Complicated FTC rules can create consumer confusion

Reviewed by Erika Rasure

Fulfilling a major campaign promise, President Joe Biden signed a Made in America executive order Monday, Jan. 25, 2021, designed to increase the amount of federal spending on products made by American companies.

A statement, released by the White House prior to the signing said, “With this order, President Biden is ensuring that when the federal government spends taxpayer dollars, they are spent on American-made goods by American workers and with American-made component parts.”

Key Takeaways

• President Joe Biden’s executive order requiring government agencies to “buy American” is designed to promote and help American companies and workers.
• The definition of Made in America, under the Federal Trade Commission, is subject to interpretation, which could make the president’s executive order difficult to enforce.
• “Unqualified Made in America” means produced or assembled in the United States with all or nearly all domestic materials.
• A looser interpretation called “qualified Made in America” allows the inclusion of more foreign materials.
• Any product whose country of origin is not the United States cannot be classified as Made in America, no matter where the materials came from.
• Policing and enforcement of Made in America laws falls to the FTC in response to complaints from the public.

A ‘Buy American’ Executive Order

President Biden’s executive order, titled “Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers,” imposes rules designed to force government agencies to increase the purchasing of products made in the U.S. instead of overseas. It’s a move toward fulfilling Biden’s Buy American campaign pledge, which he hopes will strengthen domestic manufacturing.

The premise of the order, stated in section 1, is simple: “The United States Government should, whenever possible, procure goods, products, materials, and services from sources that will help American businesses compete in strategic industries and help America’s workers thrive.”

To achieve this the order includes directives to:

• Establish a Made in America Office with a director appointed by the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
• Tighten government rules and practices, including the waiver process, to make it harder for federal agencies to purchase imported products.
• Promote strict enforcement of the Buy American Act of 1933.
• Ensure that small and medium-sized businesses will have better access to information needed to bid on government contracts. 
• Promote an accountable and transparent procurement policy.

What Is ‘Made in America’?

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), charged with preventing deception and ensuring fairness in the American marketplace, is responsible for defining “Made in America” or “Made in the USA” and enforcing that standard when it comes to products that claim U.S. origin. Guidelines and rules are laid out in a 40-page FTC publication titled Complying With the Made in the USA Standard.

There are two types of Made in America claims, unqualified and qualified. Unqualified refers to a claim that the product is “all or virtually all” made in the U.S. A qualified claim acknowledges that the product is U.S. made, but not entirely of domestic origin.

Unqualified ‘Made in America’ Claims

An unqualified claim means the manufacturer is purporting that the product is “all or virtually all Made in USA,” meaning the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and all U.S. territories or possessions. Nailing down a precise meaning for ‘all or virtually all’ is where things get tricky.

The FTC further defines the standard to say:

• All significant parts and processing that go into the product must be of U.S. origin.
• There should be no or negligible foreign content.
• The manufacturer needs “competent” and “reliable” evidence to back up the claim.
• Final assembly or processing must take place in the U.S.

Other factors the FTC takes into consideration include:

• How much of the product’s total manufacturing costs, including cost of goods sold or inventory costs of finished products, involve U.S. parts and processing
• How far removed any foreign content is from the finished product

Qualified ‘Made in America’ Claims

A qualified “Made in America” claim must include an additional descriptive element or elements that make it clear the product is not entirely Made in America using only American-made components.

The qualified standard can include the phrase “Made in America,” “Made in USA,” or “Assembled in the USA,” as long as a distinction is made between this product and one that is “all or virtually all” made in the United States. For example:

• Made in the USA of U.S. and imported parts
• Assembled in the USA from materials imported from Mexico
• Made in the USA with 60% U.S. content

As with an unqualified claim of origin, a qualified claim must be truthful. The ultimate deciding factor is whether the claim is deceptive.

Important

If a product’s country of origin is other than the United States, that product cannot be promoted or advertised as “Made in America.”

‘Country of Origin’ Legislation

Any attempt to label certain products “Made in USA” may be impacted by laws that apply to those products. These laws, known as country of origin laws, impose another check on manufacturers or retailers who may try to circumvent the rules. If the country of origin is other than the United States, the product cannot, by definition, be made in America.

The Tariff Act of 1930, Section 304 requires that “unless excepted, every article of foreign origin (or its container) imported into the U.S. shall be marked with its country of origin.”

The Textile Fiber Products Identification Act requires a “Made in USA” label on clothing manufactured in the U.S. with fabric made in the U.S. even if the materials used to create the fabric are of foreign origin.

The Wool Products Labeling Act requires wool products to be accurately labeled with fiber content and country of origin.

The Fur Products Labeling Act requires manufacturers and retailers to label fur products with the name of the animal, manufacturer’s name, and country of origin.

The American Automobile Labeling Act requires that every automobile manufactured on or after Oct. 1, 1994, and sold in the U.S. is labeled to disclose:

• The percentage of U.S./Canadian equipment (parts)
• The names of any countries other than the U.S. and Canada that individually contribute 15% or more of equipment content, and the percent of content for each such country (maximum of two countries)
• The final assembly point by city and state (where appropriate), and country
• The country of origin of the engine and transmission
• A statement explaining that parts content does not include final assembly (except the engine and transmission), distribution, or other non-parts costs

The Buy American Act of 1933 requires that a product be manufactured in the U.S. and contain more than 50% U.S. parts to be considered “Made in USA” for government procurement purposes.

How to Spot a Fake

Rooting out fakes is not easy, given the somewhat vague FTC labeling requirements. Here are some things to look for that might tip you off:

Country of origin is required to be posted conspicuously on any product that originates outside the United States. If the country of origin is not the United States, the product is not made in the USA.

Flag stickers are commonly used to distract consumers. A flag sticker or large USA label is not an indication the product is American made.

Spelling or grammar mistakes on the labels are indicative of foreign manufacture. They might be missed by non-English-speaking workers.

Made in America is not as convincing as Made in the USA. Technically, Made in America could include Canada or Mexico.

Check the websites of companies or products about which you’re not sure. There may be information in the About Us section that explains where the products are actually made.

Bar codes are not helpful indicators. Viral messages and posts saying you can tell the country of origin by the bar code are misleading at best. Bar codes do not necessarily indicate the country of origin of the product but rather the country of origin of the bar code.

Warning

Internet messages and emails suggesting you can tell a product’s country of origin from its bar code are misleading. Bar codes only tell you where the bar code came from—not the product.

What to Do If You Suspect a Fake

If you come across a product claiming to be Made in America or Made in the USA and you suspect the claim is bogus, contact the Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C. 20580; (202) 326-2996 or send an e-mail to MUSA@ftc.gov.

If you have specific information about import or export fraud, call Customs’ toll-free Commercial Fraud Hotline, 1-800-ITS-FAKE. This could include knowledge about someone removing a required country of origin label before the product is delivered.

You can also contact your state attorney general and the Better Business Bureau to report a company. Or you can refer your complaint to the National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs by emailing nad@bbbnp.org.

What Does a “Made in America” Label Mean?

In order to be sold as “Made in America” or “Made in U.S.,” a product must be manufactured from parts that are “all or virtually all” produced in the U.S., and final assembly must also be completed in the U.S. For that designation, the U.S. includes not only the fifty states and the District of Columbia, but also overseas territories and possessions.

What Does Assembled in USA Mean?

In consumer sales, a product labeled “Assembled in the U.S.A.” is an example of a qualified claim of American origin. Similar phrasings are used for products that use a significant amount of American components but do not meet the standards for an unqualified “Made in America” label. Although the standard is lower than the requirements for a “Made in America” label, manufacturers must nonetheless exercise care and ensure that qualified claims are truthful and substantiated.

Does a “Made in America” Label Avoid Sweatshops?

No. While foreign sweatshops are commonly used as an argument in favor of buying American-made products, there’s no shortage of labor law violations in domestic production. A CBS investigation into Los Angeles garment factories found high incidences of labor law violations, with workers paid as little as $0.05 cents for each article of clothing they completed. On an hourly basis, that meant some workers were earning less than $3 per hour.

The Bottom Line

In manufacturing industries, phrases like “Made in America” or “Made in the U.S.A.,” can sometimes seem difficult to parse, considering how many goods include imported components. The Federal Trade Commission has strict rules about what can be labeled as American-made, and what percentage of foreign components it can include.

Reviewed by Ebony Howard
Fact checked by Michael Rosenston

President Donald Trump signed the Executive Order “Deferring Payroll Tax Obligations in Light of the Ongoing COVID-19 Disaster” during his first term on Aug. 8, 2020. The order allowed employers to defer the employee portion of Social Security payroll taxes for certain individuals in the final four months of 2020. The intention behind the order was to provide additional relief for employees working through the coronavirus pandemic.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued Notice 2020-65 on Aug. 28, 2020 which provided additional guidance for employers on the implementation of the Executive Order.

According to the Presidential Memorandum, Trump directed “the Secretary of the Treasury to use his authority to defer certain payroll tax obligations with respect to the American workers most in need. This modest, targeted action will put money directly in the pockets of American workers and generate additional incentives for work and employment, right when the money is needed most.”

Key Takeaways

• President Trump’s payroll tax Executive Order allowed employers to defer the employee portion of Social Security taxes for certain individuals in the last four months of 2020.
• The action was taken to forestall hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic.
• The order applied only to the employee portion of Social Security payroll taxes.
• The postponed taxes were those that would have been payable from Sept. 1 through Dec. 31, 2020.
• They had to be paid in 2021, however.

Who Was Covered?

