The Minnesota Legislature is in the home stretch of its 2026 session and many Minnesotans are waiting to see if they're going to get some relief from high property taxes.

Thursday, the Minnesota Senate Taxes Committee is meeting to work on its big bill that includes $100 million in one-time property tax relief and the House Taxes Committee has a bill trying to do the same, but with a much larger piece of the pie.

The House bill would appropriate $4 billion from the state’s general fund for one-time refunds to homeowners. Republican State Rep. Greg Davids, R-Preston, is co-chair of the House Tax Committee and is sponsoring that bill. He said statewide mandates from the Legislature have caused local governments to raise property taxes.

“They're trying to keep their institutions going. And so if the state can provide some some relief— if we didn't have these unfunded mandates — they'd be in a lot better shape than they are right now,” Davids said.

His bill has drawn criticism from his DFL counterparts who said that wealthier homeowners, who have already received large tax breaks from the federal government, will receive the largest refunds under his bill. Davids said those homeowners also pay more taxes in general.

“That's the old class warfare thing. They're trying to play one group against the other,” he said. “The big houses are supporting schools and counties more than other ones. But that's— I don't want to get in that game. I just want to provide some relief.”

Listen to the full conversation by clicking the player above.

The average price of a gallon of gas in Minnesota jumped 13 cents overnight from Tuesday to Wednesday. The price has remained high nationwide amid the ongoing war with Iran and closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

A gallon of regular gas averaged $3.99 in Minnesota Thursday, up from about $3.80 Tuesday, according to AAA. Many gas stations in the Twin Cities are over four dollars a gallon.

Drivers stopped at 36 Lyn Refuel Station in south Minneapolis, at the corner of 36th Street and Lyndale Avenue, to buy gas for $3.79 a gallon.

“This one has lower prices than most. I know that they do match like match pricing with Costco and stuff. So if I can't make it to Costco, I come here. It's more convenient for the area, but, yeah, a lot cheaper than most places,” Ella Rouillard said.

Rouillard is from Minneapolis and works with unhoused youth at the YMCA Youth and Family Services. She said the price of gas greatly affects the people she works with, who are typically about 18-24 years old.

“A lot of youth are couch hopping or living in their cars. So a lot of youth need gas in order to provide themselves a safe place to stay,” she said.

She said the YMCA has been providing more gas cards for them.

Another driver, Arnulfo Flores, who lives in St. Paul, said gas prices have affected the way he lives.

“I mean, who can afford to put $50 to fill your cars up anymore? My truck, it's almost $100. I'm living on a fixed budget, you know. I'm retired, I'm living on my social security,” Flores said. “It affects how much you want to go out and about and everything.”

The national average is about $4.30 a gallon.

“It's very overwhelming. I'm making do because I don't have a choice,” Natasha Haul said, at a gas station in West St. Paul, where gas is $3.95.

Diesel prices are also inching up in Minnesota, now averaging $5.04 a gallon. That’s up about three cents over the past week.

Megan Horsager is not looking forward to buying more fuel for her farm.

She’s got a large, white, cylindrical fuel tank that sits in the middle of her family’s row-crop farm in Montevideo. While she buys her fertilizer and other planting needs in the fall, ahead of planting season, she opts to buy fuel whenever her tank needs a top-up.

That next refill will happen in June, Horsager said.

"I'm just kicking myself that I didn't price more ahead of time,” Horsager said. “Usually, June hasn't been a bad time to buy fuel, but you don't plan on the global events."

The prices of key agricultural necessities such as diesel and nitrogen fertilizer have soared since the Strait of Hormuz, a vital trade passageway, has largely been choked off amid the war in Iran.

While Horsager didn’t book enough diesel in advance, she is set with fertilizer. However, not everyone is. In fact, a recent American Farm Bureau Federation survey found that about 70 percent of respondents nationwide report they are unable to afford all the fertilizer they need.

And Horsager still worries about what fertilizer costs might be in the fall. Those worries may not be without cause.

What it’ll take for prices to come back

The Agricultural Risk Policy Center at North Dakota State University ran fertilizer price projections under different scenarios, including the Strait of Hormuz opening soon or remaining closed throughout the year.

“We have seen that even in the most optimistic scenario, we're going to see elevated prices on the nitrogen as well as phosphate side that continues on through the fall and moving into 2027,” Agricultural Risk Policy Center Associate Director Shawn Arita said.

Arita added that those prices will be higher than the ones farmers worked with this year and last year. Part of that is because it’ll take time to repair Middle Eastern fertilizer production infrastructure that’s been damaged in the war.

The center’s report shows that the price of urea, a nitrogen fertilizer, will remain 13 percent higher than its pre‐crisis price, even if the strait were to open soon.

It could also take some time before barge companies feel safe to pass through the Strait, Arita said. There are leftover underwater mines through the waterway that the U.S. is working to clear, according to President Donald Trump. The Associated Press reports that Pentagon officials told lawmakers it would likely take six months to clear the mines.

Vessels and insurance companies would likely also want some stability between the U.S. and Iran, Arita said.

“Many of these ships, as well as the insurance companies, are very, very risk-averse,” Arita said. “It's going to take time for them to see how the situation is, to feel comfortable and to have assurances that they'll be willing to re-enter the strait to pick up cargo.”

There is also a growing backlog of vessels that are stuck in the strait. There are about 2,000 vessels stranded in the Persian Gulf, according to the International Maritime Organization. Though some experts say that estimate is high, there is nevertheless a backlog.

“You're not going to see a return to normal for several months, even if the Strait of Hormuz was opened relatively quickly, because you've got to get all those ships out of there,” Michigan State University ag economist Bill Knudson said.

Once the strait opens and oil tankers pass through, there could be some immediate relief for oil prices, Knudson said. However, he adds that relief is contingent on the extent of energy infrastructure destroyed during the war.

“That'll tell us how quickly prices will return to where they were before the war started,” Knudson said. “If, say, a refinery has been destroyed, it's going to take months for it to get back online and start processing oil again.”

The longer the war goes on, the greater the risk of further damage to energy infrastructure, he added, which could further set back oil prices.

On top of that, if nitrogen fertilizer remains expensive next year, Knudson figures some farmers would likely switch from growing corn, which needs a lot of nitrogen fertilizer, to soybeans, which draw most of their fertilizer from the atmosphere. Regardless, if the war extends into the summer, farmers could continue to see higher operational costs eating into their profits next year.

“The crunch on profitability would continue if there's no solution in the next seven or eight months,” Knudson said.

‘It's not panic mode, but it's getting closer’

Megan Horsager, the farmer in Montevideo, grew up on her family’s land but wasn’t a huge fan of farm work as a kid. She went into the corporate world and took a job that, as it turned out, she didn’t like much, either. Horsager missed farm life, so she earned an agribusiness degree, got married in the process and returned to the farm five years ago.

“Every day I feel like I don't know what I'm doing,” Horsager said. “Dad said it would be five years before I felt like I had a handle on anything. It's been about five years, and I have a handle on maybe half of the different aspects of the farm.”

She’s a member of her local sugarbeet co-op, with which she signed a five-year contract. That means growing sugarbeets at a time when the crop’s prices have been rocky.

“I'm required to plant a crop that I'm fairly confident that I will lose money on, maybe at best break even,” Horsager said. “I’m trying to be optimistic, but it definitely puts a damper on the mood.”

Despite the challenges, Horsager and her family remain optimistic. They still feel the joy of planting seeds in the ground and watching them grow. Farming is what Horsager loves, which means it’s “impossible” not to feel optimistic.

For now, she says her family takes each year as it comes and “trusts the Lord for the rest.”

In the meantime, U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins recently told lawmakers that the Trump Administration is poised to draw tens of billions of dollars from tariffs and trade deals to invest in domestic fertilizer supplies. Secretary Rollins added she’s hopeful the Trump Administration will release a detailed plan soon.

It’s likely farmers will again struggle to turn a profit despite several rounds of government assistance, and experts say it wouldn’t be surprising if the government offered yet more aid.

A survey of residents and business owners in Minneapolis and St. Paul finds that workers lost an estimated $244 million during the Trump Administration’s immigration enforcement operation while businesses missed out on $610 million in revenue.

The research from the University of California San Diego’s U.S. Immigration Policy Center is included in an amended complaint that the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office filed Tuesday in an ongoing federal lawsuit in which the state is asking a judge to declare the administration’s actions illegal.

The researchers found that nearly 36 percent of survey respondents in Minneapolis reported missing work, in most cases because their place of employment had closed; the workers lost an average of $2,315 in pay.

In St. Paul, nearly 21 percent of employees surveyed said that they missed work; workers in the capital city lost $1,754 on average.

The researchers gathered data from 1,390 people across both cities who responded to the survey. The study also found that federal agents “frequently engaged in broad, non-targeted stops of residents” and were more likely to ask people of color than white people about their immigration status.

Large majorities of residents in both cities who had encounters with immigration agents said that they are less likely to seek help from law enforcement in the future.

The research team also conducted a similar survey of businesses in Minneapolis and St. Paul using city license lists. Nearly 900 business owners responded.

“A strong majority of businesses reported that Operation Metro Surge had a negative impact on their business,” the researchers write of both cities.

They estimate that Minneapolis businesses lost $445 million in revenue while those in St. Paul lost $165 million. Many business owners also answered “yes” when asked if they took on unexpected debt because of the enforcement operation.

A refund system for businesses that paid tariffs which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled President Donald Trump imposed without the constitutional authority to do so is scheduled to launch Monday.

Importers and their brokers will be able to begin claiming refunds through an online portal beginning at 8 a.m., according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the agency administering the system.

It's the first step in a complicated process that also might eventually lead to refunds for consumers who were billed for some or all of the tariffs on products shipped to them from outside the United States.

Companies must submit declarations listing the goods on which they collectively put billions of dollars toward the import taxes the court subsequently struck down. If CBP approves a claim, it will take 60-90 days for a refund to be issued, the agency said.

The government expects to process refunds in phases, however, focusing first on more recent tariff payments. Any number of technical factors and procedural issues could delay an importer's application, so any reimbursements businesses plan to make to customers likely would trickled down slowly.

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court on Feb. 20 found that Trump usurped Congress' tax-setting role last April when he set new import tax rates on products from almost every other country, citing the U.S. trade deficit as a national emergency that warranted his invoking of a 1977 emergency powers law.

Although the court majority did not address refunds in its ruling, a judge at the U.S. Court of International Trade determined last month that companies subjected to IEEPA tariffs were entitled to money back.

Not all taxed imports immediately eligible

Customs and Border Protection said in court filings that over 330,000 importers paid a total of about $166 billion on over 53 million shipments.

Not all of those orders qualify for the first phase of the refund system's rollout, which is limited to cases in which tariffs were estimated but not finalized or within 80 days of a final accounting.

To receive refunds, importers have to register for the CPB's electronic payment system. As of April 14, 56,497 importers had completed registration and were eligible for refunds totaling $127 billion, including interest, the agency said.

System requires accuracy

Meghann Supino, a partner at Ice Miller, said the law firm has advised clients to carefully list in their declarations all of the document numbers for forms that went to CBP to describe imported goods and their value.

“If there is an entry on that file that does not qualify, it may cause the entire entry to be rejected or that line item might be rejected by Customs,” she said.

Supino thinks the portal going live will require composure as well as diligence.

“Like any electronic online program that goes live with a lot of interest, I would expect that there might be some hiccups with the program on Monday,” she said. “So we continue to ask everyone to be patient, because we think that patience will pay off.”

