Alibaba Adds $123 Billion in Value in Stunning Comeback Rally
Standard Chartered will hand back $1.5 billion more to shareholders as it reported fourth-quarter earnings that beat estimates, boosted by a strong performance in its trading and wealth business. The London-headquartered bank announced a fresh buyback which would bring total shareholder distributions to $4.9 billion since 2023. The bank is in the midst of a corporate cost-saving program. CEO Bill Winters saw his total pay package jump 46% to £10.7 million ($13.6 million).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Trump administration has begun garnishing wages of student loan borrowers in default. These are the benefits businesses can offer employees to help with their debt
A few years ago, it seemed like the dream of widespread student debt forgiveness was alive and well. And although the hopes of millions of borrowers across the country have since been dashed, there are moves that employers can make to help workers toiling under the burden of defaulted loans and garnished wages. Student loan borrowers were able to take advantage of a repayments pause when the COVID pandemic began in 2020, but that expired in September of 2023. That same year, the Supreme Court struck down then-President Biden's decision to cancel up to $20,000 in debt for qualified borrowers. And in May of 2025, a five-year reprieve for student loan borrowers who were in default on their loans expired. That means that collections are now in play, and the Department of Education can garnish wages, tax refunds, and federal benefits. 'Resuming collections protects taxpayers from shouldering the cost of federal student loans that borrowers willingly undertook to finance their postsecondary education,' the Department of Education (DOE) wrote in a statement late April. 'There will not be any mass loan forgiveness.' This isn't just a problem for an unlucky few. Around 20.5% of student loan borrowers have a payment that's past due by 90 days or more, according to a TransUnion analysis. And around 5.3 million defaulted borrowers will get a notice from the Treasury Department that their wages could potentially be garnished, according to a May statement from the DOE. Workers of all ages have already been struggling for years with student loan repayment. But the latest move from the Trump administration has made the issue even more urgent. There are several different ways that employers can help their workers with student loan repayments, including through retirement benefits, educational assistant programs, and paid time off exchanges. Fortune sat down with benefits experts, who say that while offering these benefits do come with challenges, they can go a long way toward improving employee financial wellbeing. 'Business leaders can't ignore this financial pressure anymore,' says Jeremy Yonan, VP of total rewards at job site Indeed. 'Student loan debt isn't just a personal challenge, it's actually a business imperative because the ripple effect comes up in every corner of the workplace.' Many workers burdened by student loans face a tough financial tradeoff: either reduce their debt or invest in their future. That means they often miss out on contributing to their retirement plans, and their employer's valuable contributions. The Secure 2.0 Act of 2022 aimed to fix that problem. Companies can take the funds they'd use to match employee retirement contributions and instead use them to help them pay off student loans. 'When companies offer a contribution into retirement savings in connection with their student loan payments, they are helping to protect the financial future of those employees who are largely sidelined and sitting out of their primary benefit that they offer, which is the retirement match,' says Laurel Taylor, CEO of Candidly, a financial wellness company. Financially, this process is easy for employers because the money is essentially repurposed so it doesn't cost businesses extra to provide the benefit. But few employers are currently taking advantage of it because of the administrative burden. Only 11% of Candidly customers have launched the student loan retirement match in connection with secure 2.0. Benefit, according to Taylor. Goldman Sachs Ayco, an arm of the bank that specializes in workplace financial planning, says that while 31% of their corporate clients offer student loan assistance, only 10% do so through retirement. As the student loan crisis becomes more dire, however, we might see more businesses offer the benefit to their workforce. 'When employees start to see their wages garnished, it might lead some companies to accelerate adoption on the 401(K) side if participation is high enough,' says Kris Battistoni, VP of compensation and benefits solutions at Goldman Sachs Ayco. Companies that offer employees a certain number of days of paid-time off may want to consider a program that allows workers to exchange their unused time and dedicate those funds towards paying off student loan debt. The benefit is that it costs the employer itself very little, as they have already budgeted that time into their balance sheet. The drawback is that it can come with administrative burdens, because HR managers have to comply with a variety of state laws around what employees can and can't do with their PTO. There are, however, a variety of B2B businesses out there tailored to handle services like these. Businesses should also be aware that critics of these PTO exchanges argue that they incentivize employees to disregard work-life balance, which could lead to additional stress and burnout. The program also won't work for companies with flexible or unlimited PTO. 'The PTO model is interesting, because the biggest criticism that we've seen and heard and had had conversations with employers about is it sort of diminishes quality of life,' Stacey MacPhetres, senior director of education finance for EdAssist by Bright Horizons, which helps employers manage education benefits, tells Fortune. One of the easiest and most impactful ways to provide help to people with student loans is offering them financial counseling services. Student loan borrowers often have more than one loan in play at a time, with different interest rates and timelines. That can make it hard to figure out exactly how much of one's paycheck should be allocated toward paying off the debt, and which loans should be prioritized, says MacPhetres. 