ReportWire

Tag: Fiscal policy

  • Beverly faces nearly $4 million budget shortfall this spring

    [ad_1]

    BEVERLY — The city is facing a nearly $4 million shortfall in funding the fiscal 2027 operating budget.

    That number — $3,921,385, to be exact — was in a report by Beverly’s Financial Forecasting Committee released this month.

    This page requires Javascript.

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

    kAm%96 4@>>:EE66 >6E D6G6C2= E:>6D E9:D 72== 2?5 62C=J H:?E6C E@ 56E6C>:?6 7:?2?4:2= 8@2=D 2?5 @3;64E:G6D 29625 @7 E96 4:EJ’D DAC:?8 3F586E D62D@?] p=D@[ E@ >2<6 C64@>>6?52E:@?D @? 9@H @77:4:2=D D9@F=5 DECF4EFC6 E96 7:D42= a_af 3F586E]k^Am

    kAm~?6 724E DE@@5 @FE — E92E “E9:D 567:4:E 7@C642DE 😀 BF2=:E2E:G6=J 5:776C6?E” E92? E9@D6 D66? 😕 AC6G:@FD J62CD[ E96 4@>>:EE66 D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“%96 2CD6?2= @7 DEC2E68:6D E@ 4=@D6 E96 AC@;64E65 567:4:E 7@C E96 7:CDE E:>6 😕 564256D C6BF:C6D C2:D:?8 766D^@C 4FEE:?8 D6CG:46D H:E9 F?AC64656?E65 :>A24E[” E96 3@5J HC@E6 😕 :ED C6A@CE]k^Am

    kAm“%96 u:?2?4:2= u@C642DE r@>>:EE66 H2?ED E@ 6>A92D:K6 2 D6?D6 @7 FC86?4J] q6G6C=J A@=:4J >2<6CD[ 2?5 E96 4@>>F?:EJ 2D 2 H9@=6 ?665 E@ C64@8?:K6 E92E 5:77:4F=E 564:D:@?D H:== 92G6 E@ 36 >256]”k^Am

    kAm%@ 4=@D6 E96 82A[ E96 C6A@CE 7@4FD65 @? :>AC@G:?8 E96 4:EJ’D C6G6?F6 DEC62>D[ 2?5 C65F4:?8 E96 67764E @7 8C@H:?8 6IA6?5:EFC6D]k^Am

    kAm%96 >F?:4:A2= D:56 @7 E96 3F586E 😀 6IA64E65 E@ D66 2 E@E2= 6IA6?5:EFC6 @7 ;FDE F?56C Sgg]b >:==:@? 😕 7:D42= a_af[ 2 c]ebT :?4C62D6 7C@> E96 AC6G:@FD 7:D42= J62C[ 244@C5:?8 E@ E96 C6A@CE] ~? E96 D49@@=D D:56[ q6G6C=J 😀 2?E:4:A2E65 E@ DA6?5 ;FDE F?56C Sh_ >:==:@?[ 2 d]afT :?4C62D6]k^Am

    kAm%96D6 C:D6D AC:>2C:=J 4@>6 7C@> 9:896C 4@DED @7 4@==64E:G6 32C82:?:?8 28C66>6?ED H:E9 E96 4:EJ’D F?:@?D[ A6?D:@? 4@DED 2?5 9:DE@C:42==J 9:89 :?4C62D6D 😕 E96 4:EJ’D 962=E9 :?DFC2?46 3:==D[ 2== 2>@F?ED E92E 92G6 ?@ H:88=6 C@@> 😕 7F?5:?8]k^Am

    kAmq6G6C=J 😀 2=D@ DECF88=:?8 H:E9 DE2E6 2:5 ?@E <66A:?8 A246 H:E9 :?7=2E:@?[ =:>:E65 C6G6?F6 DEC62>D[ :?7=2E:@?2CJ 724E@CD E92E 2C6 9:896C E92? E2I=:>:E:?8 !C@A@D:E:@? a½ 42? 4@G6C[ E96 9:89 4@DED @7 DA64:2= 65F42E:@?[ 2 `b]eT :?4C62D6 E@ E96 4@DE @7 D6?5:?8 DEF56?ED E@ G@42E:@?2= D49@@=D W?2>6=J tDD6I %649X 2?5 @E96C 7:I65 4@DED[ 244@C5:?8 E@ E96 C6A@CE]k^Am

    kAm|@DE @7 E96 AC6DDFC6D 2C6 3F586E 492==6?86D 7@C DFCC@F?5:?8 4@>>F?:E:6D E@@[ >2<:?8 E9:D FA4@>:?8 J62C 6DA64:2==J E@F89 7@C 7F?5:?8 >F?:4:A2= 3F586ED @? E96 }@CE9 $9@C6]k^Am

    k9bm#64@>>6?52E:@?D 7@C 7:==:?8 E96 82Ak^9bm

    kAm%96 4@>>:EE66 C64@>>6?565 q6G6C=J 4@?D:56C C65F4:?8 DE277 😕 D49@@=D 2?5 @? E96 4:EJ D:56[ 2D H6== 2D :?4C62D6 C6G6?F6 DEC62>D]k^Am

    kAm%@ C2:D6 C6G6?F6[ E96 8C@FA 😕 E96 C6A@CE AC@A@D65 C2:D:?8 E96 EC2D9 766[ :?4C62D:?8 D@>6 D49@@=C6=2E65 766D E9C@F89 E96 $49@@= r@>>:EE66 2?5 DEF5J:?8 H96E96C A2C<:?8 766D 2?5 7:?6D 42? 36 :?4C62D65]k^Am

    kAm%96 4@>>:EE66 ?@E65 E96D6 24E:@?D H@F=5 :>AC@G6 E96 4FCC6?E 3F586E D:EF2E:@?[ 3FE 6G6?EF2==J[ E96D6 C6G6?F6 DEC62>D H:== DE28?2E6 2D 2 C6DF=E @7 :?4C62D65 =23@C 4@DED 2?5 E96 4@DED @7 8@@5D D@=5]k^Am

    kAm%96 E@E2= 86?6C2= 7F?5 C6G6?F6D E96 4:EJ 2?E:4:A2E6D E@ 4@==64E 😕 7:D42= a_af 😀 23@FE S`fg]h >:==:@?[ 2 a]hfT :?4C62D6 7C@> E96 =2DE 7:D42= J62C] %96 A6C46?E286 😀 2 D>2==6C :?4C62D6 E92? H92E q6G6C=J 92D C6A@CE65 😕 AC:@C J62CD[ 244@C5:?8 E@ E96 C6A@CE]k^Am

    kAm%96 4@>>:EE66 D2:5 :E 6IA64ED E96 4:EJ E@ C2:D6 E96 E2I =6GJ 3J E96 >2I:>F> a]dT 😕 7:D42= a_af 2?5 D66 2? 255:E:@?2= S`]ad >:==:@? 😕 ?6H 8C@HE9] %96 r:EJ r@F?4:= 92D G@E65 E@ <66A E2I C2E6D 2E E96 =:>:E D:?46 a_a`]k^Am

    kAm|@?6J 7@C >2:?E2:?:?8 C@25D 2?5 D:56H2=6 7C@> E96 4:EJ’D 7C66 42D9 2>@F?E 😕 E96 7FEFC6 3642FD6 @7 C:D:?8 =23@C 4@DED[ C2E96C E92? 7C@> E96 86?6C2= 7F?5 2D :E 92D 😕 E96 A2DE[ E96 4@>>:EE66 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmu@C q6G6C=J E@ <66A :ED 7C66 42D9 2>@F?E 36EH66? :ED E2C86E65 bTgT @7 E96 @G6C2== 86?6C2= 7F?5[ E96 4@>>:EE66 C64@>>6?5D[ 2D :E FDF2==J 5@6D[ E@ 6DE:>2E6 E96 FA4@>:?8 7:D42= J62C’D C6G6?F6D 4@?D6CG2E:G6=J]k^Am

    kAm%96 4@>>:EE66 2=D@ AC@A@D65 4:EJ @77:4:2=D 4@?D:56C C65F4:?8 E96 E2C86E A6C46?E286 D@ q6G6C=J 42? :?4C62D6 @A6C2E:@?2= 6IA6?5:EFC6D[ 2 >@G6 E92E 4@F=5 36 ?646DD2CJ 😕 E96 D9@CE E6C>[ 3FE E92E H@F=5 4C62E6 >@C6 AC6DDFC6D @? E96 @A6C2E:?8 3F586E 😕 E96 7FEFC6]k^Am

    kAm%96C6 H2D 2=D@ 4@?46C? 7C@> 4@>>:EE66 >6>36CD E92E E96 7656C2= 8@G6C?>6?E H:== DF3DE2?E:2==J 4FE D49@@= 7656C2= 8C2?ED 2?5 @E96C AC@8C2>D FD65 3J q6G6C=J !F3=:4 $49@@=D] %96 5:DEC:4E C646:G6D 23@FE Sa]d >:==:@? 😕 DF49 7F?5D 2??F2==J]k^Am

