On the morning of January 24 in downtown Minneapolis, an ICE agent shot and killed protester Alex Pretti, an ICU nurse at a local Veterans Affairs hospital. Just 2 miles away, on January 7, another ICE agent had shot and killed Nicole Renee Good, a mother. The deaths mark the first times during Donald Trumps second term that ICE agents have fired in anger and killed publicly verified U.S. citizens.
Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos have so far said nothing on the matter. X CEO Elon Musk earlier tweeted that Renee Good had almost killed ICE agent Jonathan Ross before Ross shot and killed her on January 7.
On the same day as Pretti’s fatal shooting on Saturday, January 24, Apple CEO Tim Cook attended a VIP screening of the new (Amazon-funded) Melania Trump documentary at the White House. Cook was silent about the shooting until Tuesday evening, when he reportedly sent a memo to Apple employees calling for de-escalation and saying that hed talked to Trump about the issue.
Its become clear to many that Trumps ICE strategy is at least as much about intimidating citizens of blue cities as it is about removing illegal immigrants. The question is, and has always been: At what point will Trumps authoritarian urges become too much for the tech industry to stomach? UC San Diego political scientist and civil war expert Barbara F. Walter writes that historically, it is the business community that often heads off civil conflict by demanding a more stable and secure business environment.
Indeed, tech leaders are credited with having persuaded the Trump administration to cancel plans to move ICE agents into San Francisco last October.
AI leaders speak first
Among tech leaders, it’s the heads of the leading artificial intelligence companies that have said the most about Minneapolis.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who has been influential among members of Congress and people within the Trump administration, says he spoke to the president about Minneapolis on Monday, following Pretti’s death on Saturday. He wrote a Slack message to employees saying he believes the ICE shootings have gone too far. He didnt make these comments publicly, however. The memo, in which Altman called Trump a very strong leader, was leaked (intentionally or otherwise) to The New York Times, which published it. (OpenAI president and cofounder Greg Brockman has become a major Trump donor as well.)
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei did speak out publicly. We need to defend our own democratic values at home, and some of the things Ive seen during the last few days concern me about that, he said in a Monday night interview with Tom Llamas on NBC Nightly News. He added that Anthropic doesnt currently have contracts with ICE and that the shootings dont make him more enthusiastic about working with the agency.
In his Slack memo, Altman spoke directly (if unclearly) to the issue of when OpenAI will, and will not, speak out on social and political issues. The company will not get blown around by changing fashions and will not make a lot of performative statements now about safety or politics, he wrote, but rather will engage with leaders and push for our values, and speak up clearly about it as needed.
Amodei and Altman may have spoken out before leaders of bigger tech companies did for any of several reasons. The research culture within AI companies has closer ties to the academic community, so researchers are perhaps more apt to speak out on moral or political issues. The competition for talent in AI is also fierce, so AI company leaders may be quick to respond, fearing the loss of valuable employees. Also, AI companies are eager to project an image of social responsibility, which might reinforce the idea that theyll be careful stewards of the technology theyre developing.
They also may have less to lose. OpenAI and Anthropic are not public companies, so they dont have to consider stockholder consensus when their leaders speak out about political issues. They are also smaller than firms like Google or Apple, and they dont rely as much on federal government contracts for revenuenot yet, anyway.
Listening to tech workers
The backlash against the fatal shootings of Good and Pretti started not with tech executives, but with employees. Several big-name researchers within AI companies denounced the ICE killings on X. Google DeepMind chief scientist Jeff Dean, Anthropic cofounder Chris Olah, former Meta chief AI scientist Yann LeCun, and Microsoft chief scientific officer Eric Horvitz were among those who spoke out. Other researchers, including OpenAIs Michael Schade and theoretical computer scientist Boaz Barak, a member of OpenAIs technical staff, endorsed or shared the tweets. Tech super-investors Reid Hoffman, Vinod Khosla, and Paul Graham also condemned the murders and demanded accountability. (Business Insider has a fuller list.)
They join a small number of tech workers who have gone public to pressure tech leaders. More than 800 of them signed an open letter, organized by a group called ICEOut.tech, that called for tech CEOs to demand that the Trump administration remove ICE agents from U.S. cities and to cancel their companies contracts with the agency. The signatories include names from some of the biggest tech and AI companies, including Apple, Google, Salesforce, Uber, OpenAI, and Anthropic.
