More stories

  • in

    These lesser-known tax tips may help college-bound families

    College is a major expense for many families, but a payment strategy can provide significant tax savings, according to a college funding expert.
    You can save on taxes by analyzing your payment options, weighing state eligibility and more.

    fstop123 | E+ | Getty Images

    LAS VEGAS — College is a major expense for many families, but a payment strategy can provide significant tax savings, according to a college funding expert.
    “Distribution planning is not just for retirement,” said certified financial planner Ross Riskin, chief learning officer for the Investments & Wealth Institute. Families also need a plan when tapping assets to pay for college, he said.

    Education funding can be complicated, especially when you’re juggling eligibility for college tax credits, Riskin said at the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ annual conference in Las Vegas on Monday.
    More from Personal Finance:Ivy League acceptance rates ‘bottomed out,’ expert saysStudent loan payments will restart soon. Many aren’t readyAs inflation rate subsides, prices may stay higher
    The American opportunity tax credit offers a maximum of $2,500 per undergraduate student for up to four years, and the lifetime learning credit expands to graduate and professional degrees, worth up to $2,000 per eligible student per year.
    However, you can’t “double dip” tax breaks by claiming one of these credits and withdrawing money from a 529 college savings plan for the same expense. So to claim the full value of the credit, you’ll need to plan ahead to cover a portion of tuition using income, loans or other eligible sources.

    Compare payment options

    “What you pay does not equal what it costs you,” said Riskin, who is also a certified public accountant. For example, let’s say you’re considering three ways to cover $30,000 in college expenses: your cash flow, a 529 plan or student loans.

    If your effective tax rate is 35% and you pay for college with $30,000 of after-tax dollars, it actually costs you $46,000, he said. You may also tap a 529 plan, which may have grown from $18,000 of contributions, for example, and can provide tax-free withdrawals for eligible expenses.

    What you pay does not equal what it costs you.

    Ross Riskin
    Chief learning officer for the Investments & Wealth Institute

    While taking out student loans may seem counterintuitive, the strategy may offer tax-free loan forgiveness for certain future nonprofit and government employees. What’s more, student loans may provide other benefits like the ability to claim the American opportunity tax credit or establishing credit for the student, Riskin said.
    “Advisors have done themselves a disservice of trying to simplify it,” he said, noting that many families default to 529 withdrawals without analyzing other options.

    How to weigh 529 plan withdrawals

    When it comes to 529 plans, there’s also the choice of whether to spend the money now or preserve it for family members, such as other children or even grandchildren, Riskin said. (Starting in 2024, families will also be able to roll unused 529 plan funds into a Roth IRA, with limitations.)
    While the Secure Act expanded qualified education expenses for federal taxes, some states don’t recognize these costs for state tax purposes. For example, K-12 education is not a qualified education expense in New York.
    If your withdrawal exceeds your qualified expenses or you take money after the year expenses were incurred, you may owe extra taxes and a penalty. There’s also a risk the state may recapture any state tax deduction previously received for contributions. “The recapture piece is important,” Riskin said. More

  • in

    Nearly 750,000 adults may lose SNAP federal food assistance after debt ceiling deal, research shows

    A bipartisan deal to raise the debt ceiling included changes to SNAP food assistance benefits.
    Here’s who may be affected the most.

    Tomml | E+ | Getty Images

    Debt ceiling deal changes SNAP work requirements

    SNAP already has work requirements for most adults ages 18 through 49 who do not have children.
    Those beneficiaries may only qualify for benefits for three months in a three-year period unless they meet certain eligibility requirements. That includes being able to show they are either working or participating in job training for 20 hours per week. They may otherwise still qualify if they fall under an exemption category, such as if they are pregnant, disabled or have a physical or mental condition that prevents them from working.

    You’re not going to balance the budget, much less pay down the debt, through these kinds of changes.

    director of SNAP state strategies at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

    The new legislation raises the ages those requirements apply to to include childless workers ages 50 to 54. The law would gradually phase in those workers by age, starting with those age 50 from 90 days after the law is enacted and eventually expanding to include 53- and 54-year-olds in 2024.

    The requirements would be effective through Oct. 1, 2030.
    The legislation also adds new categories of workers who are exempt from the work reporting requirements, including those who are homeless, veterans or those who were in the foster care system.

    Cuts may create ‘a quiet struggle’

    The changes will cut spending on SNAP, including how many people qualify for assistance.
    In a Sunday interview with Fox News, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., touted the new work requirements as a win for welfare reform in the debt ceiling deal.
    “We got it in welfare that puts people back to work, the core of what we looked for,” McCarthy said.
    But some experts are concerned about the effects the moves may have on families in need.
    Ed Bolen, director of SNAP state strategies at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said it is “upsetting” to see the changes included in the debt ceiling legislation.
    “You’re not going to balance the budget, much less pay down the debt, through these kinds of changes,” Bolen said. “On the other hand, you’re going to affect up to 750,000 low-income older Americans who need food assistance.”

