Corporate Taxes Poised to Rise After 136-Country Deal

 
1

Nearly 140 countries agreed Friday to the most sweeping overhaul of global tax rules in a century, a move that aims to curtail tax avoidance by multinational corporations and raise additional tax revenue of as much as $150 billion annually.

But the accord, which is a decade in the making, now must be implemented by the signatories, a path that is likely to be far from smooth, including in a closely divided U.S. Congress.

The reform sets out a global minimum corporate tax of 15%, targeted at preventing companies from exploiting low-tax jurisdictions.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the floor set by the global minimum tax was a victory for the U.S. and its ability to raise money from companies. She urged Congress to move swiftly to enact the international tax proposals it has been debating, which would help pay for extending the expanded child tax credit and climate-change initiatives, among other policies.

“International tax policy making is a complex issue, but the arcane language of today’s agreement belies how simple and sweeping the stakes are: when this deal is enacted, Americans will find the global economy a much easier place to land a job, earn a living, or scale a business,” Ms. Yellen said.

The agreement among 136 countries also seeks to address the challenges posed by companies, particularly technology giants, that register the intellectual property that drives their profits anywhere in the world. As a result, many of those countries established operations in low-tax countries such as Ireland to reduce their tax bills.

The final deal gained the backing of Ireland, Estonia and Hungary, three members of the European Union that withheld their support for a preliminary agreement in July. But Nigeria, Kenya, Sri Lanka and Pakistan continued to reject the deal.

The new agreement, if implemented, would divide existing tax revenues in a way that favors countries where customers are based. The biggest countries, as well as the low-tax jurisdictions, must implement the agreement in order for it to meaningfully reduce tax avoidance.

Overall, the OECD estimates the new rules could give governments around the world additional revenue of $150 billion annually.

The final deal is expected to receive the backing of leaders from the Group of 20 leading economies when they meet in Rome at the end of this month. Thereafter, the signatories will have to change their national laws and amend international treaties to put the overhaul into practice.

The signatories set 2023 as a target for implementation, which tax experts said was an ambitious goal. And while the agreement would likely survive the failure of a small economy to pass new laws, it would be greatly weakened if a large economy—such as the U.S.—were to fail.

“We are all relying on all the bigger countries being able to move at roughly the same pace together,” said Irish Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe. “Were any big economy not to find itself in a position to implement the agreement,  that would matter for the other countries. But that might not become apparent for a while.”

 

Congress’ work on the deal will be divided into two phases. The first, this year, will be to change the minimum tax on U.S. companies’ foreign income that the U.S. approved in 2017. To comply with the agreement, Democrats intend to raise the rate—the House plan calls for 16.6%—and implement it on a country-by-country basis. Democrats can advance this on their own and they are trying to do so as part of President Biden’s broader policy agenda.

The second phase will be trickier, and the timing is less certain. That is where the U.S. would have to agree to the international deal changing the rules for where income is taxed. Many analysts say that would require a treaty, which would need a two-thirds vote in the Senate and thus some support from Republicans. Ms. Yellen has been more circumspect about the schedule and procedural details of the second phase.

Friction between European countries and the U.S. over the taxation of U.S. tech giants has threatened to trigger a trade war.

In long-running talks about new international tax rules, European officials have argued U.S. tech giants should pay more tax in Europe, and they fought for a system that would reallocate taxing rights on some digital products from countries where the product is produced to where it is consumed.

The U.S., however, resisted. A number of European governments introduced their own taxes on digital services. The U.S. then threatened to respond with new tariffs on imports from Europe.

The compromise was to reallocate taxing rights on all big companies that are above a certain profit threshold.

Under the agreement reached Friday, governments pledged not to introduce any new levies and said they would ultimately withdraw any that are in place. But the timetable for doing that has yet to be settled through bilateral discussions between the U.S. and those countries that have introduced the new levies.

Even though they will likely have to pay more tax after the overhaul, technology companies have long backed efforts to secure an international agreement, which they see as a way to avoid a chaotic network of national levies that threatened to tax the same profit multiple times.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Do you agree with the global minimum tax on corporations? Why or why not? Join the conversation below.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which has been guiding the tax talks, estimates that some $125 billion in existing tax revenues would be divided among countries in a new way.

Those new rules would be applied to companies with global turnover of €20 billion (about $23 billion) or more, and with a profit margin of 10% or more. That group is likely to include around 100 companies. Governments have agreed to reallocate the taxing rights to a quarter of the profits of each of those companies above 10%.

The agreement announced Friday specifies that its revenue and profitability thresholds for reallocating taxing rights could also apply to a part of a larger company if that segment is reported in its financial accounts. Such a provision would apply to Amazon.com Inc.’s cloud division, Amazon Web Services, even though Amazon as a whole isn’t profitable enough to qualify because of its low-margin e-commerce business.

The other part of the agreement sets a minimum tax rate of 15% on the profits made by large companies. Smaller companies, with revenues of less than $750 million, are exempted because they don’t typically have international operations and can’t therefore take advantage of the loopholes that big multinational companies have benefited from.

