Investing

Foreign-born workers made up 18.6% of the civilian labor force in 2023, up from 15.3% in 2006, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.
While immigration poses some challenges, it’s a net benefit to the U.S. economy, economists say.
Without foreign-born labor, the U.S. labor pool would shrink because of lower birth rates and an aging workforce, making it harder to finance programs such as Social Security.

Pixelprof | E+ | Getty Images

The share of immigrants in the U.S. labor force has steadily increased for more than a decade, and that growth is poised to continue — a trend economists say benefits the American workforce and economy.
In 2006, 15.3% of the civilian labor force was made up of “foreign-born” workers, or those born outside the U.S., according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That share hit a record 18.6% in 2023.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, said the increase in foreign-born workers is “taking pressure off the economy.”
“In fact, it’s probably one reason why the economy grew so strongly last year,” he said.
U.S. gross domestic product, a measure of economic output, grew by 2.5% in 2023, beating expectations and increasing from 1.9% in 2022.

The growth in foreign-born workers comes amid a contentious immigration policy debate in the U.S.
In mid-February, House Republicans impeached U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, whom they blame for perceived shortcomings in border security. He now faces the prospect of a Senate trial.

Meanwhile, cities are trying to absorb an influx of people arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border. In December, the U.S. Border Patrol reported almost 250,000 encounters with migrants crossing into the U.S. from Mexico. That marked a monthly record, though that number fell by half in January, according to federal data.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas holds a press conference on Jan. 08, 2024 in Eagle Pass, Texas. 
John Moore | Getty Images News | Getty Images 

“The present migrant crisis is quite unprecedented, both in scale, in the diversity of the nationalities that are coming to the border, and the impact it’s having not only on the border states but in the states and cities inside the country,” Muzaffar Chishti, senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan immigration policy think tank, recently told CNBC.

Foreign-born workers in the U.S. labor force

In 2023, about 31.1 million workers out of the 167.1 million in the U.S. labor force were foreign-born, on average. The remainder were “native-born” workers, those born in the U.S. Immigrants’ share of the labor force has increased since 1996, when the Bureau of Labor Statistics began collecting such data.
Most are here legally: In 2021, 4.6% of U.S. workers were unauthorized, a share that’s stayed in a “narrow range” since 2005, according to the Pew Research Center.

More than 3.7 million immigrants joined the U.S. labor force between 2020 and 2023, on average — a 13.7% increase. Meanwhile, 2.6 million native-born workers joined the labor force over the same period, a 2% increase.

Why immigration is a ‘net benefit for the economy’

The labor force is the sum of people ages 16 and older who have jobs or are unemployed and actively looking for work.
A growing population and labor force are key components of a healthy economy and the nation’s ability to pay its bills, economists said.
In simple terms, more workers generate more goods and services. A larger number of people earning paychecks means more consumer spending, the lifeblood of the U.S. economy. More people paying income tax on earnings boosts tax revenues at a time of growing U.S. budget deficits, and helps prop up social programs such as Social Security and Medicare, which are funded by payroll taxes and facing a shortfall.

The problem is that native-born U.S. households are having fewer children and the baby boom generation is aging out of the job market, economists said. Absent immigration, such dynamics would cause a long-term shrinking of the U.S. population and labor force, while social programs would require greater tax revenue to support more retiring seniors.
The Congressional Budget Office, or CBO, a nonpartisan federal agency, predicts U.S. deaths will exceed births starting in 2040, at which point immigration will account for all population growth.
“When you just consider the native-born population, we’re seeing very little labor force growth because of the aging population and low birth rates,” said Jack Malde, senior policy analyst at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Immigrant workers tend to be younger, too, helping counterbalance the U.S.’ aging workforce.
About 91% of immigrants age 16 or older who arrive in the U.S. from 2022 to 2034 will be under age 55, according to recent projections by the CBO. By comparison, that would be true for just 62% of the overall U.S. adult population.
Given the needs of the U.S. workforce, immigration has been “a net benefit for the economy,” said Malde, who specializes in immigration and workforce policy.
More from Personal Finance:Pessimism about job market may not be warrantedWhy millennials’ retirement outlook isn’t rosyThis popular paycheck service is ‘payday lending on steroids,’ says expert
The CBO estimates the U.S. labor force will grow by 5.2 million people from 2023 to 2034, largely due to “a surge in immigration” that began in 2022 and will continue through 2026. As a result, gross domestic product will be about $7 trillion higher and revenues $1 trillion larger than they would have been otherwise, it said.
“More workers means more output, more income, and that in turn leads to the higher revenue,” Phillip Swagel, CBO director, said of those projections during a House hearing in February.  

