AT & T’s story goes hand in hand with the rise of mass communication in the United States. From its origins in the invention of the telephone, to its monopoly practices for much of the 20th century, to its place today among the most prominent telecommunications players in the world, the company has evolved in conjunction with the evolution of modern America.
How was AT&T founded?
AT&T (T) – Get the AT&T Inc. report began as the “Bell Telephone Company” after Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone in 1876. A year later, Bell formed the Bell Telephone Co. with its partners. In the following years the company was the National Bell Telephone Co, before changing its name again to American Bell Telephone Co. By 1882, American Bell had grown enough to acquire a controlling stake in Western Electric, an asset of Western Union. . (WU) – Get Western Union Company Report at the time.
In 1885, the American Telephone and Telegraph Co. was incorporated by American Bell. This is where we first see the name “AT&T” come into play. The subsidiary was used to build the telephone network that started in New York.
The company grew enormously before encountering its first antitrust attack in 1913. Known as Kingsbury’s Commitment, the company struck a deal with the Justice Department by ceding Western Union, while also granting other telephone companies the ability to access AT&T’s network. The deal also implied that AT&T would require government approval before buying out its competitors. Due to its size and control of the telephone network, one could argue that this agreement helped strengthen AT&T as a monopoly.
The company was sued again by the government in 1949 because it had the only provider of phones that could work with their network. The company was called Western Electric and leased phones to customers. Once again, an agreement was reached in which AT&T relinquished control of Western Electric.
In the 1980s, the telephone company could no longer hold back the government. A lawsuit brought by the Department of Justice which actually began in 1974 ended in 1982 with the dissolution of the company’s activities. Ultimately AT&T would become seven different companies. The company managed to maintain its long-distance business and the monopoly collapsed in 1984.
AT & T’s ultimate controversy has always been its structural scale within the market. The company has apparently always made good progress in gaining market share. Fast forward to more recent years, and the irony really trumps the story. After struggling for years, a former monopoly, SBC Communications (you may remember it as Southwestern Bell), acquired AT&T in 2005 to $ 16 billion. Adopting the older name, AT&T was once again on the map as one of the top dogs.
Since then, the direction of the company has been different. The advent of the Internet and cell phones has changed this forever. We’ve seen the new AT&T make several acquisitions over the past fifteen years, including Cingular Wireless, BellSouth, Cricket, and possibly DirecTV. The merit of this latest acquisition has been questioned. Today, with business segments in traditional telephony, wireless and television, AT&T is a powerhouse in the modern age of media.
Recent movements and stock market performance
In many ways, AT&T has apparently returned to the same trend of acquisitions and market control that has earned it such criticism in the past. In 2011, the company was barred from buying T-Mobile (TMUS) – Get the T-Mobile US, Inc.. Much grief has also been aroused by its successful acquisition of Time Warner for $ 85 billion. With the deal, the company took control of a multitude of media assets. These include CNN, HBO, all assets of Warner Bros. and many others. The agreement was fought tooth and nail by the Department of Justice.
A few years later, we saw the acquisition of DirecTV for $ 49 billion. The deal was a bit lackluster as the satellite TV provider struggled to grow its subscriber base in an ever-changing media landscape. It remains to be seen how the company will handle this difficult market.
These deals created many liabilities for AT&T, which now carries $ 173.5 billion in long-term debt on the balance sheet. Regardless of these debts, AT&T maintains an excellent dividend yield of 5.43%. The catch over the past few years has been a stock price that has underperformed the broader market; only gained 12% in the last five years. Still, it’s hard to walk away from a business that has positioned itself for a place in streaming. Future performance will likely be based on how the company reworks DirectTV and whether it can use HBO as a platform to really stand out in the streaming wars.
The recent Anthem class action settlement (Bell v. ATH Holding Company, LLC) reflects some trends in 401 (k) litigation: focus on share classes, arguments for including investments in funds other than mutual funds in defined contribution plans and the evolution of oversight of service providers.
The lawsuit against Anthem and its fiduciary plan committee alleged that, among other issues, they selected overpriced share classes (given what was available for a multibillion-dollar plan). The matter was recently settled for $ 23,650,000 and for certain non-monetary conditions. In this article, we review and comment on non-monetary conditions.
