Markus Andrews

Nearly 1 in 5 eligible taxpayers miss the earned income tax credit, or EITC, which averaged $2,743 in 2023, according to the IRS.
For 2024, the EITC is worth up to $7,830 for eligible families with three or more children, up from $7,430 for 2023.
Meanwhile, eligible workers ages 25 to 64 without dependents can claim up to $632 for 2024.

Milan2099 | E+ | Getty Images

This tax season, the IRS expects more than 140 million individual returns — and many filers could miss a credit worth thousands of dollars. 
The earned income tax credit, or EITC, is a tax break for low- to moderate-income workers. In 2023, eligible taxpayers received an average credit of $2,743, according to the IRS.

“Every year, millions of households receive the EITC,” former IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel said in early January, but “nearly 1 in 5 eligible taxpayers don’t claim this valuable credit because they don’t know about it or don’t realize they qualify.”
More from Personal Finance:Your tax return could be ‘flagged for audit’ without these formsHere’s what federal employees need to know when evaluating offer to resignThe Fed holds rates steady. What that means for you
For 2024, the EITC is worth up to $7,830 for eligible families with three or more children, up from $7,430 for 2023, according to the IRS. Eligible workers ages 25 to 64 without kids can claim up to $632 for 2024. 
By law, the IRS can’t issue EITC refunds before mid-February, according to the agency. However, most early tax filers will see a status update in the “Where’s My Refund?” portal by Feb. 22. Refunds should arrive by March 3 for filers who chose direct deposit and whose tax returns have no problems. 

How the earned income tax credit works

The EITC “can be confusing,” said Syracuse University law professor Robert Nassau, director of the school’s low-income tax clinic.  

For tax year 2024, you may be eligible with “earned income,” or wages from working, of up to $59,899 for single filers and up to $66,819 for married couples filing jointly, according to the IRS. These income limits are based on households with three or more qualifying children and decrease for households with fewer children.
These limits use adjusted gross income, which is your total income after subtracting pretax 401(k) plan contributions and “adjustments,” such as certain pretax individual retirement account contributions, student loan interest and educator expenses.  

Other EITC requirements include:

Your investment income can’t be above $11,600
You must be a U.S. citizen or resident alien all year
You need a valid Social Security number for you, your spouse (for joint returns) and qualifying children 
You must file a tax return

Some eligible taxpayers missing the EITC could be lower earners without a filing requirement, Nassau said. But the EITC is “refundable,” meaning you can still claim a refund even without tax liability.
You can use the IRS’ EITC assistant to see if you qualify.
If eligible, you can file for free using IRS Direct File, IRS Free File, Volunteer Income Tax Assistance and others. More

More than one-third, or 37%, of Americans want a retirement that looks different from previous generations, a recent report found.
Younger generations are increasingly shunning retirement stereotypes of the past, where stability and relaxation were the goals, the report said. Instead, most say they want a more active and adventurous retirement.

By many measures, millennials are doing considerably well financially. Still, fewer younger adults are thinking about retiring in the traditional sense one day.
“Retirement is becoming more deprioritized,” said Michael Liersch, head of advice and planning at Wells Fargo.

“Ten or 15 years ago that was always the number one goal,” he said. Now, “actually living one’s life in the moment is a bigger priority.”
Although this cohort is very focused on building wealth, “the end game might not be no longer working and sitting on my Adirondack chair,” he said. “That just might not be it.”
More from Personal Finance:Why some say millennials have ‘phantom wealth’Higher-income consumers show signs of stress62% of couples keep at least some money separate
More than one-third, or 37%, of Americans want a retirement that looks different from previous generations, according to a 2024 report from Edelman Financial Engines.
Most say that means a more active and adventurous lifestyle. And 32% say they will never be able to “fully” retire, the report found.

“This contrasts sharply with retirement stereotypes of the past, where stability and relaxation were the primary goals,” the report said.

Meanwhile, the median wealth of younger millennials and older Gen Zers — or those born in the 1990s — “more than quadrupled” in recent years, according to an analysis of 2022 data by the St. Louis Federal Reserve.
The number of millennials with seven-figure retirement balances also jumped 400% as of the third quarter of 2024, compared to a year earlier, according to data from Fidelity Investments prepared for CNBC.
Compared to other generations, millennials are also more likely to say that their income went up over the last few months and that they expect their earnings potential to increase again in the year ahead, another report by TransUnion found.
Collectively, millennials are now worth about $15.95 trillion, up from $3.94 trillion five years earlier, according to the most recent Federal Reserve data as of the third quarter of 2024.

