fees

Austin Beutner assails L.A. Mayor Karen Bass over rising city fees

Los Angeles mayoral candidate Austin Beutner took aim at the rising cost of basic city services Thursday, saying Mayor Karen Bass and her administration have contributed to an affordability crisis that is “crushing families.”

Beutner, appearing outside Van Nuys City Hall, pointed to the City Council’s recent decision to increase trash collection fees to nearly $56 per month, up from $36.32 for single-family homes and duplexes and $24.33 for three- and four-unit apartment buildings.

Since Bass took office in December 2022, the city also hiked sewer service fees, which are on track to double over a four-year period. In addition, Beutner said, the Department of Water and Power pushed up the cost of water and electrical service by 52% and 19%, respectively.

“I’m talking about the cost-of-living crisis that’s crushing families,” he said. “L.A. is a very, very special place, but every day it’s becoming less affordable.”

Beutner, speaking before a group of reporters, would not commit to rolling back any of those increases. Instead, he urged Bass to call a special session of the City Council to explain the decisions that led to the increases.

“Tell me the cost of those choices, and then we can have an informed conversation as to whether it was a good choice or a bad choice — or whether I’d make the same choice,” said Beutner, who has worked as superintendent of L.A. schools and as a high-level deputy mayor.

When the City Council took up the sewer rates last year, sanitation officials argued the increase was needed to cover rising construction and labor costs — and ramp up the repair and replacement of aging pipes.

This year sanitation officials also pushed for a package of trash fee hikes, saying the rates had not increased in 17 years. They argued that the city’s budget has been subsidizing the cost of residential trash pickup for customers in single-family homes and small apartments.

Doug Herman, spokesperson for the Bass reelection campaign, defended the trash and sewer service fee increases, saying both were long overdue. Bass took action, he said, because previous city leaders failed to make the hard choices necessary to balance the budget and fix deteriorating sewer pipes.

“Nobody was willing to face the music and request the rate hikes to do that necessary work,” he said.

DWP spokesperson Michelle Figueroa acknowledged that electrical rates have gone up. However, she said in an email, the DWP’s residential rates remain lower than other utilities, including Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric.

By focusing on cost-of-living concerns, Beutner’s campaign has been emphasizing an issue that is at the forefront of next week’s election for New York City mayor. In that contest, State Assembly member Zohran Mamdani has promised to lower consumer costs, in part by freezing the rent for rent-stabilized apartments and making rides on city buses free.

Since announcing his candidacy this month, Beutner has offered few cost-of-living policy prescriptions, other than to say he supports “in concept” Senate Bill 79, a newly signed state law that allows taller, denser buildings to be approved near public transit stops. Instead, he mostly has derided a wide array of increases, including a recent hike in parking rates.

Beutner contends that the city’s various increases will add more than $1,200 per year to the average household customer’s bill from the Department of Water and Power, which includes the cost not just of utilities but also trash removal and sewer service.

Herman pushed back on that estimate, saying it relies on “flawed assumptions,” incorporating fees that apply to only a portion of ratepayers.

In a new campaign video, Beutner warned that city leaders also are laying plans to more than double what property owners pay in street lighting assessments. He also accused the DWP of relying increasingly on “adjustment factors” to increase the amount customers pay for water and electricity, instead of hiking the base rate.

The DWP needs to be more transparent about those increases and why they were needed, Beutner said.

Source link

Asylum seekers face deportation over failure to pay new fees — before being notified

Late last month, an immigrant seeking asylum in the U.S. came across social media posts urging her to pay a new fee imposed by the Trump administration before Oct. 1, or else risk her case being dismissed.

Paula, a 40-year-old Los Angeles-area immigrant from Mexico, whose full name The Times is withholding because she fears retribution, applied for asylum in 2021 and her case is now on appeal.

But when Paula tried to pay the $100 annual fee, she couldn’t find an option on the immigration court’s website that accepted fees for pending asylum cases. Afraid of deportation — and with just five hours before the payment deadline — she selected the closest approximation she could find, $110 for an appeal filed before July 7.

She knew it was likely incorrect. Still, she felt it was better to pay for something, rather than nothing at all, as a show of good faith. Unable to come up with the money on such short notice, Paula, who works in a warehouse repairing purses, paid the fee with a credit card.

“I hope that money isn’t wasted,” she said.

That remains unclear because of confusion and misinformation surrounding the rollout of a host of new fees or fee increases for a variety of immigration services. The fees are part of the sweeping budget bill President Trump signed into law in July.

Paula was one of thousands of asylum seekers across the country who panicked after seeing messages on social media urging them to pay the new fee before the start of the new fiscal year on Oct. 1.

But government messaging about the fees has sometimes been chaotic and contradictory, immigration attorneys say. Some asylum seekers have received notice about the fees, while others have not. Misinformation surged as immigrants scrambled to figure out whether, and how, to pay.

Advocates worry the confusion serves as a way for immigration officials to dismiss more asylum cases, which would render the applicants deportable.

The fees vary. For those seeking asylum, there is a $100 fee for new applications, as well as a yearly fee of $100 for pending applications. The fee for an initial work permit is $550 and work permit renewals can be as much as $795.

Amy Grenier, associate director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Assn., said that not having a clear way to pay a fee might seem like a small government misstep, but the legal consequences are substantial.

For new asylum applications, she said, some immigration judges set a payment deadline of Sept. 30, even though the Executive Office for Immigration Review only updated the payment portal in the last week of September.

“The lack of coherent guidance and structure to pay the fee only compounded the inefficiency of our immigration courts,” Grenier said. “There are very real consequences for asylum-seekers navigating this completely unnecessary bureaucratic mess.”

Two agencies collect the asylum fees: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), under the Department of Homeland Security, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), under the Department of Justice, which operates immigration courts.

Both agencies initially released different instructions regarding the fees, and only USCIS has provided an avenue for payment.

The departments of Homeland Security and Justice didn’t respond to a request for comment. The White House deferred to USCIS.

USCIS spokesman Matthew J. Tragesser said the asylum fee is being implemented consistent with the law.

“The real losers in this are the unscrupulous and incompetent immigration attorneys who exploit their clients and bog down the system with baseless asylum claims,” he said.

The Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP), a national membership organization, sued the Trump administration earlier this month after thousands of members shared their confusion over the new fees, arguing that the federal agencies involved “threaten to deprive asylum seekers of full and fair consideration of their claims.”

The organization also argued the fees shouldn’t apply to people whose cases were pending before Trump signed the budget package into law.

In a U.S. district court filing Monday, Justice Department lawyers defended the fees, saying, “Congress made clear that these new asylum fees were long overdue and necessary to recover the growing costs of adjudicating the millions of pending asylum applications.”

Some of the confusion resulted from contradictory information.

A notice by USCIS in the July 22 Federal Register confused immigrants and legal practitioners alike because of a reference to Sept. 30. Anyone who had applied for asylum as of Oct. 1, 2024, and whose application was still pending by Sept. 30, was instructed to pay a fee. Some thought the notice meant that Sept. 30 was the deadline to pay the yearly asylum fee.

By this month, USCIS clarified on its website that it will “issue personal notices” alerting asylum applicants when their annual fee is due, how to pay it and the consequences for failing to do so.

The agency created a payment portal and began sending out notices Oct. 1, instructing recipients to pay within 30 days.

But many asylum seekers are still waiting to be notified by USCIS, according to ASAP, the advocacy organization. Some have received texts or physical mail telling them to check their USCIS account, while others have resorted to checking their accounts daily.

Meanwhile the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) didn’t add a mechanism for paying the $100 fee for pending asylum cases — the one Paula hoped to pay — until Thursday.

In its Oct. 3 complaint, lawyers for ASAP wrote: “Troublingly, ASAP has received reports that some immigration judges at EOIR are already requiring applicants to have paid the annual asylum fee, and in at least one case even rejected an asylum application and ordered an asylum seeker removed for non-payment of the annual asylum fee, despite the agency providing no way to pay this fee.”

An immigration lawyer in San Diego, who asked not to be named out of fear of retribution, said an immigration judge denied his client’s asylum petition because the client had not paid the new fee, even though there was no way to pay it.

The judge issued an order, which was shared with The Times, that read, “Despite this mandatory requirement, to date the respondents have not filed proof of payment for the annual asylum fee.”

The lawyer called the decision a due process violation. He said he now plans to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, though another fee increase under Trump’s spending package raised that cost from $110 to $1,010. He is litigating the case pro bono.

Justice Department lawyers said Monday that EOIR had eliminated the initial inconsistency by revising its position to reflect that of USCIS and will soon send out official notices to applicants, giving them 30 days to make the payment.

“There was no unreasonable delay here in EOIR’s implementation,” the filing said. “…The record shows several steps were required to finalize EOIR’s process, including coordination with USCIS. Regardless, Plaintiff’s request is now moot.”

Immigrants like Paula, who is a member of ASAP, recently got some reassurance. In a court declaration, EOIR Director Daren Margolin wrote that for anyone who made anticipatory or advance payments for the annual asylum fee, “those payments will be applied to the alien’s owed fees, as appropriate.”

