“It’s a reshaping of how we do things,” Allyse Worland, a licensed funeral director and spokesperson for the National Funeral Directors Association (NFDA), told MarketWatch. “It’s not about a casket, burials, embalmings. It’s now about service itself.”

Making funerals more personal

Jimmy Olson, who owns Olson Funeral Home & Cremation Services in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, turned one of his two chapels into a dining hall. He also offers catering and an in-house florist, and his event space has welcomed three weddings.

“You don’t have to just go to a funeral home for a funeral,” he told MarketWatch, telling families: “It’s not my funeral — it’s yours — so make it what you want.”

If a loved one golfed, he said, he might organize an outing that raises money for a favorite charity.

He isn’t alone in sensing demand for something different. In the NFDA’s 2025 Consumer Awareness and Preferences Report, 58.3% of respondents said they had attended a funeral at a non-traditional location.

Why burials are fading

The numbers explain the pivot. The NFDA’s 2026 Cremation & Burial Report projects that cremation will make up 64.3% of the country’s final dispositions this year. The group also expects yearly deaths to climb to 3.9 million by 2045 while burials fall below 600,000 a year.

Price is part of the story, but not the whole of it. In the same report, convenience and simplicity ranked first among cremation drivers at 43.3%, ahead of cost at 34.4%. Cost was down from 50.4% in 2025.

Still, the NFDA found the median funeral with a casket and burial cost $8,300, while a funeral with cremation cost $6,280, Clear Money Guide reports. That’s a gap of about $2,000, which leaves out costs like a cemetery plot.

It’s important to understand what the costs include. For example, the Federal Trade Commission says a direct cremation covers the funeral home’s basic services fee, transportation and care of the body, plus an urn or container.

Personalized extras can add up, as each add-on you choose raises the final bill. For example, using the funeral home for a ceremony or memorial service is listed as an optional extra, and flowers fall under items the funeral home buys from outside vendors on your behalf.

Olson said he sees the money pressure up close. He told MarketWatch that many of his clients are working families in the Midwest who are choosing less expensive options and shopping online for better prices.

How to keep control of the bill

Federal rules give you leverage. The Federal Trade Commission’s Funeral Rule requires funeral homes to hand over a general price list you can take with you, and you can pick and choose the arrangements you want.

Providers must also accept a casket you buy elsewhere without charging a fee — and they must give prices over the phone if you ask.

There are a few ways to take advantage of this:

• Call several funeral homes and ask for their general price lists before you visit.
• Ask for an itemized quote, so you can decline anything you don’t want.
• Price out food, flowers and the venue separately if you’re planning a gathering.
• Talk through your wishes with family now, so no one has to decide under pressure.

Olson said that giving families choices puts them back in control when they might feel they have none.

The condo association’s attorneys have sent a foreclosure threat letter, and a judge will decide this month whether she gets more time.

Speaking with CBS News Miami, Farthing has expressed just how stressful the situation has become. “I’m lucky to feed my dog some days, you know, I just don’t get out of bed because I can’t,” she said. “I can’t deal with it.”

According to a Campbell Property Management opinion piece, aging condo buildings are incurring heavy bills for condo-owning retirees across Florida –– as state rules enforce compulsory inspections and repairs of older buildings. A data report by real estate company ATTOM also showed that Florida is among the states with the highest foreclosures in the U.S., with 34,336 foreclosure starts in 2025.

The $2,300 bill threatening to make a retiree homeless

Farthing had to retire early because of the COVID-19 pandemic and health problems. Currently, she lives with diabetes, PTSD and an autoimmune disease. She has to pay $2,300 monthly for repairs to her 50-year-old building as part of mandatory assessments.

Farthing and 20 other homeowners have received help from United Way Broward, with Farthing getting nearly $10,000 in what United Way’s Vice President of Housing, Rebecca McGuire, described as “a one time, $200,000 grant specifically for HOA and taxes.” McGuire is unsure that they’d get more of that grant again.

McGuire believes the situation is pressing enough to require the intervention of lawmakers. She told CBS News Miami that “people are going to lose their homes. The situation of homelessness is going to go through the roof. People are going to walk away from condos where they put their life savings into and they’re going to sit empty.”

How Florida’s condo foreclosure actually works

Standard mortgage default protections don’t apply to Farthing’s case, as it falls under condo association law. According to Florida Statutes Chapter 718, Section 116, every condominium association (COA) automatically holds a legal claim against your property for any unpaid monthly dues, special assessments, fines or late fees.

Even if you have completely paid off your mortgage and own the home outright, the association can still place a lien on your property and eventually foreclose on it if you refuse to pay your community dues.

Under Florida Statutes Section 718.116(3), once an owner falls behind on payments, their unpaid assessments accrue interest from the due date at the rate provided in the declaration of condominium (not to exceed the rate allowed by law), or 18% per year if no rate is specified in the declaration.

Haber Law, a Miami-based boutique law firm specializing in real estate affairs, notes that a declaration of condominium is a legal contract between homeowners and their condominium association. Before the association can formally start a foreclosure lawsuit against the homeowner, it must send a 30-day late notice, a 45-day notice of intent to record a claim of lien and a 45-day notice of intent to foreclose, according to Hamilton Mikes, a Florida law firm that represents condominium associations.

How to avoid foreclosures or get out of one

Avoiding a foreclosure is easier than getting out of one. It’s important to always review the association’s Structural Integrity Reserve Study (SIRS), annual budget and board meeting minutes so you’re on top of things. If a building is over 30 years old and has underfunded reserves, it is almost certainly heading for a large assessment.

You should also participate in your condo’s governance and attend board meetings where major projects and special assessments are voted on. Homeowners can push the board to secure long-term association bank loans for major condominium repairs — allowing owners to pay small amounts over many years — rather than demanding lump-sum or short-term special assessment fees.

If you do find yourself facing foreclosure or a civil lawsuit, open every letter in your mail to avoid missing important legal notices. Before your case is handed over to collection lawyers, demand a clear breakdown of all charges and fines to verify what you actually owe and if there are any errors in the bill.

In extreme cases, you can explore local emergency grants, a reverse mortgage (if you are 62 or older) or Chapter 13 bankruptcy, which immediately halts the foreclosure and lets you repay the debt over three to five years. Of course, a last resort option is to sell the property on the open market to pay off your debt.

While this is an incredibly frustrating situation, be sure to avoid withholding dues during a dispute, as automatic interest is triggered by late payments even while a condo assessment is being contested.

When Jake’s parents sold them the house in late 2020, much of that landscaping had gone untended. They skipped the inspection and took the place as is. Chloe is now a busy 32-year-old software engineer, and Jake, 30, is a senior manager in an engineering department. They both want out.

“Everybody that we talk to is like, you know, homeownership is the dream,” Chloe told personal finance author Sethi on the Nov. 3 episode of his podcast. “And I’m like, are we just dumb?”

They locked in 2.7% when the average 30-year fixed rate tracked by Freddie Mac, the Virginia-based mortgage buyer, was near its record low of 2.65% in January 2021. Freddie Mac’s Nov. 12 survey put that average at 7.11%. For the second quarter of 2026, data from the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which regulates Freddie Mac, shows just 19.2% of outstanding U.S. mortgages under 3%. Chloe had gone back and forth for about eight months because she didn’t want to add selling to the list of money mistakes they’d already made.

How they ended up in a house appraised at $595K with no inspection

Back then, they were paying $2,400 a month in rent. Jake figured rates that low would never return and saw rent as wasted money. The house appraised at $595K, above the $500K they’d budgeted.

The mortgage went in Jake’s name alone. By his account, averaging their two credit scores would have put them under a 760 cutoff, so Chloe was left off the loan.

“Honestly, signing that though, like I wanted to throw up,” he said of the roughly half-million-dollar loan.

Their monthly payment with escrow has gone from $2,990 to $3,072. Once maintenance and other costs are added, the couple estimated they spend closer to $4,500.

Then came what Chloe calls their “schemes.” Two years ago, an $80K home equity loan paid for renovations meant to turn the house into an Airbnb rental, though Chloe admitted they barely looked at the area’s rental demand, which she said is soft. They also bought a 44-foot, eight-year-old RV for $50K and a new truck to tow it.

Getting the RV off the property proved such a struggle that it never went on a trip, and they sold it two years later for $30K to $32K. As of the episode, they were putting about $7,000 a month toward the $45K left on the home equity loan, which they need to clear before they can sell.

Why Sethi says homeowners must consider more than the math alone

When Sethi pulled up their accounts on the show, the couple was bringing in $30,166 a month before taxes, which he worked out to $361,992 a year. On top of that, they had $304K invested, $68K in savings and a net worth of $692K.

Jake’s been pushing to sell. He’d take the roughly $250K in equity, put it in an S&P 500 index fund and not touch it, so their retirement would be mostly taken care of while they’re young. Chloe would agree when he walked her through it, then start doubting it again half an hour later because the house might keep going up in value.

Sethi figured that, if they keep the house and retire in 25 years, they’d end up with about $4.8 million. Sell now and invest the equity, and he put it closer to $6.2 million, though rent would probably eat into some of that.

“One way or another, both of these decisions will be fine,” Sethi told them. So he kept steering the talk back to what they actually want.

Chloe had floated renting it out instead, but she admitted the yard was a mess the last time there were tenants and she’d likely be the one dealing with renters. Sethi warned them about letting the tail wag the dog. Without the house, he pointed out, the well and the septic system wouldn’t even be on their list.

“We can buy another house if we want to,” Chloe said near the end. “We have the money.”

What to weigh before a low rate decides where you live

Start with the full monthly cost of your house, upkeep included, as Sethi had Chloe and Jake do. Put your time on the list, as well, since the yard was costing them about eight hours a weekend.

Before you hand a renter the keys, Sethi’s advice is to work out tenant screening, repair duty and where the money for breakdowns will come from. In his view, most renovations don’t pay for themselves, which makes borrowing for one hard to justify. Moneywise’s checklist for whether you’re ready to buy covers similar ground.

Going forward, any big purchase that would mean borrowing gets a cooling-off period first, the couple said. They’ve talked to a real estate agent about listing the house and plan to head to the West Coast.

“A petition is underway to reinstate Jensen and I’m signing it too,” the Tesla and SpaceX CEO [NASDAQ: TSLA] posted on X on Nov. 13.

He isn’t alone. As of 10:30 a.m. ET on Nov. 14, an online letter called Stand with Jensen listed more than 100,000 names — including more than 5,000 people who say they currently work at Nvidia.

Huang co-founded the chipmaker in 1993 and led it for 33 years, building it into one of the world's most valuable companies. Nvidia announced Nov. 12 that he had resigned as president, CEO and board member, effective immediately. The board accepted his resignation Nov. 11, according to a regulatory filing. CFO Colette Kress is now interim CEO, and director Harvey Jones became the board’s first-ever chair.

His exit came after reports that he’d had extramarital relationships, including one with Alice Huang (no relation), a former executive at Singapore-based Megaspeed who U.S. intelligence officials reportedly suspect was recruited by China’s top spy agency. Huang has admitted to an affair. Neither he nor Nvidia has been charged with any wrongdoing thus far.

What the Stand with Jensen petition asks for

The Stand with Jensen letter asks the board to “bring Jensen back while an independent investigation establishes the facts, unless and until you can provide compelling evidence that his removal is in NVIDIA’s best interests.”

Beyond reinstatement, the letter asks the board to disclose the scope, independence and timeline of its investigation, give Huang a chance to respond before any final decision, and publicly explain the evidence behind his removal. The signers say they haven’t been shown evidence that the woman at the center of the controversy was a spy, and argue Huang deserves “due process, not mob justice.”

The site says it isn’t affiliated with Nvidia or Huang. Signers identify themselves, and organizers say they may hold new signatures for review before counting them.

Who has signed so far

At this point, the site’s live tracker broke the names down like this:

• current Nvidia employees: 5,248
• former employees: 922
• shareholders: 53,233
• other supporters: 40,745

Numbers are moving fast, and this is probably already out of date. For context, Nvidia had about 42,000 employees at the end of its last fiscal year in January, according to its annual report, so the self-identified current staff would represent roughly 12% of the company.

Musk is listed at the top as a shareholder, alongside Replit CEO Amjad Masad; Gavin Baker, managing partner of Atreides Management; Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney; and Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan. Cohere’s Aidan Gomez and Serve Robotics CEO Ali Kashani are listed as partners. Shopify CEO Tobi Lütke replied “You have my sword” to Musk’s petition post, though Moneywise didn’t find his name on the list.

Identities on the site are self-reported, and the list includes entries that appear to be fake or duplicated, including at least one offensive name listed as a current Nvidia employee. There’s even an unverifiable entry for actress Sydney Sweeney listed as a shareholder. The totals are best read as a rough gauge of support rather than a true headcount.

Inside Nvidia, staff want answers

The pushback started inside the company. A longtime engineer posted to Nvidia’s internal suggestion box urging the board to weigh employee sentiment before acting, according to internal correspondence reviewed by Wired. The post has drawn more than 1,600 comments, several asking the board to find a way to bring Huang back.

One employee sent a companywide email demanding transparency about Huang’s exit, writing: “I stand by Jensen.” About two dozen employees posted support on LinkedIn, and Moneywise couldn’t find any employee posts backing his departure.

“Nvidia is Nvidia because of Jensen,” one employee told Wired.

In an informal poll, we asked Moneywise followers whether Nvidia should bring Jensen back. Of 164 votes, 82% said “most definitely.” Just 6% said “absolutely not,” while 12% picked “he’s poaching them all,” a nod to the idea that Nvidia employees would follow Huang wherever he goes next.

Musk has been in Huang’s corner all week

The post follows days of public support from Musk. On the night of Nov. 11, before Huang resigned, Musk replied “That would be an honor” to a ZeroHedge post urging him to hire Huang. The next day, he answered “True words” to AngelList co-founder Naval Ravikant, who wrote that “one does not just simply replace the founder,” pointing to Steve Jobs and Travis Kalanick.

When Ravikant followed up by calling Huang “the Steve Jobs of Nvidia” and “irreplaceable,” Musk replied “True.” He also replied “Always” to a post praising him for being a true friend to Huang.

The two go back years. In May, Musk replied “True” to a repost of photos of the pair taken a decade apart, captioned “The most important thing in life is having true friends.”

Musk also has a business stake in the outcome. His rocket and AI company, SpaceX [NASDAQ: SPCX], has committed to building its AI data centers exclusively with Nvidia chips, and Nvidia owns a stake in SpaceX worth billions. The petition site also lists him as an Nvidia shareholder.

What is Huang doing now?

Since resigning, Huang has kept a low profile. Photos published by the Daily Mail show friends and family gathering at what the outlet described as his $38 million Pacific Heights mansion in San Francisco in the hours after he stepped down, as food deliveries, including bags of fried chicken, arrived at the door.

Washington isn’t done with him. Rep. Brian Mast, R-Fla., chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Huang agreed to come in. Three House committee chairs then asked him to sit for a closed-door, transcribed interview on Dec. 1, giving him until 8 p.m. ET on Nov. 13 to confirm or face a subpoena. It wasn’t immediately clear whether Huang had confirmed in writing by the deadline.

Senate Banking Committee chair Tim Scott, R-S.C., has separately asked Huang to testify on Dec. 3. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, whom Scott also called to testify, has agreed to appear.

The questions that haven’t been answered

The petition’s backers argue the board moved before the facts were in, and the central question is still open. Attorney General Todd Blanche said Nov. 12 there had been “no conclusions reached by the Department of Justice, or by me” about whether Alice Huang was a spy, according to Reuters. Beijing has denied that she is one, and President Donald Trump has said it isn’t yet clear either way.

What is on the record is narrower. Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs said Nov. 12 that she has been barred from re-entering the country since February amid an investigation into possible offenses tied to Megaspeed, though it said that investigation did not concern espionage.

Could he actually come back?

There’s recent precedent. In November 2023, OpenAI’s board fired CEO Sam Altman, then reached a deal to bring him back about five days later after hundreds of employees threatened to quit.

Even the White House has weighed in on both sides. President Donald Trump called Huang on Tuesday urging him to fight for his job, The New York Times reported. After Huang resigned, Trump posted on Truth Social that there was “only one man to take his place”: Apple chairman Tim Cook.

But the decision rests with Nvidia’s board, and it has given no sign of reversing course. The company is continuing its own investigation into Huang, according to The Information. On Nov. 13, the board said it was still selecting a search firm for the CEO role and had not formally engaged any potential candidates, after the Financial Times reported that it had approached Arm CEO Rene Haas. Washington’s scrutiny also goes beyond Huang himself: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has questioned whether Nvidia knew who it was selling chips to.

Sam Altman came back within five days, so there’s still time to see how this unfolds. The clock is ticking until Nvidia’s Tuesday earnings call.

Cramer told Green Bay’s WBAY-TV news that she and her husband paid $7,913.99 to local home repair company Exterior Solutions to fix their roof after a June storm, only for the September deadline to start work pass.

After exhausting all attempts to contact the company, Cramer made a bold move: she showed up on company owner Dustin Marks’s doorstep. Marks wasn’t home, but Cramer told WBAY-TV that “I did talk to his wife, and she informed me that she had set up a text chain, that there had been numerous people that had been reaching out to her.”

The text chain, evidently, connected around 20 alleged victims, including other retirees, who said they paid Exterior Solutions thousands of dollars for home repair work that never got done — some of whom eventually filed claims in court against the company to recoup their money. WBAY-TV said that Marks skipped two of those court appearances.

A growing threat to homeowners

Moneywise reached out to Marks but didn’t hear back, though his company’s website is no longer active. We also reached out to the sheriff’s offices in Kewaunee and Shawano Counties, which confirmed to WBAY-TV that they’d opened investigations into Exterior Solutions.

Kewaunee’s Sheriff Joski told Moneywise that he is unable to comment on the case, as it is part of an ongoing investigation. The Shawano County Sheriff’s Office did not reply to Moneywise’s questions by press deadline.

But WBAY-TV noted that Marks provided a statement to them, saying “Exterior Solutions was a family owned and operated company going through extensive personal problems.”

They added that he paid off $43,000 in business tax warrants in July and that he had referred at least one of the victims to his bankruptcy attorney. His attorney did not return Moneywise’s request for comment.

The alleged victims in the Exterior Solutions case are still attempting to recoup their losses, while the charges against the company haven’t been proven in court.

But when it comes to confirmed fraud cases, the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) reported that “instances of contractor fraud increased 38% from 2023 to 2025.”

“Home repair fraudsters commonly target vulnerable consumers such as senior citizens, disabled individuals, and first-time homebuyers,” the Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Inspector General (OIG) warned.

They, and others, noted that fraudsters also often prey on disaster victims.

Overall, home owners across the U.S. and Canada lost a median $1,405 last year to home repair fraud according to the Better Business Bureau — though, among the top 10% of victims, the median losses jumped to $14,050.

Scammers often employ tell-tale tactics to con their victims, the FTC said, including asking them to sign a blank contract, attempting to convince them to hand over insurance money, insisting on wire transfer, crypto or gift cards as payment and claiming that having a valid contractor’s license isn’t necessary.

But experts also say that there are ways to help ensure that the contractor you hire to fix your home will do the job right — and to try and recoup your losses if they stop showing up.

How to protect your home and money

When looking for a contractor to complete home repairs, the FTC recommends doing background research on potential hires, asking trusted friends and relatives for referrals, getting multiple estimates from different companies, ensuring all agreed upon details of the job are in the contract and to never sign a blank contract or pay the full amount up front.

To that end, the Georgia Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division advises “only pay your contractor a reasonable deposit — typically 10 percent, but no more than 25 percent, of the total contract price cost,” while ensuring a right to a refund if the contractor fails to appear is written into the contract.

And if the contractor doesn’t show up after you’ve paid the deposit, and you don’t have a refund provision in your contract, the Consumer Protection Division added that attempting to reach out to them — including sending a formal certified letter asking for a refund — and reporting them to a local or state contractor licensing board are also options.

You can also take them to court, in which case it’s a good idea to gather all contracts and receipts and any other documentation or communications with them about the job.

They added that, if you paid the deposit via credit card, you can dispute the payment by explaining the issue to the credit card company. But a successful credit card dispute typically has to take place within 90 days of the charge, so your timing on that is particularly important.

The hope, however, is that it won’t come to credit card disputes and court cases. Taking the time to vet and hire the best contractor for your needs will help ensure that the job gets done properly, on time and without any added stress to you or your wallet.

Yet that’s exactly what’s happened in the tale of the Virginia raccoon who infamously busted into a liquor store last year, smashing bottles, becoming inebriated and finally passing out next to a toilet.

The raccoon’s caper went viral, was the subject of a sketch on Saturday Night Live, and ended up raising tens of thousands of dollars for the local animal protection agency.

The raccoon wasn’t harmed by its bender either, so it seems that this was a very rare event indeed — a hangover with a happy ending.

A raccoon and a break-and-enter

According to a report from the Washington Post, the mayhem began on a Friday night last November, when the raccoon managed to squeeze through the ceiling of an ABC store in Ashland, Virginia after it had closed.

Carol Mawyer, a Virginia ABC spokesperson, told the Post that the furry intruder set off a motion sensor, which led the security company to notify the store manager, but since there were no humans detected in the store, the manager didn’t check the store until it was time to open in the morning.

Mawyer told the Post that the raccoon did about $250 in damage, smashing 14 bottles of liquor in the storage room: rum, scotch, moonshine, Canadian whiskey, vodka, peanut butter whiskey and eggnog.

In security footage, Mawyer told the Post the raccoon could be seen “having a ball” as it scampered through the aisles.

But like most wild nights, when morning came, the fun was decidedly over. The manager found the raccoon lying flat on its belly, next to the toilet in the employee bathroom.

That’s when Hanover County Animal Protection and Shelter (APS) came on the scene.

The responding animal protection officer “safely secured [the] masked bandit and transported him back to the shelter to sober up before questioning,” according to a social media post from the agency.

“After a few hours of sleep and zero signs of injury (other than maybe a hangover and poor life choices), he was safely released back to the wild, hopefully having learned that breaking and entering is not the answer,” the post read.

‘Trashed Panda’ is a sensation

Since that fateful night, the raccoon has become something of a mascot, with Hanover County APS making the savvy move to turn the international attention into a chance to do some fundraising.

The agency enlisted an apparel company to produce merch, including T-shirts, sweatshirts, hats, mugs and stickers, with illustrated images of the passed-out raccoon in his now-famous pose, accompanied by his moniker, “Trashed Panda.”

The Hanover County APS has raised more than $290,000 in the year since the break-in; they’ve even made special one-year anniversary merch to mark the occasion.

Jeffrey Parker, Hanover County’s Chief of Animal Protection, told the Washington Post that, prior to the raccoon’s bender, the agency’s annual donations were less than $20,000.

With the newfound cash, the agency decided to purchase body cameras for its eight animal protection officers, Parker told the Post.

He said that the cameras would allow officers to capture evidence for animal abuse investigations and court proceedings.

According to the report, “dozens of Hanover County residents supported the body cameras, according to a document presented by county officials last month.”

“Officers will have video proof when confronting animal abusers,” one resident wrote to county officials, the Post reported. “I work with a cat rescue group and, unfortunately, there are evil people out there that find pleasure in abusing or neglecting animals. Animals can not speak for themselves.”

The body cameras were unanimously approved by county officials on Oct. 28, the Post reported, and animal protection officers will begin using the tech early next year.

Parker told the Post that the agency has another $140,000 saved from its fundraising efforts, and he aims to use it for an emergency fund to treat injured animals the agency recovers.

While the raccoon may have suffered a bad hangover that morning, its boozy revelry had the unexpected effect of helping its fellow furry friends, making the “Trashed Panda” less of a masked bandit — and more of a masked crusader.

Huang resigned on Nov. 12 amid an investigation into his relationship with Alice Huang, a businesswoman who U.S. intelligence agencies suspect of passing information to China. Nvidia has said it has no reason to believe company secrets or national security were compromised, although its investigation remains ongoing.

Nvidia shares have lost more than 30% from their October peak, wiping out roughly $1.6 trillion in market value.

Investors have faced this question before. In 2011, Steve Jobs stepped down as Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) CEO, leaving Tim Cook to lead a company synonymous with its founder. Six years later, Uber (NYSE: UBER) investors forced out Travis Kalanick, paving the way for Dara Khosrowshahi to take over.

Both companies became considerably more valuable under their successors, but they took very different paths to get there.

Apple thrived after Steve Jobs

Steve Jobs resigned as Apple CEO in August 2011, shortly after the company briefly overtook Exxon Mobil as the world’s most valuable publicly traded company.

His departure raised questions about whether Apple could continue producing hit consumer products without the executive most closely associated with its success. As the Wharton School noted at the time, Cook faced the difficult task of succeeding a leader so closely identified with Apple.

He needed to “find a leadership style that fits him while keeping Apple’s business strategy on a steady path,” Wharton said.

Even JPMorgan analysts were uncertain, assigning the stock a “hold” rating amid concerns about the leadership transition.

But Cook thrived as CEO. He oversaw the introduction of Apple Watch and AirPods, even as the company continued to depend heavily on the iPhone. When he took over in 2011, Apple’s market capitalization was roughly $350 billion. By 2026, it had surpassed $5 trillion. Apple’s annual revenue increased from $108 billion in fiscal 2011 to $479 billion in fiscal 2026.

Cook also expanded Apple’s manufacturing footprint beyond China, including increased iPhone production in India. Meanwhile, Apple’s services business, which includes iCloud, Apple Music and the App Store, generated a record $123.3 billion in revenue in fiscal 2026.

By the time Cook retired in 2026, Apple was a much larger and more profitable company than the one he inherited from Jobs.

Uber’s comeback after Travis Kalanick

Uber faced its own leadership crisis in 2017, when co-founder Travis Kalanick was forced out following a series of workplace scandals and regulatory controversies.

Kalanick had helped turn Uber into one of the world’s most valuable startups, capitalizing on the rapid growth of the so-called “gig economy” in the 2010s. Although Uber wasn’t publicly traded, private investors valued the company at roughly $70 billion.

As The Atlantic noted at the time, Uber faced a difficult challenge: reforming its corporate culture without losing the aggressive approach that had helped it grow so quickly.

Dara Khosrowshahi, who had spent 12 years as CEO of Expedia, took over Uber in 2017. He inherited a company facing lawsuits and mounting reputational damage, while also trying to maintain growth ahead of its planned IPO.

On Khosrowshahi’s watch, Uber went public in 2019 and grew its annual revenue from $7.9 billion in 2017 to $52 billion in 2025. The company also reported $5.6 billion in operating profit in 2025, following years of losses under both Kalanick and Khosrowshahi. Today, the company has a market capitalization of $142 billion.

What it means for Nvidia

Nvidia’s interim CEO, Colette Kress, has big shoes to fill. But she’s no stranger to the company, having served as its chief financial officer since 2013.

Kress also brings nearly 25 years of previous finance experience at technology companies, including Microsoft and Cisco. Still, her expertise is in corporate finance, while Huang spent three decades overseeing Nvidia’s technology development and building relationships with its biggest customers.

Not everyone is convinced Nvidia made the right decision. The Kobeissi Letter, a financial publication run by Adam Kobeissi with 2.7 million followers on X, said Nvidia and Huang “made a massive mistake” with his resignation. It argued that the “board should have taken the time to conduct a thorough investigation, consult with shareholders and carefully evaluate the long-term implications of this decision.”

But Nvidia isn’t starting from scratch. It remains the dominant supplier of chips used to train and run AI models, with an estimated 80% to 90% share of the AI accelerator market.

Apple and Uber both prospered after losing the executives who helped build them. Nvidia could follow the same path, although replacing Huang’s technical expertise and industry relationships may prove harder than replacing his title.

But the legal fees for the high-profile cases may end up commandeering nearly a third of the amount paid out, with counsel able to seek up to $100 million in compensation for its representation.

For some customers impacted, a claim form must be submitted before the upcoming Dec. 1, 2026 deadline. Here’s what you need to know.

What does the case concern?

Complainants started filing with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington back in 2023, alleging that Amazon had failed to properly honor its own chargeback policies in some cases.

The legal action asserts that, in contradiction to the “free, no hassle returns” that the $2.8 trillion company pledges, the brand “routinely … fails to issue refunds or re-charges customers who have returned items in compliance with its refund and exchange policies because of defects in [its] return and refund processes.”

Plaintiffs also claim that “Amazon knows that most of its customers do not notice, and as a result, Amazon’s practices result in substantial unjustified monetary losses by consumers.”

A motion requesting preliminary approval of a settlement option proposed in January of this year was approved in August. This does not infer guilt or liability on Amazon’s part, but is common in such proceedings to avoid what would inevitably be a long and costly trial. The amount is expected to be enough to cover all entitled purchases, plus interest.

The retail platform denies the allegations and any wrongdoing in the matter.

Who is eligible for a settlement payout?

To qualify for the class action, you must have bought an item from Amazon.com and attempted a refund through its proprietary fulfillment channel, but either received no reimbursement at all, received the money back but were later charged for the returned product, received an untimely refund or received a refund of the wrong amount. The sale must have been made between Sept. 5, 2017 and Feb. 12, 2026.

Members are divided into two groups: those in Subclass A, who will automatically receive compensation without having to file any paperwork; and those in Subclass B, who are required to complete an eligible claim form by Dec. 1 to receive a payment. Most members are part of the former, which were identified by Amazon’s own records .

Those affected should visit www.ReturnSettlement.com to select their preferred method of payment for Subclass A, and digitally submit or download their paperwork (to mail in) for Subclass B.

Court documents call the settlement “an incredible result, no matter what metric one uses” for customers. That said, anyone who wants to opt-out of the dispute — which disqualifies you from this settlement payout, but enables you to continue to sue or be part of another lawsuit pertaining to the same allegations — must also do so online or via mail by Dec. 1. Any parties who want to object to the settlement must write to the court expressing their stance by Dec. 1.

Members are not required to attend the final approval hearing, which takes place on March 16, 2027, but can if they so wish.

The notice of proposed class action settlement, available online, provides more information. The $309.5 million remuneration amount is in addition to approximately $600 million in incomplete refunds that Amazon has already issued or is slated to issue after an internal review.

In 2026, however, the stock began to struggle amid questions about the future of AI. Everything came to a head in November, though, when it came out that Nvidia’s CEO had multiple affairs, including one with a suspected Chinese spy.

The affair rumors weren’t just tabloid fodder. Nvidia’s share value plummeted amid the scandal, and news of the CEO’s resignation will only make things worse. This is a cause for concern for many investors, since Nvidia’s size and explosive growth led many ETFs and mutual funds to hold large positions in Nvidia. Many investors, even those who didn’t buy Nvidia directly, are exposed.

Unfortunately, the incident has left some nervous investors feeling like the market is simply too risky. Let’s say, for example, that Gareth has long been suspicious of stocks, and the scandal has now convinced him he can’t trust his hard-earned funds to the market since a totally unexpected event like this can have such an impact.

He’s thinking about putting all his money into bonds instead, because he believes that at least that market likely won’t move because of one man’s affair. But is that the right move?

Develop an asset allocation that makes good sense

While it may be tempting to move all of your money into bonds when there’s turbulence in the stock market, the reality is that bonds aren’t risk-free and you don’t want too many of your assets in any one particular type of investment, even if it’s seen as a relatively safe one.

“An all-bond allocation may make you feel safe until inflation or longevity rears its head. If rates decline, bond prices may go up, but lengthening duration or reaching for yield can raise their own issues,” Mehdi Zare, a CFA and founder of Bina Capital, told Moneywise.

Bonds have also consistently underperformed stocks over a long time horizon, so you’d essentially be limiting your potential returns. And you’d be putting all of your eggs in one basket, so if the bond market performs poorly, your portfolio will suffer.

“Rarely would I recommend going 100% to bonds,” Luca Rassenti, chief advisor and founder of Diverso Advisors, said. “You more likely want a diversifying set of return streams across asset classes targeting a higher risk-adjusted return and a specific risk limit. You want to hedge not only against future cash needs but also against inflation and other risks.”

If Gareth moved forward with his plan, he’d essentially trade one problem — his anxiety about a stock market driven in part by unexpected forces — for another problem: capped returns and still some level of risk.

Don’t confuse temporary stock moves with long-term performance

It’s also important not to confuse short-term news-driven market moves with the returns the market is likely to earn over the long term.

Nvidia shares may have taken a hit when the CEO was ousted, but the stock has already made many people millionaires. Given continued demand for the high-powered chips it produces, it could bounce back once things settle.

While news like the CEO’s affair may have an outsized short-term impact, over the long term, the company’s fundamentals and its competitiveness in the marketplace will determine how the stock performs. You can’t assume a day, or even weeks or months, of losses, means that something isn’t a good investment over a long time horizon.

The reality is that CEOs have had affairs, company shares have tumbled, and even more unusual events have happened over many decades, but ultimately over the long term, the S&P 500 (long-seen as a benchmark for the market as a whole) has produced around 10% average annual returns. The stock market is a good place to put your money, even if it can feel scary.

If you don’t like the volatility that can come with being invested in a single stock, you can easily avoid that by investing in a broader market fund. While these funds still had exposure to Nvidia, the share prices generally didn’t fall as much because the pooled funds are invested in other companies too.

Investing in ETFs, or otherwise spreading your dollars out over a mix of assets, is the right move for most investors as it reduces the risk to your portfolio presented by a crisis at any one particular company. As John Murillo, chief business officer at B2BROKER told Moneywise, “No matter your age, diversification is always the key.”

According to an exclusive from Bloomberg, Huang had reportedly given up by the end, swapping his typical go-getter attitude for a look of defeat. A person familiar with the situation told Bloomberg Huang even started using phrases like “whatever” and “I don’t care.”

Huang’s resignation marks a stunning fall for the billionaire who was considered one of the powerhouses of the AI boom just weeks ago. The former CEO resigned after admitting to an extramarital affair with someone who is suspected to be a Chinese spy.

Since admitting to the affair, reports that Huang had two more affairs with Nvidia employees quickly emerged. People who’ve spoken with him in recent days told Bloomberg Huang has become more remorseful and reportedly called himself a “piece of s—.”

Huang’s resignation

Nvidia’s former CEO announced his resignation on Nov. 12 after facing growing calls to step down.

Reports of Huang’s connection to an alleged Chinese spy first emerged in October, following an exclusive from the New York Times that claimed he had a close relationship with a woman who was providing intelligence to Beijing. It was also alleged the woman, named Alice Huang (no relation), was helping smuggle advanced AI chips to China.

In a note to staff on Nov. 8, Huang admitted to having an affair but did not name the woman involved. Nvidia subsequently announced it would be launching an investigation into claims that Huang was the “target of a foreign intelligence effort,” though it said it had “no reason to believe that either national security or Nvidia secrets were compromised.”

On Nov. 11, the New York Times reported Huang also allegedly had an affair with Kimberly Powell, Nvidia’s vice president of healthcare. Nvidia’s code of conduct tells employees to avoid any situations that can create conflict, including “personal relationships.”

Huang officially resigned as Nvidia’s CEO the following morning. That same day, Reuters reported the former CEO had an “intimate relationship” with a second Nvidia employee, though she remains unnamed.

Nvidia’s future

Investors are questioning what the future of Nvidia — and the AI boom — will look like without Huang, who co-founded the chipmaker in 1993.

The scandal has already had a stunning impact on the company. Nvidia shares plummeted 14% after the market opened following Huang’s resignation, wiping out roughly $546 billion in market value. The stock did rebound during the day and was down 4.3% when the market closed. As of Nov. 13, the stock was trading at around $160, down 6.3%.

The ongoing scandal has tanked Nvidia’s market valuation by more than $1 trillion.

There could also be political fallout from the scandal. Huang, who had close ties to President Trump, could face political repercussions over the alleged foreign interference. Lawmakers could also target the Trump administration, which has faced allegations that it ignored sales of Nvidia’s chips to China, which is currently banned.

The company has rejected a $1.4 billion takeover offer from Peltz’s Trian Fund Management and its partners, adopting a defense known as a “poison pill” to make a hostile takeover more difficult.

As Reuters reported, Peltz’s investor group also included restaurant operator Flynn Group and investment companies Sixth Street Partners and BlueFive Capital.

“The proposal substantially undervalues the company,” a special committee of independent Wendy’s board members said in a statement, adding that it “is not in the best interests of Wendy’s and its shareholders.”

But Peltz is hardly an outsider. According to Reuters, regulatory filings show that he and related parties already own 16.3% of Wendy’s, giving them significant influence over the company. Their $7.35-per-share offer represented a 20% premium when it was announced in late October, though Wendy’s stock has since climbed above that price.

The takeover attempt follows years of disappointing returns for Wendy’s shareholders. The stock has lost more than 60% of its value over the past five years, falling from more than $20 to around $8.40, according to Yahoo Finance data.

The company’s operating performance has continued to deteriorate. Wendy’s withdrew its annual forecast and slashed its dividend earlier this year as U.S. same-store sales fell 7% in the second quarter. International same-store sales declined 2.3%.

The weakness continued into the third quarter, when U.S. same-store sales fell 5.7% year over year. As part of its restructuring, Wendy’s signed a letter of intent to acquire up to 163 restaurants from franchise operator Meritage Hospitality Group.

How Wendy’s poison pill could thwart Peltz’s takeover

A poison pill is a takeover defense that gives existing shareholders, excluding the potential buyer, the right to purchase additional shares at a steep discount if an activist investor crosses a specified ownership threshold.

Under Wendy’s shareholder rights plan, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in early November, an investor who acquires 15% or more of the company’s shares without board approval could trigger the poison pill defense. By allowing other shareholders to buy discounted shares, the company can dilute the acquirer’s stake, forcing them to spend more money to regain the same ownership percentage.

Peltz and his partners already own 16.3% of Wendy’s, but their existing stake is exempt. Buying additional shares without approval could trigger the poison pill.

According to the SEC filing, the plan expires on Nov. 3, 2027, unless Wendy’s terminates it earlier.

“Now that the board has taken the Poison Pill, Peltz and Trian will need to decide if they want to sweeten the offer,” Zacks stock strategist Andrew Rocco told Reuters.

Alternatively, Peltz could seek more board seats through a proxy fight or support CEO Bob Wright’s turnaround plan, Rocco said.

Wendy’s is losing ground in the fast-food wars

In August, Wendy’s reported a net loss of 245 U.S. locations in the first half of the year. The company is also dealing with the bankruptcy of franchise operator Meritage Hospitality Group, which helps explain its earlier decision to acquire up to 163 of Meritage’s restaurants. The company expects to sell and transfer the remaining locations to other franchisees through the bankruptcy process.

Competition is making its turnaround efforts harder to execute. McDonald’s and other fast-food chains are introducing aggressive value deals and promotions to attract price-conscious customers, according to QSR Magazine’s 2026 industry report.

But Wendy’s problems also reflect a broader shift in fast food. The industry was never known for healthy meals, but at least it was cheap. Now, customers are increasingly finding it offers neither. As Restaurant Dive reported, rising prices have eroded the cost advantage that fast-food chains once enjoyed over fast-casual and sit-down restaurants.

According to consumer research firm Numerator, fast-food prices have climbed 55.4% since January 2018, compared with 34.8% for everyday household goods.

Separate FinanceBuzz research found that menu prices at major fast-food chains rose between 39% and 100% from 2014 to 2024, compared with cumulative U.S. inflation of 31% over the same period.

Nobody has a problem with that, but government watchdogs do have a problem with the military jet he uses to fly back and forth between Washington, D.C. and Gainesville, Florida. In particular, taxpayer advocates point to the cost of flying Rubio on a C-37 twin-engine turbofan aircraft, which the U.S. military often uses for standard air missions and to transport high-level U.S. government officials.

According to The Washington Post, Rubio, who, as Secretary of State, isn’t allowed to fly commercially due to security mandates, has traveled “at least” 10 times to Florida football games on a military aircraft since taking office on January 1, 2025. In that time span, Rubio’s flight costs have accumulated to an estimated $1.2 million, the Post reported.

That figure has tongues wagging in taxpayer advocacy circles.

“If this travel becomes something that is undermining the integrity of your service, are you really taking care of taxpayer dollars the way that you’re obligated to as a public official?” said Cynthia Brown, senior ethics counsel at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, in comments to The Post.