Nghi Huynh, the partner-in-charge of transfer pricing at accounting and consulting firm Armanino, said most companies claiming refunds will have imported a mix of items, and not all will qualify right away.

“It’s about having a clear process in place and keeping track of what’s been submitted and what’s been paid, so nothing falls through the cracks,” she said. “Each file can include thousands of entries, but accuracy is critical, as submissions can be rejected if formatting or data is incorrect.”

Patience with the process

Small businesses have eagerly awaited the chance to apply for refunds. Brad Jackson, co-founder of After Action Cigars in Rochester, Minnesota, said he starting compiling records and preparing to enter information into the system the minute CPB announced the launch date.

The company imports cigars and accessories from Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic. Last year, it paid $34,000 in tariffs and absorbed much of the cost instead of raising customer prices, Jackson said.

Last spring, he had a two-week delay in a shipment due to a missing document, so he is being more careful with refund documents, he said.

“My main concern is the turnaround time,” Jackson said. “A refund process that takes several months to complete doesn’t solve the cash flow problem that it is supposed to fix.”

Will consumers see refunds?

Tariffs are paid by importers, and some companies pass on the tax costs to consumers via higher prices.

The system starting up Monday will refund tariffs directly to the businesses that paid them, which are not obligated to share the proceeds with customers. However, class-action lawsuits that aim to force companies, ranging from Costco to Ray-Ban maker Essilor Luxottica, to reimburse shoppers are winding their way through the U.S. legal system.

Individuals may be more likely to receive refunds from delivery companies like FedEx and UPS, which collected tariffs on imports directly from consumers. FedEx has said it would return tariff refunds to customers when it receives them from the CPB.

“Supporting our customers as they navigate regulatory changes remains our top priority,” FedEx said in a statement. “We are working with our customers as CBP begins processing refunds and plan to begin filing claims on April 20.”

Oil prices are falling by more than 10 percent Friday, and Wall Street is rallying toward another record after Iran said the Strait of Hormuz is fully open, allowing oil tankers to exit the Persian Gulf again and carry crude to customers worldwide.

The S&P 500 climbed 0.8 percent as U.S. stocks run toward the finish of a third straight week of big gains, their longest such streak since Halloween. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 678 points, or 1.4 percent, as of 9:35 a.m. Eastern time, and the Nasdaq composite was 1 percnet higher.

Stocks have jumped more than 11 percent since hitting a bottom in late March on hopes that the United States and Iran can avoid a worst-case scenario for the global economy despite their war. The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz is the clearest yet signal for optimism, and President Donald Trump said in a speech late Thursday that the war “should be ending pretty soon.”

The price for a barrel of benchmark U.S. crude tumbled 10.8 percent to $81.28.

Brent crude, the international standard, dropped 10.3 percent to $89.13. To be sure, it remains above its $70 level from before the war, indicating some caution is still embedded in financial markets.

Several times since the war began, optimism on Wall Street has quickly swung to doubt about a possible end to the fighting. That in turn has caused vicious and sudden swings of prices for everything from stocks to bonds to oil.

A strong start to the earnings reporting season for big U.S. companies has also helped to support the U.S. stock market, and several more financial companies joined the list Friday of companies delivering bigger profits for the start of 2026 than analysts expected.

State Street rose 2.9 percent, and Fifth Third Bancorp added 1.9 percent after both reported better results for the latest quarter than expected.

They helped offset an 11.5 percent drop for Netflix, which fell even though it likewise delivered a better profit than expected. It did not raise its forecast for revenue growth for the full year, which analysts said may have disappointed some investors. It also said Reed Hastings, cofounder and chairman of the streaming company, will step down from its board of directors in June when his term expires.

In stock markets abroad, stock indexes leaped in Europe following Iran’s announcement about the Strait of Hormuz. France’s CAC 40 jumped 2 percent, and Germany’s DAX returned 2.2 percent.

In Asia, where trading finished for the day before the announcement, indexes were weaker. Japan’s Nikkei 225 lost 1.8 percent, and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng fell 0.9 percent for two of the bigger losses.

In the bond market, Treasury yields eased sharply as falling oil prices took pressure off inflation. The yield on the 10-year Treasury dropped to 4.24 percent from 4.32 percent late Thursday.

Early spring means the return of warm weather and … taxes. On a recent weekend, Dan and Glynna Courter were enjoying the sun with friends over a picnic of blueberries and Cheez-Its at Birmingham's Railroad Park.

When the topic moved to how they're feeling about their tax refunds, nearly everyone at the gathering responded with a chorus of lukewarm just fines.

The lack of enthusiasm was surprising considering everyone on the picnic blanket received sizable refunds, including about $10,000 for the Courters combined. But Glynna thinks their refund wasn't that much different from last year. The couple withhold the maximum taxes from their paychecks, which helps them avoid the risk of owing taxes and leads to a bigger refund.

"We might go to a nice restaurant," Dan added, after Glynna said they'd use the refund for savings.

This is not the vibe Republican lawmakers were planning for this tax season. The White House had already declared this the "largest tax refund season in U.S. history," and so far it's on track to be, due to the Republicans' signature tax and spending law, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The White House projected the average refund "to rise by $1,000 or more this year."

But that extra refund bump has fallen short of that projection.

So far, the average refund has totaled about $350 more than last year. By early April, the average tax refund sat at $3,462, which is 11.1 percent higher than the same point last year, according to the IRS.

And Americans appear to be shrugging their shoulders at the tax changes. A recent survey by the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington think tank advising on federal policy, found 62 percent of respondents either thought the tax changes harmed them or made no difference. Even among Republicans, only 35 percent said the changes favored them.

"There's a bit of a disappointment in how much those refunds are," said Tom O'Saben, the director of tax content and government relations at the National Association of Tax Professionals. "People are quietly, perhaps, happy but not to the extent where I would call it significant."

Americans who owe taxes could be seeing a bigger slice of the savings

One possible explanation for the lower refunds is that the benefits from the tax law changes could be showing up more for Americans who don't receive refunds, but owe taxes. The IRS data on tax refunds this season does not factor in how much less Americans owed compared to last year.

"The evidence is stronger that more tax relief is relatively flowing to those who otherwise would owe when they file," said Don Schneider, deputy head of U.S. policy at the investment bank Piper Sandler.

But Schneider points out that owing less money is harder to notice than getting cash in hand.

"Getting it in a refund is probably more impactful, more easy to understand than having a reduction in what you otherwise would owe," Schneider said.

Higher-income procrastinators still have to file

Wealthier filers so far seem to have received larger benefits from the tax changes.

"Higher income taxpayers are much more likely than lower income taxpayers to report significantly higher refunds this year," said Andrew Lautz, director of tax policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

That's due in part to the increase in the SALT, or state and local tax, deduction cap raised by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Filers can now deduct up to $40,000 for property, sales and income taxes paid to state and local governments. The deduction primarily goes to wealthier Americans who own homes with big mortgage payments.

Since they traditionally are more likely to procrastinate sending in their returns, that could cause this year's average tax refund to grow later on, but likely still fall short of the additional $1,000 mark, Lautz said. "It is unlikely that we will see that kind of boost by the end of this."

Refunds are getting eaten up by higher gas prices

Part of the tepid response to refunds could be related to the extra cash Americans are spending at the pump.

The war with Iran has brought the average price for a gallon of regular in the U.S. well above $4. Data from the Bank of America Institute and PNC shows consumers have continued spending on gas, and depending on how long gas prices stay elevated, all of the benefits Americans received from the 2025 tax and spending bill could go solely to staying fueled up.

"The tax refund season might be very good, but it's also being offset by this price in gasoline," said Michael Pearce, chief U.S. economist at Oxford Economics.

Bob Jones, a retiree in Birmingham, is satisfied with his refund. He benefited from an extra deduction of $6,000 for a lot of seniors 65 and up. But the war with Iran has him worried about what that means for the price of gas, so he's put it all in savings.

"You need the savings simply for gas," Jones said.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Higher prices are good news for the oil industry — to a point. But they can bite, too.

Crude oil prices were around $70 a barrel before the war in Iran. After the U.S. and Israel attacked, they started swinging wildly, shooting up to nearly $120; with the current ceasefire, prices are between $90 and $100. Some disruptions to supply could take months to unwind even if the ceasefire holds, which has some analysts predicting a prolonged period of higher prices.

A clip from the TV show Landman recently went viral; in it, Billy Bob Thornton, as Texas oilman Tommy Norris, explains that the industry wants crude prices to live somewhere between $60 and $90 a barrel.

"Don't get me wrong — we're still printing money at $90," he says. "But gas gets up over $3.50 a gallon, it starts to pinch."

NPR doesn't usually turn to TV dramas for economic analysis. But Ed Crooks, the vice chair for the Americas at the energy and natural resources research group Wood MacKenzie, says that clip "is exactly right."

"There is a kind of a sweet spot for the oil price, a nice range for it to be in" from the industry's perspective, Crooks says. The war in Iran pushed the market well outside that range.

As a result, the current crisis isn't just a cash bonanza for the oil industry. It's also a cause for industry concern.

A big boost to profits

We'll have a better sense of exactly how much money oil producers may be printing when the publicly traded companies start to report quarterly earnings in the next few weeks. ExxonMobil, which reports earnings May 1, just told investors that it estimates higher prices have boosted its revenues by more than $2 billion.

For now, the stock performance of the energy sector is a pretty good indicator that the industry is thriving with these prices. Since the start of the year, energy stocks have risen some 25 percent, while the S&P 500 has dropped slightly. That's factoring in a drop in oil stock prices when a two-week ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran was announced on Tuesday.

And the U.S., as the world's largest oil producer, reaps a disproportionate benefit from high prices. While producers like Saudi Arabia have had their exports stymied by the near halt of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, U.S. production is unaffected. American oil companies can sell as much as ever, now at an inflated price.

President Trump has pointed to this, posting, "when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money." And that's true, for some definitions of "we."

Isabella Weber, a professor of economics at UMass Amherst, worked on a paper that found that in 2022, after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the global oil industry brought in some $916 billion in profits. The U.S. was the chief beneficiary, raking in $301 billion, some seven times the pre-COVID average annual profits for U.S.-headquartered oil and gas companies.

Weber says this money, through shareholder payouts, disproportionately flowed to the very wealthy. "We find that 50 percent of the profits in the oil and gas industry went to the top 1 percent richest Americans, whereas only 1 percent of those profits went to the bottom 50 percent," she says.

Meanwhile, when fuel is expensive, everyone who drives or buys goods pays more. The costs of high oil prices are widely distributed, while the benefits are concentrated among a few.

In fact, you can think of high oil prices as a redistributor of wealth, away from the American consumer and toward people who work for, and invest in, the oil industry. This could be a political problem for the current administration, says Crooks, because "a lot more people are affected by the downside of high gas prices than benefit from the upside."

Limits to the windfall

While soaring prices mean more cash flows to the oil industry, the conflict hasn't been all good news for producers. Some of the biggest companies are directly hurt by the conflict, because they have invested in facilities in the Middle East that have been under attack or they have oil and natural gas that can't reach markets due to the reduced traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. ExxonMobil, for instance, estimates that lower production in the Middle East and other disruptions tied to the war are costing it between $1 billion and $1.6 billion this quarter, offsetting much of that $2 billion-plus boost from higher prices.

And even companies that operate only in the U.S. might not benefit as much as you might think.

One reason: hedging. That's when a company locks in a price for its oil months in advance of actually selling it. Hedging provides some certainty in an uncertain market, letting both oil producers and consumers plan their budgets in advance.