Source link

How do you cancel a Jet2 flight? Refunds, fees and how to change your booking

Jet2.com Boeing 737 aircraft on the final approach to Manchester Airport UK

PLANS changed before you’ve even packed your case?

If you need to cancel a Jet2 flight, here’s how it works right now, plus what that means for refunds and fees.

Jet2 Airlines aircraft on the tarmac at Glasgow airport.
You can cancel your Jet2 flight onlineCredit: Alamy

How do you cancel a Jet2 flight?

It’s straightforward to cancel online.

Go to Manage My Booking, log in with your details and select Cancel flights.

Follow the on-screen steps to confirm your request.

You should receive confirmation once you’ve completed the process in Manage My Booking.

GROUNDED

Jet2 to scrap 200,000 seats this winter affecting thousands of passengers


TREE-MENDOUS

Jet2 to launch new flights to cheap Europe Christmas market with £1.50 beers

Will I get my money back if I cancel?

Jet2 treats flight-only bookings as non-refundable in most cases.

If you choose to cancel, you should not expect a cash refund unless your fare type or specific circumstances state otherwise.

Always check your booking confirmation and fare conditions before you cancel, and consider whether your travel insurance covers you for your reason to cancel.

What are my options if I don’t want to lose the fare?

If you can still travel but need different dates or times, you can amend your booking instead of cancelling.

Jet2 lets you change flights in Manage My Booking, subject to a change fee and any fare difference.

Name changes are also permitted for a fee if someone else can take your place, which can be more cost-effective than cancelling outright.

Tips before you cancel

  • Check your fare rules in your confirmation email to confirm whether your ticket has any flexibility before you cancel.
  • Compare the total cost of changing your flight versus cancelling and rebooking, especially if prices have risen since you bought your ticket.
  • If you have travel insurance, review your policy to see if your reason for cancelling is covered before you proceed.

How much does it cost to change a Jet2 flight?

Jet2 charges a fixed change fee per person per flight plus any difference between your original fare and the new fare available at the time you make the change.

Exact costs vary by route, season and availability, so you’ll see the total before you pay when you go through the change process in Manage My Booking.

Can I cancel a Jet2holidays package instead?

Flight-only bookings and Jet2holidays packages have different rules.

Package holidays follow Jet2holidays terms and conditions, including set cancellation charges on a sliding scale.

Check the Jet2holidays Manage My Booking FAQs and your booking documents for the latest charges before you decide.

If you booked a package through a third party or travel agent, speak to them first, as their terms may also apply.

What if Jet2 cancels my flight?

If Jet2 cancels your flight, you’ll be offered alternative arrangements or a refund according to Jet2’s policies.

BABY KILLER

My ex-pal burned her 6 kids alive in house fire – mistake let her walk FREE


HORROR ORDEAL

I haven’t peed for 18 months & NEVER will after UTI left me feeling suicidal

Manage this via Manage My Booking or follow the instructions Jet2 sends you at the time.

Keep an eye on your email and your booking dashboard for updates if disruption is expected.

Source link

US, China roll out port fees, threatening more trade turmoil | Business and Economy News

The United States and China have started charging additional port fees on ocean shipping firms that move everything from holiday toys to crude oil, making the high seas a key front in the trade war between the world’s two largest economies.

A return to an all-out trade war appeared imminent last week, after China announced a major expansion of its rare earths export controls, and US President Donald Trump threatened to raise tariffs on Chinese goods to triple digits.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

But after the weekend, both sides sought to reassure traders and investors, highlighting cooperation between their negotiating teams and the possibility they could find a way forward.

China said it had started to collect the special charges on US-owned, operated, built or flagged vessels, but it clarified that Chinese-built ships would be exempted from the levies.

In details published by state broadcaster CCTV, China spelled out specific provisions on exemptions, which also include empty ships entering Chinese shipyards for repair.

Similar to the US plan, the new China-imposed fees would be collected at the first port of entry on a single voyage or for the first five voyages within a year.

“This tit-for-tat symmetry locks both economies into a spiral of maritime taxation that risks distorting global freight flows,” Athens-based Xclusiv Shipbrokers said in a research note.

Early this year, the Trump administration announced plans to levy the fees on China-linked ships to loosen the country’s grip on the global maritime industry and bolster US shipbuilding.

An investigation during the administration of former US President Joe Biden concluded that China uses unfair policies and practices to dominate the global maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors, clearing the way for those penalties.

China hit back last week, saying it would impose its own port fees on US-linked vessels from the same day the US fees took effect.

“We are in the hectic stage of the disruption, where everyone is quietly trying to improvise workarounds, with varying degrees of success,” said independent dry bulk shipping analyst Ed Finley-Richardson. He said he has heard reports of US shipowners with non-Chinese vessels trying to sell their cargoes to other countries while en route, so the vessels can divert.

The Reuters news agency was not immediately able to confirm this.

Tit-for-tat moves

Analysts expect China-owned container carrier COSCO to be the most affected by the US fees, shouldering nearly half of that segment’s expected $3.2bn cost from the fees in 2026.

Major container lines, including Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd and CMA CGM, slashed their exposure by switching China-linked ships out of their US shipping lanes. Trade officials there reduced fees from initially proposed levels, and exempted a broad swath of vessels after heavy pushback from the agriculture, energy and US shipping industries.

The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Reuters.

China’s Ministry of Commerce on Tuesday said, “If the US chooses confrontation, China will see it through to the end; if it chooses dialogue, China’s door remains open.”

In a related move, Beijing also imposed sanctions on Tuesday against five US-linked subsidiaries of South Korean shipbuilder Hanwha Ocean, which it said had “assisted and supported” a US probe into Chinese trade practices.

Hanwha, one of the world’s largest shipbuilders, owns Philly Shipyard in the US and has won contracts to repair and overhaul US Navy ships. Its entities will also build a US-flagged LNG carrier.

Hanwha said it is aware of the announcement and is closely monitoring the potential business impact. Hanwha Ocean’s shares sank by nearly 6 percent.

China also launched an investigation into how the US probe affected its shipping and shipbuilding industries.

A Shanghai-based trade consultant said the new fees may not cause significant upheaval.

“What are we going to do? Stop shipping? Trade is already pretty disrupted with the US, but companies are finding a way,” the consultant told Reuters, requesting anonymity because he was not authorised to speak with the media.

The US announced last Friday a carve-out for long-term charterers of China-operated vessels carrying US ethane and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), deferring the port fees for them through December 10.

Meanwhile, ship-tracking company Vortexa identified 45 LPG-carrying VLGCs — an acronym for very large gas carriers, a type of vessel — that would be subject to China’s port fee. That amounts to 11 percent of the total fleet.

Clarksons Research said in a report that China’s new port fees could affect oil tankers accounting for 15 percent of global capacity.

Meanwhile, Omar Nokta, an analyst at the financial firm Jefferies, estimated that 13 percent of crude tankers and 11 percent of container ships in the global fleet would be affected.

Trade war embroils environmental policy

In a reprisal against China curbing exports of critical minerals, Trump on Friday threatened to slap additional 100 percent tariffs on goods from China and put new export controls on “any and all critical software” by November 1.

Administration officials, hours later, warned that countries voting this week in favour of a plan by the United Nations International Maritime Organization (IMO) to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from ocean shipping could face sanctions, port bans, or punitive vessel charges.

China has publicly supported the IMO plan.

“The weaponisation of both trade and environmental policy signals that shipping has moved from being a neutral conduit of global commerce to a direct instrument of statecraft,” Athens-based Xclusiv said.

Source link

China retaliates over U.S. port fees on Chinese ships

Shipping containers are seen at the port in Tianjin, China, Tuesday. The United States and China started charging one another port fees. Photo by Jessica Lee/EPA

Oct. 14 (UPI) — The Trump administration recently began charging fees for Chinese ships docking at U.S. ports, prompting China to retaliate.

The move, which has been long planned, is intended to correct the imbalance between American and Chinese shipbuilding businesses. The U.S. shipbuilding business has dwindled over the years as China has become dominant.

On Friday, China vowed reciprocal fees on American-made ships in its ports.

“This is symbolic — less than 1% of U.S. vessels docking in China annually are U.S.-flagged vessels, so the reality is this basically has no real impact,” Cameron Johnson, a senior partner at Shanghai-based supply chain consultancy Tidalwave Solutions, told Politico. “But it signals that Beijing will match every single effort the United States targets against China — if the U.S. sanctions a Chinese company, they’re going to sanction a U.S. company. If we impose export controls on technology, they’re going to do export controls on technology. We have just now escalated to a whole new level of trade warfare that nobody was expecting.”

Supporters say that China has used subsidies for an advantage in shipbuilding, and that the fees can deter ocean carriers from buying Chinese ships, The New York Times reported.

“Anything we can do to chip away at the disparity in shipbuilding that exists between the United States and China is to our benefit,” Mihir Torsekar, a senior economist at the Coalition for a Prosperous America, a group that supports many of Trump’s trade moves, told The Times.

Chinese-owned shipping companies must pay the levies, as well as non-Chinese-owned companies, when they send Chinese-made ships to U.S. ports.

The new fees will also target all foreign car-carrying ships that come to the United States. Car-makers lobbied against the fees, arguing that they could add hundreds to the cost of a vehicle. Shipping analysts say it could take many years for the U.S. shipbuilding industry to build a car-carrier ship.

