Investing

President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill” enacted trillions in tax breaks. But some residents in certain states and counties could see a bigger benefit.
In 2026, individual taxpayers will save an average of $3,752, according to a Tax Foundation analysis released this week. 
The highest average tax breaks for 2026 could be in Wyoming, Washington, Massachusetts, Florida and the District of Columbia, the report found.

Gary Yeowell | Digitalvision | Getty Images

President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill” enacted trillions in tax breaks — and some residents of certain states and counties could see bigger benefits.
In 2026, individual taxpayers will save an average of $3,752, according to a Tax Foundation analysis released this week. That figure falls to $2,505 in 2030 as some tax breaks expire, such as the $40,000 limit on the federal deduction for state and local taxes, known as SALT.

After falling for several years, the average tax cut could rise to $3,301 in 2035 once inflation boosts the value of permanent cuts. “That’s an interesting pattern” over the 10 years, Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the Tax Foundation, told CNBC.
More from Personal Finance:Trump’s ‘big beautiful bill’ makes Roth conversions more complicated School lunch prices are up — whether you pack it or buy it, reports findNearly 1 in 5 older student loan borrowers delinquent as Trump steps up collections
The average tax savings vary by state or county, as well as individual tax circumstances, the analysis found. “A lot of it does correlate with income,” Watson said. However, top earners can skew the average tax cuts higher, he said.  
Here are the top 10 average tax cuts for 2026 by state, based on the Tax Foundation analysis:

Wyoming: $5,374
Washington: $5,373 
Massachusetts: $5,138
Florida: $4,998
District of Columbia: $4,922 
Connecticut: $4,683
New Hampshire: $4,597
Colorado: $4,260
Nevada: $4,220
California: $4,141

By comparison, taxpayers in Mississippi, West Virginia, New Mexico, Kentucky and Alabama will see the lowest average tax cuts in 2026, all below $3,000, according to the analysis. 

Trump’s tax cuts by county

Derek Diluzio | Cavan | Getty Images

The Tax Foundation’s analysis also reviewed Trump’s tax cuts at the county level, based on the latest IRS data from 2022. Some of the largest average tax cuts by county for 2026 were among resort towns, the report found. 
For example, researchers estimate that Teton County in Wyoming, which includes Jackson Hole, could see an average tax cut of $37,373 per taxpayer in 2026. Meanwhile, Pitkin County, Colorado, which covers Aspen, could be $21,363. In Summit County, Utah, including Park City, the average tax cut could be $14,537 in 2026. 
Of course, higher-income individuals are “greatly skewing the average tax cut” in some of these resort areas, Watson said.  
By comparison, the smallest average tax cuts are found in rural counties, such as Loup County, Nebraska, where the average tax break could be only $824 in 2026.  

Who benefits most from Trump’s tax cuts

Trump’s legislation could benefit higher earners while hurting lower-income Americans, according to a Congressional Budget Office report released this week.
On average, “household resources will increase” between 2026 and 2034, mostly due to lower federal income taxes, Phillip Swagel, director of the Congressional Budget Office, wrote in the report. 
But the effects “vary by channel and across the income distribution,” he wrote.     
Top earners could see a $13,600 benefit per year in 2025 dollars, while the bottom percentile would see resources fall by $1,200 annually, the CBO report found. The shortfall for lower-income Americans would mainly be due to cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. More

The average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage was 6.58% for the week ended Thursday, Aug. 14, down from 6.63% the week prior, according to Freddie Mac.
Mortgage rates have come down a point and a half from October 2023 when rates almost hit 8%, according to Jessica Lautz, deputy chief economist at the National Association of Realtors. 
Here’s how to know if it’s time to refinance, according to experts.

The Good Brigade | Digitalvision | Getty Images

Mortgage rates have been declining, making conditions favorable for some homeowners to refinance, experts say. 
The average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage was 6.58% for the week ended Thursday, Aug.14, down from 6.63% the week prior, according to Freddie Mac.

