ReportWire

Tag: finance and investments

  • Another top Silicon Valley investor is splitting off its China business as pressure mounts | CNN Business

    Another top Silicon Valley investor is splitting off its China business as pressure mounts | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: Sign up for CNN’s Meanwhile in China newsletter which explores what you need to know about the country’s rise and how it impacts the world.


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    GGV Capital, a prominent Silicon Valley venture capital firm, has become the latest big investor to break up its US and China operations into separate companies as tensions between the two countries over tech and geopolitics continue to rise.

    The firm announced Thursday that it would divide its business into two “completely independent” firms with separate new brands, which have not been revealed.

    According to the company, one side will concentrate on North America, Latin America, Europe, Israel and cross-border US-India deals, led by teams in California and New York by managing partners Glenn Solomon, Hans Tung, Jeff Richards and Oren Yunger.

    The other side will focus on China, Southeast Asia and South Asia, run from its headquarters in Singapore, by managing partners Jenny Lee and Jixun Foo.

    GGV’s existing Chinese yuan-denominated funds “will continue to be managed independently” under its Chinese brand, Jiyuan Capital, it said.

    In a statement, the firm attributed the decision to the fact that “over the last decade, the investment landscape has shifted significantly, and the operating environment has become highly complex.”

    “Against these new realities, GGV is also evolving,” it added, without elaborating further.

    The transition is expected to be completed by the end of the first quarter of next year.

    GGV Capital has approximately $9.2 billion in assets under management. The firm is known for backing tech companies around the world, such as Alibaba (BABA), Airbnb (ABNB), Slack, TikTok owner ByteDance and Chinese ride-hailing provider Didi.

    The move comes as US-China tensions continue to affect how businesses operate across the world’s top two economies.

    Last month, the Biden administration announced it would restrict investments by US venture capital and private equity firms, as well as joint ventures, in Chinese artificial intelligence, quantum computing and semiconductors.

    The executive order will exacerbate a slump in deals between the United States and China, and deliver a “major blow” to Chinese startups, analysts and investors previously told CNN.

    Asked whether the US order or wider geopolitical tensions had factored into its decision, GGV Capital declined to comment.

    The firm has recently come under greater scrutiny from US lawmakers.

    In July, a US House committee said it had sent letters to four investment firms, including GGV, “expressing serious concern and demanding information about the firms’ investments” in artificial intelligence, chips and quantum computing companies in China.

    One investment named was a GGV deal with Megvii, an AI developer. The company is best known for its facial recognition software, and has long been accused of human rights violations against Uyghurs and other members of Muslim minority groups in China’s Xinjiang region.

    Megvii was added to a US trade blacklist in 2019 over the issue and previously told CNN that there were “no grounds” for that decision.

    The ongoing pressure has already led other firms to separate their US and Chinese businesses this year.

    In June, top global venture capital firm Sequoia announced a similar decision to cordon off its operations into three entities that cover Europe and the United States; China; and India and Southeast Asia. Its China business will be run independently under its Chinese name, Hongshan.

    Leaders of the Silicon Valley firm said at the time that it had “become increasingly complex to run a decentralized global investment business.”

    In August, Dentons, a leading law firm, also said its China unit would become a standalone legal entity, in response to new Chinese regulations related to data privacy, cybersecurity and capital control.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden cancels $72 million in student loan debt for borrowers who went to for-profit Ashford University | CNN Politics

    Biden cancels $72 million in student loan debt for borrowers who went to for-profit Ashford University | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Even though President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program was blocked by the Supreme Court earlier this year, his administration is moving forward with more targeted student debt cancellations allowed under existing programs.

    The Department of Education said Wednesday that it is canceling $72 million in federal student loan debt for more than 2,300 borrowers who attended the for-profit Ashford University in California.

    Altogether, the Biden administration has approved the cancellation of more than $116 billion of student loan debt for over 3.4 million people – about 1.1 million of whom are borrowers who were misled by a for-profit college and granted relief under a program known as borrower defense to repayment.

    This student debt forgiveness program has been in place for decades and allows people to apply for debt relief if they believe their college misled or defrauded them.

    “My administration won’t stand for colleges taking advantage of hardworking students and borrowers. As long as I am president, we will never stop fighting to deliver relief to borrowers who need it – like those who attended Ashford University,” Biden said in a statement.

    The Department of Education found that Ashford University made “numerous substantial misrepresentations” to borrowers between March 1, 2009, and April 30, 2020. The school is now known as the University of Arizona Global Campus.

    The Education Department’s review was based on evidence presented in court by the California Department of Justice during its successful lawsuit against the school and its parent company at the time, Zovio.

    The court ruled in favor of the state in March 2022, ordering a penalty of more than $22.37 million – which is the subject of an ongoing appeal.

    “As the California Department of Justice proved in court, Ashford relied extensively on high-pressure and deceptive recruiting tactics to lure students,” James Kvaal, the US under secretary of education, said in a press release.

    Borrowers whose debt relief applications have been approved due to this action can expect to receive an email in September. They will not have to make any payments on the loans being discharged when monthly payments resume in October after the expiration of the pandemic-related pause.

    Last year, Biden announced a plan to cancel up to $20,000 of federal student loan debt for low- and middle-income borrowers. The proposal would have forgiven roughly $420 billion for tens of millions of borrowers, but it was knocked down by the Supreme Court and never took effect.

    The Biden administration has been successful in other efforts to provide narrower student debt relief. Not only has it made it easier to apply for debt cancellation under the borrower defense program, but it also expanded eligibility for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which wipes away outstanding debt for public sector workers after they make 10 years of qualifying payments.

    In August, the administration launched a new income-driven repayment plan, known as SAVE (Saving on a Valuable Education), that will reduce monthly payments and the amount paid back over time for eligible student loan borrowers.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact check: Republicans make false, misleading claims at first Biden impeachment inquiry hearing | CNN Politics

    Fact check: Republicans make false, misleading claims at first Biden impeachment inquiry hearing | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Republican-led House Oversight Committee is holding its first hearing Thursday in the impeachment inquiry of President Joe Biden – and Republicans on the committee have made a series of false and misleading claims, as well as some other claims that have left out critical context.

    Below is a CNN fact check. This article will be updated as additional fact checks are completed.

    Republican Rep. James Comer, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said in his opening remarks at the hearing on Thursday that the committee has uncovered how “the Bidens and their associates created over 20 shell companies” and “raked in over $20 million between 2014 and 2019.”

    Facts First: The $20 million figure is roughly accurate for Joe Biden’s family and associates, according to the bank records subpoenaed by the committee, but the phrase “the Bidens and their associates” obscures the fact that there is no public evidence to date that President Joe Biden himself received any of this money. And it’s worth noting that a large chunk of the money went to the “associates” – Hunter Biden’s business partners – not even Biden’s family itself.

    So far, none of the bank records obtained by the committee have shown any payments to Joe Biden. And a Washington Post analysis in August found that, of about $23 million in payments the committee had identified from foreign sources, nearly $7.5 million went to members of the Biden family – almost all of it to Hunter Biden – and the rest to people Hunter Biden did business with. (The Post also questioned the use of the vague phrase “shell companies,” noting that “virtually all of the companies” that had been listed by the committee at the time had “legitimate business interests” or “clearly identified business investments.”)

    A Republican aide for the House Oversight Committee disputed the Post’s analysis on Thursday, saying that bank records obtained by the panel actually show that, of $24 million in payments between 2014 and 2019, $15 million went to members of the Biden family and $9 million went to associates. CNN has reached out to the Post for comment; the committee has not publicly released the underlying bank records that would definitively show the breakdown in payments.

    The records obtained by the committee have shown that during and after Joe Biden’s tenure as vice president, Hunter Biden made millions of dollars through complex financial arrangements from private equity deals, legal fees and corporate consulting in Ukraine, China, Romania and elsewhere. Again, Republicans have not produced evidence that Joe Biden got paid in any of these arrangements.

    Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio repeated a false claim about Hunter Biden that CNN debunked when Jordan made the same claim last week.

    Jordan claimed that Hunter Biden himself said he was unqualified to sit on the board of directors of a Ukrainian energy company, Burisma Holdings.

    “Hunter Biden’s not qualified, fact number two, to sit on the board. Not my words, his words. He said he got on the board because of the brand, because of the name,” Jordan said Thursday.

    Facts First: It’s not true that Hunter Biden himself said he wasn’t qualified to sit on the Burisma board. In fact, Hunter Biden said in a 2019 interview with ABC News that “I was completely qualified to be on the board” and defended his qualifications in detail. He did acknowledge, as Jordan said, that he would “probably not” have been asked to be on the board if he was not a Biden – but he nonetheless explicitly rejected claims that he wasn’t qualified, calling them “misinformation.”

    When the ABC interviewer asked what his qualifications for the role were, he said: “Well, I was vice chairman on the board of Amtrak for five years. I was the chairman of the board of the UN World Food Programme. I was a lawyer for Boies Schiller Flexner, one of the most prestigious law firms in the world. Bottom line is that I know that I was completely qualified to be on the board to head up the corporate governance and transparency committee on the board. And that’s all that I focused on. Basically, turning a Eastern European independent natural gas company into Western standards of corporate governance.”

    When the ABC interviewer said, “You didn’t have any extensive knowledge about natural gas or Ukraine itself, though,” Biden responded, “No, but I think I had as much knowledge as anybody else that was on the board – if not more.”

    Asked if he would have been asked to be on the board if his last name wasn’t Biden, Biden said, “I don’t know. I don’t know. Probably not.” He added “there’s a lot of things” in his life that wouldn’t have happened if he had a different last name.

    A side note: Biden had served as the board chair for World Food Program USA, a nonprofit that supports the UN World Food Programme, not the UN program itself as he claimed in the interview.

    Jordan cited new documents obtained from IRS whistleblowers, made public by House Republicans on Wednesday, to argue that the Justice Department improperly blocked investigators from asking about Joe Biden in a 2020 search warrant related to Hunter Biden’s overseas dealings.

