Latest news with #PurdueUniversity
Edmonton Journal
21 hours ago
- Edmonton Journal
Canadian NBA star charged with reckless driving in Indiana
Article content Edey allegedly was driving 101 mph (161 km/h) in a 55 mph (88 km/h) zone on the evening of May 1. According to Fox 59, an Indiana State Trooper pulled over the 23-year-old big man, who was driving a Kia Sorento, at 7:03 p.m. and issued him a citation. Edey reportedly told the officers that the only reason he was driving at that speed was because he was trying to pass another vehicle. The incident occurred in Tippecanoe County, Ind., which is where Purdue University is based. Edey spent four seasons playing NCAA hoops there for the Boilermakers.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Why Trump may want to wait to name a new Fed chair
President Trump has called Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell a "stupid person" and a "numbskull," so it wouldn't surprise many on Wall Street if Trump chose to pick someone else to lead the Fed. But as former St. Louis Fed president Jim Bullard, who now serves as the dean of the Mitch Daniels School of Business at Purdue University, explains, Trump may not want to name a replacement too early. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination here. As you know, Jay Powell has been very forceful in pushing back against the idea that there would be any influence here. It has been suggested that possibly the president could name a successor for Powell early, not actually replace them early but name the successor early. Do you think that could happen? And what effect does that then have on the decision-making process? Uh, you could do that. Uh, usually it's been viewed as uh uh something you maybe don't want to do too early because you do have to get this person through the US Senate and um, a lot of times that's a silent period for the person who's been nominated. So, uh, I'm not sure how far ahead you'd really want to uh go ahead with something like that. I will say, if you look at uh, for instance, when Janet Yellen became uh Fed chair, she was essentially in the lead position or essentially named by about September of that year for a February appointment, and that eventually was approved by the Senate and she eventually did become uh chair. So, I think it's not unprecedented that you would go uh some months early, but um, but to go many months early uh usually would be considered too long uh for the Senate review process.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Tax law might be coming for your free office snacks
A change in tax law may make companies rethink a popular workplace perk: food and drink. Starting in 2026, companies will no longer be able to deduct the cost of on-site cafeterias or takeout for workers who stay late. And accountants say the change probably applies to office snacks and coffee, too. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. Though the cost of such staff freebies is relatively small in the grand scheme of employee benefits, the potential change in tax law comes as many businesses are trimming expenses in the face of tariffs and economic uncertainty. 'Companies are in cost-cutting mode, and if they don't have some incentives, they will continue to cut back,' said Ellen Kossek, an emerita professor of management at Purdue University. 'We've seen this in Silicon Valley,' she added, referencing the onetime center of such upmarket perks as unlimited vacation time, on-site hair stylists, deluxe cafeterias and coffee bars. Because food can be a powerful motivator - especially at a time when many companies are abandoning remote and hybrid work - Kossek said companies' ratcheting down of staff offerings could affect the broader corporate culture and return-to-office initiatives. 'If you have to pay for your food, it's one less reason to come to the office.' U.S. tax law allow companies to deduct certain business costs, such as insurance, rent and office supplies, from their income before they pay taxes. But meals are treated differently, depending on the category. For instance, a company can deduct 50 percent of the restaurant bill for taking a client or a job candidate to lunch under current law. But a provision that allows companies to deduct cafeteria costs or any meals they provide in the workplace 'for the convenience of the employer' is poised to sunset in 2026. If it does, U.S. businesses would be looking at an additional $300 million a year in taxes, based on estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation. With congressional Republicans racing to advance President Donald Trump's tax and immigration bill and extend his 2017 tax cuts, some accountants had expected lawmakers to retain the workplace meal deduction. But the House version made an exception only for the restaurant industry, according to Christa Bierma, vice chair of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants' committee on employee benefits. Unless the Senate makes further changes to the legislation, which tax experts say is unlikely, restaurants will continue to get the write-off. 'For some industries, it is culturally demanded,' Bierma noted of the exception. 