Markus Andrews

The topic of student loan forgiveness sparks heated feelings about fairness, personal responsibility and economic soundness.
Why is the subject so fraught? CNBC asked a range of experts for their thoughts.

D’Aungilique Jackson, of Fresno, California, holds a “Cancel Student Debt” sign outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., after the nation’s high court struck down President Joe Biden’s student debt relief program on Friday, June 30, 2023.
Kent Nishimura | Los Angeles Times | Getty Images

It took Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin around 30 years to pay off his $100,000 student loan balance. He told CNBC that he wonders why other borrowers should just get their debt wiped away and has battled President Joe Biden’s efforts to cancel the loans.
The topic of student loan forgiveness sparks heated feelings about fairness, personal responsibility and economic soundness. The Biden administration’s most recent student loan forgiveness proposal garnered a record number of public comments, with over 148,000 people sharing their opinion.

More from Personal Finance:Average consumer carries $6,218 in credit card debtHere’s the inflation breakdown for April 2024 — in one chartSome vacationers expect to carry summer travel debt
When Marlon Fox, a chiropractor in North Charleston, South Carolina, got his $119,500 student debt forgiven last year, he didn’t tell many people his story. He lives in a mostly Republican area where there is deep skepticism toward forgiving the debt of those who’ve benefited from higher education.
“They say, ‘Hey, you got your school loans paid off? That’s unfair,'” Fox told CNBC last year.
Why is the subject of student loan forgiveness so fraught? CNBC asked a range of different experts for their thoughts.

’A common-sense fairness question’

“There is a common-sense fairness question when it comes to erasing student debt,” Griffin wrote in an email to CNBC. He served as Arkansas’ lieutenant governor before he was sworn in as attorney general in 2023.

“It’s not that the debt doesn’t get paid, it’s that the debt gets paid using existing resources, which comes from taxpayers,” Griffin said. This spring, he and attorneys general at six other states brought a lawsuit against the Biden administration’s new repayment plan, known as the Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, plan, which leads to a faster path to debt forgiveness.
“How is it fair for someone like me, who paid back my student loans, or for someone who never went to college in the first place and therefore does not have student debt, to have our tax dollars cover the personal debts of other people?” he said.

‘A narrative of personal responsibility’

To understand our attitudes about debt today, we need to look back in time, said Kate Padgett Walsh, a professor of philosophy at Iowa State University who researches the ethics of borrowing.
“Long before the invention of money, human beings were indebted to one another in families and small communities,” she said. “Children are indebted to parents for care, family and friends likewise become indebted to one another when we help each other out. Repaying these debts is part of how we all live together and build communities. Debts are a basic feature of human life with one another.”
“A person who receives the benefits of family, friends, and community without contributing their fair share is failing to be a responsible member of the group,” she added.

But the reason so many people today feel that failing to repay debts is irresponsible is because they’ve been “inundated with that message” from entities who profit from it, Padgett Walsh said.
“Lenders and businesses — especially now, given how much of our consumption is propped up by debt —profit from people taking out debt and feeling obligated to pay it back,” she said. “So, they encourage us to take out as much debt as we can possibly bear, and then insist that it would be morally wrong not to repay it.”
“We buy into this message in part because it resonates with our basic sense of an obligation to repay debts to family, friends and community that existed before money was invented,” Padgett Walsh said.
“But that can blind us to some of the real harms caused by actual forms of financial debt,” she said. “Our priorities should be preventing and alleviating student debt, rather than insisting on a narrative of personal responsibility.”

‘Different relationships to the education system’

“One reason why loan forgiveness is such a partisan issue is that members of each party have different relationships to the educational system,” said Devin Singh, an associate professor of religion at Dartmouth College and author of the forthcoming book, “Sacred Debt.”
“Statistically, a higher percentage of Democratic voters graduated from a four-year college and attended graduate school. So student loan forgiveness may affect more Democrats than Republicans directly.”
“The fact that most Americans don’t have a college degree may also mean that many resist loan forgiveness because student debt is not their problem and so forgiveness does not appear to directly benefit them,” said Singh, whose work has included explorations of the intersection of religion with politics and with economics.
The different parties also have different understandings of the role of higher education, he added.
“Democrats may express views about education contributing to the public good and supporting an engaged citizenry. Some who oppose student loan forgiveness view education as a private commodity that benefits the person who purchases it.”

