ReportWire

Tag: taxes

  • Scammers target retirees as major 401(k) rule changes loom for 2026 tax year ahead nationwide

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    If you’re over 50 and maxing out your 401(k), there’s a big change coming in 2026 that could affect how much tax you pay on your “catch-up contributions.” While it’s mostly about taxes and retirement planning, there’s an unexpected side effect: scammers are circling. Every time your financial habits or personal data become public, it’s a chance for fraudsters to try to exploit you. Here’s what’s changing, why it matters, and how to protect yourself before the scammers come knocking.

    Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report

    Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts, and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter

    What’s changing with 401(k) catch-up contributions

    REMOVE YOUR DATA TO PROTECT YOUR RETIREMENT FROM SCAMMERS

    Right now, if you’re over 50, you can make extra contributions to your 401(k) on top of the standard annual limit ($23,500 in 2025). These “catch-up” contributions are typically tax-deferred, meaning the money comes out of your paycheck before tax and grows tax-free until retirement.

    But starting in 2026, for anyone earning more than $145,000 in the previous year, these catch-up contributions will no longer be tax-deferred. Instead, they’ll become like the Roth 401(k), meaning you pay taxes on the money now, but it grows tax-free and can be withdrawn tax-free in retirement.

    That sounds simple, but it creates a ripple effect:

    • High earners will see less take-home pay now.
    • Tax planning gets trickier, and some people may consider restructuring their accounts or investment strategies.
    • And, most importantly for CyberGuy readers: these changes create new opportunities for scammers.

    Big 401(k) changes in 2026 could leave retirees exposed to new scam risks. (Cyberguy.com)

    Why the new rules could attract scammers

    FBI WARNS SENIORS ABOUT BILLION-DOLLAR SCAM DRAINING RETIREMENT FUNDS, EXPERT SAYS AI DRIVING IT

    Scammers constantly look for financially active retirees. When rules like this change, fraudsters send out emails, calls, or letters pretending to be financial advisors, IRS agents, or plan administrators. Their goal? To trick you into giving away account numbers, Social Security details, or direct-deposit information.

    Some common scam tactics to watch for:

    • Fake “plan update” emails claiming you need to verify your 401(k) contributions due to the law change.
    • Roth conversion scam calls claiming you can “avoid extra taxes” by transferring your account through a third-party “advisor.”
    • Urgency and fear tactics, such as “Act now, or lose your retirement benefits!”

    Even savvy retirees can be caught off guard, especially when the message sounds official and references real tax law changes.

    How to protect yourself from 401(k) scams and data theft

    NATIONAL PROGRAM HELPS SENIORS SPOT SCAMS AS LOSSES SURGE

    With new 401(k) rule changes taking effect, scammers are using the confusion to trick retirees and workers alike. Follow these steps to stay alert, safeguard your savings, and protect your personal data from being stolen or misused.

    1) Know the legitimate changes

    Start by understanding Secure 2.0 and how catch-up contributions will be taxed. Reliable sources include your plan administrator, the IRS website, or a licensed tax advisor. Staying informed helps you spot fake claims before they cause harm.

    2) Use a personal data removal service

    For retirees, this extra layer of protection keeps sensitive information out of reach from scammers who exploit tax changes, Roth conversions, and retirement updates. While you can manually opt out of data brokers and track your information, that process takes time and effort. A personal data removal service automates the task by contacting over 420 data brokers on your behalf. It also reissues removal requests if your data reappears and shows you a dashboard of confirmed removals.

    While no service can guarantee the complete removal of your data from the internet, a data removal service is really a smart choice. They aren’t cheap, and neither is your privacy. These services do all the work for you by actively monitoring and systematically erasing your personal information from hundreds of websites. It’s what gives me peace of mind and has proven to be the most effective way to erase your personal data from the internet. By limiting the information available, you reduce the risk of scammers cross-referencing data from breaches with information they might find on the dark web, making it harder for them to target you.

    Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting Cyberguy.com

    Scam written on a tablet surrounded by cash

    Scammers are already targeting retirees with fake “account update” alerts. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

    HOW TO SECURE YOUR 401(K) PLAN FROM IDENTITY FRAUD

    Get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web: Cyberguy.com

    3) Verify every call and email, plus use antivirus software

    If you get a call or email about your 401(k), don’t assume it’s real. Hang up or delete it, then contact your plan administrator directly using official contact details. Avoid clicking links or downloading attachments from unknown messages.

    The best way to safeguard yourself from malicious links that install malware, potentially accessing your private information, is to have strong antivirus software installed on all your devices. This protection can also alert you to phishing emails and ransomware scams, keeping your personal information and digital assets safe.

    Get my picks for the best 2025 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android & iOS devices at Cyberguy.com

    4) Monitor your credit and accounts

    Cybercriminals often use personal information from earlier data leaks or data brokers. Watch your credit reports and account activity closely. Early detection can stop suspicious transactions before they escalate.

    HOW SCAMMERS EXPLOIT YOUR DATA FOR ‘PRE-APPROVED’ RETIREMENT SCAMS

    5) Set up alerts and freezes if necessary

    Ask your bank and retirement plan to enable transaction alerts. You can also temporarily freeze your credit to prevent anyone from opening new accounts in your name. This is especially useful during times of financial change.

    6) Educate friends and family

    Scammers often target retirees and their relatives who help manage finances. Remind your loved ones never to share account details over the phone or email. Protecting everyone in your household keeps scammers from finding weak links.

    Man reviews inheritance documents

    Stay safe by confirming any 401(k) changes directly with your plan provider. (uchar/Getty Images)

    Kurt’s key takeaways

    As 2026 approaches, the new 401(k) rule changes will reshape how millions of Americans manage their retirement savings. Staying informed, cautious, and proactive can protect your financial future. Scammers thrive on confusion, but by verifying information, monitoring your accounts, and removing your personal data from risky sites, you can stay one step ahead. Remember, the more control you take over your privacy, the harder it becomes for criminals to exploit it.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Have you taken steps to see where your personal data is exposed, and what did you find most surprising when you checked? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com

    Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report

    Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts, and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

    Copyright 2025 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.

    Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson is an award-winning tech journalist who has a deep love of technology, gear and gadgets that make life better with his contributions for Fox News & FOX Business beginning mornings on “FOX & Friends.” Got a tech question? Get Kurt’s free CyberGuy Newsletter, share your voice, a story idea or comment at CyberGuy.com.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘We proudly make things here’: California distillery owner says SCOTUS should dump Trump’s tariffs

    [ad_1]

    Melkon Khosrovian recalls waiting for a shipment of bottles that were due to arrive amid the mad rush that marked the days before President Donald Trump’s tariffs took effect.

    He remembers doing the math, too.

    “We don’t have any control over when they clear [customs], and our taxes would have been $10,000 more,” if the container holding his bottles didn’t make it before the deadline, explains Khosrovian, who co-owns the Greenbar Distillery in Los Angeles. “In the meantime, we’re sitting here chewing our fingernails and wondering what’s going on.”

    What a difference a day makes.

    Khosrovian, an Armenian immigrant, founded the distillery with his wife more than two decades ago. Theirs may not be the sort of business typically regarded as blue-collar work, but Greenbar is essentially the same as any other American manufacturing firm. Khosrovian must buy equipment and raw materials, then use them to produce new goods that he distributes down the supply chain.

    And like many other American manufacturers, he says Greenbar has suffered from Trump’s tariffs, which have made that equipment and those raw materials more expensive.

    “We’re making American products, you know, selling American products, but it involves some parts that come from abroad,” Khosrovian told Reason in an interview on Monday. That includes the Bulgarian juniper berries that form the backbone of Greenbar’s gin and the various spices that add flavor to its premixed cocktails.

    “Taxing that stuff just means that we’re weakened as a company,” he adds.

    Greenbar is one of more than 700 small businesses that have joined the We Pay The Tariffs coalition, which is backed by the Trade Partnership, a pro-trade think tank. Last week, that coalition filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court—one of dozens of such briefs filed by a wide range of interested parties including businesses, economists, and more than 200 members of Congress—urging the justices to uphold lower court rulings that called Trump’s tariffs unlawful.

    The tariffs, which were “imposed without legal authority and with no public participation, comment, or even sufficient notice,” represent “an existential threat to survival” for many small businesses, the group argues in its brief.

    The Trump administration argues that the president has nearly unchecked authority to impose tariffs thanks to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law Trump has invoked repeatedly since returning to office this year. Critics point out that the IEEPA statute does not even contain the word “tariff” and has never been used in this way. Lower courts have ruled that the president does not have unlimited tariff powers, even when invoking those emergency powers.

