Corrections: July 29, 2025
An article on Sunday about Joe Kennedy III, the former Democratic congressman from Massachusetts, misstated Representative Nancy Pelosi's leadership position when she supported Mr. Kennedy in a Senate race. She was the House speaker, not the minority leader. The article also described incorrectly the relationship between Joe Kennedy III and Senator Ted Kennedy. The senator was Mr. Kennedy's great-uncle, not uncle. The article also referred incorrectly to the location of Jackson, Miss. It is near the Mississippi Delta region, not part of it.
Because of an editing error, an article on Saturday about David Ellison, who is set to become the chairman and CEO of Paramount, misstated the title of the CBS show hosted by Stephen Colbert. It is 'The Late Show,' not 'Late Night.'
A Critic's Notebook article on Friday about this year's Williamstown Theater Festival misstated the nationality of the character Genevieve in the play 'Spirit of the People.' She is Canadian, not American.
An article on Saturday about the New York Historical acquiring the archive of the photographer Bill Cunningham, who chronicled fashion for The New York Times, misstated the nature of the transaction. The archive was purchased for an undisclosed amount; it was not donated.
Errors are corrected during the press run whenever possible, so some errors noted here may not have appeared in all editions.
To contact the newsroom regarding correction requests, please email nytnews@nytimes.com. To share feedback, please visit nytimes.com/readerfeedback.
Comments on opinion articles may be emailed to letters@nytimes.com.
For newspaper delivery questions: 1-800-NYTIMES (1-800-698-4637) or email customercare@nytimes.com.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
India Eyes Fall Deadline for US Deal Amid Trump Threats
(Bloomberg) -- Indian officials are planning to continue negotiating with the US for a bilateral trade deal by fall of this year even if US President Donald Trump follows through with threatened tariffs this week, people familiar with the matter said. The World's Data Center Capital Has Residents Surrounded An Abandoned Art-Deco Landmark in Buffalo Awaits Revival Budapest's Most Historic Site Gets a Controversial Rebuild San Francisco in Talks With Vanderbilt for Downtown Campus Boston's Dumpsters Overflow as Trash-Strike Summer Drags On New Delhi is less optimistic about securing an interim agreement with the Trump administration before an Aug. 1 deadline when higher US duties kick in, the people said, asking not to be identified as the discussions are private. If India is slapped with higher duties on its imports this week, officials see this as a temporary measure until talks on a broader bilateral deal are concluded in the fall, they said. Trump signaled Tuesday that India may be hit with a tariff of 20% to 25%, while cautioning the rate hadn't been finalized yet. Any levy of that magnitude would be a blow to the South Asian nation, which had been one of the first countries to begin trade negotiations with the Trump administration, and had been seeking lower rates than the 19% given to Indonesia and the Philippines. While failure to secure an interim deal would be concerning to New Delhi, officials see any tariff hike as a temporary disadvantage, people familiar with the matter said. Negotiations for the broader deal are on track, with a team from the US expected to visit India during August, they said. Internal calculations suggests about 10% of exports would be affected in July to September if India is slapped with a tariff rate above 25%, one of the people said. Sectors including electronic goods, gems and jewelery, would be impacted, the person said. India's Ministry of Commerce and Industry didn't immediately respond to an email seeking further information. India and the US had already finalized the terms of reference for a broad bilateral trade deal during Vice President JD Vance's trip to India in April, and had committed to a fall deadline for that. The two sides were negotiating a multi-phase approach to the deal, with an interim agreement expected to cover the tariff. Talks Continue Trump had initially threatened India with a 26% import tariff. Bloomberg News previously reported that both sides were working toward a deal that would reduce India's proposed tariffs to below 20%. New Delhi is still waiting to hear from the White House on the tariff levels, but officials are bracing for levies as high as 26%, an official told reporters in the Indian capital on Wednesday, asking not to be identified as the discussions are private. Negotiators from both sides have continued talks, the person said. Negotiations hit a hurdle in recent months around US demands for greater access to India's agriculture, dairy and automobiles sectors. India had been pushing for exemptions from the US sectoral tariffs, particularly in pharmaceuticals. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said Monday that further talks are needed with India to gauge how far New Delhi is willing to go to secure a deal. 'They have expressed strong interest in opening portions of their market, we of course are willing to continue talking to them,' Greer said. 'But I think we need some more negotiations on that with our Indian friends to see how ambitious they want to be.' (Updates with additional details from officials in ninth paragraph.) Burning Man Is Burning Through Cash It's Not Just Tokyo and Kyoto: Tourists Descend on Rural Japan Everyone Loves to Hate Wind Power. Scotland Found a Way to Make It Pay Off Cage-Free Eggs Are Booming in the US, Despite Cost and Trump's Efforts Russia Builds a New Web Around Kremlin's Handpicked Super App ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's How Much Retirees Would Save If Social Security Taxes Actually Get Eliminated
President Trump has often declared that seniors should not pay taxes on Social Security benefits. While it may just seem like another former campaign promise, the White House moved forward with some big tax policy changes. Getting rid of Social Security taxes sounds great for those who depend on these benefits, but how would this work in the big picture? Good To Know: Up Next: The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) added fuel to the speculation. However, even a wage-based blessing for retirees on fixed incomes — one of the country's biggest and most reliable voting groups — can come with implications. So how much would seniors benefit if Trump were to actually succeed in eliminating tax on Social Security benefits? Let's find out. How Trump's Bill Impacts Social Security After the approval by a Republican-led Congress, Trump signed a bill that includes a tax deduction for seniors but NOT the elimination of taxes on Social Security benefits. Instead of eliminating the tax, the bill introduced a temporary $6,000 tax deduction for seniors aged 65 and older. It