‘A generational gap’

“I think there’s also a lot of misconceptions about fairness,” said Charlie Eaton, an associate professor of sociology at the University of California, Merced.
“A lot of people have trouble putting themselves in the shoes of a student loan borrower if they haven’t been one,” he said. “There’s a generational gap. A lot of older Americans didn’t have to borrow to go to college.”
“A lot of people also don’t understand many student loan borrowers who haven’t been able to pay off their debts have been making payments,” Eaton said. “It’s not they’re not making payments on their debts, but that the interest on the debt is so great that even when they’re making payments, the size of the debt still goes up.”

Fox, the chiropractor who got his debt forgiven last year, had been paying off his student debt since 1988.
Over those years, he paid around $200,000. He originally borrowed close to $60,000. More

Social Security beneficiaries may face an across-the-board benefit cut in the next decade if Congress does not take action sooner.
While Congress seems to be at a standstill, some say a bipartisan commission is the answer.
Here’s why the idea has drawn both fierce opposition and fierce support.

zimmytws | iStock | Getty Images

A protester interrupted a January congressional committee hearing to consider a bill that would create a bipartisan commission to address Social Security. “A vote for a commission is a vote to cut Social Security,” the man shouted before he was escorted off the floor.
While there was a protest of one that day, there has been a chorus of opposition to the idea of creating a commission, as well as strong support — from experts and politicians on both the left and the right.

The combined trust funds Social Security relies on to pay benefits are now projected to be depleted in 2035. On that date, the program will be able to pay just 83% of benefits.
But another date — the depletion of the trust fund specifically devoted to retirement benefits — is approaching sooner. Less than a decade from now, in 2033, Social Security may pay just 79% of those benefits.
Most Americans, 89%, think Congress should act immediately to make sure full benefits are available to both current and future beneficiaries, a 2023 AARP poll found. And 90% said Republicans and Democrats should work together to find a solution.

“We all as Americans want to get ourselves into a room, face the facts, make the hard choices and then communicate with the public about how we save this program,” said Rep. Scott Peters, D-Calif., in an interview with CNBC.
Peters is pushing for the Fiscal Commission Act alongside Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., and Sens. Joe Manchin, I-W.Va., and Mitt Romney, R-Utah.

The bill would create a commission to provide policy recommendations to address the federal government’s long-term fiscal issues, and those proposals could get expedited consideration from Congress. The commission would also be responsible for a public awareness campaign to educate Americans about the country’s current fiscal situation.
Another Democratic leader — Rep. John Larson of Connecticut — has vehemently opposed the proposal, due to the closed-door nature of the negotiations and the priority consideration any ensuing recommendations would receive.
“It’s probably one of the most undemocratic things that a Congress has ever put forward,” Larson said.
Instead, Larson is championing his own bill, Social Security 2100, to improve the program’s solvency and expand benefits through tax increases targeted at the wealthy.
Social Security advocacy groups have also staunchly opposed efforts to create a commission.
“This is a thinly veiled effort to avoid political accountability,” Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, recently testified in an April congressional committee hearing.

How the last major reforms, in 1983, came together

President Ronald Reagan signs the Social Security Act Amendment into law on April 20, 1983.
Corbis | Getty Images

The last major Social Security reforms, which were enacted in 1983, were preceded by a commission.
The National Commission on Social Security Reform, formed in 1981, is often called the Greenspan Commission, after its chairman, economist Alan Greenspan, who more famously served as chairman of the Federal Reserve.
“Most commissions, of course, don’t do anything,” Greenspan wrote in his 2007 memoir, “The Age of Turbulence.” “But [White House chief of staff] Jim Baker, the architect of this one, believed passionately the government could be made to work.”
The bipartisan commission included 15 members chosen either by the White House, the Senate majority leader or the Speaker of the House. Every commissioner was an “all-star in his or her field,” according to Greenspan.
“I ran the commission in the spirit that Jim Baker had envisioned, aiming for an effective bipartisan compromise,” Greenspan wrote.
More from Personal Finance:How Supplemental Security Income benefits may change after 50-year anniversaryWhy more people don’t wait to claim Social Security — and what experts sayA great wealth transfer or retirement savings crisis? Expert says it can be both
The group had a tall task — to come up with recommendations to solve the financing crisis the program faced at the time.
The Social Security amendments President Ronald Reagan signed into law in 1983 “involved pain for everyone,” Greenspan wrote.
The changes involved taxes on Social Security benefits, increases to payroll tax rates, a future increase to the retirement age and a near-term postponement of cost-of-living adjustments.
At the time, the changes were projected to enable Social Security to pay full benefits through 2057.
Today, the projected date is 2035, with rising income inequality contributing to the depletion dates being pushed up, according to the Economic Policy Institute and other experts. Social Security payroll taxes are capped at $168,600 in earnings. As wage growth for high earners outpaces average wage growth, more income falls above the threshold where it is not subject to Social Security payroll taxes, the EPI says.