    It will be those thorny legal matters that decide the fate of Trump’s tariffs when the Supreme Court hears the case next week. However, small business owners like Khosrovian offer a reminder of what’s at stake in the case.

    Higher costs from tariffs have forced Khosrovian to look into automating part of Greenbar’s bottling process to save money, which would mean laying off some of the staff who handle that now, he says. In the competitive market for craft booze, that’s a better option than raising prices and losing market share.

    In addition to making it more expensive for American distilleries to make booze, tariffs are also reducing sales abroad. Exports of American spirits fell 9 percent year-over-year in the second quarter, according to data from the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, a trade association.

    “Persistent trade tensions are having an immediate and adverse effect on U.S. spirits exports,” Chris Swonger, president and CEO of DISCUS, said in a statement earlier this month. “There’s a growing concern that our international consumers are increasingly opting for domestically produced spirits or imports from countries other than the U.S., signaling a shift away from our great American spirits brands.”

    The Trump administration believes it must punish American companies like Greenbar Distillery in order to solve the perceived threat of a trade imbalance. When you get right down to it, however, the execution of this policy appears somewhat ridiculous. Can empty whiskey bottles or imported juniper berries realistically be called a threat that requires such sweeping executive powers? Is forcing Khosrovian to pay higher taxes going to accomplish anything?

    “We proudly make things here, and we want to keep making more things here,” Khosrovian says. “Running a business normally is tough. Running a business where you don’t even know what things cost from day to day makes it doubly hard.”

    [ad_2]

    Eric Boehm

    Source link

  • How Mike Waltz is leading the Trump administration’s ‘a la carte’ approach to UN funding

    [ad_1]

    UNITED NATIONS — Mike Waltz is approaching his new role as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and a mandate from President Donald Trump to cut funding for what were once longtime American priorities the same way he set about representing Florida in Congress.

    “I approach nearly every decision I can here with America first, with the American taxpayer first,” Waltz said virtually at a recent event at the Richard Nixon Foundation. “So, if I had to stand up in a town hall with a group of mechanics and firemen and women and nurses and teachers and testify to them that their money is being well spent in line with our interest, that would be incredibly tough right now.”

    He added, “And that’s why we’re using, quite frankly, our contribution as leverage for reform” at the U.N.

    In recent meetings with U.N. officials, including Secretary-General António Guterres, Waltz and his colleagues at the U.S. mission have made the case that the United States — the U.N.’s largest donor — will no longer be footing the bill the way it has since the world body’s founding eight decades ago.

    Instead, U.S. officials are taking an a la carte approach to paying U.N. dues, picking which operations and agencies they believe align with Trump’s agenda and which no longer serve U.S. interests. It is a major shift from how previous administrations — both Republican and Democratic — have dealt with the U.N., and it has forced the world body, already undergoing its own internal reckoning, to respond with a series of staffing and program cuts.

    Shortly after being confirmed as ambassador, Waltz met with Guterres as world leaders gathered at the U.N. General Assembly last month. The former congressman said in a Sept. 25 interview with Larry Kudlow on Fox Business that he made it clear to the top U.N. official that U.S.-backed changes would need to take place “before you start talking about taxpayer dollars.”

    “Washington’s decision does send a worrying signal that powerful countries can get away with this and really try to apply more pressure through a process that is meant to give the organization the backing it needs to execute the mandates that every country agrees on,” said Daniel Forti, senior U.N. analyst at the International Crisis Group.

    The U.S. mission to the United Nations did not respond to requests for comment or an interview with Waltz.

    The U.S. is demanding changes to the salaries and benefits of some high-ranking U.N. officials until the U.S. “can get better transparency,” and it wants the creation of an independent inspector general to oversee the complex financial system within the world body.

    But some U.N. organizations have been written off entirely. Waltz has said in interviews that U.S. retreats from agencies like the World Health Organization, the U.N. aid agency in Gaza known as UNRWA, and the Human Rights Council are permanent. In other areas, like contributions to the U.N. cultural agency UNESCO, the U.S. decision to pull support won’t go into effect until December 2026.

    Many U.N. staffers and groups are now watching to see if the Trump administration’s targeting of climate and gender initiatives also will result in significant cuts to two of the most important priorities of the U.N. operation.

    That pressure, coupled with years of dwindling support for humanitarian aid, has forced Guterres to propose a 15% cut to the entire U.N. budget, an 18% cut to personnel and a 25% cut to peacekeeping operations around the world.

    “It is a deliberate and considered adjustment to an already conservative proposal for 2026 — reflecting both the urgency and ambition of the reforms we are undertaking,” Guterres told a U.N. budget committee this month.

    So far, one of the most drastic cuts is to U.N. peacekeeping, with the U.S. pledging to pay $680 million toward various missions out of its outstanding bill of more than $2 billion, according to a senior U.N. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private negotiations. As a result, roughly 13,000 to 14,000 military and police personnel out of more than 50,000 peacekeepers deployed to nine global missions will be sent home.

    U.N. officials have warned that the consequences of withdrawing those troops from previous conflict zones in South Sudan, Kosovo and Cyprus, among other places, will be serious and long term.

    Guterres says that while “representing a tiny fraction of global military spending — around one half of 1% — U.N. peacekeeping remains one of the most effective and cost-effective tools to build international peace and security.”

    U.N. watchers say the U.S. cuts and changes go beyond pushing conservative financial values on an international organization and will result in a shift that will fundamentally change the way the United Nations operates around the world.

    “What we’ve also found is that there’s really no other country around the world besides the U.S. that has been willing or able to step up and take on that role of financial underwriter in any considerable way,” said Forti of the International Crisis Group. “Not China, not the European countries, not the Gulf.”

    That is forcing development and humanitarian agencies to scale back “what the U.N. can actually deliver on the ground and with little prospect of the U.S. returning at scale to that role at play before,” he said.

    Even with these cuts underway, Waltz has pushed back on concerns that the U.S. would completely retreat from the U.N., echoing Trump’s recent speech in the General Assembly about the “great” but untapped potential of the world body.

    The U.S. wants to expand its influence in many of the standard-setting U.N. initiatives where there is competition with China, like the International Telecommunications Union, the International Maritime Organization and the International Labor Organization.

    “We are still the largest bill payer,” Waltz said at the Nixon event last week. “China is creeping up to a very close second, and this is a key space in our competition with the People’s Republic of China.”

    He said he understands those in the Republican base who say “we should just shut the place down, turn out the lights on the embassy and walk away.”

    But, Waltz added, “We still need one place in the world where everyone can talk, even if it’s with the North Koreans, the Venezuelans, the Europeans, Russians, (and) the Chinese.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • AP Decision Notes: What to Expect in Washington State for the Nov. 4 Election

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Washington state voters will decide whether to amend their constitution to allow funds from a long-term care insurance program to be invested in the stock market. It is the only statewide contest in a Nov. 4 election that will mostly feature mayoral and other municipal races across the state.

    The proposed constitutional amendment, known as Senate Joint Resolution 8201, will shape the future of the WA Cares Fund, which the state Legislature created in 2019 to help participants defray the costs of certain long-term care services. Washington taxpayers fund the program though a 0.58% payroll tax, which began in July 2023. As of June 30, the fund had a balance of $2.5 billion.

    Supporters of the proposal say that harnessing the growth potential from stock investments would secure the fund’s long-term stability. Opponents argue that private investments offer no guarantees and that market volatility could shrink the fund and result in reduced benefits or higher taxes. Stocks tumbled in April following President Donald Trump’s announcement of sweeping tariffs but rebounded by the summer.

    This will be the second time in five years that this issue will appear on the ballot. About 54% of Washington voters rejected a similar ballot measure in Nov. 2020, compared to about 46% who voted in favor.

    The state constitution generally bans the investment of public funds in private stocks and equities, but voters have approved several exemptions in the past, including for public pensions and retirement funds, workers’ compensation funds and a fund for individuals with developmental disabilities. Those funds are managed by the nonpartisan Washington State Investment Board, which would also oversee the WA Cares Fund if the ballot measure passes.

    Since 1966, Washington voters have considered at least 10 proposed constitutional amendments to exempt certain funds from the ban on investing public funds in stocks and equities. Five of those measures passed, most recently in 2007.

