SMART INVESTING NEWSLETTER
Should members of Congress be allowed to trade stocks? Risks to Nvidia stock that you may not realize! Understanding AI and why it's becoming more expensive, 529 Withdrawal Pitfalls & More
Brent Wilsey • September 12, 2025
 
 Should members of Congress be allowed to trade stocks?
 
 I recently saw there was a bipartisan bill presented in the House that would ban lawmakers from trading individual stocks. I feel like we have been hearing about this for years, and according to NPR, “For more than a decade, a series of bills have been proposed to address such trades, but differences about the details and a lack of support from top congressional leaders stalled past reform efforts.” The question is, will this time be different? The bill made me curious though about how active congress was when it came to trading and let’s just say I couldn’t believe the numbers! In 2022 154 members of Congress made 14,752 trades, in 2023 118 members made 11,491 trades, in 2024 113 members made 9,261 trades, and through July of 2025 108 members made 7,810 trades. That is a crazy amount of activity and I’m not sure how they even have time for that. Their returns were also quite impressive with Democrats producing an average return of 31.1% in 2024 and Republicans producing an average return of 26.1%. For reference, the S&P 500 was up 23.3%. The numbers were quite staggering when you look at the individual performance of some of these politicians. In 2024, Rep. David Rouzer (R-NC) was up 149.0%, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) was up 142.3%, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) was up 123.8%, Rep. Roger Williams (R-TX) was up 111.2% and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) rounded out the top ten with 70.9% return. These are hedge funds that are beating returns in several cases! Personally, I think it is ridiculous that politicians can trade individual stocks, and I hope there is finally action in Congress that ends it!
 
 There are risks to Nvidia stock that you may not realize!
 
 There is no denying what Nvidia has done has been extremely impressive, but one major problem with the company is the revenue is extremely concentrated. Their top customers made up 23% of total revenue in the recent quarter, which was up from 14% in the same quarter last year. Their second largest customer made up 16% of total revenue, which was up from 11% in the same quarter last year. Sales to four other customers contributed 14%, 11%,11%, and 10% of revenue respectively. This means that six customers accounted for 85% of Nvidia’s total sales. My concern is what if one of them drops out of the AI arms race or if a few of them pull back spending, that could really slow Nvidia’s business. I also believe that China is a risk to Nvidia. While sales have been hindered in the country due to political constraints, I believe many investors are looking to China as an area of potential growth for the company. All I can say to that, is do you really think the Chinese government wants Chinese companies using Nvidia chips? It was reported that Alibaba has recently developed an advanced chip, and I’d assume Huawei and other Chinese companies are racing to compete against Nvidia. While Nvidia stock essentially just keeps climbing, it’s important to realize there are several risks that could take the stock down! 
 
 Understanding more about AI and why it's becoming more expensive
 
 We are no expert on artificial intelligence, but we have learned that while AI has gotten smarter it has also gotten more expensive. It is now broken down into a unit of AI which is known as a token and while the price of tokens continues to drop, the number of tokens needed to accomplish a task is increasing dramatically. There are two basic attributes to AI, one is called training, and the other is AI inference. The increase in cost is coming from the training side that has to use large models and demands even more costly processing. AI applications are using so-called reasoning and new forms of AI double check queries on their answers, which may include scanning the entire Web. Sometimes they write their own programs to calculate things all before releasing an answer that may only be a short sentence. Delivering meaningful and better responses takes a lot more tokens to complete that process. Looking at examples, basic chatbot Q&A requires 50 to 500 tokens. Short document summaries can be used anywhere from 200 tokens to 6000 tokens. Lawyers and paralegals who use legal document analysis require 5,000 to 250,000 tokens. If one is trying to do multi-step agent workflows, well now you’re looking at 100,000 to over 1 million tokens. Please understand when we talk tokens we’re not talking about anything that has to do with cryptocurrencies, and this is a different token pertaining to AI. Some big companies are spending $100 billion a year or more to create cutting-edge AI models and building out their infrastructure. However, for all that investment there needs to be a return on investment, and businesses and individuals will eventually have to pay more for artificial intelligence. The CFO of Open AI said last October that 75% of the company’s revenue comes from your average person paying $20 a month. Currently the cheapest AI models, which includes Open AI‘s new ChatGPT – 5 nano is costing around $.10 per million tokens but go to the top-of-the-line GPT -5 and that costs about $3.44 per million tokens. What they are trying to figure out is what the consumer will pay for AI.  There is also concern about how long the big giants can keep up this spending when they’re competing with their own
 
 Financial Planning: 529 Withdrawal Pitfalls
 
 A 529 plan is a tax-advantaged savings account designed to help families pay for education costs, with contributions growing tax-deferred and withdrawals tax-free when used for “qualified education expenses” such as college tuition, fees, books, and room and board. A qualified withdrawal avoids taxes and penalties, while a non-qualified withdrawal means the earnings portion (not contributions) is subject to federal and state income tax plus a 10% federal penalty. The IRS also allows up to $10,000 per year, or $20,000 in 2026, per student for K–12 tuition, and under the One Big Beautiful Bill signed on July 4, 2025, Congress expanded 529 qualified expenses to include not just K–12 tuition, but also fees, books, and required supplies for primary and secondary education. However, California does not conform to this expansion and continues to treat K–12 withdrawals of any kind as non-qualified, taxing the earnings and applying a 2.5% state penalty. This mismatch means California families using 529 funds for K–12 costs may face unexpected taxes and penalties despite the new federal flexibility.  Keep this in mind if you are considering funding a 529 plan.
 
 Should you buy the new iPhone or work with what you have?
 
 On Tuesday, September 9th, Apple launched their new iPhone and while there was a lot of excitement around the event, I just don't see what's exciting about the limited changes. If you are excited about the new features though and if you’re a techie, you probably want to get the new iPhone just to brag about it. But if you want to be financially smart, you need to think about maybe you really don’t need a new phone. The new iPhone 17 is supposed to be the best ever, which is of course what they are going to say. The cost of the new iPhone 17 is expected to be between $800-$1200. If your phone is seven years or older, you may start running into problems with updates, which could include security fixes and updated software. Apple may not support your phone so maybe it would be wise to buy a new one. Your phone may be feeling slow or short on battery life, but there are repairs that can correct that situation for you and are far cheaper than buying a new phone. Repairs could be anywhere between $100-$350 and be sure to check out a good independent shop but be aware they may use third party aftermarket parts. You may be thinking, "what’s the big deal? It’s only $800" but it’s important to remember that a few hundred dollars here and a few hundred dollars there adds up and before you know it, you're way over your monthly budget. Also, think about what you’re saving on repairing your phone versus getting a new one. That is money that you can put away into your emergency fund or hopefully invest it for long-term growth to increase your net worth. Think about how it will grow over time and when invested properly, you’ll be very happy that you didn’t waste that few hundred dollars extra on a new iPhone. It will be interesting to see how "different" the new model really is!
 
 Here’s another indicator showing how overpriced the S&P 500 is!
 
