Did Fauci Fund 'Gain of Function' Research, Thereby Causing COVID-19 Pandemic?
During a May 10, 2021, airing of his Fox News show, host Tucker Carlson claimed that National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Anthony Fauci helped provide funding for "gain of function" research at a facility in Wuhan, China, that (supposedly) led to the COVID-19 pandemic. Tucker Carlson During that broadcast of Tucker Carlson Tonight, Carlson cited an opinion piece regarding the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic that was written by Nicolas Wade. In a nutshell, Wade argued without substantiated evidence that gain of function experiments (we'll explain what those are later) that were prohibited in the U.S. continued at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which ultimately led to the creation of SARS-CoV-2. And because the Wuhan-based institute was not properly regulated, Wade argued, the novel coronavirus was likely to have infected a researcher who would ultimately become the source of the pandemic. cited opinion piece  The 13-minute segment began with Carlson criticizing Jeffrey Zeints, U.S. President Joe Bidens appointed official to oversee the COVID-19 response efforts. Carlson then suggested that Fauci said Americans can expect to wear masks indefinitely. (We fact-checked that, too. Fauci did not say that.) fact-checked that The question is why is he doing that? Maybe he likes it, thats possible. But you gotta think at least part of Tony Faucis authoritarian germ hysteria is a cover for something else, Carlson continued. Could it be that Tony Fauci is trying to divert attention from himself and his own personal role in the COVID-19 pandemic? Now, what do we mean by that? Thats when Carlson pivoted to The origin of COVID: Did people or nature open Pandoras box at Wuhan?  Wade's opinion piece  not a scientific study as was suggested  published by the nonprofit science organization Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a reputable group that publishes free-access scientific information concerning science and global security issues. Wade is a controversial science writer whose recent theories on race have been generally disputed by researchers around the world. Wade was a former staff writer for the Science Times section of The New York Times up until 2012 and he authored the controversial book, A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History. He has been described by researchers at Georgetown University as a sad saga of a former international reporter turned laughing stock. The origin of COVID: Did people or nature open Pandoras box at Wuhan? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists disputed controversial book described By and large, Carlson hyperbolized and generalized Wades main points in his piece, stretching the key takeaways to suggest that the article explains where this virus almost certainly came from. Carlson furthered that Wade makes it clear that more than any other single American, Tony Fauci is responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic by laying out a nearly insurmountably large amount of evidence that the virus originated in the WIV. This evidence included conducting experiments  funded by American tax dollars  to make bat viruses infectious to humans approved and directed by Tony Fauci, argued Carlson. We'll take a closer look at what Wade actually wrote below. As is usual with these sorts of allegations, there is a mixture of half-truths peppered in an alarmist claim meant to incite an emotional response. First, it is important to note that Wade wrote in his opinion piece that of the two theories he believed were plausible, so far neither has direct evidence proving its validity. Each depends on a set of reasonable conjectures but so far lacks proof. So I have only clues, not conclusions, to offer. But those clues point in a specific direction. And having inferred that direction, Im going to delineate some of the strands in this tangled skein of disaster, he wrote. After the Carlson video aired, questions surrounding gain of function research were brought to a Senate health committee hearing on May 11 when Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) clashed with Fauci over whether funding from the NIH was used at WIV, suggesting that this might have contributed to the lab leak hypothesis  a controversial theory that virus-related experiments accidentally spilled over into the public sphere. https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4962333/senator-paul-dr-fauci-clash-research-funding-wuhan-lab We have not funded gain of function research on this virus in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. No matter how many times you say it, it didnt happen, said Fauci. Wade  and later Carlson  also argued that gain of function research funded by the NIH was the likely source of a laboratory leak  a hypothesis that has been contested by the broader scientific community time and again. Since SARS-CoV-2 was first named in January 2020 and subsequently declared a pandemic, conspiracy theorists have peddled notions that the virus was made in a lab and intentionally released as a biological weapon despite rigorous scientific research proving otherwise. conspiracy theorists peddled notions made in a lab biological weapon rigorous scientific research First and foremost, it is true that WIV was one of many research facilities around the world dedicated to the study of coronaviruses. Coronaviruses are one of the most common viruses and were at the center of the SARS 2001 and MERS 2012 epidemics, prompting efforts led by the NIH and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and NIH to better understand their potential for a pandemic.  Research conducted at the Wuhan Institute of virology was partially funded by NIH. Public Domain  Public Domain One form of research conducted at these labs includes the gain of function research. These are experiments to increase the transmissibility or virulence of pathogens to make them more infectious to humans in order to help improve understanding of disease-causing agents and how they interact with humans, as well as their potential to cause a pandemic. In other words, scientists manipulate the genetic code of viruses to change certain elements, making them either more or less dangerous to better understand how they work. But in 2014, the Obama administration called for a pause on funding of such experiments, SARS and MERS viruses in particular, and launched a government-led investigation into the risks and benefits of such research.  An ethical analysis white paper written by Professor Michael Selgelid and produced by the NIH Office of Science Policy and published in the journal, Science and Engineering Ethics in 2016 argued that gain of function research poses risks regarding biosecurity and biosafety. Using this guidance, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services developed a framework for guiding funding decisions about the gain of function research, and under the recommendation of experts, the NIH lifted its pause. ethical analysis white paper Science and Engineering Ethics developed lifted And it is true that WIV is located miles from where the first COVID-19 outbreak was detected and that the facility previously received funding from the NIH via the EcoHealth Alliance Inc., a research organization based in New York City, as was reported on the agencys website. But such international cooperation is not unusual, and funding to the lab was also provided through European, Asian, and African organizations as well as the World Health Organization and the European Virus Archive goes global.  WIV website To support its work, EcoHealth made subawards to the WIV and other institutions based in East Asia where coronaviruses tend to emerge and are prevalent. A subaward is made when the primary grant recipient (in this case, EcoHealth Alliance Inc.) seeks another organization to carry out part of the grantees research project. In this case, NIH said that it did not establish the terms of the award and that EcoHealth was directly accountable for the performance of the project. In an email to Snopes, EcoHealth Alliance communications manager Robert Kessler said that the organization has neither contributed to nor participated in gain-of-function research. The research proposed in the grant application sought to understand how bat coronaviruses evolve naturally in the environment to become transmissible to the human population, Jennifer Routh, a spokesperson for the NIH, told Snopes. This included studying viral diversity in bat reservoirs, surveying people who work in live animal markets or other jobs with high exposure to wildlife for evidence of bat-coronavirus infection, and analyzing data to predict which newly discovered viruses pose the greatest threat to human health. The application did not propose research to enhance any coronavirus to be more transmissible or virulent, added Routh. The application was subjected to rigorous peer review and was judged to be a high priority, given how SARS-CoV had already emerged in this bat population. To support its work, EcoHealth made sub-awards to WIV and other institutions based in East Asia where coronaviruses tend to emerge and are prevalent. And according to NIH, funds that go to sub-awardees (EcoHealth Alliance) from the primary grantee (NIH) must support the research activities that were approved and funded in the grant, which did not include gain of function research. On May 19, Dr. Francis Collins with the NIH issued the below statement, which the agency forwarded to Snopes: statement Based on outbreaks of coronaviruses caused by animal to human transmissions such as in Asia in 2003 that caused Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), and in Saudi Arabia in 2012 that caused Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), NIH and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) have for many years supported grants to learn more about viruses lurking in bats and other mammals that have the potential to spill over to humans and cause widespread disease. However, neither NIH nor NIAID have ever approved any grant that would have supported gain-of-function research on coronaviruses that would have increased their transmissibility or lethality for humans. NIH strongly supports the need for further investigation by the World Health Organization (WHO) into the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. SARS MERS The 2014 funding pause pertained to a subset of gain-of-function research that could reasonably be anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route. Following the initiation of the pause, this grant was reviewed again and determined by experts to fall outside the scope of the funding pause. funding pause But on Oct. 20, Republicans with the congressional group U.S. House Oversight Committee tweeted a letter written by Lawrence Tabak, principal deputy director of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), confirming that EcoHealth had conducted gain of function research at the WIV. The letter was directed to committee ranking member James Comer, R-Ky. Oct. 20  The letter was reported by several publications, including The New York Post, Fox News, and The New York Times. In it, Tabak said that published genomic data demonstrate that the bat coronaviruses studied under the NIH grant to EcoHealth Alliance, INC. and subaward