The Street

American workers have steadily built up 401(k) balances, but new research suggests they remain poorly prepared to spend down those savings once paychecks stop. Three studies published in June 2026 by the TIAA Institute/Nuveen, Corebridge Financial, and Vanguard all converge on the same problem.The retirement system has succeeded on the accumulation side, with $8 trillion in assets spread across 725,000 plans serving 80 million workers, according to Nuveen. Workers know how to contribute, pick funds, and stay the course through bear markets, but when paychecks stop and withdrawals start, that knowledge runs out.The gap between accumulation and decumulation represents a significant planning shortfall, and research suggests most workers are not prepared for it.Most 401(k) participants have barely planned for withdrawalsThe TIAA Institute and Nuveen surveyed more than 2,100 employees across all career stages for their 2025 Participant Sentiment Survey on Lifetime Income.Among the full sample, only 22% said they had given serious thought to how they would draw down their retirement accounts, the study found. Even among late-career participants who expect their 401(k) to serve as their primary retirement income source, just 26% reported meaningful withdrawal planning, the firms reported.Margie Glenn, a certified financial planner and certified public accountant at Moneta, told Yahoo Finance that retirees without a formal distribution plan risk burning through savings too fast or holding back too much.Without a formal distribution plan, you are flying blind…You risk either overspending early and jeopardizing your long-term security, or fearfully underspending and failing to enjoy the retirement you sacrificed a lifetime to buildKnowledge gaps compound the preparation problem, with participants answering only 32% of the survey’s 15 retirement fluency questions correctly and nearly half failing to correctly answer a single question about the mechanics of making retirement plan withdrawals, the study showed.“You can’t solve for income that lasts a lifetime if you don’t understand how long that lifetime might be,” Surya Kolluri, head of TIAA Institute, noted.Corebridge finds most pre-retirees uncomfortable drawing down balancesA Corebridge Financial study reinforces how deeply the accumulation mindset has taken hold among Americans approaching and entering retirement. The firm’s Decumulation Planning Gap Study, conducted by Greenwald Research, surveyed 2,210 adults aged 45 to 79 with at least $100,000 in investable assets. While 61% described retirement as a time meant for enjoyment, 50% said they feel uncertain about spending down their savings, Corebridge reported.Only 28% expressed comfort with watching their balances decline to cover everyday living expenses, and 70% said preserving the size of their nest egg was “very important,” according to the Corebridge data. That fear of depletion translates into a planning vacuum, with just 14% of retirees reporting a detailed strategy for managing required minimum distributions and only 29% of pre-retirees aged 55 and older having organized any withdrawal plan, Corebridge’s findings showed.“Retirement is meant to be enjoyed, but many find it difficult to give themselves permission to spend the savings they’ve worked so hard to build,” Terri Fiedler, president of Retirement Services at Corebridge Financial, said.

Corebridge research shows that many retirees struggle to spend their savings confidently, leaving retirement income plans unfinished despite years of diligently building their nest eggs.Milan_Jovic/Getty Images

Vanguard argues that sustainable income matters more than account balancesIn a research paper published in early June 2026 titled “Principles for Retirement Income,” Vanguard introduced a framework that shifts the retirement conversation away from savings targets and toward reliable income generation.The firm argues that two investors with identical savings can have vastly different outcomes depending on their withdrawal strategies. Vanguard’s framework recommends separating essential costs from discretionary spending and pairing guaranteed income sources with flexible portfolio withdrawals, as outlined in the paper.More Retirement:Vanguard drops playbook on retirement incomeVanguard warns workers losing thousands in 401(k)sFidelity’s wake-up call on Social Security, IRAs, and 401(k)s“The last day of work is a milestone, but retirement is a long journey shaped by decisions that evolve over time,” Garrett Harbron, Vanguard head of advised wealth management strategies, said.The research illustrates the stakes with a simple model that shows how dramatically withdrawal rates can change outcomes. A $500,000 portfolio earning 5% annual returns would grow to roughly $843,000 over 30 years at a 3% withdrawal rate, but at 5%, that same portfolio would run dry before reaching the 30-year mark, Vanguard’s modeling showed.A financial advisor warns that the 4% rule is only a starting pointOne commonly cited guideline suggests withdrawing 4% of total retirement savings in the first year and adjusting for inflation each year after that. A revised version, updated from the original framework first published in the 1990s, raises the sustainable starting rate to 4.7% for diversified portfolios.“The go-to number most people rely on is the 4% rule, but that should be treated more like a guideline and not an autopilot system,” Evan Mills, an associate financial advisor at Scholar Financial Advising in Winston-Salem, N.C., told Yahoo Finance.The right withdrawal rate depends on stock concentration, fixed-income allocation, retirement timeline, and spending flexibility in volatile markets, Mills explained. Pulling money from the wrong account at the wrong time can create tax inefficiencies that erode savings faster than the withdrawal itself, he warned.A formal spending plan doubles retirees’ confidence in their financial futureThe Corebridge study identified one finding that ran counter to the broader pattern: retirees who created a formal spending strategy were significantly more confident about sustaining their lifestyles, the research found.Among pre-retirees aged 55 and older who developed a decumulation plan, 57% reported high confidence in managing their retirement spending, compared with just 26% of those without one, the study showed. The gap was similarly wide among current retirees, at 55% versus 29%, Corebridge reported.The combined message carries weight for the roughly 80 million active employees whose savings are held in 401(k) plans.Related: Retirees face a harder path to $1 million