Big Techs alliance with Trump is paying dividends
Only a half decade ago, during the first Trump term, tech companies spoke out loudly against the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer, and then introduced broad new diversity policies and programs. Now that many of techs most influential leaderspeople like Musk and venture capitalists David Sacks and Marc Andreessenhave turned so enthusiastically pro-Trump, the tech industry has taken the approach of flattering, appeasing, and bankrolling Trump in his second term. A unified response to the recent events in Minnesota seems impossible.
What changed? I doubt that the majority of tech industry has radically changed its political stripes on social issues like race and policing. Whats changed is AI. After the appearance of ChatGPT in 2022, tech leaders could very likely see the broad transition that AI might bring, and the massive and expensive infrastructure build-out that would be needed to support it. (Big Tech, AI, and cloud companies are now betting hundreds of billions of dollars on building new data centers to run AI models.)
So tech leaders ecided to get behind the candidate most likely to enable it rather than regulate it. That was Trump, and they did so knowing that a lot of odious social policy would likely come with the deal. Big Tech leaders funded Trumps inauguration and his new White House ballroom. They visited him at Mar-a-Lago and at the White House to advise him on trade and tech policy. Some vigorously defended his policies on social media. And some took roles in his administration (Sacks became Trumps AI and crypto czar and Musk led DOGE, for example).
And Trump has delivered. His administrationunder the influence of people like Sacks, Musk, and Andreessenhas made it a top priority to keep the federal government out of the way of the AI infrastructure build-out. The Trump administration has stifled any chance of any meaningful AI regulation (which most Americans favor) in Congress and has even attempted to preempt states from doing so. It has canceled federal investigations into tech companies and attempted to clear away red tape at the state and local levels that might slow data center builds.
But the tech industrys alliance with the MAGA crowd has never faced a threat as serious as the one emerging from Minneapolis.
Wondering how the eager tech enablers of this regime, including some of my former VC friends and partners, are rationalizing this atrocity, former Andreessen Horowitz partner John OFarrell posted on X. Just the latest in a year of horrors. Is all the crypto and AI money in the world really worth this?
Rank-and-file tech workers may not be as ready to swallow their moral scruples as top management is. Theyre becoming more sensitized to Trumps ICE strategy and its consequences on the ground across the country. Every additional act of violence by ICE against American citizens could agitate workers exponentially more and further pressure company leaders to respond in meaningful ways. If Trump persists, tech companies may eventually have to choose between their alliance with Trump and the loyalty of their own employees.
An inclusive economy is no longer a moral aspiration or a side project. Business leaders must understand that without inclusion, we cannot create a resilient, growing economy that delivers sustainable returns for all.
In places where inclusion is part of the infrastructure of their economysupply chains, procurement processes, capital access, or business ownershippeople thrive. Inclusive economies create more resilience by expanding the base of potential business owners who can build, own, innovate, and hire. They allow more opportunities for homeownership and investing in the longevity of communities. As our economy becomes increasingly stratified and volatile, we need as much resiliency as we can get.
At Living Cities, our work with mayors, financial institutions, philanthropy, and community partners shows that places and companies that prioritize inclusion and equity reduce long-term risk, deepen trust, and create or identify new economic opportunities. Those that ignore the benefits of economic inclusion have capital, talent, and residents move elsewhere.
INCLUSION PROOF POINTS IN CITIES
Consider Memphis, where Black residents are a majority of the population but historically own only a fraction of local businesses. City and local partners supported the creation of Contractors University, a cohort model that equips small firmsmany led by entrepreneurs of colorto bid on and win city contracts. Within months, participating firms converted training into new contracts and rising revenues. Contractors University was able to take one of the largest barriers to business successaccessing procurement dollarsand turned it into a growth platform.
In Miami, inclusive capital has become part of the citys resilience strategy. Local leaders were able to preserve affordable space for dozens of small, often new American immigrant-owned businesses through partnerships with community organizations and investors to acquire commercial property in a cultural district. By partnering with local civic leaders, the City of Miami preserves both a burgeoning commercial corridor and future revenue streams.
In Austin, cultural incubators and entrepreneurial training programs are translating modest seed grants into new firms, jobs, and community wealthbecause they have been able to offer the targeted support that entrepreneurs have been missing for generations to unlock growth opportunities and sustainable businesses.
WHAT BUSINESS LEADERS CAN DO DIFFERENTLY IN 2026
The question for business leaders and investors is no longer whether to support an inclusive economy, but how quickly to align their own practices and policies with what is already working. Three shifts can help leaders tap into the benefits of an inclusive economy:
Redesign how capital moves. Replace audit underwriting and investment criteria with bias-adjusted frameworks that recognize the positive records of entrepreneurs and neighborhoods long labeled high-risk. Coupled with innovative credit productssuch as first-loss capital, guarantees, and flexible lines of creditchanging the preconception of what makes a risky investment can lead to an expanded deal pipeline and more opportunities.