Mortgage rates have come down a point and a half from October 2023, when rates almost hit 8%, according to Jessica Lautz, deputy chief economist at the National Association of Realtors. 
“That’s a substantial improvement,” said Lautz.
More from Personal Finance:Nearly 1 in 5 older student loan borrowers are seriously delinquentHere’s the inflation breakdown for July 2025Bad credit triggers a ‘subprime tax,’ Bankrate says
Lower mortgage rates often result in lower borrowing costs for home loans. Many homeowners have already jumped on the opportunity. 
“Refinance applications increased to their strongest pace in four weeks,” Joel Kan, vice president and deputy chief economist at the Mortgage Bankers Association, said in an Aug. 6 report. The share of refinance applications increased to roughly 42% of total applications, the highest level since April, according to the findings.

While most homeowners have mortgage rates that are too low to benefit, about 18.8% of outstanding mortgages have interest rates of 6% or higher, according to Realtor.com.
Homeowners who bought their properties in recent years when rates were high may want to consider refinancing, experts say. 
“A much more common mistake is for people to not realize when rates have dropped that they had an opportunity to refinance and to take advantage of it,”  said Chen Zhao, head of economics research at Redfin. 

Why mortgage rates have been declining

Mortgage rates have been falling in recent months. In May, the 30-year mortgage rate peaked at 6.89%, according to Freddie Mac data. The rate has been on a bumpy slope since then.
That’s despite the Federal Reserve holding interest rates steady at 4.25%-4.5% since December.
The federal funds rate sets what banks charge each other for overnight lending and directly impacts borrowing and savings rates for Americans. 
Yet, mortgage rates don’t follow the federal funds rate set by the central bank. Instead, they closely track the 10-year Treasury yields, which have been declining because of recent weakness in economic data, according to experts.
“The bond market is super sensitive and it reacts immediately to the data,” said Melissa Cohn, regional vice president of William Raveis Mortgage.

There’s a possibility that the Fed cuts interest rates in September, but the bond market may have already priced in that decision, said Zhao. 
Overall, experts agree that it’s worth watching where rates are, to spot opportunities to refinance. 
“People should start paying attention to where rates are going,” said Cohn. 

When it makes sense to refinance a mortgage

As mortgage rates come down, it’s worth considering refinancing a mortgage that has an interest rate over 6%, and especially if it’s 7% or higher, experts say. 
However, before you start the process, consider your plans: refinancing makes more sense if you expect to live in or own the property for a few more years.
That’s because refinancing a mortgage is not free — there are closing costs and certain fees that come with it, and you’d want to amortize the costs over the term that you expect to be in your home, said Cohn.
If you plan to keep the home for more than a year, refinancing makes sense. But if you plan to list your house for sale in the next six months, it may not be worth it, said Zhao.

Generally, refinancing costs will depend on where you live and the size of the loan, experts say.
You can expect to pay between 2% and 6% of the new loan balance, according to Bankrate. For example, if you’re refinancing a $150,000 mortgage, you might pay from $3,000 to $9,000 in closing costs. 
You also want to make sure rates have “dropped sufficiently” for you to see real savings from the refi, said Cohn. 
There are different rules of thumb of what’s considered to be “in the money,” or when rates have come down enough. But typically, if interest rates are about 50 basis points lower than your current rate, you should look into it, Zhao said.
If it’s more than that or a full percentage point lower, “you should almost certainly refinance,” she said.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

Roughly 50 years ago, nearly half of all 25- to 34-year-olds had reached traditional benchmarks of adulthood, such as moving out of their parents’ home, getting married or having kids, according to a U.S. Census Bureau working paper.
These days, less than a quarter of young adults have done the same.
“Many young adults now view marriage and children as goals to pursue only after securing financial independence,” says certified financial planner Douglas Boneparth.

Mellisa Soehono, 29, says she would “definitely” like to start a family someday.
“I do get a little bit of ‘FOMO’ seeing my friends around my age getting married, settling into a new home — and I’m just not in a place where that is really realistic for me,” said the public relations executive in Jacksonville, Florida.

To be sure, Soehono is not alone. Fewer 25- to 34-year-olds are getting married or having children, or even working full time or moving out of their parents’ home, according to a recent U.S. Census Bureau working paper.
More from Personal Finance:Here’s the inflation breakdown for July 2025Social Security COLA may be 2.7% in 2026: estimatesOlder student loan borrowers face high delinquency rates
Compared to previous generations, the share of young adults reaching those four key benchmarks notched a “significant drop,” the Census statisticians found.
Roughly 50 years ago, almost half of 25- to 34-year-olds achieved those milestones, which “mark the transition from adolescence to adulthood,” according to the analysis of the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey data — today, less than a quarter have done the same.