Luxury department stores are built on more than expensive handbags, designer shoes, and polished sales floors.They depend on trust.Shoppers expect the right products to be available, brands expect to be paid, and stores need enough experienced employees to deliver the kind of service that makes a high-end purchase feel worth it.This has made the past year difficult for Saks Global.The company behind Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus, and Bergdorf Goodman, names often used interchangeably with luxury, officially began the Chapter 11 bankruptcy process in January.The issues arose after a challenging stretch that included liquidity problems, missed payments, store closures, and deep layoffs.Now the luxury retailer is trying to turn the page under a new name.Saks Global exits Chapter 11 as Exemplar Luxury GroupSaks Global announced June 26 that it has successfully emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy as Exemplar Luxury Group (ELG), a new luxury collective that includes Neiman Marcus, Saks Fifth Avenue, and Bergdorf Goodman.The company said the restructuring leaves it with a much stronger balance sheet, including a nearly 75% reduction in debt, around $500 million in exit financing, sufficient liquidity, and support from its capital partners and key stakeholders.More Retail:Struggling women’s clothing retailer shutters 171 storesRetail giant launches first new home brand in 5 yearsDiscount retail giant wins as shoppers change how they spendThe exit is a major milestone for one of the best-known names in U.S. luxury retail. But it also shows how much the company had to shrink and simplify to get there.The company’s new board includes representatives from Pentwater Capital Management and Bracebridge Capital, two firms that played key roles in the restructuring. And with this change, the company is now positioning itself as a more focused luxury retail business built around three major banners: Neiman Marcus, Saks Fifth Avenue, and Bergdorf Goodman.CEO Geoffroy van Raemdonck said the new name reflects the company’s effort to set a higher standard for luxury retail across its brands.“This pivotal moment reinforces the enduring strength of our business, our luxury banners, and our team as we look ahead to a bright future guided by our relentless devotion to our customers,” said Geoffroy van Raemdonck, CEO, Exemplar Luxury Group.Under a new banner, the company will focus on long-term profitable growth, stronger brand relationships, personalized customer experiences, and an integrated retail model that includes stores, e-commerce, and remote selling services.That strategy matters because luxury department stores are no longer just competing on product selection. They are competing on service, exclusivity, convenience, and customer relationships.For shoppers, that could mean a stronger push toward curated assortments, better inventory, more personalized service, and tighter connections between online shopping and in-store experiences.Part of this change is Saks’ strategic cut from its eCommerce partnership with early investor Amazon, to maintain exclusivity by not selling on a mass platform, according to Reuters.For vendors, the bankruptcy exit may be even more important.Saks’ financial strain had raised concerns about payments, inventory, and confidence among brand partners. A cleaner balance sheet may help the company rebuild those relationships, especially with luxury brands that depend on tight control over distribution and customer experience.

The company behind Saks Fifth Avenue has a different name post-bankruptcy.wdstock / Getty Images

Saks reset followed closures and deep job cutsThe emergence from bankruptcy also followed a painful restructuring.TheStreet previously reported that Saks Global planned to cut about 16% of its corporate staff, or roughly 640 jobs, as it neared a bankruptcy exit.Those cuts came after more than 1,200 earlier layoffs tied to store and facility closures.In March, WARN filings showed 1,226 job cuts tied to Saks store and facility closures across 12 locations, including a major reduction at a Pottsville, Penn., facility that accounted for 435 employees.Other affected locations included stores or operations in Missouri, Maryland, North Carolina, Nevada, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Illinois, and California.Those cuts show that Saks’ bankruptcy restructuring was not just a financial move. It also reshaped the company’s physical footprint and workforce.Saks also moved to streamline parts of its business, including much of its off-price operation, as it refocuses on luxury and full-price selling.That shift may help the company protect its high-end image, but it also reflects a tougher reality for department stores. Retailers are being forced to decide which locations, formats, and customer groups are worth investing in as shoppers become more selective.Saks sets ambitious post-bankruptcy goalsSaks Global had already cleared a major hurdle earlier this month when the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas approved its reorganization plan.At the time, the company said the plan would allow it to exit Chapter 11 with debt reduced by nearly 75% and enough liquidity to support operations and invest in the future.The company also laid out long-term financial goals. ELG said its plan is to help the business accelerate sales growth, focus on full-price selling, and generate $9 billion in total gross merchandise value by fiscal 2030.It also aims to reach double-digit adjusted EBITDA by then.That gives Exemplar Luxury Group a clearer target as it tries to rebuild after bankruptcy.The company’s new board, Pentwater Capital Management and Bracebridge Capital, will each have two representatives on the seven-person board. Van Raemdonck will also serve on the board, along with two independent directors: former Ulta Beauty CEO Dave Kimbell and former Moët Hennessy Global CEO Philippe Schaus.The new structure gives the company a chance to reset, but the challenge is still significant.Exemplar Luxury Group must now prove that fewer stores, a smaller corporate team, and a cleaner balance sheet can translate into stronger luxury retail growth.Luxury shoppers are changing fastThe timing of Saks’ reset matters because the luxury market is no longer moving in a straight line.The Bain & Company report said global luxury spending reached €1.443 trillion in 2025 and is expected to stabilize in 2026, even as brands deal with economic volatility, geopolitical pressure and changing consumer habits.Personal luxury goods spending dipped in 2025 but is expected to grow again this year, the report said. The firm expects that market to rise 2% to 4% in 2026, reaching €365 billion to €373 billion under its base case.The U.S. is one of the brighter spots. Bain said luxury spending in the Americas is rising, with younger shoppers and upper-middle-class households helping broaden the market.But the report also points to a tougher reality for retailers such as Exemplar Luxury Group.Luxury shoppers are becoming more selective. Bain said experiences are outpacing tangible goods, while many shoppers are checking the secondhand market before buying new and using artificial intelligence throughout the shopping journey.That makes Saks’ next chapter about more than debt reduction.The company now has to prove that Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus, and Bergdorf Goodman can remain relevant to shoppers who want more personalized service, stronger value, better digital tools, and a clearer reason to buy.For customers, the big question is whether the bankruptcy exit leads to a better shopping experience.For workers and communities affected by closures, the reset has already come at a cost.For Saks, Neiman Marcus, and Bergdorf Goodman, the next test is whether a new name, lower debt, and new ownership can restore trust in a luxury market where shoppers still want high-end goods, but are becoming much harder to impress.Related: 89-year-old Home Depot rival closes its hardware business

