Current Events in December 2024

The U.S. Department of Transportation has adopted new regulations aimed at improving the air travel experience for passengers with disabilities, especially those who use wheelchairs. The comprehensive final rule sets rigorous standards for airlines, focusing on the accommodation and treatment of passengers with mobility challenges.

The newly established rule requires airlines to adhere to strict guidelines for assisting passengers with disabilities, emphasizing the need for safe and dignified handling. This includes hands-on training for airline employees and contractors who assist these passengers and manage their wheelchairs. 

The rule also outlines specific actions airlines must take when a wheelchair is damaged or delayed during transport, addressing a critical concern for the estimated 5.5 million Americans who rely on wheelchairs.

"Every passenger deserves safe, dignified travel when they fly," said Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. "With the new protections we’re announcing today, we’re establishing a new standard for air travel—with clear and thorough guidelines for airlines to ensure that passengers using wheelchairs can travel safely and with dignity."

The rule comes in response to statistics and personal accounts highlighting the challenges faced by disabled travelers. DOT data indicates that for every 100 wheelchairs or scooters transported on domestic flights, at least one is damaged, delayed, or lost. Such incidents can severely impact the mobility, health, and independence of affected travelers.

Enhanced training

Under the final rule, airlines will be required to train personnel to assist passengers who need assistance getting off the aircraft. A violation will be presumed to have occurred if a wheelchair is mishandled.

Additionally, the rule mandates reimbursement for accessible ground transportation and fare differences if a passenger's wheelchair cannot be accommodated on their scheduled flight.

The agency has also taken steps to improve airport accessibility through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law’s Airport Terminals Program, funding over 150 projects aimed at making terminals more accessible for people with disabilities.

Implementation of the rule will begin on January 16, 2025, with full compliance required by June 17, 2026. 

In Washington, there's an air of anticipation as the Trump Administration starts to take shape. Consumer issues didn't get much attention during the recent campaign but there's a lot of discussion now around issues like consumer protection, bank regulation, Social Security changes and other bread-and-butter topics.

Republicans are upbeat about their economic plans, which include cutting taxes, loosening regulations on banks and Wall Street and rolling back some safety and environmental rules that business leaders see as impeding growth.

While disappointed Democrats grouse about leaving the country or at least lying low for the next four years, many Republicans are upbeat about a Trump economy, which they think will spur consumers to spend more and thus contribute to economic growth.

That brings up the question of what to do with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It's little-known outside financial circles but it has been an aggressive force in regulating credit cards and financial services of nearly every description and is widely hated by Republican business leaders.

Billionaire Elon Musk has suggested getting rid of the agency entirely, saying there are too many regulatory agencies, according to a recent Wall Street Journal article. Musk co-chairs the Department of Government Efficiency, an outside group that is advising Trump on the transition.

A modest suggestion about the CFPB

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who founded the CFPB during the Obama Administration, might have a suggestion for the Trump team.

She recently highlighted how the CFPB has worked to bring down credit card prices and could help fulfill Trump’s promise to cap credit card interest rates at 10%.

According to the Federal Reserve, Americans are carrying a record $1.17 trillion in credit card debt, Warren noted at a hearing of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

"President Trump spoke to the concerns of millions when he said he would put a 10% cap on credit card interest rates," Warren said at the hearing. "That is the kind of big structural change that will make a big difference to families across America.

"Over the last decade, giant credit card companies have jacked up interest rates to historic levels. Average interest rates have nearly doubled from 13% back in 2013, to 23% in 2024, now the highest on record."

Since the Federal Reserve started tracking credit card interest rates in 1994, credit card companies have steadily increased interest rates to record highs. Even as the Federal Reserve has cut rates, credit card interest rates have remained higher than ever, with average interest rates nearly doubling over the last decade, Warren said.

She said the CFPB could be a "strong partner" with Trump in holding down interest rates paid by consumers.

During the hearing, CFPB Director Rohit Chopra highlighted the CFPB’s accomplishments in helping Americans struggling under the weight of credit card debt, like limiting late fees charged by credit card companies and cracking down on bad actors in the credit card market.

Chopra said that currently, Americans are paying an extra $25 billion a year in interest rates, compared to 10 years ago. Chopra sasid that the CFPB would partner with President-elect Trump to enforce his plan to cap interest rates at 10% if that plan was enacted.  

As sports gambling continues to expand across the United States, with online sports betting now legal in 38 states, consumers are increasingly encountering unexpected financial pitfalls, especially if they are putting their wagers on a credit card.