The complaint contains allegations regarding investments and record keeping costs, but the most striking allegations relate to investments:
All but two of the plan’s investment alternatives were Vanguard mutual funds. Although Vanguard funds were often cited by complainants as examples of low-cost investments, in this case, the complainants alleged that the committee should have selected even cheaper share classes. Two examples: the plan used a Vanguard Institutional Index Fund with a commission of 4 basis points, but a share class of 2 basis points was allegedly available; and the plan offered the Vanguard Extended Market Index Fund, which charged 24 basis points, while there was a 6 basis point share class allegedly available.
The complainants did not stop there. They alleged that there were collective trusts and separately managed accounts that were even cheaper … and that these cheaper but virtually identical investments should have been used.
In other words, as in other similar cases, the plaintiffs have argued here that the plan committee should seek the cheapest share classes available to the plan, regardless of other relevant factors. They also argued that the committee needed to determine whether the plan had access to reasonably similar group trusts or separately managed accounts that would have been even cheaper. The message that applicants send to plan committees and their advisers is that, in the view of applicants, these are the cheapest rules and, in this light, the investment search requirement has evolved over time. – beyond mutual funds.
While monetary settlement was quite important, there were also several “non-monetary conditions”:
The committee should engage an independent investment advisor who has experience with investment options in defined contribution plans. The consultant should review and make recommendations on the plan’s range of investments, including whether to include a stable value option.
The committee should meet and consider the recommendations of the investment adviser and decide whether and to what extent to implement them.
The Committee should consider, with the assistance of the Investment Advisor, among other things, (1) the least expensive equity class mutual funds available to the Plan; (2) the availability of revenue sharing discounts; and (3) the availability of collective trusts and / or separately managed accounts which present similar risks and characteristics to those of a mutual fund.
After consideration of the recommendations by the committee, he must provide the plaintiff class action lawyers with a written summary of the committee’s recommendations and decisions. (This means that plaintiffs’ attorneys will oversee the implementation of the settlement agreement for a period of three years, which is unusual in a 401 (k) plan litigation.)
The committee should also issue a request for proposals for record keeping services for the plan. Responses from archivists must include a fee proposal “on the basis of a total fixed amount and on a per participant basis. “Again, the committee’s decision must be communicated to the plaintiffs’ lawyers, but only for a period of 18 months.
Break the rule
So what do the regulations show us? Here are our main observations:
Complainants continue to emphasize low-cost share classes, disregarding other factors that a committee is entitled to consider, such as the availability of revenue sharing that could produce a lower net cost to participants. In addition, there is a new push towards the use of even cheaper group trusts and separately managed accounts, despite the fact that low cost is not the only factor committees should consider. While institutional mutual funds, group trusts, and separately managed accounts may be readily available to large plans, small plans may not have access to all of these investments at low cost. That said, we are starting to see a movement away from mutual funds towards group trusts for midsize and even smaller plans. (In fact, this is how stable value funds are often offered to small plans.)
We see a preference among plaintiffs (or at least plaintiffs’ lawyers) for setting the record keeping fee on a per-participant basis rather than on a pro-rata basis. Their argument seems to be that this results in fees that more closely reflect the costs of the services and that the fees do not automatically increase with increasing asset values or with new contributions. (Their argument about how a registrar’s fees are determined, such as a fixed dollar amount per participant, does not necessarily extend to how the costs should be allocated among participants’ accounts. Fee allocation can be pro-rated.) This position has gained ground among complainants despite the fact that there are no legal or regulatory guidelines requiring per participant fees.
It is also clear that the plaintiffs’ lawyers prefer that the plans avoid investments with revenue sharing or that, if there is revenue sharing, it should be paid into the accounts of participants whose accounts generated the revenue sharing. . In all cases, their positions remain focused on the transparency of providers and the control of the regime committees.
Diet committees and their advisers should resist the temptation to dismiss the anthem’s claims and regulations as only applying to large regimes. Instead, they must view the case as illustrating possible trends the Complainants Bar says about the fiduciary processes that plan committees must follow … or proceed at their peril. They must be aware of the costs of services and investments and weigh the impact on the participants. Since planning committees may not be aware of all the alternatives and may not have the resources to gather relevant information and make decisions, they should consider obtaining professional advice from advisers who have worked with plans similar to theirs. And these advisors should consider the benefit to themselves and their clients of assuming a fiduciary role.
