We paid them, we trusted them, and they failed us
Trump signed executive order withdrawing US from WHO, repeating criticisms from first term about pandemic response and alleged Chinese influence over the organization. US claims it paid 25% of WHO budget while larger nations like China paid less, arguing the organization failed despite American financial support and trust.
- US formally withdrew from WHO on January 22, 2026, following executive order signed January 20, 2025
- Outstanding dues total $260-280 million for 2024-2025 period
- US historically paid 25% of WHO's annual budget
- 1948 congressional resolution grants US unique unilateral withdrawal right
The United States formally withdrew from the World Health Organization on Thursday, citing mismanagement and unfair burden-sharing, while refusing to pay $260-280 million in outstanding dues from 2024-2025.
On Thursday, the United States formally withdrew from the World Health Organization, a decision that traces back to an executive order President Donald Trump signed on his first day back in office, January 20, 2025. The Department of Health and Human Services made the announcement official, ending decades of American membership in the UN's primary health agency—and raising immediate questions about what happens to the $260 to $280 million in unpaid dues the country owes for 2024 and 2025.
This is not Trump's first attempt to leave the organization. During his first term, from 2017 to 2021, he initiated withdrawal proceedings, citing what he viewed as catastrophic mismanagement of the COVID-19 pandemic. The new executive order resurrects those grievances and adds others: the WHO's failure to reform itself, its inability to respond effectively to other global health crises, and what the administration describes as the organization's susceptibility to political pressure from other member states—a pointed reference to China's influence.
The core complaint, according to Trump administration officials, centers on what they see as an inequitable financial arrangement. The United States, they argue, has shouldered 25 percent of the WHO's entire budget while countries with larger populations, including China, contribute far less. A Health and Human Services official told reporters that the organization has resisted pressure on wealthier nations to increase their contributions, allowing the American burden to grow unchecked. "We paid them, we trusted them, and they failed us," the official said, "and they never took responsibility for that failure."
When the WHO was founded in 1948, the United States secured a unique privilege: a congressional resolution granted America the explicit right to withdraw from the organization unilaterally—a provision not extended to other member nations. Now the Trump administration is leaning heavily on that 1948 language, arguing that nothing in the original resolution requires the United States to settle its financial obligations before the withdrawal takes effect. A second administration official emphasized this point to reporters, suggesting that the terms of withdrawal do not include a payment requirement.
The administration has been clear and consistent: it will not pay the outstanding dues. Officials have stated on multiple occasions that the 2024-2025 assessments, totaling between $260 and $280 million, will not be paid.
When asked how the United States plans to maintain global health cooperation in the absence of WHO membership, officials pointed to bilateral relationships and direct engagement with individual health ministries. They promised to continue working with countries on a nation-to-nation basis, framing this approach as more respectful of sovereignty and more mutually beneficial than participation in what they view as a compromised multilateral institution. The statement was careful and measured, but it sidestepped the deeper anxiety: how pandemic preparedness and disease surveillance function when the world's wealthiest nation steps away from the coordinating body designed to manage exactly those challenges.
Notable Quotes
We paid them, we trusted them, and they failed us, and they never took responsibility for that failure— Trump administration Health and Human Services official
We will continue working with countries and health ministries as we have for decades, in ways that are mutually beneficial and respect the sovereignty of our country and others— Trump administration official, on post-WHO cooperation plans
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does the Trump administration believe the 1948 resolution shields them from paying what they owe?
They're reading the language as a one-way door. The resolution gave America the right to leave, but it doesn't say anything about settling accounts on the way out. It's a legal argument, not a moral one.
But doesn't the WHO have leverage? Can't they just demand payment?
Technically, yes. But enforcement is the problem. The WHO can't seize American assets or compel payment the way a court could. It's a dispute between a member and a multilateral body, and those are notoriously hard to resolve.
The administration says they'll work directly with countries instead. Is that realistic for disease surveillance?
It's possible, but fragmented. You lose the central nervous system. When a new pathogen emerges in one country, the WHO is supposed to see it, verify it, alert everyone else. Bilateral relationships don't create that same early-warning network.
So this is really about the money, or is it about China?
Both. The money complaint is real—the US does pay a disproportionate share. But the China criticism is the deeper wound. The administration sees the WHO as captured by Beijing's interests, and they don't trust it anymore.
What happens to countries that depend on WHO technical support?
They're left scrambling. Poorer nations especially rely on WHO expertise and coordination. Without American funding and participation, those services get thinner.