Category: 3. Business

The rollout of a new Instagram Map has prompted confusion among some users of the app, who voiced their privacy concerns online after Meta unveiled the feature.

The purpose of the maps feature, according to a press release from Meta, is to provide a “lightweight” method for users to connect with each other and explore local happenings by allowing people to share where they are in real time. Users can access their “maps” by going to their DMs.

When users click on the map, it shows the geolocation of users who have opted into sharing their location, based on the last time they opened Instagram or shared an Instagram story. When users first open the map, they are prompted with options of “who can see your location,” allowing them to choose whether or not they want to share their location.

After the feature was unveiled on Wednesday, users began sharing screenshots of what the map looks like on their pages. A handful of posts criticizing the feature have amassed hundreds of thousands of views as they circulate across X, Threads, TikTok and Instagram itself. Some of the most viral posts were from people like influencer and “Bachelor” franchise alum Kelley Flanagan, who issued a warning to people online to turn their location-sharing off, suggesting it could be a risk to their privacy and safety.

“Meta has a poor track record when it comes to data privacy,” Lia Haberman, author of the social media newsletter ICYMI, told NBC News in an email interview.

Just this week, Haberman noted that a California jury ruled Meta violated the state’s Invasion of Privacy Act in a case involving the period-tracking app Flo. (A Meta spokesperson told CNBC that the company disagreed with the ruling.)

“User data is Meta’s golden goose, it’s what they’ve been able to sell to advertisers for years — mostly ethically and legally but not always,” Haberman said.

Meta emphasized that “location sharing is off unless you opt in. If you do share your location with friends, you have controls to customize this experience.” Users can select specific followers who see their location, or those on their “close friends” list.

Instagram head Adam Mosseri doubled down on that sentiment, writing in a Threads post that he uses “the map to share what I’m up to with a handful of my closest friends, and I curate that list carefully.”

Still, Haberman said, she’s concerned that users won’t realize the full extent of what they’ve provided Instagram access to, or when their location might show up on the map, through tagging places in their posts or just opening the app.

The platform is not the first to introduce such location-sharing capabilities. Many young social media users have utilized a similar feature on the app Snapchat, where “Snap Map” has been in place since June 2017. Some social media users also likened Instagram Maps to the once-popular FourSquare Swarm app, which allowed users to “check-in” to their favorite places, discover new spots and stay connected with friends.

In recent years, Instagram and other social media platforms have faced scrutiny from lawmakers and organizations about online safety, particularly around teen users.

With Maps, Meta says that its supervision features allow parents to be notified when a teen starts sharing their location, and can turn their teen’s access off to the feature at any time, if they use Meta’s parental controls. (Though many teens maintain accounts hidden from their parents.)

Common Sense Media, a group that studies the impact of media and technology on kids and families, published a report in 2023 that found that location-sharing on social media platforms, which it defined as “automatic sharing of users’ locations,” had two potential negative experiences for young female users. There are “concerns about safety,” the group wrote, as well as the “Fear of missing out (“FOMO”) or social exclusion” among users. But the positive impact could be “Social connection.”

Still, “girls were most likely to say that location-sharing (45%) and public accounts (33%) have had a mostly negative effect on them, compared to other features,” the report found.

In 2024, after news outlets first reported on Instagram’s plans to develop a “Friend Map,” several lawmakers issued concerns about how this type of feature could cause harm to younger users.

“Instagram’s proposed feature will require the tracking of young people and their devices’ locations,” Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Fla., and Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass., wrote in a May 21, 2024 letter to Mosseri, calling geolocation surveillance of minors “an unnecessary violation of privacy.”

Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., also responded to the “Friend Map” development reports last year, writing in an X post in March, “We should be doing all we can to protect our kids’ safety on social media — not exposing their real-time location to pedophiles and traffickers.”

Blackburn raised similar concerns about Snap Map in 2019, writing in a letter to CEO Evan Spiegel that “if location is left in public mode, Snap Map can reveal the location of gullible child users to complete strangers, along with their Snap video feed.”

At a Senate hearing in 2021, Jennifer Stout, vice president of global public policy for Snap Inc., said the app “makes it intentionally difficult for strangers to find people that they don’t know. We do not have open profiles, we do not have browsable pictures. We don’t have the ability to understand who people’s friends are and where they go to school.”

Representatives from Blackburn, Castor and Trahan’s offices did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday regarding Instagram’s official launch of their new feature.