“The deferral shall be made available with respect to any employee the amount of whose wages or compensation, as applicable, payable during any bi-weekly pay period generally is less than $4,000, calculated on a pre-tax basis, or the equivalent amount with respect to other pay periods,” according to the Presidential Memorandum. This equated to an approximate $104,000-a-year salary: $4,000 biweekly * 26 pay periods per year.

IRS Notice 2020-65 further clarified that the determination of total wages was made on a pay-period-by-pay-period basis. This may have disqualified the same employee in certain pay periods based on overtime wages or other bonus pay. The $4,000 threshold was also recalculated as an “equivalent amount with respect to other pay periods” if an employer paid wages on a basis other than biweekly.

Which Taxes Were Deferred?

The Executive Order applied only to the employee portion of Social Security payroll taxes (6.2%).

Employee Medicare payroll taxes (1.45%), employer Medicare payroll taxes, (1.45%) and the employer portion of Social Security payroll taxes (6.2%) weren’t included in the Executive Order. The deferral didn’t apply to the parallel Social Security taxes owed by self-employed individuals via self-employment taxes.

When Was the Effective Date?

The employee portion of Social Security payroll taxes on wages that were paid from Sept. 1 through Dec. 31, 2020 were allowed to be deferred without incurring any penalties, interest, additional amounts, or addition to the tax. Employers who deferred these taxes wouldn’t withhold the funds or pay the taxes to the IRS as typically scheduled.

The deferred taxes were postponed until Jan. 1 to April 30, 2021. Interest, penalties, and additions to tax began “to accrue on May 1, 2021, with respect to any unpaid applicable taxes,” according to the supplemental detail in IRS Notice 2020-65.

Was It Optional or Mandatory?

This guidance was optional for private-sector employers and it was likely that the administrative costs would be a deterrent for many small businesses. It takes time to process changes in a payroll system and there was additional manual tracking required to ensure that specific situations were accounted for correctly.

The federal government, the United States’ largest employer, deferred employees’ portions of their Social Security taxes to provide immediate relief during the pandemic. There was no option to opt out for federal employees. The plan was to implement these deferrals as of the second pay period in September. This included all branches of the military as well as civilian jobs with the federal government.

Important

The Executive Order was written as a deferral. Payroll taxes that were deferred by an employer would be due at a future date.

The deferred taxes from September to December 2020 would be taken out in January through to April 2021, posing specific risks to anyone planning on or forced to change jobs during that time frame. Employer A might have deferred the employee portion of your Social Security taxes. You could run into some issues because the deferred taxes weren’t able to be withheld from your paychecks from January to April 2021 if you left your job in November 2020 and started another job with Employer B in January 2021.

Supplemental IRS Guidance

Notice 2020-65 providing supplemental IRS guidance was issued on Aug. 28, 2020. It was brief and it didn’t answer all the questions that business owners and tax professionals had about implementation.

One of the issues that wasn’t covered was how employers should collect deferred payroll taxes from employees who separated from the company before the end of April 2021 when deferred payroll taxes were to be fully recouped. IRS Notice 2020-65 stated that employers could make arrangements to otherwise collect the taxes from employees if necessary.

Criticism of the Executive Order

Critics of the Executive Order claimed that deferring certain payroll taxes did nothing to help those who were hardest hit by the coronavirus pandemic: individuals who had been furloughed, laid off, or were otherwise unemployed. These individuals didn’t pay payroll taxes so the deferral didn’t affect or benefit them.

The House Committee on Ways and Means stated that the Executive Order does not affect the Social Security Trust Funds, as the taxes are only deferred. The tax wasn’t eliminated so the brief deferral should have no impact on the Social Security Trust Fund.

How Are Social Security Taxes Normally Paid?

Employees and employers are each legally obligated to pay 6.2% of the employee’s wages to Social Security for a total of 12.4%. The employee’s share is withheld from their paychecks and the employer must forward the total of both shares to the government. Self-employed individuals must pay the entire 12.4% because they’re effectively their own employers.

This rate is not expected to change in 2025.

What Is the Social Security Trust Fund?

The U.S. Treasury holds two Social Security accounts, one for Social Security and one for disability insurance. Social Security taxes are placed into the appropriate account and current benefits to those collecting are paid from it. These payments don’t deplete the account or trust fund as long as Social Security taxes continue to be paid in by active workers. The unused balance is reserved for future beneficiaries.

How Much Did the Executive Order Save Workers Per Paycheck?

A worker with annual earnings of $50,000 would be paid approximately $961 per week before taxes were withheld from that income. The Social Security tax rate for the employee’s half is 6.2% so this would work out to almost $60 per paycheck, reducing their take-home pay to about $900 a week. President Trump’s Executive Order saved them this debit but only temporarily. The tax had to be paid later.

The Bottom Line

President Trump signed the “Deferring Payroll Tax Obligations in Light of the Ongoing COVID-19 Disaster” in August 2020 during his first term in office. The intention was to give American workers and employers a bit of a financial break while they were dealing with the fallout of the pandemic. They were permitted to postpone payment of their Social Security taxes from the last quarter of 2020 to the first quarter of 2021.

These taxes came due eventually, however, and it ultimately caused hardship for some.

The legacy and lessons of Apple’s co-founder

Reviewed by Margaret James

Apple is one of the most popular and powerful companies in the world. Not only that, it revolutionized how we communicate and more. Starting by creating computers, Apple surged to the forefront of the most important companies in history with the creation of the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad. All of this success stemmed from the mind of its co-founder, Steve Jobs.

On October 5, 2011, Steve Jobs passed away at the age of 56. He had just left the CEO post at Apple, the company he co-founded, and returned to for a second period as its head. Jobs was an entrepreneur through and through, and the story of his rise is the story of Apple as a company, along with some very interesting twists.

In this article, we’ll look at the career of Steve Jobs and the company he founded, as well as some of the lessons Apple offers for potential entrepreneurs.

The fact that Apple was the first company to surpass the $1 trillion market capitalization mark, and later the $2 trillion and $3 trillion marks, is in no small part connected to the legacy and lessons learned from Steve Jobs.

Key Takeaways

• Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak co-founded Apple in 1976, introducing first the Apple I and then the Apple II.
• Apple went public in 1980 with Jobs the blazing visionary and Wozniak the shy genius executing his vision.
• Executive John Scully was added in 1983; in 1985, Apple’s board of directors ousted the combative Jobs in favor of Scully.
• Away from Apple, Jobs invested in and developed animation producer Pixar and then founded NeXT to create high-end computers; NeXT eventually led him back to Apple.
• Jobs returned to Apple in the late 1990s and spent the years until his death in 2011 revamping the company, introducing the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, and transforming technology and communication in the process.

From Blue Boxes to Apple

Steve Jobs got his start in business with another Steve, Steve Wozniak, building the blue boxes phone phreakers used to make free calls across the nation.

The two were members of the HomeBrew Computer Club, where they quickly became enamored with kit computers and left the blue boxes behind. Founding Apple in 1976, the next product the two sold was the Apple I, which was a kit for building a PC. In order to do anything with it, the customer needed to add their own monitor and keyboard.

With Wozniak doing most of the building and Jobs handling the sales, the two made enough money off the hobbyist market to invest in the Apple II. It was the Apple II that made the company, which was incorporated in 1977. Jobs and Wozniak created enough interest in their new product to attract venture capital. This meant they were in the big leagues and the company would continue to grow.

The Roller Coaster Ride Begins

By 1979, Apple was making over $5 million in net income solely on the strength of the Apple II. The Apple II wasn’t state of the art, but it did allow computer enthusiasts to create and sell their own programs. Among these user-generated programs was VisiCalc, a type of proto-Excel that represented the first software with business applications.

Although Apple did not profit directly from these programs, they did see more interest as the uses for the Apple II broadened. This model of allowing users to create their own programs and sell them would reappear in the app market of the future but with a much tighter business strategy around it.

By the time Apple went public in 1980, the dynamic of the company was more or less set. Steve Jobs was the fiery visionary, with an intense and often combative management style, and Steve Wozniak was the quiet genius who made the vision work.

Apple’s board of directors wasn’t too fond of such a power imbalance in the company, however. Jobs and the board agreed to add John Sculley to the executive team in 1983. In 1985, the board ousted Jobs in favor of Sculley.

$10.2 Billion

Steve Jobs’ net worth at the time of his death in 2011.

The Gap Years

Steve Jobs was rich and unemployed. Although he wasn’t working at Apple, he was far from idle. During this time, from 1985 to 1996, Jobs was involved in two big deals; the first of which was an investment.

In 1986, Jobs purchased a controlling stake in a company called Pixar from George Lucas. The company was struggling, but its eventual success in digital animation led to an initial public offering (IPO) that earned Jobs around $1 billion.

The second was a return to his old obsession with computers, founding NeXT to create high-end computers. These were expensive machines with an operating system representing the best attempt yet at making the power of UNIX fit into a graphical user interface. When Tim Berners-Lee created the World Wide Web, he did so using a NeXT machine.

Of these two deals, NeXT proved the most important, as it turned out Apple was looking to replace its operating system. Apple bought NeXT in 1996 for its operating system, bringing Steve Jobs back to the first company he founded.

Getting Apple Back on Track

When Jobs returned, the company wasn’t in a good place. Apple had begun to flounder as cheap PCs running Windows flooded the market. Jobs found himself in the driver’s seat again and took some drastic steps to turn around Apple’s decline.

The company asked for and received a $150 million investment from Bill Gates. Jobs used the money to ramp up advertising and highlight the products Apple already offered while choking off research and development (R&D) money in non-producing areas.

The NeXT operating system was used to create the iMac, Apple’s first hit PC in a long time. Jobs followed this up with a list of successes from the iPod in 2001 to the iPad in 2010.