“The idea that these fees will lead to anyone ordering a U.S.-built car carrier are, I think, extremely remote,” Colin Grabow, an associate director at the Cato Institute, told The Times.

The port fees levied against Chinese ships are $50 per ton, with the fee set to increase by $30 per ton each year over the next three years. Politico reported. China’s port charges will also annually escalate to a maximum of $157 in 2028.

“If the goal is to get U.S. shipbuilding back up and running, we think there are other ways that we need to focus on doing that — just putting fees on Chinese vessels isn’t going to solve that issue,” said Jonathan Gold, vice president of supply chain and customs policy at the National Retail Federation, told Politico.

Source link

Mali imposes retaliatory visa bond fees on US travellers | Migration News

The measure comes after the US added Mali to its list of African countries required to post bonds of $5,000 and $10,000.

Mali has imposed visa bond requirements on United States citizens identical to those Washington placed on Malian travellers, in a tit-for-tat response to moves that its government has condemned as a violation of bilateral agreements.

The Foreign Ministry in Bamako announced the reciprocal measures on Sunday after the US began requiring Malian nationals seeking business or tourist visas to post hefty bonds of between $5,000 and $10,000 starting on October 23.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Mali said the US programme breaches a 2005 accord guaranteeing long-term visa access between the two nations, and vowed to apply the same financial barriers to US passport holders under the principle of reciprocity.

In a statement released by its Foreign Ministry, Mali said it “has always collaborated with the United States of America in the fight against irregular immigration, with respect for law and human dignity”.

The dispute highlights escalating tensions as the administration of US President Donald Trump deploys visa restrictions as diplomatic leverage to pressure African governments on immigration enforcement and deportation cooperation.

Mali is among seven African countries facing the bond requirements under a year-long pilot scheme that the US State Department says targets nations with high visa overstay rates.

Mauritania, Sao Tome and Principe, and Tanzania were also added to the programme alongside Mali in late October, while Gambia, Malawi and Zambia were added earlier.

Trump immigration moves

Travellers subject to the bonds must pay up front through a US Treasury Department portal, and can only enter and exit the US through three designated airports.

The money is refunded if visitors depart on time, but forfeited for overstays or asylum applications. Consular officers determine individual bond amounts based on applicants’ circumstances.

The US justified the pilot by citing national security concerns and US Department of Homeland Security data showing more than 300,000 business and tourist visa holders overstayed their authorised periods in 2023.

Critics warn the fees – imposed atop standard $185 visa costs – could deter legitimate travel and harm the US tourism economy ahead of the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

Mali said it was interested in “fruitful cooperative relations”, but was introducing the measure against US citizens attempting to travel there in the spirit of reciprocity.

The visa bonds are the latest immigration measure following months of efforts by the Trump administration to pressure African nations into accepting deportees, including those not from their own countries.

Several governments have received expelled migrants in exchange for payments or political favours, while others faced swift punishment for refusal.

Burkina Faso had all visa services suspended at its US Embassy after rejecting demands to accept third-country deportees, forcing residents to travel to neighbouring Togo for applications.

South Sudan initially had visas for all passport holders revoked following a deportation dispute, though it later accepted eight people from Asian and Latin American countries.

Eswatini agreed to receive up to 160 deportees for $5.1m in US funding, while Ghana, Rwanda and Uganda have also accepted expelled migrants under bilateral arrangements, according to diplomatic sources.

Source link

China plans reciprocal ship fees on U.S. vessels entering Chinese ports

Chinese hhipping containers were seen unloaded May 2019 from arriving cargo ships at the Port of Long Beach in Long Beach, Calif. In addition to new tariffs and ship fees imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump, China will now reciprocate by slapping the same fee on China-bound U.S. ships. File Photo by Jim Ruymen/UPI | License Photo

Oct. 10 (UPI) — China said Friday it will start charging U.S. ships docking at its ports in a direct response to the Trump administration imposing the same fee on Chinese vessels entering U.S. shores.

The Chinese Ministry of Transportation announced beginning Tuesday it will charge about $56 per ton for American vessels entering China’s ports in a reciprocal response to ship fees imposed by the United States of about the same at $50 per ship via China.

In addition, China stated it will match the United States by increasing fees over time through April 2028.

In the short term, however, this will “result in an increase in costs for U.S. consumers, a decrease in profits for shippers, and a small decline in demand for exports to the U.S. in certain category,” according to Michael Hart, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in China.

The U.S. and Chinese shipping fees are set to take effect the same day.

On Friday, Beijing said the initial U.S. ship fees imposed by the Trump White House “seriously violate” global trading principles and “seriously damages” China-U.S maritime trade.

“China can give as good as it gets and has demonstrated a willingness to take direct action,” Peter Alexander, managing director of Z-Ben Advisors in Shanghai, told CNBC.

China’s Transportation Ministry said fees will apply to ships owed by American citizens, businesses, organizations and other entities under the U.S. flag holding a 25% ownership stake or more.

Alexander suggested that U.S. President Donald Trump continues to “underestimate China and this needs to stop” and was “just more tit-for-tat negotiation tactics.”

“There seems to be little consideration given to second and third-order effects of policy choices,” he added.

It arrived as communist China and President Xi Jingping seeks to leverage control over export of rare Earth minerals and Trump’s tax-like tariff policies.

“Have there been any lessons learned by the Americans over the past six months?” Alexander questioned. “It certainly doesn’t seem so,” he added.

Source link

Trash fees will spike for many L.A. residents after fiscal crisis

Many Los Angeles residents will soon be paying significantly more for trash collection after the City Council voted Tuesday to finalize a dramatic fee increase.

The trash program had become heavily subsidized, to the tune of about $500,000 a day, which officials said was no longer viable given the city’s dire financial straits, which left them scrambling to close a nearly $1-billion budget deficit earlier this year.

Having the cost subsidized by the city for so long contributed to that deficit, according to City Administrative Officer Matt Szabo.

“It should have been corrected a long time ago,” Szabo said. “If we didn’t get this rate increase, the subsidy would have been more than $200 million this year.”

The city hadn’t raised trash pickup fees in 17 years, and a 2016 state law governing organic waste disposal significantly increased operational costs. Large raises for city sanitation workers and rising equipment costs also bumped up expenditures.

Once the new fees go into effect, probably in mid-November, residents of single-family homes or apartments with four units or less will pay $55.95 a month per unit.

That sum is more than double the $24.33 a month that occupants of triplexes and fourplexes had been paying, and a roughly 50% increase on the $36.32 previously paid by residents of single-family homes and duplexes.

Those customers put their waste in black bins for regular trash, blue bins for recycling and green bins for organic waste, which are emptied by city workers once a week. Larger apartment buildings will be unaffected by the changes, because their waste collection is administered through a separate program.

The fees will increase by an additional $10 over the next four years.

By next year, the increased fees will reflect the actual cost of trash pickup and will be on par with or slightly below what residents pay in nearby cities such as Long Beach, Pasadena, Culver City and Glendale.

Still, the new fees will almost certainly engender sticker shock for L.A. residents already contending with skyrocketing insurance premiums, rising rents and eye-popping grocery prices. Rates will be reduced for low-income customers who qualify for the city’s EZ-SAVE or Lifeline programs.

The City Council approved the increase on a 12-2 vote, with Councilmembers Monica Rodriguez and Adrin Nazarian dissenting.

Last week, the council also voted to raise the prices and hours of city parking meters.

“After approving a $2.6-billion Convention Center expansion, the council is asking residents to pay more for basic services like trash collection while delivering less. That doesn’t reflect the priorities of working Angelenos,” Rodriguez said after Tuesday’s vote. “I can’t, in good conscience, support that approach.”

A number of factors catalyzed the city’s financial issues, which exploded into public view during the budget process earlier this year. Los Angeles had taken in weaker than expected tax revenues, paid out more in legal liabilities and adopted large-scale raises for city employees.

When Mayor Karen Bass first presented her budget in the spring, layoffs for more than 1,600 city workers were on the table. She and the City Council were ultimately able to avoid those cuts through a number of cost-saving measures.

Tuesday’s final vote on the trash fees came nearly six months after the council gave preliminary approval to the plan.

The matter was complicated by Proposition 218, a 1996 statewide ballot measure designed to make it harder for local governments to raise taxes and fees. To satisfy the proposition’s requirements, the city had to hold public hearings and give every affected resident the opportunity to weigh in via a notice mailed to their homes before the increase could move forward.

The fee hike legislation still has to be signed by the mayor and formally published by the city clerk. The fee can’t go into effect until 31 days after that, or mid-November at the earliest.

The city budget, however, was calculated under the assumption that the new fees would go into effect Oct. 1. The delay will leave the city on the hook for an extra $500,000 a day.

Because Tuesday’s vote was not unanimous, the ordinance will receive a second reading next week before the council formally approves it and sends it to the mayor — a technicality that will cost the city $3.5 million. The mayor plans to sign it as soon as she receives it, her office said.

The delay to mid-November will cost the city a total of at least $22 million, creating another deficit that will have to be adjusted for down the line.

