Philadelphia local news, sports, jobs, cars, homes

Category: Business Wires

All truckers and bus drivers will be required to take commercial driver’s license tests in English

All truckers and bus drivers will have to take their commercial driver’s license tests in English as the Trump administration expands its aggressive campaign to improve safety in the industry and get unqualified drivers off the road.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced the latest effort Friday to ensure that drivers meet the federal requirements to understand English well enough to read road signs and communicate with law enforcement officers. Florida already started administering its tests in English.

Currently, many states allow drivers to take their license tests in other languages even though they are required to demonstrate English proficiency. California offered tests in 20 other languages. Duffy said that a number of states have hired other companies to administer commercial driver’s licenses tests, and those companies aren’t enforcing the standards that drivers are supposed to meet to demonstrate their driving and English skills.

These latest enforcement efforts come just days after the Transportation Department said 557 driving schools should close because they failed to meet basic safety standards. The department has been aggressively going after states that handed out commercial driver’s licenses to immigrants who shouldn’t have qualified for them ever since a fatal crash in August.

A truck driver who Duffy says wasn’t authorized to be in the U.S. made an illegal U-turn and caused a crash in Florida that killed three people. Other fatal crashes since then, including one in Indiana that killed four members of an Amish community earlier this month, have only heightened concerns.

Duffy says truckers should be well qualified

States are expected to ensure drivers can speak English before giving them a commercial license, and then law enforcement is supposed to check driver’s language skills during any traffic stops or inspections. Drivers who can’t communicate effectively are supposed to be pulled off the road. A recent federal effort involving 8,215 inspections led to nearly 500 drivers being disqualified because of their English skills. California initially resisted enforcing the English rules, but the state recently pulled more than 600 drivers off the highways.

Duffy said every American wants drivers who get behind the wheel of a big rig to be well-qualified to handle those vehicles. But he said that for too long the problems in the trucking industry were “allowed to rot and no one’s paying attention to it for decades.”

“Once you start to pay attention, you see that all these bad things have been happening. And the consequence of that is that Americans get hurt,” Duffy said. “When we get on the road, we should expect that we should be safe. And that those who drive those 80,000-pound big rigs, that they are well-trained, they’re well-qualified, and they’re going to be safe.”

More efforts to crack down on fraudulent companies

The campaign will also now expand to prevent fraudulent trucking companies from getting into the business while continuing to go after questionable schools and ensure states are complying with all the regulations for handing out commercial licenses.

Duffy said that the registration system and requirements for trucking companies will be strengthened while Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration inspectors conduct more spot checks of trucks and commercial driver’s license schools.

Officials are also trying to make sure that the electronic logging devices drivers use are accurate, and that states are following all the regulations to ensure drivers are qualified to get commercial licenses.

‘Chameleon carriers’ avoid enforcement

Currently, companies only have to pay $300 and show proof of insurance to get registered to operate, and then they might not be audited until a year or more later. And even then the audits might be done virtually, which makes it less likely to identify fraudulent companies.

That has made it easy for fraudulent companies that are known in the industry as “chameleon carriers” to register multiple times under different names and then simply switch names and registration numbers to avoid any consequences after crashes or other violations.

Dan Horvath, who is the chief operating officer for the American Trucking Associations trade group, said this longstanding problem has made it far too easy for companies that have been ordered to shut down to just change their name and registration number and keep operating the same way.

“What we think at ATA has happened over the years is that we have a lack of true enforcement and intervention with motor carriers that are in operation,” Horvath said. Only a small fraction of trucking companies ever undergo a full compliance review with an in-person inspection, he said.

Past enforcement efforts

After that Indiana crash, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration knocked the company that employed the driver out of service and pulled the DOT numbers assigned to two other companies that were linked to AJ Partners. Tutash Express and Sam Express in the Chicago area were also disqualified, and the Aydana driving school that the trucker involved in the crash attended lost its certification.

Immigration authorities arrested that driver because they said the 30-year-old from Kyrgyzstan entered the country illegally. Authorities say he pulled out and tried to go around a truck that had slowed in front of him, and his truck slammed into an oncoming van.

In December, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration took action to decertify up to 7,500 of the 16,000 schools nationwide, but that included many defunct operations.

Duffy said the companies involved in that Indiana crash were all registered at the same apartment. In other cases, there might be hundreds of these chameleon companies registered at a single address.

February 20, 2026
Which Trump tariffs did the Supreme Court strike down? Here’s what to know

NEW YORK — The nation’s highest court struck down some of President Donald Trump’s most sweeping tariffs on Friday, in a 6-3 decision that he overstepped his authority when using an emergency powers law to justify new taxes on goods from nearly every country in the world.

Trump has launched a barrage of new tariffs over the last year. Despite Friday’s ruling, many sectoral levies remain in place — and the president has already said that he’ll turn to other options for more import taxes, including plans to impose a new 10% tariff globally. But the Supreme Court decision upends a core set of tariffs that Trump rolled out using the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.

IEEPA authorizes the president to broadly regulate commerce after declaring a national emergency. Over the years, presidents have turned to this law dozens of times, often to place sanctions on other countries. But Trump was the first to use it to implement tariffs.

Here’s a look at the now-overturned tariffs Trump imposed using IEEPA — and other levies that still stand today.

‘Liberation Day’ tariffs

Trump used IEEPA to slap import taxes on nearly every country in the world last spring. On April 2, which Trump called Liberation Day, he imposed “reciprocal” tariffs of up to 50% on goods from dozens of countries — and a baseline 10% tariff on just about everyone else.