Immigration has helped put a lid on inflation

A U.S. Border Patrol agent patrols the gap in the U.S.-Mexico border fence on Feb. 23, 2024 in San Diego, California. 
Qian Weizhong/VCG via Getty Images

Immigrant workers have also helped put downward pressure on pandemic-era inflation by easing a shortage of workers, economists said.
Job openings surged to record highs in 2021 and 2022 as the U.S. economy reopened. The ready availability of jobs led businesses to compete for talent by raising wages at their fastest pace in decades; higher labor costs pressured businesses to raise prices, stoking inflation.
In economic parlance, the labor market was “tight.”
“Reopening of borders in 2022 and easing of immigration policies brought a sizable immigration rebound, which in turn helped alleviate the shortage of workers relative to job vacancies,” Evgeniya Duzhak, regional policy economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, wrote in a 2023 paper.

When immigration may not be ‘such a good deal’

While a larger immigrant workforce raises overall GDP and tax revenue, those measures may not be the best barometers of economic impact, said Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, a group advocating for tighter immigration controls.
“If that’s your goal, immigration is good policy,” Camarota said. “If your goal is to increase per capita GDP, that’s a very different question.”

U.S. agents escort asylum applicants down to the U.S. side of the bridge on April 1, 2020 at the Paso del Norte International Bridge in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico.
Paul Ratje | Afp | Getty Images

A Center for Immigration Studies analysis of Census Bureau data found that labor force participation among 25- to 54-year-old U.S.-born men without a high school diploma declined 5 percentage points, to 70%, from 2000 to 2023.
It fell 6 percentage points, to 84%, for those with a high-school diploma over that time, but fell only 2 points, to 94%, for college-educated men, the analysis found.
Camarota said immigration — along with factors such as globalization, weaker unions and a stagnant federal minimum wage — suppressed wages and made it harder for native-born men without college degrees to find jobs, keeping them on the sidelines and causing their labor force participation to decline. Foreign-born workers provide businesses with an easy labor supply, leading policymakers not to care as much about the U.S.-born groups being left behind, he said.
“For society, [immigration] is not such a good deal,” Camarota said.

‘No evidence’ immigrants are taking American jobs

A worker at a restaurant in Los Angeles on Nov. 2, 2023.
Eric Thayer/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The extent to which immigration may be keeping U.S.-born men without college degrees on the sidelines is unclear, Malde said. There are other reasons why their labor force participation may have declined long-term, he said: automation and technology reducing the demand for low-skilled labor; economic shifts away from manufacturing and toward service-oriented jobs, which often require higher educational attainment; and changing social norms.
The prime-age labor force participation rate of U.S.-born men without a college degree “grew at a record pace in each of the last two years and is above its pre-COVID trend,” according to the Economic Policy Institute, or EPI, a left-leaning think tank.
In other words, the economy is both absorbing immigrants and generating job opportunities for U.S.-born workers, the institute said. The idea that immigrants are “taking all our jobs” is “deeply misguided,” EPI researchers wrote in a recent analysis.

The U.S. unemployment rate has been below 4% for two years, hovering near record lows. It was an average 3.6% for U.S.-born workers in 2023, the lowest rate on record, EPI said.
“The labor market is tight as a drum,” especially for the types of lower-paid jobs many immigrants take, Zandi said.
“There’s just no evidence at this point in time that immigrants are taking American jobs,” Zandi added. “They’re jobs that are simply going unfilled.”

How immigration affects wages

A 2017 meta analysis of economic research on immigration conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine suggests the impact of immigration on the overall U.S.-born wage “may be small and close to zero,” particularly when measured over a period of 10 years or more.

There’s just no evidence at this point in time that immigrants are taking American jobs. They’re jobs that are simply going unfilled.

Mark Zandi
chief economist at Moody’s Analytics

However, evidence for certain “subgroups” of the workforce, especially those most likely to compete with immigrants, is somewhat mixed, the analysis found. For example, some studies suggest “sizable negative wage effects on native high school dropouts,” though there are “still a number of studies that suggest small to zero effects,” it said.
There’s also a “sizable” concentration of immigrants in jobs that require high education and skill levels, such as computer software developers, accountants and physicians, the paper noted. In these jobs, “the evidence is stronger, though still inconclusive” that immigrants are pushing up wages “modestly,” it said.

