Latest news with #PermanentFundDividend
Newsweek
30-05-2025
- Business
- Newsweek
Some Americans to Receive $1,702 Direct Payment in June: Are You Eligible?
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Thousands of Alaska residents will soon receive a $1,702 direct payment from the state as part of the annual Permanent Fund Dividend program, a uniquely Alaskan initiative that redistributes a share of the state's oil wealth directly to its citizens. Why It Matters The Permanent Fund Dividend is an annual payment made to qualifying Alaska residents, drawn from the state's Permanent Fund, which was established in 1976 to invest a portion of the state's oil revenue. The fund invests in a diverse portfolio of assets, including stocks, bonds, real estate, and other investments to generate returns for residents and preserve the state's vast oil wealth. The fund has grown to over $81 billion and distributes a portion of its earnings, usually giving out in excess of $1,000 to eligible residents of the Last Frontier State. Payments vary from year to year, with the highest ever payment being $3,284. Some 600,000 Alaskans are expected to benefit this year. Stock image/file photo: Person holding several $100 bills. Stock image/file photo: Person holding several $100 bills. GETTY What to Know According to the Alaska Department of Revenue, the next wave of payments will be issued on June 18, benefiting eligible individuals who applied by the deadline and whose applications have been approved for the 2024 Permanent Fund Dividend. For the 2024 dividend, the payment amount is $1,403.83 with an additional $298.17 Energy Relief Payment, bringing the total to $1,702. It is roughly $400 more than last year's, which was $1,312. The largest payout occurred in 2022, when each eligible Alaskan received $3,284. This amount included a record-high base dividend of $2,622, along with a one-time energy relief payment of $662. Eligibility Criteria To qualify, individuals must: Be Alaska residents for the entire calendar year prior to the payment year. Intend to remain in Alaska indefinitely. Not be convicted or incarcerated for any felony or misdemeanor crimes in the state. Have filed an application by the annual March 31 deadline. According to the official PFD site, individuals with an "Eligible-Not Paid" status as of May 8 will receive their payments on June 18, assuming no issues arise with their applications. The income is also considered taxable by the state and the federal government. What People Are Saying Department of Revenue Commissioner Adam Crum said in a statement: "This is the 43rd year Alaskans have received their share of the state's natural resources and investment earnings. The 2024 PFD will create an economic opportunity across all of our local communities." What Happens Next The Alaska Legislature continues to debate the future structure of the PFD, especially as oil revenue becomes more volatile and investment returns fluctuate. Discussions have included capping the dividend, changing the formula, or implementing new taxes to offset budget shortfalls.
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Alaska Legislature finalizes $1,000 PFD; vote expected as soon as Tuesday
Members of the Alaska Legislature's budget conference committee are joined by Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, as they discuss a budget amendment with aide Pete Ecklund, right, on Sunday, May 18, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) This year's Permanent Fund dividend will be $1,000, according to a final draft state budget approved Sunday afternoon by six House and Senate negotiators. The dividend was among the biggest items in a $5.9 billion document that will fund state services from July 1 this year through June 30 next year. The draft approved Sunday is scheduled for a final vote as soon as Tuesday in the House and Senate and will advance after that to Gov. Mike Dunleavy, who may reduce or eliminate individual line items. He may not increase a line item. The Legislature's regular session reaches its constitutional limit on Wednesday. The latest forecast from the Alaska Department of Revenue expects significantly lower oil and gas revenue over the next year, and lawmakers significantly cut services and programs during the budget drafting process. Unlike in previous years, the amount of the Permanent Fund dividend was not a contentious issue for budget negotiators at the end of the legislative session. Rep. DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer, said on Sunday that lawmakers had already argued the issue earlier in the session, and even though she unsuccessfully voted for a $1,400 dividend on Sunday, she knew the $1,000 figure would be final. 