    Only three of Washington’s 39 counties voted in favor of the failed 2020 measure: King and Whatcom, where it received more than 58% of the vote, and Jefferson, where it received about 52%. King is home to Seattle and is the state’s most populous county. Pierce and Snohomish counties, the state’s second and third most populous located just to the north and south of King, both overwhelmingly rejected the proposal with nearly 60% of voters voting against.

    In the 2024 general election, voters rejected a proposal that would have allowed workers to opt out of WA Cares, which would have hobbled the program.

    The Associated Press does not make projections and will declare a winner only when it’s determined there is no scenario that would allow the trailing candidates to close the gap. If a race has not been called, the AP will continue to cover any newsworthy developments, such as candidate concessions or declarations of victory. In doing so, the AP will make clear that it has not yet declared a winner and explain why.

    Machine recounts in Washington state are automatic if the vote margin between the top two candidates is less than 2,000 votes and less than 0.5% of the total votes cast for both candidates. Manual recounts are required for statewide contests if the margin is less than 1,000 votes and less 0.25% of the total votes cast for both candidates. The AP may declare a winner in a race that is eligible for a recount if it can determine the lead is too large for a recount or legal challenge to change the outcome.

    Here’s a look at what to expect on Nov. 4:

    Polls close at 11 p.m. ET.

    The AP will provide vote results and declare a winner in the statewide ballot measure. Other elections will be held across the state, including mayoral and municipal elections in Seattle and a handful of state legislative districts, but those contests will not be included in the AP’s vote tabulation.

    Any registered voter in Washington state may cast a ballot on the proposed constitutional amendment.


    What do turnout and advance vote look like?

    There were about 5.1 million active registered voters in Washington state as of Oct. 1. Voters do not register by party.

    Roughly 79% of registered voters cast valid ballots in the 2024 general election. Washington state conducts its elections almost entirely by mail. About 66% of voters delivered their ballots via drop box, 33% sent their ballots by mail and the remainder, less than 1%, used other methods, such as in-person voting.

    In the 2021 general election, only about 39% of registered voters cast valid ballots. About 56% of voters used drop boxes, 43% sent their ballots by mail and 0.3% used other methods.

    As of Thursday, about 244,000 absentee ballots had been received and accepted before Election Day. See the AP Early Vote Tracker for the latest update.


    How long does vote-counting usually take?

    In the 2024 presidential election in Washington state, the AP first reported results at 11:07 p.m. ET, or seven minutes after polls closed. The election night tabulation ended just after midnight at 12:07 a.m. ET with about 66% of total votes counted. It took about three weeks for all counties to finish counting votes.

    As of Nov. 4, there will be 364 days until the 2026 midterm elections and 1,099 days until the 2028 general election.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Trump threatens Canada with 10% extra import tax for not pulling down anti-tariffs ad sooner

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump said on Saturday that he plans to hike tariffs on imports of Canadian goods by an extra 10% because of an anti-tariff television ad aired by the province of Ontario.

    The ad used the words of former President Ronald Reagan to criticize U.S. tariffs, angering Trump who said he would end trade talks with Canada. Ontario Premier Doug Ford said he would pull the ad after the weekend, and it ran Friday night during the first game of the World Series.

    “Their Advertisement was to be taken down, IMMEDIATELY, but they let it run last night during the World Series, knowing that it was a FRAUD,” Trump said in a post on his Truth Social platform as he flew aboard Air Force One to Malaysia.

    “Because of their serious misrepresentation of the facts, and hostile act, I am increasing the Tariff on Canada by 10% over and above what they are paying now.”

    It was unclear what legal authority Trump would use to impose the additional import taxes. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on when the 10% hike would come into effect, and whether it would apply to all Canadian goods.

    Canada’s economy has been hit hard by Trump’s tariffs, and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has been trying to work with Trump to lower them. More than three-quarters of Canadian exports go to the U.S., and nearly $3.6 billion Canadian ($2.7 billion U.S.) worth of goods and services cross the border daily.

    Spokespersons for Carney and Ford did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

    Many Canadian products have been hit with a 35% tariff, while steel and aluminum face rates of 50%. Energy products have a lower rate of 10%, while the vast majority of goods are covered by the U.S.-Canada-Mexico Agreement, and are exempt from tariffs. That trade agreement is slated for review. Trump negotiated the deal in his first term, but has since soured on it.

    Trump and Carney will both attend the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit in Malaysia. But Trump told reporters traveling with him that he had no intention of meeting Carney there.

    Trump said the ad misrepresented the position of Reagan, a two-term president and a beloved figure in the Republican Party. But Reagan was wary of tariffs and used much of the 1987 address featured in Ontario’s ad spelling out the case against tariffs.

    Trump has complained the ad was aimed at influencing the U.S. Supreme Court ahead of arguments scheduled for next month that could decide whether Trump has the power to impose his sweeping tariffs, a key part of his economic strategy. Lower courts had ruled he had exceeded his authority.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Rob Gillies in Toronto and Josh Boak in Tokyo contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Mark Schiefelbein | The Associated Press

    Source link

  • State utility says private firm set to restart abandoned $9 billion nuclear project

    [ad_1]

    COLUMBIA, S.C. — South Carolina’s state-owned utility is looking to a private company to revive a project to build two nuclear power plants that was abandoned eight years ago, losing more than $9 billion without generating a watt of power.

    Santee Cooper’s board agreed Friday to start six weeks of negotiations with Brookfield Asset Management that they hope will lead to a deal that lets the private company build the nuclear plants at the V.C. Summer site near Jenkinsville at their own risk to generate power that they could mostly sell to whom they want, such as energy-gobbling data centers.

    Santee Cooper said Brookfield preliminarily agreed to provide the utility with some of the power generated. But that and probably thousands of other details will have to be negotiated. In a twist, Brookfield took over the assets of Westinghouse Electric Co., which had to declare bankruptcy because of difficulties building new nuclear reactors.

    Utility officials said the agreement gives hope the state can get something out of a debacle that led to four executives going to prison or home confinement for lying to regulators, shareholders, ratepayers and investigators and left millions of people paying for decades for a project that never produced electricity.

    “The risk to the ratepayer is nil. The risk to the taxpayer is nil,” Santee Cooper Board Chairman Peter McCoy said.

    There are still too many hurdles for the project to get past to consider this a win right now, said Tom Clements, executive director of the nuclear watchdog group Savannah River Site Watch.

    After eight years in the elements, all the equipment and the structure of the plant, which was less than halfway finished, will need to be carefully inspected before it can be used. The permits to build and the licenses to operate the nuclear plants will need to be renewed, likely starting from scratch, Clements said.

    “I still believe that the cost, technical and regulatory hurdles are too big to lead to completion of the project,” Clements said, adding the agreement appears to let Brookfield walk away if it decide it’s not feasible.

    Santee Cooper heard from 70 bidders and received 15 formal proposals to restart construction of the reactors. Interest in the project has grown as power demand in the U.S. surges with the increase in data centers as artificial intelligence technology develops.

    Santee Cooper executives credited President Donald Trump’s executive order in May calling for the U.S. to quadruple the amount of power generated by nuclear plants over the next 25 years for opening the door to the potential agreement.

    “You have placed South Carolina in the epicenter of the resurgence of nuclear power in the United States,” Santee Cooper CEO Jimmy Staton said.

    Santee Cooper was the minority partner with what was then South Carolina Electric and Gas when construction on the two new nuclear plants started in 2013 at the V.C. Summer site — about 25 miles (40 kilometers) northeast of Columbia — where SCE&G was already operating a reactor.

    The project needed to be finished in seven years to get tax credits to keep the project’s cost from overwhelming the utilities, but it ended up behind schedule almost immediately.

    Executives lied about the problems to keep money coming in. Taxpayers and ratepayers ended up on the hook because of a state law that allowed the utilities to charge for costs before any power was generated.

    Two nuclear reactors built in a similar way in Georgia went $17 billion over budget before they were fully operational in 2023.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California union proposes taxing billionaires to offset Medicaid cuts

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A major union announced a proposal Thursday to impose a one-time 5% tax on billionaires in California to address federal funding cuts to health care for low-income people.

    Proponents, including the Service Employees International Union, hope to place the statewide measure before voters next year. The tax would be on the net worth of California’s richest residents. A small portion of the money would also help fund K-12 education since the federal government has threatened to withhold grant money from public schools.

    Backers of the measure sent a request to Attorney General Rob Bonta this week to get approval to start collecting signatures. The proposal would have to receive more than 870,000 signatures by next spring to qualify for the ballot in November 2026. If it qualifies, it’s not guaranteed to pass. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, for example, has opposed tax hikes in the past, including those specifically targeting the rich.