to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) are not and could not have become SARS-CoV-2, referencing an analysis attached to the letter that was not included in the tweet. (Snopes contacted the DHHS to receive a copy of the letter and the referenced analysis but did not receive a reply at the time of this update. We will include a copy of the report when and if we receive it.) The New York Post Fox News The New York Times The letter was also said to contain the fifth and final progress report for Grand R01AI1 10964, which was awarded to EcoHealth Alliance, Inc. and included data from a research project conducted during the 2018-19 grant period using bat coronavirus genome sequences already existing in nature. The progress report was submitted to the NIH in August 2021 as part of NIH compliance enforcement efforts, and it shows that EcoHealth Alliance violated terms of the grant by failing to report a bat experiment that made mice sicker: violated The limited experiment described in the final progress report provided by EcoHealth Alliance was testing if spike proteins from naturally occurring bat coronaviruses circulating in China were capable of binding to the human ACE2 receptor in a mouse model. All other aspects of the mice, including the immune system, remained unchanged. In this limited experiment, laboratory mice were infected with the SHC014 WIV1 bat coronavirus. As sometimes occurs in science, this was an unexpected result of the research as opposed to something that the researchers set out to do. Regardless, the viruses being studied under this grant were genetically very distant from SARS-CoV-2. Coronaviruses, especially those found in bats, have been studied around the world due to their prevalence in the natural world and ability to infect across species. In fact, there are hundreds of coronaviruses, most of which circulate among animals and some of which can jump to humans in what is called a spillover event. Following the SARS and MERS outbreaks of 2002 and 2012 respectively, the NIAID identified coronaviruses as a priority for researchers to investigate, including how these viruses originate and cause disease, as well as to develop animal study models for new treatments and potential vaccines. studied SHC014 is a SARS-like coronavirus that infects horseshoe bats that has previously been studied by researchers in mouse models to determine the risk of a SARS-CoV reemergence of infection risk from viruses that naturally circulate in bat populations. During the pandemic, the human ACE2 receptor saw renewed interest by the research community for its role as the entry point for SARS-CoV-2 infection. SHC014 previously been studied interest In short, the letter by Tabak stated that mice genetically altered to contain the ACE2 receptor were used as testers to determine whether SHC014 would bind to the receptor. And because the laboratory mice became sicker, it is likely that the virus successfully bound. In July 2021, the NIH published a media kit that described its research involving enhanced potential pandemic pathogens (PPPs), which are those that show potential in infecting human populations. Research involving PPPs is required to undergo additional scrutiny when it comes to funding, but at the time of the grant proposal, EcoHealth Alliances research did not meet the requirements for further review because it was not shown that these bat coronaviruses could infect humans. published However, grant language allowed for a second review out of an abundance of caution pending results to determine whether the research should be reevaluated or new biosafety measures be enacted EcoHealth failed to report this finding right away, as was required by the terms of the grant, wrote Tabak. EcoHealth is being notified that they have five days from today [Oct. 20] to submit to NIH any and all unpublished data from the experiments and work conducted under this review. A joint World Health Organization-China study on the origins of COVID-19 published in March 2019 said that transmission of the virus from bats to humans through another animal is the most likely scenario and that a lab leak is extremely unlikely. However, the NIH told Snopes that it strongly supports the need for further investigation by the World Health Organization (WHO) into the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. said Working with a cross-regional coalition of 13 countries, we urge the WHO to begin the second phase of their study without delay, wrote Collins.  cross-regional coalition of 13 countries In short, gain of function research is permitted under certain conditions, and some evidence suggests that such experimentation may have occurred in the past at WIV. At the time of this writing, it appears that experiments to manipulate a coronavirus resulted from research conducted by EcoHealth Alliance during the 2018-19 grant period, but there is not yet conclusive evidence to suggest outright that the virus mutated to SARS-CoV-2, or that it spilled over into the surrounding area. Snopes will update this article once further information into the investigation is provided by EcoHealth Alliance and NIH. Until then, we left this claim rating as "Unproven. Sources Andersen, Kristian G., et al. The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2. Nature Medicine, vol. 26, no. 4, Apr. 2020, pp. 45052. www.nature.com, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9. Archive, View Author, and Get author RSS feed. NIH Admits US Funded Gain-of-Function in Wuhan  despite Faucis Denials. New York Post, 21 Oct. 2021, https://nypost.com/2021/10/21/nih-admits-us-funded-gain-of-function-in-wuhan-despite-faucis-repeated-denials/. Brief Introduction----Wuhan Institute of Virology. https://english.whiov.cas.cn/Research2016/Brief_Introduction2017/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021.COVID-19 Is a Serious Threat ... But So Are Memes Claiming Its NOT. Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/04/07/woman-who-called-pandemic-a-hoax/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. Creitz, Charles. Rand Paul Blasts Anthony Fauci after NIH Admits Gain-of-Function Funding. Fox News, 21 Oct. 2021, https://www.foxnews.com/media/rand-paul-anthony-fauci-nih-gain-function-funding. Did Fauci Say Americans Can Expect to Wear Masks Indefinitely? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fauci-wear-masks-indefinitely/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. Geneticists Decry Book on Race and Evolution. https://www.science.org/content/article/geneticists-decry-book-race-and-evolution. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. Joint Statement on the WHO-Convened COVID-19 Origins Study. United States Department of State, https://www.state.gov/joint-statement-on-the-who-convened-covid-19-origins-study/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. Misinformation on Coronavirus Is Proving Highly Contagious. Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/ap/2020/07/30/misinformation-on-coronavirus-is-proving-highly-contagious/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. Moving on from Nicholas Wade to Continuing Concerns about Scientific Racism | Bioethics Research Library. https://bioethics.georgetown.edu/2014/08/moving-on-from-nicholas-wade-to-continuing-concerns-about-scientific-racism/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. NIH Lifts Funding Pause on Gain-of-Function Research. National Institutes of Health (NIH), 18 Dec. 2017, https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statements/nih-lifts-funding-pause-gain-function-research. NIH Says Grantee Failed to Report Experiment in Wuhan That Created a Bat Virus That Made Mice Sicker. https://www.science.org/content/article/nih-says-grantee-failed-report-experiment-wuhan-created-bat-virus-made-mice-sicker. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. Partnerships----Wuhan Institute of Virology. https://english.whiov.cas.cn/International_Cooperation2016/Partnerships/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021.Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens. National Institutes of Health (NIH), 8 July 2021, https://www.nih.gov/news-events/research-involving-potential-pandemic-pathogens. Samavati, Lobelia, and Bruce D. Uhal. ACE2, Much More Than Just a Receptor for SARS-COV-2. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, vol. 10, 2020, p. 317. Frontiers, https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2020.00317. Selgelid, Michael J. Gain-of-Function Research: Ethical Analysis. Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 22, no. 4, Aug. 2016, pp. 92364. Springer Link, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9810-1. Statement on Funding Pause on Certain Types of Gain-of-Function Research. National Institutes of Health (NIH), 20 Jan. 2015, https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statements/statement-funding-pause-certain-types-gain-function-research. Statement on Misinformation about NIH Support of Specific Gain-of-Function Research. National Institutes of Health (NIH), 19 May 2021, https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statements/statement-misinformation-about-nih-support-specific-gain-function-research. Tang, X. C., et al. Prevalence and Genetic Diversity of Coronaviruses in Bats from China. Journal of Virology, vol. 80, no. 15, Aug. 2006, pp. 748190. PubMed Central, https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00697-06. The Origin of COVID: Did People or Nature Open Pandoras Box at Wuhan? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 5 May 2021, https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/. Tucker Carlson Fact Checks and News from Snopes.Com. Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/tag/tucker-carlson/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. UCL. Problematical Theories. UCL Division of Biosciences, 13 Feb. 2019, https://www.ucl.ac.uk/biosciences/departments/genetics-evolution-and-environment/research/molecular-and-cultural-evolution-lab/debunking-genetic-astrology/problematical-theories. Was the COVID-19 Pandemic Planned in Rockefellers Operation Lockstep? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/rockefeller-operation-lockstep/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. WHO Report: COVID Likely 1st Jumped Into Humans from Animals. Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/ap/2021/03/29/who-report-covid-likely-1st-jumped-into-humans-from-animals/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. Why You Shouldnt Fall for the COVID-19 Bioweapon Conspiracy Theory. Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/04/01/covid-19-bioweapon/. Accessed 22 Oct. 2021. Zimmer, Carl, and Benjamin Mueller. Bat Research Group Failed to Submit Virus Studies Promptly, N.I.H. Says. The New York Times, 21 Oct. 2021. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/21/science/bats-covid-lab-leak-nih.html. Update [May 20, 2021]: This article was updated to include statements from the NIH. Update [May 25, 2021]: This article was updated to include additional comments from the NIH and EcoHealth Alliance.   Update [May 28, 2021]: This article was updated to include clarification on NIH grant-awarding processes. Update [Oct. 22, 2021]: Article was updated to include new findings established by the House Oversight Committee and a change in rating from Unproven to Research in Progress pending the results of a NIH-led investigation.