Some companies locked down relatively low prices before the war began, back when the global oil market was oversupplied and producers were worried about prices dropping even further. Now they can't take advantage of those prices rapidly shooting up instead.

Based on an analysis of public reports, Jai Singh, head of North America oil and gas research at the consultancy Rystad, estimates that companies that primarily make oil "have hedged at an average floor price of $57 [a barrel], and they've hedged about a third of their production coming into this year."

As a result, he says, "There were some limits to how much of this windfall they could enjoy."

Constraints on new drilling

Another reason companies may not be reaping the biggest-possible profits: limitations on how much they can boost production. Producing more oil would seem like an obvious way to rake in more cash, now that prices have spiked. But drilling new wells takes time. The number of partially completed wells that can come online quickly is relatively low right now.

And there are some serious physical constraints to ramping up production. In the Permian Basin in Texas, the most prolific oil basin in the U.S., a single well will often produce both oil and natural gas. You need pipelines to get that natural gas from the field to the market, and those pipelines are pretty much full right now. Producers might want to drill a new well for the oil, but they can't if they don't have any way to move the natural gas that comes with it. There are other constraints too, including staffing shortages and geological considerations.

There's also intense pressure from investors to make sure any new wells will be profitable in the long term. If companies are going to spend cash on drilling instead of paying it out as dividends to shareholders, investors want to be confident that it will pay off down the line — and if the price of oil collapses, it might not.

After all, Crooks points out, investors have been burned before. For the first 15 years of the shale boom, the U.S. shale industry lost enormous amounts of money by drilling lots of wells that turned out to be less profitable than they'd hoped. "People dug big holes in the ground, poured bucketloads of dollars into those holes and then set fire to them," Crooks says. Investors aren't tolerating that anymore.

So, will drilling a new well today make money for investors? It depends on what the price of oil is like months from now.

And nobody knows what the price of oil will be tomorrow, let alone next year.

Volatility ‘is not good for anyone’

That brings up the third challenge: volatility. Prices have been on a roller coaster since the war began.

Several oil producers declined to comment for this story, but Dustin Meyer speaks for the industry as the head of policy and economics for the American Petroleum Institute trade group.

"This amount of volatility that we're seeing in the marketplace is not good for anyone," he says. "Our industry is fundamentally predicated on making long-term investments, and it's very hard to do that when market prices are so volatile and so unstable."

Well, it's good for a very short list of people, perhaps. Bob McNally, the founder of Rapidan Energy Group, is the author of the book Crude Volatility. He says traders can benefit from volatility — if they ride the roller coaster right, buying low and selling high.

So can storage owners that charge fees for keeping oil in tanks; all that oil being traded in a wildly swinging market has to be stashed somewhere while the deals are struck. And analysts who are kept busy writing about the market gyrations. "And lawyers, because lawyers always seem to do well no matter what happens," he says. "Everybody else is harmed."

The downside of entrenched high prices

But what if prices stop swinging and just stay high for a long time?

That, too, could be bad for oil producers, depending on exactly how high. In the Landman clip, that's what Tommy Norris means when he talks about prices starting to "pinch."

When oil prices stay consistently above that $90 mark, "the economy suffers and inflation rises," Crooks, of research group Wood MacKenzie, says. "Growth falls. Interest rates may go up. People in the wider economy lose their jobs."

Oil demand is typically quite resilient; people need gasoline to go to work and get their kids to school, even if prices make them wince. But a global economic slowdown or even a recession could bring demand sharply down.

Meanwhile, high prices also increase interest in alternatives to oil, Crooks says. That's good news for electric car makers and the environment, but not for oil companies.

A recession and a boom in alternatives to oil are both examples of what the industry calls "demand destruction," meaning long-term reductions in how much oil the world wants to buy.

If global oil prices are high enough for long enough and demand drops substantially, that "puts the oil industry on a weaker footing looking years and decades into the future," Crooks says.

Copyright 2026, NPR

A new report indicates that Minnesota’s homeowner insurance premiums have grown a whopping 34 percent in the past year alone — the most of any other state in the country.

Julia Dreier, the deputy commissioner of insurance at the Minnesota Department of Commerce said the rise is partly because of an increase in extreme weather events in the state.

“We also have higher construction and repair costs, and then we just have a older housing stock here in Minnesota, and those repairs are just more complex and costly,” she said.

Dreier said the best way to mitigate costs is for homeowners to reassess their policies and double-check what is and isn’t covered. Many people unwittingly have policies that exclude specific coverage or have higher deductibles than anticipated.

She also said that Minnesota has programs for homeowners who, if they’re reinforcing parts of their home, can get large discounts on insurance premiums.

Listen to the conversation by clicking the player above.

Global leaders have been scrambling to contain the rising cost of oil and gasoline since the start of the Iran war, which took a record amount of oil off the market when tankers full of crude were stranded in the Persian Gulf and military strikes damaged refineries, pipelines and export terminals.

Hoping to ease some pain for consumers, President Donald Trump and other heads of state have been pulling on various levers, launching more oil on the market in a bid to calm the chaos.

A group of 32 nations that are members of the International Energy Agency began releasing the largest volume of emergency oil reserves in its history: 400 million barrels. Trump is tapping into oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve while lifting sanctions on Russian and Iranian crude and temporarily waiving the Jones Act, a maritime law that requires ships carrying goods between U.S. ports to be U.S.-flagged.

But despite those maneuvers, crude oil surpassed $100 a barrel and gasoline is selling for $4.06 a gallon on average in the U.S. While the stopgaps are helping, they're not adding up to enough oil to replace what's stranded, experts say.

“They're all incremental,” said Mark Barteau, professor of chemical engineering and chemistry at Texas A&M University. "You’re talking about these different patches being at the level of maybe 1 to 2 million barrels a day each, and you’ve got to get to 20, so it’s hard to see those actually adding up to the numbers that are needed. And then the question is, how long can you sustain those?”

Trapped oil

Before the war began, roughly 15 million barrels of crude oil and 5 million barrels of oil products passed daily through the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, amounting to about 20 percent of global oil consumption, according to the International Energy Agency.

In addition to that loss, some oil producing nations in the Middle East have halted oil production because they can't ship fuel out of the Gulf and their storage tanks are full. That's taken about 10 million more barrels per day off the market, the IEA said.

Then there are the eight countries around the Persian Gulf that together hold about 50 percent of global oil reserves. Under normal circumstances, they coordinate closely to raise or lower their output to keep prices steady, said Jim Krane, energy research fellow at Rice University’s Baker Institute. Usually Saudi Arabia steps in to bring spare oil to market and calm things down, he said.

“But all of that spare capacity is also bottled up inside the Persian Gulf right now and it can’t get to market either,” Krane said. “So the main emergency response system that we have is also blocked.”

The IEA said in its recent report that “the resumption of transit through the Strait of Hormuz is the single most important action to return to stable oil and gas flows and reduce the strains on markets and prices.”

Barring that, world leaders are grasping for ways to free up more oil.

Limitations of short-term fixes

Some nations have found workarounds to move oil out of the Gulf. Saudi Arabia is using its East-West pipeline, which stretches from the Persian Gulf to the Red Sea, to transfer about 5 million barrels per day out of the Gulf, said Michael Lynch, distinguished fellow at Energy Policy Research Foundation, a non-partisan institution focused on energy and economics. But the nation was already using that pipeline to transport oil, so it doesn’t have a lot of spare room to move oil from stranded tankers.

Trump also temporarily lifted sanctions on approximately 140 million barrels of Iranian oil that was already in transit. But that didn’t add oil to the market — it just widened the pool of potential buyers, said Daniel Sternoff, senior fellow at the Columbia Center on Global Energy Policy.

Typically, most Iranian oil was bought by private refiners in China, who purchased it at a steep discount, Sternoff said. But with sanctions lifted, others could scramble to buy the oil, which in turn raises its price to the benefit of Iran, he said.

“As soon as you are moving to waive sanctions on your adversary with whom you’re fighting a military conflict, to do something in their benefit, it just shows you that you are running out of options to try to prevent a rise in the price of oil,” Sternoff said.

The decision to lift sanctions on Russian oil could have more impact, because Russia had been storing unpurchased oil in tankers, Sternoff said. “By waiving sanctions, it will allow those barrels to clear.”

Trump’s temporary waiver of the Jones Act to allow foreign ships to temporarily transport goods between U.S. ports could potentially help ease natural gas prices by enabling companies to more efficiently ship liquefied natural gas from the Gulf Coast to New England.

But experts don’t expect the waiver to significantly impact the price of oil or gasoline. “It’s helpful, but not a game changer,” Lynch said.

Why U.S. oil production can’t solve the problem

The U.S. is a major oil producer, and exports more oil than it imports. But like any other oil producing nation, it can't just ramp up production instantly to fill the void.

“If the U.S. were to try to make up the global shortfall, we would need to nearly double our production,” Barteau said. “We couldn’t drill wells that fast even if we wanted to.”

Increasing domestic production by even 1 million barrels per day, a feat the U.S. accomplished during the shale boom, would be hard to duplicate, Lynch said.

“If we run every drilling rig right now, what happens a week from now when the war is over and the price goes back down $20?” Lynch asked. “People don’t want to develop long-term production based on a short-term price spike.”

Halting exports and using that oil within the U.S. wouldn't bring down gasoline prices either, experts say.

For one, oil is traded on a global market, so events happening halfway around the globe impact prices for everyone.

In addition, the U.S. doesn't produce enough of the type of oil its refineries process. It produced about 13.7 million barrels per day of oil at the end of 2025, according to the Energy Information Administration. And refineries processed about 16.3 million barrels per day that year, relying on imports to fill in the gaps, according to the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), a trade association.

That's because nearly 70 percent of U.S. refineries are set up to process heavy, sour crude, according to AFPM. But much of the oil produced in the U.S. is light, sweet crude, which was unlocked during the shale revolution.

“They need different crudes than the ones that are being produced right next to them now,” Krane said.

As a result, just 60 percent of the crude oil processed in U.S. refineries is extracted domestically, according to the AFPM. And retooling domestic refineries would cost billions of dollars, the group said. It also would require shutting down the refinery for a period of time, which generally raises gasoline prices.

“A lot of people like the IEA are making the point that this is the biggest oil crisis ever, which is partly true, partly an exaggeration, depending on how you count things,” Lynch said. “A lot of it has to do with how long does this last ... if it goes on for another six weeks we get to be in some serious trouble.”

President Donald Trump expressed frustration Tuesday with allies who have been unwilling to do more to support the U.S. war effort, telling them to “go get your own oil” as the conflict with Iran and its closure of the Strait of Hormuz sent average U.S. gas prices past $4 a gallon.

The president's social media post came after U.S. strikes hit a city that is home to one of Iran’s main nuclear sites, sending a massive fireball into the sky, and Tehran attacked a fully loaded Kuwaiti oil tanker in the Persian Gulf.

The attacks showed the intensity of the war more than a month after the U.S. and Israel launched it. The conflict has left more than 3,000 dead and caused major disruptions to the world’s supply of oil and natural gas, roiling global markets.

Trump, who has vacillated between insisting there is progress in diplomatic talks with Iran and threatening to widen the war, had earlier shared footage of the attack on Isfahan. The central city is home to one of three nuclear enrichment sites attacked by the U.S. in June, and analysts believe much of Iran’s highly enriched uranium is likely stored there.

The war is roiling oil market

Iran’s stranglehold on the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway leading out of Persian Gulf through which a fifth of the world’s oil is transported during peacetime, has driven up global oil prices, as have Tehran's attacks on regional energy infrastructure. That has shaken stock markets around the world and pushed up the cost of many basic goods.