Immigrants are ‘substantial job creators’

Luis Alvarez | Digitalvision | Getty Images

Immigrants also launch new businesses at far higher rates than the overall U.S. population, according to research published in 2020.
The study — authored by researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Pennsylvania, Northwestern University and the U.S. Census Bureau — found immigrants in the U.S. workforce to be “substantial job creators” with an 80% higher “entrance rate into entrepreneurship” compared with native-born individuals. It examined data on more than 1 million firms founded between 2005 and 2010 that survived for at least five years.
“Overall, the findings suggest that immigrants appear to ‘create jobs’ (expand labor demand) more than they ‘take jobs’ (expand labor supply) in the U.S. economy,” the study said. More

Smart Tax Planning

Starting March 4, Direct File will expand testing to eligible users 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. But space will remain limited.
The IRS plans to fully open Direct File to eligible taxpayers in pilot states on March 12 once testing concludes.
The pilot states include Arizona, California, Florida, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington and Wyoming.

Valentinrussanov | E+ | Getty Images

The IRS has unveiled final testing for Direct File, the agency’s free tax filing program, with plans to fully open in 12 pilot states on March 12.
Starting March 4, Direct File will expand final testing for eligible new users to begin federal returns, with availability 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, an IRS official said Friday.

Space will remain limited during final testing and Direct File may close briefly if users exceed the day’s allotment. However, if you already started a return, you can use the software without interruption, the IRS said. You can learn more and check eligibility at directfile.irs.gov.
After testing concludes, the IRS plans to fully open Direct File on March 12 to all eligible users in 12 pilot states, an IRS official said.

More from Smart Tax Planning:

Here’s a look at more tax-planning news.

The pilot states include Arizona, California, Florida, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington and Wyoming. Alaska was originally included, but is no longer part of the pilot.
“We will be working closely with the 12 pilot states in this test run, which will help us gather information about the future direction of the Direct File program,” IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel said in January.  
While the Direct File pilot doesn’t support state returns, the software will guide users from Arizona, California, Massachusetts and New York to a state-supported tax-prep tool.

Who qualifies for IRS Direct File

You may qualify for Direct File with a simple, straightforward return, with limited types of income, credits and deductions, according to IRS officials.
The pilot will only accept Form W-2 wages, Social Security retirement income, unemployment earnings and interest of $1,500 or less. This excludes filers with contract income reported via Form 1099-NEC, gig economy workers or self-employed filers.
As for tax breaks, you must claim the standard deduction. Direct File only accepts a few credits: the earned income tax credit, child tax credit and credit for other dependents. The software also accepts deductions for student loan interest and educator expenses.

Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO: More

Household appliances are becoming more modern and high-tech, but they don’t last like they once did, experts said. 
Here are the best ways to save when it comes to replacing those big-ticket items.

Customers look at appliances for sale at a Best Buy store in Miami, Florida, Oct. 8, 2021.
Joe Raedle | Getty Images

Sara Rathner didn’t want to replace her clothes dryer. But a part was clearly broken, causing the machine to make a high-pitched squealing sound every time she dried a load of laundry. 
“We called an appliance repair company and he came and he replaced the component,” said Rathner, a travel and credit cards expert at NerdWallet who lives in Richmond, Virginia.

However, the machine broke for the same reason again a few months later, and then again shortly after that. After the mechanic’s third visit, Rathner said he told her, “You need to stop calling me and just buy a new dryer. I cost you $250 every time I show up. One more visit, you could have just bought a new dryer.”
More from Personal Finance:How home buyers and sellers can negotiate commissionsAspiring homeowners say they face two major obstacles93% of women are stressed about money

‘The appliance upgrade cycle has shortened’

Household appliances are becoming more modern and high-tech, but — as Rathner found — they don’t last like they once did. 
In fact, homeowners are purchasing large appliances, including washing machines, dryers, dishwashers and refrigerators, more often compared with 15 years ago, according to an analysis by Zonda Media, a housing market research and analytics firm.
From 1995-2005, the average homeowner replaced appliances consistently every 12 to 13 years. Today it is every eight to nine years, noted Todd Tomalak, Zonda’s principal of building products research.

At the same time, they are spending more than before.

Homeowners spend about 34% more on appliances than they did 15 years ago, “above and beyond inflation,” Tomalak said.
“Homeowners are purchasing appliances with more bells and whistles, but which become obsolete sooner and have more aspects to repair versus appliances years ago,” he said.
“As a result, the appliance upgrade cycle has shortened.”
As prices continue to rise while the quality of some products further degrades, shoppers will need to make trade-offs on how to spend their income, said chartered financial analyst Brian Laung Aoaeh, co-founder and general partner of Refashiond Ventures, a supply chain technology venture firm based in New York. 
“There will be some [products] on which you don’t want to compromise on quality so you might be willing to pay a bit more … and then there might be certain things you decide ‘I don’t need this,'” he said.
So, Aoaeh said, as a shopper, try to ask yourself this question: “In the things that you consume, where do you absolutely need the best quality?”