    kAm“$9@F=5 E96C6 36 2 C65F4E:@? 😕 E96D6 7F?5D[ E96 4:EJ @7 q6G6C=J H@F=5 7:?5 :E 2== 3FE :>A@DD:3=6 E@ C6A=6?:D9 E96D6 7656C2= 2H2C5D H:E9:? E96:C 3F586E2CJ 42A24:EJ[” E96 4@>>:EE66 D2:5]k^Am

    kAm|6>36CD @7 E96 4@>>:EE66 2C6 (2C5 d r:EJ r@F?4:=@C 2?5 r92:C z2E9=66? u6=5>2?[ ‘:46 r92:C 2?5 s:C64E@C @7 u:?2?46^r:EJ pF5:E@C qCJ2?E pJ=6D[ (2C5 c r@F?4:=@C $4@EE w@FD6>2?[ q6G6C=J !F3=:4 $49@@=D s:C64E@C @7 u:?2?46 t>>2 !F8=:D:[ (2C5 b $49@@= r@>>:EE66 >6>36C z22C:? #@3:?D@?[ (2C5 c $49@@= r@>>:EE66 >6>36C y677C6J $:=G2[ s@>:?:4 r@A6=2?5[ z2C6? u@82CEJ 2?5 !2F= |2?K@]k^Am

    kAmk6>mr@?E24E r2C@=:?6 t?@D 2Ek^6>m k6>mk2 9C67lQ>2:=E@irt?@Do?@CE9@73@DE@?]4@>Qmrt?@Do?@CE9@73@DE@?]4@>k^2mk^6>mk6>m]k^6>mk^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Caroline Enos | Staff Writer

    Source link

  • Report: Mass. cities, towns face ‘historic’ fiscal crisis

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Massachusetts cities and towns are facing a “historic fiscal crisis” amid rising operating costs, lackluster state aid and restraints on property tax increases, according to a new report.

    The “Perfect Storm” report, released by the Massachusetts Municipal Association, found that while state government spending has increased by an average of 2.8% per year since 2010 to meet its needs, restraints on local revenue sources – including Proposition 2 1⁄2 – have held city and town spending to just 0.6% per year.


    This page requires Javascript.

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

    kAmp?5 H9:=6 DE2E6 2:5 E@ 4@>>F?:E:6D :?4C62D6D D=:89E=J 6G6CJ J62C[ :E C6>2:?D adT =@H6C E92? :E H2D 😕 a__a H96? 25;FDE65 7@C :?7=2E:@?[ E96 C6A@CE’D 2FE9@CD D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“|F?:4:A2=:E:6D 92G6 366? 7CF82=[ 2?5 2?J 4FED E96J’C6 7@C465 E@ >2<6 2C6 ?@H 4FEE:?8 3@?6[” p52> r92A56=2:?6[ ||p’D 6I64FE:G6 5:C64E@C[ D2:5 😕 2 DE2E6>6?E] “tG6? H:E9 E96 >@DE G2=:2?E 677@CED E@ @A6C2E6 677:4:6?E=J[ 4:EJ 2?5 E@H? =6256CD D:>A=J 42?’E @G6C4@>6 E96 =2C86C EC6?5D E92E 2C6 7@C4:?8 E96> E@ >2<6 5C2DE:4 C65F4E:@?D[ 76=E 3J =@42= C6D:56?ED 2?5 =@42= 3FD:?6DD6D]”k^Am

    kAm%96 C6A@CE 7@F?5 E92E >F?:4:A2=:E:6D 92G6 76H @AE:@?D E@ 7:== H:56?:?8 7:D42= 82AD] u@C @?6[ E96J 2C6 32CC65 3J DE2E6 =2H 7C@> 4@==64E:?8 =@42= :?4@>6 @C D2=6D E2I6D – @FED:56 @7 D6EE:?8 =@58:?8 2?5 >62=D E2I6D – =62G:?8 AC@A6CEJ E2I6D 2D E96:C >2:? D@FC46 @7 C6G6?F6]k^Am

    kAm|62?H9:=6[ !C@A@D:E:@? a½ =:>:ED AC@A6CEJ E2I C6G6?F6 E92E 2 4@>>F?:EJ 42? C2:D6 E@ ?@ >@C6 E92? a]dT @G6C E96 AC6G:@FD J62C[ :CC6DA64E:G6 @7 :?7=2E:@?[ E96 C6A@CE D2:5]k^Am

    kAm}62C=J E9C66 @FE @7 7@FC |2DD249FD6EED >F?:4:A2=:E:6D 2C6 2E hdT E@ hhT @7 E96:C =6GJ =:>:E – E96 2>@F?E @7 AC@A6CEJ E2I6D E96J 42? 86?6C2E6 367@C6 ?665:?8 E@ C6D@CE E@ 2 4@DE=J !C@A@D:E:@? a½ @G6CC:56 42>A2:8?[ E96 C6A@CE’D 2FE9@CD D2:5]k^Am

    kAm%96 8C@FA D2:5 2 DE2E6H:56 !C@A@D:E:@? a`⁄a @G6CC:56 42>A2:8? 😀 2 “?@?DE2CE6C” 7@C E96 >2;@C:EJ @7 |2DD249FD6EED 4:E:6D 2?5 E@H?D]k^Am

    kAm{@42= 8@G6C?>6?ED 92G6 366? <66A:?8 3F586ED 32=2?465 3J 4FEE:?8 @C C65F4:?8 6DD6?E:2= D6CG:46D[ H9:49 27764ED D49@@=D[ =:3C2C:6D[ C@25D 2?5 AF3=:4 D276EJ[ 2?5 “42? C6DF=E 😕 2? @G6C2== D9C:?<:?8 @7 4@>>F?:EJ G:3C2?4J[” E96 C6A@CE’D 2FE9@CD D2:5]k^Am

    kAm%96 8C@FA D2:5 :ED C6A@CE 😀 >62?E E@ 96=A DE2<69@=56CD[ DE2E6 A@=:4J>2<6CD 2?5 E96 AF3=:4 “36EE6C F?56CDE2?5” E96 7@C46D AFD9:?8 >2?J >F?:4:A2=:E:6D “?62C 2 7:D42= 3C62<:?8 A@:?E]” xE A=2?D E@ C6=62D6 2 D6E @7 A@=:4J C64@>>6?52E:@?D =2E6C E9:D J62C E@ “AFE 4:E:6D 2?5 E@H?D 324< @? 2 A2E9 E@H2C5 =@?8E6C> 7:?2?4:2= DFDE2:?23:=:EJ]”k^Am

    kAm“%96 DF446DD @7 E96 r@>>@?H62=E9 😀 E:65 5:C64E=J E@ E96 DF446DD @7 :ED 4:E:6D 2?5 E@H?D[” p>6D3FCJ |2J@C z2DD2?5C2 v@G6[ ||p’D G:46 AC6D:56?E[ D2:5 😕 2 DE2E6>6?E] “|2DD249FD6EED 42??@E E9C:G6 :7 >F?:4:A2=:E:6D 2C6 DECF88=:?8 E@ AC@G:56 E96 7F?52>6?E2= D6CG:46D E92E C6D:56?ED ?665 6G6CJ D:?8=6 52J]”k^Am

    kAmr9C:DE:2? |] (256 4@G6CD E96 |2DD249FD6EED $E2E69@FD6 7@C }@CE9 @7 q@DE@? |65:2 vC@FAUCDBF@jD ?6HDA2A6CD 2?5 H63D:E6D] t>2:= 9:> 2E k2 9C67lQ>2:=E@i4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>Qm4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>k^2m]k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • China’s monetary policy settings have been optimal so far: Fullerton Fund Management

    China’s monetary policy settings have been optimal so far: Fullerton Fund Management

    [ad_1]

    Share

    Robert St Clair of Fullerton Fund Management says that the PBOC is using “all the tools it has at its disposal” and the monetary stimulus could make a difference as it is targeting the heart of the problem facing China.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Teachers union blasts use of ‘millionaires tax’ money

    Teachers union blasts use of ‘millionaires tax’ money

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Backers of the state’s “millionaires tax” are accusing the Healey administration of defying the will of voters by tapping into proceeds from the tax to close out the previous fiscal year budget.

    A supplemental budget filed by Gov. Maura Healey aimed at closing out the previous fiscal year budget calls for spending $225 million in “millionaires tax” proceeds to cover costs for grants to child care programs, universal free school meals, transportation service expansions and other items.

    But the Massachusetts Teachers Association, a chief proponent of the tax, is blasting the proposal to use the money this way, saying the funding needs should have been covered by other revenue sources.

    “Fair Share funds must be used to build upon the existing spending for public education and transportation, and not become dollars lost on balance sheets,” MTA President Max Page said in a statement. “Gov. Healey’s supplemental budget proposal defies the will of the voters and the spirit of Fair Share, which is raising money to grow our public education and transportation systems.”

    Voters approved the so-called Fair Share proposal in the 2022 elections, setting a new 4% surtax on people with incomes above $1 million a year. The state collected more than $2.1 billion from the tax in the previous year, exceeding projections by budget writers.