 There are four main valuations used when valuing a public company or a stock. The most common one is what investors are paying for the earnings, that is known as a price to earnings ratio. Another one that is fairly well known is price to book value, which looks at how much you are paying for the assets, minus the liabilities of a company. The price of cash flow is not as well known, but we believe that cash flow is very important for businesses and like the other ratios, we don’t want to overpay for it. The last one that has been around for many years is the price to sales. This can be one of the best indicators because unlike price to earnings, there’s no way for a company to pad or manipulate the sales, they are what they are. As of now the S&P 500 is trading at 3.23 times sales, which is an all-time record high. When it comes to the price to earnings, the ratio is also high at 22.5 times projected earnings. While this is not a record, it is well above the average of 16.8 over the last 25 years. Some people are ignoring the valuations saying that the companies are worth these higher values, but as I said they are well above historical averages. The other problem is many of these popular names pushing the indexes higher are crowded trades and it seems like everyone is in those stocks. The problem is, if almost everyone is in those stocks and there is a pullback for any reason, there are not many people that have extra capital to step in and buy more. We have also talked about margin hitting a record high of $1 trillion and the problem here is if people have margin on their accounts, they could be hit with margin calls perhaps taking away what little cash they had left or they could be forced to sell out of the stock, which would create more downward pressure. No one knows what will cause the bad news for a fall, but it will likely come out of left field. That could then lower future expectations and that is when valuations will matter. The decline could be larger than people realize. It’s always important to understand what you are paying when you are buying stocks. Remember they’re not gambling chips; they are small pieces of large companies that trade based on valuations. 
 
 Does the BLS need to change the way they calculate the job numbers?
 
 While we know the labor market has been softening, I was quite surprised to see annual revisions to nonfarm payrolls data for the year prior to March 2025 showed a drop of 911,000 from the initial estimate. This is a huge change considering the average pace of seasonally adjusted employment gains went from 147,000 jobs a month over the period to a bit over 70,000! This means instead of adding about 1.8 million positions as originally reported, the U.S. economy created just 847,000 jobs. It also marked the largest preliminary revision on record going back to 2000 and when looking at it as a percentage of total jobs lost the revision represents the largest since 2009. To be clear, while this is troubling, this is not the final revision, and it is just the preliminary part of an annual process in which the BLS updates the job figures from its monthly employer survey using more comprehensive data from state unemployment tax records. The official revision will come in February, and large changes can still occur. As an example, last year's August revision of negative 818,000 was revised to a final reading of negative 598,000 in February of this year. With how much technology has changed, I would expect these monthly reports would get more accurate over time, not less. Maybe instead of relying on a survey of about 121,000 employers there is a better way to get this data? The BLS pointed out that the revisions were so large because businesses within its survey reported higher employment in its survey than they did in their quarterly tax reports and that businesses that responded to its survey had stronger employment than those that had been selected for the survey but didn’t respond. While this all may seem extremely troubling, I have continued to question how payroll gains could be so large without a good pool of people to fill those jobs. I still believe that though the labor market has softened more than we initially thought, I still believe the economy is in an alright spot considering the unemployment rate remains historically low. 
 
 Does the de minimis rule affect you?
 
 You may have never heard of this rule before and if you’ve been buying packages online that were less than $800, you probably didn’t realize that they could enter the US tariff free. Well, that has now changed, and you may have to pay tariffs on that small package depending on the country of origin and the type of product it is. It also is important to know how the product was delivered, did it come through a post office or a commercial carrier like UPS or Federal Express. If you buy small items overseas such things as fishing poles, pens, or small statues, and even some types of shoes, you may have to pay additional tariffs when your package arrives. It’s a little bit unclear about who and when the tariff will have to be paid. It is possible that you could receive a package from UPS and when they come to your door, you may be asked to pay the tariff right then and there. Whether you knew about it or not. You will have the right to refuse the package. When you are shopping online, you should look on the seller's website closely to see who is responsible for paying the tariff and when. The tariff can be very high if you’re buying yoga pants from Vietnam at $98 a pair, your tariff would be 56% or about $55. Expecting a child and you found a great stroller online coming from China for $399. Be prepared to pay over $540 because of the 36% tariff. If you’re trying to stay healthy and found some great deals on nutritional supplements from Canada that were only $37, by the time you pay the tariff of 63% you’ll be paying $60 for those nutritional supplements.
 
 Inflation reports likely cements Fed rate cut next week
 
 The Consumer Price Index, also known as CPI, showed August headline prices rose by 2.9% compared to last year and core prices, which exclude food and energy, saw an increase of 3.1%. Both readings were essentially in line with market expectations. Annual core price inflation was essentially in line with last month's reading, but the headline did climb from an annual rate of 2.7% in July and the August number marked the highest reading since January. This was largely due to the fact that food prices rose 3.2% compared to last year and energy is no longer providing the same benefit it did earlier in the year. Energy has largely seen deflation this year, but in August there was an annual increase of 0.2%. Gasoline was down 6.6% compared to last year, but electricity prices increased 6.6% and utility gas service rose 13.8%. What I would consider is that tariff impacted products are still surprisingly seeing little change. Apparel was up 0.2% compared to last year and new vehicles only saw an increase of 0.7%. I was surprised to see prices for used cars and trucks increase 6% though. As I've said for many months now, shelter continues to provide a large headwind in the inflation report as prices climbed 3.6%, but the positive here is it has been steadily declining, and it is well off the recent peak around 8% at the beginning of 2023. We also got the Producer Price Index, also known as PPI, earlier in the week and that came in largely better than expected. Headline prices showed an increase of 2.6% compared to last year and core prices climbed by 2.8%. Looking at all the inflation data from this past week, I wouldn't say it was overly impressive, but I believe it does enough for the Fed to justify starting rate cuts considering the concerns that are being discussed around the labor market. 
 
 Is Elon Musk worth $1 trillion?
 
 Tesla is asking shareholders to approve another huge pay package for Elon Musk. Based on the maximum payout assuming the share count remains, the total package would be worth $975 billion. Looking at the details, it is quite ambitious so I'd say if he ends up hitting these targets maybe he would be worth that amount. Operational milestones for the award include: 20 million Tesla vehicles delivered, 10 million active FSD Subscriptions, 1 million robots delivered, 1 million Robotaxis in commercial operation and a series of adjusted EBITDA benchmarks. The more challenging milestones revolve around the market cap of the company. These milestones are separated into 12 tranches with the first benefit coming at a market cap of $2 trillion and the final benchmark coming at a market cap of $8.5 trillion. I believe to achieve these lofty goals Telsa will have to execute on both Robotaxis and their Optimus robot. In the past Elon has said he believes Optimus can make Tesla a $25 trillion company and he recently said roughly 80% of Tesla’s value could eventually come from Optimus. These goals would be needed as I believe the car business will not be enough to get him to even a $2 trillion market cap, especially considering the problems they are having with slumping sales and declining market share. It was just reported the Telsa accounted for just 38% of total US EV sales in the month of August. This was the first time its market share has fallen below 40% since October 2017 and it is well off the records it had over 80% just a few years ago. From an investment perspective, Elon has proven me wrong before, but this stock is definitely one of the highest risks/speculative bets that investors can make. For me it's more like gambling and while it's entertaining to watch what Elon says and does, I wouldn't touch the stock. 
 
