内容摘要：With that funding at risk, universities are even more reliant on their endowment funds to sustain the research they conduct.

With that funding at risk, universities are even more reliant on their endowment funds to sustain the research they conduct.

A fact sheet released by Smith says the tax “holds woke, elite universities that operate more like major corporations and other tax-exempt entities accountable”.The bill is now headed to the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 seats and Democrats hold 47. It is unclear when the vote will take place, but Trump is urging Republican senators to promptly pass it.

On May 22, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform: “Thank you to every Republican who voted YES on this Historic Bill! Now, it’s time for our friends in the United States Senate to get to work, and send this Bill to my desk AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!”How many colleges could be affected by this?An investigation by The New York Times found that at least 58 schools could potentially be affected by this.

Major universities could fall under the highest tax slab.In the 2024 fiscal year, Harvard University’s total endowment was worth approximately $53.2bn – the largest of any university. There are 24,596 students at Harvard, which means the per-student endowment is $2.16m. That means it will have to pay a 21 percent tax if the bill becomes law.

Yale University’s endowment is valued at $41bn and the university has 15,490 students, bringing the per-student endowment to about $2.7m. While the institute currently pays the 1.4 percent tax, it too will have to pay a 21 percent tax if the bill becomes law.

Likewise, Stanford’s endowment is $36.5bn and it has 17,529 students, making the per-student endowment about $2.1m. While the institute currently pays the 1.4 percent tax, it will have to pay a 21 percent tax if the bill becomes law.The move marked the latest in a series of efforts by the Trump administration to stymie China’s ability to develop cutting-edge AI chips. The tiny

, which power AI systems, have long been a source of tension between the US and China.China’s Commerce Ministry spokesperson fired back against the guidance last week, accusing Washington of “undermining” the consensus reached in Geneva and describing the measures as “typical unilateral bullying and protectionism”.

Then, on May 28, the US government ramped up the row by ordering US companies which make software used to design semiconductors totheir goods and services to Chinese groups, The Financial Times reported.