    “We learned yesterday, in the search warrant…examining Hunter Biden electronic communications, they weren’t allowed to ask about Political Figure 1,” Jordan said. “Political Figure number 1 is the big guy, is Joe Biden.”

    Facts First: This is highly misleading. The Justice Department official who gave this instruction said Joe Biden’s name shouldn’t be mentioned in the search warrant because there wasn’t any legal basis to do so. Furthermore, this occurred during Trump’s presidency, so it doesn’t prove pro-Biden meddling by the Biden-era Justice Department.

    The August 2020 email from a deputy to now-special counsel David Weiss, the Trump-appointed federal prosecutor who is leading the Hunter Biden probe, said the warrant was for “BS,” an apparent reference to Blue Star Strategies, a lobbying firm that represented Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian energy company where Hunter Biden was on the board.

    The Weiss deputy said in the email that “other than the attribution, location and identity stuff at the end, none if it is appropriate and within the scope of this warrant” and that “there should be nothing about Political Figure 1 in here,” according to emails released by House Republicans. Another document released by the GOP confirm that Joe Biden is “Political Figure 1.”

    Before obtaining a search warrant, investigators need to establish probable cause and secure approval from a judge. If federal prosecutors believed the references to Joe Biden weren’t within the legal scope of what the warrant was looking for, it wouldn’t have been appropriate or lawful to include them.

    Comer said in his opening remarks that the committee recently uncovered “two additional wires sent to Hunter Biden that originated in Beijing from Chinese nationals; this happened when Joe Biden was running for president of the United States – and Joe Biden’s home is listed on the beneficiary address.”

    Facts First: This lacks important context. Comer was correct that the committee has found evidence of two wire transfers sent to Hunter Biden from Chinese nationals in the second half of 2019, during Joe Biden’s presidential campaign, but he did not explain that Joe Biden’s home being listed as the beneficiary address doesn’t demonstrate that Joe Biden received any of the money. Nor did he explain that there may well be benign reasons for the inclusion of the address. Hunter Biden has lived at his father’s Wilmington, Delaware, home at times and listed that address on his driver’s license; Hunter Biden’s lawyer Abbe Lowell said in a statement to CNN this week that the address was listed on these transfers simply because it was the address Hunter Biden used on the bank account the money was going to, which Lowell said Hunter Biden did “because it was his only permanent address at the time.”

    “This was a documented loan (not a distribution or pay-out) that was wired from a private individual to his new bank account which listed the address on his driver’s license, his parents’ address, because it was his only permanent address at the time,” Lowell said in the statement. “We expect more occasions where the Republican chairs twist the truth to mislead people to promote their fantasy political agenda.”

    White House spokesman Ian Sams wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Wednesday: “Imagine them arguing that, if someone stayed at their parents’ house during the pandemic, listed it as their permanent address for work, and got a paycheck, the parents somehow also worked for the employer…It’s bananas…Yet this is what extreme House Republicans have sunken to.”

    Comer told CNN this week his panel is trying to put together a timeline on where Hunter Biden was living around the time of the transfers, which occurred in July 2019 and August 2019. Joe Biden was a candidate in the Democratic presidential primary at the time.

    Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina claimed at the Thursday hearing, “We already know the president took bribes from Burisma,” a Ukrainian energy company where Hunter Biden sat on the board of directors.

    Facts First: Mace’s claim is false; we do not “already know” that Joe Biden took any bribe. The claim about a bribe from Burisma is a completely unproven allegation. The FBI informant who relayed the claim to the FBI in 2020 was merely reporting something he said he had been told by Burisma’s chief executive. Later in the hearing, a witness called by the committee Republicans, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, called “the bribery allegation” the most concerning piece of evidence he had heard today – but he immediately cautioned that “you have to only take that so far” given that it is “a secondhand account.”

    According to an internal FBI document made public by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa earlier this year over the strong objections of the FBI, the informant said in 2020 – when Donald Trump was president – that the CEO of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, had claimed in 2016 that he made a $5 million payment to “one Biden” and another $5 million payment to “another Biden.” But the FBI document did not contain any proof for the claim, and the document said the informant was “not able to provide any further opinion as to the veracity” of the claim.

    Republicans have tried to boost the credibility the allegation by saying it was in an FBI document and that the FBI had viewed the informant as highly credible. But the document merely memorialized the information provided by the informant; it does not demonstrate that the information is true. And Hunter Biden’s former business associate Devon Archer testified to the House Oversight Committee earlier this year that he had not been aware of any such payments to the Bidens; Archer characterized Zlochevsky’s reported claim as an example of the Ukrainian businessman embellishing his influence.

    Rep. Tim Burchett, a Tennessee Republican, falsely claimed that Hunter Biden never paid taxes on his foreign income.

    He said Hunter Biden “failed to pay any taxes” on the millions of dollars he got from Ukrainian companies, and that this shows how “the Biden family doesn’t have to” pay taxes.

    “Who’s going to write the check for the money Hunter Biden didn’t pay?” Burchett asked, adding that “hardworking Americans” would end up footing the bill.

    Facts First: This is false. Hunter Biden repeatedly missed IRS deadlines, and his conduct was so egregious that federal investigators believe it was criminal, but he eventually belatedly paid all of his back taxes, plus interest and penalties, to the tune of about $2 million.

    Documents from Hunter Biden’s criminal cases indicate that he repeatedly missed tax deadlines, even though he had the funds and was repeatedly warned by his accountant and business partners. He was prepared to plead guilty to two misdemeanors in July, for failing to pay taxes on time in 2017 and 2018, before the plea deal collapsed.

    But there’s a difference between failing to pay taxes on time and failing to pay taxes at all. In 2021, while the criminal investigation was still underway and before any charges were filed, Hunter Biden paid roughly $2 million to the IRS to cover all the back taxes, plus penalties and interest.

    Hunter Biden was able to make the massive payment thanks to a roughly $2 million loan from a friend and attorney who has been supporting him during his legal troubles, according to court filings.

    Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York accused a Republican member of the committee, Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida, of cutting out “critical context” from an image of a purported text message that Donalds displayed earlier in the Thursday hearing. Ocasio-Cortez also said that Donalds had displayed a “fabricated image.”

    The dispute was over an image Donalds showed of a purported 2018 text message from the president’s brother James Biden to the president’s son Hunter Biden – provided by IRS whistleblowers and released by House Republicans on Wednesday – in which James Biden purportedly wrote, “This can work, you need a safe harbor. I can work with you father [sic] alone !! We as usual just need several months of his help for this to work.”

    After showing the image, Donalds asked a witness at the committee, “If you saw a text message like this between the president’s brother and the president’s son, wouldn’t you be concerned about them trying to give plausible deniability for the president of the United States to not have any knowledge of said business dealings?”

    Facts First: Donalds didn’t invent the James Biden text message, but Ocasio-Cortez was correct that Donalds left out critical context – specifically, context that showed there was no sign that the purported text exchange between James Biden and Hunter Biden was about business dealings. The information released by House Republicans this week appeared to show that James Biden’s purported text about getting “help” from Joe Biden came in direct response to a purported Hunter Biden text saying he could not afford alimony, school tuition for his children, food and gas “w/o [without] Dad.” Donalds did not display this purported Hunter Biden text at the Thursday hearing.

    In other words, when James Biden purportedly mentioned the possibility of several months of help from Joe Biden, he gave no indication he was referring to some sort of business transaction, much less the foreign transactions that House Republicans have been focused on in their investigations into the president. But Donalds didn’t make that clear.

    With that said, Ocasio-Cortez herself could have been clearer about what she meant when she claimed the image Donalds showed was “fabricated.”

    The contents of the purported James Biden text Donalds displayed were not made up, according to the IRS whistleblowers. What appeared to be novel was the graphic Donalds used; he showed the text in a form that made it look like a screenshot from an iPhone text conversation, with white words over a blue background bubble. The House Republican spreadsheet that the words were taken from did not include any such graphics, and, again, it did include the preceding purported Hunter Biden message that Donalds didn’t show.

    Republican Rep. Pat Fallon of Texas said at the Thursday hearing, “In an interview back in 2019 with The New Yorker, even Hunter admitted that he talked to his dad about business, specifically Burisma.”

    Facts First: This needs context. The 2019 New Yorker article in question reported that Hunter Biden said he recalled Joe Biden discussing Burisma with him “just once” in a brief exchange that consisted of this: “Dad said, ‘I hope you know what you are doing,’ and I said, ‘I do.’”

    It’s fair for Fallon to say that this counts as Joe Biden discussing business with his son, but Fallon did not mention how brief and limited Hunter Biden said the purported discussion was.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How Biden’s SAVE student loan repayment plan can lower your bill | CNN Politics

    How Biden’s SAVE student loan repayment plan can lower your bill | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    While the Supreme Court struck down President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program in late June, a separate and significant change to the federal student loan system is moving ahead.

    Eligible borrowers can now enroll in a new income-driven repayment plan that could lower their monthly bills and reduce the amount they pay back over the lifetime of their loans.

    If borrowers apply this summer, the changes to their bills would take effect before payments resume in October after the yearslong pandemic pause.

    Once the plan, which Biden is calling SAVE (Saving on a Valuable Education), is fully phased in next year, some people will see their monthly bills cut in half and remaining debt canceled after making at least 10 years of payments.

    Unlike Biden’s blocked one-time forgiveness program, the new repayment plan will provide benefits for both current and future borrowers who sign up for it.

    But the benefits will come at a cost to the government. Estimates vary, depending on how many borrowers end up enrolling in the plan, ranging from $138 billion to $475 billion over 10 years. As a comparison, Biden’s student loan forgiveness program was expected to cost about $400 billion.

    The SAVE repayment plan has gone through a formal rulemaking process at the Department of Education. The agency has previously created several other income-driven repayment plans in the same manner without facing a successful legal challenge.

    Some parts of the SAVE plan will be implemented this summer and others will take effect in July 2024. Here’s what borrowers need to know.

    Currently, there are several different kinds of income-driven repayment plans for borrowers with federal student loans. The new SAVE plan will essentially replace one of those, known as REPAYE (Revised Pay As You Earn), while the others are phased out for new borrowers.

