RAPPER Nelly was accused of taking writer credit on song he didn’t write on his hit albums Country Grammar and Nellyville in a massive $10 million lawsuit.
The U.S. Sun can exclusively reveal that the Hot In Herre artist was sued in federal court in May after a lawsuit was initially lobbed at him in a local Missouri court in 2024.
Sign up for the Showbiz newsletter
Thank you!
Nelly was hit with a $10 million federal lawsuit in which he is accused of taking credit on songs he didn’t writeCredit: GettyThe suit, filed by a production company, accused the singer of making a secret agreement to use his name on credits for songs to avoid paying royaltiesCredit: YouTube/Nelly
Production company D2 filed an amended complaint against Nelly, 50, in August.
The suit read “D2 is a production company started in a local community skating rink by twin brothers Darren Stith and David Stith.
“D2 was known for developing producers and talents and giving them an opportunity to further their art and careers.”
The brothers claimed: “They were directly responsible for finding, nurturing, and bringing to the public the music of Nelly and the group known as the ‘St. Lunatics.’”
St. Lunatics was made up of Nelly, Ali Jones, Torri Harper, Robert Kyjuan Cleveland and Lavell Webb, aka City Spud.
In the suit, D2 alleged that they had a contract with both Nelly and the St. Lunatics, separately, but that they released the Ride Wit Me rapper from his contract with them in June of 2000, with a $75,000 payment.
D2 claimed that Nelly, in a secret agreement, claimed a writer credit on songs that weren’t written by him, and were actually written with the St. Lunatics, which made it so the artists were able to avoid paying D2 royalties on those songs.
“The Songs, which were included on the Country Grammar and Nellyville albums, sold over twenty million copies.
“D2 was never paid its portion of the revenues that were legally due to D2 under Lunatic Agreements with Harper, Cleveland, and Jones (and then the Publishing Agreement), but went to Nelly instead under the Secret Arrangement,” the suit went on to allege.
Nelly and the St. Lunatics are being sued by D2 for more than $10,000,000 for breach of contract, fraud, conspiracy and breach of good faith and fair dealing.
D2 is also suing Nelly specifically for tortious interference, which essentially means the rapper putrposely interfered with D2’s business.
The suit said the Air Force One’s rapper “intentionally induced, and caused an interruption of D2’s contractual relationship with, and its business expectancy with, Harper, Cleveland, and Jones, by proposing, negotiating, entering into, and implementing the Secret Arrangement.
“Nelly knew or should have known that his actions would interfere with the Lunatic Agreements and cause D2 to lose revenue it was entitled to receive from the Songs pursuant to the Lunatic Agreements, and later, through the Publishing Agreement,” the suit claimed.
In September, Nelly, along with Cleveland and Harper, attempted to get the suit dismissed.
The case is ongoing.
Earlier this week, Nelly’s wife, Ashanti, was seen sporting a bathing suit on a trip to Barbados just after her 45th birthday on October 13.
Nelly was not seen during the outing, though their child, Kareem Kenkaide ‘KK’ Haynes, was with her for the trip.
A third added: “So here for these two being happy and in love.”
The show’s debut came just hours after The Sun exclusively revealed the truth behind rumors that Nelly had cheated on Ashanti.
Nelly and Ashanti launched a show on Peacock after they rekindledCredit: GettyNelly and Ashanti reconnected and secretly married after more than a decade apartCredit: GettyThe rapper was sued over songs from his smash hit album County Grammar and NellyvilleCredit: Getty
Most people know that a higher credit score is better — but how much better? What does it really cost to fall just one tier below?
The average credit score in 2025 is 715, according to Motley Fool Money research. Yours might be above that, or below. And while a few points here or there may not change how lenders treat you, once the gap widens, the financial impact gets real. Especially when you’re moving between major credit tiers.
For example, a credit score of 680 sits at the lower end of the “good” range, while 740 breaks into “very good” territory. Both of these scores aren’t too far from the national average, but they unlock very different rates, terms, and perks.
1. Mortgage rates: A small score gap can cost tens of thousands
Let’s start with the biggest loan most people ever take on: a mortgage.
Suppose you’re applying for a $400,000, 30-year fixed mortgage. Here’s how your credit score might affect the interest rate you’re offered:
Credit Score
APR
Est. Monthly Payment
Total Interest Over 30 Years
680
7.00%
$2,661
$558,036
740
6.25%
$2,463
$486,633
Data source: Author’s calculations.
Total difference: over $71,000
To be fair, a lot can change over a 30-year mortgage. If your credit score improves down the road, you may be able to refinance into a lower rate and save money over time. But this example shows just how much a lower score can impact your finances right now — especially if you’re locking in a loan with today’s rates. Even a small bump in your score before applying could lead to serious savings.
2. Auto loans: Higher monthly payments, even on smaller balances
Auto lenders are also score-sensitive. According to MyFICO, here’s the rate difference you could expect with different credit scores, based on a 60-month new car loan:
680 score (prime): ~9.963%
740 score (prime): ~6.695%
On a $35,000 car loan, that difference could cost you an extra $55 per month, and over $3,300 extra in interest over the life of the loan.
Even though both of these scores fall into the “prime” range for FICO® Scores, there’s quite a big difference in the rates that are offered.
3. Insurance premiums: A hidden cost many don’t realize
In many states, your credit score plays a role in how much you pay for car and home insurance. It doesn’t show up as an interest rate — just a higher premium.
According to Motley Fool Money research, drivers with poor credit often pay more than double what those with excellent credit are charged. Even a modest difference, like $50 more per month, can add up to over $6,000 in extra premiums over a decade.
Most of the best credit cards (including travel cards, 0% intro APR cards, and big cash back cards) prefer applicants with higher credit scores.
That doesn’t mean you’ll be approved or denied strictly on your score (I’ve been denied for some cards even with an 800+ score). But when your score is lower your approval odds typically drop.
That also means missing out on premium rewards rates, long 0% intro APRs, or welcome bonuses worth $750 or more. These can be incredibly valuable perks. But you need the credit score to unlock them.
Raising your score is worth it
Here’s the bright side: moving from a 680 to a 740 (or higher) isn’t some impossible leap.
Many people can see a 40- to 60-point boost within a year or two by practicing good credit habits. Here are a few that make a huge difference:
Paying down credit card balances (lowering your utilization)
Setting autopay to never miss a due date
Not opening or closing too many accounts at once (and keeping your oldest cards open to improve history length)
Asking for a credit limit increases on existing cards slowly over time
By far the biggest factor is making sure your bills are paid on time, every time.
Even small tweaks can have a big payoff. The difference between “good” and “very good” credit could be tens of thousands of dollars over your lifetime.
Fox College Football tweeted that “The Jerry Neuheisel Era has begun with the Bruins.”
ESPN personality Pat McAfee added to the chorus of adoration for UCLA’s new playcaller, tweeting that Neuheisel “just might be a football wizard.”
Other media and sports betting sites tweeting about the Bruins’ turnaround from 0-4 to darlings of the college football world prominently featured pictures of the blond-haired assistant coach.
It was enough to prompt the sports media website Awful Announcing to ask: “Does anyone know that Tim Skipper is actually UCLA’s interim head coach, not Jerry Neuheisel?”
Having been preoccupied with saving a season, Skipper acknowledged being blissfully unaware of any narratives about who’s done what to spark his team’s turnabout.
“I guess it’s good that I don’t get on social media and all that stuff right now because I don’t feel that way,” Skipper said Monday when asked about the notion that he wasn’t getting proper credit. “But I don’t really know what’s happening in the outside world [because] I’m in this [practice] building so much.
“But I love what I’m doing, I’m just working, man, and I just try to put us in the best position to be successful on Saturday.”
Part of any credit distortion might be associated with Skipper having presided over the Bruins’ 17-14 loss to Northwestern after replacing DeShaun Foster. The next week, Neuheisel was elevated to playcaller, helping the Bruins (2-4 overall, 2-1 Big Ten) revive a dreadful offense and roll up a combined 80 points during victories over Penn State and Michigan State.
In truth, there have been enough fingerprints on UCLA’s resurgence to leave countless smudge marks.
UCLA coach Tim Skipper stands on the sideline during the Bruins’ win over Penn State on Oct. 4.
(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)
Skipper has provided energy, meticulousness and drive, and his motivational tactics — including leaving printouts asking “ARE YOU A ONE-HIT WONDER?” on players’ seats on the team plane last week — had their intended effect during a runaway victory over Michigan State.
Neuheisel has undoubtedly elevated an offense that struggled mightily under predecessor Tino Sunseri.
Kevin Coyle, the de facto defensive coordinator who was brought in before the Northwestern game to replace Ikaika Malloe, has unleashed an aggressive, disciplined style that has largely compensated for shortcomings that were previously exposed.