Jhorrocks | E+ | Getty Images

Soehono, who also has student debt from college, said she is not in a financial position to buy a home or start a family. “Where I am at with my life is focusing on my career because that’s really all I have right now,” she said.
In addition to hefty student loan bills, the recent runup in inflation helped cause rent and housing prices to jump, worsening an affordability crunch for many just starting out.
The median age of first-time homeowners is now 38 years old, an all-time high, according to a 2024 report by the National Association of Realtors. In the 1980s, the typical first-time buyer was in their late 20s.

The ‘economic bar’ for milestones is rising

Financial pressures — including rising housing costs, high rent burdens and the need for greater economic stability — are “major factors delaying family formation,” according to Douglas Boneparth, a certified financial planner and the president of Bone Fide Wealth in New York.
“Living with parents has become more common, and many young adults now view marriage and children as goals to pursue only after securing financial independence,” said Boneparth, a member of the CNBC Financial Advisor Council.
“The economic bar for starting a family has risen, with affordability concerns shaping the timing and sequencing of life milestones more than in prior generations,” he said.
Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube. More

As Social Security marks the 90th anniversary of the program’s creation, the benefits millions of Americans receive may be poised to change.
The trust funds the program relies on to help pay benefits face a shortfall in the next decade, which may prompt tax increases, benefit cuts or other changes.
CNBC.com spoke to lawmakers about the solutions they envision for the program’s future.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs the Social Security Act into law on Aug. 14, 1935.
FPG | Archive Photos | Getty Images

Ninety years ago, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act, which created the program that now sends monthly benefit checks to millions of Americans, including retirees, disabled individuals and families.
But by the time the program celebrates its centennial, benefits may not look the same as today’s Social Security payments.

The reason: Social Security’s trust funds, which the program relies on to help pay benefits, are facing a looming shortfall.
Starting in 2033 — two years before its 100th anniversary — the program may only be able to pay 77% of scheduled benefits for retirees, their families and survivors, Social Security’s trustees projected in an annual report released in June.
However, should those funds be combined with Social Security’s trust fund for disability benefits, as has happened in prior emergencies, payments may be cut one year later, in 2034. At that point, 81% of scheduled benefits would be payable, Social Security’s trustees project.
Importantly, Social Security benefits would not disappear entirely. The program would still have ongoing income from payroll taxes to help fund benefit payments.
That scenario is not inevitable. Changes to the program may be enacted sooner to shore up its funding and prevent sudden benefit cuts.

Most, 83%, of surveyed Americans think Social Security reform should be a top priority for Congress, even if it means benefit cuts or tax increases for future beneficiaries, according to a new poll from the Bipartisan Policy Center’s American Savings Education Council. The group polled more than 4,000 adults.
“This is the time for action,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, who is among the lawmakers pitching a plan to help restore the program’s solvency, told CNBC.com.

Pitch for a new $1.5 trillion investment fund

Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana speaks to the press on Capitol Hill on Feb. 10, 2021.
Nicholas Kamm | AFP | Getty Images

Cassidy has teamed up with Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia., to co-lead a bipartisan pitch — the centerpiece of which is a new $1.5 trillion investment fund for Social Security, separate from Social Security’s current trust funds.
The initial $1.5 trillion outlay would be borrowed. Because the money would be held in escrow and could be liquified, it would not increase the national debt, Cassidy said.
The funds would be invested more aggressively than Social Security’s current trust funds, which are invested in U.S. Treasury securities. Because those investments are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government, they are secure. However, the average rate of return over a one-year period was around 2.5% in 2024.
In contrast, the S&P 500 has returned an annual average of around 10%, though those results vary from year to year.
Investing the proposed separate investment fund in stocks, bonds and other investments could cover an estimated 70% of Social Security’s trust fund shortfall, Cassidy said. That would make it much more doable for lawmakers to address the remaining 30%, he said.