Rubio is not interested in apologies, noting “I have and will continue to try and make it to as many events that are important to me personally and to my family as possible,” in a statement published by The Post.

Family empathy aside, questions mount for the Secretary on the cost issue

Government accountability experts say it’s understandable that Sec. Rubio wants to see his son suit up for games and acknowledge he’s banned from taking commercial flights. That said, Rubio could improve on transparency.

“I understand why Secretary Rubio wants to be in the stands for his son,” Mackenzie Kelly, a former Austin, Texas City Council member who served on the council’s Audit and Finance Committee, told Moneywise. “I also think taxpayers are right to ask what it costs when those trips become routine.”

Kelly noted the Post’s $1.2 million estimate included trips the State Department classified as entirely personal and qualified as trips that merge official and personal business. “The figure I’d want to see is what taxpayers paid for flights or detours that would never have happened without the personal travel, after accounting for reimbursements,” she noted.

National security risks need to be heeded

There’s also the national security reality, where the U.S. Secretary of State may need to be airborne on a moment’s notice.

“The security case is compelling,” Kelly noted. “A crisis can break out while the secretary is in the air, and he needs to be able to receive classified information and respond immediately.”

Those responsibilities are especially clear when one person is handling both diplomacy and national security advice to the president. “That explains why the government may require a military aircraft for a trip,” she added. “The frequency and timing of discretionary trips are still matters of judgment.”

Other government accountability pros say that while the security reason is real, pushing Rubio on the reimbursement rule is fair play, even though Rubio is only obligated to pay Uncle Sam back the approximate price of an economy-class airline ticket.

“Paying back the price of a commercial ticket made sense for the occasional personal trip,” Jamie Davis, Esq., a compliance attorney and fractional chief compliance officer at Build & Comply Consulting Group, told Moneywise. “When personal trips become a pattern, the rule stops matching reality.”

Even so, a fair fix isn’t banning family travel for Rubio or any public official. “It’s public, regular reporting of personal trips and what they cost, plus a cap or a higher reimbursement once personal trips pass a set number per year,” Davis said.

Weighing the Buttigieg effect

Some critics have pointed to 2023, when then-Florida Senator Rubio called for an investigation into U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s use of government aircrafts, stating that taxpayers should be assured their tax dollars weren’t being squandered. Now Rubio faces similar scrutiny, although his security requirements differ from Buttigieg’s. Even so, that could feed the inconsistency narrative Rubio’s critics are adopting.

“On Buttigieg, the cleanest ethics test is whether you’d apply the same standard no matter whose name is on the manifest,” Davis said. “If he wanted an investigation then, being open to the same transparency now is the consistent position.”

Kelly agrees, noting Rubio was right to ask for an audit of Buttigieg’s aircraft use, but that he should welcome the same scrutiny now. “The two jobs have different security demands, so a review could reasonably reach different conclusions about when a government aircraft was justified,” she said. “The test of consistency is whether Rubio is willing to show taxpayers how the rules were applied to his own travel.”

Friedman’s 9-year-old son, Ozzie Roberts, has Goldenhar Syndrome, a congenital condition that results in bones and muscles forming improperly on a child’s face. For Roberts, it resulted in problems with his right ear, including pain, redness and growth issues.

“A lot of the nights during the week, just midway through the night, [he was] just crying, screaming,” Friedman told CBS. “It was really tough to see.”

Roberts received surgery to fix his ear — but Friedman’s insurance provider, Aetna (which is owned by CVS Health), wouldn’t cover the cost. That left Friedman’s family stuck with almost $30,000 they shouldn’t have had to pay.

Here’s how Friedman successfully got Aetna to pay for the surgery — and what you can do if you’re facing an insurance bill you feel should have been covered.

Becoming a ‘part-time insurance lawyer’ to fight the denial

Roberts got ear-pinning surgery, a procedure that involves moving someone’s ears closer to their head. It’s a form of plastic surgery that some people get to improve their appearance. But for Roberts, the surgery was medically necessary.

Aetna still denied the claim, saying the procedure was cosmetic. Friedman appealed the decision and was again denied, even though Roberts’ doctors wrote Aetna telling them the surgery was needed.

“I would absolutely never do anything like this unless it absolutely impeded on his health and his life,” Friedman told CBS.

Aetna told CBS that Roberts’ “original submitted billing code is typically for coverage of a cosmetic procedure and warranted further review.”

Friedman isn’t alone. According to Muni Health, Aetna denied 22%, or one in five, in-network ACA marketplace claims in 2023 — just over the national average of 20%. That means Aetna denied over one in five in-network claims.

Eventually, the family filed for an external review with the state of New York. A third-party organization would look over the claim and decide whether or not to reverse the denial.

The external appeal worked. After months of working to get the denied claim repealed, Friedman would no longer have to pay for the surgery herself.

“Which is great, but it’s only because I have a flexible job, time to document these things,” Friedman told CBS. “In the end, you have to become, like, a part-time insurance lawyer, basically, to do these things.”

When asked for comment, a CVS spokesperson referred Moneywise to the trade industry group AHIP. AHIP told Moneywise that claims denials are generally reviewed by a clinical or claims processing team member, but it was unable to speak about the specifics of Aetna policy.

How you can get outside help to fight denied health insurance claims

If you’ve tried to appeal a denied claim with your health insurance without luck, a way forward is possible.

Your next best step might be to file an external review, as Friedman ultimately did. If your claim was denied due to one of these reasons, you qualify:

• Your insurer made a medical judgement your doctor disagreed with, such as Friedman’s case;
• Your insurer denied the claim because it said the treatment was experimental; or
• Your insurer said you lied or left out information when you applied for coverage.

If you qualify, you’ll need to file within four months of your insurer’s final decision.

Your next steps depend on where you live. Almost every state has their own external appeals process, but if your state doesn’t, you can file with the federal government directly.

Check to see what your state’s specific review process is. The federal process is free, as are most state processes. If the process isn’t free, it will likely be affordable; the most states can legally charge you is $25 per external review.

Still, the process is complicated. If you’re struggling to navigate the external appeals process, look to see if your state has government programs or nonprofits designed to help people navigate the system.

For example, consumer assistance programs are state-level organizations designed to help consumers deal with health insurance problems. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services website can help you find one in your state, if available.

If not, it can point you toward other organizations that could help.

Few issues have as much widespread support as ending stock picking on Capitol Hill. A University of Maryland survey found that 86% of respondents want an outright ban on stock trading for members of Congress. If American voters had their way, they’d also keep the president, vice president and Supreme Court justices from swapping shares.

The reason for this widespread distaste is obvious: Politicians are privy to a lot of sensitive information. In fact, a previous New York Times investigation identified 97 lawmakers or relatives who made trades related to their committees.

Even though the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act of 2012 technically makes insider trading for Congresspeople illegal, enforcement remains a bit iffy and many people argue it doesn’t go nearly far enough.

On the positive side, the STOCK Act created more transparency. Members of Congress have to file their trades as Periodic Transaction Reports (PTRs) within 30 days of receiving notification of the transaction.

This wealth of information makes “Congressional copy-trading” a reality for people who want to trade like Representative Nancy Pelosi or others — and some companies have already created products that trade like politicians.

The ETFs that mimic Congressional stock pickers

The website Unusual Whales had already gained attention by publishing congressional stock disclosures before it created two exchange-traded funds (ETFs) using this data. Released alongside Subversive Capital Advisor, these actively managed ETFs entered the stock market in 2023 as the Subversive Congressional Democrats Trading ETF (BZX:NANC) Subversive Congressional Republicans Trading ETF (BZX:GOP).

Although Unusual Whales announced on X that it’s no longer part of these ETFs, the products are still available under the management of Tidal Financial Group.

According to their official website, Subversive ETFs use publicly available trading data to create funds that mimic the activities of U.S. lawmakers.

Dan Weiskopf, the co-portfolio manager of the Subversive ETFs, told Moneywise that Tidal Financial Group works to “identify clusters or patterns of buys and sells across individual members of Congress.” In particular, Weiskopf said Subversive ETFs focus on times when Congress members “buy a second and third time into weakness and strength” since “these are active decisions by members of Congress who believe they have an edge.”

He shared one specific example of this strategy focused on when U.S. Senator Dave McCormick made a large bet on spot Bitcoin ETFs. As Weiskopf noted, “The Honorable McCormick ran Bridgewater for Ray Dalio and was also on the Digital Asset Subcommittee as lobbyists were helping to form new policy.”

So how well have these ETFs performed? Since their 2023 launch, NANC is up over 100%, while GOP has climbed 70%.

Note that if you held the S&P 500 through an ETF like the SPY, you would have been up roughly 98% between the start of 2023 and November 2026.​

Will Congressional ETFs really give you an edge?

With gains similar to the S&P 500, some may wonder whether these niche ETFs are really worth the cost.

According to Weiskopf, it all comes down to how much you value Congressional intel. Weiskopf told Moneywise, “We think logical buyers of NANC and GOP are those who believe that members of Congress are ‘smart money’ to follow. Many members of Congress have a great deal of experience in investing, have a unique position in understanding policy as it develops and are careful about how they take risks.”​

Put another way, Weiskopf reasoned, “If we trust them enough to manage our country, why wouldn’t we want to capitalize on how they invest given their insights and experience?”

Keep in mind that actively managed ETFs often come with higher fees than passive index funds. Currently, the expense ratios for NANC and GOP are at 0.72% and 0.73%, respectively. That may not seem like much, but compare it with something like the State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA:SPY) at under 0.0945% or Vanguard’s S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA:VOO) at 0.03%.

Granted, Subversive’s ETFs don’t have as much historical price data, so there’s no way to tell whether they’ll outperform the S&P 500 down the line. But even if they do, investors have to cut out this higher fee in their profit calculations.

If you don’t mind getting more proactive, remember that buys and sells by elected officials are publicly viewable. You could start with official financial disclosure databases for the House of Representatives and the Senate. A few online resources like Open America and Publicfilings.org also make it even easier to see how leaders are moving their money.

​

The CEO of Chinese flying car company XPeng says the company’s low-altitude vehicle will be available to customers living in rural locations, as well as emergency services, in the second half of 2027. That’s a little later than planned, but still represents a big step for people who have dreamed of flying cars since childhood.

Xpeng’s vehicle will sell for $300,000; as you might expect, though, it likely won’t be sold in the U.S. anytime soon due to a host of regulatory and political reasons.

It’s also not what you might be imagining. Xpeng’s device is actually two vehicles — a six-wheel van that can be driven on roadways, that houses a two-seat deployable flying car in, for lack of a better word, its trunk. The “flying” part of the flying car is closer to a helicopter and has no wheels.

Air taxis near reality as well

While Xpeng’s vehicle might not be what people envisioned when it comes to flying cars, it’s not the only one that’s in the prototype phase.

In March, the U.S. Department of Transportation approved eight pilot programs across 26 states that allowed eVTOL (electric vertical takeoff and landing) aircraft to begin real-world testing. That will allow for air-taxi service in select cities, while data from the pilot companies will be used to help the FAA develop regulations to let this technology scale while keeping airspaces over cities safe.

Like the Xpeng, eVTOL vehicles aren’t street-legal, but they do help passengers avoid gridlock and rush hour issues by soaring over the highways, resulting in a much shorter ride. Big corporations have invested hundreds of millions of dollars into them to ensure they become a reality. Toyota (NYSE:TM), for instance, spent $500 million to buy into Joby in October 2024. Delta Air Lines (NYSE:DAL) is also an investor, investing $80 million into Joby. United (NASDAQ:UAL), meanwhile, in 2022, invested $10 million in Archer Aviation and $15 million in Eve Air Mobility.

The Musk factor

As you might expect, Elon Musk isn’t sitting this out. Last month, Tesla showed off a prototype vehicle that used high-pressured bursts of gas to flip mid-air, though there are voluminous unanswered questions about the vehicle, including whether it will actually be made, what it will cost and where (if it is real) it can be flown.

Xpeng’s vehicle is real, but it still faces some of the restrictions that could hamstring Tesla. The flying part of the flying car won’t be able to fly in cities initially. It will be limited to approved park areas and inaccessible areas for emergency services workers. But it’s a first step — and CEO Deli Zhao says they’ll be available beyond China soon.

“All cars in the future will grow wings and all transportation will move from two dimensions to three dimensions,” he said, adding he had signed agreements with the United Arab Emirates and countries in south-east Asia as well. “We aim to enter the European market as soon as possible.”

The reality is that not everyone wants to be a homeowner. But because getting the keys to your own place is part of the expected life path, this can create problems for those who want to buck the trend.

Take Caroline, for example. Let’s say that she’s 55 and wants to rent instead of own. She likes the flexibility of being able to move when she wants, and she really loves not having to worry about home maintenance and repairs. The problem is that her family and friends think she’s a huge failure, and they’re pressuring her to purchase a home as soon as possible.

Should Caroline give in and call a real estate agent? Or are her loved ones wrong and should she stay the course?

Renting may be the right move in some situations

Caroline’s decision to rent isn’t unreasonable, and it may even be the best choice in some situations.

“Renting or owning a home is truly a personal decision. It depends on your finances and budget,” Domenick D’Andrea, a financial advisor and co-founder of DanDarah Wealth Management, told Moneywise.

“I would never look at not owning a home as you being perceived as a financial failure,” D’Andrea said. “To me, it’s better to understand your budget and what you can truly afford before either purchasing or renting.”

If saving up a down payment or covering the monthly cost would make you house-poor or force you to devote too much of your income to housing, then owning isn’t the best choice. After all, renting is cheaper than buying in virtually every metro area in the United States, according to Realtor.com. If Caroline lives in one of these areas, renting and investing the amount she saves on housing costs makes good sense.

John Rafferty, partner and investment advisor representative at Solomon Financial, told Moneywise that renting could also save Caroline money in other ways. “If you don’t own a home, you avoid having to pay for maintenance, taxes, and homeowner’s insurance,” he said.

He also pointed out that it’s important to consider life plans because if you expect your living situation to change in the next few years, committing to owning likely makes no sense. “Buying a home is not a short-term decision,” he said. “It may take five years to net back the price that you paid for your home, plus the one-time acquisition costs that you will pay at the closing. These fees can run from 3% to 5% of the purchase price.”

Renting isn’t throwing away money

While there are plenty of great reasons to rent, Caroline may have a hard time changing her family’s perception because of the strong ownership culture in the U.S.

“Part of the ‘American Dream’ is owning a home,” Rafferty said.

Mary Ware, a senior wealth advisor and managing partner at Carnegie Private Wealth, agreed, telling Moneywise, “Owning a home can be a great way to build wealth, but homeownership isn’t a measure of financial success or failure.”

Ware said she often has this conversation with clients, especially as they near retirement and still face pro-ownership propaganda, such as the common idea that renting is throwing away money.

“There’s still a stigma around renting,” Ware said. “But you have to pay to live somewhere, whether you rent or own. Homeownership comes with expenses beyond the mortgage, including property taxes, insurance, maintenance, and unexpected repairs. Renting can free you from many of those costs and responsibilities, giving you more flexibility and independence.”

The key for Caroline is that if she doesn’t buy a house, she needs to do something else. Homeowners have a much higher net worth than renters because their mortgage payments are essentially forced savings, and they build equity with each one. Eventually, they have an asset they can sell to help fund retirement or live in to lower their costs.

If Caroline won’t do that, she needs to be disciplined about investing the difference. Her retirement nest egg needs to be bigger to cover housing costs as she ages, and the best way to make that happen is to treat investing as a must-pay bill. If she does, she should have more than enough to retire, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that choice.

“We brushed it off as something that we couldn’t do,” Hilary Petee, 42, told Business Insider.

Then, Petee discovered that her employee benefits included Nestment, a homeownership coaching platform. She decided to try it out, and now Petee and her husband have closed on a $1.4 million home.

While it’s still uncommon, some employers are adding employer-assisted housing programs (EAHP) to their employee benefit packages, alongside 401(k)s, health insurance and student loan debt relief.

For employers, this could help to recruit and retain employees in highly competitive industries. For employees, it could open the door to homeownership — and for some Americans, it could be a more coveted perk than a 401(k) match.

Why housing benefits are gaining traction

While the median home price in the U.S. declined 0.4% in October, that follows three years of rising home-sale prices — which kept rising even as mortgage rates ticked upward.

“Sale prices have risen nearly every single month for the last 13 years; the only exception was a handful of months in 2023,” according to Redfin News. It also points out that prices are “still rising rapidly in some metros with hot markets.”

That includes San Francisco, where prices rose 16.8% year over year, with AI wealth fueling competition for already-scarce housing inventory. In some markets, however, prices fell, including Austin, Seattle and Nashville.

But overall, home sales have dropped — since many Americans simply can’t afford to buy one. That could be why employer housing perks are starting to gain traction.

According to a survey on employer-sponsored homeownership by NestSteps, 78% of respondents would consider switching employers for a competitor that offered homeownership assistance — even for a lateral move with similar pay.

For employers, housing perks have a loyalty effect: the majority (89%) of respondents say they would be more likely to stay with an employer after receiving homeownership assistance, “even after the benefit has been received and the home purchased.”

And, according to a 2025 survey by insurance and surety bond firm Brown & Brown, 38% of respondents would be willing to take a salary cut of up to 10% for employer housing, while 52% of remote workers would return to the office in exchange for housing support.

Despite this, just 4% of employers were offering housing benefits at the time of the survey, though one in 10 were considering it. Those who do offer housing benefits tend to be in industries where competition for top talent is fierce, such as tech.

“Many workers, especially younger generations, are willing to relocate, return to the office or even take a pay cut for better housing support,” according to the Brown & Brown survey. “While some employers remain cautious, a growing number see these benefits as a cost-effective way to attract and retain talent.”

EAHP comes in many forms

There are a number of different ways that employers can help their workers buy a home, from coaching platforms to direct financial assistance.

The one Petee used, Nestment, is a platform that provides homeownership coaching, matching first-time homebuyers with a personal coach and AI insights.

The platform walks members through the process of buying a home, matching them with a real estate agent and lender based on their finances and goals. It then uses AI-driven data to evaluate a home’s true value before the member makes an offer.

Nestment was launched in 2021, focused on educating first-time homebuyers. In early 2026, it started offering the service as an employer benefit.

Another platform, NestSteps, launched in 2025 as an employer-sponsored benefit program, which provides education and a Home Savings Plan to help employees accelerate savings.

It has a contribution model where employers can choose to make employee contributions; payment frequency can be quarterly, annual, milestone-based or on a home purchase. Employers can also model their return on investment by comparing turnover costs to program expenses.

Other forms of employer housing perks include assistance with a down payment, closing costs or private mortgage insurance; providing a monthly housing stipend, which could be used for mortgage or rent payments; and even employer-owned housing options (say, in tech hubs).

Some employers also partner with lenders to offer lower interest rates or special mortgage products to the company’s employees.

For example, financial services company BNY launched its BNY Homeowner Program earlier this year, which offers $6,500 toward a down payment on a first home to employees earning $100,000 or less. It also offers digital homebuyer education and access to mortgage origination benefits.

While a 401(k) with employer matching is a major consideration when looking for a job, housing perks could become an equally important consideration for first-time homebuyers — especially in high-cost cities.

It’s worth asking your employer (or prospective employers) about any EAHPs or housing assistance they offer. Find out what form the assistance takes, as well as qualifying criteria, terms and limitations and how the money is paid out. Keep in mind that cash stipends are generally treated as taxable compensation.

Griffin sat down with Ramit Sethi on a recent episode of the I Will Teach You To Be Rich podcast, where she shared stories from her past experience as a house manager and revealed how the rich buy their way into an easier life.

“Why would a wealthy family need a house manager?” Sethi asked.

“When you’re dealing with such high net worth, like billionaire status, typically those types of people are really busy, they’re running businesses, they’re doing a million things at once,” Griffin explained. “So they really need somebody to make sure when they get home that their home is managed.”

“They don’t have to think about anything. All the friction is removed. When they come home, everything is as it should be,” she added.

According to an October survey on consumer spending habits from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the largest spending categories for average U.S. households are dominated by housing, transportation, food and insurance.

Unsurprisingly, according to Griffin, ultra-high-net-worth households spend their money differently than the average American household. Here’s where their money goes.

Staff

When you think of a billionaire, you might just picture one person: Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos. But, at a certain level of wealth, a name becomes a brand — and an individual becomes a team. While many of us cringe at the thought of having strangers in our homes, Griffin estimated that on any given day, the rich families she worked for would have up to a dozen people in the house at once.

“In ultra-high-net-worth homes, there was never not someone there,” Griffin said. “There was always someone in the home, even in the evenings. Whether it was staff, whether it was a live-in nanny, they were never alone. I noticed that they never wanted to be alone. There was this need to constantly have people around.”

Chefs, contractors, landscapers, drivers, dog walkers, personal trainers, you name it. The house manager essentially served as a coordinator across all of the staff members.

If there were kids in the household, Griffin said “100% there’s a nanny involved.” And sometimes, more than one.

“A lot of the time there’s a live-in nanny involved. So there will be a live-in nanny during the week, and then on the weekend they’ll be relieved by the weekend live-in nanny. In some cases, there have been two nannies.”

Luxury travel

According to the US Census Bureau, the average American spends nearly a half hour commuting to work each way, while roughly one in 10 workers face one-way commutes over 60 minutes. That equates to over 2 hours in a scrunched-up Honda Civic or Toyota Corolla.

In contrast, Griffin recalled a client who took a daily helicopter ride from Malibu to avoid the typical Los Angeles traffic congestion. Another client challenged her with the near-impossible task of shipping a $500K car from California to Hawaii in 24 hours to impress a woman. The $80K wasn’t a concern, but the fact that it would take 48 hours left him no longer interested.

She also couldn’t remember ever booking an economy or coach ticket for a client.

“A lot will travel private,” Griffin said. “If it’s not private, it’s always first class. I’ve never booked a coach ticket for a high net worth individual ever actually, in my entire experience. It was always if they’re flying on a plane, it’s first class.”

Even with all of the details fully planned out by someone else, travel can still be stressful. While packing luggage was outsourced, private planes scheduled on their behalf, and handlers ready to greet them, “there’s still always this frenzy — no matter what.”

Fully stocked refrigerators

“Every single wealthy household has a completely stocked fridge with every single drink you could possibly imagine: Perrier, sodas, diet sodas …wellness shots, even IV banana bag drips.”

Griffin explained that food is not only provided to you, it’s often put away for you, too.

“ You go outside, the pool has been cleaned,” she said. “You want to have guests over that day and want pool toys, they’re there waiting for you. Basically, every request, anything you’ve needed has been handled. You have no wants.”

“Sounds a lot like being a 7 year old,” Ramit joked.

“It’s a convenience,” Griffin replied. “You don’t have to think about these things. You should be 10 steps ahead.”

When asked if there was ever a budget, Griffin said there was “never” a budget. “I would be given a credit card and trusted with that credit card to use it at my discretion,” she said.

Perhaps the biggest shock for the former house manager was just past the refrigerator, in the cellar.

“Alcohol is mind-blowing. I would see people drinking wines that were, you know, my salary.”

For perspective, Griffin said she earned $80K a year plus benefits, but that was many years ago. These days, she estimates the salary range for an experienced house manager is in the ballpark of $150K-$200K.

“I remember having to get some wine from this massive wine cellar and I looked up one of the bottles and it was like $10K, just one of the bottles, and it was just this wall of wine, so I’m looking at hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of wine,” she said. “And they’re just sippin’ the wine. I’m sure it was phenomenal.”

That “difficult” concept, as Griffin put it, led her toward some enlightened observations.

“A lot of the spending was disconnected from intentionality. It was almost just like ‘how much can I spend?’ I’m going to spend as much as I can possibly spend. The finest of this and the finest of that.”

She attributed that to the common belief that more money means more happiness. But through her experience, she ultimately found that to not be true.

“I think money can bring ease and reduce friction in your life and help in many ways, but if you are using that as your value system to fulfill you, I didn’t see happiness that way.”

“When I saw real happiness, warmth, and joy, it came down to intentionality.”

A 2010 study from Princeton professors Daniel Kahneman and Angus Deaton may support her theory. Their landmark paper showed that a rise in income increased people’s well-being, but only to a ceiling of $75,000; beyond that, there was no increase in well-being.

Long-time radio host Dave Ramsey often says “more money makes you more of what you already are.” He says “if you’re a jerk with nothing, you’ll be a colossal jerk with money. If you’re compassionate and generous with a little, then wealth will turn you into a world-changing philanthropist.”

Ramsey’s theory lines up with Griffin’s experience. While some clients spent lavishly, spending just to spend, she described many of her clients as “absolute delights” that she still maintains close relationships with today. They donate to charity, support small businesses, buy local, just about anything to build community.

Most importantly, they don’t let money define their values.

Trouble for the nation’s second-largest bank went mainstream this October when the U.S. Department of the Treasury alleged Bank of America (BofA) put its revenues over safety regulations with weak anti-money laundering and sanctions practices. The combined penalties levied against the bank from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and the Office of Foreign Assets Control totaled $1.21 billion.

According to FinCEN, BofA failed to report $5 billion in “suspicious transactions,” some allegedly related to “chinese money laundering networks” and “illicit finance along the southwest border,” including cartels.

At the time, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent championed these penalties, claiming, “Today’s actions send a clear message that even the biggest financial institutions are not above the law.”​

Moneywise reached out to Bank of America for further comment. In response, a BofA spokesperson said, “Financial crime compliance is serious and we are responsible for getting it right. We worked with regulators to reach these penalty resolutions stemming from violations cited in the previously reported 2024 OCC Consent Order and FinCEN’s investigation.

“We have invested billions of dollars in technology and dedicated thousands of employees to combat financial crime, and our team is far along with and committed to completing the work required to address the issues raised by our regulators.”

Senator Warren wants a Capitol Hill grilling

​Despite being the third-largest penalty ever levied by the Treasury, some lawmakers balked at the number, claiming $1.21 billion was not severe enough. Senator Elizabeth Warren, who pushed for a criminal investigation, was chief among them.​

After the news broke, Warren took to X and called the payment a “slap on the wrist.” Rather than settling for these civil penalties, Warren wants BofA’s executives to face the music on Capitol Hill.

As she wrote on X, “CEO Brian Moynihan owes Congress answers, and we need a criminal investigation into the apparent violation of our anti-money-laundering laws. I’ve long said big bank CEOs should be held personally accountable if their banks break the law.”

Despite Warren’s petition to the Department of Justice, there’s no official word on a criminal investigation into Bank of America. However, a new securities class action lawsuit from the law firm Hagens Berman is hanging over Bank of America. For BofA shareholders, Hagens Berman’s litigation might offer a slight financial reprieve.

A salve for BofA shareholders?

Understandably, Bank of America’s stock hasn’t been so hot following the Treasury’s allegations. Shares in this bank slumped 4.5% after news of the $1.21 billion penalty broke. At the time of writing, BofA shareholders are down about 7.8% year to date. By comparison, the S&P 500 is up about 10.3% in 2026.

But even if your BofA shares are down, you may still get some cash back thanks to Hagens Berman’s lawsuit. Anyone who held BofA stock between August 1, 2025, and October 13, 2026, on a U.S. exchange and experienced “substantial losses” could file a claim to potentially recover damages.

Moneywise reached out to Hagens Berman for details on this pending lawsuit. According to Reed Kathrein, the Hagens Berman partner leading this BofA investigation, “Bank of America assured investors it had already completed significant steps toward fixing its anti-money-laundering deficiencies.

“Regulators have since found the bank willfully violated the Bank Secrecy Act and had not made sufficient progress since the 2024 Consent Order. We are investigating whether investors were misled.”

However, “substantial losses” isn’t a precise threshold, and there’s no word on just how much money claimants could receive. As Hagens Berman explained, “In general, to be eligible to participate in a class-action lawsuit, you must be able to demonstrate that you suffered financial losses as a result of the alleged wrongdoing and that your losses meet the criteria set by the court or law firm.”

The deadline to file on Hagens Berman’s website is December 15, 2026.

Before you dump BofA stock, take a breather

Those who own BofA stock and are anxious about holding the shares may be wondering, should I jump ship or hold through the pain?

Of course, there’s no “right” financial decision for every investor. Each individual has to decide what makes sense for their risk tolerance and portfolio strategy. However, looking at a few unemotional numbers can help make a more objective decision.

That $1.21 billion penalty may look scary, but CEO Brian Moynihan put it into perspective in BofA’s recent Q3 2026 earnings call. As Moynihan showed, the $1.21 billion penalty represents a $0.17 decline in earnings per share. In the same Q3 2026 period, Bank of America posted net income of $6.9 billion and revenue of $30 billion.

That doesn’t mean risk doesn’t still exist for BofA shareholders. However, putting the news into a broader context can help you make a more rational investment decision.

A large inheritance can be life-changing, but often it’s not — at least not over the long term. In fact, among heirs who inherit in their 20s, 30s, and 40s, research shows only about 55% of inherited dollars last a full year after they receive the money. And most, if not all, of the money is gone in under a decade.

Inheritances, especially large ones, can also cause problems if recipients make unwise financial decisions, are inundated with requests for money, or let the windfall change their relationships with loved ones. In some cases, marital conflicts can even arise.

Say, for example, Kim’s husband Mike inherited $450,000 from his mother. Mike won’t tell Kim what he’s doing with the money or even which account he put it into. This has left Kim pretty upset because she feels like the inheritance is hers as well.

But is that really the case, or does Mike have the right to hoard his cash since it came from his mom?

An inheritance isn’t necessarily marital property

Unfortunately for Kim, unless Mike’s mom explicitly left the money to both spouses, the money isn’t hers. The law says it is Mike’s alone, despite what Kim may believe.

“This is a classic unchecked assumption,” Lisa G. McCurdy, founder and managing partner of The Wealth Counselor, told Moneywise. She explained that it’s common for a spouse who inherits to think “mine,” while their partner thinks “ours,” even though that’s not generally the law when it comes to an inheritance.

“While various state laws differ in the specifics, the general rule is that inheritance is separate property,” Jason Grutter, a trust and estate attorney and partner at Trust Law Partners, LLP, told Moneywise. “This means that the money is all his, and you have no say over what he does with it.”

Roger Diefendorf, an attorney at Forum & Lex, P.C. who represents clients in marriage dissolutions, also explained to Moneywise that “if you were to divorce, the inheritance would not be split between the two of you.”

The inheritance may not stay Mike’s alone

Although Mike is likely the sole owner of his inheritance by default, this isn’t necessarily the case forever — and it also doesn’t mean that Kim won’t ever benefit from the money.

As McCurdy explained, the property’s status as “separate” from marital property can be lost, and several things could cause that to happen. Grutter said the property’s status could change if “your husband gifts a portion to you, uses some of the money to buy real estate with you, or deposits the inheritance into a joint account.”

When Mike combines his separate inheritance with marital property, this is called commingling, and it can give Kim an ownership interest. “If the inherited money gets mixed in with shared money and is used to pay for shared bills, over time it becomes difficult to sort out which money is which, and then you may be entitled to some portion of it,” Grutter said.

Katie Kober, a family law attorney at Triangle Smart Divorce, also warned Moneywise that “even keeping inherited money in a separate account doesn’t necessarily protect all of its growth.”

“If your husband actively manages investments during the marriage, the portion of the increase in value attributable to those efforts may be considered marital property,” Kober explained.

Diefendorf agreed, telling Moneywise, “The more he does with the money during your marriage, the more of a stake you can end up having. If he starts a business with it or actively manages his investments, the profits made off of his labor and skill can become community property.”

If the couple were to divorce, Diefendorf also explained that when calculating spousal support, “a judge has to take into account each spouse’s assets, including their separate property. So his inheritance could factor into how much spousal support you may be awarded.”

What should Kim do?

Kim isn’t in a great position because she has no legal right to the money now, and there’s no guarantee how much she’d get even if she decided to divorce.

Ideally, her best bet is to talk to Mike about why he’s being so secretive and how he wants to handle the inheritance going forward. Even if the law doesn’t give Kim a share, the couple’s marriage may not survive if Mike keeps the money to himself.

As McCurdy urged, even though the law doesn’t give Kim a legal right to the money, the couple should “decide together, and decide on purpose.”

Yet a recent Empower study found that almost 40% of working Americans left their retirement savings behind — and one in three lost track of those accounts completely.

The study tracked “retirement drift” — a term denoting how forgotten retirement accounts can create a mess of scattered savings that, in some cases, trace back to multiple workplaces.

The study found that 39% of Americans still have retirement savings accounts with an old employer. Of those, 34% said they “lost track” of those accounts. Broken down by generation, the number jumped to 50% of Gen Zers and 45% of Millennials, with Gen Xers hitting 30% and Boomers at 14%.

“Deciding what to do with a 401(k) from a previous employer can take a back seat when you’re starting a new job and managing other financial priorities,” Jane Bartosik, Empower’s SVP, Wealth Solutions, said in a statement. “These accounts can accumulate, making it harder to see your complete retirement picture and know what steps to take next.”

And beyond clouding your retirement picture, losing track of those savings accounts can actually cost you retirement income in the long run.

The hidden costs of forgotten retirement accounts

Over the course of a 40-year career, the Government Accountability Office says that the average American could change jobs more than 10 times and that “indecision about what to do with their retirement savings” during that process can impact their retirement security.

Generally, when an employee leaves a job with a retirement plan like a 401(k), they have four options: roll over the money into a new employer’s retirement plan, keep it where it is, move it into an IRA or cash out.

Fidelity advises that rolling it over to a new account is easiest if the new employer’s plan allows it, while an IRA could offer a wider array of investment options.

Leaving the money with your old employer, meanwhile, prevents you from contributing to the account, while plans with less than $7,000 can be legally rolled into an IRA by that employer. And, of course, cashing out means handing a chunk of your savings to the tax man.

Mychal Eagleson, founder and president of financial planning firm Teach, Plan, Retire, told Moneywise that his clients who left retirement plans with old employers only earned about 2% to 3% in compounding returns on it.

“For those closer to retirement, it’s incredibly important to be able to create a plan that accounts for their entire financial picture,” he added. “Having possibly a large account not included in that plan can lead to having to delay retirement by looking like they don’t have enough for it to be sustainable.”

And some of those forgotten retirement accounts are quite large. As of July 2025, almost 32 million 401(k) accounts were “left-behind or forgotten,” totalling around $2.1 trillion worth of assets, according to fintech company Capitalize. The same report found that those accounts boast an average balance of $66,691 and that the accounts “remain at risk of erosion by fees and stale asset allocation.”

In fact, they estimate that fees and mismanagement incurred with the forgotten accounts could cost a person up to $500,000 in “foregone savings over a career.”

When asked how respondents lost track of their retirement savings at past employers, an Empower representative told Moneywise that the confusing nature of retirement planning, a lack of prioritizing retirement savings and feeling the retirement rollover process is “overwhelming” are the biggest reasons.

How to find your forgotten retirement savings

If you’re inspired to track down old retirement accounts, Eagleson recommends starting by making a list of the relevant old employers and then searching online for their respective retirement vendors for account information. If that doesn’t work, calling their HR or benefits department or the 401(k) vendor usually leads to someone who can help.

He also suggested that, to mitigate the overwhelming nature of the process, you could either hire a firm to help you or simply tackle the old workplaces one account at a time.

“Dividing and conquering,” he added, “as well as potentially having a lot of patience, since some retirement account vendors intentionally make the process to rollover funds difficult, are essential to being successful here and ultimately getting those old accounts consolidated and managed properly.”

Online resources like the Department of Labor’s Retirement Savings Lost and Found Database may prove helpful in hunting down old retirement accounts, as could the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s Missing Participants Program.

And to avoid this issue the next time you switch jobs, Fidelity says to collect all the login and contact information necessary for your retirement account before signing off, as well as conferring with your HR department for any tips on moving your money over.

To that end, they also suggest you research and understand the rules around moving your money, “compare fees, expenses, and investment options and consider any tax impact.”

Ultimately, your nest egg is meant to sustain you through your golden years. And while searching out any missing retirement accounts today could prove tedious, you’ll be grateful you’ve got that extra cash when you clock out for good.

The 63-year-old’s departure, which followed alleged affairs with a Chinese spy and two employees of the company, means Huang is walking away from unvested restricted stock units, which are forfeited when an executive ends their term. He had roughly 346,000 of those units. He would also have received 310,000 shares of the company as part of his equity incentive plan this year.

Together, those 656,000 shares were worth $108 million as of Nov. 12’s close. They have dropped in value Friday as Nvidia stock continues to fall. It was down more than 3.5% in early trading on Nov. 13.

To most people, a $108 million loss would be devastating. To Huang, it’s a drop in the bucket.

Huang’s fortune

Though he’s no longer an employee, Huang remains the largest individual shareholder at Nvidia, with a 3.5% voting stake. Those shares constitute the bulk of his wealth, which Bloomberg estimates at $138.4 billion, which is down nearly 18% from a year ago.

That makes the $108 million in forfeited shares worth just 0.08% of his net worth.

Last year, Huang’s compensation included $1.5 million in base salary, a $3 million cash bonus, and $31 million in equity in the form of 936,771 performance stock units (PSUs), according to Nvidia’s Proxy Statement, filed with the SEC in May.

He had 1,411,679 unvested shares as of Jan. 25, 2026. It’s unclear at the moment whether he has forfeited those as well, since the terms of his resignation have not been reported.

Bigger losses coming?

Left-behind stock options might be just the tip of Huang’s fortune in the weeks and months to come, though.

Investors are still punishing the company for the scandal and, should it fail to keep up with its pace of innovation, or should rival chipmakers’ efforts topple Nvidia as it regroups, that will further impact the share price. Similarly, shareholder reaction to whoever assumes the CEO role permanently will be reflected in Huang’s net worth.

Then there are personal risks. If Lori Huang, his wife of more than 40 years, were to file for divorce following his admission of infidelity, it would be a huge financial hit. There is no known prenuptial agreement between the two, and under California community property laws, any assets acquired during a marriage are usually divided equally when a couple splits.

Lori Huang, it’s worth noting, has not made any known legal filings related to their marriage, nor has she commented since Huang admitted to being unfaithful. She remains president of the Jen-Hsun & Lori Huang Foundation, a philanthropic organization that reported about $9.2 billion in assets at the end of 2024. She is a co-trustee of three family trusts that hold the majority of Huang’s Nvidia shares.

“The company has lost around $600 billion in market value so far this week, surely making this one of the most expensive corporate crises in history,” one observer wrote.

In fact, Nvidia stock is down roughly 33% from its Oct. 6 high of $239 a share, trading Friday midday at around $161.

But some company insiders sold off more than a billion dollars in Nvidia stock in the months leading up to the Huang affair revelations, raising questions about who, if anyone, knew this scandal — and the hit the stock could take — was coming.

For example, board member Mark Stevens sold off $946 million worth of stock in the months before the scandal broke, without a trading plan. Overall SEC filings show he sold $1.35 billion worth of Nvidia stock over the last six months, with one report noting the sales were done through a family trust and could simply be a trimming of his company investment. Stevens still owns more than 27 million Nvidia shares.

Other insiders also sold off millions of dollars worth of shares since late August, like interim CEO Colette Kress, who unloaded shares worth $7.6 million, while Timothy Teter, the company’s executive vice president and general counsel, sold stock worth $13.3 million. Some of the aforementioned sales were pre-arranged.

Lucky timing, legal trading

In total, Nasdaq reports 18 Nvidia share sales and one buy in the last three months by company insiders. But simply making such trades around the same time that the bombshell Jensen Huang news dropped doesn’t constitute illegal insider trading.

U.S. law says illegal insider trading involves buying, selling, or tipping someone off to a security “on the basis of material, nonpublic information about the security.” And that can include “corporate officers, directors, and employees who traded the corporation’s securities after learning of significant, confidential corporate developments.”

While Huang’s affairs certainly qualify as significant corporate developments, simply having executed trades before the news became public doesn’t mean that anything illegal occurred. There is no evidence of intentional fraud or breach of duty or trust — elements investigators must establish in illegal insider trading cases.

Nvidia didn’t return a request for comment, while an SEC spokesperson told Moneywise that they declined to comment on the matter.