    Under these plans, payments are based on a borrower’s income and family size, regardless of how much outstanding student debt is owed.

    There is also a forgiveness component. After making at least 10 years of payments, a borrower’s remaining balance is wiped away.

    Borrowers must have federally held student loans to qualify for the SAVE repayment plan. These include Direct subsidized, unsubsidized and consolidated loans, as well as PLUS loans made to graduate students.

    Parents who took out a federal PLUS loan to help their child pay for college are not eligible for the new repayment plan.

    Borrowers with Federal Family Education Loans, known as FFEL, or Perkins Loans that are held by a commercial lender rather than the government will need to consolidate into a Direct loan in order to qualify.

    Private student loans do not qualify for the new SAVE repayment plan or any other federal repayment plan.

    Borrowers can apply for the SAVE plan by submitting a recently updated application for income-driven repayment plans found here.

    The application may be available intermittently during an initial beta testing period, according to the Department of Education. If the application is not available, try again later.

    Applications submitted during the beta period will not need to be resubmitted once a full website launches later this summer.

    Borrowers can expect to receive an email confirmation after applying.

    People who are already enrolled in the REPAYE repayment plan will be automatically switched to the SAVE plan.

    Borrowers can log in to StudentAid.gov and go to their My Aid page to see what repayment plan they are enrolled in.

    The Department of Education says that it will process applications submitted this summer before payments resume in October.

    “It may take your servicer a few weeks to process your request, because they will need to obtain documentation of your income and family size,” according to the department’s website.

    Under the SAVE plan, monthly payments can be as small as $0.

    Other income-driven repayment plans already offer a $0 monthly payment for some borrowers. But the new SAVE plan lowers the qualifying threshold.

    A single borrower earning $32,800 or less or a borrower with a family of four earning $67,500 or less will see their payments set at $0 if enrolled in SAVE.

    Increase in protected income threshold: Like in existing income-driven repayment plans, a borrower’s discretionary income, generally what’s left after paying for necessities like housing, food and clothing, will be shielded from student loan payments.

    The new SAVE plan recalculates discretionary income so that it’s equal to the difference between a borrower’s adjusted gross income and 225% of the poverty level. Existing income-driven plans calculate discretionary income as the difference between income and 150% of the poverty level.

    This change will result in lower payments for borrowers.

    Interest limit: Under the new payment plan, unpaid interest will not accrue if a borrower makes a full monthly payment.

    That means that a borrower’s balance won’t increase even if the monthly payment doesn’t cover the monthly interest. For example: If $50 in interest accumulates each month and a borrower has a $30 payment, the remaining $20 would not be charged.

    Lower payments for married borrowers: Married borrowers who file their taxes separately will no longer be required to include their spouse’s income in their payment calculation for SAVE. This could lower monthly payments for two-income households.

    Automatic recertification: Borrowers will now be able to allow the Department of Education to access their latest tax return. This will make the application process easier because borrowers won’t have to manually provide income or family size information. It will also allow the department to automatically recertify borrowers for the payment plan on an annual basis.

    Cut payments in half: Payments on loans borrowed for undergraduate school will be reduced from 10% to 5% of discretionary income.

    Borrowers who have loans from both undergraduate and graduate school will pay a weighted average of between 5% and 10% of their income based upon the original principal balances of their loans.

    For example, a borrower with $20,000 from their undergraduate education and $60,000 from graduate school will pay 8.75% of their income, according to a fact sheet provided by the Biden administration.

    Shorter time to forgiveness: Currently, borrowers who pay for 20 or 25 years under an income-driven repayment plan will see their remaining balance wiped away.

    Under the new SAVE plan, those who borrowed $12,000 or less will see their debt forgiven after paying for just 10 years. Every additional $1,000 borrowed above that amount would add one year of monthly payments to the required time a borrower must pay.

    Borrowers who consolidate their loans will receive partial credit for their previous payments toward forgiveness.

    Borrowers will also automatically receive credit toward forgiveness for certain periods of deferment and forbearance, as well be given the option to make additional “catch-up” payments to get credit for all other periods of deferment or forbearance.

    Automatically enroll struggling borrowers: Borrowers who are 75 days late on their payments will be automatically enrolled in the best income-driven plan for them, as long as they have agreed to allow the Department of Education to securely access their tax information.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden’s student loan policies continue to face legal challenges | CNN Politics

    Biden’s student loan policies continue to face legal challenges | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Legal challenges are continuing to target some of President Joe Biden’s student loan policies.

    While the president’s major student loan forgiveness program was blocked by the Supreme Court in late June, the Biden administration is also facing lawsuits over some of its other policy changes aimed at making it easier for borrowers to pay back their loans.

    On Monday, the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked new provisions that were meant to be implemented in July, which would make it easier for borrowers to get their debts erased when they’re misled or defrauded by their college under a rule known as borrower defense to repayment.

    The rule has been in place for decades. But the lawsuit targets new provisions – including one allowing for automatic debt discharges a year after a college’s closure date and another that bans colleges from requiring borrowers to agree to mandatory arbitration – which are now blocked.

    The emergency injunction request was made by Career Colleges and Schools of Texas, a group of for-profit universities. The appeals court order did not explain the reasoning for the decision but said that the case will be heard on November 6.

    Student loan borrowers may still submit applications for debt relief under the borrower defense rule during this time, but the Department of Education “will not adjudicate or process affected applications under the new regulations while the court’s order is in place,” according to the agency’s website.

    Aaron Ament, president of the nonprofit National Student Legal Defense Network, warned that “countless students are at risk of being taken advantage of by higher ed profiteers” until the protections are restored.

    Meanwhile, in a separate lawsuit filed last week, two conservative groups sued to stop the Biden administration from carrying out a one-time adjustment to some borrowers’ accounts, which was aimed at more accurately counting certain payments made previously under an income-driven repayment plan.

    These plans calculate payments based on a borrower’s income and family size – regardless of the person’s total outstanding debt. Generally, they lower monthly payments to help borrowers avoid defaulting on their loans and wipe away remaining balances after qualifying payments are made for 20 to 25 years.

    What the administration has referred to as “fixes” are expected to result in the cancellation of $39 billion worth of federal student loan debt for 804,000 borrowers, according to the Department of Education.

    The lawsuit, which was filed by the New Civil Liberties Alliance on behalf of the conservative groups Cato Institute and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, argues that one-time adjustment “is substantively and procedurally unlawful” – similar, it says, to the broader student loan forgiveness program struck down by the Supreme Court.

    The Department of Education announced in July – weeks after the other forgiveness program was blocked – that it would begin to notify the 804,000 borrowers of their forthcoming debt cancellation.

    But the one-time adjustment had been planned for more than a year. First announced in April 2022, the move was meant to help borrowers whose payments were miscounted and were already eligible for debt relief under an income-driven repayment plan.

    The changes followed a Government Accountability Office report that found that the Department of Education had trouble tracking borrowers’ payments and hadn’t done enough to ensure that all eligible borrowers receive the forgiveness to which they are entitled. In fact, 7,700 loans in repayment, or about 11% of loans analyzed, could have potentially already been eligible for forgiveness.

    In a statement sent to CNN, the Department of Education said the lawsuit “is nothing but a desperate attempt from right wing special interests to keep hundreds of thousands of borrowers in debt, even though these borrowers have earned the forgiveness that is promised through income-driven repayment plans.”

    This latest legal challenge does not appear to immediately impact the Biden administration’s new income-driven repayment plan known as SAVE (Saving on a Valuable Education), which launched last week.

    Once the SAVE plan is fully phased in, which is expected to happen next year, some borrowers could see their monthly bills cut in half and remaining debt canceled after making at least 10 years of payments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Neuralink, Elon Musk’s brain implant startup, raises $280 million from Peter Thiel’s VC fund | CNN Business

    Neuralink, Elon Musk’s brain implant startup, raises $280 million from Peter Thiel’s VC fund | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Elon Musk’s biotechnology startup Neuralink raised $280 million in a fundraising round, the company announced Monday via X, the Musk-owned social media platform formerly known as Twitter.

    The Series D round was led by Founders Fund, a San Francisco-based VC firm established by Peter Thiel, the controversial billionaire who was also a cofounder at PayPal.

    “We’re extremely excited about this next chapter at Neuralink,” the company wrote.

    The brain chip startup wants to use implants to connect your brain to a computer, a goal Musk has been working on for five years. The company so far has only tested on animals and faced scrutiny after a monkey died in project testing in 2022 as part of efforts to get the animal to play Pong, a computer game.

    Macaque monkeys have been used in testing by Neuralink as the company has been developing Bluetooth-enabled implantable chips — inserted into the monkey’s brains — that ​the company says can communicate with computers via a small receiver.

    The funding news comes months after Musk announced the company was moving towards human trials. The billionaire said at a December recruiting event that Neuralink has submitted “most” of its paperwork to the US Food and Drug Administration and could begin testing on humans within six months.

    But employees have said the company is rushing to market, resulting in careless animal deaths and a federal investigation, according to a December report by Reuters.

    Before Neuralink’s brain implants are mass-produced and hit the broader market, they’ll need regulatory approval. The FDA put out a paper in 2021 mapping out the agency’s initial thoughts on brain-computer interface devices, noting the field is “progressing rapidly.”

    A tweet by Neuralink Monday announced they were hiring and invited those interested to “join in on engineering challenges to restore vision and mobility.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US regulator seeks court order to compel Elon Musk to testify about his Twitter acquisition | CNN Business

    US regulator seeks court order to compel Elon Musk to testify about his Twitter acquisition | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    The US Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday applied for a court order to force Elon Musk to testify in an ongoing probe related to his acquisition of Twitter and public disclosures he made in connection with the deal, according to court filings.

    The filing Thursday in San Francisco federal court seeks a judge’s order requiring Musk to testify, alleging “blatant refusal to comply” with an earlier SEC subpoena.

