Trump withdraws WHO: That’s a big one, we paid $500M, China $39M. I terminated it, Biden reversed it

WHO Withdrawal

“What is this withdrawing from the World Health Organization? Ooh, that’s a big one.”

Trump’s framework — major order, significant decision.

The WHO withdrawal:

Executive order signed January 20, 2025
Formal notification to WHO
One-year withdrawal period
Funding cessation
Political signal

Funding Disparity

“So we paid $500 million to World Health when I was here, and I terminated China with 1.4 billion people. We have 3.50. We have, nobody knows what we have because so many people came in illegally, but let’s say we have 3.25.”

Trump’s population framework:

U.S. (approximately 325-350 million, uncertain due to illegal immigration)
China (approximately 1.4 billion)
Funding should be population-proportional
But disparity severe

“They had 1.4 billion. They were paying $39 million. We were paying $500 million.”

The contribution disparity:

China: $39 million (1.4 billion people)
U.S.: $500 million (~330 million people)
Per capita: China $0.03, U.S. $1.50
U.S. paying approximately 50x per capita
“A little unfair” (Trump understatement)

“It seemed a little unfair to me.”

First Termination

“So that wasn’t the reason, but I dropped out. They offered me to come back for $39 million.”

Trump’s first-term withdrawal history:

COVID mishandling criticism
WHO failure documented
Withdrawal initiated 2020
Offered return at $39 million
Declined at that price

“In theory, it should be listed that, but you know.”

Trump acknowledging the expected rate.

Biden Reversal

“And when Biden came back, they came back for $500 million. He knew that you could have come back for $39 million.”

The Biden decision:

Rejoined WHO
Paid $500 million (prior level)
Refused $39 million rate (available)
Generous U.S. contribution continued
Biden administration choice

“They wanted us back so badly, so we’ll see what happens.”

Trump’s framework — WHO wants American funding desperately. Negotiating leverage exists.

China Comparison

“China pays $39 million, and we pay $500 million, and China is a bigger country.”

The comparison:

China larger population
China paying less
U.S. paying more
Proportionality absent
American disadvantage

WHO Context

WHO mishandling issues:

COVID-19 initial response
Chinese cover-up facilitation
Delayed pandemic declaration
Travel ban criticism
Origin investigation failures

Trump’s executive order citing:

Mishandling of COVID
Failure to adopt reforms
Independence from political influence (WHO member states)
Ongoing governance issues

Inflation and Energy

Trump pivoted to inflation question. “The biggest thing and factor for inflation is energy.”

The energy-inflation framework:

Energy underpins all prices
Fuel costs drive transportation
Manufacturing uses energy
Heating/cooling costs
Food production

“They screwed up my energy policy, and then they went back to it.”

The Biden energy policy:

Canceled Keystone XL
Suspended drilling permits
LNG export pause
Regulatory restrictions
Eventually reversed some

“You know, they heard it really badly, and then they went back to it, and they started drilling more, but by that time it was too late.”

The damage done:

Oil companies stopped investment
Refining capacity reduced
Workforce disbanded
Supply tightened
Prices surged

Burgum and Wright

“Many of these things that we’re signing, and that Doug Burgum is going to be signing, and Chris Wright was phenomenal with, you know, energy, Department of Energy.”

Trump’s energy team:

Doug Burgum (Interior Secretary)
Chris Wright (Energy Secretary)
Coordinated framework
Specific expertise
Rapid implementation

“We’re going to be taking a lot, we’re going to make a lot of money from energy. We have more than anybody else. We’re going to make a lot of money from energy.”

The energy revenue framework:

U.S. has largest reserves
Domestic production expansion
Export revenue
Tax revenue from production
Royalties for federal land

Tariffs and EU

“We’re going to make a lot of money from tariffs. You know, European Union charges us, they have a VAT tax of 20%, but it’s really much higher than that. And that’s the equivalent, almost the equivalent of a tariff.”

