Taxes - newspepr.com

Home Tags Taxes

The performance of banks in Trump's economy can be attributed to several factors. During his presidency, the banking sector experienced significant growth, largely due to the implementation of business-friendly policies and deregulation efforts.

One major factor contributing to the success of banks was the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which lowered the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. This reduction in taxes resulted in increased profits for banks, as they were able to retain more of their earnings.

Additionally, the deregulation of the financial industry, particularly the revision of the Dodd-Frank Act, eased regulatory burdens on banks. The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA) signed into law in 2018, raised the threshold for systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs) from $50 billion to $250 billion in assets, reducing the number of banks subject to stricter regulations.

The strong economy, characterized by low unemployment and rising interest rates, also contributed to the success of banks. As interest rates increased, banks were able to earn more from their lending activities, further boosting their profits.

However, the thriving banking sector also raises concerns about the potential for excessive risk-taking and the impact on income inequality. The deregulation of the financial industry and the concentration of wealth among large banks may lead to increased systemic risk and decreased access to financial services for low-income communities.

Overall, the performance of banks in Trump's economy is a complex issue, reflecting both the positive effects of deregulation and tax cuts, as well as the potential negative consequences of increased risk-taking and income inequality.

Business

The performance of banks in Trump’s economy can be attributed to several factors. During his presidency, the banking sector experienced significant growth, largely due to the implementation of business-friendly policies and deregulation efforts. One major factor contributing to the success of banks was the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which lowered the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. This reduction in taxes resulted in increased profits for banks, as they were able to retain more of their earnings. Additionally, the deregulation of the financial industry, particularly the revision of the Dodd-Frank Act, eased regulatory burdens on banks. The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA) signed into law in 2018, raised the threshold for systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs) from $50 billion to $250 billion in assets, reducing the number of banks subject to stricter regulations. The strong economy, characterized by low unemployment and rising interest rates, also contributed to the success of banks. As interest rates increased, banks were able to earn more from their lending activities, further boosting their profits. However, the thriving banking sector also raises concerns about the potential for excessive risk-taking and the impact on income inequality. The deregulation of the financial industry and the concentration of wealth among large banks may lead to increased systemic risk and decreased access to financial services for low-income communities. Overall, the performance of banks in Trump’s economy is a complex issue, reflecting both the positive effects of deregulation and tax cuts, as well as the potential negative consequences of increased risk-taking and income inequality.

NewsPepr -

July 17, 2025

In 2016, then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris issued a statement that daily fantasy sports (DFS) contests were likely illegal under California law. However, she also expressed a willingness to work with the industry and state lawmakers to create a regulatory framework that would allow DFS to operate legally in the state.

Harris's statement came after several other states, including Nevada, Texas, and Illinois, had taken steps to restrict or ban DFS operations. At the time, DFS operators such as DraftKings and FanDuel had been operating in California without explicit permission or regulation from the state.

In response to Harris's statement, the California legislature introduced several bills that aimed to regulate DFS in the state. One of those bills, Assembly Bill 1437, was signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown in 2016. The law required DFS operators to register with the state and pay a licensing fee, and it also imposed certain consumer protection measures, such as age verification and responsible gaming protocols.

Under the law, DFS operators are allowed to offer contests to California residents, but they must comply with certain rules and regulations, including:

1. Registering with the state and paying a licensing fee
2. Implementing age verification and responsible gaming protocols
3. Providing clear and transparent rules and scoring systems
4. Offering tools to help customers set limits on their play and exclude themselves from playing
5. Paying taxes on their revenue

Despite the regulatory framework, some critics have argued that DFS remains a form of illegal gaming under California law. In 2020, a California appeals court ruled that a lawsuit against DraftKings and FanDuel could proceed, on the grounds that the companies' DFS contests constituted illegal gambling under state law.

It's worth noting that the legal landscape surrounding DFS is constantly evolving, and the industry remains subject to ongoing scrutiny and debate. While California has established a regulatory framework for DFS, other states have taken different approaches, and the issue remains a topic of contention in many parts of the country.

Sports

In 2016, then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris issued a statement that daily fantasy sports (DFS) contests were likely illegal under California law. However, she also expressed a willingness to work with the industry and state lawmakers to create a regulatory framework that would allow DFS to operate legally in the state. Harris’s statement came after several other states, including Nevada, Texas, and Illinois, had taken steps to restrict or ban DFS operations. At the time, DFS operators such as DraftKings and FanDuel had been operating in California without explicit permission or regulation from the state. In response to Harris’s statement, the California legislature introduced several bills that aimed to regulate DFS in the state. One of those bills, Assembly Bill 1437, was signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown in 2016. The law required DFS operators to register with the state and pay a licensing fee, and it also imposed certain consumer protection measures, such as age verification and responsible gaming protocols. Under the law, DFS operators are allowed to offer contests to California residents, but they must comply with certain rules and regulations, including: 1. Registering with the state and paying a licensing fee 2. Implementing age verification and responsible gaming protocols 3. Providing clear and transparent rules and scoring systems 4. Offering tools to help customers set limits on their play and exclude themselves from playing 5. Paying taxes on their revenue Despite the regulatory framework, some critics have argued that DFS remains a form of illegal gaming under California law. In 2020, a California appeals court ruled that a lawsuit against DraftKings and FanDuel could proceed, on the grounds that the companies’ DFS contests constituted illegal gambling under state law. It’s worth noting that the legal landscape surrounding DFS is constantly evolving, and the industry remains subject to ongoing scrutiny and debate. While California has established a regulatory framework for DFS, other states have taken different approaches, and the issue remains a topic of contention in many parts of the country.

NewsPepr -

July 4, 2025