    A spokesman for the state’s Executive Office of Administration and Finance defended the governor’s proposal, saying the spending is in line with the intent of the voter-approved tax and the state budget.

    “Our administration has consistently demonstrated our commitment to fulfilling the will of the voters who approved the Fair Share surtax to support our education and transportation systems,” the agency said in a statement. “The supplemental budget filed by the Governor maintains that commitment by proposing to use a limited amount of surplus surtax for education and transportation programs like universal school meals and child care provider grants.”

    The approach, the agency said, “aligns with how surtax revenue was budgeted in Fiscal Year 2025 and is necessary to close Fiscal Year 2024 in balance.”

    Healey’s $714 million supplemental spending plan, which requires legislative approval, seeks to close funding gaps for public health, substance use treatment and education, and fund collective bargaining agreements with labor unions.

    It also calls for overhauling how Massachusetts approves renewable energy infrastructure projects, which has also drawn criticism from lawmakers who view it as an end-run around a stalled clean energy bill.

    The issue of how billions of dollars in proceeds from the tax will be spent by the state government was a key issue in the debate over the proposal.

    A chief criticism was claims by tax proponents that the money will be devoted exclusively to transportation and education spending were misleading.

    A 2022 report by Tufts University’s Center for State Policy Analysis ahead of the tax’s approval by voters warned that while the plan clearly stated the money must be devoted to education and transportation, not all the surtax revenue is likely to be spent in those areas.

    “The problem is fungibility, or the ease with which lawmakers can shift money between programs,” the report’s authors wrote. “There is nothing illegal or untoward about this approach; it’s a common part of legislative horse-trading.”

    The report estimates that for every dollar raised by the surtax, spending on the stated earmarks is likely to increase by 30 cents to 70 cents, with the remainder being “diverted to other areas of the budget,” they wrote.

    It also noted that revenue from the tax would be “highly volatile” and is likely to rise or fall sharply, depending on the economic conditions. The number of people paying the tax will increase gradually over time, the report noted.

    Supporters say taxing the rich means more money to improve neglected public schools, expand child care options, and fix potholed roads and crumbling bridges.

    Opponents argue the tax is hurting businesses and driving away corporate investment and job creators, while putting a drag on the state’s economy as it recovers from residual impacts of the pandemic.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Fed sparking irrational market optimism over potential rate cuts, former FDIC Chair Sheila Bair warns

    Fed sparking irrational market optimism over potential rate cuts, former FDIC Chair Sheila Bair warns

    [ad_1]

    Market optimism over the potential for interest rate cuts next year is dangerously overdone, according to former FDIC Chair Sheila Bair.

    Bair, who ran the FDIC during the 2008 financial crisis, suggests Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell was irresponsibly dovish at last week’s policy meeting by creating “irrational exuberance” among investors.

    “The focus still needs to be on inflation,” Bair told CNBC’s “Fast Money” on Thursday. “There’s a long way to go on this fight. I do worry they’re [the Fed] blinking a bit and now trying to pivot and worry about recession, when I don’t see any of that risk in the data so far.”

    After holding rates steady Wednesday for the third time in a row, the Fed set an expectation for at least three rate cuts next year totaling 75 basis points. And the markets ran with it.

    The Dow hit all-time highs in the final three days of last week. The blue-chip index is on its longest weekly win streak since 2019 while the S&P 500 is on its longest weekly win streak since 2017. It’s now 115% above its Covid-19 pandemic low.

    Bair believes the market’s bullish reaction to the Fed is on borrowed time.

    “This is a mistake. I think they need to keep their eye on the inflation ball and tame the market, not reinforce it with this … dovish dot plot,” Bair said. “My concern is the prospect of the significant lowering of rates in 2024.”

    Bair still sees prices for services and rental housing as serious sticky spots. Plus, she worries that deficit spending, trade restrictions and an aging population will also create meaningful inflation pressures.

    “[Rates] should stay put. We’ve got good trend lines. We need to be patient and watch and see how this plays out,” Bair said.

    Disclaimer

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Big bank executives will assure lawmakers the industry's crisis is over, KBW CEO Thomas Michaud predicts

    Big bank executives will assure lawmakers the industry's crisis is over, KBW CEO Thomas Michaud predicts

    [ad_1]

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Public workers may receive reduced Social Security benefits. There’s growing support in Congress to change that

    Public workers may receive reduced Social Security benefits. There’s growing support in Congress to change that

    [ad_1]

    Araya Doheny | Getty Images

    When Dave Bernstein, 87, started working at the U.S. Postal Service in February 1970, he was making $2.35 an hour.

    To supplement his income, he also took on other work. Years later, Bernstein decided in 1992 to take a voluntary retirement.

    “We knew there was going to be a reduced pension because of the early out,” said Phyllis Bernstein, Dave’s wife, who is 84.

    But what came next was something the couple did not expect.

    While Dave was expecting a monthly Social Security check of around $800, it ended up being just about half that amount – around $415 – even though he had earned the required 40 credits to be fully insured by the program. The benefits were adjusted based on rules for workers who earn both pension and Social Security benefits.

    More from Personal Finance:
    Will Social Security be there for me when I retire?
    Medicare open enrollment may cut retirees’ health-care costs
    How much your Social Security check may be in 2024

    The couple, who reside in Tampa, Florida, have had a different retirement than they envisioned due to the lower income.

    Phyllis kept working until she was 82. They have also turned to family for financial support.

    Their lifestyle is frugal, with home-cooked meals and cars they kept for 20 years, or “until the wheels were falling off,” the couple jokes.

    But their limited resources have made traveling to Australia and New Zealand – Phyllis’ dream – out of reach.

    “When he retired, I was working,” Phyllis said. “We just couldn’t do the travel.”

    Today, Dave is pushing for the Social Security rules that reduced his benefits to be changed.

    His union, the American Postal Workers Union, has endorsed the Social Security Fairness Act, a bill proposed in Congress that would repeal Social Security rules known as the Windfall Elimination Provision, or WEP, and Government Pension Offset, or GPO, that reduce benefits for workers had positions where they did not pay Social Security taxes, also called non-covered earnings.

    The legislation has support from other organizations that represent public workers, including teachers, firefighters and police.

    The bill has overwhelming bipartisan support in the House of Representatives – 300 co-sponsors – at a time when that chamber has been politically divided. That support recently prompted House lawmakers to send a letter to leaders of the Ways and Means Committee to request a hearing.

    The Social Security Fairness Act has also been introduced in the Senate, with support from 49 leaders from both sides of the aisle.

    Yet some experts say just getting rid of the rules may not be the most effective way of making the system fairer.

    How the WEP, GPO rules work

    The WEP applies to how retirement or disability benefits are calculated if a worker earned a retirement or disability pension from an employer who did not withhold Social Security taxes and qualifies for Social Security from work in other jobs where they did pay taxes into the program.

    Social Security benefits are calculated using a worker’s average indexed monthly earnings, and then using a formula to calculate a worker’s basic benefit amount. For workers affected by the WEP, part of the replacement rate for the average indexed monthly earnings is brought down to 40% from 90%.

    The GPO, meanwhile, reduces benefits for spouses and widows or widowers of recipients of retirement or disability pensions from local, state or federal governments.

    It affects hundreds of thousands, if not millions of public employees that paid into Social Security and essentially are being penalized because they also happen to be public servants.

    Edward Kelly

    general president of the International Association of Fire Fighters

    Under the GPO, Social Security benefits are reduced by two-thirds of the government pension. If two-thirds of the government pension is more than the Social Security benefit, the Social Security benefit may be zero.

    The impact of the rules is far reaching, according to Edward Kelly, general president of the International Association of Fire Fighters. Many firefighters work in second jobs in the private sector as cab drivers, bar tenders or truck drivers, where they earn credits toward Social Security.

    “They steal their money, because they’re also public employees,” said Kelly, who describes his union members as “passionately angry” about the issue.

    “It affects hundreds of thousands, if not millions of public employees that paid into Social Security and essentially are being penalized because they also happen to be public servants, whether they are teachers, cops and, obviously, firefighters,” Kelly said.

    Why experts say another fix may be better

    The WEP and GPO rules were intended to make it so workers who pay Social Security taxes for their entire careers are treated the same as those who do not.

    But under those current rules, some beneficiaries receive lower benefits than they would have if they paid into Social Security for all of their careers, while others receive higher benefits, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center.

    Yet repealing the WEP and GPO rules would result in Social Security benefits that are “overly generous” for non-covered workers, research has found.

    Part of what may create that advantage is that Social Security benefits are progressive, and therefore replace a larger share of income for lower earners. So someone who only has part of their salary history in Social Security may get a higher replacement rate without considering their pension income.

    Fully repealing the WEP and GPO rules may also come with higher costs at a time when the program facing a funding shortfall. The change would add an estimated $150 billion to the program’s costs in the next 10 years, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

    Another way of handling the disparity may be to create a proportional approach to income replacement. Instead of the WEP, workers’ benefits would be calculated based on all of their earnings and then adjusted to reflect the share of their careers that were in jobs covered by Social Security. A similar approach may be taken with the GPO.

