The next is the transcript of an interview with Kevin Hassett, Nationwide Financial Council director, that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on July 6, 2025.
WEIJA JIANG: We flip now to Kevin Hassett. He’s the director of the Nationwide Financial Council and considered one of President Trump’s prime advisors. He is additionally highly regarded on that driveway the place I am normally alongside a few dozen reporters. So, Kevin, thanks a lot to your time this morning. I wish to begin with commerce, as a result of there is a huge deadline arising on Wednesday. As , that 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs that the President introduced again in April is about to finish. To date, the US has introduced a couple of offers; the UK, Vietnam, and also you’re inching nearer to a closing settlement with China. Do you count on to get any extra offers carried out with America’s greatest buying and selling companions by Wednesday?
KEVIN HASSETT: Yeah. First, I do should take- take a pause and share your ideas and prayers with the folks of Texas. It is an unimaginable, heartbreaking story, and Kristi Noem and the President have instructed the federal authorities to throw the whole lot they have at serving to the survivors and serving to clear up that place. So, anyway, I am actually heartbroken at present to see these tales, and I need you to know that within the White Home, everyone is placing each effort they’ll into serving to the folks of Texas at present. On commerce, there’s going to be fairly a bit of reports this week. And, I feel, the headline of the information is that there are going to be offers which are finalized. There are a complete quantity that Jameson Greer has negotiated with overseas governments, after which they will be letters which are despatched to international locations saying, here is how we predict it must go, as a result of the offers aren’t superior sufficient. And the headline goes to be that international locations are agreeing around the globe to open their markets as much as our merchandise, and to permit us to place some sort of tariff on their merchandise after they come into the US. At precisely what the numbers can be, can be issues that you will discover out within the information this week,.
WEIJA JIANG: Kevin, you stated there are going to be offers. For these actually essential buying and selling companions, if there’s not a deal by Wednesday, is the President going to increase this pause?
KEVIN HASSETT: You realize, the US is at all times prepared to speak to everyone about the whole lot that is occurring on the earth. And there are deadlines, and there are issues which are shut, and so possibly issues will push again the dead- previous the deadline, or possibly they want- ultimately, the President’s going to make that judgment.
WEIJA JIANG: And also you additionally talked about these letters that may begin going out tomorrow, in keeping with President Trump. He stated about 10 to 12 international locations will obtain them. Do you- are you able to inform us who’s going to get one and what they are saying?
KEVIN HASSETT: As a result of- as a result of, once more, the a part of the letter that might be occurring proper is that we’re near a deal, we’re not likely happy with the progress that we’re making on the deal, and so we’re saying, okay, effective, we will ship a letter, however possibly you get a deal on the final minute too. Till we see the whole lot that performs out, I feel that we have to simply maintain our hearth and look ahead to the information this week.
WEIJA JIANG: Is it truthful to say that these notices are going to go to our smaller buying and selling companions, as you negotiate with our larger ones?
KEVIN HASSETT: I feel that it might be that it will be each. But additionally, remember, that when we’ve nice commerce offers, our smaller buying and selling companions might develop into a lot larger buying and selling companions. And that is, I feel, one of many explanation why international locations are racing to set offers up with us forward of the deadline.
WEIJA JIANG: I’ve to ask you in regards to the deadlines, Kevin, to make these offers, since you simply talked about you are at all times open. The president stated there’s not likely any flexibility left between now and Wednesday. Lower than two weeks in the past, the Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated that offers could be wrapped up by Labor Day. So, I’m wondering, , if- how can corporations plan if the aim posts hold transferring? How can international locations negotiate if they do not even understand how a lot time they’ve left?