On June 25, Mark Cubanposted on X with advice for every major AI company in America. The post has drawn 1.9 million views. It covered data centers, labor displacement, artists, politicians, and money. It ended with a line about working people that multiple outlets pulled out the same day.Cuban thinks the AI industry is losing a PR battle and has misread the reason. His argument is that the solution involves community engagement. Most tech companies have never done it.Why Cuban says the data center fight was never about data centersCuban opened the post with an argument most people in the AI industry have not accepted.”It’s time for everyone to realize that the fight against data centers has nothing to do with data centers. They have become a proxy for the hate towards AI and the concentration and accumulation of wealth it’s creating,” he wroteA Gallup survey from May found 71% of Americans oppose AI data centers near their communities. Nearly half said they strongly oppose them. Residents cited power use, water consumption, pollution, noise, and rising utility bills. Data Center Watch found at least 75 projects worth roughly $130 billion were blocked or delayed in Q1 2026. It was the worst quarter on record for disrupted data center developments.More AI:Goldman Sachs has blunt message for AI stock investorsMicrosoft CEO sends a blunt warning on AI and the tech ecosystemThe next AI infrastructure race has nothing to do with chipsCuban’s read is that the companies building data centers are misreading what the opposition is about. People are pushing back on what the AI boom means for their jobs and communities, he wrote. The buildings are the visible target.What Cuban says the big AI companies are doing wrongCuban has been an AI enthusiast for years and said in the post that he believes the technology will produce net job gains. The June 25 post was about how the companies building it have dealt with the public. He wrote that the major LLMs had already lost the PR battle and blamed their failure to put people first.He compared the prevailing Silicon Valley mindset to John Galt from Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, the protagonist who believes civilization depends on his genius and that obligations to the public amount to coercion. Cuban said companies carrying that attitude cannot earn the trust they need to expand.He also ruled out two responses the industry has leaned on. Explaining the benefits of AI is too late, he said. Buying political influence will not work either. Cuban told the companies directly that no amount of money spent on politicians and elections would save them, Yahoo Finance reported.He added a third item to the list of things that will not work: celebrity endorsements. Paying famous people to back AI is dumb, he wrote. It does not address what people are actually worried about. Cuban said every creative he knows is terrified about what AI will do to their profession. Companies talking around that fear will not resolve it.

Cuban thinks the AI industry is losing a PR battle and has misread the reasonScalzo/Getty Images

The specific strategy Cuban laid out for AI companies and data centersCuban laid out specific steps. He called for a community tour, with companies going directly to the towns and cities facing potential job losses, asking what would help, and then doing it. He said the communities would tell them what they need.He singled out the creative sector with specific instructions. Go to working artists and creative unions in Los Angeles and New York and ask what support looks like. Go directly to the artists, he said, and not to the studios or music and film companies. Then fund what they ask for.”Billions of dollars is a lot of money across towns and city programs. Across the major LLMs, it’s a cost of doing business,” he wrote.Cuban called community spending a cost of expansion. Companies that skip it will keep hitting the same resistance. He ended the post with a direct warning: AI companies that do not earn the goodwill of working people will fall far short of the capacity they need to build the data centers their business requires. The community case and the business case are the same case.The business case behind Mark Cuban’s warning to AI investors and companiesBeing hated, Cuban wrote, is not good for business. The blocked projects in Q1 2026 put a number on that.The trust problem Cuban described predates AI. According to Pew Research, 71% of Americans said tech companies had a positive impact on the country in 2015. By 2022, that number had broadly reversed after years of social media controversies, privacy scandals, and public frustration over wealth concentration.Companies that invest in communities early face fewer permitting delays and less opposition. For investors, the argument is that the opposition risk is not fading. It is building. Companies with a genuine community strategy have a cleaner expansion path than those still spending on political lobbying and public relations that are not moving the numbers. Cuban said he believes AI will produce net job gains in a few years. His concern is whether the industry helps people through the disruption in the meantime.Related: A new AI bottleneck is starting to worry investors

TheStreet aims to feature only the best products and services. If you buy something via one of our links, we may earn a commission.Why we love this dealWhen you don’t want the entire world to hear what you’re listening to, a lightweight, high-quality pair of earbuds keeps your audio private. Headphones that let you listen to your favorite playlist or podcast without interference from the noise around you are a staple for traveling, commuting, or working out, but they’re not always affordable. The best deal on noise-canceling earbuds right now is at Walmart, and you do not want to miss the chance to save $85 on this sleek pair.Now available at an 85% discount, the Weurghy Wireless Earbuds are just $15, down from the usual $100 price tag. Shoppers are impressed by the AirPod-like performance of these earbuds, noting the especially clear sound quality and how well they fit. But because they’re available in four colors, they offer more variety than premium brands.Weurghy Wireless Earbuds, $15 (was $100) at Walmart