But a lot has changed for younger generations, too, said Brett House, an economics professor at Columbia Business School.
What assets millennials have on hand and their relative financial stability “is determined by how they shape up against immediate needs — such as housing down payments or emergency medical payments — and their capacity to generate income to replace salaries and wages in retirement amidst the shift from defined benefit to defined contribution pensions, or the elimination of workplace pensions all together,” House said.
Most younger adults are no longer getting pensions of any kind, so individuals who enter retirement age are now more dependent on personal savings and Social Security, he said.

‘People are really feeling the cash crunch’

Courtneyk | E+ | Getty Images

“There are a lot of financial priorities that we are all trying to reach simultaneously,” said Sophia Bera Daigle, founder and CEO of Gen Y Planning, a financial planning firm for millennials.
Many millennials must contend with hefty student loan balances, mortgages, car payments and child care costs in addition to saving for retirement or future college costs, she said.
“People are really feeling the cash crunch in their 30s to 40s,” said Bera Daigle, a certified financial planner and a member of CNBC’s Advisor Council. “Their net worth is going up but they don’t feel like they are getting ahead.”
That has also contributed to changing views on retirement for millennials, she said.
“When I got into this business, retirement was about quitting the grind … playing golf,” Bera Daigle said.
Now, “it’s really more about flexibility,” she added. “We don’t know what retirement will look like in 20 years… there’s a lot more emphasis on choosing the work they want to do in their 60s.”
Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube. More

Former President Joe Biden forgave more student debt than any other president.
Still, the country’s outstanding federal education debt balance is higher today than when Biden entered the White House.
The data shows how hard it is to make a meaningful dent in student debt with new student borrowing and current repayment rates.

US President Joe Biden gestures after speaking about student loan debt relief at Madison Area Technical College in Madison, Wisconsin, April 8, 2024.
Andrew Caballero-Reynolds | AFP | Getty Images

Former President Joe Biden forgave more student debt than any other president. However, the country’s education debt tab still grew during his presidency.
Outstanding federal student debt stood at roughly $1.64 trillion toward the end of 2024, according to U.S. Department of Education data analyzed by higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz. That compares with around $1.59 trillion at the start of 2021.

“Total student loan debt went up while President Biden was in office, despite all of the student loan forgiveness,” Kantrowitz said.
While Biden was in the White House, he canceled student debt for 5.3 million borrowers, for a total of $188.8 billion in relief.

While these numbers don’t account for inflation, they still show how difficult it is to make a meaningful debt in the country’s student loan balance, experts said.
There were roughly the same number of people with student debt — 42 million — both when Biden entered and exited office, according to Kantrowitz’s calculations.

Root cause of the crisis is ‘the cost of higher education’

Betsy Mayotte, president of The Institute of Student Loan Advisors, a nonprofit that helps borrowers navigate the repayment of their debt, said it didn’t surprise her that the country’s loan balance still climbed.

“We’re going to continue to see that until we solve the root cause of the student loan crisis,” Mayotte said. “And the root cause is the cost of higher education.”
Before financial aid, the sticker price at some four-year colleges and universities — after factoring in tuition, fees, room and board, books, and other expenses — is now nearing $100,000 per year.
For undergraduate students in the 2024-25 academic year, the estimated expenses for tuition, fees, housing and food at a public four-year in-state college is $24,920, and $58,600 at a private, nonprofit four-year college, according to the College Board.

“New borrowing outpaces repayment,” Kantrowitz said. Indeed, more than $300 billion in new federal loans were taken out while Biden was president, Kantrowitz calculated.
Another reason student debt didn’t drop under Biden was the Covid-era pause on federal student loan payments, which spanned from March 2020 to September 2023, Mayotte said.
“We went 3½ years where the vast majority of borrowers weren’t paying,” she said.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

Karen Bagnard’s home of more than 50 years in Altadena, California, burned down in January’s Los Angeles-area wildfires.
The fires have displaced older residents at a vulnerable time in their lives.
“I sure didn’t expect this at the end of my life,” Bagnard, 79, told CNBC. “I figured I’d go before the house would.”

Remains of Karen Bagnard’s Altadena, California, house after it burned in the January 2025 Los Angeles-area wildfires.
Courtesy: Chelsea

On the night of Jan. 7, Karen Bagnard sat in her Altadena, California, house in the dark.
Forceful winds had caused her home to lose power, and she also had no running water, save for one bathroom.