    Certain bills on Capitol Hill propose a proportional approach.

    However, a proportional formula may not solve all the inequities in the current system, according to Emerson Sprick, senior economic analyst at the Bipartisan Policy Center, which has prompted to think tank to work on refining its proposal.

    ‘Extremely complex’ to understand

    An important advantage to reforming the current formulas would be making it easier for workers to understand and plan for their retirements.

    “It is definitely extremely complex, and very hard for folks preparing for retirement or in retirement, to understand what it means for their benefits,” Sprick said.

    Social Security statements that provide retirement benefit estimates do not take these rules into account.

    Consequently, many workers find out their benefits are adjusted when they are about to retire.

    shapecharge | E+ | Getty Images

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Moody’s lowers U.S. credit-rating outlook to negative, warns ‘fiscal deficits will remain very large’

    Moody’s lowers U.S. credit-rating outlook to negative, warns ‘fiscal deficits will remain very large’

    [ad_1]

    Moody’s Investors Service turned negative on the US’s credit rating outlook Friday, citing risks to the nation’s fiscal strength and political polarization.

    The rating assessor lowered the outlook from stable, even as it affirmed the nation’s rating at Aaa, the highest investment-grade notch.

    “Downside risks to the US’ fiscal strength have increased and may no longer be fully offset by the sovereign’s unique credit strengths,” William Foster, a senior credit officer at Moody’s, wrote in a statement. “In the context of higher interest rates, without effective fiscal policy measures to reduce government spending or increase revenues, Moody’s expects that the US’ fiscal deficits will remain very large, significantly weakening debt affordability.”

    Moody’s, which is the only remaining major credit grader to assign the US a top rating, said the Aaa affirmation reflects that the US’s formidable credit strengths still preserve its credit profile.

    In a statement, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said the outlook change was a “consequence of congressional Republican extremism and dysfunction.” Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Wally Adeyemo, meanwhile, pushed back against the outlook change, saying the “American economy remains strong, and Treasury securities are the world’s preeminent safe and liquid asset.”

    Moody’s had earlier hinted at a potential downgrade, saying in a Sept. 25 report that while “debt service payments would not be impacted and a short-lived shutdown would be unlikely to disrupt the economy, it would underscore the weakness of US institutional and governance strength relative to other Aaa-rated sovereigns.”

    Fitch Ratings has the United States’ sovereign rating at a score of AA+, one notch below its highest mark, after the credit assessor downgraded the US government in August following the latest debt-ceiling battle. S&P Global Ratings has it at a score of AA+, also just below its top grade, having stripped the US of its top score in 2011 on the heels of an earlier debt-ceiling crisis.

    Ten-year Treasury note futures dropped after the announcement, reaching fresh session lows. The yield on US 10-year Treasuries, meanwhile, extended back through 4.65% and ended the session matching the highs reached in the Asia session.

    The government’s credit plans have been in particular focus after the Treasury last week announced that it would borrow $112 billion in quarterly refunding and said it expects one more step up in quarterly issuance of longer-term debt.

    The US also faces a government shutdown on Nov. 18 if Congress doesn’t come to an agreement to pass short-term spending bills. These economic disruptions would come at a challenging time for investors, who already have to contend with a toxic mix of large US fiscal deficits and persistent inflation.

    “Continued political polarization within US Congress raises the risk that successive governments will not be able to reach consensus on a fiscal plan to slow the decline in debt affordability,” according to Moody’s.

    Subscribe to the CFO Daily newsletter to keep up with the trends, issues, and executives shaping corporate finance. Sign up for free.

    [ad_2]

    Carter Johnson, Bloomberg

    Source link

  • Zombie firms are filing for bankruptcy as the Fed commits to higher rates

    Zombie firms are filing for bankruptcy as the Fed commits to higher rates

    [ad_1]

    In the U.S., 516 publicly listed firms have filed for bankruptcy from January through September 2023. Many of these firms have survived for several years with surging debt and lagging sales.

    “The share of zombie firms has been increasing over time,” said Bruno Albuquerque, an economist at the International Monetary Fund. “This has detrimental effects on healthy firms who compete in the same sector.”

    Zombie firms are unprofitable businesses that stay afloat by taking on new debt. Banks lend to these weak firms in hopes that they can turn their trend of sinking sales around.

    “A really healthy, well-capitalized banking system and financial sector is one of the most important factors in ensuring that unhealthy firms are wound down in a timely way rather than being propped up,” said Kathryn Judge, a professor of law at Columbia University.

    Economists say that zombie firms may become more prevalent when banks or governments bail out unviable firms. But the Federal Reserve says the share of firms that are zombies fell after the Covid-19 emergency stimulus measures were implemented. The Fed says banks are refusing to keep weak firms in business with favorable extensions of credit.

    The Fed economists point to healthy balance sheets at U.S. firms, despite the increasing weight of interest rate hikes. The effective federal funds rate was 5.33% in October 2023, up from 0.08% in October 2021.

    “The biggest implication of the rapid rise in interest rates that we’ve seen the last five or six quarters, actually, is that it reestablished cash,” said Lotfi Karoui, chief credit strategist at Goldman Sachs. “That actually puts some constraints on risk assets.”

    The Fed says it thinks interest rates will remain higher for longer. “Given the fast pace of tightening, there may still be meaningful tightening in the pipeline,” Fed Chair Jerome Powell said at an Economic Club of New York speech Oct. 19.

    Watch the video above to learn more about the Fed’s battle with unviable zombie firms in the U.S.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How the Fed fights zombie firms

    How the Fed fights zombie firms

    [ad_1]

    Share

    Some firms sustain their businesses by taking on more debt that they can repay. Economists call them zombie companies. When compared to their peers, zombies are smaller in size and deliver lower returns to investors. These companies distort markets, keeping resources from their fundamentally sound competitors. Banks and governments keep zombie firms alive with bailout loans. As the Federal Reserve resets the economy with higher interest rates, many zombie firms are filing for bankruptcy.

    10:01

    Tue, Oct 31 20236:00 AM EDT

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Central Banks Search for Lessons From the Great Inflation Outbreak

    Central Banks Search for Lessons From the Great Inflation Outbreak

    [ad_1]

    (Bloomberg) — After the most aggressive monetary-tightening campaign in four decades, academics and economic practitioners are running autopsies on what could have prevented the cost-of-living crisis and how to ensure the same mistakes won’t be repeated.

    Most Read from Bloomberg

    Markets have scrambled to price in high-for-longer interest rates, with a new war in the Middle East adding yet more risk to an already uncertain outlook confronting central bankers as they gather for their penultimate meetings of a tumultuous year.

    The policy navel-gazing is centering around three debates. How much flexibility central banks can allow in reaching their inflation targets, the effectiveness of asset purchases in the policy mix, and the merits of monetary and fiscal coordination.

    Bloomberg surveyed economists from around the world to gather views on those three debates. Their verdict: Central banks won’t break their economies in a rush to hit inflation targets, QE will be used more sparingly in the future, and fiscal policy risks countering the work of monetary authorities.

    What Bloomberg Economics Says…

    “A long period of galloping price gains, and fears that the last yards back to target could be most painful for workers, have reignited the debate about whether central banks should aim for a higher rate of inflation. That’s a conversation worth having. But for monetary policymakers, the imperative of retaining credibility means the right time for it is after inflation is back at target, not before.”

    — Tom Orlik, chief economist

    Rethinking Targets

    So long as people believe prices will get back toward 2%, central bankers have some leeway in deciding how aggressive they need to be in pursuing that goal.

    Economists covering 16 of the world’s most important central banks say policymakers will allow more time to bring inflation back to target if it means less damage to their economies. The Bloomberg special survey also shows that a sizable minority sees them going even further, accepting price pressures that are either slightly too strong or too weak — as long as expectations remain anchored.

    Olivier Blanchard, a former IMF chief economist, has long argued in favor of raising the inflation target, and former European Central Bank Vice President Vitor Constancio has also embraced the idea. But it’s a controversial view and only possible from a position of credibility, which means central banks would likely have to get inflation back to 2% first.

    “It would be a mistake of the first order to think you can change a goal you have set if you can’t achieve it,” according to Bundesbank President Joachim Nagel.

    Global trends suggest inflation will be stronger than in the past, with former Bank of England Governor Mark Carney among those saying rates won’t return to pre-pandemic lows.

    One lesson Gita Gopinath, the IMF’s No. 2 official, draws from the latest inflation episode is that policymakers mustn’t assume that looking through supply shocks — as text books suggest — is the optimal response. She recommends they be ready to react preemptively, even when inflation hasn’t yet spun out of control.

    They may be called into action soon on that front, should an escalation in the conflict in the Middle East hit oil deliveries.

    When the next big global slowdown comes, though, flexibility may be needed the other way. Europe’s eight-year experiment with negative rates ended with mixed reviews last summer as to whether it was all worth it.

