Latest news with #OBBBA
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
How Trump could make it harder for you to see a doctor
The Trump administration's One Big Beautiful Bill Act puts so many people at risk of losing their health insurance and food assistance, it's hard to focus on other fires set by the new law. And yet — there's one crucial conflagration I hope the state of California will fight. The budget bill contains multiple changes in federal student loan programs that will make it harder for many students to even think about getting an undergraduate degree at the University of California or at Cal State. Eligibility for Pell Grants and other loans and grants, the way repayment works, and annual and lifetime limits on borrowing by students and their parents (via Parent PLUS loans) are all changing. But let me narrow my focus to students enrolling in law, medical, pharmacy or other professional schools, the segment of the student 'market' I'm most familiar with because of my career as a professor at UC Law San Francisco. When I started teaching, the citizens of California very generously supported professional training. I recall that tuition at UC Law (then UC Hastings) was — well, there was no tuition, just fees. But with dramatically reduced public support over the years, the costs have gone up and up. Tuition and required fees alone at UC Law SF are about $60,000 a year. At medical, dental or pharmacy school? In the $50,000 to $60,000 range as well. And that's without food, housing and other expenses of daily living. (For perspective, UC's tuition costs are still less expensive than private schools: At Stanford Law School tuition will set you back about $77,000 a year and at Stanford School of Medicine, $67,000.) Under the OBBBA, professional-school students will no longer be able to get more than $50,000 a year (up to $200,000 total for a degree) in federal student loans. That leaves a significant gap in annual tuition and fees, and offers no help on the additional costs — UC calculates the total cost for one year of dental school at $104,000. There are private loans available. But federal student loans have more flexibility, particularly in repayment plans, and students need neither a strong credit history nor a co-signer to get them. The students who would need to borrow the most are the least likely to have a strong credit history or a family member who would be an acceptable co-signer for a private loan. And private loan rates are almost always higher than the government's. So just as the tax provisions in this newly passed law make the rich richer, I fear the student loan provisions will be adequate for the better off but prevent many working-class young people from obtaining professional degrees. So much for policies that support the American dream. California could control this fire through its own student loan program, adding funding to fill the gap created by the new federal rules. One option: Create an additional program under the auspices of the California Student Aid Commission, whose current aid programs are limited in scope. It's true that the state budget is already stretched thin — but this is about loans, so the money will, for the most part, be returned with interest. Do we need to be helping future professionals get an education? Absolutely! As our population ages, the demands for health professionals are only increasing. Given the long trajectory of medical, nursing and pharmacy students' education, we can't wait for another administration to come into office and fix the loan situation. We should prevent a reduction in the numbers of practitioners graduated now. We already have shortages of health professionals: Have you tried recently to find a primary care physician or pediatrician who is taking new patients? And the nurse shortage is a major problem — UC San Francisco estimates the state is short 36,000 nurses. As for lawyers, if you doubt the need for more, consider 'the justice gap.' Facing eviction? Have problems with an employer? Unable to access public benefits? Suffering domestic violence? There are not nearly enough legal aid lawyers to help, leaving many at a great disadvantage. And the young people most likely to find the new federal loan rules a barrier to law school are also likely to best understand the need for more lawyers in public interest and public service jobs, and perhaps the most likely to aspire to such jobs. The state has had a loan repayment program for those who practice public interest law. In addition to bolstering federal student loans with state loans, California could reinvigorate and expand the repayment program to cover a greater variety of jobs and to repay more than the $11,000 limit. While the federal government is acting to burn things down, our state should intervene to build things up, including the talent pool we need for the decades ahead. Marsha Cohen, emerita professor of law at UC Law San Francisco, twice served as the school's dean of admissions, which included supervising its financial aid program.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
One Big Beautiful Bill Act a tailwind for Apple and others
