org) August 13, 2026 at 2:15 PM
While gutting the federal government with help from Musk, Trump last year signed the GOP's so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, cutting programs for working people to give billionaires more tax breaks—and Wednesday's release of the latest inflation figures highlighted how Americans continue to struggle with the cost of gasoline, groceries, healthcare, housing, and more.
Redmond said that "Elon Musk became the world's first trillionaire. Donald Trump raked in over $2 billion since the 2024 election. Meanwhile, working Americans are struggling to feed their kids and pay their electric bills. But there's a better economy we can build for working people."
"That's why the labor movement will continue to fight for every worker to have a union contract that begins to level the playing field and ensures they take home the share of the profit they create," he added. "And it's why we are spending every day until November organizing and mobilizing 16 million union voters to elect pro-worker politicians who will work for us, not wealthy CEOs."
“Trump is making it easier for cartels, criminals, and US adversaries to abuse our financial system," said Sen. Andy Kim. "Because he’s in the pocket of billionaires like Elon Musk, who’d potentially benefit."
Critics are warning that the Trump administration just made financial crimes a lot easier to commit by permanently gutting a law that prevented criminals from using shell companies to obscure their activities. Elon Musk may benefit.
On Tuesday, the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a final rule permanently exempting US individuals and companies from a section of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) requiring them to identify the true owners of opaque companies.
The law, which passed in 2020, was ironically introduced and championed by then-US Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who is now President Donald Trump’s secretary of state and national security adviser.
At the time, Rubio called the law—which he introduced with Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)—"the most significant anti-corruption and money laundering law in decades."
But Republicans have since pushed to repeal the legislation, which Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) referred to as "big government overreach."
With Republicans in Congress unable to muster the votes to reverse it legislatively, the Trump administration has effectively killed the law by weakening Treasury Department policy. In March 2025, Treasury adopted an interim rule exempting US companies from its requirements.
Plans for a rule change were announced by Treasury less than 24 hours after the SpaceX and Tesla CEO, Musk—who was then leading the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—commented on his social media platform X that he would “look into” the statute in response to a right-wing comedian who'd complained about it.
According to a May report by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office, more than 99% of entities previously required to report under the law were now exempt. That exemption was made permanent this week.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said it was "a victory for common sense and American small businesses" and called the reporting requirements "burdensome... for millions of law-abiding business owners without compromising our national security.”
Nelson Bunn, executive director of the National District Attorneys Association, said the exact opposite was true.
"By exempting domestic entities and owners from reporting, FinCEN has significantly hindered prosecutors’ ability to identify the bad actors from legitimate businesses when investigating US shell companies used by transnational cartels, human traffickers, and cyberscammers,” Bunn said. "Taking away this indispensable tool for law enforcement endangers American families and communities.”
The change is drawing outrage from Democrats and some Republicans. In a statement on Thursday, Whitehouse and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said the rule change "undermines the clear intent of the law."
"The act gave the federal government needed tools to address criminal activity like human trafficking, terrorist financing, drug distribution, sanctions evasion, and more without unduly burdening legitimate commercial entities," they said. "This decision is an unfortunate one that fails to use all available tools to protect Americans and crack down on illicit financial schemes.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, highlighted that the committee's previous oversight found the rollback would likely hamper efforts to stop a host of bad actors.
These included Chinese money-laundering networks that have been used to funnel proceeds to drug cartels, fraudsters using opaque ownership to rip off federal grants and benefits, and a Venezuelan national who allegedly used shell companies to hide over $1 billion in cryptocurrency transactions.
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) said the law was “designed to stop criminals from laundering money, and Trump and Secretary Bessent are violating the Constitution to gut it,” and in doing so, “intentionally facilitating corruption and crime.”
In a letter sent to Bessent in March 2026, Warren and other Democratic lawmakers noted that Musk himself would be a direct beneficiary of the rule change, since he "uses a network of dozens of secretive companies—potentially the type of entities that, under the CTA, are required to report ownership information to the Treasury Department."
The New York Times found that in Texas alone, there are over 90 different companies and other legal entities tied to Musk, with others in California, Delaware, and Nevada, which he has used to buy property, structure business deals, hold assets, and pay for political activity—including more than $80 million in super political action committee spending to support Trump in 2024—without putting his own name on the transactions.
"Trump is making it easier for cartels, criminals, and US adversaries to abuse our financial system and harm Americans," said Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ). "Why? Because he’s in the pocket of billionaires like Elon Musk, who’d potentially benefit from his shady and corrupt actions."
Warren said: "Secretary Bessent should reverse this decision. And he needs to testify in front of this Committee to explain why he’s putting American national security at risk.”
"This is money they're taking out of your healthcare, your jobs, and your education," the California Democrat noted, calling on Republicans in Congress "to do their jobs."
Several Democrats in Congress on Wednesday blasted US President Donald Trump's plans to spend over $900 million—mostly taxpayer dollars—on construction projects on White House grounds, the details of which were first reported by The Washington Post.
"The Post previously reported that the projected cost of the East Wing construction alone was $600 million, with half coming from taxpayers," the newspaper detailed. Journalists reviewed confidential contracts and related planning documents that also "include the costs of upgrades to nearby Lafayette Square, construction of a helipad, a new visitor screening center, and other previously reported projects that would drive the total cost of work on the grounds to at least $927 million."
