Trump Told the Fed to Cut Rates. It Raised Them
When Trump publicly demanded the Federal Reserve cut rates and threatened to halt trade with deficit countries, markets responded in a way he clearly did not anticipate. What happened 12 days later rewrote the story entirely.
This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.
In early September, President Donald Trump delivered one of his most aggressive demands yet for lower interest rates. Fresh off a surprisingly strong jobs report, Trump told the Federal Reserve to cut rates and warned that he could stop trading with countries that run large trade surpluses with the United States if the Fed refused.
At the time, the message created a strange split. Trump saw the strong labor report as evidence that the United States deserved lower borrowing costs. Investors saw almost the exact opposite. A healthy labor market, combined with inflation that was still running above the Federal Reserve’s target, gave policymakers more room to keep rates elevated. Less than two weeks later, we found out which interpretation won.
Trump’s Rate-Cut Ultimatum
On September 4, Trump reacted to the August employment report with a lengthy Truth Social post celebrating the numbers and again demanding lower interest rates. The post was published at 9:41 a.m. Eastern, shortly after the Labor Department released its report. Trump argued that a stronger United States should receive cheaper borrowing costs and wrote, “LOWER THE RATE OR I’LL STOP TRADING WITH COUNTRIES WITH WHICH WE HAVE A DEFICIT.” He also told the Fed’s Board of Governors to “BE PATRIOTS for a change.” It was an unusually direct attempt to connect Federal Reserve policy with the president’s broader trade agenda.
The August Jobs Report Really Was a Big Beat
Trump was right about one important part of the story: the August jobs report was considerably stronger than economists expected. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that nonfarm payrolls increased by 162,000 jobs, while the unemployment rate held at 4.1%. Economists surveyed by Reuters had expected only about 56,000 new jobs. That made the headline gain nearly three times the consensus forecast. It was also a major acceleration from July’s revised increase of 21,000 jobs and far above the roughly 31,000 monthly average recorded during the previous 12 months.
But Most of the Hiring Came From a Few Places
mike
The 162,000-job headline looked impressive, but the gains were not evenly spread across the economy. Food services and drinking places added about 59,200 jobs, while local government education added another 41,900. Together, those two categories accounted for more than 100,000 of the month’s net gain. Manufacturing added 16,000 jobs and health care added 12,900, while the information sector lost 23,000. So August was unquestionably a strong month compared with recent reports, but it was not evidence of a hiring boom across every major industry.
Wall Street Heard “Rate Hike,” Not “Rate Cut”
This was where Trump’s interpretation and Wall Street’s interpretation split apart. Strong employment gives the Federal Reserve less reason to stimulate the economy with lower interest rates, especially when inflation is still running above target. Treasury yields and the dollar rose after the report, while all three major U.S. stock indexes finished the session lower. The 10-year Treasury yield briefly climbed above 4.81%, and futures markets pushed the implied probability of a September Fed rate hike to roughly 65%, up from about 55% before the jobs report. Investors were not positioning for the cut Trump wanted. They were increasingly preparing for the opposite.
Kevin Warsh Was Already Worried About Inflation
Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh, whom Trump selected to lead the central bank, had already made clear that inflation was his bigger concern. At the Federal Reserve’s Jackson Hole symposium on August 28, Warsh described the labor market as stable and consistent with full employment, but said the price side of the Fed’s mandate was more troubling. His message was straightforward: inflation remained too high and the Fed needed to remain focused on restoring price stability. Updated government data later showed headline PCE inflation running at 3.4% in August and core PCE inflation at 3.0%, both still above the Fed’s 2% goal.
The Fed Raised Rates Anyway
Then came the part that turned the September 4 confrontation into a much more interesting story in hindsight. At the time of Trump’s post, the federal funds target range was 3.50% to 3.75%. On September 16, just 12 days after Trump demanded a cut, the Federal Open Market Committee unanimously voted to raise the range by a quarter percentage point to 3.75% to 4.00%. The Fed said economic activity remained solid, domestic spending had been resilient and inflation was still elevated. In other words, the central bank ultimately did exactly what financial markets had started expecting after that strong August jobs report.
The Supreme Court Ruling Was More Complicated
Trump also pointed to the Supreme Court’s February tariff ruling as support for his ability to stop trading with deficit countries, but calling that power “absolute” went further than the decision itself. The Court held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. At the same time, the justices noted that IEEPA expressly allows a president, during a qualifying national emergency, to regulate, prevent or prohibit certain imports, exports and other transactions involving foreign interests. That is significant authority, but it comes from a specific emergency statute with legal conditions. The Court did not hand presidents an unlimited peacetime power to shut down trade with any country simply because a bilateral deficit exists.
The Trade Deficit Got Even Bigger
The trade numbers also changed after Trump’s warning. The July goods and services deficit was later revised to $92.8 billion. New figures released October 6 showed the deficit widening again to $105.6 billion in August as imports increased faster than exports. The goods deficit alone reached $136.6 billion, partly offset by a $31.0 billion services surplus. There is some important context here: despite that sharp monthly increase, the total goods and services deficit through August was still 19.9% smaller than during the same period in 2025. So the latest report was ugly on a month-to-month basis without erasing the improvement seen earlier in the year.
September Put the August Jobs Surge in Perspective
One month later, the labor market delivered another reminder not to read too much into a single report. The September employment report showed payrolls increasing by only 29,000, while the unemployment rate edged up to 4.2%. That did not make the August figure wrong, but it did make the 162,000-job surge look more like an unusually strong month than the beginning of a dramatic new hiring acceleration. Taken together, the reports show why the Fed tends to look at trends instead of one headline number, even when that number creates an immediate political and market reaction.
What the September Showdown Ultimately Told Us
Looking back, the September 4 episode ended up illustrating the tension between presidential economic priorities and an independent central bank unusually clearly. Trump wanted lower rates and argued that America’s economic strength justified them. The Fed looked at a resilient labor market, still-elevated inflation and its own mandate, then moved rates higher. Trump also floated an extraordinary trade response, but the Supreme Court decision he cited was far narrower than an unrestricted presidential power over commerce. The threat grabbed the headline. The more consequential development came 12 days later, when the Fed raised rates anyway.
Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.