The senators’ plan does not include any benefit cuts or tax increases for seniors, Cassidy said. It would provide benefit increases for two cohorts — beneficiaries age 80 and older who are at less than 200% of the federal poverty level, and low earners who have a long work history earning low wages.
Lawmakers could consider increasing the size of the investment fund to help cover the rest of the shortfall, he said.
Rights to manage the fund would be left to a bidding process, which could result in lower fees and higher returns, Cassidy said.
Critics, including Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., have said investing in other securities as the senators’ plan suggests would privatize Social Security and therefore threaten Americans’ retirement security.
In response, Cassidy points to the federal Railroad Retirement system, which in 2001 moved from investing solely in government bonds to more aggressive instruments, including stocks. That change was approved by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and has helped the program operate with a positive balance today.
Still, some experts are dubious.
In a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, Andrew Biggs, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said while he applauded the first bipartisan plan to fix Social Security in two decades, he questions whether the plan could work.
Among the concerns he details are the amount of money that the plan requires the government to borrow, as well as the increased investment risk that would be required without a guarantee of higher returns.

Another proposal calls for the wealthy to pay more

Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., and other lawmakers discuss the Social Security 2100 Act, which would include increased minimum benefits, on Capitol Hill on Oct. 26, 2021.
Drew Angerer | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Cassidy and Kaine are not the only lawmakers looking at potential solutions to solve Social Security’s dilemma.
Larson has a plan that has been reintroduced in multiple sessions of Congress that would provide benefit increases while increasing taxes on the wealthy. The last time Social Security was meaningfully enhanced was in 1971 under President Richard Nixon, Larson said in an interview with CNBC.com.
More than 5 million Americans currently receive below poverty-level checks from Social Security, according to Larson.
Larson’s most recent proposal from 2023 would temporarily increase benefits for all beneficiaries, while also providing specific enhancements for those receiving minimum benefits; widows or widowers in two-income households; and children of deceased, disabled or retired workers who are full-time students. The plan also proposes changing the way annual cost-of-living adjustments are calculated.
To pay for those benefit increases, Larson’s plan calls for income over $400,000 to be subject to payroll taxes. In 2025, workers stop contributing to Social Security for the year once they reach an income of $176,100. Both employers and employees pay a 6.2% tax on wages up to that threshold.
More from Personal Finance:Social Security cost-of-living adjustment may be 2.7% in 2026’Big beautiful’ bill does not eliminate taxes on Social Security benefitsHow having a ‘bridge’ strategy can help Social Security claiming
The Bipartisan Policy Center poll finds a majority of Americans support lifting the cap on income subject to payroll taxes, with 65% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans. That includes a “significant majority” of respondents with annual household incomes over $200,000, according to the results.
Larson’s plan also called for a separate 12.4% tax on net investment income for taxpayers making over $400,000.
Larson plans to reintroduce his plan in the current session of Congress with some tweaks.
“We’ll be rolling out a presentation in September that will include not only protecting Social Security, but also enhancing it,” Larson said.
The plan will also make it Congress’ responsibility to act more frequently to help ensure benefits continue to meet individuals’ needs, he said.
“I think that that’s got to be paramount to keeping this in check,” Larson said.
Larson plans to push for a vote on his bill. But he also wants an open debate.
“There has to be a public discussion,” Larson said.

What Americans want from Social Security

A person holds a sign reading ‘Save Our Social Security’ in support of fair taxation near the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. on April 10, 2025. Tax justice advocates attended a rally to speak out against President Trump’s tax cuts for the wealthy, and to urge members of Congress to intervene.
Bryan Dozier | Afp | Getty Images