Low-tax countries such as Ireland will see an overall decline in revenues. Developing countries are least happy with the final deal, having pushed for both a higher minimum tax rate and the reallocation of a greater share of the profits of the largest companies.

 
.
 
 
 
 

quintex-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1Related Contents:

 

 

 
 
 
 

What Is Financial Infidelity?

Being transparent about money matters is critical in partnerships and marriage. Here’s how to spot financial infidelity — and rectify it. When Melissa Houston and her husband first got married, they had a financial plan and laid out some joint money goals. “We knew what we were saving for and how we should spend money,” she says.

But as the years went by, Houston found herself emotionally spending, dropping $1K to $2K on weekend trips with her friends, as well as shelling out thousands on home renovations and random impulse buys. “I was using credit to cover my expenses and hid that from him,” she recalls. “As the boxes came in the mail, he asked me what was going on, and I assured him we had the money.”

Eventually, Houston told her husband the truth. She had been hiding her spending from him and had gotten the family into a financial hole. It put a giant strain on her marriage, and she is still working to gain back her husband’s trust. The duo has since gone back to their previous ways of openly discussing money. Houston is honest about her spending and runs big purchases by her partner instead of buying them behind his back.

What Houston and her husband experienced was financial infidelity. “Simply put, financial infidelity is when your spouse lies to you or keeps details about financial transactions and financial assets hidden from you,” says Sandra Radna, an attorney and the author of You’re Getting Divorced … Now What? You could be on the receiving end of financial infidelity, or you could be the one committing it, like Houston was. Either way, financial infidelity can be incredibly toxic to a marriage and is something that you should work to avoid at all costs.

What does financial infidelity look like?

Financial infidelity could be everything from declining to reveal some of your credit card purchases or other debts to your partner to stashing a portion of your paycheck into an account that your partner doesn’t know about, and making large purchases without consulting your significant other.

“We see financial infidelity occur in some really common ways, like not mentioning how much you spent on your credit card, or when one person makes a large purchase without telling their partner,” says Lauren Silbert, the vice president of personal finance with the Balance. This type of infidelity, she explains, can also occur when one person is keeping a secret account or hoarding cash or other valuables without the other person knowing.

“Another instance is the higher-earning spouse actually hiding how much money they make, keeping the majority of it for themselves, without their partner ever knowing it existed,” Silbert adds. It’s important to build a foundation of open communication and trust when it comes to dealing with financial infidelity.

The dangers of financial infidelity

Financial infidelity can break the trust in your marriage. “Arguably, the most important part of any relationship is trust,” explains Radna. She stresses that if one of the people in the relationship is not honest about what is happening in your joint financial lives, it’s a huge breach and is difficult to overcome.

“It begs the question ‘If you are lying about that, what else are you lying about?’” Radna says. And in her experience, for some couples the emotional aftermath of financial infidelity is insurmountable and can be a definite cause of divorce.

There can be significant financial repercussions as well, since, when you’re married, your partner’s debt becomes your debt. “It could also impact your credit score,” explains Ben Reynolds, the CEO and founder of Sure Dividend.

In order to avoid the repercussions of financial infidelity from occurring, it’s important to be open about your financial goals, purchases, and spending habits with your spouse. Here are some tips to keep financial infidelity at bay.

Be up front from the start

The way that you start your marriage can really set the tone for how you both talk about money. “I recommend that both parties leave everything on the table from the beginning,” says Jayden Doye, a certified public accountant and the owner of Prestige Accounting Solutions in Sandy Springs, Georgia. “They should lay out all of their assets and debts and discuss financial goals.

” Doye has seen too many couples enter into relationships with financial secrets, hiding student loans, debt, and spending habits from each other. Getting on the same page from the beginning and discussing your debt, making a plan for your spending, and working together on this can keep financial infidelity from ever occurring.

Victoria Lowell, founder of Empowered Worth and a certified divorce financial analyst and college finance counselor, agrees. “Couples need to start discussing money and finances very early on, and definitely before moving in together or marrying,” she says, noting that she often coaches clients with premarital financial counseling, which her clients find extremely beneficial.

Make money discussions routine

“Communication is the key,” says Ted Rossman, a senior industry analyst with Creditcards.com. “Most people have a hard time talking about money, but we need to get over that hurdle,” he adds. Rossman suggests scheduling regular money check-ins with your partner. “They don’t have to be long or formal. Perhaps once a month, go through upcoming bills and recent expenses and make sure you’re on track,” he says.

In addition to expenses, talk about your goals as well. This, says Rossman, can be really freeing and can reframe the discussion in a very positive way. “Do you want to buy a home in a couple years? Retire early? Send your kids to college? Identifying your money goals and values and working towards them together is so important and strengthens a relationship,” Rossman explains.

If you have been hiding things surrounding money from your partner, it’ll be easier to handle the sooner you tell the truth.

