Finance
Where’s the rest? Why your year-end bonus or gift may have shrunk
ICE launches recruiting campaign with $50K bonus
ICE is launching a campaign to recruit agents tasked with removing migrants with criminal records. The push offers strong pay and benefits.
Straight Arrow News
Americans who are receiving a year-end bonus for a job well done may be sorely disappointed when they open their envelope to find a big chunk missing.
Up to a third of a cash bonus can get swallowed up by the IRS’ special tax withholding on cash bonuses, or what it calls “supplemental income,” on top of Medicare, Social Security and state taxes. The federal flat rate for bonus pay is 22% for supplemental income under $1 million. Add Social Security (6.2%), Medicare (1.45%), and state taxes, and total withholding is roughly 30%-35%.
“That 22% federal withholding might be higher than your…regular tax bracket,” according to workforce management software company Homebase. “If they usually pay 12%, seeing 22% disappear from their bonus stings.”
Why can this spell financial disaster for Americans?
For the holidays, many Americans may have spent like they were receiving the full amount of the bonus instead of the bonus amount minus taxes, said Kevin Knull, chief executive of TaxStatus, which provides IRS data to financial advisers.
The $10,000 bonus for air traffic controllers who had perfect attendance during the government shutdown isn’t really a $10,000 bonus, for instance. The withholding on bonuses is a flat 22%, plus a 6.2% Social Security tax and 1.45% Medicare tax. Those reduce the bonus to just over $7,000, and you may still have to have state income tax taken out.
“That’s all immediately deducted and goes to Uncle Sam,” Knull said. “Somewhere around 48% of the population underestimate what they pay in taxes. Income taxes take a big bite out of paychecks.” If you spent the entire ‘$10,000 bonus,’ you overspent by about $3,000.
Separately, Americans should be aware that a bonus can also bump them into the next higher tax bracket if they’re already close to it, experts said.
Some (belated) good news?
If the tax cost of your bonus is less than 22%, or the withholding rate, you’ll receive a tax refund for the difference, or it will be applied to the tax due on any other income, experts said. Bonuses will be taxed as regular income on the final tax return. You’ll just have to wait until you file your 2025 taxes next year to get the money back.
On the flipside, if the tax cost of your bonus is more than the 22% withholding rate, you’ll owe the difference between what was withheld and your total tax cost.
How can you keep taxes low with your bonus?
If you haven’t maximized your 401(k) or IRA contributions for the year, consider adding some of the money to your retirement fund to reduce overall taxable income come tax season, wrote Kay Bell at financial products comparison site Bankrate. Contrbutions are income tax-free, but withdrawals later are taxed.
The 2025 IRA contribution limit is $7,000, or $8,000 if you’re age 50 or older. The 401(k) limit is $23,500 and an additional $7,500 for age 50 or older except those who are age 60 to 63. Those individuals have a higher catch-up contribution limit of $11,250 instead of $7,500.
Or if you expect your income to be much lower next year, pushing your tax bracket lower, consider asking your employer to defer the bonus until then, she said. You’ll still owe taxes, but you could save money by paying at a lower tax rate.
“However, even if your tax bracket doesn’t change year to year, some like receiving bonuses next year just to move the tax liability to 2026,” said Richard Pon, certified public accountant in San Francisco.
What about non-cash bonuses or gifts?
“Employers and employees may be shocked that gifts are usually taxable,” Pon said.
Cash and cash-equivalent gifts and bonuses such as gift cards, season tickets to sporting or theatrical events and gift certificates are taxed, Pon said.
“Sometimes employers deduct this from the regular paycheck,” he said. “Other times, employers pay these taxes on your behalf and gross up the income, which can double the cost of a $25 gift card to $50 with taxes if an employer pays the employee share of taxes…you should check your paystub to see if you are taxed.”
A couple of exceptions exist. The first is the “conduit gift,” which is a contribution made to an intermediary organization that then passes the funds to the final intended recipient. For example, if the parent teacher association (PTA) collected and gifted cash or gift cards to staff and faculty, those are conduit gifts and wouldn’t be taxed. The PTA was merely a conduit for gifts paid by parents.
Another exception is if a manager personally gives an employee a cash gift or gift card, Pon said. “That is a personal gift. It’s not a gift from your employer,” he said. Since the manager is “not the employer, those would be tax-free gifts to the recipients.”
He warned though those gifts may cause other frictions at work. “There are a lot of scrooges,” Pon said. “I once worked in an accounting firm and the managing partner complained I was giving gift cards and candy to our admin staff as a token of appreciation of helping me all year. The partner said I was making other managers seem unkind if they didn’t give out gifts.”