Most Americans — 64% of Democratic voters and 61% of Republicans — want Congress to work together across party lines to reform Social Security, the Bipartisan Policy Center found in its recent poll.
That’s as 41% of surveyed Americans expect Social Security will be their primary source of income in retirement, according to the BPC. Moreover, 74% of Americans worry Social Security will run out before they retire, while 80% worry Congress will cut benefits.
Nevertheless, the poll results show Americans would welcome a “comprehensive, balanced reform package that entails both benefit adjustments and tax increases,” said Emerson Sprick, director of retirement and labor policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.
Increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1% to help repair the program’s finances had the most support among BPC’s poll respondents, with 85% of Democrats and 72% of Republicans. That’s in contrast to the 65% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans who support a higher cap on payroll taxes.
A majority of voters also support adjusting benefits for those most in need, with 63% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans; reducing benefits for higher income individuals, with 64% of Democrats and 61% of Republicans; and increasing the amount that both employees and employers pay into the program, with 61% of both Democrats and Republicans. Most voters also support encouraging legal immigration that would result in more workers paying into the program, with 64% of Democrats and 54% of Republicans.
The urgency of addressing Social Security’s funding woes will increase over time.
Two new laws have provided generous enhancements for certain Social Security beneficiaries. The Social Security Fairness Act increased benefits for some public pensioners, while President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful” budget and tax package provides a tax deduction for seniors.
The changes in both laws will accelerate the trust fund depletion dates. The Fairness Act was included the Social Security trustees’ latest projections. The more recent “big beautiful” legislation will move the insolvency date for the retirement trust fund to late 2032 up from the early 2033 trustees’ projection, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Senators who are elected in 2026 will be in office during those projected depletion deadlines, Sprick said.
As the trust fund depletion dates come closer, there will be more discussion about Social Security’s future on Capitol Hill, Sprick said. The current proposals on Capitol Hill are a start, he said.
“We’ve put this off for way too long; the political process moves very slowly,” Sprick said. “But that does not negate the fact that these conversations are moving in the right direction.” More

ETF Strategist

ETF Street
ETF Strategist

Relatively weak job growth and the specter of higher inflation ahead due to tariffs mean investors may not want to take outsized risk, according to market pros.
Investors have chased lofty returns for crypto and certain tech companies, one financial advisor said.
Rebalancing, holding a diversified portfolio, and having an appropriate mix of stocks and bonds are key in this environment.

Jose Luis Pelaez Inc | Digitalvision | Getty Images

Data suggests the U.S. economy may be in a precarious spot — and investors may be wise not to take outsized risks with their portfolios for fear of steep losses, experts said.
“This is not the environment to be a hero in,” Callie Cox, chief market strategist at Ritholtz Wealth Management, wrote this month in a newsletter.

In other words: Stick to your long-term investment plan, including an appropriate asset allocation and time frame to reach your goals, experts said. Avoid the temptation to funnel a big chunk of money into high-flying shiny objects like individual technology stocks or cryptocurrency, they said.
“You need to own a basket of quality assets and investments, hold your breath and let markets do their work,” Cox said in an interview with CNBC.
To be sure, this is sound perennial advice typically offered by financial planners.
But some market-watchers caution that economic headwinds could serve up ample volatility in the coming months.
“I think there are a lot of reasons to be optimistic, but also cautious at the same time,” said Winnie Sun, co-founder of Sun Group Wealth Partners, based in Irvine, California, and a member of CNBC’s Financial Advisor Council.

Economic headwinds

Azbycx | Moment | Getty Images

The job market appears to have weakened considerably, for example.
Employers in the public and private sectors added 35,000 jobs, on average, over the past three months, according to federal data.
Job growth from May to July is happening at a “pace you normally see around or in recessions,” Cox wrote.
It’s also down from average monthly growth of 123,000 jobs during the same three-month period of 2024, and from 111,000 in the first three months of 2025.

More from ETF Strategist:

Here’s a look at other stories offering insight on ETFs for investors.

The size of the U.S. labor force has declined for three consecutive months, which hasn’t happened since 2011, Cox wrote.
“The job market is in a precarious spot after months of slowing consumer spending,” Cox wrote. “The American consumer drives the economy, and the economy ultimately drives the direction of markets,” she added.
Economists also worry about inflation reigniting as tariffs levied by the Trump administration work their way into higher prices for consumer goods and services.
There have been some signs of that in recent months, and many economists expect that inflationary pressure to bite harder in coming months.

‘People are feeling like they’ll be left behind’

Despite these headwinds, experts say the economy isn’t in dire shape. The stock market has also continued to march to new highs, with the S&P 500 stock index up about 10% since the start of the year.
Many of Sun’s clients have shown urgent interest in artificial intelligence and crypto amid lofty returns, versus more bread-and-butter long-term planning, she said.
Shares in tech giants like Meta, Microsoft and Nvidia are up about 34%, 24% and 36%, respectively, this year, for example. Bitcoin prices are also up over 25%.
It’s a “hurry-up-and-invest” mindset, Sun said.

