Riot Platforms Upsizes Coinbase Credit Facility to $200M
Key terms, including the interest rate, remain identical to the previous facility. Borrowed amounts will bear interest at an annual rate equal to the greater of the federal funds rate (upper limit) or 3.25%, plus an additional 4.50%. The credit facility has a maturity of 364 days from the effective date, with an option for a 364-day extension subject to Coinbase's approval. The loan is secured by a portion of Riot's Bitcoin holdings.
A computer engineer working in a futuristic office, programming algorithms to mine cryptocurrency.
The expansion of the credit facility comes in the middle of the recent shifts for Riot Platforms, which include its removal from several major indices as of June 28. However, the company also reported an increase in Bitcoin production for May 2025 and mined 514 Bitcoin, which is an 11% increase from the past month.
Riot Platform Inc. (NASDAQ:RIOT) operates as a Bitcoin mining company in the US. Coinbase Global Inc. (NASDAQ:COIN) operates a platform for crypto assets in the US and internationally.
While we acknowledge the potential of RIOT as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the .
READ NEXT: and .
Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
20 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Tech billionaire Trump adviser Marc Andreesen says universities will ‘pay the price' for DEI
Influential tech investor and Trump adviser Marc Andreessen recently said universities will 'pay the price' for promoting diversity and allegedly discriminating against supporters of President Donald Trump, according to messages he sent to a group chat with White House officials and technology leaders reviewed by The Washington Post. The billionaire's messages also cited Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford University, a respected institution at the heart of Silicon Valley that has incubated tech companies such as Google. Andreessen and his wife have donated millions of dollars to the school. 'I view Stanford and MIT as mainly political lobbying operations fighting American innovation at this point,' Andreessen wrote in screenshots of messages sent May 3 and reviewed by The Post. The investor described a 'counterattack' against universities in his messages and called for the National Science Foundation, a federal research funding agency, to receive 'the bureaucratic death penalty.' Andreessen co-founded one of Silicon Valley's most prominent venture capital firms, Andreessen Horowitz, which embraced President Donald Trump's candidacy last year. While Elon Musk was the most visible tech mogul in Trump's orbit until he split with the president, Andreessen has quietly helped shape the administration's hiring and policy decisions. The tech investor is known for making controversial statements, including to his 1.8 million followers on X, and has criticized universities and government agencies in media appearances, but his comments in the private chat went beyond his previous statements. In addition to criticizing Stanford and MIT, Andreessen sent a rapid-fire series of messages, according to the screenshots and two members of the chat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. 'The universities are at Ground Zero of the counterattack' from Trump voters, Andreessen wrote, alleging colleges favored immigrants over Americans and promoted DEI, or diversity, equity, and inclusion policies intended to increase race and gender representation. 'The combination of DEI and immigration is politically lethal,' Andreessen wrote. 'When these two forms of discrimination combine, as they have for the last 60 years and on hyperdrive for the last decade, they systematically cut most of the children of the Trump voter base out of any realistic prospect of access to higher education and corporate America.' Andreessen did not respond to requests for comment through his venture firm. He quickly deleted many of the messages after sending them, according to the screenshots and the two members of the chat. Andreessen sent his messages to a WhatsApp group used by Trump officials to discuss artificial intelligence policy with dozens of tech figures and academics, according to screenshots of the chat from May and June reviewed by The Post. The group, whose members have varied political views, predates the current Trump administration. It was established in 2023 to connect investors and others with a shared interest in open development of AI. A White House official said members of the Trump administration in the group participated in their personal capacity, no official policy was discussed, and that Andreessen was not an official adviser to the president. Andreessen in his messages did not suggest any action against Stanford and MIT. The Trump administration has targeted the University of Virginia, Harvard and Columbia over issues including DEI initiatives and alleged antisemitism, moving to cancel funding and student visas. 'They declared war on 70% of the country and now they're going to pay the price,' Andreessen alleged of universities, without calling out a specific school. 