    Proponents of the initiative said it was critical to backfill cuts to Medicaid because lives are at stake.

    “If we do not do this, millions of people are going to lose health care, an untold number of people will go without treatment and there will be tragedy after tragedy,” said Dave Regan, president of SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.

    Billionaires would have to pay for tax year 2026, and the money could start being appropriated in 2027. The tax would generate $100 billion in revenue for the state, backers say. The initiative says it’s “designed to make the State tax system more equitable.”

    The big tax and spending cuts law President Donald Trump signed earlier this year will cut more than $1 trillion over a decade from Medicaid and federal food assistance.

    The California Budget and Policy Center, a think tank in Sacramento, estimated the state could lose $30 billion in federal funding a year for Medicaid, which would result in up to 3.4 million people losing their coverage.

    Newsom said earlier this month that people enrolled in Covered California, the state’s health insurance marketplace, could see their monthly health care bills nearly double next year as a result of the spending cuts law.

    “California has led the nation in expanding access to affordable health care, but Donald Trump is ripping it away,” he said.

    Proponents of the proposed ballot initiative say billionaires have an obligation to do their part.

    “We hope that some and perhaps hopefully a large number of billionaires will recognize that it’s important in the state where they’ve grown their fortune that they have a responsibility to society to preserve the future of California,” said Emmanuel Saez, a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Vote “No” on Denver’s bonds to reject irresponsible debt (Letters)

    [ad_1]

    Vote “No” on Denver’s bonds to reject irresponsible debt

    After reading my ballot, I researched previous bonds that were passed by voters. The Rise Denver bond in 2021 was $260 million, and the Elevate Denver Bond in 2017 was $937 million. I added up the 2A to 2E bonds this year, and the total is up to $950 million. The total for all of these bonds adds up to more than $2 billion.

    The debt repayment for the current bonds is about $1.9 billion. The ballot states, “without imposing any new tax,” but that is not completely correct. The reason is that all these bonds are paid through commercial and residential property taxes in Denver County. The mill levy could go down if voters say no, and if voters say yes it also could have to increase to pay for these billions of dollars if property values decrease. Denver County is where I live, and expenses have gone significantly higher this year. Why do we keep adding to the bond debts? We should not vote to increase the county’s debt.

    Pete Hackett, Denver

    Denver clerk errs in leaving out information on ballot issues

    Did I hear that correctly?

    Denver’s “Ballot Issue Notice” does not provide any information about three matters: 2F, 2G and 310.  I called Denver’s Clerk and Elections Office to ask why the omissions. I was told two things: 1) Those three ballot issues have no fiscal impact on government, so applicable law does not require their inclusion in the notice. 2) Due to “budget cuts,” it was decided not to address them in the notice.  Then, I was informed that I could garner information about them at denvervotes.org.

    Denver voters expect the notice each year to address all matters on the ballot. The current notice does not highlight that 2F, 2G and 310 are not included and does not highlight denvervotes.org as a source of information about them.

    I have no way of learning how much money was “saved” by excluding these ballot matters. What I do know is that it would have been money well spent.

    Vic Reichman, Denver

    Trump’s cuts to education funding risk America’s future

    Re: “Federal government’s cuts cost state colleges millions,” Oct. 9 news story

    As an educator, I was saddened to read: “Trump administration cuts grants to Colorado colleges serving high percentage of diverse students,” October 9.

    Every American, regardless of race, gender or religious persuasion, should have the opportunity to realize their natural potential via education. Yet, there are wide swaths of America that are not properly educating students and where students are just unable to succeed for economic or other reasons. As a result, America is not producing sufficient STEM graduates to sustain, let alone grow, America’s high level of technology upon which we all heavily depend for our economy, well-being and national defense.

    On top of that, President Donald Trump has made it significantly more challenging for foreign students (who would often pursue STEM careers) to enter American schools.

    Given the fact that the president is seeking to reindustrialize America, I would like to ask him from where will the required scientists, engineers, technicians, doctors and other highly educated specialists come? America is now in crisis as we seek to pay down our $37 trillion debt and stay competitive internationally. One way to do this would be to encourage and help all groups of Americans — particularly those who are underrepresented in STEM (as an untapped talent pool) — to pursue STEM careers. Persecuting and defunding schools that seek to help underrepresented students succeed and contribute to America’s recovery is absolutely the wrong thing to do.

    Education is the only hope for the next generation of Americans to move forward.

    Michael Pravica, Henderson, Nevada

    If the U.S. doesn’t support Ukraine, we are complicit in its destruction

    Recent news articles galvanized my thought that America is sleepwalking while Ukraine is fighting for survival against Russia’s genocidal invasion. We need to take a moment to answer the question: Are we really supporting Ukraine to win? It is in America’s interest that Ukraine is successful. Our future prosperity, and that of our children, depends on what we do right now.

    Either the United States supports Ukraine to win, or we will be complicit in its destruction. Such complicity will damage national security by strengthening enemies, driving away allies, harming international trade, increasing nuclear proliferation, encouraging new wars of territorial conquest, and ending America’s role as leader of the free world. There will be less stability and fewer allies within the West, investments abroad will be less safe, and the entire West will be less prosperous. Therefore, what all of us should strive for in Ukraine is not peace at any price, because that will be bad for all countries, but a future that makes Ukraine, America, and the West stronger by making its enemies weaker.

    Take a moment to consider our future and then do what you feel is best: take up a keyboard and send a note, pick up a pen and write your political leadership, sit down with friends or family and discuss this letter, or pull out your checkbook, but just do something now. History will judge what we do today; which side will you be on?

    Arthur Ives, Highlands Ranch

    Don’t just give away national forest lands

    Should our beloved but flat-broke White River National Forest sell an asset worth more than half its annual budget or just give that asset away?

    Retired White River National Forest Supervisor Scott Fitzwilliams’ 2021 plan to effectively donate 832 acres surrounding Sweetwater Lake to Colorado Parks and Wildlife for the creation of a state park might have made sense prior to DOGE’s cuts to the forest service’s budget. It also might have made sense before the $23,860,000 Derby Fire burned 5,453 acres in the national forest  just one mile east of the lake.

    [ad_2]

    DP Opinion

    Source link

  • How to Take Advantage of This Powerful Tax Deduction

    [ad_1]

    There are a few constants in the small-business world every fall: pumpkin spice everything, a sudden panic about Q4 goals, and that wonderful realization that Section 179 is still here, waiting to make your accountant smile and your tax bill smaller.

    And every year around this time, I write an article about this, essentially saying “Don’t sleep on Section 179!” Yet, despite my best efforts, many business owners do. They get so wrapped up in finishing jobs, chasing invoices, or planning for the holiday season that they forget one of the simplest, most powerful tax-saving moves available.

    So let’s fix that.

    A quick Section 179 refresher (and why it’s so good!)

    Section 179 lets you deduct the full purchase price of qualifying business equipment bought and put into use during the year. No slow, multi-year depreciation schedules. Just one big, clean, satisfying deduction right off the top of your taxable income. Boom.

    For 2025, the limits have been generously raised mid-year as well: you can now take up to $2.5 million in deductions, with spending capped at $4 million before the benefit starts phasing out. The deduction also covers most tangible business equipment: from production machinery to office equipment to computers, many vehicles, furniture and fixtures, signage, and even some software. New or used qualify as well – it just has to be new to you. And these numbers are for your total equipment spend, and not just one piece. So if you buy a used bulldozer, a new sign for your building, and three computers for the office, you can add up their purchase prices and deduct it all.

    If you’re a growing business that needs equipment anyway, it’s basically a “why wouldn’t you?” scenario.

    The year-end magic trick

    Now, all this being said, there’s another layer to Section 179 that really comes into its own this time of year: financing the equipment and then taking the deduction.

    You can finance the qualifying equipment and still take the entire full purchase price deduction this year. This rings true even if you only make a payment or two this year. That’s why this time of year is so special.

    Say you finance $100,000 in qualifying equipment between now and year’s end. You’ll make maybe two payments before 12/31. Yet you can deduct the full $100,000 for tax year 2025. If your effective tax rate is 30%, that’s a $30,000 reduction in your taxes. That’s right – you made a whopping two payments, yet saved $30k on your 2025 taxes. That’s a massive win for your bank account and your 2025 numbers.

    And if you’re in a state that follows the federal expensing model on your state taxes, your savings could get even sweeter, as you’ll do the same thing there.