‘Not an example of a successful bipartisan commission’

The 1983 legislation is often touted as a grand bipartisan bargain between Reagan, a Republican, and House Speaker Tip O’Neill, a Democratic congressman from Massachusetts.
Yet some Greenspan Commission participants have opposed using it as a future model for reform.
One prominent critic was Robert M. Ball, who served as the commissioner for Social Security under three presidents and who represented O’Neill on the Greenspan Commission.
“Nothing, however, should obscure the fact that the National Commission on Social Security Reform was not an example of a successful bipartisan commission,” Ball wrote in a portion of the memoir he was working on when he died in 2008. The memoir, “The Greenspan Commission: What Really Happened,” was published in 2010.
“The commission itself stalled — essentially deadlocked despite continuing to talk — after reaching agreement on the size of the problem that needed to be addressed,” Ball wrote. “As a commission, that was as far as it got.”

Social Security Commission Chairman Alan Greenspan, left, shakes hands with Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, prior to a Social Security hearing on Feb. 15, 1983. At right is Sen. Bob Dole, R-Kan., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. In the background is Sen. John Danforth, R-Mo.
Bettmann | Bettmann | Getty Images

More recently, in November, five staff members who worked on the commission — including Altman of Social Security Works, who served as Greenspan’s executive assistant — issued a statement to urge policymakers not to use it as a model to fast-track changes including benefit cuts.
“In the end, they left a big hunk of the problem to be solved by the Congress, which solved it,” Bruce D. Schobel, who served as a staff actuary on the commission and signed the statement, said in an interview with CNBC.
The increase to the retirement age that is still getting phased in today resulted from House amendment, rather than from a commission recommendation, the staff members said in their statement.
Since 1983, there have been similar efforts to create a commission to consider Social Security that have failed, the staff members noted.
“Congress should address Social Security in the sunshine through regular order, as it always has,” the staff members wrote.

Lawmakers divided on best path forward

Today, lawmakers are divided on the best path forward to address Social Security.
Larson, the Democratic congressman representing Connecticut, hopes to advance his bill.
The Social Security 2100 proposal currently has almost 200 Democratic House co-sponsors. The bill would provide a host of benefit increases — including a 2% across-the-board benefit boost — which would be paid for by adding Social Security payroll and investment taxes for individuals with earnings above $400,000.
A similar proposal put forward by Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would apply tax increases for earnings over $250,000.
If the Social Security 2100 bill makes it to the floor, it may pass “overwhelmingly” on a bipartisan basis, Larson predicts.
“Congress needs to vote,” Larson said.
But Peters — the Democratic congressman representing California — said he believes a bipartisan commission is the answer after Social Security 2100 failed to move forward even under Democratic control of the White House and Congress.
“I think the other efforts are honest efforts and they’re just not going to pass,” Peters said.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., conducts a news conference on Democrats’ plan to “secure and expand” Social Security, in the Capitol Visitor Center, May 23, 2023. From left are Reps. John Larson, D-Conn., Brian Higgins, D-N.Y., Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., Jeffries, Dan Kildee, D-Mich., and Richard Neal, D-Mass.
Tom Williams | CQ-Roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