    States, food banks and charitable organizations may step in to try to make up for the reduced access to SNAP benefits.
    However, they will not be able to entirely fill the void, said Ellen Vollinger, SNAP director at the Food Research and Action Center. For every one meal food banks provide, SNAP provides nine times that assistance, she said.
    “It’s not as if the problem goes away,” Vollinger said.
    However, much of the shortfall may not be obvious. “A lot of that is going to be a quiet struggle that’s going to play out in kitchens around the country,” Vollinger added.

    Drop in SNAP benefits may hurt in other ways

    The new requirements also introduce other challenges, experts note.
    SNAP is meant to help provide support to people who may be struggling to find work, Bolen noted. Expanded work requirements may make it tougher for older workers to find support at the same time they may encounter discrimination when trying to reenter the work force, he said.
    Moreover, it may also be difficult for beneficiaries to prove they fall under the new exemption categories, particularly for those who are homeless, he said.

    Ultimately, a decline in SNAP benefits may also hurt the economy, according to Vollinger.
    For every dollar of SNAP during a downturn, estimates have found there is an economic generator of about $1.50 to $1.80, she said. Research also shows that SNAP benefits help support jobs in the farming sector, trucking industry and grocery stores, Vollinger said. More

  • in

    Ivy League acceptance rates ‘may have bottomed out,’ expert says — here’s what that means for getting into schools like Harvard

    Acceptance rates at the nation’s top schools are hovering near all-time lows.
    But demographic shifts may cause application volume to ease in the years ahead.
    “It’s never going to be harder to get in,” one college expert predicts.

    Harvard Yard, on the campus of Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
    Maddie Meyer | Getty Images

    This year’s high school graduating class faced one of the toughest college-application seasons on record.
    At the nation’s top schools, including many in the Ivy League, “it’s never going to be harder to get in,” said Hafeez Lakhani, founder and president of Lakhani Coaching in New York.

    The number of college applicants jumped 20% since the 2019-20 school year, pushing acceptance rates to all-time lows, a report by the Common Application found.
    However, the recent application surge at the country’s top colleges and universities could be short-lived, Lakhani said. “Acceptance rates may have bottomed out.”
    More from Personal Finance: SUNY sends acceptance letters to 125,000 high school seniors4 strategies to avoid taking on too much student debtThese moves can help you save big on college costs
    At the most elite schools, this year’s numbers are striking. Harvard University, for instance, received more than 56,000 applications and admitted just 3.4% to the Class of 2027. Other universities, including Princeton, Yale and Columbia, also had acceptance rates below 5%.
    But even as more students vie for the fewer available spots at those institutions, enrollment is falling nationwide.

    There’s a growing cohort of people who start college but then withdraw, and fewer international students are choosing to study in the U.S. More would-be undergraduates are also deciding to forgo college altogether, citing the high cost among other factors.
    Meanwhile, the overall population of college-age students is shrinking — a demographic trend commonly referred to as the “enrollment cliff.”
    The number of high school graduates will turn down in 2026 and then “fall rapidly through the following decade,” said Doug Shapiro, executive director of the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.

    How the enrollment cliff affects colleges

    “I don’t think we’ll see significant changes in admit rates in the next couple of years,” said Connie Livingston, head of college counselors at Empowerly and a former admissions officer at Brown University.
    However, in five to seven years, “those acceptance rates will climb slightly higher,” she predicted.

    Those 3% to 4% acceptance rates could shift to 6% to 7%.

    Connie Livingston
    former admissions officer at Brown University More

  • in

    TipRanks reveals the top 10 services sector analysts of the past decade

    A man carrying a box leaves a Deutsche Bank office in London, Britain July 8, 2019.
    Simon Dawson | Reuters

    Despite the disruption from the pandemic, the services sector has continued to grow over the past decade, offering opportunities to invest. 
    TipRanks recognized the 10 best analysts in the services sector for identifying the best investment opportunities. These Wall Street analysts surpassed their peers with their stock picking and delivered considerable returns through their recommendations.

    TipRanks leveraged its Experts Center tool to zoom in on analysts with a high success rate, and analyzed every recommendation made by analysts in the services sector over the past decade. 
    The ranking shows analysts’ ability to generate returns from their recommendations. TipRanks’ algorithms calculated the statistical significance of each rating, the average return, and analysts’ overall success rate. Further, these ratings were measured over one year.

    Top 10 analysts from the consumer goods sector

    The image below shows the most successful Wall Street analysts from the services sector.