The 10% tax kicked in early April. But the bulk of Liberation Day’s higher levies got delayed by several months, and many rates were revised over time (in some cases after new “framework” agreements). Most went into effect Aug. 7.

The national emergency underlying these tariffs, Trump argued at the time, was the long-running gap between what the U.S. sells and what it buys from the rest of the world. Still, goods from countries with which the U.S. runs a trade surplus also faced taxes.

Major trading partners impacted by Liberation Day tariffs include South Korea, Japan and the European Union — which combined export a range of products to the U.S., like electronics, cars, and car parts and pharmaceuticals. Following trade talks, Trump’s rates on most goods stood at 15% for the EU, Japan and South Korea ahead of Friday. But just last month, Trump threatened to hike levies on certain South Korean products to 25% — and countries worldwide still face sector-specific, non-IEEPA tariffs.

‘Trafficking tariffs’ on Canada, China and Mexico

At the start of his second term, Trump used IEEPA to impose new tariffs on America’s three biggest trading partners: Mexico, Canada, and China.

To justify these tariffs, Trump declared a national emergency ostensibly over undocumented immigration and the trafficking of drugs like fentanyl and the chemicals made to use it. The levies were first announced at the start of February 2025, but went into effect over time — and were at times delayed, reduced or heightened through further retaliation.

Ahead of Friday’s decision, “trafficking tariffs” on Canadian and Mexican imports were 35% and 25%, respectively, for goods that don’t comply with the 2020 United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. China, meanwhile, faced a 10% fentanyl-related tariff. That’s down from 20% imposed by Trump earlier last year. Chinese goods also once saw sky-high levies after Liberation Day, but rates had since come down during trade talks.

Top U.S. imports from China include mobile phones and other electronics, as well as clothing, toys and household appliances. Meanwhile, Canada and Mexico are both major sources of cars and auto parts. Canada is also the U.S.’s largest supplier of crude oil. And Mexico is a key exporter of fresh produce, beverages and more.

Tariffs on Brazil over Bolsonaro trial

Trump also used IEEPA to slap steep import taxes on Brazilian imports over the summer, citing the country’s policies and criminal prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro.

Brazil already faced Trump’s 10% baseline Liberation Day rate. The Bolsonaro-related duties added another 40%, bringing total levies to 50% on many products ahead of Friday.

The U.S. has actually run a consistent trade surplus with Brazil over the years. But top exports from the country include manufactured products, crude oil and agricultural products like soybeans and sugar.

Tariffs on India linked to Russian oil

India has faced additional IEEPA tariffs, too. After Liberation Day, Trump slapped a 25% levy on Indian imports — and later added another 25% for the country’s purchases of Russian oil, while also citing the emergency powers law, bringing the total to 50%.

But earlier this month, the U.S. and India reached a trade framework deal. Trump said Prime Minister Narendra Modi agreed to stop buying Russian oil, and that he planned to lower U.S. tariffs on its ally to 18%. Meanwhile, India said it would “eliminate or reduce tariffs” on all U.S. industrial goods and a range of agricultural products.

India’s top exports to the U.S. include pharmaceuticals, precious stones, clothing and textiles.

What are other non-IEEPA tariffs that countries still face today?

Despite the Supreme Court knocking down sweeping import taxes Trump imposed with IEEPA, most countries still face steep tariffs from the U.S. on specific sectors.

Citing national security threats, Trump has used another law — Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act — to slap levies on steel, aluminum, cars, copper, and lumber worldwide. He began to roll out even more Section 232 tariffs in September, on kitchen cabinets, bathroom vanities and upholstered furniture.

Amid pressure to lower rising prices, Trump has rolled back some of his tariffs recently. Beyond trade frameworks, that’s included adding exemptions to specific levies and scrapping import taxes for goods like coffee, tropical fruit and beef.

Still, Trump has threatened more sectoral levies are on the way. And following Friday’s decision, he said that he would sign an executive order to enact a 10% global tariff — using another federal law, known as Section 122. Those tariffs would be limited to just 150 days, unless they are extended legislatively.

February 20, 2026
Trump administration eases limits on coal plants for emitting mercury, other toxins

WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday weakened limits on mercury and other toxic emissions from coal-fired power plants, the Trump administration’s latest effort to boost the fossil fuel industry by paring back clean air and water rules.

Toxic emissions from coal- and oil-fired plants can harm the brain development of young children and contribute to heart attacks and other problems in adults. The plants are also a major source of greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change. The EPA announced the move at a massive coal plant next to the Ohio River in Louisville, Ky.

“The Trump EPA’s action follows the rule of law and will reduce of cost of generating baseload power, lowering costs and improving reliability for consumers,” EPA Deputy Administrator David Fotouhi said in a statement. The agency said the change should save hundreds of millions of dollars.

The final rule reverts the industry to standards first established in 2012 by the Obama administration that have reduced mercury emissions by nearly 90%. The Biden administration had sought to tighten those standards even further after the first Trump administration had moved to undermine them.

Coal-fired power plants are the largest single human source of mercury pollutants. Power plants release the mercury into the atmosphere, which then falls in rain or simply by gravity, entering the food chain through fish and other items that people consume.

Environmental groups said the tightened rules have saved lives and made communities that live near coal-fired power plants healthier. But industry groups argued that the tougher standards, along with other rules that limited emissions from coal plants, made operating them too expensive.

They accused the Biden administration of piling on so many requirements that it would drive a rush of plant retirements.

