Navigating Rental Options and Assistance for L.A. Wildfire Victims
The recent wildfires destroyed more than 16,000 structures and displaced thousands of residents. Several community organizations and businesses are stepping up to help wildfire victims find housing.
Over 160 hotels in California, Arizona, and Nevada are offering free or discounted stays to evacuees.
Organizations like the LA Tenants Union advocate for tenant protection during this challenging time. They are pushing for rent freezes and eviction moratoriums to provide a safety net for those who lost their homes.
For those who lost their job because of the fires, there are several financial assistance options:
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) offers financial assistance for temporary housing and other disaster-related expenses. The deadline for wildfire victims to apply for federal aid has been extended to March 31. People affected by the fires can apply through FEMA's website to receive help.
There are three ways to apply:
California's Employment Development Department (EDD) provides Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA) to those who lost their jobs or cannot work because of the fires. This program offers financial relief, resources, and eligibility information. To apply, visit this page on the EDD site.
To navigate the many challenges of the wildfires, victims should:
Recovery will be tough for wildfire victims, but many resources and organizations are here to help them find stable housing and financial relief. The resilience of affected communities, combined with the dedication of advocacy groups and government agencies, offers hope during these trying times.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
9 hours ago
- Forbes
Federal Disaster Tax Breaks Are Big, But Which Declarations Count?
TOPSHOT - A home burns during the Palisades Fire in Pacific Palisades, California, on January 8, ... More 2025. At least five people have been killed in wildfires rampaging around Los Angeles, officials said on January 8, with firefighters overwhelmed by the speed and ferocity of multiple blazes. (Photo by AGUSTIN PAULLIER / AFP) (Photo by AGUSTIN PAULLIER/AFP via Getty Images) Disaster victims get big tax benefits from federal disaster declarations. In fact, it can make your wildfire settlement tax free. As such, you might logically assume that it is always 100% whether your particular disaster gets the helpful federal nod from FEMA. But in the case of wildfires, is it always so clear? The tax law defines a Federally declared disaster as 'any disaster subsequently determined by the President of the United States to warrant assistance by the Federal Government under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act,' commonly known as the Stafford Act. It has three principal types of disaster relief declarations for wildfires: Only two wildfires appear to have obtained their FEMA disaster declarations as Declared Emergencies since 2019, the 2020 Oregon Wildfires (designated EM-3542-OR) and the 2021 California Caldor Fire (designated EM-3571-CA). Declared Emergencies are less common for wildfires, perhaps because there is a separate avenue for wildfires, Fire Management Assistance Declarations under Section 420 of the Stafford Act. Some wildfires are given Major Disaster Declarations, including the recent 2025 LA fires. Historically, so were the 2015 California Butte Fires (DR-4240-CA), the 2017 North Bay Fires (DR-4344-CA), and 2018 Woolsey Fire and Camp Fire (DR-4407-CA). Major Disaster Declarations qualify victims for the widest scope of direct federal assistance through FEMA via Any wildfire with a Major Disaster Declaration clearly qualifies as a Federally declared disaster for tax purposes. Section 1.165-11(b)(1) of the IRS Regulations says a Federally declared disaster 'includes both a major disaster declared under Section 401 of the Stafford Act and an emergency declared under section 501 of the Stafford Act.' These two types of declarations are specifically included within the definition of a Federally declared disaster for tax purposes. How about the third category? Section 1.165-11(b)(1) is silent about Fire Management Assistance Declarations, the third major type of declaration for wildfires. But the statutory language suggests that a Federally declared disaster means any declaration under the Stafford Act. Plainly, Section 420's Fire Management Assistance Declarations are federal relief so seem to be covered. Fire Management Assistance Declarations usually do not provide or authorize the same scope of direct federal assistance to wildfire victims as Major Disaster Declarations. However, Section 165(i)(5) of the tax code only requires that the disaster be determined by the President to 'warrant assistance by the Federal Government' under the Stafford Act. Providing money, equipment, supplies, and FEMA personnel to a State or local government to assist in wildfire containment and recovery efforts appears to fall within the definition of 'assistance by the Federal Government' under the Stafford Act. Many recent major wildfires received disaster declarations under Section 420's Fire Management Assistance provisions. The LA fires in 2025, including in Pacific Palisades were not originally Major Disaster Declarations, but Federal Management Assistance Declarations. However, on the day after they were granted relief under The Fire Management Assistance provisions of Section 420, they were then also the subject of a Major Disaster Declaration under Section 401. This supplemental disaster declaration is important for victims for non-tax reasons, but the Fire Management Assistance Declaration was arguably already sufficient to qualify the fire as a Federally declared disaster for tax purposes. Many wildfires remain disasters declared only under Section 420's Fire Management Assistance relief provisions without a Major Disaster Declaration, and this is arguably enough to unlock the tax benefits. Fire Management Assistance relief under Section 420 of the Stafford Act appears to often be granted for wildfires for the same purpose that a Declared Emergency declaration would be used outside of the wildfire context. There have only been two wildfires nationwide that have been identified as Declared Emergencies since 2019, compared to 305 fires that received a Fire Management Assistance Declaration. There are differences between the two types of declarations. However, both are usually granted to help state and local governments deal with emerging disasters that need to be contained, or to help with rescuing and immediate medical treatment of victims. The regulations under Section 165 of the tax code suggest that Declared Emergencies under Section 501 of the Stafford Act are considered Federally declared disasters for tax purposes, regardless of whether they later result in a Major Disaster Declaration. It would be unusual if similar federal assistance usually provided in the wildfire context, and also under the Stafford Act, would not be treated similarly as a Declared Emergency for income tax purposes. Some devastating wildfires are not designated as disasters by FEMA under any provisions of the Stafford Act. For example, the Mountain View Fire of 2020 burned for nearly a month, consuming nearly 21,000 acres in California, destroying 80 buildings (damaging many more) and killing at least one person. This fire was not large enough for FEMA to consider it outside of the combined capability of the California state and local governments and relief organizations to address without federal involvement. Therefore, the Mountain View Fire was designated by California as a state disaster, but not a federal disaster by FEMA. A disaster declaration by a state is NOT sufficient to qualify a disaster as a Federally declared disaster for federal tax purposes. It is easy to get confused, but no state-declared disaster that is not a federally declared disaster has a disaster description and designation on the FEMA website. There is no FEMA disaster declaration page for the 2020 Mountain View Fire, under the EM, DR, or FM prefixes. For state-declared disasters that are not Federally declared disaster, the main federal recognition of the disaster is not by FEMA. The SBA way offer relief, but that is not sufficient to make a state-declared disaster a Federally declared disaster for income tax purposes.
