The U.S. will soon mint its last penny
The U.S. Department of Treasury said Thursday that it made its final order of blank pennies this month as its moves to end production of the one-cent coin.
In Februrary, President Donald Trump ordered a halt to producing new pennies, which he posted would help "rip the waste out of our great nations budget, even if it's a penny at a time."
At the time it was not clear if the president had the authority to stop the minting of coins.
A Treasury Department spokesperson told NBC News that "the United States Mint will continue to manufacture pennies while an inventory of penny blanks exists."
The U.S. Mint said in its 2024 annual report that the cost of making the penny increased 20% that year. It currently costs 3.69 cents to make the one-cent coin. The Treasury Dept. says halting new penny production could lead to an "immediate annual savings of $56 million in reduced material costs."
The U.S Mint also loses money making the nickel, with each 5-cent coin costing 13.78 cents to make.
The department also notes that demand for the penny has drastically decreased, as Americans increasingly shift their payment habits to cards or digital services like Apple Pay.
There are more than 114 billion pennies currently in circulation.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
If You Invested Every Social Security Check for 10 Years, How Rich Would You Be?
One common criticism of Social Security is that Americans would be much better off financially if the money they paid into the retirement program through payroll taxes was instead invested into private investment accounts. That same argument can be applied to Social Security checks — seniors would have much more wealth if they invested their checks as soon as they got them. Be Aware: For You: But is this a reasonable request for most people, especially those on a fixed income? To help find the answer here is a closer look at how much you could earn by investing your Social Security checks over a decade. For those seniors who can afford to invest all of their Social Security checks, the potential payoff is considerable. The following table shows how much profit you would have made if you invested every Social Security check over the past 10 years into the S&P 500, from 2015 through the beginning of 2025. The data includes the average Social Security check by year as previously reported by GOBankingRates. It also includes the average annual return of the S&P 500 from 2015 to 2025, as cited by Macrotrends (other sources might reflect different returns). Up Next: A couple things to keep in mind: The figures below are based only on yearly averages, which means they don't include month-to-month fluctuations that happen with the stock market. They also don't include other types of investments — such as crypto or real estate — that would have produced very different returns. Year Avg. monthly SS check Total SS payments for year S&P 500 return Profit/loss for year 2015 $1,341.77 $16,101.24 -0.73% -$117.54 2016 $1,360.13 $16,321.56 +9.54% +1,557.08 2017 $1,404.15 $16,849.80 +19.42% +3,272.23 2018 $1,461.31 $17,535.72 -6.24% -$1,094.23 2019 $1,455.22 $17,462.64 +28.88% +5,043.21 2020 $1,489.30 $17,871.60 +16.26% +2,905.92 2021 $1,517.98 $18,215.76 +26.89% +4,898.22 2022 $1,615.96 $19,391.52 -19.44% -3,769.71 2023 $1,696.35 $20,356.20 +24.23% +4,932.31 2024 $1,909.01 $22,908.12 +23.31% +5,339.88 2025 $1,976 $23,712 +1.96% +$464.76 Total profit/loss +$23,432.33 According to the table above, if you invested all of your monthly Social Security checks in the S&P 500 over the past decade, your nest egg would have grown by over $20,000. That kind of return should bring cheer to financial gurus, like Dave Ramsey, who recommends applying for Social Security retirement benefits as early as possible. For example, you could start collecting benefits at age 62 instead of the full retirement age of 66 or 67 and then immediately invest every monthly payment. There's just one problem with that reasoning. A large percentage of seniors don't have the financial ability to put their Social Security checks into stocks, bonds, mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, real estate, crypto or other investments. They need the money to pay the bills. For about half of U.S. seniors, Social Security provides at least 50% of their overall retirement income, according to research from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. For about one in four seniors, Social Security provides at least 90% of income. These folks have a hard enough time making ends meet, let alone tossing their Social Security checks into various investments that might or might not pay off. Nonetheless, for retirees who can afford to invest their benefit checks, there's a pretty good chance those investments will pay off and boost your retirement savings over the long haul. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Warns of 'Red Rural Recession' -- 4 States That Could Get Hit Hard 9 Downsizing Tips for the Middle Class To Save on Monthly Expenses 10 Genius Things Warren Buffett Says To Do With Your Money This article originally appeared on If You Invested Every Social Security Check for 10 Years, How Rich Would You Be? Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Robert Kiyosaki Warns Hyperinflation Will ‘Wipe Out' Millions