Last year alone, nearly $120 billion was wagered on sports, but many bettors are facing steep "cash advance" fees when using credit cards for these transactions. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has highlighted the financial implications of using credit cards for sports betting, showing that lenders often treat these transactions as cash advances, leading to significant fees and interest charges.

In a recent analysis, the CFPB examined credit card agreements from major issuers, consumer complaints, and data from states like Kansas and Ohio, where sports betting was recently legalized. 

The findings indicate that most credit card companies, including Chase, Discover, and American Express, classify online gambling transactions as cash advances. This classification triggers high fees and interest rates, which can catch consumers off guard.

Cash advance fees are not cheap

Cash advances typically incur fees that are either a flat rate or a percentage of the transaction, whichever is greater. For example, a $20 sports wager could incur the same $10 fee as a $200 cash advance withdrawal from an ATM.

Additionally, cash advances begin accruing interest immediately at rates often around 30%, significantly higher than regular purchase rates. This means that even small bets can quickly become costly, with fees and interest accumulating rapidly.

The CFPB's analysis of credit card use in Kansas and Ohio showed a spike in cash advance fees following the legalization of sports betting. The Bureau suggests that many consumers are unaware of the financial consequences of using credit cards for gambling, as disclosures about these fees are often unclear or inconsistent. Complaints from cardholders indicate a lack of transparency from both sportsbooks and credit card issuers, leading to confusion and unexpected charges.

Also, you could lose

And of course, the bettor could lose. They don’t lose their own money, they lose money they don’t have, but will have to pay back, along with the fees.

To their credit, not all credit cards allow sports betting. Some issuers, like Bank of America and Wells Fargo, state they "may" decline internet gambling transactions, relying on merchant categorizations set by networks like Visa and Mastercard. 

However, mobile sportsbooks continue to accept credit cards, with a significant portion of bettors preferring this payment method.

The CFPB said its findings underscore the need for greater transparency and consumer awareness regarding the financial implications of using credit cards for sports betting. As the industry grows, both regulators and consumers must navigate the complex landscape of fees and interest rates to avoid unexpected financial burdens.

Choosing the right banking option can be complex, with consumers weighing features like fees, accessibility and digital tools across traditional banks, credit unions, online banks and fintech firms.

Key Insights:

• Credit unions tend to have the highest customer satisfaction, offering personalized service and fewer fees.

• Online banks attract consumers with higher interest rates and no fees but lack in-person services.

• Fintech firms and brokerages provide innovative features but may face challenges with customer support.

• Brick-and-mortar banks offer convenience for in-person banking but often charge more fees and have lower customer satisfaction.

Many consumers use multiple accounts across different providers to maximize benefits like higher interest rates, better apps, or broader ATM access. As options grow, assessing your banking needs—such as fee tolerance, access to in-person services, and digital tools—is key to finding the best fit.

Nearly 10,000 institutions to choose from

As of June 30, there were 4,539 banks insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, according to FDIC data, including both traditional brick-and-mortar banks and those operating online. That's on top of 4,533 member-owned credit unions covered by insurance from the National Credit Union Administration. 

And in recent years, Americans have also been able to turn to financial technology, or fintech, firms for accounts that can function a lot like traditional checking accounts, offering at the very least a debit card and the ability to have a paycheck directly deposited. Traditional brokerage firms have also gotten into the act, offering cash management accounts that share many of the features of a checking account—or, in some cases, providing actual accounts from an affiliated bank.  

But not all of these accounts are created equal. Even among institutions of the same basic type, accounts can vary in terms of monthly fees and whether in-person banking is easily accessible, whether there's ready access to paper checks, and which ATMs account holders can access without a fee. And whether an institution offers branch banking or is strictly online, there's the question of what online banking features are available and how easy it is to contact customer service operators by phone. 

In general, experts generally say, traditional brick-and-mortar banks are less likely to offer fee-free accounts than other types of institutions, in what's essentially a tradeoff for the convenience of in-person banking. Offerings naturally vary from institution to institution, and banks sometimes waive fees for customers with larger balances or regular direct deposits. 

On top of those complexities, while accounts at traditional banks and credit unions are typically insured up to $250,000 by the federal government, the insurance situation for accounts at other types of institutions can be more complex. "The short answer is: it depends," the FDIC has cautioned the public.

Surveying the landscape

We set out to take a look at what types of financial institutions seem to have the most satisfied customers, and what different types of institutions might have to offer for different consumers. Our first stop was our own ConsumerAffairs customer ratings and reviews, where our readers have weighed in on their experiences with different banks and other institutions through our online review form. 

