Connect with us

Business

‘Just another nail in the coffin for rural areas’: Affordable housing program faces the axe under Trump’s tax, budget cuts

Published

on



Heather Colley and her two children moved four times over five years as they fled high rents in eastern Tennessee, which, like much of rural America, hasn’t been spared from soaring housing costs.

A family gift in 2021 of a small plot of land offered a shot at homeownership, but building a house was beyond reach for the 45-year-old single mother and manicurist making $18.50 an hour.

That changed when she qualified for $272,000 from a nonprofit to build a three-bedroom home because of a grant program that has helped make affordable housing possible in rural areas for decades. She moved in last June.

“Every time I pull into my garage, I pinch myself,” Colley said.

Now, President Donald Trump wants to eliminate that grant, the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, and House Republicans overseeing federal budget negotiations did not include funding for it in their budget proposal. Experts and state housing agencies say that would set back tens of thousands of future affordable housing developments nationwide, particularly hurting Appalachian towns and rural counties where government aid is sparse and investors are few.

The program has helped build or repair more than 1.3 million affordable homes in the last three decades, of which at least 540,000 were in congressional districts that are rural or significantly rural, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal data.

“Maybe they don’t realize how far-reaching these programs are,” said Colley, who voted for Trump in 2024. Among those half a million homes that HOME helped build, 84% were in districts that voted for him last year, the AP analysis found.

“I understand we don’t want excessive spending and wasting taxpayer dollars,” Colley said, “but these proposed budget cuts across the board make me rethink the next time I go to the polls.”

The HOME program, started under President George H. W. Bush in the 1990s, survived years of budget battles but has been stretched thin by years of rising construction costs and stagnant funding. That’s meant fewer units, including in some rural areas where home prices have grown faster than in cities.

The program has spent more than $38 billion nationwide since it began filling in funding gaps and attracting more investment to acquire, build and repair affordable homes, HUD data shows. Additional funding has gone toward projects that have yet to be finished and rental assistance.

HOME’s future is in political limbo

To account for the gap left by the proposed cuts, House Republicans want to draw on nearly $5 billion from a related pandemic-era fund that gave states until 2030 to spend on projects supporting people who are unhoused or facing homelessness.

That $5 billion, however, may be far less, since many projects haven’t yet been logged into the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s tracking system, according to state housing agencies and associations representing them.

A spokesperson for HUD, which administers the program, said HOME isn’t as effective as other programs where the money would be better spent.

In opposition to Trump, Senate Republicans have still included funding for HOME in their draft budget. In the coming negotiations, both chambers may compromise and reduce but not terminate HOME’s funding, or extend last years’ overall budget.

White House spokesperson Davis Ingle didn’t respond to specific questions from the AP. Instead, Ingle said that Trump’s commitment to cutting red tape is making housing more affordable.

A bipartisan group of House lawmakers is working to reduce HOME’s notorious red tape that even proponents say slows construction.

Some rural areas are more dependent on HOME

In Owsley County — one of the nation’s poorest, located in the rural Kentucky hills — residents struggle in an economy blighted by coal mine closures and declining tobacco crop revenues.

Affordable homes are needed there, but tough to build in a region that doesn’t attract larger-scale rental developments that federal dollars typically go toward.

That’s where HOME comes in, said Cassie Hudson, who runs Partnership Housing in Owsley, which has relied on the program to build the majority of its affordable homes for at least a dozen years.

A lack of additional funding for HOME has already made it hard to keep up with construction costs, Hudson said, and the organization builds a quarter of the single-family homes it used to.

“Particularly for deeply rural places and persistent poverty counties, local housing developers are the only way homes and new rental housing gets built,” said Joshua Stewart of Fahe, a coalition of Appalachian nonprofits.

That’s in part because investment is scant and HOME steps in when construction costs exceed what a home can be sold for — a common barrier in poor areas of Appalachia. Some developers use the profits to build more affordable units. Its loss would erode those nonprofits’ ability to build affordable homes in years to come, Stewart said.