The years between saw Apple dominate the smartphone market with the iPhone, open up an e-commerce store with iTunes, and launch branded retail outlets called, what else, the Apple Store. When Jobs stepped down as CEO, Apple was scrapping with Exxon for the world’s largest market cap.

How Much of Apple Did Steve Jobs Own?

Surprisingly, at the time of his death, Steve Jobs only owned 0.24% of Apple. The bulk of his wealth came from the shares he owned in Disney, which was approximately 7% of the company.

Why Did Steve Jobs Create Apple?

There are a few reasons why Steve Jobs created Apple. One being his entrepreneurial spirit, another being his interest in computers, and also his and Wozniak’s vision of making computers accessible to the larger public by making them small enough to fit into homes and offices.

How Long Did Steve Jobs Leave Apple?

Steve Jobs was fired from Apple in 1985 and was brought back in 1996 when his company, NeXT, was purchased by Apple. This means he was gone from Apple for 11 years.

The Bottom Line

It’s impossible to sum up Jobs’s career in a single article, but a few lessons stick out. First, innovation counts for a lot, but innovative products fail without proper marketing. Second, there are no straight paths to success.

Jobs did get wealthy early on, but he would be a footnote today if he hadn’t returned to Apple in the 90s. At one point, Jobs was kicked out of the company he helped create for being hard to work with. Rather than change, he bided his time, then took over again, and this time his attitude was seen as part of his genius.

There is much more to be learned from the life of Steve Jobs, as there is in the life of every successful entrepreneur. The sheer hubris of the entrepreneurial spirit, the idea that you can do something bigger and better than it has ever been done before, always bears watching and studying, whether to imitate or just to marvel at.

Growth stocks can be a good way to build wealth. These are some of the best growth stocks for February 2025

Growth stocks are companies that investors expect to outperform industry peers or the broader market in earnings, revenue, and share price increases. Unlike more established firms, which may return these profits to shareholders in the form of dividends or use them to buy back stock, growth stocks tend to reinvest these gains in expansion, research, development, and similar areas. However, although growth stocks may generate sizable returns for investors, they also carry a higher degree of risk as a result of market volatility. Growth is one key factor investors consider, along with others such as value and momentum.

Below, we explore the best growth stocks to watch this month and offer a detailed explanation of our methodology for compiling this list. All data are current as of Jan. 30, 2025.

Growth Stocks in the Current Market Environment

In general, growth stocks tend to perform better in periods of economic expansion when the cost of borrowing is low. Though inflation is lower than it has been in recent years, higher interest rates and slowing economic growth mean that the current environment may not be ideal for these firms.

That said, not all growth stocks benefit from the same market conditions. For example, companies that enjoy a particular competitive edge within their industries or a dominant position in the market may be more likely to grow regardless of the macroeconomic environment. Similarly, firms in a hot industry that is experiencing significant growth may also outperform independently of other factors. A recent example has been technology stocks focused on AI, although an industry sell-off following the unveiling of a competitive AI platform by Chinese firm DeepSeek in January 2025 is a reminder that these conditions may change suddenly.

Health technology and biotech firms are often present in lists of top growth stocks thanks to their potential for massive breakouts following strong data about a new product or launches of a blockbuster drug or piece of equipment. Despite turbulence due to inflation and a slowdown in product launches, this sector may still be poised for significant growth due to an aging population and increased health care spending, with national health expenditures climbing to $4.9 trillion in 2023.

How We Chose the Best Growth Stocks

In our growth stocks screen, we focused on companies listed on either the Nasdaq or the New York Stock Exchange. To ensure that the firms we screened are well-established, we excluded stocks trading under $5 per share, those with a market capitalization under $300 million, and any with a daily trading volume under 100,000. Additionally, companies with growth in excess of 1,000% were excluded as outliers.

From this list, we selected the stocks with the highest 30-day returns to complete our ranking. In many cases, companies with a strong recent history of outperformance relative to industry peers or the broader market have built momentum thanks to positive company or external news, favorable market sentiment, or appealing technicals. If these conditions remain the same, these companies may experience continued growth in the future, though past performance is not an indicator of future returns.

How to Invest Wisely in Growth Stocks

Besides 30-day return, there are many key financial ratios that are helpful to use to identify potential growth stock investments. Using multiple metrics provides a fuller picture of the benefits different candidates offer, their financial positions, and how the market views them with respect to potential future gains.

Earnings Per Share (EPS) Growth

Earnings per share (EPS) growth is a measure of the percentage increase in a company’s earnings per share over a given period, typically year-over-year. Positive or accelerating EPS growth indicates underlying financial health and suggests the potential for future returns.

Price-to-Earnings (P/E) Ratio

Price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio is a comparison of a company’s stock price and its EPS. Higher P/E ratios suggest that investors are bullish about a company but may also signal that it is overvalued. On the other hand, a low P/E ratio may mean that a stock is undervalued relative to the industry or the broader market, or that investors are not especially optimistic about its prospects.

Price-to-Book (P/B) Ratio

Price-to-book (P/B) ratio is a measure of a firm’s market value against its book value, or the net value of the assets on its balance sheet. Some contrarian investors believe that a low P/B ratio indicates an undervalued stock that may have growth potential. However, P/B ratios can vary significantly from industry to industry, so it’s important to take stock of how a particular company compares with its peers.

How to Find Growth Stocks

Investors don’t have one single method for identifying promising growth stocks. Factors such as financial health, management, returns, and market position relative to industry peers are all helpful to consider.

Looking at a prospective growth stock investment, you should consider the company’s revenue, EPS, and profit margin history. Companies with a consistent record of increasing earnings may be likely to continue to grow into the future. It’s best to avoid stocks paying a dividend if you’re interested in growth potential—companies paying a dividend are opting to not reinvest profits back toward investment in company growth.

Identifying firms with a relative industry advantage over their peers depends upon the specific sector and industry. For instance, some industries—like health care—may be quite opaque to investors without special expertise. In other cases, it may be easier to identify a sustainable competitive edge in the form of a unique product, technology, or service that a company offers. An example of a competitive edge is NVIDIA Corp.’s (NVDA) data center processors, widely viewed as advantageous over rival products thanks to their system-scale integration capabilities.

A company’s management and corporate governance can also be helpful clues to its growth potential. How have the firm’s leaders navigated challenges and taken advantage of opportunities in the past? Looking to historical earnings reports can show whether a firm has been able to meet its goals, including in the area of forecasted EPS and revenue performance.

Lastly, share price performance can be an indicator of future growth potential. Look for companies that have higher stock price gains than their industry or the broader market. When making a comparison, it’s helpful to benchmark a firm’s performance against the Russell 1000 Index. As of Jan. 30, 2025, the Russell 1000 had returned 2.6% in the last 30 days. The stocks in our screen above have all significantly outperformed this level, potentially suggesting the prospect of future growth as well. A metric like compound annual growth rate (CAGR) can also help to compare two companies more directly.

Are These the Best Growth Stocks?

It is difficult to assess which growth stocks are the “best.” In reality, growth stocks in general—and these companies in particular—may not be suitable for each type of investor. Growth stocks may exhibit a higher degree of volatility than some more established, larger peers. Because many growth stocks are companies making aggressive maneuvers to expand operations, and because these moves may or may not succeed, investing in growth stocks can carry certain risks. Further, it can be difficult to predict which stocks exhibiting growth characteristics, such as the metrics identified above, will successfully generate outsized returns.

Investors interested in growth stocks should keep in mind that recent performance history is not a guarantee of future returns.

The comments, opinions, and analyses expressed on Investopedia are for informational purposes only. Read our warranty and liability disclaimer for more info.

As of the date this article was written, the author does not own any of the above securities.

The CARES Act and new CAA Act temporarily extended unemployment benefits

Reviewed by Somer Anderson
Fact checked by Kirsten Rohrs Schmitt

The U.S. Department of Labor’s unemployment insurance (UI) program provides cash benefits to eligible workers who become unemployed through no fault of their own. The program is administered by individual states, but the law itself is a federal one.

Benefits, which are funded by payroll taxes, are paid weekly by individual state governments to those who qualify. But there are specific regulations about which unemployed workers qualify for this type of insurance.

The federal government made changes to the eligibility for unemployment benefits because of the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus. They were initially put in place after the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law in March 2020. The benefits were extended with the passing of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA) and again after President Joe Biden was elected with the American Rescue Plan Act in 2021. Many of these benefits expired on Sept. 5, 2021.

Here’s a look at who does and doesn’t qualify for unemployment insurance under normal circumstances and how the rules were amended during the coronavirus pandemic in 2020 and 2021.

Key Takeaways

• You can’t collect unemployment benefits under normal circumstances if you quit your job or if you’re self-employed.
• To collect UI benefits, you must file a claim with the UI program in the state where you worked.
• The CARES Act expanded unemployment insurance benefits through three programs to help workers affected by the 2020 novel coronavirus pandemic.
• The Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program extended benefits to the self-employed, freelancers, and independent contractors.
• People who left their jobs due to a risk of COVID-19 exposure or infection or to care for a family member may also qualify for UI benefits.

Who Qualifies for Unemployment?

While each state sets its own guidelines for UI benefits eligibility, you usually qualify if you:

• Are unemployed through no fault of your own. In most states, this means you left your last job because of a lack of available work.
• Meet work and wage requirements. You must meet your state’s requirements for time worked or wages earned during an established base period.
• Meet additional state requirements.

Important

To find details about your state’s unemployment insurance program, visit CareerOneStop, a job resource website sponsored by the U.S. Department of Labor.