    X, the company formerly known as Twitter, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The SEC action is the latest turn in a long-running inquiry into whether Musk fully complied with his disclosure obligations when he began acquiring large amounts of Twitter stock, prior to his deal to buy the company. And it underscores years of friction between Musk and the agency over his public comments on numerous matters involving his companies.

    Musk began buying up large amounts of Twitter stock in early 2022, and he revealed on April 4 of that year that he had become the company’s largest shareholder. Later that month, Musk inked a deal to buy the platform for $44 billion and — after a monthslong legal battle attempting to exit the deal — officially closed the acquisition in October of last year. Musk has faced a number of legal challenges related to his Twitter acquisition in the months since his takeover.

    Musk testified twice as part of the SEC’s investigation in July 2022, according to the agency.

    Starting that same month, Musk produced “hundreds of documents” to federal investigators working on the probe, “including documents Musk authored,” according to a declaration by an SEC attorney filed alongside the agency’s court request.

    The SEC served Musk with a subpoena to testify again in the matter in May 2023, according to the court filing. The current subpoena at issue seeks evidence and testimony from Musk that the SEC does not yet possess, the agency said.

    Despite previously agreeing to testify on September 15 and rescheduling the testimony once, Musk “abruptly notified the SEC” two days before his scheduled appearance to say he would not be showing up, the filing states.

    The SEC attempted to negotiate with Musk to find alternative dates later this fall, according to court documents.

    “These good faith efforts were met with Musk’s blanket refusal to appear for testimony,” it adds.

    “The subpoena with which Musk failed to comply relates to an ongoing nonpublic investigation by the SEC,” the filing continued, “regarding whether, among other things, Musk violated various provisions of the federal securities laws in connection with (1) his 2022 purchases of Twitter, Inc (“Twitter”) stock, and (2) his 2022 statements and SEC filings relating to Twitter.”

    When Musk informed the SEC he would not be appearing to testify, his lawyer, Alex Spiro, wrote to the agency on September 13, saying Musk had “already sat for testimony twice in this matter” and that “enough is enough.”

    Spiro’s letter, which was included as an exhibit in the SEC’s court filings, accused regulators of seeking Musk’s testimony in bad faith and attempting to waste Musk’s time.

    In addition, Spiro claimed that the recent release of Walter Isaacson’s biography of Musk would interfere because it contained “new information potentially relevant to this matter” that would take time for both sides to digest.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China is huge for chip designer Arm. That’s a risk for its new investors | CNN Business

    China is huge for chip designer Arm. That’s a risk for its new investors | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    As British chip designer Arm prepares to raise about $5 billion in an initial public offering (IPO) on Thursday, its China business has become a serious point of concern.

    The SoftBank-owned firm used many pages of its IPO prospectus to warn investors of risks related to its exposure to China at a time of rising tension between Washington and Beijing over chip technology.

    Its regulatory filing last month revealed that a quarter of its sales come from China, through an unusual relationship with an entity it does not control and with which it has a complex history.

    Arm China is “an entity that operates independently of us and is our single largest customer,” the company said in its prospectus. “Neither we nor SoftBank Group control the operations of Arm China.”

    Arm, which is based in Cambridge, added that the scale of its business in China made it “particularly susceptible to economic and political risks,” which could be worsened by tensions between the country and the United States or the United Kingdom.

    The company has long been vulnerable in this area, which may have already contributed to a lower market valuation than SoftBank was expecting.

    Arm blamed an economic slowdown in China as well as “factors related to export control and national security matters” for slower growth in royalty revenues from China in its fiscal year to March. Total revenue from China did increase in that period, however.

    Royalties are hugely significant for Arm, which gets a fee from each chip developed using its products. The company relies on royalties and licensing for most of its income.

    Arm said Wednesday it priced its shares at $51 each, raising as much as $4.9 billion. The tally could rise to $5.2 billion if banks exercise an option to buy additional shares, valuing the chip designer at as much as $54.5 billion.

    That’s less than the $64 billion valuation implied when SoftBank bought a remaining 25% stake in the company from its Vision Fund unit just last month.

    Arm has declined to comment.

    Concerns about China are likely to have been “built into IPO pricing expectations already, although a worst-case scenario of increased US sanctions [or] trade restrictions probably is not,” Kirk Boodry, an investment advisor at Astris Advisory, a Japanese investment research firm, told CNN.

    Arm was publicly listed until 2016, when Japan’s SoftBank bought it for $32 billion.

    Four years later, SoftBank tried to sell Arm to Nvidia for $40 billion, in what would have been the biggest chip deal of all time. But it didn’t pass muster with global antitrust regulators, and was called off in February 2022.

    Now, Arm’s return to the stock market is being closely watched as it promises to be the biggest US IPO since 2021.

    SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son has touted it as an AI company that could have “exponential growth,” and promised that ChatGPT-like services will eventually be offered on Arm-designed machines.

    “The value of chips, and Arm’s technology, has maybe never been more in demand from the global economy,” said Kyle Stanford, lead venture capital analyst at PitchBook.

    But Arm is a middleman in the semiconductor industry, which is a key source of tension in US-China relations. Both countries are racing to boost their prowess in the sector, and each side has recently enacted export controls aimed at limiting the other’s capacity.

    “Chip tensions will never go away,” Stanford argued. “Political and regulatory pressure is likely to increase.”

    On Tuesday, former US Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Jay Clayton told US lawmakers that large public companies with major exposure to China should be prompted to disclose specific risks associated with the country, “and what type of scenario planning they have done in the event of abrupt decoupling.”

    Although US officials have insisted that America is not seeking to decouple from China, they have pointed to the importance of reducing its reliance on the world’s second largest economy.

    In its filing, Arm said it held just a “4.8% indirect ownership interest in Arm China,” through a 10% non-voting stake in a SoftBank-controlled entity that owns less than half of the Chinese company.

    While such convoluted corporate structures aren’t unique in China, “in my view, it is very problematic,” said Ivana Delevska, founder and chief investment officer of asset manager Spear Invest.

    “Investors of other companies are just waking up to this fact in light of increased tensions,” she added.

    Arm has had trouble with Arm China before. In its filing, it said the business has a record of late payments.

    “Although these historical issues did not have a material impact on our operations, any future failure to pay us the amounts we are owed … could have a material adverse effect on our business,” Arm said.

    Arm China has also been subject to a legal battle with its former CEO, Allen Wu.

    Since April 2022, Wu and entities effectively controlled by him have lodged several lawsuits in Chinese courts against Arm China, “seeking to challenge certain aspects of Arm China’s corporate governance and the actions of Arm China’s board of directors,” Arm said in its filing.

    As of August, the cases had been resolved in favor of Arm China, it said, but the outcome could still be appealed. potentially hurting the British firm in the future.

    That hasn’t stopped many of the biggest names in global tech from jumping on board.

    Companies including Apple (AAPL), Google (GOOGL), Nvidia (NVDA), AMD (AMD), Samsung and TSMC (TSM) have indicated interest in acting as cornerstone investors in the offering, according to a filing last week.

    Delevska said the interest reflected Arm’s strong position in the industry and had helped to prop up its overall valuation.

    “I believe it is good timing for the IPO,” she added. “Investors will just have to price in the China risk.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Nevada GOP Senate candidate raised money to help other candidates — the funds mostly paid down his old campaign’s debt instead | CNN Politics

    Nevada GOP Senate candidate raised money to help other candidates — the funds mostly paid down his old campaign’s debt instead | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sam Brown created a political action committee to “help elect Republicans” but most of its funds were spent paying down debt from his failed previous campaign. The group donated less than 7% of its funds to the candidates it was set up to support, according to campaign finance records – a move one campaign finance expert likened to using the PAC as a “slush fund.”

    Brown formed the Duty First PAC in July 2022, saying the organization would help Republicans take back Congress. A month earlier, Brown lost the Republican Senate primary to Adam Laxalt after raising an impressive $4.4 million for his upstart campaign, but his campaign was left with more than $300,000 in debt.

    Now Brown is running again in Nevada as a top recruit of Senate Republicans.

    A former Army captain, Brown made lofty promises when launching his PAC, Duty First.

    “With your support, we will: Defeat the socialist Democrats. Help elect Republicans who believe in accountability to the Constitution and service to the people. Stand with the #DutyFirst movement, chip in with a grassroots contribution today,” he said in a tweet announcing the PAC.

    “We’ll ensure that the socialist agenda of the Democrats does not win in November, and the Republicans continue to be held accountable to defending our Constitution and defending our conservative principles. The country’s counting on us,” Brown said in an accompanying video for the PAC’s launch in July 2022.

    Since then, the PAC raised a small amount – just $91,500 – and used the majority of their money – $55,000 – to repay debt from Brown’s failed campaign for Senate, which Brown had transferred over. Campaign finance experts told CNN this falls into a legal gray area.

    Of the $90,000 spent so far, just $6,000 made its way to five Nevadan Republican candidates’ committees. An additional payment for $1,000 was listed as going directly to congressional candidate Mark Robertson as a contribution but lists the amount as being directly paid to the candidate at his home – not to his committee.

    Instead, the Duty First PAC made over a dozen debt payments. A combined $23,000 was spent on website and software services used by Brown’s Senate campaign. Another $11,275 went towards paying down the failed campaign’s credit card, with an additional $3,000 spent on credit card interest fees.

    Duty First paid off over $1,200 in credit card debt accrued at a country club near where Brown previously lived in Dallas, Texas, and ran for the state house in 2014. A spokesman for the Brown campaign said in an email to CNN the “facility fee” charges were for a fundraiser “hosted by supporters of Sam’s campaign.”

    The most recent FEC filing shows Brown is now trying to dispute over $80,000 in remaining debt from the previous campaign, which the spokesman said “will be resolved in due course.” A majority of the disputed debt owed is for direct mail services used by Brown’s previous campaign.

    Duty First PAC is also responsible for eventually repaying Brown $70,000 that he personally loaned his committees.

    The spokesperson for Brown’s campaign defended the PAC’s spending.

    “The PAC promised to support conservative candidates in Nevada, and it did exactly that by donating to every Republican candidate in Nevada’s federal races during the 2022 general election,” they said.

