Markus Andrews

President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill” ends a federal tax credit for electric vehicles after Sept. 30.
The IRS clarified that consumers don’t necessarily need to drive their purchased or leased EV off the car lot by that date to qualify for the tax break.
Consumers only need to enter into a written binding contract and make a payment on or before Sept. 30, the IRS said.

Sinology | Moment | Getty Images

A federal tax break for consumers who buy or lease electric vehicles will disappear after Sept. 30. However, consumers may have a little bit of wiggle room on that time frame, according to a new document released by the Internal Revenue Service.
The tax credits, worth up to $7,500, were scrapped as part of a Republican tax and spending measure passed in July. The law says consumers don’t qualify for a tax break if the EV is “acquired after” Sept. 30.

Some observers initially thought that meant an EV had to be “placed in service” by that date — meaning that consumers had to be in physical possession of the car.
However, the IRS clarified that’s not the case.

If a taxpayer acquires an EV by having a “written binding contract in place” and makes a payment on or before Sept. 30, they’d be entitled to claim the federal tax credit when they eventually take possession of the vehicle — even if that’s after Sept. 30, the IRS said in a set of answers to frequently asked questions issued Aug. 21.
“This means that if you can’t drive off in the clean vehicle of your dreams by Sept. 30, there is still hope,” said Ingrid Malmgren, senior policy director at Plug In America, a nonprofit advocating for a quicker transition to electric cars.
More from Personal Finance:What lower interest rates would mean for mortgage refinancingFew 401(k) savers use this option for tax-free growthWhy ‘quiet cracking’ at work is dangerous

The IRS update applies to used, new and leased EVs, according to the IRS document. They correspond with sections 25E, 30D and 45W of the tax code, respectively.
“You can order the vehicle from the dealer or manufacturer, sign the contract, put down a deposit by Sept. 30 and take possession of it later,” Malmgren said.
Making a payment might also mean making a vehicle trade-in, Malmgren said.
Of course, the vehicle and consumer would still need to meet certain eligibility criteria to qualify for a federal tax credit.

Consumers can still receive the tax credit as an instant rebate when taking possession of the vehicle, Malmgren said, instead of waiting to file their annual tax return next year.
Aside from getting the money more quickly, there’s an additional benefit: Consumers who choose to get the tax credit at the point of sale don’t need to have a tax liability in order to get the funds.
Taxpayers should ensure they get a time-of-sale report from the dealer when picking up their EV or within three days of picking it up, according to the IRS.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

Timon Schneider | SOPA Images | Lightrocket | Getty Images

Company: Rexford Industrial Realty (REXR)
Business: Rexford Industrial Realty is a self-administered and self-managed full-service real estate investment trust (REIT). The company is focused on owning, operating and acquiring industrial properties in Southern California infill markets. It acquires, owns, improves, redevelops, leases and manages industrial real estate principally located in Southern California infill markets, through Rexford Industrial Realty, L.P. (Operating Partnership) and its subsidiaries. The company also acquires or provides mortgage debt secured by industrial zoned property or property suitable for industrial development. It provides property management services and leasing services to related party property owners. Its property management services include performing property inspections, monitoring repairs and maintenance, maintaining tenant relations and providing financial and accounting oversight. Its portfolio consists of 424 properties with approximately 51.0 million rentable square feet.
Stock Market Value: $9.47 billion ($40.01 per share)

Stock chart icon

Rexford Industrial Realty shares year to date

Activist: Elliott Investment Management

Ownership: n/a
Average Cost: n/a
Activist Commentary: Elliott is a multistrategy investment firm that manages about $76.1 billion in assets (as of June 30, 2025) and is one of the oldest firms of its type under continuous management. Known for its extensive due diligence and resources, Elliott regularly follows companies for years before making an investment. Elliott is the most active of activist investors, engaging with companies across industries and multiple geographies.
What’s happening
On Aug. 27, Elliott announced that they have taken a position in Rexford Industrial Realty.
Behind the scenes
Rexford is an internally managed industrial REIT focused on the Southern California market. The industrial REIT space has benefited from strong secular tailwinds, as the rise of e-commerce, which requires more warehouse space on average than a traditional retail business, has driven up warehousing needs over time. Moreover, Southern California is a particularly attractive location due to entitlement challenges, land scarcity, proximity to ports and its dense urban population, all of which have fueled demand and fast rent growth. Historically, this prime and irreplaceable portfolio has commanded a top of the market valuation, trading at a 20-30% premium to net asset value (NAV) and an 8-turn premium to peers on an adjusted funds from operations (AFFO) basis.