How Do I Apply for Unemployment?

To collect UI benefits, you must file a claim with the UI program in the state where you worked. Depending on your state, you may be able to file a claim in person, by telephone, or online. When you apply, you need to provide certain information, including your Social Security number and the addresses and dates of your previous job.

In general, you should contact your state’s UI program as soon as possible after you become unemployed and file your claim in the state where you worked. However, if you worked in multiple states or in a different state than where you now live, contact the state UI agency where you reside for guidance on how to file your claim with other states.

Who Doesn’t Qualify for Unemployment?

Of course, there are other ways to get disqualified, depending on where you live. In most states, you can’t get UI if you:

• Are dismissed for workplace misconduct. What constitutes misconduct varies by state, but in general, intentionally violating safety rules, theft, embezzlement, violence, and other criminal activities disqualify you from receiving benefits. A failed drug test may also constitute misconduct.
• Are dismissed for misconduct outside of work. Some states don’t allow employers to terminate employees for misconduct outside of work, but some do. If so, it may also disqualify you from collecting UI benefits. 
• Turn down a suitable job. If you pass on a job that’s comparable to the one you lost, you will probably no longer qualify for benefits. Your state may consider factors like pay, your training and background, and safety when it determines what constitutes a suitable job.
• Don’t look for work. You must report to your state’s UI program that you’ve applied to a certain number of jobs each week. If you don’t report this information on time, or if you stop looking for a job, you may lose your benefits.
• Are unable to work. If you’re on maternity leave, dealing with a family emergency, temporarily disabled, or otherwise unable to work, you may lose your eligibility. However, in some states, you may qualify for benefits if you quit a job for medical reasons or to care for an ill family member.
• Receive severance pay. In some states, you can’t collect UI benefits if you also have severance pay. If you get eight weeks of severance pay, for instance, your UI eligibility starts nine weeks after you lost your job.
• Commit fraud. If you don’t report income or a new job, you are disqualified from receiving benefits. You may even have to repay your benefits or go to jail for fraud.

COVID-19 Unemployment Relief

The unemployment rate increased to its highest level since data was first collected when the coronavirus pandemic first hit the United States, peaking at 14.8% in April 2020 before dropping down to 6.7% in December 2020. It affected almost every industry and individual across the country, regardless of their age, gender, or employment status.

The federal government took steps to alleviate the burden on unemployed individuals, especially those who wouldn’t otherwise qualify for unemployment benefits. On March 27, 2020, President Donald Trump signed the $2 trillion coronavirus emergency stimulus package, referred to as the CARES Act. It temporarily expanded UI benefits through three programs, one of which allowed certain workers normally left out to collect benefits.

The CARES Act created the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC), which provided an additional $600 benefit each week to the uninsured. That benefit expired on July 31, 2020. The passage of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, signed by President Trump on Dec. 27, 2020, included new funding for the FPUC at a lower rate of $300 per week, through March 14, 2021.

President Joe Biden extended these benefits when he signed the American Rescue Plan Act on March 11, 2021. Additional provisions were put into place, allowing unemployed individuals to continue receiving benefits. All three of these programs expired on Sept. 5, 2021.

Note

Workers are not eligible for PUA benefits if they can telework with pay. Unemployed individuals also must be authorized to work to be eligible for PUA, so undocumented workers will not qualify.

Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA)

Under normal circumstances, you can’t collect unemployment benefits if you quit your job or if you’re self-employed. This includes freelancers, independent contractors, and gig workers.

The program temporarily extended unemployment benefits to certain workers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and eligible self-employed workers through Sept. 5, 2021. Workers who qualified included:

• Freelancers and independent contractors
• Workers seeking part-time work
• Workers without enough work history to qualify for state unemployment insurance benefits
• Workers who otherwise wouldn’t qualify for benefits under state or federal law 

Individuals were required to provide self-certification they were able to work and were available for work. They were also required to prove they were unemployed, partially employed, or unable or unavailable to work due to one of these COVID-19-related situations:

• They were diagnosed with COVID-19 or had symptoms and were trying to get diagnosed.
• A member of the individual’s household was diagnosed with COVID-19.
• The individual provided care for someone diagnosed with COVID-19.
• The individual provided care for a child or other household member who couldn’t attend school or a care facility because it was closed due to COVID-19.
• The individual was quarantined or was advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine.
• The individual was scheduled to start a job, didn’t have one, or couldn’t reach it due to COVID-19.
• The individual became the primary earner because the head of the household died as a result of COVID-19.
• The individual had to quit their job as a direct result of COVID-19.
• The individual’s place of employment closed as a direct result of COVID-19.
• The individual met other criteria set forth by the labor secretary.

Benefit amounts were calculated based on previous earnings, using a formula from the Disaster Unemployment Assistance program under the Stafford Act. The PUA had a minimum benefit equal to 50% of the state’s average weekly UI benefit (about $190 per week).

Other Unemployment Programs

The CARES Act, and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, the American Rescue Plan Act extended unemployment benefits through two other initiatives: the FPUC program and the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC) program:

Keep in mind that the FPUC and the PEUC programs both expired on Sept. 5, 2021, along with the PUA.

What Disqualifies You From Unemployment?

Each state has its own rules for unemployment. Generally, in order to be eligible for unemployment, a worker must lose their job through no fault of their own, such as through involuntary termination or layoffs. They must also meet certain requirements for income and length of employment, which vary by state. Voluntarily quitting, absenteeism, or insubordination may disqualify a worker from receiving unemployment benefits.

What Is Constructive Dismissal?

Constructive dismissal occurs when an employee resigns due to unacceptable working conditions or a breach by the employer. For example, an employee who quits because the employer did not pay them on time, provided an unsafe working environment, or did not schedule them for upcoming shifts could be considered to have been constructively terminated, even though the employer did not formally fire them. Unlike other types of resignation, labor agencies will typically grant unemployment benefits to victims of constructive dismissal.

How Do Employers Pay for Unemployment?

Employers pay for unemployment insurance through payroll taxes, which are used to fund state unemployment programs. The state tax rate is typically based on the number of people a company employs, how much they’ve paid into the program, and how many employees have filed for benefits. Although a single employee is unlikely to make a big difference, a large number of unemployment claims could raise a company’s effective tax rate. When a former employee makes a claim, employers have the opportunity to dispute the claim and argue that the employee does not qualify for benefits.

The Bottom Line

Unemployment insurance represents one of the basic benefits of the modern welfare state. In exchange for a small tax deducted from one’s weekly paycheck, workers are granted the temporary assurance that they will continue receiving an income even if they lose their jobs. The benefits and requirements vary from state to state, so it is important to understand the exact rules to qualify for unemployment.

Reviewed by Robert C. Kelly
Fact checked by Vikki Velasquez

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren announced in December 2018 that she would run for the 2020 presidency, pushing for sweeping “big, structural change.” However, in March 2020, she ended her campaign for president.

“Our country is in a time of crisis—the time for small ideas is over,” she said in June 2019 at the California Democratic Convention. “The entire structure of our system has favored the rich and the powerful, pick any issue you care about and it is painfully obvious.”

According to the 71-year-old Harvard Law School professor famous for grilling bank executives and spearheading the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), America’s problems, like gun violence and the racial wealth gap, were all connected to one thing, “power concentrated in the hands of the wealthy and the well-connected.”

Warren’s message during her campaign for president was: the system is rigged and it must be broken and remade. Once seen as a radical philosophy, the direction did garner some support from those disappointed in other Democratic leaders.

Key Takeaways

• Senator Elizabeth Warren from Massachusetts ran for the Democratic nominee for president during the 2020 election cycle.
• While she dropped out of the race that Joe Biden ultimately won, her economic plan is still considered a template for the Democratic Party’s platform.
• To Warren, the single biggest structural change America needed was a more equitable, safe, and prosperous society is of its financial and economic system.
• Warren dropped out of the presidential race March 2020.

Big, Big, Big

Warren has coined the term “economic patriotism” to describe a government prioritizing the interests of regular workers and middle-class people over those of the financial sector and giant, multinational corporations.

“For decades, Washington has lived by a simple rule: If it’s good for Wall Street, it’s good for the economy,” she wrote in a Medium post arguing that the financial sector has been sucking value out of the economy instead of benefiting it.

Warren planned to target private equity firms so they’d be “on the hook” for bad investments instead of exiting with tidy profits, expand postal banking for underserved families, and appoint Fed governors that would introduce a real-time payment system for everyday transfers even if it hurt large banks.

Warren also sought new executive compensation rules for the banking industry and a reenergized Financial Stability Oversight Council to monitor and curb leveraged corporate lending that has reached record levels. The current “carried interest loophole” allows investment fund managers to count carried interest, or their share of the fund’s profit, as capital gains for taxation, and Warren planned to close it. This is something former President Donald Trump pledged to do as well.

Warren also promised to go after powerful monopolies in the tech, banking, and agricultural sectors by reversing anti-competitive mergers, passing legislation so that large tech platforms like Alphabet Inc.’s (GOOG) Google Search and Amazon.com Inc.’s (AMZN) Marketplace were legally considered platform utilities, breaking up vertically integrated agribusinesses like Tyson Foods (TYSN), and pushing for the passing of her 21st century Glass-Steagall Act, which would prevent investment banks from accessing taxpayer-subsidized insurance.

Household Debt and Welfare

Warren sought to slash household debt by raising wages and bringing down costs like rent, health care, child care, etc. She advocated raising the federal minimum wage to $15, closing the race and gender pay gap, and empowering workers by supporting unions and allowing them to elect at least 40% of board members at large U.S. corporations.