“A lot of people are feeling like they’ll be left behind,” she said. “But we don’t feel like we have the full picture yet on where the U.S. is economically.”
Tariff policy has whipsawed in recent months, leaving markets and investors grasping for answers as new import duties are announced, delayed or rescinded in a rapid-fire fashion, according to market-watchers.
“Right now, we feel it’s best to stick with diversified and long-term plans,” Sun said.
“A lot of the decisions being made right now are not financially driven,” she said. “I think it’s much more emotions-driven.”

Diversification and rebalancing are ‘key’

Sun advises investors to be well-diversified, and avoid the temptation to over-allocate their portfolio to growth-oriented sectors like technology. Having a well-diversified portfolio diversifies risks in the event lackluster economic data send markets tumbling, she said.
Exchange-traded funds or mutual funds, which are baskets of several different securities like stocks and bonds overseen by professional asset managers, can help the average investor stay diversified, she said.
ETFs often carry relatively low fees compared with mutual funds, and so can offer a cheap way to diversify.
Rebalancing more frequently in this environment is “key,” Cox said.
That entails ensuring your asset allocation hasn’t been thrown out of whack if certain segments of your portfolio outperform or underperform for a period of time.
“You never want to hit a market selloff and be more exposed to it than you think,” Cox said.
Jacob Manoukian, U.S. head of investment strategy, at J.P. Morgan Private Bank, cautions that taking too much risk off the table could also have adverse outcomes for investors.
Companies continue to have strong corporate earnings despite some relatively weak economic data — a dynamic that can persist for a while, he said.
“It’s hard to give advice to reduce risk substantially when corporate earnings are as strong as they are,” Manoukian said.
“When companies are surprising to the upside to that degree, we’d encourage investors and our clients to have the right amount of risk for their plan and not reduce risk unduly — that’s a way to underperform,” Manoukian said. More

If you’re eyeing Roth conversions, President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill” could make the strategy more complicated, financial experts say.
These transfers can kickstart tax-free growth, but the move triggers upfront taxes on the converted balance.
There are several factors to consider, including Trump’s new tax breaks, before making Roth conversions.

Alvaro Gonzalez | Moment | Getty Images

If you’re eyeing a Roth conversion, President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill” could make the strategy more complicated, according to financial experts.
Roth conversions transfer pretax or nondeductible individual retirement account funds to a Roth IRA, which starts future tax-free growth. The trade-off is paying regular income taxes on the converted balance.

Trump’s new tax cuts could make Roth conversions more appealing for some investors, experts say. But incurring too much income could impact eligibility for certain tax breaks.
More from Personal Finance:What to do with RMDs when you don’t need the moneySocial Security COLA may be 2.7% in 2026: estimatesOlder student loan borrowers face high delinquency rates
When weighing Roth conversions, you need to know the multi-year state and federal tax impact, said Judy Brown, a certified financial planner who works at SC&H Group in the Washington, D.C., and Baltimore area.
For example, if you’re nearing Medicare age or already enrolled, boosting your earnings could increase income-related monthly adjustment amounts, or IRMAA, for Medicare Part B and Part D premiums.
The strategy is “looking at a lot of different pieces, and figuring out the optimal place for each client,” said Brown, who is also a certified public accountant.

‘Fill up the lowest brackets’

Roth conversions have always been about “tax bracket management,” said CFP Patrick Huey, owner of Victory Independent Planning in Portland, Oregon. 
When making Roth conversions, advisors typically incur enough regular income to “fill up the lowest brackets,” he said. 
Your federal brackets are based on each part of your “taxable income,” which you calculate by subtracting the greater of the standard or itemized deductions from your adjusted gross income.

Trump’s temporary tax breaks

Before Trump enacted the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, lower federal income tax brackets were scheduled to sunset after 2025, which would have made converted balances more expensive.
Trump’s legislation made the lower tax rates permanent, but several new tax breaks — deductions for older Americans, tipped workers and consumers with overtime pay and car loan interest — are temporary with varying earnings limits. 
These tax breaks, which are available from 2025 through 2028, could offer more room for Roth conversions before hitting the next tax bracket, experts say.
Once these cuts expire, you could be “paying more for the exact same Roth conversion,” said CFP Ashton Lawrence at Mariner Wealth Advisors in Greenville, South Carolina.