However, as we have seen many times before with many activists, REITs are inherently poorly governed and attract management teams with misaligned interests. Rexford is no different. Despite being a California-based company, they are domiciled in Maryland, a state that is infamous for management friendly regulations, including the Maryland Unsolicited Takeovers Act, which allows the company to classify its board without shareholder approval.
A California REIT incorporating in Maryland is not for convenience reasons, but more for entrenchment purposes. It is this type of company that would also have a seven-person board with a majority (including two co-CEOs) being members for over 10 years and owning approximately 1% of outstanding common stock as a group, almost all of which was granted to them. Once setup like this, the REIT playbook is generally to take on debt, issue shares and buy as much property as you can because management’s upside is tied more to the level of assets managed than stock price. Also, at cocktail parties and clubs, it is “cool” to manage billions of dollars of properties. So, since its IPO in 2013, the company has increased its share count by over 9x, increased debt from $193 million to $3.5 billion and grew assets from $555 million to $12.6 billion. This strategy worked for a while when Rexford traded at a large premium to the underlying value of its real estate, but it finally caught up to them as sales, general and administrative expenses bloated, corporate governance eroded and executive compensation became loaded. (Two CEOs at $13 million each). As its premium to NAV started to decline, so did this strategy and Rexford now trades at a 20% discount to NAV and a 5-6 turn AFFO discount to peers with its stock price down to $40 per share (prior to Elliott’s announcement) from a high of more than $80 in December 2021.
Luckily for shareholders, the time for change has come, as Elliott Investment Management has disclosed a top five position in Rexford. While this implies a minimum of 5% economic exposure (approximately $400 million to 500 million), given Elliott’s investment history, their exposure is likely at least $1 billion of their $76 billion of assets.
Elliott has a rich history of driving change at companies like Rexford, so we expect them to advocate for better corporate governance, better capital allocation, and restore the company’s strategic focus on creating shareholder value.
While it is important to note that activism can be more challenging in Maryland, it has not acted as a prohibition, especially for experienced and committed activists like Elliott. In fact, the tools available to the company that would ordinarily discourage activism are in this situation more of poison chalice. Any attempt by management to entrench themselves in the face of an activist would only further damage their reputation and support Elliott’s case that change is warranted. So, we would expect Elliott to fare well in a proxy fight here if it came to that. But we do not think it will come to that.
When an activist engages with a company, it often puts that company in pseudo-play, getting the attention of strategic investors and private equity. This dynamic is even greater for a company like Rexford that has long been the subject of takeover speculation.
For Rexford, their premium assets, the consolidation in the REIT industry and their present discounted valuation makes the company a natural acquisition candidate. Moreover, Elliott also has a robust history of catalyzing strategic outcomes at REITs.
At Healthcare Trust of America (formerly HTA), Elliott successfully pushed for a strategic review, which ultimately led to a merger between HTA and Healthcare Realty Trust to form the largest medical office property owner in the U.S.
Given Rexford’s current 20% discount to NAV, we believe that any takeout would occur at least at NAV, but more likely at a premium given the company’s historical valuation and portfolio quality.
If such an opportunity were to materialize, as a fiduciary to its investors and Rexford shareholders, Elliott would weigh the value from an acquisition against the long-term standalone plan and advocate for whichever path would deliver the best value for shareholders. Considering the long-term plan would likely require the time and uncertainty of a board and management reconstitution, we would think that an acquisition at a reasonable premium would be the preferred path here.
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

I’m getting married next year, and a recent item on my to-do list was a fun one: buy my wedding dress. 
Experts told me that about eight to 10 months out, you should be purchasing the dress, which involves signing a contract and putting down a deposit.
Here’s what I learned about my big purchase and what to avoid.