Warren also introduced a bill that would cancel $640 billion of the current student loan debt, helping 95% of the 45 million people burdened. She also looked to make tuition free at all public technical schools, two-year colleges, and four-year colleges.

Since the debt ceiling is a dogged concern, Warren said she’d get rid of it or have it automatically increase based on the government’s spending decisions. Warren also advocated for a single-payer, Medicare for All system as was proposed by rival Sen. Bernie Sanders. She said it would cost $52 trillion over a decade, including $20.5 trillion of new federal spending, and save Americans $11 trillion over the same period. Providers, like doctors and hospitals, would have received smaller payments and brought down drug prices.

Trade and Manufacturing

While Trump’s strategy for helping U.S. trade and manufacturing was quite simplistic and focused on fixing trade deficits with tariffs, Warren advocated for America’s trade policy to be dictated by the need to protect workers, farmers, and the environment.

“America enters into trade negotiations with enormous leverage because America is the world’s most attractive market,” she wrote in another Medium post referencing economic patriotism. “As President, I won’t hand America’s leverage to big corporations to use for their own narrow purposes—I’ll use it to create and defend good American jobs, raise wages and farm income, combat climate change, lower drug prices, and raise living standards worldwide.” 

What would have looked like in terms of policy? Transparent trade negotiations with more involvement of the public, representatives from labor, environmental, and consumer groups on advisory committees, labor and environmental standards for trade partners, a multilateral agreement to protect domestic green policies from WTO challenges, border carbon adjustment, reduced exclusivity periods for drugs in trade deals, fair prices for American goods and country-of-origin labeling rules, enhanced border inspection requirements for food imports, ending Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), laws ensuring imposed duties benefit workers, and a new federal office to promote American clean energy products abroad, etc.

When it comes to manufacturing, Warren proposed a Green Manufacturing Plan that would have had the government invest $2 trillion over ten years in green research, manufacturing, and exporting.

Paying for It

Warren’s Green Manufacturing Plan would have been paid for with a Real Corporate Profits Tax that would prevent corporations from abusing loopholes. Under that plan, large U.S. companies that reported more than $100 million in profits (domestic and foreign) to investors would be charged 7% on every dollar of profit above it in addition to its liabilities under the tax laws. Research by University of California-Berkeley economists cited by Warren’s campaign said the tax would have raised $1 trillion in ten years.

When it comes to her health care plan, Warren promised: “not one penny in middle-class tax increases.” A new Employer Medicare Contribution program would have raised $8.8 trillion and companies would have spent 98% of the amount they usually spend on employee health insurance to the federal government. Businesses with less than 50 employees would have been exempt unless they already paid for health care, and large companies with extremely high executive compensation and stock buyback rates would have contributed more.

The rest of the money would have been raised through a variety of ways, such as better tax enforcement, tax on the higher take-home pay of employees, a tax on financial transactions, fees on large banks, a minimum 35% tax on foreign corporate earnings, eliminated accelerated depreciation of assets of companies, and a wealth tax.

Warren’s proposed Wealth Tax legislation was a new concept to most Americans. Essentially an additional tax of 2% to 6% on household net worth over $50 million would have raised $3 trillion over ten years and affect 0.1% of the population. Enforcement would have required additional investments in the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

Important

On March 5, 2020, Elizabeth Warren delivered a speech, announcing she would be dropping out of the 2020 presidential election.

Warren’s Economic Plan vs. Other Candidates

Warren shared many views as other Democratic candidates; however, there were some fundamental differences between her platform and others. Below are highlights of the more prominent campaigns and plans she ran against.

Warren Vs. Biden

Elizabeth Warren proposed a wealth tax, while Joe Biden did not support it. Warren’s tax plan focused on raising taxes on high-income earners through income tax and capital gains tax rates. Biden favored expanding the Affordable Care Act and adding a public option, eliminating private health insurance.

Warren proposed free public college tuition and the cancellation of student loan debt, while Biden supported making community college tuition-free and expanding income-based loan repayment options. Both Warren and Biden acknowledged the need to address climate change, but differed in specifics.

Warren’s ambitious plan for transitioning to 100% clean energy was ambitious, while Biden’s plan focused on a $2 trillion investment in clean energy over four years and rejoining the Paris Agreement. Warren’s background as a consumer advocate led to a more aggressive approach to Wall Street reform, advocating for the reinstatement of the Glass-Steagall Act and stricter regulations on the financial industry. Biden also supported financial reform, but his proposals were generally considered more moderate.

Warren vs. Sanders

Warren and Sanders both supported a single-payer healthcare system called Medicare for All, with Warren’s plan allowing private insurance for supplemental coverage and Sanders’ seeking an immediate transition to a fully government-run system without private insurance. They also both proposed a wealth tax, but with different details.

Warren proposed free public college tuition and the cancellation of student loan debt, while Sanders proposed tuition-free public college and all student loan debt cancellation. Both candidates advocated for stricter regulations on Wall Street and addressing income inequality, but Warren’s proposals were more detailed and focused on breaking up big banks and combating corporate power.

Warren’s plan included more detailed policy proposals and investments in green manufacturing, research, and infrastructure. Sanders campaigned on a “political revolution” and a transformative approach to progressive policies, while Warren proposed significant reforms but was seen as more incremental and focused on detailed policy proposals.

Warren vs. Trump

Warren supported a single-payer “Medicare for All” healthcare system, while Trump sought to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA) with an alternative plan. She proposed a wealth tax targeting the wealthiest individuals and higher taxes on high-income earners, aiming to redistribute wealth and increase funding for social programs. Trump meanwhile pursued tax cuts, particularly for corporations and high-income individuals, to stimulate economic growth.

Warren emphasized the need for stricter regulation of Wall Street and the financial industry, while Trump pursued deregulation and rolled back certain regulations. Warren also supported a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and comprehensive immigration reform, while Trump focused on tightening immigration controls, border security measures, and travel bans on predominantly Muslim countries. Warren emphasized a multilateral approach to foreign policy, criticized Trump’s “America First” approach, and sought to restore U.S. global leadership.

How Would Elizabeth Warren’s Wealth Tax Work and How Would It Be Implemented?

Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax would impose a tax on the net worth of the wealthiest Americans, helping to fund her proposed policies. Implementation would involve assessing and taxing individuals’ assets, including stocks, real estate, and other investments.

How Does Elizabeth Warren Plan to Address Climate Change and Transition to Clean Energy?

To address climate change, Elizabeth Warren proposed transitioning to clean energy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Her plan involved prioritizing investing in renewable energy. This would be done by incentivizing green technology and implementing regulations to combat climate change and create a sustainable future.

How Would Elizabeth Warren Promote Affordable Housing and Address the Housing Crisis?

Elizabeth Warren proposed various measures to promote affordable housing. This included expanding access to rental assistance, increasing funding for affordable housing programs, and implementing regulations to address housing discrimination and speculative practices.

How Does Elizabeth Warren Plan to Address Racial and Gender Wealth Gaps?

Elizabeth Warren’s plan to address racial and gender wealth gaps involved targeted policies such as increasing access to affordable housing, expanding access to capital for minority-owned businesses, investing in education and job training, and combating discriminatory practices in the financial system.

The Bottom Line

Although Warren was an underdog by most standards, Warren’s campaign did gain some ground. She came in second place in the October-November of 2019 NBC News/Wall Street Journal polls. However, Warren dropped out of the presidential race in March 2020. Even though she failed in her bid to win the Democratic primary, some of her more popular ideas may be adopted by other candidates in the future.

Reviewed by Michelle P. Scott

Infrastructure was a central legislative focus in 2021. “Generations from now, people will look back and know this is when America won the economic competition for the 21st century,” said President Joe Biden in a statement released November 6, 2021, shortly after the House of Representatives passed the $1.2 trillion bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act by a 228-to-206 vote. He signed it into law on November 15, 2021.

Progressives had threatened to vote against the measure but, at the last minute, agreed to support it after moderates promised they would back the companion social safety net and climate bill, officially known as the Build Back Better Act (BBBA)—provided an upcoming cost score by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) showed that the plan would not add to the budget deficit.

Ultimately, the BBBA would not come to pass, though parts of it were later included in the Inflation Reduction Act, a different bill signed into law in 2022.

Key Takeaways

• Infrastructure—originally used to designate building and repairing roads, bridges, railroads, and ports—has been expanded under President Biden to include human or social infrastructure.
• In 2021, lawmakers considered major proposed infrastructure bills.
• The first was the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which was agreed to on a bipartisan basis and dealt with traditional infrastructure.
• A second bill, the Build Back Better Act, dealt with social infrastructure.
• Ultimately, the Inflation Reduction Act replaced the Build Back Better Act and was signed into law.

The $1.2 Trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Package

The 2,702-page Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act contained $550 billion in new spending. The $1.2 trillion figure came from including additional funding normally allocated each year for highways and other infrastructure projects.