We filtered for valid reviews of financial institutions that offer a checking account or similar product, submitted between Sept. 1, 2020 and Nov. 14, 2024 regarding companies that had at least 10 valid reviews in that period, and found 10,325 in total. Not all of those reviews necessarily specifically address any particular account type at the institution, but many cover features and experiences relevant to any type of product or account, like issues with customer service.

Of course, people tend to fill out online reviews when they've had a particularly memorable experience, and for financial institutions, that often tends to be a negative one, since routine deposits, withdrawals, and interest payments are often unremarkable. And, indeed, the vast majority of the reviews we looked at were negative: About 92.5% were one-star reviews, on a typical one to five scale, with five being the highest, while other recent industry surveys indicate most people are generally satisfied with their financial institutions. One survey released by the American Bankers Association in October found 85% of Americans with bank accounts are "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their primary bank.

But clear distinctions still emerged in the ConsumerAffairs data between different types of financial institutions—which we divided into credit unions, brick-and-mortar banks, online banks, brokerages, and fintech firms—and those seem to mirror other findings about customer satisfaction with financial services. 

Credit unions come out on top

Looking by category, average star rating was highest at credit unions, of which there are two in our review sample: Navy Federal Credit Union and Pentagon Federal Credit Union, also known as PenFed.

Both are among the largest credit unions in the country, and as their names suggest, both have historically catered to people connected with the military and defense operations. PenFed is now open to any U.S. citizen or permanent resident, though Navy Federal remains limited to categories of people including active duty service members and reservists, veterans, civilian Department of Defense employees, and their families.

The two credit unions both received an average star rating of roughly 1.243 during our sample period, and overall 3.47% of credit union reviews were five-star reviews, the highest of any category.

Brokerages

Next in terms of overall star rating were traditional brokerages, of which our sample included two offering checking accounts or something similar: Charles Schwab and Fidelity Investments. Schwab offers checking accounts through the affiliated, FDIC-insured Charles Schwab Bank, while Fidelity offers a cash management account with checking-like features, including a debit card and mobile check deposit.

Both also typically offer reimbursements for ATM fees you may incur if you need to get cash. They collectively saw an average star rating of about 1.204, and about 2.5% of reviewers awarded five stars. Schwab came in the higher rated of the two, with a 1.25 average star rating and 3.57% of its reviews awarding a full five stars.

Online banks

After brokerages came online banks, with an average star rating of about 1.2, and about 3.39% of ratings awarded five stars. There are 10 in our sample, all of them FDIC-insured banks without a traditional network of branches.

The highest average star rating during our sample period for an online bank, about 1.41, belongs to SoFi. It offers a full assortment of financial products, including checking and savings accounts, credit cards, a variety of loans, and investment services.

About 8.97% of its reviews were five-star reviews, with fans praising the ease of setting up and accessing accounts and the lack of fees. A close second in online banking, with an average star rating of 1.375 during the period, and 8.33% five-star reviews, was Varo Bank. 

Fintech

Fintech companies saw an average star rating of 1.188 in our sample, and about 3.23% of ratings were five stars. Again, we only looked at companies offering something akin to a checking account and at least 10 valid reviews in our sample period.

The category is a broad one, including businesses offering a wide variety of deposit accounts, investment features, options for depositing cash, loan offerings, and additional features like credit monitoring and money transfer.

Our highest rated institution in this category is Chime, which had an average star rating of about 1.664 and 13.7% five-star reviews. 

Brick and mortar

Banks with brick-and-mortar branches came in with an average star rating of about 1.154, the lowest of our categories, and only about 2.18% of ratings were five stars.

Highest rated among them was Armed Forces Bank, which caters especially to military members and their families, though civilians can also open accounts. It had an average star rating of 1.75, with about 16.7% of reviews awarding five stars. USAA Bank, which also caters to military families and generally requires some sort of tie to the armed forces to join, was also relatively well received by our reviewers, with an average star rating of roughly 1.538 and about 7.69% of reviews awarding five stars.

Breaking out the four largest retail banks by assets—Wells Fargo, Chase, Citi, and Bank of America—we saw an average star rating of just 1.138, lower than our average brick-and-mortar bank rating of 1.154. Only about 2% of reviews gave four star reviews. The highest rated of the big four banks was Chase, with an average rating of 1.166 and 2.5% of reviews giving five stars.

So in general, it seems safe to say that our reviewers generally don't see a traditional bank branch network as key to their financial satisfaction, with brokerages, online banks, and fintech companies all being rated higher on average than traditional banks.

That mirrors what some other polls have found: In May 2024, the J.D. Power 2024 U.S. Direct Banking Satisfaction Survey also found online-only banks outperformed traditional banks, though the company noted that satisfaction had declined somewhat from the previous year.