The big brokerage firms are fighting for your investment accounts                               Our investment advisory firm over the years has never been a favorite of the big brokerage firms because we generally only do three, maybe four trades on average per year. But the big brokerage firms are now acting like the casinos in Las Vegas and are doing everything they can to get you on their platform. They will give you all kinds of tools and seminars, so you’ll take higher risk and do more trading. In the meantime, they're downplaying the risk of trading. You see also like the casinos in Las Vegas, there are now stories of them giving away free rooms for the big players and they are giving you free software and free education on how to trade. Robinhood even invited 1000 people to Las Vegas and took them go kart racing and provided classes with their new trade platform. Schwab and Fidelity are doing similar types of events to get you to use more of their services. Once they get you in the door, they can show you how to use margin debt, which by the way hit a new record of $1.13 trillion in September, along with option trading and other exciting ways to make you think you can make a lot of money. Doesn't that sound like the casinos in Las Vegas that try and get you to hit the gambling tables? Unfortunately, it seems to be working somewhat because the percentage of investors who now have self-directed accounts is 33%, which is a big increase from 24% just five years ago. My problem with this, as you can tell, is I don’t believe they’re teaching people how to invest but more on how to gamble and how exciting it can be. Going back 100 years it's still the same with Wall Street, they will make some big profits, and the small investors will lose most if not all of their nest egg.                                                                          Can Travis Kelce turn around Six Flags?                                          If you’re not sure who Travis Kelce is, he is a tight end for the Kansas City Chiefs and engaged to the well-known singer Taylor Swift. Six Flags, which is a public company that trades under the symbol FUN, has received an investment of $200 million from the activist investment company JANA Partners. It was not disclosed how much investment Travis has of the $200 million, but he does like to invest in companies both public and private. He has investments in over 30 companies that include manufacturing, distribution, consumer goods, entertainment, and a beer company. He is pretty excited about his investment because as a kid he used to love the roller coasters, Dippin' Dots and him and his brother have great memories at Six Flags. He has suggested that they do a roller coaster with a 300 foot drop where riders feet dangle from beneath. Investing in Six Flags seems to be an uphill battle. Year to date the stock is down roughly 45%, the company is losing money and has a market capitalization of $2.6 billion. Travis does have a long-term perspective on all his investments likes we do. He is OK investing in a company losing money in hopes it could be turned around. Our philosophy at our firm is we will not invest in companies that do not have earnings. One benefit he does have is obviously his name and I’m sure if him and his fiancé, Taylor Swift, would start showing up at Six Flags, you can bet that they will be all over the news giving the company some nice free advertising.                                                                          Markets actually declined after the Fed rate cut                                           On Wednesday, the Fed announced they would lower their benchmark overnight borrowing rate by 0.25% to a range of 3.75%-4%. This marked the second consecutive cut of 0.25% and there is still one meeting left this year where we could see another rate cut. The keyword here is could and the lack of conviction around another cut is likely what spooked the market. Powell said a December rate cut isn’t a “foregone conclusion” and while recently appointed Fed Governor Stephen Miran again dissented in favor of a 0.5% cut, there was also a hawkish dissent with Kansas City Fed President Jeffrey Schmid voting for no decrease. Schmid's vote and Powell's language was likely what sent the market lower after the announcement as many essentially had the December rate cut factored in as a sure thing. Powell also added that there is “a growing chorus” among the 19 Fed officials to “at least wait a cycle” before cutting again. This resulted in traders lowering the odds for a December cut to 67% from 90% the day prior. Given the lack of data and an economy that still appears to be in an alright position, I do believe the Fed needs to be careful cutting too quickly especially since they are taking another accommodative stance with the announcement that they would be ending the reduction of its asset purchases – a process known as quantitative tightening – on Dec 1. This in theory will stimulate the Treasury and mortgage-backed securities markets, which should help with longer dated debt instruments, as the Fed was allowing these assets to just roll off the balance sheet and now will need to step in and buy new debt to replace the securities as they mature. While QT shaved off around $2.3 trillion from the Fed's balance sheet, Covid led to a major expansion from just over $4 trillion to close to $9 trillion. The question is with the rapid expansion just a few years ago, was enough removed from the balance sheet to put it at a more normalized level. Like with the Fed cuts, I do believe if monetary policy eases too much, we risk a return of inflation and a further increase in many speculative assets that could cause problems down the road.                                                                          Financial Planning: When does a Solar System Make Sense?                                          Buying a solar system generally makes the most sense if you use a lot of electricity and plan to stay in your home long term. Installing by the end of 2025 allows you to capture the 30% federal tax credit, which significantly shortens the payback period. If the system is financed with a mortgage or home equity line of credit (HELOC), the interest may be tax-deductible, allowing for little or no upfront cash outlay and after-tax loan payments that can be lower than the monthly electricity savings. Owned solar panels usually increase home value, though not always enough to fully offset the system’s cost, which is why longer-term ownership is important to recoup the investment. In California, including a battery is almost always recommended so you can store power generated during the day for use at night, reducing the need to buy expensive electricity from the grid. Leasing can be attractive for shorter-term homeowners if lease payments are well below current utility costs, but leases generally don’t increase home value and don’t qualify for tax credits. The main advantage is immediate monthly savings without an upfront investment, though leased panels can complicate a future home sale. In some cases, it may be best not to install solar at all—for example, if you don’t plan to stay in the home long term, or if your electricity usage and potential savings are too low to justify the hassle and possible roof wear from installation.                                                                          Don't ignore the concentration risk in the indexes!                                          I've talked about this before, but the S&P 500 is not as diversified as you think. The Mag Seven, which consists of Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tesla now accounts for nearly 35% of the entire index. If you look at the QQQ, or the Nasdaq 100, the concentration is even more problematic with the Mag Seven accounting for nearly 45% of that index. If you include Broadcom in the mix, those companies would account for nearly 40% of the S&P 500 and 50% of the QQQ. While the indexes continue to climb, people continue to have the false belief that they have a sound diversified portfolio. It is when the music stops that people will come to realize how over reliant they were on the tech sector. Congratulations if you have consistently held these indexes, but the more I read, the more concerned I am that we are heading towards something similar to the Tech Bust that occurred more than 25 years ago.                                                                          