Personal finance author Robert Kiyosaki recently made a bold prediction on X about the state of the American economy. The summary of the prediction is that hyperinflation will be financially devastating to millions of Americans. Another GOBankingRates article discusses hyperinflation, stating that the situation occurs when there's a monthly inflation rate of 50% or more. However, due to the role of the Fed, the American economy has never faced such a situation, even when inflation reached as high as 23% in 1920. Trending Now: For You: Below, we examine Kiyosaki's serious claims and determine their accuracy based on expert insights. 'Hyperinflation is a state of extremely high inflation, typically reaching high double digits or triple digits,' said Marko Bjegovic, macroeconomist and founder of Arkomina Research. Kiyosaki believes everything in the economy will become more expensive, from interest rates for borrowing money to basic necessities. Kiyosaki's reasoning is likely that, with the Fed printing money, in his opinion, this could devalue the American currency and lead to higher inflation. It's safe to say that Kiyosaki believes that inflation will become so exorbitant that the average American consumer will be unable to carry their debt moving forward and will have to declare bankruptcy. Read Next: According to MoneyWise, Kiyosaki isn't a stranger to making bold claims about a possible economic collapse. We reviewed some of these claims in the statement to try to verify their accuracy. Bjegovic said there's nothing to suggest that the U.S. is currently on a path to hyperinflation. 'In that sense, the U.S. has never had hyperinflation since the Fed's inception in 1913,' he added. 'Hyperinflation has been commonly associated with countries experiencing extreme political or economic collapse, such as Weimar Germany (1920s), Zimbabwe (2000s), Venezuela (2010s), and Argentina (2020s).' Since the situation has never occurred in history, it's challenging to expect it to happen this time around. On a similar note, it's worth noting that the current Consumer Price Index (CPI) stood at 2.3% in April, the lowest level since February 2021. While inflation peaked — as reported by CNBC — at 9.1% in June 2022, it never approached the 50% figure required for a hyperinflationary state. With inflation cooling down, it doesn't appear that it will reach double digits anytime soon. Some of Kiyosaki's predictions for future asset prices are extremely bold. For context, the highest price of gold ever peaked at $3,500.05 per ounce on April 22, 2025, according to Investing News Network. Blake Mclaughlin, gold expert and vice president of exploration at Axcap Ventures, said gold's recent surge indicates underlying instability in the economy and that based on current conditions, its upward trend may continue. 'Having exposure to commodities like precious metals is a reasonable hedge for inflation. Generally, physical assets, where supplies cannot be readily or easily manipulated, provide a safe and honest place to invest,' he added. However, no evidence would suggest that gold can reach the value mentioned by Kiyosaki According to Yahoo Finance, iBitcoin hasn't passed $112,000 as of May 30 and silver is hovering around $33. These numbers are far from the substantial numbers shared by Kiyosaki. For bitcoin to go from $110,000 to one million is an extreme stretch and there's no evidence pointing towards this possibility. Upon further investigation, there aren't any other credible experts declaring that bitcoin can go as high as one million. Research shared on Business Insider showed there's only one crypto options trade that has bitcoin hitting $300,000 by the end of June and there's only one platform predicting that the digital asset will hit $200,000 by the end of the year. 'The auction Mr. Kiyosaki mentioned was held by the Treasury and not by the Fed,' Bjegovic said. It's essential to emphasize that the Fed didn't conduct this auction, as that's a crucial fact stated in the announcement. Reuters pointed out that the auction was poorly received, which led to a stock sell-off, with investors concerned about the national debt. However, the article also shared that the 20-year bonds usually see less demand than other maturities and that it wasn't a disaster. While the demand for the $16 billion sale of 20-year bonds was weak, it's also unfair to say that nobody showed up to the auction on May 21. Bjegovic said it went better than feared due to the circumstances at the time (Moody's downgrade, passage of the 'Big Beautiful Bill Act' and wider fiscal deficits). 'Treasury auctions are functioning well (as evidenced by other auctions that followed, like the two-year note this week) and inflation remains relatively low. The contents of Mr. Kiyosaki's post on X have grossly exaggerated both the current situation and what is likely to happen in the future,' Bjegovic explained. While it's important to be cautious about your investing approach, you also don't want to get caught up in the fear-mongering that can be evident on social media. As always, we recommend that you speak with a qualified financial professional before making any important decisions about your funds. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Warns of 'Red Rural Recession' -- 4 States That Could Get Hit Hard These Cars May Seem Expensive, but They Rarely Need Repairs Warren Buffett: 10 Things Poor People Waste Money On This article originally appeared on Robert Kiyosaki Warns Hyperinflation Will 'Wipe Out' Millions Errore nel recupero dei dati Effettua l'accesso per consultare il tuo portafoglio Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati
The Verge
34 minutes ago
- The Verge
A ban on state AI laws could smash Big Tech's legal guardrails