    Arrows pointing outwards

    1. Jason Seidl – TD Cowen

    Jason Seidl tops the list. Seidl has an overall success rate of 73%. His best rating has been on Daseke (NASDAQ:DSKE), a provider of transportation and logistics solutions. His buy call on DSKE stock from May 7, 2020 to May 7, 2021, generated a solid return of 327.7%.

    2. Patrick Brown – Raymond James

    Patrick Brown is second on this list and has a success rate of 75%. Brown’s top recommendation is Saia (NASDAQ:SAIA), a transportation company. The analyst generated a profit of 211.2% through his buy recommendation on Saia stock from April 17, 2020 to April 17, 2021.

    3. Scot Ciccarelli – Truist Financial

    Truist Financial analyst Scot Ciccarelli ranks No. 3 on the list. Ciccarelli has a success rate of 73%. His best recommendation has been on Five Below (NASDAQ:FIVE), a value retailer. The analyst generated a return of 249.4% through a buy recommendation on FIVE from May 18, 2020 to May 18, 2021. 

    4. Brian Nagel – Oppenheimer

    Brian Nagel bags the fourth spot on the list. The analyst has a 67% overall success rate. Nagel’s best recommendation has been on Lovesac (NASDAQ:LOVE), a manufacturer and seller of high-quality furniture. His buy call on LOVE stock generated a stellar 800% return April 2, 2020 to April 2, 2021.

    5. Carlo Santarelli – Deutsche Bank 

    Fifth-place analyst Carlo Santarelli has a success rate of 63%. His best recommendation is Caesars Entertainment (NASDAQ:CZR), a leading casino-entertainment company. The analyst delivered a profit on this stock of 437.2% from April 24, 2020 to April 24, 2021.

     6. Gary Prestopino – Barrington

    Taking the sixth position is Gary Prestopino. The analyst has a success rate of 55%. His top recommendation was for online-based automotive parts and accessories provider CarParts.com (NASDAQ:PRTS). Through his buy call on PRTS stock, Prestopino generated a solid return of 800% from Aug. 5, 2019, to Aug. 5, 2020.

    7. Helane Becker – TD Cowen 

    TD Cowen analyst Helane Becker is seventh on this list, with a success rate of 66%. Becker’s best call has been a buy on the shares of United Airlines Holdings (NASDAQ:UAL), an airline holding company. The recommendation generated a return of 180.7% from Dec. 8, 2009, to Oct. 22, 2010.

    8. Walter Spracklin – RBC Capital

    In the eighth position is Walter Spracklin of RBC Capital. Spracklin has an overall success rate of 64%. The analyst’s top recommendation is TFI International (TSE:TFI), a Canadian transportation and logistics company. Based on his buy call on TFI, Spracklin generated a profit of 215.2% from April 22, 2020, to April 22, 2021.

    9. Jeff Van Sinderen – B.Riley

    Jeff Van Sinderen ranks ninth on the list. The analyst sports a 52% success rate. His top recommendation has been on Celsius Holdings (NASDAQ:CELH), a consumer packaged goods company. The buy recommendation generated a return of 800% from April 22, 2020, to April 22, 2021.

    10. Jake Bartlett – Truist Financial

    Jake Bartlett has the 10th spot on the list, with a success rate of 66%. Bartlett’s best call has been a buy on shares of Jack in the Box (NASDAQ:JACK), a fast-food restaurant chain. The recommendation generated a return of 261.2% from April 1, 2020 to April 1, 2021.

    Bottom line

    Investors can follow the recommendations of top analysts to make an informed investment decision. We will return soon with the top 10 analysts of the past decade in the Industrials sector. More

  • in

    Borrowers brace for student loan bills to resume — ‘$600 a month, where is that going to come from?’

    The more than three-year-long pause on federal student loan payments is slated to finally conclude within months.
    Consumer advocates and borrowers are worried about the transition, which will unfold while student loan forgiveness is still tied up at the Supreme Court.

    Djelics | E+ | Getty Images

    Richelle Brooks’ budget is already tight. She doesn’t know what she’s going to do when federal student loan payments resume in the fall.
    The single mother of two has seen all her expenses rise over the last few years amid high inflation. “I go grocery shopping and spend $300 or $400 for food that’ll last two weeks in my house,” said Brooks, 35. Her mother recently moved in with her because she doesn’t earn enough as an office manager to afford the rents in Los Angeles, where they live.