Washoe County Commissioners have agreed to settle an unpaid debt from the company that operates one of the county’s golf courses. This settlement affects only a small fraction of the nearly $ 2 million owed.
Bell-Men rep Darin Menante said the settlement would eliminate Bell-Men’s litigation plans against the county.
“With respect to past outstanding issues, we have offered a lump sum payment of $ 120,000 to settle the surplus issue, and we have abandoned any future litigation plans relating to the dispute,” he said, noting also that Bell-Men is restructuring its management.
The announcement did not please some commissioners, including Vaughn Hartung.
Washoe County Commissioner Vaughn Hartung.
“It’s really difficult for me,” he said. “It’s very, very difficult to write off debt at about 10% of what’s really owed. “
Staff also said Bell-Men gave themselves pay raises during the time the late fees were piling up.
The commissioners voted to approve the settlement by three votes to two. Hartung and Lucey voted against the settlement.
[clickToTweet tweet=”County Settles Outstanding Washoe Golf Course Debt for $120,000″ quote=”County Settles Outstanding Washoe Golf Course Debt for $120,000″]
Bob Conrad is publisher, editor and co-founder of This Is Reno. He has held communications positions for various state agencies and received a PhD from the University of Nevada at Reno in 2011, where he completed a thesis on social media, journalism, and crisis communication. In addition to managing This Is Reno, he holds a part-time research position for the extension office at Mineral County University of Nevada.
More than 10 million Datto shares changed hands on the New York Stock Exchange in just over an hour on Wednesday, as investors seized their first opportunity to own part of the company fastest growing digital technology in Connecticut over the past decade.
Datto backs up the data and files of small businesses that sign up through office technology integration companies, the company being based in Norwalk since its launch in 2007 by founder and board member Austin McChord.
Domino’s in Bellefonte will pay nearly $ 50,000 to resolve a federal lawsuit brought by a handful of delivery drivers if the settlement is approved by a judge.
More than $ 34,300 would be shared among eight current or former employees, while more than $ 14,100 would go to the State College law firm that represented them.
Miller, Kistler & Campbell’s attorney David Gaines Jr., who filed the complaint on behalf of the employees, and Domino’s attorney, Jill Lashay, each declined to comment on Monday.
Robert Gee, Dylan Grubb, Darl Hoffman and Eric Rittenhouse accused Domino franchise owner Sheldon Port of illegally withholding money from a tip jar at the restaurant, failing to reimburse drivers personal expenses and improperly posting labor rights notices.
Port and the national channel denied the allegations, writing in a document filed Friday that no money had been taken from the tip pot and that all delivery drivers were paid at least minimum wage.
Domino’s did not assume any responsibility for the proposed settlement.
Payments would range from around $ 870 to around $ 10,450 if the settlement is approved by US Intermediate District Judge Matthew Brann. He was asked on Friday to approve the settlement, but it was not immediately clear when he could make his decision.
Bret Pallotto reports primarily on courts and crime for the Center Daily Times. He grew up in Mifflin County and graduated from Lock Haven University.
The previous Liberal-National state government led by Colin Barnett formulated a settlement plan that involved forcing legislation through. Parliament heard that the government was considering a dismemberment that would have brought in $ 700 million to ICWA, $ 480 million to BGNV, $ 430 million to the IRS and $ 55 million to Bond Group UK.
ICWA has played a key role in bringing the international legal feud to the brink of settlement by pushing for a single case in the WA Supreme Court.
WA Treasurer Ben Wyatt said he praised ICWA for its efforts to end the costly legal saga, which dates back to the so-called WA Inc era scandals involving the then Labor government, Mr. Bond and other discredited businessmen.
“The Bell litigation has long been a distraction and consumed an excessive amount of time and resources for all parties,” he said.
“I hope this represents the beginning of the end for Bell and that the matter is resolved in the best interests of the taxpayers of WA.”
Mr Bond, who died in 2015, was jailed for his role in removing assets from Bell after taking control of the gem of Robert Holmes Court’s business empire.
BGNV, backed by Mr Reijtenbagh, was previously involved in a legal skirmish with Bell Group liquidator Tony Woodings and ICWA over a litigation funding agreement and the priority of payment of junk bonds held by the ‘ICWA.