Spot prices of Brent crude, the international standard, hovered around $107 a barrel Tuesday, up more than 45 percent since the war started Feb. 28.

Trump directed blame at U.S. allies like the United Kingdom and France that have refused to enter a war with no clear endgame that they were not consulted on.

“You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us. Iran has been, essentially, decimated. The hard part is done. Go get your own oil!” Trump wrote.

He singled out France for not letting planes taking military supplies to Israel fly over French territory, saying the country has been “VERY UNHELPFUL,” and that “The U.S.A. will REMEMBER!!!”

Allies have refused to get involved

The French military has previously said France allowed the U.S. Air Force to use the Istres base in southern France, because it had guarantees that only planes not involved in carrying out strikes would land there.

Spain, which has emerged as Europe's loudest critic of the war, said Monday that it had closed its airspace for U.S. planes involved in the conflict.

Italy has refused permission for U.S. military assets to use the Sigonella air base in Sicily for an operation linked to the offensive in the Middle East, an official with knowledge of the matter said, confirming a local press report.

The denial was issued a few days ago and concerned American aircraft, including bombers, which were supposed to land at the base before continuing toward the Middle East, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

The Italian government later insisted that its relationship with the U.S. is “solid and based on full and loyal cooperation.”

Israel and the U.S. launch a new wave of strikes on Iran

Israel and the U.S. launched a wave of strikes on Iran, hitting Tehran in the early morning. Israel also said it had launched a new wave of strikes targeting what it described as Hezbollah infrastructure in Beirut.

The video shared by Trump appeared to show a massive attack on Isfahan, and NASA fire-tracking satellites suggest explosions happened in a mountainous region on the city's southern edge. Iran has not confirmed the attack.

A satellite image taken just before the June war suggests Tehran transferred a truckload of highly enriched uranium to a nuclear facility about 12 miles from Tuesday's strikes.

Analysts believe the truck — which the image showed going into a tunnel loaded with 18 blue containers — likely carried most or all of Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60 percent purity. That’s a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels.

Trump warned this week that if a ceasefire is not reached “shortly,” and if the strait is not reopened, the U.S. would broaden its offensive, including by attacking the Kharg Island oil export hub and possibly desalination plants.

Speaking at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth would not say if U.S. ground forces would enter the war.

“We don’t want to have to do more militarily than we have to,” he said. “But I didn’t mean it flippantly when I said, in the meantime, we’ll negotiate with bombs.”

Iran hits oil tanker in waters off Dubai

An Iranian drone hit a Kuwaiti oil tanker off the United Arab Emirates city of Dubai, sparking a blaze that was later put out, the Dubai Media Office said. Authorities said no oil spill resulted.

Four people were also wounded when debris from an intercepted drone fell into a residential area, and loud explosions could be heard later from another attack on Dubai.

Air raid sirens sounded in Bahrain, while Saudi Arabia said it intercepted three ballistic missiles launched toward its capital. Loud explosions were also heard in Israel not long after the military warned of an incoming missile barrage from Iran.

In Iran, authorities say more than 1,900 people have been killed, while 19 have been reported dead in Israel.

Two dozen people have died in Gulf states and the occupied West Bank. In Lebanon, officials said more than 1,200 people have been killed, and more than 1 million displaced.

Ten Israeli soldiers have died in Lebanon, including the four announced Tuesday, while 13 U.S. service members have been killed.

Equal Pay Day has come around again.

The annual observance marks how far into the new year women must work to make what men earned in the previous year. This year, it's March 26, a day later than it was in 2025.

That's because for the second year in a row, the gender pay gap in the U.S. has widened.

According to the most recent data from the Census Bureau, women working full-time, year-round, now earn 81 cents for every dollar men earn. That's down from 83 cents a year ago, and 84 cents the year prior.

It's the first consecutive widening of the wage gap since the 1960s, says Deborah Vagins, director of the Equal Pay Today, a national coalition that organizes not just one, but nine annual observances, marking equal pay days for different groups of women.

This year, Black Women's Equal Pay Day will be marked on July 21. Moms' Equal Pay Day is August 6. Latina Equal Pay Day is October 8.

"We are reversing decades of hard won progress," Vagins says.

Wage gap grew under Biden

While some fear that policies the Trump administration is now pursuing could exacerbate the wage gap, the Census data used to calculate the equal pay date does not reflect that because it's from 2024, when Joe Biden was president. Data from 2025 will be released this fall.

One explanation for the growing gap, offered by the Census Bureau, is that men's median income grew by 3.7 percent between 2023 and 2024 while women's median income remained stagnant.

The Biden administration, in fact, was supportive of equal pay efforts and took steps aimed at narrowing the wage gap among federal workers and contractors. But beyond that, advocates ran into resistance from Congress.

The Equal Pay Today coalition unsuccessfully pushed for federal pay transparency laws that would have required employers to provide salary ranges in job postings and banned them from seeking candidates' pay histories.

"Even a well-meaning employer could carry forward the effects of prior employers' pay discrimination," says Vagins.

A number of states already have passed such laws. Studies have found mixed results. While pay transparency does reduce inequities, it doesn't always lead to higher wages for women. Still, Vagins believes closing the wage gap without such laws will be difficult.

A window into pay disparities closed

In fact, there are fewer tools to narrow the pay gap now than there once were. Under the Obama administration, Vagins worked at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, where she helped to push through a requirement that employers submit pay data, broken down by sex, ethnicity and race, to the government.

"That data collection showed there [were] still vast pay disparities by occupation, that occupational segregation remained extremely high for certain fields," she says.

Two years in, the first Trump administration stopped the initiative, citing its burden to employers.

Now, the coalition is hoping for a changeover in Congress to revive the effort.

"If you can't measure what's going on, you can't fix it," says Vagins.

The wage gap shapes lives

While no single factor drives the wage gap, occupational segregation accounts for a large part of it. There are far more women than men doing low-wage work in restaurants, hotel housekeeping, and child care. Even within occupations, there are disparities. Studies have found male doctors earn higher wages than female doctors across all specialties.

Vagins says wage gaps affect women throughout their entire lives, translating into less savings for retirement, smaller social security checks, and limits on women's ability to create generational wealth for their kids and grandkids.

"It has very, very long-lasting impacts," she says.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Repa Mekha saw slim opportunities for himself and his peers growing up as a young Black man in Milwaukee.

He ended up in prison, where he started college and embarked on his life’s work of figuring out what it takes to create more paths forward for Black Americans and other groups left out of mainstream economies.

He worked with homeless teens in the Twin Cities and got a master’s degree from Harvard University. He also founded a nonprofit that promotes cooperatively-owned businesses and distributes “wealth-building” grants to people who are descendants of the transatlantic slave trade.

MPR News host Angela Davis talks with Repa Mekha about his life and vision for building wealth and wellbeing for Black Minnesotans.

Guest:

• Repa Mekha is the founder and CEO of Nexus Community Partners. He holds a master’s degree in public administration with a focus on community development from Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. He co-founded or served on the boards of several local and national groups dedicated to community development, including Twin Cities African American Leadership Forum. He previously worked with homeless and at-risk youth with Freeport West, a Twin Cities social service nonprofit.

  

Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.

Mary Goenner spent more than three decades teaching music to Catholic elementary school students in the St. Cloud area, earning a salary that she says was a fraction of what she would have made at a public school.

"But I thought, ‘I've got that retirement plan,’” Goenner said, referring to a pension fund through the Catholic Diocese of St. Cloud. “And I just loved the community, loved the people I worked with. It was so good that I just chose to stick with it."

Since Goenner retired three years ago, she has counted on her pension and Social Security to make ends meet. 

But last October, she got a letter from the Catholic Diocese of St. Cloud. It said the diocese's pension plan is “significantly underfunded” and doesn't have sufficient assets to meet its long-term obligations.

The diocese’s pension plan was operated by Christian Brothers Services, a Catholic financial services firm based in the Chicago area that provides retirement services for about 40,000 employees nationwide. Its pension fund is facing a massive $800 million financial shortfall.

Goenner said she couldn't believe it when she heard her pension might be at risk.

“I about fell on the floor,” she said. “I was just so shocked and terrified, not knowing how I was going to afford to keep on living as a single person.”

The financial challenges with Christian Brothers’ plan began back in the 2008 recession. In a company brochure, the firm blames the shortfall in part on economic changes and an increase in the number of retirees compared to active employees. It says the plan only has assets to cover about 66 percent of future benefits, and employers would have to increase payments to close the gap.

The dioceses of St. Cloud, New Ulm and Crookston — plus some Catholic schools in Minnesota — were among those being asked to pay more into the fund.

The Rev. Scott Pogatchnik, the vicar general for the St. Cloud diocese, said the first they heard that the fund might be in trouble was late last summer.

“Like a lot of different pension plans, they kind of go up and down,” he said. “But certainly, nothing of this magnitude was ever communicated to us.”

Looking ahead

The pension shortfall affects about 1,400 current and former lay employees of the St. Cloud diocese. They include teachers, youth ministers and administrative workers.

The diocese formed a task force and hired a consulting group and legal counsel to figure out what to do next.

Pogatchnik said staying with Christian Brothers and paying millions more every year to help the company make up the difference wasn't possible. Nor was covering the $35 million shortfall with the diocese's own funds.

Instead, the diocese froze the current pension plan in December. That means new employees can't enter it, and current employees aren't accruing any new dollars. The diocese, its parishes and schools are still contributing to the fund.

The St. Cloud diocese also created a new, separate pension fund it will operate in the future. It expects that Christian Brothers will transfer funds into that account sometime this summer, said Bailey Ziegler, the diocese’s human resources director.

Pogatchnik said it's not clear yet whether retirees’ pensions will be cut, or by how much.

"We're doing all we can right now to honor our promise to them,” he said.

Employees: Raise funds to fulfill obligations

But some employees think the St. Cloud diocese should do more. 

Jeffrey Kaster worked for the diocese for 23 years in education and youth ministry. He helped form a Diocesan Pension Concerns Group, made up of current and retired employees.

Kaster said many teachers and parish workers spent their careers working for the Catholic church for relatively low wages, so their Social Security benefits aren’t as much. Their pension is their primary source of retirement income.

“One 80-year-old person said to me, ‘I'm afraid I'm going to have to leave my house, or I might have to go get another job,’” Kaster said. “Really, it can be devastating for people.”

Kaster and other employees say the St. Cloud diocese hasn't been transparent enough with the entire church community about the pension situation. They want a face-to-face meeting with Bishop Patrick Neary, which the bishop has not yet agreed to. And they want the diocese to launch a capital campaign to cover the pension shortfall.

"We're just saying the diocese needs to raise funds to meet its moral and legal obligations,” Kaster said.

He noted that the pension situation comes six years after the St. Cloud diocese filed for bankruptcy after receiving legal claims from dozens of victims of clergy sexual abuse.

“I think that this is actually an opportunity for the diocese to just do the right thing and take care of its workers, and actually build some positive momentum for the diocese and the church,” Kaster said.

Pogatchnik said the bankruptcy doesn’t have an impact on how the diocese handles the pension issue. He said diocesan leaders have been sharing as much information as they can, and hearing almost daily from those who are affected. 

Having spent time as a parish pastor, Pogatchnik said his heart goes out to them.

“So many of these people were my employees,” he said. “They were my school teachers. They were my parish employees. They're my current coworkers.”

For now, Pogatchnik said, all options — including a capital campaign — are still on the table. But he said he doesn't want people to overestimate how much money could be raised.

Worries about the future

Meanwhile, current and retired employees of the St. Cloud diocese say they're considering legal action. And they’re trying to figure out how they would get by on much less if their pensions get smaller.