    Although Brooks earns around $100,000 as a high school principal, her student loan balance is at nearly $240,000. She’s already calculated what her new payment will be.
    “With an extra $600 a month, where is that going to come from?” Brooks said.
    More from Personal Finance:Popular home improvements aren’t the ones with best returnDebt deal would push student loan borrowers to repay this fallMany companies adding, expanding tuition assistance
    Millions of other people are likely asking a similar question.
    The more than three-year-long pause on federal student loan payments is slated to finally conclude within months. The Biden administration is preparing borrowers for their payments to resume by September, even while its loan forgiveness program is halted as the Supreme Court debates its validity. The debt ceiling deal passed by Congress also includes a provision officially terminating the pandemic-era relief policy and making it harder for the U.S. Department of Education to extend it.

    “The emergency period is over, and we’re preparing our borrowers to restart,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said at a Senate hearing last month.

    Average borrower saved $15,000 due to payment pause

    Former President Donald Trump first announced the stay on federal student loan bills and the accrual of interest in March 2020, when the coronavirus pandemic hit the U.S. and crippled the economy. The pause has since been extended eight times.
    Nearly all people eligible for the relief have taken advantage of it, with less than 1% of qualifying borrowers continuing to make payments on their education debt, according to an analysis by higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz.
    As a result of the policy, the average borrower likely saved around $15,000 in student loan payments, Kantrowitz said. The typical monthly bill is just under $350 a month.

    ‘There will be some initial chaos’

    Because there’s no lending precedent for borrowers getting such a long reprieve from their bills, there is little evidence to inform what will happen when the payments resume.
    But Kantrowitz expects most borrowers to adjust pretty quickly.
    “There will be some initial chaos, but it should settle down within a few months,” he said.
    However, Education Department Undersecretary James Kvaal warned earlier this year that if the administration is unable to deliver on President Joe Biden’s plan to forgive up to $20,000 in student debt for borrowers, delinquency and default rates could skyrocket.

    There will be some initial chaos, but it should settle down within a few months.

    Mark Kantrowitz
    higher education expert

    During previous natural disasters, borrowers were offered shorter forbearances, and many fell behind when their payments resumed, Kvaal said in a court filing.
    ″[T]he one-time student loan debt relief program was intended to avoid” that problem, he added.

    ‘Borrowers are not ready to resume payments’

    House Speaker Kevin McCarthy applauded the provision in the debt ceiling agreement that officially ends the stay on bills by September, saying the Biden administration “can [no] longer use Covid as an excuse to pause student loan repayments.”
    “It also requires borrowers to be responsible for paying off their student loans once again,” McCarthy wrote on Twitter.
    Yet consumer advocates say the troubles for student loan borrowers are far from over.
    “Borrowers are not ready to resume payments,” said Persis Yu, deputy executive director at the Student Borrower Protection Center. “Even if the risk from the virus has diminished, the financial fallout has not.”

    Before the public health crisis, when the U.S. economy was enjoying one of its healthiest periods in history, there were still problems plaguing the federal student loan system and some experts compared it to the 2008 mortgage crisis
    Only about half of borrowers were in repayment in 2019, according to an estimate by Kantrowitz. Around 25% — or more than 10 million people — were in delinquency or default, and the rest had applied for temporary relief measures for struggling borrowers, including deferments or forbearances.
    “I think they may be in a worse position,” Yu said, of those people. “Which is why President Biden’s debt relief program is so critical.”
    The Biden administration announced a new program last year that will give defaulted borrowers the chance to get into current standing. However, “the administration has barely begun doing outreach” on the program, Yu said.

    The Education Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
    Yu is also worried about the recent turnover and layoffs among student loan servicers, which faced criticism and complaints from advocates, regulators and borrowers long before Covid.
    During the payment pause, three companies that managed the loans — Navient, the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (also known as FedLoan) and Granite State — all said they’d be ending their relationship with the government. As a result, around 16 million borrowers will have a different company to deal with by the time payments resume, or not long after.
    “It is critical for folks to understand that the student loan system is not prepared to return to repayment,” Yu said. “We are relying on brand new servicers and expecting them to help millions of borrowers through a byzantine system all at once.”

    Some borrowers face hard financial choices

    Half of Paul Berlet’s monthly income goes to his rent.
    The sixth-grade English teacher earns a little under $50,000 a year, and pays $1,200 a month for his one-bedroom apartment in Wilmington, Delaware.
    To be able to afford his student loan payment in September, Berlet plans to cut back on how much food he buys. Although he’ll technically be able to come up with the extra $250 a month by doing so, he doesn’t believe he should have to make these kinds of decisions.
    “There’s no reason somebody should need to take out loans to be a teacher,” said Berlet, 23. “But to be able to serve my own community, I needed to put myself in debt.”