There’s also been a host of other contributors, from the scouting staff that helped identify the weakness leading to a successful onside kick against Penn State, to the security guards outside Drake Stadium who continually encouraged players walking into practice amid loss after loss to start the season.
And, of course, don’t forget the players — quarterback Nico Iamaleava’s leadership and poise alongside a slew of others who have risen to the moment after so much early struggle.
The Bruins are favored against Maryland (4-2, 1-2) on Saturday at the Rose Bowl for the first time since they faced New Mexico, and it might be easy to envision their success snowballing. But Skipper said he wasn’t going to introduce the idea of making a bowl game as his next motivational device.
“I’m all about the moment that you’re in, man,” Skipper said. “… This week, kind of, [the mantra] is the standard is the standard and don’t get bored with success. We have to keep doing what we’re doing and always be on the rise, you know?”
As he neared the one-month mark since his Sept. 14 promotion, Skipper acknowledged having initially worried about keeping his roster intact since players could enter the transfer portal or redshirt.
“When I first took over, it was, like, every time I talked to you guys, everybody was asking about who’s redshirting, who’s going to the portal?” Skipper said. “That was the theme that was, like, the No. 1 question. And we’ve been able to keep the team intact, you know, and that’s an everyday thing. I think we’ve shown them that, hey, we can make it, make it a good environment here, even though we have all this change and stuff, just stick with us and we’re going to be all right.”
A clean locker room and the smiles and excitement that come with winning have been among the big changes in the aura around the team that Skipper said he’s noticed since taking over.
“It looks like the guys are in good spirits and things like that, and they know that tomorrow’s gonna be a work day and they better be ready to go,” Skipper said. “But I think we’re giving the guys the ‘why’ and the reasons why we do things, and that’s helping them know what to expect.”
Put me in, coach
UCLA unveiled a sturdy offensive weapon late in the third quarter against Michigan State.
It was Siale Taupaki, a 337-pound defensive lineman used as a blocker when the Bruins reached the red zone. Going in motion on a direct snap to running back Jaivian Thomas, Taupaki flattened a defender as Thomas scored on the second-and-goal play.
“He was begging to be able to do something on the offensive side,” Skipper said of the redshirt junior, who has vacillated between the offensive and defensive lines during his seven seasons with the team. “Sure enough, he went out there and did his job, so that gave us some juice on the sideline and it was good to see.”
Etc.
Skipper said the team’s improved tackling in recent weeks was more of a function of fundamentals than scheme. “We do drills when we get [individual] time that are specifically to use your weapons — your eyes, feet and hands,” Skipper said, “and we’re learning how to wrap up and move our feet on contact because the hardest thing to do is re-start your feet when they stop.” … The University of California regents are scheduled to meet in a closed session Tuesday in San Francisco to discuss the compensation package that will be made available to UCLA’s next coach.
Banks are joining private equity funds in issuing private credit to corporate borrowers—despite regulators’ concerns about unseen risks.
As private equity becomes an increasingly dominant force in backing corporate transactions, banks are taking an “If you can’t beat ’em, join’em” approach to the business of debt-capital financing.
Standing to benefit are corporate borrowers that otherwise cannot get traditional bank financing. But the intertwining of largely unregulated private credit and regulated bank lending—with the attendant risk of government bailouts of providers of both if their loans go bad—raises questions about threats to the financial system.
What once would have been considered an unlikely partnership is nevertheless liable to deepen, since the forces behind it have been building for some time.
The global industry of private credit, supplied mainly through closed-end credit funds sponsored by the same PE firms that back equity vehicles, has grown dramatically since the 2008 financial crisis. It boasts $2.8 trillion in assets under management (AUM) at last count, up from $200 billion in the early 2000s, according to the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). Correspondingly, bank lending fell from 44% of all US corporate borrowing in 2020 to 35% in 2023, an analysis by global consultancy Deloitte of Federal Reserve data found.
“Some private credit funds may have a degree of liquidity mismatch between their investments and the redemption terms of their investors.”
Lee Foulger, Bank of England
Use of private credit is expanding dramatically elsewhere as well. The BIS estimates that total outstanding private credit loan volumes have increased globally from around $100 billion in 2010 to over $1.2 trillion today, with more than 87% of the total originating in the US. Europe, excluding the UK, has accounted for about 6% of the total in recent years, and the UK about 3% to 4%, with Canada making up most of the rest. Assets in credit funds under management in Asia-Pacific total about $92.9 billion, up from $15.4 billion in 2014, according to research firm Preqin.
The appeal of private credit to corporate borrowers is clear: Many middle-market businesses, often backed by private equity sponsors, prefer private credit for its speed, flexibility, confidentiality, and reduced disclosure obligations compared to public bond markets available through broadly syndicated loans (BSLs). Those advantages are starting to attract larger, more creditworthy companies as well.
Banks, meanwhile, increasingly are lending to private credit funds for purposes of financing corporate borrowers, often those in the sponsors’ equity portfolios. Such lending often takes the form of so-called direct lending: commercial loans used by corporates for working capital or growth financing, that the industry contends traditional banks would not underwrite.
Bank lending to the private credit industry was estimated by the Federal Reserve in May 2023 at $200 billion, and the Fed acknowledged its estimate may have understated the actual amount. Fitch Ratings found that nine of the 10 banks with the largest loan balances to non-bank financial intermediaries of all kinds had $158 billion in loans to private credit funds or related vehicles at the end of last year. And the amount of outstanding loans extended by banks to private credit funds grew by 23% in the quarter ended June 30, compared with the previous quarter, versus only 1.4% for bank lending overall, Fitch reports.
The increasing importance of bank lending to private credit is well illustrated by Blackstone Private Credit Fund, one of the largest private credit funds in the world with over $50 billion in assets. Fully 98% of the $23.5 billion in secured credit commitment facilities arranged by its subsidiaries as of December 2022 were provided by 13 banks, the remaining amount from an insurance company. The outstanding amounts drawn on these facilities totaled some $14 billion, accounting for about 50% of the fund’s total debt liabilities.
A Deepening Collaboration
Of course, banks have long been involved in financing PE buyouts, such as Sycamore Partners buyout of Walgreens Boots Alliance. Two other PE firms, HPS Investment Partners and Ares Management, together provided $4.5 billion in direct lending for the deal while banks including Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan Chase put together financing proposals to work jointly with private credit, providing some access to the BSL market. Overall, the deal Sycamore completed in August is valued at $23.7 billion, with over $10 billion in committed financing coming from private credit funds and banks.
Increasingly, cooperation between banks and PE firms is taking the shape of direct lending to borrowers. PNC Financial and TCW Group, for instance, have partnered to create a lending platform for middle-market companies. And Citizens Financial Group has built out a unit focused on lending to PE funds.
Competition from banks is also growing. Standard Chartered and Goldman are readying their own units devoted to extending private credit while Morgan Stanley is launching funds to exploit private credit opportunities. The loans may not stay on banks’ balance sheets for long, as risk is transferred once investors’ capital is deployed. But just as the securitization market froze up in the inflationary post-Covid environment, so too may risk transfer when liquidity abruptly disappears.
Indeed, regulators are concerned that banks’ involvement in private credit, whether through cooperation or competition with PE, poses hidden risks to the financial system. Researchers from the Bank of England (BoE), the BIS, the European Central Bank (ECB), and the Federal Reserve, among others, have issued reports recently warning of the systemic financial risk these relationships may pose. Without greater visibility, the BoE, for one, has instructed banks to bolster their risk management in this arena.
“Some private credit funds may have a degree of liquidity mismatch between their investments and the redemption terms of their investors,” Lee Foulger, director of Financial Stability, Strategy, and Risk at the BoE, warned in a January 2024 speech to a middle-market finance conference sponsored by Deal Catalyst and the Association for Financial Markets in Europe.
Who’s More Creditworthy?
The industry counters such concerns by pointing out that credit funds are less likely to have loan defaults than in the BSL market as sponsors typically monitor borrowers’ performance more closely, use less leverage, adopt more conservative loan-to-value structures, and offer more flexible terms than banks, while locking up investors for long periods. In a recent report, “Understanding Private Credit,” Ares Management contends that its borrowers are more creditworthy than those in the public markets and are supported by more equity and that while the private credit market is still small in comparison, it is on its way to becoming even less leveraged while any funding mismatch will diminish as it grows.
Yet concerns remain, especially given the prospect of a challenging economic environment ahead.
Fitch, for instance, notes that the industry has yet to weather higher interest rates. As the ratings firm put it in a June report, “Sponsors and lenders had largely assumed a low base rate environment, as signaled by the Fed amid expectations of transitory inflation, when determining the optimal sizes of capital structures against revenue, EBITDA, and free cash-flow projections.”
As for liquidity risk, Fitch analyst Julie Solar notes that a growing number of credit funds are open-ended and subject to runs under difficult circumstances. Although she concedes that the number of such funds is still small, at least in the US, and many feature limits on redemptions, she adds that the issue bears watching. If many more open-end funds are created and rates rise significantly, she warns, “that is when you can start to have liquidity issues.”