A more immediate legal headache

While there’s no evidence of insider trading, Nvidia isn’t off the legal hook just yet. The Huang scandal already resulted in a proposed securities class-action lawsuit alleging Nvidia “failed to disclose material facts to investors who bought from October 9, 2025 through November 8, 2026” in relation to the company’s relationship with Megaspeed, the cloud-computing company where the woman with whom Huang admitted an affair worked.

“Donald, this is on the table,” el-Sayed wrote in a post on X. “Guarantee healthcare for every American, from cradle to grave.”

El-Sayed also included a mock design of a gold “Trumpcare” card that’s reminiscent of an earlier effort from the Trump administration to launch a “gold card” visa program meant to provide foreign nationals with a fast-track to residency status. The card also prominently features Trump’s name.

The White House press office didn’t immediately respond to Moneywise’s request for comment.

‘Donald, if you’re watching…’

El-Sayed’s public reachout arrives at a moment when Democratic lawmakers are assessing the environment for future bipartisan cooperation following their sweeping midterm wins earlier this month.

Democrats are set to retake Congress on Jan. 3, but are split on how to handle Trump. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is pushing Democrats to pass popular bills that dare Trump into vetoing them, such as a ban on stock trading by members of Congress and the executive branch.

In el-Sayed’s case, he appears to believe he can team up with Trump in the last two years of his presidency on widening access to health coverage.

“Donald, if you’re watching, we can put your name on it,” el-Sayed said in a Nov. 10 interview on CNN. “I know you like to put your name on stuff. You can finally meet the unmet promise in America to guarantee everybody healthcare. So, it’s on the table if you want to do it.”

He continued: “I don’t care what it’s called. I want people to have healthcare in this country.”

What’s next for Medicare for All

Medicare for All gained steam on the progressive left during Trump’s first term. Medicare for All is usually interpreted to represent a single-payer system that delivers comprehensive health coverage — medical, dental and vision — to Americans through the federal government while significantly shrinking or abolishing private insurance. People would not be on the hook for co-pays, deductibles or premiums.

That’s the model also touted by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who has reintroduced the same bill over the years. Other Democrats, however, favor incremental steps that don’t totally scrap private insurance but, instead, retain a so-called “public option” that allows individuals to pick between private and public health plans, strengthening competition in the process.

The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) has polled Americans’ attitudes towards Medicare for All since 2017. An October survey from KFF indicated that about 66% of Americans endorse the concept of receiving health insurance from one government plan. It’s a notable increase from the 53% of Americans who favored it in Oct. 2020, the last time the poll was taken.

Jeffers created fake gas stations and charged his employer’s credit cards under the guise of routine truck fill-ups. The 35-year-old from Williamstown ran the scam from November 2022 to July 2024, according to a press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of West Virginia.

Following FBI investigations, Jeffers admitted to billing his employer for more than 900 phantom fill-ups that totaled $510,465, according to the press release. On Nov. 9, he was given a prison sentence of two years and six months.

U.S. Attorney Moore Capito said Jeffers “exploited the trust placed in him by his employer and turned a company resource into a personal revenue stream,” according to a July 30 press release by the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Inside the phantom gas station scheme

Jeffers worked as a delivery driver for a Wood County industrial gas provider. The business had a distribution site where trucks filled up their tanks before going on delivery trips, but drivers still received fuel credit cards in case they needed to fill up off-site. Those off-site fill-ups were the focus of Jeffers’ fraud scheme.

Although his delivery routes usually didn’t need any off-site refueling, Jeffers ran the fuel credit cards through accounts he had set up on online payment platforms, each posing as a legitimate service station.

The scheme bypassed a standard safeguard called Merchant Category Code restrictions, which fleet programs use to limit where a card can be charged. By dressing his accounts to look like ordinary fueling stops, Jeffers moved cash from corporate accounts straight into his own pocket.

A growing problem for fleet businesses

Jeffers’ case is not an isolated incident, as fuel card fraud is becoming more rampant. According to a 2025 WEX white paper on the rise of fuel card fraud, fleets lose 5% to 10% of their yearly fuel consumption to theft or misallocation, with fraud levels climbing as high as 12% in 2024.

The paper also highlighted the significant impact that fuel card fraud can have on the profitability of fleet businesses. “Fraud is not a victimless crime. Every dollar stolen through deception is a dollar taken from a business, its employees and ultimately the community it serves,” Capito said in the July 30 press release.

On Sept. 23, two Georgia men were indicted for impersonating a Michigan trucking company’s identity to obtain commercial fuel cards, racking up more than $760,320 in unpaid fuel purchases that accrued interest across 23 states, FreightWaves reports.

In a report by cybersecurity firm Abnormal, the firm flagged a surge in phishing scams that use fake Department of Transportation portals to harvest fleet administrator credentials. When successful, this practice allows fraudsters to trick unsuspecting administrators into providing their payment information through misleading communications.

How routine checks could have caught this sooner

Although public records do not show the exact precautions Jeffers’ employer had put in place to curb fuel card fraud, the off-site nature of his scheme suggests routine checks could have caught it sooner.

Jeffers himself admitted that his delivery routes usually never required fill-ups outside the delivery facility, and yet he billed his employer for those exact transaction types for many months. By matching transaction locations to GPS data, setting alerts for charges outside assigned routes and regularly reviewing driver activity, fleets may have a better chance at limiting fuel card fraud.

One expert — Paul Foley, vice president of in-vehicle commerce at Cubic3 — shared his opinion on the subject. In an August 2026 report, Foley wrote that case studies and surveys revealed that detecting fraud after the fact is a key failure in how fleet managers control payments.

In his opinion, according to Fleet News, “Fleets need to check a payment against company rules before it is made, not reconcile it after the money has gone.”

In the past two weeks, reports Bloomberg, Meta (NASDAQ:META) has agreed to pay a pair of teens a total of $7 million. Other settlements have ranged from $2 million to $2.5 million.

Meta’s not alone. TikTok has also been settling cases, as has Snap. The settlement amounts were confidential. Bloomberg learned the figures through conversations with anonymous sources who were familiar with the numbers.

The numbers are nowhere close to the amount the company would risk in negative public opinion should the cases go to trial. According to Bloomberg, there are approximately 9,800 pending personal injury cases in state and federal courts against the top four social media giants.

An estimated 2,000 school districts are included in that number, which could see much more sizable figures either via settlement or jury verdicts.

Big penalties

In March, a New Mexico jury found Meta’s platforms prioritized company profits over the safety of users, making Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, harmful to children’s mental health. It assessed the company with a $375 million penalty.

That same month, a California jury sided with a woman who blamed Meta and Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) for the depression and anxiety she faced after using the platforms as a child. The verdict in that case was lower — coming in at $6 million — but it was the first time a jury found that social media was being engineered to take advantage of developing brains, including those in teens. And that opened social media companies to a much greater risk of future verdicts.

(Meta and Google have said they plan to appeal the ruling.)

State settlements

While the payouts in the recent settlements with teens are significant, they’re barely a drop in the bucket compared to what Meta has agreed to with state prosecutors.

In August, the company agreed to pay $18 billion over the next 10 years to a group of states to resolve their swath of claims tied to teenage use of the platforms. TikTok, YouTube and Snap (NYSE:SNAP) face separate legal actions by a number of state attorneys general which have not yet been settled. Meta, as part of its settlement, said it would not pay $5.3 billion unless TikTok and YouTube make similar agreements to states.

New Mexico, which won $1 billion earlier this year in a trial separate from the one mentioned above, was not included in the payout. And Florida rejected it as insufficient.

“The payouts are peanuts compared to the profound harms Meta’s profit-driven addictive features inflicted on kids, and a slap on the wrist for a trillion-dollar corp that’ll pay more to lawyers than to the states,” Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier said in a social media post. “We’ll see them at trial.”

On Thursday, Nvidia announced that longtime chief financial officer Colette Kress would step in as interim CEO following Huang’s resignation. His departure comes after he admitted to having an affair with Alice Huang (no relation), a former executive at Singapore-based data center company Megaspeed, whom U.S. authorities reportedly identified as a Chinese intelligence asset.

Kress now faces the challenge of guiding the AI chip giant through a major leadership shakeup while reassuring investors, customers and employees that it’s still business as usual. In a statement shared with Moneywise, Nvidia board chair Harvey Jones backed Kress’ appointment, pointing to her more than 13 years of experience as the company’s CFO.

“The Board has full confidence in Colette to deliver on our commitments to shareholders, customers, partners and to each of you,” Jones said.

Backing Kress

Nvidia’s sudden leadership shakeup has left plenty of questions about the company’s future, but some familiar Wall Street voices believe Kress may be exactly what the chip giant needs right now. CNBC’s Jim Cramer praised Kress for her no-nonsense leadership style.

“Colette’s been my contact person other than Jensen for years,” Cramer said on X. “She’s no-nonsense, and she is absolutely the one that you need right now because she has the bearing. She will accept no nonsense.”

Shark Tank investor Kevin O’Leary also expressed confidence in Kress in a video shared on X, pointing to her years of experience at Nvidia and her understanding of the company’s business.

“She’s been around forever there,” O’Leary said. “She knows every deal. She knows the production schedule. She knows everything about how these chips are going out.”

He believes Nvidia should give Kress a chance to run the company for a couple of quarters before making a decision about its next permanent CEO. O’Leary also argued that the company’s next leader should come from within rather than bringing in an outsider.

Promoting from within is common among America’s biggest companies. According to a 2025 report from executive search firm Spencer Stuart, 73% of new S&P 500 CEOs were internal hires.

Can anyone replace Huang?

While Cramer and O’Leary are confident in Kress, Michael Burry is raising a different question: Can anyone really replace Jensen Huang?

The investor, known for predicting the 2008 housing market crash, raised concerns about Nvidia’s dependence on its longtime CEO in a Substack post titled “The Don Goes Down: What Jensen’s Fall Means.”

Burry pointed to reports that Huang had as many as 60 direct reports and delegated little responsibility, suggesting the company’s operations were heavily dependent on him.

“I do not see Colette or any new CEO replacing the Don seamlessly,” Burry wrote, arguing that Nvidia’s reliance on a single leader had been a concern.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Huang also criticized Kress during a meeting with senior finance executives in August, calling her “a deer in the headlights” while interrupting her presentation. He also reportedly described her as a finance executive focused on reporting numbers rather than helping shape the company’s strategy.

Kress joined the company in 2013 after holding finance roles at Texas Instruments, Microsoft and Cisco. During her tenure, Nvidia’s annual revenue has grown from $4.28 billion to nearly $216 billion. She also has her own stake in the company’s future. According to Nvidia’s 2026 annual report, Kress beneficially owned more than 4.4 million shares as of March.

Whether Kress will lead Nvidia permanently remains an open question. The company’s board is considering both internal and external candidates, while prediction markets have already begun weighing potential successors. On Polymarket, Nvidia executive Ian Buck has emerged as a leading contender, with Kress also among the names attracting bets.

In a message to employees shared with Moneywise by Nvidia, Kress acknowledged that it had been an “extraordinarily difficult period” for the company but expressed confidence in its future.

“We play a vital role in building the technology that is powering the AI revolution, and we have important work ahead of us,” she wrote.

Nvidia will hold a companywide meeting on Nov. 18 at 9 a.m. PT to discuss its future.

Yet increasingly, U.S. businesses are growing uncomfortable with customers sharing personal data with AI bots while using company platforms.

Exhibit A is United Airlines [NASDAQ:UAL], which has taken an aggressive stance against third-party AI agents, banning them from their digital platforms and also stopping their use with airline-linked travel agencies and associated aggregators. Meta’s Muse agent and OpenAI’s Dots are examples of the agents United is blocking.

“Sharing account credentials with personal, third-party, AI assistants can expose sensitive information, and actions taken by these tools may result in unintended purchases, account changes, or use of MileagePlus miles,” the airline said in a Nov. 11 statement. “Plus, these automated AI actions have the potential to violate [Federal Aviation Administration] and [Department of Transportation] regulations - as an example, flight check-in requires human acknowledgment that bags do not contain banned substances like explosives.”

The ban covers “unauthorized, third-party personal AI agents or assistants” and “includes updates to our booking, ticketing and distribution policies,” United stated.

While agentic AI consumer commercial use is in its infancy, United seems to be taking no chances. On Nov. 10, company CEO Scott Kirby said that while agentic AI has big potential, it needs to be policed for commercial and consumer privacy reasons.

“To be honest, I don’t want to create another middleman,” Kirby noted, as reported by The Wall Street Journal.

Weighing the risks and rewards of AI agents

CEOs evaluating the intervention of third-party AI agents working on behalf of customers have a tough choice to make, consumer commerce experts say.

“Both things are true,” Boris Kreiman, founder and CEO of Boca Raton, Florida.-based Linkbaits, an AI agent technology builder, told Moneywise. “The security concerns are legitimate: an AI agent holding your MileagePlus credentials can buy tickets and drain miles, and a rogue agent at booking scale could create real liability. But the ban also conveniently protects United’s direct-booking economics.”

For the C-suite execs tasked with managing or banning third-party AI agents, the tell will be whether companies like United build a secure, official way for verified AI assistants to access fares. Without that, attempts to ban “unauthorized” AI agents risk banning all of them, Kreiman said.

Kreiman noted that banks faced the same question with fintech apps and solved it with tokenized access, per-transaction approval, and spend limits instead of blanket bans. “An agent that can search fares but needs a tap to purchase is far safer than a customer pasting credentials into a sketchy aggregator, which is what bans push people toward,” he added.

Protecting revenue streams is a priority for businesses

Other digital market experts say that while consumer privacy concerns are valid, airlines and other consumer commercial enterprises may have ulterior reasons for walling off AI consumer-serving bots.

“There’s another point here that is not getting much attention,” Jeff Wixted, product management leading the Travel and New Verticals at Signifyd, a fraud protection technology firm, told Moneywise. “Airlines generate the bulk of their profits from co-branded credit cards. For example, American Express will pay Delta about $9 billion this year. They don’t want to cut off that revenue stream through an AI agent where they can’t market and upsell the buyer on a credit card.”

Wixted says, for that reason alone, payment networks like Amex need to step in and manage the AI consumer bot experience. “They have a vested interest in developing a standard agent protocol, particularly to help verify the intent of a purchase,” he noted.

Airlines may also be concerned about customer disputes. “While travelers have a 24-hour grace period to cancel, a high volume of cancellations could overwhelm airlines and, more importantly, disrupt their inventory,” Wixted said. “If an airline can’t resell a seat to a business traveler at a higher price and margin, that becomes a real issue. Having a large number of AI agents holding inventory could create a very big problem for airlines.

The future for AI consumer agents

Kreiman believes AI agents are here to stay and airlines will need to learn to work with them.

If they do it in a secure way, they’ll capture the demand. Otherwise, they will “play whack-a-mole against scrapers while teaching customers to book elsewhere,” Kreiman said. “From experience building agents: blanket blocks mostly stop the legitimate operators. Bad actors just route around them.”

Based on how United’s competitors are responding, the horse may have already left the barn with agentic AI.

“Southwest [NYSE:LUV] allows users to search and shop for flights directly inside ChatGPT through a custom AI plugin launched in partnership with OpenAI and Amazon Web Services (AWS), but the final transaction is carried out on Southwest’s site,” Wixted said.

Wixted also believes inventory management is probably a greater concern for United than Southwest, given their different clientele.

“An AI agent could book your flight, then continue searching for a cheaper price during the 24-hour cancellation window,” he noted. “It could cancel and rebook, repeating that cycle tens or even hundreds of times to find the best price.”

“That’s something humans simply can’t do at that scale,” Wixted noted.

In 2016, O’Neal spotted photographers in Beverly Hills, California, and ducked behind a small tree. That didn’t work, though. “I didn’t want them to see me, but I couldn’t run since I’m too big to run, so I found that tree,” he later explained on “The Late Late Show with James Corden.”

Now ABC is betting eight strangers can do a better job at hiding him. In the new show “Can You Hide... Shaq?” contestants try to keep the 54-year-old Hall of Famer hidden in plain sight around Dallas, with a cash prize for whoever wins.

“I’m 7-foot-1. I’m not exactly easy to miss,” O’Neal said in ABC’s announcement. Comedian Nicole Byer hosts the show, and it’ll premiere Dec. 3 on ABC and the ESPN App.

ABC hasn’t said anything about how much the final prize will be. “The stakes are high, and so is the prize,” is all O’Neal would say. But whatever the winner takes home, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) counts the winnings as income, so it may be worth less than it looks on TV.

How ‘Can You Hide... Shaq?’ works

In the game, the contestants split into two teams. Each team gets a mission and a time limit, and they play it out at landmarks like Reunion Tower and the Perot Museum of Nature and Science. Every time someone spots and recognizes O’Neal, it counts against the team that tried to hide him.

If a team has the fewest spottings, they win immunity for one player on the team, who leads the next round as the captain. Meanwhile, both teams earn money throughout the game to add to a shared pot of cash (the Shaq-pot) that the winner takes home. The winner has to make it through every round by winning immunity or making sure they’re not voted off the show.

The first two episodes will air on Thursday, Dec. 3, from 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. EST. Another two will air on Dec. 10, and you can stream them on Hulu the next day.

The show is an ESPN Original from Fulwell Entertainment and O’Neal’s own company, Jersey Legends Productions.

The IRS treats a game show prize like income

According to the IRS, if you win a prize on a “television or radio quiz program,” “you must include it in your income.” The prize money gets added to everything else you earned that year and taxed along with it.

If you win $2,000 or more, you’ll get a tax form called a 1099-MISC. The IRS gets a copy too, so it’ll know about your prize. It doesn’t mean you’re off the hook if the prize is smaller, too. Even a $50 prize from a photography contest counts as income.

It’s the same for non-cash prizes. Say you win a car. You owe tax on what the car is worth, even though you didn’t collect any money. So you’d pay that tax bill out of your own pocket.

If the bill is more than you can handle, you can say no to the prize. If you turn it down, you don’t have to pay any tax on it.

If you ever win big on a game show

Don’t treat the whole prize as spending money. You still have to put some of it away for taxes first.

Also, income tax works in layers, and the more you make, the higher the rate on your top layer. A big prize is added to your income, so it can push you into a higher tax bracket. Of course, it doesn’t mean your whole paycheck will get taxed at a higher rate than usual, only the part that spills into the higher bracket. So, set aside more than you’d expect.

If the prize you win is big, talk to a tax professional before you spend any of it. One conversation now can save you a nasty tax surprise later. One time early in his career, O’Neal spent his first million-dollar deal in a single day on cars and jewelry. He later found out that a chunk of that money had gone to taxes, and he was spending money he didn’t have.

Whatever ends up in the Shaq-pot, hopefully, the winner knows to save a slice for the IRS before they celebrate.

Though the political outcome was anticipated, the Nasdaq composite — the most tech-dominated major index — fell $2.5 trillion as the historic results surged in, with investors fearing that majority Democratic leadership in both the House and Senate could stifle future AI projects.

During his second term, President Donald Trump has been supportive of the sector, advocating for fast-moving innovation and robust investment, despite existential fears warranting a more tempered approach.

But with the proliferation of data centers serving as a key pain point — thus a campaign issue — experts foresee potential challenges to AI-related legislation.

While Trump has teamed up with industry leaders, passing executive orders to remove barriers to and otherwise expedite tech growth, the introduction of a Democrat-led Congress was enough to spark a sudden selloff of chip and neocloud stocks.

Downturn shows sensitivity of market

Markets have leveled out since the election, but they remain in flux, partly due to earnings announcements and unrelated scandals. But the shock reminds investors how sensitive tech stocks are to outside influences, and how pro-AI government regulations are to their success.

Senior Managing Director of Yorkville Ives & Co., Dan Ives, echoed these sentiments in a note to clients.

“There is no way to sugarcoat that Democrats taking control, especially over the Senate, will create some major hurdles for AI and tech legislation in the Beltway over the next two years,” he wrote.

Americans have voiced their concerns about data centers’ energy and water usage, as well as noise and light pollution, and impacts on surrounding home values and local fauna.

Stakeholders have clapped back, highlighting the economic promise of AI while pushing back on critiques. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, for example, says California almond farming is more of a freshwater hog than chatbot queries.

But that hasn’t stopped top Democrats from taking the opposing view of Trump’s, leaning into anti-data center sentiments. Senator Bernie Sanders called for a national moratorium on new data centers, while his colleagues have called for a “pause on advanced AI development”.

Members of Congress can pass new laws that would hamper the president’s ability to issue executive orders. They can also review existing orders, reallocate spending and legislate more legal restrictions on tech companies.

Analysts at investment bank UBS predict that nearly one-third of the data center expansion slated for 2028 could face construction delays.

How exposed is your portfolio?

If you’re not one for risk, consider diversifying your portfolio rather than relying on tech-heavy funds.

Pivoting to stable defensive market segments such as consumer goods, healthcare, infrastructure and utilities could give you peace of mind, as could booking a meeting with your financial advisor to assess and rebalance your portfolio.

Unthinkable levels of debt and capex spending in AI with limited ROI had investors balking far before the midterms. And pundits continue to warn of a bubble and impending correction. The New York Times is calling the Dem sweep the final straw in a “techmageddon”.

In 2025, she got a new prescription, but this time it came with a much higher price tag: $399 a month, or nearly $4,800 a year. Fortunately, she landed a new job in marketing that offered GLP-1 coverage through a coaching program, bringing her monthly out-of-pocket cost down to $25.

For Kennebrew, losing weight wasn’t just about her physical appearance — it also made her feel more confident, energetic and social. But she can’t help wondering whether her weight also played a role in her career opportunities.

“Not only was I smaller, but I was a lot more confident in myself too,” she said. “I don’t know if I would have felt as confident or really [been] picked for that opportunity if I was bigger.”

Cost of GLP-1s

GLP-1 medications have quickly become a popular way for Americans to lose weight. In 2026, 11% of U.S. adults said they were taking one for weight loss, up from just 3% in 2024, according to Gallup.

But in the U.S., access to health insurance is largely tied to employment. As of March 2025, more than 165 million Americans under 65 received health insurance through an employer, according to KFF.

Having insurance doesn’t necessarily mean medical care is affordable. About one in three working-age adults with private insurance are still paying off medical bills or debt, as high deductibles and limited coverage can leave patients with out-of-pocket costs.

That means changing jobs can also change how much someone pays for their prescriptions. And for medications like GLP-1s, which are typically taken on an ongoing basis, the cost isn’t just a one-time expense. It’s something patients have to budget for month after month, especially if they lose their insurance coverage.

The weight of workplace bias

But aside from the medication, new research suggests that GLP-1 use could be linked to improved employment prospects, particularly among women who were previously unemployed.

A 2026 working paper by Harvard economist Rebecca Diamond found that women who were unemployed before starting GLP-1 medications saw their employment rate rise by nearly 27 percentage points after at least 18 months, compared with similar women who wanted to take the medications but had not yet started.

After Moneywise published a story on Diamond’s findings, one reader took to Threads to share a particularly uncomfortable experience from their first corporate job.

“My first corporate job out of college told me they interviewed 3 people before choosing me. Once I worked there for a while, I asked what stood out about me versus the other applicants. No joke, my supervisor said: “You were the only one who fit in the desk,” the user wrote.

While the account hasn’t been independently verified, it offers an example of the kind of appearance-based judgment that job applicants may face.

Devin Hornick, co-founder and partner at recruiting firm KORE1, says appearance bias isn’t always so obvious, especially during the hiring process.

“Appearance bias is rarely verbalized, because all of the people in the room know what an example of appearance bias looks like and what a lawsuit would look like,” he told Moneywise.

Instead, he says, it can show up in the feedback candidates receive after an interview. They might be told they weren’t quite the right fit, didn’t have the right presence to meet with clients or weren’t someone the company could see representing its business.

The cost of feeling better

Someone’s weight or appearance shouldn’t determine their ability to get a job or succeed at work. But for people who take GLP-1 medications for medical reasons, the benefits can go beyond the number on the scale. Kennebrew, whose weight has fluctuated over the years, told CNBC Make It that she felt at her best when she was at her lowest weight. She also noticed that she received more invitations to speak at conferences and public events.

But while these medications can help people feel better, staying on them isn’t always easy, especially when insurance coverage changes.

According to an October report from Nationwide Retirement Institute, 51% of current GLP-1 users worry they may eventually have to choose between paying for their medication and saving enough for retirement. Employers are also feeling the financial pressure. A March survey from Business Group on Health found that among employers currently covering GLP-1s for weight loss, 72% said they were likely to continue offering that coverage in 2027, while 10% said they likely wouldn’t.

For anyone considering a new job in search of better coverage, salary isn’t the only number worth looking at. If you rely on GLP-1s or any other medication you take regularly, it’s worth reviewing a prospective employer’s health insurance benefits before accepting an offer. What you pay out of pocket each month can make a significant difference to how much of your paycheck you actually get to keep.

Nvidia [NASDAQ: NVDA] Board Director Mark Stevens was one of the top AI sellers in Q3 2026, selling roughly 4.2 million shares, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. There were three separate batches of stock sales from Stevens, who joined the Nvidia board in 2008 following an earlier stint as a director from 1993 to 2006.

The first common stock sale took place from Aug. 31 to Sept. 2 at equity prices ranging from $220 to $226, generating $411 million in new cash. The second sale stretched from Sept. 3 to Sept. 4 at prices ranging between $227 to $234 per share, garnering about $236 million. The third sale occurred on Sept. 18 at roughly $220 per share, netting roughly $300 million.

Still holding plenty of Nvidia stock

Prearranged trading plans are used by executives to buy or sell shares of their firm on specific dates or target prices. It’s a mechanism to wall off company employees from insider trading accusations as long as they stick to the automatic plan.

The SEC first instituted the practice in 2000 and modified it in 2022 to include a 90-day waiting period for starting trades. In some cases, the plans were abused by executives in instances like executing share sales just before an earnings report.

In Stevens’s case, he didn’t have such a trading plan, but that’s not necessarily a red flag on its own. Insiders cashing out of their stock will do so for a variety of reasons that aren’t always tied to a company’s performance, such as quickly raising liquidity. In Nvidia’s case, the move could pour water on the enthusiasm of retail investors to buy into an AI titan that has also attracted short sellers.

The first two stock sales in late August and early September followed a robust Q2 earnings report that caused Nvidia shares to jump about 10% in valuein the following week. Stevens still holds about 27.5 million shares in Nvidia, a colossal position.

The financial fallout of Huang’s resignation

Huang’s stunning resignation came shortly after reports emerged that he’d had a second extramarital relationship with Nvidia executive Kimberly Powell.

Huang was already drawing enormous scrutiny following his recent admission of an affair with a woman alleged to be a Chinese intelligence operative. Nvidia’s board of directors issued a statement on Nov. 12 that credited Huang with positioning the company as a big player in the AI boom and named Colette Kress as interim CEO.

“The Board has full confidence in Colette and the leadership team, and we expect the company’s operations, customer commitments and product roadmap to continue without interruption,” the statement said.

On Nov. 13, Nvidia was trading at about $163 per share. Its equity prices, though, have plunged about 15% in the last several days as Nvidia has shed roughly $1.7 trillion from its market cap since the start of October.

Peter Brown, 87, told CBS News that he lost his Altadena home to the 2025 Eaton Fire — one of the two devastating blazes that displaced an estimated 205,000 people in Altadena and Pacific Palisades.

He said he paid Menu Homes, a modular home building company, $538,000 to build a new wheelchair-accessible home within a year — eventually forking over $90,000 in added costs on top of that, only to have the contractor allegedly demand another $51,000 to finish the job.

“I’ve run out of money. He’s drained me. I just don’t have the $51,000,” Brown told the outlet. “He’s just taking everything. And that was going to be my savings.”

With the deadline for completion passed and the home unfinished, Brown added that he’s out of insurance money too. And on top of that, CBS noted, he owes $2,500 a month in rent while awaiting his home. A GoFundMe was set up for Brown, an Army veteran, saying he “needs our help with basic living expenses and the remaining costs of getting back into his home.”

Meanwhile, a representative for Menu Homes claims that the delays are the fault of the county — an accusation some Altadena town council members dispute.

The hidden costs of rebuilding after a disaster

Bobby Shokri of Menu Homes pinned the delays on L.A. County requirements and months of permitting approval holdups, along with additions like a garage and porch. He added that “we had a contract for a certain scope of work — the county imposed additional scope of work.”

Menu Homes didn’t reply to Moneywise’s request for comment and the dispute is ongoing.

But Morgan Whirledge, a member of the Altadena Town Council, told Moneywise that while the county’s permitting process in the wake of such a “huge wave of projects” hasn’t been perfect, it streamlined “a notoriously bureaucratic and difficult process” and waived all permit fees.

“Many of the delays are due to contractors or professionals who may be taking a long time responding to comments from the county,” he added. “Either way, it’s not an excuse for the excessive amount of charges Menu Homes is allegedly adding to their contracted price.”

He added that the alleged charges “should not fall on a homeowner with limited resources who already is under contract at a certain price” and that the Contractors State License Board guidance for disaster rebuilds, “states that contracts must be fixed price.”

Fellow council member Darlene Green told CBS News that, in a case like Brown’s, “If something changes, it shouldn’t be a shock. And it certainly shouldn’t be hundreds of thousands of dollars over the initial asking.”

And while that might be true, homeowners do often face a costly fallout after a natural disaster. Homeowners across the U.S. spent “$23 billion annually in 2021 to 2023 repairing damages from disasters,” at an average cost of $22,100 per homeowner in 2023, according to Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies.

For Floridians in the wake of Hurricane Helene in 2024, the financial stress “snowballed over time,” the non-profit Urban Institute reported. They added that “survivors sometimes faced deepening debt or worse credit” and that fixed incomes “made recovery costs harder to absorb,” recounting how one family “cashed out a 401(k) account to stay afloat.”

And while homeowners insurance does generally cover disasters like wildfires and hurricanes, Allstate warns that “coverage may vary by geographic location and by policy.” That means that you might not be covered, for example, if you live in an area that is prone to particular disasters.

Other disasters, like earthquakes and floods, require extra coverage altogether.

How to avoid a financial disaster

Before disaster strikes, it’s important to know what your homeowners insurance does and doesn’t cover — and seek out any additional coverage you might need.

But for those who, like Brown, fall victim to a disaster, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau recommends reaching out to mortgage lenders or landlords, utility providers and insurance and credit card companies to inquire about pausing or refinancing payments and waiving penalties or late charges, while paying close attention to your credit score.

Scammers, of course, may also come out of the woodwork. The Federal Trade Commission says to steer clear of contractors who ask you to pay upfront or “insist you pay by wire transfer, gift card, payment app, cryptocurrency or in cash.” If they want you to sign a blank contract and don’t have a license, that’s also a red flag.

It’s best practice, they add, to look up reviews for any potential contractor and even check with your local homebuilder’s association, insist on seeing their license and insurance coverage, pay any down payments by credit card or cheque, keep all invoices and receipts and never hand over a final payment until you’re satisfied with the finished job.

A disaster that robs you of your home and possessions is heartbreaking enough. But knowing how to navigate the aftermath to help avoid additional financial burdens can save you lots of headaches — and cash — as you work toward rebuilding your life.

Largely a result of the internet and how it’s affected every aspect of our lives, we’ve now grown accustomed to swiping our way to love, even if dating apps have left plenty of people exhausted by the process. But now, a growing number of services are taking a similar approach — not for romance, but for friendship. The difference here is the promise: They’ll help you find your people, for a price.

Alexandra Pitzer was 33 when she moved from Nashville to Honolulu for her husband’s Army job. She told the New York Times that while scrolling through Instagram, she came across an ad for a matchmaking service that promised to take the awkwardness out of making friends. After filling out a personality survey, she’d be matched with a group of women, with their get-togethers already arranged.

There was just one small detail: It cost $290.

Pitzer decided to take the chance. Before long, she was sitting at a brewery with eight other women, all of whom had paid for the same thing: the possibility of finding a friend.

“I can see most of them being lifelong friends,” Pitzer told The New York Times. “We have a genuine connection.”

Paying for friendship

A growing crop of friend-matching services is trying to make meeting people feel a little less like a dating app and a little more like being introduced by a mutual friend. Instead of endless swiping, some services arrange group meetups.

For Pitzer, she turned to the platform Real Roots, known to bring women together through organized social gatherings. In a statement to Moneywise, Real Roots explained that new members can sign up for a $25 Meet & Greet, where they’re matched with a group of seven to 10 women based on compatibility.

“If you love your group, you can continue into a six-week friendship series, but there’s zero obligation after the M&G,” the company said.

While paying to make friends might sound strange to some, these services are emerging at a time when many people are struggling to find meaningful connections.

According to a 2024 study from Harvard’s Making Caring Common Project, 67% of lonely adults experienced a form of social-emotional loneliness, including feeling disconnected from a meaningful community or group. The study also found nearly half (45%) of lonely adults struggled with knowing how to build close friendships in the first place.

Is paying for friendship worth it?

For many adults, making friends isn’t necessarily about a lack of effort. Sometimes, it’s simply not knowing where to start. Meagan Allers, head of community and partnerships at Marco Polo, says that’s part of why people are willing to pay for friendship services.

“Paying isn’t about buying friends. It buys the structure back,” Allers told Moneywise. “You are paying for someone to do the matching for you and facilitate the first awkward steps of meeting new people.”

But making an introduction is one thing. Building a lasting friendship is another.

“One dinner with strangers rarely turns into friendship,” she said. “Repeated, low-pressure contact does.”

Before spending hundreds of dollars on these services, Allers says it’s worth doing a little homework. Check whether memberships automatically renew, how easy it is to cancel and whether you can be matched with another group if the first one doesn’t work out. It’s also worth looking for programs that help people stay connected beyond a single event.

If paying to make friends isn’t in your budget, there are still plenty of ways to meet people. Allers suggests joining a weekly class, volunteering or finding a walking group. Sometimes, it’s as simple as making plans instead of waiting for someone to invite you, or sending a quick message to stay in touch.

You might find you have something in common, whether it’s your love of dogs or a shared obsession with Pilates. Paying for a friendship service might get you a seat at a local brewery with other people looking to make friends, but it doesn’t mean the person sitting across from you will become a lifelong friend.

That part still takes some effort, whether it’s making plans to meet up again or being the first to say, “Hey, it was really nice meeting you.”

Americans continue to get hit with steep increases for streaming services like Disney+, Netflix and Apple TV. With 2026 nearing a close, many streamers have increased rates again as “streamflation” squeezes family entertainment budgets.

Every major streaming platform has raised its prices since 2019, and some have more than doubled their original monthly cost. As these companies chase profitability and spend billions on original content, subscribers are wondering whether the cost of “Netflix and chill” is worth it.

Here’s a listing of the seven major streaming services ranked by their price increases, from the modest bumps to the dramatic jumps.

7. Paramount+ (NASDAQ:PSKY)

Paramount+ launched in March 2021 as a rebrand of CBS All Access. Its ad-free Premium tier debuted at $9.99 per month. Today, that same tier costs $13.99 — a 40% increase in less than four years.

The most recent price bump arrived in January 2026, adding another dollar to both monthly tiers. The Essential (ad-supported) plan now costs $8.99, up from $4.99 at launch. Annual plans are available at $89.99 for Essential and $139.99 for Premium.

6. Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX)

Netflix has steadily pushed prices higher. The standard ad-free plan cost $12.99 in January 2019. Today, that same tier runs $19.99 per month — a 54% jump.

The Premium plan has seen an even larger increase, rising from $15.99 in 2019 to $26.99 today, an almost 69% jump that adds up to an extra $132 per year for users who want 4K streaming and multiple streams.

Netflix typically raises prices every 18 months, with increases in October 2020, January 2022, October 2023, January 2025 and March 2026. The company often points to its massive content spending — roughly $18 billion in 2025 — as justification.

5. Hulu (NYSE:DIS)

Disney-owned Hulu has implemented substantial price increases since its inception in March 2008. Disney took over in 2019 after it acquired two-thirds of 21st Century Fox. The ad-supported tier cost $7.99 per month in early 2019. Today, that same plan costs $12.49 — a 56% increase.

The ad-free tier has grown even faster, from $11.99 in 2019 to $21.49 today, a 79% jump. The latest price adjustment arrived in September 2026 alongside a broader price update for Disney+.

Hulu’s pricing strategy has become increasingly intertwined with Disney’s broader streaming ambitions, as the companies fully merged in 2026.

4. Amazon Prime (NASDAQ:AMZN)

Amazon Prime memberships have steadily increased since its launch price. When they introduced monthly billing in April 2026, ad-free subscriptions were $10.99 per month. Now, they’re $19.98 per month.

That’s nearly an 82% increase. The Prime Video Ultra tier, which is part of the $19.98 total charge, includes 4K UHD, Dolby Atmos and extra concurrent streams. It also produces its own original content, including The Boys and Fallout.

3. Peacock (NASDAQ:CMCSA)

Peacock has raised prices by 160% since launch. The service debuted in July 2020 with a $4.99 monthly rate for its ad-supported Premium tier. Today, the same plan costs $12.99.

The ad-free Premium Plus tier has jumped to $19.99 per month. After staying at launch price for nearly three years, Peacock began raising prices in 2023, followed by additional increases in July 2024, July 2025 and August 2026 — the latter being its largest jump.

Executives have said the service was initially underpriced, and its growing slate of sports content, including NBA games and Sunday Night Football, has contributed to the higher rates.

2. Apple TV+ (NASDAQ:AAPL)

Apple TV+ takes second place with a 200% increase since launch. It debuted in November 2019 at $4.99 per month — well below competitors. Today, it costs $14.99.

Apple held its price steady until October 2022, when it rose to $6.99. Subsequent jumps have come in October 2023, August 2025 and August 2026.

While Apple TV+ has added original programming and recently secured exclusive rights to stream “Friday Night Baseball” and Formula One in the U.S., the 200% increase means early adopters are now paying an extra $120 per year.

1. Disney+ (NYSE:DIS)

Disney+ takes the crown with a 207% increase since launch. When it arrived in November 2019, it cost $6.99 per month. Today, the ad-free Disney+ Premium tier is priced at $21.49.

Disney implemented its first increase in 2021, followed by successive annual jumps from 2022 to 2025. The most recent increase was in September 2026.

For families who signed up expecting an affordable alternative to cable, the difference is stark: They’re now paying $174 more per year.

Is this just cable all over again?

When you add up subscriptions to just these 7 services at their current prices, you're looking at $71.93 per month if you opt for the cheapest tiers.

Want everything ad-free with standard features? That jumps to $127.42 per month. But here's where it gets truly eye-opening: If you want the premium experience, you're looking at $140.92 per month just for these seven platforms.

Add in other popular services like Spotify (11.99/month), YouTube TV (72.99/month for live TV), Max (14.99/month) or specialized platforms like Discovery+, ESPN+, Crunchyroll, or other sports packages, and you're easily pushing $200 to $250 per month.

Suddenly, your old cable bills don't look outrageous.

For now, consumers can try to stay ahead by rotating subscriptions, taking advantage of promotional offers, and bundling where it makes sense. But one thing is clear: The golden age of cheap streaming is officially over.

But in October, the city sent her a notice requesting roughly $1,000 in back property taxes. Hay admits some of the items invoiced are older than the previous owner’s 2016 purchase.

“We don’t owe this,” she told WMAR-2 News. “That’s why they do the title checks.”

Hay’s notice was one of 50,123 that were sent by the Bureau of Revenue Collections, the Department of Finance (DOF) office that collects taxes and fees. Together, they asked for $504.6 million in water bills, property taxes, citations and other charges.

Another woman, who says she has paid the city $70 a year for a permit to use a public right-of-way space since 1989, got a notice saying she still owes for 2005.

If you received one of these notices and haven’t paid, your balance has been growing since Oct. 31, when the DOF says extra interest and penalties started. Many of these charges include liens. An unpaid lien can be auctioned off and could eventually cost them the property through foreclosure, but those being billed need to be warned first.

Why old balances are showing up now

Baltimore sends out notices every October. This year, the DOF had updated its system, and the department told WMAR the new setup surfaces old balances that past letters left out.

The letters WMAR reviewed were dated Oct. 8 and due Oct. 31, but some people said theirs didn’t arrive until Oct. 16. City councilwoman Odette Ramos, who represents District 14, said the DOF is to blame, since residents normally get 30 days to pay.