Treat procurement as a growth engine. Moving beyond diversity pledges toward codified inclusive procurement standards that make it easier for local and small firms to become ongoing vendors. This means simplifying contracting processes, offering technical assistance, and publishing clear inclusion metrics tied to executive performance and cost savings from more resilient local supply chains.
Invest in ownership, not just access. Support models that keep wealth rooted locallycooperatives, employee ownership transitions, and community land trustsby aligning corporate philanthropy, impact investing, and civic partnerships around shared-ownership pathways. In St. Paul, for example, a down-payment assistance program has invested in families who lost homes through the execution of the Federal Highway Act, stabilizing neighborhoods and the local economy.
A MANDATE FOR THE NEXT ECONOMY
The past year has been turbulent, from federal shutdowns to rising costs to contracting labor markets that strain both households and balance sheets. Yet we know the path forward: Cities are proving that local economies which expand the concept of who can be full participants are more productive, predictable, and investable.
In 2026, neutrality is not a safe middle ground. Choosing not to prioritize inclusivity and resilience is, in effect, choosing to operate inside an outdated standard for risk, talent, and growth. Business leaders who want to bring about the next era of American prosperity should spend 2026 re-committing to inclusion as a core economic strategy.
Joe Scantlebury is the CEO at Living Cities.
Meta’s fourth-quarter results jumped past Wall Street’s expectations thanks to solid advertising revenue, sending shares sharply higher in after-hours trading Wednesday.
The company earned $22.77 billion, or $8.88 per share, in the October-December quarter. That’s up 9% from $20.84 billion, or $8.02 per share, in the same period a year earlier.
Revenue grew 24% to $59.89 billion from $48.39 billion.
Analysts, on average, were expecting earnings of $8.21 per share on revenue of $58.5 billion, according to a poll by FactSet.
Once again, Meta surpassed analysts earnings expectations for the quarter, cementing its position as one of the worlds most dominant media companies,” said Debra Aho Williamson, chief analyst at Sonata Insights. “Its strong performance provides a solid foundation to continue its massive investments into AI. If there were any signs of revenue shortfall, investors would look at the capital expenditures more negatively.
Meta’s expenses, which the company already warned will be significantly higher this year, grew 40% to $35.15 billion.
For the current quarter, Meta is forecasting revenue in the range of $53.5 billion to $56.5 billion. That’s above analysts’ forecast of $51.4 billion. For 2026, Meta is forecasting expenses in the range of $162 billion to $169 billion, driven by infrastructure costs and employee compensation, particularly for the artificial intelligence (AI) experts it’s been hiring at eye-popping pay levels.
Meta had 78,865 employees at the end of the year, an increase of 6% from a year earlier.
Shares of the Menlo Park, California-based company (Nasdaq: META) rose $73.15, or 10.9%, to $741.88 in after-hours trading.
By BARBARA ORTUTAY, AP Technology Writer
For years, the customer experience playbook has been treated like a technology problem. Add another tool. Deploy another bot. Automate another workflow. And yet here we are, heading into 2026 with customer satisfaction in freefall. Forresters 2025 CX Index shows scores hitting a new low for the fourth consecutive year.
This isnt a failure of ambition or innovation. Its a failure of how we define success.
Leaders have been optimizing for activity instead of outcomes. In the rush to scale digital engagement, many organizations fell into a bit of a containment trap, measuring success by how many customer interactions never reach a human. On paper, it looks efficient. In reality, its often a false economy.
If a customer gets stuck in a bot loop or a bot that cant answer a straightforward question predictably, you havent saved money. Youve lost trust. And very often, youve lost the customer.
Its clear that customer experience (CX) needs a reset. Not more experimentation or hype, but more precision. Based on what were seeing across industries, four trends will define whether companies finally break out of the CX recession, or get left behind.
1. CX isnt delivering (because were measuring the wrong things)
Despite massive investment, CX outcomes are stalling. The reason is simple: Most organizations are optimizing for the wrong metrics.
Containment, deflection, and average handle time tell you how efficiently you move customers away. They tell you very little about whether you actually solved a problem, built loyalty, or created value.
The companies that rise to the top are shifting to a hybrid model that treats AI and humans as complementary assets. AI agents handle what theyre best at: instant answers, routine transactions, and scale. Humans step in where judgment, empathy, and nuance matter.
