The Claim

Increased private-sector real earnings by $1,100 annually — earning back some of the $2,900 in purchasing power workers lost under Biden.

The Claim, Unpacked

What is literally being asserted?

Two things: (1) that private-sector workers gained $1,100 per year in inflation-adjusted earnings during Trump’s first year back in office, and (2) that this represents a partial recovery from a $2,900 annual loss in purchasing power that occurred under Biden. Embedded in the framing is a causal claim — that the administration “increased” these earnings, implying policy-driven improvement.

What is being implied but not asserted?

That the Biden administration was responsible for the $2,900 loss. That the Trump administration caused the $1,100 recovery. That workers are on a trajectory to fully recover their lost purchasing power. That this represents a meaningful economic achievement attributable to presidential action.

What is conspicuously absent?

The data source. The White House does not specify which BLS series, deflator, or time period produced either the $1,100 or $2,900 figure. This matters enormously because different measures yield dramatically different numbers. The BLS publishes several overlapping wage series — CES average hourly/weekly earnings (employer survey, 631,000 worksites), CPS median weekly earnings (household survey, 60,000 households) — and each can be deflated by CPI-U, CPI-W, or PCE. When Trump claimed a $500 wage gain in August 2025, PolitiFact rated it “Half True” and found the White House was using the more volatile CPS household survey rather than the more reliable CES employer survey, which showed gains approximately one-quarter the size.

Also absent: the role of the Federal Reserve in driving down inflation (the primary reason real wages recovered), the pandemic composition effect that inflated the January 2021 baseline from which Biden-era losses are measured, the fact that real wage recovery began under Biden in 2023-2024 as inflation fell below nominal wage growth, and the exclusion of 277,000 federal workers whose wages were eliminated entirely by DOGE.

Evidence Assessment

Established Facts

Nominal average weekly earnings for all private-sector employees (BLS CES series CES0500000011) rose from $1,222.14 in January 2025 to $1,274.93 in January 2026, a nominal gain of $52.79/week or 4.3%. With CPI-U inflation of 2.4% over the same period, this yields a real gain of approximately 1.9% in weekly earnings. Annualized, this is approximately $1,207 in real terms — broadly consistent with the $1,100 claim. By February 2026, the White House had updated the figure to $1,400 using an additional month of data that showed stronger gains. ¹

Real average hourly earnings for all private-sector employees increased 1.2% from January 2025 to January 2026, and 1.1% from December 2024 to December 2025 (BLS Real Earnings release). For production and nonsupervisory workers — the larger, lower-wage category — real hourly earnings grew 1.5% year-over-year as of January 2026. These percentage gains are genuine and represent real improvement in workers’ purchasing power. ²

Real average weekly earnings for all private-sector employees fell approximately 4% from January 2021 to January 2025 under Biden, according to FactCheck.org’s analysis of BLS data (CES0500000012). Nominal weekly earnings rose 16.7%, but the CPI rose 21.5%, producing a net real decline. For production and nonsupervisory workers, the real decline was approximately 2%. ³

The $2,900 figure does not precisely match standard BLS endpoint-to-endpoint calculations. A 4% real decline on a January 2021 annual earnings base of approximately $54,473 ($1,047.55 x 52) would yield a loss of approximately $2,179/year. The Heritage Foundation calculated losses of $2,444-$3,000 depending on methodology, time period, and whether interest rate effects were included. The $2,900 figure appears to split the difference or use a non-standard methodology that the White House has not disclosed. ⁴

Strong Inferences

The $1,100 figure likely uses the CES nominal weekly earnings series deflated by CPI-U, which combines hourly wage growth with changes in average weekly hours. The BLS Real Earnings releases report real hourly earnings (which grew 1.1-1.2% YoY) and real weekly earnings (which grew 1.5-2.0% YoY, boosted by an increase in average hours worked). The larger weekly earnings figure produces a more impressive dollar amount when annualized. This is not dishonest — workers who work more hours do earn more — but it conflates two distinct economic phenomena: wage rates rising and hours increasing. ⁵