In late 2015, as Donald Trump's presidential run began reaching a fever pitch, a few enterprising programmers created apps, pages, or browser extensionsfor peoplewho wanted to minimize their exposure to Trump, his fans, or both. exposure fans One such browser extension is called "Trump Filter." It was created by Rob Spectre,a self-described"Internet Mathemagician," who created the software with three settings ("Mild," "Aggressive," and "Vindictive") which the user could adjustbased on how strong his or her dislike of Trump might be. extension "I picked Trump for this extension in order to improve the signal-to-noise ratio in the media coverage around this election," Spectre told us. Even at this early stage with this wide field of candidates in the American presidential campaign, there is some research that suggests Trump is dominating 46% of all the headlines devoted to the election. Trump is dominating 46% of all the headlines Even finding other ideas behind the ridiculous notion of banning 1.6 billion people from entering the United States can be difficult to do on the Internet right now. I needed a way to turn the reality TV candidacy off  that's what I hope the Trump Filter does. For the rest of the field, that's really up to the developer community. I did publish the source code with a permissive license on Github  it is free for anyone to modify. It looks like a few developers are using it to create their own filters for other presidential candidates, some other politicians in other countries and, importantly the entire Kardashian family. publish the source code with a permissive license on Github a few developers are using it to create their own filters In the interest of science, we installed the extension, set it to "Mild," and tried it out on a recent articleabout Donald Trump: article   The filter worked exactly as advertised:   Spectrecreateda similar filter in 2011 to removementions of Derek Jeter from the user's internet. filter For all the advances since the era of teased-out rocker hair, one thing hasnt changed for Americas average working man: the amount of bacon he brings home. So says Rana Foroohar, a CNN global economic analyst andTimemagazine assistant managing editor (who, by the way,snagged thefirst interviewwith new Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen). Appearing on CNNsThe Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer,Foroohar brought up the point during a general discussion about the countrys economic woes. You know, I have to jump in on this because we are living in a time when the corporate share of the overall economic pie is as high as it has been in decades, Foroohar said. Meanwhile, the median male worker in this country has not seen a raise, inflation-adjusted, for 30 years, basically. Foroohars eye-popping statistic about median male worker income is certainly interesting. We wanted to know if it is correct. Comparing 1982-2012 TheU.S. Census Bureauproved a go-to source. The bureaus Septemberreporton income, poverty and health insurance coverage in 2012 contains text and tables outlining historical changes (or lack thereof) in earnings for both men and women. Foroohar referenced median earnings, which experts say is a better measure than the average because the income difference between the countrys rich and working-class earners is stark. In 2012, the latest year for which data is available, the median full-time, year-round male worker earned $49,398. In 1982, exactly 30 years earlier, earnings in 2012 dollars were $48,152. So from 1982 to 2012, there was actually an inflation-adjusted raise of $1,246.But thats more because Foroohar is looking at two years in isolation. Tracking the income of median male workers over time shows that incomes climbed steeply from 1960 to 1970. But the figure has ebbed and flowed and remained mostly stagnant since 1970, dipping as low as $46,841 in 1996 and reaching a high of $51,670 in 1973. (You canview the tableon page 50 of the report.) Point being:You could just as easily widen or shrink Foroohars 30-year window by a few years and find a number that supports her point. Median earnings of the 2012 male worker are down compared to his counterpart 25 years ago (who earned $50,166 in 1987), 35 years ago ($50,480 in 1977) or 40 years ago ($50,074 in 1970). Even though Foroohars window shows a 2.6 percent pay increase between 1982 and 2012, its really pretty close to flat, said Gary Burtless, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. It means that male median earnings increases just 0.085 percent per year (that is, 85 one-thousandths of a percentage point per year), he said. Some say men are even worse off Foroohars larger point, while technically correct and oft-repeated, misses the larger economic picture and is actually too generous, argues Michael Greenstone, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Greenstone co-authored a2012New York Timespostwith Brookings fellow Adam Looney that presented another way to examine median male wages. Instead of counting only the earnings of men with jobs, as the Census Bureau does, Greenstone factored in all working-age men. Factoring in men without jobs brings down the median income. The fraction of men in the workforce has declined sharply over the last several decades, he wrote, from 94 percent of prime-age men working in 1970 to 81 percent in 2010. It happened as incarceration rates and enrollment in the Social Security disability insurance program increased and labor force participation waned, as well as the wild success of women entering the labor market, he said. His 2012 study found real earnings of median males actually dropped by 19 percent since 1970, he found. This means that the median man in 2010 earned as much as the median man did in 1964  nearly a half century ago. The reasons for the trend are complex, Greenstone told us. Yes, there have been sweeping changes in technology, machinery and trade over the last 30 or 40 years that have had some effect. More striking, he said, is that educational attainment among men, which used to climb with each generation, has dropped off. The decline in working is concentrated among the men who have lower levels of education, Greenstone said. Its not concentrated among the college-grad guy who is married to a super successful woman. Michael Saltsman of the conservative Employment Policies Institute also argued the idea of stagnant wages is more controversial than it seems -- to a different end. He cited a 2012study in the National Tax Journalthat analyzed middle-class income from the past three cycles. Instead of using pre-tax income data, the researchers expanded the income definition to include taxes, income transfers and fringe benefits. Middle-class Americans are found to have made substantial gains, and these increases are even larger when including non-cash income, such as the ex-ante value of health insurance, the report says. Meanwhile, the earnings of female workers isnt cited as often as a metric of the economy because their participation in the workforce jumped sharply over the last 50 years. In any case, the 2012 full-time, year-round median female worker earned $37,791, according to census figures. In 1982, when about half as many women were working, median earnings were $29,731. Our ruling Foroohar said, the median male worker in this country has not seen a raise, inflation-adjusted, for 30 years, basically. Federal data for 1982-2012 shows a slight increase, though the numbers show the real value of median male earnings have been in the range of $46,840-$51,670 for about 40 years. We found another point of view that says the real median income has declined significantly once men without jobs are factored in. We also found a broader definition of income that changes the dynamic. Still, Foroohar clearly has a point. We rate her claim Mostly True. Two of Donald Trump's most prominent 2016 campaign pledges were to build a border wall along the Mexican border (or rather, to reinforce and extend it; a wall already exists along hundreds of miles of the international border), and to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, a 1994 arrangement between the United States, Canada and Mexico which he called "the single worst trade deal ever approved in this country." exists arrangement called In October 2017, left-wing Facebook page "The Other 98%" posted a widely-shared meme which claimed that Mexico had  in retaliation for Trump's border wall plans  signed a major agricultural trade agreement with Argentina, which would have very harmful effects on American farmers: meme They're trying to distract us from the fact that Mexico retaliated against the border wall by establishing an agricultural agreement with Argentina. Starting next year Mexico will be buying 100% of their corn, rice, wheat and soy from Argentina duty free. In exchange Mexico will ship cars to Argentina duty free. This will take away at least $13 billion annually from American farmers.    