(Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump hit out at Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon on Tuesday, saying the bank had been wrong to predict U.S. tariffs would hurt the economy and questioned whether Solomon should lead the Wall Street institution.

The bank CEO is the latest corporate boss to become the target of Trump's ire, and the situation shows the sensitivity corporations face about tariffs. Goldman is the latest Wall Street bank to face pressure, after Trump criticized JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America over alleged debanking, or refusing to provide banking services to individuals.

In a social media post, Trump said foreign companies and governments were mostly absorbing the cost of his tariffs.

"But David Solomon and Goldman Sachs refuse to give credit where credit is due. They made a bad prediction ... on both the Market repercussion and the Tariffs themselves."

Trump said Solomon should maybe focus on being a DJ, a hobby Solomon abandoned some time ago, "and not bother running a major Financial Institution."

A Goldman Sachs spokesperson declined to comment. A spokesperson for the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Since February 1, when Trump kicked off trade wars by slapping levies on imports from Mexico, Canada, and China, at least 333 companies worldwide have reacted to the tariffs in some manner, as of August 12, according to a Reuters tracker.

While Trump did not specify which Goldman research he was referring to, the Wall Street bank - like many of its peers - has taken a bearish stance on Trump's tariffs.

In a note published on Sunday, Goldman Sachs analysts, led by chief economist Jan Hatzius, said U.S. consumers had absorbed 22% of tariff costs through June and that figure could rise to 67% if recent tariffs continue on the same trajectory.

"I think that David should go out and get himself a new economist," Trump wrote. Hatzius declined to comment.

In April, Goldman also warned sweeping U.S. tariffs would weigh on global growth and prompt the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates more aggressively than previously expected.

Tariffs are taxes levied on imported goods to typically protect domestic industries or influence trade policies. Their cost can be distributed among manufacturers, retailers, and consumers, depending on market conditions and supply-chain dynamics.

As the second-quarter earnings season progresses, companies reported a combined financial hit of $13.6 billion to $15.2 billion between July 16 and August 8 for the full year from Trump's tariffs, according to Reuters' global tariff tracker.

Despite Trump's bid to upend global trade, U.S. stocks have continued to reach new records on AI exuberance and expectations the Fed will ease borrowing costs. U.S. consumer prices increased marginally in July, new data showed Tuesday.

SENSITIVE TOPIC

Tariffs have proven to be a sensitive topic for companies and banks. A senior JPMorgan Asset Management investment strategist this year said he had held back on some of his public comments on U.S. tariffs due to concerns about the impact his full opinions would have on his colleagues and on the Wall Street bank.

Other companies have faced pressure on tariffs. The White House accused Amazon in April of a "hostile and political act" with its reported plan to list prices of goods in light of new tariffs - which the e-commerce company later said was an idea that it did not put into place. Trump in May said Walmart should "eat the tariffs" rather than raise prices.

Trump has also taken broad aim at corporate bosses and Wall Street banks for other topics. Last week, the president demanded Intel CEO Lip Bu-Tan resign due to his ties to Chinese firms, and has repeatedly targeted Apple boss Tim Cook for making U.S.-sold iPhones outside the country. 

"President Trump jawboning about banks, whether it's Goldman Sachs or Bank of America, should not hold any merit when thinking about an overall investment," said David Wagner, head of equities at Aptus Capital Advisors. Because the economic data is complex, "investors are bound to have differing opinions regarding the health of the consumer," he added.