One-Year Notice Requirement & Disputed Unpaid Dues Framed The Departure As Critics Cite WHO’s China Deference & COVID-Era Failures

Friday, January 23, 2026, 1:30 P.M. ET. 5 Minute Read, By Jennifer Hodges, Political Editor: Englebrook Independent News,

WASHINGTON, DC.- The United States officially completed its withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO) on Thursday, January 22, 2026, marking the first time since WHO’s founding in 1948 that the U.S. is no longer a member of the U.N. health body.

     The move finalizes a break President Donald Trump set in motion one year earlier, when his administration issued a formal notice of intent to withdraw and began dismantling U.S. participation in WHO governance, staffing, and funding streams.

     Administration officials framed the exit as a sovereignty and accountability measure, arguing the WHO failed to reform, proved politically compromised, and mishandled the COVID-19 crisis. Critics in public health and diplomacy countered that the move weakens American access to global disease intelligence and leaves a vacuum likely to be filled by adversaries, including China.

Why It Took A Full Year: The One-Year Withdrawal Requirement;

     The one-year timeline was not a bureaucratic courtesy; it was a legal and procedural constraint tied to how the United States entered the WHO in the first place.

     The WHO Constitution itself contains no explicit withdrawal clause, a longstanding anomaly for an organization with nearly universal membership. However, when Congress authorized U.S. participation in 1948, it reserved America’s right to withdraw on one year’s notice, subject to the United States meeting its financial obligations for the organization’s current fiscal year.

     As a result, once formal notice was transmitted in January 2025, the withdrawal clock legally had to run its full course. Even as the Trump administration rapidly halted funding flows and recalled U.S. personnel, the effective exit date remained bound to that statutory timeline.

     The administration has maintained that the notice requirement was fulfilled and that the withdrawal is legally complete, despite unresolved disputes over final financial obligations.

The Money Dispute: Conflicting Claims Over Unpaid Dues;

     As the withdrawal became official on Thursday, the question of money remained central and contentious.

     The World Health Organization asserts that the United States still owes significant unpaid dues. Reporting has cited outstanding balances ranging from more than $130 million to figures approaching $260 million, depending on how obligations are categorized across fiscal years.

     Those discrepancies reflect a deeper accounting and legal disagreement: what constitutes the “current fiscal year,” which assessments are overdue versus still pending, and whether payment is a prerequisite for withdrawal to take effect.

     WHO documentation circulated to member states ahead of governance meetings reflects the organization’s position that U.S. obligations remain outstanding. The Trump administration has rejected that interpretation, signaling it does not recognize unpaid assessments as a legal barrier to withdrawal.

     The result is an unprecedented standoff between U.S. domestic authority and WHO institutional claims.

How Much The United States Funded The WHO;

     For decades, the United States has been either the largest or one of the largest contributors to the World Health Organization.

     U.S. funding historically flowed through two primary channels:

     • Assessed contributions, mandatory dues based on a United Nations funding scale.
     • Voluntary contributions, which are earmarked for specific programs, emergencies, and initiatives.

     Over the past decade, U.S. voluntary contributions fluctuated sharply in response to global events. They ranged from approximately $105 million in fiscal year 2020 to nearly $700 million in fiscal year 2022.

     According to WHO donor reporting, the United States contributed approximately $1.284 billion during the 2022–2023 biennium when assessed and voluntary funding are combined.

     That financial footprint translated into substantial influence, yet critics argue the organization failed to deliver accountability commensurate with the scale of American taxpayer support.

China, WHO, And The COVID-19 Failures;

     A central justification cited by the Trump administration for withdrawal has been the WHO’s relationship with China, particularly during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

     Administration officials and allied critics argue the organization deferred excessively to Beijing, delaying transparency, repeating Chinese government assurances, and failing to demand timely access for independent investigation.

     Independent reviews later criticized both China’s early pandemic response and the WHO’s speed in sounding global alarms. The WHO did not declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern until January 30, 2020, weeks after the virus had already spread internationally.

     Subsequent reporting revealed internal frustration among WHO officials over delays and restrictions imposed by China during investigative efforts, raising questions about whether the organization could compel cooperation from powerful member states during crises.

     To critics in Washington, the pandemic exposed a fundamental flaw: a global health body that cannot independently verify information from China in an emergency is structurally compromised.

What Changes Now, And What Doesn’t;

    With the withdrawal finalized, the United States ceases formal participation in WHO governance, voting mechanisms, and standing technical committees.

     Public health experts warn that the decision could complicate U.S. access to coordinated surveillance data and international deliberations on vaccine strains. The administration has countered that American health security will be pursued through bilateral agreements, alternative multilateral forums, and direct agency-to-agency cooperation.

     The broader geopolitical question remains unresolved: whether America’s exit pressures the WHO to reform, or whether it opens the door for China and other rivals to expand their influence over the world’s primary global health institution.

     That calculation is now being tested in real time.

Editor’s Note:

This article was written and verified by Jennifer Hodges, Political Editor for Englebrook Independent News, and is based on contemporaneous reporting, congressional legal analyses of U.S. withdrawal conditions established in 1948, and publicly available funding summaries from the World Health Organization and independent policy research organizations. Reported figures regarding alleged unpaid U.S. dues vary among credible sources; Englebrook Independent News has therefore presented those figures as ranges and attributed them to documented WHO financial reporting and international coverage. All facts have been reviewed to the highest editorial standards at the time of publication.