Still, some residents decried the ballooning fees, with one calling the increase “preposterous.”

“Listen to our cries,” the person, who did not give their name,said in a written public comment. “We can barely keep a roof over our heads — at this time! Los Angeles is falling apart. It is your job to fix it more practically.”

The Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council also opposed the rate hike, arguing that residents are already facing steep cost-of-living increases and that layering more fees on top of that would be “neither fair nor sustainable.”

The last time the city increased trash fees, back in the summer of 2008, City Controller Kenneth Mejia was a few months out of high school, George W. Bush was in the Oval Office and Katy Perry’s “I Kissed a Girl” was topping the Billboard charts.

Amid a global economic downturn, the city was facing widespread cuts, and leaders looked — as they often do — to the price tag of city services to try to balance the budget.

Times staff writers David Zahniser and Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

Source link

‘I used a massive bra as a suitcase and sneakily avoided annoying luggage fees’

A savvy traveller decided to use a very unique hack to stow some extra hand luggage on her return flight – and the flight attendants didn’t even bat an eyelid

A clever hack involving undergarments has gone viral after one traveller revealed how she “stuffed” her bra before a Wizz Air flight – saving her a fortune on baggage costs.

The cost of adding extra baggage onto flights can sometimes be more expensive than the ticket itself – with restrictions getting tighter on hand luggage.

Budget airlines like RyanAir and EasyJet notoriously make last-minute checks at the gate – sometimes resulting in extra fees for those who are slightly over the limit. But one woman has revealed a clever trick for sneaking in extra clothes – and it’s all in her bra.

READ MORE: Drunk Jet2 thug causes holiday flight to be diverted after spitting on passengerREAD MORE: EasyJet statement on major border change which will impact millions from October

Chelsea Dickenson was flying home from Lisbon with Wizz Air who only allow a tiny 40 x 30 x 20cm cabin bag for free.

And while she managed the outbound flight fine, she wanted to try out the clever hack for her return journey. Just before her flight, she bagged herself a giant bra – that was not her size – for less than £5 from a local shop.

“I’d never seen anyone use a bra for this purpose. And the logic was solid: airlines weigh and measure your bag, not your body. My coat pockets had been carrying overflow snacks and chargers for years, so why not give my chest a piece of the action too?,” she told the Metro.

After making it through security, she headed straight to the toilets to get changed into her bra – surprisingly fitting a lot of clothes inside.

“On the day of my flight, I wasn’t about to stroll through security looking like I’d got a Portuguese breast enlargement – this was about getting through the scales and bag sizers,” she explained.

Chelsea stuffed the bra with her gym kit, a bikini, and a fishing vest. But one thing she hadn’t prepared for was the intense heat the extra padding would provide.

“It was like a private heat wave,” she wrote. Her boyfriend James also found the sight amusing.

At the gate, the flight attendants didn’t bat an eyelid and let them board the plane smoothly. But while it worked, she admits she wouldn’t do it again and would opt for less invasive options.

Top packing hacks to avoid extra baggage fees

1. Roll your clothes

Rolling clothes like T-shirts, jeans and dresses can save a lot of space in hand luggage thanks to making the items more compact compared to simply folding.

2. Packing cubes

Investing in packing cubes can save space – especially those that are vacuum packed meaning you can get rid of excess air and flat pack your clothes with ease.

3. Wear bulky items

On the plane, opt to wear your more bulky items like coats, jackets, hoodies or tracksuits. While you might be warm layering clothes, you can always remove them onboard and stow them in the overhead lockers.

4. Place heavy items at the bottom of hand luggage

Strategically packing can save a lot of space, with heavy items helping to keep the bag’s structure while offering more room for lighter items on top.

Shop Charlotte’s bauble

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more
Charlotte Tilbury's Pillow Talk Glossy Lip Kit Bauble

£20.00

Charlotte Tilbury

Buy Now on Charlotte Tilbury

This limited-edition kit includes travel sizes of Charlotte Tilbury’s Lip Cheat lip liner and Collagen Lip Bath in either Pillow Talk Fair, Original or Medium for a fuller, jucier pout.

Source link

India expresses concern about Trump’s move to hike fees for H-1B visas

The Indian government expressed concern Saturday about President Trump’s latest push to overhaul American immigration policy, dramatically raising the fee for visas that bring tech workers from India and other countries to the United States.

The president on Friday signed a proclamation that will require a $100,000 annual fee for H-1B visas — meant for high-skilled jobs that tech companies find hard to fill. He also rolled out a $1-million “gold card” visa for wealthy individuals, moves that face near-certain legal challenges amid widespread criticism that he is sidestepping Congress.

If the moves survive legal muster, they will deliver staggering price increases. The visa fee for skilled workers is currently $215.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs said Saturday that Trump’s plan “was being studied by all concerned, including by Indian industry.” The ministry warned that “this measure is likely to have humanitarian consequences by way of the disruption caused for families. Government hopes that these disruptions can be addressed suitably by the U.S. authorities.”

More than 70% of H-1B visa holders are from India.

H-1B visas, which require at least a bachelor’s degree, are meant for high-skilled jobs that tech companies find difficult to fill. Critics say the program undercuts American workers, luring people from overseas who are often willing to work for as little as $60,000 annually. That is well below the $100,000-plus salaries typically paid to U.S. technology workers.

Trump said Friday that the tech industry would not oppose the move. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick claimed that “all big companies” are on board.

Representatives for the biggest tech companies, including Amazon, Apple, Google and Meta, did not immediately respond to messages for comment. Microsoft declined to comment.

“We’re concerned about the impact on employees, their families and American employers,” the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in a statement. “We’re working with the Administration and our members to understand the full implications and the best path forward.”

Lutnick said the change would probably result in far fewer H-1B visas than the 85,000 annual cap allows because “it’s just not economic anymore.”

“If you’re going to train people, you’re going to train Americans,” Lutnick said on a conference call with reporters. “If you have a very sophisticated engineer and you want to bring them in … then you can pay $100,000 a year for your H-1B visa.”

Trump also announced that he will start selling a “gold card” visa with a path to U.S. citizenship for $1 million after vetting. For companies, it would cost $2 million to sponsor an employee.

Trump also announced a “platinum card,” which could be obtained for $5 million and would allow foreigners to spend up to 270 days in the U.S. without being subject to U.S. taxes on non-U.S. income. Trump announced a $5-million gold card in February to replace an existing investor visa — this is now the platinum card.

Lutnick said the gold and platinum cards would replace employment-based visas that offer paths to citizenship, including for professors, scientists, artists and athletes.

Critics of H-1Bs visas who say they are used to replace U.S. citizens in certain jobs applauded the move. U.S. Tech Workers, an advocacy group, called it “the next best thing” to abolishing the visas.

Doug Rand, a senior official at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services during the Biden administration, said the proposed fee increase was “ludicrously lawless.”

“This isn’t real policy — it’s fan service for immigration restrictionists,” Rand said. “Trump gets his headlines, and inflicts a jolt of panic, and doesn’t care whether this survives first contact with the courts.”

“The president has no legal authority to tax American visas,” said Michael Clemens, a George Mason University economist who studies immigration. “He has the authority to charge reasonable fees for cost recovery, not set fees at $100,000 or $100 million or whatever suits his personal … arbitrary capricious whims.

“If the president feels that H-1B visas are harmful, he can work with the people’s representatives in Congress to reform the laws that regulate those visas. His choice to legislate by proclamation subverts our entire immigration governance system,’’ said Clemens, who is also a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “Beyond that, it is poisonous [and] irresponsible to do so with no warning, no public debate, leaving hundreds of thousands of workers and millions of their colleagues and family members in chaos and fear.’’

Lutnick said the H-1B fees and gold card could be introduced by the president but the platinum card needs congressional approval.

Historically, H-1B visas have been doled out through lottery. This year, Amazon was by far the top recipient of H-1B visas, with more than 10,000 awarded, followed by the Indian firm Tata Consultancy, then Microsoft, Apple and Google. Geographically, California has the highest number of H-1B workers.

Critics say H-1B spots often go to entry-level jobs, rather than senior positions with unique skill requirements. And while the program isn’t supposed to undercut U.S. wages or displace U.S. workers, critics say companies can pay less by classifying jobs at the lowest skill levels, even if the specific workers hired have more experience.

As a result, many U.S. companies find it cheaper to contract out help desks, programming and other basic tasks to consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, HCL Technologies and Tata — all in India — and IBM and Cognizant in the U.S. These consulting companies hire foreign workers, often from India, and contract them out to U.S. employers looking to save money.

Ron Hira, a professor in the political science department at Howard University and a longtime critic of H-1B visas, said the plan was a move in the right direction.

“It’s a recognition that the program is abused,’’ he said.

Raising the visa fee, he said, was an unusual way to address the H-1B program’s shortcomings. Normally, he said, reformers seek ways to raise the pay of the foreign workers, eliminating the incentive to use them to replace higher-paid Americans. He noted approvingly that Trump’s proclamation calls for the U.S. Labor Department to “initiate a rule-making [process] to revise the prevailing wage levels’’ under the visa program.

Critics of H-1B visas have also called on the lottery to be replaced by an auction in which companies vie for the right to bring in foreign workers.

