Washington: The White House has quietly withdrawn its plan to cut U.S. funding for the World Trade Organization (WTO), reversing an earlier announcement that had included the Geneva-based trade body in a sweeping list of aid reductions. The move, which initially put $29 million in annual contributions at risk, reflects mounting pressure from lawmakers, business groups, and international partners concerned about America’s role in global trade governance.
The funding cut was first unveiled as part of a broader $4.9 billion package of reductions, presented under the administration’s “America First” fiscal strategy. Officials framed the plan as an effort to trim spending on international institutions they consider inefficient. However, within days, the WTO disappeared from the White House’s public documents, raising questions about internal disagreements and the durability of the policy.
Democratic lawmakers immediately criticized the proposal, calling it a violation of Congressional authority since the WTO contributions had already been approved in the federal budget. Legal experts also warned that the executive branch could face challenges if it attempted to halt disbursements unilaterally. At the same time, trade groups including the National Foreign Trade Council argued that pulling back would diminish U.S. influence and allow China to expand its leadership within the WTO framework.
Behind the scenes, WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala is reported to have engaged directly with U.S. officials, including the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, to stress the importance of continued American participation. These discussions appear to have played a role in the administration’s decision to remove the organization from its cuts list, signaling a more cautious approach.
Despite the reversal, uncertainty persists. Officials have not clarified whether the $29 million earmarked for 2025 will be released in full, though budget procedures suggest that funds could automatically roll over unless the administration actively intervenes. Adding to the complexity, the United States still owes its 2024 contributions, accounting for roughly 11% of the WTO’s $232 million annual budget.
The episode underscores the delicate balance between domestic political agendas and America’s global commitments. While the White House has sought to reduce dependence on international institutions, the WTO remains a cornerstone of the global trading system, facilitating dispute resolution and establishing rules that underpin international commerce. A complete withdrawal of U.S. funding would have cast doubt on its operational capacity and credibility at a time of rising global economic tensions.
For now, the WTO has been spared from immediate financial disruption, but the incident has spotlighted America’s shifting relationship with the organization and reignited debates over whether Washington should reform or retreat from multilateral trade frameworks.