The metric shift is critical. High-performing teams measure value creation, not just cost avoidance. Personalization, resolution quality, and revenue impact matter far more than whether a conversation stayed contained, because they create value on both sides of the exchange: Customers get answers that actually move them forward, and brands earn trust, loyalty, and measurable growth. In fact, Gartners data shows that buyers have a 1.8 times greater likelihood of paying a premium, and they are 3.7 times more likely to buy more than they planned, if they feel that experience has been personalized.
The future of CX isnt about replacing people. Its about freeing them to do their best work.
2. 2026 is the year of predictable AI
Over the past two years, generative AI moved from novelty to necessity. In 2026, the conversation changes again, from capability to control.
Unpredictable AI is expensive. Hallucinations, broken flows, and inefficient token usage quietly drain budgets and introduce brand and compliance risk. Thats why predictability has become the most important word in the boardroom.
The next phase of AI adoption requires an assurance layera system that continuously tests, validates, and verifies AI behavior before it ever reaches a customer. This de-risks innovation, but just as importantly, it creates the engine for continuous improvement. It provides the framework to constantly learn from interactions, refine accuracy, and reduce the cost of every conversation, turning AI from a “science experiment” into an operational efficiency engine that gets smarter over time.
The most advanced organizations are using adversarial simulation to stress-test AI against edge cases, confusion, and hostile inputs. They break their systems before customers can. The result is confidence that allows leaders to deploy AI in high-value, high-risk use cases like payments, healthcare, and financial services.
Predictable AI doesnt just reduce risk. It unlocks ROI and drives value creation.
3. The CX budget crunch is an opportunity
CX leaders arent struggling because budgets disappeared. Theyre struggling because scrutiny increased.
In 2026, no one is funding nice-to-have initiatives. Every dollar must tie directly to financial outcomes. CX leaders need to stop selling soft metrics and start telling a before-and-after story showcasing what changed, by how much, and why it matters to the business.
The most effective teams reposition CX not as a cost center, but as an efficiency engine. They run focused pilots, prove results quickly, and use hard data to unlock broader deployment.
When you can demonstrate measurable improvements in resolution rates, conversion, or operational efficiency in 90 days, the budget conversation changes. CX stops being discretionary. It becomes essential.
4. Marketers must catch up with consumers expectations
The biggest growth shift of 2026 isnt happening in the contact center. Its happening at the top of the funnel.
Traditional lead generation is breaking down. Buyers dont want forms. They want answers, on their terms, in the moment of intent. Conversational AI enables a concierge model that replaces gated funnels with real-time, personalized dialogue.
The economics are compelling. A self-service interaction costs pennies. A live agent interaction can cost dollars. But when done right, conversational AI delivers a low-cost interaction that feels premium and high touch.
More importantly, it respects the customers time. And in 2026, that can be the ultimate differentiator.
PRECISION IS THE NEW SCALE
The lesson early in 2026 is simple: Scaling without precision is noise. Precision without scale is irrelevant. The best companies will master both.
That means measurable CX, predictable AI, disciplined investment, and conversations that meet people exactly where they are.
We dont need more technology. We need better outcomes.
And if we get that right, 2026 wont just be the year CX recovers, but the year it finally delivers.
John Sabino is CEO of LivePerson.
Trump is facing a rare bipartisan backlash after a group of federal agents shot and killed protester Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday, but tech industry leaders once some of Trumps fiercest critics are sitting this one out.
Prettis killing, depicted clearly in multiple angles of bystander video, has galvanized even apolitical corners of the internet and united voices from opposite sides of the political spectrum. The fatal shooting took place less than three weeks after an ICE agent shot and killed Minneapolis resident Renee Good as she attempted to drive away from an encounter with federal agents in the city.
In an internal letter posted to Apple employees and reported by Bloomberg, CEO Tim Cook addressed the situation unfolding in Minneapolis, but stopped far short of criticizing the president or his aggressive immigration policies, which have left two people at protests in the city dead within the span of three weeks.
Cook described himself as heartbroken by the events in Minneapolis, adding that he had a good conversation with the president on the issue and appreciated Trumps openness to talking about it.
This is a time for deescalation, Cook said. I believe America is strongest when we live up to our highest ideals, when we treat everyone with dignity and respect no matter who they are or where theyre from, and when we embrace our shared humanity. This is something Apple has always advocated for.
Cooks statement echoes Trumps own language. The president told Fox News on Tuesday that he planned to de-escalate a little bit in Minnesota.
The letter is not likely to please Apple workers who are furious that Cook attended a glitzy screening of the new Amazon-sponsored documentary about First Lady Melania Trump at the White House hours after Prettis death. Attendees were treated to popcorn in Melania-branded buckets, white cake pops, black-and-white macarons, a cereal box featuring the films poster and white sugar cookies with Melania written in black frosting, according to Yahoo News.