Many Instagram users said they worry that the new feature could also put other vulnerable groups at risk — including creators, who have very public personas, and women, who often face harassment online.

“When you’re constantly broadcasting where you are in real time, you’re sharing your daily routines,” Caitlin Sarian, known to her 1.4 million Instagram followers as cybersecuritygirl, said in a video post on Wednesday. “… where you live, where you work, literally everything about you to potential hackers, stalkers, bad exes, all of the above.”

Another creator, known as Nerdytravelingwriter on TikTok, echoed similar concerns in a video posted on Wednesday, calling it a “safety issue.”

“Think of how many creators have stalkers,” the creator, who has over 895,000 followers on TikTok said. “I’m thinking of my followers who just got out of abusive relationships. They’re still mutuals with their abusers.”

Instagram’s help center does note that users are able to hide their locations in the map feature from specific accounts if they choose, which could help those who know which profiles may want to use the information for malicious purposes.

“If you see that you’ve shared your location in the past with Instagram via phone settings, it does NOT mean the map feature is turned on automatically or that people can see your location,” the platform wrote in its Instagram story. “The reason you’re seeing your story, post or reel show up on the map is because you’ve tagged it with a location. It will appear on the map for 24 hours and does not share your real-time or live location.”

When asked for comment on the concerns, a Meta spokesperson reiterated Instagram’s policy, stating that the Map feature “is off by default, and your live location is never shared unless you choose to turn it on. If you do, only people you follow back — or a private, custom list you select — can see your location.”

Haberman, who was among those posting about the recent Instagram news on Threads, suggested one of the main reasons Instagram’s feature is being met with some criticism is because it came as a surprise to users.

“That’s fine for something with no stakes,” she said. “but a map of people’s locations has a very real world impact. More care should have been taken.”

The government’s proposed levy on international student fees could cost universities in England more than £600m a year if it goes ahead, a study has found.

The 6% surcharge on tuition fees paid by overseas students, floated in the Home Office’s recent immigration white paper, would particularly hit leading universities such as University College London (UCL) and the University of Manchester, based on the figures compiled by the Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi).

The policy would leave universities in a difficult decision over whether to pass on the cost of the levy to students or absorb some or all of it from the fees they charged, in effect cutting their income.

Nick Hillman, Hepi’s director, said: “The proposed levy on international students comes up in just about every meeting I attend. University leaders are worried it will be yet another weight dragging them down in the struggle to remain globally competitive.”

Based on annual fees from non-UK students totalling £10.3bn, the levy would bring in £621m. UCL would contribute £43m, Manchester £27m, Imperial College London £22m and the University of Oxford £17m.

The levy will also hit universities that raise a high proportion of funds from international students, including the University of Hertfordshire and the University of the Arts London.

The government has said the money raised by the levy would be used to fund “the higher education and skills system”, with further details to come in the autumn budget.

While vice-chancellors are hoping the bulk of the funds will be re-invested in higher education, Hillman said it can’t be taken for granted.

“The levy is designed to raise more money for the government’s educational priorities but it is not clear if all the money will come back out of the Treasury, nor how it will be spent if it does,” he said.

“Threatening an expensive new tax on one of the country’s most successful sectors with only a rough idea of how the money will be used seems far from ideal. Currently, the levy is a shadow looming large over universities as they prepare for the next academic year.”

The Home Office estimated the levy would initially lower student numbers by 14,000 a year, although universities say that is likely to be an underestimate.

Many universities have already seen lower income from international students following recent visa restrictions.

Vivienne Stern, the chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said: “We would urge government to think carefully about the impact that a levy on international student fees will have on universities and the attractiveness of the UK as a study destination.”

US President Donald Trump is pushing to make it easier for Americans to use retirement savings to invest in cryptocurrencies, private equity, property, gold and other kinds of non-traditional assets.

On Thursday, he ordered regulators to look for ways to change rules that might discourage employers from including such offerings in workplace retirement accounts, known in the US as 401ks.

The move is intended to eventually give everyday workers new access to investments formerly reserved for wealthy individuals and institutions, while opening up previously untouched pools of funding for firms in those fields.

But critics say it could increase risks for savers.

Most employers in the US do not offer traditional pensions, which come with a guaranteed payout after retirement.

Instead, employees are given the option of contributing part of their pay cheque to investment accounts, with employers typically bolstering with additional contributions.

Government rules have historically held the firms offering the accounts responsible for considering factors such as risk and expense.