'It's incredibly beneficial to offer, not just the monetary contribution, but expert coaching behind the scenes to make sure that those funds are being applied in the most expedient way, based on what the employee wants to accomplish,' she says. Student loan education is just as important as the ability to pay off the debt, experts say, especially if planners can help employees refinance their loans to get a better interest rate. That kind of personalized assistance can not only help with student loans, but also ease worker anxiety around their finances. 'From recent grads and mid-career professionals to parents helping get through college, having that personalized care for different life stages can provide real short term relief,' says Yonan. 'It's not just about the case investment, it's also about education.' Employers have long been able to help workers fund their education through educational assistance programs. Businesses are allowed to contribute $5,250 per employee per year towards tuition, books, or supplies, or courses. But in 2020, the program was expanded to include the ability for companies to put this money towards paying off student loan debt, according to the IRS. Many employers have questions about how they can make sure the money is being used as intended. That's because employees mostly self-certify that they've spent the money on loans, and businesses need to find an efficient way to verify that without invading privacy in the process, says Jonathan Barber, VP head of compensation and benefits solutions, at Goldman Sachs Ayco. 'I think companies thus far are uncomfortable with it because they want to verify that they're actually doing something to pay off the debt and not just giving employees funds.' Under current law, the program is set to expire at the end of 2025, according to the IRS. But experts that Fortune spoke with are confident that the program will be made permanent through legislation later this year. This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Major housing markets finally rebounding as buyers gain upper hand in unexpected cities
Housing inventory in a significant number of major metropolitan areas hit levels higher than they were before the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a new report from The real estate marketplace said nearly half of America's 50 largest metros had real estate markets whose number of active listings as of May had surpassed pre-pandemic levels. The ten metro areas that had the largest jumps in active inventory from their averages in 2017-2019 all posted double-digit percentage increases, according to Housing Crisis Deepens As 47 Major Metro Areas Now Require Homebuyers To Spend More Than 30% Of Income Eight states had representation among the ten areas that identified as having the "most dramatic improvement in active inventory," with Texas claiming three spots within the top-five. Denver stood out as the metro with the largest increase in active housing inventory from pre-pandemic levels, seeing a 100% jump, the report said. linked the surge in inventory to factors like increased construction and the time homes remain on the market. The city serves as the capital of the Centennial State. Read On The Fox Business App Austin is located in Central Texas. Inventory in the metro was up 69% in May from where it stood before the COVID-19 pandemic, according to The real estate marketplace pegged Seattle's change in active inventory at 60.9%. More than 780,000 people call the city home, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. In the Dallas-Forth Worth area, inventory rose 55.5% from pre-COVID, the report said. Homes in the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area carried a median price of $440,000 in May. San Antonio's active inventory posted a 58.3% jump from pre-pandemic levels, per The metro areas of San Francisco, Nashville, Orlando, Las Vegas and Tuscon rounded out top-10 when it came to having notched the "largest gains" in inventory. Their increases compared to before the pandemic ranged from 53.5% for San Francisco to 23% for Tuscon, according to the real estate marketplace. Top Five Buyer-friendly Markets Offer Price Cuts And Increased Inventory "In general, we're seeing strong inventory reboards in metros that have built more in the last 6 years," Chief Economist Danielle Hale said in a statement. "This milestone underscores both the importance of enabling housing construction and the growing divide in housing conditions across regions, where some markets are rapidly normalizing and others remain stuck in low-supply dynamics." The national housing market appears to be moving towards being a "buyer-friendly" one, according to The U.S. had over one million homes on the market in May, a level that the U.S. hadn't climbed above since the winter of 2019, a separate June 5 report found. Small Real Estate Investors Reach Record Market Share, Now Dominate 59% Of Investor Purchases In March, the real estate marketplace said the U.S. was contending with a supply gap of about 3.8 million homes. Supply and affordability have been two major issues that many homebuyers have been dealing with in recent article source: Major housing markets finally rebounding as buyers gain upper hand in unexpected cities Sign in to access your portfolio
Forbes
32 minutes ago
- Forbes
The Fallacy Of Across-The-Board Budget Cuts
An across-the-board cut is often seen as just or fair. But such cuts rarely make economic a hedge with electrical hedge trimmer Early July is the time when many organizations review spending plans for the rest of the year or for the upcoming year. Some like universities are reeling from cuts in federal funding. A few firms are hurting from inability to pass on tariffs to customers or from the need to spend more on newer priorities such as AI. Regardless of the cause, you can bet on one predictably flawed managerial initiative to find savings – an across the board cut for all divisions in the enterprise. Why are such cuts popular? An across-the-board cut is often seen as just or fair or politically easy to sell to staff. But the idea makes little economic sense, especially if the profitability or the contribution of specific units or divisions is relatively easy to measure. Most companies have units or divisions that need to be shut down for good, either because they are unprofitable or because they are marginal to the central mission of the enterprise. In an ideal world, a budget crisis provides an