He said that by waiting until the last minute ahead of the projected depletion date, lawmakers who are facing a 21% across-the-board benefit cut may instead negotiate that down to 15%.
“If I wanted to cut Social Security, [if] that was my goal, what I would do is do nothing,” Peters said. “My goal is not to have any cuts.”
The 1983 reform efforts are a lesson to not wait until the last minute, he said.
“When you say, ‘Don’t touch Social Security’ in the situation it’s in, it’s like telling the doctor not to treat the cancer patient in the hospital,” Peters said. “It’s just dumb.”
The Fiscal Commission Act has drawn criticism from both Social Security advocates on the left and notable figures on the right, including former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform.
Peters takes opposition as a sign they’re in the “right spot” for bipartisanship.
“I don’t understand why anyone would do this job if they don’t want to fix these big problems,” Peters said. “And that’s why we’re sent here explicitly.”
Experts including Altman have said the future of Social Security is on the ballot this November.
The AARP is posing one question — What is your position on Social Security? — to all candidates for federal office this year. More

Generation Z is beginning to invest at age 19 on average, which is significantly younger than prior generations.
Setting aside $5,000 a year each year starting at age 19 could yield $500,000 more at retirement than starting at age 25.
Most Americans trust information from advisors and accountants more than social media finance influencers.

Eternity In An Instant | Stone | Getty Images

The financial benefit of starting to invest early

The time element is crucial for investing. A teenager opening a retirement savings account could end up with hundreds of thousands more dollars compared to someone who began saving in their 20s.
For example, say you put aside $5,000 a year each year until you retire at age 65, and earn an average annual return of 7%. An investor who starts at age 25 could end up with roughly $998,000, while someone who starts at age 19 — despite contributing only $30,000 more — might end up with more than $1.5 million. Delaying until 30 would yield about $691,000. 

Experts suggest an easy way for young people to build wealth is by opening an individual retirement account that allows you to contribute after-tax dollars, also known as a Roth IRA. Roth IRAs offer tax-free growth, and the money can typically be withdrawn tax-free in retirement.
“Every young person, the minute they get their first job, should only be doing Roth IRAs if they qualify, or Roth 401(k)s,” said Ed Slott, an IRA expert and certified public accountant. “Get the vehicle, the receptacle, the Roth IRA set up and it’s more likely they’ll make it a habit for the rest of their lives as they see their account grow.”

Trust advisors, not TikTok

Much of Gen Z’s confidence about investing comes from the growing accessibility of financial resources, according to the Schwab report. More than a quarter of Gen Z, 28%, say they learned about investing in school, compared with 19% of millennials and 12% of Gen X.
There’s also a greater abundance of information available online and on social media that older generations did not have access to, especially at such early ages. However, experts recommend turning to a trusted financial advisor before taking advice from social media.
“There’s a lot of information out there, but that does not equate to knowledge or context or sometimes the hype of certain parts of the markets that feel attractive, but may not be very good for your long-term investment health,” Williams said. “It’s like being attracted to an ice cream cone versus, you know, the more boring balanced diet, to build wealth over time.”

Most Americans are swiping past the “finfluencer” content showing up on social media, the survey shows.
About three-quarters, or 76%, of Schwab survey respondents said they don’t follow any finance influencers, and 65% reported that social media has no impact on their investments. Overall, respondents said they are more likely to engage with a financial advisor (57%) than social media platforms (42%) for financial advice.

Should people with student loans be investing?

A growing concern for many young people is student loans. In the second quarter of 2024, 6.8 million borrowers under 24 hold a total of $99 billion in federal student loan debt, U.S. Department of Education data shows. That number is even higher, at $490 billion, for the 14.8 million borrowers ages 25 to 34. 

However, experts say it shouldn’t hold anyone back from investing.
“If anybody ever waited until they were debt free to do anything, they would never do anything,” Slott said.
But balancing debt repayment and investing for future goals is important. Williams recommends people make the minimum payment on their loans and start small with retirement savings — even if that means putting aside just $100 a month.
As more payments are made and the student loan debt shrinks, he said, “you’ve already started to grow some retirement savings, and you’ll have more from your budget, then, to commit.” More

During the first quarter, average retirement account balances reached the highest levels since the fourth quarter of 2021, according to Fidelity.
For workers to gauge their savings success, it can help to know how their industry peers are doing.