Hay said neither she nor her title company heard back after emailing the city to get the charges dropped. When she reached out, she was told her question would go to a supervisor, and an answer could take up to two months.

What Baltimore law says about pre-purchase debts

A deed can’t be recorded in Baltimore until a lien certificate from Finance has been obtained. Under city code, if a charge wasn’t on that certificate, the city can’t come after a buyer who paid in good faith without knowing about it. It can still go after whoever owned the property when the certificate was issued.

The department told WMAR it’s clearing charges that never made it onto a property’s lien sheet at the time of sale. It’s correcting other errors, too, but hasn’t disclosed any further details.

Maryland law has a statute on limitations for a governing body. In this case, the entity is allowed seven years to collect tax once it’s due. Councilwoman Ramos wants to know whether that limit covers some of these balances. The DOF hadn’t answered WMAR’s questions about it as of Nov. 10.

Under city code, overdue taxes accrue 1% interest and a 1% penalty every month. The DOF wrote in a statement to WMAR that it’s “working with customers who pay late due to needing additional information,” but hasn’t said whether that includes interest and penalties while bills are being disputed.

What to do if your notice includes an old balance

If charges on your notice are from before you purchased a property, ask the title company that handled your closing for the lien certificate from your settlement. A charge the certificate didn’t list is what the DOF is working on removing. Your title company can take that up with the city along with you.

Any owner can also contact the Bureau of Revenue Collections for a line-by-line history of the account via phone at 410-396-3000 or email. Check the history against your receipts, bank statements and even canceled checks.

Councilwoman Ramos is pushing the DOF to resolve its errors by February. That’s when the city mails its last bills and legal notices. Ramos added it’s when tax sale season starts.

“I get that the city needs money,” she said. “I want people to pay ... but we want to make sure that those bills are correct and that we’re following the right procedures.”

The details of how the couple is dividing assets haven’t been made public. But this isn’t the first time Hope’s finances have landed in a Utah courtroom — and the prior case is the one with a lesson anyone can benefit from.

According to Us Weekly, Hope did not respond to a lawsuit filed by Discover Bank in September 2024 over an unpaid credit card balance. As a result, a Utah court entered a default judgment ordering her to pay $12,849.

Consumer protection experts warn that ignoring debt collection lawsuits often leads to default judgments, which can allow creditors to pursue wage garnishment, bank account levies or property liens, depending on state law.

Hope’s case is a textbook example of a common but costly mistake. Unlike a divorce, where costs often hinge on two people and a negotiation, this kind of case can turn on a single missed deadline.

A broader trend fueled by technology

When a creditor sues over unpaid credit card debt, the clock starts ticking. If the defendant fails to respond by the court deadline — usually a few weeks — a default judgment can be entered automatically. This appears to have happened in Hope’s case.

According to Pew, debt collection lawsuits in the U.S. have surged back to pre-pandemic levels, reaching over 4.7 million cases per year. Ironically, Utah is “on track to surpass their most recent peak” of debt filings, Pew says.

Research shows that many consumers fail to respond, making default judgments extremely common. Once a judgment is entered, negotiating becomes more difficult and costly.

Hope’s case also reflects a growing trend of aggressive debt collection.

The New York Times reports that creditors are increasingly using AI and automation to identify overdue accounts and file lawsuits at scale, making it faster and cheaper to take consumers to court.

For consumers, this means lawsuits can arrive more quickly, sometimes with little warning — especially when balances are sold to third-party debt buyers.

Why this matters

Hope’s legal trouble came as credit card debt continues to climb nationwide. U.S. credit card debt has reached $1.29 trillion, according to CNBC reporting based on Federal Reserve data, driven by inflation and rising interest rates.

Meanwhile, “Mormon Wives” has become a breakout hit, generating widespread social media buzz. This contrast between Hope’s celebrity success alongside ordinary debt problems highlights how common financial stress is and how quickly it can spiral when ignored.

What you should do instead

Hope’s $12,849 judgment isn’t just celebrity gossip — it’s a warning. Credit card debt doesn’t disappear, and lawsuits can move quickly.

If you’re struggling with high debt or tight budgets, here are several key lessons:

Never ignore a lawsuit. Even if you can’t pay, responding preserves your rights and may prevent an automatic judgment.

Communicate early. Creditors may agree to payment plans or settlements before a case escalates.

Consider consolidation. Rolling high-interest balances into a lower-rate debt consolidation loan can reduce monthly payments and prevent accounts from becoming delinquent.

Know when to ask for help. If debt is unmanageable, a bankruptcy attorney or nonprofit credit counselor can clarify your options.

The most important lesson: open the mail, respond on time and seek help before the court gets involved.

With files from Michelle Bates

A proposed new rule issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) would alter eligibility for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. The new rule, introduced on Nov. 10, would limit SNAP eligibility to households that already receive benefits through another social program known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).

According to the USDA’s analysis, nearly 18% of SNAP recipients would lose their benefits under the proposed change. That accounts for 3.2 million households, or 6.3 million individuals.

The proposal has already faced backlash from some lawmakers and advocates. Outgoing Rep. Angie Craig, a Democrat from Minnesota and ranking member on the House Agriculture Committee, called the proposed change “heartless and cruel.”

“The proposed rule would make it harder to meet basic needs and roll back efforts to streamline federal programs,” Craig said in a statement.

How the proposed rule would change the program

The proposed change would restrict “broad-based categorical eligibility” to SNAP. The policy is currently offered by more than 40 states and allows families who receive TANF to also qualify for SNAP benefits, even if they surpass the income threshold for the program.

TANF is a federally-funded program operated by the Department of Health and Human Services that provides temporary financial support to low-income families with children. The financial support is meant to help cover essential living expenses such as rent, utilities, food and childcare.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the new proposal means a family of three that receives TANF and has an income above $35,000 could be ineligible for SNAP benefits.

The USDA estimates the new rule would reduce SNAP transfers by $44.6 billion between 2027 to 2031. It will also mean about 1.7 million children will no longer be eligible for free school meals.

The White House did not respond to Moneywise’s request for comment in time for publication.

In a statement to CBS News, White House spokeswoman Allison Schuster said the Trump administration is focused on ensuring that SNAP only goes to those who need it most.

“Rather than throwing money at a broken system, the Trump administration will continue to stop fraudsters stealing from these important programs, as well as take effective, cost-saving steps to make life more affordable for all Americans,” she told CBS News.

The proposed change would take effect in 2029.

Shrinking of SNAP

This is the latest move in the Trump administration’s effort to shrink the SNAP program. In July 2025, Trump introduced cuts to SNAP in his One Big Beautiful Bill by expanding the work requirements.

According to USDA data, roughly 5.5 million Americans lost access to the program after Trump’s bill went into effect. The Bill also shifted a portion of the cost onto states. Starting in October 2027, states may have to cover some of the costs of SNAP, which critics have said could force states to restrict the program or lower benefits.

The Trump administration has previously attempted to end broad-based categorical eligibility in 2019, but it was withdrawn by the Biden administration in 2021.

First it was Nvidia [NASDAQ:NVDA], the AI darling at the heart of the boom, which lost about a third of its stock value since its peak in early October, as CEO Jensen Huang’s career imploded in an inferno of allegations involving extramarital affairs and an apparent Chinese spy.

Now, Dutch cloud computing giant Nebius [NASDAQ:NBIS] took a tumble on the Nasdaq on Thursday as news broke that it’s lowering its revenue outlook for the year. It’s down about 17.5% on the day as of the early afternoon, trading at just under $128 per share compared to about $155 at Wednesday’s close, and well down from its peak of nearly $287 in June.

The company, which operates servers and data centers and provides cloud infrastructure for other AI companies, is still waiting on some computing capacity to come online. It was originally expected for the end of this year, but is now scheduled for some time in the first half of 2027.

As a result, it says its revenue for the year will come in at the low end of its expected $3 billion to $3.4 billion.

Like most so-called neoclouds, Nebius has massive “capex,” or capital expenditure, laying out billions now to build out computing infrastructure it hopes will be profitable later.

The company says its customers’ prepayments and its financing against existing contracts will cover 75% to 85% of its capital expenditures next year.

Nebius reported losses of $0.13 a share. Revenue is up nearly sevenfold from last year, to $980.8 million for the quarter, beating expectations.

Burry continues to be bearish on AI

In a September Substack post, “Big Short” investor Michael Burry characterized the Nasdaq, then at a record high, as “historically overvalued, and historically top heavy,” which gave him increasing confidence to ramp up his short positions against a few major AI stocks.

Among those shorts was Nebius. Although Burry no longer discloses his position sizes publicly, having shuttered his asset management company, he wrote in August that “Nebius is what the top of a boom looks like.” Nebius shares now trade well below the $212 and $247 levels at which he disclosed and added to his short. He stands to profit handsomely.

A major part of Burry’s bearish thesis is that there will soon be “a chip glut again” as the semiconductor industry falls back into its traditional boom-to-bust cyclicality.

As Burry wrote, “Over the next two years this shortage will blow off as production catches up, and memory will have a down cycle again.”

To support his case, Burry shared an interview with the Taiwanese electronics maker Acer’s CEO Jason Chen. When asked whether he noticed memory shortages, Chen responded, “No way,” adding, “How could there be a continuous shortage? China’s production capacity has been consistently increasing, and there is absolutely no shortage issue.”

Burry isn’t the only AI skeptic​

Recent signs of weakness in the tech sector, including a disastrous quarter for Alphabet [NASDAQ:GOOGL], have lent some credence to Burry’s perpetually bearish outlook. The Nasdaq plunged 5.5% and entered correction territory in the first week of November. Chip giants Micron Technology [NASDAQ:MU] and AMD [NASDAQ:AMD] suffered double-digit routs.

And there are other prominent investors who see signs of this party coming to an end.

For instance, Business Insider reported that GMO’s co-founder Jeremy Grantham said the current valuations for AI stocks are “obviously a bubble” and that “the market will become a whole lot cheaper” once it bursts.

DoubleLine Capital’s founder Jeffrey Gundlach echoed this sentiment more recently in an interview on the Julia La Roche Podcast. As the so-called “bond king” warned, “You’re going to have fallout and losers in the AI race to the holy grail. It’s going to happen. And that’s what’s going to be what leads to the next very significant drawdown in the risk assets.”

Although Gundlach said he doesn’t know when the fall will come, he says it’s close enough that he wants to be “out” of AI equities. Instead, Gundlach recommended an equal-weighted ETF tracking Fortune 500 companies to avoid overconcentration in AI, along with exposure to assets like high-quality bonds, emerging market debt, gold and a commercial real estate ETF.

On the “chip glut” theme, the analyst Sujai Shivakumar from the Center for Strategic and International Studies echoed Burry’s opinion that “Chinese overcapacity” in the chip sector could become a major risk for companies like Micron. As Shivakumar wrote, “Expanding Chinese DRAM and NAND production may ease some near-term pressure, but it could also produce future surplus, dumping, trade friction, and deeper dependence on Chinese suppliers for commoditized but strategically important memory devices.​”

Updated with files from Moneywise editor G.M. Buck

Daniel Lee of Flushing, Queens, pleaded guilty on Nov. 9 to conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to commit health care fraud, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Lee was a program director at Happy Life Inc. and Royal Adult Day Care Center, two SADC centers in Flushing. The centers offered Medicaid recipients cash to enroll, then billed Medicaid for care they never received. Lee and his co-conspirators also helped run a related pharmacy scheme involving prescriptions that patients didn’t need.

“Paying kickbacks and billing for services that were never provided is not patient care. It is theft from programs that vulnerable people depend on,” Scott J. Lampert, deputy inspector general for investigations with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said in a statement.

A decade of fraudulent claims

SADC centers are designed to help older adults and people with disabilities continue living at home while receiving extra support during the day. They typically offer meals, activities and help with everyday tasks.

“Social adult daycare centers play valuable roles serving New Yorkers in need in their communities,” New York Attorney General Letitia James said in an October statement about the state’s crackdown on fraud. “These centers should be focused only on providing fulfilling and enriching programming, not generating fraudulent profits for their owners.”

According to a February New York Post report, which cited the original federal complaint, seniors were allegedly offered $500 a month to join one of Lee’s facilities. Those who showed up reportedly received less, with their payments dropping to $300.

Meanwhile, the centers were billing Medicaid for people they claimed to serve, even when those individuals hadn’t received care. At Royal Adult Day Care, the numbers were not adding up. The facility regularly reported more than 700 visitors a day, despite having a maximum occupancy of 81 people. In August 2022, it allegedly billed Medicaid for 1,041 visits from members in a single day.

According to the complaint, the pharmacy was also involved in the alleged fraud by filling prescriptions for items such as pain relief patches. For every 60-patch prescription, the pharmacy received $525 and allegedly gave $100 back to the day care members. Lee also allegedly threatened to stop paying members if they used other pharmacies.

When authorities searched Happy Life, they found more than $100,000 in cash and seized approximately $900,000 in fraud proceeds from bank accounts, according to the Justice Department.

New York may eliminate its adult day care program

Lee’s case is just one of several fraud investigations involving New York’s SADC centers. In October, Gov. Kathy Hochul announced a crackdown targeting more than 100 providers suspected of fraud or other misconduct. She also ordered a review of the program, which serves approximately 45,000 Medicaid recipients across more than 400 SADC centers and costs taxpayers over $500 million a year.

For families, these centers can also provide much-needed relief, especially for those juggling full-time jobs while caring for an aging parent or a loved one with dementia. Losing access to these services could leave families scrambling to find alternative care, which can be expensive, or force them to take on more caregiving responsibilities themselves.

But concerns about how the money is being spent have been growing. A February audit by New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli identified more than $285 million in questionable Medicaid payments to SADC providers. Of that amount, more than $28.6 million went to providers that had been removed from health plan networks for reasons including fraud, abuse, waste or concerns about the quality of care.

While the findings don’t mean all those payments were fraudulent, they raised questions about whether the state was doing enough to oversee the program.

New York has already temporarily stopped accepting new providers, with the restriction expected to remain in place until January 2027, but Hochul is considering going further. State health officials have until Dec. 31 to recommend whether the program should be reformed or phased out, with participants moved into other services.

“New York has zero tolerance for fraud, and when bad actors take advantage of these critical programs, older New Yorkers in need lose out,” Governor Hochul said.

As for Lee, he is scheduled to be sentenced on March 2, 2027, and faces up to 30 years in prison.

On Christmas Day 2025, a 68-year-old Michigan man learned he had won $500,000 through the Michigan Lottery. (The Michigan Lottery allows winners on state-run games to remain anonymous if they win more than $10,000.)

He told Michigan Lottery Connect that he and his wife buy their family lottery tickets for Christmas each year. He realized while scratching his own ticket that he had won some money, but he initially thought he had just won $500.

He said a family member scanned his ticket with the state’s lottery app and told him “Uh, you have a few more zeros than that!”

He held off claiming his winnings — the maximum amount possible with the $10 scratcher ticket he had played with — for nearly a year. He told Michigan Lottery Connect that he planned to save his winnings.

A representative for the Michigan Lottery did not respond to Moneywise’s request for comment on this story.

You just won the lottery — what do you do with your money?

In 2024, Americans spent a bit under $105 billion on lottery tickets. They received $70 billion in winnings, and after administrative costs, nearly $30 billion went to the various programs funded by those lotteries. Many states use lotteries to generate revenue for education and other funds that benefit citizens.

The first thing you should remember is that you owe taxes on your lottery winnings. The IRS withholding rate for any kind of gambling winnings — whether that’s a state lottery, a casino, sports betting, or any other form of gambling — is 24%. That’s true whether you take a lump sum or receive annuity payments.

Most states that have a lottery also tax lottery winnings. Sometimes, they tax it at the same rate as any other income.

Choosing between a lump sum and an annuity depends on how your state taxes winnings and how you plan to use the money.

Your winnings will likely put you in a higher tax bracket, which means you could lose a lot of a lump sum immediately. However, depending on how much you win, it’s possible that you’ll still be at the highest tax bracket each year with annuity payments.

For some winners, the temptation to immediately spend a huge chunk of their winnings can actually leave you poor. If you think you’re at risk for that, annuity payments ensure that you’ll continue to receive income each year.

But even though the total amount of your lump sum payment might be smaller than what you would get over the full term of an annuity, if you invest the money, you could stand to make a lot more long-term.

If you win a large amount of money through any form of gambling, it may be worth it to find a financial advisor who can help you decide what to do with your winnings. They can help you decide the best way to use the money to meet your short-, medium- and long-term goals.

Don’t assume you’ll win a life-changing amount of money through the lottery

While there are a handful of people who win big, the majority of people will never see a huge windfall playing the lottery.

That doesn’t mean it’s wrong to spend any money on the lottery. Almost all of us spend a little bit of money in ways that don’t actually benefit us beyond a brief dopamine rush, and if occasionally spending a few dollars on a losing ticket makes you happy, doing so in moderation isn’t necessarily any worse than spending a little too much on a fancy coffee order.

But spending money on a lottery ticket is never a guarantee of winning a lot of money.

The scratcher ticket the Michigan man won — which costs $10 — says it has overall odds of winning of 1 in 3.6. However, more than two-thirds of the roughly one million winning tickets are only worth either $10 or $20. Only two tickets were printed with the maximum $500,000 prize.

In other words, even the winner of the big prize only got a tiny fraction of the overall revenue generated by sales of that ticket.

The exact odds of winning depend on the specific lottery you enter, but the odds are always low. And previous losses do not make you more likely to win in the future — if you flip a coin 20 times in a row and lose each flip, for example, you still have a 50% chance of correctly calling the next flip.

Lamarco’s Culper Research isn’t the best known short-selling and investment research firm, but it was the only company to flag “a significant China problem” at Nvidia as far back as May.

Culper, in that note, said it was shorting Nvidia — and that could be one of the best calls on Wall Street this year. Since the firm researched the note, Nvidia shares have fallen more than 27% (as of 11:00 a.m. ET on Thursday). That would represent a profit of more than $60 per shorted share.

An ‘uncomfortably close relationship’

The 40-page report raised concerns about the size of Nvidia’s business in China and flagged an “uncomfortably close relationship” between then-CEO Jensen Huang and Megaspeed executive Alice Huang. (Huang is a common surname and the two are not related.)

Lemarco said he was mocked after issuing the report. Even that was more attention the three-person firm would usually receive.

Now, however, people are more likely to listen.

“Sometimes, people care about what you have to say. Sometimes, they don’t,” Lamarco told The Wall Street Journal. “I guess in this case, they cared six months later.”

Profits for prescience?

What’s unclear is just how much, if anything, Lamarco and Culper Research made off of the decision to short Nvidia. While the chipmaker has lost over $1 trillion in market value since the report was issued, Lamarco has declined to say how much his call has earned the firm. He also has not said whether he is still shorting the stock.

Nvidia wasn’t the first company Culper has targeted. Since it was founded in 2019, it has turned its sights on several public companies, generally small-cap ones. It’s not afraid to make noise, though. One founder, for instance, hired Elon Musk’s attorney to sue for defamation after Culper alleged his company was tied to the Sinaloa drug cartel. The most recent target is Cerebras Systems, an AI hardware and supercomputer company, which labels the company “hot garbage.”

Assembling the report

The Culper report on Nvidia was many months in the making and had actually been shelved at one point, as the team didn’t feel it was worth their time.

But after officials at Super Micro Computer were charged with smuggling Nvidia chips into China, they reopened their investigation, speaking with former Nvidia employees, who speculated about the relationship between Nvidia’s Huang and Megaspeed’s Huang.

“Huang has not only vouched for Megaspeed, but seems to have quite literally walked alongside Megaspeed at every step, while maintaining an uncomfortably close relationship with Megaspeed’s Alice Huang, a Chinese national,” the report reads. “He was first spotted partying with Alice Huang in June 2024 – the same month the Apex/Alibaba pledge was filed. He then dined with Alice Huang in Taiwan in May 2025 – just weeks after the news of U.S. trade restrictions. … [One] Megaspeed employee characterized their relationship with Jensen as ‘very close’, corroborating another former Nvidia employee’s suggestion to us that many Nvidia employees wondered if there was a special relationship.”

Just under six months later, Huang is out and Nvidia has begun its search for a new leader.

A recent study from small business services provider Gusto noted that, “for the first time ever,” Gen Z comprised 9% of new startups across the U.S. in 2025, against 5% of baby boomers starting their own companies. According to Gusto, the data indicates a “fundamental transformation” through the U.S. economy.

“The current job market is leading young professionals to get creative,” Sam DeMase, career expert at ZipRecruiter, told Moneywise. “This is driven simultaneously by economic necessity and Gen Z’s desire for professional agency.”

That doesn’t mean the entrepreneurial road is easy for new business owners, especially one in their 20s starting a business for the first time.

“It’s maybe even a healthy pressure, like, well, what’s my thing?” Justus Shaw, 25, a former corporate mobile app developer, told The Wall Street Journal.

Moving on from the traditional W-2 corporate world, where he earned about $60,000 annually, Shaw launched a full-time coffee-cart catering start-up in 2025. The coffee cart rollout cost $7,000 to get off the ground, and Shaw said he had to financially support six staffers, who helped him earn $100,000 in gross revenue. But a healthy chunk of that cash is earmarked for current and future company expenses.

“The business has to make a lot more money for me to still walk away with some money,” Shaw told The Journal.

Making the freelance life a good financial fit

Shaw is not alone in launching a startup and almost immediately facing the financial risks that come with business ownership for younger entrepreneurs.

“Necessity founders can still build good companies, but they start with a shorter runway and less room to wait for the right customer,” Kira Shishkin, founder and CEO of informed.now, a San Francisco-based news research company, told Moneywise. “For instance, the risk I’d flag first is that a founder who needs income this month will take any revenue, often at prices too low to ever pay a salary.”

The good news is that with some wisdom, foresight and constant real-world testing, young entrepreneurs can build a career platform with their name on the door. That journey, startup experts say, requires following some hard-earned advice.

Get a good grip on day-to-day financial realities

There’s often a large financial gap between being traditionally employed and starting as an entrepreneur.

“You lose consistent base salary, bonus, medical coverage, 401(k), employer-shared taxes and paid days off,” DeMase said. “This adds up quickly to $15,000, in addition to the base salary loss.”

That’s why it’s critical, before pursuing entrepreneurship, to make sure your savings account can cover at least nine months of living expenses. “Then, set aside at least three months’ worth of business costs, including startup and recurring expenses,” DeMase advises.

Figure out if your business can carry a salary, and quickly

Revenue is only a number that founders post online. It doesn’t clarify the amount of cash left after rent, supplies, payroll, taxes and loan payments.

“A coffee cart that grosses $100,000 in eight months can still pay its owner nothing when every dollar goes back into the cart,” Shishkin noted. “I’d tell any founder to pay themselves a fixed amount from the first month, even a small one, so the business has to prove it can carry a salary.”

Don’t lean too heavily on artificial intelligence

While AI can produce a business plan, a logo and a website in an afternoon, a founder may believe the technology can handle the business long before a single customer has paid. That’s not the case, Shishkin said. “AI can’t tell you whether strangers will pay for what you sell,” she noted. “That test, done in person with real customers, is the question I’d want answered before any other.”

Other business experts agree, noting that customer acquisition still requires understanding why someone would choose you, finding a credible way to reach that person and learning from their response.

“Delivery requires setting expectations, checking quality and handling problems,” Dr. Morissa Schwartz, founder of Dr. Rissy’s Writing & Marketing and GenZ Publishing, told Moneywise. “The founder remains responsible for those decisions, even when a tool helps with the preparation.”

A useful habit for any newly minted entrepreneur is to keep two separate lists: assumptions produced during planning, and facts learned from customers or actual work. “Ask AI to help identify what still needs testing,” Schwartz said. “Update the plan when the evidence changes.”

At 84, Sir Paul McCartney’s plate is overflowing, according to Forbes, which analysed his investments and concluded that baby, he’s a rich man.

That’s no surprise on the surface, but the outlet revealed that the former Beatle is actually a billionaire, with Sir Paul’s fortune hitting roughly $1.4 billion thanks to various investments and holdings. Those include around $200 million from Beatles-related songwriting copyrights, not to mention $50 million from Fab Four merch and music sales, world tours that raked in “hundreds of millions,” an art collection that includes original works by Pablo Picasso and René Magritte, along with real estate in the U.S. and across the pond.

Forbes puts McCartney in third place among the world’s wealthiest musicians, behind Jay-Z’s $2.8 billion fortune and Taylor Swift’s $2 billion. McCartney, however, had to battle in court to regain some of his assets, like the legal battle with Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC for the rights to Beatles songs once famously purchased by Michael Jackson after McCartney, ironically, urged the King of Pop to invest in song publishing rights.

McCartney got his copyrights back in 2017 after a confidential settlement with Sony/ATV where the two sides essentially agreed that, well, “we can work it out.”

But song publishing, Forbes says, is McCartney’s key investment — with MPL Communications, the publishing company he founded in 1969, serving as the cornerstone of his fortune.

All you need is love — and diversification

Forbes noted that McCartney started MPL Communications “to control his solo-career publishing and master recordings, giving him a much larger cut of his future royalties.”

But that led him to purchase the publishing rights of other artists and entities, meaning “anytime ‘Blue Suede Shoes’ is streamed or a high school theater group performs ‘Grease,’ McCartney gets paid.”

Forbes says MPL’s valuation is “at least a quarter of a billion dollars.” Representatives for McCartney didn’t reply to Moneywise’s request for comment.

Still, while most Americans won’t enjoy Beatle-level investment returns, McCartney’s formula of diversification and investments offers a great map for the long and winding road toward accumulated wealth.

“Paul McCartney’s success illustrates the enduring value of owning productive assets,” Thomas Ravert, a Certified Financial Planner (CFP) with Pathway Capital Corp, told Moneywise. “For ordinary Americans, the lesson is to build wealth systematically rather than speculate on extraordinary returns.”

Ravert noted that owning a home is “an important foundation for building wealth,” but it’s not the only way. He added that consistent investing in “retirement accounts diversified among stocks, bonds and real estate investment trusts (REITs)” are all great ways to build long-term wealth. The objective, he said, is sustainable wealth creation via disciplined investing and diversification. He also touted the beauty of compounding — or, in Beatles parlance, let it be.

Eileen C. Olson, a CFP and founder of South Carolina-based Emerald Wealth, told Moneywise that “broadly diversified stocks, through low-cost index funds, have been one of the most reliable long-term wealth builders,” while real estate is a flexible long-term play because you can live in a home yourself or rent it out while it appreciates.

“Just as important,” she added, “is where you hold investments.”

Olson said that a Roth IRA is great because it “lets you pay tax today, then grow and withdraw tax-free in retirement,” while an HSA “is even better: money goes in tax-free, grows tax-free and comes out tax-free for medical costs.”

Avoid a hard day’s night by being aware of investment pitfalls

When it comes to investing success, the SEC says there’s no magical mystery to the winning formula: “regular investments plus time equals wealth.” But it also warns about the importance of managing the risks.

“Knowing your time horizon and your personal tolerance for risk is helpful,” it explains. “These factors will help you choose the types of investment products that are right for you.”

Ravert added that “successful investing begins with understanding the difference between an asset’s price and its underlying value,” noting that investors should “evaluate income potential, appreciation, expenses, taxes, liquidity and risk” to create a balanced portfolio that can “withstand changing economic conditions while building long-term financial security.”

He also warned about the pitfalls of excessive borrowing, lack of diversification and chasing short-term returns.

Olsen agrees with the dangers of too much concentration in one asset and chasing “hot” investments. She also cautions against hidden costs and making emotional decisions.

“Fear and excitement are expensive,” she said. “A written plan helps you stay the course.”

Instead, Olsen recommends being honest with yourself about the types of investments that would work best for you — for example, are you really cut out to be a landlord? — consider what the investment will cost you in time, money and stress, exercise patience and be aware of what your exit strategy looks like and what it could cost you in taxes.

“Even McCartney’s story carries a lesson about ownership: he lost control of the Beatles’ song catalog early on, while MPL, the company he owned, became the engine of his fortune,” she said. “Plant seeds that fit your life, give them time to grow and plan for the harvest.”

“That would be an honor,” Musk wrote on X on Nov. 11, replying to a post from the financial blog Zerohedge that read, “Elon please hire Jensen.” He didn’t say what job he had in mind.

Nvidia’s directors met Wednesday night to decide Huang’s future, after The Wall Street Journal reported the board was preparing to remove him. The scandal began with a New York Times report that Huang had a close relationship with Alice Huang, an executive at Singapore-based Megaspeed whom U.S. officials believe is a spy for China. Huang admitted the affair in a Nov. 8 email to staff, and on Wednesday the Times reported a second relationship, with Nvidia health care vice president Kimberly Powell, who reports directly to him.

Nvidia announced Huang would step down from his role Thursday morning. His interim replacement will be Colette Kress, Nvidia’s chief financial officer.

If Musk is serious about bringing on Huang in some way, his day job gives his offer some extra weight. SpaceX (NASDAQ:SPCX), which absorbed his AI startup xAI in February and went public in June, has built its fastest-growing business on Nvidia hardware. Nvidia, in turn, owns a multibillion-dollar piece of SpaceX.

SpaceX has bet its AI business on Nvidia chips

Musk made his bet on Nvidia explicit during SpaceX’s first earnings call as a public company in August.

“We’ve decided to build exclusively on Nvidia because we think the Vera Rubin architecture is the best architecture,” he said, adding that “our understanding with Nvidia is that we will receive a very significant percent of their GPUs next year.” GPUs, or graphics processing units, are the chips that train and run AI models.

Nvidia has said each gigawatt of its Vera Rubin systems represents about $40 billion in revenue, which puts Musk’s 2027 target of 10 gigawatts in the range of $400 billion worth of Nvidia gear, Benzinga calculated. And SpaceX is already borrowing to pay for it: Musk said in late October that the company had closed $40 billion in debt to buy GPUs, after spending $19.6 billion on capex in the third quarter alone.

Those chips are now SpaceX’s biggest moneymaker. Its AI unit, which rents computing power to other AI companies, brought in $7.6 billion in third-quarter revenue, more than half the company’s total of $14.6 billion.

SpaceX also plans to launch Starmind, a network of data center satellites, with Nvidia Rubin GPUs and Vera CPUs on board starting in 2027.

The money flows both ways. Nvidia disclosed in August that its SpaceX stake was worth about $21 billion at the end of the second quarter, making it the sixth-largest investor in the company.

Why Jensen Huang’s future matters to SpaceX

SpaceX flagged its reliance on outside chipmakers before it ever went public. Its IPO filing warned that the supply of GPUs and other specialized components is “limited to a small number of qualified suppliers.” The company is developing its own chips through Terafab, a project with Tesla and Intel, but the same filing cautioned that the effort may not succeed, in which case SpaceX “may not have other sources of sufficient AI chips.”

Nvidia has its own version of that warning. The company’s latest annual report says it’s “highly dependent on the services of our longstanding executive team.” Huang has said he keeps about 60 direct reports, and Nvidia has never publicly named a successor, which it’s wrestling with now that Kress is in as interim CEO, emphasis on “interim.”

Given all the recent hullaballoo around Nvidia, company shares have fallen off a cliff. Moneywise previously looked into what Wall Street thinks a Huang exit would cost Nvidia.

Musk also notably has personal ties to Jensen Huang. In 2016, Huang hand-delivered Nvidia’s first DGX-1 AI server to OpenAI, the lab Musk co-founded. Nearly a decade later, he delivered one of the first units of the desktop-size DGX Spark to Musk at SpaceX’s Starbase facility in Texas.

When he committed SpaceX to Nvidia in August, Musk said “we think it’s the best AI computer and we greatly value our close cooperation and partnership on many levels with Nvidia. So, we’re exclusive to Nvidia.”

U.S. Bank refunded about $10,000 of the missing money and closed the case.

He filed a report with local police, then reached out to ABC’s “7 On Your Side,” which contacted the bank on his behalf. The bank then refunded nearly $20,000 more.

In a statement, U.S. Bank told Moneywise, “We’re committed to helping our customers protect their accounts from fraud. We encourage customers to regularly review their accounts and contact us as soon as they notice activity they don’t recognize. We have a rigorous process for reviewing any claims of unauthorized activity based on the individual circumstances and information available at the time.”

If you notice unauthorized transactions on your bank account, resolving it can be a long, arduous process without a lot of transparency. While it helps to have a major news organization advocating for you, that’s not a resource that’s available to everyone.

What to do when you notice unauthorized transactions on your bank account

Banks are legally required to respond to you when you notice an unauthorized charge on your account. However, how they have to respond depends on the time frame in which you discover and report the issue.

If you realize that your debit card has gone missing, for example, it’s a good idea to reach out to your bank immediately. Once you realize it’s missing, you have two business days (not including the current day) to let the bank know about it.

If you reach out in that time frame, your maximum liability is $50. If you don’t reach out in time, your liability increases up to $500 for transactions that take place after those two days have passed.

You have more time to let your bank know about an issue with your bank statement — 60 days.

If you let your bank know about an unauthorized transaction within 60 days from when the statement was sent, you’re not liable for any money lost as a result of someone else accessing your account. If you fail to do that, though, you’re liable for any loss that happens after that 60-day mark.

There are some extenuating circumstances that qualify for an extension of the 60-day time limit and reporting requirements. For example, if a customer is hospitalized and unable to report the loss, then notice can be given by someone acting on their behalf.

What to do if you think your bank still hasn’t made your situation right

Ideally, if you notice an error with your account, you’ll catch it in time, notify the bank and get your money back.

However, the process of getting your money back isn’t automated, and a system that relies on humans can sometimes go awry. You might believe that you’re owed the money you lost, but your bank could come to a different conclusion.

In some cases — like that of the 99-year-old man who reached out to “7 On Your Side” — letting the right person know about your problem could get it escalated to someone who can solve it.

But you can also submit a complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

If you do, make sure you’ve exhausted all your options with your bank directly and make sure that you include detailed information about what you did and what went wrong.

There’s no guarantee that going through this system will get you the results you’re looking for, but the CFPB does use complaints to inform its policies and to try to improve enforcement of the law.

It publishes an annual report summarizing the results of complaints. In 2025, it received 104,200 complaints about checking or savings accounts — 10% of those complaints resulted in people receiving monetary relief.

“Can I know with absolute certainty that he is trustworthy and will honor that commitment, based on three Zoom meetings? No, I can’t,” she told Bloomberg, “but I feel a lot more confident about his character than I would have if I hadn’t had the chance to meet him at all.”

Lacob, 36, who lives in San Francisco, is chief executive of Xella Health, a women’s health company that relies on AI. She’s pregnant with a girl due in December, conceived through in vitro fertilization (IVF) with donor sperm. She chose a San Diego boutique bank, Coast to Coast Sperm Donation, where a base package runs about $25,000, and a donor’s sperm goes to six families at most.

Still uneasy with six, she paid another $25,000 to take three of those spots off the table, leaving just two other families able to choose him. The tab, which also covered the donor’s fee, genetic and medical screening, lawyers and his travel, hit $83,450 — and that didn’t include IVF. An inheritance from her late mother helped pay for it.

Compare that with a traditional bank’s vial, which, Bloomberg reported, can cost under $2,000, not counting storage, delivery or the insemination itself.

Why a contract only goes so far

The catch is in the fine print. Under the agreements, as Lacob describes them, the bank can pair him with no more than two other families, and he can’t give to rival banks. But he can still father children of his own or donate directly to a relative or close friend he knew beforehand, though Lacob says he told her he doesn’t expect either. She acknowledges she can’t fully control whether he donates to other sperm banks.

No single registry tracks donors, and nothing in the law guarantees exclusivity, reproductive attorney Melissa Brisman told Bloomberg. She doubts that paying to cap donations will, on its own, mean fewer potential siblings.

California Cryobank says something similar on its own site, noting that it “cannot stop a donor from donating to another sperm bank.”

Rules for donors

The rules are thin overall. A 2023 analysis by the law firm Nixon Peabody found most states don’t regulate tissue banks. The Food and Drug Administration’s donor rules center on disease.

Its regulations require testing for HIV, hepatitis B and C, syphilis, chlamydia and gonorrhea, and draft guidance published Jan. 7, 2025 updated how banks judge donor eligibility. Neither addresses how many families one donor can serve.

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine suggests in 2024 guidance that one donor be limited to 25 births per 800,000 people. In 2022, Colorado passed a law barring banks from matching a donor with more families once 25 have been created with his sperm anywhere.

What exclusivity costs

Lacob isn’t alone in her concerns. Bloomberg reported that donor-matching service Seed Scout charges $24,500 for full exclusivity, and Cryos International charges $49,000 before fees. California Cryobank sells a $70,000 Platinum Reserve for sole access, or a $35,000 Silver Reserve that limits access to you and nine other families.

But there are additional costs, and insurance often doesn’t help. KFF’s 2024 Women’s Health Survey found that 12% of women who needed fertility services said they didn’t get them mainly because of cost. Its 2024 employer survey noted only about 27% of large employers that offer health benefits cover IVF.

What to know before you pay

If you’re considering IVF, before committing, it’s important to understand exactly what the agreement forbids and what it leaves out, whether the donor can give directly to friends or family or donate elsewhere and what happens if he breaks the agreement.

It can also be worthwhile speaking with a tax professional about which costs might count as medical expenses. The IRS lists IVF and short-term storage of eggs or sperm as medical expenses, but only the amount above 7.5% of your adjusted gross income counts. Whether donor-sperm and exclusivity fees qualify isn’t clear from the list.

Nvidia’s board met late Wednesday to decide on the fate of Huang, who co-founded the company in 1993. While China has denied U.S. officials’ claims that Huang had been secretly having an affair with a woman working for Chinese intelligence, Huang did come clean in a memo to staff that he’d been unfaithful to his wife, sending Nvidia’s stock plummeting, losing hundreds of billions worth of market value this week alone.

Nvidia and AMD did not immediately respond to Moneywise’s request for comment.

How Lisa Su and Jensen Huang are related

Su and Huang are first cousins once removed, according to Taiwanese genealogist Jean Wu, who laid out the family tree for CNN. An Nvidia spokesperson also confirmed the family tie. “Once removed” means they’re a generation apart: Huang’s mother is a sister of Su’s grandfather.

Both Huang and Su were born in Taiwan and raised mostly in the U.S., but they didn’t grow up together. Su told Bloomberg’s Emily Chang in 2024 that the two first met at an industry event, well into their careers. “No family dinners,” she said. “It is an interesting coincidence.”

Their résumés overlap, too. Huang worked at AMD as a microprocessor designer before starting Nvidia. Su joined AMD nearly two decades later and is credited with turning the company around.

How AMD became Nvidia’s closest rival under Lisa Su

AMD is the closest competitor to Nvidia in the technology it sells and the customers it serves. AMD’s stock has risen nearly 170-fold on Su’s watch, though the company is still a fraction of Nvidia’s size.

It’s growing fast. AMD reported record third-quarter revenue of $13.4 billion on Nov. 3, up 45% from a year earlier. Sales in its data center unit, which makes server processors and AI chips, nearly doubled. Su said she expects revenue to climb more than 80% in 2027, above Wall Street’s estimate, and analysts at TD Cowen called AMD the leading alternative to Nvidia, Reuters reported.

Su has talked about competing with her relative’s company before. Asked about Huang at a Consumer Technology Association event in 2020, she called Nvidia a great company, then added: “It is a competitive world, so there’s no question that we compete hard. But it’s also a world where you also have to partner with your competitors from time to time.”

While most of us are watching from the couch, some fans are finding ways to make money from all that drama. Hunter Button, a sales analyst from Portland Oregon came across a prediction market on Kalshi for “Love Island USA” in July. Rather than rooting for his favourite couple to win, Button put some money on the line.

“I personally don’t even like to watch the events,” Button told Bloomberg. “I still have not ever seen a tennis game or watched ‘Love Island.’”

He started with about $8, placing bets on several couples to win the show. A few months later, he was up about $1,000. His logic was that if one couple didn’t make it to the finale, another might, giving him a chance to walk away with a payout.

Prediction markets are blowing up

Prediction markets let people bet on the outcome of future events, from elections and sporting events to reality TV shows. According to a September Pew Research Center analysis, combined monthly trading volume on Kalshi and Polymarket, two of the biggest prediction market platforms, more than doubled from $26 billion in May to $53 billion in July 2026.