Courtesy of Walmart

Shop at WalmartWhy do shoppers love it?Weighing just 4 grams per bud, these wireless headphones are incredibly lightweight and comfortable to wear. Their ergonomic design ensures a secure fit that stays put during walks, runs, or workouts, and you can customize the fit with three included silicone tip sizes (small, medium, large). The 13.4 millimeter dynamic drivers deliver superior sound with powerful bass and crisp highs, while four environmental noise cancelation (ENC) mics reduce up to 90% of ambient noise, so you’ll always sound clear on calls.Bluetooth 5.4 offers stable connectivity with dual-channel transmission for lightning-fast pairing to your smartphone, laptop, or tablet without interference. Smart touch controls let you adjust volume, skip tracks, answer calls, or pause music with just a tap. With an IPX7 waterproof rating, you don’t have to worry about getting caught in the rain on your commute or an extra sweaty workout ruining these earbuds. Related: Walmart’s bestselling noise-canceling earbuds are on sale for just $19These Bluetooth earbuds come with a dual LED display charging case that clearly shows battery status for both buds and the case. The long-lasting battery life for the headphones and the case combined gives you a total of up to 50 hours of playback time. The case also offers a quick charge feature to give you up to two hours of playtime in just 15 minutes.Details to knowColor options: These earbuds come in white, black, purple, and rose gold.Connectivity: Bluetooth 5.4.Battery life: Up to 50 hours.Are they waterproof?: Yes.Shoppers are equally impressed by the “fantastic” sound quality of these earbuds as they are by the comfortable fit and feel. “They stay in my ears while I do anything, walking, cutting grass, working out, etc,” one reviewer wrote. Another shopper shared that this pair of earbuds “fits in the ear nicely.”Shop more dealsTikland Wireless Sports Headphones, $22 (was $130) at WalmartCashco Bluetooth Earbuds, $13 at WalmartShopping for noise-canceling earbuds doesn’t have to stretch your wallet. Snag the Weurghy Wireless Earbuds for a budget-friendly $15 while they’re on sale at Walmart. Deals like this don’t last, so if you need high-quality headphones under $20, add this pair to your cart while you still can. 

At first glance, Hooters and Twin Peaks appear to have nearly identical business models. Although both chains built brands around scantily clad servers and sports-bar dining, they’re not quite as similar as they seem.The outfits are a bit different, but the premise is the same — use cleavage as a draw to bring men into a sports bar setting. Both chains argue that they’re family friendly, and one, Twin Peaks, has thrived, while Hooters has continued to close locations, even after emerging from Chapter 11 bankruptcy.Twin Peaks’ former parent company, FAT Brands, also filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and that led to the chain emerging with new owners.It’s a tale of two bankruptcies involving very similar brands. Post-bankruptcy, however, the chains are on very different paths, with Twin Peaks growing, while Hooters fights for survival.Twin Peaks has a new ownerAfter the FAT Brands Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Twin Peaks was purchased by Summit Acquisitions, a group of Twin Peaks franchise operators, including 3BMgmnt Inc., JEB Food Group, and Operadora 2 Montes.The company will no longer be publicly traded and will operate under the corporate name Summit Twin Hospitality I, LLC.The brand’s existing corporate leadership team, including President Roger Gondek, Chief Marketing Officer Melissa Fry, Chief People Officer Lexi Burns, and Chief Financial Officer Scott Gray, remains fully in place to lead and manage the company. More Restaurants:Major Taco Bell franchisee sells 44 restaurantsChick-fil-A opens restaurant customers can’t eat in57-year-old fast-food seafood chain closed over 700 locationsAnd while Hooters has been closing restaurants, Twin Peaks plans to grow.”No staffing reductions are planned. The organization expects to add team members as it continues its growth momentum via new lodge openings and franchise expansion,” the company shared in a press release.Twin Peaks has embraced the “breastaurant” concept pioneered by Hooters. Nonetheless, former Twin Peaks CEO Joe Hummel said “its growth momentum is more attributable to the company’s obsessive commitment to quality in its food and beverage offerings and its experience,” according to Nation’s Restaurant News.Hooters has been closing restaurantsMuch like Twin Peaks, Hooters was purchased by a group of franchise operators.Following the closing of the transaction on Oct. 31, 2025, Original Hooters, along with their partners from Hoot Owl Restaurants LLC, will own approximately 140 of the 198 domestic Hooters restaurants. These domestic restaurants, along with the 60 international locations, represent approximately $700 million in systemwide sales, according to a press release.The new owners promised a return to the chain’s original values, which has included simplifying the menu, using higher-quality ingredients, and remodeling restaurants.”And of course, what has always made Hooters special are the thousands of iconic World Famous Hooters Girls. As part of the change, all server uniforms will return the original look while staying true to the brand’s original beachy vibe and heritage,” the company shared.So far, the changes have not worked, as Hooters continues to close locations.Hooters keeps closing restaurantsHooters has been selectively closing restaurants and has left several states. It recently closed its three remaining locations in Massachusetts. “After many years of serving the community, one of our long time franchisees in Massachusetts [has] closed their locations. This decision has been made as part of our current efforts to focus, revitalize, and strengthen the original Hooters brand across America,” the brand said in a statement Boston.com reported.The chain also left Connecticut. “After 33 incredible years, we have made the difficult decision to close this location,” a sign on the door of the Berlin Turnpike, Wethersfield, restaurant read, CT Insider reported. “Thank you for the many memories, the great laughs and of course the hot wings shared. We are truly grateful for every guest who walked through our doors and every team member who made it special.”In most cases, the shutdowns are sudden. In West Palm Beach, Fla., for example, I drove by the chain operating as normal one day, then saw it closed with for-lease signs the next.The chain also closed its location at Minnesota’s Mall of America, marking its exit from the state, according to Fox 9.These ongoing closures, along with a handful of others, follows the company closing 30 corporate-owned restaurants as part of its Chapter 11 restructuring, Fox News previously reported.

Hooters has struggled, even after it emerged from bankruptcy.Shutterstock

Why is Twin Peaks thriving while Hooters struggles?Hooters and Twin Peaks have similar concepts, yet each chain has made different decisions about how to execute its model.”Twin Peaks has done a solid job of enhancing its menu options,” said Darren Tristano, CEO of Foodservice Results, an Oak Park, Illinois-based food industry research firm, according to American Recruiters. “Many of the Twin Peaks locations have outdoor spaces, large settings with ample square footage, and its food and ice-cold beers are differentiators compared to Hooters.” Both chains face an uphill battle when it comes to winning over female customers.Roger Lipton, president of Lipton Financial Services, which specializes in the restaurant industry, noted that the “alluring waitresses create a mixed message.”Some men want to ogle them, but some guys won’t bring their wives or kids. You lose some customers who are offended,” he said.Twin Peaks has also benefited from strong unit economics. The chain has continued signing franchise agreements and opening new locations, while many casual dining competitors have slowed expansion.Hooters, in contrast, has focused on stabilizing its existing business after emerging from Chapter 11 bankruptcy rather than expanding its footprint.The difference between the chains, however, may come down to food. Twin Peaks was founded with the idea of offering an upscale take on bar food.”We’ve become a nation of foodies. At Twin Peaks, the eats are on par with the bods,” according to The New Republic.Randy Dewitt, who founded Twin Peaks, called out Hooters in that article.“I thought, ‘I don’t get it, their food is terrible, their operation is hit-or-miss, their facilities are the pits.’ It became pretty clear to me that that was a niche we could enter,” he said.Related: Discontinued Pepsi soda brand quietly returns to stores