    Starting in the fall, he expects to return to the diet he had eaten as a broke college student.
    “When I go grocery shopping now, I’m able to buy fresh ingredients, vegetables, a piece of salmon if I want it,” he said. “But that will go away, and I’ll be back to [instant rice] and beans.”
    Brooks also doesn’t believe she should have to be hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt for her education.
    Her parents didn’t attend college, she said. Her mother was a waitress for much of her life; her father wasn’t around. To finance her degrees, she turned to government loans.

    I’ll be back to minute rice and beans.

    Paul Berlet
    student loan borrower

    “By attaining an education, I was working to better myself and get out of poverty,” Brooks said.
    Her student debt has made that mission difficult. And she worries the consequences will continue.
    Her daughter, Mariah, will start college herself in three years. During the pause on student loan payments, Brooks has been able to put aside $150 a month for Mariah’s education.
    But starting in September, she won’t be able to do that anymore. More

  • in

    Activist investor Elliott is back at NRG Energy. Here’s how the firm plans to build value

    Vm | E+ | Getty Images

    Company: NRG Energy (NRG)

    Business: NRG Energy is an integrated power company involved in producing and selling electricity and related products and services to residential, commercial, industrial and wholesale customers. It generates electricity using natural gas, coal, oil, solar, nuclear and battery storage.
    Stock Market Value: $7.6B ($33.30 per share)

    Activist: Elliott Management

    Percentage Ownership:  > 13.0%
    Average Cost: n/a
    Activist Commentary: Elliott is a very successful and astute activist investor, particularly in the technology sector. Its team includes analysts from leading tech private equity firms, engineers and operating partners – former technology CEO and COOs. When evaluating an investment, the firm also hires specialty and general management consultants, expert cost analysts and industry specialists. The firm often watches companies for many years before investing and has an extensive stable of impressive board candidates.

    What’s happening?

    On May 15, Elliott sent a letter to NRG. The firm called on the company to implement a plan that includes appointing five new independent board members it has identified and making operational and strategic improvements, including a review of Vivint Smart Home.
    This is not Elliott’s first foray with NRG. In January 2017, the firm filed a 13D on NRG with a plan centered around operational improvements and portfolio actions. Elliott saw a company with an attractive collection of generation and retail assets that had lost its focus as it expanded beyond its core merchant power and retail electricity businesses, which led to an uncompetitive cost structure, an overleveraged balance sheet and a complex asset portfolio. As part of its plan, Elliott suggested that NRG focus on its core businesses by reducing costs, monetizing non-core assets to simplify its portfolio and paying down debt. NRG conducted a four-month business review that targeted initiatives, including $1.065 billion of total cost and margin improvement, $2.5 billion to $4.0 billion of asset divestitures and $13 billion of debt reduction. In February 2017, Elliott settled with the company for the replacement of two directors, including the chairman, with a longtime director (since 2003) taking over the chairman role. Elliott exited their 13D six months later with a 103.5% return versus 7.5% for the S&P 500. One year later, one of their directors resigned from the board. Two years after Elliott wrapped up the engagement, the other director resigned.