“The reliability of the electric grid is in a better place because of the administration’s swift repeal of this rule. As crafted, the rule would have dealt a crippling blow to power plants that are essential to maintaining grid reliability,” said Jim Matheson, CEO of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association.

The coal industry’s outlook has changed dramatically in the last year.

In March, the EPA promoted the “biggest deregulatory action in U.S. history,” announcing their intention to peal back dozens of environmental protections. The Biden administration’s focus on climate change was over — EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the actions marked “the death of the ‘green new scam.’” Fossil fuel rules were big targets, including major efforts to reduce carbon emissions from coal plants and mandate greenhouse gas reporting. The Trump administration has also extended deadlines for dozens of coal-fired power plants to comply with certain Clean Air Act rules.

Beyond fewer environmental protections, the Trump administration has issued emergency orders halting the planned shutdown of several coal plants. Officials say the plants produce consistent power during major storms or at other times when need is high. Removing coal would reduce the grid’s reliability, especially at time when a rush of new data centers is demanding more than ever from the grid, they say. Officials have dismissed concerns about higher customer costs from keeping coal plants operating, their plentiful emissions, and their significant contribution to climate change.

And earlier this month, the EPA revoked a finding that climate change is a threat to public health, which has long been the basis for U.S. action to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Recently, President Donald Trump hosted a group of coal miners who honored him as the “Undisputed Champion of Beautiful, Clean Coal.”

Activists say favoring coal makes little sense at a time when renewables are cleaner, cheaper, and reliable.

Gina McCarthy, who headed the EPA under former President Barack Obama, said the Trump administration will be remembered for helping the coal industry at the expense of public health.

“By weakening pollution limits and monitoring for brain-damaging mercury and other pollutants, they are actively spiking any attempt to make America – and our children – healthy,” said McCarthy, who is also the chair of the climate action group America Is All In.

Associated Press writer Matthew Daly contributed.

February 20, 2026
How to choose the best nursing home or assisted living facility

Sometimes it’s a fall that brings a broken hip and a loss of mobility. Or memory problems that bubble into danger. Or the death of the partner who was relied upon for care.

The need to move to a nursing home, assisted living facility, or another type of care setting often comes suddenly, setting off an abrupt, daunting search. It’s likely something no one ever wanted, but knowing what to look for and what to ask can make a big difference.

Here’s what to do when looking for a long-term care facility:

Start with government ratings

Regulation of assisted living facilities varies greatly from state to state, meaning there’s no centralized standards or source for information. If you’re looking for a nursing home, though, they are monitored by the federal government.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services maintains records on nursing homes, including data on who owns the facility, how robust its staffing is, and what types of violations it might have been fined for. It assigns homes a star rating, from one to five.

Sam Brooks, director of public policy for the National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care, says while the star rating “can be notoriously unreliable,” due to its reliance on self-reported data, it can still provide some clues about a home.

“One or two stars, expect it to be bad,” Brooks says.

Ratings can be a resource to rule out the worst options, but not necessarily to find the best. Still, Brooks suggests taking a closer look at four- and five-star facilities and to consider a home’s ownership, too. Nonprofit homes are often better staffed.

You could scour inspection reports and online reviews for clues, too, but eventually you’ll need to make a list of potential candidates and start making visits.

“The data,” Brooks says, “only goes so far.”

Look past the lobby

When visiting a home on your list, be careful not to be too swayed by decorative touches that might be designed to lure you in, like a lobby’s furniture, dangling chandeliers, or vases of flowers.

“When I tour a building, I listen first. Is it loud? Are call bells ringing nonstop?” says Mark Sanchez, CEO of United Hebrew, a nursing home in New Rochelle, N.Y.

After that, Sanchez says, switch your senses. Do you detect an odor? Do you see residents clustered around the nurses’ station, perhaps clamoring for help? Are staffers speaking respectfully to residents? Are they making eye contact? Are they rushed?

“Culture shows up in small moments,” Sanchez says, “and it matters.”

Seeking input from families of current residents can be insightful. Another resource may be your local long-term care ombudsman. Ombudsmen, funded by the federal Older Americans Act and present in every state, investigate long-term care residents’ complaints.

With all the available information on each home, it can be easy to feel like you’re drowning in data. So pay attention to how a place feels, too, and pair that with concrete facts.

When Jennifer Fink was making the “stressful, grief-inducing, hard, and scary” decision on what memory care community was right for her mother, she didn’t consult state databases or Google ratings. She went with her gut reaction and luckily, it was right.

“Trust your gut. Keep top of mind that the salesperson wants your loved one’s money,” says Fink, of Auburn, Calif. “If it’s giving you the ‘ick,’ then move on.”

Staffing matters most

More than any other single thing, experts on long-term care stress that a facility’s staffing is most important. That means both the quality of the care you witness workers giving residents during your visit and the average staffing levels shown in the reported data.

A home providing an average of three hours of nursing care to each resident each day may not look all that different on paper from one providing three-and-a-half hours. But those minutes matter dearly, meaning the difference between a person getting a shower, having help at mealtime, or being discovered if they’ve fallen.

During a visit, pay attention to how quickly call bells are answered and whether it seems like residents are engaged in activities. Ask staff how long they’ve worked there. A home that holds on to its workers for years may offer your loved one more continuity.

Evan Farr, an elder law attorney in Lorton, Va., who wrote The Nursing Home Survival Guide, says visiting a facility at night or on the weekend can be particularly revealing.