Among checking providers included in the category, J.D. Power's poll ranked Charles Schwab Bank the highest for the sixth year in a row, followed by Capital One, then Ally Bank. 

"We do see that in particular the online institutions that are banks do have satisfaction that is quite a bit higher than traditional banks," said Paul McAdam, senior director for banking and payments at J.D. Power, in an interview. 

Consumers prefer online banking

Consumers appear to be attracted to online banks by higher interest rates and lower fees, McAdam said, and in some cases by the ease of online banking or particular innovative features in banking apps. Logically enough, affluent customers are likely to be attracted to the ability to earn interest on funds they've saved, and budget-conscious consumers appreciate the lack of fees, McAdam said. 

Fintech firms offering bank services, or "neobanks," ranked between online-only banks and traditional banks, he confirmed. Their customers generally report fewer problems overall than traditional banks, but they also tend to find that when they do have problems, it can be harder to reach someone who can actually help, sometimes requiring going through multiple channels including chat sessions and phone calls, McAdam said.

"It's harder to reach phone reps; it's harder to find the 800 number for service," he said. "It's just not as easy to get help with problems."

Traditional banks not abandoned

Studies also suggest that consumers haven't abandoned traditional banks. For one reason, some people still prefer banking in person. A study released in June by Chime and the Financial Technology Association found that while 63% of those surveyed said they found banking apps more convenient than the brick-and-mortar bank, 28% felt just the opposite.

A Consumer Reports poll last year found similar results, with 55% of bank app users saying they felt more comfortable on the app than in a physical bank and 23% saying they felt more comfortable in a bank branch than using an app.

If anything, those numbers may underestimate the appeal of brick-and-mortar banking. Earlier this year, Galileo Financial Technologies—an independently operated company owned by SoFi that builds technology for financial companies—released a survey with Datos Insights that found that 38% of those surveyed consider one of those four biggest U.S. banks by assets to be their primary financial services provider.

Another 39% pointed to other types of traditional banks and 14% said they primarily used a credit union, while only 6% said an "online/digital-only bank" was their primary financial institution. Survey results indicated it wasn't just a matter of longtime customers sticking with the institutions they know.

"Surprisingly, 66% of Gen Z primarily bank at a Big 4 or super regional bank, while older millennials and Gen Xers are the biggest users of online banks," according to the study. "The market remains split."

Still, the Galileo/Datos report pointed to a study released last year by Cornerstone Advisors that found almost half of the checking accounts opened in the first half of 2023 were opened with digital banks and fintech firms. It's not a contradiction—consumers are opening multiple accounts for different purposes and to access different services offered by different banks, and deliberately opening backup accounts in case they ever have trouble accessing some of their funds. 

Multiple providers becoming the norm

“The Galileo Consumer Banking Report reveals that fintechs and neobanks are meeting an unmet demand for new, flexible services that let consumers 'bank' wherever they are, whether online or mobile," said David Albertazzi, director of Datos Insights' retail banking & payments practice, in an email.

"This shift hasn’t led consumers to abandon their primary banks; instead, they’re augmenting their financial toolkit by integrating new services from multiple providers, he said.

That's become increasingly easy with online banks and fintech companies offering free accounts—of participants in the Galileo/Datos survey who did close accounts, 27% cited fees—and many institutions offering easy-to-use free funds transfers. Savvy consumers can keep a minimum balance or receive their direct deposits at one bank, getting any fees waived, then transfer money to free accounts at online banks or fintech firms offering better interest, better apps, or a broader free ATM network.

"We know that on average a consumer has between two and three deposit accounts," said Jennifer White, senior director for banking and payments at J.D. Power. "So as a result they have experiences with multiple institutions at the same time."

And a March 2024 Consumer Reports study of mobile banking apps also indicated that when it comes to digital banking, it's not simply the case that online-only banks and fintech companies have features that traditional banks don't.

The study found the traditional banks examined typically had more "financial well-being tools and features," such as automatic saving options, budgeting tools, and options to split direct deposits between checking and savings accounts than the online banks and fintech firms examined.

Traditional banks were also more likely to offer websites and apps in Spanish, according to the study. On the other hand, the study confirmed, purely digital institutions were more likely to come without fees and pay more interest on savings accounts.

Consumers may also be wary of putting all of their nest egg in one basket, particularly if their total balances exceed federal deposit insurance limits or they're uncertain about when fintech accounts are covered by the FDIC. 