opportunity to make such hard calls for closure of such entities. Instead, CFOs prefer, in many instances, to cut say 10% of the budget of all divisions to find savings. As a result, entities with more potential to drive current or future growth or profitability are deprived of capital or headcount. And the weak unit that deserves to be shut down limps on to bleed more money for yet another year. The consequences A significant consequence is that divisions tend to be afraid of hiring, even if they need headcount, knowing that the dreaded middle of the year call will result in eliminating some headcount. This uncertainty slows down the division – size and timing of the cuts are always looming in divisional leaders' minds. Another nuanced angle is an across the board cut from which number. Typically, these cuts are based on the budgeted numbers for a division, which themselves tend to be unrealistic and more often than not aspirational, given the new era of political and economic uncertainty that we face. Repeated across-the-board cuts also encourage divisions to create cookie jar reserves in headcount or padded expenses. And, this in turn leads to budget numbers that cannot be trusted or results in under-investment in areas where the money should have gone to. Perhaps these secret reserves in divisions could have funded that AI project that the CEO wanted. Why does this inefficient practice perpetuate? Partly because CEOs and CFOs are averse to shrinking the enterprise by shutting down the unprofitable division. Some have a hard time prioritizing. Others do not fully understand the long-term harm imposed on profitable units whose budgets are slashed. Some point to the potentially positive impact on employee morale by suggesting that everyone in the firm is willing to sacrifice resources to bail out the weaker units. 'We are in this together!' is what CEOs often sell. On the contrary, across-the-board cuts hurt morale as employees anticipate the cuts and their anxiety leads to lower productivity. What should managers do? Map out revenue producing divisions by their profit and loss numbers, evaluate direct margins for the division, identify the weakest division that perpetually makes little or no direct margin and sacrifice them. Forget common overheads for now and focus on direct margin for this activity. Examples of enterprises that do this well include Amazon that back in the day closed its' auction business because it could not effectively compete with ebay on that product line. Microsoft sold its display advertising business because it could not effectively compete with Google in that area. Instead, they focused on search and cloud computing. In essence, the leaders at Amazon and Microsoft had the guts to shut down divisions that had not grown or were unprofitable, even when measured using direct margins, for five years and more. Resist the temptation to cut tech and finance budgets Needless to say, use the resources saved to double down on divisions that have greater future growth potential and are profitable. Moreover, resist the temptation to cut investments in divisions that build resilience for the entire company and/or bring accountability to the organization. For instance, many companies under-invest in technology, finance and legal units for different reasons. Unless the firm is run by an engineer or a technologist, technical debt (the gap between where the code and technology infrastructure needs to be given business trajectory relative to where it is) needs to keep creeping up over time. Technical debt weighs the firm down in the long run although the short-term pain is not obvious. Finance and legal are often seen as compliance overhead by many CEOs. However, finance and legal can drive change and/or accountability if these are seen as units that can contribute beyond compliance and are viewed as co-decision makers with the CEO. The best-run companies tend to have strong finance leadership. Examples of cases where across the board cuts do more harm than good Universities are notorious for insisting that every school in the system take a pay cut or cut budgets by 10%. Universities tend to be consensus driven institutions which are ill-suited to trimming fat and for taking hard calls for cutting say the myriad statistics classes run in every school in the university (Agri statistics, statistics for psychology, for the education division, for anthropology, for biology, for economics, for environmental science, for political science, for sociology, for business, for different divisions in the b-school such as in accounting or finance or marketing and the like). This is not to say that the context in which statistics is applied is unimportant. But surely, one can save money by consolidating some of the statistics classes offered in the university instead of requiring everyone to take a 5%-10% cut in their budgets. And this is just one example of where inefficiencies can be eliminated without materially affecting the quality of the educational experience students get. The other domain where across-the-board cuts are common is the government. Instead of thinking hard about the social and/or economic desirability of cutting specific programs, it is politically much easier to ask every program or agency to cut 10% of their budget. Are non-profits different? One could argue that my foundational premise behind an across-the-board cut, that direct margins or contributions of divisions can be measured, is violated in non-profits such as universities and the government. That is perhaps true to some extent, but I worry that this argument is oversold. For instance, if someone argues that liberal arts need to be trimmed in a university, how does one figure out the marginal dollar or reputational contribution of liberal arts to the university? That is fair, but have we eliminated programs or classes or courses that potentially need to go on common sense considerations, even without a deep consideration of costs and benefits. In government, if we don't really know the costs and benefits of a program, why did we initiate the program anyway? And there will always be interest groups who want nothing cut. So, an across-the-board cut is potentially more attractive in non-profits but only as a last resort after the relatively obvious laggards are eliminated. So, if you are a leader thinking about an across-the-board cut, think hard about the tradeoffs involved before you pull the trigger.