First Lady Melania Trump, the Slovenian-born former Melania Knauss, was granted an H-1B work visa in October 1996 to work as a model.

In 2024, lottery bids for the visas plunged nearly 40%, which authorities said was due to success against people who were “gaming the system” by submitting multiple, sometimes dubious, applications to unfairly increase chances of being selected.

Major technology companies that use H-1B visas sought changes after massive increases in bids left their employees and prospective hires with slimmer chances of winning the random lottery. Facing what it acknowledged was likely fraud and abuse, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services this year said each employee had only one shot at the lottery, whether the person had one job offer or 50.

Critics welcomed the change but said more needs to be done. The AFL-CIO wrote last year that while changes to the lottery “included some steps in the right direction,” it fell short of needed reforms. The labor group wants visas awarded to companies that pay the highest wages instead of by random lottery, a change that Trump sought during his first term in the White House.

Associated Press writers Ortutay and Kim reported from Oakland and Washington, respectively. AP writers Adriana Gomez Licon in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., Elliot Spagat in San Diego and Paul Wiseman in Washington contributed to this report.

Source link

N.Y. judge orders Rudy Giuliani to pay $1.36M in back legal fees

Sept. 17 (UPI) — A New York judge on Wednesday ordered former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani to pay $1.36 million in legal fees to the law firm that represented him in several cases involving his dealings with President Donald Trump.

In addition to the unpaid legal fees, New York County Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron ordered Giuliani to pay interest to the law firm Davidoff Hutcher & Citron starting from October 2023.

The unpaid fees are for work the former partner Robert Costello did for Giuliani between November 2019 and July 2023 on 10 lawsuits filed against him in state and federal courts as well as disciplinary proceedings involving his law license. The cases included the Jan. 6 committee investigation and the Fulton County, Ga., presidential election case.

The law firm, which filed its lawsuit against Giuliani in September 2023, said Giuliani paid $214,000 of nearly $1.6 million in legal fees. Giuliani said he never agreed to pay the firm for its work and that he never received any invoices.

Engoron ruled against Giuliani, saying the former mayor referenced an invoice number in one of the checks he did pay to the firm.

Ted Goodman, a representative for Giuliani, took issue with Engoron proceeding over the case. In 2024, the judge issued a $454 million civil fraud judgment against Trump after finding the president lied about his wealth and value of other assets to obtain better financial conditions.

“The idea that Judge Arthur Engoron is permitted to sit on a case involving President Donald Trump’s good friend and former personal lawyer, Mayor Rudy Giuliani, flies in the face of justice and demonstrates the partisan political nature of this decision,” Goodman said in a statement to The Hill.

Source link

L.A. marijuana businesses will pay higher fees, as industry struggles

Legal marijuana businesses in Los Angeles will pay thousands more dollars in renewal fees, the City Council decided Tuesday, bringing fresh financial woes to an already constricting market.

City officials said the fee increases are necessary to make up for declining tax revenue from the marijuana industry, at a time when the city is in dire financial straits.

“This is a difficult but necessary action for the continued functions of [the cannabis department] and to avoid further strain on our General Fund,” City Councilmember Imelda Padilla in a statement.

But some struggling business owners said the increased fees could threaten their survival.

Luis Rivera previously ran three different marijuana delivery businesses in the city, two of which have gone under. He’s now considering shuttering the remaining one, Bonafide Delivery in Sun Valley, due to the fee increases and low profit margins.

“There’s nowhere to pull the money from,” Rivera said. “The fees will be disastrous.”

The new fees, which the council approved unanimously, are expected to bring in about $6 million this year to the city’s Department of Cannabis Regulation, which is required to recoup all its expenses through fees or other charges.

After four straight years where gross receipt taxes from marijuana sales exceeded $100 million, the amount dropped to about $90 million in 2024, according to cannabis department data.

High state and local taxes and the high cost of doing business because of a lack of access to traditional banking and financing, as well as competition with the illegal cannabis market, have contributed to the falling revenue, said Bryan Bergman, an attorney who works with cannabis businesses.

The illegal dispensaries often undercut the prices of legal stores, in part because they do not pay taxes or fees, and have also been hotbeds of crime, according to law enforcement.

“The fee increases are coming at a really bad time for industry folks. And it’s a very significant increase,” Bergman said.

Cannabis products for sale at Bonafide in Sun Valley.

Cannabis products for sale at Bonafide in Sun Valley.

(David Butow/For the Times)

The cannabis department’s budget is $8.6 million for this fiscal year, and it is expected to pay additional $19 million to other parts of city government, such as the city attorney’s office, for their marijuana-related work.

While increasing fees for marijuana businesses, the new ordinance decreases fines for major violations of city rules and regulations. For example, delivering marijuana goods outside of allowable hours will now result in a $23,000 fine, down from $42,000.

The new ordinance also creates a new category of “severe” violation, such as diverting cannabis to unlawful establishments, which would result in a $34,000 fine. Cannabis Department officials said the goal was to avoid excessively heavy fines.

Los Angeles has the nation’s largest municipal commercial cannabis department, overseeing nearly 1,100 licenses for brick-and-mortar dispensaries, delivery businesses and growing operations.

Department officials argued that its fees, which had not gone up since 2020, did not match the cost of operations. Since the department first authorized fees in 2020, its staff has grown from 37 to 63 members. Through collective bargaining agreements, their salaries have also increased 19% since 2020.

The most widespread hit for marijuana businesses will come from renewal fees, which must be paid annually.

A license renewal will jump from $8,486 to $12,617. A temporary approval renewal will go from $4,233 to $6,294, and a record renewal will increase from $1,829 to $2,719.

The new ordinance also contains other fee changes, including an increase in the business diagram modification review fee and a drop in the ownership structure modification review fee.

A Cannabis Department spokesperson said that participants in its social equity program, which provides support to cannabis operators from communities most harmed by the war on drugs, will have some of their increased fees covered by money from a state grant.

The grant will cover about $3.1 million in new fees, said Jason Killeen, the cannabis department’s assistant executive director, during a city council committee meeting Tuesday. More than half of the money will cover the difference between the old renewal fee and the new one for the 317 social equity license holders. The rest of the grant money will go toward new applicants for social equity licenses.

The increased fees come as the city struggles with a budget crisis likely to continue for several years. This year’s budget closes a nearly $1-billion gap through layoffs and other cuts.

The City Council approved an increase in ticket prices for the L.A. Zoo and has taken steps to raise trash fees for roughly 740,000 customers. The city may also raise parking meter fees and extend the meters’ hours of operation.

The Cannabis Department has acknowledged that the new fees will be a hardship for businesses.

“Please understand that this fee study was necessitated by law and is central to DCR’s ability to continue serving this community effectively and equitably,” Executive Director Michelle Garakian wrote in a July news bulletin. “It’s easy to feel like no one at the City cares. But I assure you, DCR does. DCR has to navigate limited resources, competing needs, and make challenging decisions.”

Source link

Dad’s genius 15-minute DIY hack to avoid Ryanair’s £510 luggage fees

Neil Armstrong was worried about potential charges over luggage size restrictions when he flies with his family of nine – so he decided to take matters into his own hands

Passengers walking with the right size carry on luggage for Ryanair (Image: agafapaperiapunta via Getty Images)

When Neil Armstrong and his family of nine were gearing up to fly with a budget airline, he was concerned about potential extra charges due to luggage size restrictions. The clan had booked flights with Ryanair, an airline notorious for its stringent carry-on bag policy and associated fees.

To sidestep a hefty bill, the 54-year-old took the initiative. Equipped with cardboard and tape, he constructed his own replica of the airline’s sizer cage in just 15 minutes. He then used this DIY sizer to measure all the family’s hand luggage, ensuring there would be no costly surprises at the airport.

READ MORE: EasyJet, Ryanair and TUI travellers warned over little-known rule that could stop them flying

A Ryanair bag sizer at an airport
Ryanair are strict on the sizes of hand luggage and Neil didn’t want to be caught out(Image: Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto)

A viral video on TikTok shows Neil diligently crafting the sizer to the exact dimensions of 40x20x25cm. The father-of-three confessed that he had to swap his own hand luggage backpack after discovering it didn’t fit into his homemade box, reports the Daily Record.

However, he is now confident he has avoided a potential £510 fee, based on Ryanair’s standard charge of €60 (£51) per bag. The graphic designer remarked that he felt ‘like a Ryanair employee’ while inspecting the bags but urges other patrons of the budget airline to follow suit.

His daughter, Imogen (Immy) Armstrong, 20, shared a TikTok video of Neil assembling the box, which has since amassed over 200,000 views. Neil, from Maidstone, Kent, said: “The family had a bit of a snigger but they think it’s a great idea. I’m proud of it. I’ve read that people have been charged so I wanted to be sure that our bags would fit. I didn’t want to get caught out.

“You can get the tape measurer out but that’s not really accurate and I saw the boxes at the airport but when you’re there it’s too late. I thought I’d make my own and all 10 of us can get our hand luggage and make sure it fits in that.