ICWA has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to support Mr. Woodings in suing a syndicate of banks which, acting on bad mortgages, appointed receivers to take control of Bell from Alan Bond in 1991. The receivers have then stripped Bell of about $ 280 million.
When the banks gave in to legal pressure from Mr Woodings and the commission, payment for the settlement had to be shared among the creditors.
However, the money remained intact amid disputes involving creditors that now appeared to have been resolved.
It may console some Australians to know that their Prime Minister is doing God’s work. Millions more are more likely to be confused or even flabbergasted. Yet thanks to a squeaky YouTube video, shot at a Pentecostal conference on the Gold Coast last week, Scott Morrison has given us a window to the soul that he otherwise kept closed.
During his years in parliament, Morrison took offense at any questioning of his faith. Even innocent requests are aggressively dismissed as sneering or disrespectful. Now, however, he has shared with his Pentecostal colleagues how he views his beliefs as a mission statement for his post as Prime Minister.
On some level, this shouldn’t be surprising; after all, we lead our lives according to our own values and beliefs. However, a prime minister is not a private person. He is elected to lead a nation with a secular constitution and in a representative democracy voters have a right to know on what basis such a leader is prepared to do the job.
It is clear, for example, that if Morrison had been the prime minister during the campaign for marriage equality, this would never have happened, just as it did not happen under Tony Abbott, who was often ridiculed as than “Catholic captain”. It took another Catholic for Malcolm Turnbull – advised by Peter Dutton, who does not claim strong religious affiliation – to break the deadlock with a national postal vote. Although Morrison claimed his Cook electorate would not support same-sex marriage, he returned a “yes” vote of 55%. Rather than represent this majority view, Morrison abstained from the vote and fled parliament before he ratified the nation’s overwhelming will.
In fact, it is interesting – in light of the discussion sparked by Morrison’s claim in the video that he has been “called to do the work of God” – to see how Dutton once defined the tension between politics and religion. In Niki Savva’s book Plots and prayers, documenting Turnbull’s disappearance and Morrison’s rise, she describes Dutton bemoaning the fact that moderate Liberals voted for Morrison rather than him in the 2018 coup.
Savva quotes Dutton as saying he was no more to the right than Howard or Costello. Tellingly, he said, “I’m not the evangelist here, I’m not proud of abortion, I voted for same-sex marriage and I wasn’t going to bring Tony Abbott back. But you are framed with these things.
Ironically, it was the hard-hearted image of Dutton, created when he took over the duties of the border protection portfolio from Scott Morrison, that has greatly poisoned the opinion of moderates towards him. He succeeded in ruthlessly implementing Morrison’s ‘turn the boats’ policy and continued to do everything to thwart refugee advocates and medics urging more humane treatment of those imprisoned in the Nauru and Nauru camps. Manus Island. This pursuit of Morrison’s vision likely kept him from beating Morrison in the vote.
Only 1 percent of the Australian population identifies as Pentecostal. Other mainstream churches question the denomination’s orthodoxy and its so-called “prosperity gospel,” which measures God’s blessings by material wealth and possession. The “option for the poor” is seen by large traditional churches as a key measure to “do the work of God” – which is particularly found in the Gospel of Matthew. It underpins the social justice teachings of the Catholic, Anglican and United Churches, for example. Its application does not fit well with a series of policies pursued by the Morrison government and exposes the Prime Minister to the accusation of hypocrisy.
In addition to the continued brutal treatment of refugees, the robo-debt saga is another indictment. This computerized debt collection from 400,000 welfare recipients led the government to shell out $ 2.1 billion in a settlement after numerous legal warnings and 2,000 deaths. The minister who inherited the Morrison project was the man he called “Brother Stuie” – his evangelical Christian colleague Stuart Robert.
Two weeks ago the InsidersRobert repeated the false claim that the “exact program” had been used previously for 25 years. He conveniently ignored that the coalition government reversed the burden of proof in 2016, drastically removed human oversight, and dramatically expanded the regime’s enforcement.
Morrison was shy about his appearance at the Australian Christian Churches Conference. The media were not alerted and the usual transcripts were not provided. His office said the prime minister had been invited to address the conference, “in the same way he attends many other speaker events, including for other religious groups.”