    I do understand the counter argument: “well, if you take the whole deduction now, then there’s no depreciation the following years”. To which I say “So what? Money now is worth more than money later.” Given the choice, smart businesses always take the money now.

    Why this matters in 2025

    We’re in a weird year economically – inflation has bounced around, supply chains are mostly healed, but prices on durable goods haven’t really come down. The Fed didn’t cut rates as much as people hoped, and many businesses are still playing catch-up on expansion projects they delayed in 2023 and 2024.

    In that environment, Section 179 is less of a “bonus” and more of a strategy. It helps you preserve cash, reduce taxes, and modernize equipment without overextending.

    To me, it’s one of the few pieces of the tax code that is 100% pro-business. It rewards investment, productivity, and forward thinking, exactly the behaviors that keep small and mid-sized companies alive and our economy moving.

    So yes, it’s still worth shouting about. It’s why I bang out one of these articles annually.

    Use it—don’t lose it

    One last thought: the clock is ticking. You can’t just order something on December 27th and hope it counts – the equipment must be purchased and placed in service before midnight 12/31. That means delivered, unwrapped, installed, plugged in, booted up, whatever…  

    Also, the deduction only works if you have taxable income to deduct from – Section 179 cannot be used if you have a loss (nor can it create a loss).

    But those are pretty straightforward, easily-met rules. Add in that almost anything your business could use will likely qualify for the deduction, and you have a scenario that most companies can take advantage of. So if you’ve read this far, definitely look into this.

    Ok, time for my end-of-the-article-let’s-keep-Dan-out-of-trouble disclaimer: always talk to your accountant or tax professional before making any financial decisions or tax-related purchases. Using Section 179 is smart, but going through your accountant is even smarter! 

    The opinions expressed here by Inc.com columnists are their own, not those of Inc.com.

    [ad_2]

    Dan Furman

    Source link

  • Americans may get bigger tax refunds next year, economic study finds

    [ad_1]

    Many Americans could see heftier tax refunds next year when they file their 2025 tax returns, largely due to new provisions enacted through the Republicans’ “one big, beautiful bill” act that are retroactive to the start of the current year, according to an analysis from Oxford Economics. 

    Total taxpayer savings could amount to an additional $50 billion through bigger tax refunds or a cut in their 2026 taxes, Oxford lead economist Nancy Vanden Houten wrote in the Oct. 21 report. 

    A $50 billion boost in tax refunds would represent an 18% increase from the $275 billion in refunds the IRS sent this year to nearly 94 million taxpayers who overpaid on their 2024 federal tax returns, according to data from the agency. The average refund in 2025 was $2,939, according to the IRS.

    The “big, beautiful bill,” signed into law by Mr. Trump in July, extended the tax reductions enacted under th 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. But the new law also added an array of new breaks, such as eliminating taxes on some overtime and tipped income. It also lifted the cap on the deduction for state and local taxes, or SALT, from $10,000 to $40,000, a change that is expected to primarily help higher-income Americans. 

    Although the tax changes are effective this year, the IRS hasn’t yet updated its withholding tables, which provide guidance to employers on how much in federal tax to withhold from their employees’ paychecks, Vanden Houten wrote. As a result, many taxpayers are unlikely to have taken the step of lowering their withholding amounts on their own, she noted. 

    “[M]any taxpayers will pay too much in tax this year and see larger tax refunds or smaller tax bills next year than otherwise would be the case,” Vanden Houten said, adding that will likely produce a “windfall at tax time in 2026 through larger refunds and lower tax bills.”

    The Oxford analysis doesn’t estimate the average size of individual tax refunds next year, but it noted that a “disproportionate share of the benefits will accrue to upper-income households.” 

    That echoes earlier analyses from tax specialists who said that higher-income Americans are likely to see a bigger relative boost from the new tax law compared with lower-income households. For instance, $6 of every $10 in new tax breaks from the “big, beautiful bill” will go to the top 20% of households, or people with incomes over $217,000 per year, according to a Tax Policy Center analysis published in July. 

    Wealthy households also will benefit from the higher SALT cap, which can only be tapped by tax filers who itemize — typically high-income households with sizable deductions that surpass the standard deduction. That boost from the bigger SALT break will deliver an extra $5.1 billion in total tax savings, Oxford estimated.

    Seniors are also likely to enjoy a bigger tax refund in early 2026, with the new $6,000 deduction for people over 65 years old under the “big, beautiful bill” providing as much as $9.3 billion in tax savings, the Oxford estimated. 

    Edited by

    Alain Sherter

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A wish list for Carney’s fall budget – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    But things changed in the second quarter as Canada’s economy weakened. This has put the spotlight on the weakness of Canadians’ income and savings in the face of change. It also provides an important opportunity for the November 4 federal budget to protect financial well-being in the months ahead.  

    The income gap reaches a new high

    The income gap, which is the difference in the share of disposable income between households in the top 40% and the bottom 40% of income distribution, is a common measure that makes the news. It was at a record high of 49% in the first quarter, with a slight reduction in Q2, and has been increasing every year since the pandemic. 

    Interest rates have had a lot to do with this. Fortunately, for the first time since 2022, household interest payments declined by almost 5% in Q1. Disposable income, therefore, increased for those indebted households. 

    Then the U.S. tariffs entered the economic picture. Lower-earning households tend to suffer the most during periods of uncertainty and this is holding true now. Statistics Canada reported declining average wages, mainly due to reduced hours of work in Q1. Those working in mining and manufacturing, professional and personal services were particularly affected. 

    For the lowest-income households, income grew at a faster-than-average pace (+5.6%) in the second quarter. But on closer inspection, this was actually due to an increase in government transfers including Employment Insurance (EI), social assistance, and retirement benefits.  

    Unfortunately, tax collections—the very source of these payments in the future— will decline too. The Parliamentary Budget Office projects a lower nominal GDP (which measures the size of the tax base), averaging $12.9 billion less annually from 2025 to 2029. This too is due to the impact of tariffs.

    The government plans to increase taxes for some as well as penalties and fines and resulting interest charges to bolster its revenues. However, a more positive, proactive approach is to make income- and wealth-building easier. That starts with getting back to the basics.

    Diversification of investments matters    

    Despite a good start in the first quarter of the year (Q1), Canadians’ financial well-being was affected by the impact of tariffs imposed in the second quarter (Q2). Consider the following investing trends:

    Article Continues Below Advertisement


    1. Lower-income households tend to earn interest income. Net investment income dropped the most for low-income households. The decline in investment earnings (-35.3%) more than offset the decline in interest payments (-7.1%). Second-quarter outcomes were similar.
    2. Higher-earning households have more diversified portfolios, holding more equities. These produce more tax-efficient capital gains and dividend income. These households’ net worth grew as the value of their financial assets increased by 7.1% in Q1—close to three times the rate of inflation—and 9.6% in Q2. These families also had limited growth in mortgage debt (+1.9%).
    3. As a result, by the end of the second quarter, the wealthiest 20% of households had accumulated almost two-thirds (64.8%) of Canada’s total net worth, averaging $3.4 million per household. The bottom 40% of households accounted for 3.3% of total net worth, averaging $86,900.  
    4. As a special wealth-builder category, homeowners experienced lower borrowing costs and lower inflation and this resulted in more savings as debt reduction in Q1. Still, personal net worth declined for younger Canadians and those without investment portfolios, because real estate values also declined.

    Income Tax Guide for Canadians

    Deadlines, tax tips and more

    The wealthy will be OK, others need help

    What can we learn from this? The wealthiest households can continue to increase their net worth, even if incomes are interrupted or don’t keep up with inflation and debt servicing costs are threatened by unemployment, incapacity, or retirement. That’s because their investment earnings and capital appreciation make up for the income gap.  

    Where are the opportunities for lower-income households? There are two. In the face of the same issues, it is critical to be able to continue to save consistently. Second, it is important to earn more tax-efficient investment income.

    This is where government policy comes in. It seems to be an easy ask for some to pay more tax, but that can result in brain drain, reduced incentives work or innovate, and the flight of capital. The real opportunity in the next federal budget is to help all Canadians build both income and wealth, against the backdrop of economic uncertainty, and to do so with the help of knowledgeable professionals.

    Building income and capital: a six-part plan

    Tax and financial literacy is elusive but critical to the prosperity of Canadians. Having the knowledge, skills, and confidence to make responsible financial decisions enables people to plan ahead and deal with increasingly complex systems that are a barrier to accessing income supplements through tax refunds, credits, and social benefits. 

