PM Dickon Mitchell to deliver keynote address at Connected Caribbean SummitThe Lewis Cass boys wrestling team went 8-1 at the TRC Super Duals on Friday and Saturday at Maconaquah. The Kings had wins over Rochester (40-39), Manchester (57-23), Northwestern (78-5), Peru (42-33), Wabash (42-40), Whitko (66-18), Southwood (77-0) and Maconaquah (42-37). Their lone loss was to Northfield (44-33), which also went 8-1. The Norse won the team title on criteria. Eli Bowyer (138) and Hunter Sellers (215) went 8-1 on the day for the Kings. Abraham Baker (106), Landen Adams (113), Eli Grist (126) and Brecken Smith (175) went 7-2. Levi Bell (120), Brinxston Jones (157) and Nick Park (190) went 6-3. Dominic Sebastian (144) went 5-4. Colton Copeland (132) went 4-5. Landen Baker (150) went 3-3. Eli Auten (285) went 3-6. Michael Mills (150) went 0-3. Jillian Salts turned in a strong all-around performance of 27 points, 13 rebounds, two blocked shots and two steals to lead Carroll past visiting Marion. Also for the Cougars, Eliza Rinehart had nine points, six rebounds, four assists and two steals, Teagan Coveris had seven points and Emily Justice had six points and four assists. Carroll (8-1) has won seven games in a row. Winamac fell to visiting Class 1A No. 6 Tri-County. Grace Tyler scored 12 points to lead the Cavaliers (7-1). Hannah Arvin had 10 points, nine rebounds and five steals. Grace Luck added eight points and Sara Zarse added seven points, nine boards, seven assists and four steals. Kandace Kroft had eight points and four assists to lead the Warriors (6-4). Kaelyn O’Connor added six points.80jili shop login 。

SAN ANTONIO , Nov. 22, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- The 2025 Hyundai Santa Cruz XRT has been named the Compact Truck of Texas at the Texas Auto Writers Association (TAWA) annual Truck Rodeo held Sept. 26-27, 2024 . The TAWA Texas Truck Rodeo is a prominent annual event where top automotive media evaluate new vehicles based on performance, value, and overall appeal. Competing against strong contenders, the updated 2025 Santa Cruz XRT impressed judges with its rugged design, advanced technology, and enhanced off-road capability. "We are thrilled to see the 2025 Hyundai Santa Cruz XRT recognized as the 'Compact Truck of Texas .' This award reflects our commitment to offering customers a versatile, fun-to-drive vehicle that is not only capable off-road but also packed with cutting-edge technology and design," said Ricky Lao , director of product planning, Hyundai Motor North America. "The Santa Cruz XRT brings together rugged capability with advanced safety features, making it the perfect choice for adventure-minded consumers seeking the best of both worlds." "The Texas Truck Rodeo is a premier event where vehicles are put to the test by seasoned automotive journalists, and the competition this year was fierce. The 2025 Hyundai Santa Cruz XRT stood out for its impressive blend of rugged off-road capability, cutting-edge technology, and unique design," said Cory Fourniquet , president, Texas Auto Writers Association. "This recognition as the 'Compact Truck of Texas' is well-deserved and highlights Hyundai's commitment to delivering versatile and innovative vehicles that meet the needs of Texas drivers." The 2025 Santa Cruz XRT, featuring a new aggressive front design, XRT-exclusive enhancements including front tow hooks, all-terrain tires, and wrench-inspired wheels, sets a new standard. The model's updated interior boasts a panoramic curved display with an available 12.3-inch driver information cluster and infotainment touchscreen display, alongside standard wireless Apple CarPlay® and Android AutoTM, providing an intuitivedriving experience. Hyundai Motor America Hyundai Motor America offers U.S. consumers a technology-rich lineup of cars, SUVs, and electrified vehicles, while supporting Hyundai Motor Company's Progress for Humanity vision. Hyundai has significant operations in the U.S., including its North American headquarters in California , the Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama assembly plant, the all-new Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America, and several cutting-edge R&D facilities. These operations, combined with those of Hyundai's 835 independent dealers, contribute $20.1 billion annually and 190,000 jobs to the U.S. economy, according to a recent economic impact report . For more information, visit www.hyundainews.com . Hyundai Motor America on Twitter | YouTube | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn | TikTok View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/2025-hyundai-santa-cruz-xrt-named-compact-truck-of-texas-at-texas-auto-writers-associations-truck-rodeo-302314024.html SOURCE Hyundai

SRC on Show shines spotlight on local innovation