-- Morgan Stanley stated in a note on Wednesday that it anticipates the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) will provide a meaningful boost to free cash flow (FCF) across the IT hardware sector, with Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) among the primary beneficiaries. 'We estimate the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) can add 12% upside to our IT Hardware coverage FCF in 2025, and 5%, on average, annually, to our coverage over the next 4 years,' Morgan Stanley analysts wrote. The bill allows companies to immediately deduct R&D and capital investment expenses from U.S. taxes, accelerating tax savings and increasing near-term cash flow. Morgan Stanley projects the legislation will generate more than $12 billion in incremental cash flow for covered names over the next year and $20 billion cumulatively over four years. 'This benefit is mostly about timing, as it pulls forward future tax savings rather than changing the long-term cash flow picture,' the analysts said. Apple is forecast to account for 90–95% of the total OBBBA-related FCF uplift within the bank's hardware coverage. 'Notably, Apple (AAPL) is expected to account for the vast majority of group FCF tailwinds,' the note stated. On a percentage basis, 2025 FCF uplifts are said to include Garmin (NYSE:GRMN) (31%), Resideo (20%), Cricut (NASDAQ:CRCT) (13%), and Apple (12%). Morgan Stanley expects GRMN and CRCT to sustain the strongest average annual tailwinds, 9% each, over the next four years. By contrast, Dell (NYSE:DELL), IBM (NYSE:IBM), Intuitive Machines, and Sonos (NASDAQ:SONO) are 'unlikely to materially benefit,' the analysts wrote. Related articles One Big Beautiful Bill Act a tailwind for Apple and others - Morgan Stanley Risks Rising? Smart Money Dodged 46%+ Drawdowns on These High-Flying Names Apollo economist warns: AI bubble now bigger than 1990s tech mania
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Business
- Reuters
First Solar raises annual sales outlook, expects higher prices due to tariffs
July 31 (Reuters) - First Solar (FSLR.O), opens new tab raised its annual sales forecast on Thursday, as the U.S. solar panel maker expects higher prices for its products following additional tariffs on foreign-made panels. Shares of the Tempe, Arizona-based company rose over 4% after the bell. The solar industry, which has grappled with lackluster demand and high interest rates, is now bracing for the impact of U.S. President Donald Trump's policies related to renewable energy as well as his plans to impose tariffs on most imports. While Trump's sweeping tax and spending bill - dubbed the "One Big, Beautiful Bill Act" (OBBBA) - aims to phase out solar and wind tax credits by 2028, the U.S. tariffs are expected to improve the outlook for solar companies. "In our view, the recent policy and trade developments have, on balance, strengthened First Solar's relative position in the solar manufacturing industry," CEO Mark Widmar said. Earlier this month, U.S. solar panel makers, including First Solar, asked the U.S. Commerce Department to impose tariffs on imports from Indonesia, India and Laos, as they sought to protect their recent investments and better compete with Chinese rivals. The industry is also expected to benefit from rising demand for power as corporations and governments increasingly adopt cleaner sources of power to combat climate change. First Solar now expects current-year net sales to be between $4.9 billion and $5.7 billion, compared with its previous projection of $4.5 billion and $5.5 billion. Analysts, on average, estimated the company's 2025 net sales at $5.07 billion, according to data compiled by LSEG.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
First Solar raises annual sales outlook, expects higher prices due to tariffs
(Reuters) -First Solar raised its annual sales forecast on Thursday, as the U.S. solar panel maker expects higher prices for its products following additional tariffs on foreign-made panels. Shares of the Tempe, Arizona-based company rose over 4% after the bell. The solar industry, which has grappled with lackluster demand and high interest rates, is now bracing for the impact of U.S. President Donald Trump's policies related to renewable energy as well as his plans to impose tariffs on most imports. While Trump's sweeping tax and spending bill - dubbed the "One Big, Beautiful Bill Act" (OBBBA) - aims to phase out solar and wind tax credits by 2028, the U.S. tariffs are expected to improve the outlook for solar companies. "In our view, the recent policy and trade developments have, on balance, strengthened First Solar's relative position in the solar manufacturing industry," CEO Mark Widmar said. Earlier this month, U.S. solar panel makers, including First Solar, asked the U.S. Commerce Department to impose tariffs on imports from Indonesia, India and Laos, as they sought to protect their recent investments and better compete with Chinese rivals. The industry is also expected to benefit from rising demand for power as corporations and governments increasingly adopt cleaner sources of power to combat climate change. First Solar now expects current-year net sales to be between $4.9 billion and $5.7 billion, compared with its previous projection of $4.5 billion and $5.5 billion. Analysts, on average, estimated the company's 2025 net sales at $5.07 billion, according to data compiled by LSEG. 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