“These are the times when staffing is reduced and the true operation of the facility becomes apparent,” Farr says. “It is entirely possible to have a five-star rated facility that is woefully understaffed from 5 p.m. Friday until 8 a.m. Monday morning.”

Keep a long-range view

When faced with an urgent decision, it can be difficult to focus on anything beyond the factors in front of you. But it’s important to choose a home with a long-range view.

At the start, many long-term care residents are able to pay for the cost of their bill. But what happens if their money runs out? If it’s a nursing home that accepts Medicaid, how many beds are allocated to such residents? Would your loved one get that slot? If it’s an assisted living facility, do they even accept people on Medicaid?

Assisted living facilities often have complicated billing structures that require a bevy of questions to understand. Ask how costs may change as a person’s needs increase. Some places tack on separate charges for tasks like helping a person to the bathroom.

“Four-thousand dollars a month can become $8,000 overnight,” says Geoff Hoatson, founder of the elder law practice Family First Firm in Winter Park, Florida.

Another fact of long-term care that few understand is how often facilities seek to remove residents seen as undesirable, often due to a change in their financial circumstances or in their health. Dementia patients in particular — with challenging care needs and symptoms that can sometimes bring aggression — are targeted with orders to leave.

“Ask specifically what conditions would require transfer,” Hoatson says.

February 20, 2026
Sponsors are becoming more visible at the Winter Olympics with product placement and arena shoutouts

MILAN — Eileen Gu and all the other freestyle skiers wait for their scores by a large Powerade-branded cooler, then glide away without taking a drink.

Bottles of the blue sports drink are stacked in hockey penalty boxes. Even the tissues in figure skating’s drama-packed “Kiss and Cry” area are branded.

One way the Olympics generally stand out is by the absence of advertising on courses, rinks, and slopes. But increasingly at the Milan Cortina Games, sponsors are creeping into the action.

“We continue to open up those opportunities for partners,” International Olympic Committee marketing director Anne-Sophie Voumard said Wednesday, noting sponsor products can now “organically be present” more widely.

The change has seemingly accelerated since French luxury goods maker LVMH prominently placed its Louis Vuitton brand at the opening ceremony of the 2024 Paris Olympics.

“It seems like there’s been an increasing need and desire from the sponsors for the IOC to show greater value in the TOP [the Olympic partners] program,” Terrence Burns, who has worked for the Olympic body in marketing and consulted for sponsors and hosting bids, told the Associated Press.

There’s product placement on TV, even if it is still restrained compared to most American sports. Spectators inside the Olympic arenas hear shout-outs by the announcers and see logos on the big screen.

It’s all happening as sponsors eye fresh opportunities for the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics.

The IOC is looking to create extra value in its TOP program, which has been a financial success for the organization over four decades. There are 11 TOP sponsors in Milan, after peaking at 15 in Paris. Revenue in 2025 dropped a bit to $560 million in cash and services compared to $871 million in 2024.

Watching a hockey game in the arena is different

An Olympic hockey game looks clean and non-commercial on TV to NHL fans used to seeing sponsors on the boards. It’s a little different in the venue.

“This is the Corona Cero wave!” roars an announcer, attaching an alcohol-free beer brand to efforts to liven up fans at a quiet afternoon game with a wave around the arena.

An automaker gets a mention with the “Stellantis Freeze Cam” and an interview with a boxer during the intermission between periods is “thanks to Salomon,” a skiwear brand that signed a sponsor deal with the Milan Cortina organizing committee.

Burns thinks the logos in Olympic arenas are a morale booster for sponsors, but worth relatively little compared to the big campaigns they typically launch in the year before the Games.

“I think it’s a psychological ‘Attaboy’ to see your brand on a board somewhere in and around the Olympics,” Burns said. ”I get it, but show me how that helps you sell more things.”

A long-term trend ahead of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics

The Olympic Charter, a kind of constitution for the Games, says any logo in an Olympic venue must be approved “on an exceptional basis,” but the IOC has gradually relaxed its restrictions.

“The Olympic world moves slow, and it should. It’s a 3,000-year-old brand, so they’ve got to be careful with it,” Burns said.

Barely a decade ago, the “clean venue” policy was so strict that IOC staff checked the hand dryers in arena bathrooms to make sure they had their manufacturer’s brand covered with tape.

For the Tokyo Olympics in 2021, restrictions on athletes promoting their personal sponsors on social media were relaxed after a legal challenge in Germany.

The Paris Olympics saw medals delivered to the podium in Louis Vuitton-branded boxes before athletes were handed a phone for “the Olympic Victory Selfie, presented by Samsung,” a new tradition that’s continued at the Milan Cortina Games.

Voumard, the IOC’s marketing director, acknowledged the need to “be mindful of the legacy of those [Olympic] Games and the uniqueness of the presentation.”

New opportunities

The Los Angeles Olympics will break new ground on sponsorship.

For the first time, the IOC has approved the selling of naming rights for venues in a pilot program. The volleyball venue in Anaheim will keep its Honda Center name, just like it does for NHL games, and Comcast is putting its brand on a temporary arena for squash.

Until now, stadiums named for sponsors have had to switch to generic names for the Olympics. The O2 Arena in London became the North Greenwich Arena for basketball and gymnastics in 2012, and a raft of French soccer stadiums got new names for 2024.

Burns predicts the IOC might come under pressure from Los Angeles organizers to take further sponsor-friendly steps, and might need to push back on some requests to protect the Olympic brand.

“It’s not unreasonable to think that LA would look to what happened in Paris with Louis Vuitton or even Samsung on a podium,” Burns said.