Only about 2 in 10 Americans approve of Biden's pardon of his son Hunter, poll findsNEW YORK , Dec. 9, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Rowley Law PLLC is investigating potential securities law violations by The Interpublic Group of Companies (NYSE: IPG ) and its board of directors concerning the proposed acquisition of the company by Omnicom (NYSE: OMC ). Stockholders will receive 0.344 shares of Omnicom common stock for each share of Interpublic Group stock that they hold. The transaction is expected to close in the second half of 2025. If you are a stockholder of Interpublic Group and are interested in obtaining additional information regarding this investigation, please visit us at: http://www.rowleylawpllc.com/investigation/ipg /. You may also contact Shane Rowley, Esq. at Rowley Law PLLC, 50 Main Street Suite 1000, White Plains, NY 10606, by email at [email protected] , or by telephone at 914-400-1920 or 844-400-4643 (toll-free). Rowley Law PLLC represents shareholders nationwide in class actions and derivative lawsuits in complex corporate litigation. For more information about the firm and its attorneys, please visit http://www.rowleylawpllc.com . Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. SOURCE Rowley Law PLLC

Snap-on CEO Nicholas Pinchuk sells $7.7 million in stockRwanda launches agriculture strategy to build resilient, sustainable agri-food systems

Trump has flip-flopped on abortion policy. His appointees may offer clues to what happens nextInventor Nikola Tesla predicted that “When wireless is fully applied, the Earth will be converted into a huge brain, capable of response in every one of its parts.” A key part of wireless internet service is Wi-Fi, which has expanded Americans’ broadband access in countless locations, including homes, schools, hotels, coffee shops, offices and airports. It hasn’t quite converted the whole Earth to a huge brain, but with over 18 billion devices in operation, Wi-Fi is always there and everywhere. Wi-Fi’s beginnings are humble. In 1985, the FCC opened a limited number of spectrum bands for unlicensed use. While licensed spectrum forms the core of cellular networks and is auctioned by the FCC for exclusive use, with unlicensed there’s no payment to use the spectrum and no centralized control or exclusivity, enabling the freedom to innovate. So little was expected from these spectrum bands that they were deemed “junk bands.” Initially, unlicensed spectrum supported baby monitors, cordless phones and garage door openers. Today, Wi-Fi uses it to connect iPhones, tablets, smart TVs and many other devices. Wi-Fi’s success is rooted in the freedom of unlicensed spectrum. In the U.S. it is used to access an internet fundamentally uncensored by the government. Wi-Fi is therefore an example of “permissionless innovation,” an optimistic theory embracing human innovation and ingenuity as overall good things. It allows that harms from innovation can be addressed as they occur, so the government need not attempt to anticipate or attempt to prevent potential harms in large part because it is rarely possible to accurately predict what will go wrong. In stark contrast is the precautionary principle, which refers to the belief that regulation is required whenever an activity creates a substantial possible risk to health, safety or the environment, even if the supporting evidence is speculative. It holds that a regulator such as the FCC can discern actual risks and potential harms before devising regulations limiting innovation that will either ameliorate the risks or block the innovation altogether. The precautionary principle is pessimistic and technocratic. Fortunately, the FCC embraced permissionless innovation by opening spectrum bands for unlicensed use. It has been so successful that according to The Internet and Television Association, 53% of all U.S. internet traffic is delivered over Wi-Fi. The Wi-Fi advocacy group WifiFORWARD sponsored a study predicting that the economic value of Wi-Fi will reach $2.4 trillion dollars in 2027, which includes a consumer benefit forecasted to be $514 billion dollars. The association also states that more than 80% of cable operators’ mobile data traffic is now offloaded to Wi-Fi networks. Carrying 80% of the traffic means that Wi-Fi is the primary choice for this wireless data and the cellular network is secondary. Wi-Fi has allowed cable companies to effectively compete with cellular providers, increasing consumer choice. Permissionless innovation gives the United States a competitive advantage, particularly regarding the internet and internet-related services such as Wi-Fi. This is especially so in comparison to America’s prime global economic and security competitor: China. Former Chairman Deng Xiaoping famously said, “If you open the window for fresh air, you have to expect some flies to blow in.” When it comes to the internet, present day China has no tolerance for flies. Its internet is characterized by top down, centralized control. For example, the “Great Firewall” combines technological and regulatory tools to monitor, filter, and restrict internet traffic within China. It acts as a digital barrier between China and the rest of the world so well that the Internet Society says it is “more accurately described as a national intranet.” Heavily