AT&T Seeks More Than $2 Billion for Mexico Mobile Unit
Dallas-based AT&T is seeking more than $2 billion for the business, according to the people, who asked not to be identified discussing confidential information.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Montana woman discovers husband of 21 years didn't pay his taxes — now IRS is after them. What Dave Ramsey says to do
It's one thing for a spouse to keep a minor secret from their partner — it's another thing to hide an $82,000 tax bill. That's the situation Alice in Montana found herself in when she wrote to The Ramsey Show. Her husband of 21 years failed to pay an $82,000 tax bill from 2021. Now, the IRS is coming after their home, and she wants to know if she should take out a second mortgage to cover the bill or sell it. "I feel blindsided and betrayed," she wrote in. Ramsey's response? "What a mess!" Don't miss Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 6 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast) Robert Kiyosaki warns of a 'Greater Depression' coming to the US — with millions of Americans going poor. But he says these 2 'easy-money' assets will bring in 'great wealth'. How to get in now Financial infidelity Alice and her husband's finances weren't always smooth, as evidenced by her alluding to a past bankruptcy. However, thanks to a strong 2021 for her husband's real estate business, they wound up owing the IRS $82,000. The money was in the husband's business account, so Alice trusted him to pay them. Instead, he used it to cover other business expenses and a failed side venture without telling her. He also blew off their accountant. Their CPA eventually filed their taxes for them in 2023, sans signatures — an act Ramsey called illegal. 'That's a good way for the CPA to end up in jail,' he quipped. Alice's husband then proceeded to hide IRS notices from her regarding the tax debt. She only found out when she signed for a certificate letter from the IRS saying the agency intends to levy their home for $150,000. Alice turned to Ramsey for guidance: should she buy her husband's share of the house or use a second mortgage to cover the IRS bill? Ramsey assumed that by "buy him out," Alice intended to divorce her husband. After bantering with co-host Rachel Cruze over whether she meant 'bail him' out, Ramsey added that as a nurse, Alice probably had taxes withheld from her paychecks. Now, if Alice and her husband intend to go to marriage counseling, then, between his real estate income and her nursing income, they can pay off the tax debt themselves. But Ramsey added that Alice should sell the house if she's getting a divorce. There was some good news for Alice: she may not be responsible for the taxes in the event of a divorce. "You would file under what's called the innocent spouse provision," he explained. "You were not aware of these taxes; you were not aware of the business activities that created these taxes." Because of this, Ramsey said the IRS shouldn't hold her liable even if her filing status at the time of the debt was married filing jointly. However, he suggested that Alice hire a skilled tax attorney or a knowledgeable CPA to argue her case. Ramsey added that if the house has a lien and is sold, the IRS can only take the money out of the husband's portion if Alice gets approved for innocent spouse relief. But this only works if they get a divorce. Otherwise, Alice and her husband need to work on reestablishing trust. Stay in the know. Join 200,000+ readers and get the best of Moneywise sent straight to your inbox every week for free. How innocent spouse relief works The IRS's innocent spouse relief program is designed to protect people like Alice from liability when their spouses underpay taxes on a joint tax return and they're unaware of it. If you're in a situation like hers, you may be eligible for innocent spouse relief. However, that relief only pertains to taxes on your spouse's income. You cannot claim innocent spouse relief for your income, household employment taxes, business taxes or certain other taxes. You can request innocent spouse relief if: You and your spouse filed a joint tax return Your taxes were underreported in error You did not know about errors on your tax return You reside in a community property state The IRS instructs people to request innocent spouse relief as soon as they become aware that they're on the hook for a tax bill. You must also request innocent spouse relief within two years of receiving a notice from the IRS about a tax bill. The IRS also says that if you didn't sign or consent to file a joint tax return with your spouse, you may be able to limit your responsibility for your spouse's taxes. You can call the number on your tax debt notice to learn more. This situation may apply to Alice, as she stated that their accountant filed their tax return without their signatures or consent. Of course, applying for innocent spouse relief does not guarantee approval. According to Jackson Hewitt Tax Services, in 2021, the IRS received over 26,000 innocent spouse relief requests but only approved about 4,800. Because approval is not guaranteed and there are many nuances involved, it may be best to consult a tax professional with expertise in the area rather than attempt to get relief on your own. What to read next Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan 'works every single time' to kill debt, get rich in America — and that 'anyone' can do it Here are 5 simple ways to grow rich with real estate if you don't want to play landlord. And you can even start with as little as $10 Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you? This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind. 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