'Nobody would want to be the first one to say we're not going to do this anymore.' Ending the tax advantage makes philosophical sense for conservatives, said Tax Foundation analyst Alex Muresianu. Under current rules, a company-paid lunch is essentially a form of tax-free income. And if the employee isn't paying tax, the company should, Muresianu said. 'We want to tax all employee compensation the same,' he said. 'And instead of wages, having employer-provided meals in various contexts is a form of nonwage compensation.' That thinking, though, doesn't align with other provisions in the Republican bill, which treats overtime wages and tips as tax-free. Trump is pushing senators to pass his tax bill by July 4 despite warnings from many economists and some lawmakers about the projected price tag; the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office expects it to expand the deficit by $2.4 trillion over a decade. In 2017, when lawmakers opted to sunset the in-house meal deduction in eight years, the coronavirus pandemic had not yet driven millions of workers home from their desks. Today, some management experts question the wisdom of removing a business incentive at a time when many workers are chafing at RTO mandates. 'I think the corporate culture will change in several ways,' said University of Manchester professor Cary Cooper, who has researched hybrid work arrangements. Free food can be a powerful motivator, he said. 'If they're taking that away … or minimizing the quality of the food being provided - and there will be companies that will do that - you're not going to motivate people to return to the office.' Cooper suggested that senators consider extending the deduction as they reshape the tax bill. Without a delay, he foresees repercussions for businesses that need employees on-site, such as hospitals. 'In our day and age, I think it's just silly. I don't know why you would want to change the law in that direction at all.' Last summer, Bierma's committee of CPAs submitted a long list of questions and suggestions to the IRS seeking guidance on how companies should plan for the change. It hasn't received an answer. The law clearly removes tax advantages for company cafeterias - businesses can no longer deduct the cost of food, beverages or operations, which are now fully or partly deductible. Also out are meals that employers might provide in the workplace, such as dinner for staffers who stay beyond their shifts. But that leaves questions about more modest niceties. Accountant Richard Pon, who counts law firms and retailers among his clients, is convinced that the deduction will also go away for break-room staples such as coffee, fruit, chips and granola bars. 'Just having a small kitchen … some people will take the position that's not an eating facility. That's not a cafeteria,' he said. 'I think the position of the IRS might say that's an eating facility, no matter how small it is.' Related Content Trump is as unpredictable as ever, even when faced with war Field notes from the end of life: My thoughts on living while dying He's dying. She's pregnant. His one last wish is to fight his cancer long enough to see his baby. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Grizzlies center Zach Edey charged with reckless driving after reportedly driving more than 100 mph in Indiana
Memphis Grizzlies center Zach Edey was charged with reckless driving after he allegedly drove over 100 miles per hour on a road in Indiana last month, according to Fox 59 . Edey was pulled over and issued a citation on May 1 after an Indiana State Trooper reportedly saw him speeding through Tippecanoe County — which is the county in Indiana that holds Purdue University, where Edey went to college. Edey was spotted driving 101 mph in a 55 mph zone, per the report. He told the officer that he was 'trying to pass a vehicle' once he was pulled over, but offered no other explanation. Advertisement Edey is now facing misdemeanor speeding and reckless driving charges. He is due back in court next week. Edey, 23, is coming off his rookie season in the NBA. The Grizzlies selected him with the No. 9 overall pick in last year's draft after a dominant run with the Boilermakers. He averaged 9.2 points and 8.3 rebounds per game with the Grizzlies last season. They went 48-34 and made the playoffs for the fourth time in five years, though they fell in the opening round. The news of Edey's citation came just hours after reports that Cleveland Browns rookie quarterback Shedeur Sanders received a near-identical citation in Ohio. Sanders was cited for driving 101 mph on a Cleveland-area highway earlier this week.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Tax law might be coming for your free office snacks