censoring and controlling its internet may be advantages for the Chinese government when it comes to control, but it stifles innovation. Permissionless innovation for Wi-Fi has created competitive advantages for our economy because the unlicensed structure and low cost provide space to create and experiment – there’s no heavy-handed, prescriptive regulation or other barriers to entry to get in the way. It leads to innovation and technological advancement that China’s internet model restricts or prevents. In China’s internet, permissionless innovation is anathema. In the United States it’s a success story that the rest of the economy ought to follow. Brian Rankin is Adjunct Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. ©2024 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. Grows Stock Position in Vanguard Growth ETF (NYSEARCA:VUG)RT commentator Scott Bennett dies at 46-- Shares Facebook Twitter Reddit Email This article originally appeared at TomDispatch . Gaza , Haiti, Iran, Israel , Lebanon, Russia , Syria , Ukraine and Venezuela: President-elect Donald Trump will face no shortage of foreign policy challenges when he assumes office in January. None, however, comes close to China in scope, scale or complexity. No other country has the capacity to resist his predictable antagonism with the same degree of strength and tenacity, and none arouses more hostility and outrage among MAGA Republicans. In short, China is guaranteed to put Trump in a difficult bind the second time around: He can either choose to cut deals with Beijing and risk being branded an appeaser by the China hawks in his party, or he can punish and further encircle Beijing, risking a potentially violent clash and possibly even nuclear escalation. How he chooses to resolve this quandary will surely prove the most important foreign test of his second term in office. Make no mistake: China truly is considered the Big One by those in Trump’s entourage responsible for devising foreign policy. While they imagine many international challenges to their “America First” strategy, only China, they believe, poses a true threat to the continued global dominance of this country. “I feel strongly that the Chinese Communist Party has entered into a Cold War with the United States and is explicit in its aim to replace the liberal, Western-led world order that has been in place since World War II,” Rep. Michael Waltz, Trump’s choice as national security adviser, declared at a 2023 event hosted by the Atlantic Council. “We’re in a global arms race with an adversary that, unlike any in American history, has the economic and the military capability to truly supplant and replace us.” Related So who understands the Chinese economy? Definitely not China As Waltz and others around Trump see it, China poses a multi-dimensional threat to this country’s global supremacy. In the military domain, by building up its air force and navy, installing military bases on reclaimed islands in the South China Sea, and challenging Taiwan through increasingly aggressive air and naval maneuvers, it is challenging continued American dominance of the western Pacific. Diplomatically, it’s now bolstering or repairing ties with key U.S. allies, including India, Indonesia, Japan and the members of NATO. Meanwhile, it’s already close to replicating this country’s most advanced technologies, especially its ability to produce advanced microchips. And despite Washington’s efforts to diminish a U.S. reliance on vital Chinese goods, including critical minerals and pharmaceuticals, it remains a primary supplier of just such products to this country. Fight or strike bargains? For many in the Trumpian inner circle, the only correct, patriotic response to the China challenge is to fight back hard. Both Waltz, Trump’s pick as national security adviser, and Sen. Marco Rubio, his choice as secretary of state, have sponsored or supported legislation to curb what they view as “malign” Chinese endeavors in the U.S. and abroad. Waltz, for example, introduced the American Critical Mineral Exploration and Innovation Act of 2020, which was intended, as he explained , “to reduce America’s dependence on foreign sources of critical minerals and bring the U.S. supply chain from China back to America.” Rubio has been equally combative in the legislative arena. In 2021, he authored the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which banned goods produced in forced labor encampments in Xinjiang Province from entering the U.S. He also sponsored several pieces of legislation aimed at curbing Chinese access to U.S. technology. Although these, as well as similar measures introduced by Waltz, haven’t always obtained the necessary congressional approval, they have sometimes been successfully bundled into other legislation. Howard Lutnick, the billionaire investor Trump chose as commerce secretary, claims that the incoming president "wants to make a deal with China," and will use tariffs as a bargaining tool. In short, Trump will enter office in January with a toolkit of punitive measures