In the past, employers have shied away from offering investments like private equity, which often have higher fees and face fewer disclosure requirements than public companies and can be less easy to convert to cash.

The order gives the Department of Labor 180 days to review rules and experts said any change was unlikely to be felt immediately.

But investment management giants such as State Street and Vanguard, known for their retirement accounts, have already announced partnerships with the likes of alternative asset managers Apollo Global and Blackstone to start offering private-equity focused retirement funds.

Trump’s personal business interests include firms involved with crypto and investment accounts.

The Department of Labor in May rescinded guidance from 2022 that urged firms to exercise “extreme care” before adding crypto to investment menus in retirement accounts.

During Trump’s first term, the Department of Labor issued guidance aimed at encouraging retirement plans to invest in private equity funds, but concerns about litigation limited take-up and former President Joe Biden later revoked it.

Roger W. Ferguson Jr. is the Steven A. Tananbaum Distinguished Fellow for International Economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. Maxmilian Hippold is a research associate for international economics at CFR.

More From Our Experts

President Donald Trump has long been a critic of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, whom he appointed in 2018. Since beginning his second term, Trump has continued to call for lower interest rates and has repeatedly expressed frustration with Powell’s resistance. In recent weeks, however, Trump’s public criticism has reached new heights, threatening the independence of the Federal Reserve and demonstrating a remarkable willingness to risk the role of the United States as the bedrock of global financial stability.

More on:

United States

Federal Reserve

Monetary Policy

Economics

In a meeting with legislators on July 15, Trump reportedly discussed the possibility of firing Powell and even held up a draft of the letter he would use to do so. Although he later backtracked following public outcry, his administration continues to publicly advocate for rate cuts and appears to still be considering Powell’s removal. On Truth Social, Trump demanded that interest rates be lowered from the 4.25–4.50 percent range to as low as 1 percent at the Fed meeting in July.

In a highly unusual move, President Trump also visited the Federal Reserve’s headquarters in Washington, DC, on July 24 to inspect ongoing renovations and highlight their rising costs. Some analysts have speculated that Trump could use those cost overruns as justification for removing Powell—though most legal experts question the legitimacy of such a rationale. Comparable projects in Washington, such as the construction of a Capitol Visitors Center, have similarly gone over budget.

Amid those developments, Federal Reserve Governor Adriana Kugler unexpectedly announced her resignation from the board of governors, effective August 8. The day before her resignation was to take effect, Trump selected his ally Stephen Miran, also a vocal critic of Powell, to fill the spot until the end of Kugler’s term set for January 31. 

More From Our Experts

The Importance of Independence

The Federal Reserve’s independence as practiced today was not always a given. In the first decades following its founding in 1913, the executive branch (particularly the Treasury Department) maintained significant control over monetary policy. The Fed did not secure true operational independence from the federal government until the Treasury-Federal Reserve Accord of 1951, which allowed it to set monetary policy without concern for the long-term borrowing costs of the U.S. government.

The importance of that independent monetary policy is multifaceted. First, it shields the Federal Reserve from undue political influence, such as pressure from the White House to lower interest rates ahead of an election, which could offer short-term political gains but cause long-term economic harm. Second, independence enhances the Fed’s credibility and fosters market confidence in its decisions. Crucially, it also empowers the Federal Reserve to take difficult but necessary actions, even when they are unpopular.

More on:

United States

Federal Reserve

Monetary Policy

Economics

A prime example is the tenure of Chair Paul Volcker (1979–87), during which the Fed confronted stagflation—an unusual combination of high inflation and stagnant economic growth. To combat inflation, the Fed made the unpopular decision to sharply raise interest rates, triggering a deep economic recession. Although those policies caused significant short-term hardship for many American households, they ultimately restored price stability and laid the foundation for sustained economic growth. Without independence from political decision-makers, such bold and necessary actions would have been far less likely.

Today, the Federal Reserve’s independence remains central to the strength of the U.S. economy and the global standing of the U.S. dollar. Public pressure from the president on the Fed (such as speculation about removing the Fed chair) undermines that independence and risks eroding confidence in the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. This uncertainty could lead investors to demand higher interest rates on U.S. sovereign debt at the same time the federal government is projected to run increasingly large deficits.

