Did trump actually lower the budget in 2025
Executive summary
President Trump’s administration proposed and enacted measures in 2025 that cut or redirected specific program funding and pushed large tax cuts, but independent analysts and budget offices say those moves did not produce a net, sustained reduction in the federal budget deficit — the One Big Beautiful Bill is estimated to increase deficits by roughly $4.1 trillion over 2025–2034 even after about $1.1 trillion of spending reductions (Tax Foundation) [1]. The administration’s FY2026 blueprint sought about $163 billion in immediate cuts to next-year spending while also advancing major tax reductions and rescissions that outside analysts say raise deficits over the decade (Reuters; Tax Foundation) [2] [1].
1. Cuts on paper vs. cuts in long-term arithmetic
The Trump White House advanced a FY2026 budget blueprint that proposed roughly $163 billion in near-term cuts to domestic programs, slashing budgets for education, housing and public health while boosting defense and border security priorities (Reuters) [2]. The administration’s Office of Management and Budget document and advocacy materials list dozens of program eliminations and steep reductions — 46 programs highlighted for elimination by the White House and others (PBS) [3]. Independent analysts caution that presidential budget proposals are proposals, not final law, and that some “cuts” are policy rewrites or transfers rather than permanent net declines in total federal outlays (PBS; White House OMB materials) [3] [4].
2. The one-big-bill paradox: tax cuts plus some spending cuts still add to deficits
Congress and the White House moved a major package — dubbed the One Big Beautiful Bill — that combined large tax cuts with some spending changes. The Tax Foundation estimates the bill reduces federal tax revenue by about $5.0 trillion on a conventional basis and, after dynamic effects and roughly $1.1 trillion of spending reductions, still increases deficits by about $3.0–$4.1 trillion over 2025–2034 depending on modeling assumptions (Tax Foundation) [1]. Nonpartisan CBO estimates and multiple watchdogs reached similar conclusions: enacted policies and proposed tax expansions are projected to raise deficits over the coming decade despite some targeted spending reductions (Tax Foundation; Boston Globe summarizing CBO) [1] [5].
3. Temporary revenue windfalls and policy reversals masked headline progress
Fiscal data for fiscal 2025 showed a narrower deficit than some expected, helped by an unusual surge in customs/tariff receipts and one-off timing effects; Treasury reported record customs receipts that reduced the fiscal 2025 deficit to about $1.775 trillion (Reuters) [6]. But analysts warn these are volatile and policy-dependent: later rollbacks of tariff ideas and political shifts already erased hundreds of billions in projected deficit reductions, per subsequent CBO-informed reporting (Fortune) [7]. The Boston Globe highlighted that tariff revenue helped in 2025 but warned those gains won’t persist under other proposed policies like large direct payments [5].
4. Administrative rescissions and use of executive tools increased cuts on the books — and controversy
The administration revived the use of rescissions and undertook Department of Government Efficiency actions that paused or sought to rescind appropriations, trimming or eliminating foreign aid and public broadcasting lines and proposing broad program eliminations (Wikipedia; PBS) [8] [9]. Those rescissions and withholding moves produced headline reductions but prompted legal and congressional pushback, and watchdogs such as GAO have found the administration’s handling of appropriations problematic in several instances (Government Executive; PBS) [10] [9]. Available sources do not provide a comprehensive accounting that those administrative actions produced a sustainable, legally uncontested net reduction in total federal spending beyond the near term (not found in current reporting).
5. Competing narratives: White House priorities vs. outside analysts
The White House framed its budget as restoring fiscal discipline by cutting “waste” and redirecting funds toward defense, border security and infrastructure priorities (White House OMB summary; Reuters) [4] [2]. Outside analysts — the Tax Foundation, CBO summaries reported in major outlets, and budget-watchdog groups — conclude the combined policy package will increase deficits heavily over a decade because tax cuts outweigh enacted spending restraints (Tax Foundation; Boston Globe; Fortune) [1] [5] [7]. Political actors and sympathetic analysts emphasize program eliminations and agency streamlining; nonpartisan scorekeepers emphasize net fiscal outcomes and model the decade-long trajectory.
6. Bottom line and limits of available reporting
The available reporting shows the administration both proposed and enacted targeted cuts and rescissions in 2025 while also enacting large tax reductions and policy choices that independent analysts say increase deficits materially over the next decade (Tax Foundation; Reuters; Boston Globe) [1] [2] [5]. Whether those actions constitute “actually lowering the budget” depends on definition: the administration reduced or redirected many specific program lines and narrowed the 2025 deficit with volatile revenues, but authoritative budget analyses say the net effect is larger deficits over time (Tax Foundation; Reuters; Boston Globe) [1] [6] [5]. Sources do not state that all proposed cuts became permanent, nor do they provide a final, uncontested tally that the federal budget was lowered on a sustained basis beyond the fiscal-year quirks reported (not found in current reporting).