for fighting China ready to roll along with strong support among his appointees for making them the law of the land. But of course, we’re talking about Donald Trump , so nothing is a given. Some analysts believe that his penchant for deal-making and his professed admiration for Chinese strongman President Xi Jinping may lead him to pursue a far more transactional approach, increasing economic and military pressure on Beijing to produce concessions on, for example, curbing the export of fentanyl precursors to Mexico, but when he gets what he wants letting them lapse. Howard Lutnick, the billionaire investor from Cantor Fitzgerald whom he chose as commerce secretary, claims that Trump actually "wants to make a deal with China," and will use the imposition of tariffs selectively as a bargaining tool to do so. What such a deal might look like is anyone’s guess, but it’s hard to see how Trump could win significant concessions from Beijing without abandoning some of the punitive measures advocated by the China hawks in his entourage. Count on one thing: This complicated and confusing dynamic will play out in each of the major problem areas in U.S.-China relations, forcing Trump to make critical choices between his transactional instincts and the harsh ideological bent of his advisers. Trump, China and Taiwan Of all the China-related issues in his second term in office, none is likely to prove more challenging or consequential than the future status of the island of Taiwan. At issue are Taiwan’s gradual moves toward full independence and the risk that China will invade the island to prevent such an outcome, possibly triggering U.S. military intervention as well. Of all the potential crises facing Trump, this is the one that could most easily lead to a great-power conflict with nuclear undertones. When Washington granted diplomatic recognition to China in 1979, it “ acknowledged ” that Taiwan and the mainland were both part of “one China” and that the two parts could eventually choose to reunite. The U.S. also agreed to cease diplomatic relations with Taiwan and terminate its military presence there. However, under the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, Washington was also empowered to cooperate with a quasi-governmental Taiwanese diplomatic agency, the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the U.S., and provide Taiwan with the weapons needed for its defense. Moreover, in what came to be known as “strategic ambiguity,” U.S. officials insisted that any effort by China to alter Taiwan’s status by force would constitute “a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area” and would be viewed as a matter “of grave concern to the United States,” although not necessarily one requiring a military response. Will Trump embrace "strategic clarity," guaranteeing Washington’s automatic intervention should China invade Taiwan? That would be certain to provoke fierce, hard-to-predict responses from Beijing. For decades, one president after another reaffirmed the “one China” policy while also providing Taiwan with increasingly powerful weaponry. For their part, Chinese officials repeatedly declared that Taiwan was a renegade province that should be reunited with the mainland, preferably by peaceful means. The Taiwanese, however, have never expressed a desire for reunification and instead have moved steadily towards a declaration of independence, which Beijing has insisted would justify armed intervention. As such threats became more frequent and menacing, leaders in Washington continued to debate the validity of “strategic ambiguity,” with some insisting it should be replaced by a policy of “ strategic clarity ” involving an ironclad commitment to assist Taiwan should it be invaded by China. President Biden seemed to embrace this view, repeatedly affirming that the U.S. was obligated to defend Taiwan under such circumstances. However, each time he said so, his aides walked back his words , insisting the U.S. was under no legal obligation to do so. We need your help to stay independent Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism The Biden administration also boosted its military support for the island while increasing American air and naval patrols in the area, which only heightened the possibility of a future U.S. intervention should China invade. Some of these moves, including expedited arms transfers to Taiwan, were adopted in response to prodding from China hawks in Congress. All, however, fit with an overarching administration strategy of encircling China with a constellation of American military installations and U.S.