Start small

Money conversations may seem daunting at first, but it all starts with building trust and safety around money, says Silbert. She says to start with some “gentler money talks. For example, don’t try to make tough decisions right away. Instead, share about how your parents handled money. Talk about your experiences with financial institutions. Tell each other what item or experience has always represented true luxury in your mind.

And so on.” As the safety grows, then move on to harder conversations. These, explains Silbert, are usually the ones that have more opportunities for disagreement or discomfort. And when having these conversations, it’s important to approach them with an open mind and to create a judgment-free zone.

Come clean if you’ve been hiding things from your partner

The longer you conceal money and spending habits from your partner, the more damage you are likely to cause to your relationship and your finances. To heal from financial infidelity, the offending partner needs to come forward. Carrie Krawiec, a licensed marriage and family therapist at Birmingham Maple Clinic in Troy, Michigan, shares her three steps for admitting to financial infidelity:

  1. Sincerely apologize.
  2. Take responsibility without excuses.
  3. Take all steps and measures to make sure the behavior doesn’t repeat itself.

“When the first three are done, there should be acknowledgment by the wounded party that one to three have been sufficiently met,” she explains.

Bring in a third party

It can be beneficial to schedule meetings with a financial adviser who can help you draw up money goals as a couple and get you thinking about a long-term financial strategy. A couple’s counselor can also assist partners with working through any conflicts that they may be having about everyday spending.

And it’s especially important to get help when you’re working through a bout of financial infidelity in your marriage, as this can be hard to navigate alone. “I strongly suggest that couples who are facing this seek counseling,” suggests Lowell, who notes that a marriage therapist or financial coach can help partners open up the dialogue to discuss their philosophy about money, debt, and so forth.

Source: What Is Financial Infidelity?

.

Related Contents:

Financial Infidelity: The Things we Buy, the Lies we Tell

Financial Infidelity is Rampant

Financial Infidelity’ is Pretty Common

Your Cheatin’ Wallet

How Infidelity Causes Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

How Infidelity Causes Post Traumatic Stress Disorder | Psychology Today

Healing From Infidelity

The U.S. Debt-Ceiling Farce Is a Headache Investors Could Do Without

The latest twists in the seemingly endless saga of the U.S. debt ceiling underscore once again how strange the whole thing is.

The very existence of the debt ceiling is utterly superfluous. Every couple of years members of Congress have to vote to allow borrowing to fund measures that they’ve already approved through individual spending bills. Its main function is political: Whichever party isn’t in power at the time uses it to try to either extract something from, or embarrass, the other side.

On top of that, the limit isn’t really the limit. By invoking the vague catchall of “extraordinary measures,” Uncle Sam can keep on borrowing even after it’s hit the cap—or when the limit has been reinstated following a suspension, as was the case at the end of last month. Given that the alternative is either what’s known as a technical default or a seizing up of everyday government spending, that’s a good thing, even if you’re a fiscal hawk, which is an endangered species these days.

Just because something is mainly theatrical, though, that doesn’t mean it can’t have an impact. This month marks the 10th anniversary of S&P’s decision to strip America of its AAA credit rating, a move that followed one of many bruising Congressional fights over the debt limit. The move by the ratings agency back then sent a shiver through markets and caused a lot of consternation from Wall Street to Washington. But the U.S. has continued to borrow cheaply—indeed, even more cheaply than before.

Right now, the ceiling is at about $28.4 trillion, and the U.S. Treasury’s fancy footwork on accounting should keep U.S. borrowing authority officially intact for a little while. That should allow lawmakers to stitch together enough votes for either an increase or another suspension in the coming months. But what if they don’t?

One subplot of the drama helps put some perspective on this question. With the overall cap for debt back in force as of the start of August, the Treasury has been forced to slash its cash pile—essentially the balance of the government’s main checking account—to around the same level it occupied before the last ceiling suspension. The legislation that governs the ceiling includes a measure to hold things in check; without it, there’d be little to restrain the government from simply issuing tons of debt, while the now-lapsed suspension was still in place, in order to be able to spend the money later.

For quite a long time, some market observers have acted on the assumption that this time around, the cash pile would end up somewhere in the vicinity of $130 billion. In May, though, the Treasury itself said its borrowing plans were premised on the pile amounting to around $450 billion.

Ultimately, the Treasury got down to within around $10 billion of that, which the market appears to accept as close enough. Would it have made much of a difference if they were off by $50 billion or $100 billion—or $500 billion? Would there be any real penalty beyond a bit of political scoring in the never-ending ceiling tussle?

This isn’t a moot point. In its quest to get the cash balance down, the Treasury has affected markets. It has been dialing back its borrowing in T-bills—its shortest-maturity securities—and that, in turn, has been distorting money markets and complicating the Federal Reserve’s management of interest rates.

The issue is that when there’s a shortage of T-bills, they become more expensive, and the yield they offer falls. And because the kinds of people who buy T-bills also invest in a range of other money market instruments, the rates on those come under pressure, too.