In the eurozone, 42% of funds are open-ended, according to the ECB, although most of their investors are institutional and tend to have longer time horizons than retail investors.
Solar also raises concern about what she called “leverage upon leverage,” noting that business development companies—publicly traded vehicles that account for about half of private credit—as well as PE firms themselves are often significantly indebted to banks. Indeed, bank lending for buyouts may be an even greater risk, simply because it is so much larger than direct lending.
Banks’ involvement in credit funds is an added concern for regulators. A May 2024 financial stability report from the ECB pointed out, “Private markets still need to prove their resilience in an environment of higher interest rates as they have grown to a significant size only in the past decade.”
The industry counters that interest rates on many if not most of its loans float, eliminating the need for refinancing in a rising rate environment. But that’s likely to do nothing for the borrowers themselves.
“The floating-rate debt structure of private credit agreements makes them vulnerable to challenges around debt servicing and refinancing in a higher rate environment,” the BoE’s Foulger noted at the January 2024 conference.
A Federal Reserve Bank of Boston report in May acknowledged that banks’ losses could be mitigated in response to adverse conditions as most private credit debt is secured and among the funds’ most senior liabilities. Yet, the authors cautioned that “substantial losses could also occur in a less adverse scenario if the default correlation among the loans in [private credit] portfolios turned out to be higher than anticipated—that is, if a larger-than-expected number of [private credit] borrowers defaulted at the same time. Such tail risk may be underappreciated.”
Expanding economies and bank regulatory hurdles prompt emerging-market companies to tap the private credit market.
Shapoorji Pallonji Group, an Indian construction company, made its mark in financial history in May, when it took down a $3.4 billion private credit facility, shattering records for the world’s fastestgrowing big economy. Lenders included US-based heavy-hitters Ares Management and Cerberus Capital.
Financiers hope the deal is a sign of things to come.
“The Shapoorji Group event is a strong indicator of the market’s potential,” says Nicholas Cheng, head of the Private Markets Group at Standard Chartered Global Private Bank. “It serves as a proof of concept for other large corporations.”
Emerging markets so far represent a tiny slice of a global private credit sector that is roaring toward $2 trillion in outstanding loans. India, probably the subsector’s hottest jurisdiction, absorbed $9.2 billion in private credit last year, a 7% increase from 2023, according to Ernst & Young.
Nicholas Cheng, Head of Private Markets Group, Standard Chartered Global Private Bank
Singapore’s sovereign Private Credit Growth Fund handed Apollo Global Management a $1 billion mandate to “target local high-growth businesses,” a government website revealed in July. Indian banking power Kotak Mahindra Bank is looking to add $2 billion to its private-credit war chest, CEO Lakshmi Iyer said in April. South Korea’s IMM Holdings closed a $700 million private credit fund over the summer with backing from Seoul’s National Pension Fund.
Investors near and far are gearing up for growth.
“Now is the time when we see the step change,” predicts Matt Christ, a New York-based debt portfolio manager at asset manager Ninety One. “Emerging markets account for 65% of global GDP, but only 3% of the private credit universe.”
There are reasons for the lag. Private credit in the US and Europe has been primarily driven by private equity firms borrowing to make or add leverage to acquisitions. Emerging market companies are more financially conservative, with one eye always out for macroeconomic instability, and leveraged buyouts are rare. Pension funds and other pots of capital also tend to be more cautious.
“India’s financial system … has a real growing need for private credit.”
Michel Lowy, SC Lowy Financial
“The appetite for highly levered capital structures is dramatically lower in emerging markets, both among institutional investors and companies themselves,” says Christ.
In the US, and to a lesser extent Europe, regulators opened the door to private credit by restricting banks from lending they viewed as risky following the 2008 global financial crisis. But in emerging markets, banks remain more dominant, Cheng observes: “There is still a strong preference for traditional bank relationships in many Asian markets. Educating both borrowers and investors on the benefits of private credit is an ongoing effort.”
Compounding the difficulty is the extra cost of private credit relative to bank loans or bond markets. Shapoorji is reportedly paying 19.5% annual interest in rupees on a three-year loan. That compares to a benchmark prime lending rate of just below 14%, according to Indian Bank’s website. Michel Lowy, CEO of Hong Kong-based SC Lowy Financial, says his Indian private credit deals earn an “18%-20% USD equivalent return” over rupee-denominated bank loans.
Emerging market private credit can be more lucrative than developed market transactions by “200 to 300 basis points,” says Christ at Ninety-One, which lends mostly in dollars.
Regulatory Hurdles, Data Center Opportunities
Paying these premiums can nonetheless be worth it to borrowers who end up on the wrong side of regulatory guidance or are poorly served by banking systems evolving less rapidly than their markets. Lowy’s most active private credit market is Korea. Regulators there are have been looking to rein in rising housing prices by “putting pressure on the banking system to decrease exposure to real estate,” he says.
That leaves some developers to raise cash by any means necessary. SC Lowy jumped into the breach in July, organizing $250 million in “short-term bridge financing” for “a completed luxury development” in Seoul’s Gangnam district.
The firm is compensating for regulatory rigidities anomalies in its No. 2 market, India, too. An Indian credit card manufacturer sought funds to buy out minority shareholders and “settle debt in a subsidiary,” Lowy recounts. Their obstacle was that Indian banks are not allowed to lend directly to holding companies, only their operating subsidiaries. Lowy stepped in with a private credit facility “in excess of $100 million.”
“The development of India’s financial system has not kept pace with the growth of the economy,” Lowy concludes. “They have a real growing need for private credit.”
Private lenders can earn their extra interest with greater flexibility on structures and terms, Christ says: “We can have longer maturities than bank credit, which is generally two to three years. We might also mix cash with payment in kind. We go under the tent and work with management teams.”
Fruitful new terrain for private credit globally is financing the data centers needed to service an expected explosion in AI. US-based hyperscalers have grabbed the headlines with their ambitious plans in the field. Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta Platforms lately floated its intention to raise $26 billion in private debt for AI expansion. But Asian data center capacity is growing faster and will overtake the US by the end of this decade, global real estate advisor Cushman & Wakefield predicts.
Many of the operators across emerging markets are local players scrambling to raise money fast. “Data centers are a huge part of what we’re doing, in India, Latin America, Southeast Asia, everywhere,” Christ says.
He’s not the only one.
In June, DayOne Data Centers in Singapore announced plans to raise $1 billion in private credit. The company will borrow in dollars, paying 9.5% to 10% annually on a four-year term, according to published reports. Princeton Digital Group, also Singapore-based, unveiled a $400 million program in April.
Legal And Cultural Complexities
Expanding from these sorts of numbers to multibillion-dollar private credit deals on the Shapoorji model will not be easy in emerging markets. Legal and cultural complexities can only be tackled one country at a time, leaving a fractured playing field of relatively small markets. India’s economy, for all its dynamism, remains one-seventh the size of the US.
Bankruptcy laws can leave recovery of bad debts uncertain, even if lenders are able to press agreements governed by New York or English Law, the global standards.
“The regulatory landscape can be complex,” Standard Chartered’s Cheng observes. “This creates challenges for enforceability of covenants and scalability.”
Lenders will look to compensate for these risks with higher interest rates, which may shrink the pool of potential borrowers. US and European private credit giants show limited interest anyway, given the mega-transactions they increasingly tackle back home.
“We don’t see a lot of crossover from developed markets into emerging market transactions, where the legal work needs to be done on a highly local level,” Christ says.
Still, private credit is finding its niche, or niches, in emerging markets, and a steady stream of deals in the hundreds of millions can alter financial landscapes. For borrowers left out or unsatisfied by traditional, regulated banks, expensive credit can be better than no credit.
A YOUNG woman has moaned about how the Jobcentre has found “yet another way” to get on her nerves.
Serena Lola, a 23-year-old who receives Universal Credit, described the Jobcentre as “dumb” and “poorly run.”
2
A 23-year-old woman has moaned about the “dumb” JobcentreCredit: TikTok/@serenaxlola
2
The unemployed content creator opened up on her recent “illogical” situationCredit: TikTok/@serenaxlola
The content creator, who is currently unemployed and is “vibing her way through life” took to social media to express her frustration at her situation, leaving many open-mouthed.
As she travelled to her local Jobcentre, she fumed: “The Jobcentre has found yet another way to p**s me off.”
The youngster acknowledged that she was sent money to pay for travel to an interview, but the ticket didn’t cost the full amount she was given.
As a result of being overpaid by the Jobcentre, she now owes them £15.
Read more real life stories
After receiving a letter requesting the overpaid money back, Serena explained: “They told me that I have to come into the Jobcentre and hand them cash – now this just seems illogical to me, especially in a day and age of technology where we can bank transfer money.