Jose Luis Pelaez Inc

To gauge your retirement preparedness, you may compare your 401(k) balance with other savers’ progress. But you might find that people in your field are a better comparison point than those in your age group.
Recent data from Fidelity finds that 401(k) plan investors on the firm’s platform had a $125,900 average 401(k) balance in the first quarter.

When broken down by age, the average balance was $241,200 for baby boomers, $178,500 for Gen X, $59,800 for millennials and $11,300 for Gen Z.
More from Personal Finance:Biden advisor unveils tax policy plan ahead of expiring Trump tax cutsWhy maintenance and repair costs can be a surprise for first-time homeownersHere are the ‘micro pockets’ of deflation in May 2024 — in one chart
Yet comparing balances by industry may help savers better gauge how they compare with their fellow workers.
Fidelity put industry data together so the companies on its 401(k) platform could better understand their employees’ savings behavior, according to Mike Shamrell, vice president of thought leadership for workplace investing at Fidelity.
“We still have a lot of companies that are really in a war for talent,” said Shamrell, and their 401(k) plans are often a hiring tool.

“They want to make sure that what they’re doing is aligned with the companies that they’re competing with for talent,” Shamrell said.

The average 401(k) balance tends to be higher in industries where pay is greater, he noted.
Legal services is at the top of that list, with a $306,400 average 401(k) balance.
The petrochemical industry came in second, with $255,500, followed by energy production/distribution, with $214,400.
Industries with the lowest average 401(k) balance include retail trade, with $51,200; health care excluding physicians, with $66,600; and real estate, with $70,700.  

What experts say to focus on instead

Instead of balances, a better metric to gauge workers’ retirement savings success is their total savings rate, experts say. Fidelity generally advises workers to aim to set aside 15% of their pre-tax income, including employer contributions, toward retirement.
Overall, Fidelity’s 401(k) participants had an average total savings rate of 14.2%, including employee and employer contributions — the closest it has ever been to the firm’s recommended savings rate.

While workers may get distracted by how big they think their nest egg needs to be in order to retire — with one recent Northwestern Mutual survey suggesting people believe they need $1.46 million to live comfortably in retirement — experts say it’s generally best to focus on a consistently high savings rate.
Industries where the total savings rate is highest include pharmaceuticals, with a total savings rate of 19.7%; petrochemicals, 19.1%; and airlines, 18.4%.
Industries with the lowest average total savings rate include retail trade, 10.4%; health care, excluding physicians, with 10.9%; and construction and scientific and technical, each with 12.3%.

Where employer help is most generous

Of course, to have a high total savings rate, it helps to have generous help from employers. The overall average employer contribution rate is 4.8%, according to Fidelity.
The industries where employer contribution rates are highest include petrochemicals, with 8.2%; and pharmaceuticals and airlines, each with 7.8%.
The industries where employer contribution rates are lowest include health care, excluding physicians, with 2.9%; retail trade, 3%; and scientific and technical, 3.1%.  
To be sure, any retirement savings progress may be diminished if investors take out a 401(k) loan, as 17.8% of Fidelity’s plan participants have. More

YOUR GUIDE TO NAVIGATING YOUR FINANCIAL FUTURE

The second-quarter estimated tax deadline for 2024 is June 17 and you could trigger a penalty if you don’t send a payment.
Filers may owe estimated taxes with earnings from self-employment, gig economy work, small businesses, investments and more.
You can avoid late-payment penalties by sending 90% of 2024 taxes or 100% of your 2023 levies if your adjusted gross income is less than $150,000.

D3sign | Moment | Getty Images

The second-quarter estimated tax deadline for 2024 is June 17, and you could owe a penalty if you don’t send a payment, according to the IRS.
You typically owe estimated tax payments for income without withholdings, such as from contract jobs, freelancing or gig economy work, or if you run a small business.

But quarterly estimated tax payments are not just for the self-employed or small business owners, experts say.
More from Personal Finance:Biden advisor unveils tax policy plan ahead of expiring Trump tax cutsWhy maintenance and repair costs can be a surprise for first-time homeownersHere are the ‘micro pockets’ of deflation in May 2024 — in one chart
For example, you may need a quarterly payment after a large distribution from a pretax individual retirement account or a significant profit from selling an asset, according to certified financial planner Kelly Renner at Life Strategies Financial Partners in Augusta, Georgia.
You must make quarterly estimated tax payments if you expect to have at least $1,000 in tax liability or more on your 2024 return.
For the 2024 tax year, the estimated tax deadlines are April 15, June 17, Sept. 16 and Jan. 15, 2025. If you skip these deadlines, you could trigger an interest-based penalty calculated using the current interest rate and balance due.

