Ontario Raises Electricity Price by 25% for Minnesota, Michigan and New York
A Canadian province that exports electricity to the US raised power prices for three states by 25% on Monday in retaliation for President Donald Trump's tariffs.
Ontario directed its grid operator, the Independent Electricity System Operator, to add a C$10 ($7) per megawatt-hour surcharge to all power exported to Minnesota, Michigan and New York.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
2 Dividend Stocks to Hold for the Next 2 Years
Dividend stocks can generate reliable passive income. The key is to find companies that have a strong track record of paying and increasing their dividends. Investors also want to be sure that they are picking companies that can generate enough earnings and free cash flow to cover and raise their dividends in the future. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › Since the pandemic began, the stock market has proven to be erratic, plunging at times only to quickly recover and launch into fresh bull markets. Today, with plenty of new uncertainty due to issues including President Donald Trump's trade wars, U.S. fiscal concerns, and the concerning trajectory of the U.S. economy, more volatility is certainly on the docket. That's why investors may want to check out some dividend stocks, which can provide reliable passive income. The returns of dividend stocks can be much more dependable than those of non-payers, especially if you choose ones with good track records and the ability to grow their earnings and free cash flows so they can keep regularly increasing their payouts. Here are two dividend stocks that meet those criteria that investors can feel comfortable buying and holding for the next two years. The iconic footwear and apparel company Nike (NYSE: NKE) has been less than iconic as a stock lately. It's now down by about 39% over the last five years (as of June 4). Intensifying competition in the footwear and apparel space, struggles with the brand, and an excessive focus on digital promotions and sales have resulted in the company underperforming in recent years. To change its trajectory, the board hired longtime Nike veteran Elliot Hill out of retirement to take the helm, and Nike is now deeply entrenched in his turnaround plan. Hill is focused on getting the company back to what it does best -- renewing its intense focus on the brand, leading the way on product innovation, and reactivating and improving its sales relationships with wholesalers. Hill also said earlier this year that Nike will be focused on five product areas -- running, basketball, football, training, and sportswear -- and three markets: the U.S., the United Kingdom, and China. But as some analysts have pointed out, Nike's turnaround could take longer than expected, especially if the global trade war continues or if the U.S. economy tips into a recession. A longer turnaround could make it difficult to entice investors to buy and hold the stock, which is why Nike is likely to make paying and raising its dividend a priority. Its yield of about 2.6% at the current share price isn't bad, but it trails most Treasury yields right now and over the past few years. In November, Nike increased its quarterly dividend by 8%, marking the 23rd consecutive year the company has hiked the payout. In a couple more years, Nike is likely to join an exclusive club -- the Dividend Aristocrats®, which are S&P 500 companies that have increased their payouts for a minimum of 25 straight years. (The term Dividend Aristocrats® is a registered trademark of Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC.) Its ascension into that group will give Nike added some credibility among dividend investors. Nike also has a trailing 12-month free cash flow yield of 5.66%, more than double its current dividend yield. Nike has a good dividend track record and clear incentives to keep raising its payouts to reward shareholders for their patience. If its turnaround is successful, that should also enable the company to grow earnings and free cash flow, which will also bolster its capacity to pay higher dividends. If you've followed Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC), then you know that the bank has been on a bumpy ride over the last decade. In 2016, it came to light that large numbers of employees at the bank had been opening banking and credit card accounts in customers' names without those customers' authorization. The scandal evolved into a reputational nightmare for Wells Fargo and cost it billions of dollars in fines and lost profits. Regulators put various restrictions and consent orders on the bank to monitor its actions. In addition, the Federal Reserve in 2018 put an asset cap on it, preventing it from growing its balance sheet above $1.95 trillion -- limiting its ability to expand, pursue acquisitions, and make more money. In 2019, the bank brought on Charlie Scharf to take over as CEO, and he did a tremendous amount of work to overhaul the bank's regulatory infrastructure and leadership team. Scharf also significantly cut expenses, sold off non-core assets, and ramped up higher-returning businesses like investment banking and credit card lending. This year, after Trump returned to the White House, banking regulators under his administration quickly terminated the consent orders that were put in place to monitor its behavior in the wake of the scandal, and just recently lifted the asset cap. That's a massive deal for the bank, which can now begin to grow its balance sheet again and go on the offensive in the financial services market. During the pandemic, Wells Fargo was one of the few banks forced to cut its dividend due to regulations put into place by the Federal Reserve. While the bank has been able to regrow its payout, its yield still sits in the bottom half of its peer group. Furthermore, broader deregulation of the banking sector from Trump and his administrators is likely on the way. I suspect the largest banks will eventually have much lower regulatory capital requirements than they have now, which will allow them to return more capital to shareholders. Furthermore, Wall Street analysts on average currently expect Wells Fargo to grow its diluted earnings per share by about 8% this year and by close to 14% next year, according to data provided by Visible Alpha. Over the last 12 months, Wells Fargo's dividends only consumed about 31% of earnings, so it should have plenty of opportunities to keep growing its payouts in the coming years. Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $363,030!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $38,088!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $674,395!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join , and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.*Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Wells Fargo is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Bram Berkowitz has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Nike. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 2 Dividend Stocks to Hold for the Next 2 Years was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk post claiming that Donald Trump appears in Epstein files removed from X
Elon Musk's social media post claiming Donald Trump is in files relating to the disgraced paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein has been removed. The tech billionaire made the allegation on X as he traded blows with the in a dramatic public row. In , which now appears to have been deleted, said: "@realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. "Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out." He gave no evidence for the claim, which was dismissed by the White House - with the post disappearing from his social media platform by Sunday. Users clicking on the message - first posted on Thursday - were instead greeted with: " page doesn't exist. Try searching for something else." Epstein killed himself in his jail cell in August 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of sex trafficking minors. Musk and Mr Trump's relationship broke down publicly on Thursday, just days after the Tesla and SpaceX chief executive left his role as a special government employee. In a fiery exchange, Musk posted a series of messages on X criticising the president's signature tax and spending bill as a "big ugly spending bill". President Trump posted on Truth Social, saying Musk had been "wearing thin" and claimed he "asked him to leave" his government position - something Musk denied. Read more: Musk then hit back with his claim about the US president appearing in the Epstein files. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed the comment in a statement. "This is an unfortunate episode from Elon, who is unhappy with the One Big Beautiful Bill because it does not include the policies he wanted," she said. "The president is focused on passing this historic piece of legislation and making our country great again."The spat hit shares, which closed down 14.3% on Thursday, losing about $150bn (£111bn) in value. In an , Mr Trump was asked about reports a phone call was scheduled between him and Musk on Friday. He reportedly said: "You mean the man who has lost his mind?"