Rack of bridal gowns hanging in a shop window in San Diego, California.
Cavan Images | Istock | Getty Images

I’m getting married next year, and a recent item on my to-do list was a fun one: buy my wedding dress. 
In mid-August, I had an appointment at a bridal boutique in New York City.

My goal for the appointment was to narrow down the dress options from five to two. I would then return to the store with my mother in late September to make the official decision with her. (She already had her flights booked for that weekend).
More from Personal Finance:Couples leverage ‘something borrowed’ to cut wedding costsSome couples are having ‘micro weddings’ as average cost is over $30,000How to use credit cards to pay for your wedding
I explained all of this to the sales associate, but when I told her my wedding date, she gave me a concerned look: “That’s very soon,” she said.
I had no idea that when you buy your dress in relation to your wedding date can affect its pricing. But it’s a great example of the kind of research and decision-making that goes into planning a wedding, especially if you’re looking to stick to a budget.
Here’s what I would have done differently when it came to my big purchase, and what experts recommend.

The earlier you start shopping, the better

During the appointment, the sales associate explained that if I waited until September to purchase the gown during my mother’s visit, I would incur so-called “rush fees,” an added cost to make sure the dress arrived on time. 
Rush fees depend on what exactly you’re rushing and how close you are to the wedding date, said Lauren Kay, executive editor at The Knot, a wedding site. In my case, rush fees would have been approximately $500, the sales associate said.
That would have represented 20% of my dress budget.
Brides should typically start shopping for a wedding dress about 12 months out from their wedding, according to The Knot. At that point, come up with a budget and research styles you like.
About eight to 10 months out, you should purchase the dress, which involves signing a contract and putting down a deposit, according to the bridal site.
“Purchasing your dress about nine months ahead of your wedding date gives you a nice cushion,” said Kay.

CNBC personal finance reporter Ana Teresa tries on a wedding dress.
Ana Teresa Sola Riviere | CNBC

I had somewhat followed that timeline: After I got engaged in March, I began to browse social media and bridal boutique websites for dresses I liked. I narrowed down my budget and thought about how much I was comfortable spending.
But at that point, my fiance and I did not have a venue nor a wedding date, so I held off from making an official purchase.
Fast forward to August. We’ve selected the venue and have sent the save-the-dates. By the time I had my dress appointment, the wedding was about nine months away.
The silver lining was that I was still on time, even if just barely, and I could avoid the rush fees. I had to consider the cost as my budget for the dress was roughly $2,500. 
Had I better understood that timing, I’d have booked my mom to come in much earlier.

Across the country, the average cost for a wedding dress is about $2,000, according to The Knot’s 2025 Real Weddings Study, which surveyed about 17,000 couples in the U.S. who got married the year before.
To avoid the added cost, I decided I would make the call on the dress at the end of the appointment. I explained the situation to my mom, and luckily, she understood. The sales associate and I video-called her on and off during the appointment as I tried on different dresses.
Then came the veils.

Instead of a ‘dress budget,’ consider an ‘attire budget’

In most instances, experts say, brides are not required to pay the full price of a dress immediately.
Instead, bridal stores require an upfront deposit to order the dress, which can range from 30% to 50% of the total cost, according to the Knot. The remaining balance is due at the time of pickup.
In my case, I was required to pay 65% of the total cost up front.
If you try on veils or other accessories during your appointment, and ultimately pick one, remember that the item’s price will be included in the total balance, thus making your down payment higher.
In my case, I wish I had remembered this detail in the moment. Looking back, I would have asked about the veil’s cost as I tried it on, rather than finding out at the point of the contract.

CNBC personal finance reporter Ana Teresa tries on a wedding dress.
Ana Teresa Sola Riviere | CNBC

No matter when in the process you buy accessories like a veil or shoes, experts say it’s important to factor them into your overall budget. While veils can cost about $100 to $600, the more intricate details they have, the more expensive they can be, according to The Knot.
Therefore, instead of a “dress budget,” brides may want to consider an “attire budget,” said Kay. Beyond the dress, factor in a veil or other headpieces, jewelry and shoes, as well as related costs like alterations.
“That’s something that can often be forgotten and that can add a significant cost to the dress,” she said.
While alteration costs can vary depending on what your dress needs, some places require a flat fee. With some preparation, you could research different alternatives to the bridal shop alterations. More

The U.S. retirement system earned a C+ in the Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index, a grade researchers said reflects gaps in coverage and income stability.
The U.S. relies heavily on voluntary savings plans, leaving many workers without consistent coverage.
Nations like the Netherlands and Australia use mandatory contributions to expand participation and build stronger safety nets.