In one recent high-profile case, fintech companies reportedly worked with a third-party firm called Synapse Financial Technologies to place customer funds in FDIC-insured bank accounts, but after Synapse filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in April, some customers have found their funds in limbo.

The FDIC has since proposed a rule that would mandate stronger record keeping for such arrangements. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau also warned in June 2023 that funds stored in payment apps like PayPal, Venmo, and Cash App—all of which offer debit cards and other features that let them be used similar to traditional checking accounts—may not be covered by federal deposit insurance, giving consumers something else to consider as they weigh options for managing their funds.

Which is best for you?

There's no one-size-fits-all answer to this question. If it seems like there are a lot of banking options, there are! And most people would say that's a good thing, since a wide range of choices means that each individual can find a solution that works for their particular situation.

If you're a newcomer to banking, maybe a walk-in bricks-and-mortar branch is best as a "starter" bank, since there are tellers there who can walk you through the process and help with any glitches.

Once you're familiar with how banking works, an online bank offers the convenience of not having to physically go to the bank and, in most cases, will charge fewer fees and pay you higher interest. 

Combining the best of walk-in and online, of course, is a credit union. As we found in our study, they tend to have the highest customer satisfaction scores while offering the convenience and cost savings of in-person and online banking.

Fintech -- apps provided by non-bank companies -- is also convenient but probably isn't a substitute for a "regular" bank account. For one thing, fintech accounts may not provide FDIC insurance and may not offer much assistance if you run into trouble. 

To find the best bank for you, read this article a few times, then check online reviews for the banks that look interesting to you, paying special attention to credit unions. Good hunting!

Impossible Foods is recalling 79,949 cases of Impossible Savory Ground Sausage Meat because it can contain pieces of metal, according to a U.S. Food and Drug Administration filing from Friday.

The Impossible Foods recall, which is still taking place, began on Nov. 15 and on Dec. 13 the FDA classified it as a Class II recall, which means the food can cause temporary or reversible harm, according to the filing.

What are the product details of the recalled plant-based sausage meat?

• Product name: Impossible Savory Ground Sausage Meat
• Size: 14-ounce chubs with eight retail chubs per case
• Use by dates: Between 6/28/25 to 1/28/26 and 7/3/25 to 1/25/26
• Universal product codes (UPC): 816697021088, 81669702109

Where was the recalled plant-based sausage meat sold?

Impossible Foods said the meat sold "nationwide" without providing more details.

What should buyers of the recalled plant-based sausage meat do?

Impossible Foods said it was offering coupons for buyers of the recalled food. 

Buyers can request a coupon on Impossible Foods's website.

How was the metal found in the recalled plant-based sausage meat?

After receiving "a small number" of complaints from buyers, Impossible Foods said it found that aluminum packaging from its fasteners in food manufacturing entered the plant-based meat.

"While our investigation showed that less than 0.00126% of total packages of our raw ground sausage were affected, that simply does not meet our high standard for quality and excellence," the company said.

California has introduced new insurance regulations aimed at encouraging insurers to offer more policies in wildfire-prone areas.

Under these new rules, insurers will use advanced computer models, which take into account weather, geography, and other data, to set insurance rates, rather than relying solely on past losses.

The change comes in response to the impact of climate change on wildfires, which has made it difficult to find homeowners and renters insurance in some of the state's most populous areas. 

“With our changing climate we can no longer look to the past. We are being innovative and forward-looking to protect Californians’ access to insurance,” Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara said in a statement.

The regulations are part of Lara's plan to stabilize the state’s troubled home insurance market. Insurers will now be required to write policies in higher-risk areas, with a goal of covering 85% of homes in those neighborhoods. In exchange, insurers such as State Farm and Allstate have been given some regulatory concessions.

These changes aim to help homeowners who have found it difficult to get insurance in wildfire-prone areas, often turning to the state’s last-resort insurer, the FAIR Plan. However, consumer groups have raised concerns about potential rate hikes and the transparency of the computer models used by insurers.

While the regulations have support from environmental and farming groups, critics fear they could lead to higher insurance premiums without offering more policies. The new rules will take effect in January 2024 and are seen as a step toward addressing the growing insurance crisis in California.

“Consumers should expect large rate hikes but not more insurance policies sold under the new rules,” Carmen Balber, executive director of Consumer Watchdog, said in a statement.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has released a special report on illegal activities in the student loan market. The report highlights violations related to student loan refinancing, private lending, servicing, debt collection, and federal loan servicing.