    The Bank for International Settlements argues that there’s room for greater tolerance for moderate shortfalls even if they’re persistent, because “low-inflation regimes, in contrast to high-inflation ones, have self-stabilizing properties.”

    Rethinking Quantitative Easing

    With a more flexible approach to those 2% targets, monetary policy after the 2008 financial crisis would have looked very different in many parts of the world. Trillions of dollars, euros, yen and pounds of asset purchases did little to raise prices in the face of global disinflationary forces until governments used the money they raised to stuff cash into consumers’ pockets during Covid lockdowns.

    But that’s also been blamed for distorting financial markets. Episodes such as the Silicon Valley Bank blow-up are seen by some as a direct result of central bank reserves creation under QE, along with regulatory and supervision failures.

    Only 40% of economists surveyed predict central banks will use QE the same way as they did before. A quarter expect them to deploy it more sparingly, about 30% see its only role going forward as a tool to address financial-stability concerns and a small minority doesn’t see it being used again at all.

    There are other problems with bond-buying that may affect how it’s used in the future. QE effectively swaps long-term borrowing costs for short-term ones. What’s been a lucrative deal for taxpayers when official interest rates were low has now turned into a disastrous trade.

    The clearest depiction of the problem is in the UK, where the BOE secured taxpayer indemnity for any losses on QE. Over the next decade, it estimates, its purchases will cost the government over £200 billion ($243 billion).

    And policymakers have little experience in unwinding their balance sheets, where small mistakes can trigger big market turbulence.

    The Fed experienced some of that when it tried to shrink bond holdings between 2017 and 2019. More recent efforts to reduce portfolios have progressed rather smoothly, partially because central banks have amassed so much debt over the years that they’re far away from any thresholds that would trigger a squeeze.

    But the fact that they’re treating quantitative tightening as a technical adjustment rather than a part of their efforts to conquer inflation raises questions about the future use of a tool that’s only trusted to work one way.

    The ECB faces an extra legal burden on bond holdings that comes with operating in a currency union of 20 countries. Concerns around illegally financing governments and debt mutualization have already landed the central bank in court several times.

    Mixing Policies

    Low interest rates and large-scale QE programs allowed treasuries to borrow on the cheap to finance stimulus campaigns, protecting labor markets, businesses and consumers from collapse. But the spending blowout throughout and since the pandemic — part critical emergency funding, part political need to show an all-hands-on-deck approach in crisis — contributed to the latest outbreak in inflation.

    While the same kind of pulling in the same direction is needed to restrain demand, many governments are concerned that if they tighten policy too hard, voters will kick them out and replace them with populists or extremists. That’s reviving questions about whether central banks can deliver price stability all on their own.

    “If we were designing optimal policy arrangements from scratch, monetary and fiscal policy would both have a role in managing the economic cycle and inflation, and that there would be close coordination,” Philip Lowe said in his last speech as Australian central bank governor in September.

    Economists surveyed by Bloomberg predict fiscal policy will somewhat counteract the Fed’s efforts to rein in inflation in the US.

    “It’s true that there are circumstances where working hand in hand and supporting each other has proved helpful,” ECB President Christine Lagarde told a panel discussion in June at the institution’s annual economic forum.

    Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who sat to her right, signaled he wasn’t ready to rely on that kind of cooperation. “Our assignment is to deliver price stability kind of regardless of the stance of fiscal policy.”

    Central bankers warn that any failure to scale back fiscal spending risks coming at the cost of yet higher interest rates. They also want elected officials to put in place policies that help deliver sustainable growth.

    “A change in mindset needs to happen,” said Agustin Carstens, the former governor of the Bank of Mexico who’s now the general manager of the BIS. “Growth needs to depend less on fiscal and monetary policy, it should depend more on structural policies.”

    –With assistance from Philip Aldrick, Rich Miller, Harumi Ichikura, Cynthia Li, Sarina Yoo, Andrew Langley and Zoe Schneeweiss.

    Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek

    ©2023 Bloomberg L.P.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 75% of people ages 50 and up worry Social Security will run out of money in their lifetimes, survey finds

    75% of people ages 50 and up worry Social Security will run out of money in their lifetimes, survey finds

    [ad_1]

    AleksandarNakic | E+ | Getty Images

    The subject of Social Security was largely left untouched in the first Republican presidential debate.

    But worries about the future of the program loom large in Americans’ minds, a recent survey from Nationwide Retirement Institute shows.

    To that point, 75% of individuals ages 50 and up worry Social Security will run out of funding in their lifetimes, according to the survey of 1,806 individuals taken between May and June.

    That is up from 66% of adults who said the same in 2014.

    Those concerns have increased as the depletion dates for the program’s funds come closer. The program’s combined funds are due to run out in 2034, at which point 80% of benefits will be payable, Social Security’s trustees have said.

    More from Personal Finance:
    Many borrowers may have a different student loan servicer
    Here’s how to save on school supplies, deal hunters say
    If you found gold coins, the tax man wants a piece

    Meanwhile, the fund the program relies on to pay retirement benefits is projected to last until 2033 — just a decade away — with 77% of benefits payable at that time.

    “You’ve got people on this stage that won’t even talk about Social Security and Medicare,” former vice president Mike Pence said during Wednesday’s Republican primary debate.

    In a February interview with CNBC, Pence said it was necessary to “get everybody at the table” to discuss the future of the programs.

    “There’s lots of good ideas to solve this that are common sense that don’t impact people at the point of the need, that don’t affect anybody that is going to retire in the next 25 years,” Pence said, pointing to legislation passed 50 years ago that raised the retirement age and ushered in long-time solvency.

    While the other candidates didn’t take Pence’s bait to debate the future of the programs on Wednesday, they have addressed them in separate interviews.

    Florida Governor Ron DeSantis told Fox News in July that he would “protect people’s Social Security,” though he is open to reform.

    “Talking about making changes for people in their 30s or 40s so that the program’s viable, you know, that’s a much different thing, and that’s something that I think that there’s going to need to be discussions on,” he said.

    Uncertainty about the future of Social Security comes as more Americans rely on the program for their sole source of income, with 21% doing so according to Nationwide’s latest retirement survey, versus 13% in 2014.

    Meanwhile, just 31% said they currently have income from pensions, versus 48% who said the same 10 years ago.

    While the fate of Social Security remains uncertain, experts say there are a couple of things people can do to position themselves for the most benefits available to them.

    “This is one of the largest decisions you’ll make in your life” — and one people are least informed about when going into it, said Tina Ambrozy, senior vice president of strategic customer solutions at Nationwide.

    1. Base claiming strategy on your personal situation

    Uncertainty around the future of Social Security is the No. 1 reason many retirees are claiming before age 70 – the maximum age it pays to wait to before getting benefits – and full retirement age, when they stand to receive 100% of the benefits they earned, a Schroders survey recently found. (Find out your full retirement age by using this calculator.)

    But experts say it’s still best to base your retirement claiming strategy on your personal situation, rather than fears about the program’s outlook.

    Even if lawmakers fail to enact changes to Social Security before the depletion dates, the average retiree will still receive around 77 cents on the dollar, Joe Elsasser, a certified financial planner and founder and president of Covisum, a Social Security claiming software company, recently told CNBC.com.

    Targeting the claiming strategy that will get you the most benefits will put you in a strong position, even if there are changes down the road.

    To be sure, waiting to claim is not the best strategy for everyone, and the decision shouldn’t be based exclusively on age, Ambrozy said.

    2. Get educated on the ins and outs of the rules

    Social Security comes with many complex rules, and almost half of adults — 49% — said they know how to maximize their benefits, Nationwide’s survey found.

    Yet just 13% of adults can correctly guess their full retirement age, which is when they are eligible for 100% of the benefits they earned.

    Notably, almost half of respondents — 49% — erroneously believe their benefits will go up at full retirement age even if they claim early.

    “Once you elect to start receiving benefits, it locks in,” Ambrozy said. “You’re not just going to just step up based on age.”

    To avoid costly mistakes, experts say it’s best to study up on the program’s rules, including information provided by the Social Security Administration.

    We just are big believers that you should ask for help and don’t wait until it’s too late.

    Tina Ambrozy

    senior vice president of strategic customer solutions at Nationwide

    To gauge how much money you may be eligible for in retirement, it helps to set up an online Social Security account, where you can also make sure your earnings history and other crucial information is correct.

    But prospective beneficiaries should avoid asking workers in their Social Security office for advice, Ambrozy said, as they may not be experts in claiming strategies.

    Instead, consulting a financial advisor who is well versed in Social Security can help you identify the most optimal claiming strategy for your personal situation.

    “We just are big believers that you should ask for help and don’t wait until it’s too late,” Ambrozy said. “Don’t wait until you’ve already filed and you’re starting to collect and then suddenly you realize you’ve made an incorrect choice.”

