Private Capital Firms to Break Into 401(k) Retirement Plans
Welcome to Going Private, Bloomberg's twice-weekly newsletter about private markets and the forces moving capital away from the public eye. Today, we're looking at the latest push to bring private assets into 401(k) retirement funds and concerns in enterprise software. Plus, private credit managers took to Nashville to debate the benefits of size and scale. If you're not already on our list, sign up here. Have feedback? Email us at goingprivate@bloomberg.net — Isabella Farr and Davide Scigliuzzo
As alternative asset managers have swelled, they've started to search near and far for more funds. They've tapped individual investor pockets, traditional family offices, even Australian retirement funds.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Berkshire Hathaway shares sag since Buffett say he's retiring
Berkshire Hathaway shares sag since Buffett say he's retiring originally appeared on TheStreet. Warren Buffett's retirement announcement was not what investors wanted. During the middle of Thursday's trading, shares of Berkshire Hathaway () and () had fallen as much as 10.3% from all-time intraday highs of $812,855 and $539.80 on May 2. May 2 was the day before some 40,000 investors and fans jammed the company's annual meeting, held in an Omaha, Neb., arena. 🔥 💰 At the very end of the meeting, Buffett, who has been CEO of the company for more than 60 years, announced he will step aside on Dec. 31. Greg Abel is slated to replace Buffett, who will serve as chairman. The shares fell nearly 5% on May 5, the first day of trading after Buffett's announcement and have stumbled steadily since. Perhaps some good news: shares of both classes ended Friday about 1% higher at $740,396 and $493.53, respectively. So, maybe the stocks' downturn may have uptick was probably helped by Friday's big market rally. The gains, however, came after five straight days of declines for both share classes. In fact, the A shares have shown just nine gains since May 2. The B shares rose just 10 times in those 24 days. And the stocks are down 8.9% and 8.6%, respectively, in those 24 days, while the Standard & Poor's 500 Index is up 5.5%. But remember this. Year to date, the A shares are up 8.7% and the B shares are up 8.9%. The S&P 500's 2025 gain so far: just 2%. One explanation for the decline is investors are having trouble dealing with the possibility that Buffett won't be the face of the company. Buffett evolved into a folk hero for many investors partly because of his folksy, plainspoken manner, especially as he chaired the company's annual meeting. Plus, his rigorous devotion to value investing and the company's investment track record built a company that still has a $1 trillion-plus market capitalization despite the stock's decline. Berkshire's investment in Apple () has been legendarily profitable — in part because Buffett resisted investing in technology for years until his partner, the late Charlie Munger, convinced him Apple was a consumer company. Apple CEO Tim Cook has been a regular attendee at the Berkshire annual meeting. Buffett himself is now reputed to be worth more than $157 billion. All this in the face of multiple market slumps and recessions. And that reputation gave him the ability to move markets all by himself. Berkshire investors did suffer with everyone else during the 2008 market crash; the shares fell as much as 48% between a top in October 2008 until their bottom in March 2009. Buffett is 94, and, by his own admission in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, he's slowing down. He said Abel is not only terrifically able, but, Buffett added, Abel has a lot more energy. One other trait Buffett praised. Abel is willing to get directly involved with subsidiaries in need of help. Two more issues may be affecting Berkshire shares: Berkshire was downgraded modestly by UBS analyst Brian Meredith, who still rates either share class a buy. But dividend income from its investments might not be as strong as in previous years. Berkshire is not expected to buy back shares any time soon. Companies do that to boost support stock prices. Buffett thinks Berkshire's current intrinsic value is 9% higher than the current stock prices. Fund manager buys and sells See a big stock rally ahead? Be patient, money manager says Fund manager, skeptical of AI, backs shocking stock Veteran fund manager sends surprising message on the weak dollar Abel, who just turned 63, has been Buffett's designated successor since 2021. He is now vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway Energy, the holding company for Berkshire's electric utility the same time, Berkshire Hathaway may be facing another personnel issue. Ajit Jain, the head of Berkshire Hathaway's big insurance operation, is thinking about retiring, and there are discussions on how to replace him. Jain, now 73, joined Berkshire Hathaway in 1986 while in his 30s. And he has reportedly suggested a list of possible replacements, The Journal reported. The insurance business is Berkshire's largest business unit, with upwards of 20 separate subsidiaries. Best known: auto insurer Geico. The business is hugely profitable and is the source of funds that Buffett and Munger invested so profitably. Berkshire Hathaway has evolved into a huge conglomerate, built around insurance. Holdings include the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad, the insurance business, electric utilities, retail companies, Benjamin Moore, the paint manufacturer, Dairy Queen and Duracell batteries. Berkshire Hathaway shares sag since Buffett say he's retiring first appeared on TheStreet on Jun 8, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jun 8, 2025, where it first appeared. 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