    To that end, here’s my six-point wish list. Perhaps you’d like to add to it?

    1. Protection for interest earnings. Periods of high interest rates to combat inflation are particularly damaging to average households that earn interest income. If this monetary policy is necessary, protect those fragile savings from both inflation and taxes. Bring back the $1,000 investment income deduction, eliminated in 1987, to do so.  
    2. Deduction for professional help. Canadians need help with their tax and financial literacy. They won’t get that interacting with online help alone, no matter how good it is. Especially at a time the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) is pushing for increased digitization, helping individuals better understand basic tax planning—what comes first, an RRSP, a TFSA or FHSA, for example—can bolster lifelong wealth-building habits and help to diversify their investments. To remove barriers to professional help, make income tax preparation and financial planning costs tax-deductible.
    3. Waive CRA penalties and interest from auto-filing. Even though the federal government is touting automatic tax filing for 5.5 million of the lowest-income Canadians by 2028, in reality, navigating both tax and digital complexity underlying this initiative may be unattainable for most targeted filers. Imagine the repayment nightmare for years to come (remember CERB?) if these tax returns are incorrect. The CRA should be empowered to permanently waive interest or penalties resulting from honest errors in automatic tax filing processes. 
    4. Help young people start saving. Young workers are most susceptible to job loss but have the most to gain from increased compounding time in their investments. By enabling matching grants for start-up savings for the first five years after post-secondary education, similar to the grants available for registered education savings plan (RESP) and registered disability savings plan (RDSP) savings, sound saving habits could be encouraged with a New Graduate Savings Plan.   
    5. Recognize community service as a tax deduction. Younger Canadians aged 15 to 24 are most likely to volunteer, while those over age 65 volunteer the most hours. Keeping track of volunteer hours is not much more onerous than keeping track of dollars donated to charity. The resulting tax savings could help with community wealth creation. The Liberals had proposed a Health Care Workers Hero Tax Credit in their party platform. This should be extended to those who volunteer to help others with tax preparation and financial planning, by expanding the charitable donation credit. 
    6. Change retirement savings options. Most people know that the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) alone will not fund their retirement, even with the higher premiums workers and their employers are now paying. Rising CPP premiums squeeze out cash flows needed to fund a tax-free savings account (TFSA), which ensures a tax-free retirement. Required matching premiums also make it difficult for employers to give raises or increase staffing. One way to improve cash flow for more private savings is to increase take-home pay. Governments should encourage TFSA savings by making contributions tax deductible for both employees and employers who contribute to their employees’ accounts.

    Get free MoneySense financial tips, news & advice in your inbox.

    Read more about tax planning:



    About Evelyn Jacks, RWM, MFA, MFA-P, FDFS


    About Evelyn Jacks, RWM, MFA, MFA-P, FDFS

    Evelyn Jacks is President of Knowledge Bureau, a world-class financial education institute where readers can take micro-credentials in Financial Literacy, the Fundamentals of Income Tax Preparation, and earn career-enhancing Specialized Credentials, all online.

    [ad_2]

    Evelyn Jacks, RWM, MFA, MFA-P, FDFS

    Source link

  • Editorial: Vote no on Santa Clara County Measure A sales tax increase

    [ad_1]

    The Medicaid cuts in President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” will squeeze Santa Clara County health care funding. But raising local taxes is not the solution.

    Instead, county supervisors should stem their rapidly escalating spending, which has doubled in the past eight years and ranks highest per capita by far of the 10 largest California counties.

    And voters should reject Measure A, the five-year sales tax increase on the Nov. 4 special election ballot that has been in the planning stages since long before Trump won reelection.

    The measure would add another five-eighths of a cent to each dollar of taxable goods, pushing the total rate to 10% or more in most of the county.

    State data indicates that the average person in the county currently pays at least $1,700 a year in sales tax, which is distributed between state and local governments. Measure A would increase that by at least $113 annually.

    [ad_2]

    Mercury News Editorial

    Source link

  • Political crisis in France eases for now as prime minister survives no-confidence vote

    [ad_1]

    PARIS — PARIS (AP) — France’s latest political crisis eased — for now — when Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu survived two consecutive no-confidence votes on Thursday, averting another government collapse and giving President Emmanuel Macron a respite before an even tougher fight over the national budget.

    The immediate danger may have receded but the core problem is still very much center stage. The eurozone’s second-largest economy is still run by a minority government in a splintered parliament where no single bloc or party has a majority.

    Every major law now turns on last-minute deals, and the next test is a spending plan that must pass before the end of the year.

    On Thursday, lawmakers in the 577-seat National Assembly rejected a no-confidence motion filed by the hard-left France Unbowed party. The 271 votes were 18 short of the 289 needed to bring down the government.

    A second motion from the far-right National Rally also failed.

    Had Lecornu lost, Macron would have faced only unpalatable options: call new legislative elections, try to find yet another prime minister — France’s fifth in barely a year — or perhaps even resign himself, which he has ruled out.

    Macron’s decision to dissolve the National Assembly in June 2024 backfired on him, triggering legislative elections that stacked the powerful lower house with opponents of the French leader but producing no outright winner.

    Since then, Macron’s minority governments have sought to barter support bill by bill and have fallen in quick succession.

    That collides with the architecture of the Fifth Republic, founded in 1958 under Charles de Gaulle.

    The system was built for a strong presidency and stable parliamentary majorities, not for coalition horse-trading or a splintered house.

    With no single bloc near an absolute majority of 289 seats, the machinery is grinding against its design, turning big votes into cliffhangers and raising existential questions about the governance of France.

    For French voters and observers, it’s jarring. France, once a model of eurozone stability, is now stumbling from crisis to crisis, testing the patience of markets and allies.

    To peel away opposition votes, Lecornu offered to slow the rollout of Macron’s flagship 2023 pension law, which raises the retirement age from 62 to 64.

    The proposed slowdown could push the law back roughly two years, easing near-term pressure on people nearing retirement while leaving the end goal intact.

    The government puts the short-term cost of the delay at 400 million euros ($430 million) for next year and 1.8 billion euros ($1.9 billion) for 2027, saying it will find offsets.

    For many in France, pensions touch a nerve — the 2023 law triggered massive protests and strikes that left heaps of trash rotting on Paris streets.

    The government then used Article 49.3 — a special constitutional power that lets a prime minister push a law through without a parliamentary vote. But the backlash only hardened.

    With Thursday’s reprieve, Macron’s government has some breathing room. It shifts the battle to the 2026 budget, with a debate opening on Oct. 24.

    Lecornu has vowed not to use Article 49.3 to pass a budget without a vote — which means no shortcuts: every line must win support in a fractured chamber.

    The government and its allies hold fewer than 200 seats. For a majority, they need opposition support.

    That math makes the Socialists, with 69 lawmakers, and the conservative Republicans, with 50, both potential swing blocs. But their backing isn’t a given, even though they both lent support to Lecornu against Thursday’s no-confidence motions.

    The Socialists say the budget draft still lacks “social and fiscal justice.”

    France’s deficit sits near 5.4% of GDP. The plan is to bring it to 4.7% next year with spending restraint and targeted tax changes while trying to protect growth.

    The left is preparing a renewed push for a wealth-side measure aimed at ultra-high fortunes.

    The government rejects that path and prefers narrower, lower-yield steps, including measures on holding companies.

    Analysts predict hard bargaining over benefit freezes, higher medical deductibles and savings demanded of local authorities — each concession risking votes on one flank even as it gains them on another.

    The clock is ticking: Against a year’s end budget deadline, the government must show how it will pay for the pension slowdown and negotiate, in parallel, with the Socialists and conservatives over taxes and spending.

    For the president, success would mean proving that France can pass a credible budget and start to rein in its deficit without extraordinary procedural force.

    If the talks crack — on pensions, taxes or spending — the risks of Lecornu’s government collapsing return, and at the end of the year, France could find itself back where it started: deadlocked.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tax extension filings still due on Oct. 15 despite government shutdown. Here’s what to know.

    [ad_1]

    Although the U.S. government remains closed, taxpayers who requested a filing extension from the IRS earlier this year remain on the hook to submit their income tax returns by Oct. 15. 

    “Taxpayers should continue to file, deposit and pay federal income taxes as they normally would,” an IRS spokesman told CBS News. “The lapse in appropriations does not change federal income tax responsibilities.”

    In a typical year, about 20 million Americans — about 13% of all taxpayers — ask the IRS for a tax filing extension, according to agency data. Extensions, which are provided automatically if a taxpayer requests more time, provide an additional six months to prepare and file federal returns. 

