Expert slams unrealized capital gains tax proposal
Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris has expressed support for the Biden administration’s economic proposals. One of the more controversial proposals is to introduce a 25% minimum tax on total income, including unrealized capital gains, for individuals with wealth over $100 million. Jason Katz, managing director and senior portfolio manager at UBS, is a vocal opponent of this measure aimed at the wealthiest Americans. In an interview with Fox Business, Katz criticized the proposal sharply, calling it "an unmitigated disaster." Capital gains are the increases in value of an asset over time. When an asset is sold, and the increase in value is converted into cash, these are called realized capital gains, which are generally taxable. Unrealized gains, in contrast, are increases in value that have not yet been realized through a sale and are not presently subject to taxes. While Harris has broadly adopted President Biden’s tax policy proposals, it’s worth noting that she recently said she wants a smaller increase in the capital gains tax rate for the rich than him. This means she could also deviate from his plan in other ways and choose not to tax unrealized capital gains.
Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris has expressed support for the Biden administration’s economic proposals. One of the more controversial proposals is to introduce a 25% minimum tax on total income, including unrealized capital gains, for individuals with wealth over $100 million. Jason Katz, managing director and senior portfolio manager at UBS, is a vocal opponent of this measure aimed at the wealthiest Americans. In an interview with Fox Business, Katz criticized the proposal sharply, calling it "an unmitigated disaster." Capital gains are the increases in value of an asset over time. When an asset is sold, and the increase in value is converted into cash, these are called realized capital gains, which are generally taxable. Unrealized gains, in contrast, are increases in value that have not yet been realized through a sale and are not presently subject to taxes. While Harris has broadly adopted President Biden’s tax policy proposals, it’s worth noting that she recently said she wants a smaller increase in the capital gains tax rate for the rich than him. This means she could also deviate from his plan in other ways and choose not to tax unrealized capital gains.
Woman loses $23K to scammer posing as BoA employee
After a long day helping customers at her art studio, small business owner Amy Kelly, 65, got a phone call that changed her life. It was 4:30 p.m. on Sept. 5 when the Maine resident received a call from a person claiming to be a customer service representative from the Bank of America’s fraud department. The man said his name was Justin Turner. He told Kelly that the bank was getting in touch with her to prevent an unauthorized transaction on her account. The man said she was going to lose $23,000 by the next day. In order to stop this transaction, he said, Kelly needed to share her screen with him in order to complete a wire transfer to “protect” her money. “I was starting to panic and all my logic just went out the window,” she told CBS 13 News. After sending the money, Kelly asked “Justin Turner” if she should go to her Bank of America branch to ensure the process was completed properly. He said no — it was “all taken care of.” “That’s when I knew I had been scammed,” she said. When she immediately went to her Bank of America branch, Kelly alleges she was kept waiting to be put in touch with the manager for six hours. Now, weeks later, the issue is still unresolved.
After a long day helping customers at her art studio, small business owner Amy Kelly, 65, got a phone call that changed her life. It was 4:30 p.m. on Sept. 5 when the Maine resident received a call from a person claiming to be a customer service representative from the Bank of America’s fraud department. The man said his name was Justin Turner. He told Kelly that the bank was getting in touch with her to prevent an unauthorized transaction on her account. The man said she was going to lose $23,000 by the next day. In order to stop this transaction, he said, Kelly needed to share her screen with him in order to complete a wire transfer to “protect” her money. “I was starting to panic and all my logic just went out the window,” she told CBS 13 News. After sending the money, Kelly asked “Justin Turner” if she should go to her Bank of America branch to ensure the process was completed properly. He said no — it was “all taken care of.” “That’s when I knew I had been scammed,” she said. When she immediately went to her Bank of America branch, Kelly alleges she was kept waiting to be put in touch with the manager for six hours. Now, weeks later, the issue is still unresolved.