Comparing tax breaks

While Trump’s new tax cuts could make more space in the lower tax brackets, higher income from Roth conversions can impact eligibility, experts say.
For example, the additional $6,000 deduction for older Americans starts to phase out, or get smaller, once modified adjusted gross income exceeds $75,000 for single filers or $150,000 for married couples filing jointly.
It probably still makes sense to convert funds at 22% or 24% tax rates now — and skip the $6,000 deduction — to avoid the 30% brackets for large pre-tax required withdrawals later, Brown said.
Most retirees must take required minimum distributions, or RMDs, from pretax retirement accounts starting at age 73 or face an IRS penalty. More

Parents and other caregivers packing a school lunch will pay more for the standard fare this year, due to food inflation and tariffs, reports show.
Although school-provided lunches are generally less expensive than lunches from home, those costs are rising too.

Ann Hermes/The Christian Science Monitor via Getty Images

Even a peanut butter and jelly sandwich is not immune to inflation’s bite.
Although grocery prices cooled in July, food costs, overall, are trending higher, according to the latest consumer price index.

As a result of food cost inflation, parents who pack lunches for their school-age children will pay more in the coming academic year compared with last year, a new report by Deloitte also found.

For parents and other caregivers, the average daily cost of packing a lunch for school is now $6.15, according to Deloitte. That’s up 3% on average, compared with the start of the 2024 school year.
“The high point of inflation was really around 2022, but grocery costs today are 20% more than they were five years ago,” said Natalie Martini, Deloitte’s U.S. retail and consumer sector leader and a mother of two school-age children.
That’s driving “a significant increase in the cost to bring a lunch from home,” she added.

President Donald Trump’s blanket tariffs could also bring higher prices on certain foods, experts say, including fresh produce, nuts and cheese.

A separate study by progressive think tanks Groundwork Collaborative and The Century Foundation found that families will pay nearly $163 more this year for school lunch staples — a 5.4% jump over last year — in part because of Trump’s tariff agenda.
“From lunch boxes and notebooks to juice boxes and pencils, parents are being squeezed at every turn,” Liz Pancotti, Groundwork Collaborative’s managing director of policy and advocacy, said in an email.
Also, many school supplies are at least 20% more expensive than they were pre-pandemic, according to a CNBC analysis.

Although school-provided lunches are almost always cheaper and sometimes free, about 42% of the parents polled said their children bring lunch from home on most school days, according to Deloitte’s report. While price is a key issue, healthy eating was the top concern among caregivers, Deloitte found.
Yet those polled said they would switch from name brands to store brands or substitute a cheaper main lunch item, like a less expensive sandwich, to cut costs.
Deloitte surveyed more than 1,200 caregivers of school-age children in May.

School lunches are getting more expensive

School-provided lunches, which cost around $3 on average, are not shielded from price hikes either, largely due to the rising costs of food and labor in addition to staffing shortages, according to the most recent School Nutrition Association annual survey.
The cost of elementary and secondary school lunches rose 3.3% in May 2025 relative to May 2024, according to a consumer price index report by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Key legislative reforms over a decade ago paved the way for healthier meals at school with more fruits, vegetables and whole grains on the menu, experts say. However, that also caused costs to increase across the board, as cafeterias integrated more nutritious offerings, the U.S. Department of Agriculture found.

At the same time, nearly 90% of school nutrition directors said worker shortages are a challenge to their operations, particularly when it comes to meeting the new nutritional standards, which require additional staff, training and equipment, according to the School Nutrition Association survey.
Shelly Werger, a mother of seven in Guttenberg, Iowa, said the cost of a school lunch in her district jumped to $4.80 this year from $3.20 the year before.
Despite the price increase, it’s more practical for her youngest children, who are 12 and 16 years old, to buy lunch at school — even though they sometimes complain about the food, Werger said. “They don’t even always like the lunches, but we don’t always have time to make a meal either.”
Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube. More

Nearly 1 in 5 — or roughly 18% — of student loan borrowers who are age 50 and older became “seriously delinquent,” or 90 days or more late on their payments, in the second quarter of 2025, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
But there’s still time for older student loan borrowers who are behind on their bills to avoid default, and the risk of their wages and retirement benefits being garnished.

