REAL ID questions answered: What is it, and why did it take so long?
REAL ID questions answered: What is it, and why did it take so long? | Cruising Altitude
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Real ID explained: what it is, why it matters, and how to get yours
Real ID requirements: everything you need to know about getting compliant for travel and ID.
Starting May 7, a REAL ID-compliant driver's license or alternative acceptable identification is required for air travel and access to most federal facilities.
REAL ID enhances security by requiring stricter documentation for identity verification when issuing state IDs.
Implementation of REAL ID was delayed due to various factors, including slow adoption by states and the COVID-19 pandemic.
It's REAL ID day! Starting today (May 7), you'll need a REAL ID to get on an airplane, or to present for access at most federal facilities.
But you're not totally out of luck if you don't have a REAL ID-compliant driver's license and are hoping to travel. There are alternative documents like your passport and other federally issued ID cards, like the one you receive when you enroll for Global Entry, that will do the job just as well.
If you don't have any of those eligible documents, the Transportation Security Administration may subject you to additional screening or identity checks, but you won't necessarily automatically get turned away from your flight.
That said, it will be easier to travel if you have a REAL ID, and the alternative compliance options are only temporary, so you're better off getting a document that will work if you don't already have one.
As we enter this new era, here's what you need to know.
What is REAL ID?
I bet you've read a sentence like this many times if you've been keeping track of this rollout:
REAL ID is a state-issued identification document that complies with 'minimum security standards' established by Congress under the REAL ID Act, which was signed into law in 2005 in as part of Washington's response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
You can tell if your state-issued ID is compliant because it will have a gold or black star, or a gold or black circle with a star cutout typically in the upper right-hand corner (see photo below). A few states use the shape of the state, and California uses a bear shape, all with a star cutout, as their designator. Check with your state for enhanced driver's license designators, which are also REAL ID compliant.
So, basically, REAL ID is a set of rules for states on what kind of documentation they're required to check before issuing identification documents of their own.
How is REAL ID more secure?
The main thrust of the REAL ID requirements is that they will make state-issued identification documents more secure and standardized.
'To obtain a state-issued REAL ID, individuals must provide documentation showing their full legal name, date of birth, social security number, two proofs of address for their principal residence and proof of their lawful status,' a TSA spokesperson told me in a statement.
Before the REAL ID Act went into effect, states had more leeway and were not under such stringent requirements to actually verify a person's identity before issuing identification documents.
The law is meant to ensure that ID applicants are able to prove their identity and their lawful right of residency before obtaining a state-issued ID.
Some states, including my home state of New York, may continue issuing non-REAL ID-compliant documents for residents who are unable to provide the proper documentation to receive a REAL ID. But while those non-compliant IDs can still be used for other purposes like driving, they will not be accepted at airports or other federal facilities going forward.
Why did REAL ID take so long?
'But wait,' you're saying, 'the REAL ID Act was signed into law 20 years go. Why are we just making a big deal about this now?'
Great question. The short answer is: many states were slow to implement their Real ID programs for a variety of reasons, and then COVID hit, which interrupted things even further.
The initial deadline for compliance was May 11, 2008 (wishful thinking), and by March 2017, half the states were still out of compliance with their ID-issuing processes.
The Department of Homeland Security warned that repeated delays mean people may not be taking this 2025 deadline seriously, but I'm here to tell you this time, it's actually happening.