'From my perspective, I already knew what this number was going to be,' she said. Compressing the dividend is the state's precarious budget situation. In December, Dunleavy handed lawmakers a budget draft with a $2.1 billion deficit and a $3,900 dividend; the budget will leave the Capitol with a surplus of about $55 million. Legislators expect that surplus will evaporate in the coming months — oil prices are running below the Department of Revenue forecast, and Republican members of Congress are planning to reduce the amount the federal government pays for major programs, including food stamps and disaster relief. The Senate approved a budget draft with deeper cuts than the final document, but during the compromise process, lawmakers added individual line items preferred by the House, which proposed higher levels of spending and a draw from the Constitutional Budget Reserve, the state's main savings account, to pay for that spending. The final version of the budget eliminates that draw from savings, except as needed to cover a deficit remaining in the current fiscal year. If lawmakers don't approve the CBR draw, money would be taken from the state investment bank — better known as the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, or AIDEA — and the state's education trust fund. That will put pressure on members of the House's 19-person Republican minority caucus, who previously voted against drawing from the CBR. Thirty votes are needed in the 40-person House to spend from the CBR. The final version of the budget includes an additional $13.7 million for child care programs, $5.7 million more for infant early learning programs and 15 new full-time positions to help process public assistance applications. The conference committee, in charge of negotiating the compromise budget, also approved a House proposal to increase funding for behavioral health services used by mentally ill homeless people by $13.75 million. 'The Alaska Behavioral Health Association made a strong case that they need that,' said Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage and chair of the conference committee. In future years, the state will try to obtain behavioral health funding through federal Medicaid grants. A $1 million grant to food banks — proposed by the House — was rejected in the final version of the budget, as was funding for public radio. There will be no new troopers for the Matanuska-Susitna Borough; the committee voted 4-2 to eliminate a section of the House budget that would have re-established the trooper post in Talkeetna. Sen. James Kaufman, R-Anchorage, and Johnson voted in favor of the addition. Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel and a vote against the addition, said that the reopened trooper post was suggested by Gov. Mike Dunleavy who withdrew that proposal — and all of his other proposed budget increases — before the conference committee met. Johnson said the failure to include the troopers, who could be used to curtail the Railbelt drug trade, was 'probably one of the bigger disappointments for me in there.' The final version of the budget also eliminates a paragraph that sought to restrict gender dysphoria treatment, the kind used by transgender Alaskans. That paragraph was inserted by the House in its budget draft, but the Senate didn't include it. Conversely, a paragraph limiting abortion care, adopted by the Senate but rejected by the House, was included in the final budget draft. That paragraph has been repeatedly challenged in court, and the effect of including it in the budget is a small cut to Medicaid funding. Josephson said the result of the two decisions is a return to the status quo — the Legislature has included the anti-abortion language in its budget for years, and the anti-transgender language was new this year. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
25-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Undermining well-funded public education undermines Alaska
The final vote tally for members of the House and Senate totaled 33-27, to sustain Gov. Dunleavy's veto of House Bill 69, to increase school funding, on April 22, 2024 (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon) On April 22, 2025, the Alaska Legislature had the opportunity and responsibility to secure stable and meaningful investment in our children's education. With the override vote on House Bill 69, lawmakers were given a chance to rise above political posturing and provide the first real increase to the base student allocation, or BSA, in nearly a decade. They failed. Seven no votes. That's all it took to deny our public schools the $1,000 per-student increase so many have been fighting for, not for political gain, but for survival. Our students, educators and families are not abstract line items in a budget. We are not 'special interests.' We are the very people who hold up the future of this state. And yet, 27 elected officials chose to turn their backs on us. Their 'No' votes were loud and clear: They do not believe our children, especially those in underfunded, rural, and urban schools deserve a fully resourced, safe, and equitable education. They chose the governor's austerity politics over our students' needs. They chose silence in classrooms over music. Larger class sizes over individualized attention. Closures over community. Let's be honest: This was never just about numbers. This was about priorities. Those who voted against the override would like us to believe Alaska can't afford to fund its public education system. But