While the Post highlighted how the administration has "sidestepped Congress and shielded visibility into what would become the most expensive overhaul" of the property in decades, the White House declined to answer the newspaper's questions and claimed that the money is being spent in a "manner consistent with" congressional intent.
"President Trump continues to implement long-overdue and necessary renovations to beautify the People's House as we celebrate our great Nation’s 250th anniversary of independence," said White House spokesperson Davis Ingle. "Thanks to the Builder-in-Chief, the White House will be properly glorified and remain in excellent condition for generations to come."
The report came amid a court battle over Trump's proposed ballroom—for which he's already demolished the East Wing—and just days after journalist Scott MacFarlane revealed that, according to internal documents from the National Park Service, massive sums of money have been diverted to fund assorted projects commissioned by the president.
Responding to the Post's article on Bluesky, US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a potential 2028 presidential candidate, said that "the price of Trump's ballroom keeps going up, and he has lied to Americans about how much taxpayers will pay for it. This is money they're taking out of your healthcare, your jobs, and your education. I am calling on Republicans to do their jobs and block this wasteful spending."
Both chambers of Congress are narrowly controlled by Republicans, but that could change after the November midterm elections. Other lawmakers joined Khanna in calling out Trump's priorities, as Americans struggle with the high cost of necessities, from gasoline and groceries to healthcare and housing.
"The same president who says there's no money for daycare or healthcare wants to hand you a nearly $1 billion tab for his personal playground," stressed Congressman Richard Neal (D-Mass.). "There's a golden age happening alright, but only for residents at the White House."
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) said that "when it comes to Trump, everything must be bigger, shinier, and all about him—including the White House. He's turning a place that belongs to the American people into his very own DC Mar-a-Lago on the taxpayers' dime. And the price tag keeps going up. It’s now at least $900 million. This is crazy corruption and a massive grift on Americans."
As inflation continues to spiral out of control and gas prices remain well above $4, this is how Donald Trump is spending your taxpayer dollars. $900 million for a gilded ballroom at the White House. $0 to lower your costs. The Trump White House in a nutshell.
[image or embed]
— Chuck Schumer (@schumer.senate.gov) August 12, 2026 at 10:14 AM
The Post reporting coincided with the US Bureau of Labor Statistics announcing the latest inflation figures, which underscored the financial strain that American consumers are enduring under Trump and the GOP-controlled Congress. Democrats who shared the article on social media emphasized the current affordability crisis.
"Trump secretly transferred $500 million taxpayer dollars into shadowy accounts to fund his White House construction spree. He even redirected funds allocated by Congress to hire more Secret Service agents," said Congressman Gabe Amo (D-RI). "Americans can't afford gas and groceries, but this is Trump's priority."
Similarly, Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) said: "While families are struggling to afford groceries, gas, and rent, Trump is spending at least $900 million on his latest cosmetic project. Trump's priorities? Trump."
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) declared that "Trump isn't helping your household afford the basics. He's too busy spending your tax dollars making the White House a tacky mess."
"Today's report is yet another reminder that Trump's promise to lower costs on 'Day One' was a lie," said the House Budget Committee's top Democrat.
As Americans continue to struggle with the cost of gasoline, groceries, healthcare, housing, and more under President Donald Trump, congressional Democrats and economists on Wednesday used his own government's latest inflation figures to call out the Republican's handling of the US economy.
The US Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that the consumer price index—a measure of goods and services bought by households—increased 0.1% on a seasonally adjusted basis in July after falling 0.4% in June. The annual inflation rate was 3.4% before seasonal adjustment.
The brief reprieve for American consumers in June was tied to Trump's illegal Iran War cooling off a bit, so the new numbers were expected, given the ramped-up hostilities that followed and persist. The conflict and its various consequences are expected to hurt Republicans in the November elections.
"Prices started climbing again in July, and Trump's catastrophic mismanagement of our economy means more spikes in the months ahead," warned Alex Jacquez, a former Obama administration official who is now senior vice president of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, in a statement.
"The president said it himself: He is only 'semi-negotiating' an end to the war, all while slapping new tariffs on 99% of our imported goods," noted Jacquez. "Trump is not serious about bringing much-needed relief to working families who are weary of higher prices at the pump and on the shelves, and who are pessimistic about an economy that is bleeding jobs."
US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said Wednesday that "as inflation continues to spiral out of control and gas prices remain well above $4, this is how Donald Trump is spending your taxpayer dollars. $900 million for a gilded ballroom at the White House. $0 to lower your costs. The Trump White House in a nutshell."
House Budget Committee Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) recalled when Trump was asked in May how much "Americans' financial situations" were on his mind as he tried to negotiate an end to the Iran War, and the president replied, "Not even a little bit," then returned to his misleading talking points on nuclear weapons.
"Month after month, Donald Trump continues to prove that he doesn't 'think about Americans' financial situation,'" Boyle said. "Over the last year and a half, Trump and Republicans in Washington have ripped healthcare away from millions of Americans, forced families to pay expensive tariff taxes, and started a disastrous war with Iran."
"Today's report is yet another reminder that Trump's promise to lower costs on 'Day One' was a lie," the congressman added. "American families deserve better."
House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) declared on social media Wednesday, "Donald Trump's economy is a disaster."
"His war is spiking gas costs. Wages are down. Inflation is up," she said, looking to the midterms. "In November, Democrats will take back the House and fight for an affordable America."