Several Trump administration actions share prominent themes with Project 2025, especially stronger presidential direction of executive agencies, tighter control over federal hiring, and changes in AI and energy policy. The clearest examples show policy alignment—not proof that every order implements the guide or that similarity establishes authorship or coordination.
What Project 2025 is—and what an executive order is
Project 2025’s primary policy document is Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, a 920-page set of recommendations across federal agencies produced by the Heritage Foundation’s 2025 Presidential Transition Project. It is a policy guide, not an executive order or law. An executive order, by contrast, is an action issued by a president; its directions, scope, and legal effect depend on its text and applicable law.
The Associated Press has compared Project 2025 with Trump’s 2024 campaign positions, identifying both shared ideas and differences. That comparison provides campaign-era context, not a substitute for the wording of orders issued after inauguration.
Where selected executive actions align
The examples below illustrate areas of overlap. They are not a complete audit of every proposal in the guide or every executive action.
#1 Best Overall
| Area | Trump administration action | Relationship to Project 2025 | Important limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Presidential control of agencies | Executive Order 14215, “Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies,” dated February 18, 2025 | Strong thematic alignment with the guide’s proposals to strengthen presidential direction of the administrative state | Thematic similarity does not establish that the order was copied from the guide |
| Federal workforce | A July 7, 2025 memorandum restricted filling vacant federal civilian positions and creating new ones through October 15, 2025 | Related to the guide’s recommendations on federal personnel and executive management | The restriction had an end date, exceptions, and an applicable-law qualification; it was not an unrestricted permanent hiring freeze |
| Artificial intelligence | Executive Order 14179 revoked the prior AI order and directed a review of policies and actions taken under it | A related shift in policy direction | The sources cited here do not establish a direct match to a specific Project 2025 recommendation |
| Energy and climate | A July 7, 2025 energy order directed steps to terminate specified wind and solar clean-electricity tax credits and a review of agency preferences for those sources over dispatchable energy | Broad overlap with energy and climate themes identified in the AP comparison and the guide | The order addresses specified credits and agency practices, not every part of energy policy |
Agency control: the clearest match in governing approach
Executive Order 14215 states that the executive branch should be subject to presidential supervision and control. It directs independent regulatory agency chairs to coordinate with White House policy councils, requires strategic plans to go to the Office of Management and Budget for clearance, and says the President’s and Attorney General’s legal interpretations control executive-branch employees.
The order’s stated policy is: “Therefore, in order to improve the administration of the executive branch and to increase regulatory officials’ accountability to the American people, it shall be the policy of the executive branch to ensure Presidential supervision and control of the entire executive branch.” The sentence appears in Executive Order 14215, issued by the White House on February 18, 2025.
Rank #2
Federal hiring: a time-limited restriction
The July 7, 2025 memorandum restricted filling vacant federal civilian positions and creating new ones through October 15, 2025, subject to exceptions and applicable law. Covered hiring was to follow the Office of Personnel Management’s Merit Hiring Plan. This is evidence of a hiring-control approach related to Project 2025’s personnel and executive-management recommendations; the dates and qualifications matter when describing it.
Artificial intelligence: a change of direction, not a proven one-to-one match
Executive Order 14179, “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence,” revoked the previous AI order and directed officials to review policies and actions taken under it for possible inconsistency with the new administration’s policy. That is a clear change in federal policy direction. The available comparison does not establish that this action directly implements a particular Project 2025 recommendation.
Energy: specified tax credits and agency treatment
The July 7, 2025 energy order directed Treasury to take steps to terminate specified clean-electricity production and investment tax credits for wind and solar facilities. It also directed Interior to review regulations and practices for preferences for wind and solar relative to dispatchable energy sources. That makes the action relevant to the broader overlap on energy and climate policy, but its scope should not be enlarged beyond those specified subjects.
How to judge whether an order “implements” a proposal
“Aligns with” can mean anything from a shared general objective to a close match in the proposed policy and the action taken. A careful comparison separates those levels instead of treating all overlap as implementation.
- Find the specific proposal. Identify its chapter or page in Mandate for Leadership; a general similarity in subject is not enough to claim a close match.
- Read the operative action. Check the executive order or memorandum itself to see whether it rescinds, directs, reviews, or proposes something—and note its exceptions, time limits, and scope.
- Keep campaign positions separate. A 2024 campaign statement and a post-inauguration executive action are different kinds of evidence.
- Check implementation and legal constraints. An order’s instructions do not, by themselves, establish what agencies have completed or what legal effect a provision will have.
- Do not infer coordination from resemblance. Shared objectives support a finding of policy alignment, not a claim about who authored an order or whether it was coordinated with the guide’s authors.
- Look for differences and omissions. A proposal may not appear in an order, and an order may address only part of a broader recommendation.
What the comparison can—and cannot—establish
The selected actions support a conclusion that there are notable areas of thematic overlap, particularly in executive-branch control and workforce policy, alongside related shifts in AI and energy policy. The strength of the match varies: the agency-control order has a clear parallel in governing approach, while the AI example is a related policy shift without a documented one-to-one match in the sources cited here.
No proportion of Trump’s 2025–2026 executive orders that align with Project 2025 is established by the primary and comparative sources described here. The guide’s 920-page length measures the document, not the degree of alignment. The White House executive-order index lists actions through 2026, but a current assessment should account for later orders, amendments, and implementation; this selection is not an exhaustive tally.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches2Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems3Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteWhy the distinction matters to readers
For personal-finance readers, the energy example is the most directly connected to a tax-policy subject: it concerns specified wind and solar credits, not a general change to every household’s taxes. The other examples concern executive management, federal hiring, and AI policy. Their inclusion in a comparison does not, by itself, establish a change to an individual’s finances or the final legal effect of an agency action.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