That’s not necessarily a concern until it starts pushing the rates on which the Federal Reserve focuses out of its target band. At that point, the Fed needs to pull some other levers. Such a response carries costs while continuing the cycle of distortion.

A further example: On occasion, the imminent approach of a so-called technical default by the world’s largest debtor nation has prompted odd moves in various T-bills as those securities that are most at risk of non-payment become market pariahs. While this is most acutely a problem for investors in those individual issues, it throws out of kilter a market that helps benchmark a huge swath of the world’s borrowing—both government and private.

Nobody can honestly pretend that the ceiling is a mechanism to rein in debt. It causes distortions, and it wastes a lot of time and energy that the denizens of Washington could devote to ensuring the money being borrowed is spent effectively and productively. That’s not to say that debt and deficits don’t matter. But the way the U.S. thinks and legislates on the topic needs to change. —With Alex Harris

By: Benjamin Purvis

Source: The U.S. Debt-Ceiling Farce Is a Headache Investors Could Do Without – Bloomberg

More Contents:

Apple’s Next iPhone Shows How It’s Perfected the Game of Inches

Sunscreen Worries Grow as Another Potential Carcinogen Found

JetBlue Begins New York-to-London Direct Flights Starting at $202

Consumer Inflation in U.S. Moderates While Remaining Elevated

Apple Readies New iPhones With Pro-Focused Camera, Video Updates

The family that bet everything on bitcoin when it was $900 is now storing it in secret vaults

Hackers return nearly half of the $600 million they stole in one of the biggest crypto heists

Herd immunity from Covid is ‘mythical’ with the delta variant, experts say

Social Security cost-of-living adjustment could be 6.2% in 2022

Crypto Investors Get Ready for More Taxes But Clearer Rules

Sure, you might have to actually pay U.S. taxes on those crypto trades. But at least it will be easier to figure out how much you owe.

A new push by Congress to require crypto brokers to report transactions to the Internal Revenue Service could create some unwelcome tax bills but could clarify rules for traders and users of Bitcoin and other digital tokens, potentially strengthening the system in the long run, people in the industry say.

The new rules — a last-minute addition to the $550 billion bipartisan infrastructure package now being considered by the U.S. Senate — would also force businesses to disclose trades of digital assets of more than $10,000. The provisions are designed to raise $28 billion.

The measures add to increased scrutiny the IRS has recently applied to traders of Bitcoin, Ethereum and other digital assets. The agency has promised it will issue new rules that clarify how those virtual currencies should be taxed.

People who trade digital currencies must pay income taxes on any gains, even if some crypto investors have been ignoring their tax obligations. But even for those who want to follow the law, it can be difficult to keep track of what’s owed.

Filing taxes on crypto trades can create huge headaches, especially for those who conduct multiple transactions each year. While traditional stock brokerages are already required to send detailed tax forms to clients, crypto exchanges aren’t. Even if firms wanted to help their clients file taxes, it’s not always clear how to do that under the current regulations.

In addition, tax obligations can pop up in surprising places. People who use digital currencies to pay for things — like, say, a Tesla, or a pizza — are supposed to pay taxes on any increase in value of the crypto they spend. It’s a key difference between using digital “currencies” and actual, fiat currencies such as the U.S. dollar to conduct commerce.

Andrew Johnson, a project manager at a large national bank, has invested tens of thousands in crypto and uses a dedicated service to figure out what he owes in taxes. He’s been using CoinTracker, which he learned about though a YouTube channel that he trusts.

“Most would benefit from a tracking service to help with taxes,” he said. “For me, I decided it was worth the cost to not have to manually track all the trades I did — which could take hours or days.”

Read more from Bloomberg Opinion: How Can I Lower My Taxes on Bitcoin?

Cryptocurrency exchanges and others in the industry have raised concerns that the U.S. Senate is rushing the rules into effect without consulting them first.

Some wondered whether the new rules and regulatory attention would encourage mainstream investors to join the space — or hurt the appeal of cryptocurrencies by killing its anything-goes ethos.

“Some portion of crypto investors may start to have second thoughts about the tax consequences,” said Michael Bailey, director of research at FBB Capital Partners. “It’s almost like crypto is a really fun party, but it’s getting late and a few people are starting to look at their watches as they think about the next morning.”

For years, the IRS has been warning taxpayers to report cryptocurrency transactions on their tax returns. More recently, the agency has made clear that fighting tax evasion through digital currencies is a top priority.

The IRS has started collecting vast amounts of data on blockchain transactions, has subpoenaed crypto exchanges and worked on coordinating enforcement with foreign governments. Last year, the IRS added a yes-or-no question to the front page of the 1040 income tax form asking whether filers had sold or exchanged virtual currencies.

The jurisdiction of U.S. law enforcement only reaches so far, and crypto traders who prize secrecy could flee to offshore exchanges, or take other measures to avoid being spotted by the IRS. However, the U.S. has already shown it can crack down on foreign tax evasion by, for example, forcing banks in Switzerland and elsewhere to divulge details on American clients.