New spending included:

• $110 billion for roads and bridges. In addition to construction and repair, the funding also helped pay for transportation research at universities, funding for Puerto Rico’s highways, and “congestion relief” in American cities.
• $66 billion for railroads. Funding included upgrades and maintenance of America’s passenger rail system and freight rail safety but nothing for high-speed rail.
• $65 billion for the power grid. The bill would fund power lines and cable updates and provide money to prevent power grid hacking. Clean energy funding was also included.
• $65 billion for broadband. Funding included to expand broadband in rural areas and low-income communities. Approximately $14 billion would help reduce Internet bills for low-income citizens.
• $55 billion for water infrastructure. This funding included $15 billion for lead pipe replacement, $10 billion for chemical cleanup, and money to provide clean drinking water in tribal communities.
• $50+ billion for cybersecurity and climate change. This resilience funding would protect infrastructure from cybersecurity attacks and address flooding, wildfires, coastal erosion, droughts, and other extreme weather events.
• $39 billion for public transit. Funding here is provided for upgrades to public transit systems nationwide. The allocation also includes money to create new bus routes and help make public transit more accessible to older and disabled Americans.
• $25 billion for airports. This allocation provided funding for major upgrades and expansions at U.S. airports. Air traffic control towers and systems would receive $5 billion for upgrades.
• $21 billion for the environment. These monies would be used to clean up superfund and brownfield sites, abandoned mines, and old oil and gas wells.
• $17 billion for ports. Half of the funds in this category would go to the Army Corps of Engineers for port infrastructure. Additional funds would go to the Coast Guard, ferry terminals, and reduction of truck emissions at ports.
• $11 billion for safety. Appropriations here would address highway, pedestrian, pipeline, and other safety areas, with highway safety getting the bulk of the funding.
• $8 billion for western water infrastructure. Ongoing drought conditions in the country’s western half would be addressed through investments in water treatment, storage, and reuse facilities.
• $7.5 bill for electric vehicle charging stations. The Biden Administration asked for this funding to build significantly more charging stations for electric vehicles nationwide.
• $7.5 billion for electric school buses. With an emphasis on bus fleet replacement in low-income, rural, and tribal communities, this funding would allow those communities to convert to zero-emission buses.

The Cost of the Build Back Better Act

While passage of the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act created a path to invest billions of dollars in roads, bridges, water systems, transit, and broadband, the passage of the BBBA and the massive investment in human infrastructure it represents was far from ensured, particularly due to concerns about its cost.

In November 2021, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the BBBA would increase the deficit by $360 billion over 10 years. This figure, the CBO noted, did not include any additional revenue generated from enhanced enforcement of tax collections, though it did include the $275 billion in funding for that enhancement. The Treasury Department estimated that additional revenue would amount to $200 billion. By subtracting the $200 billion in additional revenue from the $360 billion projected deficit, the deficit would be reduced to $160 billion or $16 billion annually.

Critics of the bill maintained that the BBBA was “riddled with design errors” and that if its temporary provisions became permanent, the bill would further increase the deficit. On the other hand, the CBO estimated that it would also lead to major offsets, including through recovered health care cost, business taxes, and retirement plan modifications.

The House of Representatives passed and sent the BBBA to the Senate on Friday, November 19, 2021. In the Senate, the Build Back Better Act was contentious. Discussion centered around gaining support from two moderate Democratic Senators, Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) and Joe Manchin (D-WV), who refused to support the legislation in its original state.

How the Build Better Act Evolved

An Original $3.5 Trillion Proposal

The original Democratic FY2022 Budget Resolution Agreement Framework memorandum was designed to enact President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda as first framed. This proposal, often called an investment in human infrastructure, was far-reaching and ambitious, with a $3.5 trillion price tag. It listed the following amounts and areas to be addressed:

• $135 billion for the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Funding to address forest fires, reduce carbon emissions, and address drought concerns.
• $332 billion for the Banking Committee. Including investments in public housing, the Housing Trust Fund, housing affordability, and equity and community land trusts.
• $198 billion for the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. This would develop clean energy.
• $67 billion for the Environment and Public Works Committee. These monies would fund low-income solar and other climate-friendly technologies.
• $1.8 trillion for the Finance Committee. This part of the bill was for investments in working families, older people, and the environment. It included a tax cut for Americans making less than $400,000 a year, lowering the price of prescription drugs, and ensuring that wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share of taxes.
• $726 billion for the Health, Labor, Education, and Pensions Committee. This addressed universal pre-K for three- and four-year-olds, childcare for working families, tuition-free community college, funding for historically black colleges and universities, and expanding the Pell Grant for higher education.
• $37 billion for the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. This would have electrified the federal vehicle fleet, electrified and rehabbed federal buildings, improved cybersecurity infrastructure, reinforced border management, invested in green-materials procurement, and invested in resilience.
• $107 billion for the Judiciary Committee. These funds addressed establishing “lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants.”
• $20.5 billion for the Indian Affairs Committee. This addressed Native American health and facilities, education and facilities, housing and energy programs, resilience and climate programs, BIA programs and facilities, Native language programs, and the Native Civilian Climate Corps.
• $18 billion for the Veterans Affairs Committee. This funds upgrades to veteran facilities.
• $83 billion for the Commerce Committee. This would have gone to technology, transportation, research, manufacturing, and economic development investments. It funded investments in coastal resiliency and healthy oceans, including the National Oceans and Coastal Security Fund and the National Science Foundation research and technology directorate.

A Modified $2.3 Trillion Proposal

By the time the House passed the BBBA, its scope had been reduced, and its cost was drawn down to around $2.3 trillion. Notable exclusions in the updated version of the bill included Medicare vision and dental benefits, free community college, and an income tax for billionaires. It retained the following provisions:

• $382 billion for child care and universal preschool. The plan is designed to save most American families more than half of their spending on child care by providing two years of free preschool for every three- and four-year-old in America and additional funding for childcare.
• $205 billion family and medical leave. Permanently authorizes the first-ever national paid family and medical leave guarantee for U.S. workers, providing up to four weeks of paid leave.
• $190 billion for Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Credit. The proposal extends the expanded Child Tax Credit for one year and provides additional funds to extend the expanded Earned Income Tax Credit.
• $150 billion for home care. This funding expands home care for older people and those with disabilities.
• $175 billion for housing. The plan invests in affordable housing, including the construction and rehabilitation of homes, and investments in rental assistance and housing vouchers.
• $40 billion higher ed and workforce development. The legislation will increase Pell Grants and provide post-secondary education opportunities such as apprenticeship programs for underserved communities.
• $17 billion for the Small Business Committee. This provides for small business access to credit, investment, and markets.
• $40 billion for equity and other investments. According to the White House, spending in this area will be designed to achieve equity through investments in maternal health, community-violence interventions, and nutrition.
• $5 billion in supply chain investments. These investments will safeguard our economy and support domestic job growth.
• $3 billion to support child nutrition. This investment will help expand eligibility and eliminate paperwork so more children can receive free school meals.
• $275 billion in State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction relief. This is accomplished by increasing and applying the cap over the long-term, allowing states and counties to raise more revenue to deliver essential public services.
• $130 billion in ACA credits. This money will expand affordable healthcare coverage, reduce premiums for more than 9 million Americans, and deliver healthcare to the uninsured in states not enrolled in expanded Medicaid coverage.
• $35 billion Medicare hearing coverage. While dental and vision coverage was not cut, Medicare recipients will have coverage for hearing aids and tests. The funding will also cover nursing home transparency and staffing standards and bolster funding for the Elder Justice Act program.
• $559+ billion for clean energy and climate. The plan proposes cutting greenhouse gas pollution by over a gigaton in 2030, reducing consumer energy costs, helping to create more clean air and water, and creating hundreds of thousands of jobs.

However, despite modifications that significantly reduced the scope and cost of the BBBA from its original form, moderate centrist Democratic Senator Joe Manchin announced in late December 2021 that he could not support the proposal. Lacking this critical support, the proposal was effectively dead.

In August 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act to invest in energy production, scale down inflation, and lower health care costs. While this was still a substantial piece of legislation, it fell notably short of Build Back Better’s original aims.

Infrastructure Negotiations Timeline

Though both Democrats and Republicans praised the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill, it took nearly three months after it passed the Senate to be approved by the House. Significant challenges remained to be addressed before the previously $3.5 trillion (now $2.3 trillion) Build Back Better bill reached its final stages. Here’s how the process for both bills has gone so far.