Cook and techs other big players are all-in on the second Trump administration. Silicon Valley CEOs attended the presidents inauguration and even donated to build Trumps deeply controversial $300 million ballroom a project that misled the public and resulted in the total demolition of the White Houses historic East Wing.
By standing behind the president, Cook and others likely hope to cultivate a comfortable regulatory environment for their businesses while staving off other Trump-issued punishments, like targeted tariffs. Some of the richest, most powerful men in the world once checked Trumps power, but theyve enthusiastically abandoned that role during his second term.
Trumps misinformation machine distorts the facts
Silicon Valley leaders may be firmly behind Trump, but Americans are increasingly unsettled by the administrations immigration policies. More than half of those polled earlier this month believe that ICEs enforcement actions are making cities less safe and fresh polling over the weekend revealed that nearly 60% of Americans believe that ICE has gone too far.
In spite growing public anger and video evidence to the contrary, Trump officials scrambled to distort the facts of Prettis death over the weekend.
Homeland Security Kristi Noem misleadingly claimed that Pretti attacked officers while brandishing his gun a falsehood plainly contradicted by video evidence. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller went even further, describing Pretti as an assassin who tried to murder federal agents, a claim that Vice President JD Vance and Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino doubled down on.
Other Trump officials asserted that Pretti broke the law by carrying a concealed weapon to a protest, but the Minneapolis police verified that he held a gun license and was behaving lawfully.
You cannot bring a firearm loaded with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want, FBI Director Kash Patel told Fox News over the weekend. President Trump himself also said that Pretti he shouldn’t have been carrying a gun, rankling Second Amendment advocates and many of his own supporters.
Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy called Prettis killing incredibly disturbing, adding that DHSs credibility is in question. There must be a full joint federal and state investigation, Cassidy said on X. We can trust the American people with the truth. The NRA echoed calls for an investigation, criticizing public officials who demonized Americans for lawfully carrying weapons.
Allbirds shoe brand announced on Wednesday that it will close all of its U.S. stores by the end of February (with the exception of two outlets) and go online, turning to e-commerce instead. It will, however, continue to operate two London-based brick-and-mortar locations.
Fast Company has reached out to Allbirds for more details about the locations that will be closing.
This is an important step for Allbirds, as we drive toward profitable growth under our turnaround strategy, Allbirds CEO Joe Vernachio said in a statement. We have been opportunistically reducing our brick-and-mortar portfolio over the past two years. By exiting these remaining unprofitable doors, we are taking actions to reduce costs and support the long-term health of the business.
Famously dubbed the “world’s most comfortable shoes,” Allbirds were all the rage in the late 2010s (yes, I had a pair). They can be described as a combination of sneaker and business casual shoe, made of wool and tree fiber. They felt softin my opinion, almost like walking on airdue to the sugar cane foam sole.
The once trendy eco-friendly footwear, which had been a favorite of tech bros in San Francisco and hip New Yorkers, have become less popular in recent years, resulting in less traffic to their store locations. Like many U.S. retailers, they’ve also struggled as consumers cut spending amid growing inflation and higher cost of living, and have flocked online to shop.
Allbirds financials
Shares of Allbirds Inc. (NASDAQ: BIRD) were trading up 0.08% in midday trading on Wednesday after an early morning spike.
The company reported third quarter 2025 earnings in November, including net revenue of $33 million, down 23.3% from $43 million in the same period last year; and negative earnings per share (EPS) of -$2.49, which beat expectations of -$2.64.
The national taxpayer advocate is cautioning that the 2026 tax filing season is likely to present challenges for taxpayers who encounter problems with filing their taxes given the exodus of IRS workers since the start of the Trump administration.
National Taxpayer Advocate Erin M. Collins released her annual report to Congress on Wednesday, two days after the start of the 2026 season. She finds that while the IRS was able to process returns in 2025 without major disruptions, entering 2026, the landscape is markedly different.
The IRS is simultaneously confronting a reduction of 27% of its workforce, leadership turnover, and the implementation of extensive and complex tax law changes mandated by Republicans’ tax and spending measure that President Donald Trump signed into law last summer, Collins said in her report.
Collins says most taxpayers should be able to file their returns and receive their refunds without delay, but she notes the success of the filing season will be defined by how well the IRS is able to assist the millions of taxpayers who experience problems.
The tax filing season began on Monday, and agency leaders, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and IRS CEO Frank Bisignano, have said they expect a smooth season.