Maybe we will see a decline in the federal deficit next year                                          I have said before that at this point, the federal debt is not a huge problem, but it’s something that needs to be taken care of before it does get too far out of hand. There only seems to be two ways to reduce the federal debt, one is to reduce spending, which would hurt the economy, or two is to increase taxes, which would probably hurt the economy even more. I recently read something in the Wall Street Journal that gave me a glimmer of hope that there’s another way that maybe we can reduce the federal debt. In one of the articles it mentioned that at the NATO summit in June, President Trump achieved something that has not been possible by every other president since Richard Nixon was in office over 50 years ago in the early 70s. Somehow President Trump convinced the Europeans to make a commitment to increase their defense spending from 2% to 5% of their GDP. This means they’ll be taking care of themselves and that’s less money that the United States has to spend to defend them. In addition to that, President Trump has also pretty much ended most aid to Ukraine and instead offered to sell Tomahawk missiles to the Europeans, which they can give to Kyiv if they want. That would make a lot more sense for the Europeans, and it would save the United States billions and billions of dollars, which should help reduce our spending and generate some revenue to add to our GDP. The tariffs are also generating billions and billions of dollars of revenue for the federal government. I think we could see maybe more ways to reduce spending and increase revenue that no one has thought of. What all this means is, we could see a slightly lower federal deficit by the end of 2026. Let’s keep our fingers crossed as this debt needs to be addressed before it becomes out of control.                                                                          The much anticipated meeting between Trump & Xi ended with little news                                          I would say it was positive that Trump and Xi finally met, but the meeting ended in what looks like a trade truce instead of a trade deal. Trump agreed to cut fentanyl tariffs on China to 10%, which brings the overall levy on Chinese imports to 47% from 57%. This also means the 100% tarriffs Trump threatened to go into effect on Nov. 1st over rare earths will not occur. The US also agreed to postpone a rule announced on Sept. 29th that blacklisted majority-owned subsidiaries of Chinese companies on an entity list. Beijing said it will work to stop fentanyl coming into the U.S. and buy American-grown soybeans along with other agricultural goods. China also agreed to pause for one year the export controls on rare earths that were announced on Oct. 9th, but China’s rare earths restrictions announced in early April remain in place. The two countries also agreed to suspend fees for one year on ships that dock at each other’s ports. A big problem here according to Trump, the rare earths deal will need to be negotiated every year. I'm concerned by this because there could be a major difference in philosophy with the next administration. Another negative was details were quite light after the meeting and it wasn't really clear what China agreed to in terms of agriculture and energy purchases and their cooperation on fentanyl trafficking. Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, said China will buy 25 million metric tons of soybeans annually over the next three years, but all China said was the two sides agreed to expand agricultural trade without providing specifics. Other major points of contention including TikTok and chip exports from Nvidia appeared to go unresolved. Moving forward, Trump said he plans to visit China in April and Xi will come to the U.S., either Palm Beach, Florida or Washington, D.C., at a later date.                                                                          If we lower interest rates, it is possible we may never be able to raise them again                                          I know that seems strange, but you have to realize that the United States is now nearly at its 1946 peak of indebtedness relative to the size of the economy. It's important to remember 1946 was just after World War II and the country was paying off all the debt that was run up during the war. I do believe going forward, if the economy can maintain or continue to grow and the plans from the current administration generate more revenue, I think we will be fine. However, if they don’t work and the debt continues to rise, it would be hard to raise rates as it could scare current owners of treasury debt as interest expense would climb dramatically, which would make it difficult to recover. This is one problem that Japan is already faced with. Their large amount of debt to GDP and the debt itself cannot keep going up forever as people will eventually become scared and begin selling their treasury bills, notes, and bonds. The average interest rate on US debt is around 3.4%, which is not too excessive and could be paid off overtime. Increasing interest rates in the future would be a problem because as debt matures, it could have to be refinanced at much higher levels than the 3.4%. I believe the best way out of this situation is to maintain the current debt but increase the GDP, which would then in the long term generate more revenue to not only service the debt but also potentially be in a spot to begin paying the debt down.                                                                          Some states are thinking of putting price caps on insurance companies, bad idea!                                          Illinois is considering a ban on insurance companies being able to increase rates because of catastrophes in other states. At first thought this sounds like a great idea, but the problem is it makes the pool of insurance much smaller and if Illinois would have a catastrophe of their own with a smaller pool to cover the losses, insurance premiums could skyrocket perhaps even double. Louisiana gave its regulator the power to reverse excessive premiums. New York and Michigan are looking at imposing reductions on insurance premiums on both homes and cars. These states need to review what happened in California when the state refused to let insurance companies increase their premiums. Many insurance companies said we will lose money if we stay so we are pulling out of California. After a while California realized their mistake and allowed double digit increases insurance premiums and the insurance companies came back. People, regulators and the government forget that in many places home prices in just a few years more than doubled, which is ironic since people loved to brag about it. The reason this is important is when thinking about insuring an asset, if your house went from $400,000 to $800,000, would it not make sense to have your insurance premium increase 100% as well? States need to think more like Utah that has 130 insurers in their market. This gives consumers the ability to shop for lower prices and in order to compete insurance companies will have to figure out how to keep their rates competitive. I also don’t believe that people in government understand how rigorous the actual analysis insurance companies do to figure out how to cover the losses is and that they still need to make a profit for their shareholders. If someone thinks profit is a bad word, just think about that the next time you look at your pension plan or the growth in your 401(k). If companies were not making profits, the value of your pension plan or 401(k) would never grow.                                                                          Small business owners may not be putting your deposits into your 401(k)                                          I was surprised to see this, but apparently there are some small businesses that deduct the money from your paycheck but then fail to make the deposit into your 401(k) account. Part of the reason could be retirement plans with less than 100 participants are exempt from an annual audit that the federal law requires. The Labor Department has retrieved almost $24 million in missing 401K loan payments and contributions over the last 10 years through 3,100 civil investigations. The agency has also recouped $14 million through 115 criminal cases involving theft of 401(k) money. What is more staggering is that on top of that, there was roughly $260 million that was voluntarily returned to employees after the companies got caught. They often said the mistake was due to confusion around the rules. A former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary at the Labor Department’s Employee Benefits Security Administration, which regulates 401(k)'s, says when small companies are facing financial difficulties, they tend to use those deposits as a short-term loan with the intention of paying them back quickly. But unfortunately, that doesn’t always happen and in the meantime, it is possible that your 401K account is missing gains because the money is not invested. If you work for a small company, I recommend at least once a quarter looking at your 401(k) not to see how well it’s doing, but to verify that the deductions from your paycheck are actually going into your account. I would guess roughly 99% of small businesses withdraw the money and put it into your 401(k), but for those 1%  that is not happening for it is something you want to be on top of and make sure the money is coming out from your paycheck and going into your 401(k) account. If you find that is not the case, I recommend stopping your 401(k) contributions as soon as possible. If it goes on too long, there are companies that just close the doors, leaving the employees with little help of getting their money back.
 