'MIT is merit-based and affordable, driven by innovation and entrepreneurship, and committed to excellence — all with a mission of national service,' said its spokesperson Kimberly Allen in an email statement. A spokesperson for Stanford, Dee Mostofi, declined to comment on the message Andreessen wrote about the university. Andreessen grew up in rural Wisconsin and rose to prominence in Silicon Valley in the 1990s as co-creator of Netscape, one of the first popular web browsers. His influence and wealth has grown during the past decade through Andreessen Horowitz, which has invested in Facebook, Twitter and Airbnb. The firm financially backed Musk's 2022 takeover of Twitter, which Andreessen said would encourage free speech. The investor has supported Democratic presidential candidates, including Hillary Clinton in 2016, but backed Republican Mitt Romney in 2012. Andreessen and his firm backed Trump after his attempted assassination in July last year, an endorsement the firm said could protect tech start-ups from hostile policies pushed by the Biden administration. In a company blog post, Andreessen and his co-founder wrote that their firm's political efforts were 'entirely focused' on helping start-ups, including through 'expansion of high-skilled immigration to encourage foreign graduates of American universities' to build companies in the United States. Andreessen has previously criticized DEI, affirmative action, federal agencies and universities, alleging colleges radicalized young tech workers and were 'unfixable,' including on his firm's podcast and in podcast interviews after the election. The investor in January told podcaster Lex Fridman he was rethinking his support for high-skilled immigration, which the tech industry uses to source talent, because he thought it had disadvantaged native-born Americans. Andreessen's message to the group about subjecting the NSF to 'the bureaucratic death penalty' alleged that the agency, a major funder of university science and tech labs, backed projects that led to online censorship of American citizens — a talking point among some Trump supporters. The investor added: 'Raze it to the ground and start over.' Some members of the group chat found Andreessen's comments discussing immigration and attacks on universities extreme and out of character with the chat's usual tone, the two members of the chat said. AI insiders have often used the chat to impress on Trump officials that alienating immigrants and attacking universities will undermine the ability of the U.S. to maintain its lead in technology by attracting and training top talent, the two members said. Andreessen ceased participating in the group soon after his messages in early May, the two members said. The chat is moderated by Sriram Krishnan, a White House senior policy adviser on AI, according to screenshots and the two group members. Krishnan created the group before Trump's second term, while he was working as a partner at Andreessen's firm. Dean Ball, another White House adviser on AI, is also a frequent contributor, the two chat members said. AI experts in the chat include Meta's chief AI scientist Yann LeCun, a professor at New York University, who supported Kamala Harris's presidential bid; and Fei-Fei Li, a Stanford professor and robotics entrepreneur, who worked with the Biden administration to promote government funding for public sector AI projects. Steven Sinofsky, a partner at Andreessen's firm, is also in the group. LeCun and Krishnan declined to comment for this article. Ball, Li and Sinofsky did not respond to requests for comment. In recent months the group has argued over Trump administration budget cuts at the NSF, and whether the government should place export restrictions on Chinese AI company DeepSeek, the two members told The Post. In January U.S. tech stocks crashed after the company claimed it could achieve similar results to American rivals with fewer resources. Andreessen has said that encrypted messaging apps such as WhatsApp and Signal, which allow users to set up disappearing messages, have become a safe outlet for tech elites to share polarizing views likely to meet public backlash, a trend he called 'the group chat phenomenon' in the January podcast interview with Fridman. Andreessen is on the board of Meta, which owns WhatsApp. Group chats took off in Silicon Valley during the political upheaval of 2020, spurred by pandemic lockdowns and the murder of George Floyd. 'The great culture wars of 2020 meant people, especially in tech, weren't comfortable sharing their views in public lest they get various online mobs after them,' Krishnan wrote on his personal blog last year. The chats provide venues to workshop those ideas before they're shared on social media, Krishnan said, functioning as 'the memetic upstream of mainstream opinion.' Group chats helped forge a new alliance between tech elites and Trump before Silicon Valley elites publicly declared their support and Andreessen was at the center of many of those messaging threads, Semafor reported in April. The tech industry has historically lobbied in favor of government funding for scientific research and high-skilled immigration, which some studies show has been crucial to the sector's flourishing. A growing number of tech figures such as Musk and venture capitalist David Sacks, now Trump's AI and crypto czar, have broken with that received wisdom in recent years, celebrating Trump's moves to slash government funding and target Harvard and other schools. Andreessen's comments against Stanford in the group chat pit a high-priest of Silicon Valley against a beloved local school that has served as a crucial pipeline for the industry, providing ideas, research funding and technical talent, including the founders of Instagram and LinkedIn. MIT has long been a top recruiting ground for the tech industry. Two pension funds for MIT employees have invested in venture funds managed by Andreessen's firm, according to federal filings. Andreessen's comments in May came after another member of the chat group expressed skepticism that diversity policies or environmental and workplace regulation had reduced economic growth. When Krishnan, the investor turned Trump official, invited Andreessen to offer an opposing view, Andreessen fired off his comments about immigration and diversity. The billionaire also mentioned a personal disagreement with Stanford, alleging that his wife, philanthropist Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen, was forced to leave her position as chair of its Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society, which she co-founded and helped fund. Arrillaga-Andreessen did not respond to requests for comment. '[T]hey forced my wife out of Stanford without a second thought, a decision that will cost them something like $5 billion in future donations,' Andreessen wrote in his messages to the group, without specifying the cause of the dispute. Arrillaga-Andreessen's LinkedIn profile indicates she stopped being chair of the philanthropy center in 2024. Mostofi in an email statement praised Arrillaga-Andreessen's philanthropic and academic contributions to the university. 