Even if parts of the crypto universe remain hidden, it may be difficult to move those assets onshore and turn them into legitimate wealth.

“If a U.S. taxpayer is into crypto for the ability to underreport income from sales or transfers, chances are someone in a chain somewhere may have to disclose it,” said Julio Jimenez, an attorney who is principal in the tax services group at Marks Paneth LLP.

All this isn’t necessarily a bad thing for law-abiding investors in digital assets if they end up with clearer rules and easier-to-understand annual statements from crypto firms.

“I think it will have a positive effect on the industry,” said Brett Cotler, an attorney at Seward and Kissel LLP in New York who specializes in blockchain and cryptocurrency. While exchanges and fintech firms that deal in digital currencies may have to spend money upgrading reporting and compliance systems, it will improve customer service, he said.

Johnson, the crypto trader, said he thinks the new rules will help legitimize the crypto ecosystem and foster international growth.

“While at its heart, crypto assets have been a means of moving value outside of government-controlled rails, I still understand the need for regulation in the crypto space in order for wider adoption to take place,” he said.

— With assistance by Natasha Abellard, and Laura Davison

By ,  , and

Source: Bitcoin (BTC): What Is Impact of Government Plan to Tax Crypto Trades? – Bloomberg

Most Read

The Covid-19 Outbreak Has a New Epicenter in the U.S.

Fauci Says Shots Work Despite Cases Among Fully Vaccinated

Are Covid Shots Working? What the Real World Tells Us

Fauci Backs Vaccines; Chicago Praises Lollapalooza: Virus Update

In Provincetown, Covid Hits 14 Friends in Show of Delta’s Might

Netflix And Boeing Among Today’s Trending Stocks

According to a report from the Washington Post dropped June 12, 1-year inflation is up 5%, while 2-year inflation sits around 5.6%. This has impacted everything from raw materials like lumber and glass to manufactured products. Used cars are up 29.7% in the last year, while gas has shot up over 56%, and washing machines and dryers sit up around 26.5%.

This comes as the global microchip shortage compounds retailers’ problems as they struggle to automate their supply chains. And while the economy (and the stock market) is certainly rebounding from covid-era recession pressures, consumers are stuck footing high-priced bills as both demand and the cost of materials continue to rise. Still, the Fed maintains that prices should stabilize soon – though “soon” may mean anywhere from 18-24 months, according to consulting firm Kearney.

Until then, investors will have to weigh their worries about inflation on the equities and bonds markets against the growing economy to decide which investments have potential – and which will see their returns gouged by rising prices across the board. To that end, we present you with Q.ai’s top trending picks heading into the new week.

Q.ai runs daily factor models to get the most up-to-date reading on stocks and ETFs. Our deep-learning algorithms use Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology to provide an in-depth, intelligence-based look at a company – so you don’t have to do the digging yourself.

Netflix, Inc (NFLX)

First up on our trending list is Netflix, Inc, which closed at $488.77 per share Friday. This represented an increase of 0.31% for the day, though it brought the streaming giant to down 9.6% for the year. The company has experienced continual losses for the past few weeks, with Friday ending below the 22-day price average of $494 and change. Currently, Netflix is trading at 47.1x forward earnings.

Netflix, Inc. trended in the latter half of last week as the company opened a new e-commerce site for branded merchandise. Currently, the store’s offerings are limited to a few popular Netflix tv shows, but the company hopes to increase its branded merchandise branded to shows such as Lupin, Yasuke, Stranger Things, and more in the coming months. With this latest move, the company hopes to expand its revenue channels and compete more directly with competitors such as Disney+.

In the last fiscal year, Netflix saw revenue growth of 5.6% to $25 billion compared to $15.8 billion three years ago. At the same time, operating income jumped 21.8% to $4.585 billion from $1.6 billion three years ago. And per-share earnings jumped almost 36% to $6.08 compared to $2.68 in the 36-month-ago period, while ROE rose to 29.6%.

Currently, Netflix is expected to see 12-month revenue around 3.33%. Our AI rates the streaming behemoth A in Growth, B in Quality Value and Low Volatility Momentum, and D in Technicals.

The Boeing Company (BA)

The Boeing Company closed down 0.43% Friday to $247.28, trending at 9.93 million trades on the day. Boeing has fallen somewhat from its 10-day price average of $250.67, though it’s up over the 22-day average of $240 and change. Currently, Boeing is up 15.5% YTD and is trading at 180.1x forward earnings.

The Boeing Company has trended frequently in recent weeks as the airplane manufacturer continues to take new orders for its jets, including the oft-beleaguered 737 MAX. United Airlines is reportedly in talks to buy “hundreds” of Boeing jets in the next few months, while Southwest Airlines is seeking up to 500 new aircraft as it expands its U.S. service. Alaskan Airlines, Dubai Aerospace Enterprise, and Ryanair have also placed orders for more Boeing jets heading into summer.