-armed allies and partners. From Beijing’s perspective, then, Washington is already putting extreme military and geopolitical pressure on China. The question is: Will the Trump administration increase or decrease those pressures, especially when it comes to Taiwan? That Trump will approve increased arms sales to, and military cooperation with, Taiwan essentially goes without saying (as much, at least, as anything involving him does). The Chinese have experienced upticks in U.S. aid to Taiwan before and can probably live through another round of the same. But that leaves far more volatile issues up for grabs: Will he embrace “strategic clarity,” guaranteeing Washington’s automatic intervention should China invade Taiwan, and will he approve a substantial expansion of the American military presence in the region? Both moves have been advocated by some of the China hawks in Trump’s entourage, and both are certain to provoke fierce, hard-to-predict responses from Beijing. Many of Trump’s closest advisers have, in fact, insisted on “strategic clarity” and increased military cooperation with Taiwan. Waltz, for example, has asserted that the U.S. must “be clear we’ll defend Taiwan as a deterrent measure.” He has also called for an increased military presence in the Western Pacific. Similarly, last June, Robert C. O’Brien, Trump’s national security adviser from 2019 to 2021, wrote that the U.S. “should make clear” its “commitment” to “help defend” Taiwan, while expanding military cooperation with the island. Trump himself has made no such commitments, suggesting instead a more ambivalent stance. In his typical fashion, in fact, he’s called on Taiwan to spend more on its own defense and expressed anger at the concentration of advanced chip-making on the island, claiming that the Taiwanese “did take about 100% of our chip business.” But he’s also warned of harsh economic measures were China to impose a blockade of the island, telling the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, “I would say [to President Xi]: if you go into Taiwan, I’m sorry to do this, I’m going to tax you at 150% to 200%.” He wouldn’t need to threaten the use of force to prevent a blockade, he added, because Xi “respects me and he knows I’m [expletive] crazy.” Such comments reveal the bind Trump will inevitably find himself in when it comes to Taiwan this time around. He could, of course, try to persuade Beijing to throttle back its military pressure on the island in return for a reduction in U.S. tariffs — a move that would reduce the risk of war in the Pacific but leave China in a stronger economic position and disappoint many of his top advisers. If, however, he chooses to act “crazy” by embracing “strategic clarity” and stepping up military pressure on China, he would likely receive accolades from many of his supporters, while provoking a (potentially nuclear) war with China. Trade war or economic coexistence? The question of tariffs represents another way in which Trump will face a crucial choice between punitive action and transactional options in his second term — or, to be more precise, in deciding how severe to make those tariffs and other economic hardships he will try to impose on China. If Trump follows the advice of the ideologues in his circle and pursues a strategy of maximum pressure on Beijing, he could precipitate nothing short of a global economic meltdown. In January 2018, the first Trump administration imposed tariffs of 30% on imported solar panels and 20% to 50% on imported washing machines, many sourced from China. Two months later, the administration added tariffs on imported steel (25%) and aluminum (10%), again aimed above all at China. And despite his many criticisms of Trump’s foreign and economic policies, Biden chose to retain those tariffs, even adding new ones, notably on electric cars and other high-tech products. The Biden administration has also banned the export of advanced computer chips and chip-making technology to China in a bid to slow that country’s technological progress. Accordingly, when Trump reassumes office on Jan. 20, China will already be under stringent economic pressures from Washington. But he and his associates insist that those won’t be faintly enough to constrain China’s rise. The president-elect has said that, on day one of his new term, he will impose a 10% tariff on all Chinese imports and follow that with other harsh measures. Among such moves, the Trump team has announced plans to raise tariffs on Chinese imports to 60%, revoke China’s Permanent Normal Trade Relations (also known as “most favored nation”) status, and ban the transshipment of Chinese imports through third countries. Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter , Crash Course. Most of Trump’s advisers have espoused such measures strongly. “Trump Is Right: We Should Raise Tariffs on China,” Marco Rubio wrote last May. “China’s anticompetitive tactics,” he argued, “give Chinese companies an unfair cost advantage over American companies... Tariffs that respond to these tactics prevent or reverse offshoring, preserving America’s economic might and promoting domestic investment.” But Trump will also face possible pushback from other advisers who are warning of severe economic perturbations if such measures were to be enacted. China, they suggest, has tools of its own to use in any trade war with the U.S., including tariffs on American imports and restrictions on American firms doing business in China, including Elon Musk’s Tesla, which produces half of its cars there. For these and other reasons, the U.S.