As of 1 November 2017, Mexico and Argentina have not signed an agreement like the one described by "The Other 98%", but the two countries have held talks about a more limited (though still significant) trade deal involving grains and cars. Furthermore, the main catalyst for the negotiations has been the uncertainty caused by Donald Trump's vow to renegotiate NAFTA rather than his plans to build a border wall.  The source cited by "The Other 98%" is a September 2017 article by Daily Kos, which reported: Daily Kos Mexico already retaliated against Trump and his insults earlier this year by establishing an agricultural agreement with Argentina. Starting next year Mexico will be buying 100% of her corn, rice, wheat and soy from Argentina duty free. In exchange Mexico will ship cars to Argentina, duty free. This will taken [sic] away $13 billion annually from American farmers.  It's not clear what the source of these claims is, but a similar meme appeared online earlier in 2017, which read: meme Mexico has retaliated against Trump's racial profiling and insistence that Mexico will pay for his border wall. Beginning in 2018, Mexico will be buying its corn, rice, wheat and soy from Argentina. Not America. American farmers stand to lose $13 billion. The ripple effect will be even more devastating. The fact that this announcement was made during Trump's Made in America week, is just karmic icing.  "Made in America Week" took place from 17-24 July 2017; we found no evidence of any deal between Mexico and Argentina being announced during that time period. However, talks have been ongoing between the two countries.  place In the spring of 2017, Mexico's Deputy Economy Minister Juan Carlos Baker made several comments in interviews about his country's negotiations with Argentina and Brazil. On 26 March 2017, the Financial Times reported: Financial Times Mexico, the worlds biggest buyer of US corn, is considering offering duty-free access to Brazilian and Argentine maize as an alternative to American imports in a move that could have big consequences for US farmers worried about Donald Trumps trade and tax agenda. [...] "I am pretty optimistic about the possibility of having a deal with these countries soon," Juan Carlos Baker, Mexicos deputy economy minister, told the Financial Times in an interview. "Were pretty far advanced with Brazil...Argentina is a few steps behind," he said.... The following month, Baker told Reuters that a deal with Argentina could be finalized by the end of 2017: Reuters Mexico, seeking closer ties with the rest of Latin America, expects to finish negotiations on a trade deal with Argentina involving cars and agricultural products around the end of the year, Mexicos deputy minister for foreign trade said in an interview on Tuesday. [...] Under the deal, Argentina could gain part of the lucrative grains market in Mexico, Latin Americas No. 2 economy, Baker told Reuters. In 2015 Mexico imported $2.3 billion worth of U.S. corn and $1.4 billion of U.S. soy. But Baker said those numbers will likely decrease under a renegotiated North American Free Trade Agreement called for by Trump. "The potential is there," Baker said. "The Argentine exporters could find attractive conditions in Mexico." Mexico, in turn, could export cars to Argentina, he said. "We have a very strong manufacturing industry and Argentina is an important market for us," Baker said. A trade deal between Mexico and Argentina may be in the works, but it has not yet been announced as of 1 November 2017. However, assuming a deal goes ahead to shift Mexico's importation of certain products from the United States to Argentina, the numbers are significant  but not as dramatic as they are in the meme. According to United States Grain Council statistics, the United States exported $2.5 billion worth of corn to Mexico in 2015 and 2016. In 2015, the United States exported $2.9 billion worth of soy products to Mexico, according to the U.S. Soybean Export Council (page 19.) According to Global Agricultural Trade System statistics for 2016, exports of wheat and rice were worth $612 million and $274 million, respectively.  Grain Council page 19 Global Agricultural Trade System This yields a total of $6.3 billion in U.S. exports to Mexico of corn, rice, wheat and soy  the four products specified in the above meme. So even if Mexico did decide to stop importing all these products from the U.S., the likely annual financial cost to the American agriculture industry would be extremely significant, but still only around half the $13 billion claimed. It's not entirely clear where the figure of $13 billion came from, but it might have originated in an October 2017 letter sent to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, and signed by dozens of food and agriculture companies and industry associations, warning Ross about the dangers, as they see them, of withdrawing from NAFTA.  letter According to a study by ImpactECON, if Canada, Mexico, and the United States return to most favored nation (MFN) tariff rates upon any withdrawal from NAFTA, the negative impact on the United States will far outweigh any benefits from higher U.S. tariffs, including a net loss of 256,000 U.S. jobs, a net loss of at least 50,000 jobs in the U.S. food and agriculture industry, and a drop in GDP of $13 billion from the farm sector alone. The study mentioned here was an August 2017 working paper produced by the economic consulting firm ImpactECON. It did not actually mention any figure of $13 billion. Rather, it projected that over the course of two to three years after a U.S. withdrawal from NAFTA, real GDP in the United States would fall by as much as 0.09 percent. working paper Gross domestic product, or GDP, is the combined market value of all goods and services produced in a particular geographic area (in this case, the United States.) It is a calculation commonly used to measure the total size of an economy. Real GDP is gross domestic product adjusted for inflation - meaning, roughly speaking, the size of the economy in relation to the cost of living.  As of the third quarter of 2017 (when the ImpactECON report was published), the real GDP of the United States was $17.01 trillion, according to figures from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. A 0.09 percent decline in that would amount to a $15.3 billion loss  not far off the $13 billion posited by the food and agriculture industry, in their letter.  figures There are a couple of things to note here: firstly, the 0.09 percent decline estimated in the ImpactECON report relates to the entire U.S. economy, and not "the farm sector alone," as mentioned in the letter. In fact, the working paper projects a very small increase in production for the crops and forestry sector (0.04 percent, page 20), accompanied by a significant boost to production in the sugar sector (5.11 percent), but it also projects production declines of between one and two percent in the meat, food and livestock and fishing sectors.  page 20 Secondly, this real GDP declined is projected to happen "in the next 2-3 years", so if the meme is using the letter to Wilbur Ross as the source of its $13 billion figure, it is misrepresenting the decline as happening "annually." projected Politico. "Full Transcript: First 2016 Presidential Debate."
 Politico. 27 September 2016. Webber, Jude. "Mexico Eyes Duty-Free Corn Deals to Counter Trump."
 Financial Times. 26 March 2017. Misculin, Nicolas. "Mexico, Looking South, Sees Trade Deal With Argentina Around Year's End."
 Reuters. 18 April 2017. U.S. Soybean Export Council. "2015 Annual Report."
U.S. Soybean Export Council. 27 October 2015. NAFTA Food and Ag Trade Working Group. "Letter to Wilbur Ross."
NAFTA Food and Ag Trade Working Group. 25 October 2017. Bureau of Economic Analysis. "Gross Domestic Product: Second Quarter 2017 (Advance Estimate.)"