'Her initiative as the founder and longtime chair of [the center] was instrumental in driving attention to these important topics,' Mostofi said, adding that Arrillaga-Andreessen will teach at Stanford's business school in the fall. The couple's names were included in the job titles of academics who led the philanthropy center. They donated almost $28 million to Stanford Hospital in 2007 and $2 million to Stanford Healthcare in 2020. Andreessen, who was born in Iowa, went to the University of Illinois, and built his businesses in California, suggested in his messages that he was among a large group of Americans tired of perceived injustice. 'My cohort of citizens,' he wrote, had once been willing to accept diversity policies as the cost of prior bigotry in American society, 'even though the discrimination was now aimed at us,' according to the screenshots. 'The insanity of the last 8 years and in particular the summer of 2020, totally shredded that complacency,' Andreessen added, apparently referring to protests and discussion of diversity after the death of Floyd. 'And so now my people are furious and not going to take it anymore,' he wrote.
CNBC
27 minutes ago
- CNBC
These college majors have the best job prospects — and they aren't what students expect
For many students, majoring in finance is a proven pathway to a well-paying career and job security. In fact, U.S. graduates believe that finance offers the best career prospects overall, considering today's economic climate, according to a new survey by the CFA Institute, a non-profit focused on financial education. The group polled more than 9,000 current college students and recent graduates between the ages of 18 and 25. While confidence about career prospects in finance increased over the past year, confidence decreased in other areas including STEM and healthcare, the CFA Institute also found. However, finance ranks well behind many other majors when it comes to employment opportunities after college, other data shows. More from Personal Finance:Trump aims to slash Pell GrantsStudent loan borrowers face 'default cliff', report findsWhat the endowment tax in Trump's megabill may mean for college "For me, a career in finance represents a pivot to stability," said Rafael Perez, 29, who is pursuing a Master of Science degree in finance at California State University in Sacramento. "I've been a creative my entire life, so discovering my affinity for finance was a relief in a sense." Perez says he still experiences some pushback from his peers. "When I tell people I'm getting an MS in finance, they often jokingly call me a 'finance bro,'" he said. "Despite the negative connotations of the phrase, it also reflects an expectation of financial success and prestige." Students and their families are paying more attention to which college majors are most likely to pay off, and are putting greater emphasis on a degree's return on investment, according to Peter Watkins, CFA Institute's senior director of university programs. "There's an awareness from students that they have to make sure the degrees will make them work-ready," he said. As young adults enter the real world, they are facing an increasingly tight labor market. According to a recent analysis of labor market conditions for recent college graduates by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, job opportunities "deteriorated noticeably in the first quarter of 2025." Among this group, the unemployment rate jumped to 5.8% — the highest reading since 2021. Although finance majors had higher salaries compared to most other majors, grads with nutrition, art history and philosophy degrees all outperformed both finance and STEM fields when it comes to employment prospects, the New York Fed found. For finance and computer science, the unemployment rate in those fields was 3.7% and 6.1%, respectively. By comparison, the unemployment rate for art history majors was 3%, and for nutritional sciences, the unemployment rate was just 0.4%, the New York Fed found. After notching significant gains since 2020, the rise of computer science majors came to a near standstill this year, other reports show, fueled by concerns that artificial intelligence is rapidly taking over jobs in the field. Economics majors also fared worse than majors such as theology and philosophy when it came to the employment rates for recent college graduates, according to the New York Fed. Philosophy majors have an unemployment rate of 3.2%, for example, and for economics, it's 4.9%. The New York Fed's report was based on Census data from 2023 and unemployment rates of recent college graduates. The disconnect between the New York Fed's outcomes by major and the CFA survey findings — which is based on perceptions — is likely due in part to societal expectations, particularly from parents, Watkins said. "It may possibly be parental guidance, as in, 'go for business,'" he said. Meanwhile, demand for humanities majors is on the rise, and with good reason. At a conference last year, Robert Goldstein, the chief operating officer of BlackRock, the world's biggest money manager, said the firm was adjusting its hiring strategy for recent grads. "We have more and more conviction that we need people who majored in history, in English, and things that have nothing to do with finance or technology," Goldstein said. This demand for liberal arts degrees is fueled by the rise of artificial intelligence, which drives the need for creative thinking and so-called soft skills. "It's a bit of a gold rush in AI, people who are adopting quickly are going to succeed quickly," Watkins said.