Retirement funding looks very different depending on where you live.
While the United States leans heavily on voluntary 401(k)-style savings plans, other nations rely on mandatory contributions or more traditional pensions to ensure broad coverage and steady income.

Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index takes these structural differences into consideration when ranking some of the world’s biggest retirement systems.
“We do it because we want to give a picture of the retirement landscape,” said Christine Mahoney, global pensions leader at Mercer, a consulting firm. “We try to look at what the public systems are, what the private systems are, and look at how people will fare in retirement across all of those.”
The U.S. retirement system received a C+ rating from the Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index in 2024. It ranked 29 out of 48 global pension systems assessed.
“It means that the system is solid, designed well, but there is a significant risk,” said Mahoney. “And if we don’t clear that risk up, the system could be in some jeopardy.”

How the U.S. could ‘significantly’ improve its C+ grade

Halfpoint Images | Moment | Getty Images

Countries around the world are raising their retirement ages, as well as requiring mandatory contributions into personal retirement savings, according to research from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Experts suggest this can help address modern problems such as people living longer and fewer workers paying into the system.

“For the U.S. system, the thing that could change that grade significantly, the most important is actually coverage,” Mahoney said. “Our 401(k) plans are voluntary.”
The Netherlands is frequently given a top score in the index. Mahoney says one of the key features that makes the Dutch system stand out is mandatory contributions.
There are two broad models for retirement plans, and they function very differently:

A defined contribution plan, such as a 401(k) or individual retirement account, works like a bucket. Workers decide how much to put in, how to invest it and, in some cases, employers add to the bucket as well. The balance at retirement depends on contributions and investment returns, leaving the final outcome uncertain. In the United States, participation in these plans is voluntary, and workers typically must choose to opt in.

A defined benefit plan resembles a faucet. Programs like Social Security or employer-sponsored pensions in the U.S. promise a steady stream of income in retirement, often based on salary and years of service. It’s frequently required that the worker fund the program, either through taxes or as grounds for employment. Employers or governments manage the funding and investment risk, while retirees receive predictable monthly payments, typically for life.

What countries like the Netherlands and Australia do differently from the U.S. is require workers to pay into defined contribution plans.
“In the Netherlands … there’s a mandatory contribution made,” Mahoney said. “You can’t opt out of it either as an employer or as an employee. So getting money [into defined contribution accounts] in the U.S. is a real challenge because it is a voluntary system. If we’re going to stay voluntary, then getting it easier to launch a plan and join a plan is the critical thing for [the U.S.] to focus on.”
Watch the video above to learn more about how the U.S. retirement system stacks up against those of countries like the Netherlands and Australia. More

 Higher-income households have higher rates of retail refunds compared with lower-income shoppers, according to a recent report by the Bank of America Institute.
Wealthier shoppers can afford to purchase “speculatively,” the report notes.

Piyaphorn Promnonsri | E+ | Getty Images

Shoppers with higher incomes are more likely to return retail purchases they make, a new report finds. 
Higher-income households had the highest percentage of retail refunds, at 5.3% of their purchases in 2025, according to a recent report by the Bank of America Institute that compared higher-, middle- and lower-income shopper return behavior. The analysis is based on aggregated, anonymous transaction data from bank debit and credit card holders who made at least five transactions per month.