Washington Post
39 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Republicans are right to blanch at this Elon Musk gravy train
Elon Musk last week slammed President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' for the trillions in new federal debt it is projected to cost — a subject well worth the nation's attention. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana), however, pointed to a different possible motive for the tech billionaire's dissatisfaction with the bill: It 'has an effect on his business,' the speaker said. Johnson suggested that Musk began his campaign against the bill after they spoke about an obscure policy the act would roll back — one that has directed billions of dollars to Tesla, Musk's electric vehicle company. Johnson's claims provide a revealing look at the side effects of well-meaning — but not all that well designed — government mandates (in this case, for the automobile industry to reduce emissions in specific ways), and how they can distort both politics and the economy. While the bill has many flaws, Republicans are right to object to the Tesla gravy train. Rather than keep it, as Musk would probably prefer, they should replace it with clean energy policies that promote competition and choice. Tesla heavily depends on selling automotive regulatory credits to traditional automakers. Manufacturers of gas-powered cars are failing to produce as many zero-emissions vehicles as national and state-level mandates from Washington, Sacramento and Brussels require. Consumers' appetite for EVs has grown, but not enough for traditional carmakers to transition off gas as quickly as the mandate-writers would have liked. So those companies must buy credits from EV-makers such as Tesla, which produces only zero-emissions vehicles. In 2024, Tesla made $2.76 billion on emissions deals, a 54 percent increase from the year before. During the first quarter of 2025, Tesla reported earning $595 million in regulatory credits, even as its total net income for the period was only $409 million. A February Post analysis found that Musk and his businesses received at least $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits over the years, including $11.4 billion through automotive regulatory credits. 'About a third of Tesla's $35 billion in profits since 2014 has come from selling federal and state regulatory credits to other automakers,' The Post tabulated. 'These credits played a crucial role in the company's first profitable quarter in 2013 and its first full year of profitability in 2020. … Without the credits, Tesla would have lost more than $700 million in 2020, marking a seventh-consecutive year with no profits.' If you haven't heard of these regulatory credits, you're not alone. Even for those paying close attention, the EV policy fight that has attracted the most attention has been the One Big Beautiful Bill's proposed phaseout of $7,500 tax credits for electric car-buyers. Musk has expressed openness to eliminating the policy; analysts speculate that doing so could entrench his dominance in the U.S. EV market by making it harder for new entrants to break in. Such are the arcane politics and weird incentives that complex government regulations can promote, as companies compete for the profits that can flow from getting a clause inserted or deleted from the federal code. To be sure, the federal EV mandate's writers were well-intentioned. They wanted to accelerate the needed transition to electric vehicles, as transportation overtook electricity generation as the country's largest source of planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions. They used various policy levers available to them — from the Clean Air Act to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards — because Congress failed to enact more efficient clean energy policies. Republicans can change that, eliminating the mandates, tax credits and other subsidies that riddle federal law and replacing them with a robust and rising carbon tax. This policy would empower consumers and companies — each acting according to what makes the most sense for themselves, without government micromanagement — to decide how to green the economy. Maybe consumers would prefer to buy more plug-in gas-electric hybrid cars that eliminate 'range anxiety' before fully moving to EVs, which will be easier when electric car technology is more mature and charging infrastructure more ubiquitous. That's the beauty of a carbon tax: The emission costs from consumers' decisions would be reflected in the sticker prices they pay, maximizing choice and minimizing federal micromanagement — all while reducing the overall expense of a green energy transition. Admittedly, carbon taxes have been less politically successful than other policies that disguise their costs to consumers. (EV mandates boost car prices across the board; renewable electricity requirements increase power bills; etc.) But the politics cannot be as unflattering as the Musk-Trump meltdown the country had to endure last week.