Avoid a penalty by meeting the ‘safe harbor’ rules

It is possible to avoid penalties for missed estimated tax payments by meeting “safe harbor rules” from the IRS, explained Sheneya Wilson, a certified public accountant and founder of Fola Financial in New York.
You meet the safe harbor rules by paying at least 90% of the current year’s tax liability or 100% of last year’s taxes, whichever is smaller.
However, that threshold climbs to 110% if your adjusted gross income from 2023 was $150,000 or higher. You can find adjusted gross income on line 11 of Form 1040 from your 2023 tax return.

While the safe harbor protects from penalties, you could still owe taxes for 2024 if you earn more than 2023 and don’t make higher estimated payments.
If you are expecting “rapid income growth” for 2024, you should work with a tax professional for a “proper tax plan and projection,” Wilson said.

How to make quarterly estimated tax payments

The “most secure, fastest and easiest way” to make estimated tax payments is online, according to the IRS.
You can use your online account, IRS Direct Pay or the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Electronic Federal Tax Payment System, or EFTPS.
“Every taxpayer should have an account with IRS.gov,” which makes it easy to make payments and reconcile transactions, Wilson explained.
However, if you prefer to mail payments, experts suggest using certified mail with a return receipt for proof of an on-time payment.

Don’t miss these exclusives from CNBC PRO More

More homeowners are listing their homes for sale.
But properties are taking longer to sell as potential buyers face high prices and interest rates.
Here’s what that means for homebuyers and sellers.

Goodboy Picture Company | E+ | Getty Images

More homeowners are listing their homes for sale, but properties are taking longer to sell as potential buyers face high prices and interest rates.
New listings from home sellers jumped in May, up 13% from a year ago, according to the latest market report by Zillow.

“You have an increase in sellers coming back on the market,” said Orphe Divounguy, a senior economist at Zillow.
More from Personal Finance:Here’s the inflation breakdown for May 2024How much homeownership costs annuallyBiden and Trump both want to extend tax cuts
But with buyers not returning to the market, many new listings are just adding to inventory. The number of homes on the market rose 22% compared with last year, Zillow found.
“Homes are staying on the market for a bit longer because the sales are not keeping up with the flow of homes coming on the market,” Divounguy said.

‘The market is slowing down’

Almost two-thirds, or 61.9%, of homes listed on the market in May had been for sale for at least 30 days without going under contract, according to a new analysis by Redfin. About 40.1% of homes that were for sale in May had been listed for at least two months without going under contract, Redfin found.

“The market is slowing down. Homes are taking longer to sell and that allows inventory to accumulate on the market,” said Daryl Fairweather, chief economist at Redfin.

Yet despite the recent jump in supply, “we’re still starved for inventory in the for-sale market,” said Divounguy. The housing inventory in the U.S. is still 34% below pre-pandemic levels, according to Zillow.
“We’re short nationwide of about 4.3 million homes,” he said. “We’re still in a housing unit deficit.”

Homebuyers are waiting on lower mortgage rates

As mortgage rates have remained high and housing affordability has strained household finances, buyers have been unable to enter the market, Divounguy explained.
“Buyers are facing these incredibly high mortgage rates, at least relative to what they were during the pandemic,” said Fairweather, who believes homebuyers might lack the motivation and financial ability to purchase a home.
The 30-year fixed rate mortgage in the U.S. slid to 6.95% on June 13, lower from 6.99% a week prior, according to Freddie Mac data via the Federal Reserve. 

While mortgage rates could “change pretty quickly” or “on a dime,” said Fairweather, buyers are unlikely to see big movement in the near term. The Fed held rates steady at its June meeting and now anticipates just one rate cut this year. Its next meeting is July 30-31.
“There’s no right answer for homebuyers who are deciding whether to wait or not,” Fairweather said. “It’s just up to chance when mortgage rates drop. Nobody really knows when that will happen, so it’s hard to plan your life around that.”