Forbes
29 minutes ago
- Forbes
Questions About The New Tax Bill? Taxgirl Has Answers
M isinformation about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) was rampant even before President Donald Trump signed it into law on Thursday, July 4, 2025. Taxpayers and TikTokers posted articles mistakenly touting provisions that didn't make the final cut. (One dropped provision, for example, allowed Medicare Part A beneficiaries to contribute to Health Savings Accounts.) Worse, misinformation was spread by the government itself—Trump falsely claimed the law 'eliminates' taxes on Social Security benefits, and a misleading mass email from the Social Security Administration added to the confusion. The problem is that OBBBA is an 800+ page bill with dozens of complicated tax and other provisions–some permanent and some temporary; some delayed and some retroactive; some familiar and some entirely new. There are phase outs, limits and gotchas that simply can't be explained in sound bites. Many of these complications are meant to either limit the cost of tax breaks or to prevent anticipated abuses. Warning: There are some answers that even tax lawyers like me can't be sure of, until the Treasury and IRS issue regulations. Take the provision that supposedly fulfills Trump's 'no tax on tips' campaign promise. It's retroactive to the start of the year, but only lasts through 2028. It protects up to $25,000 in tips from income tax (but not Social Security or Medicare taxes), if, that is, you work in a job that is traditionally tipped and don't earn too much. (Which jobs are covered? That awaits word from the IRS, though presumably servers, casino dealers and delivery drivers will qualify.) The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimates that the tax cuts in OBBBA will reduce federal revenues by $4.475 trillion between 2025 and 2034. Some taxpayers assume that means that the cuts will offers lots of benefits to families across the board. Not exactly. A Tax Policy Center analysis suggests the law distributes most of its benefits to high income households, with households making between $460,000 and $1.1 million getting a 4.4% boost to their after -tax incomes, compared with a 2.3% after-tax gain for middle-income households making between $67,000 and $119,000. Households earning less than $35,000 will get less than a 1% after-tax boost and will end up worse off, after taking into account the law's cuts to Medicaid, SNAP (food stamps), and Affordable Care Act health insurance subsidies. One thing is true across the board: The new law contains enough changes and complexity to make planning and compliance in the short run more difficult for both individuals and businesses–and to make a lot of extra work for the IRS. In addition to issuing guidance, the tax agency will have to revise form W-2 (to allow workers to claim a new break for overtime which lasts from 2025 through 2028) and create new withholding tables (to adjust for the tax breaks for tips and overtime). These administrative changes will coincide with preparations for the run-up to the next tax season, including reworking existing IRS software and tax forms. (Drafts of tax forms for the 2025 tax year, including Form 1040, are already available on the IRS website and will have to be revised.) And all of that work? It will have to be done by an IRS workforce that has already been reduced by 25% (for more on reductions at the IRS, including a detailed breakdown of employee losses, click here). And it will all be overseen by a new IRS Commissioner who has little to no tax experience. To help cut through the fog—and separate text from guesses (and occasionally, some truly terrible AI takes), our Forbes team has been combing through the new law to provide you with information you need (or want) to know about the individual tax cuts. The questions below are some of the top ones I've gotten on social media, via email, and in a Reddit Ask Me Anything session. The $6,000 Senior Deduction Q: The SSA email promises that 90% of social security recipients will pay no federal taxes on their Social Security income. Any truth to that? A: That's complicated. The email was misleading in that there is no separate provision in the new law that specifically relates to taxes on Social Security. Instead, under OBBBA, seniors aged 65 and older are eligible to claim a new, temporary deduction of $6,000 beginning in 2025—the deduction would expire after 2028. The deduction would be available to taxpayers who itemize and those who claim the standard deduction. This is a stand-in for Trump's 'no tax on Social Security' promise. The new deduction is per qualifying senior, not per tax return, so a married couple could get an extra $12,000 deduction. It's also age-dependent, not benefits-dependent, so it's possible that you could receive Social Security benefits (if you took them at, say, age 62) and not qualify for the deduction. The opposite is also true–if you chose to delay your benefits until, say, age 67, and you are now 65, you would qualify for the deduction. Once you reach retirement age, whether your Social Security benefits are taxable depends on your filing status and how much other income you receive. If your only source of income is your Social Security check, your benefits are generally not taxable. You may not even need to file a return. That will NOT change with the new deduction. If you received income from other sources, you may be paying tax on your benefits now. The quick formula: Add your adjusted