• Aug. 10, 2021: Immediately after passing the bipartisan bill, the Senate voted 50 to 49 to begin debate on the $3.5 trillion infrastructure bill.
• Aug. 11, 2021: Senate Democrats passed the $3.5 trillion budget resolution 50 to 49. Democrats in the House and Senate began the time-consuming task of drafting a final product.
• Aug. 23, 2021: House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer sent a “Dear Colleague” letter to House members on August 10 stating that the House would “return to session the evening of Aug. 23, 2021” to consider the anticipated Senate budget resolution (the $3.5 trillion bill). Hoyer said the House would remain in session “until our business for the week is concluded.”
• Aug. 24, 2021: The House of Representatives did pass the budget resolution, which also instructed House committees to write the $3.5 trillion legislation. To please Democratic centrists eager to pass the bipartisan $1.2 trillion bill, the resolution included a nonbinding commitment to vote on that infrastructure bill by September 27. In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “In consultation with the Chair of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I am committing to pass the bipartisan infrastructure bill by September 27. I do so with a commitment to rally House Democratic support for its passage.”
• Sept 15, 2021: The memorandum outlining the $3.5 trillion plan recommended that congressional committees “submit legislation to the Committee on the Budget by September 15 to carry out this section, though this date is not binding.” The markup was completed on time and advanced on Sept 15, 2021.
• Sept 27, 2021: The original nonbinding deadline to vote on the $1.2 trillion infrastructure package became the deadline to begin debate on the bill with a new voting deadline of Sept 30, 2021, vis-a-vis Speaker Pelosi’s “Dear Colleague” letter referenced above.
• Sept 30, 2021: The new deadline to vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill saw the passage of H.R. 5305 to extend funding and suspend the debt limit through Dec. 3, 2021, but no infrastructure bill. Instead, infrastructure was delayed so progressive and moderate Democrats could work out differences, especially on the still $3.5 trillion BBBA.
• Oct. 24, 2021: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on CNN that Democrats planned to reach an “agreement” on the Build Back Better agenda and a vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill sometime in the next week.
• Oct. 28, 2021: President Biden revealed his framework for a scaled-down Build Back Better agenda before leaving for Europe and the G20 summit. Biden’s move was designed to bring progressive Democrats to vote for the bipartisan infrastructure bill ahead of the passage of the yet-to-be-formally-crafted BBBA.
• Oct. 31, 2021: In her remarks on CNN, Pelosi said the bipartisan infrastructure plan must be passed by October 31, when an extension for transportation funding programs expired. This was the new deadline for at least part of Biden’s infrastructure; however, as of November 4, neither infrastructure bill had been passed.
• Nov. 5, 2021: The House passed the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure and Jobs Act, which was already passed in the Senate, allowing it to go to the president’s desk for signature.
• Nov. 15, 2021: The president signed the Infrastructure and Jobs Act bill into law.
• Nov. 16, 2021: Vice President Harris and the Department of Commerce (DOC) announced the first and second sets of grants for the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program, totaling $2.4 million. This program is receiving additional funding through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
• Nov. 18, 2021: The CBO score on the Build Back Better Act was delivered to Congress, predicting a $367 billion deficit from the BBBA. Additional, not included, revenue would reduce the deficit to at least $160 billion.
• Nov. 19, 2021: The House of Representatives approved the Build Back Better Act by a 220 to 213 vote and sent it to the U.S. Senate for consideration and amendments. Debate in the Senate was expected to last several weeks.
• Nov. 19, 2021: The U.S. Department of Transportation awarded $1 billion in Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) grants to 90 major projects across 47 states. This funding will be boosted by an additional $7.5 billion from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
• Nov. 24, 2021: The USDA began accepting applications for the $1.15 billion ReConnect rural broadband program for loans and grants to state, local, or territorial governments, corporations, Native American Tribes, and limited liability companies and cooperative organizations. Funds from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will boost this program.
• Dec. 2, 2021: The EPA announced $7.4 billion in Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding for states to upgrade America’s aging water infrastructure, sewerage systems, pipes, and service lines.
• Dec. 13, 2021: The Biden-Harris Administration announced an EV Charging Action Plan to achieve the President’s goal of building a national network of 500,000 electric vehicle chargers. The plan is funded by bipartisan infrastructure law’s $7.5 billion allocation.
• Dec. 15, 2021: The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) announced $52.5 billion in funding to all 50 states and the District of Columbia under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
• Dec. 16, 2021: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) at USDOT announced $3 billion in infrastructure funding for 3,075 airports to be used as investments to upgrade critical infrastructure.
• Dec. 16, 2021: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) at USDOT announced $260 million in funding from the bipartisan infrastructure law for highway safety programs to reduce traffic crashes.
• Dec. 16, 2021: President Biden announced “a productive call with Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Schumer earlier today, ” he briefed the congressional leaders on a recent discussion with Senator Joe Manchin. The President indicated that Manchin “reiterated his support for Build Back Better funding at the level of the framework plan I announced in September.”
• Dec. 17, 2021: EPA announced $1 billion in funding to clean up 49 Superfund sites across 24 states. Money from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will accelerate cleanup at dozens of other sites nationwide, stop toxic waste from harming communities, and create good-paying jobs. 
• Dec. 17, 2021: DOI released initial guidance for the states interested in applying for funding to cap and plug orphaned oil and gas wells that reduce methane emissions and create jobs. Initially, 26 states expressed interest in the $4.7 billion funding for well plugging, remediation, and restoration available in infrastructure programs. 
• Dec. 21, 2021: The DOE Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations will oversee $20 billion of infrastructure funding to scale up clean energy, create new, good-paying jobs for American families and workers, and reduce pollution.
• Dec. 23, 2021: The Maritime Administration announced $241 million in Port Infrastructure Development grants to improve ports, strengthen the nation’s supply chains to meet demand from the rapid economic recovery over the past year, and help ease inflationary pressures. Funding for this program will be boosted by an additional $2.25 billion through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
• Dec. 31, 2021: The Federal Communications Commission launched the Affordable Connectivity Program, providing broadband subsidies of up to $30/month for low-income households (up to $75/month for households on Tribal Lands) and up to $100 towards the purchase of a desktop, laptop or tablet computer. Funding for this program are provided by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
• Jan. 14, 2022: As part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the White House announced a $27.3 billion initiative to improve 15,000 bridges over the next five years in U.S. states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and tribes.
• Jan. 16, 2022: Senator Tim Kaine, in an interview on Face the Nation, told host Margaret Brennan that although the most recent version of Build Back Better was, in his opinion, dead, the core parts of the legislation—including reduced child care and education expenses, workforce training, and support for workforce health care—would pass.

Funding Freeze

Shortly after returning to office in 2025, President Trump ordered a freeze on funding related to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act, including funding that Congress had already authorized. During the freeze, agency heads must evaluate which grants or loans are consistent with the president’s goals relating to “financial assistance for foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal,” according to the presidential memorandum.

Shortly after the freeze was ordered, the government rescinded the memo in the face of widespread legal opposition from nonprofits and local governments. In separate cases, two federal judges granted temporary pauses to the funding freeze, saying that the executive branch lacked the legal authority to withhold funds that Congress had already authorized.

What Is Infrastructure?

Infrastructure refers to the underlying foundation or framework of a system or organization. When used in the context of government programs, it usually describes roads, bridges, railways, and ports that provide the transportation network of a nation, state, or local area.

Infrastructure can also be used to describe the people and systems that make an organization or government function. This type of infrastructure is called social infrastructure.

What Is H.R. 3684?

H.R. 3684 is known officially as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and more informally as the bipartisan infrastructure legislation, passed by the U.S. Senate on Aug. 10, 2021. This legislation—now law—provides funding for traditional infrastructure including roads, bridges, railroads, and ports. It is expected to cost $1.2 trillion.

Does the Build Back Better Agenda Include Immigration Reform?

The Build Back Better framework announced by President Biden on Oct. 28, 2021, included $100 billion in funding to achieve certain types of immigration reform including: “Providing long-awaited relief to millions through reconciliation, and making enhancements to reduce backlogs, expand legal representation, and make the asylum system and border processing more efficient and humane.” This investment required a ruling by the Senate parliamentarian that would allow it to be passed on a reconciliation basis—meaning, in this case, it would not require Republican support. Ultimately, the Senate parliamentarian rejected the request to include the immigration reform provision in the infrastructure plan.

The Bottom Line

Major infrastructure bills were a significant subject of debate in 2021. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, signed into law in November 2021, sought to improve the infrastructure of the U.S. and the lives of its citizens, by allocating funds to improve roads, bridges, broadband, water, airports, and more. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 was a stripped-down version of the Build Back Better Act, and included funding for energy production, lowering inflation, and reducing health care costs.

Fact checked by Kirsten Rohrs Schmitt
Reviewed by Somer Anderson

The EU is one of America’s largest trading partners, accounting for $555 billion in goods traded in 2024. The U.S. exported $341.9 billion worth of goods from the EU. Imports from the EU amounted to $555.6 billion, making the trade deficit $213.6 billion, one of the highest ever on record, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Trade relations between the United States and the European Union (EU) hit a bit of a rough patch when President Donald Trump imposed tariffs during his first term on many goods made in Eurozone countries. Numerous other political moves have affected U.S./EU trade over the years, however.

Key Takeaways

• The European Union (EU) is one of the largest and most important trading partners with the United States.
• The U.S. is the EU’s largest trading partner.
• Germany and the Netherlands are the largest importers of American products in Europe.
• Tariffs and protectionism can lead to harmful trade spats despite the large volume of trade between the two regions.

Example of U.S./EU Trade

Trade relations between otherwise friendly regions can take a turn for the worse if a nation feels that a key industry is threatened by unfair practices abroad.

The first Trump administration proposed additional duties on EU exports that were worth $11 billion in retaliation for a bloc granting aircraft manufacturer Airbus (EADSY) what they viewed to be illegal subsidies. The World Trade Organization (WTO) ended up ruling that the subsidies hurt the U.S. by causing an Airbus rival, Boeing Co. (BA), to lose sales in an uncompetitive manner.

The WTO also ruled that the EU failed to comply with its rulings, paving the way for the U.S. to impose countermeasures. The U.S. was awarded $7.5 billion as compensation in 2019.

The EU was then authorized in 2020 to impose tariffs of $4 billion due to illegal subsidies granted by the U.S. government to Boeing. The list of EU products covered by additional duties included aircraft, helicopters, and fuselages from France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom as well as a variety of non-airline-related items such as cheeses, fruits, jams, wines, and yarns from any of the 28 member states of the Eurozone.

This airline example proved disruptive to the larger context of international trade between the U.S. and the EU. The Biden administration sought to undo many of the tariffs imposed by President Trump. A deal was reached in October 2021 to roll back several of the tariffs on European aluminum and steel.

Top Imports and Exports

The U.S. was the top importer of pharmaceutical and medicinal products from the EU in 2023, representing 33.2% of their exports at €92 billion.

Manufactured goods to the U.S. including machinery but not electrical and computer equipment represented 89% of the EU’s exports in 2023.

Motor vehicle-related imports were equal to $27 billion in 2022 and accounted for around 10% of all goods imported from the EU. This category includes cars, motor vehicle bodies, trailers, and car parts.

Important

Trade between the U.S. and EU dipped in 2020 compared to previous years due to the COVID-19 pandemic which affected international trade around the world.

The largest U.S. exports to the EU in 2022 were mineral fuels and oils at $108.94 billion, machinery including nuclear reactors at $50.13 billion, and pharmaceutical products valued at $37.89 billion.