“My daughter called and said, ‘Mom, do you realize there’s a fire?'” said Bagnard, who is 79 years old and legally blind. “I had no idea there was a fire.”
At that point, the evacuation zone for the Eaton Fire was far enough away for her to feel safe.
“I thought, ‘Oh, they’ll never get to my house,'” Bagnard said.
More from Personal Finance: How climate change is reshaping home insurance costs California wildfire victims may receive a one-time $770 payment Top-rated charities active in Los Angeles fire relief efforts
About 30 minutes later, her daughter Chelsea Bagnard called back. With the fire spreading quickly, Bagnard’s home was now near the border of the evacuation zone.

After Bagnard’s grandson, Dalton Sargent, who is 32 and also lives in her home, came back from work, the two decided to leave for the night.
In the more than 50 years she lived in the house, Bagnard had been close to evacuating before but had never actually left.
“I thought, ‘Okay, we’ll evacuate this time, but we’ll be back,'” she said.
That was the last time she stepped foot in her home.
The next day, Bagnard’s daughter and grandson returned to the neighborhood to check on the home before authorities sealed off the area. What they found was a “smoldering pile of debris,” her daughter wrote on Facebook, with only larger appliances such as the refrigerator and stove recognizable.
It was Jan. 22 before Bagnard was able to return to her neighborhood to see the devastation for herself.
“They brought a chair for me, and I sat in the driveway, and what I could see was just the land,” Bagnard said of the surreal scene. “I started looking at it in terms of, ‘How would we rebuild?'”

Karen Bagnard, 79, sits in the ruins of her Altadena, California, home, after it burned in the Los Angeles-area wildfires of January 2025. “I hope to live long enough to see it rebuilt,” she said.
Courtesy: Chelsea Bagnard

Older adults especially vulnerable to natural disasters

The Los Angeles-area wildfires destroyed tens of thousands of acres, ruining homes and entire neighborhoods. Insured losses could climb to $50 billion, according to estimates from JP Morgan.
Additionally, an unknown number of residents have been left homeless.
For older individuals, the catastrophe comes at a vulnerable time in their lives, when relocating and coping with physically difficult conditions can be more challenging.
By 2034, we’ll have more people over 65 than under 18 in our country, according to Danielle Arigoni, an urban planning and community resilience expert and author of the book “Climate Resilience for an Aging Nation.”
Yet those demographics are not used as a lens for climate resilience planning in most cases, she said.
“In two decades, we have not seen any improvement in the fatality rate of older adults in these kinds of disasters,” Arigoni said. “When you see that kind of trend line, to me that just screams for a different approach.”
The LA-area wildfires forced some assisted living facilities to evacuate, and some burned down, according to Joyce Robertson, CEO and executive director of Foundation for Senior Services.
In the aftermath of the fire, the public charity is focusing on providing supplies, including wheelchairs, and is working with nursing and assisted living facilities to help fill gaps for services and resources.
“You can imagine the stress for all those seniors having to evacuate,” Robertson said.
For older individuals who live on their own, the risk is that they will not be able to leave their homes, said Carolyn Ross, co-executive director of the Village Movement California, a coalition of 50 neighborhood-based community organizations that provide community programming and expertise to help older residents age in place.
“In natural disasters, they are disproportionately affected, more likely to be the ones found in their homes because they couldn’t evacuate,” Ross said.

The hardest hit of the Village Movement’s communities — Pasadena Village — had around 60 members displaced by the fires, and 19 lost their homes entirely, including Bagnard.
“It’s been heartbreaking,” said Katie Brandon, executive director at Pasadena Village.
“But it’s also been really beautiful to see the older adults really support each other, be there for each other, and see the communities of support that they’ve built over the last months and years really work for them,” Brandon said.
As Bagnard searched for a new residence, one of the Pasadena Village members stepped up to offer her a six-month temporary lease to live with her in her home, though the two women had not previously met.
Bagnard has been a valued member of the Pasadena Village for many years, according to Brandon, having hosted many events and programs at her “beautiful house, outside on her patio.”
As Bagnard regroups, the Pasadena Village is replacing the computer she lost with the accessibility features she needs due to her vision loss. The community organization is working with other affected area residents to help provide the equipment they need, such as air purifiers and computer printers. Where possible, it’s also encouraging older residents to continue to gather socially.
“The insurance companies seem to be pretty good at reacting and seeing what they can replace, but sometimes it’s quite a process,” Brandon said. “The sooner we can get our older adults the resources and equipment that they need, the better off they’ll be in this recovery period.”

Older victims face greater health, financial risks

Experts emphasize that older individuals may face a prolonged recovery.
In the aftermath of a disaster, there tends to be a lot of people helping, providing donations and other support, said Joan Casey, associate professor at the University of Washington’s School of Public Health.
Yet in the rebuilding period that follows, there’s often a lull, where volunteer efforts and donations dry up, she said.
Yet more than a year from now, those same disaster victims may still be displaced from their homes, she said.
“It’s that medium-term disaster period where we still want to check in on people,” Casey said.