    An extension can help taxpayers who are facing complex tax situations or who need extra time to get their documents prepared for filing. Even so, an extension doesn’t get exempt you from paying taxes you owe to the IRS, as the tax agency expects taxpayers to make good on their debts by the regular April 15 deadline.

    Most IRS operations are closed during the government shutdown. About half of the agency’s workers have been on furlough since Oct. 8, with essential employees continuing to work in areas such as taxpayer services and submission processing, according to Baker Tilly, a tax advisory company.

    When is the tax extension deadline? 

    The deadline to file your taxes if you’ve received an extension is 11:59 p.m. on Wednesday, Oct. 15, in your local time zone, which means taxpayers should submit their electronic filing before that time on Wednesday. 

    Can you get an extension past Oct. 15? 

    Generally, no, according to the IRS. 

    However, the agency this year has given some state residents more time beyond Oct. 15 to file their federal returns due to natural disasters in their regions. 

    For instance, all residents of both Arkansas and Tennessee qualify for an extension because of April storms, flooding and tornadoes. Taxpayers in those states have until Nov. 3 to file their federal returns. Kentucky residents and people living in some West Virginia counties also have until Nov. 3 due to February storms that caused severe damage in those areas. 

    What are the penalties for missing the filing deadline?

    If you miss the Oct. 15 filing date to file your tax return, the IRS will charge 5% of the amount due for each month or part of the month that it is late, up to a maximum of 25%. 

    But the IRS says that it might waive the penalty “if you have a reasonable explanation for filing late,” and asks taxpayers to attach an explanation for the late filing with their tax return. 

    If you file late and are owed a refund, the IRS generally doesn’t charge a penalty.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Postal traffic to US still down 70% five weeks after duties exemption on low-value packages ended

    [ad_1]

    Postal traffic is to the U.S. is still down about 70% five weeks after the end of the “de minimis” exemption that spared low-value packages from duties and packages, the United Nations postal agency said Friday.

    Confusion has reigned since the U.S. ended the tariff exemption for packages worth less than $800 on Aug. 29. In September, the Universal Postal Union reported 88 of its 192 member countries had suspended all or some of its postal services to the U.S. to have time to adjust their shipping procedures.

    On Friday, the UPU said “only a handful” of those had resumed operations to the U.S.

    The organization said traffic to the U.S. on Oct. 3 was down 70.7% compared with volume one week before the regulatory changes. On Aug. 29, when the exemption ended, volume plummeted 81% from a week earlier.

    Bern, Switzerland-based UPU said it is rolling out technology that will help members calculate, collect and remit required duties to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection through the UPU’s Customs Declaration System.

    “Postal services are essential services,” said Lati Matata, Director of the UPU’s Postal Technology Centre, in a statement. The technology, an application programming interface, or API, will allow “every postal operator in (UPU’s) network – no matter how big or small – to meet customs requirements to ensure that citizens worldwide, including U.S citizens, receive their postal items,” Matata said.

    Since the exemption ended, purchases that previously entered the U.S. without needing to clear customs now require vetting and are subject to their origin country’s applicable tariff rate, which can range from 10% to 50%.

    While the change applies to the products of every country, U.S. residents will not have to pay duties on incoming gifts valued at up to $100, or on up to $200 worth of personal souvenirs from trips abroad, according to the White House.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New 2026 tax brackets are here: What higher thresholds and a bigger standard deduction mean for paychecks and the top 1% | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    The IRS has set the 2026 tax brackets and standard deductions, keeping seven rates in place while shifting the income thresholds upward to account for inflation and to reflect changes enacted in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, meaning many paychecks will see modest relief in 2026 and the top rate still bites only above very high incomes.

    For most households, the standard deduction rises again, which will reduce taxable income before the brackets even apply, and high earners will continue to face a 37% top rate but at slightly higher income thresholds than in 2025.

    The 2026 brackets

    Standard deduction changes

    What it means for the average household

    What it means for high earners

    Estate and wealth-transfer context

    ‘Sugar high’ risk

    • Fortune previously detailed how OBBBA cements TCJA-era individual rate architecture and boosts the standard deduction in 2025, framing the law’s household-level impact and distributional tilt as favoring higher earners according to independent modeling cited in our reporting.​
    • Budget watchdogs have highlighted broader fiscal implications and the bill’s “sugar high” risk, linking tax cuts and spending choices to debt trajectories and future policy trade-offs that shape the 2026 tax bracket environment.

    For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 

    Fortune Global Forum returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and global leaders will gather for a dynamic, invitation-only event shaping the future of business. Apply for an invitation.

    [ad_2]

    Ashley Lutz

    Source link

  • Arizona Sheriff’s Office Misused Millions Meant to Remedy Racial Profiling, Report Reveals

    [ad_1]

    PHOENIX (AP) — The sheriff’s office for metro Phoenix spent millions of dollars budgeted for compliance costs in a racial profiling case over Joe Arpaio’s immigration crackdowns on things that had little or nothing to do with a court-ordered overhaul of the agency, according to an expert’s report.

    The report released Wednesday criticized the use of compliance money by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office to fund personnel costs and tasks, either in part or in full, that aren’t connected to the overhaul.

    It also pointed out inappropriate spending: $2.8 million for surplus body-worn camera licenses that went beyond the court’s orders; $1.5 million in renovations in the relocation of an internal affairs office; over $1.3 million to buy 42 vehicles; and an $11,000 golf cart to bring staff from headquarters to the internal affairs operation, even though the department was leasing parking space at the latter location.

    For over a decade, Maricopa County taxpayers have picked up the bill for remedying constitutional violations found in a 2013 profiling verdict over then-Sheriff Arpaio’s traffic patrols targeting immigrants.

    The racial profiling case centered on 20 large-scale traffic patrols launched by Arpaio that targeted immigrants from January 2008 through October 2011. That led to the profiling verdict and expensive court-ordered overhauls of the agency’s traffic patrol operations and, later, its internal affairs unit.

    The county says $323 million has been spent so far on legal expenditures, a staff that monitors the sheriff’s department’s progress and the agency’s compliance costs. The county has said the total is expected to reach $352 million by July 2026.

    The federal judge presiding over the case expressed concerns about transparency in spending by the sheriff’s office and ordered a review, leading to the blistering report from budget analysts. The report was prepared by budget analysts picked by the case’s monitor.

    The report concluded 72% of the $226 million in spending by the sheriff’s office from February 2014 to late September 2024 was either wrongly attributed or “improperly prorated” to a compliance fund.

    Budget analysts who reviewed hundreds of employee records over roughly that time period found an average of 70% of all positions funded by compliance money were “inappropriately assigned or only partially related to compliance.”

    Those expenditures were unrelated to or unnecessary for compliance, lacked appropriate justification or resulted from purposeful misrepresentation by the sheriff’s office, county leaders or both, the budget analysts wrote.

    Sheriff Jerry Sheridan’s office released a statement saying its attorneys are reviewing the report to identify areas of common concern and any findings it may dispute. Sheridan, who took office this year, is the fourth sheriff to grapple with the case.

    Raul Piña, a longtime member of a community advisory board created to help improve trust in the sheriff’s office, said the report opens up a broader conversation about the integrity of the sheriff’s office.

    “You will have to double-check now whenever the agency talks about statistics,” Piña said.

    Beginning earlier this year, county officials ramped up their criticism of the spending. They said the agency shouldn’t still be under the court’s supervision a dozen years after the verdict and shouldn’t still be paying such hefty bills, including about $30 million to those who monitor the agency on behalf of the judge since around 2014.

    The report criticized Maricopa County and its governing board for a lack of oversight over the spending.

    Thomas Galvin, chairman of the county’s governing board and a leading critic of the continued court supervision, said the board’s legal counsel is reviewing the report. “The board has confidence in MCSO’s budgeting team and will respond accordingly,” Galvin said.

    Since the profiling verdict, the sheriff’s office has been criticized for disparate treatment of Hispanic and Black drivers in a series of studies of its traffic stops. The latest study, however, shows significant improvements. The agency’s also dogged by a backlog of internal affairs cases. While the agency has made progress on some fronts and garnered favorable compliance grades in certain areas, it hasn’t yet been deemed fully compliant with the court-ordered overhauls.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Denver brewery closed, seized due to unpaid taxes

    [ad_1]

    A Denver brewery known as a hub for the Latino community closed suddenly this week after city officials seized the property’s assets due to unpaid back taxes.