Fast Company
17 minutes ago
- Fast Company
My employee is bad at his job but keeps saying he's doing great
columnist Alison Green answers questions about workplace and management issues—everything from how to deal with a micromanaging boss to how to talk to someone on your team about body odor. A reader asks: I recently hired a new administrative employee. His job is to answer phones, greet guests, and complete various tasks I assign to him. His customer service skills are strong, but his attention to detail is very weak. I have given him a lot of feedback and training, but he continues to make basic mistakes and misses almost every deadline I give him. But he is constantly telling me how great a job he's doing. He routinely tells me things like, 'You are going to be so happy when I show you what I've done for you!' or 'You are going to love me—I am making your life so much easier!' and then hands me a report that I have to spend a half-hour correcting. Yesterday, I told him to follow up with me when he completes tasks because I would rather he proactively inform me than wait for me to ask. His response: 'As you know, I always complete tasks immediately [ this is untrue ] but I didn't know you needed me to remind you of that. No problem at all!' This behavior is really grating on me. His work product hasn't improved and I'm starting to feel like he's trying to manipulate me into not giving him corrections. I'm starting to struggle giving him feedback because I feel like he ignores me and I'm letting that affect my interactions with him. Have I already arrived at the 'this needs to improve or else' conversation? He started just two months ago. I want to give him time to learn and grow, but my patience is zapped. Green responds: I'm sorry, I laughed out loud at 'As you know, I always complete tasks immediately [ this is untrue ].' You do need to have the 'this needs to improve or else' conversation. You've given him very basic feedback over and over, he's not improving, and he misses almost every deadline you give him. His overhyping of his own work makes this more concerning. If you could see that he was taking your feedback seriously, he understood that his work isn't where it needs to be, and he was working hard to incorporate your feedback, I'd say sure, give him some time to work on mastering the job. But when he's ignoring your feedback and telling you his work is superb when you've clearly told him it's not, that's a serious problem, and not the sort that time usually helps with. However! There's potentially some room for hope if you haven't been completely clear with him. When you've given him feedback and talked about mistakes, have you been clear that the work isn't at the level you need and that the pattern of mistakes is serious? And when he misses deadlines, have you told him clearly that it can't keep happening? (For example: 'This was due yesterday—what happened?' Followed by, 'It's really important that you turn in work by the agreed-upon deadline or tell me ahead of time if you're worried about your ability to do that.') If you haven't done those things, it's possible that this could turn this around. A lot of managers in your situation think, 'But I shouldn't need to do that! He should know that missing a deadline is a big deal, and that he needs to take feedback seriously.' And indeed, he should. But many employees miss the cues that managers think are obvious—and when you're frustrated with someone, the first step is to make sure that you've been really clear about the expectations you need them to meet. (In fact, whenever you're feeling frustrated with an employee, that's a flag to check how clear you've been.) If you've done those things and this is still happening, then yes, it's time for a serious conversation where you explain you can't keep him in the job if you don't see significant improvement on these fronts quickly. Interestingly, I think you can do all of this without directly addressing the 'I'm amazing' comments. By addressing the crux of the problem—his work is not what you need it to be—he'll probably get the message that his self-hype isn't in line with the reality. If he doesn't, that's not a great sign about how well he's processing your message. That said, if you want to address it, you can! You could say, 'I was surprised to hear you say you always complete tasks immediately when I've shared my concern about a number of missed deadlines recently.' Or you can take the hype as statements of his intentions rather than what he's actually done. For example, with his 'I am making your life so much easier!' comment, you could refer back to that later with something like, 'I know you want to make my life easier and I appreciate that—that's what I want from your role as well. When you give me a report with errors that I have to spend half an hour correcting, that's not happening. I need you to double-check your work before it comes to me so that you're spotting and correcting your own errors and I don't need to fix anything when it comes my way.' But I think if you keep the focus on the gap between the work he's producing and the work you need—and just consider the self-hype a strange and even amusing eccentricity —you'll figure out pretty quickly if he can succeed in the job or not, and that's what really matters.