Sanders warns of the impact of high Ozempic prices
Novo Nordisk CEO Lars Fruergaard Jorgensen has called attention to the complexities of the U.S. healthcare system while justifying the company’s drug pricing – prices that Senator Bernie Sanders has slammed as “outrageously high.” Sanders accused the company of potentially driving up healthcare expenses for all Americans. “The prices for these drugs are so high in the United States that everyone — regardless of whether they use the products or not — will likely be forced to bear the burden of Novo Nordisk’s profit maximizing strategy through higher insurance premiums and taxes,” Sanders wrote in a public letter to Jorgensen. In response, Jorgensen defended the company’s pricing at a senate hearing in front of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), attributing the high costs to the U.S. healthcare system rather than corporate greed. While he acknowledged that Americans pay more than consumers in Europe and the U.K., Jorgensen emphasized that many patients still access the drugs at affordable rates between $25 and $50 per month. The debate underscores growing tensions around the skyrocketing demand for GLP-1 drugs, which, though originally developed for type 2 diabetes, have surged in popularity because of their effectiveness for weight loss.
Novo Nordisk CEO Lars Fruergaard Jorgensen has called attention to the complexities of the U.S. healthcare system while justifying the company’s drug pricing – prices that Senator Bernie Sanders has slammed as “outrageously high.” Sanders accused the company of potentially driving up healthcare expenses for all Americans. “The prices for these drugs are so high in the United States that everyone — regardless of whether they use the products or not — will likely be forced to bear the burden of Novo Nordisk’s profit maximizing strategy through higher insurance premiums and taxes,” Sanders wrote in a public letter to Jorgensen. In response, Jorgensen defended the company’s pricing at a senate hearing in front of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), attributing the high costs to the U.S. healthcare system rather than corporate greed. While he acknowledged that Americans pay more than consumers in Europe and the U.K., Jorgensen emphasized that many patients still access the drugs at affordable rates between $25 and $50 per month. The debate underscores growing tensions around the skyrocketing demand for GLP-1 drugs, which, though originally developed for type 2 diabetes, have surged in popularity because of their effectiveness for weight loss.
Musk: America going bankrupt ‘extremely quickly’
The U.S. national debt is skyrocketing, and Tesla CEO Elon Musk is sounding the alarm. At the recent All-In Summit hosted by the “All-In Podcast,” the billionaire warned, “America is going bankrupt extremely quickly, and everyone seems to be sort of whistling past the graveyard on this one.” This isn't the first time Musk has voiced concerns about the country’s debt crisis. In July, he shared a headline stating, “Interest Payments on US National Debt Will Shatter $1,140,000,000,000 This Year – Eating 76% of All Income Taxes Collected: Report.” Musk added his own stark commentary: “America is going bankrupt btw.” Musk’s warnings are rooted in a troubling reality. The U.S. national debt stands at $35.3 trillion — and continues to rise. It’s not just the staggering size of the national debt that’s concerning, but the alarming rate at which it continues to grow due to the deficit. In fiscal year 2024, the federal government spent $1.9 trillion more than it collected. Musk noted that interest payments on the national debt have surpassed $1 trillion annually: “We're adding a trillion dollars to our debt, which our kids and grandkids are going to have to pay somehow.” As the debt continues to balloon, Musk warned that eventually, "the only thing we'll be able to pay is interest." But can the country really go bankrupt? It's a complicated question because the federal government cannot file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization. Congress would have to decide to let the federal government default on its debt, otherwise it can keep borrowing as long as there is demand from investors for government bonds. How long this can continue and the debt pile continue to grow depends on whom you ask and there are various studies looking at the possibilities. Many economists fear runaway inflation if the government keeps printing money to serve its needs. According to the non-partisan Peter G. Peterson Foundation, rising debt affects the economy in several ways — more spending on interest costs means less to invest in the public and economic growth and lower confidence in the government’s ability to repay debt would reduce private investment. "Technically speaking, the government can't go bankrupt because it only promised to hand over a certain number of dollars; it didn't promise what the value of those dollars would be. Because the value of the dollars was never specified, the government can print enough to render the dollars nearly worthless. To the rest of us, the effect is the same as the government going bankrupt," wrote the co-hosts of podcast "Words & Numbers." Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has taken notice of the growing debt, and Musk is a key part of his proposed solution.