Vladimir Vladimirov | E+ | Getty Images

More older student loan borrowers are struggling to pay their monthly bill, as the Trump administration ramps up its collection efforts.
Nearly 1 in 5 — or roughly 18% — of student loan borrowers who are 50 and older became “seriously delinquent,” or 90 days or more late on their payments, in the second quarter of 2025, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The rate for that age group was closer to 10% in 2019.

For comparison, closer to 8% of student loan borrowers between the ages of 18 and 29 became seriously delinquent during that time frame, and around 11% of those aged 30 to 39 did.
“Being delinquent on student loan debt is difficult for people who are approaching their retirement years,” said Lori Trawinski, director of finance and employment at AARP.
“People end up having to make extremely difficult choices,” Trawinski said.
Some of the repayment troubles may stem from older Americans borrowing more than they can afford for their children’s college education, experts say. Other people run into financial difficulties after returning to school later in life and then not accessing the career opportunities they’d hoped for.
More from Personal Finance:Trump floats tariff ‘rebate’ for consumersStudent loan forgiveness may soon be taxed againStudent loan borrowers — how will the end of the SAVE plan impact you? Tell us

Whatever the reason, falling behind on your education debt may quickly have more financial consequences.
Earlier this summer, the Trump administration announced that it would soon resume collection activity against student loan borrowers who aren’t making their payments. This comes after a nearly five-year period during which student loan holders were shielded from the consequences of missing their bills, a policy that began at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Here’s what older borrowers in the red need to know.

There’s still time to prevent default

There are key differences between student loan delinquency and default.
While becoming delinquent for 90 days or more on your student loans can show up on your credit report and lower your score, the more severe consequences of federal collection activity don’t usually start until you’re more than 270 days late and eventually fall into default, said higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz.
Meanwhile, private lenders typically consider student borrowers in default after 120 days without a payment, he said.
Delinquent student loan borrowers have time to get current, said certified financial planner Douglas Boneparth, president of Bone Fide Wealth in New York.
“For those struggling, the first step is to explore all available federal repayment options, especially income-driven repayment plans, which can significantly lower monthly payments and prevent default,” said Boneparth, who is also a member of the CNBC Financial Advisor Council.
You can try to find a repayment plan with monthly bills you can afford at Studentaid.gov.

The so-called Income-Based Repayment plan is one of what may be a dwindling number of manageable repayment options left to borrowers, after recent court actions and the passage of President Donald Trump’s tax and spending bill. That legislation phases out several other repayment plans.
There are tools from the Education Department to help you determine how much your monthly bill would be under different plans.
Struggling borrowers can also see if they’re eligible to pause their payments, such as through a forbearance or economic hardship deferment — though it’s important to check if your debt will accrue interest during the reprieve.
“Requesting a temporary forbearance can buy time, but ideally, borrowers should aim for an affordable, sustainable payment plan rather than stop-gap measures,” Boneparth said.

Social Security protected, but not wages

Older student loan borrowers who are behind on their payments received some good news earlier this summer: The Department of Education has paused its plan to garnish defaulted borrowers’ Social Security benefits. Normally, Social Security recipients can see their checks reduced by up to 15% to pay back their defaulted student loan.
An Education Department spokesperson told CNBC in an email Tuesday that the department has not offset any Social Security benefits since restarting collections on May 5 and has paused future Social Security offsets.
Still, older borrowers should take steps to get their debt out of delinquency as quickly as possible and avoid becoming at risk for more punishing collection activity, said AARP’s Trawinski.
While the Trump administration said in June that it was pausing Social Security offsets, “what they did not do is issue a formal rule or regulation saying they won’t do so in the future,” Trawinski said. As a result, she said, “there’s an expectation that they will at some point resume those garnishments.”
For those older borrowers who are still working, the Education Department can also garnish up to 15% of your disposable, or after-tax, pay, toward a defaulted student loan, Kantrowitz said.
“We anticipate wage garnishment to begin later this summer,” a spokesperson for the Education Department told CNBC on Aug. 5.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More