One of those nonprofits, Housing Development Alliance, helped Tiffany Mullins in Hazard, Kentucky, which was ravaged by floods. Mullins, a single mother of four who makes $14.30 an hour at Walmart, bought a house there thanks to HOME funding and moved in August.

Mullins sees the program as preserving a rural way of life, recalling when folks owned homes and land “with gardens, we had chickens, cows. Now you don’t see much of that.”

It’s a long-term impact

In congressional budget negotiations, HOME is an easier target than programs such as vouchers because most people would not immediately lose their housing, said Tess Hembree, executive director of the Council of State Community Development Agencies.

The effect of any reduction would instead be felt in a fizzling of new affordable housing supply. When HOME funding was temporarily reduced to $900 million in 2015, “10 to 15 years later, we’re seeing the ramifications,” Hembree said.

That includes affordable units built in cities. The biggest program that funds affordable rental housing nationwide, the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, uses HOME grants for 12% of units, totaling 324,000 current individual units, according to soon-to-be-published Urban Institute research.

Trump’s spending bill that Republicans passed this summer increased LITHC, but experts say further reducing or cutting HOME would make those credits less usable.

“It’s LITHC plus HOME, usually,” said Tim Thrasher, CEO of Community Action Partnership of North Alabama, which builds affordable apartments for some of the nation’s poorest.

In the lush mountains of eastern West Virginia, Woodlands Development Group relies on HOME for its smaller rural projects. Because it helps people with a wider range of incomes, HOME is “one of the only programs available to us that allows us to develop true workforce housing,” said executive director Dave Clark.

It’s those workers — nurses, first responders, teachers — that nonprofits like east Tennessee’s Creative Compassion use HOME to build for. With the program in jeopardy, grant administrator Sarah Halcott said she fears for her clients battling rising housing costs.

“This is just another nail in the coffin for rural areas,” Halcott said.

___

Kramon reported from Atlanta. Bedayn reported from Denver. Herbst contributed from New York City, and Kessler reported from Washington, D.C.

___

Kramon is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Trump wants more health savings accounts. A catch: they can’t pay insurance premiums

Published

on



With the tax-free money in a health savings account, a person can pay for eyeglasses or medical exams, as well as a $1,700 baby bassinet or a $300 online parenting workshop.

Those same dollars can’t be used, though, to pay for most baby formulas, toothbrushes — or insurance premiums.

President Donald Trump and some Republicans are pitching the accounts as an alternative to expiring enhanced federal subsidies that have lowered insurance premium payments for most Americans with Affordable Care Act coverage. But legal limits on how HSAs can and can’t be used are prompting doubts that expanding their use would benefit the predominantly low-income people who rely on ACA plans.

The Republican proposals come on the heels of a White House-led change to extend HSA eligibility to more ACA enrollees. One group that would almost certainly benefit: a slew of companies selling expensive wellness items that can be purchased with tax-free dollars from the accounts.

There is also deep skepticism, even among conservatives who support the proposals, that the federal government can pull off such a major policy shift in just a few weeks. The enhanced ACA subsidies expire at the end of the year, and Republicans are still debating among themselves whether to simply extend them.

“The plans have been designed. The premiums have been set. Many people have already enrolled and made their selections,” Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the president of the American Action Forum, a conservative think tank, warned senators on Nov. 19. “There’s very little that this Congress can do to change the outlook.”

Cassidy’s Plan

With health savings accounts, people who pay high out-of-pocket costs for health insurance are able to set aside money, without paying taxes, for medical expenses.

For decades, Republicans have promoted these accounts as a way for people to save money for major or emergent medical expenses without spending more federal tax dollars on health care.

The latest GOP proposals would build on a change included in Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which makes millions more ACA enrollees eligible for health savings accounts. Starting Jan. 1, those enrolled in Obamacare’s cheapest coverage may open and contribute to HSAs.

Now Republicans are making the case that, in lieu of the pandemic-era enhanced ACA subsidies, patients would be better off being given money to cover some health costs — specifically through deposits to HSAs.

The White House has yet to release a formal proposal, though early reports suggested it could include HSA contributions as well as temporary, more restrictive premium subsidies.