The U.S. national debt is skyrocketing, and Tesla CEO Elon Musk is sounding the alarm. At the recent All-In Summit hosted by the “All-In Podcast,” the billionaire warned, “America is going bankrupt extremely quickly, and everyone seems to be sort of whistling past the graveyard on this one.” This isn't the first time Musk has voiced concerns about the country’s debt crisis. In July, he shared a headline stating, “Interest Payments on US National Debt Will Shatter $1,140,000,000,000 This Year – Eating 76% of All Income Taxes Collected: Report.” Musk added his own stark commentary: “America is going bankrupt btw.” Musk’s warnings are rooted in a troubling reality. The U.S. national debt stands at $35.3 trillion — and continues to rise. It’s not just the staggering size of the national debt that’s concerning, but the alarming rate at which it continues to grow due to the deficit. In fiscal year 2024, the federal government spent $1.9 trillion more than it collected. Musk noted that interest payments on the national debt have surpassed $1 trillion annually: “We're adding a trillion dollars to our debt, which our kids and grandkids are going to have to pay somehow.” As the debt continues to balloon, Musk warned that eventually, "the only thing we'll be able to pay is interest." But can the country really go bankrupt? It's a complicated question because the federal government cannot file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization. Congress would have to decide to let the federal government default on its debt, otherwise it can keep borrowing as long as there is demand from investors for government bonds. How long this can continue and the debt pile continue to grow depends on whom you ask and there are various studies looking at the possibilities. Many economists fear runaway inflation if the government keeps printing money to serve its needs. According to the non-partisan Peter G. Peterson Foundation, rising debt affects the economy in several ways — more spending on interest costs means less to invest in the public and economic growth and lower confidence in the government’s ability to repay debt would reduce private investment. "Technically speaking, the government can't go bankrupt because it only promised to hand over a certain number of dollars; it didn't promise what the value of those dollars would be. Because the value of the dollars was never specified, the government can print enough to render the dollars nearly worthless. To the rest of us, the effect is the same as the government going bankrupt," wrote the co-hosts of podcast "Words & Numbers." Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has taken notice of the growing debt, and Musk is a key part of his proposed solution.
KY man forced from home during ‘squatters’ dispute
This past summer, Daniel Toma, a homeowner in Louisville, Kentucky, invited his friend, Amy Davis, and her boyfriend, Tyler Sencuk, over for a few beers. Afterward, when the couple's car wouldn't start, Toma let them spend the night in his garage while they worked to fix it. After working on the car in the driveway for a few days, they brought along a mattress and other personal belongings. That’s when things started to head south. The couple allegedly changed the locks on the garage, installed cable, and started to receive mail to Toma’s address — all without any formal agreement or rent payments. “I asked them to go, my roommates asked them to go, they wouldn’t leave. We tried to tell them to leave. [Sencuk] started saying (they) had squatters rights,” Toma told WAVE. “I didn’t want to throw them out on the street, I was just trying to be kind.” Toma put up a 30-day eviction notice around Labor Day — but the situation went from bad to worse. Sencuk and one of Toma’s roommates got into a physical altercation, leading to Sencuk filing an emergency protective order against Toma. The judge granted the order, which forced Toma to stay 500 feet away from them — and his own home, effectively leaving him homeless.
This past summer, Daniel Toma, a homeowner in Louisville, Kentucky, invited his friend, Amy Davis, and her boyfriend, Tyler Sencuk, over for a few beers. Afterward, when the couple's car wouldn't start, Toma let them spend the night in his garage while they worked to fix it. After working on the car in the driveway for a few days, they brought along a mattress and other personal belongings. That’s when things started to head south. The couple allegedly changed the locks on the garage, installed cable, and started to receive mail to Toma’s address — all without any formal agreement or rent payments. “I asked them to go, my roommates asked them to go, they wouldn’t leave. We tried to tell them to leave. [Sencuk] started saying (they) had squatters rights,” Toma told WAVE. “I didn’t want to throw them out on the street, I was just trying to be kind.” Toma put up a 30-day eviction notice around Labor Day — but the situation went from bad to worse. Sencuk and one of Toma’s roommates got into a physical altercation, leading to Sencuk filing an emergency protective order against Toma. The judge granted the order, which forced Toma to stay 500 feet away from them — and his own home, effectively leaving him homeless.