     

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • As Republican contenders start to line up for the White House in 2024, Social Security may be key issue

    As Republican contenders start to line up for the White House in 2024, Social Security may be key issue

    [ad_1]

    zimmytws | iStock | Getty Images

    Last November’s midterm elections were expected to bring a so-called “red wave” of wins for Republican candidates. But ultimately, voters gave Democrats an edge in some of the most competitive congressional districts.

    One deciding factor was candidates’ messages around Social Security and Medicare, which helped sway voters, particularly those ages 50 and up, according to an analysis from AARP following the Nov. 8 election.

    Now, as the 2024 presidential election approaches, and GOP hopefuls line up for their party’s nomination, they face new pressure to decide where they stand, particularly with Social Security.

    Former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis — who thus far are in the lead in the Republican polls — have so far pledged not to touch the program.

    “Under no circumstances should Republicans vote to cut a single penny from Medicare or Social Security to help pay for Joe Biden’s reckless spending spree,” Trump said in January.

    In March, DeSantis told Fox News, “We’re not going to mess with Social Security as Republicans.”

    Their position matches that of President Joe Biden, who during the State of the Union prompted both sides of the aisle to agree the program is “off the books.”

    More from Personal Finance:
    This tool lets you play at fixing Social Security woes
    Retirement-savings gap may cost economy $1.3 trillion by 2040
    How a retirement age change could affect younger Americans

    While that stance is popular with the public, some experts say it is ill-advised.

    “It’s fundamentally irresponsible to say we’re not going to touch it when everybody who’s ever looked at the finances of the program recognizes that it’s going bankrupt,” said Whit Ayres, president of North Star Opinion Research, a center-right political polling operation.

    The situation presents an opportunity for a hero to emerge, one who can put the program on sound financial footing, Ayres said.

    One longshot Republican hopeful — former Cranston, Rhode Island, mayor Steve Laffey — plans to enter the race with his own bold plan to reconstruct Social Security as the first priority on his agenda.

    “Our biggest problem is this: We as Americans simply don’t directly confront our problems,” Laffey said.

    Social Security is the “ultimate example of that,” he said.

    Changes needed ‘sooner rather than later’

    A crucial inflection point, particularly for Social Security, is coming, according to the program’s trustees.

    Social Security’s combined funds will only be able to pay full benefits until 2034. At that point, just 80% of benefits will be payable if nothing is done sooner.

    Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle would need to agree on fixes for the program. These could include benefit cuts, such as raising the retirement age, tax increases or a combination of both.

    But with Democrats vowing to protect benefits and Republicans swearing off tax increases, that has thus far left little room for compromise.

    As Washington leaders recently worked out a deal to raise the nation’s debt ceiling for two years, the cost of Social Security and Medicare came under scrutiny.

    Both Social Security and Medicare fall under the category of mandatory spending, which altogether represents more than two-thirds of the nation’s budget, according to the Tax Foundation.

    Consequently, it is impossible to address the nation’s spending without addressing those programs, according to Tax Foundation economist Alex Durante.

    “The longer we push this out, it becomes more difficult to try to protect everyone that receives the benefits,” Durante said. “It’s important that we tackle this sooner rather than later.”

    Proposal for ‘modern version’ of Social Security

    The Social Security plan Laffey would implement throws out the traditional approaches of tax increases or benefit cuts.

    Instead, he wants to gradually phase out the FICA tax completely. Currently, workers and employers each pay 6.2% on up to $160,200 in wages toward Social Security.

    That would be replaced by new Personal Security System accounts, to which workers would contribute 10% of their pay. Those balances would be invested in a weighted index of global stocks, bonds and other securities.

    The plan comes from Laurence Kotlikoff, a Boston University economics professor who has devoted much of his career to helping people get the most from Social Security and demystifying the program’s many rules.

    Kotlikoff himself ran for president in 2012 and 2016 as a third-party candidate. In subsequent election cycles, he has urged Laffey to run.

    The two met when Laffey was working on “Fixing America,” a 2012 documentary about Americans’ perspectives on fixing the country’s problems post-financial crisis. Laffey wrote and co-produced the documentary, for which he interviewed Kotlikoff.

    Laffey, a former Morgan Keegan executive, has mostly been out of politics after serving two terms as mayor of Cranston, Rhode Island.

    He ran for a U.S. Senate seat in Rhode Island in 2006 and then in 2014 pursued the Republican nomination for a U.S. House seat representing Colorado, where he now lives. He was unsuccessful in both races.

    Republican 2024 presidential hopeful Steve Laffey arrives for an interview at a local TV station in Cranston, Rhode Island, on March 17, 2023.

    Ed Jones | Afp | Getty Images

    Laffey launched a campaign for mayor at a time when Cranston had the lowest bond rating in America, he said. The big accomplishment he boasts as Cranston mayor is bringing the city’s bond rating up. The city’s S&P rating climbed to an A- in 2006 from a B in 2002, according to a spokesman for Laffey.

    The Social Security plan would be a fully funded system, where you get your money back in the form of an inflation-indexed annuity, according to Kotlikoff.

    “It’s a modern version of Social Security,” Kotlikoff said.

    The goal would be to give beneficiaries a bigger return on the money than they get now.

    It also aims to address the program’s current inequities. The government would make matching contributions on behalf of lower earners, the disabled and unemployed. Spouses would share their contributions to the program equally.

    The investment strategies would be computerized and custodied by the federal government, not by Wall Street. Everyone would get the same rate of return, Kotlikoff noted.

    The expectation is that over a 40-year time horizon the accounts would be able to make up for down years and ultimately provide workers with more money than today’s Social Security program.

    The hope is a worker who is 20 years old in 2025 may eventually stand to get $10,000 per month, rather than $2,000, which would be a “lot better,” Laffey said.

    The plan coincides with Laffey’s plans to overhaul government spending, such as changing the Federal Reserve’s inflation target to zero, rather than the current goal of 2%, in order to force Congress to work within its budget.

    ‘Both sides are going to have to give’

    Because any changes to Social Security involve strict emotions, the big question is whether lawmakers and Americans would be ready to embrace a new direction for the program.

    The idea of rethinking the way Social Security funds are invested has come up before.

    While in office, President George W. Bush had proposed letting Americans save part of their Social Security taxes in personal retirement accounts, referred to as “partial privatization.”

    Andrew Biggs, who worked in the White House on Social Security reform at the time and who is now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, remembers the proposal did not come close to succeeding, even as Social Security still had surpluses and Republicans controlled both houses of Congress.

    Consequently, privatization — where personal accounts are funded out of part of the existing payroll tax — would be a long shot, he said.

    “If Bush couldn’t do it then, despite a great effort, that’s not happening now,” Biggs said.

    But personal accounts funded on top of the existing Social Security program, such as ensuring everyone signs up for a retirement plan at work, could be “more possible,” he said.

    Another challenge may be getting Americans to embrace the idea.

    The only people who like personalized accounts are affluent, college-educated white men, said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster and president at Lake Research Partners, who has conducted focus groups with married couples on the subject.

    Women of all ages, who are very worried about the future of the program for their own economic security, are less likely to embrace the idea, she said.

    Biden and Trump campaign signs are displayed as voters line up to cast their ballots during early voting at the Alafaya Branch Library in Orlando, Florida, Oct. 30, 2020.

    Getty Images

    For candidates, taking such a position can also jeopardize their primary and general election viability, Lake said.

    Yet Ayres, of North Star Opinion Research, sees an opportunity for reforms much like President Ronald Reagan helped usher in, which put Social Security on sound financial footing for half a century, he said.

    That likely won’t come from an “unworkable” overhaul of the program, Ayres said, but instead more marginal changes, such as raising the retirement age by several months and increasing the cap on Social Security earnings.

    Like Reagan’s efforts, it would also require bipartisan commissions, he said.

    As with the newly inked debt ceiling deal, “both sides are going to have to give a little bit,” Ayres said.

    “Just putting your head in the sand and waiting for it to go bankrupt is a fundamentally irresponsible position,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A.I. trade is leaving investors vulnerable to painful losses: Evercore

    A.I. trade is leaving investors vulnerable to painful losses: Evercore

    [ad_1]

    The artificial intelligence trade may be leaving investors vulnerable to significant losses.

    Evercore ISI’s Julian Emanuel warns Big Tech concentration in the S&P 500 is at extreme levels.

    “The AI revolution is likely quite real, quite significant. But… these things unfold in waves. And, you get a little too much enthusiasm and the stocks sell off,” the firm’s senior managing director told CNBC’s “Fast Money” on Monday.

    In a research note out this week, Emanuel listed Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Nvidia and Alphabet as concerns due to clustering in the names.

    “Two-thirds [of the S&P 500 are] driven by those top five names,” he told host Melissa Lee. “The public continues to be disproportionately exposed.”

    Emanuel reflected on “odd conversations” he had over the past several days with people viewing Big Tech stocks as hiding places.

    “[They] actually look at T-bills and wonder whether they’re safe. [They] look at bank deposits over $250,000 and wonder whether they’re safe and are putting money into the top five large-cap tech names,” said Emanuel. “It’s extraordinary.”