While sports accounted for much of that growth, reality TV is finding its own audience on these platforms. Kalshi told Moneywise that nearly $80 million has been traded across its U.S. and U.K. “Love Island” markets. The company also said its entertainment markets generated more than $813 million in trading volume through Sept. 25, 2026, compared to over $300 million in all of 2025 and $43 million in 2024.

It's not exactly hard to see the appeal. Reality TV fans have spent years gathering around their televisions with a glass of wine, a charcuterie board and plenty of opinions about who deserves to win. They host watch parties, debate their favourite couples and spend the season guessing who will make it to the finale. Now, those predictions can come with a potential payout.

“Reality TV shows are massive cultural moments that audiences don’t just watch, but actively debate in real time,” Clarissa Bronfman, who works in culture growth at Kalshi, told Moneywise. “Kalshi brings people together to harness the wisdom of the crowd around those moments, turning passive viewing into an interactive experience where fans can put their instincts to the test."

Not everyone visiting Kalshi is necessarily looking to place a trade. According to the company, 75% of people who visit the platform are simply checking the odds rather than trading.

“Reality TV has always invited viewers to guess who goes home, and prediction markets let them put real money behind the hunch they were already sharing in the group chat,” Evan Nierman, CEO of crisis PR firm Red Banyan, told Moneywise. “A financial stake makes a casual fan feel like a player, which is exactly what these platforms are selling.”

Be wary of the markets

While some people are making money betting on reality TV, there’s no guarantee they’ll come out ahead. Just like other types of betting, a wrong prediction can mean losing the money you put in.

There are other risks to consider, especially with shows like “Survivor” and “Big Brother,” which are often filmed before they air. That means contestants, producers and crew members may already know who wins while viewers at home are still guessing.

“Many reality competitions are taped months before they air, so the ending is already known to crew members and others behind the scenes. Every suspicious trade invites the question of who leaked it,” he said. “When the answer points inside the production, the reputational damage lands on the network whose secret was traded.”

Kalshi told Moneywise it prohibits insider trading and has safeguards in place to identify suspicious activity. The company said it verifies the identities of everyone who signs up to trade, uses AI-powered surveillance to monitor unusual activity and examines social connections between traders to help detect possible misconduct.

Kalshi is also facing legal challenges over how its prediction markets operate. In August, a Washington state judge ordered Kalshi to stop offering several types of bets in the state, including those involving sports, politics and entertainment, after finding that the company likely violated state gambling laws.

The order came as part of an ongoing lawsuit brought by Washington Attorney General Nick Brown, who accused Kalshi of operating an illegal gambling business. The company was ordered to block Washington users from accessing the restricted markets by Sept. 2. Kalshi has maintained that its prediction markets are subject to federal regulation rather than state gambling laws.

The pecan-farming company Farmers Investment Co. (FICO) is selling all of its assets, including thousands of acres of farmland along the Santa Cruz River.

The company, which is owned by the Walden family, was a major player in the region for 78 years. Its fields held almost 400,000 pecan trees, making it one of the world’s largest pecan groves.

The sale includes company assets, but not the company itself. Who’s buying is unknown, although FICO expects them to continue farming pecans on the land.

“It has been a difficult decision for our family and partners to sell these farms. But we know it is the right decision for this time,” said the Waldens in a statement to the Arizona Daily Star. “We have confidence in the buyers. They are experienced in growing pecans and other kinds of agriculture.”

Here’s what’s behind the sale — and what could happen to the area if its new owners aren’t keen on pecan growing.

FICO cites higher fuel and fertilizer prices as a reason for selling

Gas prices have been rocky ever since the Iran War closed the Strait of Hormuz. If these prices are hitting regular consumers hard, they’re hitting farmers even harder — especially since farmers also rely on fertilizer similarly blocked by the Strait.

Farm labor has also increased in price recently, thanks to some changes to how workers are classified. That’s making farming more and more expensive for farmers, making it harder to make a strong profit.

“Agricultural commodity prices are not keeping up with the costs for anything,” FICO CEO Brian Driscoll told the Arizona Daily Star. “Overall, with the economics as they are, it’s time to sell.

The other reason for the sale is more personal. Driscoll says the Walden family, along with their partners, the Crowns, have reached an age where they’re ready to sell. Richard Walden is 84; his wife Nan is 72.

“The Walden family, along with our original partners, the Crown Family, have been privileged to be stewards of the land in what is now Green Valley and Sahuarita since 1948,” said the Walden family in a statement. “Our children and grandchildren, along with 3 to 4 generations of wonderful employees, have worked this land together.”

Driscoll says that the company isn’t anticipating itself or the buyers performing any layoffs. FICO is planning on offering severance packages to any employees who stay on during the transition.

The area could be turned into real estate for a burgeoning community

FICO intentionally sold its farmland to buyers they believe will continue to use that land for pecan farming.

“FICO has been a pillar of Sahuarita, Green Valley and San Simon for decades and we’re proud to be joining these communities as growers, neighbors and caretakers of this land,” said a spokesperson for the buyers. “We know how rare orchards like these are (…) We look forward to (…) continuing the tradition of stewardship FICO has long upheld.”

But there are technically already plans in place to turn the northern parts of the groves into mixed-use development. These plans were approved back in 2015 — and it looks like a real estate boom is about to catch up.

“The pecan groves site, it is a potential premium area for homes,” said Jose Figueroa, a real estate agent in the area, to The Arizona Daily Star. “New homes are still a hot item (…) I think the groves are already being seen as a potential site for development.”

Figueroa said he wouldn’t be surprised if the area is developed within the next five years if pecan sales continue to struggle. A private consultant from the area, Linda Morales, told the Arizona Daily Star that the area might have been developed already if it wasn’t sitting on floodplain.

FICO did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

According to the New York Times (NYT), Alina Habba Mildon was hired by Concord Partners, a company set up last year by Isabela Herrera, the daughter of Julio Herrera Velutini, a billionaire banker from Venezuela. At the time, Mr. Herrera was facing felony bribery charges in Puerto Rico.

He was pardoned by Trump in January 2026.

In a letter dated Nov. 4, Concord Partners reportedly terminated Mildon citing a “failure to perform duties.” According to an unnamed person who spoke to the NYT, Mildon’s priorities shifted after she started dating 25-year-old Turhan Mildon, a Turkish investor, earlier this year. The pair were married in September.

Despite being fired, Mildon will still walk away with a hefty paycheck. She will keep the $6.5 million already paid to her, as well as her $8 million signing bonus. She will, however, lose the four-year contract she signed that would have paid her $10 million a year, plus bonuses.

Mildon’s role

According to the NYT, Mildon began working for Concord on Jan. 1 after being brought in as general counsel. She was reportedly brought on to help Mr. Herrera with his criminal case, as well as supporting the company’s operations.

At the time of her hiring, Mr. Herrera’s team was already working to secure a pardon from Trump. He made a $3.5 million donation to a super PAC connected to the president.

Mr. Herrera was granted a pardon just weeks after Mildon joined the company, though she has previously denied playing any role in getting it granted. According to the NYT, Mildon was a special government employee at the time of the pardon, which allowed her to work for both the federal government and keep her outside employment for up to 130 days.

“Any insinuation that my employment — all of which has been vetted and disclosed to the DOJ — had anything to do with securing a pardon is false,” she said previously in a statement, according to the NYT.

Trump lashes out

Mildon, who served as a legal spokesperson for Trump from 2021 to 2025, was fired just days after the president had an angry outburst about her contract. According to the NYT, the president told his aides that the Herrera family should stop paying Mildon.

“I thought it was terrible,” the president said last month. “I told her, and I said, ‘I don’t want her paid.’ I thought we had somebody speak to the people that did it, and she used her relationship to do that. And it was far too much.”

A new startup is offering a way around that, but it’s going to cost you — a lot. A new service called No Tip will deliver Costco prepared foods to you, but you’ll need to brace yourself for a steep markup.

That hot dog combo, for instance? You’ll pay a total of $18, which works out to 1,100% more than someone who visited the store themselves. That $9.95 pizza? That’ll run you $28.

The steep price increases are a blend of markups by the app (the $1.50 hot dog combo is priced at $3, for instance) and the $15 delivery fee, plus any taxes. The founder, though, is defending the prices.

Not aimed at individuals

No Tip, says Jack Chen, is designed as a catering service. While it’s happy to deliver individual orders, that’s not the company’s business plan. If, however, you’ve got an office party where you need several pizzas, the $15 delivery fee starts to look more attractive.

The company says it can handle orders for as many as 200 people — and it provides plates and forks as well.

No Tip was born when Chen, a software engineer, had a craving one night for Costco pizza, but didn’t feel like making the trip to the warehouse or dealing with the throng of people at the food court. Figuring he wasn’t the only person to experience this, he launched the business.

“I know my friends have paid, like, $30-plus dollars for some terrible Domino’s in the past,” he told SFGate. “So why not try to do this?”

The app currently only covers Southern California. Prices are all inclusive and, as you might guess by the name, drivers do not expect to be tipped.

Retail’s best-known loss leader

Costco’s $1.50 hot dog is part of the store’s appeal for some people. The food court is a loss leader for the chain, but it draws people to stores, where they often buy additional items.

Costco’s CEO has vowed to never increase the price of the combo, saying it would remain at $1.50 “forever” on an earnings call in September 2022. It has held that price since the 1980s, while hot dog prices have continued to rise. In January 1980, the average price of a frankfurter was $1.68, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. By 2022, it was up to $5. (The BLS no longer tracks hot dog prices.)

That’s not to say the idea of increasing prices hasn’t been floated at Costco. CEO Craig Jelinek discussed concerns about the losses from the meal deal with founder and former CEO Jim Sinegal, at one point.

Sinegal, he told 425 Business, replied “If you raise the effing hot dog, I will kill you. Figure it out.”

Residents were overflowing at a city meeting earlier this week, expressing their anger, concerns and sadness for the theft, which is an especially large heist for a local government. While the city’s police chief says Cranbury would recover $17.3 million of the lost funds, another $9 million remains unaccounted for and may be lost. The city has insurance for this sort of thing, but it only covers up to $5 million.

“I can’t even get on my iCloud account without a two-factor identification,” said Catherine Colaizzo, a resident of the city. “I don’t know how you would transfer $26 million. That seems a little bit absurd.”

Delayed disclosure

The theft of the money was bad, but some citizens were also upset by the timing of the city’s disclosure about the crime. Residents didn’t learn of the $26 million theft until Friday, Nov. 6, when Cranbury released a public statement. That was several days after an election that saw one of the five seats on the township committee up for grabs.

“We’re expected to believe that it’s a coincidence that you suddenly felt comfortable releasing this information at 3 p.m. last Friday afternoon, right after the election?” Carol Haring, who lost the race by 27 points, asked during the meeting.

Cranbury’s police chief took responsibility for the delayed announcement, saying he put a gag order on city officials and even refused a request by the mayor to make an announcement. Speaking too early, he said, would have alerted the thieves, who could have liquidated all of the stolen money. By delaying, the city was able to regain some of what was lost.

Still, at least one citizen vowed to find candidates to challenge any committee members up for re-election next year.

“I respectfully want to tell the township committee that the buck really should stop with you all,” said resident Jim Grossnickle.

A new criminal focus

Cybercriminals have increasingly been targeting local authorities. According to SonicWall Research, attacks on state and city governments were up 242% in the first half of 2026. That works out to more than 300 million intrusion alerts that were rated with either medium or high priority.

Those come as local governments often have lower budgets for their IT departments and may not have updated software that has security vulnerabilities.

“State and local government is the one place where the data does not show attackers backing off,” said Michael Crean, SonicWall SVP of Managed Services. “State and local government networks are taking the brunt of attacker focus. State and local IT teams are being asked to defend expanding digital footprints with limited resources, relying on aging public-facing systems and inconsistent departmental patch cycles. Attackers recognize these structural friction points, and they are actively exploiting them.”

The stat is part of a new survey out of MIT that polled emerging career mathematicians across dozens of higher learning institutions, measuring their feelings about artificial intelligence and how they see it impacting their livelihoods. It is a preprint, meaning it has not yet been peer-reviewed.

This year has been a banner one for automated, algorithmic number crunchers, which have managed to disprove long-established theories and solve hundreds of open equations, some of them having previously baffled human arithmeticians for decades.

It’s exciting progress for technology, but also daunting for humanity, representing what so many of us fear: machines not just replacing, but besting us.

‘Incredibly uncertain about our own futures’

The fact that entry-level professionals across sectors are most impacted by the rise in artificial intelligence and facing dire unemployment rates served as the impetus for the MIT paper, with researchers acknowledging that though there has been talk about neural networks’ influence on STEM disciplines, it’s mostly been among more established voices who are less exposed to the immediate risk of replacement.

“The personal stakes are highest for early career researchers,” they assert, expressing a goal of not just “providing a platform for graduate students and postdocs to voice their opinions, concerns, and experiences” on the matter, but also drawing authorities’ awareness to the level of crisis younger people are facing.

“We’re being forced to reckon with existential questions about a field we love, all while incredibly uncertain about our own futures,” the team writes.

“As AI companies turn to the field of math as a new benchmarking standard, frontier models are getting better at proving mathematical theorems at a faster rate than most of us were prepared for. As a result, mathematicians are grappling with the fact that a core part of our jobs could soon be automated.”

And the results speak for themselves.

By the numbers

Of the nearly 300 people surveyed, most of whom hailed from the U.S., an astounding 81% have considered altering their career trajectory because of how chatbots and similar tech are developing. A total of 17% ultimately decided against shifting paths at this point, while 8% have already changed course, and 56% are still undecided.

Additionally, looking ahead, the vast majority of respondents anticipate that developments in AI will make it harder to secure a tenure-track role in their field. As a result, 70% say their likelihood of remaining in the maths sector after degree completion has decreased in recent months (vs. 9% who say it has increased).

Interestingly, 86% of participants admit to using AI for their work in some capacity (mostly for scouring source literature), despite the ontological threat that the tech poses. However, 55% said that they “relatively dislike” using AI for such tasks, compared to 31% who “relatively like” it.

Perhaps most disheartening were the attitudes proliferating as machine learning advances: 76.5% say they’ve been left less motivated to pursue their research goals, and that they’d be dejected if AI ended up solving a problem they’d been working on.

All this in mind, less than one-third feel as if their departments are adequately addressing the issues and dilemmas that AI presents, while the largest chunk of academics — 39% — have deeply mixed feelings, identifying as “theoretically excited about applications of AI to math, but strongly disagreeing with how things are unfolding in practice.” An additional 32% say they are either opposed to AI use for anything whatsoever in the field, or against it being used for any “creative” math tasks. A total of 10% said the state of things is “too complicated” at this point to form an opinion.

Instead, billionaires threw roughly $395 million toward the effort to defeat Prop 40 through the Building a Better California political organization — including Google co-founder Sergey Brin, who forked over upwards of $130 million.

To be fair, though, it wasn’t just billionaires opposing the wealth tax. Opponents included some Democrats, like Governor Gavin Newsom, while a report from the state’s Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) echoed concerns that Prop 40 could lead to a billion-dollar decrease, per year, in tax revenue as the wealthiest residents exit the Golden State.

Meanwhile, the narrow split in the vote over Prop 40 illustrates the slim runway that legislators have to get an actual wealth tax off the ground.

Yet, despite Prop 40’s defeat, lawmakers across the country, on the federal and state levels, are forging ahead with their own plans for wealth taxes targeting the 1%.

The trillion-dollar tax debate

The United States has never enacted a federal wealth tax. However, if some Democratic lawmakers get their way, that could soon change.

In March, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Ro Khanna put forward the “Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act” — a 5% annual billionaire tax which, they believe, could raise $4.4 trillion by 2036. They added that “In its first year, the bill would provide a $3,000 direct payment to every man, woman and child in a household making $150,000 or less — $12,000 for a family of four.”

The bill has been referred to the Senate’s Committee on Finance.

Similarly in March, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Pramila Jayapal and dozens of other lawmakers introduced the “Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act,” which would tax households with net worths above $50 million 2% annually, with a 3% tax for a household net worth over $1 billion.

Like the Sanders/Khanna bill, this one was referred to the Senate’s Committee on Finance, as well as to Ways and Means in the House.

It’s unclear if either bill will actually pass but, contrary to the arguments against Prop 40, a 2025 report from the non-partisan Tax Policy Center found that even just a federal 1% tax on assets above $50 million — or $25 million for the unmarried — “would raise nearly $2 trillion over a 10-year period,” with 86% of the payments coming from families in the top 1% income bracket.

And an October 2026 report about wealth taxes in Scandinavian countries showed that a 1% tax increase on the wealthy had a negligible impact on investments and employment.

The real threat, however, to a federal wealth tax is the Constitution itself. The Tax Policy Center noted that “The U.S. Constitution bans the federal government from imposing direct taxes that are not collected evenly across states based on their populations,” meaning a federal wealth tax would likely head for a Supreme Court showdown.

State wealth taxes, however, are another thing entirely — and these states are focused on trying to tax the rich with new legislation.

Five state tax plans targeting the wealthy

Massachusetts

Massachusetts passed a millionaire’s tax in 2022, while fresh majorities in Connecticut’s House and Senate have some Democrats eyeing similar legislation there.

Hawaii

The Aloha State, which already has one of the highest tax burdens in the country, passed an annual 13% personal income tax rate hike for income above $1 million, which leaders believe could yield $53 million in extra revenue. The tax hike takes effect in 2027.

Maine

Maine passed a supplemental budget bill that adds a 2% annual income tax surcharge for those making more than $1 million — which the state says “would raise just under $96 million in state fiscal year 2027 and approximately $74 million in each year of the next biennium.” Like with Hawaii, this tax takes effect next year.

Rhode Island

Rhode Island passed a new millionaire’s tax that levies a 3% income tax surcharge on incomes over $1 million, with annual revenue expected to hit $150 million. The tax, which takes effect in 2027, will be implemented gradually, at 1% a year until it hits 3%.

Washington

Washington state voters gave the go-ahead to a 9.9% tax on income above $1 million that kicks in on Jan. 1, 2028. It’s estimated that the first year of tax collections alone could result in a $3.5-billion windfall.

Under consideration: New York and Illinois

Both New York and Illinois proposed annual billionaire mark-to-market taxes that would tax unrealized gains via the value of investments and assets above $1 billion — even if the asset or stock hasn’t been sold. For example, if a billionaire owns stock that rises in value from $2 billion to $3 billion one year, that $1 billion net gain would be counted as part of the taxpayer’s income and taxed.

In New York, taxation would be subject to a “phase-in cap amount” that is “equal to a quarter of the worth of a taxpayer’s net assets in excess of one billion dollars.”

Both bills, however, remain stuck in their respective state legislatures and it’s unclear if they have the potential to move forward or if the rich in those two states might dodge a similar bullet as California’s billionaires.

At the start, not much.

“Democrats won the House and Senate, but easing the financial strain on many Americans would take legislation, and that requires the President’s signature, which will be hard to come by,” Zandi recently wrote in a post on X.

Democratic lawmakers have already started identifying specific priorities to pack into an affordability agenda once they take control of both the House and Senate on Jan. 3, 2027. Many Democrats, for example, are focused on unwinding the Medicaid cuts that the Trump administration enacted, which will go into effect in the new year. They also want to end the Iran War, reinstate defunct Affordable Care Act tax credits that shrink premium payments and reclaim tariff authorities from the executive branch.

“We’ve made clear to anyone out there who’s been stealing from the American people, shortchanging the American people or screwing over the American people that, beginning on day one, we’re going to hold the crooks accountable and disrupt business as usual,” House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said in an October interview with MS NOW.

Pressure points from Democrats

This stretch of divided government will likely continue for two more years, only this time, Democrats have real oversight options available due to their control of the legislative branch with padded majorities.

Zandi said he expects Democrats will use a range of tactics to put pressure on Trump to end the Iran War, which has driven up gas prices and contributed to the ongoing cost-of-living crisis in America. Among the tactics are a litany of hearings, tougher oversight and a war powers resolution that reasserts Congress’ power in declaring armed conflict.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has already stated her intent to probe corruption in corporate America, as well as her desire to push Democrats to dare Trump into vetoing popular measures, such as barring AI surveillance pricing and lifting the federal minimum wage.

“It would be a tremendous breach of faith with Americans if Democrats spend the next few years railing against Trump and waiting for some future Democratic trifecta before we deliver real change,” she told the New York Times.

Zandi estimates the Iran War has cost American families $2,200 so far, mostly in the form of higher energy prices. “Ending the war would ease costs for oil, diesel, jet fuel and home heating,” Zandi said on X.

‘The president will need Democratic votes’

For his part, Trump has expressed a willingness to strike bipartisan deals with Democrats, particularly on the vexing issue of immigration. He cracked the door open for undocumented landscapers, hotel maids and others who are already paying taxes to be conferred a pathway to legal status.

“I think that’s something that’s actually doable,” Trump recently told 60 Minutes.

Republicans, though, are well aware that they’re losing congressional control in less than two months. It’s possible the party bands together to pass legislation that only requires GOP votes and stuff in as many of their priorities as they can, such as additional defense funding or lifting the debt limit.

The latter is likely a must-do item for Congress in the near future, and Zandi said Democrats will have a shot at applying pressure next year if Republicans don’t succeed in raising the debt limit by Jan. 3, 2027.

“If they fall short, the President will need Democratic votes, and Democrats could use that clout to restore enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies and reverse cuts to SNAP and Medicaid,” Zandi wrote on X.

Depending on the stock and how much you own, the payouts can be quite decent, even wading into double-digit percentage territory for some high-yield (though usually volatile) equities. But even when returns are relatively meager, the extra cash can be enough to completely offset certain everyday costs — like, say, a Costco membership.

In the case of Costco Wholesale Corp. [NASDAQ: COST] stock, the quarterly dividend and associated stock owner benefits can actually end up covering your entire annual enrollment fee, making it somewhat of a “hack” for loyal shoppers.

Cash dividend means three shares can pay for membership

On Nov. 10, the beloved American warehouse brand announced that a special cash dividend, amounting to $30 per share, will be paid out to all investors on December 4, 2026. Considering that a Personal or Business Costco card is $65 a year, that means just three shares could completely finance your dues for the year.

However, it should be noted that the capital return is only available to those who serve as shareholders of record by the end of day on Nov. 24, 2026. And per the IRS, the shares must be held for more than 60 days for the dividend to be considered qualified. This will affect how the dividend is taxed if shares are held in a taxable brokerage account (qualified dividends are taxed at long-term capital gains rates, while regular dividends are taxed at a typical income tax rate).

This new disbursement comes on top of the fact that, theoretically, the amount customers save on their shopping hauls should more than cancel out the fee for said membership. The retail titan also periodically holds promotions that include statement credits or vouchers with sign-up, and tends to offer special cash dividends to investors every few years, making it even more worth it.

The model that drives the Costco engine and allows for perks like this

Costco continues to inspire membership growth and consumer loyalty through its exclusive in-house label — which also helps safeguard the company against tariffs and inflation — alongside its rock-bottom prices (due to narrow product markups) and unique bulk offerings. Most of its profit comes from membership payments, while sales pay for its svelte operations and resulting low overhead costs.

In its release about the cash dividend, the Costco board also verified a common-stock repurchase program of up to $4 billion to replace the one expiring at the start of January 2027. It will run until November 2030.

Other “hacks” that dividend recipients have been known to take advantage of include free meals at annual meetings; one man went viral on TikTok for showcasing the bougie shareholder dinner he was able to attend for owning just one $18 share in a luxury property developer.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced on Nov. 10 that it had accepted a filing from Musk’s Starlink Spectrum Holdings to buy 800 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio Service licenses from investment firm Grain Management.

The deal could come with an $8 billion price tag, as reported earlier by the Wall Street Journal. In a regulatory filing submitted in October, when the proposed purchase was first announced, SpaceX claimed it would “ensure all Americans have access to high-speed mobile broadband no matter where they go.” In its announcement, the FCC agreed, noting that access, centered on cellphone tower wireless service, would be available to “approximately 100% of the U.S. population.”

Rejection by big carriers

The deal could also add to the apparent concerns of the nation’s three major carriers — Verizon (NYSE:VZ), AT&T (NYSE:T) and T-Mobile (NASDAQ:TMUS) — who all reportedly rejected Musk’s previous requests to allow his mobile service to piggyback off their existing networks. The companies, via CTIA, their wireless communications trade organization, also warned the FCC that a wider radio spectrum buildout could “have real consequences for consumers who rely on ever-increasing wireless capacity to access the modern economy and support their day-to-day living.”

T-Mobile also appealed separately to the FCC, saying the quality of service in the 5G network could suffer if the agency makes more spectrum bands available. And in October, the three mobile carriers announced their own joint satellite partnership to expand coverage to “underserved areas” across the country.

SpaceX, meanwhile, spent $17 billion to buy spectrum from Boost Mobile parent company EchoStar — a deal the FCC approved in May.

A T-Mobile spokesperson told Moneywise, “We welcome competition because it pushes us to be better and creates more value for customers. Spectrum and towers alone don’t make a network. Building a leading wireless network, providing top-of-class service and earning customer trust take significant time, investment and expertise. Satellite technology has an important role in extending connectivity, but it’s complementary to terrestrial networks.”

Moneywise also reached out to SpaceX, Verizon, and AT&T but did not receive responses on this matter by publication time.

What happens next if the FCC gives the go-ahead?

The FCC’s agreement to review the filing is not a rubber stamp of approval. The Commission will allow public comments and opposition to the deal in December.

That said, if it does go through, SpaceX noted that “Starlink Mobile will deploy a flexible architecture combining our satellite-to-mobile constellation in space with an advanced terrestrial deployment that can seamlessly connect devices everywhere.”

Musk previously noted during a third quarter earnings call that he believes Starlink connectivity will “ultimately be a business that generates several hundred billion dollars of revenue a year.” The business pulled in around $5.2 billion in revenue in the third quarter of 2026.

Of course, there’s no guarantee that the FCC will ultimately give the green light — though it could help that FCC Chair Brendan Carr is reportedly a big fan of Musk’s.

Aside from sharing a photo of himself with Musk at a SpaceX launch on X, the New York Times reports that Carr has previously “lavished praise” on him, “repeatedly expressing his admiration for the tech mogul” while approving SpaceX satellite launches and even allegedly changing “some of the [FCC’s] rules to benefit the company.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has been trying to rally his colleagues toward a solution, and he seems ready to revisit it after the blue tsunami that swept the Nov. 3 midterms.

“A top priority will be to expand Social Security benefits by at least $2,400 a year & extend Social Security’s solvency for generations,” Sanders, who expects to be the next chair of the Social Security subcommittee, wrote in a post on X.

“How? By scrapping the cap & demanding that the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes,” he continued.

This proposal, S.770, was introduced in 2025, but Sanders returned to it in the months leading up to the midterms.

On Aug. 3, Sanders penned a letter stressing this change could avert the funding cliff and help “increase benefits by $2,400 a year and expand Cost-of-Living Adjustments,” in an open letter to his Democratic colleagues. That’s an additional $200 a month in average benefits.

“At a time when the wealthiest people in America are becoming much wealthier, asking them to pay the same percentage of their income into Social Security as teachers, nurses, firefighters, and construction workers is not a radical idea,” he wrote. “It is common sense. It is what the American people want.”

Sanders also took aim at Elon Musk specifically in his letter.

“It means that Elon Musk — the wealthiest man in the world, worth an estimated $690 billion — pays the same amount into Social Security as someone earning $184,500 a year,” Sanders wrote.

Since August, Musk’s net worth has increased to nearly $900B, according to a Forbes live tracker of billionaire wealth.

In the wake of the Democrats’ recent midterm success and Sanders’ expected appointment as chair of the Social Security subcommittee, it appears this proposal might get a shot at becoming reality.

Social Security Expansion Act

Originally reintroduced in February 2025, the Social Security Expansion Act would add additional revenue to the program by extending payroll taxes on wages, salaries and self-employment earnings to income above $250,000. It would also include capital gains and dividends.

In 2026, the maximum amount of annual earnings that are subject to payroll taxes is $184,500.

“That [cap] means if you’re a nurse or you’re a construction worker, you’re paying Social Security on 100% of your income,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) said during a congressional hearing on Social Security solvency in August. “But if you’re a corporate lawyer raking in millions, you’re only paying Social Security on a tiny little fraction of your income. That is not right.”

Eliminating this tax cap, according to an estimate by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, would address roughly 73% of the Social Security program’s long-run funding shortfall. In other words, almost three-quarters of the gap can be filled by simply imposing the same payroll tax rate on high-income earners as ordinary Americans.

As for the “Bernie Bump” itself, Sanders’ office states only 7% of households would see an increase in their taxes.

But even if Democratic lawmakers align and decide to push forward the proposal, there’s still a risk the change won’t materialize. Or, if it does, it may be substantively different than what was proposed. After all, Sanders’ proposal would still need to pass in the House, clear a 60-vote Senate threshold and receive executive approval.

One Clearwater, Florida, woman recently learned that lesson the hard way, losing approximately $1.5 million over a two-year period between 2024 and 2026 in a law enforcement fraud event. The scam began with a phone call to the unnamed victim, in which the caller said the woman was involved in a serious legal issue and needed to work with law enforcement to resolve it quickly.

“They told the victim that they work for the U.S. Attorney’s Office and that she was in a lot of legal trouble and that in order to clear her name, she would need to provide them with all of her money and assets, which they would then return to her at a later date with interest,” said Clearwater Detective John Bennett, as reported by Tampa-based WFLA.com. If anyone represents themselves this way, “it’s a scam,” he said.

Complying with the request to empty her financial accounts, the woman liquidated her household assets, used the funds to buy gold bars and waited for law enforcement to show up and collect them, with a promise to return the assets once the matter was resolved. The fraudsters showed up at the woman’s house, took the gold bars and haven’t been seen since.

“The next thing I know, no job, no nothing, no money, no nothing. Everything was taken away from me,” the woman told WFLA.

An inside look at a typical law enforcement scam

Security sector professionals also say a law enforcement fraud event launches with a surprise contact the victim never sees coming.

“It typically starts with a call, text or pop-up claiming your identity was used in a crime, or your accounts are compromised,” Richard Stocks, CEO and co-founder of Flggd, a Tampa Bay-based scam-detection and consumer anti-fraud platform, told Moneywise. “A ‘federal agent’ then says your money isn’t safe where it is and offers to ‘protect’ it.”

The victim is usually told to keep it secret, even from family and their bank, and to convert savings to gold, cash or crypto for a courier or a “secure” account. “The scam capitalizes on both fear and secrecy so that by the time anyone else hears about it, the money is gone,” Stocks noted.

Law agent-based scams work because they don’t feel like scams to the victim. In actuality, they feel more like an emergency.

“The criminals combine three things: authority, like a ‘federal agent’ with a badge number and case file; fear of arrest, prosecution and losing everything; and isolation, via a confidential investigation order where you don’t tell your family or your bank,” Ermo Eero, a risk analyst and CEO at IronWallet, a non-custodial crypto wallet provider, told Moneywise. “Once someone is afraid of being charged with a crime, they stop asking ‘is this real?’ and start asking ‘how do I make this stop?’”

The outrageous demands don’t break the spell, as Eero said they’re introduced gradually. “First, there’s a small ‘verification’ step, then a bigger one,” he noted. “Each payment makes the next one easier, because admitting it’s a scam means admitting everything already sent is gone. Over two years, that sunk-cost trap becomes enormous.”

Payment-wise, law enforcement fraudsters love gold bars and bitcoin as preferred payment methods, as both let money leave the banking system, where most fraud controls operate in the dark.

“Gold handed to a courier is close to untraceable: no account, no transaction record and it can be melted and resold,” Eero said.

Yet Bitcoin is different, as every transaction is recorded on a public blockchain, so investigators can often follow the money.

“The problem is recovery, not tracing,” Eero noted. “Funds move across many wallets in minutes, can be sent to exchanges in jurisdictions that don’t cooperate with U.S. law enforcement and there’s no central party that can reverse a transfer.”

Don’t fall for it, security sector pros warn

Fraud protection experts say accommodating anyone who claims to be a law enforcement official and demands money for any reason is a huge unforced error.

“A real agent never demands payment, not ever,” Brandon Henderson, a trial attorney at HMW Law, told Moneywise. “A real agent never asks you to buy gold, or move money into bitcoin, or hand anything valuable to a courier. And no real agent tells you to keep an investigation secret from your family or from your own bank.”

To wall off financial predators masquerading as law enforcement agents, start looking for major red flags that should plant immediate doubt in a potential victim’s mind. These items should be at the top of that list, Stocks stated.

• Any government agency asking you to move, withdraw or “protect” money is a red flag “because they don’t,” Stocks said.
• Changing money forms, like into gold bars or cash handed to a courier, crypto ATMs or gift cards as payment, is a major giveaway.
• Being told to keep it secret, especially from your bank or family, “and any pressure to act today, or threats of arrest,” Stocks added.

If you’re contacted by someone you believe is setting you up for a financial scam, law enforcement or otherwise, take these steps immediately.

1. Hang up and call the agency yourself on a number you look up, “and never one they give you,” Stocks said.
2. Tell someone you trust before you move any money. “Scammers rely on isolation,” Stocks noted.
3. If your bank teller asks questions, let them help. “They are trained to spot this activity,” Stocks said.
4. If the fraud event has already happened, “report it to the FBI at ic3.gov, then call your local police straight away, and call your bank,” Stocks advised.

Perhaps the largest leverage a targeted victim holds is common sense, along with a dose of patience.

“The best fraud protection is a 24-hour pause and one phone call to someone you trust,” Eero stated.

“We believe if Jensen was removed as CEO, Nvidia is worth a lot less (25%-30%) as a company/stock and would change the future direction of the company and create a dramatically different competitive environment around AI GPUs globally especially for China,” Dan Ives, a tech stock analyst and partner at Yorkville Ives, a self-launched merchant bank, said in a Nov. 9 post on X.

The comment comes as Huang grapples with the fallout of an extramarital affair with an alleged Chinese spy that could jeopardize his job. Ives estimated there’s a roughly 15% chance that Jensen is removed.

Nvidia didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from Moneywise.

Huang’s affair

In a Nov. 8 email to staff, Huang admitted he was unfaithful to his wife, and multiple outlets have reported the affair was with Alice Huang (no relation), a woman accused of being a Chinese intelligence operative. She was an executive at Megaspeed, a Singapore-based company that the U.S. has suspected was helping China get around AI chip sale bans.

“You deserve better from me,” Huang said in the email. “My responsibility is to serve you and be worthy of your trust. I have fallen short of that responsibility. I am fully committed to NVIDIA and will work to earn back your confidence.”

On the same day, Nvidia’s board of directors announced it was launching an investigation into reports that Huang was the target of foreign intelligence efforts, though the company said it has no reason to believe its CEO had “compromised” American national security.

Nvidia’s paradox

It’s difficult to overstate Nvidia’s significance in the frenzied AI buildout. The AI behemoth is a prominent developer of the graphics processing units (GPUs) powering AI infrastructure like the data centers springing up across the U.S.

Its market capitalization hit approximately $5.79 trillion at the start of October, though it has slid to about $4 trillion, still leaving it as one of the most valuable firms on earth. If Ives’ prediction did come to fruition, Huang’s ouster could knock off between $1 trillion to $1.2 trillion from Nvidia’s overall value.

Nvidia also planted itself in the AI boom’s financial ecosystem by partnering with Wall Street firms in a $500 billion gambit to marshal new capital and streamline chip financing, so Nvidia’s customers can better afford them.

Huang has served a critical role in Nvidia’s meteoric rise from a chipmaker for video games to a manufacturer of the cutting-edge chips now supplying the AI boom. Some AI observers, though, argue Huang is not indispensable to the AI age.

“Jensen has no choice but to resign. This goes beyond having an affair. His credibility is gone. A cloud of suspicion will forever follow him,” Samuel Hammond, an AI expert at the right-leaning Foundation for American Innovation think tank, wrote in a Nov. 9 X post. “He must step aside for the sake of his family, his country, and his shareholders.”

Huang’s powerful backer

Investors have punished Nvidia in the days since the scandal became public. By midday on Nov. 10, Nvidia was trading at about $168 per share, a roughly 10% drop since Friday.

Huang can count on a powerful backer: President Donald Trump. Nvidia had reportedly donated $25 million to Trump’s ballroom project and Huang had persuaded Trump to ease back on a strict ban on advanced chip sales to China, a geopolitical rival in the AI race.

“I asked him that question: ‘Did you have any idea that she was a spy?’” Trump told reporters at the White House on Nov. 9. “He said, ‘I had no idea that she was a spy,’ and I really believe him.”

The president later said he believed Huang would “be in good shape” once all was said and done.

But when the Cleveland contractor called The Ramsey Show for help, co-host Jade Warshaw focused on something he’d mentioned in passing — musical instruments and equipment he figures are worth $8,000 to $10,000.

Selling them “knocks out half of your debt if you can get $10,000 for that,” she told him.

The numbers

Jim told the hosts he earns roughly $4,000 to $6,000 a month doing new construction and remodeling, and he wants to “catch up for some lost time.”

His home is paid off, and he puts its value at $150,000 to $160,000. He also owns his work van outright and got his sons through college without debt. The $23,000 is a mix of credit card, medical and personal loan balances, and he has no budget.

Selling the gear is just step one

The math is simple. A $10,000 sale would leave about $13,000 in debt, and co-host Rachel Cruze suggested chasing extra income to finish it off.

Jim’s range is a guess, though. At $8,000, the sale would cover about 35% of the debt, not half. It pays to check what similar items have actually sold for before counting on a number.

Warshaw and Cruze stuck to the show’s “baby steps” order: a $1,000 starter fund, then paying off debt, then a fuller emergency fund and 15% of his income going toward retirement. Because his house is paid off, they said three months of expenses in savings would do instead of six. They put the whole plan at nine to 12 months.

Mixing business and personal money

Jim admitted he doesn’t separate his business and personal money. Warshaw observed that could hide the truth: He may think he makes $4,000 to $6,000, but after expenses it might be closer to $3,000. The advice was to open a business account, pay himself from it and build the budget from that number.

The U.S. Small Business Administration makes a similar case, saying separating the two makes bookkeeping cleaner and tax time easier. For a sole proprietor like Jim, taxes matter: The IRS puts the self-employment tax rate at 15.3% and says it applies regardless of age, even to people already collecting Social Security or Medicare.

Looking forward

Jim isn’t the only one without a plan. The Federal Reserve found that in 2025, around 65% of U.S. families had some kind of retirement plan — meaning roughly a third didn’t.

Cruze told Jim he may need to work another five to six years. Since Jim was born after 1943, if he holds off on claiming Social Security, he’ll get an 8% increase for each year delayed past full retirement age, until he’s 70, the Social Security Administration notes.

If you’re behind on finances, the same three steps apply: Take stock of what you own that you could sell, separate business money from personal money if you’re self-employed and find out when claiming benefits makes sense for you.

“Well, the deal would be we would work something out,” Trump told “60 Minutes” on CBS News in an interview that was taped on Nov. 6 and aired Nov. 8. “And I think it’s something-- I think that’s something that’s actually doable.”

“When you go into a hotel and you have a woman that’s worked there as — you know, as a maid, as a cleaner…great jobs, and all of a sudden, they’re being taken outta the country, it’s tough,” Trump said. “It’s a tough thing.”

Trump’s remarks were made on the same day he promoted Stephen Miller, a hard-liner in favor of sharply restricting immigration, to the White House chief of staff post. Democratic leaders quickly bashed the promotion, with one calling for Miller to be fired.

The president, though, has issued mixed signals on immigration since the interview aired. He later affirmed his support for an immigration policy that doesn’t confer legal status on people residing in the U.S. without authorization. “We have a very strong deportation policy. There’s no amnesty,” he said at a Nov. 9 press conference. “We keep that, but we focus on the worst of the worst.”

‘Too tough’

In the “60 Minutes” interview, Trump credited his hard-line immigration policy for bolstering support, but admitted it also dissuaded some voters from backing the Republicans in the midterms.

“I think it both helped and hurt. I think I got an A+ for closing up the border. I get very high marks for getting the bad ones out,” he said. “But I get hurt because we also took people that had good jobs, that created one violation, or breaking of the law, and that was that they came into the country illegally.”