“I’m now having to pay £1.75 to go to the Jobcentre, when I don’t have a job or an income, to hand in cash.
“So now that’s £1.75 I’m wasting to go to the Jobcentre, when that’s something that could be done online.”
Serena was fuming with the circumstances, after being forced to go to a cash point, withdraw money and then “physically trek” to hand the payment back.
While Serena recognised it was a “minor, non-issue,” she was clearly very irritated by the “illogical” situation,.
“But come on – it just shows you how poorly run the system is and they could be doing things a lot better and a lot easier,” she concluded.
Jet-setting divorcee nicknamed ‘Miss Holiday’ unmasked as benefits scrounger after splurging £40k loot on lavish trips
Social media users react
Serena’s TikTok clip, which was posted under the username @serenaxlola, has clearly left many open-mouthed, as it has quickly racked up 359,600 views, 9,177 likes and 445 comments.
Social media users were stunned by Serena’s situation and many flocked to the comments to express their thoughts.
One person said: “So ridiculous.”
They have to make everything 10 times more difficult for no reason
TikTok user
Another added: “Ring them and raise a complaint. You are out of pocket for travelling to the Jobcentre to pay them back, defeating the purposes of supporting you in the first place. That’s not okay.”
In response, Serena wrote back and penned: “It’s such a silly system.”
Will I be better off on Universal Credit?
Around 1.4million will be better off on Universal Credit, the government calculates.
A further 300,000 will see no change in payments, while around 900,000 will be worse off under Universal Credit.
Of these, around 600,000 are expected to get top-up payments if they move under managed migration, so they don’t lose out on cash immediately.
The majority of those – around 400,000 – are claiming Employment Support Allowance (ESA).
Around 100,000 are on tax credits while fewer than 50,000 each on other legacy benefits are expected to be affected.
Examples of those who may be entitled to less on Universal Credit according to the government include:
Households getting ESA who and the Severe Disability Premium and Enhanced Disability Premium
Households with the lower disabled child addition on legacy benefits
Self-employed households who are subject to the Minimum Income Floor after the 12 month grace period has ended
In-work households that worked a specific number of hours (eg lone
parent working 16 hours claiming Working Tax Credits
Households receiving tax credits with savings of more than £6,000 (and up to £16,000)
But they could miss out on any future increase to benefits and see payments frozen.
Those who move voluntarily and are worse off won’t get these top-up payments and could lose cash.
Those who miss the deadline and later make a claim may also not get this transitional protection either.
The clock starts ticking on the three-month countdown from the date of the first letter, and reminders are sent via post and text message.
There is a one-month grace period after this, during which any claim to Universal Credit is backdated and transitional protection can still be awarded.
The most recent data from the DWP shows 61,130 individuals have made a claim for UC, and 39,920 awarded transitional protection.
Another 40,540 are still in the process of moving to the new benefit.
A third commented: “They have to make everything 10 times more difficult for no reason.”
To this, Serena responded: “Tell me about it.”
Meanwhile, someone else questioned: “Can’t they just take it from your next UC payment?”
Clearly baffled by the situation, Serena responded: “That’s what I thought?!? But clearly not.”
Unlock even more award-winning articles as The Sun launches brand new membership programme – Sun Club
Entitledto’s free calculator determines whether you qualify for various benefits, tax credit and Universal Credit.
MoneySavingExpert.com and charity StepChange both have benefits tools powered by Entitledto’s data.
You can use Policy in Practice’s calculator to determine which benefits you could receive and how much cash you’ll have left over each month after paying for housing costs.
Your exact entitlement will only be clear when you make a claim, but calculators can indicate what you might be eligible for.
Double Olympic and world Jakob Ingebrigtsen will also be competing over the 1500m distance with Arizona-based Giffnock North athlete Gourley and his fellow Scots.
“Off the top of my head, I think I’m ranked outside the top 30 in terms of season’s bests this year so that probably tells you a lot about the depth of the event just now,” said Gourley
“I’m pretty confident in saying I’ll finish higher than that. I’d love to outperform that ranking and I think I will, but it gives you a sense of how deep the event has got.
“Not just the people at the top – the top 20 are all quite close together and there are so many people running under 3:30 in the 1500m and that used to be a time that maybe one or two people a year would run.
“It’s now become so commonplace that it’s got silly, if anything. At the same time, it only counts for so much when you all line up at a championship and I’m looking forward to beating plenty of people ranked ahead of me.”
To help with that, Gourley has taken himself away to a special preparation camp in a location that makes him feel like he’s on holiday.
A fair few would swap places with him in Hawaii where, as well as some specialist training sessions, he’s also been able to enjoy a little rest and recovery.
“I have spent some time at the beach because it would be a bit rude not to,” he added.
“I’d love to learn how to surf, somebody’s got to teach me one day. Actually, I just kind of swim around in the waves until I crash out onto the shore. That’s about as adventurous as I get.”
It may take a bolder approach on the track but if he can safely negotiate the rounds in Tokyo, Gourley will feel on safe ground if he gets to another global 1500m final to round off his year.
How much you can get depends on a number of factors, with the lowest you can borrow £100.
Meanwhile, single people could get up to £348, while those who live with a partner could get up to £464.
The highest reward is only eligible for people with children and that is worth £812.
But it is not always guaranteed that you will be accepted for the payment.
Firstly, you must have been claiming Universal Credit, Employment and Support Allowance, Income Support, Jobseeker’s Allowance or State Pension Credit for six months or more.
There is an exception if you need the money to help start a new job or stay in employment.
You will not be eligible either if you have earned more than £2,600 in the past six months or £3,600 if you are in a couple.
Disability benefit explained – what you can claim
You will also not qualify if you have not paid off any previous advance loans, as you can only have one at a time.
You can apply for a budgeting advance by calling the Universal Credit helpline on 0800 328 5644.
An advisor will then asses you can pay the loan back – they’ll see if you have any debts and how much you owe to help work this out.
The phone lines are open Monday to Friday, 8am to 6pm, and you’ll normally get a decision on the same day.
Alternatively, you can apply through your online account or speak to your Jobcentre Plus work coach.
Paying the advance back
You have to pay any money you were given back, but you will not be charged interest.
The money will be taken out of your Universal Credit payments, and you will pay it back over two years, starting from your next payment.
So for example, if you get an advance of £240 and you pay this back over 24 months, £10 will be taken out of your payment each month until this is paid back.
If you cannot afford your advance repayments, you can ask for the amount you pay to be lowered.
You can call the Universal Credit helpline or contact the Jobcentre helpline.
Are you missing out on benefits?
YOU can use a benefits calculator to help check that you are not missing out on money you are entitled to
Entitledto’s free calculator determines whether you qualify for various benefits, tax credit and Universal Credit.
MoneySavingExpert.com and charity StepChange both have benefits tools powered by Entitledto’s data.
You can use Policy in Practice’s calculator to determine which benefits you could receive and how much cash you’ll have left over each month after paying for housing costs.
Your exact entitlement will only be clear when you make a claim, but calculators can indicate what you might be eligible for.
Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing [email protected].
You can also join our new Sun Money Facebook group to share stories and tips and engage with the consumer team and other group members.
Nearly two dozen television shows will receive incentives for shooting in California — including two series that relocated from Texas and Canada — in the first award period since the state bolstered its film and TV tax credit program earlier this summer.
The 22 shows were chosen amid a massive amount of interest in the state’s incentive program, which now has an annual cap of $750 million, up from $330 million. In this round, the California Film Commission saw a nearly 400% increase in applications, said Colleen Bell, the agency’s executive director.
“These enhancements to our program, they’re not just about curbing runaway production,” she said in an interview. “We’re building momentum to grow and expand production here in California.”
In total, the 22 shows were allocated $255.9 million in credits and are expected to generate about $1.1 billion of economic activity in California, she said. The productions are estimated to employ 6,500 cast and crew members and more than 46,000 background actors.
Of the 22 awarded series, 15 were new projects, five were recurring shows and two relocated from outside of California, including Tom Segura’s darkly comedic Netflix series “Bad Thoughts,” which previously filmed in Texas.
Apple TV+ comedy “The Studio” and legal thriller “Presumed Innocent” received production incentives, as did CBS’ “NCIS: Origins,” a new HBO series by comedian Larry David, a pilot called “Group Chat” from “black-ish” creator Kenya Barris and a new Hulu drama from Dan Fogelman of “Paradise” and “This is Us.” All of the qualified projects that applied were able to get a tax credit in this round, Bell said.
“California has long been the entertainment capital of the world — and the newly expanded film and TV tax credit program is keeping it that way,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement. “We’re not just protecting our legacy — we’re reminding the world why the Golden State remains the beating heart of film and television.”
Newsom called for an expansion of the state’s film and TV tax credit program late last year in an attempt to stem the tide of productions moving to other states or countries with lucrative incentive packages. Hollywood studios, producers, unions and other workers rallied around the issue for months, traveling up to Sacramento to lobby legislators about the importance of the entertainment industry to California’s economy.