How to save on big-ticket purchases

While most consumers would struggle to cover a $1,000 unexpected expense, there are ways to spread out the cost of replacing a big-ticket appliance that breaks without warning. Otherwise, if your fridge or washing machine is on its last legs, seasonal discounts and credit card rewards can help you save.
1. Buy Now, Pay Later may work in your favor: Buy Now, Pay Later programs can smooth out your budget, Rathner said. These loans cut big-ticket items into static monthly payments, but it can be tricky if you have more than one plan running at the same time. “If you don’t plan carefully, you might risk overdrawing your account because you’ve got too many of these plans going on at once.”
2. Seasonal sales can help cut the cost: If you have the time to shop around and plan for this purchase instead of an emergency situation, you can take advantage of seasonal sales, Rathner said. “All major holidays have sales for things like appliances: July Fourth, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Black Friday, of course.”
3. In-store financing may be available: “You can also see if the store that you’re purchasing the item from offers any sort of financing that might be favorable for you,” Rathner said. Some large retailers still offer old-school layaway programs, for instance.
Retail credit cards can also give shoppers benefits such as discounts and early access to sales. Some include a “deferred interest” or a 0% interest retail card that gives customers roughly six to 12 months to pay off a big purchase. Make sure to pay off the item within the time frame; if not, you will be saddled with interest on the full amount you charged.
4. Credit cards can offer perks: You might be able to reap the rewards if you use a credit card that offers benefits such as a sign-on bonus, which often requires the cardholder to hit a high spending minimum, said Rathner. “If it’s a sign up bonus that’s attainable to you and you have one of these major appliance purchases coming up anyway that you’ve been planning for, then the timing can work out in your favor,” she said. Make sure to pay off the card balance by the due date; otherwise, the high interest rate fees will be added on.
Also, consider researching cards that offer warranties as a benefit: “That will add an extra year on top of the manufacturer’s warranty as well,” she said. Make sure the warranty covers the appliance you’re shopping for. More

A shift from pensions to 401(k) plans has made it so retirement savings is a worker’s responsibility.
Yet, new research finds most individuals say pensions are essential for achieving the American Dream.

A United Auto Workers union member holds a sign outside the Stellantis Sterling Heights Assembly Plant to mark the beginning of contract negotiations in Sterling Heights, Michigan, on July 12, 2023.
Rebecca Cook | Reuters

Many Americans long for the days when companies guaranteed workers income in retirement.
That includes Sara Schambers, a fourth-generation Ford auto worker and member of the United Auto Workers union, who saw her grandparents retire with financial security. But after obtaining a permanent position in 2012, the same benefits have not been available to her.

“Without a pension and post-retirement health care, you have people leaving this company after 30 years’ service with nothing more than a, ‘Have a nice day, hope the stock market doesn’t crash,'” Schambers told Senate leaders during a hearing in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday.
Ford did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

More than three-quarters of Americans, 77%, say the unavailability of pensions is making it harder to achieve the American Dream, according to a new report from the National Institute on Retirement Security.
Meanwhile, 83% say all workers should have a pension to be independent and self-reliant in retirement.

How the move from pensions to 401(k)s affects workers

Over the past four decades, nongovernment employers have been shifting from providing pensions, otherwise known as defined benefit plans, to defined contribution plans such as 401(k)s.

Pensions typically pay lifetime retirement benefits based on factors such as an employee’s salary and years of service. The employer takes responsibility for the investments made on the employee’s behalf, including the risk as to whether adequate funds will be available to pay the benefits owed. Pension employees traditionally receive steady monthly checks once they retire, though plans may offer lump-sum distributions.
More from Personal Finance:78% of near-retirees failed or barely passed a basic Social Security quizWhy Social Security beneficiaries may owe more taxes on benefits62% of adults 50 and over have not used professional help for retirement
In contrast, 401(k)s and other defined contribution plans mostly require employees to oversee their contributions and investment selections. While employers may help with matching contributions or features that automatically nudge employees to save more, the amount of income employees may ultimately receive as income in retirement is unknown.
With the shift from pensions to 401(k)s, the responsibility for saving for retirement has transferred from employers to workers.
Yet, some research suggests workers still fare best when the responsibility for retirement savings falls on the employer.