Teri Krowka-Ansberry spent 23 years working as a director of faith formation for several parishes in the St. Cloud diocese. She said she was able to retire four years ago because of her pension.

“I was so grateful to have that,” she said. “So that's why now it's jolting, to say the least.”

Krowka-Ansberry said she already lives frugally, but worries about how she and other retirees will pay for basic costs of living and health care if their pensions are cut.

“My concerns right now are paying bills, prices going up, gas, food, insurance,” she said. “Everybody is struggling.”

In the six years Mike Korstad has worked buying and selling precious metals at Minnesota Gold and Silver exchange in St. Louis Park, he says it’s never been this busy.

Some days, there are long lines of people outside the shop’s door, waiting for him to open up.

“You can see them about 9:45, they roll up into the parking lot, and they'll sit in their cars waiting, and then boom, right at 10, it's one after the other and some days it's been pretty non-stop," Korstad said.

He says that while gold dominates the news, silver is actually outperforming its precious metal counterpart, so many people are trying to cash in by selling whatever silver items they have.

In addition to silver coins and bars, they bring in old relics they’ve inherited but have no use for.

“Full sets of sterling silver, bring in the candle holders, silver plates.” Korstad said. “They’ll bring in everything.”

Silver was worth about $32 an ounce a year ago at this time. But on January 29, it peaked at a record price of $121.60 an ounce, nearly quadrupling in value.

Gold has soared about 70 percent from this time last winter, peaking at an all-time high of nearly $5,600 an ounce on Jan. 28.

Prices of both precious metals have fallen a bit since, but Korstad says many people are still looking to take advantage of these high prices and sell off their silver and gold, and he’s also seeing an increase in people wanting to buy them as an investment, figuring prices will continue to rise.

“I think what's driving this is a lot of economic uncertainty across the board,” said Korstad.

Jennifer Lee is a senior economist at BMO Capital Markets. She agrees, saying that the sudden interest in precious metals is a response to global uncertainty surrounding President Donald Trump's unique brand of foreign policy.

“The world’s not really sure what is going to come next in terms of policy changes, if there are going to be any, and certainly in terms of changes to trade agreements as well.” said Lee.

Lee notes that over the past year, Trump raised taxes on imports from more than 90 countries, although his administration has been making deals with some countries to lower certain tariffs. This makes it tricky for businesses to plan for the future.

“Businesses find it very difficult when we don't know whether or not a certain trade deal will hold up,” Lee said. “You don't know how much your products or inputs are going to cost, how much you can get and whether or not you can still get them.”

Analysts say investors often look to diversify their assets when things are uncertain and precious metals are usually considered a safe haven even if the economy is doing poorly.

In fact, when the U.S. dollar weakens, gold becomes more valuable.

For example, in the aftermath of the 2008 economic crisis, the value of the dollar fell, while the price of gold surged.

Since then, central banks around the world have also started to drive up the cost of gold by stockpiling the precious metal. 

According to the World Gold Council, from 2022 to 2024, central banks bought a combined average of more than 1,000 tons of gold every year.

Even as the precious metal prices rose sharply in the last year, the amount central banks were buying dipped only slightly, suggesting that they believe it to be a sound investment regardless of price.

The United States has the world’s biggest stockpile of gold, sitting at more than 8,000 tons.

Why are central banks stockpiling all of this Gold?

Trevor Yates, a senior investment analyst with the investment company Global X, said it’s too diversify their assets.

“They manage their reserve portfolio, like investors manage their retirement accounts,” Yates said. “They like to diversify.”

Yates says that global central banks are moving away from investing in things like bonds and are instead, stocking up on gold.

“It has a pretty long track record, and it's really held up and really maintained its purchasing power over thousands of years,” said Yates.

Mike Korstad says his customers at the Minnesota Gold and Silver exchange are essentially doing the same thing, putting their trust in an asset they can actually hold in their hands that will likely continue to grow in value over the long term.

Korstad says that he thinks that a lot of the people that come into his shop aren’t comfortable with the current state of the economy and are searching to remedy their worries.

“That differs from the people that were coming in from years prior. It's just their... It's uncertainty,” said Korstad.

It’s hard to say how prices of precious metals will fare in the future, but as central banks continue to buy them up, economists and investment analysts don’t expect the price of gold and silver to drop significantly anytime soon. In fact,they believe it will continue to rise over the long term.

A federal judge ruled Friday that President Donald Trump's administration cannot block federal money for child care subsidies and other programs aimed at supporting needy children and their families from flowing to five Democratic-led states for now.

The states of California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York argued that a policy announced Tuesday to freeze funds for three grant programs is having an immediate impact on them and creating “operational chaos.” In court filings and a hearing earlier Friday, the states contended that the government did not have a legal reason for holding back the money from those states.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it was pausing the funding because it had “reason to believe” the states were granting benefits to people in the country illegally, though it did not provide evidence or explain why it was targeting those states and not others.

The programs are the Child Care and Development Fund, which subsidizes child care for children from low-income families; the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which provides cash assistance and job training; and the Social Services Block Grant, a smaller fund that provides money for a variety of programs.

The five states say they receive a total of more than $10 billion a year from the programs.

The ruling from U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, who was nominated to the bench by former President Joe Biden, is in place until further arguments are made in court.

The government had requested reams of data from the five states, including the names and Social Security numbers of everyone who received benefits from some of the programs since 2022.

The states argue that the effort is unconstitutional and is intended to go after Trump’s political adversaries rather than to stamp out fraud in government programs — something the states say they already do.

Jessica Ranucci, a lawyer in the New York Attorney General’s office, said in the Friday hearing, which was conducted by telephone, that at least four of the states had already had money delayed after requesting it. She said that if the states can’t get child care funds, there will be immediate uncertainty for providers and families who rely on the programs.

A lawyer for the federal government, Kamika Shaw, said it was her understanding that the money had not stopped flowing to states.

Attorneys general in five Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit Thursday against President Donald Trump's administration after it said it would freeze money for several public benefit programs, citing concerns about fraud in the programs designed to help low-income families.

The states — California, Colorado, Minnesota, Illinois and New York — called the move an unconstitutional abuse of power. The Trump administration announced earlier this week it was withholding their social safety net funding. The funding went toward three federal programs, two of which focus on lifting families with children out of poverty.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, said the Trump administration is overstepping its authority by freezing billions of dollars in funds that were already approved for the states by Congress.

The lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York asks the courts to order the administration to halt the freeze and release the funds.

“Once again, the most vulnerable families in our communities are bearing the brunt of this administration’s campaign of chaos and retribution,” James said.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services this week told the five states it was freezing their money for the Child Care and Development Fund, which subsidizes child care for children from low-income families; the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which provides cash assistance and job training; and the Social Services Block Grant.

HHS officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit.

About half of the $10 billion in funding targeted by the Trump administration supported California programs, said the state's attorney general, Rob Bonta.

In letters to the states, Alex J. Adams, assistant secretary for the Administration for Children and Families, wrote that HHS had “reason to believe” the states were providing benefits to people who were in the U.S. illegally, offering no further details about the allegations. They requested reams of data, including the names and Social Security numbers of everyone that had received some of the benefits.

“The letters requested that California turn over essentially every document ever associated with the state's implementation of these federal programs and do so within 14 days, by Jan. 20, including personally identifiable information about program participants,” Bonta said. “That is deeply concerning and also deeply frustrating.”

The government intensified its focus on the child care subsidy program after a conservative YouTuber released a video claiming day care centers in Minneapolis had committed up to $100 million in fraud. The child care centers were run by members of the city’s Somali community, which has been frequently maligned by Trump and targeted by immigration authorities.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, has defended his state’s response and said his state is taking aggressive action to prevent further fraud.

A few days before he ushered in the New Year, Duncan Alexander sat surrounded by five dogs living in the creaky 19th-century house he calls home, pondering his future.

It’s been a while since he’s felt any control over his financial future. As a kid, he had once daydreamed of working hard at a job and saving enough money to buy his own home. But today, at 34, he’s still living in his childhood home in Hendrum, and the dreams he once had as a child are now gone.

“I [feel] trapped on a train,” Alexander said. “It’s going somewhere. I don’t know exactly where it’s going, but I also can’t get off the train, so I just have to hope for the best.”

Alexander drives a half-hour south every day to Fargo, where he works as a house cleaner. He’s dependent on clients who can afford his $40-an-hour services, a price he raised by $10 from what he charged customers two to three years ago.

“Due to inflation, we had to increase our prices, and due to the price increase,” Alexander said, “[some of our clients] just weren’t able to afford it anymore, and had to stop because of that specifically.”

Alexander likely lost some of his business because consumers were much more cautious in 2025. It’s a trend that Erick Garcia Luna, a regional economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, has noticed.

“In general, consumers are facing some pressures,” Garcia Luna said. “[You have] persistent inflation, now you have also a cooling labor market and slower wage growth.”

And yet despite factors that usually signal a downturn, the economy has continued to grow, Garcia Luna said. The latest GDP estimate shows the economy grew at an annualized rate of about 4.3 percent in the third quarter of 2025. And most of that growth comes from consumer spending, which, in nominal terms, increased 5.2 percent year over year. 

“It kind of makes you imagine that everyone is going out on a shopping spree,” Garcia Luna said. “But like most things, the devil’s in the details.”

Taking inflation into account, consumer spending growth was actually softer, increasing just 2.4 percent last year over 2024. It’s a sign that GDP growth isn’t necessarily coming from consumers being more active in the economy by buying more things, but rather, they’re spending more due to inflationary price increases. 

And yet, it’s more than inflation that weighs on consumers’ spending decisions, Garcia Luna said. 

“I was trying to think about how to frame the state of the consumer,” he said. “The answer to how the consumer is doing is honestly multi-layered. It's very complex.”  

The whole picture, he said, requires discussing savings rates, employment opportunities, stock and retirement income earnings, and more. All are topics state residents talked about when MPR News asked Minnesotans about their personal economic situation before the end of last year.

Some said they were seeing new job opportunities opening a path towards economic stability, while others said they were afraid of losing whatever savings they had. 

But whether they are single mothers or financial advisers, most said they noticed rising costs in some aspect of their lives. And because of those costs, they often had to change the way they lived. What follows are the stories of how that came to be. 

Declining Discretionary Spending

April Aegerter still remembers the years when she could comfortably live off her massage therapy business in St. Paul. 

“I’ve just been sustaining myself, and it’s great working from home, because (there’s) no overhead,” Aegerter said. “It’s mostly neighborhood people, so everybody’s close.”

Over the years, she’s built a steady client base that’s helped her afford most necessities, though health care has always been out of reach. And then, the COVID-19 pandemic happened. 

Her business closed and remained so long after lockdown orders were lifted, as she wanted to protect her immunocompromised aunt. 

“So my whole client base, you know, basically, I didn’t see them for months, and then that kind of turned into years,” she said. “Some of them never came back.”

Like Alexander, Aegerter’s subsistence revolves around people being able and willing to afford discretionary spending on things such as home cleaning and personal wellness. 

All of which, Garcia Luna of the Minneapolis Fed notes, are the kind of things people are spending less money on. 

“I think it is important to distinguish that about two-thirds of consumers’ spending… 60-some percent, is spent on things like housing, health care, utilities and insurance,” Garcia Luna said. “And you know, those are not easy for individuals to cut back on. They are, you know, in a few words, less discretionary.”

And with prices on such necessary expenses steadily rising since 2022, Aegerter says she’s noticed her clients are tightening their budgets more. And in those budgets, her services no longer fit. 