They may be more susceptible to certain health and financial risks, particularly if they do not have a community safety net.
Nearly 80% of older adults have two or more chronic conditions, according to research from the National Council on Aging. If that includes respiratory or heart disease, the worsened air quality may be even more harmful to their health.
Older adults may also have paid off their homes, which means they may not be required to have homeowners’ insurance. Consequently, some may be completely uninsured, while others may be underinsured in an effort to keep their monthly expenses down, Arigoni said.
Scientific literature on how disasters affect older adults is “pretty mixed,” especially with regard to mental health, according to Casey. Some neurologists have found natural disasters may be a tipping point in cognitive function for older adults, she said.
Yet there’s also evidence that older individuals may be more resilient because they have developed better strategies to deal with stress over time, Casey said. They may have already experienced a disaster before, and therefore may be better prepared to handle another event.

‘I hope to live long enough to see it rebuilt’

Remains of Karen Bagnard’s Altadena, California, house after it burned in the January 2025 Los Angeles-area wildfires.
Courtesy: yesterday, my mom saw her home of over 50 years for the first time since it burned

Prior to losing her home in the wildfire, Bagnard, a professional visual artist, had recently gone through a big life adjustment as she dealt with her vision loss.
In early 2024, she held a show of her work at Pasadena Village, where she talked about coming to terms with blindness. Her favorite piece — of a sphere falling — played on darkness and light amid a color scheme of blue, teal and black, a symbol of her own journey.
“Knowing that you’re going blind is like a free fall into the darkness, and then at some point you realize that you bring the light with you, so it isn’t really dark,” Bagnard said. “You have a different kind of light; the light is inside.”
That piece was destroyed and is now among her home’s ashes, along with most of her other artwork.
For most of her life, Bagnard did pen-and-ink drawings with watercolor washes. Since the onset of her vision loss, she has transitioned to other methods, using decoupage and handmade papers as well as writing haikus.
The process of coping with her vision loss has helped her to keep the more recent loss of her home in perspective, she said, though she admits she still has moments of frustration.
To help rebuild, she has applied for a Small Business Administration loan, and her daughter started a GoFundMe account.
Other community organizations, in addition to Pasadena Village, have also stepped in to offer support.
A local nonprofit organization, Better Angels, has provided grant money to Bagnard and her grandson. And Journey House, a provider of foster care services, has promised to help Bagnard’s grandson, a former foster youth, who also lost everything in the fire.
Amid her home’s rubble, Bagnard said she has also seen signs of hope. A Danish plate with a mermaid, which Bagnard considers an art muse, survived the fire, as well as cement stairs she had painted with images of the four seasons.
She has told her two daughters and grandson it is up to them to decide what to do with the property they will eventually inherit.
“I’m going to be 80 next month, and I hope to live long enough to see it rebuilt,” Bagnard said. More

Jaque Silva | Nurphoto | Getty Images

Investors had a volatile end to January as they weighed the Federal Reserve’s pause on rate cuts, a busy earnings season and the prospect of new tariffs.
Given these dynamics and the volatility in the stock market, it could be difficult for investors to pick the right stocks for their portfolios. Tracking the recommendations of top analysts could be helpful in this regard, as they look beyond short-term noise and focus on companies’ long-term growth potential.

With that in mind, here are three stocks favored by the Street’s top pros, according to TipRanks, a platform that ranks analysts based on their past performance.
Netflix
We start with streaming giant Netflix (NFLX). The company recently impressed investors with better-than-anticipated results for the fourth quarter of 2024, reporting about 19 million subscriber additions.
Reacting to the stellar Q4 print, JPMorgan analyst Doug Anmuth reiterated a buy rating on NFLX stock and boosted the price target to $1,150 from $1,000, saying “NFLX enters the new year firing on all cylinders.”
Anmuth added that Netflix is gaining from a very solid content slate. While the Jake Paul and Mike Tyson fight, the Christmas Day NFL games and the second season of “Squid Game” were major content releases in Q4, the analyst noted the company’s commentary that these three together accounted for only a small percentage of the overall subscriber additions and that the robust additions were driven by broad content strength.
The analyst also highlighted that Netflix is witnessing enhanced engagement per member household and encouraging retention. Reacting to the company’s decision to raise prices, Anmuth expects only a little pushback in the U.S. and a few other markets, given the strong content. Looking ahead, the analyst believes that the story this year will shift more towards advertising, with the company gearing up to pursue several initiatives.