Senate Commerce Republicans have kept a ten year moratorium on state AI laws in their latest version of President Donald Trump's massive budget package. And a growing number of lawmakers and civil society groups warn that its broad language could put consumer protections on the chopping block. Republicans who support the provision, which the House cleared as part of its 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' say it will help ensure AI companies aren't bogged down by a complicated patchwork of regulations. But opponents warn that should it survive a vote and a congressional rule that might prohibit it, Big Tech companies could be exempted from state legal guardrails for years to come, without any promise of federal standards to take their place. 'What this moratorium does is prevent every state in the country from having basic regulations to protect workers and to protect consumers,' Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), whose district includes Silicon Valley, tells The Verge in an interview. He warns that as written, the language included in the House-passed budget reconciliation package could restrict state laws that attempt to regulate social media companies, prevent algorithmic rent discrimination, or limit AI deepfakes that could mislead consumers and voters. 'It would basically give a free rein to corporations to develop AI in any way they wanted, and to develop automatic decision making without protecting consumers, workers, and kids.' 'One thing that is pretty certain … is that it goes further than AI' The bounds of what the moratorium could cover are unclear — and opponents say that's the point. 'The ban's language on automated decision making is so broad that we really can't be 100 percent certain which state laws it could touch,' says Jonathan Walter, senior policy advisor at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. 'But one thing that is pretty certain, and feels like there is at least some consensus on, is that it goes further than AI.' That could include accuracy standards and independent testing required for facial recognition models in states like Colorado and Washington, he says, as well as aspects of broad data privacy bills across several states. An analysis by nonprofit AI advocacy group Americans for Responsible Innovation (ARI) found that a social media-focused law like New York's ' Stop Addictive Feeds Exploitation for Kids Act ' could be unintentionally voided by the provision. Center for Democracy and Technology state engagement director Travis Hall says in a statement that the House text would block 'basic consumer protection laws from applying to AI systems.' Even state governments' restrictions on their own use of AI could be blocked. The new Senate language adds its own set of wrinkles. The provision is no longer a straightforward ban, but it conditions state broadband infrastructure funds on adhering to the familiar 10-year moratorium. Unlike the House version, the Senate version would also cover criminal state laws. Supporters of the AI moratorium argue it wouldn't apply to as many laws as critics claim, but Public Citizen Big Tech accountability advocate J.B. Branch says that 'any Big Tech attorney who's worth their salt is going to make the argument that it does apply, that that's the way that it was intended to be written.' Khanna says that some of his colleagues may not have fully realized the rule's scope. 'I don't think they have thought through how broad the moratorium is and how much it would hamper the ability to protect consumers, kids, against automation,' he says. In the days since it passed through the House, even Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), a staunch Trump ally, said she would have voted against the OBBB had she realized the AI moratorium was included in the massive package of text. California's SB 1047 is the poster child for what industry players dub overzealous state legislation. The bill, which intended to place safety guardrails on large AI models, was vetoed by Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom following an intense pressure campaign by OpenAI and others. Companies like OpenAI, whose CEO Sam Altman once advocated for industry regulation, have more recently focused on clearing away rules that they say could stop them from competing with China in the AI race. 'What you're really doing with this moratorium is creating the Wild West' Khanna concedes that there are 'some poorly-crafted state regulations' and making sure the US stays ahead of China in the AI race should be a priority. 'But the approach to that should be that we craft good federal regulation,' he says. With the pace and unpredictability of AI innovation, Branch says, 'to handcuff the states from trying to protect their citizens' without being able to anticipate future harms, 'it's just reckless.' And if no state legislation is guaranteed for a decade, Khanna says, Congress faces little pressure to pass its own laws. 'What you're really doing with this moratorium is creating the Wild West,' he says. Before the Senate Commerce text was released, dozens of Khanna's California Democratic colleagues in the House, led by Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA), signed a letter to Senate leaders urging them to remove the AI provision — saying it 'exposes Americans to a growing list of harms as AI technologies are adopted across sectors from healthcare to education, housing, and transportation.' They warn that the sweeping definition of AI 'arguably covers any computer processing.' Over 250 state lawmakers representing every state also urge Congress to drop the provision. 'As AI technology develops at a rapid pace, state and local governments are more nimble in their response than Congress and federal agencies,' they write. 'Legislation that cuts off this democratic dialogue at the state level would freeze policy innovation in developing the best practices for AI governance at a time when experimentation is vital.' Khanna warns that missing the boat on AI regulation could have even higher stakes than other internet policies like net neutrality. 'It's not just going to impact the structure of the internet,' he says. 'It's going to impact people's jobs. It's going to impact the role algorithms can play in social media. It's going to impact every part of our lives, and it's going to allow a few people [who] control AI to profit, without accountability to the public good, to the American public.'