    It’s particularly concerning because the bullish activity comes as small caps are getting slammed, according to Emanuel. The Russell 2000, which has exposure to regional bank pressures, is trading closer to the October low.

    For protection against losses, Emanuel is overweight cash. He finds yields at 5% attractive and plans to put the money to work during the next market downturn. Emanuel believes it will be sparked by debt ceiling chaos and a troubled economy over the next few months.

    “You want to stay in the more defensive sectors. Interestingly enough with all of this AI talk, health care and consumer staples have outperformed since April 1,” Emanuel said. “They’re going to continue outperforming.”

    Disclaimer

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Survey Finds Americans Have $21 Billion In Unspent Gift Cards

    Survey Finds Americans Have $21 Billion In Unspent Gift Cards

    [ad_1]

    A new survey found that 47% of Americans have one unused gift card, voucher, or store credit, totaling $21 billion nationwide, with the average person having $175 in such unused funds. What do you think?

    “What a waste of so many thoughtless gifts.”

    Lamar Headen, Deregulator

    “How else do people expect someone to save for retirement?”

    Eric Borreguero, Unemployed

    “Oh, I thought that was just a piece of plastic with the word ‘Sephora’ on it.”

    Keesha Sheffield, Freelance Alternate

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China’s Xi visiting Saudi Arabia amid bid to boost economy

    China’s Xi visiting Saudi Arabia amid bid to boost economy

    [ad_1]

    BEIJING — Chinese leader Xi Jinping is attending a pair of regional summits in Saudi Arabia this week amid efforts to kick-start economic growth weighed down by strict anti-COVID-19 measures.

    The Foreign Ministry said Wednesday that Xi will attend the inaugural China-Arab States Summit and a meeting with leaders of the six nations that make up the Gulf Cooperation Council in the Saudi capital of Riyadh. His state visit to Saudi Arabia will end on Saturday.

    China is the world’s second largest economy and a major source of outward investment. To fuel massive demand, it imports half its oil, of which half of those imports come from Saudi Arabia, amounting to tens of billions of dollars annually.

    China’s economic growth had been on a steady decline for years and was dealt a major blow by rolling lockdowns imposed across the country as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Chinese economic growth rebounded to 3.9% over a year earlier in the three months ending in September, up from the first half of the year’s 2.2%, but still well short of the government target.

    China’s COVID-19 infection numbers are lower than those of the United States and other major countries. But the ruling party is sticking to “zero-COVID,” which calls for isolating every case, while other governments are relaxing travel and other controls and trying to live with the virus.

    China’s ruling Communist Party shares many of the authoritarian tendencies of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, shielding Beijing from criticism over its harsh policies toward Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities. More than a million have been sent to detention centers where they report being forced to denounce Islam and swear fealty to Xi and the party.

    Beijing denies the charges, saying they have been providing job training and ridding Muslims of extremist, separatist and terroristic tendencies.

    The trip to Saudi Arabia marks a further move by Xi to restore his global profile after spending most of the pandemic inside China. Xi was granted a third five-year term in October, but street protests against “zero-COVID” policies last month saw the most significant public challenge to his rule and may have prompted a relaxation of some measures.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UK’s self-billed ‘Scrooge’ promises tax rises, spending cuts

    UK’s self-billed ‘Scrooge’ promises tax rises, spending cuts

    [ad_1]

    Britain’s Treasury chief, Jeremy Hunt, has warned a spending crunch and tax increases are on their way as he bids to fill the “black hole” in the country’s finances

    LONDON — Britain’s Treasury chief warned Sunday of a coming spending crunch and tax increases for cash-strapped Britons as he bids to fill the “black hole” in the country’s finances.

    Billing himself as a Scrooge figure ahead of Thursday’s Autumn Statement, when he will update Parliament on the government’s budget measures, Jeremy Hunt said he was forced to make “very difficult decisions” in his attempt to curb inflation and put the economy back on an even keel.

    He told British broadcasters that he was determined to make an expected recession as shallow as possible, and warned that everyone could expect to pay more tax.

    “I’m a Conservative chancellor and I think I’ve been completely explicit that taxes are going to go up, and that’s a very difficult thing for me to do because I came into politics to do the exact opposite,” he told the BBC, using his official title, Chancellor of the Exchequer.

    Hunt is seeking to make up to 60 billion pounds ($71 billion) in savings and extra revenue in a bid to tighten up public finances and undo some of the damage economists say was done by his predecessor, Kwasi Kwarteng, and former prime minister Liz Truss.

    According to the Resolution Foundation, a think tank, Truss and Kwarteng blew 20 billion pounds on unfunded cuts to national insurance and stamp duty, with a further 10 billion lost to higher interest rates and Government borrowing costs.

    Hunt said he would continue his predecessor’s pledge to help Britons with soaring energy bills, but added government departments could expect to see cuts.

    Earlier he told The Sunday Times in an interview “I’m Scrooge who’s going to do things that make sure Christmas is never canceled.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bank of England makes biggest interest rate hike in 30 years

    Bank of England makes biggest interest rate hike in 30 years

    [ad_1]

    LONDON — The Bank of England made its biggest interest rate increase in three decades Thursday, joining the U.S. Federal Reserve and other central banks worldwide in rapid hikes as it tries to beat back stubbornly high inflation fueled by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the disastrous economic policies of former Prime Minister Liz Truss.

    The central bank boosted its key rate by three-quarters of a percentage point, to 3%, after consumer price inflation returned to a 40-year high in September. The aggressive move comes even as the bank predicted a two-year economic contraction through June 2024, which would be the longest recession since at least 1955, according to the Office for National Statistics.

    “If we don’t take action to bring inflation down, it gets worse,” Bank of England Gov. Andrew Bailey told reporters. “There’s no easy outcome in this sense.”

    Even so, the central bank should not increase its key rate too far, he said, but with uncertainties ahead, policymakers will “respond forcefully” if needed.

    The interest rate decision is the first since Truss’ government announced 45 billion pounds ($52 billion) of unfunded tax cuts that sparked turmoil on financial markets, pushed up mortgage costs and forced Truss from office after just six weeks. Her successor, Rishi Sunak, has warned of spending cuts and tax increases as he seeks to undo the damage and show that Britain is committed to paying its bills.

    “High energy, food and other bills are hitting people hard. Households have less to spend on other things. This has meant that the size of the UK economy has started to fall,” the bank said in its November monetary policy report.

    The rate increase is the Bank of England’s eighth in a row and the biggest since 1992. It comes after the U.S. Federal Reserve on Wednesday announced a fourth consecutive three-quarter point jump as central banks worldwide combat inflation that is eroding living standards and slowing economic growth.

    Central banks have struggled to contain inflation after initially believing that price increases were being fueled by international factors beyond their control. Their response intensified in recent months as it became clear that inflation was becoming embedded in the economy, feeding through into higher borrowing costs and demands for higher wages.

    The war in Ukraine boosted food and energy prices worldwide as shipments of natural gas, grain and cooking oil were disrupted. That added to inflation that began to accelerate last year when the global economy began to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Europe has been particularly hard hit by a jump in natural gas prices as Russia responded to Western sanctions and support for Ukraine by curtailing shipments of the fuel used to heat homes, generate electricity and power industry and European nations competed for alternative supplies on global markets.

    The U.K. also has struggled as wholesale gas prices increased fivefold in the 12 months through August. While prices have dropped more than 50% since the August peak, they are likely to rise again during the winter heating season, worsening inflation.

    The British government sought to shield consumers with a cap on energy prices. But after the turmoil caused by Truss’ economic policies, Treasury chief Jeremy Hunt limited the price cap to six months instead of two years, ending on March 31.

    Meanwhile, food prices have jumped 14.6% in the year through September, led by the soaring cost of staples such as meat, bread, milk and eggs, the Office for National Statistics said. That pushed consumer price inflation back to 10.1%, the highest since early 1982 and equal to the level last reached in July.

    Increases in the cost of tea bags, milk and sugar mean that even the “humble” cup of tea, which people across the country turn to when they need a break from the pressures of daily life, is getting more expensive, the British Retail Consortium said Wednesday.

    “While some supply chain costs are beginning to fall, this is more than offset by the cost of energy, meaning a difficult time ahead for retailers and households alike,” said Helen Dickinson, the consortium’s chief executive.

    Truss’ failed economic plan made things worse, driving the pound to a record low against the dollar, threatening the stability of some pension funds and triggering predictions that the Bank of England would boost interest rates higher than expected. That increased mortgage costs as lenders repriced their products.

    The economic turmoil is putting homeownership further out of reach for many young people, according to research released this week by Hamptons, a U.K. real estate agency.

    Mortgage rates average around 6.5%, compared with 2% a year ago.

    That means the average first-time homebuyer would have to make a down payment equal to 41% of the purchase price to keep their monthly repayments at the same level as a similar buyer who made a 10% down payment last year, Hamptons said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Brazil’s Lula to reclaim presidency after beating Bolsonaro

    Brazil’s Lula to reclaim presidency after beating Bolsonaro

    [ad_1]

    RIO DE JANEIRO — Brazilians delivered a very tight victory to Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in a bitter presidential election, giving the leftist former president another shot at power in a rejection of incumbent Jair Bolsonaro’s far-right politics.