The dangers of undermining central bank independence are far from hypothetical. Numerous countries have faced economic crises as a direct result of political interference in monetary policy. The most recent example is Turkey. In 2019, after President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan appointed close allies to lead the central bank, the country adopted an unorthodox monetary policy based on Erdoğan’s belief that lowering interest rates would spur growth and simultaneously contain inflation. That approach led to years of high inflation, peaking at 75 percent in May 2024. Eventually, Erdoğan reversed course and allowed a more conventional monetary policy to rein in inflation. Even so, inflation remains elevated at 38 percent today.

A New Fed Chair

The Federal Reserve’s July 30 decision to hold interest rates steady until its next scheduled meeting in September has further frustrated Trump and his supporters. In the same week, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released updated figures showing a slowdown in hiring over the past three months and an increase in unemployment. Trump responded by firing the bureau’s head, Erika McEntarfer, alleging without evidence that she had faked the numbers. Given the Fed’s dual mandate to ensure price stability and maximize employment, those developments have complicated its economic outlook.

Although President Trump will have the opportunity to appoint a new Federal Reserve chair next May when Powell’s term concludes, he may not wait that long. McEntarfer’s dismissal from the Bureau of Labor Statistics has only fueled speculation. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has recently indicated that the Fed chair cannot be removed without cause. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, regarded as a more measured voice in Trump’s inner circle, reportedly opposed Powell’s dismissal on both legal and economic grounds. Although Bessent has declined to be considered for the role himself, he recently urged the Fed to conduct an internal review of its nonmonetary policy operations. President Trump will likely refrain from firing Powell outright, opting instead to announce his nominee for the next chair in the coming months—thereby increasing pressure on the current leadership.

In the thick of mounting criticism and a growing public pressure campaign, some economic analysts have begun calling on Powell to resign to safeguard the Fed’s independence. Mohamed El-Erian, chief economic advisor at Allianz, has argued that the current heated climate is unsustainable and risks intensifying and widening criticism of Powell’s leadership, thereby eroding the institution’s credibility. In his view, Powell’s resignation would help de-escalate tensions and be the most constructive path forward.

However, such a move would set a troubling precedent for future administrations, in which Fed chairs could be pressured to resign simply because the White House disagrees with their monetary policy decisions—undermining the fundamental independence of the institution. For the stability of the dollar and the entire U.S. financial system, it is critical that Powell does not resign prematurely. Equally important is that the next chair not be seen as a political loyalist of President Trump, but rather as an independent figure committed to upholding the integrity of the Federal Reserve System.

This work represents the views and opinions solely of the author. The Council on Foreign Relations is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher, and takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.

This section focuses on the methodology for simulating the C&D waste management process outlined in the proposed conceptual framework. To evaluate its effectiveness, the framework is applied to an existing townhouse in the Washington, D.C., area. The study assesses the financial benefits of implementing BIM and Digital Twin technologies in demolition waste management by comprehensively analysing cost savings and resource optimisation. For this simulation, architectural and structural data of existing townhouses were obtained from the study by Kaewunruen et al.³². This data is the foundation for accurately modelling the demolition and waste management process, ensuring that the simulation reflects real-world scenarios. By integrating BIM and Digital Twin technologies, the study aims to enhance demolition planning, optimise waste classification and transportation, and quantify the economic and environmental benefits of improved C&D waste management practices.

Demolition waste management and BIM-integrated planning

Effective demolition waste management necessitates the development of a comprehensive demolition plan, including a three-dimensional (3D) model of the existing building. In this study, the 3D model of a townhouse in the Washington, D.C. area is first constructed and then imported into BIM-Navisworks to facilitate precise planning and execution. The process begins with classifying BIM object categories and identifying relevant attributes, such as the dismantling method and the corresponding recycling approach. This classification ensures that each building component is appropriately managed during demolition, optimising waste separation and material reuse. The next step involves establishing a systematic demolition sequence. In alignment with standard demolition practices, the deconstruction process follows a top-down approach, reversing the original construction order to maintain structural stability and ensure safety. Particular attention is given to the disassembly of prefabricated components, where beams and slabs are removed as integrated units, while walls and columns are dismantled collectively. Figure 5 presents the fundamental demolition sequence, illustrating the phased deconstruction process in conjunction with the demolition schedule developed in Navisworks. The demolition plan for the case study commences with removing the building’s windows, followed sequentially by the doors and roof walls. Upon completion of roof removal at Stage 4, the subsequent phases involve systematically dismantling the beams, staircases, and interior and exterior walls, proceeding progressively from the third floor down to the ground floor. The demolition workflow is monitored and updated in real time, utilising an imported demolition plan from a spreadsheet to guide and track progress.