The White House has alternated between different BLS data sources to maximize the apparent wage gain. In August 2025, when Trump claimed a $500 mid-year wage gain, PolitiFact found the administration was citing the CPS household survey (median usual weekly earnings, 60,000 household sample) rather than the CES employer survey (average weekly earnings, 631,000 worksites). Economists including Douglas Holtz-Eakin of the American Action Forum stated the payroll (CES) series is more reliable. Dean Baker of CEPR called the household survey “highly erratic.” Using the CES measure, the actual mid-year nominal gain was approximately $121 — one-quarter of the claimed figure. The real (inflation-adjusted) gain using CES data was approximately $1 per week, or $26 over six months. ⁶

The real wage recovery that produced the $1,100 gain began under Biden in 2023-2024, driven primarily by the Federal Reserve’s success in reducing inflation. As CPI inflation fell from 6.5% in December 2022 to 3.4% in December 2023 to 2.9% in December 2024, nominal wage growth consistently outpaced inflation, producing positive real wage gains. The BLS data shows real average hourly earnings turned positive on a year-over-year basis in approximately mid-2023 — eighteen months before Trump returned to office. The 2025 continuation of this trend is a function of inflation remaining moderate (2.4-3.0%) while nominal wages grew 3.8-4.3%, a dynamic established well before the current administration’s policies could have had effect. ⁷

The January 2021 baseline from which the $2,900 Biden-era loss is measured was artificially elevated by the pandemic composition effect. When low-wage workers lost jobs en masse in March-April 2020, average wages mechanically rose — not because anyone got a raise, but because lower-earning workers were no longer counted. By January 2021, this compositional distortion was still partially present. FactCheck.org noted that measuring real wage changes from pre-pandemic (2019) rather than January 2021 shows modest gains rather than losses under Biden. Both baselines are defensible, but neither tells the complete story. ⁸

The “private-sector” framing excludes approximately 277,000 federal workers whose earnings were eliminated entirely by DOGE-driven workforce reductions. When the denominator excludes workers whose wages went to zero, the average for remaining workers looks better. This is the same denominator problem identified in Items #69 and #72. ⁹

What the Evidence Shows

The core numbers in this claim are closer to reality than most of the economic claims in the “365 Wins” list. Real wages did grow in 2025, and workers’ purchasing power genuinely improved. Real average weekly earnings rose approximately 1.5-2.0% year-over-year, and the $1,100 annualized figure is roughly derivable from BLS data — though it requires using the most favorable (weekly rather than hourly) measure, and the precise figure depends on which months, which series, and which deflator you select.

The $2,900 Biden-era loss figure is harder to verify. Standard BLS data shows a real weekly earnings decline of approximately 4% from January 2021 to January 2025, which would produce an annualized loss of approximately $2,179 from the January 2021 earnings base. The Heritage Foundation calculated $2,444-$3,000 using varying methodologies. The $2,900 figure falls in this range but the White House has not disclosed its calculation, making it impossible to verify precisely.

The deeper problem is not the numbers but the causal story. The claim says the administration “increased” real earnings, implying policy causation. But the real wage recovery of 2025 is overwhelmingly a function of inflation dynamics that predate and are largely independent of the administration’s actions. The Federal Reserve’s rate-hiking cycle (2022-2023) brought inflation down from 9.1% to under 3%. As inflation fell below nominal wage growth, real wages mechanically recovered. This trend began in mid-2023 — during the Biden administration — and continued through 2025. The administration’s most consequential economic policy, tariffs, actually increased price pressures: the CPI components most affected by tariffs (goods, food) showed higher inflation in 2025 than services.

The choice of data series matters enormously. When PolitiFact investigated Trump’s August 2025 claim of a “$500 wage increase,” they found the White House was using the more volatile CPS household survey, which showed gains four times larger than the more reliable CES employer survey. The real gain using the preferred measure was approximately $1 per week. The “$1,100” claim in the “365 Wins” list appears to use the CES weekly earnings series (which includes hours changes), but the White House has not been consistent about which data source it uses, choosing whichever produces the largest number at any given time.

The Bottom Line

The claim is mostly true on the numbers but misleading in its framing. Real earnings for private-sector workers did increase by roughly $1,000-1,200 annually in 2025, and workers did lose significant purchasing power during the Biden-era inflation surge. The $2,900 loss figure is not precisely verifiable but falls within the range of credible estimates. The $1,100 gain figure is approximately correct using the most favorable standard measure.