Over the last three fiscal years, Boeing’s revenue has plummeted from $101 billion to $58.2 billion, while operating income has been slashed from $11.8 billion to $8.66 billion. At the same time, per-share earnings have actually grown from $17.85 to $20.88.

Boeing is expected to see 12-month revenue growth around 7.5%. Our AI rates the airline manufacturer B in Technicals, C in Growth, and F in Low Volatility Momentum and Quality Value.

Nvidia Corporation (NVDA)

Nvidia Corporation jumped up 2.3% Friday to $713 per share, trending with 10.4 million trades on the books. Despite its sky-high stock price, Nividia has risen considerably from the 22-day price average of $631.79 – up 36.5% for the year. Currently, Nvidia is trading at 44.44x forward earnings.

Nvidia is trending this week thanks to surging GPU sales amidst the global chip shortage, as well as its planned 4-for-1 stock split at the end of June – but that’s not all. The company also announced Thursday that it also plans to buy DeepMap, an autonomous-vehicle mapping startup, for an as-yet undisclosed price. With this new acquisition, Nvidia will improve the mapping and localization functions of its software-defined self-driving operations system, NVIDIA DRIVE.

In the last fiscal year, Nvidia saw revenue growth of 15.5% to $16.7 billion compared to $11.7 billion three years ago. Operating income jumped 20.8% in the same period to $4.7 billion against $3.8 billion in the three-year ago period, and per-share earnings expanded 22.6% to $6.90. However, ROE was slashed from 49.3% to 29.8% in the same time frame.

Currently, Nvidia is expected to see 12-month revenue growth around 2%. Our AI rates Nvidia A in Growth, B in Low Volatility Momentum, C in Quality Value, and F in Technicals.

Nike, Inc (NKE)

Nike, Inc closed up 0.73% Friday to $131.94 per share, closing out the day at 5.4 million shares. The stock is down 6.7% YTD, though it’s still trading at 36.8x forward earnings.

Nike stock has slipped in recent weeks as the athleticwear retailer suffers supply chain challenges in North America. And despite recent revenue growth in its Asian markets, it also continues to deal with Chinese backlash to its March criticism of the Chinese government’s forced labor of persecuted Uyghurs.

In the last fiscal year, Nike saw revenue grow almost 3% to $37.4 billion, up 5.8% in the last three years from $36.4 billion. Operating income jumped 40.9% in the last year alone to $3.1 billion – though this is down from $4.45 billion three years ago. In the same periods, per-share earnings grew 33.7% and 82.8%, respectively, from $1.17 to $1.60. And return on equity nearly doubled from 17% to 30%.

Currently, Nike is expected to see 12-month revenue growth around 10.3%. Our AI rates Nike average across the board, with C’s in Technicals, Growth, Low Volatility Momentum, and Quality Value.

Mastercard, Inc (MA)

Mastercard, Inc ticked up 0.33% Friday to $365.50, trading at a volume of 2.7 million shares on the day. The stock is up marginally over the 22-day price average of $363.86 and 2.4% for the year. Currently, Mastercard is trading at 43.64x forward earnings.

Mastercard has faltered behind the S&P 500 index for much of the year – not to mention competitors like American Express. While there’s no one story to tie the credit card company’s relatively modest stock prices to, it may be due to a combination of investor uneasiness, already-high share prices, and increased digital payments. But with travel recently on the rise, it’s possible that Mastercard will be making a comeback.

In the last three fiscal years, Mastercard’s revenue has risen 3.3% to $15.3 billion compared to $14.95 billion. In the same period, operating income has fallen from $8.4 billion to $8.2 billion, whereas per-share earnings have grown from $5.60 to $6.37 for total growth of 16.4%. Return on equity slipped from 106% to 102.5% at the same time.

Currently, Mastercard’s forward 12-month revenue is expected to grow around 4.7%. Our deep-learning algorithms rate Mastercard, Inc. B in Low Volatility Momentum and Quality Value, C in Growth, and D in Technicals.

Q.ai, a Forbes Company, formerly known as Quantalytics and Quantamize, uses advanced forms of quantitative techniques and artificial intelligence to generate investment

Source: Netflix And Boeing Among Today’s Trending Stocks

.
Critics:
The S&P 500 stock market index, maintained by S&P Dow Jones Indices, comprises 505 common stocks issued by 500 large-cap companies and traded on American stock exchanges (including the 30 companies that compose the Dow Jones Industrial Average), and covers about 80 percent of the American equity market by capitalization.
The index is weighted by free-float market capitalization, so more valuable companies account for relatively more of the index. The index constituents and the constituent weights are updated regularly using rules published by S&P Dow Jones Indices. Although called the S&P 500, the index contains 505 stocks because it includes two share classes of stock from 5 of its component companies.

See also:

References:

Is Patient Financing Right for Your Health Practice?

In these times of post-pandemic financial uncertainty, additional return on investment for medical providers is more welcome than ever. Patient financing — which for the purposes of this article means partnering with an external lender to provide service and procedure payments — can produce not just steady income for a practice, but help ensure that patients won’t have to put off procedures or, worse yet, abandon them altogether.