  
Inflation report likely solidifies Fed rate cut this month                               The September Consumer Price Index, also known as CPI, showed inflation climbed 3% year over year for both the headline and core numbers. Core CPI, which excludes food and energy, came in better than both the estimate and the previous month's reading; both stood at 3.1%. It was a surprise to get this data with the government shutdown, but since it is used as a benchmark for cost-of living adjustments in benefit checks by the Social Security Administration it was a rare economic point in an otherwise quiet period. Energy, which provided such a benefit to the headline number for many months, has started to reverse course as it climbed 2.8% compared to last year. Gasoline was a small benefit as it was down 0.5%, but energy services climbed 6.4% thanks to an increase of 5.1% for electricity and an increase of 11.7% for utility gas service. What I would look to as tariff impacted areas, has still remained quite muted considering apparel prices fell 0.1%, new vehicles were up just 0.8%, and food prices had maybe the hardest hit with an increase of 3.1%. Much of this came from food away from home, which was up 3.7%. Food at home saw a more muted increase of 2.7%. Shelter inflation remained above the headline and core numbers at 3.6%, but it is much less problematic than it was in prior periods. Another positive was owner's equivalent rent climbed 0.1% compared to the prior month, which was the smallest month over month increase since January 2021. Overall, this report likely produced enough evidence for the Fed to cut rates at this month's meeting as odds stood above 95% after the inflation announcement. The likelihood for a December cut also initially climbed to 98.5% following the report.                                                                          The bank earnings from last week had some surprising undertones.                                          Overall, the third-quarter report from the big banks showed things are pretty much going along OK. But then a couple of the big banks brought up the issue of private credit and some bankruptcies that led to write-downs. Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, pointed out that even though he said he probably should not say it that "if you see one cockroach, there are probably more." Some smaller financial institutions like Zions Bancorp and Alliance Bancorp took a $50 million charge and $100 million charge respectively due to potentially fraudulent loans. The issue here is commercial banks have been making loans to nonfinancial depository institutions or NFDIs and I point out that this type of funding is not very transparent for investors to see what is going on behind the scenes. I was surprised to learn that these NFDIs now account for roughly 1/3 of commercial and industrial loans originated by large banks. One may think if you’re invested in AI companies, you’re safe but research has shown that even your deep pocket players of AI are funding investments with these private loans. As time passes, the more I read, the more I become concerned about what we don’t know about leverage in this economy.                                                                          Risky investing behavior continues to amaze me!                                          Many people will point out that we have missed the boat on crypto, but I continue to worry about the space long term as there is no true way to value what these cryptocurrencies are worth. While this is a major concern for our firm, I would say leverage in the space is another major risk. A big problem is the rules and regulations and ultimately the transparency in the space is not as clear as when you invest in public equities. I was blown away reading an article on CNBC by how crazy the leverage can be, and I bet most investors have no clue about it. While there are ways to leverage crypto in the US, the offshore market is where things get wild! Offshore, decentralized exchanges Hyperliquid offer maximum leverage of 40-times for bitcoin and 25-times for ether and Binance Labs-linked Aster offers as much as 100x leverage, depending on the token. Leverage is so dangerous because if a decline comes and investors need to unwind a position it can create a cascade of selling that leads to massive losses. It is not just the crypto market where people are gambling though. We saw a return to meme craziness with Beyond Meat producing massive gains of 128% Monday and 146% Tuesday. On Wednesday, the stock at one point produced another triple-digit intraday gain, but it ended up closing down 1% on the day. I also saw a nuclear power development company by the name of Oklo have a sizeable pullback after the Financial Times noted the 500% advance in 2025 and $20 billion market value has come despite “no revenues, no license to operate reactors and no binding contracts to supply power.”  These are examples of pure gambling and examples like these typically come during frothy times before reality hits and big pullback comes.                                                                          Financial Planning: The real cost of financial mistakes                                          When it comes to financial wellbeing, avoiding mistakes can be even more powerful than chasing great decisions. Too often, people lose ground not from lack of opportunity, but from unforced errors. Drawing retirement income without tax strategy can quietly cost thousands in extra taxes or Medicare premiums. Holding too much cash or being overly aggressive both expose you to risk, one to inflation, the other to unrecoverable losses. Maintaining investing discipline sounds simple but emotional reactions like selling when markets fall or chasing what’s hot can destroy more wealth than poor returns ever could. Many homeowners also miss out by not structuring their mortgage correctly resulting in more short-term fees, long-term interest, and missed investment returns. The key isn’t perfection; it’s recognizing that protecting yourself from big mistakes is often the best investment you can make.  When making a financial decision, do your best to get your information and advice from accurate and unbiased sources so you can fully understand the impact of the decision.                                                                          What signals you should watch if you are holding gold.                                          Wouldn’t it be nice if there was a flashing red light that came across your phone saying this is the peak for gold and now is the time to get out. Obviously, that never happens on any investment so investors have to watch for signs that could cause the investment to decline. There are many signs that could arise, and it might be one or a few of them that could cause gold to turn and begin dropping. One area that could bring more stability is President Trump has been trying and trying to get a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. I know that he is meeting again, I believe in a couple of weeks and if peace is reached with the Russian and Ukraine, it could be a negative for gold. Another thing that could derail gold from its increasing value is for the first time in 45 years silver hit a record high. Many times, investors of gold will buy silver as well and they may decide rather than buying more gold to diversify they will buy silver instead since they have so much gold already. This could hurt the demand for gold, which could stall the rally. Higher oil prices can also take away gold demand. Currently there seems to be a glut of oil on the market, but the Middle East is never a stable area of the world and any disruption there could cause oil to turn around and climb 10 to 20%. Currencies are currently weak and if we were to start seeing currencies like the yen or the dollar start to get stronger along with higher interest rates, this would also not be good for gold. Placing a value on an ounce of gold is difficult to say the least. So, it does make it hard to value, but hopefully these points we have laid out assist you in trying to attach some value to the price of gold.                                                                          Gen Z is turning their back on buying a home and investing more into stocks.                                          This is good news and bad news at the same time. It is nice to see younger investors have interest in stocks, but they seem to not understand the risk they’re taking. Young investors have only seen stocks average around 14% per year and believe that will happen over the next 40 to 50 years. Since they have been priced out of the housing market, they feel they might as well invest their money, which is wise, but I worry that when we have a long downturn, which will happen someday, these young investors will sell their stocks at a low price and have nothing to fall back on since they don’t own a home. The home ownership rate for Gen Z, which are those between 13 and 28 years old, is just 16%. This is on the low side compared to history. A study from JPMorgan Chase showed in the last ten years, 25-year-olds with investment accounts has risen from 6% in 2015 to now 37%. I’m all for investing in equities if people understand how to invest properly and not gamble. I always love the stories about how somebody bought a house back in the 1970s, they’re now up 1500%. Which means a $25,000 house is not worth $375,000, what could be better? How about if you had your money invested in stocks, you would be up over 6000% and that same $25,000 would be worth $1.5 million, which is four times as much. Just imagine if you put those stocks in a 401(k) and received a tax deduction, your employer matched some of your deposits and it grew tax deferred, wow. The problem is they all want to buy the next hot tech company and make 1000% over the next couple years, rather than focusing on the long term. Unfortunately, that is a formula that will fail for many of the young investors, leaving them without a home and a small amount of investment savings.                                                                          Lays potato chips will become healthier                                          Because of the campaign to make America healthy again that has gained traction in Washington and with consumers, artificial colors and seed oils are becoming a thing of the past. Lays potato chips are a top selling brand and have been around for 80 years, but because of the switch to healthier foods, the potato chips are switching to olive oil or avocado oil from seed and corn oils. The new chips will be easy to recognize because Lays, which is owned by PepsiCo, is changing the packaging from that shiny crinkly bag we have become so used to, to a heavier matte finish displaying potatoes and chips. With consumers buying less snacks and their preferences changing faster than anyone expected, Pepsi had to change course. It’s surprising that back in 2021 research revealed that 42% of people didn’t know that Lays chips were made out of real potatoes and Pepsi will need to do a better job with their messaging so consumers know what they are actually eating. Having more natural ingredients will be a challenge for the company because colors that come from plants, vegetables, or other natural products don’t behave the same as artificial ones and are more sensitive to light and temperature. The shelf life of potato chips with natural ingredients may also be shorter, which could be a problem for PepsiCo.  Sales of potato chips increased dramatically during the pandemic and PepsiCo increased prices substantially during that timeframe. To get consumers to try the new improved healthier chips, the company might need to lower prices to bring consumers back. I personally can’t wait to try the new chips. I hope that they’ve also reduced the sodium content as well.                                                                          The government thinks it’s OK for some fees in your investments to be hidden                                          Your first reaction to that may be that there’s no way that could be possible. Why would the government allow investment funds to hide their fee? I can’t give an answer why, but a bill that was recently passed by the House and is now waiting for approval from the Senate would authorize portfolios to skip reporting expenses of certain funds they may invest in. I read this stuff and I can hardly believe it, but what they are trying to allow is if a fund owns BDC's, which are Business Development companies, which have very high expenses and can range anywhere from 1% to 5%, Congress is saying it’s OK not to disclose those expenses. BDC's are very high-risk investments but over the last five years their assets have grown from $127 billion to over $450 billion. What is concerning for me is if this does pass in the Senate, will it also be ok to hide fees for private equity, venture capital, private debt, and other alternative vehicles that would want the same treatment as BDC’s. I’m not a big believer in big government, but I do believe that the government should have rules and regulations for investors like they have rules for speed limits on highways.                                                                          With more young people renting, the furniture market is changing                                          Furniture stores like Ethan Allen and RH do well when people buy new homes. New homeowners will generally have to fill entire rooms and change many things in the house to personalize to the way they like. But now with the price of homes becoming nearly unaffordable, many young people are shopping differently to make their long-term rentals feel comfortable and personalized. When I’m talking about young people, I’m not talking about those just in their early 20s because according to the National Association of Realtors, the average age of the first-time homebuyer in 2024 climbed to 38 years old. So, until home prices become affordable again, which may be a while, some major furniture stores will probably suffer. Those that serve renters such as Wayfair and Williams Sonoma will probably continue to do well though. Renters are generally more practical about shopping for their apartments and in many cases will buy single items at lower prices from different vendors. However, don’t think that means they’re spending only $10-$15.  Since they know they will be in that rental for a while, they are still spending sometimes thousands of dollars to buy multiuse products like folding tables and pullout couches with built-in storage. Business has always fascinated me following consumer trends, this is the new trend for younger people as they try and make these long-term rental homes and apartments a place they are proud of. This trend will change someday, but I believe it is probably down the road at least a few years.                                                                          Are the best days for packaged food companies over?                                          With the diet drugs, and the campaign to "Make America Healthy Again" from RFK, your packaged food companies are struggling. They’re also fighting inflation and tariffs, which is making the environment even more challenging. But consumers, whether they are high or low income, if they like a certain product, they’ll pay a premium for it even if it is not the cheapest thing on the shelf. One may think the best thing for these companies is to really become healthy fresh food companies, but they may be able to have some other options that are healthier than before. What they need to do as time passes is to get creative at what they’re good at and not try to be something they're not. There are many companies in this category like Mondelez, Hershey’s, Kraft Heinz and Conagra. Some of these companies have seen their stocks drop 30, 40 or even as much as 50%. Even with that drop many of their dividends have remained the same, which means the yield for that dividend is much higher. I think for long-term investors there may be some opportunities here as the companies become more creative and the tariffs just become part of doing business. Also, these companies will change their products somewhat to meet consumers expectations, and eventually some consumers will still want to have some good cookies or a hotdog as a treat.
 