To highlight, the 3D model of the existing townhouse located in Washington, D.C., including static structural elements such as beams, columns, and walls, is developed using Autodesk Revit. This BIM model was subsequently imported into Navisworks to support detailed demolition planning. Within the Navisworks environment, the BIM model was integrated with a predefined demolition schedule to quantify the building components designated for removal at each stage of the demolition process. Upon finalisation of the demolition plan, the model was further integrated with three distinct waste management strategies. These strategies encompass alternative treatments for materials resulting from demolition, including reuse, recycling, and landfilling. This integration enabled a comparative analysis of the financial implications associated with each waste management approach. The automation of this workflow was achieved through the use of Dynamo scripts, which allowed for real-time parametric linking between the demolition schedule, component classification, and corresponding waste management strategy. This facilitated dynamic visualisation and monitoring of component removal and material allocation throughout the demolition timeline, thereby supporting informed decision-making within a C&D waste management framework.

While the outcomes presented are specific to the case study, the workflow architecture is inherently modular and adaptable. Its application to other demolition projects is feasible with appropriate customisation to reflect project-specific parameters, data formats, and model structures. A key limitation, however, lies in its reliance on structured and consistently formatted data, which may require additional preprocessing for broader implementation. A detailed discussion of the financial benefits and implementation outcomes is provided in the subsequent sections.

In this study, the primary categories of C&D waste include concrete, metal, wood, and glass. According to existing research, a significant proportion, ranging from approximately 50–95% of construction and C&D waste can be effectively recycled or reused. This potential is primarily determined by the material properties, with both inert materials (e.g., concrete, sand) and non-inert materials (e.g., glass, wood, plastic) offering opportunities for recovery and diversion from landfill⁴². Based on these findings, the present study proposes three distinct waste treatment strategies aimed at optimising the management of C&D waste. Each strategy differs in terms of recycling efficiency and reliance on landfill disposal. Importantly, the proposed waste management plans are designed to satisfy the constraints outlined in Eq. (3), ensuring both environmental and economic feasibility within the demolition framework.

• Plan A: 50% of C&D waste is recycled, with 10% on-site recycling & sale (X_p) and 40% transported to recycling facilities (X_R). The remaining 50% is disposed of in landfills (X_L).

• Plan B: 80% of C&D waste is recycled, including 10% for on-site recycling & sale and 70% processed at recycling facilities. The remaining 20% is landfilled.

• Plan C: 95% of C&D waste is recycled, with 10% on-site recycling & sale and 85% transported to recycling facilities. Only 5% is sent to landfills.

These waste management plans provide a structured approach to balancing economic and environmental sustainability, offering varying levels of material recovery while minimising landfill disposal. The selection of an optimal strategy depends on project-specific constraints, financial considerations, and regulatory requirements.

Waste dismantling and transportation strategy

The quantity of dismantled waste is presented in Table 2. Utilising BIM-Navisworks for pre-demolition planning, this study assumes that 10% of dismantled components can be directly reused and sold on-site. In practice, the recycling of reinforced concrete structures is primarily achieved through crushing and separation into aggregate and steel. Since wood is a natural material, it can be repurposed into engineered wood products⁴³. Current research indicates that the predominant treatment method for dismantled glass involves reprocessing, with some materials being converted into concrete aggregates⁴⁴. A study found that the average transport distance of C&D waste by truck ranges from 10 to 30 kilometres⁴⁵. This study references these existing waste management solutions and assumes that the transportation distance from the demolition site to the treatment facility is approximately 10 km. The transportation plan is managed through a real-time data platform integrated with a DT system. When the accumulated waste reaches a predefined transportation threshold, an automated “Transport Order” is generated. The total mass of material was calculated using Eq. 9, with the material density referenced from Ansys Granta EduPack 2021⁴⁶.

Within the “Transportation Task Allocation” framework, the data platform assigns tasks to specific drivers via smartphone-based communication. Simultaneously, drivers provide real-time feedback regarding waste transportation and recycling status through mobile terminals, ensuring an efficient, closed-loop system for waste transportation management. This dynamic approach enhances logistical efficiency while reducing environmental and operational costs.