-China Business Council has warned that additional tariffs and other trade restrictions could prove disastrous, inviting “retaliatory measures from China, causing additional U.S. jobs and output losses.” As in the case of Taiwan, Trump will face some genuinely daunting decisions when it comes to economic relations with China. If, in fact, he follows the advice of the ideologues in his circle and pursues a strategy of maximum pressure on Beijing, specifically designed to hobble China’s growth and curb its geopolitical ambitions, he could precipitate nothing short of a global economic meltdown that would negatively affect the lives of so many of his supporters, while significantly diminishing America’s own geopolitical clout. He might therefore follow the inclinations of certain of his key economic advisers like transition leader Lutnick, who favor a more pragmatic, businesslike relationship with China. How Trump chooses to address this issue will likely determine whether the future involves increasing economic tumult and uncertainty or relative stability. And it’s always important to remember that a decision to play hardball with China on the economic front could also increase the risk of a military confrontation leading to full-scale war, even to World War III. And while Taiwan and trade are undoubtedly the most obvious and challenging issues Trump will face in managing (mismanaging?) U.S.-China relations in the years ahead, they are by no means the only ones. He will also have to decide how to deal with increasing Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea, continued Chinese economic and military-technological support for Russia in its war against Ukraine, and growing Chinese investments in Africa, Latin America and elsewhere. In these, and other aspects of the U.S.-China rivalry, Trump will be pulled toward both increased militancy and combativeness and a more pragmatic, transactional approach. During the campaign, he backed each approach, sometimes in the very same verbal outburst. Once in power, however, he will have to choose between them — and his decisions will have a profound impact on this country, China and everyone living on this planet. Read more from Michael Klare on the world of war Swarms of AI "killer robots" are the future of war: If that sounds scary, it should Spurring an endless arms race: The Pentagon girds for mid-century wars Ukraine isn't the world's only nuclear flashpoint: Taiwan crisis is getting ugly By Michael Klare Michael T. Klare is the five-college professor emeritus of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and a senior visiting fellow at the Arms Control Association. He is the author of 15 books, the latest of which is " All Hell Breaking Loose: The Pentagon’s Perspective on Climate Change ." He is a founder of the Committee for a Sane U.S.-China Policy . MORE FROM Michael Klare Related Topics ------------------------------------------ Analysis China Donald Trump Foreign Policy Marco Rubio Michael Waltz Nuclear War Tomdispatch Trade War War Xi Jinping Related Articles Advertisement:

By Kemberley Washington, CPA, Bankrate.com The IRS Direct File program, which lets taxpayers file their federal income tax return directly with the IRS for free, is doubling its reach to 24 states for the 2025 tax season, up from 12 states in 2024, the program’s pilot year. The Direct File program will also accept more types of tax situations for the 2025 tax season. While taxpayers who used the system in 2024 could claim a handful of tax credits, including the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit , that list is expanding in 2025 to include the child and dependent care credit , among others. An estimated 30 million taxpayers will qualify for the Direct File program in 2025, the IRS says. More than 140,000 taxpayers filed their federal tax returns through the Direct File program in 2024. About 90% of users said their experience was excellent or above average, according to a survey of about 11,000 Direct File users in 2024, conducted by the General Services Administration. “We’re excited about the improvements to Direct File and the millions more taxpayers who will be eligible to use the service this year,” said Danny Werfel, the IRS commissioner, in a statement. “Our goal is to improve the experience of tax filing itself and help taxpayers meet their obligations quickly and easily.” The IRS says that taxpayers can use Direct File when the 2025 tax season kicks off in January, and it will be available until Oct. 15, 2025. But the program’s future is somewhat unclear: In December, 29 Republican lawmakers sent a letter to President-elect Donald Trump, calling for him to end the Direct File program on his first day in office. Lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives also introduced legislation in July to end the Direct File program. For now, here’s what you need to know about how the IRS Direct File program works, and how to qualify for it. The Direct