  
Will gold hit $5000 an ounce?                               With all the excitement surrounding the run up in gold this year it seems to be an easy target. However, as investors pour money into precious metals, such as gold, people have to remember that President Trump has pledged to stimulate the economy through tax cuts. The run up in gold has been due to investors that worry about the future of the dollar and other major currencies. Wall Street has labeled this the debasement trade. The dollar did decline in the first six months of 2025, but it has since stabilized. September saw a record $33 billion invested in exchange traded funds tied to physical gold. The excitement continues for gold buyers, but it is important to remember that normally during uncertain times investors will find safety in dollar denominated assets like treasuries that can push-up the dollar's value. The danger for gold investors is if the narrative shifts, gold could have a major decline. If you look back 165 years to 1860, you will see that gold has other multi-year runs but has consistently had a major bust after those run ups. Investors in gold should also look at what happened in 1979 with a major rally in gold but 3 1/2 years later all the gains accumulated had disappeared. Investors may want to take some of their profits because the higher gold climbs, the bigger the fall could be. In my view, $5000 per ounce for gold is a big gamble.                                                                          Great news, more working-class Americans than ever before are in the stock market.                                          That does sound like good news, but then when you dig a little deeper, it is rather scary! 54% of Americans with incomes between $30,000 and $80,000 have taxable investment accounts. There are several reasons for this like no more commissions for trading stocks, the excitement of investing on certain social media sites, and it’s so easy to trade stocks now as anyone who has a cell phone can pretty much trade stocks instantaneously. I remember an old saying from years ago that when your barber starts talking to you about stock tips that is the peak of the market. This seems to be where we're at today and unfortunately, these investors have only been investing for probably the last five years and have not experienced any long, lasting declines or turmoil in the markets. Many of these investors are simply trading stocks and don’t understand the fundamentals of investing for the long-term. Some of them have experienced very good returns, not because of any specialized knowledge but because of the luck of picking some highflyers that have done well for them in the short term. In many cases, they do not believe it’s luck and they feel they now know what they’re doing. These investors probably have no idea what the earnings or debt is for the stocks they are trading. They just see that they continue to make money as they buy and sell. It is a shame because many of them are young investors from 25 to 45 years old and a big mistake could cost them years of compounding. Over my 40+ years of working in the investment industry I’ve heard the same story many times, and it never turns out well. When you try to help them understand how things really work in the investment world, they justify what they’re doing with such statements as “this time it is different”. I wish these young investors would understand that investing in stocks and earning a 10% annual return per year is very good. I’m sure many who read this or hear the words I speak think I have no clue what they’re doing, and they have a specialized technique that can’t fail. When the day comes,  which it will, these investors will be left with a small amount of capital and not much time left to invest because they are now older and closer to retirement. Only then will they realize that their risky trading strategy proved to be nothing more than gambling!                                                                          Lower end consumers are having a hard time making their car payments                                          With the rising cost of cars and higher interest rates, lower end consumers are falling behind on their car payments, and the numbers are starting to get a little scary. 14% of new cars that were sold to people had a credit score under 650, this is the highest percent going back to 2016. People seem to be getting in over their head as subprime loans that are 60 days or more overdue are at a record 6% this year. The number of repossessed vehicles is also climbing to a record not seen in 16 years to an estimated 17.3 million repossessed vehicles. Some consumers overbought a car probably due to a good salesperson and that new car smell that sometimes is hard to resist. Some consumers are starting to regret their new car purchase considering the average car payment is around $750 and 20% of loans and new leases are over $1000 a month. We will continue to watch this indicator along with others to verify that we are only seeing a slowdown of growth in the economy, rather than a declining economy. It's important to remember to be careful where you invest. It appears that some of these subprime loans for cars ended up in private loan deals that were sold as low risk because of no market fluctuation. The problem here is we are starting to see write-downs from publicly traded banks for bad loans and with private credit you might not know there is a problem until it's too late since they don't have to disclose the same info as these publicly traded companies.                                                                          Financial Planning: Upgrade Your Emergency Fund to an Emergency Plan                                          When paychecks stop, as many federal employees are currently experiencing, having an emergency plan with multiple layers of liquidity is essential. The first line of defense is your credit card. When used strategically, it can buy you up to two months of interest-free spending since no interest accrues until after the statement due date. However, you don’t want to carry a balance beyond that point. Next comes cash reserves, ideally kept in a high-yield Treasury bill money market fund, where your money earns competitive interest while avoiding state tax. Beyond cash, having credit lines such as a HELOC provides deeper, low-cost access to capital without forcing you to liquidate investments. These can take a couple of months to establish, and since they generally don’t have origination fees, it’s best to set them up before you need them. After that, investment accounts can serve as a secondary safety net. Taxable accounts may generate capital gains, but withdrawals are unrestricted. Roth IRA contributions can be withdrawn tax- and penalty-free at any age, and HSA accounts can issue reimbursements for qualified medical expenses incurred in prior years. In a true last-resort scenario, you can even access retirement funds through a 60-day rollover, temporarily using the cash before redepositing it. By layering these tools, from credit to cash to credit lines to investments, you build a structured, flexible liquidity plan that can withstand extended income disruptions and operate far more efficiently than simply keeping 12 months of expenses in a savings account.                                                                          Not a good time to be a Qualcomm shareholder                                          Qualcomm, a San Diego based business, has made many people millionaires over the years. However, what made them successful years ago is now one of their biggest problems, and that is their relationship with China. In fiscal year 2024, almost 50% of Qualcomm's revenue came from China. About six months ago, we came very close to investing a large portion of our portfolio into Qualcomm, but decided against it for a few reasons, one of which was the relationship with China. On Friday, Chinese regulators said they launched an investigation into Qualcomm for perhaps violating the country's anti-monopoly law. In 2024, Qualcomm tried to acquire a company called Autotalks, which was based in Israel and dealt with the communication between cars and their surroundings, but ultimately gave up on the deal. In June of this year, the company went ahead and acquired that auto chip designer. Now the company is facing the investigation from China. We have written many times that we are concerned on any tariff deals with China because they are very slow negotiators and very hard as well. I would love to tell you this is a buying opportunity for Qualcomm, but there are just too many concerns in the current environment that could cause Qualcomm to fall further than the 7% decline experienced last Friday. I will not feel comfortable until China and the United States have a trade deal signed in writing.                                                                          