million

After Gov. Gavin Newsom announced this week that the U.S. Department of Justice may be investigating his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, media and pundits pounced on millions in charity payments he has solicited for nonprofits, including ones she is involved in.

Those donations, known as “behested payments,” aren’t illegal in California, but, long before Newsom started asking for them, many have found them unsavory — with good cause. A behest, after all, is by definition a command or at least a strong suggestion.

Anytime a politician is commanding money, regardless of the purpose, there is at least the appearance that the giver — Meta, Google, Blue Shield for example — may expect something in return.

It may seem absurd that the Trump administration could be investigating Newsom for questionable ethics, when Trump has hawked everything from crypto-coins to sneakers from the Oval Office. But the problem Newsom now faces is that behested payments are actually skeevy, and legal or not, they make an excellent target for pummeling the presidential contender. Especially because some of the charities are tied to his wife.

“The Newsom case has blown it wide open, but this has been an issue for years,” Sean McMorris told me. He’s the transparency, ethics and accountability program manager at Common Cause, a nonpartisan organization that has been raising alarms over behested payments for more than a decade.

McMorris said that while these payments don’t violate any laws, they are “ripe for abuse” because companies and people likely aren’t ponying up cash just to be good citizens. If you or I called up PG&E and asked them to give a few million to our favorite cause, I doubt we’d have much luck, even if it involved kittens, puppies or small children in need.

The entire system, McMorris points out, “doesn’t really work unless you’re shaking down people who you know need things from you as a politician.”

Jerry Brown used behested payments to get millions for charter schools he supported. Lesser luminaries such as mayors (including Antonio Villaraigosa, Eric Garcetti and Karen Bass, just to name the last three in L.A.) have used them for all kinds of stuff from jobs programs to fixing up official residences.

And it’s far from a Democratic thing. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, used them to pay for travel and after-school programs. Republican James Gallagher, who recently won a congressional seat, used them to fund computers for schools while he was in the state Legislature. Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones has raised millions, including helping to get $800,000 in donations to fund a replica of a historic ship for the maritime museum in his San Diego district.

Trump himself could be considered king of behested payments, with his corporate-paid ballroom and birthday bash.

Literally, folks, find me a politician with an itty-bitty bit of clout, and I’ll show you a trail of behested payments stretching through their pet projects. For that reason alone, it’s unlikely that California legislators will take any action to curb them, especially now when doing so would appear as a criticism to Newsom and Democrats in general.

And, to be fair, behested payments can do a lot of good. Newsom supercharged behested payments during the pandemic, raising hundreds of millions for programs to get Californians through that social disaster.

For that reason and others, not all experts find them terribly troubling. Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor with an expertise in election and governance issues, points out that money in politics is nothing new and at least behested payments are (mostly) required to be acknowledged. Anything over $5,000 and the politician has to report it to the California Fair Political Practices Commission, which keeps a public database.

That makes behested payments far more transparent than, say, dark money donations to a mysterious political action committee. And at least the money is going to a good cause, be it historical ships or computers for kids.

“I actually don’t think that they’re the evil mechanism that other people do,” Levinson said. “I mean, my feeling is like, let’s live in reality, right? People are going to want to give as much money to or close to powerful people as possible, and I think that we have a choice between money going to independent expenditure groups or political committees or going to nonprofits.”

So behested payments in and of themselves might not be much of a headache for Newsom. But some of the payments Newsom solicited went to nonprofits Siebel Newsom is involved with, and which have paid her a salary. That proximity is uncomfortable for many of us. There is no distinction for a behest given to a charity with direct ties to the politician, but maybe there should be.

Still, salaries being paid by behested payments also aren’t illegal, and it’s been done before, even by Newsom. Villaraigosa was paid through behested funds for his work as the state “infrastructure czar” back in 2022. Bass considered paying former L.A. Police Commissioner Steve Soboroff through behested-funded nonprofits for his work after the recent fires before public scrutiny pushed him to forgo the funds.

None of that is to say the Newsoms are off the hook in a federal investigation. Newsom’s office said that along with the FBI, agents from the IRS have been knocking on doors and asking questions. All of us — probably the Newsoms included — will just have to wait to see if the fine-tooth combs of the feds pick up any dirt.