In addition to the higher cap, the revamped program broadened the types of productions eligible for incentives, including half-hour television shows, certain large-scale competition shows and animated shorts, series and films.
For this round of incentives, the California Film Commission was able to consider all of the new categories except for animated shows and large-scale competition shows because those require new regulations that are being drafted, Bell said. Those categories could be eligible starting early next year, she said.
The new program provisions also upped the tax credit to as much as 35% of qualified expenditures for productions filmed in the greater Los Angeles area, and up to 40% for projects shot outside the region. For this application period, most of the series will shoot in the L.A. area, except for four that will shoot at least partially outside of that zone, Bell said.
“People want to shoot their projects here in California,” Bell said. “Now, decision makers are giving California a second look because we have made these important programmatic changes that have made us much more competitive with other jurisdictions.”
Cole Palmer is the poster boy for Chelsea, but other star players like Moises Caicedo, Enzo Fernandez and Marc Cucurella are now delivering on high price tags.
Pedro Neto scored three goals in three consecutive games at the Club World Cup for the first time in his senior career, while new signings Joao Pedro and Liam Delap have been bright in their first matches for the club.
Players like Benoit Badiashile, Christopher Nkunku and, to a lesser extent, Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall, show that not every transfer has been a roaring success.
However, Chelsea have been good at selling players – as highlighted by the sale of unsuccessful £45m signing Joao Felix to Al-Nassr for £43.7m this summer.
Noni Madueke generated £52m, Djordje Petrovic was sold for £25m and Ishe Samuels-Smith left for £6.5m this summer.
Sales like these balance record-breaking purchases worth £1.6bn by this ownership. About £600m, not including potential sell-on clause revenue, has been made and recent club accounts show an English record of £152m banked for player sales from the 2023-24 season.
There remains a high net spend of about £1bn in three years, but Chelsea’s owners say these stay on the balance sheet and represent an “investment”.
The much-criticised approach of offering up to 10-year deals to players has also given Chelsea increased bargaining power when selling players, renewing contracts or simply keeping their wage bill down in the longer term.
There is noise that Caicedo, arguably among the best midfielders in the world, is angling for improved terms on his contract signed in 2023 – but that still runs for a further six years and negotiations have yet to formally begin.
Manchester City striker Erling Haaland signed a nine-and-a-half-year contract – and, as the old saying goes, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
The California Supreme Court sided with environmental groups in a Thursday ruling, saying that state lawyers were wrong in their claim that the Public Utilities Commission’s decision to slash rooftop solar incentives could not be challenged.
The unanimous decision sends the case brought by the three groups back to the appeals court.
The groups argue the utilities commission violated state law in 2022 when it cut the value of the credits that panel owners receive for sending their unused power to the electric grid by as much as 80%. The rules apply to Californians installing the panels after April 14, 2023.
The Supreme Court justices said the appeals court erred in January 2024 when it ruled against the environmental groups. In that decision, the appeals court said that courts must defer to how the commission interpreted the law because it had more expertise in utility matters.
“This deferential standard of review leaves no basis for faulting the Commission’s work,” the appeals court had concluded then in its opinion.
The environmental groups argued the appeals court ignored a 1998 law that said the commission’s decisions should be held to the same standard of court review as those by other state agencies.
“The California Supreme Court has ruled in our favor that the CPUC is not above the law,” said Bernadette Del Chiaro, senior vice president at the Environmental Working Group, after Thursday’s decision was published. The other groups filing the case are the Center for Biological Diversity and The Protect Our Communities Foundation.
The utilities commission did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the ruling.
More than 2 million solar systems sit on the roofs of homes, businesses and schools in California — more than any other state. Environmentalists say that number must increase if the state is to meet its goal, set by a 2018 law, of using only carbon-free energy by 2045.
The utilities commission has said that the credits given to the rooftop panel owners on their electric bill have become so valuable that they were resulting in “a cost shift” of billions of dollars to those who do not own the panels. This has raised electric bills, especially hurting low-income electric customers, the commission says.
The credits for energy sent by the rooftop systems to the grid had been valued at the retail rate for electricity, which has risen fast as the commission has voted in recent years to approve rate increases the utilities have requested.
The state’s three big for-profit electric utilities — Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric — have sided with commission in the case.
The utilities have long complained that electric bills have been rising because owners of the rooftop solar panels are not paying their fair share of the fixed costs required to maintain the electric grid.
For decades, the utilities have worked to reduce the energy credits aimed at incentivizing Californians to invest in the solar panel systems. The rooftop systems have cut into the utilities’ sale of electricity.
THOUSANDS on Universal Credit and 11 other benefits can expect early payments this month.
Benefits are paid into your bank or building society account earlier if your usual payment date falls on a bank holiday or the weekend.
1
Universal Credit and 11 other benefits are being paid early this month to some claimantsCredit: Alamy
The nextbank holiday is on Monday, August 25, meaning if you’re expecting a payment on this date it will be made on August 22.
So, if you check your statement on August 22 and notice a surprise amount of money, it will likely be your benefit being issued earlier.
If you are paid earlier than usual this month, make sure the money stretches further as you will have to wait longer than normal to get your next payment.
Universal Credit and 11 other benefits are paid on the first working day before a bank holiday. The full list is:
Anyone paid one of the above 12 benefits on August 22 instead of August 23, 24 or 25, should receive the same amount as usual.
The only reason the payment amount might change is if you have had a change in your circumstances.
For example, if you are on Universal Credit and your earnings have increased, your payment might go down.
If you are expecting a payment on August 22 and don’t receive it, contact the DWP.
You can also submit a complaint to the Government department to get a problem sorted if your payment is wrong.
How does work affect Universal Credit?
After August, there are two more bank holidays before the end of the year which could impact when you receive your benefits.
Entitledto’s free calculator determines whether you qualify for various benefits, tax credit and Universal Credit.
MoneySavingExpert.com and charity StepChange both have benefits tools powered by Entitledto’s data.
You can use Policy in Practice’s calculator to determine which benefits you could receive and how much cash you’ll have left over each month after paying for housing costs.
Your exact entitlement will only be clear when you make a claim, but calculators can indicate what you might be eligible for.
The new plans mean that anyone up to the age of 22 will not be able to claim the health element.
That means people claiming the health element of Universal Credit and new claimants with the most severe conditions will see their incomes protected in real terms.
The Government had put forward that people would need to score four points in one task such as washing and dressing to qualify for support.
Currently they can qualify with eight points across multiple activities.
The Government initially partially u-turned, saying the changes would come into effect in November 2026, but anyone claiming the benefit before this date would not be impacted.
Nine months ago, Gov. Gavin Newsom pledged to more than double the annual amount of funds allocated to California’s film and television tax credit program.
Flanked by Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, legislative leaders and union representatives, Newsom said the state “needed to make a statement and to do something that was meaningful” to stop productions from leaving the state for more lucrative incentives in other states and countries.
Though Hollywood was born in California and the entertainment business became the state’s signature industry, “the world we invented is now competing against us,” he said at the time.
On Wednesday, Newsom signed a bill that will increase the cap on California’s film and TV tax credit program to $750 million, up from $330 million. Industry workers say the boost will help stimulate production that slowed due to the pandemic, the dual writers’ and actors’ strikes of 2023, a cutback in spending by studios and streamers and the Southern California wildfires earlier this year.
“We’ve got to step up our game,” Newsom said in a speech before he signed the bill. “We put our feet up, took things for granted. We needed to do something more bold and significant.”
Rebecca Rhine, Directors Guild of America executive and Entertainment Union Coalition president, credited Newsom for staying committed to the production incentive boost even after the wildfires in Southern California, federal funding cuts, the state’s budget deficit and the deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles.
“You understand that our industry is vital to the state’s economy and cultural vibrancy, while also sustaining thousands of businesses and attracting visitors from around the world,” she said during the signing ceremony. “Now, let’s get people back to work.”
Critics of the program and taxpayer advocates have said, however, that the tax credit is a corporate giveaway that doesn’t generate as much economic effect as promised. California’s increase also comes as states like Texas and New York have also ramped up their own film and TV tax credit programs.
But the fight isn’t over yet. Lawmakers and Hollywood industry leaders are gearing up for a vote Thursday in the legislature on a separate bill that would expand the provisions of the film tax credit program, which they say is key to making production more attractive in California and must pair with the increased program cap.
That bill, AB 1138, would broaden the types of productions eligible to apply for the program, including animated films, shorts, series and certain large-scale competition shows. It would also increase the tax credit to as much as 35% of qualified expenditures for movies and TV series shot in the Greater Los Angeles area and up to 40% for productions shot outside the region.
California currently provides a 20% to 25% tax credit to offset qualified production expenses, such as money spent on film crews and building sets. Production companies can apply the credit toward any tax liabilities they have in California.
