US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick testified before the House Oversight Committee on May 6, 2026, regarding his past relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Lutnick detailed a 2005 encounter at Epstein’s New York home that he described as off-putting
, though he later admitted to visiting Epstein’s Caribbean island in 2012.
The transcription of a closed-door interview with US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has revealed a contradictory timeline regarding his associations with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Lutnick, a key figure in the Trump administration’s global tariffs policy, appeared voluntarily before the House Oversight Committee to address his history as a former neighbor of Epstein in New York.
The 2005 New York Encounter
Lutnick’s testimony focused heavily on a specific interaction from 2005 that served as the catalyst for his claimed break from Epstein. According to the released transcriptions, Lutnick and his wife were invited to Epstein’s New York residence. During a tour of the home, Epstein showed the couple a room equipped with candles and a massage table.
When Lutnick questioned how often Epstein received massages, the financier reportedly replied that he received them Every day and the right kind of massage
. Lutnick testified that he found this specific comment off-putting
. He and his wife excused themselves and left the premises immediately following the exchange. Lutnick stated that he told his wife afterward that he intended to avoid any further personal or professional relationship with Epstein.
Contradictions Over the Caribbean Visit
The central tension in the committee’s probe involves the duration of Lutnick’s ties to Epstein. Lutnick had previously asserted to Congress that he had cut all ties with the financier in 2005 following the massage table incident. However, this narrative was complicated by a confirmation earlier this year that Lutnick visited Epstein’s private island in the Caribbean in 2012 while on a family vacation.
This seven-year gap between the supposed severance of ties and the island visit created a discrepancy that lawmakers pressed during the May 6 deposition. The transition from a total break in 2005 to a 2012 visit suggests a more prolonged or intermittent connection than Lutnick’s initial congressional statements indicated.
Congressional Friction and Committee Findings
The House Oversight Committee remained divided on the quality of Lutnick’s testimony. Democratic members of the panel characterized the Commerce Secretary’s responses as evasive
, suggesting that the inconsistencies in his timeline were a deliberate attempt to obscure the nature of his relationship with Epstein.
Republican Chair James Comer offered a more nuanced assessment. While Comer acknowledged that Lutnick’s narrative regarding the island visit wasn’t 100% truthful
, he described the overall account provided during the hearing as forthcoming
. Despite the discrepancies in the timeline, Comer stated that the committee determined Lutnick had committed no wrongdoing.
The political divide reflects a broader struggle within the committee over how to handle the Epstein investigation. The probe is not limited to Lutnick; it seeks to map the wider network of billionaires and political figures who interacted with Epstein and his co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell.
Broadening the Probe: Ted Waitt and Ghislaine Maxwell
Lutnick was not the only high-profile figure to provide testimony as part of this specific phase of the investigation. Ted Waitt, the billionaire co-founder of Gateway computers, also provided testimony to the panel. Unlike Lutnick’s focus on Epstein, Waitt’s testimony centered on his years-long relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell.
Waitt detailed his concerns regarding Maxwell’s professional involvement and her role in Epstein’s operations. The inclusion of Waitt’s testimony alongside Lutnick’s underscores the committee’s strategy to examine the peripheral support systems that allowed Epstein to maintain his social and professional standing among the global elite.
As of May 14, 2026, neither Howard Lutnick nor Ted Waitt has been accused of any wrongdoing by the victims of Jeffrey Epstein. The investigation continues to focus on the extent of the knowledge held by these associates and whether their interactions provided a shield of legitimacy for Epstein’s activities.
The fallout from this testimony likely centers on the credibility of the Commerce Secretary. For an official tasked with managing high-stakes global trade and tariff negotiations, the revelation of inconsistent testimony before Congress creates a vulnerability that political opponents may exploit. The committee has not yet indicated if further depositions or public hearings will be scheduled to resolve the contradictions in the 2005-2012 timeline.