Noncash gifts like hams, turkeys, an occasional ticket to a sporting event or theatrical event are considered a “de minimis fringe benefit,” which is not taxable, Pon said. But note, a coupon or gift card intended to buy a turkey, ham or other item may be taxable, he said.
Medora Lee is a money, markets and personal finance reporter at USA TODAY. You can reach her at mjlee@usatoday.com and subscribe to our free Daily Money newsletter for personal finance tips and business news every Monday through Friday morning.
Finance
Psychological shift unfolds in soft Aussie housing market: ‘Vendors feel pressure’
Property markets move in cycles, and with interest rates rising and other pressures like high fuel costs, some markets are clearly slowing down. Many first-home buyers who have only ever seen markets going up are conditioned to think that when purchasing, competition is always intense and decisions need to be made quickly.
In those times, buyers often feel they need to act fast, stretch their budget and secure a property at almost any cost. But things have definitely changed.
In a softer market, the dynamic shifts. Properties take longer to sell, competition thins, and it’s the vendors who begin to feel pressure.
RELATED
For buyers who understand how to navigate that change, the balance of power quickly moves in their favour. The opportunity is not simply to buy at a lower price. It is to negotiate from a position of strength.
If that’s you right now, these are the key skills first-home buyers need to take advantage of in softer market conditions.
The most important shift in a soft market is psychological. In a rising market, buyers often feel like they are competing for limited opportunities. In a softer market, the opposite is true. There are more properties available, fewer active buyers and less urgency overall. This gives buyers options.
When buyers understand that they are not competing with multiple parties on every property, their decision-making improves. They are more willing to walk away, compare opportunities and avoid overpaying. Negotiation strength comes from not needing to transact immediately. When that pressure is removed, buyers are able to engage more strategically.
One of the most common mistakes first-home buyers make is continuing to apply strategies that only work in rising markets. Auction urgency is a clear example. In strong markets, auctions often attract multiple bidders and create competitive tension. In softer conditions, properties are more likely to pass in, shifting the process away from a public bidding environment into a private negotiation.
This is where leverage increases.
Private negotiations allow buyers to introduce conditions that protect their position. These may include finance clauses, longer settlement periods or price adjustments based on due diligence. Opportunities that are rarely available in competitive markets become standard in softer ones.
Finance
Finance Committee approves an average increase of University tuition by 3.6 percent
The Board of Visitors Finance Committee met Thursday and approved a 3.6 percent average increase in tuition, a 4.8 percent average increase in meal plan costs and a 5 percent increase in the cost of double-room housing for the 2026-27 school year. The approval was unanimous amongst Board members, though some expressed resistance to the increases before voting in favor of them.
The Committee heard from Jennifer Wagner Davis, executive vice president and chief operating officer, and Donna Price Henry, chancellor of the College at Wise, about reasons for the raise in tuition and rates. According to Davis and Henry, salary increases for professors and legislation passed by the General Assembly contribute to tuition and rates increases.
The Finance Committee, chaired by Vice Rector Victoria Harker, is responsible for the University’s financial affairs and business operations, and the Committee manages the budget, tuition and student fees.
Changes in tuition vary between schools, with the School of Law seeing at most a 5.1 percent increase, the School of Engineering & Applied Science seeing at most a 3.2 percent increase and the College of Arts and Sciences seeing at most a 3.1 percent increase in tuition for the 2026-27 school year.
For the 2026-27 school year at the College at Wise, the Committee also unanimously approved a 2.5 percent average increase in tuition, a 3.8 percent increase in meal plans and a 2 percent increase in the cost of housing.
Last year, the Committee approved a 3 percent average increase in tuition, a 5.5 percent increase in meal plans and a 5.5 percent increase in the cost of housing for the University.
Davis cited increased costs as the primary reason for the approved increase in tuition. She said that the budget that could be passed by the General Assembly for June 30, 2027 through June 30, 2028 could increase professor salaries — University professors receive raises via this process. Davis said that the Senate and House of Delegates have separate proposals dealing with the pay increases that are currently unresolved, with House Bill 30 raising salaries by 2 percent and Senate Bill 30 raising salaries by 3 percent.
Davis said every percent increase in faculty salaries costs the University $15 million annually, and the Commonwealth will increase funding to the University by $1-2 million to help pay for that increase. According to Davis, the most common way to stabilize the budgetary imbalance caused by raised salaries is through tuition raises.