Unmarried couples who assume their longtime partner will automatically inherit assets or make medical decisions during an emergency could be making a costly mistake.That’s the message from Harry Margolis, estate planning attorney and author of “Get Your Ducks in a Row.”In an interview, Margolis said unmarried partners generally do not receive the legal protections that marriage automatically provides, making estate planning documents far more than a formality. Without them, a surviving partner could lose inheritance rights, decision-making authority, and even the ability to participate in funeral or estate arrangements.For millions of Americans living together without marrying, that distinction matters now. Estate planning isn’t simply about passing along wealth. It’s also about ensuring the person you trust most has legal authority when you need it.Below is a transcript of the interview with Margolis, edited for brevity and clarity.What estate planning documents do unmarried couples need?Bob Powell: What happens when you’re together but not married? What estate planning issues do you need to know about? Here to discuss that is Harry Margolis, author of “Get Your Ducks in a Row.” Harry, what is it that unmarried partners need to know about estate planning?Harry Margolis: Unmarried couples probably have even more incentive to do estate planning than married couples. Everyone should have an estate plan, but the law automatically gives married couples many rights that unmarried partners don’t have.Depending on the state, spouses may automatically have inheritance rights, authority to communicate with doctors if a partner is hospitalized, access to medical information, and other legal protections.If you’re not married, you have to create those rights yourself.If you want your partner to communicate with medical providers when you’re injured or become ill, you need a health care proxy or health care power of attorney, depending on your state.If you want your partner to make financial or legal decisions for you, you need a durable power of attorney.If you want your partner to inherit your assets, you need a will, unless you’ve already arranged for assets to pass through beneficiary designations, joint ownership, or trusts.A will also names your executor or personal representative. Without one, an unmarried partner has no automatic standing as next of kin. Parents, children, or siblings generally have those rights instead.If you want your partner involved in your affairs after your death or incapacity, you need the proper legal documents.Key takeawaysUnmarried partners generally have no automatic inheritance or decision-making rights.A will, health care proxy, and durable power of attorney are foundational estate-planning documents.Review beneficiary designations regularly, especially after relationship changes.Without proper planning, assets may pass to relatives instead of a longtime partner.Putting legal documents in place now can help avoid family disputes and costly litigation.Why do beneficiary designations matter?Bob Powell: I assume the same is true for beneficiary designations on retirement accounts, life insurance policies, and similar assets.Harry Margolis: Exactly. If they’re not named, they have no rights.It’s also important to review beneficiary designations if your relationship changes. Some unmarried relationships last for decades, while others do not. Because there isn’t a formal divorce process, people often forget to update beneficiary forms, wills, and other documents after a breakup.What is the worst-case outcome if unmarried partners don’t plan?Bob Powell: What’s the worst-case outcome if an unmarried partner isn’t named in a will, trust, or beneficiary designation?Harry Margolis: Essentially, they have no rights and receive nothing.Someone could try to argue there was an agreement or contractual claim against the estate, but that’s often difficult. Those disputes frequently lead to litigation, which is expensive and usually benefits only the lawyers.It’s much better to avoid that situation by putting your own estate plan in place.Why is estate planning even more important for unmarried couples?Bob Powell: It sounds like much of your advice is similar to what you’d give married couples, except the consequences of failing to plan are even greater.Harry Margolis: That’s exactly right. We recommend estate planning for everyone, but it’s even more important when you don’t have the legal protections that come with marriage.What this means for youIf you and your partner are not married:Create a will if you want your partner to inherit assets.Complete a health care proxy or health care power of attorney so your partner can make medical decisions if you’re unable to.Sign a durable power of attorney to authorize financial decisions during incapacity.Review beneficiary designations on retirement accounts and life insurance policies regularly, especially after relationship changes.Related: Social Security deadline just moved closer: Why one expert warns 2032 is the real danger zone

A week before Apple raised prices on its most popular computers and tablets, Tim Cook sat down with the Wall Street Journal and used a phrase that stopped people mid-scroll. He called the memory chip shortage hitting Apple’s supply chain “a hundred-year flood.” He said he had never seen anything like it in 40 years in the industry.Elon Musk read the quote and immediately agreed. “Biggest price jump in anything I’ve ever seen too,” he posted on X. The two men are not often aligned. On this they are. And what they are describing has already started showing up in the prices consumers pay for MacBooks, iPads, and soon iPhones.What Tim Cook told the Wall Street Journal about the memory chip shortageCook’s WSJ interview landed in mid-June, but the real consequences came on June 25. CNBC reported that Apple announced price increases for Macs and iPads by hundreds of dollars that morning. Apple’s online store briefly went down as the updated prices went live. The stock fell more than 6%, the worst single-day drop since April 2025.”This is a hundred-year flood,” Cook told the Journal. “I’ve never seen anything like it in any area in over 40 years.”He had already told investors on Apple’s April earnings call that “significantly higher memory costs” were coming in the June quarter. By mid-June, the situation had moved from a warning to an announcement.More Apple:Goldman Sachs resets Apple stock forecast after WWDCApple answers Wall Street’s biggest AI concernMorgan Stanley revamps Apple stock target after key event”Unfortunately, price increases are unavoidable,” Cook said. “We’re doing our best to mitigate the huge increases that are being passed to us, and we’ve been trying to shield our customers from the increases, but the situation has become unsustainable.”Apple’s own statement was just as direct. “The consumer electronics industry is facing an unprecedented challenge,” the company said. “The rapid expansion of AI data centers has created an extraordinary surge in demand for memory and storage. We have never seen a component price increase this much, this quickly.”Why Elon Musk agreeing with Cook is the most telling part of this storyWhen Musk posted his agreement on X, he was not just endorsing Cook’s frustration. He was confirming the severity of the shortage from the other side of the trade.SpaceX’s Colossus data center in Memphis is one of the largest AI training clusters on earth. Musk’s xAI and SpaceX operations are precisely the kind of AI infrastructure buildout that has been consuming memory and storage chips at a pace the supply chain cannot match. Cook is paying the price for a shortage that Musk’s own operations are helping to create.Both CEOs calling the same shortage historic is the detail that matters. The companies paying the cost of the memory crunch and the companies driving it have arrived at the same conclusion about how severe it is.