For example, Toronto Plastic Surgeons provides this facility to its patients through Medicard Patient Financing. There are also veterinary financing services for pets available through Medicard Patient Financing. What are some reasons practitioners might have employed in deciding upon this option?

No More Delays

There are, unfortunately, economic disparities when it comes to accessing healthcare services. Too often, the high-income and privileged have more access to healthcare resources than the medium- and low-income populations. Patient financing can help in reducing this imbalance, because the simple and daunting truth is that many medical problems don’t come announced, and it’s often impossible to plan for their associated expenses. With financing, patients don’t need to wait to get their accounts in order before opting for procedures — the result is, ideally, prompt and less stressful treatment.

Related: Fintech fuelling growth in Healthcare Financial Industry

Increased Patient Satisfaction

Since clients can often better manage their expenses via patient financing, they tend to be more satisfied on the whole. In part this is because they are not stressed and burdened with sudden financial decisions associated with urgent medical procedures. Better yet, they are more likely to stay loyal to a practice if they don’t have to worry as much. Compared to other practices that don’t offer this option, they are more likely to choose the former, which can mean increased business through word of mouth.

Reduced Collection Costs

When you partner with a patient financer, you receive payments on time. It also means that your team won’t spend needless hours and energy trying to collect payments.

Steady Cash Flow and Less Bad Debt

In setting up a conventional payment plan for a patient, your team is taking the responsibility of keeping tabs on payments and collecting them on time. It’s essentially extending a loan to a patient, typically without any interest. However, expenses like bills, payroll and lease/rent go on as usual. This can lead to tied up in , which will easily and quickly impact a budget. But when you opt for association with a patient financing company, the latter bears the cost of collections, including giving you the option of getting payment upfront.

Related: Healthcare is in Turmoil, But Technology Can Save Businesses Billions

Better Marketing

Association with a financing company with its own marketing arm can help promote a business — making your clinic stand out in comparison to competitors.

Which to Choose?

When it comes to financing models, three predominate. In the first, Self-Funding, you as the healthcare provider are responsible for receivables. From creating a payment schedule to collecting funds to following up with the patient, your team carries out all the tasks. In the Recourse Lending model, you work with a patient financier/lender, which will approve a patient’s loan after the business/practice passes qualifying criteria.

If the patient doesn’t pay, the lending/financing company will recover the losses from you. Among the drawbacks here is that the practice will have to bear the losses and lender’s fees. Lastly, there is the Non-Recourse Lending model. Similar to the second, you work with a lending company. Key differences are that it is the patient who has to pass the underwriting criteria (if the lender doesn’t approve the patient, no funding is provided by them), and that losses are borne by the lender. One disadvantage of this method is that the lenders charge interest from patients; when rates are high, patients might not be interested. Also, patients with a weak credit history might be rejected during the underwriting evaluation.

By : Chris Porteous / Entrepreneur Leadership Network Contributor – High Performance Growth Marketer

Source: Is Patient Financing Right for Your Health Practice?

.

Critics:

Publicly funded healthcare is a form of health care financing designed to meet the cost of all or most healthcare needs from a publicly managed fund. Usually this is under some form of democratic accountability, the right of access to which are set down in rules applying to the whole population contributing to the fund or receiving benefits from it.

The fund may be a not-for-profit trust that pays out for healthcare according to common rules established by the members or by some other democratic form. In some countries, the fund is controlled directly by the government or by an agency of the government for the benefit of the entire population. That distinguishes it from other forms of private medical insurance, the rights of access to which are subject to contractual obligations between an insured person (or their sponsor) and an insurance company, which seeks to make a profit by managing the flow of funds between funders and providers of health care services.

When taxation is the primary means of financing health care and sometimes with compulsory insurance, all eligible people receive the same level of cover regardless of their financial circumstances or risk factors.

Most developed countries have partially or fully publicly funded health systems. Most western industrial countries have a system of social insurance based on the principle of social solidarity that covers eligible people from bearing the direct burden of most health care expenditure, funded by taxation during their working life.

Among countries with significant public funding of healthcare there are many different approaches to the funding and provision of medical services. Systems may be funded from general government revenues (as in Canada, United Kingdom, Brazil and India) or through a government social security system (as in Australia, France, Belgium, Japan and Germany) with a separate budget and hypothecated taxes or contributions.

The proportion of the cost of care covered also differs: in Canada, all hospital care is paid for by the government, while in Japan, patients must pay 10 to 30% of the cost of a hospital stay. Services provided by public systems vary. For example, the Belgian government pays the bulk of the fees for dental and eye care, while the Australian government covers eye care but not dental care.

Publicly funded medicine may be administered and provided by the government, as in the Nordic countries, Portugal, Spain, and Italy; in some systems, though, medicine is publicly funded but most hospital providers are private entities, as in Canada. The organization providing public health insurance is not necessarily a public administration, and its budget may be isolated from the main state budget. Some systems do not provide universal healthcare or restrict coverage to public health facilities. Some countries, such as Germany, have multiple public insurance organizations linked by a common legal framework. Some, such as the Netherlands and Switzerland, allow private for-profit insurers to participate.