Analysis of financial benefits

Table 3 provides a comprehensive breakdown of unit costs associated with the treatment of various categories of C&D waste in the Washington, D.C., area. These costs encompass multiple components, including waste collection fees, transportation expenditures, material recovery processing costs, and landfill disposal charges. The data reflects region-specific economic factors and operational practices, offering valuable insight into the financial implications of C&D waste management strategies and supporting cost-benefit analyses for sustainable demolition planning. The data is sourced from the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and supplemented with information from local organizations, including American Recycler, the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, and Zero Waste DC. Furthermore, by utilising BIM-Dynamo software enables precise quantification of the total demolition volume of the existing building model, facilitating an in-depth analysis of the financial benefits associated with different waste management strategies. Figure 6 illustrates the sequential process, beginning with the initial static calculation and progressing to the real-time, automated demolition workflow executed using Dynamo, based on the parameters defined in this study. The system architecture is designed to be adaptable to varying demolition plans, allowing for immediate updates and dynamic reconfiguration within the model. In this case study, the system processes input data derived from the three proposed demolition scenarios, Plans A, B, and C, as described in previous sections, allowing for a comparative analysis of material flows and resource recovery potential under each approach. Tables 3 and 4, and 5 present the detailed cost analyses corresponding to the three proposed C&D waste treatment plans. Each table outlines the breakdown of waste treatment fees for various material categories, including concrete, steel, wood, and glass. These calculations encompass associated costs such as collection, transportation, material recovery, and landfill disposal. In addition to the treatment expenses, the tables also account for the potential financial returns generated through the reclamation and resale of reusable materials. The resulting net financial benefits are computed for each plan, thereby enabling a comparative assessment of the economic efficiency and resource recovery potential across the different demolition strategies.

As illustrated in Table 6, increasing the recycling rate of C&D waste from 50 to 80% and 95% yields a substantial improvement in financial returns. The analysis demonstrates that, at a 50% recycling rate, the process results in a financial deficit, with a negative net benefit of -£10,627.62. This indicates that under low recycling conditions, the costs associated with collection, transportation, and treatment outweigh the economic value of recovered materials. However, when the recycling and reuse rate is increased to 80%, the financial outlook shifts positively, resulting in a net benefit of £70,418.51. Further improvement is observed at a 95% recycling rate, where the net monetary benefit reaches £110,941.57, as presented in Table 7. These findings underscore the strong correlation between higher recycling efficiency and economic viability, highlighting the importance of maximizing material recovery rates in sustainable demolition practices. Therefore, based on the simulation calculations conducted through the BIM-Dynamo integration, the results indicate that the intelligent waste management approach proposed in this study’s conceptual framework has the potential to generate positive economic returns in the context of building demolition and C&D waste management. The analysis reveals a strong positive correlation between the material recycling rate and the overall financial benefits, suggesting that higher levels of material recovery significantly enhance the cost-effectiveness of demolition activities. This correlation highlights the economic viability of adopting a BIM-driven decision-support system, which enables dynamic modelling, real-time scenario analysis, and optimisation of resource recovery strategies. As such, the proposed approach not only supports environmentally sustainable practices but also offers measurable financial advantages, reinforcing the value of digital technologies in circular economy applications within the construction sector.

Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday that aims to allow cryptocurrency and other alternative assets like private equity and real estate to be included in the investments in 401(k) retirement accounts.

The order smooths the way for fund managers to tap into trillions of dollars of Americans’ retirement savings. It could open up a vast new funding source to managers of so-called alternative assets outside stocks, bonds and cash, though critics say it also could bring too much risk into retirement investments. Such a move would be a boon for big alternative asset managers by opening the $12tn market for retirement funds, known as defined contribution plans, to their investments.

Trump’s executive order is part of his administration’s broader embrace of the cryptocurrency lobby and rollback of regulations on digital currencies. Formerly a skeptic about crypto who said bitcoin “seemed like a scam”, Trump has this year launched his own lucrative cryptocurrency enterprise, courted crypto supporters and promised to make the US into the “crypto capital of the world”.

“A combination of regulatory overreach and encouragement of lawsuits filed by opportunistic trial lawyers has stifled investment innovation,” Trump said in the order. “My Administration will relieve the regulatory burdens and litigation risk that impede American workers’ retirement accounts from achieving the competitive returns and asset diversification necessary to secure a dignified, comfortable retirement.”

There is concern among some analysts that allowing cryptocurrency to be included in 401(k) contributions carries a high degree of risk, however, given that crypto is inherently speculative and in recent years has been the subject of rampant fraud.