Apple is the most visible company absorbing the cost, but it is far from the only oneMondon/Getty Images

How memory chip prices got to where they are in 2026Memory and storage chip prices have quadrupled in the past three quarters, according to Counterpoint Research, cited by CNBC. The cause is structural. Hyperscalers including Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Amazon need massive amounts of high-bandwidth memory to run AI data centers. Chip suppliers are steering production toward that demand because it is higher-margin and comes in larger, more predictable orders.Consumer electronics makers including Apple, Dell, HP, and Nintendo get what is left over.Right now, that is not much.Micron’s most recent quarter captures how fast the market has shifted. The company’s revenue quadrupled year-over-year and its gross margin jumped from 39% to 84.9%, surpassing Nvidia and Meta. For memory suppliers, this shortage is a windfall. For everyone buying memory, it is the opposite.The Wall Street Journal published a chart showing computer software and accessories prices rising about 15% year-over-year, something that last happened in the 1980s. The Journal called the AI data center buildout “a third wave of inflation,” after the energy and food inflation waves of 2022 and 2023.How far the memory chip crisis is spreading beyond AppleApple is the most visible company absorbing the cost, but it is far from the only one. HP, Dell, and Nintendo have already raised prices on their products. Best Buy’s incoming CEO Jason Bonfig told reporters the company expects its computing division to be the most affected by price increases in the coming quarters.The scale of the problem gets into stark relief with Gartner’s forecast. CNBC reported that Gartner expects soaring memory costs to reduce global PC shipments by 10.4% and smartphone shipments by 8.4% in 2026. That is not a supply chain inconvenience. It is a contraction in how many devices the world can afford to buy.Ranjit Atwal, a Gartner analyst, captured the situation when he spoke to CNBC about Apple specifically. “Even Apple can’t be safe,” he said, “as much as they have all the expertise and long-term planning, and everything else. This is beyond their capacity to limit the impact.”Counterpoint Research estimates that higher memory costs could add roughly $200 per iPhone for Apple. If that flows through to consumer prices, the phone that has become the default device for hundreds of millions of people gets meaningfully more expensive heading into the holiday cycle.Cook did not say when iPhone price increases would arrive. He did not have to. The Mac and iPad hikes announced June 25 made the direction clear enough.Related: Mark Cuban doubles down on the stock market and Elon Musk

Nationwide supermarket chains, as well as regional grocery companies, regularly review their store portfolios to eliminate underperforming locations that are dragging down their business.The nation’s second largest grocery chain, The Kroger Companies, in June 2025 said that it would close 60 stores over 18 months. The 143-year-old grocery chain operates about 2,800 supermarkets across 35 states and Washington, D.C., according to its website.

Heinen’s downtown Cleveland store, which is closing July 31, is located in a historic building.Artaxerxes Longhand / Getty Images

Heinen’s closes iconic storeAnd now, iconic supermarket chain Heinen’s said that it will close its downtown Cleveland location at East 9th Street and Euclid Avenue on July 31, since the store could not reach the level of long-term sustainability it needed to remain open, the company’s co-president, Jeff Heinen said in a statement.The store occupies the historic Cleveland Trust Company rotunda with a classic domed ceiling. The loss of the store eliminates an important full-service grocery resource for residents, workers, and visitors in the downtown area.”This was a difficult decision, and we appreciate the efforts of our associates and the support of our customers to make this store successful,” Heinen said. “We wish it would have been a more favorable outcome. Despite ongoing adjustments, the store did not reach the level of long-term sustainability needed to continue operating.”The downtown Cleveland Heinen’s location, which opened in 2015, is the only store in the chain that is closing. The store employed about 70 workers. No employees will be laid off, according to WKYC-TV.Store shuts down July 31″After more than 11 years serving the community at East 9th Street and Euclid Avenue, we have made the difficult decision to close the Heinen’s store in downtown Cleveland. Our final day of operations will be Friday, July 31,” the grocery chain posted on Facebook on June 26.”We are proud to have been part of the downtown Cleveland community and grateful for the customers who chose to shop with us. The support and loyalty we received, along with the dedication of our associates, made this store truly special. While we wish the outcome had been different, we will always appreciate the relationships and memories created there,” the post said.Company doesn’t lay off workers”This decision affects only the Downtown Cleveland store. There will be no layoffs, and our associates will be offered positions at other Heinen’s locations,” the message said.”All other Heinen’s locations remain open, and we hope to see you at our other stores,” the post concluded.”I’m deeply disappointed by the closure of Heinen’s downtown location,” Cleveland mayor Justin Bibb said in a statement, according to WEWS-TV 5.”For years, this store has been an important resource for downtown employees, residents, and visitors alike, and its presence has been a key part of the neighborhood’s continued growth and vitality,” Bibb said. Rising costs have been a major problem for supermarkets, as Kroger CEO Greg Foran said in a recent earnings call.”First, our operating costs have been growing faster than our sales. That’s not sustainable. And frankly, it’s not acceptable,” he said during Kroger’s first-quarter earnings call.Regional supermarket chain Giant Eagle, which operates over 200 food and pharmacy retail stores in Western Pennsylvania, North Central Ohio, northern West Virginia, Maryland, and Indiana, will close its third store over the last two months when it shuts its close its Lancaster, Ohio, location this summer.The chain already closed stores in North Versailles, Pa., on May 31 and Columbus, Ohio, on April 11.Heinen’s founder Joe Heinen opened his first store in Shaker Heights, Ohio, in 1929 as a butcher shop that transformed into Cleveland’s first supermarket, selling meat, produce, and dry goods.The grocery store chain currently operates 19 locations in Northeast Ohio and 5 in Illinois, with 2 warehouses, and a state-of-the-art manufacturing facility, according to its website.Heinen’s closing details:Downtown Cleveland store, East 9th Street and Euclid Avenue, Cleveland.Number of employees: 70.Opened: 2015.Closing date: July 31, 2026.Remaining Heinen’s stores: 23.Related: 49-year-old beloved steakhouse chain closes 41 locations