 U.S. Department of Commerce. 28 July 2017. Walmsley, Terry; Minor, Peter. "Reversing NAFTA: A Supply Chain Perspective."
 ImpactECON. August 2017. Update [2 November 2017]: Added possible source of the $13 billion figure in the meme. In the summer of 2020, multiple readers asked Snopes to verify the accuracy of a widely-shared Facebook post that listed several "quiet acts of random kindness" purportedly performed by U.S. President Donald Trump: Facebook post   The post correctly identified Trump's date of birth as June 14, 1946, then presented four incidents as examples of the "quiet acts of random kindness" supposedly performed by the businessman turned president. Supporters of Trump have previously promoted similar anecdotes that portray him as generous, and we have examined several of those in depth. correctly examined Overall, the July 2020 Facebook post contained mostly accurate and verifiable claims, along with one long-debunked urban legend. "In 1995, his car has a flat tire. A black man walking by notices it's owner is wearing a suit. So he steps in and fixes the flat. 'How can I repay you?' asks the gentleman? 'My wife has always wanted some flowers' the man says. A few days later, the black man's wife gets a beautiful bouquet of flowers with a note saying, 'Thanks for helping me. By the way... the mortgage on your house is paid off.'" This is no more than an old urban legend that has appeared and re-appeared in various forms with certain details changed, including the name of the celebrity who supposedly paid off the mortgage, for decades. Snopes first debunked it in 1998, after a version of the story involving Trump had appeared in Forbes magazine two years earlier. debunked Over the years, similar stories have been told about Henry Ford, Nat King Cole, and Bill Gates, demonstrating that the 1995 version about Trump was just a variation of an old yarn. "A USMC Sargent spends 7 months in a Mexican prison for a minor charge. He is beaten. After he is returned to America, The man from Queens sends him a check for $25,000, 'To get you started.'" This anecdote relates to the story of U.S. Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi, who was arrested in Mexico in March 2014 and spent seven months in prison there on weapons-trafficking charges after he crossed the border at San Ysidro, California. His car was found to contain three firearms and ammunition, items he legally owned and was permitted to carry in the United States, but not in Mexico. We examined his case and the complexities surrounding it in a previous fact check. Tahmooressi's protracted detention in Mexico, along with his claims of having been beaten and restrained for weeks on end, caught the attention of several high-profile commentators in the United States, including the broadcaster and U.S. Navy veteran Montell Williams, then-Fox News anchor Greta van Susteren, and Trump. fact check Trump Tahmooressi's mother Jill, who was a vocal and persistent advocate for her son's release and return to the United States, confirmed in a phone call with Snopes that Trump had indeed sent Andrew a check for $25,000 after he was released in late 2014. Trump also enclosed a letter, which Tahmooressi reproduced in her memoir. In that letter, dated Nov. 11, 2014, Trump wrote: memoir "It is my great honor to present you with this check for $25,000. You have served our country with fortitude and dignity, and we are fortunate to have someone like you as a brave Marine and protector of our wonderful nation. We are proud of you and I wish you and your family the very best for many years to come."   "A black bus driver saves a suicidal girl from jumping off a bridge. Our man from Queens sends him a check for $10,000." In October 2013, Buffalo, New York, bus driver Darnell Barton made international headlines after he saved the life of a woman contemplating suicide. Barton stopped his bus and comforted the woman, who was standing on the outside of railings along an overpass, before carefully helping her on to the other side of the railings and staying with her while first responders arrived on the scene: saved https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eyire35WVqMThe Buffalo News reported at the time that Mayor Byron Brown had presented Barton with a $10,000 check from Trump in a ceremony at city hall: reported "Donald J. Trump wasn't there himself. But in the well-appointed office of Mayor Byron W. Brown, a check for $10,000 from the real estate mogul was presented to the hero bus driver who brought a woman on the brink of suicide to safety. 'Although I know to you it was just a warm-hearted first response to a dangerous situation,' Trump wrote to Darnell J. Barton, 'your quick thinking resulted in a life being saved, and for that you should be rewarded.'" "A rabbi's critically ill son needs to get from NYC to California for specialty care. No airlines will fly him. The generous man uses his private jet to fly the child." Another accurate description, which we addressed at greater length in a 2015 fact check. In July 1988, the Ten family needed to travel to New York for urgent medical treatment for their three-year-old son Andrew Ten, who had a rare respiratory condition. Because Andrew required the constant aid of a respirator and life support machine but commercial airlines could not accommodate that equipment, the family could not travel to New York on a conventional flight. fact check The boy's father, Harold Ten, an orthodox Jewish rabbi, contacted Trump to ask for the use of his private jet, and the property magnate agreed without hesitation, according to a contemporaneous report by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency: report Asked why he thought Trump made his private jet available, Ten replied, "Because he is a good man. He has three children of his own and he knows what being a parent is all about." Ten said he believes that Trump fulfilled the Talmudic saying that "he who saves one person's life is as if he saved the entire world." Among the relatives at the airport to greet the child and his parents were the paternal grandparents of the sick boy."Donald Trump is a miracle, just a miracle," said grandmother Feigy Ten, who came to the airport with her husband, Phillip Ten. Both grandparents thanked Trump's generosity over and over again. Evon, Dan.  "So You Think You Know the Real Donald Trump?"   Snopes.com.  25 July 2016. Snopes.com.  "Did Donald Trump Pay Off a Good Samaritan's Mortgage?"   3 March 1998. MacGuill, Dan.  "Did Mexican Authorities Arrest and Torture a U.S. Marine for Accidentally Crossing the Border?"   Snopes.com.  5 December 2018. Thompson, Carolyn.  "NY Bus Driver Saves Woman from Jumping Off Bridge."   Associated Press.  30 October 2013. Terreri, Jill.  "Bus Driver Receives Trump Check, Headed for Rachael Ray Show."   The Buffalo News.  7 November 2013. Snopes.com.  "Did Trump's Private Jet Carry a Sick Child From California to New York?"   15 August 2015. Rabi, Yitzhak.  "Orthodox Child with Rare Ailment Is Rescued Aboard Tycoon's Jet."   The Jewish Telegraphic Agency.  20 July 1988. During Russia's invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, American social media users enthusiastically shared posts that called for a boycott of Lukoil gas stations on the East Coast, on the basis that they were Russian owned. As one very widely shared tweet summarized: social media users enthusiastically shared posts called boycott Russian summarized "#BoycottRussia. Lukoil gas is Russian owned."   wrote "Fill your tank elsewhere. Lukoil is a Russian multinational corporation headquartered in Moscow. Their CEO, Vagit Alekperov, is a Russian oligarch worth an estimated $19.6 billion. Lukoil gas stations are all over PA, NJ and NY." These posts undoubtedly contained a significant element of truth. Lukoil is indeed a large Russian-headquartered multinational petroleum and natural gas producer, with a U.S. subsidiary that oversees a network of gas stations, primarily in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. Moreover, the company's billionaire president, Vagit Alekperov, has ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. has ties However, Lukoil typically does not operate those U.S. gas stations itself. Rather, it operates on a franchise basis, meaning any successful boycott of Lukoil-branded gas stations would likely have a negligible effect on the parent company or its billionaire president, but could prove financially devastating for dozens of U.S. franchise owners and their hundreds of local employees. In brief, Lukoil itself might be "Russian owned," but its U.S. gas stations are U.S.