‘Workers want to have the choice to retire or not’

Most Americans, 79%, now say the U.S. is facing a retirement crisis, up from 67% in 2020, according to the NIRS.
The median retirement savings for all households is just $39,000, according to Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economics at The New School for Social Research and author of the book, “Work, Retire, Repeat: The Uncertainty of Retirement in the New Economy.”
A lack of adequate retirement funding has forced many Americans to work longer.
“Workers want to have the choice to retire or not, and they can only do that with good pensions,” Ghilarducci said at an NIRS event on Tuesday.

Yet, others argue the switch to a defined contribution system has been successful in helping Americans build wealth.
Americans have amassed $41.5 trillion in inflation-adjusted retirement assets, an increase of 330% over the past 35 years, noted Rachel Greszler, senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
“When not managed properly, defined benefit plans can end up like Ponzi schemes,” Greszler said at Wednesday’s Senate hearing.
Neither Social Security nor multiemployer pensions can pay benefits as promised, she noted. Social Security’s trust funds face insolvency in the next decade, which may prompt across the board benefit cuts of more than 20% if Congress does not act sooner.
To shore up Social Security, the average American household would have to pay at least $3,000 per year more in taxes, money that would better be invested in personal accounts, Greszler argued.
At the Senate hearing, Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., pointed to another reason why a move to pensions may not necessarily be best for today’s workers. Those benefits offered by the federal government include a vesting period of five years, which may preclude workers who switch jobs frequently — or who are laid off by their companies — from participating. Defined contribution plans such as 401(k)s, however, are portable from job to job.

A return to pensions?

Some employers are considering a return to pensions, notably with IBM shifting from a 401(k) match to a defined benefit contribution.
Yet, “only a handful” of other major companies would be likely to follow IBM’s lead to reopen their defined benefit plans, a recent analysis from the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College found.
Still, that isn’t stopping Schambers, the auto worker, from hoping to have pensions reinstated in the next round of union contract negotiations.
“Our next UAW contract expires in 2028,” Schambers said. “And we’re ready to fight like hell for real retirement security, for a pension and post-retirement health care.”Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO: More

Register now for CNBC’s virtual Women & Wealth Event on March 5th, 2024

Women and Wealth Events
Your Money

Largely as a result of the wealth gap, women tend to be more financially vulnerable than their male counterparts.
Even a small cash reserve can provide security, according to writer Paulette Perhach, who coined it a “f— off fund.”
Here’s how to build your own.

There’s a wealth gap between women and men that has been stubbornly hard to shake.
Gender pay gaps have persisted despite women’s increasing levels of education and representation in senior leadership positions at work. Women are still more likely to take time out of the labor force or reduce the number of hours worked because of caretaking responsibilities, often referred to as the “motherhood penalty.” 

That contributes to a growing wealth discrepancy, which is difficult to escape, according to Stacy Francis, a certified financial planner and president and CEO of Francis Financial in New York.

More from Women and Wealth:

Here’s a look at more coverage in CNBC’s Women & Wealth special report, where we explore ways women can increase income, save and make the most of opportunities.

Largely as a result of the wealth gap, women tend to be more financially vulnerable than their male counterparts. Regardless of their household income, 93% of women feel stress when it comes to money, according to a new report by Fidelity Investments.
Other reports show that many American women stay in marriages that are unhealthy and even border on dysfunctional due to financial insecurity.
Even in the healthiest relationships, women are likely to outlive men, Francis says, which is why she advises her female clients to consider that at some point, “They are going to be on their own.”
“Most all of us are going to be in the driver’s seat of our finances alone in the car at some point,” said Francis, who is also a member of the CNBC Financial Advisor Council.

While the benefits of saving are clear, for women, the ability to be independent is particularly powerful.

The benefit of a ‘f— off’ fund

In a viral 2016 Billfold piece, writer Paulette Perhach outlined the security that even a small cash reserve can provide. She recommended building up some savings that could be tapped even in a non-emergency and coined it a “f— off fund.”
“Whether the system protects you or fails you, you will be able to take care of yourself,” Perhach told CNBC. “It’s about creating options.”
In fact, financial stress levels drastically decrease with each additional month of emergency savings set aside, according to Fidelity. Roughly 81% of women with no emergency savings felt a fair amount or a lot of stress. Once women have three months’ worth of emergency savings, only 26% report high stress levels, Fidelity found.