Lower-income households had the smallest percentage of retail refunds at around 3.7% of their purchases.
Higher-income shoppers are less cash-strapped than lower earners, the report notes, so they are more likely to “buy items speculatively,” especially if they know they can “return it later if they decide it’s not right for them.” 
This behavior is similar to what shopping experts call “bracketing,” or the act of ordering multiple products in different sizes, colors or variations, with the intention of keeping a few and returning the rest.
“That’s likely to be somewhat easier for someone who has a higher income to do,” said David Tinsley, lead author of the report and senior economist at the Bank of America Institute.
More from Personal Finance:The key to being confident in an uncertain market: CFPTrump to ‘prevent benefits’ for some under Public Service Loan ForgivenessThe ‘ideal’ age to start saving for retirement: report

To be sure, bracketing is not really new, said Edgar Dworsky, a consumer advocate and founder of ConsumerWorld.org.
“It’s really been around as long as the internet has been around,” Dworsky said. “Unlike walking into a department store — going into Macy’s and trying on something there, or seeing things in person — you’re buying much more blindly online.”
More shoppers are making more frequent returns. Nearly half, or 46%, of consumers return purchased items multiple times a month, according to a separate 2024 report by Optoro, a returns solutions company. That’s a jump from 29% in 2023.
While consumers value the ability to return products, retailers have been tightening their return policies in recent years to mitigate the high costs, experts say. 

Why return policies are tightening

Broadly, the ability to return unwanted purchases is important for consumers.
About 76% of surveyed respondents consider free returns important when deciding where to shop, per a 2024 report by the National Retail Federation and Happy Returns, a returns shipping company.
Nearly as many, 67%, of respondents stated that a negative return experience would deter them from shopping with a retailer again. 
The survey polled more than 2,000 consumers who had returned at least one online purchase in 2024, and 249 e-commerce and finance professionals from retailers with at least $500 million in revenue.
Despite those desires, returns can be costly for retailers. In 2024, retailers expected that about 16.9% of their annual sales would be returned, reaching an average cost of $890 billion, according to the report.
“Retailers themselves say it’s a very expensive business,” said Tinsley.

To offset the costs, companies have been tightening their return policies in recent years. NRF and Happy Returns found that about 66% of retailers began charging for one or more return methods.
Another way to cut back on costs is by shortening the window consumers have to make returns, said Dworsky: “We’ve generally seen this over the years.”
“I think back to the old days when you bought something … and you had maybe 180 days or maybe no return limit,” he said.
As tariffs, or taxes on imported goods, increase the cost of products, companies may look for ways to tighten return policies even further to cut down on expenses, said Dworsky.
“One of the ways of cutting expenses is to cut back on the length of return periods,” he said.

What to consider before you go shopping

To avoid going through the hassle of returning a product, Dworksy said it’s important to understand what you’re buying ahead of time.
One way to do so is by checking online reviews from customers who recently purchased the item. Some retailers, like Amazon, will flag whether shoppers tend to keep or return certain products, which can help you gauge the quality of the piece.
Check a retailer’s return policies before you buy, especially if you think there’s a chance you won’t keep the item. Look for businesses that offer more flexible terms, he said.
A 2024 report by GoDaddy found that 77% of shoppers check the return policy before making a purchase. The site polled 1,500 consumers in September.

For additional protections, it can be helpful to use a credit card for the transaction, said Dworsky.
Credit cards can offer several kinds of return protections that help cardholders in different ways, such as extending the time a consumer has to return an item or the ability to dispute charges and get a refund, per Bankrate.
However, make sure to review the fine print in your card and what terms may apply.
“Credit card return protection is a notoriously fickle credit card perk that’s increasingly rare,” notes the Bankrate report. More

The “de minimis” rule exempts shipments under $800 from tariffs and other duties.
President Donald Trump is ending the rule on Friday.
All low-value goods shipped to consumers from overseas will be subject to extra fees, raising costs, economists said.

Containers are loaded and unloaded at Port Jersey Container Terminal in New Jersey, on May 1, 2025.
Mostafa Bassim/Anadolu via Getty Images

The Trump administration is scrapping the “de minimis” rule on Friday, a move likely to raise prices for consumers who buy inexpensive goods online and that may trigger near-term shortages for certain items, economists and trade experts said.
“It’s a massive change for the U.S. consumer,” said Rathna Sharad, CEO of FlavorCloud, a cross-border logistics firm.

‘Quite a big price increase’

The de minimis exemption lets U.S. consumers import $800 worth of goods free of tariffs, duties and fees. The rule makes it cheaper for consumers who buy products directly from international sellers.
The volume of these low-value shipments has swelled amid the rise of e-commerce, experts said.
In 2024, the U.S. received about 1.4 billion de minimis shipments, more than double the 637 million in 2020, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection data.
The average de minimis shipment was about $48 in 2024, according to CBP data.