Gulf Today
5 hours ago
- Business
- Gulf Today
Plot twist: Republicans just got families more money
Abby McCloskey, Tribune News Service Washington is a funny place. I don't think President Donald Trump was thinking about former President Joe Biden with his One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). But it certainly seems to poke fun at Biden's BBB (Build Back Better) plan in name — and exceed it in some of its family priorities. The Democrats' BBB was all about supporting working families with child care, paid leave and an expanded Child Tax Credit — but it never made it past the Democratic-held Senate. Somehow it was Republicans who ended up taking ground on these working family policies in their behemoth reconciliation package. How's that for a political scramble? The OBBBA will impact families in myriad ways — but while Medicaid cuts, Trump Accounts and the expanded Child Tax Credit have all gotten attention, two working family provisions have flown under the radar. The first is child care — specifically, tax incentives to get employers to include it as part of their compensation packages. The law expands the employer-provided child care credit (45F) in size and scope. The law increases the maximum annual credit from $150,000 to $500,000, raises the percentage of qualifying expenses to 40%, and allows small businesses to access a credit up to $600,000 at 50% of qualified expenses. The credit is intended to persuade companies to build or operate child care facilities or to contract with an existing child care provider to secure slots for employees' children. Critics are sceptical that this will impact child care in a meaningful way. They argue that the take-up of this tax credit has been relatively small in the past. It can end up rewarding large companies that are already offering such support. And even with a partial offset, child care is a huge expense and most companies simply don't have the margin to subsidize it. This is a critique I also have lobbed, preferring for the money to go directly to parents. A 2022 GAO study supports these concerns, finding that only 200 companies filed for the credit in 2016 (the most recent data available) for a total of less than $20 million in benefits. But supporters say the credit has been underused because the offset has not been large enough and that the significant OBBBA expansion will help, especially for small businesses. Time will tell. The tax-and-spending law also expands direct child care support for families. The law increased the maximum annual amount for dependent care flexible spending accounts (an employer-sponsored account similar to a health care FSA). Parents can use these funds to pay for daycare for children under 13 with pretax dollars, but the cap had not been raised since 1986. The new law raises it from $5,000 to $7,500. For me, the big win in the OBBBA is that it expands the Child and Dependent Tax Credit — not to be confused with the Child Tax Credit. (The CTC is a general payment to family, while the CDCTC is used against child care expenses specifically.) The expansion of the CDCTC allows it to cover up to 50% of eligible child care costs, and the cap is now indexed to inflation. This tax credit was created nearly 50 years ago, with an average claimed credit of$206 (or $1,166 in today's dollars). Inflation and the relative cost of child care have eaten away at the size of that credit, which has not been expanded since 2001 except for a pandemic-related boost. I've long argued that the CDCTC should be thought of as a school-choice programme for early childhood care. Just like states are starting to give parents public vouchers to use towards the cost of a K-12 school of parents' choice, a CDCTC payment could help to offset the cost of a parent's choice for an early childhood care provider, be it to help pay for a nanny or centre-based care or faith-based Mom's Day Out programme, whether full-time, part-time, or something in between. There are still ways the credit can be improved, such as being made larger and refundable, distributed in a timelier manner, and paired with reform to child care regulation. In wilder moments, I've proposed that the entirety of the CTC be converted into the CDCTC to be used as a $10,000 educational voucher given every year for the first five years of a child's life. (For families not requiring child care in the early years, these funds could apply to homeschool materials, tutoring, private primary and secondary school, or college.) But the expansion is a step in the right direction — thanks in large part to the bipartisan leadership of senators Katie Britt, Republican of Alabama, and Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia. But wait, there's more. The OBBBA made permanent a temporary credit for paid leave passed by a Republican Congress in 2017. This credit partially offsets costs to companies that provide paid family and medical leave (45S) and allows it to be applied against insurance premiums. There's no question that greater access to paid leave would result in improved health and economic outcomes for parents and children, especially with regard to childbirth.