How to build a cash reserve

Most financial experts recommend having at least three to six months’ worth of expenses set aside, or more if you are the sole breadwinner in your family or in business for yourself.
To get there, “start with baby steps,” Francis said.
“The best thing you can do is make room in your budget to have that money go toward your emergency fund in a consistent and sustainable way, so you don’t find yourself strapped,” Francis said.
Lorna Kapusta, head of women and engagement at Fidelity, suggests creating a budget with three main ‘buckets.’ The goal is to put 50% of your income toward essential expenses, such as rent, food and utilities, another 15% toward retirement and 5% in an emergency fund, she said. The remaining 30% provides a cushion for a higher cost of living or other discretionary spending areas.
Even if you can’t reach those savings targets at the outset, commit to putting something in a high-yield account, many of which now pay more than 5% — the most savers have been able to earn in nearly two decades — and aim to increase it over time, she advised.
Similarly, contribute enough to your 401(k) to at least get the full employer match. Then, opt to auto escalate your contributions, which will steadily increase the amount you save each year. 

Once an emergency fund is off the ground, most experts recommend meeting with a financial advisor to shore up a long-term strategy. Many employer-sponsored plans now offer counseling or one-on-one coaching. There’s also free help available through the National Foundation for Credit Counseling.   
“One of the things that I talk to my clients about is the importance of establishing a personal financial plan,” said Judith Lee, senior vice president and wealth management advisor at Merrill Lynch. “Having a plan gives them a roadmap in terms of where they are right now and their individual goals.”
Ultimately, that money roadmap is key to feeling empowered, she added. “The specific choices one makes about savings and spending has an impact,” Lee said. “The discipline it takes to save is an acknowledgement to ourselves that we are worth the sacrifice.”
Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.
SIGN UP: Join the free virtual CNBC’s Women & Wealth event on March 5 at 1 p.m. ET, where we’ll bring together top financial experts to help you build a better playbook, offer practical strategies to increase income, identify profitable investment opportunities and save for the future to set yourself up for a stronger 2024 and beyond. More

Register now for CNBC’s virtual Women & Wealth Event on March 5th, 2024

Women and Wealth Events
Your Money

Half of women said they were reluctant to talk about money because they consider it a private topic, compared to 41% of men, according a new survey from Wells Fargo.
The only money topic women were less reluctant than men to talk about is how much they earn.

Talking about personal finances is harder than talking about religion, politics or death — and almost as hard to talk about as sex, a new survey finds. And women are more likely than men to find talking about money difficult.
Half of women said they were reluctant to talk about money because they consider it a private topic, compared to 41% of men, according to the survey, from Wells Fargo in partnership with Versta Research. Feeling judged was another top-cited reason, for 35% of women and 31% of men. 

The only money topic women were less reluctant than men to talk about is how much they earn, the survey found. Men were more open to talking about their savings, debt, specific investments, spending habits and money mistakes, among other topics.
Wells Fargo polled 3,403 U.S. adults and 203 teens between September 5 and October 3, 2023.

More from Women and Wealth:

Here’s a look at more coverage in CNBC’s Women & Wealth special report, where we explore ways women can increase income, save and make the most of opportunities.

Why personal finance is a taboo topic

Asked to rank conversations on their difficulty, 60% of respondents said it was difficult to talk about sex, while 57% said personal finance was difficult to discuss. To compare, 40% said it was difficult to talk about politics, 29% religion, and 28%, their personal health.
When asked directly about the difficulty of talking about sex compared to finances, 47% said having an open and honest conversation about their money is more challenging than discussing their romantic life. Privacy, not wanting others to know how much or how little they have and feeling judged were top reasons people cited holding them back from talking about their money. 
“When you think of money taboos and this idea that talking about money and talking about sex are actually almost the equivalent in their difficulty, it really just highlights the taboos that sometimes hold us back,” said Michael Liersch, head of advice and planning for Wells Fargo. 

“We really need to ask ourselves, what’s holding us back from getting the information we need to be successful on our own terms,” said Liersch.
The survey also found generational differences in how women feel about money discussions. More than half, 53%, of Gen Z women ages 14 to 26 said feeling judged made them avoid talking about money, versus 35% of women across all generations.
“Women are often penalized for traits their male counterparts receive applause for,” said Lindsay Bryan-Podvin, a financial therapist based in Ann Arbor, Michigan. “When it comes to money, we are fearful that if we advocate for ourselves, such as asking for a raise or negotiating down a too-high car insurance payment, we’ll be met with hostility.”