    Since the end of the firm’s engagement, NRG has reversed much of its progress and has underperformed the S&P Utilities Index by 44% and integrated power peers by 53%, which can largely be attributed to various operational failures and a loss of strategic direction. NRG missed two years of financial guidance in 2021 and 2022 after struggling with repeated plant outages and demonstrating an inability to manage through extreme weather events. Perhaps more impactive to its dismal performance was the company’s acquisition of Vivint (a home security business), completed on March 10. This acquisition prompted a 20% decline in NRG’s market cap over the first week and begs the question of why the company would make such a large bet on a strategy that many other firms have already failed to execute successfully.
    Missteps aside, Elliott thinks that the company’s retail franchise is a crown jewel that has been a market leader in Texas for over 20 years and there remain several opportunities to get back on track. Now Elliott is back with a plan that is remarkably similar to its 2017 plan: improve operations, refresh the board, and fix strategy and capital allocation. Elliott calls on the company to adopt an operationally focused strategy of improving reliability, reducing costs and meeting financial commitments. The firm thinks that this could lead to at least $500 million of recurring, EBITDA-accretive cost reductions by 2025. Additionally, Elliott believes that NRG should conduct a strategic review of its home services strategy, including Vivint, and focus on the core integrated power business. The company should also establish a new capital allocation framework to return at least 80% of free cash flow to shareholders, with any growth investments focused on the generation and retail businesses. Elliott states that this plan would allow the company to return $6.5 billion of excess capital (~85% of the current market cap) to shareholders over the next three years. Elliott believes that this plan could create over $5 billion of value, driving the stock price to upward of $55 per share.
    To effectively oversee this plan, Elliott believes that the board needs new independent directors with expertise in the power and energy industry. Elliott has identified five candidates that it believes will help implement the foregoing operational and strategic changes. The board and management currently consist of the same chairman Elliott agreed to in 2017, five (out of 10) of the same directors from before Elliott’s 2017 engagement and the same CEO as from before the firm’s engagement. Elliott does not come out and say that the company needs a new CEO, but the firm certainly dances around it in the May 15 letter: It notes that the company “must restore the credibility of the management team.” “The Board should also evaluate the management team’s ability to drive high-performance operations on a sustained basis.” “Strong management will be key to the success of the Repower NRG Plan,” and “significant changes are needed.”
    One of the biggest, but under-recognized benefits of shareholder activism is that activists often not only create value during their engagement, but they also put the company on the right trajectory to sustain shareholder value over the long term. The latter did not happen here, and now Elliott is realizing the difference between giving someone a fish and teaching them to fish. Or, to use a more business-like analogy, the difference between “clock building” and “time telling” as explained by author Jim Collins in the book “Built to Last.” “Searching for a single great idea on which to build success is time telling; building an organization that can generate many great ideas over a long period of time is clock building. Enduring greatness requires clock building,” Collins wrote. In 2017, Elliott’s campaign was about time telling. To achieve the kind of long-term value the firm appears to be aiming for this time around, it is going to have to build a clock.
    They will have time to make this happen. Elliott has only recommended directors instead of nominating them, which signals amicable engagement, but it cannot formally nominate directors until Dec. 29 and has until Jan. 28, 2024 to make nominations. The amount of change that is needed to sustain long-term value as Elliott alludes to in its letter will take more than just replacing two directors this time, so an early settlement might not be in the cards.
    It should be noted that activists have historically not been that successful the second time around when they go back to the well. A 2019 study conducted by 13D Monitor concluded that when activists file a second campaign at the same company, they have an average return of 16.78% versus 28.56% for the S&P 500 the second time around. That’s compared to an average return of 46.54% versus 6.25% the first time they engaged.
    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

  • in

    Boycotts hit stocks hard. Here’s what might be next for Bud, Target and others caught in the anti-Pride backlash

    Pride Month merchandise is displayed at a Target store on May 31, 2023 in San Francisco, California. 
    Justin Sullivan | Getty Images

    Even before Pride month was underway, it seems as if it was open season on companies celebrating the LGBTQ community.
    One by one, companies have come under an expanding attack. Anheuser-Busch, Target, Kohl’s and VF Corp.’s North Face brand have all felt the vitriol of this latest push from the right. And the list keeps growing. These companies have been branded as “woke capitalists” — and worse — as critics urged boycotts of these companies’ products. Bud Light came into the crosshairs after it struck a partnership with trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney, while North Face received backlash for an ad featuring drag queen Pattie Gonia. Target and Kohl’s have been criticized for Pride-themed clothing.

    related investing news

    17 hours ago

    While it’s too early to say how successful these efforts will be in lowering sales at the companies recently drawn into this attack, damage has been done to the stocks already. And some on Wall Street expect that to continue with analysts recently downgrading Target’s and Anheuser-Bush’s ratings, citing in part the ongoing controversy.
    “The main reason boycotts generally are effective is because they threaten the reputation of the company by putting the company in a negative media spotlight, and companies don’t want to have negative attention of any kind drawn to them,” said Brayden King, a professor of management and organizations, who has studied how boycotts impact company stock prices, in an interview.
    King’s research focused on 133 separate boycotts launched between 1990 and 2005, in a study that was published in 2011. About a quarter of the 177 companies targeted by these actions offered a concession to protestors.
    “They often concede to boycotter’s demands, not because they feel that there’s sales pressure on them, but rather because they don’t want to continue to be a target of negative media attention,” he said.
    King’s research found that the stock of a company will fall about 1% each day of national print media coverage. But once the issue falls out of the daily news cycle, the stock generally recovers.

    Why Bud Light is an outlier

    King sees Anheuser-Busch’s situation as an outlier because the controversy has harmed its sales. The company has been under fire for more than two months. Over that time, its stock is down more than 18%.

    Stock chart icon

    Anheuser-Busch InBev shares hit a 52-week high of $67.09 on March 31.

    “With 7 weeks of data, the consumer backlash at Bud Light seems quite durable,” said Cowen analyst Vivien Azer, in a research note Friday. “This is not a surprise to us, given how violent the responses were to Bud Light on social media. Indeed, in each of the last five weeks, we have seen Miller Lite and Coors Light gain over 200 bps of market share from Bud Light (where market share fell 390 bps most recently).”
    Cowen’s consumer research suggests Molson Coors will be able to maintain the market share it’s gaining.
    “Relative to Miller Lite and Coors Light, the Bud Light brand seems to skew to white consumers, men, younger consumers and lower-income consumers. The income bias toward Bud Light, we believe, is a key factor in driving the durable market share gains to TAP,” Azer explained.
    Molson Coors shares are up 24% over the past two months, as analysts have spotlighted the market share gains it’s making.
    Bud Light has tried to win back customers with a $15 off rebate program on Budweiser, Bud Light, Bud Select and Bud Select 55. While shoppers will need to put out money for the purchases on the front end, once the rebate is processed, the product is essentially free, according to Azer.
    Will this be enough to soothe angry consumers? She’s unconvinced.
    “Recall there were consumers that were happy to destroy beer they had already purchased,” she said.