    According to a CNN analysis of Duty First PAC’s FEC filings, of all the money raised, less than 7% went to candidates. When considering Brown’s personal loans, debt the PAC took on from Brown’s campaign, and expenditures, fewer than 2% of the PAC’s funds went towards candidates in 2022

    The money not spent on debt went to a variety of consulting and digital marketing expenses. The PAC spent $1,090 on a storage unit, more than it donated to the winning campaign of Republican Rep. Mark Amodei.

    Despite this, Brown played up his PAC’s donations to candidates in interviews and in posts on social media.

    “I have pledged to help defeat the Democrats in Nevada,” he added in an email, announcing the launch of the PAC.

    The PAC’s donations were from grassroots donors, who typically donated $50 or less.

    Just a day before the 2022 midterm election, Brown announced donations to several candidates running for office in Nevada.

    Records with the FEC show the 2022 donations to House candidates were made on October 31, while the donation to Laxalt’s Senate campaign was made in early September.

    “The Duty First PAC proudly supports conservatives fighting for Nevada,” he said in a tweet after making the donations on November 7, 2022. “This past week, we donated funds to the four Republicans working to take back the House. Join us in supporting them right now!”

    Later, following the 2022 midterms in a late November interview on a local Nevada radio station, Brown played up the PAC’s work and said it would continue to work between election cycles.

    “Duty First is here to kind of work between the cycles, so to speak and help candidates who are running,” Brown said. “In fact this cycle, you know, we had raised money and supported all of our Republican federal candidates, Adam Laxalt, as well as the four Congressionals.”

    “And so, it’s our way of pushing back against the Democrat agenda and their representation,” Brown said. “But, also, it gives Duty First supporters and people that believe in our mission, a sort of platform to remind Republicans what we’re about.”

    Campaign finance experts CNN spoke to said Brown marketing the Duty First PAC as a way for people to financially support conservative candidates was a “creative way” for Brown to pay off old campaign debts behind the scenes.

    “It creates a situation where contributors to a PAC may think that PAC is doing one thing, which is supporting political candidates, when in fact what it’s doing is being used to pay off long standing debts from a previous campaign,” said Stephen Spaulding, vice president of policy at Common Cause and former advisor to an FEC commissioner.

    Since the FEC has not issued an advisory opinion that would “apply to that candidate and any other candidate that has a very similar situation,” Spaulding said transferring debts between campaign committees and PACs is a gray area in campaign finance law. In Brown’s case, his candidate committee was rolled into a PAC, Sam Brown PAC, that was associated with his candidacy, which the campaign finance experts agree is a common maneuver for candidates. But what struck the experts as odd was that Brown terminated the Sam Brown PAC, and transferred his outstanding loans and debts to the Duty First PAC.

    Brown’s 2024 candidate committee, Sam Brown for Nevada, is an entirely new committee with its own FEC filings, despite having the same name as his previous committee. This committee, formed in July 2023, is not affiliated with the Duty First PAC, nor is it obligated to pay off the remaining $271,000 in previous campaign debt and loans.

    “Unfortunately, Sam Brown, like too many other politicians, has given almost no money to other candidates and, instead, has used his PAC as a slush fund,” said Paul S. Ryan, executive director at Funders’ Committee for Civic Participation. “Many donors would understandably be upset if they learned their money wasn’t used to help elect other candidates like Brown – the reason they made their contributions,” he added.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New York AG accuses crypto firms of deceiving investors in $1 billion fraud | CNN Business

    New York AG accuses crypto firms of deceiving investors in $1 billion fraud | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The fallout from the colossal implosion of Sam Bankman-Fried’s crypto business is still rippling through the digital asset industry nearly a year later.

    On Thursday, New York’s attorney general filed a lawsuit against three digital asset firms that were caught up in the collapse of Bankman-Fried’s empire last fall — Gemini Trust, Genesis Global Capital and Digital Currency Group, parent company of Genesis. The lawsuit accused the companies of lying to investors and covering up more than $1 billion in losses.

    The AG’s office said that an investigation found Gemini, the crypto firm founded by Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, deceived investors about significant risks associated with a lending service it ran jointly with Genesis. The program, called Gemini Earn, marketed itself as a low-risk investment in which customers could lend crypto assets to Genesis while earning interest payments as high as 8%.

    “These cryptocurrency companies lied to investors,” Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. “And it was middle-class investors who suffered as a result.” At least 29,000 New Yorkers were among the 230,000 investors whose money was lost, James said.

    James’ lawsuit is the latest effort among US officials to crack down on the trillion-dollar crypto industry, which for years has operated in the shadows of traditional financial regulation. Crypto advocates argue that regulators have dragged their feet in establishing guidelines for digital assets, which they believe are distinct from traditional securities like stocks or bonds.

    In the immediate aftermath of the FTX crash, Genesis froze customer redemptions in its lending unit, citing market turmoil. The lending unit later filed for bankruptcy.

    According to the latest lawsuit, Gemini knew that Genesis’ loans were risky and, at one point, “highly concentrated” with Bankman-Fried’s crypto trading house Alameda Research. Bankman-Fried is currently on trial in federal court in New York, where he has pleaded not guilty to seven counts of fraud and conspiracy.

    “Gemini hid the risks of investing with Genesis, and Genesis lied to the public about its losses,” James said.

    The lawsuit also names former Genesis CEO Soichiro “Michael” Moro and Digital Currency Group CEO Barry Silbert.

    Gemini’s owners, the Winklevoss twins, have said Genesis owed more than $900 million to some 340,000 customers using the Earn program.

    The AG’s lawsuit follows another civil action brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which in January sued Genesis and Gemini for offering unregistered securities through the Earn product.

    Gemini responded to the latest suit Thursday with a statement on X (formerly Twitter), claiming that Gemini itself was the victim of a “massive fraud.”

    “The NY AG’s lawsuit confirms what we’ve been saying all along” — that Gemini, its customers and other creditors were lied to about Genesis’ finances. But the company said it “wholly” disagrees with the lawsuit.

    “Blaming a victim for being defrauded and lied to makes no sense and we look forward to defending ourselves against this inconsistent position.”

    A Genesis spokesperson said that “while there is no basis for the NYAG’s claims against Genesis, we have been cooperating with all authorities and intend to continue doing so.”

    “Genesis has not violated the law and continues to focus on maximizing recoveries for creditors in its Chapter 11 cases,” the spokesperson added.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fortnite players can now apply for a portion of its $245 million FTC settlement | CNN Business

    Fortnite players can now apply for a portion of its $245 million FTC settlement | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Millions of Fortnite users can now claim their small part of the $245 million that the game’s parent company agreed to pay as part of a settlement with the US Federal Trade Commission.

    Epic Games in December settled allegations with the FTC that it used deceptive tactics that drove users to make unwanted purchases in the multiplayer shooter game that became wildly popular with younger generations a few years ago. The FTC said Tuesday it has now opened the claims process for the more than 37 million potentially affected users who could qualify for compensation.

    Epic Games agreed in December to pay a total of $520 million to settle US government allegations that it misled millions of players, including children and teens, into making unintended purchases and that it violated a landmark federal children’s privacy law.

    In one settlement, Epic agreed to pay $275 million to the US government to resolve claims that it violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act by gathering the personal information of kids under the age of 13 without first receiving their parents’ consent. In a second and separate settlement, Epic also agreed to pay $245 million as refunds to consumers who were allegedly harmed by user-interface design choices that the FTC claimed were deceptive.

    The FTC said in a statement Tuesday that the Fortnite maker “used dark patterns and other deceptive practices to trick players into making unwanted purchases” and also “made it easy for children to rack up charges without parental consent.”

    (“Dark patterns” refer to the gently coercive design tactics used by countless websites and apps that critics say are used to manipulate peoples’ digital behaviors.)

    The FTC is now notifying users who may be eligible to receive part of that $245 million settlement fund. Affected users may receive an email from the FTC over the next month with a claim number, or they can go directly to the settlement site and file a claim using their Epic account ID.

    Here’s who can apply: Users who were charged in-game currency for items they didn’t want between January 2017 and September 2022, parents whose children made charges to their credit cards on Fortnite between January 2017 and November 2018 or users whose accounts were locked sometime between January 2017 and September 2022 after they complained to their credit card company about wrongful charges. Claimants must be 18 years old; for younger users, their parents can submit a claim on their behalf.

    Users have until January 17, 2024, to submit a claim to be included in the settlement class. It is not yet clear how much the individual settlement payments will be.

    Epic’s agreement with the FTC also prohibits the company from using dark patterns or charging consumers without their consent, and forbids Epic from locking players out of their accounts in response to users’ chargeback requests with credit card companies disputing unwanted charges.

    Epic said in a blog post in December when it reached the agreement that, “no developer creates a game with the intention of ending up here.” It added, “We accepted this agreement because we want Epic to be at the forefront of consumer protection and provide the best experience for our players.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US watchdog teases crackdown on data brokers that sell Americans’ personal information | CNN Business

    US watchdog teases crackdown on data brokers that sell Americans’ personal information | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The US government plans to rein in the vast data broker industry with new, privacy-focused regulations that aim to safeguard millions of Americans’ personal information from data breaches, violent criminals and even artificial intelligence chatbots.

    The coming proposal by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would extend existing regulations that govern credit reports, arrest records and other data to what the agency describes as the “surveillance industry,” or the sprawling economy of businesses that traffic in increasingly digitized personal information.

    The potential rules, which are not yet public or final, could bar data brokers from selling certain types of consumer information — including a person’s income or their criminal and payment history — except in specific circumstances, the CFPB said.

    The push could also see new restrictions on the sale of personal information such as Social Security numbers, names and addresses, which the CFPB said data brokers often buy from the major credit reporting bureaus to create their own profiles on individual consumers.

    Issued under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the regulations would seek to ensure that data brokers selling that sensitive information do so only for valid financial purposes such as employment background checks or credit decisions, and not for unrelated purposes that may allow third parties to use the data to, for example, train AI algorithms or chatbots, the CFPB said.