Zach Wichter is a travel reporter and writes the Cruising Altitude column for USA TODAY. He is based in New York and you can reach him at zwichter@usatoday.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Dividend King Federal Realty Has a High Yield and Industry-Leading Business
Federal Realty has the longest dividend increase streak in the REIT sector. The company focuses on quality over quantity and is a skilled developer and redeveloper. Federal Realty's dividend yield is notably higher than the REIT industry average. 10 stocks we like better than Federal Realty Investment Trust › Federal Realty (NYSE: FRT) is not the largest real estate investment trust (REIT) you can buy. It isn't even the largest REIT in its strip mall niche. It actually has a fairly small collection of properties in its portfolio. And yet it stands head and shoulders above every other REIT when it comes to its dividend. Here's why now is a good time to consider adding Federal Realty and its industry-leading business to your portfolio. Federal Realty owns strip malls and mixed-use properties, which generally include apartments and offices in the mix with retail. Some of the REIT's individual properties are quite large developments with multiyear projects on them. Others are simple strip malls where locals go to meet their everyday needs, like buying groceries or getting a haircut. From this perspective, Federal Realty isn't particularly differentiated from its competitors. That changes when you see that it only owns around 100 properties, which is generally a much smaller portfolio than its closest peers. However, those properties are particularly well located, with Federal Realty's assets having a higher average income around them and higher average population density. In other words, its portfolio is focused in wealthy areas with lots of residents nearby, which is exactly where retailers want to be located. The strength of Federal Realty's portfolio today is highlighted by its occupancy rates. After dipping during the coronavirus pandemic, they are now back above that level and closing in on 20-year highs. Occupancy ended the first quarter of 2025 at 93.6% but is expected to close in on 95% as the year progresses. Even during the pandemic, when non-essential businesses were closed by the government in an attempt to slow the spread of COVID-19, Federal Realty's occupancy didn't fall below 89%. The real story, however, is Federal Realty's dividend, which has been increased annually for 57 consecutive years. That makes the REIT a Dividend King, which alone is an impressive feat. But there's two more nuances here. First, Federal Realty has the longest dividend streak of any REIT. Second, it is the only REIT that is a Dividend King. Having a small, well-positioned portfolio has clearly paid off. Federal Realty didn't just buy 100 or so properties 57 years ago and sit on them for half a century. It is actually a quite active buyer and seller of assets. The key to its long-term success is what it does with the assets it buys. Usually Federal Realty buys well-located properties that need a little love and attention. That could be as simple as a coat of paint and more focus on tenant quality. A refresh of a property's exterior to make it look up to date goes a long way in attracting customers and tenants. But often the capital investments being made are far more extensive. Federal Realty will usually add to the properties it buys in some way. That can include adding apartments and offices above street-level retail space. It can involve tearing down an entire property and rebuilding it from scratch. Or it can be as simple as getting the permitting to make changes, which alone adds value to a property. When Federal Realty believes that it can sell a property for an attractive price, it will do so and then go on the hunt for another property that it can work on to improve its value over time. In other words, Federal Realty's portfolio is in a near-constant state of flux. And the inherent push is for the improvement in the quality of its portfolio. Management knows from experience that well maintained and located properties attract tenants, customers, and buyers, and that is the REIT's guiding star. Given the quality of Federal Realty's business model, highlighted by its Dividend King status, the shares don't go on sale very often. Today the dividend yield is 4.6%, which is notably higher than the S&P 500 index's (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC) 1.3% and the average REIT's 4.1%. Federal Realty's yield is also near the high side of the range over the past decade. If you are looking for a reliable dividend backed by a high-performing business, Federal Realty should probably be on your short list today. Before you buy stock in Federal Realty Investment Trust, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Federal Realty Investment Trust wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $669,517!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $868,615!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 792% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 173% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Reuben Gregg Brewer has positions in Federal Realty Investment Trust. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Dividend King Federal Realty Has a High Yield and Industry-Leading Business was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
GOP braces for first ‘test run' on codifying DOGE cuts