-operated and locally staffed. As such, we're issuing a rating of "Mixture." Lukoil emerged from the dissolving Soviet Union in the early 1990s, and entered the American market a decade later. According to the company's website, Lukoil acquired the American company Getty Oil in 2000, taking over and rebranding its existing network of gas stations. the company's website The first Lukoil-branded gas station was opened in the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan in September, 2003. Notably, the grand opening was attended by Putin himself  who was in the U.S. at that time for talks with then-President George W. Bush. In the photograph below, Putin can be seen outside the Manhattan Lukoil, with Alekperov to his right, and U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to his left: attended by Putin himself  Russian President Vladimir Putin (C) and Lukoil President Vagit Alekperov (L) listen as U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) (R) gestures as he speaks about U.S.-Russian relations during the opening of Lukoil's gasoline station September 26, 2003 in the Chelsea neighborhood of New York City. Lukoil, a Russian oil company, acquired Getty Petroleum Marketing Inc. and its 1,300 stations in November 2000. (Photo by Stephen Chernin/Getty Images)  At the time, Lukoil was reported to have taken over Getty's existing network of 1,300 gas stations, but by 2022, the number of Lukoil-branded gas stations in the United States had declined to around 230  most, if not all, located in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York.  Importantly, most  if not all  of those gas stations are operated as franchises. Franchising is a popular business model in the United States, with the best-known examples being fast food restaurants such as McDonald's and convenience stores like 7-Eleven.  popular business model in the United States Roughly speaking, the franchisee (local entrepreneur) pays the franchisor (main company) some fees: typically an up-front franchise fee, and regular royalties  usually a percentage cut of their income from sales. In return, the franchisor gives the franchisee the right to operate a business using their well-known brand, for a defined period of time, usually several years. The company might also provide advice or assistance with logistics, advertising, marketing, and so on. The local entrepreneur is also contractually obliged to operate the business in accordance with certain prescribed methods, customer service models, and so on. Lukoil  or more specifically, Lukoil North America, a Delaware-registered LLC with an address in Moorestown, New Jersey offers three-year leases to franchisees in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. In fact, as of March 2, the company's website listed for lease 13 different gas station sites in those states: Lukoil North America, a Delaware-registered LLC 13 different gas station sites   offer to lease" document The aforementioned Bidder is submitting the below rental offer to lease the LUKOIL branded service station listed above, and is prepared to enter into an Agreement with LNA for the lease of the same, subject to the conditions specified below. The lease term is generally three (3) years, however a longer term can be approved, at LNA's discretion, provided a sufficient site improvement or supply commitment is made to justify a longer term.   Google post "LUKOIL gas stations in the United States are independently owned and operated by local business owners who are members of the communities they serve, and 100% of the gasoline and diesel fuel sold is sourced from American oil refiners." Snopes asked Lukoil for details on the exact number of Lukoil-branded gas stations in the United States, and the number of those operated on a franchise basis, if not all. We also asked for precise details about the company's revenue from franchise fees, royalties and/or rent paid by U.S. franchisees, but we did not receive a response in time for publication.  However, Lukoil's 2021 financial results, which were published on March 2, gave an indication of the relatively small role of U.S. gas station revenue in the company's overall income, most of which stems from oil and gas exploration and production inside Russia. Lukoil's 2021 financial results In 2021, according to Lukoil, the company had total sales of 9.4 trillion rubles ($88 billion), and its earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) were 1.4 trillion rubles ($13 billion). Of that $13 billion, just 8.3% ($1 billion) was made up of "refining, marketing and distribution" outside Russia. Although a more detailed breakdown is not available, it is reasonable to suppose that income related specifically to U.S. gas stations made up an even smaller fraction of that $1 billion, given that Lukoil refines, markets, and distributes petroleum in several other countries throughout the world.  It's also not clear whether, in the event of an effective widespread boycott of U.S. Lukoil-branded gas stations, franchisees would still be obliged to continue paying fees and rent to Lukoil North America even if they had no income from gas or convenience store sales. Therefore, a successful boycott could require financial devastation  if not ruination  among many dozens of local entrepreneurs in the United States, as well as sudden unemployment for their hundreds of workers, in order to achieve what would be only a very small financial impact on the Russian parent company, or its bosses in Moscow.  On March 3, Lukoil's board of directors issued a statement in which they expressed their "deepest concerns about the tragic events in Ukraine," and called for an immediate end to the conflict and a "lasting ceasefire." issued a statement Maass, Peter. The Triumph of the Quiet Tycoon. The New York Times, 1 Aug. 2004. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/01/magazine/the-triumph-of-the-quiet-tycoon.html. PRESS RELEASE MARCH 02, 2022 LUKOIL RELEASES FINANCIAL RESULTS UNDER IFRS FOR 2021 PJSC LUKOIL Today Released Its Audited Consol. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3AnFU75r0Wkh4J%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.lukoil.com%2Fapi%2Fpresscenter%2Fexportpressrelease%3Fid%3D577486+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us. Accessed 3 Mar. 2022. Updated [March 4, 2022]: Added reference to the Lukoil board of directors March 3 statement about the Russian invasion of Ukraine. In mid-2015, social media users got their collective hopes up about the advent of the pizza vending machine, an innovation that would enable them to obtain one of their favorite things (pizza) while simultaneously avoiding one of its least popular aspects (human interaction). Tweets and Facebook posts about the pizza vending machine (called "Let's Pizza") touted the announcement of this "new" concept: @italiaricci You should get one for your house! #PizzaVendingMachine #NowIWantOne pic.twitter.com/3SV5Z9bAuX @italiaricci #PizzaVendingMachine #NowIWantOne pic.twitter.com/3SV5Z9bAuX  Stephanie (@Xxsteff22xX) July 1, 2015 July 1, 2015  Photo: #PizzaVendingMachine this is so cool!!! https://t.co/V0S2MtG9sB #PizzaVendingMachine https://t.co/V0S2MtG9sB  Linda Glatham (@LindaGlatham) June 30, 2015 June 30, 2015  The tone of the social media buzz suggested that pizza vending machines were, if not yet popping up all over the place, at least a soon-to-be common sight. (Although hot food vending machines are somewhat common, the novelty of one devoted specifically to pizza apparently fires the imagination.) Interest in the concept in mid-2015 appeared to stem in part from a confusing article titled "Watch This Vending Machine Make Pizza" that was dated 27 June 2015 but had been originally published on 21 March 2014, featuring a YouTube clip uploaded in February 2013 that was filmed in 2012: published During our trip to Italy in 2012, in the little town of Sorrento, my wife and I discovered a Lets Pizza vending machine that promised freshly made pizza in just 2.5 minutes and all for 3 euros. It was such a novel idea, we figured we had to film the whole process.  