Billionaire Ken Griffin cast doubt on two of President-elect Donald Trump’s most loudly heralded economic policy plans: tax cuts and tariff hikes.

Republicans should be mindful of the effect of tax cuts on the growing national debt and the impact of tariffs on the long-term competitiveness of American businesses, Griffin said in an interview with Bloomberg Television’s Sonali Basak at the Economic Club of New York.

“The big problem is we’ve got to get productivity growing,” Griffin said.

Saul Martinez/Bloomberg

The Citadel founder on Thursday suggested the opposite course might be needed: “There’s a real question about where do we need to raise taxes to start to put our house in order.”

He also said Republicans, who will control the White House and both chambers of Congress in January, will need to look at cutting spending as well. He acknowledged that doing so will be difficult, saying that “these are really unpopular decisions for politicians to make.”

Trump has pledged to extend his 2017 tax cuts and eliminate other levies on tips for service workers and Social Security benefits. He’s also pledged to impose a 10% or 20% tariff on all imported goods — with even higher duties on Chinese products — and argues that they will increase revenues while bringing manufacturing operations back to the US.

“I am gravely concerned that that rise of tariffs puts us on a slippery slope towards crony capitalism,” Griffin said. Tariffs give a short-term benefit for domestic companies that produce goods, but in the long term, they harm productivity, he added.

“Those same companies that enjoy that momentary sugar rush of having their competitors removed from the battlefield soon become complacent,” Griffin said.

Griffin said tariffs will ultimately hurt the U.S. economy, which needs to rapidly increase productivity if it wants to meet all its obligations, including paying benefits promised to retiring Americans through programs like Social Security and Medicare.

The Financial Data Transparency Act has significant implications for the modernization of government financial reporting. Against this backdrop, the latest Governmental Accounting Standards Board meeting on Nov. 13 was particularly exciting due to its focus on advancing the digital financial reporting taxonomy — a transformative initiative poised to shape the future of government financial reporting. 

The meeting showcased the board’s progress, deliberations and alignment with emerging regulatory and technological trends, signaling a pivotal moment for the evolution of public sector reporting. GASB senior project manager Paulina Haro presented her report and recommended paths forward in the meeting. 

The board discussed progress in the development of a digital financial reporting taxonomy aimed at modernizing and standardizing electronic reporting practices. This initiative builds on seven years of electronic financial reporting monitoring, evolving from observation and exploration to an actionable framework for voluntary implementation. The taxonomy seeks to enhance usability, data accuracy and efficiency for users, preparers and other stakeholders in the government financial reporting ecosystem. Collaboration with internal teams, former fellows and external experts has paved the way for the board to propose a clear path forward.

The project will initially focus on GASB GAAP requirements, with future expansions considered based on stakeholder requests. Haro emphasized that using the term ACFR, or the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, was problematic and too broad as a starting point. The intent is to start with a foundational structure and move forward from there. 

The digital taxonomy will cover key components of financial reporting, including basic financial statements, notes to financial statements and required supplementary information such as management’s discussion and analysis. Phase One will establish a foundational framework for GAAP reporting, avoiding selective prioritization of data points to maintain the integrity and completeness of GASB standards. Haro emphasized it’s important to create the impression the Taxonomy Team is not “picking and choosing what is essential and not.” The users’ voices would be critical to the process. Subsequent phases may incorporate additional elements like supplementary and non-GAAP reporting components, pending stakeholder input and board decisions.

Board members emphasized the importance of retaining GASB’s monitoring activity, which ensures the board remains informed about technological advancements and their implications for government financial reporting. Monitoring provides critical insights into evolving user and preparer needs, as well as the broader impacts of technology on financial reporting processes. This understanding is key to maintaining the relevance of GASB standards and ensuring alignment with modern reporting practices. The monitoring activity will function as an ongoing effort, enabling the board to anticipate and respond to technological shifts effectively.