Most of the shipments come from China, which accounts for about 60% of the volume, Sharad said.

President Donald Trump ended the de minimis exemption for China in May. He’s now doing the same for the rest of the world.
Cheap items bought online and shipped to consumers’ doorsteps will be slapped with duties, whereas they’d previously applied just to packages over $800, Sharad said.
All shipments — including beauty products from Korea, leather shoes from Italy, kitchen knives from Japan — will be subject to additional fees and taxes, such as tariffs that the Trump administration has levied on most U.S. trading partners.
“For the consumer, it can be quite a big price increase,” said Mary Lovely, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, whose research specializes in trade with China and global supply chains.

‘Pro-poor trade policy’

Amazon delivery person sorting packages to be delivered, Manhattan, New York.
Lindsey Nicholson/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

The actual price increase for consumers will depend on many factors such as country-specific tariff rates, duties the U.S. places on goods and manufacturing materials, and how businesses adjust pricing, economists said.
Here’s how the end of de minimis would impact some specific consumer goods, according to a FlavorCloud analysis:

$30 slippers (lightweight, premium cotton) from China would cost about $45, a 51% increase;
$37 nutritional supplements (plant-based, performance-formulated) from Canada would cost about $60, up 60%;
A $240 chef’s knife (with wooden handle and white steel) from Japan would cost about $298, up 24%.

Pablo Fajgelbaum, an economics professor at University of California, Los Angeles, and Amit Khandelwal, an economics professor at Yale University, write that de minimis is a “pro-poor trade policy.”
More from Personal Finance:Wealthy Americans are traveling to Europe to dodge tariffs on luxury goodsWhy it may be time to diversify away from the S&P 500More changes are ahead for student loan repayment plans
An end to the rule would disproportionately hurt low-income and minority households, which derive more of a financial benefit from the duty exemption than richer households, according to research they published in February.
“Most people [using the de minimis exemption] are people who were living on a budget and are concerned about prices,” Lovely said. “I think some people will just buy less.”
It’s not just consumers: Small businesses will also have to adjust to the new regime, Lovely said.
It puts more pressure on them when tariffs are already raising their costs for goods and manufacturing materials like steel and aluminum, she said.

More transparency for imports

The Trump administration argues that scrapping the de minimis rule will limit trafficking of counterfeits, illicit drugs and weapons by bad actors.
The government currently has little insight on de-minimis shipments due to the simplified customs clearance procedures for them, attorneys at law firm Hogan Lovells wrote recently.  
Collecting duties on more imports also raises federal tax revenue, economists said.

However, beefing up oversight of these shipments creates a larger administrative burden and requires more manpower to screen packages — all of which come with an extra cost for the federal government, economists said.
It’s unclear whether the additional tax revenue collected by the federal government will outweigh the extra costs, Lovely said. “I don’t think we’ll ever really know.”
A U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesperson wasn’t immediately able to provide comment for this story.

Meanwhile, postal services in Australia, India, Japan, New Zealand, Switzerland, the UK and other European nations said recently that they’d suspend shipments to the U.S. amid confusion over questions like how customs duties would be collected.
While the trade system will eventually adjust, there may be delays and higher prices in the short term, economists said.
The near-term impact may be “unavailability” of certain items, especially with the end-of-year holidays approaching, said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale University Budget Lab and former chief economist at the White House Council of Economic Advisers during the Biden administration.
“I would not say this will have a large macroeconomic impact on the U.S.,” Tedeschi said. “That said, for certain people it will cause a great deal of headache,” he added. More

Football player Travis Kelce proposed to pop star Taylor Swift with an old mine, brilliant cut diamond ring.
Jared Jewelers told CNBC through a written statement that the ring could cost approximately $250,000 to $500,000.
Swifties may not find it easy to follow the trend: “Due to their rarity, true old mine diamonds can be harder to source,” one expert said.