The bump to 35% puts California more in line with incentives offered by other states such as Georgia, which provides a 30% credit for productions.
“This bill is the second step,” Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur said during Wednesday’s press conference. “It’s about maximizing economic impact, prioritizing equity and turning the tide on job loss.”
Newsom also held out hope for the possibility of a federal film and TV tax incentive, which he had floated in May after President Trump called for tariffs on film produced overseas.
“We’d like to see [Trump] match the ambition that we’re advancing here today in California with the ambition to keep filmmaking all across the United States, here in the United States,” Newsom said. “I am hopeful that we, in the hands of partnership, continue to work with the administration.”
New Delhi, India — When models sashayed down the ramp at Milan Fashion Week last week, Harish Kurade looked at them on his smartphone in awe, sitting in his village in southern Maharashtra state, more than 7,000km (4,350 miles) away.
Models were showcasing a new line of open-toe leather sandals, designed by Prada, the iconic luxury fashion house. However, in India, the visuals raised a furore among artisans and politicians after the Italian giant failed to credit the ancient Maharashtra roots of its latest design.
“They [Prada] stole and replicated our crafty work, but we are really happy,” said Kurade in a chirpy tone. “Today, the world’s eyes are on our Kolhapuri ‘chappals’ [Hindi for sandals].” Kolhapur is a city in Maharashtra after which the sandals are named.
After facing backlash, Prada acknowledged that its new sandal designs “are inspired by traditional Indian handcrafted footwear, with a centuries-old heritage”, in a letter to the Maharashtra Chamber of Commerce.
While Kurade is chuffed about the centuries-old sandal-making craft from his village potentially gaining global exposure, other artisans, politicians and activists are wary of cultural appropriation and financial exploitation by Prada.
So, what is the controversy about? And what are artisans in Kolhapur saying about Prada? Can it change anything for the workers behind the original sandals?
What did Prada step into?
Prada showcased the classic T-strapped leather flats at the Spring/Summer 2026 menswear collection at Milan Fashion Week.
In its show notes, the Italian brand described the new range of footwear only as “leather sandals”. The notes made no mention of any Indian connection, despite its uncanny resemblance to Kolhapuri sandals, which are wildly popular across India and often worn on special occasions, such as weddings and festivals, along with traditional Indian clothing.
Outraged, a delegation of Kolhapuri sandals manufacturers met Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on Thursday last week to register their protest.
Showing his support for the delegation is Dhananjay Mahadik, a member of parliament from the state’s Kolhapur district, belonging to the governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Mahadik told reporters that the sandal makers and their supporters are in the process of filing a lawsuit in the Bombay High Court against Prada.
Mahadik also wrote to Fadnavis, drawing “urgent attention to a serious infringement on Maharashtra’s cultural identity and artisan rights”, and called on him to “protect the cultural heritage of Maharashtra”.
In his letter, he noted that the sandals are reportedly priced at approximately $1,400 a pair. By contrast, the authentic Kolhapuri sandals can be found in local markets for about $12.
A model walks the runway during the Prada collection show at Milan Fashion Week’s menswear spring and summer show, on June 22, 2025, in Milan [Piero Cruciatti/AFP]
How has Prada responded?
The Maharashtra Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Agriculture (MACCIA) also wrote to Patrizio Bertelli, the chairperson of Prada’s Board of Directors, about the concerns of sandal makers.
Two days later, the company responded, acknowledging that the design was inspired by the centuries-old Indian sandals. “We deeply recognise the cultural significance of such Indian craftsmanship. Please note that, for now, the entire collection is currently at an early stage of design development, and none of the pieces are confirmed to be produced or commercialised,” Prada said.
The company added that it remains “committed to responsible design practices, fostering cultural engagement, and opening a dialogue for a meaningful exchange with local Indian artisan communities, as we have done in the past in other collections to ensure the rightful recognition of their craft.
“Prada strives to pay homage and recognise the value of such specialised craftspeople that represent an unrivalled standard of excellence and heritage.”
Srihita Vanguri, a fashion entrepreneur from the city of Hyderabad, said that Prada’s actions were “disappointing but not surprising”.
“Luxury brands have a long history of borrowing design elements from traditional crafts without giving due credit – until there’s a backlash,” she told Al Jazeera. “This is cultural appropriation if it stops at inspiration without attribution or benefit-sharing.”
Kolhapuris, which the sandals are also known as, are not just a design, she insisted. They carry the legacy of centuries of craft communities in Maharashtra and the neighbouring state of Karnataka. “Ignoring that context erases real people and livelihoods,” she added.
What about artisans of Kolhapur?
Kolhapur, nestled in southwestern Maharashtra, is a city steeped in royal heritage, spiritual significance and artisanal pride. Beyond its crafts, Kolhapur is also home to several revered Hindu temples and a rich culinary legacy – its food is spicy.
Its famed sandals date back to the 12th century, with more than 20,000 local families still involved in this craft.
The family of Kurade, who was happy about Prada showcasing the sandals, lives on the outskirts of Kolhapur, and has been in this business for more than 100 years.
But he said the business has taken a beating in recent years. “In India, people don’t really understand this craft or want to put money in this any more. If an international brand comes, steals it and showcases it on global platforms, maybe that is good for us,” he told Al Jazeera.
He said that craftsmen like those in his family “still stand where they were years ago”.
“We have the craft and the capacity to move ahead, but the government has not supported us,” the 40-year-old said.
Rather, Kurade said, politics has made things worse.
Since 2014, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu majoritarian government came to power in New Delhi, cows have transformed from just symbols of reverence into a flashpoint for religious identity and social conflict. Cow protection, once largely cultural, has become violent, with vigilantes hunting down Dalits and Muslims, the communities that mostly transport cows and buffaloes to trading markets where they are bought for slaughter.
That has disrupted a reliable supply of cow and buffalo hides, which are then tanned with vegetables to make Kolhapuri chappals.
“The original hide we use for quality is restricted in several states because of politics around cows,” said Kurade. “The supply has touched new lows due to politics on cows – and we have been suffering because it has become really expensive for us to keep doing it with the same quality.”
Craftsmen like Kurade believe that if they can make the sandals cheaper and more accessible, “people will wear this because it is what people have loved for centuries”.
Still, Kurade said, while Prada can try and imitate Kolhapuri aesthetics, it cannot replicate the intricate hand-woven design patterns, mastered by the Dalit community in southern Maharashtra and some parts of bordering Karnataka. Dalits are traditionally the most marginalised segment of India’s complex caste hierarchy.
“The authentic design is something which is rare and unique,” he said. “Even shops in Kolhapur city may not have them.”
The real designs, Kurade said, are still made in villages by using centuries-old craft.
But because of the challenge of sourcing quality hides, and faced with an increasingly digital marketplace that artisans are unfamiliar with, Dalit sandal makers need help, he said.
“People who know markets, who can sell it ahead, are the ones cashing in on this. Poor villagers like us cannot run a website; we do not have the marketing knowledge,” he said.
“The government should look into this, to bridge this gap – it is their duty to look into this. The benefits never reached the real makers from the Dalit groups.”
Kolhapuri sandals are on display at a store in New Delhi, India, June 27, 2025 [Adnan Abidi/Reuters]
Has it happened before?
Since 2019, after sustained advocacy by artisan groups, India has protected Kolhapuri sandals under its Geographical Indications of Goods Act (1999), preventing commercial use of the term “Kolhapuri Chappal” by unauthorised producers. But this protection is limited within national borders.
Prada has previously faced significant criticism over alleged cultural appropriation, most notably in 2018 when it released the “Pradamalia” collection – keychains and figurines that resembled racist caricatures with exaggerated red lips, drawing immediate comparisons with blackface imagery. After the backlash, Prada pulled the products from stores and issued a public apology.
Prada has also been criticised for store displays that have evoked racial stereotypes, as well as for its use of animal-based luxury materials like ostrich and exotic leathers, which have drawn criticism from environmental and labour rights groups.
But Prada is not alone.
In 2019, Christian Dior drew criticism for incorporating elements inspired by the traditional attire of Mexican horsewomen in its Cruise collection, without formal acknowledgement or collaboration.
In 2015, French designer Isabel Marant came under fire in Mexico for marketing a blouse that closely mirrored the traditional embroidery patterns of the Mixe community in Oaxaca, sparking accusations of cultural appropriation.
Rather than apologise, Vanguri, the fashion entrepreneur, said that the “real respect would be Prada co-creating a capsule collection with Kolhapuri artisan clusters – giving them fair design credit, profit share, and global visibility”.
“Structurally, they could commit to long-term partnerships with craft cooperatives or even fund capacity-building and design innovation for these communities,” she said.
From negotiating with Iran to bombing its nuclear facilities and then brokering a ceasefire, Trump’s erratic pivots appear to be driven more by optics than coherent diplomacy. Mainstream Western news outlets, however, are making the job easier – painting Iran as an existential threat while downplaying Israel’s illegal actions.