KEVIN HASSETT: Proper. Effectively, the tough outlines of the offers have gotten clear to everyone, as a result of we’ve some offers just like the UK, and the Vietnam deal which are beginning to be, , I assume, tips for what would possibly occur. However, one of many issues that we’re seeing that is actually attention-grabbing to me, is that individuals are simply on-shoring manufacturing of the US at a file fee. As we have had file job creation, file capital spending, and that is even forward of the Large, Lovely Invoice. And so, I feel what’s occurring is that individuals are responding to President Trump’s, , potential threats to have excessive tariffs on international locations by transferring their exercise right here into the US, which is creating jobs, greater than 2 million jobs, since he took workplace, and elevating wages. You realize, wage progress is heading up in the direction of the actually, actually excessive pinnacles that we noticed in 2017. And so, I feel there is a race proper now to get exercise into the US. And, partly, that race has been kicked off by President Trump.
WEIJA JIANG: I bear in mind after these reciprocal tariffs have been introduced, you informed me that there have been about 15 offers that international locations have been bringing to the President. How shut, should you might give us any quantity in any respect, what quantity are we going to see this week?
KEVIN HASSETT: Yeah, you will have- you will should get that from Jameson and the President. I feel that, , we have seen a number of offers which were finalized by our negotiators, after which the President finds issues that would make them higher. And so, it’s- I am not going to get forward of the President on the variety of offers.
WEIJA JIANG: Okay, thanks, Kevin. We’ll look out for that. I wish to transfer now to the One Large, Lovely Invoice that, after all, the President signed into regulation on Independence Day. You have got it, and now it’s a must to pay for it. And there is a consensus that this invoice provides tremendously to the deficit. I do know that you’re so accustomed to these numbers. The Yale Finances Lab estimates it can add $3 trillion to the debt. The Tax Basis says this tax portion of the invoice might additionally add $3 trillion to the deficit. The Committee for a Accountable Federal Finances, which components in curiosity on the debt, says it might add as much as $5 trillion over the following decade. And on this very program, even Speaker Johnson answered within the affirmative when requested if this invoice would add over $4 trillion to the deficit. I do know that the administration says the invoice will truly shrink the deficit by $1.5 trillion. Assist me perceive why there may be such a drastic distinction between your quantity and all these others.
KEVIN HASSETT: Effectively- nicely, to start with, let’s keep in mind that science will not be democracy. Fact will not be democracy. Our estimates are primarily based on modeling that we used final time, once I was Chairman of the Council of Financial Advisers to say what would occur if we had a invoice, how a lot progress we’d get. And we stated, and we have been criticized soundly, that we’d get 3% progress. And we even had the actually technical macroeconomic fashions that stated that we’d get 3% progress. We run the identical fashions by means of this tax invoice, it is even higher. And what we’re seeing is that should you get 3% progress once more, then that is $4 trillion extra in income than the CBO and these different our bodies are giving us credit score for. They’ve been flawed up to now, they usually’re being flawed once more, in our perception. However, the factor that disappoints me is that if I put out a mannequin and I say, hey, here is what is going on to occur, we will get 3% progress. After which it seems it is 1.5% progress, then, as an instructional economist, as a scientist, then it is my obligation to say, what did I get flawed? What did my mannequin miss? These folks aren’t doing that. And that is the factor that I discover disappointing, as a result of we put peer-reviewed educational stuff on the desk, stated we will get that 3% progress, after which we received it proper final time, and we imagine we will get it proper this time. However, should you suppose that 1.8% progress is what is going on to occur over the following 10 years, then you need to agree with the CBO quantity. However, there’s one other a part of the CBO quantity that it is advisable to fear about. And that’s that if we do not move the invoice, that it is the greatest tax hike in historical past. And with that huge tax hike, that after all, we’d have a recession. The CEA says that we would have a few 4% drop in GDP and lose 9 million jobs. If we had a 4% drop in GDP and we misplaced 9 million jobs, what would occur to the deficit? And so, I do not suppose that the CBO has a really sturdy file. I do not suppose these locations have a really sturdy file. And what they should do is get again to the fundamentals of taking a look at macroeconomic fashions. There is a actually well-known macroeconomist at Harvard named Jim Inventory. They need to return and browse the whole lot Jim Inventory has written for the final 15 years, and fold these into their fashions, after which possibly we might discuss.