Student loans, which amount to over $1.7 trillion in debt, are a significant financial issue in the U.S. Recently, many borrowers faced challenges as they returned to repayment after the COVID-19 payment pause ended. The CFPB found several illegal practices:

1. Misleading Borrowers About Refinancing: Some lenders misled borrowers about losing federal protections when refinancing federal loans and failed to follow instructions for consolidating loans.
2. Deceptive Private Lenders: Some lenders denied benefits to eligible borrowers and falsely advertised loan benefits, such as autopay discounts and job-related payment suspensions.
3. School Misconduct Claims: Some servicers failed to properly address borrowers’ claims of school misconduct, such as misleading them about their right to challenge loans.
4. Illegal Collection Tactics: Certain contracts allowed schools to withhold academic transcripts or threaten legal actions against students in default.
5. Problems with Federal Loan Servicers: Federal loan servicers failed to provide accurate billing statements and made errors in processing applications for income-driven repayment plans.

The CFPB has directed companies to correct these violations and, when necessary, opened investigations for enforcement. This report is part of ongoing oversight of the student loan market and reflects the CFPB’s effort to protect borrowers from unfair practices.

With the holidays just days away, Target is the latest retailer to help consumers get their last-minute shopping done. 

This year, shoppers will be able to get gifts delivered – or picked up – on Christmas Eve, and there are still ways to save on last-minute gift ideas. 

"At Target, we understand that life can get busy, which is why we're committed to making last-minute holiday shopping easy and affordable with delivery options and deals that fit every schedule and budget," said Michael Fiddelke, executive vice president and chief operating officer, Target. 

"Whether you're picking up one final gift or making a quick grocery run, our team is ready to help you wrap up your to-do list and save money in multiple ways so you can enjoy the magic of the season."

Last-minute gift deals

Every week throughout the holiday season, Target has been offering exclusive deals for shoppers on popular items. With one week left to go, there are still ways for consumers to save on gifts this season. 

Here’s a look at what to expect: 

• Up to 40% off floor care, including Shark and Dyson

• Up to 50% off select toys, including Squishmallows, 5 Surprise, and Play-Doh

• Up to 40% off small appliances, including Ninja and Cuisinart

• Spend $40 on beauty and health, get a $10 Target gift card

• 30% off select women’s clothing 

• Additional savings on books, tech, and video games 

Get gifts delivered on Christmas Eve

In addition to the deals on last-minute gifts, Target is offering shoppers a few different ways to get their gifts at their convenience. 

For one, the retailer has extended holiday hours at nearly all of its brick-and-mortar locations. Stores open at 7:00 a.m. local time and remain open until midnight local time through December 23. 

While all stores are closed on Christmas Day, stores will be open on Christmas Eve from 7:00 a.m. local time through 8:00 p.m. local time. 

Shoppers can also take advantage of Target’s pick-up and drive up options, as well as same-day delivery, through Christmas Eve. Orders placed for in-store pick-up or drive up by 6:00 p.m. on Christmas Eve will be ready before stores close. Same-day delivery orders must be placed by 3:00 p.m. on Christmas Eve to receive them in time. 

Earlier this year, a report came out highlighting the health and safety risks that Amazon employees face during high-volume times of year – the holidays, Prime Day sales, etc. 

Now, Senator Bernie Sanders (I – Vt.), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), is leading a group of legislators with the release of a report entitled, “The Injury-Productivity Trade-off: How Amazon’s Obsession with Speed Creates Uniquely Dangerous Warehouses.” 

Senator Sanders has been conducting an ongoing investigation of Amazon’s warehouses since June 2023, working with current and former Amazon employees to get a better understanding of the safety measures in place. 

Ultimately, this work has led the Senators to a clear conclusion: Amazon prioritizes speed and efficiency, not their employees’ safety and well-being. This leads to high rates of injury, which the company has disregarded. 

What’s happening at Amazon?

Since this investigation began in June 2023, the HELP Committee has interviewed nearly 500 current and former Amazon employees. They’ve conducted over 135 virtual and in-person interviews, which translated to over 1,400 documents, photos, and videos to support the interview topics. 

While the full report is 160 pages, the HELP Committee has outlined 10 primary findings in its investigation: 

1. Amazon manipulates its workplace injury data to portray its warehouses as safer than they actually are.

2. Contrary to its public claims, Amazon imposes speed and productivity requirements on workers, commonly called “rates.” 

3. Amazon forces workers to move in unsafe ways and to repeat the same movements hundreds and thousands of times each shift, resulting in extremely high rates of musculoskeletal disorders.

4. Although Amazon has safety procedures in place, the company’s required rates make those procedures nearly impossible to follow.

5. Amazon’s failure to ensure safe working environments—based in large part on its unsustainable rates and productivity quotas—results in debilitating injuries. 

6. Amazon has studied the connection between speed requirements and worker injuries for years, but it refuses to implement injury-reducing changes because of concerns those changes might reduce productivity.

7. Amazon actively discourages injured workers from receiving outside medical care, putting injured workers further at risk. 

8. Workers who need short-term or permanent workplace accommodations for work-related injuries and disabilities experience significant challenges obtaining appropriate accommodations.

9. Amazon terminates workers injured in the company’s warehouses who are on approved medical leave.

10. Amazon deflates the injury numbers it records for federal regulators.

What does Amazon say?

In the Senators’ report, they say that they’ve reached out to Amazon several times to learn more about the company’s injury protocol, the quotas the company imposes on workers, how injured workers are treated, and more. According to their account, Amazon has presented very little to the Committee as it relates to these issues. 

Amazon, however, has released its own statement in response to the recent report, adamantly denying the claims. 

“We’re disappointed that Sen. Sanders has published a pre-conceived and one-sided narrative instead of a factual report. We’d hoped this report would have taken into account the thousands of pages of information, data, and details we provided throughout this investigation, and the conclusions drawn would be based on facts,” the company said. 

“But, the false information in this report doesn’t change reality: Our safety progress is well documented, and we’re proud of it. We’re grateful to our 1.1 million frontline employees and 9,000 health and safety professionals around the world who work hard every day to ensure a safe, comfortable, and inclusive working environment.” 

Scams are a threat all year round, but in December, as many people plan end-of-the-year charitable contributions, there’s usually an increase in scams that take advantage of good intentions. One scheme in particular could also land the donor in trouble.

The IRS is warning taxpayers to be aware of fraudulent tax schemes involving donations of ownership interests in closely held businesses, often marketed as "charitable LLCs." These schemes, which primarily target higher-income individuals, are deemed abusive transactions by the IRS and can lead to severe financial and legal consequences.

The IRS emphasizes that taxpayers are ultimately responsible for the accuracy of their tax returns. Engaging in these schemes to reduce tax liability can result in the assessment of the correct tax owed, along with penalties, interest, and potential fines and imprisonment. Charities are also cautioned against inadvertently enabling these schemes.

While legitimate deductions for donations of closely held business interests are permissible, unscrupulous promoters sometimes lure taxpayers into schemes involving false charitable deductions. These schemes typically involve creating limited liability companies (LLCs), transferring assets into them, and then donating a majority percentage of nonvoting, non-managing membership units to a charity. 

Meanwhile, the taxpayer retains control of the voting units and can reclaim the assets for personal use. In some cases, promoters may even control the charity receiving the donation.

The IRS is actively investigating these abusive transactions using a variety of compliance tools, including thorough audits and civil penalty investigations. The IRS says hundreds of tax returns have been filed using this scheme, leading to criminal convictions, including a promoter pleading guilty and a donor convicted of obstruction.

Red flags

To avoid penalties and potential legal repercussions, the IRS advises taxpayers to be vigilant against abusive transactions marketed by unscrupulous promoters. Key red flags include promises of personal benefits beyond tax deductions, transactions involving the creation of entities solely for donations, and arrangements allowing personal use of donated assets.

Properly claiming a charitable contribution deduction for a donation of a closely held business interest requires meticulous record-keeping. Taxpayers must document the name and address of the charitable organization, the date of the contribution, and a detailed description of the business interest. 

Additional requirements vary based on the value of the claimed deduction, including obtaining written acknowledgments, completing specific IRS forms, and securing qualified appraisals for larger donations.

Dementia, which can affect people as they age, may have many different causes or contributors. A recent study presented at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America points to a new one.

Researchers have identified skeletal muscle loss as a significant risk factor for developing dementia, particularly Alzheimer's disease (AD). This research highlights the potential of using brain MRI scans to detect early signs of muscle deterioration, offering a proactive approach to managing dementia risk in older adults.

Skeletal muscles, which account for about one-third of a person's total body mass, are essential for movement and physical activity. However, as people age, they naturally experience a decline in muscle mass. 

The study, led by Dr. Kamyar Moradi and a team of researchers from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, focused on the temporalis muscle—a muscle located in the head that aids in jaw movement—as a marker for generalized skeletal muscle loss.

The study involved 621 participants from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort, all of whom were initially free of dementia. Researchers utilized baseline brain MRI exams to measure the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the temporalis muscle. 

Participants were divided into two groups based on their CSA measurements: those with large CSA and those with small CSA. Over a median follow-up period of 5.8 years, the study tracked the incidence of AD dementia, changes in cognitive and functional scores, and brain volume alterations.