If there is any lesson to be learned at this point, it’s about ambition and hubris. Behested payments are easy money for California politicians and business as usual — everyone does it. But maybe they shouldn’t. It’s not black or white.

Newsom is learning quickly what it means to have a powerful enemy like Trump, one who has shown he will use the full power of the American government for his own purposes. One who can tip the scales and slide white to gray and gray to felony.

Federal investigators do not like to come up empty-handed, and the wink-wink nature of behested payments creates just that kind of ambiguity that provides reasonable cause for investigation — a self-inflicted vulnerability that surely has every California politician nervous.

Paint is peeling and algae is blooming less than two weeks after the $14 million renovation of DC’s Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. US President Donald Trump promised to ‘fix’ the landmark, but it’s been plagued with problems despite the multi-million dollar overhaul.

A controversial proposal to tax California billionaires to fund healthcare has tenatively qualified for the November ballot, setting the stage for a more intense and expensive battle over whether the state should squeeze the ultra-rich.

Supporters say the proposed tax is crucial to compensate for federal healthcare funding cuts, approved by President Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress, that will harm millions of the state’s most vulnerable residents.

In April, supporters of the billionaire tax submitted nearly 1.6 million signatures, roughly double the number needed to qualify. The California secretary of state’s office on Wednesday declared that enough valid signatures were submitted. The initiative will officially qualify for the Nov. 3 ballot on June 25 unless the proponents withdraw it beforehand.

The initiative would impose a one-time tax of up to 5% on taxpayers and trusts with assets valued at more than $1 billion, with some exceptions, such as property. The levy could be paid over five years. Ninety percent of the revenue would fund healthcare programs, and the remaining funds would be spent on food assistance and education programs. The proposal would cost the state’s richest residents about $100 billion if a majority of voters support it.

Opponents of the measure say the proposal is an ineffective attempt to address the long-term effects of the healthcare cuts and would destroy California’s economy and budget.

The state budget in California is already largely dependent on income taxes paid by its highest earners. Because of that, revenues are prone to volatility, hinging on capital gains from investments, bonuses to executives and windfalls from new stock offerings, and are notoriously difficult for the state to predict.

The proposal already triggered a fierce debate, accentuating the divide between the rich and poor in a state that’s expensive to live in.

The Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West and other supporters of the billionaire tax say that it would raise $100 billion, offsetting federal funding cuts to healthcare as well as funding education and state food assistance.

But supporters face strong opposition from billionaires with deep pockets. Tech executives and other business leaders oppose the idea and have threatened to move to other states. Opponents say taxing billionaires would harm California’s economy while not addressing underlying financial issues.

The proposal also has divided politicians within the Democratic Party. California Gov. Gavin Newsom spoke out against the billionaire tax, expressing fears that billionaires would move out of the state. But U.S. lawmakers such as California Rep. Ro Khanna and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders have backed a billionaire tax, saying the rich should pay their fair share to fund essential services.

Business executives have already poured millions of dollars into groups that oppose the billionaire tax or are promoting alternative solutions to wealth inequality.

Tech executives, venture capitalists and business leaders have donated roughly $118 million to a nonprofit called Building a Better California, according to data on the secretary of state’s website. Most of the funding comes from Google co-founder Sergey Brin, who has given more than $82 million to the group. Executives from DoorDash, Ripple, Stripe and other companies also have contributed.

The group says it supports policies such as expanding access to affordable housing, protecting innovation, requiring government transparency and securing more stable education funding.

PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel has contributed $3 million to the California Business Roundtable, which opposes the tax. Former Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt donated $1 million to that group as well.

California would probably collect tens of billions of dollars from the wealth tax if it passed, but it could also lose other tax revenue, a December letter from the state legislative analyst’s office said. The office also mentioned that it’s tough to predict the exact amount the state would collect because of factors that can affect a billionaire’s wealth such as fluctuating stock prices.