Beyond the increase in salary, Davis cited the minimum wage increase, inflation and Virginia Military Survivors & Dependents Education Program as increased costs to the University. VMSDEP is a program that gives education benefits to spouses and children of disabled veterans or military service members killed, missing in action or taken prisoner. Davis said that the program is “partially unfunded” and could cost the University somewhere between $3.6 to $6 million, depending on how many students qualify for the program.
Davis spoke on other contributing factors to the increase in tuition, specifically collective bargaining — which allows workers to bargain for better wages and working conditions.
“If we look at other institutions or other states that have collective bargaining, [collective bargaining] does put an upward pressure on tuition,” Davis said.
Prior to Thursday’s meeting, the Committee heard the proposal for tuition increases from Davis and Henry April 6 in a Finance Committee tuition workshop with public comment. During the tuition workshop, tuition increases ranged from 3 to 4.5 percent for the University and 2 to 3 percent for the College at Wise. Both increases approved Thursday are within the ranges originally proposed.
Meal plan costs, on average, will be increasing by 4.8 percent in the upcoming academic year. Davis said that the University has been expanding dining options with the opening of the Gaston House and new locations for the Ivy Corridor student housing that is still in progress. She also said that the University has been taking steps to increase the availability of allergen-friendly food options.
Davis shared that the 5 percent cost increase in housing is due to the expansion of student housing in the Ivy Corridor. Davis also said that there will be 3,000 new units added to the Charlottesville housing market by 2027, of which 780 beds will be for University housing. Davis said that she hopes the Ivy Corridor housing would “free up” the city housing supply by having more students live on Grounds.
Board member Amanda Pillion said she was “concerned” about how tuition increases would harm rural families — she said the constant increases in cost could make a University education out of reach for middle-income Virginians.
“This is the second governor I’ve served under. Both times I’ve heard affordability, affordability, affordability,” Pillion said. “We need to really be conscious of the fact that … there is a large group of people that [are middle-income] that these increases [in tuition and fees] are really tough for.”
The Committee also approved a renovation for The Park — an 18-acre recreational hub in North Grounds — which will cost $10 million. As part of the renovation, The Park will include a maintenance facility, storm water systems and a maintenance access route. Davis said the renovation will address safety and security issues for the 200 people that use The Park daily. According to Davis, the University will use $2 million of institutional funds and issue $8 million of debt to fund the renovation.
The Finance Committee will reconvene during the regularly scheduled June Board meetings.
Finance
A Protracted US–Iran War Could Strain Climate Finance From Wealthy Countries to Developing Nations – Inside Climate News
WASHINGTON, D.C.—The ongoing war in Iran is casting a long shadow over the climate finance commitments countries agreed to in 2024, experts warned, as surging oil prices and rising defense budgets put further pressure on the limited pot of money developing nations are counting on to stave off worsening impacts from a warming planet.
The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund’s annual spring meetings are underway in the capital this week, with a focus on a coordinated global response to a world economy under pressure from slower growth and rising debt, exacerbating global inequities.
The U.S. war in Iran adds new supply-chain challenges. In a press briefing Tuesday, the IMF slashed its growth forecast to 3.1 percent for the year, down from 3.3 percent in January, with global inflation rising to 4.4 percent.
“Our severe scenario assumes that energy supply disruptions extend into next year, with greater macro instability. Global growth falls to 2 percent this year and next, while inflation exceeds 6 percent,” said Pierre‑Olivier Gourinchas, the IMF’s director of research.
The blunt assessment has caused a scramble to determine what financial support the institution can offer to member states. And it has raised fresh questions about climate-finance obligations, already under strain from donor-country budget cuts and the United States jettisoning global climate commitments under the second Trump administration. One of President Donald Trump’s first actions back in office last year was ordering the U.S. to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement.
Since the COVID-19 pandemic, wealthier countries that promised climate finance have experienced widening fiscal deficits and rising debt, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development found in its latest assessment. As a result, aid from donor countries has already declined sharply—dropping almost 25 percent in 2025 compared to 2024. Even before the Iran conflict began, that was projected to drop further this year.
COP29, the global climate conference held in late 2024 in Baku, Azerbaijan, set a commitment of $300 billion per year by 2035, with a broader goal of reaching $1.3 trillion annually from public and private sources. Called the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), the arrangement replaced the previous $100 billion-a-year commitment that wealthy nations had met belatedly in 2022, two years after the deadline.
Developing nations widely criticized the $300 billion figure as grossly inadequate, given the scale of the climate crisis. These countries are among the least responsible for the pollution driving that crisis and among the hardest hit by its effects.