    Raíces Brewing Co. in Lincoln Park owed $98,703 in sales and personal property taxes, according to a distraint warrant issued by the city. The business closed on Wednesday when the warrant was issued.

    Brewery CEO José Beteta was not immediately available to comment on the circumstances, but a detailed goodbye note on Raíces’ website states the company had been working with the city for about a year to establish a payment plan for the taxes. The company blamed “a series of unexpected charges” issued by the city that it said are related to what’s called a business personal property tax. That’s essentially a tax on whatever assets a business owns.

    The note alleged that Raices had “never received prior billing notices” and that all invoices dating back to 2019 “arrived together in 2024, already including years of interest and penalties — despite our lack of prior information.”

    However, city spokesperson Laura Swartz said in a statement that the personal property taxes owed only amounted to $10,765, or about 10% of the business’s total outstanding balance. Raices owed nearly $69,000 in sales tax and about $30,000 for penalties and interest, she said.

    “It’s unfortunate that this situation has gotten to this point. We want Denver’s businesses to succeed and that means offering the best customer service we can to them,” Swartz said. “Before issuing a warrant, we attempt to reach the business by phone, mail, email, and in person to both collect the sales tax and ensure they can continue to operate. As Raices has noted, the city has attempted to work with them for years, including on a payment plan that was not fulfilled.”

    [ad_2]

    Tiney Ricciardi

    Source link

  • IRS releases income tax brackets and standard deductions for 2026. Here’s what to know.

    [ad_1]

    The IRS is adjusting the income limits for its federal income tax brackets to account for the impact of inflation, an annual reset that could provide relief for some Americans when they file their taxes next year.

    The IRS makes these adjustments, typically in October or November, to avoid what it known as “bracket creep,” which is when inflation pushes people into higher tax brackets, potentially forcing them to dole out more money come April. 

    The upshot: Americans will have to earn more income next year before reaching a higher tax bracket. For example, the upper tax limit on a single filer making $50,000 will be 12% in 2026 versus 22% in 2025.

    See the updated tax brackets below.

    Standard deduction

    In addition to setting the federal income tax brackets, the IRS also released changes to 2026 standard deductions on Thursday.

    • Married couples filing jointly will have a standard deduction of $32,200
    • Heads of households will have a standard deduction of $24,150
    • Single taxpayers and married individuals will face a standard deduction of $16,100

    Seniors could see additional relief due to a provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that provides a temporary tax deduction of up to $6,000 for people aged 65 and older. The tax break, which is set to expire at the end of 2028, is available to those with an adjusted gross income of $75,000 or less for single filers and $150,000 or less for couples filing jointly.

    The IRS  announced Wednesday that an agency-wide furlough would begin on Oct. 8 due to a lapse in federal appropriations as a result of the government shutdown. Taxpayers with an Oct. 15 extension deadline should plan on submitting their returns as planned, according to the IRS.

    “Taxpayers should continue to file, deposit, and pay federal income taxes as they normally would; the lapse in appropriations does not change Federal Income Tax responsibilities,” a spokesperson told CBS News in an email.

    Understanding your tax bracket

    There’s a misconception that Americans pay the top tax rate on every dollar of their income, but that isn’t the case. Taxation in the U.S. is progressive, meaning that tax rates increase the more you earn. In other words, the seven income tax rate brackets — 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% and 37% — represent the percentage you’ll pay on portions of your income. 

    For instance, a single taxpayer making $50,000 in taxable income in 2026, will pay 10% in federal taxes on the first $12,400 of their income (the top threshold for the 10% bracket) and then 12% on the remaining $37,600.

    To determine your marginal tax bracket, you must first figure out what your highest taxable income is.

    For instance, a married couple with $150,000 in gross income would first subtract the 2026 standard deduction of $32,200 from that amount, leaving them with $117,800 in taxable income. That would put their top marginal tax rate at 22%. However, their effective tax rate is much lower:

    • Their first $24,800 of income will be taxed at 10%, or $2,480 in taxes
    • Their earnings from $24,800 to $100,800 would be taxed at 12%, or $9,120 in taxes 
    • Their income from $100,800 to $117,800 would be taxed at 22%, or $3,740 in taxes

    Combined, they would pay $15,340 in federal income taxes, giving them an effective tax rate of 13%.

    Mary Cunningham

    Mary Cunningham is a reporter for CBS MoneyWatch. Before joining the business and finance vertical, she worked at “60 Minutes,” CBSNews.com and CBS News 24/7 as part of the CBS News Associate Program.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why late-career savers need to be careful with RRSPs – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    When should you keep contributing to your RRSP?

    If you have a group RRSP with matching contributions from your employer, this provides a significant boost to your savings. Many group plans offer matching contributions of 25%, 50%, or even 100% on contributions up to a certain dollar amount or percentage of income. To get your hands on this free money, you have to keep contributing. Defined contribution (DC) pension plans fall into this same category, with employer contributions making maximum participation a compelling opportunity. 

    If you do not have much retirement savings or pension income, RRSP contributions are also generally advantageous. The reason is that you are likely to be in a lower tax bracket in retirement. Paying a lower tax rate in the future than today makes RRSP contributions even more compelling. 

    Anyone in a high tax bracket today—especially near or at the top tax bracket in their province—will probably benefit from making RRSP contributions. 

    If someone plans to retire abroad in another country, late-career RRSP contributions are also typically advisable. The withholding tax rate on RRSP and registered retirement income fund (RRIF) withdrawals for non-residents generally ranges from 15% to 25%. Most countries have lower tax rates than Canada and will recognize tax withheld in Canada as a credit against foreign tax payable. Some countries do not tax foreign income at all, so the withholding tax on RRSP/RRIF withdrawals may be the only tax implications of withdrawals. 

    Compare the best RRSP rates in Canada

    When should you not contribute to your RRSP?

    Although most people find themselves in lower tax brackets in retirement, some may pay more tax. One example may be someone who has a spouse with a large RRSP or pension whose income is fairly modest today. Pension income-splitting allows most pension income, including RRIF withdrawals after age 65, to be split up to 50% with a spouse. So, a high-income retiree can move income onto a low-income spouse’s tax return. A low-income taxpayer today may be in a much higher tax bracket in retirement in a case like this. It would make sense for them to redirect retirement savings to a tax-free savings account (TFSA) if you have the contribution room or simply save in a non-registered account.

    Someone who is transitioning to retirement and working part-time may be another good example of someone whose tax rate may be higher in the future, and further RRSP contributions are not advisable. 

    Someone whose retirement income is likely to be in the $100,000 to $150,000 range should also consider the impact of Old Age Security (OAS) pension recovery tax. OAS clawback acts like an effective 15% tax rate increase for RRSP/RRIF withdrawals for OAS recipients. 

    Government support like the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS), a means-tested benefit that is payable to low-income OAS pensioners, could be affected by RRSP/RRIF withdrawals. So, if someone has a choice between RRSP and tax-free savings account (TFSA) contributions, and may have little to no income beyond CPP and OAS, a TFSA may be a better choice than an RRSP. 

    Article Continues Below Advertisement


    If someone has debt with a high interest rate, especially credit card debt, this may be another reason to pause the RRSP contributions. 

    Should most people contribute to RRSPs? 

    Most working age Canadians can expect to be in a lower tax bracket in retirement than in their working years. As a result, most people should be contributing to their RRSPs and will be better off in the long run by growing their savings. If someone has maxed out their TFSA, and choosing between RRSP and non-registered savings, RRSP contributions may still be advantageous even if their tax rate is the same or slightly higher in retirement. 

    There is a non-financial benefit to segmenting savings into less accessible accounts like an RRSP. A TFSA or savings account is more likely to be raided for a discretionary expense, so the psychology of RRSP contributions is a worthwhile consideration beyond the financial factors. 

    If you have an employer match on your retirement account contributions, you should almost always be contributing regardless of your current or future tax rate. 

    Professional financial planners can help you project your future income, taxes, and investments using financial planning software. This can help determine whether RRSP contributions will benefit your potential retirement spending or estate value in the future based on your actual numbers, rather than a rule of thumb.

    Have a personal finance question? Submit it here.

    Read more about planning for retirement:



    About Jason Heath, CFP


    About Jason Heath, CFP

    Jason Heath is a fee-only, advice-only Certified Financial Planner (CFP) at Objective Financial Partners Inc. in Toronto. He does not sell any financial products whatsoever.

    [ad_2]

    Jason Heath, CFP

    Source link