gross income (AGI) + nontaxable interest + ½ of your Social Security benefits. Your benefits won't be taxed if that amount isn't more than the base amount: $32,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly; $25,000 for taxpayers filing as single, head of household (HOH), qualifying widow/widower with a dependent child, or married filing separately who did not live with their spouses at any time during the year; and $0 for married persons filing separately who lived together during the year. If you owe tax on your Social Security benefits, typically up to 50% of your benefits will be taxable. No one pays federal income tax on more than 85% of their Social Security benefits. That's a long way of saying that most people already don't pay tax on their benefits. According to the White House, 64% of Social Security beneficiaries do not pay on their benefits currently–that's expected to increase to 88% under the new law. Note that the new $6,000 deduction itself phases out for seniors with higher incomes. Up until $150,000 for joint filers ($75,000 for all other taxpayers), you would qualify for the full deduction. Then the deduction begins to shrink at a rate of 6% over those amounts—in other words, for every $100 extra you earn, you lose $6 of the deduction. That means the deduction completely disappears once income reaches $350,000 for joint filers or $175,000 for all other taxpayers. The SALT Deduction Q: Has the SALT cap been raised to $40,000 for single filers or just $40,000 for married filers? A: Under OBBBA, if you itemize your deductions, you can deduct state and local income taxes or sales taxes, plus state and local property taxes up to a total (for both categories) of $40,000, often referred to as the SALT cap. That's per return, not per taxpayer, so it's the same amount for married taxpayers filing jointly and single filers (you don't get a bigger deduction if you're married). However, if you file as married filing separately, the deduction is cut in half, to $20,000 on each return. If that sounds a bit like a marriage penalty, it is (two single taxpayers living together will get a bigger tax break than one married couple filing a joint return). There's another marriage penalty too. The benefit of the $40,000 deduction begins to phase out at the same $500,000 in income for a married couple filing jointly and a single. You can read more about some of OBBBA's odd marriage incentives and disincentives here. The Gambling Hit Q: If I file a Schedule C for gambling, does the 90% for losses thing actually impact me, or is that only if I itemize? A: This provision is getting a lot of attention. It limits the amount of losses gamblers can deduct from their taxes from 100% of winnings to 90% of winnings. In simple terms, this means that if you lose $100,000 at the craps tables but win back $100,000 in poker, you would have to report $100,000 in income but would only be able to deduct $90,000 (90% of $100,000) in losses. (Remember that you can normally only claim gambling losses up to your gambling winnings.) The changes weren't included in the House bill, but they did make it into the Senate bill and later became law. We haven't seen the guidance on this, but as written, the limitation would apply to both casual gamblers and professional gamblers. The latter claim their losses on Schedule C. The result is that you could now end up with taxable income from gambling even if you actually lost money overall. That has, as you can imagine, made a lot of people very unhappy. There's already a bill introduced in Congress to repeal the 90% loss limitation—Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) voted yes on OBBBA but is already on board for the FAIR BET Act, introduced by Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) to repeal the gambling provision. The Charitable Change Q: Can you pick a particular change that is under the radar that you think deserves more attention? Something that you think will be a big deal that people aren't focused on right now? Great question! I would say the charitable deduction. By the numbers (as opposed to the dollars), most people who donate to charity don't itemize, which means they don't receive a tax benefit for their generosity. But, under OBBBA, the charitable donation deduction has been expanded to include a permanent deduction for taxpayers who do not itemize their deductions. Beginning in 2026, taxpayers who do not itemize can claim a deduction of up to $1,000 ($2,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly). This is for cash donations only (not for contributions of goods) and you can't claim this new deduction for contributions to donor-advised funds. 'No Tax On Overtime And Tips' Q: What else do I need to know about 'no tax on overtime and tips'? I'm sure it's not as clear cut as it seems. A: Oh my gosh, yes! There are so many nuances here. Tips first. Tip income is temporarily deductible—only for tax years 2025 through 2028—for individuals in traditionally and customarily tipped industries (Treasury is supposed to provide a list of these). The deduction is available regardless of whether you itemize and is limited to $25,000 of reported tips. It's important to note that this is a federal income tax deduction, not an exclusion, which means that payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare) still apply. It also means that tips are reportable—and taxable—at the state and local level. If you think you can just put a tip line on your invoice to avoid paying taxes