    The announcement follows an agency study into the data broker industry this year that found widespread concerns about how consumer data is being collected, used and shared. The inquiry received numerous submissions from the public warning about the disproportionate risks that unregulated data sharing can have on minorities, seniors, immigrants and victims of domestic violence.

    “Reports about monetization of sensitive information — everything from the financial details of members of the U.S. military to lists of specific people experiencing dementia — are particularly worrisome when data is powering ‘artificial intelligence’ and other automated decision-making about our lives,” CFPB Director Rohit Chopra said in a statement. “The CFPB will be taking steps to ensure that modern-day data brokers in the surveillance industry know that they cannot engage in illegal collection and sharing of our data.”

    The CFPB’s proposal will first be floated with a group of small businesses for feedback before being publicly unveiled in a formal rulemaking, the agency said.

    The CFPB isn’t the only US agency clamping down on the massive data industry. Last year, the Federal Trade Commission proposed a sweeping set of regulations that may restrict how all businesses collect and use consumer data, taking aim at what FTC Chair Lina Khan has described as the “persistent tracking and routinized surveillance of individuals.”

    The agency initiatives reflect how Congress has continually failed to produce a comprehensive, national-level consumer privacy law, despite years of lawmaker negotiations and the rise of privacy regulations overseas that increasingly affect US businesses.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden administration seeks to remove medical bills from credit reports | CNN Politics

    Biden administration seeks to remove medical bills from credit reports | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Millions of Americans with unpaid medical bills would no longer have that debt show up on credit reports under proposals being considered by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

    The agency, which is soliciting feedback from small businesses that may be affected, expects to issue a proposed rule next year, the bureau said Thursday.

    If the rule is finalized, consumer credit companies would be barred from including medical debt and collection information on reports that creditors use to make underwriting decisions.

    Creditors would only be able consider non-medical information when evaluating borrowers’ loan applications. And debt collectors would no longer be able to use the listing of medical debt on credit reports as leverage to pressure consumers into paying questionable bills, the bureau said.

    “Research shows that medical bills have little predictive value in credit decisions, yet tens of millions of American households are dealing with medical debt on their credit reports,” said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra. “When someone gets sick, they should be able to focus on getting better, rather than fighting debt collectors trying to extort them into paying bills they may not even owe.”

    Roughly 20% of Americans reported having medical debt, according to a 2022 report from the bureau. But Chopra stressed that many health care bills contain mistakes.

    “Families are often barraged with a string of confusing and error-ridden bills, and too many of us have ended up in a doom loop of disputes between insurance companies and health care providers,” he said. “These bills, even ones where the patient doesn’t owe anything further, can end up being reported on the patient’s credit report.”

    The proposals under consideration are the latest step in the bureau’s efforts to curb the impact of medical debt on consumers. CFPB and other agencies are also looking into medical billing practices, including costly products such as medical credit cards and installment loans.

    The White House has also sought to help lessen Americans’ medical debt burden as part of its effort to help people contend with inflation and higher costs of living. Last year, it laid out a four-point plan to help protect consumers, including having the bureau investigate credit reporting companies and debt collectors that violate patients’ and families’ rights.

    Medical debt has lowered people’s credit scores, which affects their ability to buy a home, get a mortgage or own a small business, Vice President Kamala Harris said in a call with reporters on Thursday.

    “We know credit scores determine whether a person can have economic health and well-being, much less the ability to grow their wealth,” she said. “Today, we are offering a solution to fix this problem … Together, these measures will improve the credit scores of millions of Americans so that they will better be able to invest in their future.”

    Also last year, the three largest credit reporting agencies – Equifax, Experian and TransUnion – announced they would remove nearly 70% of medical debt from consumer credit reports.

    The agencies no longer include medical debt that went to collections on consumer credit reports once it has been paid off. That eliminated billions of dollars of debt on consumer records.

    In addition, unpaid medical collection debt no longer appears on credit reports for the first year, whereas the previous grace period was six months. That gives people more time to work with their health insurers or providers to address the bills. And medical collection debt of less than $500 is no longer included on credit reports.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Call to arms: Thousands of Revolutionary War stories are waiting to be told. A new project asks the public to help uncover them | CNN

    Call to arms: Thousands of Revolutionary War stories are waiting to be told. A new project asks the public to help uncover them | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The National Park Service and US National Archives and Records Administration are calling on Americans to help reveal the untold stories of the United States’ first veterans to commemorate the upcoming 250th anniversary of American independence.

    The Revolutionary War Pension Files Transcription Project aims to transcribe approximately 2.3 million original documents that correspond with more than 83,000 individual soldiers. The information spans 150 years, from wartime records to 20th century inquiries made by veterans’ descendants.

    The goal of the project is to unearth personal stories from the battlefield and home front, using information included in federal pension applications from Revolutionary War veterans and their widows, according to the National Park Service. And they need the public’s help to do it.

    “We’re asking the public in the next three years, as we lead up to the 250th anniversary of the United States, to help us transcribe the pension files to be able to unlock these stories of our first veterans,” Suzanne Isaacs, community manager for the National Archives Catalog, said.

    While the Continental Army issued signed discharge papers, veterans who served in the militia had to give oral testimonies and provide witnesses to corroborate their stories. As a result, thousands of court records have yet to be digitally transcribed in the National Archives Catalog.

    These verbal attestations were an opportunity for veterans to tell their stories in vivid detail. When pension acts were put in place in the early 19th century, many veterans were elderly and illiterate, so they gave detailed accounts in hopes of recording their life stories.

    However, relying on oral testimonies also allowed for embellished tales that were difficult to disprove.

    For example, William Shoemaker testified that he spent 18 months as a prisoner of war to receive pension pay. Historian Todd Braisted discovered, more than two centuries later, that Shoemaker joined a loyalist unit and was captive for only two months.

    When requirements for pension pay loosened in the 1830s, widows who were married before the conclusion of the war became eligible to apply. To receive funds, widows had to give oral testimonies about their husbands’ service and provide proof of their marriage.

    That means the National Archives files also include documents such as marriage licenses, wartime letters and soldiers’ diaries.

    Judith Lines applied for widow’s pension in 1837 using one of the rarest kinds of documents – a correspondence from her husband written during his service under Gen. George Washington. John Lines’ 1781 note is the only known preserved letter penned by a Black Continental soldier.

    With the help of volunteer archivists, these rare, firsthand stories from the Revolutionary War will be more accessible to the public and archived in the National Archives. Volunteers can register for a free account with the National Archives Catalog. No prior experience is required.

    “This project is a way to help make accessible the records of our first veterans, the veterans of the Revolutionary War,” Isaacs said.

    The veterans and their families might never have imagined that their accounts of the war and its effects on their lives could be so readily available to the nation. The documents included in this project offer a personal perspective that, before now, was largely unknown.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Inside efforts to avert environmental ‘catastrophe’ in the Red Sea | CNN

    Inside efforts to avert environmental ‘catastrophe’ in the Red Sea | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: A version of this story appears in CNN’s Meanwhile in the Middle East newsletter, a three-times-a-week look inside the region’s biggest stories. Sign up here.



    CNN
     — 

    Moored five miles off the coast of Yemen for more than 30 years, a decaying supertanker carrying a million barrels of oil is finally being offloaded by a United Nations-led mission, hoping to avert what threatened to be one of the world’s worst ecological disasters in decades.

    Experts are now delicately handling the 47-year-old vessel – called the FSO Safer – working to remove the crude without the tanker falling apart, the oil exploding, or a massive spill taking place.

    Sitting atop The Endeavor, the salvage UN ship supervising the offloading, UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator for Yemen David Gressly said that the operation is estimated to cost $141 million, and is using the expertise of SMIT, the dredging and offshore contractor that helped dislodge the Ever Given ship that blocked the Suez Canal for almost a week in 2021.

    How to remove one million barrels of oil from a tanker

    Twenty-three UN member states are funding the mission, with another $16 million coming from the private sector contributors. Donors include Yemen’s largest private company, HSA Group, which pledged $1.2 million in August 2022. The UN also engaged in a unique crowdfunding effort, contributing to the pool which took a year to raise, according to Gressly.

    The team is pumping between 4,000 and 5,000 barrels of oil every hour, and has so far transferred more than 120,000 barrels to the replacement vessel carrying the offloaded oil, Gressly said. The full transfer is expected to take 19 days.

    The tanker was carrying a million barrels of oil. That would be enough to power up to 83,333 cars or 50,000 US homes for an entire year. The crude on board is worth around $80 million, and who gets that remains a controversial matter.

    Here’s what we know so far:

    The ship has been abandoned in the Red Sea since 2015 and the UN has regularly warned that the “ticking time bomb” could break apart given its age and condition, or the oil it holds could explode due to the highly flammable compounds in it.

    The FSO Safer held four times the amount of oil spilled by the Exxon Valdez off Alaska in 1989 which resulted in a slick that covered 1,300 miles of coastline. A potential spill from this vessel would be enough to make it the fifth largest oil spill from a tanker in history, a UN website said. The cost of cleanup of such an incident is estimated at $20 billion.

    The Red Sea is a vital strategic waterway for global trade. At its southern end lies the Bab el-Mandeb strait, where nearly 9% of total seaborne-traded petroleum passes. And at its north is the Suez Canal that separates Africa from Asia. The majority of petroleum and natural gas exports from the Persian Gulf that transit the Suez Canal pass through the Bab el-Mandeb, according to the US Energy Information Administration.

    The sea is also a popular diving hotspot that boasts an impressive underwater eco-system. In places its banks are dotted with tourist resorts, and its eastern shore is the site of ambitious Saudi development projects worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

    The first step of the mission was to stabilize and secure the vessel to avoid it collapsing, Gressly said. That has already been achieved in the past few weeks.

    “There are a number of things that had to be done to secure the oil from exploding,” Gressly told CNN, including pumping out gases in each of the 13 compartments holding the oil. Systems for pumping were rebuilt, and some lighting was repaired.

    Booms, which are temporary floating barriers used to contain marine spills, were dispersed around the vessel to capture any potential leaks.

