In 2025, President Donald Trump has argued that his economic agenda is “pro-growth” and “pro-worker.” But a growing body of analysis suggests the biggest gains from his signature tax and policy moves flow upward—toward high-income households, large corporations, and, in ways that raise ethics questions, Trump’s own business ecosystem—while many families face stubbornly high costs and shrinking public supports.
A centerpiece is the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed July 4, 2025, which the IRS describes as a major rewrite affecting federal taxes, credits, and deductions starting in 2025. IRS The law’s supporters point to lower headline tax burdens and expanded deductions. Critics counter that the structure and long-run distribution heavily favor the top, especially as it extends and locks in rate structures and benefits that disproportionately help higher earners and investors. The Tax Policy Center’s tracker on the 2025 reconciliation package highlights distributional impacts of the law and its tax provisions. Tax Policy Center A separate analysis from the Center for American Progress, citing CBO/JCT estimates, argues that the bill’s largest dollar benefits accrue to the highest-income households over time. Center for American Progress
At the same time, cost-of-living pressures haven’t disappeared. The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ CPI reporting shows prices continuing to rise year-over-year (even if not at peak inflation levels), meaning everyday essentials still cost more than they did previously. Bureau of Labor Statistics+1 One policy driver repeatedly flagged by economists is trade policy: the Trump administration’s sweeping 2025 tariffs pushed average import duties sharply higher, and AP reporting notes that these costs often land on businesses and consumers through higher prices. AP News The Tax Foundation estimates Trump’s tariffs function like a broad-based tax increase—about $1,200 per U.S. household in 2025—which undercuts purchasing power for typical families. Tax Foundation
Where the “upward” tilt becomes most visible is what helps pay for tax cuts: reductions or tighter rules for programs that cushion low- and middle-income households. For SNAP, USDA guidance on implementing the 2025 law details stricter exceptions and eligibility-related changes (including removing certain exemptions for groups such as homeless individuals and veterans in specific provisions). Food and Nutrition Service CBPP has argued the related reconciliation approach amounted to the largest SNAP cut on record, linking those reductions to financing tax policies that are “skewed to the wealthy.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities In health care, KFF’s tracking of the 2025 budget bill provisions describes Medicaid work/verification requirements and reductions that could affect coverage and access—changes that tend to hit working-poor families, seniors, and people with disabilities hardest. KFF
There are also fights around reproductive health funding. Recent reporting highlights state-level responses to Trump budget proposals aimed at defunding Planned Parenthood, with critics warning it would reduce access to contraception, STI testing, and cancer screenings for low-income residents. Jacksonville Journal-Courier
Then there’s the question of who benefits inside Trump’s orbit. Early in 2025, AP reported the Trump Organization issued a voluntary ethics policy that still allowed deals with private foreign companies—raising concerns about influence-seeking while Trump is in office. AP News PBS NewsHour also reported that new business activity and large flows of money into Trump-linked companies revived familiar questions about profiting off the presidency. PBS
Finally, governance choices matter. On Day One, Trump signed an executive order rescinding numerous prior orders, and outside policy trackers note the administration has reshaped regulatory and oversight priorities across agencies. The White House+1 Supporters call this “cutting red tape.” Opponents argue it weakens guardrails that protect consumers, workers, and the integrity of public programs.
Put together, the critique is straightforward: tax and policy changes that lift after-tax incomes at the top, combined with tariffs that can raise prices and budget moves that squeeze safety-net programs, create an economy where the wealthy gain leverage while average households absorb higher costs and reduced support. The administration disputes that framing—but the distributional math and program impacts are exactly where the debate is now concentrated.