What to do if you’re a buyer or a seller

Some markets in the U.S. are seeing a significant increase in unsold inventory. About 60.5% of listings in Dallas, Texas, stayed on the market for at least 30 days, up from 53% a year earlier, according to Redfin.
In Fort Lauderdale, Florida, the share of unsold listings that have stayed on the market for at least 30 days is 75.5%, up from 68.2% a year prior, Redfin found.
A similar increase is happening in two other areas in Florida. The share of unsold homes in Tampa that have been on the market for 30 days is 68.7%, up from 61.9% a year ago; in Jacksonville, 69.2%, up from 62.9% in the same period, per Redfin data.
“When you give buyers more options, that means they have more bargaining power,” Divounguy said.
If you notice homes for sale linger on the market for longer in your area, “there’s probably an opportunity to get [a property] for under its listed price,” Fairweather said.
If you make it into the home inspection process and you learn about issues that were neither noticeable during the initial walkthrough nor disclosed, it may be worth asking the home seller to do repairs, she said. 
But don’t overdo it: “You don’t want to be nit-picky and ask for every single repair,” such as chipped paint, Fairweather said. 

Other markets are still in favor of home sellers as inventory remains tight, Divounguy said. Not only do many homeowners have record home equity, they also have low mortgage payments.
If a home seller needs to move this year due to upcoming life changes and their area is experiencing high levels of unsold listings, they may need to be prepared to cut their asking price to draw interest.
“Price cuts sell homes,” he said. More

Deflation occurs when prices are falling for consumer goods and services. It’s the opposite of inflation.
Prices have deflated over the past year in some categories, according to the consumer price index.
The dynamic has largely occurred for physical goods such as furniture, cars and electronics. Prices for travel and for some groceries have fallen, too.

Pixelseffect | E+ | Getty Images

Consumers saw prices for some goods and services deflate in May, amid a backdrop of broadly easing inflationary pressures.
Whereas inflation is a measure of how quickly consumer prices are rising, deflation is the opposite: It gauges how quickly they’re declining.

There are currently some “micro pockets” of deflation in the U.S. economy, said Joe Seydl, a senior markets economist at J.P. Morgan Private Bank.

In these pockets, there was an “extreme disconnect” between supply and demand during the Covid-19 pandemic that sent prices soaring, Seydl said. Prices are now normalizing as those dynamics unwind, he said.
However, Americans shouldn’t expect deflation across the broad U.S. economy, economists said.
“Consumers would love to have the prices they had back in 2019,” Seydl said. “But we very likely won’t see that, unless we have a major recession.”

Why prices are deflating for goods

Consumers have largely seen prices deflate for physical goods, such as cars, furniture and appliances, economists said.

For example, households have seen prices for furniture and bedding fall by 3.7% since May 2023, according to the consumer price index. Those for laundry equipment, dishes and flatware, and outdoor equipment and supplies are down 8.8%, 8.1% and 5%, respectively.

Prices have also fallen for new cars by 1.4% in the past year, while those for used cars and trucks decreased 9.3%. Vehicle prices were among the first to surge when the economy reopened broadly early in 2021, amid a shortage of semiconductor chips essential for manufacturing.
Demand for physical goods soared in the early days of the Covid pandemic as consumers were confined to their homes and couldn’t spend on things such as concerts, travel or dining out.
“A lot of that funding found itself in new cars and home renovations,” said Michael Pugliese, a senior economist at Wells Fargo Economics.
More from Personal Finance:Here’s the inflation breakdown for May 2024 — in one chartThe Federal Reserve holds interest rates steadyMaintenance costs can be a surprise for first-time homeowners
The health crisis also snarled global supply chains, meaning goods weren’t hitting the shelves as quickly as consumers wanted them.
Such supply-and-demand dynamics drove up prices.
Now, however, they’ve fallen back to earth. The initial pandemic-era craze of consumers fixing up their homes and upgrading their home offices has diminished, cooling prices. Supply-chain issues have also largely unwound, economists said.
Overall physical goods prices, excluding food and energy commodities, have deflated in all but one month since May 2023, for example, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Goods prices are down 1.7% over the past year.