As a result, Aegerter made just $12,000 last year in her massage therapy business. 

“I’m overwhelmed with sadness,” she said. “I just try to pray every day that things will get better.”

Aegerter says neighborhood food shelves and charities have been a tremendous help in keeping her fridge stocked. She says every penny counts these days. 

“I’m basically living secondhand constantly, and I don’t even have like, ‘oh, the sun’s gonna come up tomorrow,’” she said. “No, it’s not.”

Inflation and the market

“The way economists have been referring to this ‘K-shaped economy’, is precisely that there is a share of the population that may be supporting the economy,” Garcia Luna of the Minneapolis Fed said. 

He’s referring to those with higher incomes, which are growing substantially while lower-income wages stagnate. And while Chris Harrington says he’s not one of those wealthy earners, he has seen his investments’ value increase. He works remotely in Minneapolis for a national financial advisory firm. ”

Decades ago, he began investing in index funds. They grow steadily but slowly, which means they tend to be for folks who, like Harrington, have lower risk tolerance and greater financial patience. 

Over the course of over 20 years, he and his family have built a decent nest egg that’s put financial anxieties in the rearview mirror. That was true even after President Donald Trump announced steep, across-the-board tariffs on imports,  which sent stock values tumbling.

“We actually got a little more conservative in our portfolio as a result of that,” Harrington said. “Since then, markets have rebounded so much that we’re back up not to exactly where we were before in terms of stock allocation, but the stock portion that we have has definitely grown.” 

And that stock growth is a paradox for him. Inflation is increasing most of his day-to-day costs, but at the same time, that steady inflation means the companies he’s investing in are earning more. 

His stock valuations are going up, which is great for his long-term wealth, but in the short term? He’s having to spend more on necessities and pare down his other discretionary spending.

“I wouldn’t say it’s a good thing, no, because generally, [inflation] is a cost to all of us,” Harrington said. “But those of us who can afford to own shares and companies, not only are we paying more, but we’re also earning more.”

But at the same time, Harrington says he can’t put as much into his savings because of his higher everyday costs, which, Garcia Luna of the Minneapolis Fed said, is becoming more common for many consumers.

“You had enhanced earnings in the years following the pandemic,” he said. “Inflation has remained high, so I think some of that is contracting the ability to save.”

Some, though, have been able to break from the norm. Maureen Perry is a freelance writer and actor who lives in Columbia Heights, and she said 2026 is shaping up to be her best year she’s ever had, as her work contracts keep trucking in, while her husband landed a full-time job in marketing.

“That alone is like the most kind of stable thing that we’ve had for the entire time we’ve been married,” Perry said. “It gives me even more freedom if there is fluctuation in my freelance stuff.”

For decades, Perry said her work has come and gone inconsistently, forcing the couple to live below their means while saving as much as they can. That’s meant maxing out their contributions to their Roth IRAs and Health Savings Accounts. 

And thankfully, she said, her main client continues to entrust her with projects. It’s a testament to her craft, she said, which wouldn’t have been possible had she not been given a college scholarship as a teen.

“I can’t overstate how much it has probably made my life possible not having any student loan debt,” Perry said. “Even before I was a full-time freelancer, I was working very low-income jobs, so I could spend as much time as possible acting, which is not a lucrative profession.”

Talking about her current situation is difficult for Perry. It has not been easy working up to a place where she can feel stability for the first time in her life. There are still other people out there, she said, working to reach that place of comfort and are, in the meantime, still struggling.

“You can [also] get lulled into a sense of security, but that can vanish in an instant too,” she said. “And as a freelancer, yeah, it could be like, well, this main client went away, and now I'm back to square one.”

The consumers in financial limbo

Cassandra Grandahl, a stay-at-home mother of a three-year-old, saw her luck vanish not in an instant, but over the course of several months.

“Both cars broke down. The cat needed to go to the vet. The kid needed to go to the doctor. I had to go to the doctor. Then something with the house broke,” she said. “It was just like one thing on top of another within a couple of weeks, and it totally decimated our savings.”  

Grandahl described their household as being middle-income. They used to shop for groceries at stores like Target and eat out often. But after getting hit with such huge expenses,  they now scrimp and shop at Aldi, and rarely eat out.

“We canceled all of our monthly subscriptions, our gym memberships, we don't do any more house projects,” Grandahl said. “We do fewer activities with the kid. We don't go to the art museum together or take ballet classes together anymore.”

Her husband is the sole breadwinner of the house, earning about $100,000 a year, but with both a mortgage and a toddler in the picture, Grandahl says they’re living paycheck to paycheck even after cutting back on spending. 

“I literally don't see how someone would afford to have one income,” Grandahl said. “It feels to me like something is broken in the system that we live in.” 

Like Grandahl, Kelley Leaf, a social work instructor at the University of Minnesota, is also feeling like she’s teetering at the edge of financial trouble. 

She earns a $86,000 salary, which Leaf said has been enough to keep up with inflationary pressures and her day-to-day bills, placing her in what she calls a comfortable spot. But she’s also contending with $168,000 in student loans that are currently in forbearance.

When those payments restart, she’ll be looking at shelling out a minimum of $1700  a month, the same amount as her mortgage. She doesn’t know when those payments will kick in again, nor what she’ll do then.

“Does crossing my fingers and hoping count as preparing?” She wondered.

For both Grandahl and Leaf, 2026 is a year filled with uncertainty and gloom. And they’re not alone in that feeling.

“Expectations for higher inflation over the next 12 months, according to consumers themselves, remain high,” Garcia Luna of the Minneapolis Fed said. “While expectations for higher earnings and job finding are trending down or are trending lower, and expectations matter, because oftentimes households feel the changes in the local economies before they actually hit the statistics.”

When describing Minnesotans’ overall economic picture for 2026, Garcia Luna sees a very uneven landscape – some will continue earning well and will see their incomes and portfolios rise, while others will likely continue to be squeezed by higher prices while their incomes stagnate. 

And then there are those like Grandahl, people whose economic outlook could change due to unexpected expenses, even with a sturdy income—those who have no idea what this year holds.

“I sometimes worry about what world we're creating for my daughter someday,” Grandahl said. “Especially with us not being able to invest as much as we had planned on investing.”

She once dreamt that her child could go to college and make a successful life for herself. But these days, she’s heard that the value of a degree is decreasing. Grandahl’s husband works in the tech sector, which has also seen mass layoffs of people who just a few years ago thought their jobs might be secure forever.

“By the time she's 18, I'm not going to know what advice to give her,” Grandahl said. “I don't know if going to college is the right idea anymore. At that point, if a degree is not going to get you a job, then why would you go? Why would you get into all that debt?”

There is one thing she does know for sure, though. Grandahl said she and her husband will do their best to rebuild their savings and investments, although not for their own sake, for their daughter’s. 

A Powerball player in Arkansas won a $1.817 billion jackpot in Wednesday's Christmas Eve drawing, ending the lottery game's three-month stretch without a top-prize winner.

The winning numbers were 04, 25, 31, 52 and 59, with the Powerball number being 19.

Final ticket sales pushed the jackpot higher than previous expected, making it the second-largest in U.S. history and the largest Powerball prize of 2025, according to www.powerball.com. The jackpot had a lump sum cash payment option of $834.9 million.

"Congratulations to the newest Powerball jackpot winner! This is truly an extraordinary, life-changing prize," Matt Strawn, Powerball Product Group Chair and Iowa Lottery CEO, was quoted as saying by the website. "We also want to thank all the players who joined in this jackpot streak — every ticket purchased helps support public programs and services across the country."

The prize followed 46 consecutive drawings in which no one matched all six numbers.

The last drawing with a jackpot winner was Sept. 6, when players in Missouri and Texas won $1.787 billion.

Organizers said it is the second time the Powerball jackpot has been won by a ticket sold in Arkansas. It first happened in 2010.

The last time someone won a Powerball jackpot on Christmas Eve was in 2011, Powerball said. The company added that the sweepstakes also has been won on Christmas Day four times, most recently in 2013.

Powerball's odds of 1 in 292.2 million are designed to generate big jackpots, with prizes growing as they roll over when no one wins. Lottery officials note that the odds are far better for the game's many smaller prizes.

"With the prize so high, I just bought one kind of impulsively. Why not?" Indianapolis glass artist Chris Winters said Wednesday.

Tickets cost $2, and the game is offered in 45 states plus Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Copyright 2025, NPR

If your budget is being squeezed from all sides, you’re not alone. Owning an insurance policy for your home is becoming more expensive.

“Insurance is getting more expensive because the cost of repairing homes is getting more expensive,” said Julia Dreier, deputy commissioner of insurance for the Minnesota Department of Commerce.

Additionally, Dreier said premiums themselves aren’t rising as much as the deductibles are.

“So their insurance product is not as valuable as it used to be,” she said. Dreier also recommended that policy owners really spend time to review their policies and see what’s covered and what isn’t.

“A lot of people don’t realize that floods aren't covered under a typical homeowner's policy, and now is the time you want to think about buying a separate flood insurance policy before spring thaw happens,” she said.

Listen to the full conversation by clicking the player above.

Borrowers have spent much of 2025 trying to keep up with dizzying changes to the federal student loan system.

The Trump administration and Congress are in the process of overhauling everything from how much Americans can borrow to how quickly they have to pay it back.

Here's what to know as we head into a new year:

President Biden’s SAVE Plan is ending

The U.S. Department of Education announced in early December that it had reached a proposed settlement agreement to end the popular, yet controversial Biden-era student loan repayment plan known as SAVE.

The Saving on a Valuable Education Plan "was the most affordable, generous and flexible plan for millions of student loan borrowers," says Persis Yu of the liberal advocacy group Protect Borrowers.

But it was so affordable, generous and flexible – with its fast-tracked loan forgiveness and monthly payments as low as $0 for low-income borrowers – that Republican state attorneys general sued the Biden administration for exceeding its authority.

Legal challenges put SAVE borrowers in limbo for months, during which they were not required to make payments on their loans. Interest began accruing in August.

This new agreement, pending court approval, would end the long legal battle by ending SAVE itself.

"The law is clear: if you take out a loan, you must pay it back," Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said in a statement announcing the proposed agreement. "American taxpayers can now rest assured they will no longer be forced to serve as collateral for illegal and irresponsible student loan policies."

Under the agreement, the Education Department would commit to moving the roughly 7 million borrowers still enrolled in SAVE into other repayment plans – though some of those plans are also in flux.

Whether you blame Biden or Republicans for SAVE's downfall, Betsy Mayotte, founder of the Institute of Student Loan Advisors (TISLA), says it puts borrowers in a real bind.

"People that made other financial decisions based on what they thought their payment was gonna be on the SAVE plan – they're in trouble," Mayotte says. "A payment plan has never been challenged in court and has never been pulled out from existing borrowers."

Now, Mayotte says, those roughly 7 million SAVE borrowers will have to change plans and find a way to afford what will likely be higher monthly payments.

Complications for borrowers working toward Public Service Loan Forgiveness

Liz Kilty, an oncology nurse in Portland, Ore., has been on the SAVE plan from the start.

"As soon as SAVE was an option, I signed up for it," says Kilty, who works in a public hospital and wanted to keep her monthly payments reasonably low on her way toward Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF).

Since 2007, PSLF has offered a path for borrowers who work in public service – including teaching, nursing and policing – to have their loan balances erased after 10 years on the job.

Kilty has $36,000 in debt remaining, and 15 payments to go before she can qualify for loan forgiveness.