WEIJA JIANG: I wish to discuss too, Kevin, about one other quantity that I do know you and the President disagree with, however that Democrats and lots of Republicans are apprehensive about, and that is the CBO’s projection that as many as 12 million People might lose Medicaid protection due to this regulation. What’s the NEC’s estimate for a way many individuals might lose protection?
KEVIN HASSETT: Effectively- nicely, yeah. Let’s- let’s unbundle that somewhat bit. As a result of, first, on the CBO protection, so what are we doing? So, what we’re doing is we’re asking for a piece requirement. However, the work requirement is that it is advisable to be on the lookout for work, and even doing volunteer work, and also you needn’t do it till your children are 14 or older. And so, the concept that is going to trigger a large hemorrhaging in availability of insurance coverage, does not make a number of sense to us. After which, should you take a look at the CBO numbers, should you take a look at the large numbers, they are saying that individuals are going to lose insurance coverage. About 5 million of these are individuals who produce other insurance coverage. They’re individuals who have two kinds of insurance coverage. And so, subsequently, in the event that they lose one, they’re nonetheless insured. And so, the CBO numbers on that aspect do not make any sense to us in any respect. However, on the opposite aspect, return to 2017 after we had work necessities for Obamacare, they stated that we lose about 4 million insured between 2017 and 2019, and about double that over the following 10 years. And, in reality, the variety of insured went up. It went up fairly a bit, by greater than 10 million over these two years, as a result of the underside line is, one of the best ways to get insurance coverage is to get a job. And we have a Large, Lovely Invoice that is going to create a number of job creation and a number of insurance coverage, and the CBO is simply not accounting for that. And once more, they want to return and take a look at all of the issues that they received flawed. You understand that they are underestimating Medicaid spending by 20%. They need to look again in any respect the issues they received flawed, and clarify what they will do to get it proper sooner or later, and to do a greater job. And in the event that they try this, we’ll take them extra critically. However proper now, I do not suppose any critical thinker might take them critically, as a result of they’ve carried out so flawed, and flawed for thus lengthy. Even back- should you return to when President Obama handed Obamacare, they received each single quantity there flawed about how many individuals would get non-public insurance coverage and the way few folks would get Medicaid, and so forth. And so, their file on this modeling house is about as unhealthy because it’s doable to be. In actual fact, you would, sort of, roll the roulette wheel and give you a greater set of numbers, higher historical past, observe file than CBO.
WEIJA JIANG: Kevin, what in regards to the enhanced subsidies? Is that quantity flawed too? That the ACA permits about $705 for folks to assist pay for his or her medical health insurance. That does not sound just like the waste, fraud, and abuse that I do know you and the President have talked about eliminating. That simply seems like individuals who can’t afford protection, and now it will be much more so with the subsidies gone.
KEVIN HASSETT: Proper. Effectively- nicely, should you’re- should you’re taking a look at the- the change within the tax on the suppliers, which is one thing that has been a key speaking level for the Democrats, they are saying that that is going to shut down rural hospitals. What has occurred is that, moderately than let the states- the states have this recreation the place they offer a greenback to a hospital after which the federal authorities matches the greenback, after which the state taxes a few of the greenback away. In different phrases, that we’ve an settlement with the states that they will match, however then they’ve this they’ve this trick the place they tax the hospitals after they offer them the cash, so actually, it is the federal authorities giving them the cash. And that is why we have been overspending Medicaid by 20% since this trick began occurring. And so, what we have carried out is that we have put a haircut on that. However, we have additionally put $50 billion right into a belief fund to make it possible for the agricultural hospitals are there to deal with the sick. So, I feel it is a prudent kind. It is sound budgetary politics. And I feel that no person’s going to lose their insurance coverage.
WEIJA JIANG: Kevin Hassett, we are going to watch for a way that ages. Thanks very a lot. Actually admire —
KEVIN HASSETT: – And if I get it flawed, we’ll verify, and we’ll discuss why I received it flawed. I promise.
WEIJA JIANG: Thanks. We’ll have you ever again. Thanks very a lot, Kevin.