Federal pressure on hospitals and insurers to lower healthcare costs is meant to ease the financial burden on American households, but those savings may never reach consumers.Mark Cuban, the billionaire entrepreneur and co-founder of the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, is warning that consumers should not count on those savings reaching them.In a post on X, Cuban praised the Trump administration’s efforts to cut healthcare costs but issued a pointed warning, arguing that insurers have both the track record and the incentive to absorb negotiated savings rather than pass them along to consumers.His message puts a spotlight on a gap in the reform conversation that could determine whether federal cost-cutting measures translate into relief for the more than 82 million Americans already making financial trade-offs to cover medical bills, according to West Health-Gallup research.Cuban calls insurer transparency the missing piece of healthcare reformCuban’s core argument targets what he describes as a flawed assumption built into the administration’s cost-reduction strategy.Giving insurance companies stronger leverage in negotiations with hospitals and drug manufacturers does not guarantee those companies will share any resulting discounts with plan holders, Cuban wrote in his post on X.He called the expectation that insurers would voluntarily reduce costs for consumers “ridiculous,” citing the industry’s history of resisting reform.Related: Microsoft and Copilot just hit a jackpot in healthcareTo support that claim, Cuban pointed to the history of pharmacy benefit manager reform, arguing that when regulators attempted to rein in PBM practices in previous years, the companies found ways to recoup the lost revenue.”These are the same companies … they sued and found other ways to charge new fees,” Cuban wrote. His proposed fix is specific and aggressive: eliminate the confidentiality clauses that currently shield pricing contracts between insurers and healthcare providers from public scrutiny.Cuban suggested that noncompliant insurers and hospitals face fines of $1 million per day, a penalty structure designed to make secrecy more expensive than transparency.Healthcare costs continue climbing for employers and workersHealthcare expenses are rising at their fastest pace in over a decade, squeezing employers and employees alike, the backdrop against which Cuban’s warning lands.The total health benefit cost per employee is projected to increase 6.7% in 2026, pushing the average above $18,500, the steepest annual jump in 15 years, according to Mercer’s 2025 National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans.Mark Cuban, Co-Founder of Cost Plus Drugs, has argued that the only way to ensure carriers and hospitals genuinely comply with transparency rules is to require them to publish their contracts.More Health Care:Mark Cuban floats controversial way to cut health costsMedicare and health insurance company files Chapter 11 bankruptcyMicrosoft and Copilot just hit a jackpot in healthcareIn 2025, the average cost of employer-sponsored health insurance reached $17,496 per employee, a 6% increase that outpaced both inflation and wage growth, according to the survey.Prescription drug spending drove a significant portion of the increase, rising 9.4% among large employers, Mercer found.

Healthcare costs are climbing faster than wages and inflation, leaving employers and workers paying more as prescription drug spending accelerates.Morsa Images/Getty Images

Federal officials escalate hospital transparency enforcementCuban’s call for contract disclosure aligns with, but goes beyond, the federal government’s existing transparency push targeting hospitals specifically.Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz recently warned more than 500 hospitals that they remain out of compliance with federal price transparency requirements. The requirements took effect at the start of the year, with enforcement penalties starting in April,according to the Healthcare Financial Management Association (HFMA). “Post your real prices,” Kennedy said in a video posted to X. “Come into compliance immediately or prepare for serious consequences.”Penalties for noncompliant hospitals accumulate daily and can reach $2 million per year for larger facilities, CMS noted. Cuban’s larger point is that hospital disclosures cannot, on their own, prove savings reach consumers. Only insurer-hospital contract transparency, he argues, can close that gap.Cuban’s broader push to break up insurer conglomeratesThe contract transparency proposal is one part of a broader campaign Cuban has waged against what he views as anti-competitive consolidation in the health insurance industry.Cuban publicly endorsed the bipartisan Break Up Big Medicine Act, introduced in February 2026 which would force large insurers to separate their pharmacy benefit manager divisions, provider groups, and drug distribution networks from their core insurance operations, he noted on X earlier this year.His Cost Plus Drugs pharmacy model operates on the opposite principle, offering generic medications at the manufacturer’s cost plus a flat 15% markup, with a separate pharmacy handling fee and shipping cost disclosed at checkout, Cuban has explained.Rising healthcare costs can affect householdsThe financial strain Cuban is warning about is already showing up in household budgets across income levels.About one in three adults, representing more than 82 million Americans, reported making at least one daily trade-off in the past year to cover healthcare expenses, including rationing prescriptions and borrowing money, West Health-Gallup found in a March 2026 report. The burden extends well beyond low-income households, with a quarter of adults earning $90,000 to $120,000 also reporting trade-offs.An estimated 24 million Americans say they have postponed retirement due to healthcare costs in the past four years, while 18% have delayed changing jobs and 14% have put off buying a home, a separate West Health-Gallup survey of 5,660 adults found.”When families across every income level are forced to choose between medical bills and paying their heating or electric bill, that’s not a personal budgeting problem; it’s a systems failure,” Tim Lash, president of the West Health Policy Center, said in the report.Related: Mark Cuban goes in hard on the American healthcare system