 Ryanair check-in area
Ryanair check-in area (Image: Nuria Gonzalez Sanchez via Getty Images)

“I went and got some cardboard, followed the strict centimetre rule, stuck the cardboard together and made this box. The rest of the family only live streets away so I told them to come round when they have a minute and pop their bags in.

“It’s not until you mock something up that you can actually visualise it (the Ryanair measuring box). I don’t want to spend my holiday spending money on a bag. I realised the bag I was going to take wasn’t going to fit so I’ve used another one. I felt like a Ryanair worker, saying to the kids ‘no that won’t do. Go and get another one (bag)’. I’d encourage other people to do it too so they’re not caught out.”

The family is now confidenT that they will avoid any extra baggage fees for their flight from London Stansted to Tenerife. Imogen’s TikTok video bore the caption ‘When your dad doesn’t wanna pay Ryanair £70 so makes his own hand luggage check’.

A TikTok user reacted by saying: “A new level of airport dad has been unlocked.” A second person commented: “Honestly, great idea.” A third quipped: “Hey, I don’t blame him! Work smarter not harder.” Ryanair has been approached for a response.

Source link

I discovered how to dodge extra baggage fees with flight attendant’s 1 clever hack

Flying with just a small personal bag can be a struggle when it comes to packing light, but a flight attendant has shared a handy hack that could help avoid extra fees

A shot of two young friends boarding a plane on the runway at the airport in Toulouse, France. One young woman is looking over her shoulder and smiling at the camera while carrying a backpack and boarding pass.
I discovered how to dodge extra baggage fees with flight attendant’s 1 clever hack(Image: SolStock via Getty Images)

Excess luggage charges can quickly escalate, turning a dream getaway into a costly nightmare. Keen to keep my Poland trip this month on the cheap, I flew with no-frills carrier Ryanair and stuck to the complimentary baggage allowance – just a small personal item.

The challenge arises when you’re keen to bring home souvenirs, on top of having a compact cross-body bag. Flight attendant Miguel Muñoz previously shared with Express.co.uk a nifty loophole, noting that “duty-free bags don’t count as carry-on baggage” and are usually overlooked by gate staff. This tip has even been echoed by thrifty TikTokers, so I was eager to try it out.

Miguel outlined the trick: “If you have something that doesn’t fit in your suitcase or you want to bring an extra bag on board, here’s the trick.

“All you have to do is carry a duty-free bag. Or ask for one at the duty-free shop, and you can place whatever you want in the shopping bag.”

Woman checking size of her carry-on luggage at airport.
I flew with budget airline Ryanair and just opted for the free baggage option – a small personal bag(Image: Maria Korneeva via Getty Images)

Boarding the plane with my bulging duty-free bag had me anxious, but to my relief, the crew waved me through without a hitch.

With Ryanair’s baggage fees stretching from £12 to £59.99, avoiding that extra charge felt like a victory.

This trick was a lifesaver for the extra bag and jacket that I couldn’t squeeze into my main luggage.

While this method did work wonders for me, a few folks have mentioned that airline staff requested a look inside their bags.

Women leaving airport duty free shop with shopping bags
Duty-free bags are allowed in addition to hand luggage(Image: Getty Images/Collection Mix: Subjects RF)

To sidestep this, if you’ve made any duty-free purchases, place them on top. Also, always ensure your airline permits carrying duty-free items onboard in this manner.

Having triumphed with this hack, I’m eager to test out the neck pillow packing hack. This essentially involves replacing the pillow stuffing with small clothing items.

However, it’s worth noting that some travellers have been caught out using this hack, with a few even being denied boarding.

Source link

New fees for Brits to enter France, Spain and Italy and when they come in

Because of Brexit, UK holidaymakers will soon need to pay to visit France, Spain, Italy and other EU countries

Couple passing security gate at the airport
Some people will be exempt from the fee, however(Image: Westend61 via Getty Images)

UK holidaymakers will soon need to pay for a permit to enter France, Spain, Italy and other countries, although the need to apply for an European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) has been postponed. As per the latest update, Brits heading to the EU won’t need an ETIAS until at least April 2027.

Earlier this year, the EU’s Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs said the ETIAS roll-out would likely begin in the final quarter of 2026. However, due to a grace period, UK travellers won’t be required to secure an ETIAS before jetting off to the EU until 2027.

The introduction of ETIAS is tied to the launch of the Entry/Exit System (EES). After numerous setbacks, the EU has agreed to gradually implement the EES from October this year.

READ MORE: EasyJet demands end to ‘very disruptive’ summer strike that impacts 70% of flightsREAD MORE: Foreign Office tells Brits to keep copies of essential travel documents at home

This staggered approach allows member states to slowly introduce the new border system over a six-month timeframe. If the EU decides to kickstart the EES in October 2025, member states will need to register ten per cent of travellers crossing the border after the first month.

For the initial 60 days, the system can function without biometric features. However, by January 2026, all member states should have the EES operating with biometric capabilities, and by April 2026, the EES roll-out should be fully operational.

The Entry/Exit System (EES) is an automated IT system designed to register non-EU nationals travelling for short stays each time they cross the borders of various European countries including Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.

READ MORE: ‘Beautiful’ UK beach is a ‘true gem’ and ‘feels like Spain’READ MORE: UK airports hike ‘kiss and fly’ fees while most EU airports don’t charge at all

If you’re journeying to a Schengen area country using a UK passport, you’ll need to register your biometric details, such as fingerprints or a photo, upon arrival. This EES registration will supersede the current practice of manually stamping passports when visitors enter the EU.

Once the EES is fully up and running, the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) will be rolled out. According to EU authorities, ETIAS will be launched six months after the EES, around October 2026.

There will be a transitional period and a grace period, each lasting six months, which means that ETIAS will become mandatory for most people in April 2027 and fully compulsory by October 2027. The ETIAS application fee is 7 euros per traveller aged 18-70, with people outside of this age bracket exempt.

ETIAS explained

The ETIAS travel authorisation is an entry requirement for nationals exempt from visas travelling to any of these 30 European countries. It is tied to a traveller’s passport.

It is valid for up to three years or until the passport expires, whichever comes first. If you get a new passport, you need to get a new ETIAS travel authorisation.

With a valid ETIAS travel authorisation, you can frequently enter these European countries for short-term stays – typically up to 90 days within any 180-day period. However, it doesn’t assure entry, as you’ll also need a valid passport, among other requirements.

Source link

Heathrow Airport’s major expansion plans with an increase to passenger fees

With plans to expand even further, Heathrow Airport has proposed an expansion, but it will be at the cost of the passengers as ticket prices are set to rise to cover the cost

Heathrow Terminal 5 is an airport terminal at Heathrow Airport. Opened in 2008, the main building in the complex is the largest free-standing structure in the UK
Passenger prices may go up to cover the cost of the expansion(Image: BrasilNut1/Getty Images)

Heathrow Airport has announced plans for a huge expansion – at the cost of their passengers. Heathrow’s latest business plan suggests that the airport is to take on a further £8bn of debt, leaving their passengers to pay for terminal upgrades in a bid to accommodate an additional 10 million passengers annually by 2031, contingent on an increase in airline fees.

The proposed 10 million passenger increase represents a 12 per cent rise on current numbers, and to do this the airport is exploring the option to raise the average charge per passenger from the current £28.46 to £33.26.

READ MORE: Airport worker shares tip to make your suitcase the first off the plane

London, UK - 08 12 2023: London Heathrow Airport British Airways Terminal 5.
Heathrow has proposed plans for the expansion(Image: Alexsl/Getty Images)

Heathrow is Europe’s busiest airport, and has been under plans from the government for a long-term vision of a new runway – which isn’t anticipated to be operational until 2035 at the earliest. So this new proposal offers a quicker route and was submitted to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on Friday, detailing upgrades to existing terminals as a means to boost capacity.

Now the CAA is set to review the plans, but it comes after the airport is currently under fire for already being too expensive. Heathrow has reportedly been facing claims from airlines for being one of the world’s most expensive, and have urged the regulator to reduce the charges already

IAG, the parent group of Virgin Atlantic and British Airways, the Heathrow Airline Operators’ Committee (AOC) and the Arora hotel group have joined together in a coordinated attack on the airport’s regulatory regime.

They hope to “conduct an urgent and fundamental review into the way in which Heathrow, the UK’s only hub airport and the largest in Europe, is regulated, for the benefit of consumers, businesses and the UK economy,” as reported by the Independent.

“Heathrow has become the world’s most expensive airport, with passengers and airlines today paying £1.1bn more each year than if charges were in line with equivalent major European airports,” the partners said in a statement. However, Heathrow argue that this investment will make expansion more affordable and less disruptive.

Heathrow chief executive Thomas Woldbye said in a letter to the Transport Select Committee: “One factor is that the airport’s small physical footprint means a lot of our infrastructure has to be underground or built in a unique way, increasing the cost.

“We are also the busiest two-runway airport in the world, meaning the intensity of our operating environment is comparatively more complex and makes it much harder to make targeted improvements and investment while remaining operational.”

Paul McGuinness (Chair, No 3rd Runway Coalition) said: “The astonishing detail in Heathrow’s Five Year Plan is that only £2bn is of its £10bn cost will be funded by shareholder equity; so adding a further £8bn of debt to Heathrow’s current £20bn of arrears.”