See also

How To Think Though Hard Financial Choices And Make Better Money Decisions

https://i1.wp.com/onlinemarketingscoops.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/shutterstock_710867164-648x364-c-default.jpg?resize=924%2C519&ssl=1

When you first learn to manage your money, you will likely feel like you are drowning in a sea of strict rules to follow: Pay off your debt, create a budget, live within your means, save more, start investing… the list goes on.

The nice thing about being in this stage, however, is that it’s pretty easy to find objectively correct answers to the questions you likely have at this point.

There’s one specific answer if you ask “what is a Roth IRA and what are the income limits if I want to contribute.” There’s a systematic way to figure out the answers to questions like, “how can I save up X amount of dollars in Y amount of time?”

But eventually, you will find an inflection point. It lies just beyond basic financial stability; it’s everything that comes after you develop sufficient financial resources.

At this point, you’ll face a new challenge: feeling confident about your decisions when you have multiple choices you could make with your money, and none of them are objectively better than another.

The Challenges Of Managing Your Money (Once You Have More To Manage)

Before you reach a certain level of income, you don’t really have a lot of agency over how you use your money; it has to go to bills, expenses, basic needs and savings. You don’t have a lot of options.

But at some point, your personal finances can no longer be managed on a spreadsheet alone. You’ll begin to have more freedom and flexibility, and therefore more choice.

When there are multiple avenues you can afford to take, determining which of your multiple choices starts getting hard to do.

One way to make a hard decision is to evaluate the objective facts around the options. This is where numbers do matter and can sometimes point us to very clear answers (like if you’re wondering if you should pay off debt faster or invest more; the answer could be easy to determine just by looking at the interest rate of your debt versus your expected investment return).

Financial choices can start feeling hard — or even impossible — once there is no objective measure of which option is better or worse. If the numbers tell you that either option can work for you, you can’t rely solely on that objective measurement to determine the best course of action.

It’s at this point where the conversation has to shift to subjective values.

The Role Of Your Values, Priorities, And Preferences In Financial Planning

In her TED Talk, Philosopher Ruth Chang says this is what truly makes a hard decision: when we have two options, we seek ways to compare them and make a judgement about which is better.

Comparing options is easy to do when you can quantify the options with real numbers, because you have clear outcomes: one option will be greater than, lesser than, or equal to the other.

But not all choices — even when they are financial choices or decisions about what to do with your money — can be quantified.

As Chang says, “the world of value is different from the world of science. The stuff of the one world can be quantified by real numbers. The stuff of the other world can’t.”

It might seem strange to say there are aspects of your finances that can’t be quantified by real numbers — but that’s exactly what happens when you get to a point where your income sufficiently covers your needs, many of your wants, and you still have money left over each month.

You then get to choose what to do with the money you have available.

Chang again explains that this is exactly what makes a decision hard: you have a number of alternatives that are not greater than, lesser than, or equal to each other.

There’s no set answer for the things you “should” do, or “ought” to do. That’s open-ended. The only real answer is what you decide is important to you, and of the highest value.

How You Can Improve The Quality Of Your Financial Decisions

In her TED Talk, Chang provides some advice for making better decisions when we face two options that, objectively, are pretty equal to each other and therefore there is no clear-cut “best” choice:

“When we face hard choices, we shouldn’t beat our head against a wall trying to figure out which alternative is better. There is no best alternative. Instead of looking for reasons out there, we should be looking for reasons in here: Who am I to be?”

Put another way, you can find the right answer to a hard choice if you consider which option best aligns with the person you want to be, or the values you want to live by.

That, at least, is the very philosophical answer to dealing with hard choices, which might not feel practice enough (especially when this is your money we’re talking about).

Using our values and ideal life vision to make financial decisions does not mean we should just completely throw all the numbers out the window and stop caring about financial facts.

We still need to consider your balance sheet, investment strategy, net worth, and a million other technical aspects that go into making a sound financial plan.

We need to look at the convergence of what we can quantify, like the numbers, and what we can’t, like your values and vision for your life.

This is how you can start making much higher-quality financial decisions: when you build a strategy that accounts for your financial reality and reasonable future assumptions and then factor your values, goals, and priorities into that framework.

That allows you to stay grounded in what the numbers are telling you… but it also points to the secret to making final decisions that bring you the most happiness and fulfillment.

Once you understand the objective landscape of your financial life and identify the choices you have available to you, the “best” course of action for you is the one that most closely reflects the person you want to be.

Eric Roberge is a CFP® and the founder of Beyond Your Hammock, a fee-only financial planning firm based in Boston. His goal is to help motivated professionals in their

Source: How To Think Though Hard Financial Choices And Make Better Money Decisions

.

References

“The Future of Jobs Report 2018” (PDF).

%d bloggers like this: