Current Events in January 2025

Buyers seeking a home purchase face many challenges and a new survey suggests at least one challenge will remain for the foreseeable future. Fewer current homeowners have expressed interest in selling, reducing the number of homes on the market.

In fact, a new survey conducted for real estate broker Redfin found 34% of current homeowners have no intention of “ever” selling while 27% say they wouldn’t consider selling for at least 10 years.

Broken down by generation, older homeowners are more likely than their younger counterparts to say they’ll never sell. More than two of every five baby boomer homeowners say they’ll never sell, compared to 34% of Gen X owners and 28% of millennial/Gen Z owners.

This fact makes it harder to buy a home for a couple of reasons. Fewer home listings reduce options. 

But a second important factor is what limited inventory does to home prices. When there are a limited number of homes, there is more competition among buyers, allowing sellers to remain firm on asking prices.

New listings of existing homes are below pre-pandemic levels in much of the country, though listings have started ticking up in recent months. A recent Redfin analysis found that just 25 of every 1,000 U.S. homes changed hands in the first eight months of 2024, the lowest turnover rate in decades.

Why fewer people are moving

Nearly two in five (39%) homeowners who don’t plan to sell anytime soon say it’s because their home is almost or completely paid off, making that the most commonly cited reason. 

Homeowners who have paid off their mortgage are motivated to stay put because it means they own their home free and clear, and get to live there while paying only for things like property taxes and HOA fees. Almost as many respondents – 37% -- said they’re not selling because they simply like their home and have no reason to move.

Affordability appears to be another major reason homeowners are hesitant to sell. Nearly one-third of respondents said they’re staying in their current home because today’s home prices are too high, and 18% don’t want to give up their low mortgage rate. This survey question was asked to respondents who have owned their home for at least six years and have no intention of selling within the next five years.

Homes cost more

Housing costs have risen significantly since before the COVID-19 pandemic; home prices are up roughly 40% since then, and the weekly average mortgage rate is 6.91%, up from just under 4% in 2019. A recent Redfin analysis found that more than 85% of U.S. homeowners with mortgages have an interest rate below 6%.

“The just-because movers—those who just want a bigger or nicer house—are staying put, mostly because it’s so expensive to buy a new house,” said Marije Kruythoff, a Redfin Premier agent in Los Angeles. 

Simply put, most of the people who are selling their homes are selling because they need to. Those numbers may be too small to increase the number of available homes for people who want to buy.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a lawsuit against Evoke Wellness, LLC, Evoke Health Care Management, and their executives Jonathan Mosley and James Hull for using misleading Google ads and telemarketing to trick people seeking addiction treatment.

The FTC claims Evoke used fake Google search ads that looked like ads from other addiction treatment clinics.

These ads led people to call Evoke’s own call center, where telemarketers pretended to be from a central admissions office or another clinic, misleading callers about which clinic they had reached. Even when people asked for a specific clinic, the telemarketers continued the deception, the suit alleges.

“Preying on consumers suffering from addiction and other substance use disorders is wrong, and it’s illegal,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

“The use of deceptive online ads to trick consumers into selecting one clinic over another is unacceptable, and the Commission will continue taking action against clinics, marketers, and others in this space, as well as their executives, when they break the law.”

Between 2021 and 2023, Evoke ran over 68,000 misleading ads, leading to at least 3,500 calls to their call center. The FTC says this violates both the FTC Act and the Opioid Addiction Recovery Fraud Prevention Act. The lawsuit is asking the court to stop Evoke’s deceptive practices and impose penalties.

Californians affected by the wildfires in the Los Angeles area can begin applying for federal assistance, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Saturday. 

"Thanks to our strong partnership with the federal government and the President’s swift action, Californians can apply now for federal assistance. Even as we make resources available to help folks recover, we’re still laser-focused on fighting these fires and protecting lives and property,” Newsom said.

To begin the process, go to https://www.disasterassistance.gov and answer a few questions to get started. You'll need to create an account and start an application to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). For business losses, visit the MySBA Loan Portal.

The state has established a website -- www.ca.gov/LAfires -- where you can get real-time information, sign up for alerts and find other resources, including information for seniors, animal control and family services.

For information on filing an insurance claim, see the California Department of Insurance Wildfire Resources page. 

More about California Wildfires 

• Southern California wildfire victims can now apply for federal aid

• First the fire, then the insurance vacuum

• California ups premium options for homeowners insurance

• California revises home insurance rules, hoping insurers write more policies

What you will need

FEMA understands that you may not have all of your personal documents with you or that they may have been lost in the fires. To apply for assistance, you only need: 

• Names of everyone living in your home at the time of the fires.
• Social Security number (yours or your child’s).
• Household income.
• Contact information.
• Information of property damage/emergency needs.

If you have insurance, you should file a claim as soon as possible. FEMA assistance is available to help jumpstart your recovery if you have uninsured or underinsured damage. If insurance does not cover all your damage, FEMA may provide additional help. There are three ways to apply: 

• Online at DisasterAssistance.gov and in Spanish language at DisasterAssistance.gov/es.
• Calling the FEMA Helpline at 1-800-621-3362 for assistance in multiple languages. 
• On the FEMA App for mobile devices.  

It's a process

After applying for assistance, you will receive a letter from FEMA by mail or email and you can find it on your DisasterAssistance.gov account, based on the preference you indicated when you applied. The letter will explain whether FEMA has found you eligible for assistance, how much and how the assistance must be used.

In some cases, you may receive a letter stating you are “not approved” for help from FEMA. While this may seem like a denial, you may still be eligible for FEMA assistance. Oftentimes, survivors are “not approved” because FEMA needs additional information to make a determination. The letter will explain the reason for the initial decision. Read the letter carefully. The fastest way to submit additional documents is to upload to your disaster assistance account at DisasterAssistance.gov.

With just nine days to go until it's banned in the U.S., things aren't looking great for TikTok. The Supreme Court heard arguments today on TikTok's challenge to the law banning it because of concerns about its Chinese owner, ByteDance Ltd. 

"Are we supposed to ignore the fact that the ultimate parent is in fact subject to doing intelligence work for the Chinese government?” Chief Justice John Roberts asked TikTok’s lawyer.

That and similar questions from the justices made it clear to observers that ByteDance's defenses aren't winning the hearts and minds of the court. 

ByteDance and the thousands of content creators that keep the platform rocking along and entertaining 170 million U.S. users have tried to frame the issue as one centering on free speech, which is prominently enshrined in the First Amendment.

It's not absolute

But, sacred though it is, the freedom to speak and publish is not unlimited. The classic example of speech that is not protected is shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater. 

The Biden Administration basically cites that argument, saying that Chinese control of TikTok permits a foreign totalitarian adversary to spread propaganda, manipulate the platform's content and collect the data of individual Americans for espionage or blackmail purposes.

“Just on the data collection, that seems like a huge concern for the future of the country,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh said to TikTok’s lawyer, Noel Francisco, according to Bloomberg News.

The content creators whose videos, stand-up routines and how-to spiels populate TikTok argue that their users' right to view the content they select deserves protection and they generally minimize the dangers cited by the government.

But the justices and government lawyers arguing for the Biden Administration say the basic issue is that Congress and the White House have deemed that ByteDance has dangerously close ties with the Chinese Communist government. 

Texas chimes in

As if being banned by two (so far) of the three branches of the federal government wasn't enough, Texas has waded into the skirmish, charging in a lawsuit that TikTok has been deceptively marketing its app as safe for minors, despite regularly showing inappropriate and explicit material to children.

"TikTok actively worked to deceive parents and lure children onto their app despite the presence of an overwhelming amount of profane and illicit material,” said Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in an email to ConsumerAffairs. “Companies may not jeopardize the health and wellbeing of Texas children by blatantly lying about the products they provide.”

In a suit filed Jan. 9, Paxton charged that TikTok lied about its safety standards and concealed the truth about the prevalence of inappropriate and explicit material. Specifically, to deceive parents and maintain its current age rating in major app stores, TikTok falsely represented that the presence of graphic videos depicting drugs, nudity, alcohol, and profanity was “infrequent” and “mild,” the suit alleges.

Paxton said an investigation found a virtually endless stream of videos on such topics easily accessible to minors. Paxton previously sued TikTok for violating the Securing Children Online Through Parental Empowerment (“SCOPE”) Act by unlawfully operating its platform in a manner that puts the online safety and privacy of Texas children at risk.

What's a TikTok to do?

If, as expected, the court turns down TikTok's plea, come Jan. 19 it will be illegal for TikTok to continue operating and posting its material. ByteDance would then have just a few options:

• Sell the business. ByteDance has said it would not consider unloading the platform but it may not have much choice if the decision goes against it.
• Go rogue. Presumably, ByteDance could continue hosting the site on servers outside the United States but, while that's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to implement and maintain. Operating a gigantic web platform isn't like running a single server. It would require continued services from U.S. tech companies that now provide routing, caching and any number of other tasks. Those companies would face enormous fines if they continuing aiding in the distribution of TikTok.  
• Close TikTok down and dispose of its intellectual property. It could presumably sell off the most popular videos to other platforms and simply retire as an ongoing U.S. business enterprise. TikTok might become a Facebook feature (it now syndicates some videos to Facebook, billing them as "Reels"). This would be akin to a television network going out of business and selling off its most popular shows.  

It will be missed

To a certain extent, it's a generational debate, with younger consumers depending on TikTok and older ones largely dismissing it as a silly waste of time. It's also criticized for some of its racier content, which critics say amounts to sexual exploitation.

Younger Americans, in fact, seem to see TikTok as something more than an algorithm-driven mishmash of entertainment. shameless self-promotion, online retailing and, believe it or not, news.

A recent survey conducted by Numerator found that 31% of U.S. adult consumers use TikTok, making it the fifth-most-popular social media app behind Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and Pinterest, although its support falls off with age:

• 76% of Gen Z use it,
• 40% of Millennials,
• 36% of Gen X, and
• 18% of Baby Boomers. 

TikTok users are not only loyal, they also tend to be heavy mobile users, with 41% saying they spend more than six hours per day using mobile devices compared to 31% of all consumers. 

Lobbyists and promoters for TikTok have been heard to say that its young fans will remember the ban and seek retribution in the next election. Threats like that are easy to make but in the thick-skinned atmosphere on Capitol Hill they are regarded as being about as significant as, say, a cat's meow.    

A group of authors, including Ta-Nehisi Coates and Sarah Silverman, have accused Facebook parent Meta Platforms of using pirated books to train its artificial intelligence systems with approval from CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

Coates is an author, journalist, and activist. He gained a wide readership during his time as national correspondent at The Atlantic, where he wrote about cultural, social, and political issues, particularly regarding African Americans and white supremacy. Silverman is a comedian who first rose to prominence for her brief stint as a writer and cast member on Saturday Night Live.

The authors allege that Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg knew about the pirating but approved using the material anyway. Their suit, filed in 2023, claims that Meta used pirated works from a database called LibGen to train its AI, which includes millions of pirated books, and distributed them through torrents.

The suit accuses Meta of copyright infringement, arguing that the company misused their books to train its AI system, Llama. Meta has argued that their actions fall under the "fair use" doctrine, use of such material falls under "fair use."

The fair use doctrine is a legal principle that allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. It is part of U.S. copyright law and provides exceptions to the exclusive rights granted to copyright holders. The fair use doctrine is intended to balance the rights of creators with the public's interest in using creative works for certain purposes like education, commentary, or research.

The authors are now seeking to update their complaint, based on new evidence showing that Meta knowingly used pirated content. They also want to revive certain claims, including allegations that Meta illegally stripped their books' copyright information.

What about fair use?

Whether or not Zuckerberg knew about the copying, the case revolves around whether copying an entire book can possibly be considered fair use.

In determining whether a use qualifies as fair use, courts consider four factors, according to Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute:

1. Purpose and Character of the Use: This looks at whether the use is for commercial or non-commercial purposes and whether it transforms the original work. Uses that are educational, non-profit, or transformative (e.g., using a work in a way that adds new meaning or value) are more likely to be considered fair use.

2. Nature of the Copyrighted Work: This considers whether the work is factual or creative. Factual works are more likely to be subject to fair use than highly creative works (like novels or movies).

3. Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used: The less of the work you use, the more likely it is to be considered fair use. However, even a small portion may be too much if it's considered the "heart" of the work.

4. Effect on the Market or Value of the Work: If the use negatively impacts the market value or potential sales of the original work, it's less likely to be considered fair use. If the use does not affect the market for the original work, it’s more likely to be deemed fair use.

Examples of fair use include:

• Quoting or paraphrasing a work in a review, commentary, or academic paper.
• Using brief excerpts of a copyrighted work in a parody or satire.
• Reproducing a copyrighted work for educational or non-profit purposes.

Fair use is not always clear-cut and often requires a case-by-case analysis or, as in this case, litigation.

The fair use doctrine is discussed in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976 (Title 17 of the U.S. Code). This section outlines the factors that courts should consider when determining whether a particular use of copyrighted material qualifies as fair use.

For further details on the fair use doctrine, you can refer to the U.S. Copyright Office's official page:

• U.S. Copyright Office - Fair Use: https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use

A huge decline in the price of cookies more than offset rising egg and coffee prices in December as the ConsumerAffairs Datasembly Shopping Cart Index fell by $1.21. The Index, which tracks the prices of 25 commonly purchased grocery items, was only 35 cents higher than in December 2023.

But unless you bought a lot of cookies last month you might not have saved money. The price of a 14 oz. package of cookies dropped from $6.16 in November to $4.97 last month, a decline of 19%.

Eggs and coffee posted the largest increases. Eggs, which are in short supply in many areas of the country because of bird flu, rose from $6.09 in November to $6.30. The price of 12 oz. of whole bean coffee, was the same as in November – $12.98. However, that's 49 cents more than in December 2023.

Prices of several other products stabilized in December or fell slightly. The prices of ketchup, butter and bread were down from November and year-over-year.

The December Shopping Cart Index

In a big surprise for economists, the U.S. economy added 256,000 jobs in December, dropping the unemployment rate to 4.1%. The consensus estimate on December job creation was around 155,000.

The monthly report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows the healthcare industry did most of the hiring last month. Healthcare added 46,000 jobs, with 15,000 new jobs in home health care services. Nursing and residential care facilities added 14,000 jobs while hospitals hired 12,000 people last month. The sector averaged 57,000 new jobs a month throughout 2024.

In something of a surprise retail stores added 43,000 jobs in December, following a loss of 29,000 jobs in November. In December, employment increased in clothing, clothing accessories, shoe, and jewelry retailers

One area of the retail sector lost ground, however. Retailers specializing in building materials and garden equipment lost 11,000 jobs.

Meanwhile, government employment continued to trend up in December, adding 33,000 jobs. That’s slightly below the 2024 average of 37,000 a month.

Employment in social assistance increased by 23,000 in December, mostly in individual and

family services, which added 17,000 jobs. That’s close to the 2024 monthly average.

Workers continued to earn a little more. In December, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 10 cents, or 0.3%, to $35.69. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.9 percent.

Food that is perfectly fine for people can be poison for pets, meaning pet owners need to be mindful of their pet’s environment. The Pet Poison Helpline has unveiled its annual list of the Top 10 Pet Poisons of 2024, highlighting the most common toxins that pose a threat to household pets. 

The list is based on data from actual calls received by the helpline. The list underscores the ongoing risks associated with everyday substances that pets may encounter.

"Although there are thousands of potential toxins, some items rise to the top of the list every year,” said Dr. Renee Schmid, a senior veterinary toxicologist and director of Veterinary Medicine at Pet Poison Helpline. “This year's lists for dogs and cats are very similar to 2023, but the order has changed slightly, and the differences between dogs and cats continue to be significant."

Top threats

For dogs, the top culprits include:

1. Chocolate

2. Grapes/Raisins

3. Bromethalin (a rodenticide)

4. Xylitol

5. Ibuprofen

6. Marijuana (THC)

7. Anticoagulant Rodenticides

8. Vitamin D3 (overdose)

9. Carprofen (overdose)

10. Onions/Chives/Leeks/Shallots (Allium species)

Schmid highlighted a notable shift, with bromethalin moving up two places from fifth to third, and carprofen advancing from tenth to ninth. The latter is often due to accidental ingestion or overdose rather than therapeutic use.

For cats, the list differs significantly:

1. Lilies (Lilium species)

2. Chocolate

3. Onions/Chives/Leeks/Shallots (Allium species)

4. Garlic

5. Ibuprofen

6. Alstroemeria, Peruvian Lily

7. Vitamin D3 (overdose)

8. Amphetamine Combos

9. Carprofen

10. Tulips

"Lilies pose an extreme danger to cats, whereas chocolate is the biggest temptation for dogs," Schmid explained, reflecting the distinct differences in the lists for each species.

Don’t let your dog use marijuana

Marijuana remains a significant concern for dog owners, with a 430% increase in THC-related calls from 2019 to 2023. Although there was a 24.7% decrease in marijuana-related calls in 2024 compared to the previous year, it still ranks sixth on the dog list. Schmid attributes this decline to increased educational outreach about the dangers of THC exposure.

"Even if you don't use marijuana, your pet can still be exposed," Schmid warned. "We've seen cases where dogs have ingested a neighbor's pot brownies or a visitor's THC-infused treat without the owner's knowledge. Dogs are far more likely to be attracted to marijuana than cats."

This annual report serves as a crucial reminder for pet owners to remain vigilant about potential toxins in their pets' environments and to seek immediate veterinary assistance if exposure is suspected.

First your home burns to the ground, then you remember that the insurance company canceled your policy a few months ago.

That's the situation facing many of the Pacific Palisades homeowners who've lost their homes in the disastrous wildfires that roared through their neighborhood this week.

Many thousands of homeowners in the Los Angeles area were booted off their policies in recent months, especially those who had been covered by State Farm, which abandoned much of the state. A recent investigation by the San Francisco Chronicle found that the insurer had planned to cancel 69.4% of policies in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood. 

Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara said in late December that California would allow "reinsurance" costs -- the insurance that insurance companies buy -- to be added into premiums while also requiring insurers to write more policies in high-risk areas. But it's doubtful that action came soon enough to help today's fire victims.

Beyond the Palisades, a similar situation afflicts many homeowners throughout Southern California. Some have been without insurance for more than a year, basically playing roulette with their largest personal asset.  

A growing insurance drought

California isn't alone. A report published in December by the U.S. Senate Budget Committee found that Florida, Louisiana and North Carolina were also suffering from an insurance drought.

“It’s deadly, deadly serious,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island), who commissioned the report. He called the non-renewals "a sign of market distress."

Nearly 3% of insurance policies in Florida weren't renewed in 2023, the highest non-renewal rate in the nation for the last year covered by the report, which warned that other states were likely to experience similar insurance crises as climate change accelerates across the country.

"Unless the United States and the world rapidly transition to clean energy, climate-related extreme weather events will become both more frequent and more violent, resulting in ever-scarcer insurance and ever-higher premiums," the Senate report warned. 

"This is predicted to cascade into plunging property values in communities where insurance becomes impossible to find or prohibitively expensive -- a collapse in property values with the potential to trigger a full-scale financial crisis similar to waht occurred in 2008," it said. 

Most things sold on Amazon are made in China. Now, most of its top sellers are Chinese, too.