In this regard, it was an official Prime Minister’s job and for which he was able to use a VIP jet and the usual “security protocols”. Perhaps, as one prominent clergyman noted, Morrison was aware that he was dangerously close to crossing the line between church and state – and that he was better off than he was. be there officially as Prime Minister, as a worshiper who rules the country.
In the age of the ubiquitous smartphone, Morrison couldn’t have been naive enough to think his presence would go unrecorded. His audience, by his reaction, was clearly delighted by his improvised speech. According to Goalkeeper Australia, which revealed the story, the Vineyard Christian Church broadcast the Prime Minister’s speech and the vision was echoed by the Rationalist Society.
Anthony Albanese of the Labor Party was reluctant to comment on “the Prime Minister’s faith”, saying it was his business. But Albanese thought the separation of church and state was important. He told ABC radio that he believed that “the idea that God is on any political side is no more respectful than the idea that when someone’s sports team wins it is is because of divine intervention ”.
Obviously, Morrison, who has revealed that he is always looking for signs from God, believes divine intervention helped him achieve his “miracle victory” in 2019. If the latest Newspoll is any guide, he will need some help. ‘similar help next time. The 51-49’s favorite Labor lane is the same number the poll returned ahead of the last election. It is, and has been for months, a lineball result and leadership could make all the difference in such a tight competition.
On this point, Morrison would welcome Newspoll’s latest measure on “leadership traits.” Its results baffled the Labor Party and even some members of the Liberal Party baffled. The new figures claim the prime minister enjoys a higher level of support than any other over the past decade – and that he has recorded the biggest margin on an opposition leader since 2008.
Morrison, according to the survey, has more vision for Australia than Albanese and is more sympathetic, caring, decisive and trustworthy. The findings are despite its appalling mismanagement of Brittany Higgins’ rape allegations and the less than convincing double standards applied to the allegations against Christian Porter and Andrew Laming.
Another pollster, Peter Lewis of Essential, has an explanation related to the pandemic. In Goalkeeper Australia he wrote that the initial response to the pandemic was a series of big announcements and significant increases in public spending. Lewis noted that there are few times a political leader can actually do anything decisive – and when it does, people love it. He wrote: “This is why the pandemic has worked so well for Morrison.”
Morrison is also lucky the prime ministers saved him from his instinct to be more Pollyanna in his approach, wanting to go soccer and keep everything open and functional. Other right-wing leaders, such as Donald Trump, Boris Johnson and Narendra Modi, have not been so lucky with their denial optimism. Their nations have suffered disastrous and catastrophic consequences. In the United States and Britain, there followed an exceptional deployment of vaccines, which now serve to show how abandoned the Australian government has been in its planning and delivery. In India, there was no such luck.
On this point, the Essential poll found that the number of Australians blaming Morrison for the vaccine debacle is steadily increasing. The number is now 48%, up 6 points in just two weeks. This is a problem that Albanese and his health spokesperson, Mark Butler, have hammered relentlessly. In contrast, only 16 percent accept the government’s excuse of inevitable delays in vaccine production.
Certainly, if our vaccine distribution had been anything like what had been promised, we would have been in a better position to repatriate the 9,000 Australians stranded in Covid-ravaged India, not to mention the other 27,000 who desperately want to return home. .
It’s hard not to see the ‘drums of war’ we heard about this week and the announced $ 747 million defense facility upgrade for the Northern Territory as more than a distraction from government controversies. on vaccines and quarantine.
Peter Dutton’s warning that we cannot “ignore the conflict with China over Taiwan” is certainly a frightening prospect; but there is no escape from the here and now reality of the Covid pandemic. Or the old adage that “God helps those who help themselves”.
This article first appeared in the print edition of The Saturday Paper on May 1, 2021 under the headline “They will run for office and never get tired.”
A free press is a paid press. In the short term, the economic fallout from the coronavirus has taken about a third of our income. We will survive this crisis, but we need the support of readers. Now is the time to subscribe.