He continued: “Heathrow’s business plans shows their determination to grow irrespective of whether or not expansion takes place. The fact that 80% of this investment will be financed through debt reveals a continuation of a strategy to sweat their assets to their limit which brings with it associated risks and higher costs which will no doubt be passed onto passengers.”

Do you have a story to share? Email [email protected]

Source link

Restaurants, bars consider turning off music as licensing fees skyrocket

Ever since operetta composer Victor Herbert sued Shanley’s restaurant in New York in 1917 to force it to pay for playing his song on a player-piano, songwriters and music publishers have depended on Performing Rights Organizations to make sure they get compensated.

For much of the last century, three organizations dominated the industry, a relatively staid and unglamorous corner of the music scene that remained largely unchanged throughout the eras of radio, records and CDs. But the rise of streaming has led to a surge in revenue and spawned a handful of new organizations looking to cash in.

Now there are at least half a dozen PROs in the United States, representing songwriters and publishers, each demanding that bars, restaurants, hotels and other venues pay a fee or risk being sued.

Businesses say the rising licensing costs have become overwhelming, and some question whether it’s even worth playing music at all. The House Judiciary Committee last fall asked the Copyright Office to investigate the current system and consider potential reforms. In February, the Office opened an inquiry and received thousands of comments from businesses and songwriters.

“The growing proliferation of PROs and their lack of transparency have made it increasingly difficult to offer music in our establishments,” hundreds of small businesses from across the country wrote to the Copyright Office in a joint letter.

“The issue is not that small businesses are unwilling to pay for music,” they wrote, adding that the current system is unfair and untenable. “Small businesses can be left feeling like PROs have them over the proverbial barrel.”

Creating a welcoming ambiance in a restaurant or yoga studio isn’t as simple as putting on a Spotify playlist. Streaming has unleashed trillions of songs, and every one must be licensed and have royalties paid to the songwriter whenever any track is played in public. Violations can cost up to $150,000 per infringement.

This booming market for music publishing has led to a windfall for the two major PROs. The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, founded in 1914, and BMI, established in 1939, together represent more than 90% of musical compositions in the U.S. today with talent lists covering Taylor Swift, Olivia Rodrigo, Jay-Z, Lady Gaga and Eminem, to name a few. SESAC, founded in 1931, rounds out the original three and operates on an invite-only basis.

ASCAP, the oldest and, as a nonprofit, the only PRO to publicly share data on its collections and payout, has seen revenue jump to $1.8 billion in 2024 from $935 million in 2010. Broadcast Music Inc., in its last public report as a nonprofit in 2022, showed record revenue of $1.6 billion, with 48% of that from digital sources.

This kind of growth hasn’t gone unnoticed. In just over the last 12 years, three new PROs have emerged. Legendary music manager Irving Azoff founded Global Music Rights in 2013, offering “boutique services” and royalty transparency, building a stable of more than 160 high-profile songwriters such as Bad Bunny and Bruce Springsteen.

AllTrack, founded in 2017, caters to smaller, independent songwriters. Pro Music Rights launched in 2018 and says it represents more than 2.5 million musical works, including AI-created music.

Many songs today are composed by several songwriters, each of whom could be affiliated with a different PRO. Therefore, to legally play those songs, establishments must pay for a license from each PRO. Most PROs offer blanket licensing agreements, meaning that they provide access to their entire repertoires for one fee. And while that gives a particular venue a wide range of musical freedom, it also means bars and restaurants are paying for thousands of songs they may never play or are essentially paying twice, in instances where a song with multiple writers is represented by more than one PRO.

The National Restaurant Assn. said its members pay an average of $4,500 per year to license music, or 0.5% of the average U.S. small restaurant’s total annual sales.

“This may not seem like a large amount, but for an industry that runs on an average pre-tax margin of 3%-5%, this cost is significant, especially since operators don’t clearly understand what they get for this particular investment aside from avoiding the very legitimate threat of a business-ending lawsuit,” the association wrote in public comments to the Copyright Office.

The American Hotel & Lodging Assn. said the mushrooming number of PROs has led to “significant increases in both financial and administrative burdens.” It gave an example of one “major global hotel chain” that reported the cost per hotel for PRO license fees rose by about 200% from 2021-25, with some hotels seeing increases of 400% or more.

A large hotel that hosts occasional live music events could be paying a single PRO $5,000 to $20,000 a year. If it’s paying all of the major PROs, it could be incurring as much as $80,000 in fees, according to the association.

BMI said its licensing fees have remained “relatively steady over the years” and are based on objective criteria that apply equally to all similar businesses. Fees for individual bars and restaurants start at just over $1 a day, according to BMI. Other factors that go into licensing fees include the occupancy rate, and the type of music being played — live, DJed or recorded, for example.

Songwriters’ livelihoods

In the 1917 Supreme Court case that delivered Herbert his victory over Shanley’s, Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote: “If music did not pay, it would be given up.”  He wasn’t only referring to the songwriters, but also to the venues themselves and addressing whether music helped generate revenue. The ruling was a win for Herbert personally but also for ASCAP, which he had helped found, and established the royalty payment system that’s largely still in use today.

A spokesperson for ASCAP said an increase in fees paid to songwriters by venues is an appropriate and inevitable outcome of a growing market. The organization’s musical repertoires have grown exponentially over the years to include tens of millions of works, giving music users more music and more choice, the spokesperson said. ASCAP says about 90 cents of every dollar it collects from licensees is made available for distribution to its members as royalties.

“Licensees are seeking more regulation of PROs because they want to pay songwriters less,” ASCAP Chief Executive Elizabeth Matthews said in a statement to Bloomberg. “If transparency, efficiency and innovation are the goals, more free market competition among PROs is the answer— not unnecessary government intervention.”

Songwriters depend on PROs for their livelihoods, especially in the streaming era. Many individual songwriters wrote to the Copyright Office in defense of the PRO system, expressing concern that government regulation would only diminish their hard-won earnings.

“Every royalty payment I receive represents not just compensation for my work, but my ability to continue creating music that enhances these very businesses,” wrote Joseph Trapanese, a composer who has created scores for film and TV.

Performance royalties make up about half of total publishing revenue, which is collected by PROs and dispersed to songwriters, according to the National Music Publishers’ Assn. Last year, only about 5% of songwriters’ earnings came from bars, restaurants and other venues, a figure that is “significantly undervalued,” according to NMPA executive vice president and General Counsel Danielle Aguirre.

“There is a substantial opportunity for growth here,” she said, speaking at the group’s annual meeting in June.

The organization set a goal to significantly increase that money over the next year, likely by enforcing licensing requirements.

Several establishment owners equated the PRO’s efforts to collect fees to a mob-like shakedown, citing aggressive on-site confrontations and threatening letters.

BMI said it spends a lot of time trying to educate business owners on the value that music brings to their establishment, federal copyright law requirements and the importance of maintaining a music license.

Lawsuits are always a last resort, a spokesperson said, which is why BMI spends sometimes years on educational outreach. If those efforts are ignored, however, an in-person visit might occur, and BMI may take legal action.

Opaque, bureaucratic

Despite their differences, songwriters and businesses agree that the current system is opaque and bureaucratic and could serve both sides better.

Businesses complain about the lack of a comprehensive database of songs and the fact that there is no easy system for reporting which songs they’ve played. Meanwhile, songwriters claim that the sheer volume of music and businesses throughout the U.S. makes it hard to track where and when their work is played and to know whether they’ve been properly compensated.

“What’s really being called to question is, is this system working accurately—is the money that should be finding its way to the songwriters’ pockets finding its way in an efficient manner?” said George Howard, a professor at Berklee College of Music. “And the answer is ‘no.’ There’s no excuse for that with the level of technology we have today.”

BMI and ASCAP joined forces in 2020 to launch Songview, a free digital database showing copyright ownership and administration shares for more than 20 million works. The two PROs are exploring including GMR and SESAC, which would add even more songs to the platform.

Some of the complaints about the PRO licensing system go back decades. Michael Dorf, a producer and founder of the legendary Manhattan music club The Knitting Factory, has faced off with PROs numerous times over his 30-some years as a venue operator. In the 1990s, he signed singer-songwriters who performed at his club to his publishing company and submitted their setlists to the PROs, assuming he and his acts would reap the resulting royalties from their performances.

But no money came in

“We didn’t receive one penny,” Dorf, who’s also the founder and chief executive officer of City Winery, said in an interview. “To me, there is a cost of doing business, and we want to have the artists and the songwriters properly paid — we love that. What’s simply frustrating is to pay money and know it’s not going to the reason why it’s being collected.”

Caleb Shreve, a songwriter and producer who’s worked with the likes of Jennifer Lopez and is also chief executive at Killphonic Rights, a rights collection organization, said he hears music he has produced “all the time in yoga spots and bars, and I’ve never seen them on publishing statements.” Many songwriters are convinced the current system favors the biggest artists at the expense of middle-tier and emerging songwriters. Because of the blanket licensing system, BMI and ASCAP don’t track individual song use by those licensees and instead rely on proxy data, like what’s popular on the radio or through streaming platforms, to divvy up those collected fees.

Sometimes radio hits mimic what’s played in an arena, restaurant or bar, but not always.