California billionaires who were residents of the state as of Jan. 1 would be affected by the ballot measure if it passes. Some wealthy residents announced plans to moves out of state. On Dec. 31, venture capitalist David Sacks announced that he was opening an office in Austin, Texas, the same day Thiel publicized his firm had opened a new office in Miami.

As soon as enough votes were counted to officially knock Tom Steyer out of the California governor’s race, the anti-billionaire schadenfreude kicked in.

Social media and legacy media, conservative and liberal, all seemed to have a rare melding of the minds, delivering endless variations of, “How dare he try to buy elected office! We showed him.”

“I hope you received the message from California that a power-hungry communist billionaire cannot buy the state!” wrote one detractor on social media. “How much money did you waste spamming Californians? Do you know how many hundreds of millions of dollars you wasted?”

“What a waste,” screamed a New York Times headline, slamming Steyer for not donating that money directly to building houses or funding Planned Parenthood — one-off actions that prop up broken systems instead of changing them.

I get it.

In an age when income inequality is reaching serf-lord levels, hating the rich seems easy and reasonable. You could take several zeros off the $200 million Steyer spent on his campaign and it would still be more than most of us make in a lifetime. That’s a rage-inducing reality for many, if not most of us, for whom pairing a full tank of gas with a restaurant dinner seems like careless luxury these days.

I’m not here to defend the nine-zeroes class. But maybe we should take a beat and make sure our outrage is working for us, not against us. While Steyer has spent the last few months advocating for universal healthcare, better pay and protections for workers, and putting curbs on out-of-control corporations from the energy sector to AI, other billionaires have spent that time actively undermining democracy and our financial system. Heck, some even seem to be undermining humanity. Why aren’t we raging at them?

Take, for example, a certain billionaire who seemingly would prefer to be a trillionaire: Elon Musk.

Last week, his SpaceX held an IPO in which somehow the rules of Wall Street meant to protect small investors and pension plans were set aside to his benefit. Like it or not, if you hold a public pension or a 401(k) in America that uses index funds (which most do) you will likely be an investor in his unproven and possibly risky business. I’m sure that will work out fine.

Or consider the hundreds of millions of dollars right-wing AI and surveillance-company billionaires, some Californians, are dumping into political races across the country right now to ensure that their dangerous and unpredictable technologies are not regulated, or regulated in largely meaningless ways. It’s a situation so dire that one wealthy insider last week warned in his own op-ed that if his former colleagues are successful, “It could concentrate economic power in ways that would make the Gilded Age look quaint.”

Then there’s our president, king of self-enrichment, whose wealth has skyrocketed to more than $6 billion during his time in office. Much of that moola is in opaque cryptocurrency holdings, an industry he has championed as his fortunes in it have increased.

But don’t think Trump is in it only for himself: He’s enriching his family, too.

His daughter Ivanka recently made her own “eat cake” headlines over an alleged $1.5-billion project that would convert an uninhabited Albanian island into a luxury resort. The Albanians are so mad, they’ve been protesting in the streets for nearly two weeks. Meanwhile, her brothers have coat-tailed off their dad’s crypto-ventures to make their own fortunes, as other investors suffered losses.

Those are our individual billionaires, never mind the corporations, who can dump as much money as they want into our politics thanks to the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizen’s United decision. In 2025, the oil and gas industry in California, led by Chevron and the Western States Petroleum Assn., spent about $34 million on lobbying. Not to be outdone, the Golden State’s water and electricity interests, including PG&E, spent about $35 million to bend politics to their will.

But sure, hate the goofy guy in the vintage Nikes pointing all this out.

“I’m proud of the enemies we made,” Steyer said in his concession. “In this race, those corporations revealed that they see a government that puts working people first as an existential threat — even when proposed by a billionaire. By spending $55 million — the most ever against a single candidate in a California primary — they showed the lengths they would go to in order to protect a status quo that only serves them and their profits.”

I don’t like the amount of money in our political system either, but the truth is, it’s there. And worse, the majority of those who have it seem intent on diminishing the political and economic power of those who don’t.

We are increasingly moving toward a country where the well-being of the majority of people will depend on the largesse of the few — Silicon Valley’s tech industry now talks about a universal basic income as a great boon for the coming mass unemployment they are creating.