Another sign of a slowing economy is the number of people quitting their jobs                                          It’s a pretty obvious indicator because if there’s a lot of jobs out there for higher pay, people are more willing to quit their job to obtain a higher paying job somewhere else. When going back about 20 years you will see the number of people quitting their jobs declined rapidly during the Great Recession as the rate fell to under 1.5%. It fell again in 2020 to about 1.7% during the pandemic, but after Covid the percentage of people quitting their jobs increased substantially to nearly 3.5%. The labor market changed dramatically during this time period in part to all the stimulus and loose money that was floating around in the economy from the government. As the economy has started to tighten, the most recent report released from the federal government before the shutdown shows that the percentage of workers quitting their jobs in the private sector has fallen back down to 2.1%. Based on the data, we are seeing a slowdown in the economy but I'm still not expecting a major recession. We will continue to watch other important data and keep you informed of how the economy is doing.                                                                          AI does consume a lot of energy, but it can also reduce energy consumption as well.                                          There’s no secret AI is hogging a lot of energy with bigger demand needed in the future. On the positive side, it can also make transportation and other uses of energy more efficient to help save energy. It is estimated ground freight trucks using AI dynamic route optimization could cut emissions by 10 to 15%. According to Texas A&M University, AI could also analyze traffic in real time and quickly come up with better routes to reduce stop and go driving which leads to sitting in traffic and burning fuel. It is estimated that 3.3 billion gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel in 2022 was consumed, that is over 215,000 barrels a day of petroleum. Commercial buildings could also benefit from AI with the use of sensors that can track occupancy in real time and shut down some elevator banks and turn off lights that aren’t needed as the number of people declines throughout the day. Heating ventilation and air conditioning systems with the use of AI could receive forecasts on heat waves and pre-cool buildings ahead of the heatwave, which would also lower energy use. Buildings could also be equipped with smart window shading that could adjust to sun angles and avoid glare and reduce heat coming from the windows. I doubt these energy saving ideas will completely offset the high demand of energy by AI data centers, but it could at least help somewhat.                                                                          Will Tesla ever be able to use their self-driving cars in the US?                                          I ask this question because it seems like they are so close but yet so far away when it comes to having their Full Self Driving system operate with no drivers on the road. It seems that even though they claim 2.9 million vehicles are currently equipped with the FSD System and they have millions of miles of test data, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, known as NHTSA, keeps finding problems with the system. NHTSA has found some concerns that could cause injuries. One such incident was when a car approached an intersection with a red light, it drove right through it without stopping. There’s also questions about how the FSD system works in reduced visibility conditions such as heavy rain or fog. Questions have also come up on Tesla‘s being able to be operated remotely. What is interesting about NHTSA is they do not advise when new products come out, instead it is only after they have been road tested do they issue a recall if it is not performing well. It is then up to the car manufacturer to voluntarily fix the problem. If they do not correct the problem, then NHTSA launches an investigation which could lead to court battles and years before a solution is found. There is no doubt in my mind that Tesla's will eventually be seen on the road driving themselves, but the big question is when?                                                                          The excitement of drinking wine is going sour                                          Over the last few years wine consumption has been falling. California is starting to feel the pinch since the state produces roughly 80% of wine shipped in America. Since 2021, cases of wine shipments from California to the US are down 15%. There are several reasons for this, but a large one is the percentage of US adults who drink alcohol is now 54% and that’s the lowest in nearly 90 years according to a Gallup poll. People are eating and drinking less for health reasons and due to the diet drugs people just don’t eat or drink as much they used to. Wine sales recovered and grew in 2004 after the popular movie called Sideways about Pinot Noir and then again during the pandemic wine sales spiked. Good news for wine consumers is with the current glut of wine on the market; it is causing prices to fall. There are currently wine producers in Northern California that are ripping out vines to reduce production because they can’t sell their full harvest of grapes. Adding to the oversupply problem was the great weather this summer for grapes on the vine as wine makers had one of the biggest producing seasons of grapes. Big companies like Constellation Brands, which sells roughly $900 million of wine, have cut back on their purchases of grapes because their warehouses are filled with it. Adding to the problem is the wine business in Canada. Even though the tariffs of 25% for US wine going to Canada have been lifted, there are certain provinces like Ontario and Nova Scotia that still ban the sale of US wine. This has all culminated into a difficult time period for wine producers in the US.                                                                          Will the new electric Ferrari be able to carry on the tradition?                                          To answer that question quickly, I’m going to say no based on how poorly EVs have been accepted by Porsche consumers. If you want a cheap Porsche, go to the dealership and you can pick up an electric Porsche relatively cheap. Ferrari thinks they can convince people who can afford a $300,000 car that their electric vehicle will have the same prestige as their internal combustion engine. It has taken Ferrari years and hundreds of millions of dollars to come up with a battery powered sports car, including building a factory just to build the electric vehicles. The new Ferrari is called Elettrica, it goes 0 to 60 mph in just under 2.5 seconds and has a top speed of 193 mph. It is estimated that a single charge will last about 329 miles. Don’t start searching the Internet for what one looks like, they have kept the model looks under wraps and will not release images until spring of next year with delivery starting later in 2026. Over the past year, the stock, which trades under the ticker RACE, has declined by about 12% but over the years it has done very well. I do worry that going forward the company is reaching for growth considering over the next five years the company is expected to release 20 new models, which I think will hurt the exclusivity of a Ferrari and also create confusion around what Ferrari to get. Apparently, the company may feel this way as well, since they have reduced their annual revenue growth for the next five years to only 5%, which is below the expectations of the analysts. Time will tell, but sometimes a company has to realize what they’re good at and known for and not try to keep up with the most recent hot items like electric vehicles.
 