The U.S. dollar’s strength relative to other global currencies has also helped rein in prices for goods, economists said. This makes it less expensive for U.S. companies to import items from overseas, since the dollar can buy more.
The Nominal Broad U.S. Dollar Index is higher than at any pre-pandemic point dating to at least 2006, according to Federal Reserve data. The index gauges the dollar’s appreciation relative to currencies of the nation’s main trading partners such as the euro, the Canadian dollar and the Japanese yen.

Deflation for groceries, travel and electronics

Prices have also declined in the past year for some non-goods items.
For example, grocery prices have fallen for items such as ham, rice, fresh fish and seafood, milk, potatoes, coffee, margarine and cheese. Notably, consumers have seen apple prices fall 13.2% in the past year amid burgeoning supply.
Each grocery item has unique supply-and-demand dynamics that can influence pricing, economists said. Egg prices, for example, spiked in 2022 due largely to a historic and deadly outbreak of bird flu and have since fallen.

Travelers have also seen deflation for airline fares, down 5.9%, hotel rates, down 1.7%, and car rental rates, down 8.8%, since May 2023. For example, airlines have increased the volume of available seats for travelers by flying larger planes on domestic routes, which has helped push down prices, Hayley Berg, lead economist at travel site Hopper, wrote recently.
Additionally, evidence suggests “consumers are becoming a bit more price sensitive,” said Olivia Cross, a North America economist at Capital Economics.
That behavior is a gut check for retailers, who may find they need to offer more competitive prices to attract customers, she said.

Elsewhere, some deflationary dynamics may be happening only on paper.
For example, in the CPI data, the Bureau of Labor Statistics controls for quality improvements over time. Electronics such as televisions, cellphones and computers continually get better, meaning consumers generally get more for the same amount of money.
That shows up as a price decline in the CPI data. More

President Joe Biden’s top economic advisor on Thursday unveiled plans to address the battle over trillions of dollars in expiring tax breaks enacted by former President Donald Trump.
After 2025, several provisions from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA, of 2017 will expire without action from Congress, which could increase taxes for more than 60% of filers.
White House National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard unveiled Biden’s “key principles” for the multitrillion-dollar tax debate.

Director of the National Economic Council Lael Brainard speaks at the White House in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 11, 2024.
Drew Angerer | Getty Images

President Joe Biden’s top economic advisor on Thursday unveiled plans to address trillions of dollars in expiring tax breaks enacted by former President Donald Trump.
After 2025, several provisions from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA, of 2017 will expire without action from Congress, which could increase taxes for more than 60% of filers, according to the Tax Foundation.

Some expiring individual provisions include lower federal income tax brackets, a higher standard deduction, a more generous child tax credit and doubled estate and gift tax exemption, among others.
“President Biden plans to extend tax cuts for hardworking Americans by making sure the wealthiest and big corporations pay their fair share,” White House National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard told reporters Wednesday evening during a press call.
More from Personal Finance:The Fed holds interest rates steady — what that means for your monthly billsDon’t ‘set it and forget it’: How to give your finances a mid-year checkupHere’s the inflation breakdown for May 2024 — in one chart
Biden will follow “key principles” to support middle-class and working families as the 2025 tax cliff approaches, Brainard said.
Expiring TCJA provisions could affect all Americans, but Brainard reaffirmed Biden’s pledge to extend tax breaks only for those making less than $400,000. Aiming to raise revenue for his “commitment to seniors and fiscal responsibility,” Biden would allow TCJA provisions to expire for those making more than $400,000, Brainard said.

By comparison, former President Donald Trump has said he plans to extend all expiring TCJA provisions.

Fully extending TCJA provisions could add an estimated $4.6 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Trump hasn’t released specific plans on how to fund expiring TCJA provisions but has voiced support for tariffs, which are taxes levied on imported goods from another country.In a statement, Trump campaign National Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump was proud to have passed the TCJA and if reelected would “advocate for more tax cuts for all Americans.”

While the TCJA permanently reduced the top federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, Biden aims to raise corporate taxes and implement a global minimum tax, according to Brainard.
The plan also called for sustained IRS funding, which has been targeted by Republicans since Congress approved nearly $80 billion in funding via the Inflation Reduction Act.

Don’t miss these exclusives from CNBC PRO More