Chinese sellers on Amazon started making up more than half of e-commerce platform's 10,000 top-performing sellers in 2024, compared with U.S. sellers accounting for around 46%, according to research by consultancy Marketplace Pulse.

Back in 2016, sellers from China made up only around 15% of Amazon's top sellers, versus nearly 76% for the U.S.

China's share is even higher for all active sellers and its share has steadily gone up over the last decade in the U.S and other international versions of Amazon's platform, Marketplace Pulse said.

By comparison, Marketplace Pulse said 30% of sellers on Walmart.com are Chinese versus 20% a year ago.

The growth of Chinese sellers invites government scrutiny of Amazon and also comes at the expense of Americans, Marketplace Pulse Founder Juozas Kaziukėnas said.

"Nurturing sellers in China promises getting closer to the source at a significant expense of sellers, jobs, taxes, safety, quality, counterfeit, and many other issues in the U.S," Kaziukėnas said.

Amazon didn't immediately respond to ConsumerAffair's request for comment.

The rise of Chinese sellers follows the launch of Amazon Haul in Nov. 2024, a discount storefront where shoppers buy directly from Chinese manufacturers in an effort to compete with similar offerings like Temu.

Chinese sellers have also been gaining on e-commerce platforms even as imports from China have shown signs of decline in the U.S., Kaziukėnas said.

China accounted for less than half of low-cost imports in 2024, according to the Kearney reshoring index, after some Chinese businesses have moved manufacturing to other countries, such as Vietnam, to avoid the risk of tariffs.

First-time homebuyers faced challenges in 2024 with elevated mortgage rates and rising home prices. However, 2025 may offer some relief, at least in certain housing markets.

In its analysis of current housing trends, Realtor.com finds the most promising opportunities for first-time buyers are in Mid-Atlantic and some Florida housing markets.

According to the analysis, Harrisburg, Pa., will be the best market for first-time buyers, followed by Rochester, N.Y., and several Florida locales, including Villas, Lauderdale Lakes, and Altamonte Springs. These markets are recognized for their affordability, strong local economies, and appealing amenities. 

The report found that 2024 saw a record low in first-time homebuyer activity, with only 24% of successful buyers falling into this category. Despite high home prices and mortgage rates projected to remain above 6% throughout 2025, an increase in market inventory offers a glimmer of hope for prospective buyers. 

"The places highlighted offer opportunities for first-timers in terms of the cost of housing, availability of homes for sale, and quality of the location,” said Danielle Hale, Realtor.com’s chief economist. 

Expect trade-offs

“Even in these high-opportunity areas, tradeoffs likely need to be considered for buyers to get to the closing table. Choosing the best place will come down to what's most important to each buyer and their family, and our list of places, and their qualities, is a good guide."

Affordability remains a key factor for first-time buyers, with all top 10 markets featuring median listing prices significantly below the national median of $416,880. For instance, Villas, Florida, the most expensive market on the list, has a median price of $236,950, nearly $180,000 less than the national figure. 

These affordable prices align with the general rule that housing costs should not exceed 30% of a buyer's income, a criterion met by all highlighted markets.

Strong economies 

Economic strength is another crucial consideration, as maintaining mortgage payments requires stable employment. The top-ranked markets boast lower-than-average unemployment rates and proximity to major job hubs.

Harrisburg and North Little Rock, Ark., are near state capitals, while Rochester, Lansing, and Baltimore benefit from nearby academic institutions and hospitals. Wilmington, Del., offers commuting access to Philadelphia, enhancing its appeal.

Beyond financial and economic factors, the report underscores the lifestyle benefits these markets offer. Each location scores well for family-friendliness, with amenities catering to diverse needs, from daycares for young families to nightlife for singles and parents. However, some areas, like Lansing and North Little Rock, may lack in dining and shopping options but excel in family-oriented services.

Finally, the potential return on investment is a significant consideration for first-time buyers. All top 10 markets are expected to experience price growth exceeding the national forecast of 3.7%, with Florida's Altamonte Springs, Villas, and Lauderdale Lakes projected to see the most substantial gains.