“It’s their fiduciary responsibility to try to make as much money as they can. So they’re going to be looking for any and all opportunities to generate incremental revenue from sponsors. That’s the IOC’s role as a franchisor to protect that.”

February 20, 2026
Tariffs paid by midsize U.S. companies tripled last year, a JPMorganChase Institute study shows

WASHINGTON — Tariffs paid by midsize U.S. businesses tripled over the course of the past year, new research tied to one of America’s leading banks showed on Thursday — more evidence that President Donald Trump‘s push to charge higher taxes on imports is causing economic disruption.

The additional taxes have meant that companies that employ a combined 48 million people in the U.S. — the kinds of businesses that Trump had promised to revive — have had to find ways to absorb the new expense, by passing it along to customers in the form of higher prices, employing fewer workers, or accepting lower profits.

“That’s a big change in their cost of doing business,” said Chi Mac, business research director of the JPMorganChase Institute, which published the analysis Thursday. “We also see some indications that they may be shifting away from transacting with China and maybe toward some other regions in Asia.”

The research does not say how the additional costs are flowing through the economy, but it indicates that tariffs are being paid by U.S. companies. The study is part of a growing body of economic analyses that counter the administration’s claims that foreigners pay the tariffs.

The JPMorganChase Institute report used payments data to look at businesses that might lack the pricing power of large multinational companies to offset tariffs, but may be small enough to quickly change supply chains to minimize exposure to the tax increases. The companies tended to have revenues between $10 million and $1 billion with fewer than 500 employees, a category known as “middle market.”

The analysis suggests that the Trump administration’s goal of becoming less directly reliant on Chinese manufacturers has been occurring. Payments to China by these companies were 20% below their October 2024 levels, but it’s unclear whether that means China is simply routing its goods through other countries or if supply chains have moved.

The authors of the analysis emphasized in an interview that companies are still adjusting to the tariffs and said they plan to continue studying the issue.

White House spokesperson Kush Desai called the analysis “pointless” and said it didn’t “change the fact that President Trump was right.” The study showed that U.S. companies are paying tariffs that the president had previously said would be paid by foreign entities.

Trump defended his tariffs during a trip to Georgia on Thursday while touring Coosa Steel, a company involved in steel processing and distribution. The president said he couldn’t believe the Supreme Court would soon decide on the legality of some of his tariffs, given his belief that the taxes were helping U.S. manufacturers.

“The tariffs are the greatest thing to happen to this country,” Trump said.

The president imposed a series of tariffs last year for the ostensible goal of reducing the U.S. trade imbalance with other countries, so that America was not longer importing more than it exports. But trade data published Thursday by the Census Bureau showed that the trade deficit climbed last year by $25.5 billion to $1.24 trillion. The president on Wednesday posted on social media that he expected there would be a trade surplus “during this year.”

The Trump administration has been adamant that the tariffs are a boon for the economy, businesses, and workers. Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, lashed out on Wednesday at research by the New York Federal Reserve showing that nearly 90% of the burden for Trump’s tariffs fell on U.S. companies and consumers.

“The paper is an embarrassment,” Hassett told CNBC. “It’s, I think, the worst paper I’ve ever seen in the history of the Federal Reserve system. The people associated with this paper should presumably be disciplined.”

Trump increased the average tariff rate to 13% from 2.6% last year, according to the New York Fed researchers. He declared that tariffs on some items such as steel, kitchen cabinets, and bathroom vanities were in the national security interest of the country. He also declared an economic emergency to bypass Congress and impose a baseline tax on goods from much of the world in April 2025 at an event he called “Liberation Day.”

The high rates provoked a financial market panic, prompting Trump to walk back his rates and then engage in talks with multiple countries that led to a set of new trade frameworks. The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on whether Trump surpassed his legal authority by declaring an economic emergency.

Trump was elected in 2024 on his promise to tame inflation, but his tariffs have contributed to voter frustration over affordability. While inflation has not spiked during Trump’s term thus far, hiring slowed sharply, and a team of academic economists estimate that consumer prices were roughly 0.8 percentage points higher than they would otherwise be.

February 20, 2026
How the rich pass on their wealth. And how you can too

NEW YORK — Death and taxes may be inevitable. A big bill for your heirs is not.

The rich have made an art of avoiding taxes and making sure their wealth passes down effortlessly to the next generation. But the tricks they use to expedite payouts to heirs and avoid handing money to the government — can also work for people with far more modest estates.

“It’s a strategic game of chess played over decades,” says Mark Bosler, an estate planning attorney in Troy, Mich., and legal adviser to Real Estate Bees. “While the average person relies on a simple will, the well-to-do utilize a different playbook.”

Consider a trust

First, consider the facts: Despite widespread misconceptions, only estates of the very richest Americans are generally subject to taxes. At the federal level, estates of over $15 million typically trigger taxes. At the state level, 16 states and the District of Columbia do collect estate or inheritance taxes, according to the Tax Foundation, sometimes with lower exemptions than the IRS, but still at thresholds targeting millionaires.

While most people can pass on what they have without worrying about their heirs being caught in a web of taxes, it can require planning to escape a messy process that can hold up estates for years and cost families significantly in court fees and lawyer bills.

The solution at the center of many estate planners’ designs is a trust.

Though trusts conjure images of complex arrangements utilized by the uber-rich, they are relatively simple tools that can make sense for many people. They come with expense, often costing thousands of dollars in lawyer fees to set them up. But for a retired couple with a paid-off house, 401(k)s and a portfolio of investments, they can ease the passing of assets to heirs.