Overall, Anmuth is bullish on Netflix based on double-digit revenue growth estimates for 2025 and 2026, operating margin expansion, its dominant position in streaming, and expectations of a multi-year rise in free cash flow. He now expects 30 million net additions in 2025 compared to the previous estimate of 21 million. The analyst also increased his revenue estimates for 2025 and 2026 by 4% and raised his operating profit estimate for both years by 13%.
Anmuth ranks No. 80 among more than 9,300 analysts tracked by TipRanks. His ratings have been profitable 63% of the time, delivering an average return of 20%. See Netflix Hedge Fund Activity on TipRanks.
Intuitive Surgical
This week’s second stock pick is Intuitive Surgical (ISRG), a pioneer in robotic-assisted surgery and the maker of the popular da Vinci surgical systems. The company ended 2024 on a strong note, with market-beating earnings. However, ISRG’s gross margin guidance for 2025 fell short of expectations and indicated contraction compared to 2024.
In reaction to the results, JPMorgan analyst Robbie Marcus reaffirmed a buy rating on ISRG stock and increased the price target to $675 from $575. The analyst noted the company’s upbeat profitability metrics and explained that the revenue beat was driven by solid gross system placements and procedure growth.
In particular, Marcus noted the placement of 174 da Vinci 5 systems in Q4 2024, way ahead of JPMorgan’s estimate of 125. “With strong momentum from dv5 heading into 2025 and a setup for another year of beat-and-raise quarters, we remain bullish on Intuitive and reiterate our Top Large Cap Pick,” he said.
Commenting on the 2025 outlook, Marcus stated that Intuitive Surgical’s gross margin guidance of 67% to 68% slightly lagged JPMorgan’s and the Street’s estimate of about 68.5%. However, the analyst contended that while the gross margin guidance miss triggered some concerns, he sees the outlook as conservative, with a possible upside just as seen in 2024. He highlighted that ISRG’s 2024 initial gross margin outlook was 67% to 68%, but it then ended the year favorably with a gross margin of nearly 69%.
Overall, Marcus thinks that Intuitive Surgical is well positioned in the rapidly growing, underpenetrated soft-tissue robotics space. He expects the introduction of new systems and approval of the use of ISRG’s systems in new procedures to drive future expansion.
Marcus ranks No. 683 among more than 9,300 analysts tracked by TipRanks. His ratings have been profitable 56% of the time, delivering an average return of 11.2%. See Intuitive Surgical Ownership Structure on TipRanks.
Twilio
Finally, let’s look at the cloud communications platform Twilio (TWLO). Goldman Sachs analyst Kash Rangan upgraded TWLO stock to buy from hold and increased the price target to $185 from $77 following the company’s analyst day event and ahead of the fourth-quarter results in February.
“Following multiple years of growth compression and several strategic actions, we believe Twilio is now hitting an inflection point both in terms of narrative and fundamentals,” said Rangan, explaining the reason behind his rating upgrade.
Further, Rangan expects solid free cash flow generation, supported by Twilio’s aggressive cost reduction and efficiency measures. Rangan added that TWLO’s analyst day reinforced his optimistic view, thanks to accelerated product velocity and an improved go-to-market strategy.
The analyst thinks that enhancements to the company’s Communications portfolio can help Twilio expand its already dominant position in the core CPaaS (communications platform as a Service) market. He thinks that following robust Q3 results, there is still notable upside in TWLO stock, driven by the company’s strategic actions over the past two years.
Also, Rangan sees a possible upside to the calendar year 2025 revenue growth estimates, given inflecting usage trends in communications and new product cross-sell opportunities, backed by core platform enhancements and generative AI innovations.
Rangan ranks No. 345 among more than 9,300 analysts tracked by TipRanks. His ratings have been successful 61% of the time, delivering an average return of 11.4%. See Twilio Stock Charts on TipRanks. More

Pavlo Gonchar | SOPA Images | Getty Images

Company: Soho House & Co Inc (SHCO)

Business: Soho House provides a global membership platform of physical and digital spaces that connects diverse groups of members from across the world. The members use the platform to work, socialize, connect and create all over the world. The company’s segments include United Kingdom, North America and Europe, and the rest of the world. Soho House’s global portfolio consists of approximately 42 Soho Houses, nine Soho Works, Scorpios Beach Club in Mykonos, Soho Home (its interiors and lifestyle retail brand) and its digital channels.
Stock Market Value: ~$1.53B ($7.87 per share)

Stock chart icon

Soho House shares over the past year

Activist: Third Point

Ownership: 9.89%
Average Cost: $7.64
Activist Commentary: Third Point is a multi-strategy hedge fund founded by Dan Loeb, that will selectively take activist positions. Loeb is one of the true pioneers in the field of shareholder activism and one of a handful of activists who shaped what has become modern day shareholder activism. He invented the poison-pen letter in a time when it was often necessary. As times have changed, he has transitioned from the poison pen to the power of the argument. Third Point has amicably obtained board representation at companies like Baxter and Disney, but the firm will not hesitate to launch a proxy fight if it is being ignored.