In a 5 March 2014 article published in The Gate entertainment magazine, the author described encountering one of these contraptions in Sorrento, Italy, the same place where the video clip seen above was shot: article My last travel piece about Sorrento was filled with details about why I loved this beautiful town along the coast of Italy. There was one other reason why I loved the town though, and it all came down to a magical vending machine that made pizzas. Yes, its a pizza vending machine (called Lets Pizza), and it makes them from scratch. For 3 euros, this machine mixes up dough from scratch, covers it in pizza sauce and cheese, and then bakes itall in less than 2-and-a-half minutes. On 14 June 2012, the pizza vending machine branded "Let's Pizza" was covered by The Frisky in an article that touted the machines as soon to arrive in the U.S.: article Turns out the pizza gods have heard our prayers, because an innovative pizza vending machine called Lets Pizza is finally making its way to the States. The Lets Pizza has been popular in Europe for years (for obvious reasons), but heres what Americans can expect ... A Facebook page for Let's Pizza UK also promoted the concept, but that page hasn't been updated since 2011, and the mid-2015 reaction to the pizza vending machine rumors that circulated on social media indicated that if any of the machines already existed in the United Kingdom, they weren't very popular or well-known. Let's Pizza UK In April 2015, Rochester television station WHEC tweeted about pizza vending machines: Local business offers pizza vending machines @whec_rleclair has the story https://t.co/K0F8flxpFb @whec_rleclair https://t.co/K0F8flxpFb  news10nbc (@news10nbc) April 21, 2015 April 21, 2015  However, that tweet linked to an on-site article describing a different pizza vending machine, Pizzametry, that was still in the conceptual stages: article It's a pizza vending machine that creates hot, fresh pies and the prototype is in Webster. So the search is on for investors, possible manufacturers and vendors to help Pizzametry grow along with the upstate economy and its all thanks to the pizza lovers of the Rochester region ... The pizzas will sell for about $4 to $6. The machines can be built for $28,000. A Daily Mail article published in July 2014 reported the "Let's Pizza" machines had not caught on after their 2009 unveiling, primarily due to their considerable size and cost: article The Let's Pizza machine was unveiled by Mr Torghele in 2009 but has been slow to catch on. The downside is that it is each one is the size of nearly three average vending machines. It also retails for more than ten times the amount, at $32,000. When the meme peaked, there was perhaps at least one "Let's Pizza" pizza vending machine operating in Sorrento, Italy -- but predictions of its immigration to the United States were then largely unfulfilled. But in 2016, the Tampa Bay Times reported that a handful of the machines popped up in Florida; at least one more was spotted in Ohio: reported Guys, the stories are true! Xavier now has North America's first Pizza ATM and we got it j https://t.co/oVJlzHXjsv pic.twitter.com/mbTvsQQmpz https://t.co/oVJlzHXjsv pic.twitter.com/mbTvsQQmpz  Xavier Admissions (@XUAdmissions) August 5, 2016 August 5, 2016  In January 2017, Grub Street noted that "after nearly four years of teasing," an unreported number pizza vending machines were scheduled to be installed that month. Little Caesar's announced a "Pizza Portal" in August 2017, but the technology still required a trip to the store to pick up a pizza. Although a handful of pizza vending machines appeared in the United States after the meme circulated, they remained few and far between as of late 2017. noted announced When it comes to taxing businesses, the United States is leading the world, according to Republican U.S. Senate candidate Joe Kyrillos.As he looks to unseat Democratic incumbent Robert Menendez this November, Kyrillos has refused to sign an anti-tax pledge, but maintained in an Aug. 20 interview on WOR-AM that hes looking to lower tax rates.We've got the highest corporate tax rate in the world, in the world, said Kyrillos, a state senator representing Monmouth County. So, Im about reducing tax rates.As far as the corporate tax rates on the books, Kyrillos claim is on the money. However, when you factor in various tax breaks, the rate actually paid by U.S. businesses has been among the highest in the world, but not in first place, studies show.For this fact-check, were focusing on two different types of corporate tax rates: statutory and effective rates.To back up Kyrillos claim, a spokeswoman pointed to the top statutory corporate tax rate of 39.2 percent in the United States. That figure represents a combination of federal, state and local tax rates imposed by law before any tax breaks.Once Japan reduced its combined corporate tax rate in April, the U.S. rate became the highest among industrialized nations, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation, a pro-business group.So, Kyrillos claim about a first-place finish is on target in terms of statutory rates.But the United States does not necessarily lead the world when you consider the effective tax rates paid by U.S. businesses. Due to various tax breaks, those rates are typically lower than the top statutory rate.In a September 2011 report, the Tax Foundation summarized the findings of the latest 13 studies of effective corporate tax rates across the world. Due to different methodologies, those studies determined U.S. effective tax rates ranging from 23 percent to 34.9 percent, according to the report.The United States did not rank first in any of those studies, but in 10 of them, U.S. effective rates ranked among the top five highest for the countries analyzed, the report states. However, the effective rate in Japan will likely drop, possibly moving the United States to the top spot in future studies.Apart from that Tax Foundation report, its worth noting that a separate analysis found thirty Fortune 500 companies, including General Electric, didnt pay any federal corporate income taxes over the 2008-2010 period. That study was done by the left-leaning Citizens for Tax Justice along with the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.So, whats the better measure -- statutory or effective rates?According to Tax Foundation president Scott Hodge, statutory rates make for better comparisons. Effective rates are unpredictable and vary across different industries, but the statutory rates are fixed, Hodge told us. (The effective tax rate) will differ from industry to industry and business to business, whereas the list price is what it is and everyone starts at that point, Hodge said.But Joseph Rosenberg, a research associate at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, argued that effective tax rates provide the best measure of comparison for overall tax burdens. Aparna Mathur, an economist with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, added in an e-mail that both are equally valid measures of looking at the burden of the corporate income tax.Our rulingIn a radio interview, Kyrillos claimed, We've got the highest corporate tax rate in the world.Its accurate that, at 39.2 percent, the United States has the highest statutory corporate tax rate among industrialized nations. But with various tax breaks, U.S. effective corporate tax rates range anywhere from 23 percent to 34.9 percent, studies show.Those effective tax rates may not land in first place, but theyre still among the highest in the world.We rate the statement Mostly True. To comment on this ruling, go toNJ.com. On Nov. 15, 2019, former U.S. ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testified before the U.S. House Intelligence Committee in the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump. Shortly after, some of Trump's defenders took to social media apparently to discredit her testimony, claiming that the ambassador's net worth far exceeded her salary, insinuating because of some illicit means: testified   We have found no evidence to corroborate this claim. Those making the claim have offered a wide range of figures. We also found that this claim did not originate with a credible financial news outlet, such as Forbes, and that the websites publishing this information have offered no evidence. Furthermore, while this claim implies some sort of wrongdoing on her part, no one has offered any information about how she supposedly built her alleged fortune.  In other words, this claim appears to have been conjured out of thin air.  While the tweet shown above claimed that Yovanovitch has a net worth of $17 million, other social media users have offered differing estimates of her net worth: social media users One possible explanation for the discrepancies in this claim is that there is no credible evidence for the estimates.   Some social media users pointed to articles published on Walikali and Gossipgist to support their claim that Yovanovitch's net worth far exceeded her salary. However, just like the above-displayed tweets, these sites offered no evidence to support their estimates.  Walikali Gossipgist The articles published on these websites provide some basic biographical information about the former ambassador to Ukraine. They do not, however, provide any insight into any business dealings or investments that Yovanovitch may have made that could have resulted in a $17 million net worth. Instead, they simply tacked on their estimate ($6 million in both cases) without making any attempt to justify that figure.  We reached out to Walikali and Gossipgist for more information on how they arrived at their estimates and will update this article if more information becomes available. In sum, the claim that Yovanovitch has a net worth of $17 million (or $12 million or $6 million or $3 million) is wholly unsubstantiated. This rumor appears to have been made up out of whole cloth in an apparent attempt to discredit her U.S. House testimony.  Flaherty, Anne.  "5 Key Takeaways From Testimony by Former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch."
  ABC News.  15 November 2019. McCarthy, Tom; Smith, David.  "Ukraine Ambassador Describes Trump's 'Shocking' Smear Campaign Against Her."