    Budweiser beer in the brewery section at a Walmart Supercenter on March 02, 2023 in Austin, Texas. 
    Brandon Bell | Getty Images

    There are several factors contributing to the impact the Bud Light boycott is having on sales that are specific to the beer category, according to King. He said, the first is that a bar, restaurant or music venue could remove the product, which takes the decision away from consumer. Then, there is the social nature of drinking.
    “When you’re purchasing something in private, there’s nobody looking over your shoulder to hold you accountable,” King said. However, beer may be purchased to drink with friends so there could be more social pressure, he said.

    Companies on edge

    The situation with Bud Light may have put companies more on edge. Target has carried Pride month apparel for years, but when confronted with pushback this year, the retailer moved product in some stores to other areas or removed it all together, citing concerns for worker safety. But this decision also carries a risk. Target could wind up offending both sides of the issue.
    “The fact that a small group of extremists are threatening disgusting and harsh violence in response to Target continuing its long-standing tradition of offering products for everyone should be a wake-up call for consumers and is a reminder that LGBTQ people, venues, and events are being attacked with threats and violence like never before,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, president and CEO of GLAAD, a LGBTQ media advocacy group, in a written statement.
    The group has pushed for Target to put the Pride merchandise back on the sales floor and online, and do what it can to protect workers in the stores. Target has also received bomb threats from those claiming to support the LGBT community, who wanted the merchandise retured to the store, according to media reports.

    Stock chart icon

    Target’s stock hit a 52-week low on Thursday.

    Target’s stock has fallen about 10% since news broke on May 24. But shares were already trending lower after the retailer’s earnings report showed weakness in parts of its business.
    Meanwhile, both VF Corp. and Kohl’s shares seemed to be bouncing back on Friday. After recovering some lost ground, the North Face parent is down about 9% since it launched its “Summer of Pride” ad on May 23. Kohl’s shares rose nearly 12% on Friday, recouping nearly all of the ground it lost. But the stock sank as low as $17.89 on Thursday, its lowest level since May 22, 2020.

    Stock chart icon

    VF Corp. shares traded as low as $16.77 on Thursday.

    Target’s stock sank to a 52-week low of $126.75 on Thursday, following a downgrade by JPMorgan to neutral. While analyst Christopher Horvers cited a weakening consumer as the primary reason that he expects tougher times ahead for the discount retailer, the recent controversies were mentioned as a factor in the decision. Horvers slashed his price target to $144 from $182.
    Meanwhile, Wells Fargo analyst Edward Kelly said the recent pullback in the stock’s price might have been seen as a buying opportunity prior to this issue.
    “The current stock price could have been a good entry point, but it’s hard to step in front of the current uncertainty,” Kelly wrote in a research note Thursday.
    Kelly said that he has seen “early evidence of some near-term financial impact.” Among the factors he cited was Placer.ai data that showed foot traffic at Target stores was soft in the week ended May 28.
    “Traffic has been a key bright spot for TGT as it struggled with margin issues, and a slowdown would be negative. It remains to be seen how long any impact would last,” Kelly said.

    Issues give brands ‘powerful gravitational pull’

    Even with the risk, companies will continue to tie brands to social issues because it fosters a deeper relationship with customers.
    “If you build your argument to consumers only on the stuff, only on the features, only the functional utility of what it is that you do, then competitors can come in and offer that, just a copy of that, and claim that  they have a better mousetrap,” said Americus Reed, a professor of marketing at the University of Pennsylvania, in an interview Wednesday on CNBC’s “Power Lunch.”

    Stock chart icon

    Kohl’s shares on Thursday hit a low of $17.89, the stock’s lowest level since May 22, 2020, when it traded as low as $17.19.