on compensation, think again. Tips must be paid voluntarily (service charges don't count towards the deduction). Plus, sole proprietors and passthrough companies who would otherwise qualify for the Section 199A deduction are excluded. That includes businesses which provide professional services like doctors, lawyers, consultants, athletes and brokers—typically, any business whose success depends on the reputation or skill of its employees. And don't let those social media threads on 'cash only tips' throw you—the deduction applies to cash or cash-equivalent tips (including those tips on credit cards). Now, overtime. Workers who receive overtime will be eligible for a deduction for qualified overtime pay of $12,500 ($25,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly). As with tips, this is a deduction, not an exclusion. The deduction would apply to taxpayers regardless of whether they itemize and would also be temporary, only for tax years 2025 through 2028. For purposes of the rule, overtime compensation is defined as the amount paid in excess of the employee's regular rate—only the overtime compensation is part of the break. That's the 'half' portion of 'time and a half' that's eligible for the deduction, not the entire amount. The employee would still be taxed at normal rates on their regular rate of pay. The overtime deduction phases out for taxpayers with income over $150,000 ($300,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly)—that means the maximum deduction would disappear at $275,000 for single filers. You can read more questions and answers on overtime and tips, including details on the phase-out of the tips deduction, here. Phaseouts Q: Can you explain phaseouts? For example, with respect to the overtime deduction, you mention $150,000 and $275,000 for single filers. What's the picture look like when part of, say, $250,000 is overtime? A: A phaseout means that the benefit decreases as your income increases. For a single person, the maximum overtime deduction is $12,500—you can claim the maximum benefit so long as your income is under $150,000. When your income goes over that amount, the amount of the deduction scales accordingly. The law is written so that the benefit of the deduction is reduced by $100 for each $1,000 by which a single person's modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) exceeds $150,000. So, if your income was $250,000, that's $100,000 over the threshold—which means that the deduction is reduced by $10,000 ($100 x 100), leaving you with a maximum overtime deduction of $2,500. The deduction disappears completely once your income hits $275,000. An Overtime Break For The Self-Employed? Q: If I'm self-employed through my S-Corp, is there anything preventing me from just lowering my hourly wage, and giving myself a bunch of overtime to save on taxes and end up with the same weekly pay? A: Gosh, wouldn't that be great? Unfortunately, there is something preventing you from doing that. While it's unclear what kinds of brakes the IRS will be able to put on recharacterizing salaried work as hourly and including overtime, we expect Regulations (IRS guidance) to address this. In fact, that bit is in the new law, which says, 'The Secretary shall issue such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section, including regulations or other guidance to prevent abuse of the deduction allowed by this section.' The phaseouts may also play a role in reducing abuse. The deduction begins to phase out for taxpayers with income over $150,000 ($300,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly)—that means the maximum deduction would disappear at $275,000 for single filers. Final Thoughts If you're picking up on a theme, it's that many of these provisions require guidance from the IRS, while others require patience (new forms, remember?). So I don't recommend that taxpayers cancel or reduce any withholding just yet. The numbers are fact- and circumstance-dependent and will vary for each taxpayer, depending on age (you must be 65 or older to claim the senior deduction) and the type and amount of income (there is a phaseout for many provisions). For many taxpayers, it's likely better to file early in 2026 and receive a refund rather than trying to make changes in withholding at the end of this year. One more thing: It's worth noting that these questions are geared towards individual taxpayers. We'll be doing another question and answer piece for business owners soon—watch for it. You can read a summary of the new law, including what it could mean for your business here. We've answered additional reader questions here and on social media (we recently hosted an AMA on Reddit). If you don't see your own question addressed, I will be continuing to answer questions. Here's how to ask yours. To keep up-to-date as more information becomes available from the IRS, subscribe to our free tax newsletter—that way, the information you need will land in your email inbox each Saturday morning with no additional work on your part! More from Forbes Forbes Answers To Your Individual Tax Questions About The One Big Beautiful Bill Act By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes What The One Big Beautiful Bill Act Will Mean For You And Your Business By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes Will Mamdani's Proposed Millionaire Tax Save Or Sink New York City? By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes Forbes Small Business Toolkit–For The Trump Era By Kelly Phillips Erb