What’s happening

On Jan. 29, Third Point sent a letter announcing that it supports Soho House’s decision to explore a take-private transaction but has concerns about the process that was undertaken which resulted in a proposed transaction with the chairman of the Board. They believe that several qualified parties with significant experience investing in the hospitality industry would be interested in paying a superior price to the current deal.

Behind the scenes

Soho House is a global membership platform of physical and digital spaces that connects a diverse group of members to work, socialize, connect, create and have fun. The company operates a global network of 45 Soho House private members’ clubs, along with other ventures such as 8 Soho Works co-working spaces. Soho House, previously Membership Collective Group, went public in 2021 raising $420 million at a $2.8 billion valuation and a $14 stock price. Since going public, revenue more than doubled from $561 million to $1.2 billion and earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization increased to $99 million, while the stock price declined from $14 to below $5 per share as of mid-December. The company has an attractive recurring revenue model, as opposed to hospitality peers who must constantly fight for their next customer, a substantial wait list for membership, and a reasonably priced, yet luxury offering. Importantly, their houses have a steep maturity curve, with new houses needing time to develop their membership base resulting in early loss-making. However, as they mature in profitability and durability, they can contribute, on average, 35%+ house-level margin, with some well above that. 

On Dec. 19, Soho House announced that it had received an offer from a new third-party consortium to acquire the company for about $9 per share conditioned on certain significant shareholders, including Soho House’s executive chairman Ron Burkle and The Yucaipa Companies and its affiliates, rolling over their equity interests as part of the transaction. The offer, supported by Burkle and Yucaipa, sent shares up 47%. Just a day earlier, shares closed at $4.91. Soho House did not disclose a lot of details about this offer, but one thing that you could probably assume is that with 46.7% of the outstanding shares and 62.3% of the voting power, Burkle would likely end up controlling the private entity. So, to recap, Burkle took the company public at $14 per share and used the $420 million raised to fund its growth. Management ran the company down from $14 per share to $4.91 per share. Now that they see an opportunity for a turnaround, they seem willing to take it private at a cheap price, which wouldn’t benefit the public shareholders.
Enter Dan Loeb and Third Point who, on Jan. 29, 2025, filed a 13D declaring beneficial ownership of 9.89% of the company’s Class A stock with an accompanying letter to the board of Soho House. In the letter, Loeb applauded the decision to return the company to private ownership, but he lambasted the board for its failure to ensure a fair sales process that maximizes value for all shareholders. Instead, he accused them of engaging in an opaque process that resulted in a “sweetheart deal” with Soho House’s chairman. Loeb thinks that an independent and rigorous sales process would yield several interested and qualified parties with significant investing experience in the hospitality sector. He urged the company to launch a process of this nature and warned that transactions involving controlling shareholders, especially in instances of super-voting control rather than economic interest, are subject to the most exacting standards under Delaware law, and that the board’s conduct could expose them to liability for failing to discharge their fiduciary duties.
This is not a typical activist campaign for Third Point. This is not Third Point opportunistically using activism to create value. Instead, Third Point was a cornerstone investor in the Soho House IPO and is not the type of investor to stand by quietly while management fails to maximize value for shareholders. This is a $40 million investment for Third Point that is now worth $43 million. Third Point manages more than $11 billion. This investment will not move the needle for the firm, but Loeb is the type of person who will do everything he can to maximize the value of every investment. Additionally, the best activists — like Loeb — have activism in their blood and cannot morally stand idly by while management harms shareholders.
There is no doubt that this is an example of poor corporate governance – an opaque, poorly disclosed sale of the company at a low price to the majority shareholder without running a sales process. But Ron Burkle is not a bad person. While some members of the board might be less sophisticated public company directors not fully aware of their duties and liability, they are not bad people either. As a 46.7% owner with super-voting Class B shares and voting control of a company he took public and ran for many years, Burkle and the board probably thought they could get this by the shareholders without any challenge. Well, that is not the case anymore. So, one of the following three things is going to happen now: (i) Burkle will increase his offer to a value closer to the IPO price, (ii) someone else will come in and offer more for the company – there are certainly interested buyers out there who might have seen any offer to Burkle as futile but might now see a path to an acquisition with Third Point involved; or (iii) Third Point will commence a lawsuit against Soho House and the directors. We do not see it coming to this. The board has smart lawyers and advisors who will inform the directors of their reputational and potential financial liability. We expect that Burkle and the board will ultimately do the right thing and make a fair offer to acquire the company if they really want it.  
Third Point is a multi-strategy hedge fund founded by Dan Loeb, a true pioneer of shareholder activism. In addition to selectively taking activist positions, the firm has generated impressive returns in credit, venture and growth strategies as well. While Third Point is known by many for its poison-pen letters, that was the Third Point of 15 years ago. The modern-day Third Point succeeds at its activism through the power of the argument and respect. Activists are often criticized and avoided, but this is a situation where one is spending his own money to protect the value for all shareholders, and just about everyone would welcome that.        
Ken Squire is the founder and president of 13D Monitor, an institutional research service on shareholder activism, and the founder and portfolio manager of the 13D Activist Fund, a mutual fund that invests in a portfolio of activist 13D investments. More