“Opening up the $9tn 401(k) industry to alternative assets overall is reasonable, but if these assets and sectors are highly speculative and underregulated, it could be a big mistake,” said Anil Khurana, executive director of Georgetown University’s Baratta Center for Global Business.

Trump also issued a separate executive order on Thursday targeting the alleged “debanking” of conservatives, promoting a longstanding rightwing grievance that banks refused them access to their services on political grounds. Prominent Silicon Valley investors took up the issue over the past year as part of a push to ease regulatory scrutiny of crypto assets.

The order on 401(k) contributions directs the labor secretary to consult with her counterparts at the treasury department, the Securities and Exchange Commission and other federal “regulators to determine whether parallel regulatory changes should be made at those agencies”, a White House statement said.

The new investment options carry lower disclosure requirements and are generally less easy to sell quickly for cash than the publicly traded stocks and bonds that most retirement funds rely on. Investing in them also tends to carry higher fees and, in the case of cryptocurrency, exposes retirees to a market known for its volatility.

In defined contribution plans, employees make contributions to their own retirement account, frequently with a matching contribution from their employer. The invested funds belong to the employee, but unlike a defined benefit pension plan, there is no guaranteed regular payout upon retirement.

Whatever changes may come from Trump’s order, it likely will not happen overnight, private equity executives say. Plaintiffs’ lawyers are already preparing for lawsuits that could be filed by investors who do not understand the complexity of the new forms of investments.

The world’s largest asset manager, which lobbied for the change, is not waiting. BlackRock plans to launch its own retirement fund that includes private equity and private credit assets next year. However, CEO Larry Fink acknowledged in a recent call with analysts that the change may not be an immediate boon for the industry.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

“The reality is, though, there is a lot of litigation risk. There’s a lot of issues related to the defined contribution business,” Fink said. “And this is why the analytics and data are going to be so imperative way beyond just the inclusion.”

The Department of Labor issued guidance during Trump’s previous presidency on how such plans could invest in private equity funds within certain limits, but few took advantage, fearing litigation.

Proponents argue that younger savers can benefit from potentially higher returns on riskier investments in funds that get more conservative as they approach retirement.

Democratic senator Elizabeth Warren wrote in June to the chief executive of annuity provider Empower Retirement, which oversees $1.8tn in assets for more than 19 million investors, asking how retirement savings placed in private investments could be safeguarded “given the sector’s weak investor protections, its lack of transparency, expensive management fees, and unsubstantiated claims of high returns”.

Donald Trump said Thursday he will nominate a top economic adviser to the Federal Reserve’s board of governors for four months, temporarily filling a vacancy while continuing his search for a longer-term appointment.

Trump said he has named Stephen Miran, the chair of the White House’s council of economic advisers, to fill a seat vacated by Adriana Kugler, a Biden appointee who is stepping down Friday as governor. Miran, if approved by the Senate, will serve until 31 January 2026.

The appointment is Trump’s first opportunity to exert more control over the Fed, one of the few remaining independent federal agencies. Trump has relentlessly criticized the current chair, Jerome Powell, for keeping short-term interest rates unchanged, calling him “a stubborn MORON” last week on social media.

Miran has been a strong defender of Trump’s income tax cuts and tariff hikes, arguing that the combination will generate enough economic growth to reduce budget deficits. He also has played down the risk of Trump’s tariffs generating higher inflation, a major source of concern for Powell.

The choice of Miran may heighten concerns about political influence over the Fed, which has traditionally been insulated from day-to-day politics. Fed independence is generally seen as key to ensuring that it can take difficult steps to combat inflation, such as raising interest rates, which politicians might be unwilling to take.

Federal Reserve governors vote on all the central bank’s interest-rate decisions, as well as its financial regulatory policies.

Miran’s nomination, if approved, would add a near-certain vote in support of lower interest rates. Kugler had echoed Powell’s view that the Fed should keep rates unchanged and further evaluate the impact of tariffs on the economy before making any moves.

At its most recent meeting last week Fed officials kept their key rate unchanged at 4.3%, where it has stood after three rate cuts late last year. But two Fed governors – Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman – dissented from that decision. Both were appointed by Trump in his first term.

Still, even with Miran on the board, many of the 12 Fed officials who vote on interest rate policy remain concerned that Trump’s sweeping tariffs could push inflation higher in the coming months.