for the last seven years, they found money for everything but schools for tax credits, bloated bureaucracies, private interests and the Permanent Fund Dividend, which somehow remains sacred while our kids go without updated textbooks, working heat or school counselors. Meanwhile, school districts across the state now brace for catastrophic consequences. Layoffs. School closures. Slashed programs. And most devastatingly, students losing opportunities they may never get back. As a mother of five, a teacher, and the Alaska education chair for the NAACP Tri State Area Conference, I am furious. But I am not surprised. We've seen this coming. We've been warning them. We've testified, rallied and begged. This veto was a betrayal. The failure to override it was a choice. Let me be clear: This is not over. And to be clear this doesn't just impact students and teachers. It affects all of us. When schools suffer, communities suffer. When education is unstable, workforce readiness declines, mental health needs go unmet, and family stress skyrockets. Local businesses lose future workers. Property values drop. Crime and disengagement increase. These outcomes do not stay confined to the walls of a school they ripple through every neighborhood, every economy, every generation. Well-funded public education is a public good. It is the bedrock of a strong democracy, a healthy economy, and a just society. Undermining it undermines us all. To those who stood with us the 33 House and Senate members who voted to override we see you. We thank you. And to the others: we'll be seeing you, too. Because this is not just about a failed vote. It's about a fight for the soul of public education in Alaska and we are not backing down. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
2 States Where Residents Might See Stimulus or Similar Payments in April
The cost of living is on the rise, with many Americans now paying more to cover basic necessities. A recent GOBankingRates survey found that 47% of Americans are paying significantly more for groceries now compared to last year, and an additional 29% are paying slightly more. Find Out: Read Next: Stimulus payments can help offset these cost increases, but, unfortunately, these types of payments are not as widely available as during pandemic times. However, if you live in certain states, you may be eligible for a stimulus check. Residents of Alaska may receive a check in April as part of the Permanent Fund Dividend program. The state is currently paying out the 2024 Permanent Fund Dividend, which is $1,702. Dividend applications for 2024 (and prior year) that are in 'Eligible-Not Paid' status on April 9 will be distributed on April 17. According to the State of Alaska Department of Revenue, to be eligible to receive the 2025 payment, you must meet the following requirements: You were a resident of Alaska during all of calendar year 2024. You have the intent to remain an Alaska resident indefinitely. You have not claimed residency in any other state or country or obtained a benefit as a result of a claim of residency in another state or country at any time since Dec. 31, 2023. You were not sentenced as a result of a felony conviction during 2024. You were not incarcerated at any time during 2024 as the result of a felony conviction. You were not incarcerated at any time during 2024 as the result of a misdemeanor conviction in Alaska if convicted of a prior felony or two or more prior misdemeanors since Jan. 1, 1997. If absent from Alaska for more than 180 days, you were absent on an allowable absence. You were physically present in Alaska for at least 72 consecutive hours at some time during 2023 or 2024. Check Out: Although California is not distributing stimulus checks in April, there is an important deadline to note this month if you plan to apply for Sacramento's Family First Economic Support pilot program. The program will provide $725 a month for 12 months for those who are eligible and selected to participate. To be eligible, you must meet the following requirements: Must be the parent or legal guardian of a child ages 0-5 years, and the child must reside with the you at least 50% of the time. You must reside full-time in one of these ZIP codes: 95815, 95821, 95823, 95828 or 95838. You must have an annual household income of less than 200% of the federal poverty line. You must not be participating in any other guaranteed income programs. Applications will open on April 14 and close on April 27. Participants will be selected by the end of May, and payments will begin in mid-June. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban: Trump's Tariffs Will Affect This Class of People the Most7 Tax Loopholes the Rich Use To Pay Less and Build More WealthHow To Get the Most Value From Your Costco Membership in 20254 Affordable Car Brands You Won't Regret Buying in 2025 This article originally appeared on 2 States Where Residents Might See Stimulus or Similar Payments in April Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
22-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Does Alaska have a revenue problem or spending problem?