will only be effective from 2026 through 2028, though, and has income-based eligibility limits. The bill is also an umbrella under which many components of Trump's overall tax plan can be found, such as the Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act, as well as requiring retirees who exceed income thresholds to pay federal income tax on up to 85% of their Social Security benefits. However, it turns out that what appears to be a proposal to help the most vulnerable populations with their tax returns would actually benefit wealthy retirees the most. And, the cost in lost revenue could threaten the program's future and lead to reduced benefits for all. Find Out: It's also good to note that eliminating income tax on Social Security benefits could increase the federal deficit by up to $1.6 trillion over 10 years. If Trump's promise to end taxes on Social Security is passed altogether (again, to be clear, the OBBBA does not eliminate Social Security taxes), households earning between $32,000 and $60,000 annually would get an average tax cut of about $90. That means that less than 1% of the lowest-earning households (those making about $33,000 or less annually) would get a tax cut, 28% of middle-income households would get a tax cut, and roughly 20% of households earning more than $5 million a year would get a tax cut. According to the Tax Policy Center, 'The biggest winners would be those in the top 0.1% of income, who make nearly $5 million or more. They'd get an average tax cut of nearly $2,500 in 2025.' How Social Security Benefits Are Taxed About 68 million Americans collect Social Security benefits. As of 2025, the average monthly Social Security retirement benefit was estimated at around $1,999. Most recipients owe nothing to the IRS. According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), 'About 40% of people who get Social Security must pay federal income taxes on their benefits.' Kiplinger pointed out that the IRS taxes not just retirement benefits, but all payments pulled from the program's trusts, including disability and survivor benefits, although Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments are exempt. Additionally, some states tax Social Security income too, but the president does not have the power to alter that. The federal government taxes or doesn't tax benefits based on the recipient's combined income, which includes their monthly Social Security checks. For single filers: Those earning between $25,000 and $34,000 in combined income can be taxed on up to 50% of their benefits. Those earning more than $34,000 can be taxed on up to 85% of their benefits. For couples filing jointly: Those earning between $32,000 and $44,000 can be taxed on up to 50% of their benefits. Those earning more than $44,000 can be taxed on up to 85% of their benefits. Final Take To GO: This Could Hurt More Than Help The bottom line is that the majority of recipients wouldn't get a tax break, and for most who would, the savings would be negligible. If Social Security taxes are eliminated, it's not likely you would see much of a difference in your tax return or your budget overall if you're a lower to average income earner. In other words, 60% of recipients who the IRS doesn't tax keep their entire payments because they don't have enough income to qualify for taxation. For them, Trump's plan wouldn't leave them with a single extra dollar. The rich, however, would reap the lion's share of the gains (as per usual, some might say). This is because Trump's plan to repeal Social Security taxes would lead to about 20% of the households earning more than $5 million a year getting a tax cut. While every dollar counts, $90 in savings pales in comparison to the projected cost of $1.6 trillion in lost revenue over the next decade, which would drive Social Security and Medicare hospital insurance into insolvency faster, resulting in sharply reduced benefits for tens of millions of recipients. Andrew Lisa contributed to the reporting for this article. More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 3 Reasons Retired Boomers Shouldn't Give Their Kids a Living Inheritance (And 2 Reasons They Should) Mark Cuban Says Trump's Executive Order To Lower Medication Costs Has a 'Real Shot' -- Here's Why This article originally appeared on Here's How Much Retirees Would Save If Social Security Taxes Actually Get Eliminated
NBC News
23 minutes ago
- NBC News
Live updates: Senate confirms ex-Trump lawyer Emil Bove for judgeship; Hegseth discusses political run
Trump revealed yesterday that Jeffrey Epstein 'stole' one of convicted sex offender's main accusers, Virginia Giuffre, from his Mar-a-Lago club. President Donald Trump walks across the South Lawn of the White House after returning on Marine One, on Tuesday. Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images Trump said convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein 'stole' Virginia Giuffre from his Mar-a-Lago club, a stunning admission that could increase scrutiny of his relationship with the late financier — even as his administration seeks to change the subject from Epstein. Trump was speaking to reporters yesterday afternoon when he was asked about his comments over the weekend about a falling-out with Epstein because he took employees from his business. Read the full story here. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has privately discussed the idea of running for political office next year in Tennessee, according to two people who have spoken directly with him about it. If Hegseth were to follow through on the discussions, it would amount to a major leadership shake-up at the department that oversees the American military and millions of federal employees. The Defense Department bars civilian employees from running for political office, meaning Hegseth would have to resign to do so. Read the full story here. The Republican-led Senate voted last night to confirm Emil Bove as a judge on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, granting a lifetime appointment to President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer. He was confirmed 50-49, with only Republican votes, as they set aside allegations from three whistleblowers about the conduct of Bove, a Justice Department official, which include accusations that he flouted laws and Justice Department procedures. Read the full story here. Trump started his second term with one huge difference compared with his first term: Polls regularly showed majorities of Americans approving of his handling of immigration. In fact, it was his best issue, whereas it had been one of his least popular before. Six months into his second term, it's still among his best issues, but it's no longer as popular. There has been a clear decline in support for Trump's handling of immigration, with his approval rating dropping across a handful of prominent polls. Read the full story here.