    The second step is to transfer the oil onto the replacement vessel, which is now underway.

    exp Yemen tanker United Nations cnni world 072611ASEG1_00001402.png

    Oil being removed from tanker near Yemen in Red Sea

    After The Safer is emptied, it must then be cleaned to ensure no oil residue is left, Gressly said. The team will then attach a giant buoy to the replacement vessel until a decision about what to do with the oil has been made.

    “The transfer of the oil to (the replacement vessel) will prevent the worst-case scenario of a catastrophic spill in the Red Sea, but it is not the end of the operation,” Gressly said.

    While the hardest part of the operation would then be over, a spill could still occur. And even after the transfer, the tanker will “continue to pose an environmental threat resulting from the sticky oil residue inside the tank, especially since the tanker remains vulnerable to collapse,” the UN said, stressing that to finish the job, an extra $22 million is urgently needed.

    A spill would shut the Yemeni ports that its impoverished people rely on for food aid and fuel, impacting 17 million people during an ongoing humanitarian crisis caused by the country’s civil war and a Saudi-led military assault on the country. Oil could bleed all the way to the African coast, damaging fish stocks for 25 years and affect up to 200,000 jobs, according to the UN.

    A potential spill would cause “catastrophic” public health ramifications in Yemen and surrounding countries, according to a study by researchers at Stanford University School of Medicine. Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Eritrea would bear the brunt.

    Air pollution from a spill of this magnitude would increase the risk of hospitalization for cardiovascular or respiratory disease for those very directly exposed by 530%, according to the study, which said it could cause an array of other health problems, from psychiatric to neurological issues.

    “Given the scarcity of water and food in this region, it could be one of the most disastrous oil spills ever known in terms of impacts on human life,” David Rehkopf, a professor at Stanford University and senior author of the study, told CNN.

    Up to 10 million people would struggle to obtain clean water, and 8 million would have their access to food supplies threatened. The Red Sea fisheries in Yemen could be “almost completely wiped out,” Rehkopf added.

    The tanker has been an issue for many people in Yemen over the past few years, Gressly said. Sentiment on social media surrounding the removal of oil is very positive, as many in Yemen feel like the tanker is a “threat that’s been over their heads,” he said.

    The tanker issue remains a point of dispute between the Houthi rebels that control the north of Yemen and the internationally recognized government, the two main warring sides in the country’s civil conflict.

    While the war, which saw hundreds of thousands of people killed or injured, and Yemen left in ruins, has eased of late, it is far from resolved.

    Ahmed Nagi, a senior analyst for Yemen at the International Crisis Group think tank in Brussels, sees the Safer tanker issue as “an embodiment of the conflict in Yemen as a whole.”

    “The government sees the Houthi militias as an illegitimate group controlling the tanker, and the Houthis do not recognize (the government),” Nagi told CNN.

    The vessel was abandoned after the outbreak of the Yemeni civil war in 2015. The majority of the oil is owned by Yemeni state firm SEPOC, experts say, and there are some reports that it may be sold.

    “From a technical point of view, the owner of the tanker and the oil inside it is SEPOC,” Nagi said, adding that other energy companies working in Yemen may also share ownership of the oil.

    exp un yemen oil spill tanker achim steiner vause intv FST 071912ASEG2 cnni world_00003204.png

    U.N. begins high-risk operation to prevent catastrophic oil spill from Yemen tanker

    The main issue, Nagi added, is that the Safer’s headquarters are in the government-controlled Marib city, while the tanker is in an area controlled by the Houthis. The Safer is moored off the coast of the western Hodeidah province.

    Discussions to determine the ownership of the oil are underway, Gressly said. The rights to the oil are unclear and there are legal issues that need to be addressed.

    The UN coordinator hopes that the days needed to offload the oil will buy some time for “political and legal discussions that need to take place before the oil can be sold.”

    While the UN may manage to resolve half of the issue, Nagi said, there still needs to be an understanding of the oil’s status.

    “It still poses a danger if we keep it near a conflict zone,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Colombia’s marijuana farmers want out of the shadows. Will the government ever legalize their harvest? | News – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    Colombia’s marijuana farmers want out of the shadows. Will the government ever legalize their harvest? | News – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    [ad_1]

    Cajibio (CNN) — On a recent Friday morning, about 200 coca and marijuana farmers gathered in the small town of Cajibio, southwestern Colombia, to hear the government out.

    Colombian’s government was still licking its wounds after an initiative to legalize recreational marijuana had sunk in Congress less than 10 days before.


    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAmpE E96 >66E:?8[ @77:4:2=D 7C@> E96 yFDE:46 |:?:DECJ =2:5 @FE A=2?D 7@C 9@H E@ E24<=6 E96 4@F?ECJ’D 3FC86@?:?8 AC@5F4E:@? @7 :==:4:E 4C@ADi 3F:=5 36EE6C C@25D 2?5 3C:586 E@ 4@??64E E96 72C>6CD H:E9 =682= >2C<6ED[ D@ E92E =:4:E 4C@AD 42? 36 D@=5 2E 2 =2C86C AC@7:E 2?5 <66A A6@A=6 @77 7C@> 8C@H:?8 5CF8Dj 2 8@G6C?>6?E AFD9 E@ =682=:K6 =2?5 E:E=6D E@ 7@C>2=:K6 E96 72C>6C’D C:89ED E@ E96 =2?5 E96J H@C< @?[ 2?5 2 ?6H :?:E:2E:G6 E@ =682=:D6 A@E]k^Am

    kAmv=@C:2 |:C2?52[ E96 5:C64E@C @7 5CF8 A@=:4J 2E E96 yFDE:46 |:?:DECJ[ DEC6DD65 E96 8@G6C?>6?E H2?E65 E@ >2<6 :E C:89E E@ E96 72C>6CD[ 3FE *F=:6C {@A6K[ 2 cgJ62CD@=5 D:?8=6 >@E96C H9@ C6AC6D6?ED 2 8C@FA @7 23@FE g__ >2C:;F2?2 72C>6CD 2?5 H9@ 92CG6DED 23@FE ad_ A=2?ED @7 42??23:D[ H2D ?@E >F49 :?E6C6DE65 😕 =:DE6?:?8]k^Am

    kAmxE 😀 E:>6 E@ DE2CE 24E:?8[ {@A6K D2:5]k^Am

    kAm|@C6 E92?…

    [ad_2]

    MMP News Author

    Source link

  • Judge denies AMC settlement on stock conversion, shares surge | CNN Business

    Judge denies AMC settlement on stock conversion, shares surge | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    A judge on Friday blocked a proposed settlement on AMC Entertainment Holdings’ stock conversion plan that would allow the company to issue more shares, sending its common shares soaring and preferred shares down in after-hours trading.

    Delaware Vice Chancellor Morgan Zurn said in the ruling that she cannot approve the settlement “as submitted,” because it would release potential claims by preferred shareholders who were not represented in the lawsuit or settlement.

    AMC shares were up 69% at $7.44 in trading after the bell. Its preferred shares were down 20% at $1.43.

    The company was sued in February for allegedly rigging a shareholder vote that would allow AMC to convert preferred stock to common stock and issue hundreds of millions of new shares.

    The conversion would dilute the common stockholders’ ownership, but allow AMC to pay down some of its $5.1 billion in debt.

    AMC has told investors it is burning cash at an unsustainable rate and warned that an inability to raise capital could force the company into bankruptcy.

    It cannot carry out its plan to do so until the litigation has been resolved.

    The settlement received more than 2,800 objections from shareholders, a level of interest Zurn called “unprecedented” in her ruling on Friday.

    “AMC’s stockholder base is extraordinary,” she said, adding that many “care passionately about their stock ownership and the company.”

    The judge rejected the settlement after determining the holders of common stock could not release AMC from potential claims that belong to holders of preferred shares, an issue which objectors did not raise.

    Many objectors sought permission to opt out of the settlement and sue on their own behalf, dismissing AMC’s dire financial predictions as “fear tactics.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Key US inflation gauge cooled last month to the lowest level in nearly three years | CNN Business

    Key US inflation gauge cooled last month to the lowest level in nearly three years | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Minneapolis
    CNN
     — 

    Wholesale inflation continued its yearlong slowdown last month, rising by just 0.1% for the 12 months ended in June, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Producer Price Index released Thursday.

    The PPI index, a key inflation gauge that tracks the average change in prices that businesses pay to suppliers, has cooled significantly since peaking at 11.2% in June 2022 and has now declined for 12 consecutive months. Annual producer price inflation is at its lowest level since August 2020, BLS data shows.

    Economists were expecting an annual increase of 0.4%, according to Refinitiv.

    On a monthly basis, prices increased by 0.1%.

    Goods prices held steady for the month, after tumbling 1.6% in May, according to the BLS report. As such, prices for services — which increased 0.2% from May — were the primary driver behind June’s slight increase.

    PPI is a closely watched inflation gauge since it captures average price shifts before they reach consumers and is a proxy for potential price changes in stores.

    While the PPI doesn’t directly correlate into exactly what will come from the following month’s Consumer Price Index — a major inflation gauge that tracks price shifts for a basket of goods and services — it provides a look at whole economy inflation, minus rents, said Alex Pelle, Mizuho Securities US economist.

    And that picture right now is looking pretty sharp.

    “It’s definitely a good month for inflation,” Pelle told CNN. “You saw that in CPI, and now you’re seeing it in PPI.”

    In June, inflation as measured by the CPI cooled to 3% annually, its lowest rate since March 2021, the BLS reported Wednesday.

    Both the CPI and PPI have declined monthly since their peaks in June 2022, when record-high energy and gas prices fueled the spikes to 9.1% and 11.2%, respectively.

    As such, the base effects of year-over-year comparisons are playing a part in the indexes’ sharp retreats.

    Still, underlying inflation is showing a cooling trend as well — albeit more muted.

    In the case of PPI, when stripping out the more volatile categories of food and energy, this “core” index rose 2.4% for the 12 months ended in June. That’s a step back from the 2.6% increase seen in May and economists’ expectations of 2.6%.