Travis Kelce, left, and Taylor Swift react as the Edmonton Oilers and the Florida Panthers play during the first period in Game 4 of the 2025 Stanley Cup Final at Amerant Bank Arena in Sunrise, Florida, on June 12, 2025.
Bruce Bennett | Getty Images

Global popstar Taylor Swift and NFL player Travis Kelce are officially engaged — with a large diamond ring to prove it. But Swifties hoping to emulate the style may find it challenging to do so, experts say.
After a two-year relationship, Swift and Kelce announced their engagement through an Instagram post on their official accounts on Tuesday.

In the photos of their social media post appears a hard-to-miss diamond on Swift’s finger, a style that’s known as an old mine brilliant cut, Tree Paine, Swift’s publicist, told The Associated Press. The ring was designed by Kindred Lubeck at Artifex Fine Jewelry in New York City.
More from Personal Finance:Couples leverage ‘something borrowed’ to cut wedding costsSome couples are having ‘micro weddings’How to use credit cards to pay for your wedding
“It looks to be upwards of 10 carats, and it might be a vintage stone given the cut,” Paul Zimnisky, a New York-based diamond industry analyst, said via email. “Given the quality of the diamond and the size, it could easily be worth hundreds of thousands.” 
Jared Jewelers told CNBC through a written statement that the ring could cost approximately $250,000 to $500,000.
However, “no one knows for sure,” said Amanda Gizzi, senior vice president of corporate affairs at industry group Jewelers of America. 

It’s “a lot of speculation at this point,” she said.

‘This ring aligns to recent trends’

While Swift’s ring was designed for her, it wouldn’t be unusual to see replicas or similar styles appear across the market, said Zimnisky. (The trend-setting Swift’s engagement moved several stocks this week, including names related to jewelry and apparel, amid fan interest in her ring and engagement dress.)
A comparable diamond, meanwhile, may be harder to come by.
Old mine diamonds have a “distinct elongated shape with curved edges” and go back to the time when diamonds were cut, shaped and polished by hand, according to Sarah Hanlon, celebrity and entertainment editor of The Knot, a bridal site.
“Due to their rarity, true old mine diamonds can be harder to source,” Hanlon said over email.
What’s more, the larger carat weight a stone is, the rarer and more expensive it’s likely to be, Gizzi said, “especially when we’re talking about natural diamonds versus a lab-grown.”
According to Zimnisky, lab-grown diamonds can be found for almost 90% less than the cost of a natural diamond. 

However, experts say the elongated style of the singer’s ring has already been popping up among engaged couples — or as a song by Swift goes, “It’s been a long time coming.”
“This style is very much on trend for what we’ve started to see, which is elongated cuts like hers, as well as a return to natural diamonds and then also this idea of antique cuts,” Gizzi said. 
According to Jared Jewelers, “this ring aligns to recent trends in bold gold looks, fancy cuts, and oversized elongated stones.”
In fact, elongated shapes like marquise have been selling for a premium this year due to high demand, said Zimnisky.

‘There’s no wrong way to go about it’

Couples inspired by Swift’s ring can find more affordable versions with less expensive gemstones, said Zimnisky.
While old mine diamonds are rare and can be more costly, diamond shapes like cushions, emeralds and Asschers are easier to come by, said The Knot’s Hanlon.
Couples can also look into the vintage jewelry market, experts say. 
“There’s no wrong way to go about it,” said Gizzi. “The inspiration is definitely something that can be found in different price points.”

When shopping for engagement rings, start off by defining your budget. While costs can range widely, the average couple spent $5,200 on an engagement ring, according to The Knot’s 2024 Jewelry and Engagement study.
Instead of rules of thumb like spending “three months’ salary,” your budget should come down to what you’re looking for in a ring, experts say.
When shopping for natural diamonds, the four C’s – the color, carat, clarity and cut – determine the feature of the diamond as well as the price. 
Lab-grown diamonds will no longer follow the same rules. In June, the Gemological Institute of America, the organization that designed the widely used grading system, said it will instead use descriptive terms to determine the quality of lab-grown diamonds and classify the gems as either “premium” or “standard.”
The new grading system will be on the market on Oct. 1, said Stephen Morisseau, a spokesperson for the GIA.
Still, when looking at either lab-grown or natural stones, you want to understand the stone’s dimensions, its brilliance, the shape and the weight, said Gizzi. More