The Alaska State Capitol is seen on Monday, Feb. 3, 2025, in front of snow-covered Mount Juneau. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) The Legislature reconvened in Juneau a month ago, but months from now, we should expect that lawmakers and the executive branch will once more be tied up in knots grappling with how to align state spending with state revenue. Our elected leaders end up in the same predicament every year due to an inability to answer a fundamental question: Does Alaska have a revenue problem or a spending problem? Or both? Alaskan families face the same question as they wrestle with how to live within their means. On the revenue side, Alaska's situation could not be simpler. We have revenues from oil production and earnings revenue from the Permanent Fund — setting aside federal revenues for this discussion, although that massive revenue stream does impact the overall budget significantly. Alaska has some smaller revenue streams that are insignificant compared to our main revenue sources. Some observers argue that reducing the Permanent Fund Dividend is a 'tax' based on the notion that getting a smaller PFD from the government is equivalent to being taxed. That argument is just a distraction, given that the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that PFDs are state expenditures — and not an entitlement — subject to legislative appropriation just like any other category of state spending. The reality is that Alaska truly is unique among all 50 states when it comes to our revenue position. We have no state sales tax, no personal income tax, statutorily balanced budgets, and a huge endowment to fund government for generations to come. On the expenditure side, Alaska has been fortunate that for much of the past 50 years, our expenses have basically been 100% covered by taxes and royalties paid from the oil industry. Alaska has partnered with the industry to develop our resources in the most economic way. The industry made reasonable profits and the state garnered sufficient revenues to cover the cost of state government and support local education. Talk about win-win! But due to factors largely beyond our control, including oil price fluctuations and production stagnation, our revenue stream has declined while our spending habits have not. While oil money used to pay our bills, for the last seven years the state has used earnings drawn from the Permanent Fund. The governor has made some minor budget vetoes in the last few years, but far from the 'right sizing of government' he promised when he first ran for governor. These minor vetoes have had little impact on overall state spending growth. In truth, there has been no comprehensive, disciplined evaluation of how to control state spending for the long term. In fact, in the Legislature now, there is strong sentiment in favor of increasing the budget to boost education spending and bolster state pensions. I'm not going to get into the merits of those spending plans, but instead focus on our long-term structural budget challenge. How can we address the serious structural imbalance between state spending and state revenues? I think what we must do is return to the basics, and consider that the process by which we build our state budgets is flawed. I've always been a strong advocate for a 'zero-based' budget process, like how we all do our family budgets. We start with the revenue we are bringing in each month and spend it accordingly to balance at the end of each month and hopefully have some left to squirrel away into savings. Yet Alaska's approach has consistently been to take last year's budget and just layer more spending on top of it. The bottom line is, we have reached a tipping point as it becomes undeniable that our current revenue streams cannot support future spending trends. Our fiscal mindset based on 'free' revenue began five decades ago and, for now, we still enjoy a healthy annual PFD. Whether that can or should continue will be a crucial element to any discussion to align revenues with spending. A recent Division of Legislative Finance presentation was a wake-up call on the steep challenges facing Alaska today. Their analysis highlighted that even a 75/25 Permanent Fund earnings split — 75% for state spending, 25% for PFDs — would leave a $200-plus million deficit before any new spending is considered, such as the hundreds of millions being debated in additional spending for education and pensions. Now that we know even a 75/25 split will not balance our budget, what's next? Not exactly a revolutionary statement: Taxes will soon be required to balance our budgets going forward, but it will mean a seismic shift for the Alaskan economy. My deep concern is with the impact on the economy by attempting to extract enough revenue from the working Alaskans through an income and/or sales tax to satisfy our constitutionally required balanced budget. We are already seeing a net outmigration of working-age Alaskans for economic opportunity elsewhere. And, according to numerous nationwide studies, our state struggles to attract new investment and jobs. It's now up to our elected leaders to make the hard decisions about the long-term structural changes that must happen. They must take advantage of the runway in front of them or risk having Alaska's economic train go off the rails. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