    Core PPI, which ticked up 0.1% on a monthly basis, is at its lowest annual level since February 2021.

    Inflation is looking a heck of a lot better than last year, when the Federal Reserve embarked on a campaign to combat price hikes with rate hikes, but economists don’t expect the latest CPI and PPI prints will dissuade central bankers from giving another crank to tighten monetary policy.

    Starting in March 2022, the central bank rolled out 10 consecutive interest rate hikes to tame inflation, finally hitting pause last month. The Fed is widely expected to raise rates by another quarter point when it meets later this month.

    “[The June data] means that the doves are going to have a little bit better of an argument to hold sooner rather than later, so that does reduce the probability of a second hike this year,” Pelle said, noting the commonly used terms to describe Fed members’ differing monetary policy approaches.

    Doves tend to favor looser monetary policy and issues like low unemployment over low inflation, while hawks favor robust rate hikes and keeping inflation low above all else.

    But just how long a hold could last is another matter, said Pelle.

    The job market is cooling from a scorching state, but it remains historically hot and tight. Considering ongoing demographic shifts (including the massive Baby Boomer generation aging out of the workforce), that tightness could continue, Pelle said.

    “Do we really need to be cutting rates if you have GDP running around trend and the labor market still very tight,” he said. “Inflation is coming down, but the economy is maybe growing a little bit into these higher rate levels. So the hold could be longer than people expect. But we might have some of the sting out on getting even higher.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Could the June CPI report change the Fed’s rate trajectory? | CNN Business

    Could the June CPI report change the Fed’s rate trajectory? | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story first appeared in CNN Business’ Before the Bell newsletter. Not a subscriber? You can sign up right here. You can listen to an audio version of the newsletter by clicking the same link.



    CNN
     — 

    After the June jobs report showed a cooling but still-hot picture of the labor market, investors are looking to a key inflation report due Wednesday for more clues on the economy’s health. But some investors say the results will likely do little to sway the Federal Reserve’s interest rate trajectory.

    What happened: The labor market added just 209,000 jobs in June, below economists’ expectations for a net gain of 225,000 jobs. That’s the smallest monthly gain since a decline in December 2020.

    But beneath the surface, the jobs market remains hot. Average hourly earnings growth remained steady at 0.4% from May and also unchanged at 4.4% year-over-year, suggesting that wage inflation remains sticky. The unemployment rate also fell to 3.6% from 3.7%, though jobless rates for Black and Hispanic workers rose sharply.

    There is “nothing in the release that would change our expectation that the Fed has more work to do,” said Joseph Davis, global chief economist at Vanguard.

    Accordingly, traders continued to overwhelmingly expect a quarter-point rate hike at the Fed’s July meeting. Traders saw a roughly 92% chance of such a decision as of the market close on Friday, according to the CME FedWatch Tool.

    What’s next: The June Consumer Price Index report, a key inflation reading, is due on Wednesday.

    Economists expect a 3.1% increase in consumer prices for the year ended in June, which would be a cooldown from a 4% annual increase in May, according to Refinitiv.

    Recent data has suggested that inflation is coming down, though it remains above the Fed’s 2% target. The Personal Consumption Expenditures price index, the Fed’s favorite inflation gauge, rose 3.8% for the 12 months ended in May. That’s down from the revised 4.3% annual rise seen in April.

    But it’s unlikely that the June CPI report will change the Fed’s interest rate trajectory, barring a huge upside or downside surprise, especially considering that Fed officials in recent weeks have been vocal that more rate hikes are likely coming, said James Ragan, director of wealth management research at DA Davidson.

    Still, that doesn’t mean investors should expect infinite rate hikes from the Fed.

    “We continue to expect that [the] Fed will soon reach its terminal rate, bringing it closer toward the end of its most aggressive tightening campaign in generations,” said Candice Tse, global head of strategic advisory solutions at Goldman Sachs Asset Management.

    The Producer Price Index report for June is due on Thursday.

    UPS and the Teamsters union are in contract negotiations. Without a deal, 340,000 Teamsters could go on strike on August 1.

    Such an event could be damaging to the US economy, reports my colleague Chris Isidore.

    UPS carries 6% of the country’s gross domestic product in its trucks. The company carried an average of 20.8 million US packages a day through last year, and that number is down only slightly this year.

    In other words, the company’s services are critical to keeping the gears moving seamlessly in supply chains that saw massive snarls during the height of the Covid pandemic. A strike could potentially bring back the problems that were so prominent just a couple years ago, including shipping delays and higher prices.

    The Biden administration is keeping an eye on negotiations between both parties in “recognition of the role UPS plays in our economy and of the important work that UPS workers did through the pandemic and continue to do today,” acting labor secretary Julie Su told CNN on Friday.

    But the company and union broke off last week, with both sides claiming the other walked away from the bargaining table.

    Read more here.

    Monday: Consumer credit for May and NY Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Expectations for June.

    Tuesday: NFIB small business optimism survey for June.

    Wednesday: Consumer Price Index report and housing starts for June.

    Thursday: Producer Price Index report for June.

    Friday: University of Michigan consumer sentiment and inflation expectations for July.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Expect more rate hikes from the Fed after the latest jobs report | CNN Business

    Expect more rate hikes from the Fed after the latest jobs report | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Washington, DC
    CNN
     — 

    An interest rate hike later this month was already in the cards for the Federal Reserve. But after the June jobs report, the timing of a second hike remains unclear.

    Job gains remain robust, wage growth is still going strong, and unemployment continues to hover near historic lows. That means the job market is still fueling demand in the economy, which the Fed has been trying to slow through rate hikes. And Fed officials have made it clear they think the central bank still has more work to do to bring down inflation, which is still running well above the 2% goal.

    Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago President Austan Goolsbee, a voting member of the Fed committee that decides interest rates, said in an interview Friday that he sees “a decent chance of further tightening down the pipeline” and that inflation “needs to come down more.”

    Other Fed officials have struck a similarly hawkish tone on inflation, hinting strongly at a hike in July.

    “I remain very concerned about whether inflation will return to target in a sustainable and timely way,” said Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas President Lorie Logan on Thursday during a meeting hosted by the Central Bank Research Association. “I think more restrictive monetary policy will be needed to achieve the Federal Open Market Committee’s goals of stable prices and maximum employment.”

    Fed officials voted last month to hold the key federal funds rate steady at a range of 5-5.25% to reassess the economy after a string of 10 consecutive rate hikes and to monitor the effects of bank stresses in the spring, according to minutes from that meeting released Wednesday.

    “We can take some time and assess and collect more information and then be able to act, knowing that we also communicated through our projections that we don’t think we’re done, based on what we know,” said New York Fed President John Williams Wednesday during a moderated discussion in New York. “And obviously we’re absolutely committed to achieving our 2% inflation goal.”

    And Fed Chair Jerome Powell himself has doubled down on the need for more rate increases in recent speeches, not ruling out back-to-back hikes, despite economic indicators showing slight progress on inflation.

    Financial markets are pricing in a more than a 90% chance of a rate hike later this month, according to the CME FedWatch Tool.

    The Fed wants to see the labor market slow down broadly, bringing it into “better balance,” as Powell has frequently described it. That means wage growth would need to cool consistently, monthly payroll growth would need to be close to a range of 70,000 and 100,000 — the smallest job gain needed to keep up with population growth — and unemployment would need to rise, according to economists. Job market conditions don’t resemble that just yet.

    “This is clearly a very tight labor market, so I expect the Fed to look at this data and say there is justification here for continued small rate increases because the labor market is not cooling enough,” Dave Gilbertson, labor economist at payroll software company UKG, told CNN.

    Labor costs are higher because of a persistent difficulty in hiring, weighing on labor-intensive service providers such as hospitals and restaurants, which has put upward pressure on consumer prices since businesses typically raise wages to address hiring challenges.

    Powell homed in on that dynamic in recent remarks, and research from top economists argues the Fed will have to slow the economy further to fully address the labor market’s stubborn impact on inflation. Whether that means a full-blown recession or a so-called soft landing remains to be seen, but some Fed officials are optimistic.

    “I feel like we are on a golden path of avoiding recession,” Goolsbee told CNBC Friday.

    And there has been some progress on bringing the job market back into better balance while inflation has come down. Job openings fell to 9.82 million in May, down from a peak of 12 million in March 2022, though they still greatly exceed the number of unemployed people seeking work. And June’s jobs total of 209,000 is still robust by historical standards.

    But Gilbertson said labor shortages have been largely driven by demographic shifts, which might keep the job market tight for the foreseeable future.

    Beyond the expected hike in July, the Fed is going to remain laser-focused on wage growth to inform its decision-making later in the year. Central bank officials will pay particular attention to the Employment Cost Index, which recently showed that pay gains picked up in the first three months of the year. The index for the second quarter will be released in late July — after the Fed meets.

    “The focus is on the path of wage inflation because of its pass-through to services inflation,” said Sonia Meskin, head of US Macro at BNY Mellon IM.

    The June jobs report showed that average hourly earnings growth was unchanged at 0.4% from the month before and also unchanged at 4.4% year-over-year — not a welcome development.

    Core inflation hasn’t decelerated as fast as the headline measure because of the tightness in the labor market. The Personal Consumption Expenditures price index, the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge, rose 3.8% in May from a year earlier, down from April’s 4.3% rise; while the core measure edged lower to 4.6% from 4.7% during the same period.

    Within the core measure, services inflation also remains sticky and Powell said in last month’s post-meeting news conference that “we see only the earliest signs of disinflation there” and that the services sector’s “largest cost would be wage cost.”

    The Fed’s strategy to address services inflation is simply by curbing demand through more rate hikes. So, in addition to the labor market, the Fed is highly attentive to consumer spending, which has cooled in the past several months, according to figures from the Commerce Department.

    Other headwinds are expected to weigh on consumers in the months ahead, such as the resumption of student loan payments and the Supreme Court blocking President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program. Americans are also running down their savings accounts while racking up debt, so US consumers may need to start cutting back soon.

    [ad_2]

    Source link