Trump’s Economic Claims Under Scrutiny
In a recent interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, former President Donald Trump vigorously defended his economic policies, particularly his use of tariffs, in response to concerns about rising consumer prices and slowing economic growth. Trump argued that his administration had generated unprecedented investment in the United States, boasting, “I think we probably have close to $9 trillion of investments coming into this country.” He went further, asserting that no previous administration had achieved anything close to that figure.
Additionally, Trump frequently claims that in just two months, he secured more investment than President Joe Biden did over his entire four-year term. However, independent analysis and media fact-checking have raised serious doubts about the accuracy of these statements.
Lack of Evidence Supporting the $9 Trillion Investment Claim
While it’s true that many companies have announced billions of dollars in investment plans since Trump’s second inauguration on January 20, independent reviews have found no credible evidence that the total comes anywhere near the $9 trillion figure Trump has cited.
According to a CBS News investigation, the White House has not provided detailed data or documentation to support Trump’s claim. In fact, the administration’s own published figures are far lower. For example, on April 29, the White House issued a statement claiming that $5 trillion in U.S. investments had been secured within Trump’s first 100 days. This statement included a list, called “The Trump Effect,” which aimed to showcase the impact of his “America First” economic agenda.
Upon closer examination, the numbers tell a different story. The investments listed by the administration total closer to $2 trillion from private companies and rise to around $5 trillion only when foreign government commitments are included. Even then, the connection to Trump’s policies remains vague. Importantly, the source of the additional $4 trillion that Trump mentions remains unclear, and the administration has offered no explanation to clarify the discrepancy.
Some Investments Preceded Trump’s Term
A deeper review of the White House’s list reveals another problem: several of the investments cited actually predate Trump’s time in office or were previously announced. For instance, Novelis, an aluminum manufacturer based in Georgia, was highlighted for its $4.1 billion investment in a new Alabama plant. However, records show that construction on this project began in October 2022, and the total investment was detailed in a company report from February 2024 — before Trump’s return to office. Interestingly, after CBS News inquired about this discrepancy, the Novelis project was quietly removed from the administration’s website.
Similarly, the administration took credit for Corning’s $1.5 billion commitment to expand its solar products facility in Michigan. Yet Corning representatives confirmed that $900 million of this sum had been announced months prior to Trump’s inauguration. Only $600 million was newly pledged in late April 2025.
Another major entry, Johnson & Johnson’s $55 billion investment plan over four years, includes a $2 billion investment in North Carolina that was initially announced in October 2024 — again, before Trump resumed office. Furthermore, the administration’s list cites the $500 billion Stargate Project, an ambitious AI infrastructure initiative by OpenAI and SoftBank, which had been under development for at least a year prior to Trump’s inauguration.
Comparing Trump’s and Biden’s Investment Records
Trump has repeatedly contrasted his investment achievements with those under President Biden, often stating that he attracted more investment in two months than Biden did in four years. However, fact-checkers have found no substantial evidence to support this comparison.
According to the Biden administration’s December 2024 report, the private sector committed over $1 trillion to clean energy, semiconductors, and pharmaceutical projects during Biden’s tenure. This includes manufacturing plants, green energy projects, and domestic supply chain investments. Notably, Biden’s report highlighted actual projects under construction or completed, offering a more detailed and location-specific breakdown.
In contrast, Trump’s list of investments is broader, often relying on large, vague corporate pledges without confirmed timelines or specific sites. For example, Trump’s team pointed to Apple’s recent $500 billion U.S. investment announcement. Yet, Apple had also pledged $430 billion under Biden’s term, including a North Carolina engineering center that has since been paused. Interestingly, Biden’s investment report did not count Apple’s past commitments in its totals, making direct comparisons even murkier.
Expert Caution: Announcements vs. Real Impact
conomic experts caution against taking corporate investment announcements at face value. Nick Nigro, founder of Atlas Public Policy, which monitors clean energy investment, explained that companies often make large public pledges to build goodwill with new administrations, regardless of their actual follow-through.
“It’s not unusual whether it was President Trump, President Biden, or President Obama. Companies frequently announce these investments to align themselves with whoever is in power,” Nigro stated.
History shows that both Republican and Democratic administrations have claimed credit for projects started under their predecessors. For example, pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly made major investment announcements during Trump’s first term, and some of these projects later appeared in Biden’s “Investing in America” reports.
The Role of Federal Policy and Legislation
President Biden signed landmark legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, which included significant incentives — such as $24 billion in tax credits — aimed at attracting private investment and bolstering domestic manufacturing. These policies are expected to shape investment patterns for years, potentially influencing projects announced during Trump’s current term.
Experts, including Nigro, emphasize that the true impact of such federal policies may take years to assess and that it remains difficult to link specific investment announcements directly to Trump’s actions. “It’s frankly just too early to say these new investments are solely due to the Trump administration’s policies,” Nigro noted.
Conclusion: Untangling Fact From Political Spin
While President Trump highlights eye-popping investment figures as evidence of his economic success, independent reviews suggest that many of these claims are overstated or misleading. Some investments were announced before he returned to office, others rely on vague pledges without firm commitments, and comparisons to the Biden administration often overlook key context.
As the political debate over the economy intensifies, it remains essential to carefully examine not just the size of announced investments, but their timing, credibility, and connection to actual policy — factors that will ultimately determine their real impact on American jobs and economic growth.