Stakeholder engagement will play a crucial role in shaping the taxonomy. The board proposed forming a consultative group to guide the project. This group will include representatives from diverse sectors, such as accountants, auditors, data technologists and software vendors. By bringing together expertise from various fields, the group aims to ensure the taxonomy meets the needs of all stakeholders while addressing technical and practical challenges. Board members highlighted the importance of including participants who understand both accounting principles and technological systems to bridge gaps and enhance collaboration.

The board plans to publish an initial exposure document for public comment in 2025. This document will introduce selected components of the taxonomy, including financial statements, notes and required supplementary information, to showcase its architectural design and functionality. These components were chosen to provide a comprehensive but manageable overview, allowing stakeholders to evaluate the taxonomy’s structure and usability. The board acknowledged the challenges of presenting complex technological and accounting concepts in an accessible manner, committing to including explanatory materials tailored to different audiences.

The project’s timeline reflects both ambition and caution. Board members praised the team for exceeding expectations in their progress so far but emphasized the need to balance urgency with thoroughness. The taxonomy’s design must address diverse stakeholder needs while aligning with emerging regulatory frameworks such as the Financial Data Transparency Act. The board committed to monitoring FDTA developments to ensure the taxonomy remains relevant and adaptable to future requirements.

Looking ahead, the board reaffirmed its commitment to the project as a priority initiative, with updates and deliverables integrated into upcoming technical plans. GASB chair Joel Black said this will be a technology project, with its own classification and will not end with a new standard. Beginning in February 2025, the board will receive detailed presentations on taxonomy architecture and design choices, while continuing to refine the framework based on internal deliberations and external feedback. By maintaining a collaborative, phased approach, the board aims to deliver a taxonomy that enhances the accuracy, usability and efficiency of government financial reporting in an increasingly digital landscape.

Kai-Uwe Steck, a star witness who spilled the beans to German prosecutors and TV viewers about the Cum-Ex scandal, turned silent at a trial into his own alleged role in a €428 million ($446 million) tax scheme.

The tax lawyer, who for years has testified in countless Cum-Ex cases where he also extensively described his own role, “for now” won’t comment at his trial, a spokeswoman for the Bonn court said on Friday. He’s free to change his mind about that in the future, she added.

The 53-year old lawyer once was a key figure in what became a Cum-Ex industry, involving some of the world’s top banks. Steck was a law partner of Hanno Berger, the attorney dubbed “Mastermind” of the strategy that exploited how dividend tax was once collected. Their firm was instrumental in selling the business model to rich private investors. For years, they made millions from their work. After German prosecutors started to investigate, Steck flipped sides and became the first person to cooperate with the authorities in the probe.

Steck, who lives in Switzerland, traveled numerous times to police headquarters in Düsseldorf to testify and later was key to recruiting traders to follow his example. Under the fake name “Benjamin Frey” and wearing disguising make-up and a wig, he also appeared in German TV documentaries about the scandal.

In an opening statement on Thursday, his defense lawyer Gerhard Strate asked the court to drop the case because of human rights violations. His client had confessed to the crimes as early as 2017 but was charged only seven years later, in violation of the right to a speedy trial. Instead, Cologne prosecutors “used” him as a witness, degrading him to a mere “object,” according to the attorney.  

A ‘pawn’

“He became a pawn in the tactical considerations of the prosecution and had to testify as a witness at each of the trials held in Bonn from the fall of 2019 until this year,” Strate said, according to a verbatim of the statement published on his website. “Now he is being thrown under the bus by the beneficiaries of his risktaking and courage.”

Strate said Cologne prosecutors promised to drop his case before trial because of his extensive collaboration but failed to put that deal into writing and now it can’t be found in their files. This bad example will stop others from cooperating, he warned.  

Steck, who for years hoped he could dodge trial, had fired his long-time defense team after he was indicted in April. He hired a new pair of attorneys, including Strate. 

Just a month earlier, Steck had testified in the case of the former head of M.M. Warburg & Co. At the time, he said Cologne prosecutors “at no time” promised him anything. His attorney Strate didn’t immediately reply to a request for comment on the March testimony.

Steck is also scheduled to testify next week in the Munich Cum-Ex trial of the two founders of Avana Invest GmbH. 

Steck’s case is: LG Bonn, 62 KLS 1/24.