CBS News
26 minutes ago
- CBS News
Florida Power & Light reaches "settlement in principle" regarding rate increase proposal, utility says
With a high-stakes hearing scheduled to start Monday, Florida Power & Light and numerous parties have reached a "settlement in principle" on a plan for base electric rates over the next four years, the utility said Friday. But other parties, including most notably the state Office of Public Counsel — which is designated by law to represent consumers — have not agreed to the potential settlement and want to move forward with the planned hearing at the Florida Public Service Commission. The developments late Friday afternoon added uncertainty to a closely watched case that has involved FPL seeking rate increases that would lead to customers paying billions of dollars in the coming years. In a filing at the commission, FPL did not detail terms of the potential deal but said that "on the heels of the extensive litigation" in preparation for the hearing, "FPL and multiple intervenors have reached a settlement in principle that would resolve all pending issues." The utility asked the regulatory commission to suspend timeframes in the case "to allow the settling parties to promptly memorialize the terms of the settlement. With the ability to focus on preparing the agreement, FPL and signatory parties will be positioned to submit the settlement for review by the commission's staff and any non-settling parties by August 20, 2025." But state Public Counsel Walt Trierweiler said in a filing that his office and four other parties object to a continuance and "will continue to prepare for the hearing." The commission is expected to decide how to proceed Monday. FPL early this year filed a proposal for rate increases of $1.545 billion in 2026 and $927 million in 2027. Also, FPL would pass along costs to customers in 2028 and 2029 for solar-energy and battery-storage projects. Base rates make up a major part of customers' monthly bills, along with costs such as power-plant fuel. Base-rate cases play out over months at the Public Service Commission and involve voluminous amounts of financial and other data. The multi-day hearing scheduled to start Monday would include expert testimony and lead to a decision this fall by the commission about whether to approve the FPL proposal or scale it back. If a settlement is ultimately finalized, the commission would hold a hearing on it and decide whether to sign off. Along with FPL, other parties involved in the potential settlement are the Florida Industrial Power Users Group; the Florida Retail Federation; the Florida Energy for Innovation Association; Walmart, Inc.; EVgo Services LLC; Americans for Affordable Clean Energy; Circle K Stores, Inc., RaceTrac, Inc.; Wawa, Inc.' Electrify America LLC; federal government agencies; Armstrong World Industries, Inc. and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, according to FPL's filing. FPL President and CEO Armando Pimentel said in a prepared statement that a "settlement would provide a win for our customers and the state of Florida. We appreciate the constructive engagement of key intervenors. Any agreement that we reach should enable FPL to continue to make smart investments on behalf of our customers, ensuring that we can continue to provide reliable electricity to power our fast-growing state while keeping customer bills low." But the Office of Public Counsel has been joined in its objections by the groups Florida Rising, the Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida, the League of United Latin American Citizens and Floridians Against Increased Rates. Settlements in base-rate cases are relatively common. FPL is operating under a four-year settlement that will expire at the end of 2025. As another example, the commission last year approved a base-rate settlement for Duke Energy Florida. In contrast, the commission held a contested hearing before approving rates for Tampa Electric Co.