The Iran war has triggered a new set of worries as top economists and experts weigh potential impact and likely mitigation strategies.
“Even before the Iran conflict, reaching the NCQG target would have been difficult, particularly with the U.S. withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. The war worsens the outlook,” said Gautam Jain, senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University.

He said sustained disruption of the Strait of Hormuz would exacerbate the problem and the effects would weigh on the global economy. As a result, aid budgets would decline and the political pushback to external spending would increase.
The conflict is “pushing energy security to the forefront of government agendas,” Jain said. That will likely strengthen incentives to deploy more renewables and other forms of domestic clean energy, but the war’s economic convulsions could cut both ways for the energy transition.
“In low-income countries, the transition could be significantly delayed, given limited fiscal capacity to absorb sustained energy price shocks,” Jain said.
One of the main priorities for the World Bank during the meetings in Washington is to develop a new Climate Change Action Plan to replace the one expiring in June. “In the current geopolitical context, progress on this front looks quite unlikely,” Jain said.
Jon Sward, environment project manager at the Bretton Woods Project, which monitors World Bank and IMF policies, said countries that used to fund climate finance are now choosing to spend that money on other priorities.
This story is funded by readers like you.
Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.
Donate Now
The Gulf crisis exposed the fragility of a global economic system tethered to fossil fuel extraction and use, Sward noted. For countries dependent on fossil fuel imports, “this is yet another price shock, and quickly diversifying to renewables is certainly an option that many countries are looking at,” he said in an email.
He said that although multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF have begun to assess the conflict’s fallout, it is not yet clear what their response will be or how the World Bank’s climate finance would be affected.
“All of this points to the need for more serious discussions on pausing debt repayments for affected countries and the mobilisation of non-debt creating forms of finance, in order to address the multiple, overlapping shocks facing countries in the Global South, in particular,” he said in his email.
Experts said that rising security and defense expenditures were also cutting into an already limited pot of money badly needed by developing countries struggling to cope with climate challenges.
“The system was already too fragile given that the U.S. leads all the major multilateral development banks … and has disavowed these targets,” said Kevin Gallagher, director of the Global Development Policy Center at Boston University. On top of that, he said, U.S. threats to abandon NATO’s European countries incentivizes them to prioritize defense budgets over climate finance.
He said developing countries are already under pressure to cough up climate funding on their own. The current conflict could make that nearly impossible.
“This year was supposed to be putting together a roadmap to take the $300 billion annual target to the agreed upon $1.3 trillion. This is likely to be abandoned unless new donors such as [the] UAE, China and others step in to fill the gap left from the West,” Gallagher said in an email.
The crisis in the Persian Gulf makes the loudest case for renewables, he said. “The energy security argument from this conflict is to diversify from fossil fuels. The Dutch took that cue after the Middle East oil shock of the 1970s to build the world’s best wind turbines, and China did after Middle East conflicts in this century. Fossil fuels are now a bad bet on security, economic and climate grounds. The writing is on the wall.”
Gallagher said the World Bank should accelerate solar and wind technology programs across the world. “If the Fund and the Bank don’t rise to this occasion,” he said, “not only is the global economy and climate at stake, but so is the legitimacy of these institutions.”
Gaia Larsen, a climate finance expert at the World Resources Institute, said it’s too early to know whether stronger interest in energy independence through renewables is translating into shifts in investment. But “if we’re trying to think about long-term peace and long-term access to energy, then renewables are really increasing in prominence,” she said.
About This Story
Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.
That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.
Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.
Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?
Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.
Thank you,
-
Nevada5 minutes agoIN RESPONSE: Cortez Masto lands bill would keep the proceeds in Nevada
-
New Hampshire11 minutes agoNew Hampshire grapples with nuclear waste storage – Valley News
-
New Jersey17 minutes agoNearby shooting interrupts 13-year-old’s birthday party in Paterson; 1 killed, 3 injured
-
New Mexico23 minutes agoCalm and warmer conditions move into New Mexico
-
North Carolina29 minutes agoMemorial service held for former Miss North Carolina Carrie Everett
-
North Dakota35 minutes ago
Richard D. Langowski Obituary April 16, 2026 – Tollefson Funeral Home
-
Ohio41 minutes agoThree Buckeyes Who Proved They Belong at Ohio State Spring Game
-
Oklahoma47 minutes agoOklahoma’s Jahsiear Rogers ‘Knew It Was Time to Showcase’ His Talents In Spring Game
