logo
Nebraska on the verge of bankruptcy because of tariffs, labor shortages? Truth behind viral claim

Nebraska on the verge of bankruptcy because of tariffs, labor shortages? Truth behind viral claim

Hindustan Times2 days ago
A rumor circulating online has claimed that as of August 2025, Nebraska is on the verge of bankruptcy because of tariffs and labor shortages after immigration raids were carried out. This claim, however, does not appear to be true, snopes.com has revealed. Nebraska on the verge of bankruptcy because of tariffs, labor shortages? Truth behind viral claim (Pixabay - representational image)
The state constitution says that Nebraska must balance its budget every year; it cannot have a debt and cannot go bankrupt. Farmers in Nebraska, however, have been experiencing uncertainty due to new economic measures. This did put a strain on its grain sales to China.
What does the rumor claim?
A rumor that circulated this month claimed that Nebraska was $500 million short of its budget because of the economic damage tariffs and labor shortages inflicted on its farms. Immigration raids caused the labor shortages, per the rumor.
A video (archived) on Instagram claimed that the state witnessed $2 billion worth of contracts for exporting soybeans to China canceled after the tariffs were imposed. The video was shared on Facebook too.
The video was shared by TikTok user @joeclark207, who identified himself as an elected official from Georgia. Snopes.com confirmed that Joe Clark had actually been a council member for Fayetteville since 2020.
Is Nebraska seeking help to avoid bankruptcy?
The outlet said that no evidence was found about the state seeking help to avoid bankruptcy. Nebraska, in fact, is constitutionally mandated to balance its budget to ensure no debt is incurred.
Article IV-7 of the Nebraska State Constitution reads, 'No appropriations shall be made in excess of the recommendation contained in such budget including any amendment the Governor may make thereto unless by three-fifths vote of the Legislature, and such excess so approved shall be subject to veto by the Governor.'
Article XIII-1 of the Constitution says, 'The state may, to meet casual deficits, or failures in the revenue, contract debts never to exceed in the aggregate one hundred thousand dollars, and no greater indebtedness shall be incurred except for the purpose of repelling invasion, suppressing insurrection, or defending the state in war, and provision shall be made for the payment of the interest annually, as it shall accrue, by a tax levied for the purpose, or from other sources of revenue, which law providing for the payment of such interest by such tax shall be irrepealable until such debt is paid.'
To put it simply, the state must not spend more money than it takes in.
In April 2025, the state's economic forecasting board announced a $190 million shortfall in revenue for the 2025 fiscal year, adding that it was going to collect $90 million less than projected in 2026 and $100 million less in 2027. An April 26, 2025, report by The Nebraska Examiner said that the budget deficit for 2025 would be closed with state reserves.
Read More | Trump softens stance on India, China tariffs? What he said after meeting Putin
The Nebraska Legislature in May 2022 went on to pass several budget bills for 2025-27, closing the projected deficit. This left a surplus of $1.1 million.
Nebraska really did announce in July this year that it had ended its fiscal year with $86 million less in tax revenue than it had projected, in part due to tax cuts. Farmers in the state did face uncertainty after President Donald Trump decided to implement tariffs on China.
The US Bureau of Economic Analysis reported (archived) at the end of June that Nebraska's gross domestic product had shrunk by 6.1% in the first quarter of 2025. "Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting, which decreased in 39 states, was the leading contributor to the decreases in 11 states, including Nebraska, Iowa, Montana, and Kansas," the report read. At the time, KLKN reported that this happened because of higher costs and lower corn and soybean prices.
According to the report, John Hansen, president of the Nebraska Farmers Union, said that this was "the worst financial time for family farmers in decades." In March this year, WOWT reported that the Nebraska Farm Bureau said the state's farmers sell $2.1 billion in grains to China every year, and were worried about a trade war between China and the United States.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump Publicly ‘Humiliates' EU Chief; ‘BOOTS OUT' Ursula From White House
Trump Publicly ‘Humiliates' EU Chief; ‘BOOTS OUT' Ursula From White House

Time of India

time22 minutes ago

  • Time of India

Trump Publicly ‘Humiliates' EU Chief; ‘BOOTS OUT' Ursula From White House

EU chief Ursula von der Leyen raised abducted Ukrainian children in talks. She called it a moral duty to bring them home, speaking 'as a grandmother.' But Trump told her he thought they were there for a 'different reason.' The dismissive remark shocked EU leaders at the White House meet. It raised doubts on how seriously Trump treats humanitarian crises. Bundestag Vice President also said Trump also asked EU Chief to leave the White House meeting room a few times. Read More