Sen. Bill Cassidy — a Louisiana Republican who chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee and is facing a potentially tough reelection fight next year — has proposed loading HSAs with federal dollars sent directly to some ACA enrollees.

“The American people want something to pass, so let’s find something to pass,” Cassidy said on Dec. 3, pitching his plan for HSAs again. “Let’s give power to the patient, not profit to the insurance company.”

He has promised a deal can be struck in time for 2026 coverage.

Democrats, whose support Republicans will likely need to pass any health care measure, have widely panned the GOP’s ideas. They are calling instead for an extension of the enhanced subsidies to control premium costs for most of the nearly 24 million Americans enrolled in the ACA marketplace, a larger pool than the 7.3 million people the Trump administration estimates soon will be eligible for HSAs.

HSAs “can be a useful tool for very wealthy people,” said Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee. “But I don’t see it as a comprehensive health insurance opportunity.”

Who Can Use HSAs?

The IRS sets restrictions on the use of HSAs, which are typically managed by banks or health insurance companies. For starters, on the ACA marketplace, they are available only to those with the highest-deductible health insurance plans — the bronze and catastrophic plans.

There are limits on how much can be deposited into an account each year. In 2026 it will be $4,400 for a single person and $8,750 for a family.

Flexible spending accounts, or FSAs — which are typically offered through employer coverage — work similarly but have lower savings limits and cannot be rolled over from year to year.

The law that established HSAs prohibits the accounts from being used to pay insurance premiums, meaning that without an overhaul, the GOP’s proposals are unlikely to alleviate the problem at hand: skyrocketing premium payments. Obamacare enrollees who receive subsidies are projected to pay 114% more out-of-pocket for their premiums next year on average, absent congressional action.

Even with the promise of the government depositing cash into an HSA, people may still opt to go without coverage next year once they see those premium costs, said Tom Buchmueller, an economics professor at the University of Michigan who worked in the Biden administration.

“For people who stay in the marketplace, they’re going to be paying a lot more money every month,” he said. “It doesn’t help them pay that monthly premium.”

Others, Buchmueller noted, might be pushed into skimpier insurance coverage. Obamacare bronze plans come with the highest out-of-pocket costs.

An HHS Official’s Interest

Health savings accounts can be used to pay for many routine medical supplies and services, such as medical and dental exams, as well as emergency room visits. In recent years, the government has expanded the list of applicable purchases to include over-the-counter products such as Tylenol and tampons.

Purchases for “general health” are not permissible, such as fees for dance or swim lessons. Food, gym memberships, or supplements are not allowed unless prescribed by a doctor for a medical condition or need.

Americans are investing more into these accounts as their insurance deductibles rise, according to Morningstar. The investment research firm found that assets in HSAs grew from $5 billion 20 years ago to $146 billion last year. President George W. Bush signed the law establishing health savings accounts in 2003, with the White House promising at the time that they would “help more American families get the health care they need at a price they can afford.”

Since then, the accounts have become most common for wealthier, white Americans who are healthy and have employer-sponsored health insurance, according to a report released by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office in September.

Now, even more money is expected to flow into these accounts, because of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Companies are taking notice of the growing market for HSA-approved products, with major retailers such as Amazon, Walmart, and Target developing online storefronts dedicated to devices, medications, and supplies eligible to be purchased with money in the accounts.

Startups have popped up in recent years dedicated to helping people get quick approval from medical providers for various — and sometimes expensive — items, memberships, or fitness or health services.

Truemed — a company co-founded in 2022 by Calley Means, a close ally of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — has emerged as one of the biggest players in this niche space.

A $9,000 red cedar ice bath and a $2,000 hemlock sauna, for example, are available for purchase with HSA funds through Truemed. So, too, is the $1,700 bassinet, designed to automatically respond to the cries of a newborn by gently rocking the baby back to sleep.

Truemed’s executives say its most popular products are its smaller-dollar fitness offerings, which include kettlebells, supplements, treadmills, and gym memberships.

“What we’ve seen at Truemed is that, when given the choice, Americans choose to invest their health care dollars in these kinds of proven lifestyle interventions,” Truemed CEO Justin Mares told KFF Health News.