  
Do stock dividends give you better returns?                               With the S&P 500 currently paying a dividend of only 1.1%, which is the lowest in about 25 years, people may wonder if they should even care about dividends. In 2024, dividends were only 36% of profits, which was 20 points below the average going back nearly 100 years. Looking at return figures, if you go back 65 years, reinvested dividends did account for roughly 85% of the S&P 500’s total return. With the market at all-time high valuations, investors should not give up on investing in companies that pay good dividends, but they also should do plenty of research to verify the dividend is strong and will last. And never ever buy a company just because it pays a dividend! When looking for companies that pay dividends, look for stocks with new or increasing dividends because since 1973 they returned on average 10.2% versus 6.8% for those companies that did not increase their dividend. Over the same timeframe, those stocks not paying dividends had a return of only 4.3%. Remember when looking at investing in dividend stocks to check that the company has a good amount of cash flow, a reasonable payout ratio to pay that dividend and a strong balance sheet that does not have excessive debt and a good amount of cash for liquidity.                                                                          How will the US government shutdown affect you and the economy?                                          Over the last 50 years, the government has shutdown 21 times with the longest being December 2018 when it lasted 34 days. The shutdown will affect mostly those consumers who are traveling with experts from the travel industry saying it will lose about one billion dollars a week. Think about all the national parks that will be closed and the frustrations at the airports will probably curtail travelers' enthusiasm for traveling. Even with all the negative headlines, stocks tend to do well during a government shutdown with the average three month return after the shutdown at 9.5% and one year later at 22.4%. I would not encourage people to think they will get a 22% return this time around because of the valuation on the stock market these days. Unfortunately, bonds don’t do as well with the three-month return being a -37% and a one-year return on bonds being a -10.7%. What this means is during a government shutdown generally long-term interest rates increase as bonds fall, and this would be detrimental to the housing market as we would then see mortgage rates increase if history repeats itself. On the shorter end of the yield curve, the Federal Reserve who sets short term interest rates will be handicapped because they will not be getting economic information such as the labor report and other government data to make their decision for interest rates cuts. It is possible if the shutdown is still ongoing at the end of October, the Federal Reserve may not cut interest rates because of the lack of data.                               The million-dollar question of how long it will last is a difficult one to answer as no one knows for sure but it appears since both sides are so far apart, they will not come to the negotiating table and until some negativity starts showing up in the economy there is not much pressure on the politicians. That means this shutdown could be one for the record books and could perhaps last a month or two!                                                                          Public debt looks strong, but private debt not so much                                          Public debt, which are bonds that trade on the public market, is looking rather strong based on the small yield margin between investment grade and speculative grade securities compared with the risk-free government debt. In September, $207 billion of corporate bonds were issued and that’s the fifth highest monthly amount on record. Year to date returns for those holding public corporate bonds stands between 7 to 8%. Private debt on the other hand is starting to have issues as companies such as Tricolor Holdings, which is a lender to individuals with low credit ratings, filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy in September. The debt holders may get something, but when a company files chapter 7 bankruptcy, the government receives their money first along with the attorneys and then what is left over if any, goes to the debt holders then equity holders. Also, last month an auto parts company called First Brands filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy, they had $6 billion of leveraged loans outstanding. This could be the beginning of an avalanche of defaults in private credit as I believe if the economy continues to slow down, these products will have some major problems. Hopefully you weren't sold anything that deals with private debt, equity or real estate by your broker.                                                                          Financial Planning: Updated Tax Brackets for 2026                                          For 2025, married couples filing jointly will see their standard deduction rise from $31,500 to $32,200 with an additional $1,650 per spouse for those age 65 or older and a new $6,000 deduction per spouse for households with adjusted gross income (AGI) under $150,000, bringing the total possible standard deduction to $47,500. The 12% federal tax bracket will now apply to taxable income up to $100,800 (up from $96,950), and the 0% capital gains and qualified dividend threshold will increase to $98,900 (from $96,700). When calculating tax liability, AGI minus the standard deduction equals taxable income.  For retirees, this means the $150,000 AGI level is an especially important threshold to stay under. It unlocks the extra $6,000 standard deduction, keeps all ordinary income in the 10% and 12% brackets, and ensures that capital gains and dividend income remain tax-free. These inflation adjustments give married couples, especially retirees and middle-income earners, more room to keep their income in lower tax brackets and reduce their overall taxable income going into 2026.                                                                          Why would any company set up manufacturing in the country of India?                                          I say that because their rules are ridiculous when it comes to running corporations. India's government is a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic. The country is having problems with manufacturing because of how difficult it is for a company to leave India if the manufacturing plant is not profitable. It is estimated in India it takes an average of 4.3 years to completely close a factory because of the control of the government. There are laws from the government that if a company wants to shut their factory, the state government can refer it and dispute the closing of the factory at an industrial tribunal. In other words, you can’t just close your factory and go somewhere else unless the government says you can. The unions in India also have additional ridiculous requirements, which General Motors experienced when they tried to close their factory. The union insisted they either guarantee a new owner that would provide jobs for all of the workers or a severance package that paid out full-time salaries and medical benefits until retirement. I thought things had gotten bad here in the U.S. because of the push to socialism but take a look at India and one can see how bad socialism can be to a country. I doubt the growth in India can match the growth of the United States long term as I believe capitalism is a much better system.                                                                          The clock is ticking on home energy tax credits                                          Because of the One Big Beautiful Bill that was passed, at the end of the year many home energy tax credits will be gone. So, if you’re thinking of appliances that save energy or heat pumps or solar systems you need to act fast. The big question you should ask here, is it worth it? If you’re looking at adding a new natural gas, propane or oil furnace, hot water boiler, or air conditioning units, if they meet certain energy efficient standards you could get a $600 tax credit. Heat pumps are supposed to be pretty efficient, and you could get a tax credit up to the limit of $3200, which is around 30% of the cost of the unit and installation. Does your electrical panel look rather scary, and are you concerned about a fire? Here you can also get a $600 credit with an electric panel costing somewhere between $2000-$4000. If you’re not sure what is the best for your home, there are certified contractors or auditors that will assess your appliances, heating and cooling systems, insulation, lighting, and pretty much anything else that could save you money with tax credits. There is a cost for the audit that generally ranges from $300-$500, but you can receive a tax credit of $150 which comes from the energy efficient home improvement credit.                                                                          Are you being too cheap?                                          When we are younger, we are taught to be careful with our money, watch our pennies and don’t overspend. But as you grow your net worth over time, there may be certain levels where you can loosen up a little bit. I’m not talking about going crazy and that you should go on a spending spree, but using rules of thumb that maybe prove you don’t have to watch every penny. Research from a professor at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business found 15 to 25% of people have trouble spending money. Unfortunately, the opposite holds true as well and about 15 to 25% of people have no trouble spending money and they actually overspend. While that is a whole separate problem, here we’re talking about the people who have trouble spending money. The rule that has been established is called the 0.01% rule. What it states is that you should not fret over spending something that cost 0.01% of your net worth. If you have a $1 million net worth exclusive of your home and you’re debating about buying something that would cost up to $100 that would make you happy, don’t worry about it spend the hundred dollars. I will caution people this does not mean you do this every day or apply the same thought over and over again as that can add up in the long term. This concept of what I'll call realistic spending is designed to relieve some stress as you should not beat yourself up about spending an extra hundred dollars once in a while. I myself have lived with very frugal spending since I had a paper route when I was a boy and will now apply this rule going forward. I’m sure this will make my wife happier and there will be less disagreements about some purchases going forward.                                                                          For young people today, financial stability comes before marriage                                          Up until probably 20 to 30 years ago, couples got married and worked together to afford to buy a home and build a nest-egg. But with the young people of today, that has changed to where they would rather hit financial stability, advance in their careers and then get married. The current median age for a first marriage in 2024 was 30 years old for men and 29 years old for women. Going back just 17 years, a man was getting married for the first time at 28 and women at 26. During that same timeframe, there was a 9% decline in first marriages among 22- to 45-year-olds. Women over the years have improved their relative economic position while men have been pretty much staying the same. What this has done to marriages is that the man is no longer the ultimate breadwinner and therefore a woman does not need to get married just because a man makes more and he is not needed to bring home the bacon. Those with a college degree have a higher rate of getting married than those without one, but even that rate has been declining. 25 years ago, 68% of those who got married had a college degree or greater and that has only fallen to 64% today. Those with less than a college degree saw rates fall from 62% to only 53%. While there are many blue-collar jobs that pay very well, some women may not want to marry someone who does not have a college degree if they have one. I would love to get women’s comments on how they feel about this.                                                                          Do you need a daily money manager?                                          With the population getting older and more people having wealth as they hit their later years, the need for a daily money manager makes sense for many elder Americans. A daily money manager is a financial professional who provides personal financial services. The service they provide would include bill paying, reconciling checking accounts and investment statements, organizing tax documents, negotiating with creditors and even reviewing medical insurance papers. Be aware they’re not an investment advisor and should not be giving investment advice. This industry has grown rapidly over the last few years, and there are now Certified Daily Money Managers known as CDMMs. These are professionals who have advanced knowledge of the management of personal financial matters and have earned the certification through meeting the eligibility requirements along with passing an extensive exam that was developed by the American Association of Daily Money Managers. What you can expect to pay for a Daily Money Manager can range anywhere from $30-$150 per hour depending on your geographic location, the services they provide, and the CDMM‘s expertise. When looking for a daily money manager, be sure to ask for references and verify their bonding. It should also be important to understand how they’re going to bill you and when asking about a consultation, verify that it is a free consultation.                                                                          Could there be a nuclear reactor on the moon in four years?                                          It sounds ridiculous being such a short timeframe, but Sean Duffy, who is acting administrator for NASA, wants to fast track an effort to place a nuclear reactor on the moon by late 2029. We are now in a race with China and Russia, who also want to claim the moon for nuclear power before we do. Why a nuclear reactor on the moon? It’s because a moon outpost could generate new scientific and economic activities around research, mining, and even tourism. There are challenges with a nuclear reactor with a big one being keeping the reactor cool. On earth, reactors are built near bodies of water, which are used for cooling the reactor's core and can also dissipate heat into the atmosphere. On the moon there is no water or air so they will have to use large radiation panels to disperse the heat and heavy radiation shielding to protect the lunar environment and astronauts from the radiation. With private industry in the U.S. and expertise from companies like SpaceX, which is run by Elon Musk, and Blue Origin, which is run by Jeff Bezos, I think the moon is the limit. Maybe that saying is no longer applicable since the moon is not that far out of reach any longer.