Florida residents feel 'neglected' amid floods
Days after Hurricane Debby hit Florida in August, residents of Twin City Mobile Home Community in St. Petersburg were still experiencing flooding. And it's not the first time their homes have been underwater — the park has flooded multiple times lately. "We may be poor and live in here, but we're people, too," resident Erin Roth told ABC Action News at the time. "We're 100% neglected." Her neighbor, James Lawson, gave a harrowing description of the flooding in recent years. "[Hurricane Ian] flooded out to the top of the hood of that truck and killed my Durango," he said. "Then, [Hurricane] Idalia ... the water was up to my chin, and I'm 6-foot-1." It's possible the community faced more damage in at the hands of Hurricane Helene as it made its way through the Tampa Bay area in September. However, there doesn't yet appear to be local news reporting to confirm.
Days after Hurricane Debby hit Florida in August, residents of Twin City Mobile Home Community in St. Petersburg were still experiencing flooding. And it's not the first time their homes have been underwater — the park has flooded multiple times lately. "We may be poor and live in here, but we're people, too," resident Erin Roth told ABC Action News at the time. "We're 100% neglected." Her neighbor, James Lawson, gave a harrowing description of the flooding in recent years. "[Hurricane Ian] flooded out to the top of the hood of that truck and killed my Durango," he said. "Then, [Hurricane] Idalia ... the water was up to my chin, and I'm 6-foot-1." It's possible the community faced more damage in at the hands of Hurricane Helene as it made its way through the Tampa Bay area in September. However, there doesn't yet appear to be local news reporting to confirm.
Can Amazon force workers back to the office?
Amazon employees are up-in-arms over a recent note from CEO Andy Jassy alerting them to a change in policy about remote work. In a Sept. 16 letter, Jassy said that employees would be expected to return to the office five days a week, barring extenuating circumstances or a remote work exception, beginning on Jan. 2, 2025. As Jassy pointed out: "Some of our teammates may have set up their personal lives in such a way that returning to the office consistently five days per week will require some adjustments," but he's made clear that this isn't optional given the type of team he'd like to create. Unsurprisingly, however, many workers aren't pleased with the forced change. The big question, though, is what can they do about it?
Amazon employees are up-in-arms over a recent note from CEO Andy Jassy alerting them to a change in policy about remote work. In a Sept. 16 letter, Jassy said that employees would be expected to return to the office five days a week, barring extenuating circumstances or a remote work exception, beginning on Jan. 2, 2025. As Jassy pointed out: "Some of our teammates may have set up their personal lives in such a way that returning to the office consistently five days per week will require some adjustments," but he's made clear that this isn't optional given the type of team he'd like to create. Unsurprisingly, however, many workers aren't pleased with the forced change. The big question, though, is what can they do about it?
Celeb chef slams Gavin Newsom over fast food wage
California’s $20 minimum wage for fast-food workers took effect on Apr. 1. While the legislation has faced criticism, Gov. Gavin Newsom is celebrating its impact. “Since the law was enacted, California has added 11,000 new jobs in the industry. As of July, our state boasts a historic 750,500 fast food jobs,” he wrote in a recent op-ed for Fox News, citing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. According to Newsom, California now has more fast food jobs than ever before. He also highlighted how the legislation has improved conditions for those working in the fast food sector, stating, “Because of California’s compassion for working people, these men and women living paycheck to paycheck now enjoy better working conditions, reduced financial stress and greater opportunities for upward mobility.” However, not everyone shares Newsom’s enthusiasm. Celebrity chef and restaurant owner Andrew Gruel dismissed the op-ed as “typical Gavin Newsom self congratulatory propaganda based on questionable data.” “I think it's a little early to put the book on the shelf and take the victory lap here,” Gruel told Fox Business, cautioning that it may be too soon to fully assess the long-term effects of the wage hike on the industry.