A significant increase in risk

Findings revealed that individuals with smaller temporalis muscles were approximately 60% more likely to develop dementia, even after adjusting for other known risk factors. Additionally, these individuals experienced greater declines in memory, functional activity, and brain volume.

"This is the first longitudinal study to demonstrate that skeletal muscle loss may contribute to the development of dementia," said  Moradi. 

The study's co-senior author, Dr. Marilyn Albert, emphasized the importance of early detection through brain MRI, which could facilitate timely interventions such as physical activity, resistance training, and nutritional support to mitigate muscle loss and reduce dementia risk.

Farmers Insurance says it will resume offering several types of insurance coverage to new customers in California, including condominium, renters, umbrella, landlord, vacant, and manufactured home insurance. Many of these coverage options had been paused for over a year.

The company plans to begin reintroducing these policies on December 14, 2024, starting with condominium and renters insurance. Farmers will also increase the number of homeowners policies it accepts from 7,000 to 9,500 per month.

This decision comes after regulatory changes in California, aimed at stabilizing the state's insurance market amid challenges such as wildfire losses. Farmers said it is optimistic about the improvements in the market and hopes to offer more coverage options as the state’s Sustainable Insurance Strategy is implemented.

Farmers will reopen coverage options in phases, with the following dates:

• Condominium and Renters insurance: December 14, 2024
• Personal Umbrella insurance: December 24, 2024
• Manufactured Home Landlord insurance: March 1, 2025
• Dwelling Fire Landlord and Vacant insurance: March 15, 2025

Additionally, Farmers resumed accepting new applications for business insurance earlier this year and lifted its moratorium on new commercial automobile insurance policies in July.

Buy-herbal.com has issued a recall of all lots within current expiration dates of Nhan Sam Tuyet Lien Truy Phong Hoan capsules. A Food and Drug Administration analysis has found these products to contain undeclared furosemide, dexamethasone and chlorpheniramine. 

Furosemide was found at 5.24 mg/g or 1.84 mg/capsule. Dexamethasone was found at 2.22 mg/g or 0.780 mg/capsule. Chlorpheniramine was found at 4.38 mg/g or 1.54 mg/capsule. 

Products containing these drugs cannot be marketed as dietary supplements. The FDA said Nhan Sam Tuyet Lien Truy Phong Hoan Capsules is an unapproved drug for which safety and efficacy have not been established and therefore, subject to recall.

What to do

Buy-herbal.com is notifying its customers via email who have bought the product on buy-herbal.com to return for a refund of the recalled product.

Consumers who have Nhan Sam Tuyet Lien Truy Phong Hoan subject to recall should stop using the product and contact info@buy-herbal.com for return and refund. Please ship the recalled products to 136-61 41st Ave, Box # 248, Flushing, NY 11355 and contact info@buy-herbal.com for refunds.

Consumers with questions regarding this recall can email info@buy-herbal.com or call 917 495 6088 on Monday through Friday from 10 am till 6 pm Eastern Time. Consumers should contact their physician or healthcare provider if they have experienced any problems that may be related to taking or using this drug product. Customers can contact info@buy-herbal.com for return and refunds.

Adverse reactions or quality problems experienced with the use of this product may be reported to the FDA's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program either online, by regular mail or by fax.

There has been a significant decline in mortgage lending in 2024, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which released its annual report on trends in the mortgage market today.

Both loan applications and originations fell by about a third from 2022, with refinancing activity experiencing a sharper drop, especially for single-family homes. In fact, refinancing originations were down nearly two-thirds from 2022.

The number of mortgage applications decreased by about 4.3 million, or 30.3%, from 2022, while originations decreased by 2.7 million, or 32.2%.

Refinancing of single-family homes fell by 64%. Most of the refinance originations left in the market were a small number of cash-out refinance loans.

Rising interest rates contributed to higher monthly mortgage payments, with the average payment for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage increasing by $250 from December 2022 to December 2023. Despite this, the average debt-to-income ratio for home purchases stayed stable, likely due to lenders focusing on higher-income borrowers.

In 2023, more than half of all borrowers paid discount points, with a significant increase from 2022. Additionally, the median total loan costs rose for both home purchase and refinance loans.

Notably, Hispanic and Black borrowers saw the largest increases in loan costs.

Independent mortgage companies continued to dominate the market, originating more loans than banks or credit unions. The report also found that the median total loan costs for refinance loans saw a sharp rise compared to home purchase loans.

The report highlights key shifts in the mortgage market, including the rise of non-depository institutions and the growing burden of rising costs on borrowers.