What Does the World Trade Organization Do?

The World Trade Organization (WTO) monitors and manages trade between nations. These countries negotiate agreements with the WTO and the agreements are binding when signed. The WTO says that its goal is to “improve people’s living standards, create better jobs, and promote sustainable development.”

What Country Does the U.S. Trade With Most?

Mexico was the top U.S. trading partner in November 2024 followed by Canada, China, Germany, then Japan.

How Did COVID-19 Affect International Trade?

One study reported that the number of cargo ships departing their ports of origin decreased by 29% from 2019 through April 2020. Another study pointed out that only 22% of manufacturing jobs could be performed from home.

The Bottom Line

The EU and U.S. have an intimate relationship when it comes to trade. The EU is one of the largest American trading partners and the U.S. is the EU’s largest trading partner. Tariffs, legislation, and other measures of protectionism have affected the balance since 2010, however. Trade also dropped in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The EU’s imports and exports with the United States both increased between January 2022 and December 2023, however.

Reviewed by Julius Mansa
Fact checked by Suzanne Kvilhaug

What does it mean to “invest” in the Iraqi dinar? In simple terms, it’s the same as investing in any other currency. You purchase a certain amount of Iraqi dinar (IQD) by paying the respective amount of U.S. dollars (USD).

As with buying stocks, bonds, or other currency, when you invest in dinar, you purchase it at a given price and expect the price to rise. The real question, though, is not can you invest in this particular currency, but should you? While Iraqi dinars could be useful to those living in or near Iraq, there are many reasons to avoid this currency.

Key Takeaways

• The Iraqi dinar is the currency of Iraq; like any other currency, it can be exchanged for U.S. dollars.
• Hopes that Iraq’s economy can recover from civil and regional wars have led to some speculation that the Iraqi dinar can increase in value against the dollar.
• Major banks and brokers do not offer trading of the IQD/USD pair, and transactions are placed through money exchanges, with hefty fees.
• The value of the Iraqi dinar is set by the Iraqi government.
• Iraq’s currency faces many challenges and considerable uncertainty in both the short and long terms.

Understanding the Iraqi Dinar

Following the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the economy of Iraq suffered under the weight of United Nations sanctions and widespread government corruption. As the government of Saddam Hussein struggled to contain inflation and speculation, the Iraqi dinar fell from its prewar government-set rate of $3 to less than a penny in 1993. By 1994, the inflation rate reached more than 448%.

When the U.S.-led coalition overthrew the Iraqi government in 2003, the old dinars continued to circulate until the interim government launched a new currency the following year. New dinar notes were printed in the United Kingdom and exchanged at par value for Saddam dinars.

The fact that several global powers supported the new government raised hopes that the Iraqi economy would soon turn for the better, especially after the economic isolation that the country suffered through the 1990s. By 2007, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) praised the Iraqi government’s anti-inflation measures, noting that “the Central Bank of Iraq raised its policy interest rates sharply and allowed a gradual appreciation of the dinar.”

As the Iraqi economy began to recover, many speculators began to buy large amounts of Iraqi dinars, expecting the currency to continue to rise. Some pointed to the rise of the Kuwaiti dinar after the Gulf War as evidence that the Iraqi dinar could experience similar success. At the same time, several U.S. regulators warned of scammers selling dinar “investments” for inflated rates and fees.

In late 2020, facing a significant liquidity shortfall exacerbated by plummeting oil prices and the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic, the Iraqi government announced a devaluation of more than 20% of the Iraqi dinar. The measure resulted in public protests in the already struggling nation.

In January 2024, Iraq banned cash withdrawals and transactions in U.S. dollars. The goals were to reduce misuse of its hard currency reserves in financial crimes and the evasion of U.S. sanctions on Iran, according to a Central Bank of Iraq official, as well as to deemphasize the U.S. dollar that was preferred over the Iraqi dinar in the Iraqi economy.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Investing in the Iraqi Dinar

There are reasons to be optimistic about the future of the Iraqi economy. In 2023 (the latest data available), the country had 11.7% of the world’s oil reserves, providing a strong foundation to rebound and follow the path of its many Middle Eastern counterparts by establishing itself as a stable and developing economy. While this scenario is not unrealistic, it will require significant political reforms to improve the business climate and establish investor confidence.

It is also worth noting that buying dinars is not the best way to bet on Iraq’s economic revival. The Iraqi dinar does not float freely; the exchange rate is fixed by the central bank, meaning that the currency is unlikely to experience rapid appreciation, even if Iraq’s economy does gain traction. In contrast, a more traditional investment vehicle—like Iraqi stocks—could offer returns even if the dinar’s value remains unchanged.

Moreover, legitimate currency trading volume is extremely low. The IQD is not traded on the global forex market, and only a handful of Middle Eastern banks are willing to trade in it. If you want to acquire Iraqi dinars, you can buy them only at select money exchangers, who may or may not be legally registered. These brokers may charge fees of up to 20% for such transactions, significantly eroding the profit potential.

The largest concern, however, is the number of scams and frauds concerning the Iraqi dinar. U.S. state regulators have been warning since as far back as 2011 about currency “brokers” who promise high returns while charging hefty fees for hard-to-sell dinars. This scam proved particularly popular after the 2016 elections, amid rumors that then-President Donald Trump would somehow cause the Iraqi currency to soar. (In January 2016, the dinar was trading at about 1,090 dinars per US$1.)

Pros

• Iraq has major oil reserves that could support economic growth.

• For those living or working in Iraq, or doing business in the country, buying dinars could be a viable investment.

Cons

• The IQD has very little true trading volume.

• The IQD exchange rate is fixed by the Central Bank of Iraq, and the currency does not freely float on the market.

• Scammers continue to offer overpriced IQD “investment packages” to speculators abroad.

• The IQD does not trade on global forex markets, meaning that the only way to buy it is through high-fee money exchanges or certain banks in the Middle East.

How Much Is the Iraqi Dinar Worth?

One U.S. dollar (USD) was worth 1,309 Iraqi dinars (IQD) as of Jan. 31, 2025.

Who Sets the IQD Exchange Rate?

The value of the Iraqi dinar is fixed by the Iraqi government and stays constant, until the next time the central bank decides to change it. This means that the government decrees the price for sale and purchase of the currency.

Where Is the Iraqi Dinar Traded?

The Iraqi dinar does not trade on the global forex market. This means that the only way to acquire dinars for investment purposes is through high-fee money changers or the black market.

The Bottom Line

How Iraq, its economy, and hence the forex rate, develop over the long term is a continuing, uncertain bet. If you hold Iraqi dinars and do not live in or near the Middle East, the currency is difficult to trade and cannot earn interest. Although it is possible that the dinar could rise in the distant future, there are many other investments with lower risks and possibly higher rewards. When Iraq’s very survival is at stake, currency revaluation is unlikely to be on the agenda.

In addition, trading forex currencies is always risky, as external factors at international levels are difficult to control or predict. Unless they are trading on regulated markets or through regulated agents, traders and investors should exercise extreme caution when trading exotic currencies like the Iraqi dinar.

Learn how and how often to check your financial health

Your control over your finances defines your financial health, the means to work toward your financial goals, your ability to handle a financial surprise, and the freedom to enjoy your life.

To measure the state of your financial life, you can ask yourself several key questions each year.

Key Takeaways

• Financial health or fitness is, in part, a measure of your ability to meet your financial obligations.
• Your financial health is also your ability to secure your financial future and to fund choices that allow you to enjoy life.
• Conducting an assessment at least yearly can help you stay on top of your financial well-being.
• Setting a budget, reducing debt, and saving for emergencies and retirement can improve your financial health.

What Is Financial Health?

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) breaks financial health down into four elements:

• Your control over your current finances
• Your ability to handle an unexpected expense
• Your freedom to make financial choices that allow you to enjoy life
• Your progress on your financial goals for the future

What Should Be Part of a Financial Health Check-Up?

When conducting a thorough financial check-up, you can:

• Assess your financial goals
• Evaluate your budget
• Check on your emergency fund, retirement savings, and any other investments
• Review your debt levels
• Check your credit score and credit report
• Review your insurance coverage and taxes
• Establish and update your estate plan

How Frequently Should Financial Health Check-Ups Occur?

For many people, an annual financial check-up is a good place to start. The first of the year is a good time to review your finances and make plans for the year ahead. It can also be helpful to assess how major life events, such as a new job, a home purchase, marriage, divorce, the birth of a child, or a death in the family, impact your financial health.

How Can Consumers Improve Their Financial Health?

Over the past year, financial well-being in the United States has declined. In 2023, 38% of families reported difficulty paying bills, which jumped to 43% in 2024, according to the CFPB.

While many people are grappling with financial challenges exacerbated by inflation’s effects, several steps can still be taken to improve their financial health.

• Budgeting: Create a budget to manage your discretionary and non-discretionary spending. Can you cut back on unnecessary spending like subscriptions and streaming services? Whatever your income level, living below your means is essential to establishing financial resilience.
• Debt management: How much debt do you have? What steps can you take to reduce it?
• Saving: Do you have an emergency fund and long-term savings? Can you automate savings contributions to help you stay on track?
• Investing: Are you investing money in retirement accounts, such as an IRA or 401(k)? Are you taking advantage of employer-matching contributions?

The Bottom Line

Strong financial health typically means you have a steady flow of income, solid savings, and the ability to spend money on the things and experiences that make you happy. Regularly checking in on your finances ensures you have a clear picture of your financial health. If you are concerned about your financial well-being, turn to the several ways you can build a stronger path to your financial future.