ASCAP said it tracks trillions of performances every year across all media platforms and only uses sample surveys or proxy data when obtaining actual performance data isn’t feasible or is cost prohibitive.

Technology could be a way to solve the current issues without regulation. London-based Audoo is one company leading the way.

Founded by musician Ryan Edwards in 2018 after he heard his music being played in a department store and discovered he wasn’t getting paid for it, the growing startup uses proprietary listening devices it places in cafes, gyms and other public venues to recognize and log songs. It uploads the data to the cloud, ensuring every artist — not just the chart toppers — receives compensation for their work.

The company has attracted investment from music icons including Elton John and Adele, and its devices are used by PROs in the U.K. and Australia. It made its first foray into the US earlier this year, placing listening devices in about 180 establishments around the Denver area in a test run.The collected data underscored that what’s played in public places doesn’t necessarily mirror what’s on the popular playlists or radio and streaming platforms. Edwards likens the idea of using proxies to political polling — directionally helpful but not precise.

Audoo found that 77,000 unique tracks were played around Denver over two months, split among 26,000 artists, according to data viewed by Bloomberg News. On average, only 6.6% of the top-40 songs played in the venues also appeared on Billboard’s top radio-play chart.

In markets where Audoo has partnered with venues, Edwards said business owners have been proud to support particular songwriters and the music business writ large.

“All of a sudden it went from a push-and-pull of, ‘Why do I owe you money?’ to, ‘OK, I can understand music is funding the people who create,’” Edwards said.

Carman and Soni write for Bloomberg.

Source link

Three Ryanair fees you need to know about before holidays abroad in 2025

The Mirror has delved into three key Ryanair rules to be aware of before heading on that summer trip abroad

Passengers waiting in line and boarding a Ryanair low cost airline airplane at London Stansted Airport in the UK
Ryanair is among many airlines to impose fees in certain situations(Image: NurPhoto via Getty Images)

It’s no secret that Ryanair is among the UK’s most popular airlines. In the past year, it carried 200 million passengers, a first for any European airline within that period.

With more Brits expected to fly in summer 2025, it is important to stay up to date with the budget airline’s latest travel policies. Even small oversights could lead to fees or penalties before your trip.

Below, the Mirror has delved into three key lesser-known fines to be aware of. While many of these penalties are not unique to Ryanair, being aware of them can assist in your holiday planning.

A Ryanair airline plane at Adolfo Suarez Madrid-Barajas airport, Jan. 2, 2024, in Madrid, Spain
Various Ryanair fees are listed on its website (Image: Europa Press via Getty Images)

1. Check-in fee at Ryanair

Travellers who currently opt to check in at Ryanair’s airport desk are subject to a £55/€55 fee to ‘cover the extra cost’. If the flight is departing from Spain, this will cost £30/€30.

Instead, passengers are encouraged to check in for their flights using the Ryanair app or website before reaching the airport. Anyone who has pre-reserved a seat can check in up to 60 days before a scheduled departure, while others may check in during the 24 hours before a flight. Generally, check-in closes two hours before departure.

Besides this, it’s also essential to know that anyone who has checked in but cannot present a boarding pass when arriving at the airport may need to pay a reissue fee at the airport desk. This is usually £20/€20 per passenger.

READ MORE: ‘I visited the Maldives on a budget – I spent under £50 on my first day’READ MORE: Couple find ‘Maldives of Scotland’ beach after taking detour on hiking holiday

If you’d like to check in online with Ryanair, follow these steps:

  1. Visit Ryanair.com or access the Ryanair app on your device.
  2. Log in to your existing account or create a new one if needed.
  3. Click on the ‘Check-in’ option.
  4. Adhere to the on-screen instructions and input the required details from your travel documents.
  5. Once check-in is complete, either print out your boarding pass or save it to your mobile device for easy access.

2. Name change fee Ryanair rules

The ‘name change fee’ is charged to anyone who needs to update their reservation’s name. This is especially relevant if you are transferring flights to someone else, as you can modify the details online up until the day before your flight. While making these changes will cost £115/€115 online, the fee can bump up to £160/€160 if an agent is contacted to process the alterations.

Ryanair’s guidelines stipulate: “Full name changes can be made online up to 24 hours before scheduled departure, or by contacting us or at the airport up to two hours before scheduled departure subject to a fee, see our table of fees. The fee will be higher if you contact us and changes will be made through our Customer Service Team.”

Importantly, you won’t be charged if your booking was made under a maiden or married name that has already been updated on your passport before your flight. Additionally, passengers can change their first or last name once free of charge within 48 hours of booking.

Ryanair also allows passengers to correct up to three characters per name free of charge, as long as the correction is made at least 48 hours before the scheduled flight. There is no need to include middle names or double-barrelled surnames when booking.

Travellers who have already checked in for their flight must contact Ryanair to be ‘unchecked’, enabling them to modify their booking through the Ryanair app or website.

Shot from above of an anonymous woman packing things in her suitcase on the bed.
Ryanair passengers can check in up to 60 days before a scheduled departure (stock image)(Image: Getty Images)

READ MORE: ‘Fairytale’ beach just 2 hours from London with hidden caves unveiled at low tideREAD MORE: Evening habit linked to higher diabetes and heart disease risks

3. Missed departure fee Ryanair rules

Known as the ‘missed departure fee’, this £100/€100 charge penalises travellers who arrive late at the airport. The budget airline’s website states that it also applies to passengers who arrive after their flight has departed and want to be rebooked on a later flight.

“Only available at less than 40 mins before and up to 1 hour after flight departure time,” Ryanair’s site reads. “Also available to customers who arrive at the ticket desk up to an hour after their flight departure to move to the next available flight. The fee is charged per passenger per sector.”

Even passengers who arrive at the airport before the 40-minute pre-flight deadline might face an additional charge.

For more information on Ryanair’s fees and policies, visit its website.

Get all the hottest shopping deals, cash saving tips and money news straight to your phone by joining our new WhatsApp Community – The Money Saving Club. Just click this link to join https://crnch.it/eutplxS1

We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice here https://crnch.it/jeQqC872

Source link

Holiday warning for Brits as easy pool mistake could mean you pay hefty fees

Brits on holidays this summer have been warned not to make an easy poolside mistake or they could risk facing some pretty hefty fees if things go wrong

Brits have been warned of an easy poolside mistake they could make
Brits have been warned of an easy poolside mistake they could make(Image: Getty Images)

There’s nothing quite like cooling off in the pool after basking in the sunshine while on holiday. However, Brits are being warned to stay vigilant if they step away from their sunlounger, or they could risk some hefty fees.

A travel insurance expert has warned that there are some easy mistakes we all make that quickly invalidate your travel insurance, meaning that if things do go wrong it’s likely your claim will be rejected.

One of those is stepping away from your bag, even if you can see it from the pool and feel like your surroundings are fairly secure.

“Stepping away from your bag for even a few minutes can invalidate your claim,” warns Niraj Mamtora, Director at Forum Insurance. “People think a quick dip or a trip to the bar is harmless, but from an insurance perspective, you’ve left those items unguarded. That’s classed as negligence. Most policies will state clearly that unattended belongings in public areas are not covered, regardless of how short the time or how secure you felt.”

A view of a beach with sun loungers and parasols
If you’re going to leave your bag behind, keep valuables locked in your hotel safe(Image: Getty Images)

READ MORE: Brit couple furious over ‘unfair’ sunbed rules after hotel issues stern warningREAD MORE: Europe’s ‘sunniest beach’ has golden sands, crystal waters and flights from £17.99

It’s not just about insurance either. Hotels are increasingly cracking down on people who leave their belongings unattended for a few hours, in a bid to fight back against sunbed wars. This has included introducing time limits on how long staff will leave an unattended lounger before picking up the belongings and taking them to reception, where holidaymakers can retrieve them.

‘Sunbed wars’ see people frantically rushing in the early hours of the morning to leave their towels on sunbeds to claim these for the day. However, tensions rise when people do this but don’t return for hours at a time, leaving others unable to enjoy the pool despite there being empty beds.

READ MORE: Sleep expert reveals when you should try to stay awake on flights to beat jet lagREAD MORE: Holiday warning for Brits as selfie mistake could land you with £100,000 fine

Just recently, holidaymakers were spotted using a sneaky tactic before the pool staff had even laid out the loungers, with other tourists slamming the “pathetic” behaviour. Meanwhile, one British couple was recently livid when they returned to a stern warning from hotel staff after they’d left their loungers for half an hour, claiming that other holidaymakers had been away from their sunbeds for longer but not received any backlash.

If you are going to step away from your sun lounger, you may want to leave your valuables back in your room – but even then, Niraj warns that you’ll want to make sure they’re in the safe.

“Valuables not stored in a locked safe are rarely covered,” explains the insurance expert. “If you leave your passport, jewellery, or expensive tech out on the bedside table or tucked into a suitcase, and they’re taken, your insurer may argue you failed to secure them properly.

“The policy wording often requires that high-value items be locked in a hotel safe when not in use. It’s a small effort that makes a big difference to whether you’re covered.”

Have you had issues with sunbed wars on your holiday? Email us at [email protected].

Source link