Traffic congestion on NH corridor: HC directs forming committee to ready traffic management plan
Traffic congestion on NH corridor: HC directs forming committee to ready traffic management plan

The Hindu

time22 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

Traffic congestion on NH corridor: HC directs forming committee to ready traffic management plan

The Kerala High Court has directed that a committee be constituted to form an interim traffic management plan for the congested Edapally-Thrissur NH 544 corridor, especially in the vicinity of the Paliyekkara toll plaza. Such a monitoring mechanism was essential to ensure smooth movement of vehicles, especially in view of a 12-hour-long traffic hold up on the corridor, a Division Bench of Justice A. Muhammed Mustaqu and Justice Harisankar V. Menon observed while considering petitions regarding acute traffic hold-ups on the corridor, especially around construction sites. The committee must hear the opinion of MPs, MLAs, and local authorities, before finalising any plan. It ought to consider whether restricting the movement of heavy vehicles through the stretch during daytime, at least from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., and rerouting them through alternative roads, would be feasible. Holding the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) responsible for traffic snarls that have become the norm on the busy corridor, the High Court had earlier this month issued an order to the agency to halt toll collection at the Paliyekkara plaza in Thrissur for four weeks. The court had further directed the Centre to take appropriate decisions within this time frame to address the concerns and grievance of motorists and other members of the public who have a harrowing time on the NHAI-owned corridor that links Ernakulam and Thrissur districts. It reminded that the Supreme Court had held that the right to safe and well-maintained roads was recognised as a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution and it was the responsibility of the State to develop and maintain such roads, it said.

Is Governor's indefinite delay on bill beyond review, top court asks Centre
Is Governor's indefinite delay on bill beyond review, top court asks Centre

India Today

time22 minutes ago

  • India Today

Is Governor's indefinite delay on bill beyond review, top court asks Centre

The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned whether a Governor could keep a Bill passed by the legislature pending indefinitely and if such a delay was entirely outside the scope of judicial Justice of India B R Gavai, heading a five-judge Constitution Bench, asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta whether such indefinite delay would still remain beyond judicial review. 'Either the Governor gives assent or does not. But if he keeps it pending for an unlimited period, is that completely outside judicial scrutiny?' the CJI asked during a hearing on a Presidential Mehta argued that when a bill is presented to a Governor, they have the power under Article 200 of the Constitution to simply refuse to approve it. This refusal, or withholding of assent, means the bill effectively dies. The Governor cannot send it back to the legislature for reconsideration, leaving no further recourse for the bill."This Court is not the answer, unless there is a constitutional amendment,' he CENTRE TOLD COURTThe Solicitor General argued that the framers of the Constitution deliberately did not set timelines for the President or Governors to act on Bills. 'The Government of India Act, 1915 had a timeline. But the Constituent Assembly consciously removed it. Dr B R Ambedkar replaced 'six weeks' with 'as soon as possible' in Article 111,' he added, 'Our parliamentary democracy has clearly demarcated powers. The Court's role is judicial review, not governance. If the buck stops at this Court for every problem, that is not the heart and soul of separation of powers.'He maintained that any exercise of power under Article 200 — whether assent, withholding assent, or returning a Bill — was outside the scope of judicial bench, also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar, observed that while courts cannot probe why assent was given, they can examine the constitutionality of the process. 'When it comes to a question of law, that too becomes part of the decision-making process,' the CJI THE CASEThe Presidential Reference was made to clarify the powers of the President and Governors in granting assent to Bills. On Day 1, the bench stressed that advisory opinions under Article 143 cannot overrule existing Surya Kant had underlined, 'We are in advisory jurisdiction, not appellate jurisdiction. We will answer only if a question of law has arisen.' Justice P S Narasimha added that such opinions 'cannot be treated as precedents.'Attorney General R Venkataramani earlier told the court that the Governor has four options under Article 200—grant assent, withhold assent, return the Bill, or reserve it for the President—and cautioned against the judiciary stepping into the legislative domain. 'It is a matter of textual amendment. Can the Court rewrite the Constitution?' he hearings will continue next week.- Ends

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store