Contributors:
Roxane Farmanfarmaian – Senior fellow, European Leadership Network Seamus Malekafzali – Journalist Mohsen Milani – Author, Iran’s Rise and Rivalry with the US Samira Mohyeddin – Journalist, On the Line Media
On our radar
Few atrocities compare to the massacres Israel is perpetrating, repeatedly, against starving refugees in Gaza – yet they are receiving minimal attention in mainstream media. Nic Muirhead reports on the latest developments at the aid distribution sites that have turned into death traps.
Assal Rad: “It’s really important to get headlines right”
Over the past 20 months, historian Assal Rad has been correcting misleading mainstream news headlines on Israel’s genocide in Gaza. She talks us through the unmistakable parallels she has noticed with the coverage of Israel’s 12-day war with Iran.
Featuring: Assal Rad – Non-resident fellow, Arab Center Washington DC
After weathering a pandemic, dual strikes and massive wildfires, Hollywood is finally getting a lifeline.
California legislators voted Friday to more than double the amount allocated each year to the state’s film and television tax credit program, raising that cap to $750 million from $330 million.
Other states and countries have increasingly lured productions away from California with generous tax credits and incentive programs, leaving many in Hollywood without work for months. In interviews, town halls and legislative committee hearings, industry workers said that without state intervention, they feared Tinseltown would be hollowed out, similar to Detroit after the heyday of its auto industry.
“It’s now time to get people back to work and bring production home to California,” Directors Guild of America executive and Entertainment Union Coalition President Rebecca Rhine said in a statement. “We call on the studios to recommit to the communities and workers across the state that built this industry and built their companies.”
From there, state lawmakers looked to expand the provisions of the program. A separate bill going through the Legislature would broaden the types of productions eligible to apply, including animated films, shorts and series and certain large-scale competition shows. It would also increase the tax credit to as much as 35% of qualified expenditures for movies and TV series shot in the Greater Los Angeles area and up to 40% for productions shot outside the region.
That bill, AB 1138, was unanimously approved Thursday by the state Senate Revenue and Tax Committee. It will be up for final votes next week.
California provides a 20% to 25% tax credit to offset qualified production expenses, such as money spent on film crews and building sets. Production companies can apply the credit toward any tax liabilities they have in California.
The bump to 35% puts California more in line with incentives offered by other states, such as Georgia, which provides a 30% credit for productions.
Lawmakers and industry insiders have said the increased tax credit cap and the proposed criteria changes to the incentive program must both be approved to make California more competitive for filming. The bill was written by Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles) and state Sen. Benjamin Allen (D-Santa Monica).
“After years of uncertainty, workers can once again set the stage, cue the lights, and roll the cameras — because California is keeping film and TV jobs anchored right here, where they belong,” Zbur said in a statement about the $750-million cap. “This is a historic investment in our creative economy, our working families, small businesses, and the communities that depend on this industry to thrive.”
Martin Lewis issued a warning about using credit cards abroad(Image: Getty)
Martin Lewis has issued an urgent alert to Brits about the use of credit cards while on holiday. The finance expert has drawn attention to the potential hazards of withdrawing cash with this type of card.
And in certain destinations, such as Morocco, it’s not possible to get local currency before leaving the UK. Regardless of where you’re headed, Martin strongly discourages using your credit card for cash withdrawals.
On his website Money Saving Expert, he expanded on his guidance. Martin said: “Withdrawing cash on a credit card abroad?”.
As reported by GlasgowLive, he highlighted that this habit could have a detrimental effect on your credit score. “It could impact your credit rating,” he further explained.
According to Martin, it’s always better to use a debit card “if you can.”(Image: 2015 Karwai Tang)
“We get this question a lot, as we warn against credit card ATM withdrawals in the UK, as it risks high interest and many lenders see it as a debt-problem indicator.”
However, infrequent use of this method is generally not an issue. He stated: “Yet if you only do it occasionally abroad on a specialist card, it’s not a biggie, just don’t overdo it and pay it off in full” He also mentioned that in some countries, using a UK card can be a “bit trickier”.
This includes:
In Japan, you may need special ATMs to use international cards
In China, hotels take cards, but elsewhere Alipay is easier
In India, some shops and restaurants won’t take international cards
As well as using credit cards for cash withdrawals he also advised against using them to top up prepayment cards. He clarified: “You’ll likely pay fees and interest.
The latest round of California’s film and television tax credit program will provide government incentives to 48 upcoming projects, according to the California Film Commission.
The slate, which includes both major studio projects and independent films, is expected to employ more than 6,500 cast and crew members and 32,000 background performers, measured in days worked. These projects will pay more than $302 million in wages for California workers, the commission said Monday.
The projects are estimated to collectively generate $664 million in total spending throughout the state.
Of the awarded films, five are features from major studios, including the sequel to Sony Pictures’ “One of Them Days,” which is expected to receive almost $8 million in tax credits and spend $39 million in qualified expenditures.
An untitled Netflix project, which is set to film in California for 110 days, is expected to receive the largest credit of the slate at $20 million.
The rest of the awarded projects are independent, with 37 of them operating on budgets under $10 million. More than half of the films will be shot in the Los Angeles area, the commission said.
“California didn’t earn its role as the heart of the entertainment world by accident — it was built over generations by skilled workers and creative talent pushing boundaries,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement. “Today’s awards help ensure this legacy continues, keeping cameras rolling here at home, supporting thousands of crew members behind the scenes and boosting local economies that depend on a strong film and television industry.”
The announcement comes as the industry has expressed concern over the amount of production fleeing California in favor of other states or countries that offer more attractive tax incentives.
Late last year, Newsom proposed an increase to the state’s film and TV tax credit, upping the annual tax credit allocation from $330 million to $750 million in an attempt to keep production in California.
In March, the commission announced it was selecting a record 51 projects with tax incentives, marking the most amount of awarded films in a single application window.
Meerut, India – The last of the paint had begun to peel off Mohammad Mohsin’s house two years ago. The faded green, white and yellow paints on the walls still bore stains from last year’s monsoons.
A narrow, 3-foot-tall (0.9 metres) passage only possible to enter by crouching, led from the kitchen into a courtyard lined with buffalo dung, a rusting scooter, and a creaking cot in northern India’s Meerut district, about 100km (62 miles) from New Delhi.
“We will get the house painted when it’s finally wedding time,” Mohsin had said, leaning on an iron shovel, when Al Jazeera visited him in February earlier this year, referring to his sister Aman’s wedding plans.
But the date for the wedding came and went – without it being solemnised.
In 2023, Mohsin had borrowed roughly $1,440 under the Indian government’s Kisan Credit Card (KCC) scheme. “Kisan” means “farmer” in Hindi.
Launched in 1998, the KCC initiative is intended to modernise rural credit by providing accessible, short-term, low-interest credit to farmers for agricultural expenses, thereby replacing exploitative private moneylenders.
Issued against land holdings, the KCC operates like a revolving credit line, allowing farmers to borrow at the start of a crop cycle and repay after the harvest. With a modest interest rate of 4 percent annually, the scheme is among the most accessible financial instruments for millions of farmers.
But for years now, the KCC scheme has deviated from its original purpose. Farmers in rural India, where agriculture barely sustains families and where dowry in marriages is the norm, have used KCC loans as a convenient but dangerous alternative to family income.
The KCC money Mohsin borrowed in 2023 from a state-run bank’s local branch was not meant to sow sugarcane or buy fertiliser. He always meant to use it for his sister’s dowry: Aman’s prospective in-laws had demanded a Maruti Wagon-R car, a larger Mahindra Scorpio SUV, and hundreds of thousands of rupees in cash, when the marriage was planned.
KCC looks and can be used like a regular credit card, including for cash withdrawals. Clutching the family’s KCC card issued in his father Mohammad Kamil’s name, Mohsin withdrew the money from an ATM and went straight to a car dealer in Meerut to make the down payment for a Wagon R car.
In February 2025, Aman’s proposed marriage collapsed under a new set of dowry demands. By now, Mohsin was already in significant debt and had no money to sow crops, or invest in seeds or farm machinery.
He was also saddled with the car he had bought for the groom. He missed paying the monthly instalments a few times. When farmers fail to repay during a crop cycle, the interest rate jumps from 4 percent to 7 percent, which is what happened with Mohsin.
He now repays the loan in small instalments, but knows that he will be playing catchup for years. And the longer he delays his payments, the higher the risk that the loan could be classified as a non-performing asset (NPA), damaging his credit rating and future borrowing capacity.
Meanwhile, 22-year-old Aman finished Fazilat, a seven-year course in Islamic theology offered by Darul Uloom, a prominent Muslim seminary in Deoband, about 80km (50 miles) from Meerut. The course is considered the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree from a regular college.
Aman’s family has also resumed its search for another groom. “I will get married when the right family agrees,” Aman told Al Jazeera.