  The Guardian.  15 November 2019. The Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law Aug. 16, 2022, by President Joe Biden, has many provisions aiming to lower drug costs, address the climate crisis, reduce the deficit, and ask large corporations to pay a greater share of taxes. But one aspect of the Democratic plan has sparked some of the biggest headlines: $80 billion over 10 years to beef up the Internal Revenue Service. Heres a sample of unfounded and debunked claims: A Delta Force seized a shipment of weapons headed to the IRS, a TikTok video claimed. PolitiFact National rated thisPants on Fire. The government is arming up the IRS because Joe Biden is raising taxes and disarming Americans, U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., said. PolitiFact National rated thisFalse. Democrats' new army of 87,000 IRS agents will be coming for you  with 710,000 new audits for Americans who earn less than $75k, House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy insisted. PolitiFact National rated thisMostly False. In Wisconsin, meanwhile, Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson weighed in Aug. 7, 2022, the day the Senate approved the measure, with anews releaseciting a litany of grievances with the IRS and this claim: Last year, the IRS audited Americans earning less than $25,000 a year at five times the rate of other groups. According to Democrats and the White House, the Inflation Reduction Act money for the IRS is meant to improve tax compliance enforcement of the wealthiest in the nation. So, Johnsons claim caught our attention. Is he right? Two sides point to the same study to make their points When asked for backup, Johnson spokesperson Alexa Henning pointed to an April 13, 2022, letter from U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., a member of the Senate Finance Committee, and U.S. Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., a member of the House Ways and Means Committee. The letter was sent to Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen and Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rettig. Theletter from two prominent Democrats, no less  accuses the IRS of targeting low-income Americans for tax audits. After noting the lawmakers are working to secure more money to expand audits, the letter says: The most vulnerable taxpayers should not shoulder the burden of insufficient IRS enforcement funding simply because they require fewer resources to audit. Keep those thoughts in mind as we move ahead. At the core of the letter  and therefore of Johnsons claim  is an analysis of tax data from the 2021 fiscal year by Syracuse Universitys Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), a nonpartisan, nonprofit data research center. Here is what the analysis found:  Whats behind this? The March 8, 2022,TRAC analysissays the IRS accomplished over 650 thousand audits last year by jacking up its already high reliance on correspondence audits  essentially a letter from the IRS asking for documentation on a specific line item on a return. All but 100,000 of the 659,000 audits were conducted with these letters through the mail. Indeed, in the 2021 fiscal year, that sort of audit accounted for 85% of all audits, up from about 80% in the previous two years. The analysis noted a similar phenomenon occurred more than 20 years ago, amid a cutback in IRS staff. In other words, with less staff, the most simple audits continue, while other more complex audits fall off. A limitation in the IRS ability to audit millionaires is the availability of IRS revenue agents, a particular class of investigators. Only this class of auditors, given sufficient training and experience, are qualified to examine complex tax returns  the types of returns typically filed by high-income individuals and large-scale businesses, the analysis states. When asked about Johnsons claim, IRS media relations chief Karen A. Connelly referred PolitiFact Wisconsin to the March 17, 2022,congressional testimonyfrom Rettig. In it, Rettig called the TRAC findings absolutely 100% false and said he was tired of having to deal with this issue. We audit high-income taxpayers more than any other category in the Internal Revenue Service, Rettig said. Taxpayers reflecting over $10 million of income are audited at a rate exceeding 7%. Taxpayers at the $25,000 level, which is primarily  the earned income taxpayer would be the only people we would look at, are audited at 1.1%. According to TRAC, Rettig was referring to numbers from 2016. They argue that makes their own numbers more up to date. But that misses an important point. The IRS does not have to initiate audits in the same year returns are filed. So, as years pass, and more audits are started, the picture changes. Under the IRSs definition of the audit rate, the 2016 figure was the most current complete data, said Janet Holtzblatt, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. Holtzblatt said audits of 2016 tax returns would have begun, at the earliest, in 2017. So at the time of the preparation of the 2020 Data Book, the audit data for 2016 returns were the most recent year outside the statute of limitations for audits. So, its the total number of audits possible for 2016 returns. Data for a later year would not be complete because the IRS could still be opening up audits for that year. That is, by the IRS definition, the 2019 audit rate would not reflect all the audits that would eventually be done on 2019 tax returns. So, all of that leaves us in an interesting spot. In arguing against a bill that provides more money to do more audits of high-income individuals, Johnson cites the same statistics as those calling for the increased spending. Fair enough. And those numbers do refer to last year. But, under the audit process, they are not complete. The numbers will only rise  and the proportions could change  as more audits are begun and completed. That means its not as simple as Johnson suggests. Johnson said last year, the IRS audited Americans earning less than $25,000 a year at five times the rate of other groups. That, well, tracks with the TRAC data  and lawmakers on the other side of the issue have cited the same information in making their case for the bill. But both sides are missing a key point: Audits are not all begun instantly, so at best the figures cited are preliminary ones. They will change, and the proportion may well shift, as time passes and more audits are started and completed. In other words, the statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Thats our definition for Mostly True. In early 2019, several progressive Democratic politicians who were frequent headline subjects  including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Sen. Bernie Senators of Vermont, and Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota  were often tagged by critics with the word "socialist," used as a pejorative. At the recently concluded Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), for example, Republicans warned of "radical" Democrats "embracing socialism." News accounts proclaimed that "Republicans are determined to paint Democrats as out-of-control, out-of-their minds socialists." CPAC accounts That political climate touched off the online circulation of a memetic quote from 33rd U.S. President Harry S. Truman, who purportedly fended off similar attacks on Democrats in 1952 by declaring that "socialism" was a "scare word [Republicans] have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years":  The circulated meme was an accurate reproduction of a portion of a campaign speechTruman delivered from the rear platform of a train in Syracuse, New York, on 10 October 1952. (Truman himself was not a candidate for re-election that year, but he stumped for the Democratic ticket, headed by Illinois Gov.Adlai Stevenson II). Much of Truman's speech was a caustic rebuke of Republicans (and their presidential nominee, General Dwight D. Eisenhower), whom Truman characterized as having "opposed almost all our programs to help the economic life of the country" and "having blindly turned [their] back on the tradition of public action for the public good": speech [Republican Senator Robert] Taft explained that the great issue in this campaign is "creeping socialism." Now that is the patented trademark of the special interest lobbies. Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years. Socialism is what they called public power. Socialism is what they called social security. Socialism is what they called farm price supports. Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance. Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations. Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people. When the Republican candidate inscribes the slogan "Down With Socialism" on the banner of his "great crusade," that is really not what he means at all. What he really means is, "Down with Progress -- down with Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal," and "down with Harry Truman's fair Deal." That is what he means. Truman had earlier touched on the idea of "socialism" as a Republican scare word during an address he delivered at a Better Business Bureaus dinner on 6 June 1950, leading into a sardonic joke about New York Gov. Thomas E. Dewey (the unsuccessful Republican presidential nominee in the 1944 and 1948 elections): address I know that you have been hearing a lot of charges lately about Government interference with business, about the undermining of the free enterprise system, and about "creeping socialism." In short, you have been hearing that the Government is doing everything possible to wreck every industry in the country. Nothing could be further from the truth. The record shows that the Government action in recent years has been the salvation of private enterprise ... I know there are some people who still don't believe that the policies of the Government have had anything to do with our present prosperity. That reminds me of a story I heard on my recent nonpolitical trip. It seems that there was a rock-ribbed old gentleman of a political persuasion, shall we say, somewhat different from mine. One of his friends asked him what man to vote for for President in 1952. "Well," he said, "I would like to vote for Dewey." "Dewey!" said the friend. "Why Dewey?" "Well," he said, "I voted for him the last two times, in 1944 and in 1948, and business has never been so good as it is today" ... The funny thing is that this has all been said before. The current campaign is almost exactly like the campaign of the old Liberty League, back in 1935 and 1936. I was in that campaign, too, by the way. It uses the same old slogans, the same old scare words, and the same old falsehoods. The only difference is that it sounds even more foolish now than it did 14 years ago. Lightman, David.  "Accusations of Socialism Drive GOP's 2019 (and 2020) Playbook."   The [Tacoma] News Tribune.  12 February 2019. Pappas, Alex.  "At CPAC, Conservatives Warn of 'Radical' Dems Embracing Socialism, Trump Impeachment."   Fox News.  28 February 2019. Truman, Harry S.  "Address at a Dinner of the Better Business Bureaus."   The American Presidency Project.  6 June 1950. Truman, Harry S.  "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in New York ."   The American Presidency Project.  10 October 1952.