Fleming Island, Fla., April 28, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) – OBITX, Inc., (OTCMKTS: OBTX), an advanced software and services development company specializing in blockchain technologies and decentralized processing, announced today hui having settled the debt owed to the Company in exchange for ownership of Render Payment, LLC. The Company earns $ 400,000 in assets and approximately $ 800,000 in intellectual property rights. Over the past four years, Render Payment has generated an average revenue of $ 1.6 million and a net profit of $ 600,000 from buying and selling cryptocurrencies. OBITX intends to reuse the use of Render Payment’s intellectual property, in particular its developed and functional software application using blockchain. Render Payment was originally designed to act as a third party payment collaborator bridging the gap between FIAT currency and cryptocurrencies. OBITX intends to use parts of the protocols established with the proprietary software in the development of a blockchain certificate of deposit and rewards program that it intends to launch in the near future.
Eric Jaffe, CEO of OBITX, said: “It is always a good thing to be able to address historical issues and it has a positive effect on the future. Settling an unpaid debt that was written off years ago shortens the time needed to complete the development of our planned new product line, a rewards program based on the use of blockchain technology.
OBITX will not carry the value of intellectual property on its books. The objective of the acquisition was to access specific code developed by industry experts that would reduce the time to market for major research and development software developments. Mr. Adams, the CTO of the company went on to say, “We will dissect the software developed by Render Payment where we will use elements of its innovative coding in a new product that we are developing and plan to roll out in the second quarter of This year. We intend to apply for patent protection before the product is released to the general public.
About OBITX: Based in Fleming Island, Florida, OBITX, Inc., (OTCMKTS: OBTX) is a consulting and services organization specializing in blockchain technologies and decentralized processing.
This press release contains “forward-looking statements” which are not purely historical and may include statements regarding beliefs, plans, expectations or intentions regarding the future. Such forward-looking statements include, among others, the development, costs and results of new business opportunities and words such as “anticipate”, “seek”, “intend”, “believe”, “estimate”, ” expect “,” plan “,” plan “or similar expressions may be considered” forward-looking statements “within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Actual results could differ from those projected in the statements forward looking due to many factors. These factors include, but are not limited to, the uncertainties inherent in new projects, future US and global economies, the impact of competition and the Company’s reliance on existing regulations regarding the use and development of products at. cannabis base. These forward-looking statements are made as of the date of this press release, and we assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statements or to update the reasons why actual results could differ from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Although we believe that the beliefs, plans, expectations and intentions contained in this press release are reasonable, there can be no assurance that such beliefs, plans, expectations or intentions will prove to be correct.
Financial advisors used to recommend that debt payments be paid first, even before the coronavirus epidemic. However, with over 36 million Americans now unemployed the emphasis has shifted towards savings.
It is important to have an emergency savings fund. Experts suggest that you keep at least $1,000 in a high yield savings account to save for unexpected expenses. However, it can be difficult for you to determine which goals are most important if your credit card debt is high and your savings are low.
If you pay your minimum payments on time, your credit rating will be in good standing. Saving money will help to prepare you for unexpected financial situations, such as losing your job, losing income, or being furloughed.
Credit cards, however, have the highest interest rate of all credit products. It is possible to end up paying enormous interest if your current priority is to pay off your credit card balances.
You can consolidate your credit cards debt by using a personal loan via companies like https://dedebt.com/debt-consolidation/, Payoff, or LightStream. It will result in one monthly payment. This will typically result in lower interest and can help to end the debt cycle.
CNBC Select provides a detailed explanation of debt consolidation, its benefits, and how it can help you save money over the long term.
What is debt consolidating?
You may be eligible for a debt consolidation loan if your outstanding debt is on more than one card. This loan is used for the payment of your credit card debt. It then pays off the loan in monthly installments. Usually, this interest rate is lower than what you are paying on your credit cards. Personal loans usually have fixed rates. That means that the APR for the entire loan term is locked in and you will continue to pay the same monthly payments until it’s paid. This is in contrast to credit cards, which may have variable rates that can change.
You can either get a loan from a traditional lender (like a bank) or through an online peer lending company like SoFi, LendingClub, or both. Banks have more than one lender. To get approved for a loan, you must have a satisfactory credit score, good borrowing history, on-time payments, and a sufficient debt-to-income ratio to show you can afford the monthly payments. Peer-to-peer lenders are more flexible or have less stringent requirements. Upstart takes into account your education, job history, and credit score.