Among the reasons: Even if you aren’t leaving enough behind to trigger taxes, your estate can get tied up in probate court, which typically assesses fees based on an estate’s total value.

“You are leaving what might have gone to your children or other loved ones to attorneys and the courts,” says Renee Fry, CEO of Gentreo, an online estate planner based in Quincy, Massachusetts. “Anywhere from 3[%] to 8% of an estate might be lost.”

Trusts can allow an estate to sidestep court altogether and to shield it from public view by keeping details out of public records. Some people also use them to protect their savings if they someday need nursing home care and would prefer to qualify for a government-paid stay under Medicaid instead of paying themselves.

Pass on stocks virtually tax-free

Imagine being an investor in a stock like Nvidia that has soared in recent years. Now imagine being able to reap the profit of selling your shares without paying tax.

It’s possible with one caveat: You have to die.

That scenario, known in estate lingo as “step-up,” allows many rich families to grow their wealth while ensuring their heirs won’t be saddled with the bill.

It works like this: Say your savvy uncle bought 100 shares of Nvidia when it began trading in 1999 at $12 a share. Between splits and a soaring price, that $1,200 investment would be worth more than $9 million today. If he left it all to you, you could sell the shares owing little or no tax because gains are calculated from the day he died, not the day he bought it.

Benjamin Trujillo, a partner with the wealth advisory firm Moneta, based in St. Louis, Mo., says it all seems “like a magic trick.” And it’s completely legal.

“Wealth transfer looks like smoke and mirrors,” Trujillo says. “Assets like stocks can quietly grow for decades and, when they’re inherited, the tax bill often disappears.”

Lawmakers have sometimes proposed limits on the “step-up” rule, but at least for now, it remains, making it one of the biggest not-so-secret weapons in the arsenals of those looking to create generational wealth. If stocks aren’t your forte, “step-up” applies to other types of investments too, including artwork, real estate, and collectibles.

Keep up to date on beneficiaries

Ever get a prompt on one of your accounts asking you to name a beneficiary? It’s more than a confusing (or annoying) nudge from your brokerage. Estate planners say it is one of the simplest ways to ease the transfer of assets to loved ones after you die.

Regulations vary from place to place, but many banks and brokerages allow you to name a beneficiary to whom the funds will be transferred to upon your death.

“One of the easiest ways to transfer assets hassle-free,” says Allison Harrison, an attorney in Columbus, Ohio, who focuses on estate planning.

Beneficiary designations generally override wills, so it’s important to make sure yours are up to date to avoid the mess of having, say, an ex-spouse end up with everything you saved.

All of this requires planning, but experts say investing a little time in mapping out your estate is one of the moves that separates the rich from the less well-off.

“Wealthy families plan,” says Fry. “They don’t leave assets and decisions unprotected.”

February 20, 2026
U.S. trade deficit slipped lower in 2025, but gap for goods hits a record despite Trump tariffs

WASHINGTON — The U.S. trade deficit slipped modestly in 2025, a year in which President Donald Trump upended global commerce by slapping double digit tariffs on imports from most countries. But the gap in the trade of goods such as machinery and aircraft — the main focus of Trump’s protectionist policies — hit a record last year despite sweeping import taxes.

Overall, the gap between the goods and services the U.S. sells other countries and what it buys from them narrowed to just over $901 billion, from $904 billion in 2024, but it was still the third-highest on record, the Commerce Department reported Thursday.

Exports rose 6% last year, and imports rose nearly 5%.

And the U.S. deficit in the trade of goods widened 2% to a record $1.24 trillion last year as American companies boosted imports of computer chips and other tech goods from Taiwan to support massive investments in artificial intelligence.

Amid continuing tensions with Bejing, the deficit in the goods trade with China plunged nearly 32% to $202 billion in 2025 on a sharp drop in both exports to and imports from the world’s second-biggest economy. But trade was diverted away from China. The goods gap with Taiwan doubled to $147 billion and shot up 44%, to $178 billion, with Vietnam.

Economist Chad Bown, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said the widening gaps with Taiwan and Vietnam might put a “bull’s-eye’’ on them this year if Trump focuses more on the lopsided trade numbers and less on the U.S. rivalry with China.

In 2025, U.S. goods imports from Mexico outpaced exports by nearly $197 billion, up from a 2024 gap of $172 billion. But the goods deficit with Canada shrank by 26% to $46 billion. The United States this year is negotiating a renewal of a pact Trump reached with those two countries in his first term.

The U.S. ran a bigger surplus in the trade of services such as banking and tourism last year — $339 billion, up from $312 billion in 2024.

The trade gap surged from January-March as U.S. companies tried to import foreign goods ahead of Trump’s taxes, then narrowed most of the rest of the year.

Trump’s tariffs are a tax paid by U.S. importers and often passed along to their customers as higher prices. But they haven’t had as much impact on inflation as economists originally expected. Trump argues that the tariffs will protect U.S. industries, bringing manufacturing back to America and raise money for the U.S. Treasury.

February 19, 2026
Grandson of the inventor of Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups accuses Hershey of cutting corners

The grandson of the inventor of Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups has lashed out at the Hershey Co., accusing the candy company of hurting the Reese’s brand by shifting to cheaper ingredients in many products.

Hershey acknowledges some recipe changes but said Wednesday that it was trying to meet consumer demand for innovation. High cocoa prices also have led Hershey and other manufacturers to experiment with using less chocolate in recent years.