But families do not just agree. They negotiate – and dowry is the currency. Tens of thousands of Indian women have been killed by their in-laws over dowry demands. In 2024 alone, India saw a dowry-related death every 30 hours, according to data from the National Crime Records Bureau.
“In our part of the world, no dowry means no groom,” Aman’s 60-year-old mother, Amina Begum, told Al Jazeera, sitting in one of the corners of their sparse home.
Once a groom is finalised and the new dowry demands are negotiated, Mohsin will need cash again. And he may have to rely on the KCC scheme, again.
But a new KCC loan cannot be sanctioned until the previous one is fully repaid. The only way around this involves local middlemen who help farmers repay the interest on existing KCC loans, and get the principal renewed in the bank as a fresh loan. In exchange, these middlemen charge an interest rate as high as between 2 and 5 percent per day.
The result: If Mohsin gets another KCC loan sanctioned, he will need to use that to also repay the middlemen who helped him get it – perpetuating the cycle of indebtedness he is trapped in.
Mohsin at his home near Meerut in India [Ismat Ara/Al Jazeera]
‘System breaks your dignity’
India’s farmers receive limited state support for unexpected or heavy personal expenses, such as hospital bills, children’s education, social obligations, or even weddings – often forcing them to rely on informal credit or agricultural loans meant for farming needs.
For instance, India’s public healthcare spending is among the lowest globally, consistently under 2.5 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP). The limited resources put a significant strain on poor families in cases of medical emergencies.
As a result, across India’s agrarian belt, mainly in the north, the KCC scheme is being drained to plug life’s emergencies, exposing a deep rural distress.
A farmers’ union leader and a politburo member of the Communist Party of India, Vijoo Krishnan, says that in addition to weddings, farmers are increasingly using KCC loans for healthcare and education. This diversion of money leads to what Krishnan calls a “development debt trap”, where farmers are forced to take on loans just to meet basic survival needs, rather than to invest in productivity or growth.
A 2024 study published in The Pharma Innovation Journal, an Indian interdisciplinary publication that also features research in agriculture and rural development, found that only a fraction of KCC loans go towards agriculture. About 28 percent of the KCC-holding farmers who were respondents in the study said they used the fund for household needs, 22 percent for medical expenses, 14 percent for children’s education, and nearly 10 percent for marriage-related expenses.
“Farming barely pays enough to sustain a family,” said Mohammad Mehraj, the former head of Mohsin’s Muslim-majority village of Kaili Kapsadh. “If there’s a medical emergency or a wedding, the pressure is too much.”
The fear of repayment haunts farmers, rooted in the deep shame that failure brings. Everyone has heard the stories. “In a nearby village, a man in his forties was declared a defaulter. His name was read out in the village square. The shame was so unbearable that his wife moved back to her parents’ home,” Mohsin recalled. The man in question, he says, has not been seen since. No one knows if he fled, or if he is even alive.
Mohsin lives with the same fear. “The system doesn’t break down your door, it breaks your dignity,” he said. In small villages with close-knit communities, a bank official’s visit to the house to seek repayment of loans is seen as an embarrassment to be avoided at all costs.
“I’d rather starve than have a bank man knock on our door,” said Mohsin’s father, Kamil, who is in his 70s, his voice barely above a whisper. Around him, others nodded in agreement.
To escape shame, farmers like Mohsin rely on the middlemen who charge a steep interest rate to help them renew KCC loans without settling the principal.
Thomas Franco, a former general secretary of the All India Bank Officers’ Federation, said that while schemes like KCC have expanded credit access for farmers, they have also created a debt trap.
“At the harvest time, many farmers, already burdened with earlier debts, are forced to take additional loans. Loans intended for productivity often get diverted to meet immediate social obligations,” he told Al Jazeera.
By 2024, the Indian government’s official data shows that the KCC scheme had disbursed more than $120bn to farmers, a sharp rise from $51bn in 2014.
But those numbers mask a more complex reality in which banks become a part of the serial indebtedness crisis, while showcasing high numbers of loan disbursals, Franco said.
“The loans get renewed every year without actual repayment, and in the bank’s books, it shows as a fresh disbursal, even though the farmer does not get the actual funds. This exaggerates the success numbers,” he said.
Meanwhile, as India’s farmers find themselves buried in mountains of debt, many are taking their own lives.
In 2023, Maharashtra, India’s richest state, contributing about 13 percent to the country’s GDP, reported the highest number of farmer suicides – at 2,851. This year, Maharashtra’s Marathwada region is one of the worst hit. In the first three months of 2025 alone, the region recorded 269 suicides, marking a 32 percent increase from the same period in 2024.
In neighbouring Karnataka, between April 2023 and July 2024, 1,182 farmers died by suicide, primarily due to severe drought, crop loss and overwhelming debt. In the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, farmer suicides rose by 42 percent in 2022, compared with the previous year. Similarly, Haryana, also in the north, reported 266 farm suicides in 2022, up 18 percent from 225 in 2021.
Critics argue that without deep structural reforms aimed at providing better public welfare systems for farmers and their families, such as affordable healthcare, quality education, and reforms to make farming profitable, schemes like the KCC will remain short-term solutions.
Jayati Ghosh, a leading development economist and professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, said that India’s agricultural credit system is fundamentally out of sync with how farming works.
“Crop loans are typically structured for a single season, but farmers often need to borrow well before sowing, and can only repay after harvesting and selling. Forcing repayment within that narrow window is unrealistic and harmful, especially when farmers lack the support to store crops and wait for better prices,” she said.
Ghosh, who co-authored a 2021 policy report for the Andhra Pradesh government and has studied agrarian distress for more than three decades, told Al Jazeera that key Indian financial institutions – the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), the central bank and NABARD, the apex rural development bank – were to blame for treating agriculture like any other commercial enterprise.
“The failure lies with NABARD, the RBI and successive governments. Agricultural lending needs to be subsidised, decentralised and designed around real conditions in the field,” she said.
Schemes like the KCC, she said, are built on the flawed belief that cash alone can solve rural distress.
“We’ve built a credit system assuming farmers just need money. But without investment in irrigation, land security, local crop research, storage and market access, loans won’t solve the crisis,” she said.
Mohsin (left) and a cousin survey their fields while wondering whether farming has any future at all in India [Ismat Ara/ Al Jazeera]
‘I wonder if farming even has a future’
The KCC scheme has also been riddled with controversies, with multiple loan scams surfacing across India in recent years.
In Kaithal, a town in northern Haryana state, six farmers used forged documents to secure nearly $88,000 in loans, which ballooned to $110,000 before detection, due to accrued interest over time after the farmers failed to repay them.
In the Himalayan state of Uttarakhand, agricultural dealer Mohammad Furkan, in collusion with a bank manager, created fake bills and ghost loans worth $1.2m in 2014, earning him a three-year sentence in March 2023.
In Lucknow, the capital of Uttar Pradesh state where Meerut is located, three State Bank of India managers sanctioned about $792,000 in fraudulent KCC loans between 2014 and 2017, using forged land records and fake documents. The federal Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI) booked them in January 2020 after an internal bank inquiry. The matter is still being probed.
Yet, bank officials say that despite years of scams and red flags, the KCC scheme continues to suffer from weak oversight.
“There’s no systemic check in place,” said a loan disbursal agent affiliated with the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), who has been processing KCC applications in rural Uttar Pradesh for more than a decade. He spoke to Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity, as he is not authorised to speak to the media.
But even if the KCC was cleaned up and all scammers punished, it would not solve the problem, say some farmer leaders.
“This is not about debt. It’s about dignity,” said Dharmendra Malik, the national spokesperson of the Indian Farmers’ Union, a prominent group. “You can’t solve agrarian distress with easy loans. You need investment in irrigation, storage, education and guaranteed prices for the crops.”
Back in Kaili Kapsadh, Mohsin’s buffalo stood tethered in the courtyard, swatting flies with its tail. It is worth $960 and, in this village, that is a status symbol, akin to owning a vintage car in a wealthy urban suburb.
But prestige does not pay back loans. Mohsin has not been able to renew his family’s KCC loan, worth about $1,500, for more than two years. He is still repaying the last one.
Each harvest yields the same bitter crop for him: more bills and losses. Looking at his sugarcane fields, already browning under a harsh sun, he said: “Sometimes I wonder if farming even has a future.”
If you or someone you know is at risk of suicide, these organisations may be able to help.
![Mohsin at his home near Meerut in India [Ismat Ara/Al Jazeera]](https://www.aljazeera.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/DSC_0133-1749527540.jpg?w=770&resize=770%2C513&quality=80)
![Mohsin (left) and a cousin survey their fields while wondering whether farming has any future at all in India [Ismat Ara/ Al Jazeera]](https://www.aljazeera.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/DSC_0218-1749527590.jpg?w=770&resize=770%2C513&quality=80)