File program is a new initiative, about to enter its second year, that allows taxpayers to file their federal tax returns electronically with the IRS. The no-cost tool guides taxpayers through every part of their federal income tax return. Taxpayers can file using a smartphone, computer or tablet. One of the program’s advantages is that, if you have questions as you’re working on your return, you can get live support directly from the IRS via chat or phone. IRS representatives can answer basic tax questions and help with technical issues in English and Spanish. The Direct File program has income limits, as well as limits on the types of income, deductions and credits you can enter on your tax return. For the 2025 tax season: To be eligible for Direct File, your income can come from the following sources: But if you’re self-employed, or have business or rental income, you can’t use Direct File . Same goes for IRA contributions or distributions: If you have either, you can’t use Direct File. You can use the IRS Direct File program only if you claim the standard deduction — the program isn’t available to people who itemize. But you can claim certain above-the-line deductions: student loan interest , educator expenses and health savings account contributions . You can’t use Direct File if you want to deduct your IRA contributions. The Direct File program allows for the following tax credits in 2025: However, if you want to claim education credits , credits for energy efficient home upgrades or the adoption expense credit , you can’t use the Direct File program. More taxpayers will have access to the IRS Direct File program in 2025. In 2024, the IRS kicked off the program with only 12 states; that number has expanded to 24 states for the 2025 tax season. For some of the states that participate in the IRS Direct File program, your federal return information will be transferred automatically to the state tax website, but in some cases you’ll have to re-enter your information. Visit this IRS Direct File page to get the details for your state. Here is a list of the participating states: If you don’t qualify for the IRS Direct File program, you may have other options to file your tax return for free. In addition to Direct File, the IRS offers the Free File program, in which it partners with online tax software providers to provide free federal income tax return filing. Some providers also allow you to file a state income tax return. For the 2024 tax season, your adjusted gross income had to be less than $79,000 to qualify for the Free File program. That dollar threshold is likely to rise slightly for the 2025 tax season. The IRS also offers the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) program, which provides certified volunteers to prepare basic tax returns if you earn less than $67,000 a year, are disabled, or speak limited English. You can find a site near you by visiting this IRS page . ©2024 Bankrate.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Sara curses Marcos, Liza, Romualdez amid ordeal of OVP staffTrump has flip-flopped on abortion policy. His appointees may offer clues to what happens next

TikTok's future in the U.S. appeared uncertain on Friday after a federal appeals court rejected a legal challenge to a law that requires the social media platform to cut ties with its China-based parent company or be banned by mid-January. A panel of three judges on The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled unanimously that the law withstood constitutional scrutiny, rebuffing arguments from the two companies that the statute violated their rights and the rights of TikTok users in the U.S. The government has said it wants ByteDance, TikTok's parent company, to divest its stakes. But if it doesn't and the platform goes away, it would have a seismic impact on the lives of content creators who rely on the platform for income as well as users who use it for entertainment and connection. Here are some details on the ruling and what could happen next: In their lawsuit, TikTok and ByteDance, which is also a plaintiff in the case, had challenged the law on various fronts, arguing in part that the statute ran afoul of the First Amendment and was an unconstitutional bill of attainder that unfairly targeted the two companies. But the court sided with attorneys for the Justice Department who said that the government was attempting to address national security concerns and the way in which it chose to do so did not violate the constitution. The Justice Department has argued in court that TikTok poses a national security risk due to its connections to China. Officials say that Chinese authorities can compel ByteDance to hand over information on TikTok's U.S. patrons or use the platform to spread, or suppress, information. However, the U.S. hasn't publicly provided examples of that happening. The appeals court ruling, written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg, said the law was “carefully crafted to deal only with control by a foreign adversary." The judges also