But SAVE's legal troubles have slowed her down: Since her payments were frozen, so too was any progress she could make toward forgiveness. "I was like, 'Are you kidding me?' Like, 'This is the year I'm going to be done, and this is the year that they're going to screw things up?' I've been waiting a decade [for forgiveness] and now things could go awry, and you're just helpless."

Earlier this month, Kilty applied for the PSLF Buyback, to make her remaining 15 payments in one lump sum and finally qualify to have the remainder forgiven.

One reason PSLF is still an option for Kilty and other borrowers is because it was created by Congress.

The Trump administration doesn't have the authority to stop PSLF – but it has worked to change the rules. Effective July 1, 2026, the department says it will deny loan forgiveness to workers whose government or nonprofit employers engage in activities with a "substantial illegal purpose." The job of defining "substantial illegal purpose" will fall not to the courts but to the education secretary.

In November, the cities of Boston, Chicago, San Francisco and Albuquerque, N.M., sued the Trump administration over those PSLF changes.

The complaint argued that a city or county government's resistance to the administration's immigration actions, for example, could lead the secretary to exclude that government's public workers – including a local nurse, like Kilty – from loan forgiveness.

Repayment plans are changing 

SAVE aside, trying to change repayment plans in 2026 is about to get weird.

That's because, in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), Republicans also decided to gradually shut down two other popular, more affordable plans: Income-Contingent Repayment (ICR) and Pay As You Earn (PAYE). Both base payments on a borrower's income, and both will end in mid-2028.

Current borrowers can still, technically, enroll in these plans – for now. Another income-adjusted plan to consider – one that's not going anywhere – is Income-Based Repayment (IBR).

You can find a handy list of all of these plans and compare your monthly payments on the Education Department's Loan Simulator.

Congress also used the OBBBA to create two new repayment plans, beginning on July 1, 2026, that, for new borrowers, will replace all of the current options.

1. The standard plan

Under this new standard plan, new borrowers would agree to a repayment window between 10 and 25 years, depending on the size of their debt, with what they owe being divided up, along with interest, into equal monthly payments, like a home mortgage.

Under this plan, borrowers with larger debts would qualify for a longer repayment period.

2. The Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP) 

For borrowers worried they don't earn enough to cover the standard plan's rigid monthly payments, Republicans created the RAP for future and current borrowers alike.

Payments would, for the most part, be based on borrowers' total adjusted gross income (AGI), and the department will waive any interest that is left after a borrower makes their monthly payment. The result: Borrowers in good standing will no longer see their loans grow.

In fact, Republicans want to make sure borrowers see their balances go down every month. For those whose monthly payments are less than $50, the government would match whatever they do pay and apply it toward the principal.

While other plans offer forgiveness of remaining debts after 20 or 25 years, the RAP would delay that to 30 years. That's a big difference, says Preston Cooper, who studies student loan policy at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

Borrowers with typical levels of debt "and typical incomes for their degree level are almost always gonna pay off well before they hit that 30-year mark," Cooper says. "So if you're going into RAP, I wouldn't be thinking about forgiveness because you're probably gonna pay it off."

Beginning July 1, 2026, new loans will be subject to new borrowing limits

We've covered big changes to repayment, but there are also big changes to how much graduate students can borrow in the first place. (Undergraduates won't see any changes.)

New limits will make it harder for lower- and middle-income borrowers to attend pricier graduate schools. Republicans are shutting down the current grad PLUS program, which allows students to borrow up to the cost of their degree.

"Colleges could simply raise the price, pass the cost on to students, and the federal government would be required to write a check through the federal student loan program, " Cooper says. "That system was completely untenable, and I very much understand why Congress elected to end it." 

After July 1, grad students' borrowing will be capped at $20,500 a year. Ideally, Cooper says, this will push some schools to lower their prices.

Until they do, though, Persis Yu, with Protect Borrowers, says many students will face a serious funding gap between their federal loans and the actual cost of graduate school.

"Students are gonna have to make up that gap with some other type of funding," Yu says, "and many students are gonna have to turn to the private student loan market."

Mayotte, at TISLA, says she thinks some schools will abandon certain degree programs.

"I got a bad feeling in the pit of my stomach when this law went through because I don't think it's gonna lower the cost of education like members of Congress think that it might," Mayotte says.

Borrowers working toward a professional graduate degree (think medicine or law) will have their borrowing capped at $50,000 a year.

Parents and caregivers who use parent PLUS loans to help students pay for college will also see new loan limits. They will be capped at $65,000 per child.

‘The precipice of a default cliff’

Amidst all this change, data shows that millions of borrowers are struggling to keep up with their payments.

Preston Cooper at AEI recently published an analysis of the latest federal student loan data, and the results were sobering: 5.5 million borrowers in default, another 3.7 million more than 270 days late on their payments and 2.7 million in the early stages of delinquency.

"We've got about 12 million borrowers right now who are either delinquent on their loans or in default," Cooper says.

That's more than 1 in 4 federal student loan borrowers – a crisis raising bipartisan alarm.

Persis Yu, of Protect Borrowers, warns America is at "the precipice of a default cliff."

Mayotte adds, "I really do think we're headed for historic default rates, for a while."

And so, heading into 2026, the big question hanging over the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans is: Can all the changes they've made help bring these borrowers back into good standing? Or will the default numbers snowball into an avalanche?

Copyright 2025, NPR

The Powerball jackpot has jumped to an eye-popping $1.7 billion, after the 46th drawing passed without a big winner.

The numbers drawn Monday night were 3, 18, 36, 41, 54 and the Powerball 7.

Since Sept. 6, there have been 46 straight drawings without a big winner.

The next drawing will be Christmas Eve on Wednesday, with the prize expected to be the 4th-largest in U.S. lottery history.

Powerball’s odds of 1 in 292.2 million are designed to generate big jackpots, with prizes growing as they roll over when no one wins. Lottery officials note that the odds are far better for the game’s many smaller prizes. There are three drawings each week.

The estimated $1.6 billion jackpot goes to a winner who opts to receive 30 payments over 29 years through an annuity. Winners almost always choose the game’s cash option, which for Monday night’s drawing would be an estimated $735.3 million.

Powerball tickets cost $2, and the game is offered in 45 states plus Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Some Minneapolis homeowners are assessing how to tighten their budgets to help cover their growing property taxes.

“It's hurting people,” said Steve Brandt, president of the Minneapolis Board of Estimation and Taxation. The current taxation plan for the city shows the burden of property taxes on homeowners shifting from 48 percent in 2025 to around 56 percent in 2030.

That increase, Brandt said, is because of declining values in downtown commercial areas. The Minneapolis City Council already approved an 8 percent increase on Dec. 9. Hennepin County followed closely behind with a 7.79 percent increase to its property taxes as well.

Brandt said he has ideas on other income streams to offset that added financial burden, but he doesn’t have the power to implement them.

“The Legislature is crucial for most of these ideas” Brandt said. “I think the more other cities come in and say, ‘Hey, we need something besides the property tax,’ the better off Minneapolis is.”

Listen to the conversation by clicking the player above.

The Powerball jackpot has grown to an estimated $1.25 billion for Wednesday night’s drawing after lottery officials said no ticket matched all six numbers drawn Monday night.

The U.S. has seen more than a dozen lottery jackpot prizes exceed $1 billion since 2016. Here is a look at the largest U.S. jackpots won and the places where the winning tickets were sold:

1. $2.04 billion, Powerball, Nov. 7, 2022. The winning ticket was sold at a Los Angeles-area gas station.

2. $1.787 billion, Powerball, Sept. 6, 2025. The winning tickets were sold in Missouri and Texas.

3. $1.765 billion, Powerball, Oct. 11, 2023. The winning ticket was sold at a liquor store in a tiny California mountain town.

4. $1.602 billion, Mega Millions, Aug. 8, 2023. The winning ticket was sold at a supermarket in Neptune Beach, Florida.

5. $1.586 billion, Powerball, Jan. 13, 2016. The winning tickets were sold at a Los Angeles-area convenience store, a Florida supermarket and a Tennessee grocery store.

6. $1.537 billion, Mega Millions, Oct. 23, 2018. The winning ticket was sold at a South Carolina convenience store.

7. $1.348 billion, Mega Millions, Jan. 13, 2023. The winning ticket was sold at a Maine gas station.

8. $1.337 billion, Mega Millions, July 29, 2022. The winning ticket was sold at a Chicago-area gas station.

9. $1.326 billion, Powerball, April 7, 2024. The winning ticket was sold at an Oregon convenience store.

10. $1.269 billion, Mega Millions, Dec. 27, 2024. The winning ticket was sold at a gas station in Northern California.

Nonprofits around Minnesota raised more than $37.8 million on Thursday, breaking records for the annual Give to the Max Day campaign.

Donors from every Minnesota county and every U.S. state helped break last year’s record of $37.1 million, according to GiveMN, the nonprofit that organizes the event.

“That leaves me feeling overwhelmingly and abundantly grateful,” GiveMN Executive Director and CEO Jenna Ray said on Friday morning.

GiveMN said about 6,000 organizations received donations, with the number of donors estimated in the tens of thousands.

Many of those nonprofits reported tight budgets this year, Ray said. In research from the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits earlier this year, organization leaders noted higher costs, increased demand for services and disruptions to federal funding.

“We knew that this was a really crucial time and really crucial campaign for organizations all around the state,” Ray said.

Ray said many donors are also feeling economic uncertainty, but that didn’t seem to translate to a decrease in giving. 

“When we asked folks how they were planning on showing up, the majority of folks told us that they either planned on keeping their individual giving budgets the same or increasing them this year, which is really heartening,” Ray said.

Donors were especially interested in giving to hunger relief organizations this year, Ray said, as SNAP benefit delays made headlines and families face tighter budgets. Also bringing in high donation levels, she said, were animal welfare and environmental nonprofits.

GiveMN doesn’t track the exact number of individual donors, so Ray said she’s not sure if more people gave this year than last year. But the average donation amount was higher than last year.

The annual giving day, started in 2009, is a key fundraiser for many nonprofits around the state, and kicks off the end-of-year giving season. Ray said nonprofits typically bring in most of their fundraising money between November and the New Year.

We’ve all been told that our credit scores matter — but what does that really mean?  

A high credit score can open doors. It can help you get a lower interest rate on a car loan, qualify for a mortgage or even make it easier to rent an apartment. 

But a lower score? It can quietly cost you thousands of dollars in higher interest payments over time — money that could be going towards your savings, your home or your future. 

MPR News guest host Catharine Richert talks with a financial coach about what determines your credit score, simple steps to improve it and the smart choices that can strengthen your financial health for years to come. 

Guest:

• Demitri McGee is a financial coach, certified housing counselor and youth director at Build Wealth Minnesota, a nonprofit opportunity center dedicated to helping families through financial education, personalized coaching and community-based programs.

 Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.     

Thinking about adding attic insulation, swapping your old air conditioning system for a heat pump, or putting solar panels on your roof?

Federal tax credits can cut the cost, but the clock is ticking.

President Donald Trump’s tax and spending bill passed this summer is doing away with several energy incentives that encouraged homeowners to reduce their energy use and switch to cleaner energy sources.

MPR News guest host Catharine Richert talks with her guests about the tax credits and home energy efficiency.

You can also find more information on home energy audits, how to get started on home energy efficiency projects and rebate, tax credit and financing programs at the Center for Energy and Environment.

Guests:

• Rebecca Olson is the vice president of community energy solutions at the Center for Energy and Environment. 

• Eric Pasi has been involved with developing solar energy in Minnesota for nearly 20 years. He’s the co-founder and CEO of Enterprise Energy in Minneapolis and on the board of the Minnesota Solar Energy Industry Association. He is also the author of "CleanWave: A Guide to Success in the Green Recovery."  