an hour ago
Trump's tariffs could pay for his tax cuts -- but it likely wouldn't be much of a bargain
WASHINGTON -- WASHINGTON (AP) — The tax cuts in President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act would likely gouge a hole in the federal budget. The president has a patch handy, though: his sweeping import taxes — tariffs. The Congressional Budget Office, the government's nonpartisan arbiter of tax and spending matters, says the One Big Beautiful Bill, passed by the House last month and now under consideration in the Senate, would increase federal budget deficits by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. That is because its tax cuts would drain the government's coffers faster than its spending cuts would save money. By bringing in revenue for the Treasury, on the other hand, the tariffs that Trump announced through May 13 — including his so-called reciprocal levies of up to 50% on countries with which the United States has a trade deficit — would offset the budget impact of the tax-cut bill and reduce deficits over the next decade by $2.5 trillion. So it's basically a wash. That's the budget math anyway. The real answer is more complicated. Actually using tariffs to finance a big chunk of the federal government would be a painful and perilous undertaking, budget wonks say. 'It's a very dangerous way to try to raise revenue,' said Kent Smetters of the University of Pennsylvania's Penn Wharton Budget Model, who served in President George W. Bush's Treasury Department. Trump has long advocated tariffs as an economic elixir. He says they can protect American industries, bring factories back to the United States, give him leverage to win concessions over foreign governments — and raise a lot of money. He's even suggested that they could replace the federal income tax, which now brings in about half of federal revenue. 'It's possible we'll do a complete tax cut,'' he told reporters in April. 'I think the tariffs will be enough to cut all of the income tax.'' Economists and budget analysts do not share the president's enthusiasm for using tariffs to finance the government or to replace other taxes. 'It's a really bad trade,'' said Erica York, the Tax Foundation's vice president of federal tax policy. 'It's perhaps the dumbest tax reform you could design.'' For one thing, Trump's tariffs are an unstable source of revenue. He bypassed Congress and imposed his biggest import tax hikes through executive orders. That means a future president could simply reverse them. 'Or political whims in Congress could change, and they could decide, 'Hey, we're going revoke this authority because we don't think it's a good thing that the president can just unilaterally impose a $2 trillion tax hike,' '' York said. Or the courts could kill his tariffs before Congress or future presidents do. A federal court in New York has already struck down the centerpiece of his tariff program — the reciprocal and other levies he announced on what he called 'Liberation Day'' April 2 — saying he'd overstepped his authority. An appeals court has allowed the government to keep collecting the levies while the legal challenge winds its way through the court system. Economists also say that tariffs damage the economy. They are a tax on foreign products, paid by importers in the United States and usually passed along to their customers via higher prices. They raise costs for U.S. manufacturers that rely on imported raw materials, components and equipment, making them less competitive than foreign rivals that don't have to pay Trump's tariffs. Tariffs also invite retaliatory taxes on U.S. exports by foreign countries. Indeed, the European Union this week threatened 'countermeasures'' against Trump's unexpected move to raise his tariff on foreign steel and aluminum to 50%. 'You're not just getting the effect of a tax on the U.S. economy,' York said. 'You're also getting the effect of foreign taxes on U.S. exports.'' She said the tariffs will basically wipe out all economic benefits from the One Big Beautiful Bill's tax cuts. Smetters at the Penn Wharton Budget Model said that tariffs also isolate the United States and discourage foreigners from investing in its economy. Foreigners see U.S. Treasurys as a super-safe investment and now own about 30% of the federal government's debt. If they cut back, the federal government would have to pay higher interest rates on Treasury debt to attract a smaller number of potential investors domestically. Higher borrowing costs and reduced investment would wallop the economy, making tariffs the most economically destructive tax available, Smetters said — more than twice as costly in reduced economic growth and wages as what he sees as the next-most damaging: the tax on corporate earnings. Tariffs also hit the poor hardest. They end up being a tax on consumers, and the poor spend more of their income than wealthier people do. Even without the tariffs, the One Big Beautiful Bill slams the poorest because it makes deep cuts to federal food programs and to Medicaid, which provides health care to low-income Americans. After the bill's tax and spending cuts, an analysis by the Penn Wharton Budget Model found, the poorest fifth of American households earning less than $17,000 a year would see their incomes drop by $820 next year. The richest 0.1% earning more than $4.3 million a year would come out ahead by $390,070 in 2026. 'If you layer a regressive tax increase like tariffs on top of that, you make a lot of low- and middle-income households substantially worse off,'' said the Tax Foundation's York. Overall, she said, tariffs are 'a very unreliable source of revenue for the legal reasons, the political reasons as well as the economic reasons. They're a very, very inefficient way to raise revenue. If you raise a dollar of a revenue with tariffs, that's going to cause a lot more economic harm than raising revenue any other way.''