After the July jobs report was released last Friday, Miran criticized the Fed chair for not cutting benchmark interest rates, saying that Trump had been proven correct on inflation during his first term and would be again. The president has pressured Powell to cut short-term interest rates under the belief that his tariffs will not fuel higher inflationary pressures.

“What we’re seeing now in real time is a repetition once again of this pattern where the president will end up having been proven right,” Miran said on MSNBC. “And the Fed will, with a lag and probably quite too late, eventually catch up to the president’s view.”

By Greg Robb and Robert Schroeder

Trump economic adviser Stephen Miran will serve in the post until Jan. 31

Council of Economic Advisers Chair Stephen Miran has been tapped by President Trump to serve on an interim basis as a Federal Reserve governor.

President Donald Trump on Thursday said he’s tapping key White House economic adviser Stephen Miran to serve as a Federal Reserve governor – albeit for only a short time.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump said he’s chosen Miran, who heads the Council of Economic Advisers, to serve until Jan. 31 in the seat vacated by Adriana Kugler.

“In the meantime, we will continue to search for a permanent replacement,” Trump said.

Benson Durham, head of global policy at Piper Sandler, said White House officials didn’t seem ready to announce anyone to replace Jerome Powell as chair of the Fed. Powell’s term ends in May 2026, and that discussion can now continue in the months ahead.

Miran’s nomination must be confirmed by the Senate. Experts said it is unlikely the Senate will vote on his nomination until after the Fed’s next meeting on Sept. 16-17.

The Fed’s last two meetings of the year are in late October and mid-December.

Since becoming the head of Trump’s economic council, Miran has been a strong proponent of the president’s tariffs and has recently argued there is no evidence that they have caused any inflation.

Trump has heavily criticized Powell over monetary policy, consistently pressuring him to lower interest rates. Miran has joined in on that criticism.

Trump announced his decision shortly before U.S. stock markets closed Thursday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA and S&P 500 SPX ended lower, while the Nasdaq Composite COMP scored a record close after a weak auction of 30-year Treasury bonds BX:TMUBMUSD30Y.

Miran is an academic who attended Harvard University. Several of his academic papers have been influential in the early days of Trump’s second term, and he’s previously argued that the U.S. trade deficit was too large.

One paper in particular that captured Wall Street’s attention was Miran’s work questioning whether a strong dollar was in the nation’s best interest. That line of thinking has been U.S. government policy since the 1990s and the Clinton administration.

For months, Wall Street has debated Miran’s view on a weaker dollar. There has been talk that the Trump administration would eventually gather global finance ministers to Mar-a-Lago to try to restructure the international financial system to better serve American interests.

The talk about a weaker dollar has had an impact. Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said there has been a clear trend this year that the dollar “is being reduced in its centrality” in the global economy.

In periods of market turmoil this year, experts point out that the dollar has weakened at the same time that long-term bond yields have risen. This is the trading pattern often seen in emerging markets. In the past, the dollar has always risen during financial crises as a safe haven.

The ICE U.S. Dollar Index DXY, a closely watched gauge of the U.S. dollar’s value against its main rivals, retreated Thursday afternoon after reports of Miran’s impending nomination hit the newswires.

As of Thursday afternoon, the dollar index was down 9.6% since the start of 2025, FactSet data show. At the end of June, the dollar index cemented its weakest showing during the first six months of a year since at least 1973.

Mark Spindel, who has written a book on Fed independence, said Miran is academically qualified to serve on the Fed and should be able to be confirmed by the Senate. Miran’s nomination will first go to the Senate Banking Committee, which confirmed him to his current post in March by a 13-11 party-line vote.

But Miran is not likely to have much influence at the Fed in the few months he holds the seat, Spindel noted. “He’s just a seat warmer for a couple of meetings,” he said.

Senate Banking Committee Chair Sen. Tim Scott said he’d consider the nomination quickly. “Miran is an accomplished economist and has been instrumental in advising on economic policy and advancing a pro-growth agenda,” the South Carolina Republican said in a statement.

Miran has also often been overshadowed in the past few month by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who has become Trump’s market whisperer.

Earlier this year, Miran’s efforts to explain the president’s tariff plans to the public “fell flat,” Spindel said.

Miran may use his time on the Fed to audition for a permanent seat, but the president doesn’t need to make that decision until next year.

-Greg Robb -Robert Schroeder

This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.

  (END) Dow Jones Newswires

  08-07-25 1727ET
Copyright (c) 2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.