    Da Silva received 50.9% of the vote and Bolsonaro 49.1%, according to the country’s election authority. Yet the morning after the results came in — and congratulations had poured in from world leaders — Bolsonaro still had yet to publicly concede or react in any way, even as truckers blockaded some roads across the country in protest.

    Bolsonaro’s campaign had made repeated — unproven — claims of possible electoral manipulation before the vote, raising fears that, if he lost, he would not accept defeat and try to challenge the results.

    For da Silva, the high-stakes election was a stunning comeback. His imprisonment for corruption sidelined him from the 2018 election won by Bolsonaro, who has used the presidency to promote conservative social values while also delivering incendiary speeches and testing democratic institutions.

    “Today the only winner is the Brazilian people,” da Silva said in a speech Sunday evening at a hotel in downtown Sao Paulo. “It’s the victory of a democratic movement that formed above political parties, personal interests and ideologies so that democracy came out victorious.”

    Da Silva is promising to govern beyond his party. He says he wants to bring in centrists and even some leaning to the right, and to restore the kind of prosperity the country enjoyed when he last served as president from 2003-2010. Yet he faces headwinds in a politically polarized society.

    Bolsonaro’s four years in office have been marked by proclaimed conservatism and defense of traditional Christian values. He claimed that his rival’s return to power would usher in communism, legalized drugs, abortion and the persecution of churches – things that didn’t happen during da Silva’s earlier eight years in office.

    This was the country’s tightest election since its return to democracy in 1985, and the first time that a sitting president failed to win reelection. Just over 2 million votes separated the two candidates; the previous closest race, in 2014, was decided by a margin of roughly 3.5 million votes.

    Some of Bolsonaro’s supporters outside his home in Rio on Sunday night screamed about electoral fraud. And overnight, truck drivers who backed Bolsonaro blocked several roads across the country, including a stretch of the Rio de Janeiro-Sao Paulo highway, local media reported. Videos posted on social media early Monday morning showed traffic at a complete halt. Similar reports popped up in several other states.

    Da Silva’s win extended a wave of recent leftist triumphs across the region, including Chile, Colombia and Argentina.

    The president-elect will inherit a nation straining against itself after he is inaugurated on Jan. 1, said Thomas Traumann, an independent political analyst who compared Sunday’s results to Biden’s 2020 victory.

    “The huge challenge that Lula has will be to pacify the country,” he said. “People are not only polarized on political matters, but also have different values, identity and opinions. What’s more, they don’t care what the other side’s values, identities and opinions are.”

    Among world leaders offering congratulations on Sunday night was U.S. President Joe Biden, who in a statement highlighted the country’s “free, fair, and credible elections.” The European Union also commended the electoral authority for its effectiveness and transparency throughout the campaign.

    Bolsonaro had been leading throughout the first half of the count and, as soon as da Silva overtook him, cars in the streets of downtown Sao Paulo began honking their horns. People in the streets of Rio de Janeiro’s Ipanema neighborhood could be heard shouting, “It turned!”

    Da Silva’s headquarters in downtown Sao Paulo hotel only erupted once the final result was announced, underscoring the tension that was a hallmark of this race.

    “Four years waiting for this,” said Gabriela Souto, one of the few supporters allowed in due to heavy security.

    Outside Bolsonaro’s home in Rio, ground-zero for his support base, a woman atop a truck delivered a prayer over a speaker, then sang excitedly, trying to generate some energy as the tally grew for da Silva. But supporters decked out in green and yellow barely responded. Many perked up when the national anthem played, singing along loudly with hands over their hearts.

    For months, it appeared that da Silva was headed for easy victory as he kindled nostalgia for his presidency, when Brazil’s economy was booming.

    Bolsonaro’s administration has been widely criticized for its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and the worst deforestation in the Amazon rainforest in 15 years. But he has built a devoted base by presenting himself as protection from leftist policies that he says infringe on personal liberties while producing economic turmoil and moral rot. He sought to shore up support in an election year with vast government spending.

    “We did not face an opponent, a candidate. We faced the machine of the Brazilian state put at his service so we could not win the election,” da Silva told the crowd in Sao Paulo.

    Da Silva built an extensive social welfare program during his tenure at president that helped lift tens of millions into the middle class. The man universally known as Lula left office with an approval rating above 80%, prompting then U.S. President Barack Obama to call him “the most popular politician on Earth.”

    But he is also remembered for his administration’s involvement in vast corruption revealed by sprawling investigations.

    Da Silva was jailed for 580 days for corruption and money laundering. His convictions were later annulled by Brazil’s top court, which ruled the presiding judge had been biased and colluded with prosecutors. That enabled da Silva to run for president for the sixth time.

    Da Silva has pledged to boost spending on the poor, reestablish relationships with foreign governments and take bold action to eliminate illegal clear-cutting in the Amazon rainforest.

    “We will once again monitor and do surveillance in the Amazon. We will fight every illegal activity,” da Silva said in his speech. “At the same time, we will promote sustainable development of communities in the Amazon.”

    The president-elect has pledged to install a ministry for Brazil’s original peoples, which will be run by an Indigenous person.

    But as da Silva tries to achieve these and other goals, he will be confronted by strong opposition from conservative lawmakers.

    Unemployment this year has fallen to its lowest level since 2015 and, although overall inflation slowed during the campaign, food prices are increasing at a double-digit rate. Bolsonaro’s welfare payments helped many Brazilians get by, but da Silva has been presenting himself as the candidate more willing to sustain aid going forward and raise the minimum wage.

    In April, he tapped center-right Geraldo Alckmin, a former rival, to be his running mate. It was another key part of an effort to create a broad, pro-democracy front to not just unseat Bolsonaro, but to make it easier to govern.

    Building bridges among a diverse — and divided — country will be key to his success, said Carlos Melo, a political science professor at Insper University in Sao Paulo.

    “If Lula manages to talk to voters who didn’t vote for him, which Bolsonaro never tried, and seeks negotiated solutions to the economic, social and political crisis we have,” Melo said, “then he could reconnect Brazil to a time in which people could disagree and still get some things done.”

    ———

    Carla Bridi contributed to this report from Brasilia.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Wall Street heads for first weekly win streak since summer

    Wall Street heads for first weekly win streak since summer

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Wall Street is rallying Friday, led by Apple, Exxon Mobil and other companies that made even bigger profits during the summer than expected.

    The S&P 500 was 1.2% higher in early trading and on pace to close out its first back-to-back weekly gains since August. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 533 points, or 1.7%, to 32,576, as of 10:30 a.m. Eastern time, and the Nasdaq composite was 1.1% higher.

    Stocks have revived recently in part on hopes that the big hikes to interest rates shaking the market may be set to dial down later this year. Some investors are even talking again about a “pivot” by the Federal Reserve away from a focus solely on beating down inflation through rate hikes, even if many analysts say such hopes may be overstretched. More recently, many big U.S. companies have been reporting stronger earnings than expected, though the bag remains decidedly mixed.

    Apple rose 5% and was the strongest force lifting the S&P 500 in its first trading after reporting fatter revenue and profit than expected for the latest quarter. Oil producers were also strong after delivering record earnings on the back of rising crude prices. Exxon Mobil climbed 2.8%, and Chevron rose 2%.

    They helped to offset a 10.8% drop for Amazon, which offered a weaker-than-expected forecast for upcoming revenue. It was the latest in a lengthening list of discouraging trends for some of the Big Tech companies that have dominated Wall Street for years with their seemingly unstoppable growth.

    Earlier in the week, Meta Platforms lost nearly a quarter of its value after reporting a second straight quarter of revenue decline amid falling advertising sales and stiff competition from TikTok. Microsoft and Google’s parent company also reported weaker trends than Wall Street expected.

    Rising interest rates have hit Big Tech stock prices harder than the rest of the market, and the pressure increased Friday as yields climbed.

    Data released in the morning showed the raises that U.S. workers got in wages and other compensation during the summer was in line with economists’ expectations. That should keep the Fed on track to keep hiking rates sharply in hopes of weakening the job market enough to undercut the nation’s high inflation.

    The yield on the two-year Treasury, which tends to track expectations for Fed action, rose to 4.38% from 4.28% late Thursady.

    The 10-year yield, which helps set rates for mortgages and many other loans, climbed to 3.98% from 3.93% and was briefly back above 4%.

    Trading in Twitter’s stock has ended, after Elon Musk has taken control of the company following a lengthy legal battle.

    In Europe, stock indexes were mixed in relatively muted trading.

    Shares fell 0.9% in Tokyo even as the government approved a massive stimulus spending package to help the world’s No. 3 economy cope with inflation. As expected, the Bank of Japan wrapped up a policy meeting by keeping its ultra-lax monetary policy unchanged even as it forecast higher inflation.

    ———

    Associated Press writers Elaine Kurtenbach, Matt Ott and Mari Yamaguchi contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link