He also cracked the door open to a deal for unauthorized immigrants, particularly for those who have been paying federal income and payroll taxes, as a large share already do.

“There’s a large part of the country that think they should be allowed to stay if they’re good people working in a landscaping company, or working in a hotel or doing something,” Trump said. “And in some cases, paying taxes.”

Pressure to soften a hard-line deportation policy

At various points, the White House has been lobbied by trade associations and business groups to tamp down its mass deportation policy. In late October, the Washington Post reported that over 40 farm and agricultural industry groups sent a letter to the president and congressional leaders warning that immigration raids were at risk of inflating grocery prices.

“Targeting immigrant workers who have not committed crimes and blocking workforce solutions for agriculture devastates agricultural producers, drives up food costs for all Americans and makes our nation more dependent on other countries,” the letter said, according to the Post.

The nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute has estimated that the Trump administration has carried out roughly 980,000 deportations spanning January 2025 through the end of July 2026. More than two-thirds of those deportations were made up of migrants intercepted at the border. A rising share of them consisted of arrests in the U.S. interior, compared with the Biden administration.

Congress has struggled to lock in immigration deals stretching back to the second Bush administration due to the highly charged politics around it.

In early 2024, a bipartisan group of senators clinched a border enforcement deal that would have overhauled the asylum process during a stretch of high crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border. It died in the Senate once Trump, then a 2024 presidential candidate, urged his party to oppose it.

The retailer has split its biggest sale of the year into three separate windows. The first runs Nov. 12 to 15, though only Walmart+ members get a head start on the 12 while everyone else has to wait until the 13.

The second wave arrives around Black Friday itself on Nov. 27, with members again getting early access to deal drops starting Nov. 23 and other shoppers a day later until the 29. Cyber Monday closes it out from Nov. 30 to Dec. 2.

There’s a version of this sale saga that’s easy on your wallet. Three windows means three chances to find the thing you actually wanted at the price you actually wanted to pay, and more time to think between them.

There’s also a version that isn’t. Three sales means three rounds of urgency and three opportunities to settle for something “close enough” to the real thing because what you really wanted sold out too quickly.

So here are four ways to make sure Black Friday works for you, and not the other way around — regardless of where you’re shopping.

1. Make a list, a budget and a promise to stick to both

There’s a reason Santa makes a list and checks it twice. After all, you never hear about the North Pole running a deficit. If Santa can accurately budget gifts for all the world’s children, you can do the same for your own loved ones.

Most experts will tell you that a Black Friday budget is key to reigning in your spending while ensuring you aren’t tempted by discounts on things you don’t actually need. That means making a list, complete with how much you’re willing to spend on each item, and then sticking to it.

Need extra incentive? Aim to come in under budget with the promise of spending the difference you saved on a little treat for yourself for a job well done.

2. Do your research

With a list, budget and willpower in hand, it’s time to research the best deal.

There are, of course, many strategies for this. Some of the most helpful include price tracking sites, apps or browser extensions like CamelCamelCamel or Honey, which keep tabs on prices for items on your list from different retailers to alert you to where you can get them cheapest. To that end, BlackFriday.com collects sales ads and flyers from numerous retailers across the country to help you sort the best deals.

Still, however you decide to go about your research, Consumer Reports (CR) says that many stores “have holiday refund and return policies that include partial refunds for items that go on sale for less later in the season.” So if you purchase something now and then find it discounted at the same store closer to Christmas, CR adds that many stores will refund you the difference.

3. Loyalty programs are your friend

CR also notes that store loyalty programs are a great way to help you avoid busting your budget because they “often grant members early access to coupons, sales and promotions, then let them earn rewards for what they buy.” Just be careful not to use loyalty discounts as an excuse to go overboard on items you don’t need. Remember, your list is your guide. Stick to it.

4. Black Friday and Cyber Monday aren’t the only days to save

While Black Friday and Cyber Monday deals get all the press, there are actually two other major shopping days ahead of the holidays.

First, the day after Black Friday is known as Small Business Saturday (SBS): a day when local shops across the country offer holiday sales in an effort to boost support for small businesses and get in on the crazy spending action. The U.S. Small Businesses Administration says that there’s nothing “small” about SBS, however, noting that, since its inception in 2010, “the total reported U.S. spending at small businesses during the annual Small Business Saturday is an estimated $223 billion.”

And there’s also Green Monday, which falls on the second Monday of December. Kicked off in 2007 by eBay, the day was, in theory, originally supposed to “promote the last day you could buy something online and get it shipped to you before the holidays.”

Now, it’s often just another excuse for retailers to offer discounts and rake in more holiday gift money. But the point is, between SBS’s focus on small businesses and Green Monday’s mid-December deals, you don’t need to feel pressured into buying something you’re unsure of on Black Friday.

And if you’re ever tempted to panic-buy, remember: the holidays aren’t a race to snag the deepest discount. With more sales events ahead and plenty of ways to score smart deals, you can take a breath, stick to your plan and keep your budget firmly in the “nice” column.

With files from Michelle Bates

But they’re not looking to steal your money or personal information. Instead, they’re fighting scammers in an arms race involving AI, cryptocurrency and organized crime. They work for ChainPatrol, a start-up that takes down scam sites impersonating legitimate cryptocurrency brands.

Nikita Varabei once worked at one of those brands, then founded ChainPatrol with his friends Umar Ahmed and Vito Giovannetti. They recognized a need for the service amid confusion surrounding digital currencies like Bitcoin and the newness of crypto technology.

“It’s a little bit of the Wild West,” he told Moneywise. “It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t settle the Wild West. But when you’re on that frontier, there’s bandits and highwaymen and robbers.”

“And snake-oil salesman,” Ahmed added.

Varabei and his teammates are among the hired guns patrolling the frontier, employed by Coinbase, Polymarket, Moonpay and other big brands to track down charlatans, according to their website.

“These companies want to get rid of scammers,” he said. “They’re under attack.”

Varabei wants to stop fraudsters in their digital tracks not only to prevent victim losses, but to restore trust in crypto, which he believes is a truly transformative and empowering technology.

Moneywise talked to Varabei and Ahmed about just what they’re up against.

A David vs. Goliath challenge

Every day, the team must scan the one to two million new websites that launch around the world, filter them down to 500,000 that may be relevant to their clients, and then identify fake ones. It’s a daunting task.

Just two years ago, it would take a criminal up to a week to create an impostor site based on a real brand like Coinbase, PayPal or Booking.com. But impostor sites were flawed, with easy tells like poor spelling and grammar, imperfect images and amateur logos.

Now, thanks to AI, hucksters can do the same job within minutes, producing not just one but multiple clones with different web addresses. Take one down, another goes up. And the sites look more and more professional — evading detection by security researchers.

“We have to be constantly innovating and adapting, just like the scammers,” Varabei said.

The biggest challenge is the scale of the crime syndicates involved. These crime rings operate throughout Asia, the Americas, Africa and Europe. They operate as big businesses and employ thousands of workers to carry out scams 24/7.

How does a small group of software engineers take on such a daunting challenge? They fight fire with fire, leveraging both AI and human intelligence. Their team of 10 in Toronto is bolstered by analysts employed in every time zone who work on investigations around the clock. Ahmed noted that their international colleagues bring both cultural awareness and language skills to the job to identify scams in multiple locations.

When they identify a fake site, they contact platforms around the world to load threat warnings every time someone opens a link to it. That’s a process called blocklisting, and they can make it happen in as little as 15 minutes to immediately reduce the risk.

Ahmed said time is of the essence. Once someone loses money to a cryptocurrency scam, it’s almost impossible to identify the thief or get the funds back. “There’s no undo button for it,” he said.

Once they identify the imposters, they work with search engines, social media apps and web hosts to take them down. That takes longer, because the platforms must be sure they aren’t taking down legitimate sites. The team needs rock-solid evidence.

“Figuring out the right evidence is an art in and of itself, something that we’ve spent years developing and continue to upgrade,” he told Moneywise.

Thanks to the trust the company has built with platforms, ChainPatrol can trigger takedowns in as little as 24 hours, compared to the weeks or months it takes others. Every week they take down tens to thousands of sites.

But the problem continues. Everyone has to be vigilant, including everyday consumers like you.

Three common crypto scams

While cryptocurrency and AI are still part of the digital frontier, the scams the team sees follow familiar playbooks. Here are three of the most common.

Support scams

This is a common scam in which criminals send out a message that they represent an institution — in this case a cryptocurrency company — reporting an issue with the recipient’s account, complete with a link or phone number to call for support. If the victim is hooked, scammers ask them to share their account details.

Recovery scams

These cruel scams target people who have already fallen victim to a cryptocurrency scam. Criminals send texts or emails to victims, promising to return their money for a fee. Of course, the fraudsters have no intention of returning the money, and just steal more in the process. Nikita said criminals watch for victims who post on social media about the scams they fell for.

Fake recruiter scam

Umar said anyone can fall for scams, including experts and professionals. That includes software engineers — many of whom are dealing with a tough job market in the face of AI. Criminals impersonate recruiters with LinkedIn and other organizations, approaching coders with offers to work at high-profile cryptocurrency brands. There may be an interview offer with a website link that takes the would-be job applicant to a fake Zoom link. Then the criminals install a virus on the victim’s device.

Four ways to protect yourself

Here’s some advice from ChainPatrol on how to stay alert.

Don’t trust, verify

Question unusual requests via email, chat or text — especially involving your account security, requests for personal information or financial transactions. Don’t click links in messages. Open a browser on a separate device, log into your official account, and check your security settings.

Don’t go through it alone

Scam victims often don’t come forward out of embarrassment or fear of punishment, leaving them at even greater risk. If you suspect you’re a scam victim, confide in a trusted friend or colleague and report it to authorities.

Harden your security

The best offense is a good defense. Make sure your digital valuables are harder to steal by using a reputable password manager and strong, unique passwords. Using Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) options like authenticator apps and hardware tokens. Avoid SMS-based MFA because it is vulnerable to SIM swapping attacks.

Reduce your online footprint

Audit your social media accounts and messaging apps for privacy and security permissions. Does everyone need to see your phone number when they search your name? Do you need to post about your stock market gains or purchases? Each one is a signal to would-be scammers that they should pay attention to you.

An increasingly popular way for winners to protect themselves is to create a trust before receiving the prize, then naming a trustee representative, who collects the money instead. There’s still a photo with the comically large check, but there’s no easy way for n’er-do-wells to know who actually won the jackpot.

That’s a strategy the winner of the largest-ever prize winner in Megabucks history employed recently after winning $29.71 million — only this winner had an appreciation for the ridiculous.

A nod to Mr. Potato Head

The money was given to the “Mr. Potato Head Trust of Springfield” on Oct. 28. Trustee Hyman Darling said the name was chosen by the winner in honor of, well, someone they know who reminded them of Mr. Potato Head. The ticket was purchased in Holyoke, Mass., and the winner took a lump sum of $19,635,669 before taxes.

The anonymous winner isn’t the first to employ this strategy. Last year, the winner of a $15 million prize, also in Holyoke, took a one-time cash payment of $9.75 million before taxes and had it claimed by the trustee of the Dublin Street Nominee Trust.

Massachusetts requires the winners of large lottery prizes to be identified, and it’s one of at least 22 states that does so (some states allow partial anonymity). Not all of those states let you bypass public disclosure with a trust or LLC, but some, including Massachusetts, will.

The loophole offers a degree of protection, but it also comes at a financial cost, as the lawyer overseeing the trust will charge fees. (Of course, when you’ve just pocketed tens of millions of dollars, you can probably afford the legal bill.)

The downside of sudden wealth

Trusts can also help you put some limits on spending, depending on how they’re set up, which could ensure you’re able to enjoy your newfound wealth without blowing the money recklessly.

There are plenty of cautionary tales of lottery winners who found their multimillion dollar wins to be curses, rather than blessings. At the very least, it can be said that winning the lottery doesn’t always improve your life.

Take the winner of the largest Powerball jackpot in Kentucky history, which topped $167 million. He has been arrested five times since he won, most recently for public intoxication in a Walmart parking lot.

Jack Whittaker, who won $315 million in 2002, first said it seemed like a dream, but he later called it the worst thing to ever happen to him. While he tried to spread the wealth, he ended up alienating some people and losing others, including a granddaughter he was supporting.

And after William “Bud” Post III won $16.2 million in the Pennsylvania state lottery in 1988, his brother allegedly attempted to murder him by hiring a hit man.

To avoid the problems with a big cash windfall if you happen to win a future lottery, most financial advisors suggest taking the payout via an annuity, since few people are ready to handle that sum of money all at once. Experts say the best thing you can do if you win a lottery is find an experienced financial advisor to help you manage it, along with an attorney and tax expert who will all work together to protect your winnings and financial future.

In an X post following the November midterms, the Bridgewater Associates founder warned that the Democratic sweep of the House and Senate will do little to resolve America’s mounting debt and deepening political divisions.

“Our problems won’t go away and what matters above all else is whether the representatives deal with them in an effective bipartisan way or an ineffective confrontational way,” Dalio wrote.

He pointed to disagreements over wealth, social values, climate change and technology, none of which will disappear simply because Congressional control has changed hands.

He noted, “There is only one possible successful path forward for the United States and all other over-indebted, financially/socially/ politically fractured democracies that are suffering from the same problems (e.g., France, other European nations, and the UK), and that is to have smart and strong moderates of the left and the right work together against the extremists to deal well with the difficult issues.”

“That is very unlikely,” he added.

“The most important question is whether there will be more fighting and dysfunction or less; I think it is likely there will be more fighting and more dysfunction,” he said.

Dalio’s biggest immediate concern is Washington’s handling of the federal debt. With several major funding and debt deadlines approaching, he warned that political gridlock could drive up short-term Treasury yields and undermine confidence in U.S. government debt.

Dalio has been warning about a U.S. debt crisis for years

This isn’t the first time Dalio has warned about America’s growing debt burden. In 2025, he compared the risk of a debt crisis to a “heart attack” that could strike within three years, warning that the government could eventually struggle to find enough buyers for its debt.

A year earlier, he told the Financial Times he was particularly concerned about weakening demand from foreign investors, who have traditionally been major buyers of U.S. government bonds.

Meanwhile, the federal debt has continued to climb. Including intragovernmental holdings, the U.S. national debt first crossed $30 trillion in January 2022. By November 2026, it had reached $40.56 trillion, according to official Treasury Department data.

Annual budget deficits are a major reason the debt keeps growing, regardless of which party controls Washington. In fiscal 2026, the federal government spent $2 trillion more than it collected, bringing the deficit to 6.2% of GDP, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That was up from $1.78 trillion, or 5.8% of GDP, the previous year.

Servicing that debt is becoming increasingly expensive. Net interest costs reached around $1.14 trillion in fiscal 2026. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget notes that the U.S. government spends more on interest than it does on Medicaid and national defense.

Moody’s Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi has warned that rising interest rates could make the debt problem more difficult to manage. In comments reported by Fortune, he described America’s debt and interest rate problem as “far away the most important one in the world,” citing the rise in 10-year Treasury yields since the Iran war as a particular concern.

“A vicious cycle threatens to take hold, with higher rates adding to the interest payments and debt load, which in turn pushes rates up even more,” he said.

How to protect your finances if the debt crisis worsens

Although these issues may seem far removed from the lives of ordinary Americans, the consequences could extend well beyond Washington. Higher Treasury yields and mounting government debt could affect borrowing costs, the value of savings and the stability of investments.

Dalio has offered several ways investors can prepare. In August, he recommended trimming bond holdings and shifting more money into assets that could hold their value if the dollar weakens, including gold.

In October, he also discussed inflation-indexed bonds, which offer protection against rising prices by adjusting their principal value with inflation.

Meanwhile, Fidelity has emphasized financial preparedness during economic downturns, including building emergency savings, controlling household spending and sticking with a long-term investment plan.

Having adequate savings can also reduce the need to sell investments when markets fall. As Fidelity cautioned, “Missing the best days of the recovery can affect your long-term results.”

Similarly, Vanguard recommends building a cash buffer for unexpected expenses and economic uncertainty. However, it cautions against holding too much cash because inflation can erode its purchasing power, underscoring the importance of remaining invested for the long term.

These established financial strategies can help investors weather economic uncertainty, whether or not Dalio’s debt-crisis predictions come true.

In a statement released on Nov. 7, NASA said it’s looking “for the explorers who will help write the next chapter of human spaceflight.” The space agency is seeking a new generation of astronauts who will not only test spacecraft but will also “live and work beyond Earth,” on a future moon base.

Astronauts will also help pioneer the systems and operations that will one day take crews to Mars.

“The window is open. The mission is waiting. And the only thing missing from the greatest adventure humanity has ever embarked upon is you,” NASA Deputy Administrator Matt Anderson said in the statement.

The starting salary for the position is $164,395 — significantly higher than the average salary of around $72,800. But the job comes with obvious personal sacrifices — like leaving Earth, for example. In comparison, NASA astronauts make less than the average dentist, who boasts a median annual wage of $176,110.

The requirements

The salary may not be a concern for those with dreams of space exploration. But dreams aren’t enough to secure a spot at the agency. Competition to join NASA is steep — and the agency is looking for the best of the best.

“Those missions will demand technical excellence, sound judgment, teamwork, and courage,” NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman said in the statement. “NASA’s astronaut corps has always called on remarkable Americans willing to take on extraordinary challenges in service to the nation.”

In order to apply for the job, you must be a U.S. citizen and have a master’s degree in a STEM field; however, the latter requirement can be satisfied through other educational work and degrees, including doctors and those in test pilot programs.

Physical challenges ahead

Candidates must also pass NASA’s long-duration physical and show “strong leadership, teamwork, and communication skills.”

This is the first time the agency has opened applications since 2024. At that time, the agency received more than 8,000 applications, but just 10 astronauts were selected. They are currently completing nearly two years of training.

According to NASA, there are 32 active astronauts in the space agency, and those selected to join will study things like spacewalking, lunar geology and how to operate high-performance aircraft. Since it began its missions in the 1960s, NASA has selected 370 people to train as astronauts.

The call for the next generation comes as NASA works towards its goal of returning humans to the Moon by 2028, with a test flight planned for 2027. If the feat is achieved, it will be the first time humans have set foot on the Moon since 1972.

Scott Bright of Bellevue, Washington, is suing Kalshi after running up a net loss of more than $308,000 on the platform when he wagered on sporting events. His lawsuit says the “wagering occurred at a time when it was unlawful in Washington and when the Washington Attorney General had already sued KalshiEX LLC in this Court alleging precisely that.”

Bright is asking for more than $580,000 — which includes both the $308,000 in losses as well as the winnings he recycled into additional wagers, which he then lost.

Seeking to dismiss

Kalshi has since filed a response to the lawsuit, seeking to dismiss it.

Bright, the company said, did not lose money gambling, but instead lost it on “event contracts,” something that can only be regulated by the federal government, not the state. In addition, Kalshi says Bright knew that losing money was possible while he continued to utilize the platform.

“Plaintiff alleges that his activity on the platform was gambling and that he ‘lost.’ He does not allege that anyone misled him about how the platform worked, what it charged or the risk that any position might lose,” Kalshi wrote in its response. “Yet, he now sues KalshiEX and its parent, Kalshi Inc., to recover nearly double his own alleged net realized loss.”

Kalshi, in addition to seeking to dismiss the case, also filed a motion to stay, which would pause proceedings until the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether to hear a separate case that centers on whether state gambling laws apply to prediction markets.

A separate suit by the state of Washington resulted in a preliminary injunction that forced the company to geofence the state and stop accepting several types of wagers. Bright transferred cash into his Kalshi account before those took effect.

Many losers, few winners

Prediction markets tout their winners in marketing, but just like traditional gambling, users are more likely to lose.

A study by The Wall Street Journal found that 67% of profits on Polymarket, one of the leading prediction market platforms, go to just 0.1% of accounts. And of the 1.6 million accounts studied, more than 1 million were unprofitable. On Kalshi, there are 2.9 unprofitable users for every profitable one.

Prediction markets are also easily susceptible to abuse, as insiders (whether on staff or members of an audience in pre-recorded events) might know what will be said or done in advance and place a bet on that information. Earlier this year, a soldier in the U.S. Special Forces placed a wager using classified information about the removal of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, earning himself over $400,000. He was later arrested for that.

And in September, disgraced former U.S. representative George Santos was slapped with a lifetime ban from Kalshi for allegedly improperly manipulating the price of contracts on the platform, pointing to his public statements about his plans to attend the State of the Union address earlier this year and wagers he subsequently made on that contract. (He led people to believe he would be at the speech, but was not. Meanwhile, he placed bets against his attendance.)

Santos, via trades on the platform about that event, made profits of $17,840, the company said in a regulatory filing.

With this in mind, the FDA is now requiring the companies that produce GLP-1 drugs — such as Novo Nordisk, which produces Wegovy and Ozempic, as well as Eli Lilly, which produces Zepbound and Mounjaro — to include information about this risk on their packaging.

“FDA’s drug safety communication applies to all medicines with GLP-1 RA activity and does ​not reference any findings specific to Lilly medicines,” said a Lilly spokesperson, according to CNN. “We are carefully evaluating the update and will respond to ​FDA promptly.”

NAION is a rare condition that can cause rapid-onset vision changes and loss that can result in blindness. It typically occurs in people over the age of 50 and is usually permanent. While the underlying cause has yet to be completely understood, this condition is believed to be caused by a decrease in blood flow to the front section of the optic nerve.

This news comes after a number of lawsuits were filed by GLP-1 users who say they were not sufficiently warned that taking the drug could result in vision loss. Before the FDA ruled on updating GLP-1 warning labels, NAION was not listed on the medication’s packaging in the U.S., but is included in some other countries.

In June, Novo Nordisk updated labels for Wegovy and Ozempic in Europe to read that semaglutide, an active ingredient in weight-loss drugs, may cause NAION in one in 10,000 patients.

Evidence linking GLP-1 medications and NAION is mixed. While some research has suggested a possible association, other studies have found no correlation between the two. In May, The American Academy of Ophthalmology said there was insufficient evidence for a blanket warning, writing “causality has not been established.”

What do GLP-1 makers say?

“Patient safety is Lilly’s top priority,” Eli Lilly said in a statement to Moneywise.

“We actively monitor, evaluate and report safety information for all our medicines to the FDA. As part of our routine safety review process, we have ongoing discussions with regulators regarding potential safety topics and we will continue to review data, including any data regarding ophthalmic issues. If anyone is experiencing side effects when taking a Lilly medicine, they should talk to their doctor or other healthcare professional.”

Novo Nordisk said it believed the personal injury lawsuits filed against the company were “without merit and we are defending them.”

“Patient safety is a top priority for Novo, and we take all reports of adverse events seriously,” Liz Skrbkova, head of U.S. media and stakeholder relations for Novo, told Moneywise. “We care deeply about the wellbeing of people who take our medicines and collaborate closely with health authorities and regulatory bodies worldwide.

“Semaglutide has a well-established safety profile, supported by robust clinical development programs. We recommend that all patients maintain close contact with their healthcare professional for proper diagnosis, appropriate treatment, ongoing guidance and careful monitoring.”

Recent pickup in usage

The lawsuits surrounding GLP-1 drugs and NAION didn’t just pop up. In January, a Maryland truck driver claimed an “eye stroke” left him blind, and he blamed it on GLP-1 drugs. And while the current lawsuits represent a small fraction of the people taking the weight-loss drugs, recent changes in availability are putting more of a spotlight on them.

Just under three months ago, a new federal program expanded access to GLP-1 drugs under a program known as Medicare Bridge. At the end of August, federal officials said 600,000 older Americans had signed up to receive the drugs, which cost just $50 per month.

Medical officials say patients who are taking semaglutide who haven’t experienced any symptoms should continue to take the medication. People who have not started yet and are concerned about the risk of NAION should consult their doctors before deciding whether to proceed with GLP-1 drugs.

With files from Chase Kell.

Announced on Oct. 26, the partnership between Mastercard and Donaldson’s Beast Industries will also include educational resources designed to help young people and entrepreneurs learn financial literacy. The companies say they want to help creators turn their online following into sustainable business.

“The next generation is shaping culture and creating new forms of commerce at the same time,” Mastercard chief marketing and communications officer, Jill Kramer, said in the press release. “Through our work with Beast Industries, we’re meeting people where they are, bringing culture and commerce closer together, and opening new pathways from ideas and influence to meaningful economic opportunity.”

The partnership comes as Donaldson explores a financial education channel on YouTube, raising conflict of interest concerns. With Beast Industries expanding into financial services, can fans distinguish independent money advice from a potential sales pitch?

What’s at stake

Donaldson isn’t just another YouTuber. According to rankings by daily analytics tracker Social Blade, MrBeast is the platform’s most-subscribed channel, with 526 million subscribers.

Across all his channels, he commands more than 655 million subscribers. His core viewers are teenagers and young adults, Fortune reports — a demographic that can be vulnerable to financial missteps.

Donaldson’s plans also put him in a high-liability industry, with financial services being among the most heavily regulated in America. Credit cards, loans and insurance carry significant long-term costs and risks requiring careful disclosure and consumer protection.

According to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) guidelines, influencers must “clearly and conspicuously” disclose any material connection to products they endorse. But financial products face even stricter scrutiny.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) actively pursue enforcement actions against “finfluencers” who promote financial products without proper disclosures.

For example, in 2022, Kim Kardashian paid $1.26 million to settle SEC charges for promoting cryptocurrency without disclosing her $250,000 payment.

According to compliance experts, the SEC can remove finfluencers from securities-related marketing entirely and can work with the U.S. Department of Justice to pursue criminal penalties when warranted. Per FTC guidance, violations can result in civil penalties up to $53,088 per violation.

What content consumers need to know

The latest move in Donaldson’s financial empire dreams has even more potential to raise a question of conflict if he also promotes his own products on that same station.

Money in MrBeast videos is treated as entertainment. In a story about the YouTuber’s Amazon Prime show Beast Games, Business Insider’s Katie Notopoulous wrote about feeling compelled to explain to her elementary school-aged son, who watched with her, that real-world money isn’t simply “an object to build into pyramids or toss around in bags”.

Now, imagine the content creator explaining Roth IRAs, student loans or insurance products while simultaneously selling those products through MrBeast Financial. Even with proper disclosures, will it be possible for viewers to separate genuine advice from sales pitches?

If MrBeast or any creator-turned-advisor offers educational content, approach it with caution:

• Assume it’s marketing. Educational content from someone selling financial products should be treated as advertising, unless disclosed otherwise.
• Check the profit motive. Before following financial advice from a creator, ask yourself: Does this person make money if I follow this advice?
• Verify with licensed professionals. Entertainment figures are not usually fiduciary advisors. Verify any advice with independent, licensed financial advisors who have legal obligations to act in your interest.
• Understand long-term costs. Financial products like loans and insurance carry costs extending for years or decades. Influencer charisma cannot erase interest rates, fees or coverage limitations.
• Look beyond disclosures. Even properly disclosed sponsorships can mislead when educational tone masks sales intent.

The real issue isn’t whether Donaldson has good intentions. It’s whether creator-driven financial education can be truly independent when the creator profits from selling financial products.

The property had towering 100-foot trees, eucalyptus, hydrangeas and smilax growing down the hillsides.

So when it went up for sale in 2024, Rea didn’t spend much time debating whether she wanted it. She and her husband bought it for about $1 million, closing escrow while they were on a family trip to Switzerland.

However, their mortgage carries an interest rate of nearly 8%, with monthly payments sitting at an eye-watering $7,000. But with no desire for the 9-to-5 grind, the couple’s solution was to build a greenhouse in the backyard and turn it into a rental space for photo shoots and small private events.

The project cost almost $200,000. Today, it brings in an average of $24,000 a month, according to Rea, 37, who spoke with Business Insider in an interview published Nov. 7.

She and her husband, who share three children, are now working on plans to build more greenhouses using her original design.

A $200,000 greenhouse instead of a $600,000 ADU

Rea and her husband had owned several properties around Southern California, including a home in Carlsbad. The couple had also run a wedding venue, which they eventually sold. After buying the Vista property, they started renting out the house and backyard on Airbnb while they figured out what to do with the space.

One possibility was building an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) to rent out, but it didn’t take long for that idea to lose its appeal. A contractor told them a three-bedroom, two-bath unit would cost $500,000 to $600,000 to build, including permits, and could rent for about $3,500 a month.

That was a big investment for the rental income it might bring in — and with three young kids at home, Rea wasn’t keen on having tenants living in their backyard.

“I previously worked in the wedding industry and have a pretty good idea of what people are looking for,” she told Business Insider. “In Southern California, there are many beautiful venues, but not a lot that are small and intimate.”

She had also been saving greenhouse ideas on Pinterest for about 10 years. After getting a quote from a company in England that was well beyond their budget, she sketched out her own design and brought in a friend who was a welder to help build it.

People— who also recently interviewed Rea — reported that a construction company had quoted more than $250,000 for the project. Rea didn’t like its proposed designs, either, so she decided to draw up her own plans.

The finished greenhouse included electrical work, flooring and a fireplace. Construction took about 10 months and cost just under $200,000.

The setting was arguably the biggest selling point. Tucked down a hill, the greenhouse has seasonal creeks on either side, large trees all around and a winding path lined with about 150 French lavender plants. Inside, the all-glass structure has 12-foot ceilings, travertine floors, a limestone fireplace and tall arched double doors.

Photo shoots and intimate events are the bread and butter

Rea told Business Insider that the greenhouse now earns an average of $24,000 a month from rentals. Photo shoots and content-creation sessions make up the bulk of the business, while smaller-scale private events bring in some of the highest fees.

The couple hosts about 10 to 15 intimate events a year, including rehearsal dinners, bridal showers and baby showers. They’ve also hosted marriage proposals and small wedding receptions.

When they first opened, they charged $3,000 for a day rental. Now, the minimum price for an event is $7,500. Photo shoots start at $375 an hour, according to Business Insider.

That pricing reflects the type of space Rea was trying to create. A large wedding venue can come with substantial food and beverage minimums, making it difficult for someone planning a small gathering to justify the expense.

Rea saw an opening for people who wanted somewhere special without booking a traditional wedding venue. And the smaller bookings have another advantage. Photoshoots and content-creation sessions can bring in good money without requiring the same level of preparation as an event.

Rea also has more control over how much business she takes on. She told People that she turns down about 80% of inquiries, partly to maintain a balance between running the venue and raising her children.

“I absolutely love that I can hustle for a couple days or a couple weekends and then I’m free as a bird to have slow mornings with my kids and dig in the garden and plant things,” she said.

Rea also told Business Insider that some of the monthly revenue goes back into maintaining the property. Refreshments and event supplies cost between $200 and $350 a month, while professional cleaning runs another $350 to $500.

Now, she’s looking beyond the backyard. Rea has applied for a patent for the greenhouse design and is working with the welder who helped build the original to produce three different sizes. They already have a couple of preorders.

The business has also given the family more say over how they spend their time. In her interview with Business Insider, Rea talked about how younger generations are finding different ways to build wealth, rather than following the traditional path of staying in one job for decades.

For her, that meant taking a chance on an idea she knew well, putting her experience in the wedding business to use and seeing whether people would pay for a space like this. So far, the interest suggests they will.

Medicare’s annual open enrollment period is underway. Until Dec. 7, you can go online to review your coverage and make changes to your Medicare PDP. But only about one in five PDP participants do, even though failing to shop around could leave money on the table.

That’s especially true this year.

Overall, the changes to PDP premiums are modest. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services predicts that the average Part D premium will increase by less than $1 per month. But depending on which plan you have, your monthly premium could increase by much more.

Switching to a new plan could save you hundreds of dollars next year.

Here’s what to know about the changes coming to Medicaid next year, as well as what you should look out for when picking out a new plan.

AARP plans see the highest premium increases

If you have an AARP-branded PDP, you could have the most to gain by switching your Part D plan. Premiums for the AARP Medicare RX Preferred plan will increase by more than $50 per month in every state, as well as Washington, D.C. In four states (California, Florida, New York and Pennsylvania), the monthly premium increase will exceed $100.

Holders of the AARP Medicare Rx Saver plan should also review their coverage. Premiums will rise by more than $50 per month for beneficiaries in 33 states.

Those two plans cover over 2 million enrollees, meaning a significant chunk of Part D holders will be impacted by these increases.

The good news is that more affordable plans are available for AARP PDP users in every single state. The bad news is that you’ll have fewer other options to choose from. For the fourth consecutive year in a row, the average number of PDPs people will have to choose from dropped, going from 11 to nine.

If you previously relied on a $0 premium PDP, you might be out of luck. Medicare Part D no longer offers $0 premium PDPs to people who aren’t receiving low-income subsidies. That means that almost 30% of current PDP beneficiaries[g] who don’t qualify for low-income subsidies will have to start paying each month for their drug plan after not paying a premium in 2026.

Still, there are low-cost options available for people who don’t have the budget to spend on high-premium drug plans.

If you’re among the 55% of Medicare beneficiaries who are on a Medicare Advantage plan, then none of this affects you. But you should still check your Medicare Advantage coverage during open enrollment; you might be one of the million Americans losing their MA plan.

What to check for your Medicare PDP during enrollment

If you have a Medicare Part D plan, you have until December 7 to log on to the Medicare portal and choose a new plan.

When looking for a new plan, you should definitely keep an eye out for premium costs. But that’s not all you should look out for.

You’re likely already on some prescribed drugs that work for you. Whatever plan you switch to isn’t guaranteed to cover those drugs; make a list of what drugs you take at what dosages and check to see if they’re covered under the plans you’re interested in.

Similarly, make sure whatever pharmacy you use to pick up your drugs is covered under your new plan.

If your drugs are covered with a higher copay, consider how much extra you’ll pay for that drug over the course of a year. A higher-premium plan might be worth it if the amount you’ll save in drug costs is high enough.

You’ll also want to consider how high your Part D deductible would be before you commit to any specific plan. A higher-premium but zero-deductible plan might save you money over a $700 deductible, lower-premium plan, depending on your specific pharmacy needs.

If, after doing the math, you’re struggling to fit higher premiums or drug prices into your budget, help may be available. Social Security offers a Medicare Part D Extra Help program for people who are struggling to pay for the medicine they need.

CMS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

But that’s still an improvement over $25 a day, which is what Tammy Jones, a South Carolina woman, says she has been paying for over a year.

Jones says she was paying around $76 a month when her husband was alive. But after receiving a bill for nearly $10,000 more than a year ago, she had to switch to relying on an expensive generator.

She adds that she’s been falsely accused of connecting jumper cables to her power box. She denies the claims and says she hasn’t received proof.

What to do if you think your electricity bill is wrong

Receiving a higher-than-expected utility bill can be surprising and frustrating, especially when it exceeds more than your planned budget.

If you receive an unusually high bill, start by reviewing the details of the bill. Compare it to bills from previous months.

In some cases, energy costs in your area may have gone up for reasons unrelated to your own electricity usage. For example, many people have reported significantly higher electricity bills after new data centers were constructed in their communities.

But if the cost of electricity per kilowatt-hour hasn’t gone up enough to explain the rising cost, consider how you use your electricity.

If you suspect a device in your home is using up more power than it should be — whether it’s something new you just plugged in, or an older device that might be faulty — you can use a wattage meter to measure how much electricity the device uses over time.

This device plugs into an electrical outlet, with the appliance or other device plugged into the meter. It measures how much electricity the device uses over time.

If you decide to file a complaint, start by researching the relevant consumer protection laws in your area. Knowing your rights as a consumer can help you avoid any surprises, such as having your electricity shut off while you’re disputing a bill.

Your next steps will depend on where you live, but it’s generally a good idea to continue paying the amount you believe you actually owe each month. That way, it’s clear you’re still willing to hold up your end of the deal, even if you disagree with the utility company about how much you owe.

Look into whether your state offers solar incentives

Regardless of how much you’re currently paying for electricity, you’d probably welcome a way to bring that bill down. Some homeowners are doing just that by installing solar panels.

Unfortunately, the federal solar tax credit expired at the end of 2025, meaning homeowners can no longer benefit from it. It offered 30% of the installation cost as a tax credit.

Some states offer sales tax and property tax exemptions for solar installations. Others provide rebates on electricity bills, while some even allow homeowners to sell excess electricity back to the utility when their solar panels produce more power than they use.

The cost of installing solar power — and the potential savings — can vary significantly from state to state. It may take years to break even, but if you own your home and know you’ll keep living there for years to come, solar panels may deliver substantial long-term savings.

She never did come clean — he discovered it when their joint account went into overdraft and his credit score plummeted.

“I’m struggling with essentially how to reconcile my vow to stand by my wife for better or worse and my responsibility to protect the future that I’ve been building for my lifetime,” he said during a recent episode of The Ramsey Show.

Five years on, and Jake isn’t even clear what his wife is spending the money on. While she admitted giving some to her brother, she won’t discuss the total amount she’s taken or where it’s going.

“Your marriage is very seriously broken,” Ramsey told him, and it either has to change or it’s going to end. “There’s no such thing as status quo here,” he said, adding, “It’s going to burn down; it’s going to end in ashes.”

What is financial infidelity?

So why did Jake put up with this for five years? “I was being guilted, maybe gaslit, into believing that it was something I was doing wrong, that I wasn’t being forgiving,” he said.

There’s a term for this: financial infidelity.

A lot of couples fight about money. And some people are financially irresponsible. That doesn’t make them a financial ‘cheater’ per se.

Financial infidelity occurs when one partner in a committed relationship intentionally hides their spending, savings or debt from the other. That might mean hiding significant debt or making large purchases or investments without their partner’s knowledge.

And if the other partner finds out, the ‘cheater’ may get defensive, revert to gaslighting or stonewall their partner.

John Delony, who co-hosted the episode, refers to financial infidelity as someone breaking the unity of a marriage by violating their partner’s safety and trust. In this case, he said, Jake’s wife’s actions violate both of those things.

“It’s not for better or worse,” said Delony. “For better or worse is job loss. For better or worse is an illness,” he said. In this case, he said, she’s “essentially stolen $100,000,” refuses to talk about it, and shows no remorse for her actions.

But financial fidelity is perhaps surprisingly common. Almost 6 in 10 Americans (59%) have a financial secret, including 11% who have a separate bank account that their partner doesn’t know about, according to a study by Talker Research on behalf of TD Bank U.S.

And a WalletHub survey found that nearly 1 in 3 people admit to lying about money to their partner. Yet, more than 1 in 10 believe financial infidelity is worse than physical or emotional infidelity, and almost half (47%) would divorce or break up with someone because of financial problems.

How to recover from financial infidelity

In Jake’s case, his wife refuses to talk about her spending. Indeed, she told him to go ahead and start divorce proceedings, and that she wouldn’t fight it — a sign that there are bigger issues in their marriage.

But that doesn’t mean all instances of financial infidelity will end in a breakup or divorce — so long as both partners are willing to work it out. After all, there are many reasons why people lie about money.

“They might anticipate disapproval of their purchases or hope to avoid confrontation (which inevitably leads to confrontation in the longer term),” writes Dr. Karen Stollznow, Ph.D., in Psychology Today. “Others are afraid of feeling embarrassed or ashamed about their reckless spending habits.”

But financial infidelity can have serious consequences — and not just for your relationship. Like Jake, it could affect your credit rating if you have joint accounts or shared finances. And, like Jake, if the debt is significant, it could affect your financial future, including your retirement plans.

You can’t work on a problem if you don’t acknowledge it. Dealing with financial infidelity starts with communication.

If a partner has a secret account, why do they feel they need to lie about it? There’s nothing wrong with having a separate account; the issue is lying about its existence.

Maybe one partner has significant credit card debt, but they’re too ashamed to admit it to anyone, so they struggle in silence. By coming clean with their partner, they could work on a solution together to get out of debt. Sure, it might be an uncomfortable situation, but it’s a path forward.

If someone has a gambling addiction, that could require professional intervention. And if someone refuses to talk about their financial secrets, stonewalls you or gaslights you, then you may need a marriage counsellor.

If a partner is draining your shared accounts, then you may need to take steps to protect yourself. For example, Ramsey tells Jake to shut down any joint accounts with his wife right away.

While a marriage counsellor could help in certain scenarios, a financial advisor may be able to help in others, such as getting out of debt and back on track with savings. But if one partner isn’t willing to do the work, then it could be the sign of a larger issue.