A change in tax law may make companies rethink a popular workplace perk: food and drink. Starting in 2026, companies will no longer be able to deduct the cost of on-site cafeterias or takeout for workers who stay late. And accountants say the change probably applies to office snacks and coffee, too. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. Though the cost of such staff freebies is relatively small in the grand scheme of employee benefits, the potential change in tax law comes as many businesses are trimming expenses in the face of tariffs and economic uncertainty. 'Companies are in cost-cutting mode, and if they don't have some incentives, they will continue to cut back,' said Ellen Kossek, an emerita professor of management at Purdue University. 'We've seen this in Silicon Valley,' she added, referencing the onetime center of such upmarket perks as unlimited vacation time, on-site hair stylists, deluxe cafeterias and coffee bars. Because food can be a powerful motivator - especially at a time when many companies are abandoning remote and hybrid work - Kossek said companies' ratcheting down of staff offerings could affect the broader corporate culture and return-to-office initiatives. 'If you have to pay for your food, it's one less reason to come to the office.' U.S. tax law allow companies to deduct certain business costs, such as insurance, rent and office supplies, from their income before they pay taxes. But meals are treated differently, depending on the category. For instance, a company can deduct 50 percent of the restaurant bill for taking a client or a job candidate to lunch under current law. But a provision that allows companies to deduct cafeteria costs or any meals they provide in the workplace 'for the convenience of the employer' is poised to sunset in 2026. If it does, U.S. businesses would be looking at an additional $300 million a year in taxes, based on estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation. With congressional Republicans racing to advance President Donald Trump's tax and immigration bill and extend his 2017 tax cuts, some accountants had expected lawmakers to retain the workplace meal deduction. But the House version made an exception only for the restaurant industry, according to Christa Bierma, vice chair of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants' committee on employee benefits. Unless the Senate makes further changes to the legislation, which tax experts say is unlikely, restaurants will continue to get the write-off. 'For some industries, it is culturally demanded,' Bierma noted of the exception. 'Nobody would want to be the first one to say we're not going to do this anymore.' Ending the tax advantage makes philosophical sense for conservatives, said Tax Foundation analyst Alex Muresianu. Under current rules, a company-paid lunch is essentially a form of tax-free income. And if the employee isn't paying tax, the company should, Muresianu said. 'We want to tax all employee compensation the same,' he said. 'And instead of wages, having employer-provided meals in various contexts is a form of nonwage compensation.' That thinking, though, doesn't align with other provisions in the Republican bill, which treats overtime wages and tips as tax-free. Trump is pushing senators to pass his tax bill by July 4 despite warnings from many economists and some lawmakers about the projected price tag; the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office expects it to expand the deficit by $2.4 trillion over a decade. In 2017, when lawmakers opted to sunset the in-house meal deduction in eight years, the coronavirus pandemic had not yet driven millions of workers home from their desks. Today, some management experts question the wisdom of removing a business incentive at a time when many workers are chafing at RTO mandates. 'I think the corporate culture will change in several ways,' said University of Manchester professor Cary Cooper, who has researched hybrid work arrangements. Free food can be a powerful motivator, he said. 'If they're taking that away … or minimizing the quality of the food being provided - and there will be companies that will do that - you're not going to motivate people to return to the office.' Cooper suggested that senators consider extending the deduction as they reshape the tax bill. Without a delay, he foresees repercussions for businesses that need employees on-site, such as hospitals. 'In our day and age, I think it's just silly. I don't know why you would want to change the law in that direction at all.' Last summer, Bierma's committee of CPAs submitted a long list of questions and suggestions to the IRS seeking guidance on how companies should plan for the change. It hasn't received an answer. The law clearly removes tax advantages for company cafeterias - businesses can no longer deduct the cost of food, beverages or operations, which are now fully or partly deductible. Also out are meals that employers might provide in the workplace, such as dinner for staffers who stay beyond their shifts. But that leaves questions about more modest niceties. Accountant Richard Pon, who counts law firms and retailers among his clients, is convinced that the deduction will also go away for break-room staples such as coffee, fruit, chips and granola bars. 'Just having a small kitchen … some people will take the position that's not an eating facility. That's not a cafeteria,' he said. 'I think the position of the IRS might say that's an eating facility, no matter how small it is.' Related Content Russian attack destroys Kyiv building as Trump avoids talk of new sanctions Field notes from the end of life: My thoughts on living while dying He's dying. She's pregnant. His one last wish is to fight his cancer long enough to see his baby. Sign in to access your portfolio