Congressional Republicans are gearing up for a major test of how easily they can lock in cuts sought by President Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said he aims to have the House act swiftly on approving Trump's request for more than $9 billion in cuts to foreign aid and public broadcasting funding. That package is expected to hit the floor this week. 'We haven't done anything like this in a while, so this is probably, in some ways, a test run,' House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) told reporters. Trump last week sent Congress a request for $8.3 billion in cuts to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and foreign aid, and more than $1 billion in cuts to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides some funding to NPR and PBS. The request kick-starts a process that would allow Republicans to claw back funds for a list of programs on the administration's chopping block with just a simple majority in both chambers. That means Republicans wouldn't require Democratic votes in the Senate if they can stay mostly unified in greenlighting what's known as a rescissions package. But it's been decades since Congress has approved such a request to yank back funds previously greenlighted by lawmakers. Trump tried to use the same process to rescind funds in his first term but was unsuccessful, despite Republicans controlling the House, Senate and White House at the time. Republicans are bullish that this time will be different, however. '[Trump's] done this before, and they've got a great team, I think, in place,' Cole said. 'They've thought about these things a lot in the time in between his first and his second term.' 'They just seem to me to be much more sure-footed, and there's no question, the president has much more influence inside the Republican Party than he had during his first term,' Cole added. Still, some Republicans have expressed concerns about parts of the request. Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) voiced opposition last week to cutting the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), saying Wednesday that the idea makes 'no sense' to her 'whatsoever.' 'Given the extraordinary record of PEPFAR in saving lives, it has literally saved millions of lives, and so I do not see a basis for cutting it,' she said. And not all Republicans are thrilled by the proposed cuts to public broadcasting in the plan, which calls for rescinding $535 million in both fiscal 2026 and 2027. 'You go to rural America, public television is how you get emergency broadcasting and all that kind of stuff,' Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), a spending cardinal, said Thursday. 'I look at Idaho Public Television, they're a great organization, and we don't see the politics that some states do in them, or at least they believe they see that and stuff.' However, Simpson said he still intends to support the overall package. 'I don't think in the long run, the rescissions are going to hurt them, because we're talking about the advanced appropriations and stuff like that.' 'What they're concerned about is, and should be, is the next year's appropriation process and stuff,' he continued. On its website, DOGE estimates that it's racked up $180 billion in savings as of June 3 through a combination of efforts like asset sales, contract cancellations and renegotiations, 'fraud and improper payment deletion, grant cancellations' and workforce reductions. And White House budget chief Russell Vought signaled further special requests to lock in more DOGE cuts could be on the way when pressed on the matter during a budget hearing last week, particularly as the administration's ongoing efforts to shrink the government have been tangled up in courts. But he also said it's 'very important' for this first package of cuts to pass, adding, 'If it does, it'll be worth the effort and we'll send up additional packages.' 'We are very anxious to see the reception from a vote standpoint in the House and the Senate,' Vought said, though he added, 'I'm less concerned about the House as I am in the Senate.' Some Republicans see the package introduced this week as potentially the easiest one to deal with, as many in the party have been critical of foreign aid and funds going to outlets like PBS and NPR, which they've accused of political bias. In a statement promoting the package on the social platform X, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) on Friday touted the president's request as cutting '$9.4 BILLION in wasteful spending' while holding 'bureaucrats accountable to the American people.' The package would target dollars for items like migration and refugee assistance that the administration says support activities that 'could be more fairly shared with non-U.S. Government donors,' USAID efforts they say have been used to 'fund radical gender and climate projects,' and development assistance they argued 'conflict with American values' and 'interfere with the sovereignty of other countries,' among other rescissions. Funding would also be eliminated for the United Nations Children's Fund, U.N. Development Program and the U.N. Population Fund under the proposal, as well as the World Health Organization and 'portions of the U.N. Regular Budget for the U.N. Human Rights Council and the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East.' Democrats, meanwhile, have come out in strong opposition to the plan, accusing Trump of seeking political retribution and undermining foreign assistance efforts. They've also signaled trouble down the line when it comes time for both sides to negotiate a funding deal for fiscal 2026 — when Democratic support will likely be necessary to keep the government open in early fall. 'It's going to make it very difficult for us to do bipartisan bills if we believe that he's just going to send rescissions over for whatever they want or don't want in a bipartisan agreement,' Sen. Patty Murray (Wash.), top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, told The Hill this week. 'They need Democratic votes.' There's been some GOP frustration over the administration's handling of the annual funding work as well, as lawmakers on both sides have pressed the White House for more information about its budget plans in recent weeks. 'If we're getting to the point where we are right now, where we have a [funding stopgap], where we don't really have spend plans that are meaningful, now we have the administration transferring to the Congress their desires with rescission,' Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), a senior appropriator, said. 'I don't want to be a committee that no longer has a purpose. The role that we play is significant.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Fix the wealth gap by changing the corporate tax code