Steel-man: Workers’ purchasing power genuinely improved in 2025. After the painful inflation-driven real wage losses of 2021-2022, the combination of moderate inflation and steady nominal wage growth produced real gains that most workers could feel. The administration is correct that this partial recovery occurred during its tenure and that workers are better off in real terms than they were a year earlier. Even the adversarial baseline — acknowledging that $2,900 was lost and only $1,100 recovered — is an honest framing that does not claim the problem is fully solved.

Where the claim misleads is in its attribution. The word “increased” implies the administration caused the gain. But the primary driver was the Federal Reserve’s success in taming inflation — a process that began in 2022 and produced real wage recovery starting in mid-2023. The administration inherited a favorable inflation trajectory and wage growth dynamics. Its most significant economic policy — tariffs — actually worked against real wage gains by raising goods prices. The “private-sector” framing hides 277,000 workers whose earnings were zeroed out by DOGE. And the data-source inconsistency — using whichever BLS series produces the most favorable number at any given moment — undermines trust in the specific dollar figures even when they fall within the range of legitimate measures.

Sources

Footnotes

1. FRED Series CES0500000011, “Average Weekly Earnings of All Employees, Total Private,” seasonally adjusted, January 2021-February 2026. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES0500000011. BLS CPI-U data (CPIAUCSL). https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CPIAUCSL ↩

2. BLS Real Earnings releases, January and February 2026. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/realer.htm. White House, “President Trump Delivers Another Inflation Win” (2026-02-12). https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2026/02/president-trump-delivers-another-inflation-win-real-wages-surge-price-relief-reaches-americans/ ↩

3. FactCheck.org, “Biden’s Final Numbers” (2025-10-20). https://www.factcheck.org/2025/10/bidens-final-numbers/. BLS CES series CES0500000012 (real average weekly earnings). ↩

4. Heritage Foundation, “Americans Have Lost $4,200 in Annual Income Under The Biden Administration.” https://www.heritage.org/press/heritage-expert-americans-have-lost-4200-annual-income-under-the-biden-administration. House Budget Committee, “Fiscal State of the Union: Biden’s Real-Wage Decline.” https://budget.house.gov/press-release/fiscal-state-of-the-union-bidens-real-wage-decline ↩

5. BLS Real Earnings Summary, February 2026 (covering January 2026 data). Real average hourly earnings +1.2% YoY; real average weekly earnings +2.0% YoY (difference driven by 0.6% increase in average workweek). https://www.bls.gov/news.release/realer.nr0.htm ↩

6. PolitiFact, “Trump says workers got a $500 wage bump. Really?” (2025-09-05). Rating: Half True. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2025/sep/05/donald-trump/wage-increase-500-dollars-2025-workers/. Al Jazeera, “Fact check: Have US workers gained $500 in wages this year?” (2025-09-06). https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2025/9/6/fact-check-have-us-workers-gained-500-in-wages-this-year ↩

7. BLS CPI-U data (CUUR0000SA0), 12-month percent change: Dec 2022: 6.5%, Dec 2023: 3.4%, Dec 2024: 2.9%, Dec 2025: 2.7%. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUUR0000SA0?output_view=pct_12mths. Analysis per Item #72 evidence. FactCheck.org, “Competing Narratives on Real Wages, Incomes Under Biden” (2024-06-14). https://www.factcheck.org/2024/06/competing-narratives-on-real-wages-incomes-under-biden/ ↩

8. FactCheck.org, “Competing Narratives on Real Wages, Incomes Under Biden” (2024-06-14). https://www.factcheck.org/2024/06/competing-narratives-on-real-wages-incomes-under-biden/. Analysis of pandemic composition effect on wage averages. ↩

9. NPR, “Officially, 59,000 federal jobs are gone under Trump. There’s more to the picture” (2025-06-04); Cato Institute, “DOGE Produced the Largest Peacetime Workforce Cut on Record” (2026). BLS Employment Situation data showing federal employment decline of approximately 277,000. Per Item #69 evidence. ↩