The 2.5% Social Security cost-of-living adjustment for 2025 is the lowest increase to benefits since 2021.
To increase those checks, retirees may consider two money moves.

A customer walks by a display of fresh eggs at a grocery store on Sept. 25, 2024 in San Anselmo, California.
Justin Sullivan | Getty Images

The first Social Security benefit checks for 2025 include a 2.5% increase — the lowest annual cost-of-living adjustment since 2021.
For retirees, that amounts to an increase of about $50 per month, on average, according to the Social Security Administration.

Still, amid stubborn inflation and persistent elevated costs for everyday items, some retirees may feel that the increase is not enough.
“I think overall folks are glad to see the raise,” said Jim Blair, founder at NSSA Professionals and a former Social Security administrator. “It’s not necessarily keeping up with everything, but it’s better than nothing.”
The latest government inflation data shows the measure used to calculate the annual Social Security COLA — the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, or CPI-W — was up 2.8% over the last 12 months as of December.
More from Personal Finance:Why retirees may feel the 2025 Social Security COLA isn’t enoughHere’s the changes Americans would make to close Social Security’s financing gapSocial Security Fairness Act beneficiaries face lengthy wait for higher payments
Another measure used by the Federal Reserve to gauge long-run inflation — core inflation excluding food and energy under the personal consumption expenditures price index — was up 2.8% in December, according to data released on Friday.

For retirees who would like to see bigger Social Security benefit checks, there are a couple of strategies they may consider trying, Blair said.

Adjust your tax withholdings

Social Security beneficiaries may have up to 22% of their benefits withheld for taxes.
“If you’re struggling a little bit, particularly if you’re not in too high of a tax bracket, you can always adjust that,” Blair said.
If you’ve been getting refunds, reducing how much you have withheld will allow you to access those funds sooner, though you will get back less during next year’s tax filing season, Blair said.
But there may be a risk you may owe money at tax time next year, depending on your personal circumstances, he said.
Beneficiaries can adjust the tax withholdings on their benefits by filing Form W-4V with the Social Security Administration.

Ask to have your Medicare premiums adjusted

Most retirees pay a standard monthly premium rate for Medicare Part B, which covers preventive care, medically necessary services and durable medical equipment.
In 2025, that standard monthly premium is $185 per month.
But higher-income retirees pay more for what’s known as an income-related monthly adjustment amount, or IRMAA.
That also applies to monthly premiums for Medicare Part D prescription drug plans, which have average estimated monthly premiums of $46.50 in 2025.
The premiums are based on income tax filings from two years prior. If you’ve since had a life changing event that has prompted your income to go down — such as if you’ve retired, sold an income-producing business or survived the death of a spouse — you can apply to have your Medicare withholdings adjusted.
To do that, complete Form SSA-44 and submit it to the Social Security Administration. More

Consumers have demonstrated a high tolerance for the increasing price tag of attending live events, also known as “funflation.”
The cost of concert tickets has especially soared, mostly due to dynamic pricing.
Although most music fans would rather not have to pay sky-high prices, there is also a “devil-may-care” attitude when it comes to these types of experiences, says Greg McBride, Bankrate’s chief financial analyst.

From Billie Eilish and Sabrina Carpenter to Kendrick Lamar and SZA, 2025 promises to be another big year for live music events. That may also mean concertgoers will be shelling out more for their favorite shows.
After rising steadily post-pandemic, admission to movies, theaters and concerts jumped 20% since 2021, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ consumer price index data.