Medicare beneficiaries may soon have a less expensive way to obtain certain GLP-1 medications prescribed for weight loss, while workers covered by employer health plans could face higher premiums or reduced coverage as the cost of those drugs continues to climb.In this interview, Jae Oh, CFP and author of “Maximize Your Medicare,” explains how a new 18-month Medicare pilot program could expand access to GLP-1 medications for some beneficiaries beginning in July, why formulary rules still matter, and how rising use of these medications is affecting employer-sponsored health insurance.Below is a transcript of the interview with Oh, edited for brevity and clarity.Some Medicare beneficiaries may get GLP-1 drugs for flat monthly copayBob Powell: Starting in July, some Medicare beneficiaries will be able to access GLP-1 medications by paying one flat fee per month. Good news for some, yes?Jae Oh: I think it is good news because it expands the number of Medicare beneficiaries who can obtain GLP-1 medications.We’ve discussed before that GLP-1 drugs are generally covered under Medicare Part D when there is a qualifying medical condition. Under this new pilot program, which is expected to begin next month and run for 18 months, eligible beneficiaries would pay a flat $50 copay. It also broadens access to people pursuing medically supported weight-loss programs.GLP-1 medications must still appear on your Part D formularyBob Powell: In the past, we’ve talked about Part D coverage requiring the medication to appear on a plan’s formulary.Jae Oh: That’s an important point.There are many GLP-1 medications on the market today. Whether you have a standalone Part D prescription drug plan or prescription coverage through a Medicare Advantage plan, your specific plan must include the medication your physician prescribes.Simply being prescribed a GLP-1 medication does not automatically guarantee coverage.The pilot program could begin as early as JulyBob Powell: Because Medicare drug plans are annual contracts, is it more likely that this won’t officially begin until January?Jae Oh: Based on the information I’ve seen, it could begin as early as July 1.That’s welcome news because it aligns with broader efforts to improve health outcomes. The thinking is straightforward: If beneficiaries who want to lose weight can access these medications more easily, they may improve their overall health and potentially reduce future medical claims.At least in theory, that’s how the program is intended to work.The existing Part D out-of-pocket cap remains in placeBob Powell: Do beneficiaries need to pay attention to the medical indication used to qualify for the flat fee?Jae Oh: Yes.The flat-fee program appears to apply specifically to weight-loss treatment, while existing Part D coverage continues to operate as it does today.It’s also worth remembering that Medicare Part D now includes an annual out-of-pocket maximum of $2,100 for 2026.The pilot program will run for 18 monthsBob Powell: The program lasts 18 months. After that, it could either end or continue depending on the results.Jae Oh: That’s right.It’s a pilot program, and policy decisions in Washington can change quickly. A great deal can happen over an 18-month period, so it’s difficult to predict what happens after the pilot concludes.Rising GLP-1 costs are creating pressure on employer health plansBob Powell: What’s happening in the large employer market with respect to GLP-1 medications?Jae Oh: We’re seeing some remarkable developments.Recent data suggest roughly 20% of prescription drug spending under large employer health plans is now devoted to GLP-1 medications.Many large employers operate self-funded health plans, meaning they assume much of the financial risk themselves. Heavy utilization of GLP-1 medications increases the cost of those plans and can make them more difficult to sustain financially.Employers may respond with higher premiums or reduced coverageBob Powell: One report estimated the average annual cost for a patient taking a GLP-1 medication is about $7,400, with total U.S. spending exceeding $100 billion. Those are remarkable numbers.Jae Oh: They are.Insurance works by spreading costs across everyone participating in the plan. The money required to pay for these medications has to come from somewhere.Employers may eventually decide to stop covering certain GLP-1 medications altogether if costs continue climbing. Another possibility is increasing employee cost-sharing by requiring workers to pay more out of pocket.Medicare beneficiaries should revisit eligibility for GLP-1 coverageBob Powell: What’s the practical advice for Medicare beneficiaries and employees?Jae Oh: For Medicare beneficiaries, anyone who previously couldn’t obtain a GLP-1 medication because it wasn’t covered for weight-loss purposes should revisit that question.Given that this pilot program is expected to begin very soon, it makes sense to determine whether you now qualify.For employees, it’s important to monitor changes to your employer’s health plan. Workers generally have fewer options because coverage decisions are made by the employer.If your employer offers a Health Savings Account (HSA), those funds may help pay for medications that are no longer covered under your health plan.Consumers should expect additional GLP-1 policy changesBob Powell: It sounds as though Medicare beneficiaries and employees alike should pay close attention to future developments.Jae Oh: Absolutely.GLP-1 medications continue to generate headlines because obesity and diabetes affect millions of Americans. These drugs have produced dramatic results for many patients, making them one of the most closely watched developments in health care today.I expect we’ll continue seeing new developments.Longer life expectancy also creates new retirement planning challengesBob Powell: If GLP-1 medications improve health and extend life expectancy, retirees may need larger retirement savings to support a longer retirement.Jae Oh: It’s an interesting tradeoff.The goal is to become healthier and live longer. But living longer also means paying living expenses over a longer period.As part of LIMRA’s Retirement Income Institute, we’re focused on longevity risk, which is the possibility of outliving your savings.It’s still too early to know how much these medications may ultimately extend life expectancy. We don’t yet have enough long-term data to answer that question.More GLP-1 headlines are likelyBob Powell: Anything we missed?Jae Oh: I think we’ll continue seeing additional headlines. This is an area that’s changing rapidly, and we’ll likely have more to discuss as new developments emerge.Related: Medicare’s 2033 funding crisis: What retirees should do right now