Bisignano last week announced new priorities and a reorganization of IRS executive leadership in a letter addressed to the agencys 74,000 employees, saying that he is confident that with this new team in place, the IRS is well-prepared to deliver a successful tax filing season for the American public.
Bessent as well as others in Trump’s second administration have also promised American taxpayers substantial tax refunds, as part of the Republican administration’s solution to an ongoing affordability crisis.
Still, other IRS watchdogs have outlined major concerns at the start of the 2026 tax season.
Diana M. Tengesdal, deputy inspector general for audit at the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, wrote a letter to IRS leadership on Monday and pointed to IRS staffing at October 2021 levels, combined with thousands of unprocessed tax returns and taxpayer correspondence.
The IRS started 2025 with about 102,000 employees and finished with about 74,000 after a series of firings and layoffs brought on by the Department of Government Efficiency. While last year IRS employees involved in the 2025 tax season were not allowed to accept a buyout offer from the Trump administration until after the taxpayer filing deadline, this year many of those customer service workers have left.
Tengesdal’s office says despite new efforts to modernize tax administration, initiatives to offset staffing losses may not yield expected benefits during the 2026 Filing Season.
More than 165 million individual income tax returns were processed in 2025, with 94% submitted electronically. The average refund was $3,167.
___
Follow the AP’s coverage of the IRS at https://apnews.com/hub/internal-revenue-service.
Fatima Hussein, Associated Press
As a continuation of President Donald Trump‘s pitch to Americans on affordability and the economy under his administration, the U.S. Treasury and White House are celebrating the upcoming launch of a program they view as a key milestone: Trump Accounts.
A provision of Trump’s tax legislation, Trump Accounts are meant to give $1,000 to every newborn, so long as their parents open an account. That money is then invested in the stock market by private firms, and the child can access the money when they turn 18.
A U.S. Treasury event Wednesday brings together an assortment of politicians and celebrities from Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz to rapper Nicki Minaj to discuss the program and its potential impact on the economy. Backers of Trump Accounts have said they’re a way to help children from low-income households build wealth.
Heres what you need to know about Trump Accounts and how to claim them.
What is a Trump Account?
Its a new savings tool where money is invested in the stock market on behalf of a child. The child cant access the money until they turn 18 and can only use it for specific purposes, such as paying tuition, starting a business or making a down payment on a home.
After a parent opens an account, the U.S. Treasury will contribute $1,000 for newborns. Private banks and brokerages will manage the money, which must be invested in U.S. equity index funds that track the stock market and charge the accounts no more than 0.10% in annual fees.
Parents can contribute up to $2,500 annually in pretax income, much like they do for retirement accounts. Parents employers, relatives, friends, local governments and philanthropic groups can also pitch in. Yearly contributions are capped at $5,000, but contributions from governments and charities dont count toward that total.
Who gets $1,000?
As part of the initiatives launch, parents of older children are also encouraged to open accounts, but they wont get the $1,000 bonus. That money is only reserved for babies born during the calendar years of the Trump administration.
To qualify for the $1,000 seed money, a baby must be a U.S. citizen, have a Social Security number and be born between Jan. 1, 2025, and Dec. 31, 2028. Any parent can open an account for a qualifying child, regardless of the parents immigration status.
Its important to note that the child wont be able to access the money until they turn 18, except in rare circumstances, so it cant help with immediate expenses. And disbursements from the accounts will be subject to taxes.
What about older children?
Children born before 2025 wont qualify for the $1,000 incentive, but parents can still open accounts for them as long as theyre under 18. Parents can still invest up to $2,500 pretax for those kids.
In December, billionaires Michael and Susan Dell announced a $6.25 billion donation that will allow some children who are 10 and under to receive $250 in seed money if their parents open an account. That money is reserved for kids who live in ZIP codes with a median family income of $150,000 or less and who wont get the $1,000 seed money from the Treasury.
A few weeks later, hedge fund founder Ray Dalio and his wife Barbara pledged $75 million for kids under 10 in Connecticut, where Dalio lives. That would amount to $250 for 300,000 children in qualifying ZIP codes. Those large contributions are part of an effort by the U.S. Treasury dubbed the 50 State Challenge by Secretary Scott Bessent to encourage wealthy philanthropic donors to pitch in.
Other corporations participating in the program include Uber, MasterCard, BlackRock, Visa and Charles Schwab, according to the Trump Accounts website.
How do I open a Trump Account for my kids?
The accounts wont be open for contributions until July 2026, but parents of eligible kids can sign up using Form 4547 from the Internal Revenue Service. Parents can fill out the form when filing taxes this year or when the administration opens an online portal this summer, according to the Trump Accounts website.