rejected the claim that the statute was an unlawful bill of attainder or a taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Furthermore, Ginsburg wrote the law did not violate the First Amendment because the government is not looking to “suppress content or require a certain mix of content” on TikTok. TikTok and ByteDance are expected to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, but it's unclear whether the court will take up the case. TikTok indicated in a statement on Friday the two companies are preparing to take their case to high court, saying the Supreme Court has “an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech." "We expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” a company spokesperson said. Alan Morrison, a professor at The George Washington University Law School, said he expects the Supreme Court to take up the case because of the novelty of the issues raised in the lawsuit. If that happens, attorneys for the two companies still have to convince the court to grant them an emergency stay that will prevent the government from enforcing the Jan. 19 divestiture deadline stipulated in the law, Morrison said. Such a move could drag out the process until the Justices make a ruling. Tiffany Cianci, a TikTok content creator who has supported the platform, said she was not shocked about the outcome of the court's ruling on Friday because lower courts typically defer to the executive branch on these types of cases. She believes the company will have a stronger case at the Supreme Court. “I believe that the next stages are more likely to produce a victory for TikTokers and for TikTok as a whole,” Cianci said. Another wild card is President-elect Donald Trump, who tried to ban TikTok during his first term but said during the recent presidential campaign that he is now against such action . The Trump transition team has not offered details on how Trump plans to carry out his pledge to “save TikTok." But spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said in a statement last month that he plans to “deliver” on his campaign promises. After Trump takes office on Jan. 20th, it would fall on his Justice Department to enforce the law and punish any potential violators. Penalties would apply to any app stores that would violate a prohibition on TikTok and to internet hosting services which would be barred from supporting it. Some have speculated that Trump could ask his Justice Department to abstain from enforcing the law. But tech companies like Apple and Google, which offer TikTok's app on their app stores, would then have to trust that the administration would not come after them for any violations. Craig Singleton, senior director of the China program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said enforcement discretion — or executive orders — can not override existing law, leaving Trump with “limited room for unilateral action." There are other things Trump could potentially do. It's possible he could invoke provisions of the law that allow the president to determine whether a sale or a similar transaction frees TikTok from “foreign adversary” control. Another option is to urge Congress to repeal the law. But that too would require support from congressional Republicans who have overwhelmingly supported the prospect of getting TikTok out of the hands of a Chinese company. In a statement issued Friday, Republican Rep. John Moolenaar of Michigan, chairman of the House Select Committee on China, said he was “optimistic that President Trump will facilitate an American takeover of TikTok” and allow its continued use in the United States. ByteDance has said it won't sell TikTok . And even if it wanted to, a sale of the proprietary algorithm that powers TikTok is likely to get blocked under Chinese export controls that the country issued in 2020. That means if TikTok is sold without the algorithm, its likely that the buyer would only purchase a shell of the platform that doesn't contain the technology that made the app a cultural powerhouse. Still, some investors, including Trump’s former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and billionaire Frank McCourt, have expressed interest in buying it. This week, a spokesperson for McCourt’s Project Liberty initiative, which aims to protect online privacy, said participants in their bid have made informal commitments of more than $20 billion in capital. The spokesperson did not disclose the identity of the participants.

Up 11% in 2024, can ASX 200 shares shine again next year?

Why UK Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) Applications for Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Other GCC Nation Tourists Boost Tourism?Only about 2 in 10 Americans approve of Biden's pardon of his son Hunter, poll finds

Supermarket shopps say 'its crazy' after spotting product on shelves before New YearRecursion Pharmaceuticals CEO sells $285,600 in stock

David Bonderman, co-founder of private equity firm TPG and co-owner of Seattle Kraken, dies at 825 top tech gifts for the holidays