The VAT framework:

European Union Value Added Tax
20%+ typical
Applied to imports
U.S. exports subject
Effective tariff equivalent

“And they’re tough, they’re very tough. They don’t take our cars, they don’t take our farm product, they don’t take almost anything.”

The EU trade framework:

European cars dominate EU market
American cars excluded by regulation
EU agricultural protection
Various non-tariff barriers
Selective market access

“And yet we take their cars, we take their farm product, we take a lot from them.”

The asymmetry:

U.S. markets open
EU markets restricted
Trade deficit result
Unbalanced framework

EU Trade Deficit

“So, you know, we have like a $300 billion deficit with the European Union, so we’ll straight that out with either tariffs, or they have to buy our oil.”

The $300 billion deficit:

U.S. imports more than exports to EU
Persistent annual deficit
Various sectors involved
Strategic concern

The solutions:

Tariffs to equalize
EU buying U.S. oil/LNG (equalization)
Trade deal framework
Market access reciprocity

“The one thing they can do, or well I guess, the one thing they can do to catch up quickly, buy our oil, I guess. And they should do that.”

Trump’s simple solution — EU buys American oil. Fixes trade deficit while addressing EU energy security concerns.

China Visit

“Will you travel to China this year? Yeah, I could be. I’ve had the invite.”

Trump responding to China visit question:

Invitation received
Possible 2025 visit
Subject to agenda
Strategic engagement
Personal diplomacy potential

BRICS Framework

“Mr. President, talking about the European Union and the tariffs, what do you mean when you say that European Union in conflict is part of BRICS? That or what? BRICS. Oh, BRICS. No, they’re talking about BRICS.”

BRICS reference:

Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa
Expanded to include others
Reserve currency alternative
Trade framework competitor
Threat to U.S. dollar dominance

“BRICS are six nations, I think it’s seven nations. And they were looking to do a number in the United States. And if they do that, they won’t be happy about what’s going to happen to them.”

Trump’s warning to BRICS:

Replacing dollar consequences
U.S. retaliation framework
Specific economic consequences
Deterrence messaging

Universal Tariff

“Are you considering a universal tariff? I may, yeah, but we’re not ready for that yet.”

Universal tariff consideration:

Single tariff on all imports
Discussed during campaign
Not immediate
Option preserved
Policy flexibility maintained

Significance

Trump’s WHO withdrawal + tariff + energy + EU framework captured multiple dimensions:

International organizations: WHO withdrawal, funding reform
Energy framework: Inflation through energy solved
Trade framework: Tariffs as revenue + leverage
EU framework: $300B deficit addressed
BRICS deterrence: Dollar dominance protected

The WHO withdrawal — second attempt for Trump — demonstrates sustained commitment. Funding disparity ($500M vs $39M) provided clear political case.

The energy-inflation framework — “biggest factor” — placed energy at center of economic policy. Burgum and Wright framework executing.

The EU trade framework captured Trump’s core complaint — asymmetric market access, VAT as tariff equivalent, persistent deficits. Solutions: tariffs or oil purchases.

The BRICS warning — consequences for dollar replacement attempts — represents financial warfare deterrence. Trump signaling early to prevent escalation.

Key Takeaways

Trump on WHO withdrawal: “What is this withdrawing from the World Health Organization? Ooh, that’s a big one. So we paid $500 million to World Health when I was here, and I terminated it.”
Trump on funding disparity: “They had 1.4 billion. They were paying $39 million. We were paying $500 million. It seemed a little unfair to me.”
Trump on Biden’s rejoin: “They offered me to come back for $39 million … And when Biden came back, they came back for $500 million. He knew that you could have come back for $39 million.”
Trump on energy-inflation: “The biggest thing and factor for inflation is energy. They screwed up my energy policy … We’re going to be taking a lot, we’re going to make a lot of money from energy. We have more than anybody else.”
Trump on EU and tariffs: “European Union charges us, they have a VAT tax of 20%, but it’s really much higher than that. And that’s the equivalent, almost the equivalent of a tariff … we have like a $300 billion deficit with the European Union, so we’ll straight that out with either tariffs, or they have to buy our oil.”