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Ag Reserve's 22,000 acres: A look at Palm Beach County's growth and preservation today
As Palm Beach County's population swells, the desire to develop has followed suit. But amid the rise of new residents and construction, county officials also have worked to create a harmonious relationship between the need for new development and the preservation of some of South Florida's last relatively untouched land. Recently, an overview of the county's Agricultural Reserve — which is about 22,000 acres of mostly farmland and limited development in the northwestern part of the county — was provided to county commissioners, detailing current projects, preservation, the land's history and where it's at today. And as a frequent source of great controversy among residents, developers, and farmers alike, county officials are attempting to forge ahead in a way that addresses the often competing interests as effectively as possible. 'The established goals were to preserve and enhance ag and environmental and water resources,' county planner Stephanie Gregory said during a recent public meeting when an Ag Reserve overview was presented to commissioners. When the Ag Reserve master plan was created, the objectives, according to Gregory, 'included a heavy emphasis on preservation, including enhancing agriculture, environmental resources, water management capability and open space while also creating a sustainable form of development and minimizing the costs or impact to taxpayers. 'While the focus was preservation, there was also an understanding that there would be some form of development included,' Gregory told commissioners. As it stands, a 2025 Ag Reserve 'snapshot' breaks down how the land is divided: — 6,530 acres, or 30% of the reserve, is made up of residential development. — 881 acres, or 4% of the reserve, is made up of non-residential development. — 13,374 acres, or 61% of the reserve, has been set aside for preservation, primarily through either agriculture or natural, conservation land. — 489 acres, or 3% of the reserve, is undeveloped 'remaining lands.' — 670 acres, or 3% of the reserve, is considered 'other uses' such as canals. But it took a lot of planning, policy changes and time for that snapshot to be the reality, and county officials are still working on how to keep development regulated while preserving Ag Reserve landowner rights. Reserve boundaries were first created in 1980 when 'the emphasis was the preservation of agriculture and very low densities,' according to county documents. A prominent rule for development in existence time was the '80/20 rule,' which allowed 20% of a plot of land in the Ag Reserve to be developed on while the other 80% of that same plot would be dedicated to preservation. This eventually led to the creation of the 60/40 rule, which is the same principle but with 60% preserve and 40% development. In 1989, the boundaries of the reserve were revised, cutting out about 5,000 acres and leaving about 22,000 acres that make up the Ag Reserve of today. Shortly after, the county had an economic impact and land-use suitability analyses conducted, a goal of which was to determine how best to protect and intentionally build on the land. 'Through extensive public engagement by the consultants, the goals of the master plan were defined,' Gregory said. Then, in 1999, county voters approved a referendum that authorized a $150 million bond to purchase agricultural and environmental lands. More than 2,000 acres have been purchased since. That same year, the county adopted a 'managed growth tier system' to identify 'different tiers in order to acknowledge and protect the differing lifestyles of the community,' such as Urban and Suburban, Exurban and Rural. In the more than two decades since the bond was purchased, the Ag Reserve has gone through many developmental and policy changes, such as the addition of different land-use designations. Most recently, two different land-use designations were adopted by the county commissioners: Essential Housing and Commerce. The Essential Housing land-use designation was approved to foster the creation of higher-density multifamily residential development so people who work in and right around the reserve have places to live. The Commerce land-use designation was approved to support 'light industrial uses.' For example, food production could be considered a light industrial use while a chemical plant could be considered a heavy industrial use. 'There are various changes that have occurred on what is allowed and what is not allowed in the preserve area through the years,' said Thuy Shutt, the county's planning director, during the recent public meeting. And various changes are likely to keep occurring as more people move into Palm Beach County and as developers crane to find land ripe for building. For now, several projects are either under construction or awaiting potential approval. Those include: — Park West North and Park West South, which proposes warehouses, a fitness center, manufacturing and processing space, and self-service storage in West Delray. These two projects were recently approved for transmittal, which means it goes before the state for review before coming back to the county commissioners. — West Boynton Ranches is a proposal for 259 homes, 65 of which could be workforce housing. This plan is attempting to rely on the Essential Housing land-use designation, though planning commissioners recently voted to recommend denial for the project. A recommendation by planning commissioners does not determine how county commissioners vote, however. — GL Homes received final approval for a plan to bring 481 homes on a plot of land called Whitworth South in West Boynton, adding to a cluster of other suburbs, including others by GL Homes, such as Valencia Sound, Valencia Cove and Valencia Reserve. — Bedner Bros Farms Inc., representing Bedner's Farm Fresh Market in West Boynton, received approval to bring warehouses and office space, applying under the commerce land-use designation. These types of proposals often face opposition at some point during the approval or denial process, and the concerns tend to be the same: increasing traffic, inadequate county infrastructure and taking away too much of the Ag Reserve's preserve land. Sometimes, these concerns prevail, and a proposal is rejected. Take GL Homes' land swap, for example. This proposal had aimed to take land inside the Ag Reserve and exchange it for land outside of it to build more than 1,000 homes, a synagogue, school, a park and more. Approving the plan would have set a new precedent for other developers to swap land outside the Ag Reserve for land inside of it, which county commissioners ultimately decided against. The commissioners often find themselves as the mediators among developers, residents and environmentalists, and not everyone leaves satisfied after decisions are made. 'It's enlightening to see what's happened, but I think the issue here was also that we didn't properly plan from the get-go, and I'm glad that this board has been able to shift and adjust to the times,' Commissioner Joel Flores said during the meeting where the Ag Reserve overview was presented. 'Our population has grown tremendously, and we've been able to to adjust to that.'