California’s $20 minimum wage for fast-food workers took effect on Apr. 1. While the legislation has faced criticism, Gov. Gavin Newsom is celebrating its impact. “Since the law was enacted, California has added 11,000 new jobs in the industry. As of July, our state boasts a historic 750,500 fast food jobs,” he wrote in a recent op-ed for Fox News, citing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. According to Newsom, California now has more fast food jobs than ever before. He also highlighted how the legislation has improved conditions for those working in the fast food sector, stating, “Because of California’s compassion for working people, these men and women living paycheck to paycheck now enjoy better working conditions, reduced financial stress and greater opportunities for upward mobility.” However, not everyone shares Newsom’s enthusiasm. Celebrity chef and restaurant owner Andrew Gruel dismissed the op-ed as “typical Gavin Newsom self congratulatory propaganda based on questionable data.” “I think it's a little early to put the book on the shelf and take the victory lap here,” Gruel told Fox Business, cautioning that it may be too soon to fully assess the long-term effects of the wage hike on the industry.
Rupert Murdoch goes to probate court with his kids
While Rupert Murdoch is a titan of the media industry, his recent family drama reveals the challenges even the wealthiest families face with estate planning. In a closed-door hearing before a Nevada probate commissioner, the 93-year-old billionaire and his four eldest children have been engaged in a dispute that could determine the future of Fox Corp. and News Corp., which are the parent companies of Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, respectively. Murdoch’s family trust owns about 40% of each company. The hearing, whose final arguments concluded on Sept. 23, centered on Murdoch’s proposed changes to the trust, which was originally created to give equal control of his businesses to each of his four oldest children after his passing. The New York Times reported that Murdoch sought to modify these terms so as to give his son Lachlan an elevated role, potentially sidelining his siblings Prudence, Elizabeth and James. The latter three siblings responded by taking their father to court, claiming that the effect of the changes would be contrary to their best interests. The court has not yet delivered its ruling. The saga bears a striking resemblance to the drama in the hit HBO series Succession, whose creators have cited the Murdoch family as inspiration. But the real-life stakes are clear, not just for the Murdochs but for anyone looking to protect their wealth and ensure a smooth transition for future generations — regardless of the size of their nest egg.
While Rupert Murdoch is a titan of the media industry, his recent family drama reveals the challenges even the wealthiest families face with estate planning. In a closed-door hearing before a Nevada probate commissioner, the 93-year-old billionaire and his four eldest children have been engaged in a dispute that could determine the future of Fox Corp. and News Corp., which are the parent companies of Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, respectively. Murdoch’s family trust owns about 40% of each company. The hearing, whose final arguments concluded on Sept. 23, centered on Murdoch’s proposed changes to the trust, which was originally created to give equal control of his businesses to each of his four oldest children after his passing. The New York Times reported that Murdoch sought to modify these terms so as to give his son Lachlan an elevated role, potentially sidelining his siblings Prudence, Elizabeth and James. The latter three siblings responded by taking their father to court, claiming that the effect of the changes would be contrary to their best interests. The court has not yet delivered its ruling. The saga bears a striking resemblance to the drama in the hit HBO series Succession, whose creators have cited the Murdoch family as inspiration. But the real-life stakes are clear, not just for the Murdochs but for anyone looking to protect their wealth and ensure a smooth transition for future generations — regardless of the size of their nest egg.
New act may help Americans with pensions
In a move that could significantly impact the retirement income of millions of Americans, a bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers is pushing to repeal a set of Social Security rules that reduce benefits for individuals who also receive pension income from certain public service jobs. The proposed legislation, known as the Social Security Fairness Act, would erase the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO), which have long been criticized for penalizing public servants and their spouses with pensions. The WEP is believed to reduce benefits for about 2 million Americans, while the GPO rule affects about 800,000 Americans. The discharge petition put forth by House Representatives, Garret Graves and Abigail Spanberger, on September 10, 2024 has now hit the required 218 signatures needed to force a vote, but whether the act is passed remains to be seen.
In a move that could significantly impact the retirement income of millions of Americans, a bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers is pushing to repeal a set of Social Security rules that reduce benefits for individuals who also receive pension income from certain public service jobs. The proposed legislation, known as the Social Security Fairness Act, would erase the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO), which have long been criticized for penalizing public servants and their spouses with pensions. The WEP is believed to reduce benefits for about 2 million Americans, while the GPO rule affects about 800,000 Americans. The discharge petition put forth by House Representatives, Garret Graves and Abigail Spanberger, on September 10, 2024 has now hit the required 218 signatures needed to force a vote, but whether the act is passed remains to be seen.
Moneywise Digest