As Delony tells Jake: “She’s already left your marriage. She’s just asking you to go make it official.”

According to CNBC reporting, the CEO of PepsiCo North America, Ram Krishnan, wrote in a letter to employees that the cuts would be necessary to make the company “faster, more connected, and more capable, while continuing to invest in growth.”

Per company filings, as of the end of last year, PepsiCo employs 306,000 people globally, of whom 125,000 are in the U.S.

The company revised its earnings outlook downwards last month. In North America, beverage sales volume is down 2%. Pepsi shares are up less than 1% year to date, compared to 7.4% overall for the Nasdaq exchange they trade on.

A string of closures

PepsiCo announced the immediate closure of its Knoxville, Tennessee bottling plant in October, informing 122 employees that their salaries and benefits would wrap up Jan. 1.

This follows PepsiCo’s September closure of another bottling plant in Cheverly, Maryland, which stunned 100 affected workers and town officials, per the Washington Post.

In an official statement shared with Moneywise, PepsiCo Beverages U.S. stated that shutting down the Knoxville plant was a “difficult decision” and that the company was “incredibly thankful for the contributions of our employees and the support of the community.”

The corporation said it is committed to providing support for workers as they transition to new employment in the coming months.

The company reported a third-quarter net income of $3.07 billion just 11 days earlier.

But the writing was on the wall in Ramon Laguarta’s latest earnings call. The CEO of PepsiCo told investors he was disappointed with the soft drink side of the business — the business PepsiCo was built on.

“We’re putting all the urgency of the business and the focus on improving our performance in soft drinks,” Laguarta said. “We’re cutting costs in many areas.”

The cost-cutting has included shutting down bottling plants in the past few years. In October 2024, the food and beverage giant announced it was shutting down bottling operations in Atlanta, Chicago, Cincinnati and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania — affecting nearly 400 workers, per the Associated Press.

Doubling down on core Pepsi sodas and healthier options

Even with the closures announced to date, the company still has plenty of capacity to manufacture and distribute beverages. It has plants throughout North America, as well as 17 sites under Pepsi Bottling Ventures, its partnership with the Japanese multinational Suntory Holdings.

Meanwhile, Laguarta says he’s adjusting how the company promotes its mix of soft drinks for a more bubbly bottom line. The trade publication Consumer Goods Technology reports that he plans to double down on investments in the company’s core Pepsi lineup and Mount Dew — as opposed to its other soft drinks, like Crush, Dr. Pepper, and Mug Root Beer.

Another piece of the strategy? Marketing healthier options. Susan Houseman, a senior economist at the Upjohn Institute, told the Washington Post that soft-drink manufacturers like PepsiCo are seeing a drop in demand for sugar-filled sodas — one of the reasons that plants like the company’s Cheverly site have closed.

That’s why Laguarta plans to focus on sports drinks like Gatorade and Propel, as well as Alani, an energy drink it distributes through its partnership with Celsius Holdings. It is also promoting Poppi, a line of prebiotic soft drinks it acquired for $1.95 billion in 2025.

Coca-Cola [NYSE:KO] is doing the same, launching a new prebiotic line called Simply Pop, as Food Dive notes. But unlike Pepsi, Coca-Cola plans to expand its infrastructure.

Updated with files from Moneywise editor G.M. Buck

According to a statement from Michael Rapino, Live Nation’s president and CEO, fans of live entertainment have propelled the company into a record-setting quarter, with revenues from Q3 2026 hitting $10.1 billion. That’s up 19% year over year. Fan attendance, which hit 61 million in Q3, is also up 19%, while fee-bearing ticket sales reached 98 million, a 10% increase from last year’s third quarter.

“In a world of endless screens and AI-generated everything, the one thing that can’t be replicated is being there,” Rapino said in a statement, according to Music Ally. “Through October, we’ve sold 170 million tickets, up 13% and already ahead of all of last year. We now expect to welcome nearly 180 million fans in 2026.”

In terms of global sales, Live Nation’s international growth resulted in a 29% spike in fan attendance and a 20% boost in fee-bearing ticket sales. In his statement, Rapino added that “year-to-date, international markets surpassed the U.S. in both concert attendance and sponsorship revenue.”

For anyone who’s purchased tickets to a live event in recent years, this news may not come as a surprise. Ticket prices have steadily increased since the Covid-19 pandemic, and other factors like high service fees, dynamic pricing and the controversial retail market certainly haven’t hurt Live Nation’s sales.

But what may come as a surprise are the comments that two Live Nation executives once made when chatting about their customers.

‘These people are so stupid’

Back in March, when Live Nation was in court defending itself against allegations that it operates as a monopoly, private messages between Ben Baker and Jeff Weinhold, both Live Nation regional ticketing directors at the time, were made public.

In these messages, which were exchanged on Slack in 2022, the two gloated about fleecing customers, with Baker admitting “I gouge them on ancil [ancillary] prices,” including how he charges “$50 to park in the grass … $60 for closer grass.” He added “robbing them blind, baby … that’s how we do it,” to which Weinhold laughed, Bloomberg reports.

Weinhold also boasted about raising prices, including VIP parking at one particular event, which charged $250. “These people are so stupid,” Baker quipped. “I almost feel bad taking advantage of them.”

The messages imply that the perceived price gouging is deliberate, even celebrated, while fans are left holding the increasingly hefty bill — an issue so pervasive that the Federal Trade Commission used it as one of the key points in a 2025 lawsuit against Live Nation and Ticketmaster, which is owned by the former.

Prosecutors sought to enter the private Slack messages into evidence in the court case, which aimed to break up the company’s “monopoly power” over live events. They also hoped to compel Baker — who’s since been promoted to head of amphitheater ticketing, according to Pollstar — to testify. But Baker evaded that fate, at least for now, after the Department of Justice (DOJ) settled its antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation and Ticketmaster.

That said, despite the antitrust settlement, numerous state attorneys general plan to continue the fight — which means there could be justice for frustrated fans on the horizon.

The Live Nation settlement and what it means for fans

The antitrust suit, launched in 2024 by the DOJ and a coalition of state attorneys general, aimed to undo the 2010 Live Nation and Ticketmaster merger. The New York Times reported that the union gave Live Nation “global reach and a sprawling business model unmatched by any rival” — a $25 billion revenue generator in 2025 alone, and that includes control over hundreds of venues and artists.

The DOJ, however, shocked everyone — including presiding Manhattan Judge Arun Subramanian — by announcing it had reached a tentative settlement with Live Nation.

The settlement essentially states Live Nation must allow unaffiliated sellers 50% of their tickets to shows at venues they own, put a 15% cap on services fees and make a portion of its tickets available to third-party sellers. It must also relinquish 13 amphitheaters, pay $280 million in damages and agree to an eight-year extension of DOJ oversight.

The government touted the settlement as a consumer win, but critics disagree.

Syracuse University’s Bill Werde said it’s “generous to call that fine a slap on the wrist.” Meanwhile, Stephen Parker of the National Independent Venue Association told the Associated Press that the settlement “does not appear to include any specific and explicit protections for fans, artists or independent venues.” And former DOJ antitrust attorney John Newman warned that ending the lawsuit means “carte blanche” for Live Nation and Ticketmaster to “keep jacking up prices, keep cutting out competition,” according to NBC News.

That’s a huge disappointment for fans who’ve decried Live Nation and Ticketmaster’s practices for years — including a highly-publicized 2022 lawsuit by Taylor Swift fans for price fixing, fraud and other complaints related to the sale of tickets for her Eras tour.

The settlement, however, can’t stand without Judge Subramanian’s approval, the same judge who called it “absolutely unacceptable.” Judge Subramania has not yet signed off on the deal. And even if the DOJ settlement gets approved, nearly 30 states, from New York to Utah, plan to continue the legal battle against Live Nation — meaning Baker and Weinhold’s words could still come back to haunt them in court.

“Pretty much every F500 CEO is complicit in” allowing their employees’ health insurance claims be denied, said Cuban in a recent X post. He says CEOs might not even know it’s happening, calling it “horrific.”

“Employees and their families get sicker while the denial is appealed… when the CEO has no clue,” says Cuban. “Even if the cost to help the patient could [be] a small amount.”

The culprit is a common employer-sponsored insurance setup that leaves companies without control of or knowledge about how their employees’ health insurance is being handled. But there’s a fix that can keep employees healthy while helping employers comply with federal laws.

Here’s a breakdown of what Cuban’s talking about.

Most large employers offer self-insured health insurance

The majority of Americans get their health insurance through either their employer or a loved one’s employer. Indeed, the Affordable Care Act requires that employers with at least 50 full-time employees provide health insurance that meets a minimum baseline to their workers.

There are two primary ways that employers can offer health insurance plans: They can either offer a fully insured plan or a self-insured plan.

A fully insured plan is the simpler option. An employer partners with an insurance company, such as United Healthcare or Aetna, to provide a plan to employees. The insurance company takes on the risks associated with paying for healthcare, while the employer pays the insurance company a fixed premium.

As convenient as this is, it’s usually the more costly option for employers because they have to pay for the insurance company to turn a profit.

Most large employers instead opt for a self-insured, or self-funded, plan. For these plans, the employer pays for its employees’ healthcare itself, taking on the risk involved personally.

Cuban has no problem with employers’ actions up until this point, calling self-insured plans a “good thing.”

TPAs help employers carry out health plans — but they also introduce problems

Self-funded plans save employers money over the long run. But most employers don’t already have employees skilled in running a health insurance plan. Instead, many employers hire a third-party administrator, or TPA, to oversee the plan, including processing health insurance claims.

This step is where Cuban says employers frequently go wrong.

“They hire a third party administrator that is owned by a Too Big To Care insurance company. - Really Bad,” said Cuban in the X post. “They allow that TPA to deny care determined by the doctors that the TPA selected to be in network - Horrifically bad.”

TPAs that needlessly deny claims are obviously bad for employees, who could face significant health and financial hits. But they’re also bad for employers, who could be held accountable for a TPA’s improper claim decision.

What CEOs can do to help employees get the healthcare they need

The problem with this setup is that CEOs are largely kept in the dark with what their TPAs are doing — making it hard for them to do their due diligence in keeping their employees happy and healthy.

Cuban says that regular reporting can help bring light to a TPA’s decisions.

“I think [F500 CEOs] should get a report that lists any potential denials that could negatively impact patient health,” says Cuban in a reply to his original post.

This would help protect both employees and the employer.

“The fiduciary does have an obligation to review denials to make sure that they are not frivolous,” says Cuban in another reply. “Only way to (…) make sure there isn’t a crazy percentage of denials that have been overturned on appeal is to have them reported and tracked.”

Some health insurance companies have come under hot water for overturned denial claims. United Healthcare is currently undergoing a lawsuit that alleges the company used an AI model to deny claims; the lawsuit says that over 90% of the denied claims were overturned in appeals.

Health insurance companies Humana and Cigna are also facing similar lawsuits.

Mark Cuban did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Seattle City Councilmember Dan Strauss wrote that permit bill, and it passed 6-3 on Oct. 20. On Nov. 2, Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson called him to say she’d veto it.

“Before we passed this legislation, Mayor Katie Wilson promised me not to veto it and to work together to implement,” Strauss said in a statement.

Wilson signed the other four RV bills but vetoed the permit program. Her office estimated that the program would cost over $10 million by the end of 2027, and she wants the city to focus on outreach instead.

How the permit program would have worked

Without a permit, an RV couldn’t park on a city street between midnight and 6 a.m. If you do park an RV past those limits, without a permit, the city could tow your RV without warning.

To get a permit, you’d have to be counted in a one-time city census of RV residents. And even if you had a permit, you’d still have to follow rules. You’d have to park overnight in an industrial area, follow the same 72-hour parking limit as everyone else and sign up for a shelter or housing waitlist.

In her veto letter, Wilson wrote that a one-time count of every RV resident would be costly and could shut out anyone it missed. She also warned that towing RVs with people still inside could lead to injuries and leave the city legally liable.

Seattle’s been to court over this before. In 2016, the city towed the truck Steven Long was living in after a $44 ticket for parking longer than 72 hours. The initial impound bill came to $946.61.

Long fought it, and in 2021 the Washington Supreme Court sided with him. The court ruled that a vehicle someone lives in is protected under the state’s homestead law, like a house. It also said a person’s ability to pay matters when deciding whether a bill like Long’s is an excessive fine.

What Wilson’s executive order does instead

The order directs the Human Services Department (HSD) to help open Glassyard Commons, a safe lot in West Seattle with room for up to 72 RVs plus 20 tiny homes.

The order also has the city keep a list of people living in vehicles, by name, so it can point them to the safe lot and other help on the way to housing. Wilson said the fear of losing their RV keeps many people from saying yes to shelter. One of the bills she did sign lets the city store their RVs while they try out housing.

And nobody’s sure how many RVs are out there. Strauss says the number is 145, and could even be higher. When reporters asked for a count, HSD Deputy Director Chris Klaeysen said the department is still “looking at ironing out those details.”

Who’s angry about the veto, and why

Even Wilson admits people are upset. “I share the frustrations of residents and of members of the Seattle City Council around this important issue,” she said.

Councilmember Rob Saka is one of them. He says his district has more RV problems than any other part of the city. He voted for the permit program, but now he says he’ll give Wilson’s group time. “Our residents deserve results, not just another process,” he said.

That matters because overturning a veto takes six votes, and Strauss only has five without Saka. The council has until Dec. 2 to vote on the veto. Strauss still wants that vote, and he calls Wilson’s order a copy of his own bill.

Homeless advocates cheered the veto. “People will lose their homes and belongings,” Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness Executive Director Alison Eisinger said about the bill.

A man who has lived in his RV in Columbia City since 2019 told Real Change he didn’t know what would happen to him under the ban.

What happens next

If six councilmembers don’t vote to override the veto by Dec. 2, the permit program is gone.

Whatever happens, the city is still spending money on RVs. Wilson’s office says it held back $5 million in RV outreach money from this year’s budget until the council finished debating. Next year, she wants $3.5 million for another safe lot.

For people living in RVs, there’s still the 72-hour rule. And if your RV does get towed, the 2021 ruling means what you can afford matters if you fight the impound bill.

Arizona’s attorney general filed a suit against the online giant in 2024 alleging “unfair and deceptive business practices” related to its cancellation process for Prime.

Now, Amazon and the AG have reached a settlement, with Amazon agreeing to pay $3 million, which the AG will distribute to “eligible consumers,” according to a report from the Arizona Daily Star.

Amazon “denies that it ever engaged in activity that violates any Arizona law,” in the settlement, the Daily Star report says.

‘Intentionally confusing and misleading’’

In a release announcing the suit in 2024, the AG alleged that Amazon’s cancellation process, “is intentionally confusing and misleading, a strategy Amazon tellingly called Project Iliad.”

“Amazon’s cancellation process allegedly required users to navigate a complicated and manipulative interface with skewed wording, confusing choices, and repeated nudging. Such methods, known as ‘dark patterns,’ exploit cognitive biases to influence and manipulate consumer choices,” the release said.

According to the release, Amazon’s Project Iliad tactics were allegedly successful in reducing Prime subscriptions to the tune of 14%.

On top of the $3 million, the settlement will also see Amazon pay $1.5 million for the state’s legal fees, $1.5 million into a consumer education and fraud investigation fund for AG’s office and $1 million in donations to charities selected by the AG, according to the Daily Star.

The lawsuit alleged that until 2023, consumers had to navigate through at least six steps to cancel a Prime membership, the Daily Star said.

Richie Taylor, spokesperson for the Arizona Attorney General’s Office, told the Daily Star that it was not clear whether the $3 million payout would cover all affected Arizonans. “Our goal is to get as much back to consumers as possible,” he said.

The AG’s suit claimed that “Amazon values its Prime members not only for the subscription fees it collects from them [...] but also because Prime members spend more than twice as much as other Amazon customers, averaging about $1,400 per year.”

FTC settlement

In 2025, Amazon settled a lawsuit that the Federal Trade Commission filed in 2023 alleging “that Amazon enrolled millions of consumers in Prime subscriptions without their consent, and knowingly made it difficult for consumers to cancel.”

Amazon agreed to pay $2.5 billion in the settlement, with $1.5 billion of that to be distributed to consumers.

It also agreed to change its practices, including “a clear and conspicuous button for customers to decline Prime,” the FTC said, stipulating that “Amazon can no longer have a button that says, ‘No, I don’t want Free Shipping.’”

The settlement also said that Amazon must create “an easy way for consumers to cancel Prime, using the same method that consumers used to sign up. The process cannot be difficult, costly, or time-consuming and must be available using the same method that consumers used to sign up.”

Like the Arizona settlement, Amazon did not admit or deny any wrongdoing.

The FTC had, in 2024, proposed an updated “click to cancel” rule that would “require sellers to make it as easy for consumers to cancel their enrollment as it was to sign up.”

The amended rule was blocked after a federal appeals court said in 2025 that the FTC had not conducted a preliminary regulatory analysis, according to a report from the Associated Press.

However, this year, the FTC appeared to be reviving its efforts to amend the existing rule, as it launched an advance notice of proposed rulemaking, which means it is considering new regulatory action.

The switch, announced by parent company SpaceX in an Oct. 29 note to customers, will be based on Starlink’s ability to meet rising consumer demand and properly manage network capacity in select areas. So far, the demand-based pricing model is only rolling out in Missouri and Kansas.

“As our constellation grows and network capacity changes, service pricing may change from time to time,” SpaceX stated in its customer note, as reported by technology influencer Sawyer Merritt in an Oct. 30 X post. “With your next billing cycle on or after Nov. 30, the monthly price for your Residential service plan will be adjusted to $156/month.” The company added that it will review the dynamic pricing invoice structure about four times annually, and cost limits will apply, too.

Why the shift to dynamic pricing?

Starlink claimed that the pricing shift is necessary to keep service levels up.

“Strong demand for Starlink reflects the value customers continue to see in the service, and pricing may change as we continue to invest in affordable, high-performance products and services,” Starlink stated on its website.

The move really comes down to traffic management, telecom experts say.

“A satellite can only serve so many homes in one patch of sky, and SpaceX can’t just run more cable down the road when a neighborhood fills up,” Tyler Cooper, editor-in-chief at BroadbandNow.com, told Moneywise. “So price becomes the lever that gets pulled.”

Starlink will likely raise rates where a cell is crowded to slow signups and protect speeds, and cut it where there’s spare capacity to fill the empty seats, Cooper said. “If you’re familiar with airline pricing, this is nothing new,” he added.

Industry competitors likely won’t match the Starlink shift, mainly because of technology differences.

“I’d personally be surprised if Comcast or AT&T Fiber adopted quarterly repricing,” Cooper said. “Wired networks don’t hit capacity walls the same way, and in more competitive markets customers can just leave. The ones I’d watch are the 5G home internet providers, because they have the same crowded-tower problem.”

Rural customers may wind up paying more

Starlink customers in less populated areas could see steeper price increases than customers in urban areas.

“It isn’t the stated intent, but Starlink would say it’s pricing congestion, not captivity, but a rural cell gets congested because everyone there signs up, since there’s nothing else,” Cooper stated. “Meanwhile, in Kansas City, a denser market where people have other options, Residential Max is listed at $117. So the less choice you have, the more likely you are to end up in the expensive zone.”

Options Starlink customers have

With Starlink’s pricing changes potentially affecting millions of subscribers over time, customers should weigh several practical steps to protect themselves from rising internet costs.

“Keep a copy of your order, deal, price increase notice and bills,” Roger Diefendorf, an attorney at San Francisco-based Forum & Lex, P.C. and a former California administrative law judge, told Moneywise. “Ask them to explain why you are being charged that amount. Maybe your deal ran out, or something was added.”

One issue to check is whether you signed a deal that required you to keep your account for a specific number of months to receive your equipment for free. “It may just be month to month, but that’s not always clear from your monthly bill,” Diefendorf noted. “In their U.S. terms, they state that you may owe a change fee if you cancel or make changes to your plan while under a service commitment.”

A Starlink contract also tells customers to cancel service before the next bill so you aren’t charged another month, Diefendorf said. “Check the terms that apply to your order,” he advised. “Verify that the other provider will be able to service your home and how much you will be paying per month. You may get a lower monthly price but pay more overall with installation and cancellation fees.”

If you’re still not satisfied with your bill, you can keep your documents and file a billing complaint with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission. “If you’re in Missouri, you can also contact the Missouri Attorney General about potentially deceptive advertising or billing practices,” Diefendorf said. “There is no guarantee you’ll receive your money back or a lower price.”

Starlink customers should also aim to budget for the bill you might get, not the one you have. “At this point, customers should expect price increases,” Cooper said. “Then, I’d take a hard look at your plan, because a lot of people pay for speed they don’t use. But yes, this hits households with fixed incomes hardest.”

Additionally, if you’re retired, and your Social Security check adjusts once a year and your internet bill can change every three months, that’s a real problem. “In rural areas where Starlink is the only real option, ‘just switch providers’ isn’t really advice,” Cooper added.

Serena Arvayo and her family have been awarded $8 million after a neighbor sued over the vocalizations of Arvayo’s child, who has autism, according to NBC Bay Area. Among the things the neighbor complained about were the sounds the child would make when chasing bubbles in the Arvayos’ backyard during the weekend.

Ezequiel, known as Zeek, is a 14-year-old who suffers from Level 3 autism, the most severe form of the disorder that’s left him unable to speak. His mother says Zeek is capable of producing sounds, which often sound like grunts, a process called vocal stimming.

The lawsuit

Arvayo — a single mother — and Zeek lived with her father in a San Jose home but moved out following complaints from the neighbor. The family was still hit with a lawsuit in December 2023 from the neighbor, who claimed her property value was dropping because of Zeek.

According to NBC Bay Area, the suit — filed against the family and the landlord — claimed Zeek should be considered a “nuisance” and not be allowed around the home again. The neighbor also claimed Zeek was left in the backyard almost daily and would “wail and scream for hours, often without adult supervision,” according to KRON4 News.

A friend of Arvayo alleges the neighbor tried to recruit other people on the street to join her suit, but was rebuffed.

Arvayo filed a countersuit against the neighbor, telling NBC Bay Area that the neighbor called her son’s grunts “disgusting.”

According to the New York Post, the family’s countersuit noted the child attended school and behavioral therapy on weekdays from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. On weekend afternoons, the countersuit said, he enjoyed chasing bubbles in the backyard and that “often resulted in him expressing his joy through vocal stimming, a form of vocalization and self-stimulatory behavior. Given his condition and need for supervision, Ezequiel was never left unsupervised.”

The ruling

The court threw out the lawsuit by the neighbor in September. A jury awarded the family $8 million for what their attorney describes as the neighbor’s “intentional infliction of emotional distress.”

“This has been a years long battle that we had no choice but to fight,” Arvayo’s attorney Rachael Boden told KRON4 News. “This verdict shows that the jury listened to the evidence, understood the struggles and the daily life of the Arvayo family and truly stood behind this amazing family. While the sounds an Autistic child makes are audible, they do not constitute a nuisance in our civilized society. We hope this case shines a light on the real-life day to day that families like this go through.”

Arvayo told NBC News in 2024 that she believed the suit was the result of a lack of understanding of autism.

The mother has written a children’s book that encourages awareness and empathy for children who have moderate to severe autism. It’s called “A Friend Like Zeek” and it currently has a 4.9 out of 5-star rating on Amazon.

“That is a lot of money,” Forward told KHOU 11. “It’s a big hit for a small business like ours.”

Forward is now working with the Houston Police Department and Chase Bank to recover the stolen money. She is likely the victim of a practice called check washing, experts say, in which criminals steal a check and then use chemicals including bleach and nail polish remover to erase all check information and replace it with their own.

Her case is just one among a wave of mail thefts happening across the country.

Gangs stealing checks ‘en masse’

Scott Anchin, senior vice president, strategic initiatives and policy for the Independent Community Bankers of America, told USA TODAY that, unlike in the past when check fraudsters operated independently, “now, you have real organized criminal gangs who engage in check fraud.” These gangs “steal checks en masse,” he added.

Three men from New York, two from the Bronx and one from Queens were arrested on allegations of stealing thousands of checks worth close to $5 million from blue mailboxes across Long Island, FOX 5 News reported .

And in November of last year in Oklahoma, eight people pleaded guilty in federal court to a scheme that’s said to have drained more than $100,000 from local bank accounts using stolen USPS master keys, per a KOCO 5 News report.

Many consumer advocates now believe that online payments — via electronic check, debit or credit card — are the safest bet for consumers as check fraud rises.

Creative approaches

Check thieves are creative in their approach to stealing mail in their hunt for checks, including using fishing devices fitted with mouse glue traps to pull out every envelope the adhesive catches.

“Usually they use a belt and then adhesive trap or a mouse,” Raymond Tierney, Suffolk County District Attorney, told FOX 5 New York. “Once the adhesive gets down to where the mail is, all the mail sticks, they bring it up,” he added.

Jared Kay, a small business owner in the same neighborhood, said his insurance payment was intercepted. “When I dropped it off the USPS blue box, you figure that’s the most secure way of sending a check in the mail,” Kay told FOX 5. He added that he believes an insider was involved in the theft of his check: “Someone inside was taking these letters, opening them up, and when they find a check, they gave it to someone to wash it.” (There is no evidence to support it was an inside job, Fox 5 noted.)

One Long Island family, the Kudlers, is still trying to recover more than $2,000 from Chase after discovering three of their checks had been altered, telling FOX 5 that the date, amount and name of the payee had all been changed.

The Oklahoma City case demonstrates how large check fraud operations have become. The group may have used stolen USPS arrow keys to open blue mailboxes and steal mail across Oklahoma City, KOCO 5 reported. The criminals also reportedly tried to recruit others in plain sight, advertising their scheme on social media.

Fraudsters also have moved beyond just washing ink off checks with acetone and now “cook” them as well. This technique involves scanning the information on the original, including the signature and editing it in software such as Photoshop, then printing counterfeits, David Maimon, a cybersecurity expert and professor at Georgia State University, explained to KHOU 11.

“I strongly recommend folks to simply avoid writing checks and mailing them using USPS,” he added. You can also arrange for your bank to send checks on your behalf.

Still insist on mailing checks? How to protect your money

If you still want to mail physical checks, the first step experts recommend is to reduce the number of stops in your mail’s delivery journey. If you can take the check straight to the post office, do it. Joe Bernardo, head of fraud and claims at Wells Fargo, told USA Today, “The more touch points there are along the way, the more bad things can happen.” You should also avoid keeping checks in your mailbox overnight.

You can also request checks with watermarks or holograms that may be more secure, and writing in permanent ink is safer than using a ballpoint pen. Also be sure not to leave a blank space where a criminal is more likely to fill in their own information.

Once you’ve mailed out a check, monitor your bank account to track when the money is debited. Debits don’t happen until the payee deposits the check and their bank processes it. If your available balance drops by more than the amount you wrote on the check, something is likely wrong.

You should also set up automatic notifications and opt to receive a text or push notification whenever a check clears or a debit occurs, instead of having to manually sign in to your bank app all the time.

You can also track checks that are owed to you. USPS’s Informed Delivery Service provides you with digital previews of incoming mail. If a check you’re expecting has been photographed but never arrives, flag it immediately. Review the details of the check previews to ensure nothing has been tampered with, including the recipient’s name and address.

Don’t delay when you suspect fraud, as there are time limits attached to reporting. If you miss the window, your bank can legally refuse a claim you make.

For example, a JPMorgan Chase Deposit Account Agreement states that in order to be considered for reimbursement, you must alert the bank “within 60 days after we make a statement available if a check drawn on your account that you did not authorize or that is altered is listed on your statement” and “within 6 months after we make the statement available if a check drawn on your account has any unauthorized, forged, improper or missing endorsements on the back of the check.”

The cost of living has been a hot topic in 2026, with inflation rising faster than in 2025 due to U.S. tariffs and the war in Iran. Those economic pressures have driven up everyday costs, from groceries to gas.

To keep pace, the IRS is raising the standard deduction for married couples filing jointly to $33,200, up $1,000 from 2026. Single taxpayers and married individuals filing separately will see their standard deduction rise by $500 to $16,600. Roughly 90% of taxpayers choose the standard deduction over itemizing expenses on their tax returns.

The IRS also adjusted tax bracket income thresholds to account for inflation, though the top tax rate remains capped at 37% for single filers making over $661,375.

Without these annual inflation tweaks, Americans receiving cost-of-living raises could end up pushed into higher tax brackets even if their actual purchasing power hasn’t changed.

Here is a breakdown for the new 2027 tax brackets:

• 37% for incomes over $661,375 ($793,650 for married couples filing jointly)
• 35% for incomes over $264,550 ($529,100 for married couples filing jointly)
• 32% for incomes over $208,325 ($416,650 for married couples filing jointly)
• 24% for incomes over $109,125 ($218,250 for married couples filing jointly)
• 22% for incomes over $52,025 ($104,050 for married couples filing jointly)
• 12% for incomes over $12,800 ($25,600 for married couples filing jointly)

Other key IRS changes for 2027

Aside from higher standard deductions and income tax brackets, the IRS also increased caps for several popular tax credits and exclusions, including the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit.

The maximum EITC in 2027 for qualifying taxpayers with three or more children will climb to $8,496 in 2027, up from $8,231 in 2026. The credit targets working low- and middle-income individuals and families who qualify to reduce their tax burden. According to the IRS, about 24 million families claimed $70 billion through the EITC in 2025.

For the Child Tax Credit, the maximum amount for 2027 increased by $100 to $2,300 per eligible child, with the refundable portion rising to $1,800. (If a refundable credit exceeds your total income tax liability, the IRS refunds you the remaining balance.)

Other notable 2027 adjustments cover adoption expenses, medical savings accounts, foreign earned income limits and annual gift exclusions.

What tax relief is available for 2026?

While the Nov. 5 updates apply to returns filed in 2028, taxpayers can still take advantage of several credits and deductions when filing next spring:

• Charitable deductions for non-itemizers: For the first time, taxpayers who take the standard deduction can take away up to $1,000 in charitable donations (2,000 if married and filing jointly), provided donations go to qualified non-profit organizations. Personal gifts to family members do not qualify.
• Senior tax deduction: Seniors age 65 and older can claim a new $6,000 deduction. This benefit phases out once adjusted gross income exceeds $75,000 for single filers or $150,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly.
• Income timing strategy: “If you’re barely over those thresholds, either deferring income or accelerating deductions can help you to maximize this deduction,” says Logan Allec, a CPA and owner of CPA Clarita Group, told Moneywise in September. Allec suggests prepaying 2027 property taxes, paying rental property insurance premiums early or making charitable donations before year-end.
• Auto loan interest deduction: Filers can deduct up to $10,000 in loan interest paid on a new, U.S.-assembled vehicle purchased for personal use, provided the loan originated after Dec. 31, 2024.

The IRS recalculates tax brackets and standard deductions annually to reflect shifts in the cost of living. For comparison, the standard deduction for the 2026 tax year is $16,100 for single filers, up from $15,750 in 2025.

The men, who are from New York, allegedly purchased goods at stores such as Kohl’s, Target, Home Depot and Lowes using counterfeit bills and then returned them for real cash.

According to a press release covered by WXPI Channel 11, they profited at least $12,436 through the scheme. They are alleged to have gone to stores across 16 counties in Pennsylvania.

The men haven’t been arrested yet. The investigation into the alleged crimes includes the U.S. Secret Service, along with state police and police departments across municipalities.

How the government identifies counterfeit currency

It might come as a surprise to find out that the Secret Service played a part in a counterfeiting investigation. Today, they’re most commonly known for protecting people like current and former presidents, vice presidents and their families.

But the Secret Service was actually founded in 1865 to combat counterfeit currency. At the time, nearly a third of all money in circulation in the U.S. was counterfeit. The agency only began protecting presidents after the assassination of President McKinley in 1901.

These days, you’re far less likely to ever run into a counterfeit bill. The Federal Reserve estimates that about $15 to $30 million in counterfeit bills are in circulation, out of $2.3 trillion in total circulating cash.

The government uses a wide variety of security features on bills to make them harder to counterfeit (and easier for counterfeits to be detected).

Currency production is split between the U.S. Mint, which handles coins, and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP), which handles paper currency. The BEP has designed a large number of security features, including ink that changes color depending on the viewing angle and textured printing.

Bills are periodically redesigned with new security features. The BEP is currently preparing a series of redesigns for most U.S. bills (except the $1 and $2 bills). The first new bill will be the $10 bill. Production on the new $10 bill was announced to start in 2026, though the new design has not yet been unveiled.

What to do if you realize you have a counterfeit bill

Knowing the security features of a real bill can make it easier to notice when you’re handling a counterfeit.

You’re unlikely to come across very many counterfeit bills, but if you do, you should first take note of how you got it.

If you acquired it from an individual, the Federal Reserve suggests writing down information like that person’s license plate number and physical characteristics.

Don’t spend the counterfeit bill — knowingly spending it once you realize it’s fake is a crime. And if you received it as change while shopping, don’t return it to the store where you got it. Instead, the Federal Reserve says, store it separately from any real money you have and contact your local police.

According to Reuters, the Seattle-based division had 50,494 employees as of December 2025, meaning about 2,500 roles would be affected by the layoffs.

As CNBC reports, some people will be notified that their roles have been eliminated, while other cuts will be achieved through attrition (not replacing jobs that are vacated).

CEO Kelly Ortberg said on an earnings call last month that the company is delaying the ramp-up of manufacturing for its Max aircrafts to the second half of 2027, and that the manufacture of airplane wings is proceeding slower than expected.

“Unfortunately, that means we need to align our staffing levels to our revised business plan,” Boeing’s head of its commercial aircraft unit, Stephanie Pope, said in a statement.

This marks another bump amid several challenging years for Boeing.

Tempers flew high inside Boeing

This time last year, Ortberg unleashed his frustration with the company’s employees during a company-wide meeting, The Wall Street Journal reported.

“We spend more time arguing amongst ourselves than thinking about how we’re going to beat Airbus,” Ortberg said about the company’s European rival.

The firm had been reeling from several high-profile disasters, chief among which are its 737 Max 8 planes, which were involved in two crashes, in 2018 and 2019. The crashes resulted in 346 deaths. It was also coping with repeated labour disruptions, including a machinist strike.

Ortberg blamed the work culture of deflecting responsibility, overspending, and overpaid managers, according to the WSJ.

“Don’t sit at the water cooler and b—h about people,” Ortberg told employees on the call. “We’re at a low here, folks.”

Getting by at work during stressful times

All companies, even those far less embattled than Boeing, have to pay attention to interpersonal dynamics among employees. And anyone employed a medium-size or large firm would do well to think about how they can contribute to a healthy culture.

Whether you’re on location or working remote, everyone has some type of office personality, a style of communication they adopt at work.

Every job has an office gossip, for example.

Indeed identified 10 workplace personality types, including the people-pleaser, the perfectionist, and the upward worker.

Some people work best in their silos, others are motivated by competition, and there are even employees who thrive by inspiring others.

Whatever your office personality type, it’s important to know which qualities help you and which ones hinder you in the workplace.

Updated with files from Moneywise editor G.M. Buck

Between skyrocketing housing costs, inflation and childcare expenses that rival mortgage payments, living comfortably on a single income requires careful planning and an understanding of your household’s bottom line.

A shifting political landscape could soften the heightened anxiety. According to reports by The New York Times and GV Wire, the Trump administration has drafted a policy proposal, championed by Vice President JD Vance, that would allow married couples with a stay-at-home parent to tap into the federal childcare subsidies. By allocating funds from the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), the draft plan could provide qualifying single-income households with roughly $9,00 per child annually.

Critics have argued that diverting these funds could squeeze working parents who depend on subsidized daycare; the proposal signals a change in how the government supports early childhood care. But until any policy changes take effect, families still need to know: what does it actually take to support a family on a single income today?

A six-figure reality in some states

With high child care costs, it’s an idea that many parents might consider. A SmartAsset study suggested that in 2026, getting by on a single paycheck may be harder than ever.

In the report, a ranking was made of how much a single working parent needs to earn in every U.S. state to support a household with a nonworking partner and one child. The most expensive states were, predictably, Hawaii and California, while the cheapest were Arkansas, Mississippi and Kentucky.

Another big reason that families consider dropping to one income is the cost of child care. In at least 20 states and Washington, D.C., full-time childcare costs hit lower-income Americans the hardest, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

So on paper, staying home can look like a straightforward cost-saving move. If one paycheck barely covers day care, why not just cut out that expense altogether? But eliminating child care costs doesn’t automatically make a one-income household affordable.

Leaving the workforce for several years can have lasting consequences as well, especially when it comes to future earnings and career growth, Emily Green, head of wealth management at Ellevest, told CNBC Make It.

Women are especially affected. About 82% of stay-at-home parents are women, according to Pew Research Center data from 2023, making them more likely to experience career interruptions, missed raises and slower retirement savings.

“In households where there’s a little more financial wiggle room, women often don’t think about what they may give up in the long term — say in 5 to 10 years — by leaving their jobs now,” Green said.

When the stay-at-home parent is ready to go back to work, they may find it challenging after a long break. Resume gaps can limit job opportunities or lead to lower pay than before, a hidden cost that doesn’t show up in a monthly budget.

A checklist for potential stay-at-home parents

Before leaping into a single-income household, financial experts say it helps to walk through the numbers and trade-offs carefully. Start with these four simple steps.

Make a financial plan

“Those who fail to plan are planning to fail” is a familiar adage, and one that certainly applies to personal finance. Before you make this major life decision, figure out how much of your current lifestyle a single income will cover, and which expenses you can trim.

A financial advisor can help you crunch the numbers and build a plan that works for your family. But with something as sensitive as your finances, and a decision as big as potentially leaving the workforce — it’s important to find someone you trust.

Finding the right advisor isn’t always easy — there’s no one-size-fits-all solution. That’s why Advisor.com lets you set up a free initial consultation with no obligation to hire to see if they’re the right fit for you.

Once you’ve got the right financial advisor in your corner, the next step is getting a clear picture of where your money’s actually going. That starts with the basics — budgeting and tracking your spending.

Make a budget and stick to it

If you enjoy creating spreadsheets, this is your time to shine. To make a basic budget, record your monthly income, expenses and debts. Then, consider the 50/30/20 rule for simple financial management: 50% of your income for needs (essentials like housing and groceries), 30% for wants (purchases like streaming subscriptions and dining out) and 20% for savings, investments and debt repayment.

You can also let Rocket Money work behind the scenes to keep your finances on track.

With the app’s premium Net Worth feature, you can link all your accounts — banking, investments, retirement, property, vehicles and even manually added items like jewelry — and it shows your assets versus liabilities in real time, no spreadsheets required.

With free tools like subscription tracking, bill reminders, credit scores and budgeting basics, plus premium features such as automated savings and customizable dashboards, Rocket Money makes it easier to see the big financial picture, stay on top of your investments and keep you focused on building your wealth.

Save on necessary costs

If the big picture still doesn’t add up to an affordable stay-at-home parenting option, you may be able to spend less to make up the difference. That could mean cutting back on nonessentials, as well as finding better deals on the things you really need.

Some costs — like home insurance for homeowners and car insurance for licensed drivers — are unavoidable.

And homeowners insurance is getting more expensive. The average single-family homeowner already pays an eye-watering $2,370 in yearly premiums, and to make matters worse, 47% of policyholders saw their rates go up in the past year, according to a 2025 study by J.D. Power.

This is bad news for those who simply auto-renew with their current provider every year. In such a quickly shifting landscape, it can pay off to take two minutes to shop around for better rates.

Drivers are also paying a pretty penny on premiums these days. As of January, the national average cost of car insurance is $2,297 annually (or $191 per month), according to Experian data. But rates can vary widely depending on your state, driving history and vehicle type.

Create an emergency fund

By making a financial plan, sticking to your budget and lowering the cost of insurance, you may find yourself in a better position to stay home with your kids.

But what do you do when the unexpected happens? That’s where an emergency fund comes in.

Whether you’re a single- or dual-income household, unforeseen circumstances like layoffs and medical crises can throw even the best-laid financial plans into disarray. But an emergency fund that can cover three to six months of living expenses could help you weather the storm.