‘There really are no stupid questions’

John Howard | The Image Bank | Getty Images

To help boost our comfort level with talking about money, experts say, consider how conversations are framed. That can help you reduce feelings of judgment, or that your ideas are wrong.  
“People feel like they’re stupid questions, but there really are no stupid questions when it comes to [finances],” said Liersch, who holds a Ph.D. in behavioral science.
Although talking about money with friends and family can be challenging, look for ways to naturally weave it into the conversation, said Bryan-Podvin, who is the founder of Mind Money Balance.
“Most people crave having someone to talk about money with but are wary of bringing it up,” she said.
“Try, ‘I’ve got my performance review coming up. Any tips on making sure I get my full merit-based raise?’ or ‘I saw you went to the Bahamas recently! It looked so fun! How did you save up for it?'”
SIGN UP: Money 101 is an eight-week learning course to financial freedom, delivered weekly to your inbox.
SIGN UP: Join the free virtual CNBC’s Women & Wealth event on March 5 at 1 p.m. ET, where we’ll bring together top financial experts to help you build a better playbook, offer practical strategies to increase income, identify profitable investment opportunities and save for the future to set yourself up for a stronger 2024 and beyond. More

A Harvard Business School graduate tricked his fellow alumni and associates into investing at least $2.9 million in a Ponzi scheme, New York Attorney General Letitia James said.
James’ office said it had secured a court order blocking the grad, Vladimir Artamonov, “from harming investors through his fraudulent scheme.” Artamonov allegedly projected returns of 500% to 1,000% by claiming to learn which investments Berkshire Hathaway planned to make.
James’ office said it learned of the fraud when it was told about an investor who ended his own life after discovering he had lost $100,000 in Artamonov’s alleged scheme.

A general view of the Baker Library/Bloomberg Center on February 17, 2024, at Harvard Business School in Allston, MA. 
Erica Denhoff | Icon Sportswire | Icon Sportswire | Getty Images

A Harvard Business School graduate tricked his fellow alumni and associates into investing at least $2.9 million in a Ponzi scheme he ran, New York Attorney General Letitia James said Thursday.
James’ office said it had secured a court order blocking the grad, Vladimir Artamonov, “from harming investors through his fraudulent scheme,” which allegedly projected returns of 500% to 1,000% by claiming to learn which investments Berkshire Hathaway planned to make.

The order in Manhattan Supreme Court also bars Artamonov from withdrawing and transferring funds in his bank and brokerage accounts.
Artamonov allegedly lured at least 29 investors into the scheme, most of whom he met through his connections to the elite college, the attorney general said.
More from Personal Finance:This IRS issue is ‘the biggest, most consistent problem’ for filersNumber of 401(k) millionaires and average balances rose in 2023’Ghosting’ gets more common in the job market: It’s not a ‘passing fad’
James’ office said Artamonov lost millions of dollars in investors’ funds by buying short-term options but did not disclose his losses, instead using new money invested with him to repay existing investors.
“Artamonov also used his investors’ money to fund unauthorized personal expenses for vacations, shopping, and dining,” the office said.

James’ office said it learned of the fraud when it was told about an investor who ended his own life after discovering he had lost $100,000 in Artamonov’s alleged scheme.
Even after the man’s suicide, Artamonov continued soliciting new investors, lying to them about the fund’s strategy and performance, James’ office said in a statement.
“Even sophisticated investors can be conned by fraudsters, especially when personal relationships and networks are used to build a false sense of trust,” James said.
“Vladimir Artamonov used his alumnus status from Harvard Business School to prey on his classmates and others while seeming legitimate and dependable. Instead, he has been scamming people out of their investments, with horrific consequences.”
Artamonov did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Mark Cautela, head of communications at Harvard Business School, told CNBC in an email: “We just found out about this earlier today. We have no additional comment.”

Artamonov, who James’ office said graduated from the business school in 2003 with a master’s degree, previously worked in New York as a securities professional.
James’ office said that from September 2021 up to the present, he solicited at least $2.9 million from at least 29 investors for an investment fund dubbed “Project Information Arbitrage” or the “Artamonov Fund.”
“Artamonov identified many of his investors through the HBS alumni network,” the AG’s office said. “Many of his investors did not have a close personal relationship with him and only knew him as an acquaintance.”
The office said “Artamonov lured clients by claiming that he could learn which investments Berkshire Hathaway would make ahead of the market by examining public state insurance filings.”
“Artamonov boasted to his investors that it is like ‘having a private time machine’ and ‘getting tomorrow’s newspaper today,'” as he projected massive investment returns, James’ office said.
But in reality, the office said, Artamonov used the investors’ funds to purchase short-term options which expired within days of purchase “and appeared to have no relation to Berkshire Hathaway or its investment activities.” More

Nearly a third, 31%, of homebuyers and sellers negotiated with their agents and a majority of those, 64%, successfully reduced their fees, according to a new report by LendingTree.
Many buyers and sellers are unaware they have this option, as real estate agent costs are often “not at the forefront” of their minds, said Jacob Channel, a senior economist at LendingTree.
Here’s how real estate agents help you in the housing market and how to negotiate with them.