As Congress crafts yet another budget, it is time to confront a quiet enabler of America's growing wealth gap: the way we tax corporate profits. The U.S. corporate tax system is a maze of complexity, distortion and avoidance. At the same time, the richest Americans — who own the lion's share of corporate stock — see their wealth balloon not from income, but from capital appreciation fueled by retained corporate earnings. They pay little or nothing in taxes until they choose to sell — if ever. Here is a simple idea that could transform that system: Replace the corporate income tax with a flat tax on retained earnings. Instead of taxing corporate profits on paper, tax the portion that companies choose not to distribute — those retained earnings that quietly accumulate on balance sheets, inflate stock values and end up driving inequality. The logic is straightforward. Retained earnings represent profits that aren't reinvested in capital or returned to shareholders. They sit — often offshore and untaxed — fueling stock buybacks or simply increasing book value. Meanwhile, shareholders can borrow against those unrealized gains, grow richer by the year and legally avoid income tax altogether. Under the current system, corporations face a 21 percent statutory income tax rate. But due to loopholes and global tax arbitrage, the effective rate is often much lower — closer to between 9 percent and 15 percent. At the same time, the top 1 percent of Americans own more than 90 percent of stocks and mutual fund wealth, much of which compounds through retained earnings without triggering taxable events. A 20 percent flat tax on retained earnings, applied at the corporate level, would be lower than the statutory income tax but much harder to evade. It would simplify the tax code, eliminate gamesmanship and ensure that profits benefit society, whether distributed or not. Companies could avoid the tax by issuing dividends — thereby transferring the tax burden to shareholders, who would then pay ordinary dividend taxes. Or companies could reinvest in productive capital expenditures or research and development, which could be exempted from the tax base. People often complain that the rich don't pay their fair share in taxes. A retained earnings tax addresses this directly, since the wealthy are by far the largest shareholders. By inducing higher dividend payouts, the tax would convert more untaxed wealth into taxable income — ensuring the rich pay more, proportionally and predictably. This plan is fair. Wealth would no longer accumulate tax-free inside corporations. Ultra-wealthy shareholders would see more of their income flow to dividends, triggering taxes like ordinary Americans face on wages. In 2024, S&P 500 companies earned approximately $1.9 trillion in pre-tax profits. Of that, they paid only about $248 billion in corporate taxes — just 13 percent of total profits — and distributed around $650 billion in dividends to shareholders. That left well over $1 trillion in earnings to be retained or used for stock buybacks. A 20 percent tax on just the retained portion — estimated near $870 billion — would yield $174 billion annually. More importantly, it would encourage companies to issue more dividends — triggering personal income tax obligations at rates of 15 percent to 23.8 percent. For the first time in decades, untaxed paper wealth held by the ultra-rich would convert into real, taxable income. This plan is earnings are already reported as a line item on corporate financial statements, so no need for armies of tax accountants. This plan also encourages efficiency. Corporations would be nudged to either distribute profits or reinvest productively — reducing hoarding, stock buybacks and financial manipulation. The scale of profit hoarding is not theoretical. As of late 2024, Apple held over $65 billion in cash and equivalents. Microsoft held more than $71 billion. Alphabet, parent company of Google, sat on over $95 billion and Amazon was at $100 billion. These figures represent retained capital sitting in balance sheets — largely untouched by taxation. In many cases, this hoarded cash fuels share repurchases or simply adds to paper valuations, thus benefiting the wealthiest shareholders while contributing nothing to public coffers. Of course, this idea has precedents. President Franklin D. Roosevelt experimented with an undistributed profits tax in the 1930s. Today, a version survives as the Accumulated Earnings Tax, but it's rarely enforced and easy to circumvent. This proposal is simpler, bolder and broader. Critics may worry this plan would discourage reinvestment or burden growth. But a well-designed system can exempt reinvested earnings tied to clear capital investment or innovation. What this proposal targets is not growth but excessive hoarding of profits that serves only the wealthy few. Others may fear that such a tax would prompt corporations to switch to alternative structures or shift operations abroad. But a retained earnings tax can be applied based on financial disclosures for U.S.-based public companies and expanded to large LLCs or partnerships. In fact, it may reduce incentives to move profits offshore, since it targets where wealth stays, not where it's reported. The politics are promising. A retained earnings tax is lower than the current corporate income tax — yet may raise more consistent, sustainable revenue. It eliminates the need to police every deduction, credit and carve-out. It also aligns with populist sentiments on both the left and right: no more tax-free stockpiling, no more billionaires (referred to by some today as 'oligarchs') borrowing off their gains while avoiding taxes. Congress has a chance to reset how we think about taxing wealth — not by chasing every dollar of income, but by targeting the retained profits that silently fuel inequality and sidestep the tax system. Fixing the corporate tax code is essential not just for raising revenue but for restoring fairness, transparency and trust in the American economic compact. Peter D. Wells is principal at Ancient Wisdom Consulting. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