And yet, consumers have demonstrated a high tolerance for the increasing price tag, also known as “funflation.”

Concertgoers attended an average of seven shows in 2024, and most plan to see more in 2025, according to a recent report by CouponCabin.
The survey of more than 1,000 music fans in December found that nearly 36% said they will spend $100 to $499 on concert tickets in 2025, while more than 17% plan to spend up to $1,000.

Chalk it up to ‘funflation’

After testing new limits in 2024, Americans proved a willingness to splurge — even travel abroad — to catch shows like Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour, bringing so-called passion tourism into the spotlight, some experts say.
Younger adults, particularly Generation Z and millennials, have even said they would go into debt to pursue some of these experiences, other recent reports show.

Nearly two out of five Gen Z and millennial travelers have spent up to $5,000 on tickets alone for destination live events, one recent study from Bread Financial found.

Why concert tickets got so expensive

Dynamic pricing is partly to blame for the escalating price tag, according to Joe Bennett, a forensic musicologist at Berklee College of Music.
Originally coined by economists in the late 1920s, dynamic pricing refers the charging of a higher price at a time of greater demand. Consumers often associate it with shifting airline ticket prices or how ride-hailing services adjust fares at busy times, Bennett said.
“We all know that if you are looking for an Uber or Lyft, there are certain times of night when it’s more expensive. The market seems to have adapted to that,” he said. “But concert tickets were generally a fixed price.”
That’s no longer the case. And now there is heightened awareness — and controversy — around the practice when it comes to buying highly sought-after event tickets.
More from Personal Finance:’I cry a lot but I am so productive, it’s an art’Recession pop: How music hits on economic trends’I’m looking for a man in finance’
How and when dynamic pricing is used is at the discretion of the artist or management, according to Andrew Mall, an associate professor of music at Northeastern University — and it is often determined under the radar.
However, with so many recent high-profile tours, “for sure, dynamic pricing has surged to the forefront of concertgoers’ attention,” he recently told CNBC.
Ticketmaster is under investigation in the U.K. for its recent use of dynamic pricing in sales of reunion concerts from Britpop band Oasis.
Many Oasis fans took to social media to complain that they ended up paying more than double the face value of the ticket without warning. The band said it would abandon the practice for the North American leg of its tour.
Swift reportedly refused to dynamically price her Eras Tour tickets because “she didn’t want to do that to her fans,” Jay Marciano, chairman and CEO of AEG Presents, which promoted the event, told HITS Daily Double in October.

How ticket pricing evolved

Throughout the 21st century, revenue from recorded music has gone down while revenue from live music events has gone up. By the mid-2000s, concerts “provided a larger source of income for performers than record sales or publishing royalties,” economist Alan Krueger wrote in a paper on the economic issues and trends in the rock and roll industry.
Live music industry revenue jumped 25% in 2023 alone, according to data from Statista.
Ticketmaster in 2011 first introduced an early version of dynamic ticket pricing, which is now the standard for live music ticketing sales.

In more recent years, “ticket sales went crazy” driven by post-pandemic pent-up demand and a surge in megastar stadium tours, Bennett said.
“You can see why it’s tempting,” he said. “The live music industry is constantly leaving money on the table that fans would pay. Dynamic pricing is sort of a capitalist inevitability given the forces at play, but I don’t want to live in a world where it costs $1,000 for my daughter to see Taylor Swift.”
Still, it’s now common for ticket-selling platforms to charge more per ticket depending on demand for the event at any given time — whether consumers like it or not, according to Matt Schulz, LendingTree’s chief credit analyst.
“It’s not very popular, as you might imagine,” Schulz said. “Businesses and musicians are trying to see what the market will bear, and it makes things really difficult for the consumer.”

Why pricey tickets are here to stay

“Consumers don’t like the idea of dynamic pricing, but there is a renewed ‘YOLO’ [you only live once] attitude over the past few years since the pandemic and, increasingly, that drives a devil-may-care approach when it comes to spending on discretionary experiences,” said Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate.com.
Even with household budgets strained, “you get to a point where there are just some experiences where consumers draw the line and say, that’s not something I’m willing to give up,” he said.
Ticket sellers are apparently aware of this mentality, too.
“Our research consistently tells us that concerts are a top priority for discretionary spending, and one of the last experiences fans will cut back on,” Live Nation said on a quarterly earnings call in 2023. 
But as consumers continue to spare no expense to see their favorite artist or group, that means that means dynamic pricing is here to stay, at least for now.
“The live music sector has been leaning into this attitude for a long time,” Northeastern University’s Mall said.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More