San Francisco Chronicle
11 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Exclusive: Trump administration may hit S.F. with a $140 million bill. Here's why
The Trump administration could claw back about $140 million in federal funding that San Francisco already received to cover costs the city incurred during the pandemic, the Chronicle has learned. San Francisco spent well over $400 million to shelter vulnerable homeless people in hotels to protect them from COVID-19 after the virus began spreading five years ago. After the city applied for reimbursement, the Federal Emergency Management Agency under former President Joe Biden sent $148 million — and the city was expecting even more money. But this week, San Francisco officials learned that FEMA has indicated it now believes the city is entitled to be reimbursed for just $7 million of the total amount spent on the shelter-in-place hotels. While FEMA hasn't officially requested any money back, city officials believe that determination lays the groundwork for the agency to seek a $141 million refund from the amount it already paid the city. There's a big problem: San Francisco already spent the money. And the city is in a dire financial situation, with Mayor Daniel Lurie working to close a roughly $800 million shortfall in his inaugural budget proposal expected to be announced Friday. San Francisco's government costs are rising faster than its tax revenue, which is being hampered by one of the nation's slowest economic recoveries from the pandemic. It's not clear how FEMA arrived at its determination. The Chronicle has reached out to the agency for comment. FEMA's decision, which San Francisco is expected to appeal, represents one of the largest direct hits the Trump administration has tried to take against the city this year. Lurie and other local officials are bracing for more: The mayor plans to propose a $400 million reserve to help the city defend itself against the uncertainty caused by threatened cuts to federal funding. Lurie said in a statement to the Chronicle that San Francisco endeavored to keep its citizens safe during the pandemic 'with a commitment from the federal government to cover those costs.' 'As our administration makes the tough decisions to tackle the historic budget deficit we inherited, we are navigating tremendous uncertainty at the federal and state levels and preparing for challenges that may lie ahead,' Lurie said. 'But right now, FEMA still owes San Francisco hundreds of millions of dollars, and I will continue to advocate relentlessly with our federal partners until we receive every single dollar.' Supervisor Connie Chan, who chairs the Board of Supervisors' budget committee, said the $400 million reserve being planned by city officials is intended largely as 'a guardrail' against possible federal cuts to Medicaid and housing subsidies — not to pay back pandemic reimbursements already sent by FEMA. 'San Francisco must fight Trump, not only against potentially upcoming draconian cuts, but also for this illegal clawback of the money that San Francisco has already delivered,' Chan said. If San Francisco is unsuccessful in its appeal of the FEMA decision, Chan believes a lawsuit is likely called for, saying she is looking to City Attorney David Chiu 'and his capable team to stand firm and have a strategic approach to protect San Francisco's resources.' Jen Kwart, a spokesperson for Chiu, said in a statement that her office is 'working with our clients and evaluating next steps to ensure San Francisco gets the resources it is entitled to.' In remarks to reporters after he introduced his $15.9 billion city budget proposal Friday, Lurie said San Francisco would 'fight for every dollar that our city is owed.' He confirmed that the city would appeal the FEMA funding decision and said it would take 'probably a number of months for us to find out.'
Business Upturn
17 hours ago
- Business Upturn
Affle 3i shares surge over 5% today after key update on Bobble investment and legal action
By Aditya Bhagchandani Published on June 10, 2025, 09:31 IST Shares of Affle 3i Ltd surged over 5% on Tuesday, June 10, reaching ₹1,970.00, following a crucial update regarding the company's ongoing legal and investment matters with Talent Unlimited Online Services Private Limited (Bobble). The stock emerged as one of the top gainers on NSE, climbing ₹101.30 from its previous close of ₹1,868.70. In a regulatory filing dated June 9, Affle 3i announced that its Investment Committee will convene on June 16, 2025, to assess the current status of its investment in Bobble. The company had earlier flagged Bobble for recurring financial losses, suspected fraudulent transactions, regulatory non-compliance, and potential data leakage involving entities linked to China. Affle had previously classified this investment as 'Held For Sale' and is now pursuing legal enforcement of its rights. Despite a court mandate and an arbitration ruling directing Bobble to comply with inspection rights, the startup has allegedly failed to cooperate. Affle has since filed an execution petition with the Delhi High Court and is also supporting the Enforcement Directorate's probe into Bobble under FEMA. The sharp stock movement reflects investor optimism regarding Affle's assertive legal stance and its commitment to corporate governance and transparency. Disclaimer: The information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial or investment advice. Stock market investments are subject to market risks. Always conduct your own research or consult a financial advisor before making investment decisions. Author or Business Upturn is not liable for any losses arising from the use of this information. Aditya Bhagchandani serves as the Senior Editor and Writer at Business Upturn, where he leads coverage across the Business, Finance, Corporate, and Stock Market segments. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to journalistic integrity, he not only contributes insightful articles but also oversees editorial direction for the reporting team.