Registering for a Trump Account is required for a child to receive the money. In May, parents who sign up will get information about how to finish opening the accounts.
Whats the idea behind the accounts?
Backers of the accounts say they want to introduce more people to the stock market and give even children born into poverty a chance to benefit from it. Supporters also say the accounts bolster capitalism at a time when openly socialist candidates are growing more popular.
About 58% of U.S. households held stocks or bonds in 2022, according to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, though the wealthiest 1% owned almost half the value of stocks in that same year.
Before Trump created the accounts, California, Connecticut and the District of Columbia were piloting baby bonds programs that are similar to Trump Accounts in some ways. Several other states, including Maryland, are weighing programs.
But those programs are targeted for youth growing up in poverty or foster care, plus children who lost a parent to COVID-19. Wealthier children dont benefit. Theyre also managed by the state, not private investment firms.
What do critics say?
Critics point out the accounts do little to help children in their early years, when theyre most vulnerable and most likely to be in poverty. The accounts, they say, also fail to offset cuts the Trump administration and congressional Republicans have made to other programs that benefit young people and their families, including food assistance and Medicaid. Republicans created the accounts in the same Trump tax bill that reduced spending for some of those programs.
And even with the contribution from the government, critics say the Trump Accounts will widen the wealth gap. Affluent families that can afford to make the maximum pretax contribution to the accounts will realize the greatest benefits. Poor families who cant afford to set aside money for the accounts will benefit the least. Assuming a 7% return, the $1,000 in seed money would grow to roughly $3,570 over 18 years.
___
The Associated Press education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find APs standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.
Makiya Seminera and Moriah Balingit, AP education writer
Virtues such as compassion, patience, and self-control may be beneficial not only for others but also for oneself, according to new research my team and I published in the Journal of Personality in December 2025.
Philosophers from Aristotle to al-Frb, a 10th-century scholar in what is now Iraq, have argued that virtue is vital for well-being. Yet others, such as Thomas Hobbes and Friedrich Nietzsche, have argued the opposite: Virtue offers no benefit to oneself and is good only for others. This second theory has inspired a lot of research in contemporary psychology, which often sees morality and self-interest as fundamentally opposed.
Many studies have found that generosity is associated with happiness, and that encouraging people to practice kindness increases their well-being. But other virtues seem less enjoyable.
For example, a compassionate person wants to alleviate suffering or misfortune, but that requires there be suffering or misfortune. Patience is possible only when something irritating or difficult is happening. And self-control involves forgoing ones desires or persisting with something difficult.
Could these kinds of virtues really be good for you?
My colleagues and I investigated this question in two studies, using two different methods to zoom in on specific moments in peoples daily lives. Our goal was to assess the degree to which, in those moments, they were compassionate, patient, and self-controlled. We also assessed their level of well-being: how pleasant or unpleasant they felt, and whether they found their activities meaningful.
One study, with adolescents, used the experience sampling method, in which people answer questions at random intervals throughout the day. The other, studying adults, used the day reconstruction method, in which people answer questions about the previous day. All told, we examined 43,164 moments from 1,218 people.
During situations that offer opportunities to act with compassion, patience, and self-controlencountering someone in need, for example, or dealing with a difficult personpeople tend to experience more unpleasant feelings and fewer pleasant ones than in other situations. However, we found that exercising these three virtues seems to help people cope. People who are habitually more compassionate, patient, and self-controlled tend to experience better well-being. And when people display more compassion, patience, and self-control than usual, they tend to feel better than they usually do.
In short, our results contradicted the theory that virtue is good for others and bad for the self. They were consistent with the theory that virtue promotes well-being.
Why it matters
These studies tested the predictions of two venerable, highly influential theories about the relationship between morality and well-being. In doing so, they offered new insights into one of the most fundamental questions debated in philosophy, psychology, and everyday life.
Moreover, in the scientific study of morality, lots of research has examined how people form moral judgments and how outside forces shape a persons moral behavior. Yet some researchers have argued that this should be complemented by research on moral traits and how these are integrated into the whole person. By focusing on traits such as patience, compassion, and self-control and their roles in peoples daily lives, our studies contribute to the emerging science of virtue.
What still isnt known
One open question for future research is whether virtues such as compassion, patience, and self-control are associated with better well-being only under certain conditions. For example, perhaps things look different depending on ones stage of life or in different parts of the world.
Our studies were not randomized experiments. It is possible that the associations we observed are explained by another factorsomething that increases well-being while simultaneously increasing compassion, patience, and self-control. Or maybe well-being affects virtue, instead of the other way around. Future research could help clarify the causal relationships.