How debt consolidation works
Consolidating debt loans are similar to balance transfer cards with a zero percent APR period. However, they work differently. Balancing transfers can be charged fees of between 2% – 5% unless you have opted for a no-fee balance transfer card. Citi(r), Double Cash Card, for instance, charges a fee equal to or greater than 3% of your total balance ($5 minimum). To be eligible for this card, you need good to exceptional credit. However, there are personal loans that can be obtained by people with good or fair credit.
Contrary to a debt transfer, which transfers debt from one account into another, a consolidation loan allows cash to be deposited directly into your account. This cash can then be used to pay off all of the credit card debt. Next, you make monthly payments to your lender according to the timeline you choose when you apply for the loan. Once the personal loan is paid off your credit line is closed.
As with all loans, interest will be charged. The APR of a personal loan may be lower than that of credit cards, which average 16.6% per year, depending on creditworthiness. In general, interest payments are included in your monthly payment and spread over the term of the loan. The most common loan terms run from six months to seven. Your monthly payments will be lower the longer the loan term. However, you will be charged more interest in the long term. It is best to choose the shortest-term loan you are able to afford.
Some lenders charge a signup or origination fee. There are many non-fee options, with different interest rates depending on credit scores. When possible, you should choose a personal loan that is not charged a fee.
A consolidation loan can help you consolidate multiple credit card debts. Because you only have one account, merging your balances into one personal consolidation loan is an effective way to simplify your bill payments.
The most important factor for debt consolidation loans
Although debt consolidation loans are a great way to simplify budgeting, the main factor you should consider when opening one of these is the interest rates. Americans carry $6,194 on average in credit card debt. The average APR is around 16.61%. Assume you could only afford $6,194 in credit cards debt. Pay the minimum amount each month on time so that you don’t pay late fees. You would need to pay this balance for more than 17 years and pay an estimated $7286 in interest fees. (Learn how we came up with these numbers.
Peer-to-peer lending platforms allow you to score a loan for debt consolidation with APRs as low as 4%. According to Fed, the average APR for personal loans is currently 9.63%.
Imagine that you have $10,000 in credit cards debt and a 16.61% interest rate. Experian calculates that interest would cost $2,656.53 if the debt was paid off in three year’s time. For $1,447.90, interest would be paid if you took out personal loans with a 9.63% annual percentage rate. This represents a savings potential of $1,208.63 that could nearly reduce your interest payment by half.
Before applying for any personal loan, it is important to check what APR you qualify for. You will need to enter your social security number and date of birth.
It’s not a guarantee but it can give you an idea of your eligibility for rates. Do not consolidate if the lender offers you the exact same APR (or a lower rate) on your loan than you have with credit cards.
Consolidating debt can help you reduce your spending by allowing you one monthly payment to repay the debt. Converting your credit card debt to an installment loan can help you boost your credit score. It will reduce your credit utilization rate.
You should be aware of the interest rates and fees involved in a consolidation loan. The ideal loan will allow you to reduce your monthly payments while saving you interest.
To avoid credit creep, you should have a plan ready for when your balance reaches $0.
June 12e, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a settlement with Metro Beauty Academy (MBA), a private beauty school located in Allentown, Pennsylvania. MBA will pay $ 425,000 to resolve allegations of its involvement in a federal student financial aid fraud program.
A whistleblower alleged that MBA had submitted applications for federal student financial aid on behalf of students who were not eligible for such financial aid. These fraudulent actions spanned from January 2009 to December 2013, and the allegations also include admission by the MBA of students who did not have the appropriate certifications. The United States alleges that in some cases, the MBA “created bogus degrees for students, or encouraged students to obtain bogus degrees from” degree factories. “
A whistleblower filed a lawsuit against MBA under the False Claims Act (FCA), which under the FCA qui tamThe provisions can “sue on behalf of the United States and get part of the recovery from the government”. The whistleblower, or “relator”, will receive part of the settlement of $ 425,000.
“When schools agree to participate in the federal Title IV financial aid program, they must comply with regulations designed to ensure that qualified students have access to higher education,” said US Attorney William M. McSwain. He went on to say that fraud cases like this are not only detrimental to law-abiding educational institutions, but also unfair to students attending other schools “who may find themselves unqualified for a job and riddled with debt ”.
Finally, McSwain said, “We thank the Relator and Relator’s Counsel for their invaluable contribution to this matter. Without information from citizens like the rapporteur, fraud detection and retention of government program funds would be much more difficult. “