Means joined the Department of Health and Human Services in November after a stint earlier this year at the White House, where he worked when Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law in July. Truemed’s general counsel, Joe Vladeck, said Means left the company in August.

Asked about Means’ potential to benefit from the law’s expansion of HSAs, HHS spokeswoman Emily Hilliard said in a statement that “Calley Means will not personally benefit financially from this proposal as he will be divesting from his company since he has been hired at HHS as a senior advisor supporting food and nutrition policy.”

Truemed is privately held, not publicly traded, and details of how Means will go about divesting have not been disclosed.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Netflix lines up $59 billion of debt for Warner Bros. deal

Published

on



Netflix Inc. has lined up $59 billion of financing from Wall Street banks to help support its planned acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery Inc., which would make it one of the largest ever loans of its kind.

Wells Fargo & Co., BNP Paribas SA and HSBC Plc are providing the unsecured bridge loan, according to a statement Friday, a type of financing that is typically replaced with more permanent debt such as corporate bonds.

Under the deal announced Friday, Warner Bros. shareholders will receive $27.75 a share in cash and stock in Netflix. The total equity value of the deal is $72 billion, while the enterprise value of the deal is about $82.7 billion.

Bridge loans are a crucial step for banks in building relationships with companies to win higher-paying mandates down the road. 

A loan of $59 billion would rank among the biggest of its type, Anheuser-Busch InBev SA obtained $75 billion of loans to back its acquisition of SABMiller Plc in 2015, the largest ever bridge financing, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Stocks: Facing a vast wave of incoming liquidity, the S&P 500 prepares to surf to a new record high

Published

on



The S&P 500 index ticked up 0.3% yesterday, its eighth straight upward trading session. It is now less than half a percentage point away from its record high, and futures were pointing marginally up again this morning. Nasdaq 100 futures were even more optimistic, up 0.39% before the open in New York. The VIX “fear” index (which measures volatility) has sunk 12.6% this month, indicating that investors seem to have settled in for a calm, quiet, risk-on holiday season.

They have reason to be happy. Washington is preparing a wave of incoming liquidity that is likely to generate fresh demand for equities.

For instance, the CME FedWatch index shows an 87% chance that the U.S. Federal Reserve will deliver an interest rate cut next week, delivering a new round of cheaper money. Further cuts are expected in 2026.

Furthermore, Wall Street largely expects President Trump to announce that Kevin Hassett will replace Fed chairman Jerome Powell in May—and Hassett is widely regarded as a dove who will lean in favor of further rate cuts.

Elsewhere, the Fed has begun a series of “reserve management purchases,” a program in which the central bank will buy short-term T-bills—a move that will add more liquidity to markets generally.

Banks, brokers and trading platforms are also lining up to handle ‘Trump Accounts,’ into which the U.S. government will deposit $1,000 for every child. The trust fund can be invested in low-cost stock index trackers—a new source of investment demand coming online in the back half of 2026.

So it’s no surprise that nine major investment banks polled by the Financial Times expect stocks to rise in 2026; the average of their estimates is by 10%.

The Congressional Budget Office also estimates that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will add 0.9% to U.S. GDP next year largely because it allows companies to immediately deduct capital expenditures from their taxes—spurring a huge round of corporate spending. 

With all that fresh money on the horizon, it’s clear why markets have shrugged off their worries about AI and Bitcoin. The only shock will be if the S&P fails to hit a new all-time high by the end of the year.

Here’s a snapshot of the markets ahead of the opening bell in New York this morning:

  • S&P 500 futures were up 0.2% this morning. The last session closed up 0.3%. 
  • STOXX Europe 600 was up 0.3% in early trading. 
  • The U.K.’s FTSE 100 was up 0.14% in early trading. 
  • Japan’s Nikkei 225 was up 2.33%. 
  • China’s CSI 300 was up 0.34%. 
  • The South Korea KOSPI was down 0.19%. 
  • India’s NIFTY 50 is up 0.18%. 
  • Bitcoin was flat at $93K.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.