One particularly interesting possibility is that there might be a virtuous cycle: Perhaps virtue tends to promote well-being, and well-being, in turn, tends to promote virtue. If so, it would be extremely valuable to learn how to help people kick-start that cycle.
The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.
Michael Prinzing is a research and assessment scholar at Wake Forest University.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
A federal judge said Tuesday that a nearly completed Massachusetts offshore wind project can continue, as the industry successfully challenges the Trump administration in court.
At U.S. District Court in Boston, Judge Brian Murphy halted the administration’s stop work order for Vineyard Wind, citing the potential economic losses from the delays and the developers’ likelihood of success on their claims. Vineyard Wind is one of five big offshore wind projects on the East Coast that the Trump administration froze days before Christmas, citing national security concerns and the fourth that has since been allowed to go forward.
A spokesperson for the company, Craig Gilvarg, said in a statement that it would work with the Administration to understand the matters raised in the Order.
Vineyard Wind will focus on working in coordination with its contractors, the federal government, and other relevant stakeholders and authorities to safely restart activities, as it continues to deliver a critical source of new power to the New England region, Gilvarg added.
Developers and states sued seeking to block the administration’s order. Prior to Vineyard Wind’s hearing, federal judges had allowed three of the five to restart construction: the Revolution Wind project for Rhode Island and Connecticut by Danish company Orsted, the Empire Wind project for New York by Norwegian company Equinor, and Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind for Virginia by Dominion Energy Virginia. Those three judges essentially concluded that the government did not show that the national security risk is so imminent that construction must halt, said Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond Law School professor who has been following the lawsuits.
Orsted is also suing over the administration halting its Sunrise Wind project for New York the fifth paused project but has not had a hearing yet.
Vineyard Wind is a joint venture between Avangrid and Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, located 15 miles (24 kilometers) south of Marthas Vineyard and Nantucket, Massachusetts. It is 95% complete and partially operational, able to produce nearly 600 megawatts of power for the New England electric grid, according to the complaint. Before the pause, it was on track to be complete by the end of March, with 62 turbines generating a total of 800 megawatts. That is enough clean electricity to power about 400,000 homes.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell said the completion of this project is essential to ensuring the state can lower costs, meet rising energy demand, advance its climate goals and sustain thousands of good-paying jobs.
U.S. Sen. Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, welcomed the judge’s ruling.
This stay is an important step in the process to fight back against the Trump administrations lawless attacks against our union jobs, grid security, and energy affordability, Markey said in a statement. Vineyard Wind 1 is currently delivering affordable and reliable power into our grid and has the permits, financing, and approval to deliver even more. Shutting off Vineyard Wind 1 would kill thousands of local union jobs, prevent power from reaching 400,000 homes, and cause us to lose out on $3 billion of energy savings.”
The administration’s announcement that paused construction did not reveal specifics about its national security concerns. But in a court filing, Matthew Giacona, acting director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, said he reviewed classified documents in November that discussed direct impacts to national security that arise from operating offshore wind projects near early warning monitoring and radar systems. Giacona said he determined the ongoing activities for the Vineyard Wind project did not adequately provide for the protection of national security interests, absent potential mitigation measures.
Given its nearly complete status, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management decided to allow Vineyard Wind to continue partially operating during the suspension period while it consulted with defense officials and the owners, Giacona said. But he said he is not aware of any measures that would mitigate the national security risks.
Trump has targeted offshore wind power
President Donald Trump has targeted offshore wind from his first days back in the White House, recently calling wind farms losers that lose money, destroy the landscape and kill birds. Research from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory shows that states with the most utility-scale wind and solar often have low electricity prices, supported by federal tax incentives. However, states with aggressive, binding programs to mandate more renewable energy have seen prices increase as a result of those policies, according to the study.
Turbines, like all infrastructure, can pose a risk to birds. The National Audubon Society, which is dedicated to the conservation of birds, thinks developers can manage these risks and climate change is a greater threat.
White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers has said the construction pause is meant to protect the national security of the American people and Trump has been clear that wind energy is the scam of the century.”
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has criticized the Vineyard Wind project, specifically, because of a blade failure. Fiberglass fragments of a blade broke apart and began washing onto Nantucket beaches in July 2024 during the peak of tourist season. Manufacturer GE Vernova agreed to pay $10.5 million in a settlement to compensate island businesses that suffered losses.
Kennedys family famously opposed an earlier failed wind project not far from the familys Cape Cod estate.
___
The Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find APs standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.
Jennifer McDermott and Michael Casey, Associated Press