• Stuart Fleischauer is the owner of All Seasons Heating and Air Conditioning in Ottertail, Minn. 

Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.   

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.     

In a sign of how unusual this week's Federal Reserve meeting is, the decision it will make on interest rates — usually the main event — is just one of the key unknowns to be resolved when officials gather Tuesday and Wednesday.

For now, it's not even clear who will be there. The meeting will likely include Lisa Cook, an embattled governor, unless an appeals court or the Supreme Court rules in favor of an effort by President Donald Trump to remove her from office. And it will probably include Stephen Miran, a top White House economic aide whom Trump has nominated to fill an empty seat on the Fed's board. But those questions may not be resolved until late Monday.

Meanwhile, the U.S. economy is mired in uncertainty. Hiring has slowed sharply, while inflation remains stubbornly high.

So a key question for the Fed is: Do they worry more about people who are out of work and struggling to find jobs, or do they focus more on the struggles many Americans face in keeping up with rising costs for groceries and other items? The Fed's mandate from Congress requires it to seek both stable prices and full employment.

For now, Fed Chair Jerome Powell and other Fed policymakers have signaled the Fed is more concerned about weaker hiring, a key reason investors expect the central bank will reduce its benchmark interest rate by a quarter point on Wednesday to about 4.1 percent.

Still, stubbornly high inflation may force them to proceed slowly and limit how many reductions they make. The central bank will also release its quarterly economic projections Wednesday, and economists project they will show that policymakers expect one or two additional cuts this year, plus several more next year.

Ellen Meade, an economics professor at Duke University and former senior economist at the Fed, said it's a stark contrast to the early pandemic, when it was clear the Fed had to rapidly reduce rates to boost the economy. And when inflation surged in 2021 and 2022, it was also a straightforward call for the Fed, which moved quickly to raise borrowing costs to combat higher prices.

But now, “it’s a tough time,” Meade said. “It would be a tough time, even if the politics and the whole thing weren’t going on the way they are, it would be a tough time. Some people would want to cut, some people would not want to cut.”

Amid all the economic uncertainty, Trump is applying unprecedented political pressure on the Fed, demanding sharply lower rates, seeking to fire Cook, and insulting Powell, whom he has called a “numbskull,” “fool,” and “moron.”

Loretta Mester, a former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland and finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, said that Fed officials won't let the criticisms sway their decisions on policy. Still, the attacks are unfortunate, she said, because they threaten to undermine the Fed's credibility with the public.

“Added to their list of the difficulty of making policy because of how the economy is performing, they also have to contend with the fact that there may be some of the public that’s skeptical about how they’ve gone about making their decisions,” she said.

David Andolfatto, an economics professor at the University of Miami and former top economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, said that presidents have pressured Fed chairs before, but never as personally or publicly.

“What’s unusual about this is the level of open disrespect and just childishness,” Andolfatto said. “I mean, this is just beyond the pale.”

There are typically 12 officials who vote on the Fed's policies at each meeting — the seven members of the Fed's board of governors, as well as five of the 12 regional bank presidents, who vote on a rotating basis.

If a court rules that Cook can be fired, or Miran isn't approved in time, then just 11 officials will vote on Wednesday. Either way, there ought to be enough votes to approve a quarter-point cut, but there could be an unusual amount of division.

Miran, if he is on the board, and Governor Michelle Bowman may dissent in opposition to a quarter-point reduction in favor of a steeper half-point cut.

There could be additional dissenting votes in the other direction, potentially from regional bank presidents who might oppose any cuts at all. Beth Hammack, president of the Fed's Cleveland branch, and Jeffrey Schmid, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, have both expressed concern that inflation has topped the Fed's 2 percent target for more than four years and is still elevated. If either votes against a cut, it would be the first time there were dissents in both directions from a Fed decision since 2019.

“This degree of division is unusual, but the circumstances are unusual, too," Andolfatto said. “This is a situation central banks really don’t like: The combination of inflationary pressure and labor market weakness.”

Hiring has slowed in recent months, with employers shedding 13,000 jobs in June and adding just 22,000 in August, the government reported earlier this month. And last week a preliminary report from the Labor Department showed that companies added far fewer jobs in the year ending in March than previously estimated.

At the same time, inflation picked up a bit last month and remains above the Fed's 2 percent target. According to the consumer price index, core prices — excluding food and energy — rose 3.1 percent in August compared with a year earlier..

With inflation still elevated, the Fed may have to proceed slowly with any further cuts, which would likely further frustrate the Trump White House.

“When you get to turning points, people can reasonably disagree about when to go,” Meade said.

After Iowa gas station employee Timothy Schultz won a $29 million lottery jackpot in 1999, he decided to hold a press conference. Lottery officials told him it would help him avoid being “hounded by media" since state law required his name to be disclosed anyway.

But the then-21-year-old soon felt the consequences of his overnight fame.

He felt like a “deer in headlights,” and his life immediately changed: Strangers regularly asked him for autographs or to “rub him for good luck.” Shultz, now in his 40s, said he would consider remaining anonymous today if he were given the choice.

“I wasn’t just Tim anymore, I was Tim the lottery winner,” Shultz said.

Saturday's drawing is for $1.8 billion

Saturday's $1.8 billion Powerball jackpot is the second-largest in history, but even if there is a winner, don’t expect to find out who they are or how they plan to use their winnings — unlike when Schultz won, most winners can now remain anonymous.

Lawmakers in many states have changed the rules in recent decades to protect winners from being targeted by criminals and unscrupulous people asking for money. And even in the approximately two dozen states where names are disclosed, winners are advised to avoid public scrutiny.

Kurt Panouses is a lottery lawyer who has represented winners for decades, including some worth hundreds of millions.

Panouses advises his clients to use intermediaries where possible and claim their prizes on busy news days, such as Election Day, to avoid coverage.

Panouses regularly fields inquiries from investors, scammers and people in need, all trying to reach his clients.

“It’s hard for people who don’t have the experience or life perspective to say no,” Panouses said.

Lotteries have a long history of public disclosure

It wasn't always this way. For centuries, public disclosure of those with winning tickets was an essential part of ensuring people could trust lotteries.

Lotteries in America date to the 1700s, when governments, like now, used them to raise money. Jonathan D. Cohen, the author of “For a Dollar and a Dream: State Lotteries in Modern America,” said they were born out of a “distinctly American desire for government services without paying taxes for them.”

Early on, they were more like raffles. Winners would be announced at fairs with ticket holders in the audience.

In the 1980s, in some states, Cohen said, people would buy tickets to jackpot games with in-person drawings. About 20 people would stand on stage and one would win. Their emotional personal stories helped fuel the popularity of lotteries.

“Here’s this housewife, here’s this orphan,” Cohen said. “The person who wins the lottery is sitting right there and, of course, immediately starts weeping.”

The big multi-state lotteries like Powerball and Mega Millions, which roll over prize money when no one wins and generate ever-larger jackpots, disrupted that approach, he said. It reduced the human element but allowed for bigger prizes.

Nine states allow all lottery winners to remain completely anonymous for all lotteries. Ten states allow lottery winners to remain anonymous for wins above a certain amount, ranging from $10,000 in Minnesota to $10 million in Virginia.

In some states where there is no anonymity for individual winners, people can still claim prizes anonymously through private trusts.

Attorney Mark K. Harder claimed the $842.4 million jackpot on behalf of a Michigan couple in 2024.

In addition to the security concerns, Harder said the couple wanted to be perceived "the way they had always been perceived."

Harder said the family also hired a public relations team to vet their social media profiles to make sure they didn't unintentionally give anything away.

At least one winner has regretted hitting the jackpot

In one well-known case, Andrew “Jack” Whittaker Jr. of West Virginia became an instant celebrity in 2002 when he won a lump sum of $113.4 million after taxes. It was the largest U.S. lottery jackpot won by a single ticket to date.

But he quickly fell victim to scandals, lawsuits and personal setbacks, later saying he wished he had torn up the ticket. He died in 2020.

Cohen said such well-publicized instances are outliers. The vast majority of winners are healthier and wealthier than non-winners, he said.

States, meanwhile, have an interest in disclosing the names to thwart fraud and to boost trust, he said.

“You don’t want the lottery director’s nephew to win every jackpot and just claim it anonymously and nobody knows who it is,” Cohen said.

He noted that states have mechanisms to prevent such subterfuge, like requiring that names of winners be disclosed to their lottery commissions.

The winner of the largest jackpot so far bought his ticket in California, which requires disclosure. Edwin Castro released a written statement after he claimed a 2022 jackpot worth $2.04 billion but declined to speak to reporters.

Last year, a Laotian immigrant and cancer survivor who won a $1.3 billion Powerball jackpot bucked recent trends at a press conference where he hoisted a huge check above his head. Shultz said those stories, along with his own, have value.

“I think it could be really positive, if they want to inspire other people,” he said.

Retirement is often seen as the time to finally slow down, enjoy life and live off your years of savings. But that’s not reality for many people.  

More older Americans are entering retirement weighed down with debt in the form of mortgages, credit card balances, medical bills and even student loans.  

MPR News host Angela Davis talks with guests about what’s behind the trend of rising debt in retirement, what lies ahead and ideas for tackling it.

Guests:

• Chris Farrell is the senior economics contributor at MPR News and Marketplace and author of the recent 12-part series on Marketplace and Next Avenue, Buy Now, Pay Later, about the debt burden of older Americans nearing and during retirement.

• Henry Rucker is associate director of Homeownership and Financial Coaching at Project for Pride in Living, a Minneapolis nonprofit organization that focuses on affordable housing and career readiness for low-income households.  

Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.     

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.     

With deadlines drawing near, school district leaders in Minneapolis and St. Paul this week pushed ahead on plans to close budget gaps for the next school year. St. Paul officials said they’d ask city voters this fall to approve additional funding in a referendum.

Both face enrollment challenges and are proposing cuts to manage dropping funds. 

Board members in St. Paul, Minnesota’s second largest district, finished their budget Tuesday, agreeing to draw down reserves to close more than two-thirds of a $51 million deficit projected for the upcoming academic year. The rest will come from cuts and planned new sources of revenue to plug holes. 

“We are making an intentional decision this year of deficit spending, drawing down our fund balance mostly to maintain programs and services as much as possible,” Tom Sager, the St. Paul district’s head of financial services, told board members Tuesday. 

He warned further cuts could be necessary next year. 

Earlier this year, the district proposed making cuts to the district’s Early Childhood Family Education programming, which provides families with parenting and education resources. But the latest version of the budget reinstates more than $500,000 in ECFE programming and positions.  

“While no budget created is ever perfect, I feel like we are making progress,” said St. Paul school board member Yusef Carrillo. “Seeing services cut, even though we try to steer them away as much as possible from schools, it is painful and they do have impact.”

The Minneapolis school district, the state’s fourth largest, is also facing a shortfall, despite making recent cuts and getting voter approval for a technology levy late last year. 

“We had to make some difficult choices considering our financial situation and understandably the focus was on reductions and changes,” said Lisa Sayles-Adams, the district superintendent. “Our proposed budget invests in direct student services and supports closest to the classroom.” 

State demographer Hazel Reinhardt called Minneapolis’ enrollment struggles a “perfect enrollment storm” due to lower birth rates, families leaving the cities and losing students to charter, private and other open enrollment options.

“If we don’t figure out how to provide better services to our students in a more fiscally sustainable way, I do not believe we have a fiscally sustainable future for our district that we can rely on,” board member Joyner Emerick said.