The bottom line

Choosing to have one parent stay home means avoiding day care expenses, but it should also take into account housing, health care, an emergency fund and retirement — and whether or not they can all be supported by a single paycheck. There are also the long-term career implications to consider.

For many families, the decision comes down to a combination of parenting philosophies, whether the math works and being able to plan for whichever option is the best fit.

At their peak in 2004, the company had about 9,000 stores globally, stocked with movies for all types of viewers.

Flash forward to today and only one Blockbuster store remains in the world. In an episode of Bartell’s Backroads, ABC10 reporter John Bartell visited the store and spoke with its owner. Standing outside the building, Bartell said lightheartedly, “Oh, your eyes aren’t deceiving you. Your nostalgic movie memories are alive and well in Bend, Oregon.” Adding, “This is the last Blockbuster on the planet.”

The business turned 41 in October 2026, and with thousands of Blockbuster stores closed, it’s fair to wonder how the Bend branch has stayed open this long.

How Blockbuster went from 9,000 stores to one

Blockbuster’s collapse unfolded quickly as competitors silently chipped away at its core business. By the late 2000s, Netflix was offering DVD deliveries via mail, Redbox stationed automated, self-service movie rental kiosks in strategic locations and online streaming was becoming popular..

Blockbuster’s late fees, which generated about $800 million in 2000, according to a C-Suite Network study, pushed customers toward more affordable alternatives. Blockbuster reportedly declined a $50 million offer to buy Netflix the same year.

Weighed down by debt and punished by the 2008 recession, Blockbuster filed for bankruptcy in 2010, according to a BBC report. Dish Network bought the remains in 2011, and by January 2014, it had closed all its company-run stores and its DVD-by-mail service. Only a few franchise shops were left, and they all closed one after the other, except for the one in Bend. Alaska’s last stores closed in 2018, BBC reported, and when a Perth, Australia location shut down in March 2019, Bend became the last Blockbuster on Earth.

Why this Oregon shop survived when every other one folded

The Bend store wasn’t always a Blockbuster. Ken and Debbie Tisher originally opened it as a Pacific Video Store in 1992, before converting it into a Blockbuster franchise in 2000. Because of their independent ownership agreement, they were shielded from the corporate bankruptcy. The owners pay Dish Network a licensing fee for the trademark.

The store’s day-to-day operations are overseen by General Manager Sandi Harding, who has worked at the shop since 2004. Her devotion to the place drew national attention and a 2020 documentary called “The Last Blockbuster.”

When asked how the store survived, Harding told ABC10, “a lot of luck has played into it. A lot of hard work has played into it.” Further attributing their survival to “just my love of movies, love of my crew that works here, my customers.”

The store is still fitted with some of its original features, including an old checkout system. Pointing to the 1990s hardware, Harding said, “It is a DOS-based IBM computer system,” adding, “You can see it has 1985 to 2006 in here.”

When the Perth store closed, Harding got a surprise call. “That store actually called us the last night they were open and wished us well,” she told ABC10. “All the way from Australia just to tell us good luck.”

The merchandise and tourist business that helps pay the bills

Movie rentals alone won’t be enough to keep the store going. According to a report from The Washington Post, roughly 80% of the store’s revenue is generated from merchandise sales.

Speaking about the store’s survival strategy, Harding told The Oregonian, “70 to 80% of the business is the merchandise.” T-shirts, hoodies and Blockbuster-branded fanny packs available online have turned the shop into a pop-culture gift store.

Harding acknowledged this shift, noting that nostalgia keeps the business viable. “I think it’s great that people are nostalgic for it. It’s certainly helping us stay alive,” she told Fox.

Tourists fly in from around the world for a selfie in front of the sign. Some rent a movie just to walk back outside and drop it in the return slot, teaching their kids a ritual that is best experienced at a real-life Blockbuster.

“We’ve had people who will come in and rent a movie just to go back outside and put it in the Dropbox, so their kids can experience that with them,” Harding told ABC10.

The shop also focuses on providing a human experience that Harding says “you don’t get sitting on your couch all by yourself.” According to her, walk-in customers get to meet other renters and exchange recommendations on different things. “You could be walking around and be in the same aisle with another customer and the other customer could be like, ‘Oh my gosh, did you see that?,” she said.

A lesson for investors and small business owners

Blockbuster’s collapse remains a cautionary tale in business about ignoring shifts in technology. Netflix has since become the world’s largest paid streaming service, according to a Resourcera report, after Blockbuster passed up the buy offer in 2000.

The lesson is clear. An industry giant can be reduced to nothing if it fails to adapt and innovate. Blockbuster’s decline from about 9,000 stores to one surviving franchise illustrates this perfectly.

The Bend store only remains because of customer sentiment and nostalgia. As Bartell put it, “Streaming might rule the present, but here in Bend, Oregon, rewinding is still required, at least metaphorically.”

Regarding the store’s future, Harding told ABC10, “As long as we can pay the bills and pay our employees, we’re going to keep going.”

“Well, you should’ve had stock,” Trump said in a CBS News interview that aired on Nov. 8.

The two briefly spoke over each other during the exchange before Trump appeared to suggest that “everyone’s” net worth had surged by an equivalent amount. Douthat, however, quickly clarified that his personal net worth had not skyrocketed by nearly $3 billion.

‘I devote almost no time to my net worth’

Trump went on to further dismiss longstanding concerns that he’s profited from his time in the Oval Office. Presidents usually divest their stock holdings and place them in a blind trust managed by an independent trustee before taking office, but Trump didn’t do so when his second term began.

“I devote almost no time to my net worth. I don’t care,” Trump told Douthat. “I have a lot of money, and far more than I ever thought I’d have. And I guess it’s gone up. I don’t even know.”

Without naming him, Trump brought up his son, Eric, saying he’s a “very straight, good guy” who manages his finances. “I don’t even talk to him about it,” the president said.

Trump added that he believes it would be difficult to tell his adult sons to pause all business dealings during their father’s second term. “It’s all computer generated,” Trump said. “I have no idea what the hell they’re buying.”

According to Forbes, Trump’s net worth swelled to $7 billion as of mid-September. Just over one-third of that fortune rests on crypto sales made from stablecoins, among other digital assets. Real estate investments and the Trump Media & Technology Group [NASDAQ: DJT] — the parent company of Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social — account for another large portion of his net worth.

Trump has also maintained financial stakes in companies heavily involved with the AI buildout, alongside oil and gas companies. The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonpartisan watchdog, released a report on Oct. 1 indicating that by the end of 2025, Trump held between $2.9 million and $9.5 million in companies spearheading data center construction and supplying equipment for the AI buildout.

A late October analysis carried out by Democratic lawmakers on the Joint Economic Committee — a joint House and Senate panel tasked with analyzing the U.S. economy — also indicated that Trump’s estimated oil and gas stock holdings have increased to $81.6 million, a 43% increase from the end of 2025.

A White House spokesperson told Moneywise in early October that Trump’s holdings are kept in discretionary accounts and invested in computer-based portfolios that duplicate major indexes automatically.

“Neither President Trump nor any member of his family has any ability to direct, influence or provide input regarding how the portfolio is invested or when investments are bought or sold,” White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said at the time.

The latest on a stock trading ban

Stock trading bans have languished in Congress for years. In late September, Democratic senators blocked a bill that would have placed a limit on congressional stock trading, arguing the bill wasn’t stringent enough.

Provisions to restrict Trump and his family from trading weren’t included in the bill, which was also attached to an unrelated and unpopular voter ID measure favored by many Republicans. The White House did endorse this legislation.

The House Freedom Caucus (HFC), though, urged Congress on Nov. 9 to enact a stock-trading ban for the legislative, judicial and executive branches, including the president and members of his family. It’s a notable development, since the HFC is a staunchly conservative group of House lawmakers that has stepped up in Trump’s defense on Capitol Hill.

The “Shark Tank” star and billionaire entrepreneur posted on X that the midterms were “a rebuke of the way we do politics and run this country” regardless of party affiliation, saying it was time for both Republicans and Democrats to address the money problems plaguing government and average Americans.

“The math is the math,” he wrote. “We have to reduce the deficit and spending. We need to raise taxes on the wealthy without diminishing investment that creates jobs, raises and improved productivity.”

The total U.S. national debt is crushing, at $40.5 trillion, with the debt to GDP ratio at 125%. To reduce the debt, Cuban recommends that all federal agencies cut their spending by 1% a year for five years.

But he also recommends raising government revenue by dramatically increasing taxes — specifically on wealthy individuals and corporations — in order to save programs like Social Security.

The Social Security Administration projects its primary trust fund will run out by 2032, reducing benefits for beneficiaries unless something can be done.

Moneywise reached out to Cuban for comment but did not hear back as of publication. Here’s a breakdown of his proposals.

Tax more to support Social Security, raise wages

Since 2018, Americans in the highest tax bracket have paid a 37% tax rate to the IRS. For 2026, income over $640,600 for individuals and $768,700 for couples is subject to this rate. In 2027, those numbers will rise to $661,375 and $793,650.

Cuban proposes boosting the top marginal tax rate to 44%. For context, 44% is still lower than the 50% tax rate the richest Americans paid in the early 1980s, per the Bradford Tax Institute, but it’s also higher than they’ve paid since the 1990s.

While the people in this tax bracket represent just 1% of the population, according to the finance and investing website DQYDJ, their contributions have an outsized impact on federal revenue. According to the National Taxpayers Union Federation, the wealthiest Americans paid nearly 38.4% of all income taxes in 2023.

Cuban also proposes a Social Security tax on income between $1 million and $5 million. Currently, the highest amount of earnings on which individuals must pay Social Security tax is $184,500. This will rise to $192,300 in 2027.

As the Wall Street Journal reveals, he’s also recommended increasing taxes on windfall profits of $1 billion or more — such as when he sold his majority stake in the Dallas Mavericks for $3.5 billion in 2023 per HITC.

In addition, Cuban has a carrot-and-stick proposal to incentivize companies to pay higher wages to their workers while also raising corporate tax revenue.

Normally, when publicly traded companies buy back their stock from shareholders they have to pay a 1% buy-back tax to the government. Cuban suggests raising that to 4% for any publicly traded company that doesn’t pay its workers at least $25 an hour.

He also suggests the government institute a new $20/hour minimum wage mandate for very profitable businesses.

Drawing the line at a pure wealth tax

While Cuban is for raising income taxes equally for everyone in the top tax bracket, he draws the line at a targeted wealth tax of the kind that Sen. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have proposed, per the National Taxpayers Union Federation. He believes such a tax would penalize small business owners and startup founders.

Sanders recommends that the U.S. government establish a 1% tax on individuals with a net worth over $32 million to as much as 8% for wealth over $10 billion. Cuban is worth an estimated $6.8 billion, according to Forbes.

Sanders estimates that could raise $4.35 trillion in federal revenue in the next decade, allowing the government to restore $1.1 trillion to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act and expand Medicare, among other items.

Nvidia stock dropped 6.39% on Monday morning following the Sunday letter Huang sent to employees apologizing for the affair (without mentioning the other party), and reaffirming his commitment to the company.

The company didn’t respond to Moneywise’s request for comment, but a spokesperson reiterated that the news “will not slow Nvidia,” while the board said they have “no reason to believe” that Nvidia secrets or national security were compromised.

They also, however, have no succession plan for Huang, whose job hangs in the balance and whose ouster, Reuters warned, could lead to “a full blown leadership ⁠crisis.”

Could Nvidia’s leadership woes become a problem for your portfolio?

Escalating concerns over the pace of AI already caused Nvidia’s stock to take a 22% hit last month. It remains the world’s second-most valuable company, at $4.5 trillion, however, as its AI chips are central to the global data center buildout.

Yet given Fidelity’s note that the 10 largest stocks, including Nvidia, “accounted for nearly 40% of the S&P 500 Index” in June, many investors may not realize how tied their portfolio is to the company’s fortunes.

Investigations, of course, still need to be completed — which could include fresh scrutiny from the incoming Democrat-controlled Senate and Congress.

But Gary Black, managing partner with The Future Fund LLC, wrote on X that, while he doubts Huang will remain as Nvidia CEO and has no successor, he doesn’t “see long-term value impairment.” He acknowledged, though, that “many portfolio managers will reduce their Nvidia holdings in the coming weeks as a result of uncertainty” over the situation.

Yorkville Ives tech analyst Dan Ives wrote that the potential for Huang’s removal “will add risk to the stock” given his importance to the company, while analyst Tristan Gerra of Baird told CNBC that the U.S. government could restrict the company’s dealings with China as a result.

Still, CNBC reported that Baird and multiple other analysts are hedging their bets that Nvidia stock will outperform by up to $500, with one noting that, despite the headlines, “The AI movement will march on and Nvidia has the best allocations to serve it.”

To be safe, however, FINRA says a look “under the hood” of your ETFs and mutual funds offers a better understanding of your exposure levels to potential volatility around any given stock — after which you can speak with a financial advisor to discuss how to best protect your portfolio.

Beyond that, investors will have to wait for investigations to play out before the true impact of this scandal on Nvidia’s stock price, and their own portfolios, is known.

“As an investor I want to know whether anything has compromised NVIDIA’s technology, damaged customer relationships or affected its ability to do business and grow earnings,” analyst Steven Fiorillo wrote on X. “Those are the questions that matter for the stock and for the people whose savings are invested in it.”

In a letter to Nvidia employees, Huang admitted to being unfaithful to his wife following reports that he had a relationship with Alice Huang (who has no relation to the Nvidia CEO), a former executive at Singapore-based data centre company Megaspeed, who U.S. authorities reportedly identified as a Chinese intelligence asset.

“I owe my family and all of you an apology,” Huang wrote in the letter released on Nov. 8. “I was unfaithful to my wife. My actions hurt her and our children. There is no excuse for what I did. I am deeply sorry.”

Nvidia’s board has since launched an independent investigation into whether Huang was targeted by Chinese intelligence, but the affair could also have major consequences for his personal fortune.

His wife, Lori, is a co-trustee of a family trust that includes more than 528 million Nvidia shares as of March 2026, according to the company’s 2026 proxy statement. If this scandal were to lead to a divorce, billions of dollars could potentially be at stake.

Why the affair is raising national security concerns

According to The New York Times, Secretary of State Marco Rubio oversaw the preparation of a classified memo earlier this spring, which reportedly warned senior Trump administration officials about Huang’s relationship with Alice Huang.

The memo was based on electronic surveillance of Alice, whom U.S. officials believed had been recruited by China’s Ministry of State Security, the country’s main intelligence agency.

Nvidia makes some of the world’s most advanced AI chips, which power everything from chatbots to data centres. The U.S. has restricted sales of certain chips to China over concerns that the technology could be used to strengthen the rival country’s military and AI capabilities.

Megaspeed, where Alice worked as an executive, reportedly purchased about $2 billion worth of Nvidia products in recent years, the NYT reports. U.S. authorities also suspect Megaspeed helped get restricted chips into China, bypassing U.S. export rules.

“While the Board has no reason to believe that either national security or NVIDIA secrets were compromised, the Board’s inquiry will examine all available information,” Nvidia’s board of directors said in a statement. The board also said it still has confidence in Huang’s leadership, and he has agreed to cooperate with the investigation.

“Today’s news will not slow Nvidia,” an company spokesperson told Moneywise. “Jensen is committed to continuing to lead Nvidia as CEO without interruption.”

The cost of an affair

Huang and his wife were college sweethearts who studied engineering together at Oregon State University. The couple married in 1985, eight years before Huang co-founded Nvidia, and have since built a life and an enormous fortune together.

Huang, however, has already seen billions wiped off his fortune in recent days. On Nov. 5, his net worth fell by $15.1 billion to $150.9 billion as Nvidia shares plunged more than 9% amid broader concerns about AI spending. That decline came before Huang publicly admitted to the affair.

His fortune took another hit Nov. 9 following news of the investigation, as Nvidia shares were down 5% at 11 a.m. EST. In fact, Forbes estimates Huang lost $7.4 billion within the first half-hour of trading.

But if Huang and his wife were to divorce, there could be even more money at stake. They have long-standing ties to California, where assets acquired during a marriage are generally considered community property and typically divided equally between spouses. Huang founded Nvidia after the couple married, which means some of his enormous wealth could potentially be subject to division.

However, the outcome would depend on how the assets are owned, the terms of their trusts and whether they have any marital agreements. Since California is a no-fault divorce state, an affair alone wouldn’t generally entitle Lori to a larger share of their wealth.

For now, Lori hasn’t publicly commented on the affair and there’s no indication the couple is planning to divorce. In his apology, Huang said he hopes his family can heal and that, over time, he can earn back their trust. Whether the scandal will have any lasting impact on his marriage, his fortune or his position at Nvidia remains to be seen.

CEO Elon Musk wrote in an X post on Sunday that demand for the stainless-steel pickups is now outpacing the rate at which Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) can make them at its factory and global headquarters in Austin, which is the only hub that manufactures the vehicle.

“We will try to make as many as possible before shutting down the line in about 8 months, but will have to return deposits for a lot of people,” he wrote in the post, which came two days after he broke the hearts of Cybertruck fans with the initial news of its end to make way for fabrication of the flashy new autonomous Cybercab.

How much were the deposits and how much will Tesla have to pay out?

The brand’s website currently states that reservation “pre-order payments” are fully refundable up until the car’s shipping date.

But there has been some confusion between the initial reservation fee and the order fee that a client pays once they reach the front of the reservation waitlist and are able to customize their vehicle.

Reservations opened up when the truck was first unveiled in 2019 for a mere $100 USD, a tiny fraction of the $60,990 to $120,000 price tag of the angular, head-turning set of wheels.

This price was briefly bumped to $250 when the first of them began hitting the roads at the end of 2023. Then in August 2024, the reservation system was done away with entirely, and direct orders were opened up to the general public without any waiting period. The fee to configure and lock in a Cybertruck, the order fee, was also set at $250, and was non-refundable at the time.

Of course, now that Tesla is the one cancelling orders, these funds will be returned to would-be Cybertruck owners.

According to the latest sales figures via Bloomberg, a total of 7,133 of the machines were purchased in the U.S. during the first five months of this year, compared to the 250,000 Musk touted in 2019. But, the model’s discontinuation has prompted a reported surge in interest.

It’s unclear how much of that interest has translated into actual orders, but in Musk’s tweet, he did state that shifts are being ramped up at the Texas plant, as the order backlog for the truck “is currently far more than we can make before dismantling the line for Cybercab expansion around June/July next year.”

The model usually takes between a few weeks and a few months from order to shipment, depending on trim. Orders for multiple variations have been paused.

Musk denies that halting assembly is due to profitability concerns

Despite rampant speculation and data showing that Cybertruck purchases have fallen year-over-year since 2023, the tech mogul insists that winding down operations is simply a matter of limited factory capacity and the opportunity cost.

“This is not a case of Cybertruck being unprofitable, as has been misreported by legacy media, but rather that the opportunity cost of the complexity of Cybertruck is vastly outweighed by the value of incremental Cybercab production,” Musk wrote in his post Sunday.

Many fans have taken to socials to lament the termination of the polarizing auto — and agree with its maker’s assertion that “there will never be another vehicle like it.”

The roof, though, was never finished. In fact, it didn’t even pass a county inspection and, most importantly, it never generated a single kilowatt of energy for the house. Now, a San Diego Superior Court judge has found Tesla liable for fraud.

Conroy estimates fixing the damage to his roof would cost more than $2.5 million. Tesla [NASDAQ: TSLA], at one point, reportedly made a counter offer of $5,000, according to a lawsuit over the construction failure.

The Musk connection

Tesla solar roofs were first introduced in 2016. CEO Elon Musk, at the time, presented them as an option that costs less than conventional roofing and solar panels, and spent $2.6 billion to acquire solar panel installer SolarCity. Within 10 years, however, Tesla discontinued the product.

Conroy’s case presented internal communications about his experience as evidence, with several high-ranking officials on the chain. One message his legal team submitted as an exhibit, for example, showed Bobby Yang, Tesla’s director of model engineering, discussing the project with others and using the term “experimenting” in regard to Conroy’s house. The message also indicated daily progress reports were being sent to Musk.

Tesla, last month, accepted liability for three of the five claims in Conroy’s suit as the company stipulated to breach of warranty, breach of contract and negligence. However, it continued to fight claims of fraud and negligent misrepresentation.

Judge Cynthia Freeland, who is overseeing the case, had sanctioned the company twice already, with penalties totaling just under $29,000, for failing to produce documents. With both of those financial sanctions, she warned that issue sanctions, which essentially declare that disputed facts in the case are taken as established, could follow.

On Sept. 11, she followed through on that, saying Tesla was liable for fraud and negligent misrepresentation, and future hearings would be focused on compensatory and punitive damages.

Tesla has asked the judge to reconsider that ruling, but she has reportedly refused. The case is still ongoing, and Tesla has asked the California Court of Appeal to reverse the order, saying it is “unduly punitive” and violates due process.

Tesla did not respond to Moneywise’s request for comment.

A nightmare project

While any sort of roof work can be a headache, Conroy’s description of the work in the legal filing underscores what the experience was like.

The roof tear off was supposed to be a two-day job. It took two weeks. The roof was also left exposed and unprotected for long stretches. Making matters worse, scratched tiles were installed, while other glass tiles shattered on the walkway. The family says it still cannot walk barefooted in the area.

An electrical consultant, hired by Conroy, opened up part of the roof and said the way the wiring and conduits were run under the tiles greatly increased the chances of a short-circuit, which could have resulted in a fire during heavy rain.

Conroy is in the process of removing the roof.

It’s a good gig. Brady is in the third season of a 10-year deal with the network reportedly worth $375 million — and he may need the cash flow.

He recently bought a rare rookie card for Las Vegas Raiders quarterback Fernando Mendoza, and according to his business partner Chris Costa, it cost him a “life-altering amount of money.” Brady didn’t say exactly what he paid, but the card has the only Mendoza autograph ever produced with the inscription “My 1st NFL Auto.”

The appeal is obvious. Brady is a part-owner of the Raiders, and Mendoza was the team’s first-round pick in this year’s draft.

But a keepsake isn’t the same thing as an investment. Collectible cards can turn a profit, and sometimes a spectacular one — they can also sit in a safe for years earning nothing while you pay to insure them.

Anyone buying rare cards, whether it’s a 1-of-1 autograph or a graded Pokémon card, is betting on finding someone who wants it as badly as they did, with a bigger wallet.

Tough negotiations

You might think a card collector who was contacted by the player many consider the greatest of all time might get a little starstruck and be easier to sway when asked to sell their collection’s crown jewel. Nuh-uh.

First, Brady had to find the owner, which he admits wasn’t easy. Then, he went back and forth with that collector for the better part of a month before capitulating to the owner’s demands — a big pile of cash as well as an autographed jersey. The two are also set to meet in person down the road.

“I figured you’ve got to invest in it and it’s going to hopefully bring some good luck to Las Vegas,” Brady said when showing off the card at Fanatics Fest in July.

The Mendoza mystery

While Brady is obviously bullish on Mendoza, he isn’t the Raiders’ starting quarterback.

Kirk Cousins was signed as a free agent in April and promptly named the team’s starter. Mendoza, though, has had a strong preseason, which has led to some calls to reconsider that decision.

But the Raiders still haven’t said when he’ll play. That leaves Brady holding a card for a quarterback who has yet to make a meaningful impact — and no way to value it until he does.

“It’s baptism by fire every day at all positions — especially rookie quarterbacks,” said head coach Klint Kubiak during training camp. “I see an improving player that we’ve just got to keep being hard on to get better.”

In a note to staff sent on Nov. 8 and posted on CNBC, Huang admitted to having an extramarital affair, saying he was “unfaithful” and hurt his wife and children. He did not name the woman in the affair but Nvidia has announced it will investigate reports he was the “target of foreign intelligence efforts.”

“I take full responsibility for what I did and the hurt I caused, and I accept the criticism that comes with it,” Huang said, adding that he supports the investigation. “I am committed to protecting NVIDIA and supporting America’s national security.”

The announcement comes after reports Huang had a close relationship with a woman named Alice Huang, who U.S. intelligence officials believe was working for the Chinese government.

When asked about the affair, Trump called Huang a “fine person,” and said he thinks he should remain the head of Nvidia.

“I have not spoken to him about it,” Trump told reporters on Nov. 8, before returning to Washington. “I just know he’s a fine person, but you never know what is going on…He’s done such an incredible job…He’s a fine person in my opinion.”

Trump was reportedly briefed roughly a year ago that a woman with ties to Huang was a Chinese spy but did not act on the intelligence. The president stood by his decision not to act and called the Nvidia CEO an “honorable guy.” He also said he would still be willing to take Huang on his upcoming trip to Asia.

“I haven’t heard he’s done anything wrong,” the president told reporters.

Alleged foreign intelligence

Nvidia’s investigation comes after a New York Times (NYT) exclusive published on Oct. 29 claimed a top executive at a Singapore-based data center company tied to Nvidia was possibly directing its AI chips to China.

Several U.S. outlets have reported that American officials believed Alice Huang, who has no relation to the Nvidia CEO, was an intelligence asset who was sending information to Beijing and helping smuggle advanced AI chips to China.

Nvidia had previously defended Mr. Huang’s relationship to Ms. Huang, telling the NYT that the CEOs interactions with Ms. Huang were “not unusual or unexpected,” and that “meetings with customers are part of a CEO’s job; Jensen talks with thousands of customer executives every year.”

The company also said it was confident the U.S. government would notify Nvidia if it “believes that any person is a threat to American industry.”

In a press release on Nov. 8, Nvidia announced it will investigate alleged foreign intelligence efforts, following reports Huang was a target.

“The Board prioritizes US national and economic security, which is paramount to the interests of NVIDIA and its shareholders,” the statement said. But, the board “has no reason to believe that either national security or NVIDIA secrets were compromised.”

The market reacts

Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA) shares are sliding after news of the investigation broke. The stock fell 5% Monday morning, amid concerns about the company and Huang’s role as its head. According to the Wall Street Journal, it’s on track to lose more than $200 billion in market value.

The chipmaker is central to the AI boom and is one of the most valuable companies in the world. While Huang has vowed to stay on as CEO, the results of the investigation could undermine faith in the company and jeopardize his future with it.

The latest stock drop comes after Nvidia already suffered a significant sell off following the midterm election. On Nov. 5, the stock plunged 9% in just one day, dropping Huang’s net worth on paper by $15.1 billion and briefly lowering his spot on the Bloomberg’s Billionaires Index.

Spousal benefits are worth up to 50% of a worker’s primary insurance amount (the standard benefit they’d collect at full retirement age). Both husbands and wives can claim spousal benefits, but women more often end up claiming because they commonly work or earn less due to the pay gap and time out of the workforce for caregiving.

Qualifying spouses of retired workers collect an average of $986.68 per month in benefits, which can be a lifeline, as around 44% of the retired-age population relies on Social Security for 100% of their income. However, what happens if you devote your life to caring for your family, don’t earn a big Social Security benefit because of it, and then end up getting divorced?

Let’s say Sara stayed home with the kids for 20 years, but now she’s 65, divorced, and wants to claim Social Security benefits based on her ex-husband Jeff’s work history. The only problem? Jeff said: “No way.”

With Jeff committed to blocking her and their divorce finalized five years ago, the big question is whether Sara can collect spousal benefits anyway. The good news is, experts are clear on the answer, and the rules work in Sara’s favor.

Her ex can’t stop her from getting the benefits she deserves

The first and most important thing that Sara needs to know is that Jeff can’t prevent her from claiming Social Security benefits based on his work history.

“Your ex-husband has no say in whether you claim divorced-spouse benefits on his record,” Kristyn Carmichael, an attorney, certified divorce financial analyst, and founder of Couples Solutions Center, told Moneywise. “He isn’t asked for permission, he isn’t notified, and your claim doesn’t reduce his benefit or his current spouse’s benefit by a single dollar.”

Carmichael said that she regularly hears concerns that an ex won’t allow a Social Security claim in mediation, but these fears are unfounded because ex-spouses don’t get a vote.

“Divorced-spouse benefits are set by federal law, not by your ex or your divorce decree,” she told Moneywise. “If you meet the requirements, you can apply directly with Social Security, and he’ll never know. Even a settlement agreement can’t take that right away, because state courts can’t divide or waive Social Security benefits.”

Not only can’t her ex stop her, but Sara actually has more flexibility in getting benefits than she would if she were still married. If you’re married, you cannot claim your spousal benefits until the person whose work record they’re based on has claimed their own retirement or disability checks. This isn’t the case after divorce.

“Another very important rule is that the ex-husband does not have to be drawing Social Security yet,” explained Evan H. Farr, a certified elder law attorney at Farr Law Firm. “He must be old enough to receive Social Security, be fully eligible for Social Security retirement benefits, and the two of you must have been divorced for 2+ years.”

This means it doesn’t matter if Jeff is waiting to start Social Security, and he can’t stop Sara from claiming her spousal benefits by delaying his own retirement checks. He has no control over when she claims as long as the divorce happened at least two years ago.

Sara has to meet eligibility requirements

While Sara can claim Social Security whenever she wants, and Jeff can’t stop her, she still must meet Social Security’s eligibility requirements for divorced spouses. As both Farr and Carmichael explained, this means:

• The marriage must have lasted at least a decade before finalizing the divorce
• Sara must be at least 62 (if she’s under full retirement age, she’ll receive a smaller benefit)
• Sara must not be remarried to someone else

If she meets these criteria, she can file for benefits. And if she did remarry after divorcing Jeff, she could still claim on Jeff’s work history if that subsequent marriage ended.

Jeff also gets some good news, though. Sara’s decision won’t affect his income or the eligibility of any future spouses to claim spousal benefits, because, as Carmichael explained, “several ex-spouses can all claim on the same worker’s record without reducing each other’s benefits.”

Sara should see how much she can collect, confirm when her full retirement age is, and make an informed choice about when claiming is right for her — and this process doesn’t have to take Jeff’s wishes into account at all.

According to IRS guidelines, retirees must take annual withdrawals from certain tax-deferred accounts, known as required minimum distributions (RMDs). Those who miss the Dec. 31 deadline could face a penalty equal to 25% of the amount they didn’t withdraw.

For example, a retiree who falls $20,000 short of their required withdrawal could owe the IRS $5,000 in penalties, in addition to the income taxes due when they eventually withdraw the money.

The penalty was 50% before Congress passed the SECURE 2.0 Act in 2022. Under the new rules, retirees who correct the shortfall within the correction period, generally two years, can have the penalty reduced to 10%. The IRS may also waive it entirely if the mistake resulted from a reasonable error and the taxpayer is taking steps to fix it.

Why the penalty?

The rules exist because traditional retirement accounts allow Americans to postpone paying income taxes on their savings, often for decades. But the IRS eventually requires them to start withdrawing that money, even if they don’t need it to cover living expenses.

Under current rules, Americans born between 1951 and 1959 generally must begin taking RMDs at age 73. The starting age increases to 75 for those born in 1960 or later, following changes introduced by the SECURE 2.0 Act.

RMDs apply to traditional IRAs, SEP IRAs, SIMPLE IRAs and most workplace retirement plans, including 401(k)s and 403(b)s. However, employees who are still working may be able to delay withdrawals from their current employer’s plan until retirement, as long as they don’t own 5% or more of the business.

Roth IRAs and Roth 401(k)s are exempt from RMDs during the original account owner’s lifetime.

Those turning 73 in 2026 have until April 1, 2027, to take their first RMD. But postponing it means taking two distributions in 2027, since the second is still due by Dec. 31. Taking both withdrawals in the same year could push retirees into a higher tax bracket.

Inherited retirement accounts face their own deadline

The Dec. 31 deadline also matters for Americans who inherited retirement accounts, especially now that the IRS is enforcing annual withdrawals for certain beneficiaries following years of temporary relief.

Under the SECURE Act, most non-spouse beneficiaries who inherited a traditional IRA from someone who died in 2020 or later must empty the account within 10 years. But if the original owner died on or after the date they were required to begin taking RMDs, beneficiaries generally must also take annual withdrawals.

The rules have caused confusion. As Ed Slott and Company explained, the IRS waived penalties for certain missed annual withdrawals from 2021 through 2024 as it worked to finalize its guidelines. But that relief expired in 2025, leaving affected beneficiaries on the hook for penalties if they miss their annual RMDs.

For example, someone who inherited a traditional IRA from a parent in 2020 may still need to take annual withdrawals if the parent had already started taking RMDs. In that case, a withdrawal would be required in 2026, even though the account doesn’t have to be emptied until the end of 2030.

This can come as a surprise to younger heirs. Someone who inherits an IRA in their 40s or 50s may have to take annual distributions decades before reaching the usual RMD starting age.

Why multiple retirement accounts can complicate RMDs

Retirees with multiple retirement accounts need to be particularly careful because withdrawing enough money overall doesn’t necessarily satisfy every IRS requirement. This is especially important because having multiple retirement accounts is increasingly common. Research cited by Vanguard in 2025 found that 31% of retirement savers ages 50 to 59 had four or more workplace retirement accounts.

According to Fidelity, RMDs are generally calculated using each account’s balance as of Dec. 31 of the previous year, divided by an IRS life expectancy factor.

For retirees with multiple traditional IRAs, the required withdrawals can be added together and taken from just one IRA. The same general rule applies to multiple 403(b) accounts, although IRA and 403(b) withdrawals must be handled separately.

The rules are different for 401(k)s. Each account has its own RMD requirement, meaning retirees with several 401(k)s must take a separate withdrawal from each.

For example, someone with a $5,000 RMD from an IRA and a $4,000 RMD from a 401(k) can’t simply withdraw $9,000 from the IRA and assume they’ve met both requirements. In this case, they still need to withdraw $4,000 from the 401(k).

Fidelity also notes that some 401(k) administrators automatically send distributions, while others don’t. Retirees should check with their plan administrators rather than assume the withdrawals will happen automatically.

The kicker? He wants his children to manage distributing the money to charities after he’s gone. While that could trigger resentment in some families, his children Susie, 73, Howard, 71 and Peter, 68, are fully on board. They’ve seen his will and he’s talked about it publicly.

Preaching what he practiced, Buffett shared this advice with parents about being upfront about your will while you’re alive:

“When your children are mature, have them read your will before you sign it,” he wrote. “Be sure each child understands both the logic for your decisions and the responsibilities they will encounter upon your death.”

He has adjusted his will based on his own children’s feedback and is directing the cash to their charitable foundations and that of his late first wife to distribute as they see fit. The man who once said, “It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it” trusts them.

After all, his son Howard succeeded him as chairman of Berkshire Hathaway in September, and all three children are philanthropists who actively manage charitable trusts.

Here’s why experts agree that people should follow Buffett’s advice on wills as much as they do his advice on investing.

What children don’t know can hurt them

Buffett said he’d seen too many cases where families were torn apart learning about a will after a parent died, leaving them with unanswered questions, anger, or jealousy about another sibling’s inheritance. Not the greatest legacy.

Unfortunately, fear of family conflict itself may cause parents to avoid discussing their will. In fact, 32% of Americans surveyed by Western & Southern Financial Group admitted they were afraid they’d upset or worry family members if they talked about their will. More than 50% said simply talking about end-of-life plans made them uncomfortable.

According to a 2025 Fidelity family and finance study, while 70% of parents had prepared a will, 68% hadn’t told their children about their inheritances. That’s despite 97% of the respondents agreeing that it’s important to talk about estate planning with your family.

Many parents are not as confident in Buffett in their adult children’s ability to manage money. A 2025 Fidelity family and finance study found that 40% of parents don’t think their children can manage debt and 43% don’t think they can stick to a budget.

But parents who don’t talk to their children about their wills are not only setting them up for conflict, but for potential financial headaches too. Disagreements over inheritances could lead some family members to challenge a will in probate court, a costly process.

Heirs may face an unexpected inheritance tax in some states including Kentucky, Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

The more time children have to prepare so they can manage future inheritances — or manage expectations if there will be no inheritance — the better.

Talk to your children about your will early

Experts recommend setting up a family meeting to talk through the will openly so that everyone is on the same page and allowing time for people to ask questions.

Alternatively, you can have one-on-one conversations, but make sure everyone is privy to the same information — including details like where your estate plan documents are stored and contact details for your lawyer, accountant, and financial advisor.

Ken Polk, founder of Arlington Family Offices, a wealth management firm for wealthy families, told Business Insider that he likes parents to prepare their children for inheritances really early — as young as six.

“Ultimately, preserving legacy comes down to a child’s character and who they’re becoming,” he said.

He suggests having your children identify character traits that they would like to embody as adults and to write a letter to their future selves to inspire them on their path. Then teach them the basics of money management with jars or envelopes to divide their money into: “some to give, some to save, and the rest for living.” They can graduate to bank accounts by 12.

Polk says by the time they’re young adults — especially if they are going to receive money via a trust — they should be ready to discuss inheritances in a responsible way.

If you have too little saved and feel like you owe too much, that’s a really frightening place to be.

Say, for example, that Fred is 56, has $140,000 in savings, owes $40K on credit cards and personal loans, and has a teen looking at colleges and hoping for tuition help. Fred’s feeling hopeless about his financial situation, but he’s not alone.

“With high inflation, high interest rates, and higher day-to-day expenses, this situation is more common than we all wish,” Domenick D’Andrea, a financial advisor and co-founder of DanDarah Wealth Management, told Moneywise.

The good news is, while it will take work, Fred still has time to change course and build the financial security he deserves. Here’s what he can do.

Forget about paying for college

Unfortunately, Fred must first face a hard truth. He most likely won’t be able to pay for his son’s college.

“For the most part, parents want to do everything that they can do for their children,” D’Andrea said. “I would discuss college costs with them and explain that they may need to take out loans.”

John Gillet, CEO and founder of Gillet Agency, agreed, telling Moneywise, “Student loans exist, but I haven’t heard of a retirement loan. I wouldn’t sugarcoat this, but you’ll have to hyperdrive and hyperfocus your allocations toward retirement savings. Your window is closing.”

Experts also warn that any loans taken out should be in his son’s name, not Fred’s. As Howard Dvorkin, chairman of Debt.com, warned, “Parent PLUS loans or taking on debt to finance a child’s degree at the expense of your financial survival is a trap.”

Dvorkin suggested Fred tell his son to “explore community college transfers, in-state tuition, grants, scholarships and student-level work-study,” but not to provide direct financial help because “securing your retirement protects your child from having to financially support you later in life.”

A secure retirement is still within reach

While Fred’s teen may be out of luck when it comes to getting college costs covered, Fred still has a chance to achieve retirement security.

“Is a comfortable retirement hopeless? No, but it requires an immediate transition from passive hoping to aggressive execution,” Dvorkin said. This means allocating money the right way and potentially tackling the problem from both ends — cutting spending and increasing income or invested assets.

“I’d start with building a budget and seeing what expenses can either be reduced or eliminated,” D’Andrea recommended. Focusing on big-ticket items could be helpful, as Pete Waitzman, founder of Expedition Money, asked, “What are the big expenses you can shed, restructure or redo?”

If you can lower your housing or car payment, for example, you’ll benefit from months or years of savings. Cutting spending on these big items requires you to make a change once, not keep depriving yourself on an ongoing basis. Then, you can use the money to repay what you owe and invest.

“First, eliminate the $40,000 debt,” Dvorkin said. “You cannot out-invest a 20%-plus credit card interest rate. Prioritize paying off high-interest balances immediately.”

Once the debt’s been paid off, it’s time to crank up retirement investing. “Leverage catch-up contributions,” advised Dvorkin. “At 56, you’re eligible for catch-up contributions in 401(k)s and IRAs. Combine that with a focused plan to work until 67 or 70, allowing your remaining savings to compound while maximizing your future monthly Social Security benefit.”

Fred may also want to take some steps to increase his income so he has more to put toward saving and investing, D’Andrea advises.

Hopefully, Fred can succeed in these goals, but he may also have another ace up his sleeve and not even know it. “Consider the equity in your home,” Gillet said. “I’ve had clients with significant home equity sell their homes in retirement, then simply rent. This strategy can be useful under the right conditions to help bolster retirement savings.”

Fred will have to evaluate all of these options to decide how to get back on track. This will take work, but it’s essential because, as D’Andrea warned, “If you don’t try to change things financially, a comfortable retirement can become hopeless or, dare I say, impossible.”