Brad Reese, 70, said in a Feb. 14 letter to Hershey’s corporate brand manager that for multiple Reese’s products, the company replaced milk chocolate with compound coatings and peanut butter with peanut butter creme.

“How does The Hershey Co. continue to position Reese’s as its flagship brand, a symbol of trust, quality and leadership, while quietly replacing the very ingredients (Milk Chocolate + Peanut Butter) that built Reese’s trust in the first place?” Reese wrote in the letter, which he posted on his LinkedIn profile.

He is the grandson of H.B. Reese, who spent two years at Hershey before forming his own candy company in 1919. H.B. Reese invented Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups in 1928; his six sons eventually sold his company to Hershey in 1963.

Hershey said Wednesday that Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups are made the same way they always have been, with milk chocolate and peanut butter that the company makes itself from roasted peanuts and a few other ingredients, including sugar and salt. But some Reese’s ingredients vary, Hershey said.

“As we’ve grown and expanded the Reese’s product line, we make product recipe adjustments that allow us to make new shapes, sizes and innovations that Reese’s fans have come to love and ask for, while always protecting the essence of what makes Reese’s unique and special: the perfect combination of chocolate and peanut butter,” the company said.

Brad Reese said he thinks Hershey went too far. He said he recently threw out a bag of Reese’s Mini Hearts, which were a new product released for Valentine’s Day. The packaging notes that the heart-shaped candies are made from “chocolate candy and peanut butter creme,” not milk chocolate and peanut butter.

“It was not edible,” Reese told the Associated Press in an interview. “You have to understand. I used to eat a Reese’s product every day. This is very devastating for me.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has strict ingredient and labeling requirements for chocolate. To be considered milk chocolate, products must contain at least 10% chocolate liquor, which is a paste made from ground cocoa beans and contains no alcohol. Products also must contain at least 12% milk solids and 3.39% milk fat.

Companies can get around those rules by using other wording on their packaging. The wrapper for Hershey’s Mr. Goodbar, for example, contains the words “chocolate candy” instead of “milk chocolate.”

Reese said Hershey changed the recipes for multiple Reese’s products in recent years. Reese’s Take5 and Fast Break bars used to be coated with milk chocolate, he said, but now they aren’t. In the early 2000’s, when Hershey released White Reese’s, they were made with white chocolate. Now they’re made with a white creme, he said.

Reese said Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups sold in Europe, the United Kingdom, and Ireland are also different than U.S. versions. On Wednesday, a package advertised on the website of British online supermarket Ocado described the candy as “milk chocolate-flavored coating and peanut butter crème.”

In a conference call with investors last year, Hershey chief financial officer Steven Voskuil said the company made some changes in its formulas. Voskuil did not say for which products but said Hershey was very careful to maintain the “taste profile and the specialness of our iconic brands.”

“I would say in all the changes that we’ve made thus far, there has been no consumer impact whatsoever. As you can imagine, even on the smallest brand in the portfolio, if we were to make a change, there’s extensive consumer testing,” he said.

But Brad Reese said he often has people tell him that Reese’s products don’t taste as good as they used to. He said Pennsylvania-based Hershey should keep in mind a famous quote from its founder, Milton Hershey: “Give them quality, that’s the best advertising.”

“I absolutely believe in innovation, but my preference is innovation with quality,” Reese said.

February 19, 2026
Billionaire Les Wexner says he was ‘duped’ by adviser Jeffrey Epstein, ‘a world-class con man’

NEW ALBANY, Ohio — The billionaire behind the retail empire that once blanketed shopping malls with names such as Victoria’s Secret and Abercrombie & Fitch told members of Congress on Wednesday that he was “duped by a world-class con man” — close financial adviser Jeffrey Epstein. Les Wexner also denied knowing about the late sex offender’s crimes or participating in Epstein’s abuse of girls and young women.

“I was naive, foolish, and gullible to put any trust in Jeffrey Epstein. He was a con man. And while I was conned, I have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide,” the 88-year-old retired founder of L Brands said in a statement to the House Oversight and Reform Committee released before his interview.

The panel’s Democrats had subpoenaed him after the latest Justice Department release of Epstein-related documents revealed new details about Wexner’s relationship with the well-connected financier. Ranking member Rep. James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, said that Wexner “answered every question asked of him” during the six-hour proceeding and that a video and transcript would be released soon.

Wexner described himself to the lawmakers as a philanthropist, community builder and grandfather who always strove “to live my life in an ethical manner in line with my moral compass,” according to the statement. He said he was eager “to set the record straight” about his ties with Epstein. Their relation ended bitterly in 2007, after the Wexners discovered he’d been stealing from them.

As one of Epstein’s most prominent former friends, Wexner has spent years answering for their decades-long association and he sought to use the proceeding to dispel what he called “outrageous untrue statements and hurtful rumor, innuendo, and speculation” that have shadowed him.

Rep. Robert Garcia, a California Democrat who sat in on Wednesday’s interview, expressed skepticism in comments to reporters gathered near the proceeding.

“There is no single person that was more involved in providing Jeffrey Epstein with the financial support to commit his crimes than Les Wexner,” he said.

In response to allegations by the prominent late Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre, who claimed in court documents that Wexner was among men Epstein trafficked her to, Wexner testified to utter devotion to his wife of 33 years, Abigail. He said he’d never once been unfaithful “in any way, shape, or form. Never. Any suggestion to the contrary is absolutely and entirely false.”

Wexner’s name appears more than 1,000 times in the Epstein files, which does not imply guilt and Wexner has never been charged with any crimes. His spokesperson said the number of mentions is not unexpected given their long-running ties.