Fuse | Corbis | Getty Images

When you buy or sell a home, your real estate agent’s commissions can trim thousands of dollars off the sale price — but many consumers don’t realize you can negotiate those terms.
Nearly a third, 31%, of homebuyers and sellers negotiated commissions with their agents, according to a new report by LendingTree. A majority of those, 64%, successfully reduced the fees. LendingTree polled 2,034 U.S. adults in mid-January.

About 36% of homebuyers and sellers say they didn’t know they could negotiate a real estate agent’s commission.
More from Personal Finance:Aspiring homeowners say they face two major obstacles to buyingH&R Block used deceptive marketing, deleted tax filer data, FTC complaint allegesHere are ways to get by without a paycheck after a layoff
That’s understandable: When buyers are budgeting costs for a new property, they often focus on the bigger things, like the down payment and the mortgage, said Jacob Channel, a senior economist at LendingTree.
“Real estate commission fees are one of the sort of less glamorous or less talked out parts of the homebuying process,” said Channel.
“Thoughts like how much a real estate agent’s going to get paid or who pays the real estate agent probably aren’t at the forefront of your mind,” he said.

How real estate agent commissions work

In 2023, the average commission was 5.37%, LendingTree found. Rates typically range from 5% to 6%, translating to thousands of dollars and the earnings are usually split evenly between the buyer and seller agents involved with the transaction. The seller typically pays those commissions at closing.
The median home sale price by the end of 2023 was $417,700, according to the Federal Reserve. That would mean commissions at a 5.37% rate amount to $22,430.49.
Yet 48% of homebuyers and sellers didn’t know how much their agent received in commission for their latest home transaction, according to LendingTree.
“The homebuying and selling experience can be so overwhelming,” said Channel. “Unless you’re paying close attention, it’s kind of hard to come up with an itemized list of what exactly you spent and where exactly you spent it.”

Some home sellers avoid these fees entirely by selling the home on their own. So-called for sale by owner homes represented 10% of home sales in 2021, according to the National Association of Realtors.
Technology has made it easier for Americans to buy and sell properties on their own through online marketplaces. But they may end up putting in more time and energy than they initially anticipate or make the process even more complicated, Channel said.
“[Real estate agents] are doing a lot of work behind the scenes that isn’t necessarily [or] immediately apparent to sellers and buyers,” he said.
Agents are often familiar with local housing market trends, know how to sell a property for a higher price and are familiar with the necessary paperwork involved in the transaction, said Channel.
“All housing markets have their own individual quirks,” he said. “If you’re a seller and you try to do it on your own, you might miss something or … not position yourself in a particularly strong way to get a good deal to sell your house for as much as you could.”

How to negotiate real estate agent fees

While real estate agents must be upfront with their fees, buyers and sellers should make sure to ask questions about what they are charging and why. An agent’s rate often depends on factors like the property type and how easily they think it will sell.
Keep in mind that agents’ “livelihoods depend on the commission fees that they make,” said Channel.
If you find an agent you like but worry about the cost, see if you can come to an agreement or reach a discount. You may have more leverage to negotiate if your home is desirable, has a high value or if your local market is hot.
Look into different agents in your area and compare their fees. So-called low-commission agents may offer fewer services, but charge commissions as low as 1% to 1.5%. Others work on a flat-fee basis.
If you’re working with a dual agent, or a real estate agent who’s representing both the buyer and seller, you might point out to them that they don’t have to split the commission with anyone. Even with a slightly lower rate, they’re more likely to take home more money if they had split 5% with a second agent, said Channel.

Antitrust lawsuit may have ripple effect on fees

As of now, the home seller is responsible for paying both their agent and the buyer’s. But that could change if a lawsuit stands.
In an antitrust lawsuit last fall, a federal jury found the NAR and several large real estate brokerages had conspired to artificially inflate agent commissions. As a result, the NAR, Keller Williams and HomeServices of America are liable for nearly $1.8 billion in damages. Re/Max and Anywhere Real Estate settled before the trial, each paying damages.
“Last month, NAR filed motions asking the Court to set aside the trial verdict and enter judgment as a matter of law in favor of NAR or, at the very least, order a new trial. These motions are part of the post-trial process, and we expect rulings on them in due course,” a spokesperson from NAR told CNBC in a statement.

A spokesperson on behalf of HomeServices of America declined to comment.  
Keller Williams settled for $70 million in early February.
If the verdict stands, it could mean that a home seller won’t be required to pay the buyer’s agent, experts say. More buyers may bypass agents, or try to negotiate fees.
“Hopefully, this will give us even more transparency,” said Channel. “This goes to show … why it’s so important to pay attention to all the costs when you go to buy or sell a home.”
Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO: More