    “So a bit of … why it is so attractive to align with purpose and these sorts of issues is that … it gives you an opportunity to link more deeply with consumers,” Reed said. Even though it can go awry, the upside can be powerful because the connection “has powerful gravitational pull,” he said.
    In fact, those strong relationships are usually why boycotts fail to hurt a company’s sales longer term, according to King. He said research has shown that for every consumer that stops buying a product another shopper will begin a “buycott” by purchasing items to show their support for the opposite side of the issue.
    Still, with threats coming from both sides of the issue, and stocks suffering sharp selloffs, companies may proceed a bit more cautiously.
    “They may internally continue to embrace those values as important to their culture and identity, but externally they may be more risk adverse in terms of how they communicate those values,” King said.
    —CNBC’s Christopher Hayes contributed to this report. More

  • in

    New York sends college acceptance letters to 125,000 high school seniors, but broader enrollment crisis may be hard to fix

    To help spark interest in college, the State University of New York is sending acceptance letters to 125,000 graduating high school students.
    But college enrollment may have reached its peak, some experts say.
    Not only are fewer students interested in pursuing a degree after high school, but the population of college-age students is also shrinking.

    Graduates of Baruch College participate in a commencement ceremony at Barclays Center in Brooklyn, New York, June 5, 2017.
    Bebeto Matthews | AP

    In the days ahead, 125,000 graduating high school seniors will receive automatic acceptance letters from the State University of New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul announced Thursday.
    “Access to quality higher education is an engine for social mobility and we are taking comprehensive steps to ensure that college is affordable and accessible for students from all backgrounds,” New York’s governor said in a statement.

    Nationwide, college enrollment has noticeably lagged since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, when a significant number of students decided against a four-year degree in favor of joining the workforce or completing a certificate program without the hefty price tag or zoom screen.
    But a downturn in enrollment was in the works long before 2020.
    More from Personal Finance:529 college savings plans took a hit last year4 strategies to avoid taking on too much student debtThese moves can help you save big on college costs
    “The enrollment crisis didn’t start with the pandemic, it accelerated with the pandemic,” said Hafeez Lakhani, founder and president of Lakhani Coaching in New York. “This is the fuel on the fire.”
    In fact, undergraduate enrollment in the U.S. topped out at roughly 18 million students over a decade ago, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

    Today, there are more than 2.5 million fewer students enrolled in college, Doug Shapiro, executive director of the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, estimated.

    Population of college-age students is shrinking

    Not only are fewer students interested in pursuing any sort of degree after high school, but the population of college-age students is also shrinking, a trend referred to as the “enrollment cliff.”
    “There’s a broad-based drop in belief or trust in higher education as an institution,” said Cole Clark, a managing director within Deloitte’s higher education practice and co-author of a recent trends report. “It’s as much of a threat as the demographic cliff.”
    These days, only about 62% of high school seniors in the U.S. immediately go on to college, down from 68% in 2010. Those that opt out are often low-income students, who increasingly feel priced out of a postsecondary education.

    Steadily, college is becoming a path for only those with the means to pay for it, other reports also show.
    Would-be college students are looking more closely at the return on investment as tuition costs remain high and a shortage of workers increases opportunities in the labor force — with or without a diploma.
    At the same time, deep cuts in state funding for higher education have pushed more of the costs on to students and paved the way for significant tuition increases.

    Arrows pointing outwards

    High schoolers are more interested in career training

    Most Americans still agree a college education is worthwhile when it comes to career goals and advancement. However, only half think the economic benefits outweigh the costs, according to a report by Public Agenda, USA Today and Hidden Common Ground — and young adults are particularly skeptical.
    The rising cost of college and ballooning student loan balances have played a large role in changing views about the higher education system, which many think is rigged to benefit the wealthy, the report found. 
    Only 45% of students from low-income, first-generation or minority backgrounds believe education after high school is necessary, according to a study by ECMC Group.
    High schoolers are putting more emphasis on career training and post-college employment, the nonprofit found after polling more than 5,000 high school students six times since February 2020.

    More than 75% of high schoolers now say a two-year degree or technical certification is enough, and only 41% believe they must have a four-year degree to get a good job, a separate report by Junior Achievement and Citizens also found. 
    “A lot of students are weighing their options,” said Connie Livingston, the head of college counselors at college counseling firm Empowerly and a former admissions officer at Brown University.
    “Does it make more sense to go to community college, trade school or directly into the workforce? In this economic climate, that’s attractive.”

    Earning a college degree is almost always worthwhile

    And yet, earning a bachelor’s degree is almost always worthwhile, research shows.
    Bachelor’s degree holders generally earn 75% more than those with just a high school diploma, according to “The College Payoff,” a report from the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce — and the higher the level of educational attainment, the larger the payoff.
    But even while degrees deliver a strong premium in the job market, confidence in the higher education system is declining, according to Deloitte’s Clark.
    “There is a lot of rhetoric about the individual with a college degree and a ton of debt and underemployed,” he said.
    “You are going to continue to see this paradox,” Lakhani added. “There’s a subconscious consensus that it’s only worth going to college if you can go to a life-changing college.” 
    Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube. More