‘A most loyal friend’

Epstein first met Leslie Wexner through a business associate around 1986.

It was an opportune time for Wexner’s finances. The Ohio business owner had grown a single Limited store in Columbus into a suite of 1980s mall staples: The Limited, Limited Express, Lane Bryant and Victoria’s Secret. Bath & Body Works, Abercrombie & Fitch, Lerner, White Barn Candle Co., and Henri Bendel would follow.

Wexner told lawmakers that it was several years before he turned over management of his vast fortune to Epstein, after the “master manipulator” connived to gain his trust. He gave Epstein power of attorney in 1991, allowing Epstein to make investments and do business deals and to purchase property and help Wexner as he developed New Albany from a small rural city to a thriving upscale Columbus suburb.

Epstein had “excellent judgment and unusually high standards,” Wexner told Vanity Fair in a 2003 interview, and he was “always a most loyal friend.”

On Wednesday, the billionaire said he didn’t circulate in Epstein’s social circle, but often heard accounts of his encounters with other wealthy people.

Epstein “carefully used his acquaintance with important individuals to curate an aura of legitimacy,” Wexner said. He said he visited Epstein’s infamous island only once, stopping for a few hours one morning with his wife and young children while they were cruising on their boat.

“It is interesting that Mr Wexner has already begun to clarify in his mind that somehow he and Mr. Epstein weren’t even friends,” Garcia told reporters. “We should be very clear that the two were very close, per reporting. They spent a lot of time together.”

Epstein recalls ‘gang stuff’

In one of the newly released documents, Epstein sent rough notes to himself about Wexner saying: “never ever, did anything without informing les” and “I would never give him up.” Another document, an apparent draft letter to Wexner, said the two “had ‘gang stuff’ for over 15 years” and were mutually indebted to each other — as Wexner helped make Epstein rich and Epstein helped make Wexner richer.

Wexner spokesperson Tom Davies said Wexner never received the letter, characterizing it as fitting “a pattern of untrue, outlandish, and delusional statements made by Epstein in desperate attempts to perpetuate his lies and justify his misconduct.”

Wexner told the congressional representatives that Epstein “lived a double life,” presenting himself to his wealthy clients as a financial guru with steady girlfriends while “most carefully and fully” hiding his misdeeds with underage girls. “He knew that I never would have tolerated his horrible behavior. Not any of it,” he said.

Exploiting a sexy brand

Some accusers said Epstein touted his ties to Wexner and claimed that he could help get them jobs modeling for the Victoria’s Secret catalog.

One woman, an aspiring actor and model, told the FBI that Epstein said he was best friends with the longtime Victoria’s Secret owner and that she’d have to learn to be comfortable in her underwear and not be a prude, according to recently released grand jury testimony. Another woman said she reported Epstein to police in 1997 after he groped her during what she thought was a modeling interview for the Victoria’s Secret catalog. After Epstein’s 2019 arrest, Wexner’s lawyers told investigators that the business owner had heard a rumor that Epstein might be holding himself out as connected to Victoria’s Secret, prosecutors wrote in a recently disclosed memorandum summarizing the probe. When Wexner asked Epstein about it, Epstein denied doing so, the lawyers said, according to the memo.

Wexner did not address the specific issue in his statement Wednesday, but repeatedly lamented being deceived by Epstein — “an abuser, a crook, and a liar.” L Brands sold off Victoria’s Secret in 2020, in one of Wexner’s final acts as chair.

A relationship unravels

Wexner did not publicly reveal until after Epstein’s arrest on federal sex trafficking charges in July 2019 that he had severed their relationship. In a Wexner Foundation letter that August, he said that happened in 2007. But the Justice Department’s newly released records show the two were in touch after that.

Wexner emailed Epstein on June 26, 2008, after a plea deal was announced that would require him to serve 18 months in a Florida jail on a state charge of soliciting prostitution from a minor in order to avoid federal prosecution. He wound up serving 13 months.

“Abigail told me the result … all I can say is I feel sorry. You violated your own number 1 rule … always be careful,” Wexner wrote. Epstein replied: “no excuse.”

Davies said the 2007 date Wexner cited in 2019 applied to firing Epstein as financial adviser, revoking his power of attorney, and removing his name from Wexner’s bank accounts.

Wexner also said in the 2019 letter that Epstein had misappropriated “vast sums” of his and his family’s fortune while overseeing his finances. An investigative memo from the latest document release says that Wexner’s attorneys told investigators in 2008 that Epstein had repaid him $100 million. Wexner said in Wednesday’s statement that Epstein returned “a substantial amount” of the undisclosed total.

Garcia said that congressional investigators have identified more than $1 billion that was “either transferred, provided in stocks or given directly” by Wexner to Epstein — though Wexner “appears to be unaware” of much of it.

Continuing fallout for Wexner

On Wednesday, Wexner testified that he had never seen Epstein with any young girls and acknowledged the “unfathomable” pain he inflicted, even as discoveries in the Epstein files have placed new pressure on him.

One survivor, Maria Farmer, said a redacted FBI report contained in the document release vindicated her longstanding claim that she filed one of the earliest complaints against Epstein while she was under his employ in 1996 working on an art project at the Wexners’ estate.

Meanwhile, survivors of a sweeping sexual abuse scandal at the Ohio State University are citing Wexner’s association with Epstein to try to get his name removed from a campus football complex and university nurses also want his name scrubbed from the Wexner Medical Center.

February 18, 2026