But is existence off a charity-pittance really what we want for ourselves and our children? Do we really want these ultra-wealthy overlords to use their money unchecked to make decisions that will shape our future, diminish our rights and ultimately leave us without the power to fight back?

If Steyer wants to use his money to join this battle to keep power by the people and for the people, then the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Like it or not, us average worker bees need money to fight money. In this age when animus eats discernment like the rich eat caviar, the luxury we really can’t afford is hating the good guys just because it’s easy — even if they’re billionaires.

The Washington National Opera filed a lawsuit on Thursday that demands more than $17 million from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The opera company claims it is owed millions in donations that have been withheld.

The lawsuit claims that after the opera company and the Kennedy Center parted ways in January, center officials have not returned more than $17 million in gifts and donations that belong to the opera company. The lawsuit lists the federal government as a defendant because the Kennedy Center was established by Congress.

According to the suit, the opera company and the Kennedy Center had a longstanding contract in which WNO produced its operas at the Kennedy Center, which in return, provided a number of services and other support for the opera company including managing its donations.

In late 2025, after approximately 15 years of affiliation, the suit claims that the Kennedy Center stopped performing the obligations of their agreement, which included marketing, fundraising and administrative support, as well as timely reporting on the growth of the opera company’s funds. When the opera company requested the Kennedy Center remedy the issue, center officials asked to sever ties.

“Five months have now passed since the termination of the affiliation, and the Kennedy Center still has not returned the funds to WNO,” reads the suit. “To the contrary, according to the Kennedy Center’s Chief Financial Officer, the Kennedy Center has put a significant portion of WNO’s money at risk by using it to collateralize the Kennedy Center’s line of credit.”

In an emailed statement responding to the lawsuit, Roma Daravi, a spokeswoman for the Kennedy Center, told The Times that the contract between the opera house and the center financially burdened the center for more than a decade. The statement claimed that taking into account the company’s endowment, an external accounting firm calculated that the opera company had “accumulated a $72 million deficit to the center” between 2011 and 2026.

“The Center has acted transparently and in the best interests of the public throughout this process,” the statement reads. “This lawsuit is meritless, and we plan to pursue a countersuit to defend the institution.”

The legal action comes during a tumultuous time for the Kennedy Center. Last year, President Trump fired the board and appointed himself chairman of the Kennedy Center.

In December, President Trump’s name was installed on the exterior of the center the day after his handpicked board of trustees voted to change the institution’s name to the “Trump-Kennedy Center.” Last month, a federal judge ordered President Trump’s name to be removed from the exterior of the building within two weeks and a halt to the Trump administration’s planned two-year closure of the venue.

On Friday, the court-ordered deadline for removing his name sparked widespread interest and crowds gathered outside the center. A live cam was also placed near the structure.

The Times arts editor Jessica Gelt contributed to this report.

Embattled reality TV personalities Todd and Julie Chrisley are suing an Atlanta law firm and one of its attorneys, alleging that legal mistakes led to the couple’s conviction.

The lawsuit, filed June 5 in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, alleges that Atlanta-based Balch & Bingham LLP and attorney Chris Anulewicz “put their own interests ahead of their clients’ lives” by taking on the couple’s case and appointing Anulewicz as the lead, which they say meant “money, publicity, and the kind of high-profile notoriety that brings in business.”

According to the Chrisleys, Anulewicz “had no meaningful criminal defense experience,” and “Balch knew this — or should have.” They also claim that while representing them, Anulewicz steered them into a $75,000 investment in his brother-in-law’s food truck business.

The lawsuit claims that the couple’s conviction and subsequent federal prison sentence were the result of an “unlawful, warrantless search of the Chrisleys’ warehouse” by the Georgia Department of Revenue, and that Anulewicz missed a deadline to suppress derivative evidence that was ultimately used as the foundation of the prosecution’s case.

“That illegal search launched the entire federal case,” reads the lawsuit. “The district court agreed the search was illegal and suppressed the physical documents. But Anulewicz — operating without supervision from Balch — never moved to suppress the derivative evidence: the emails, bank records, and financial documents that federal agents obtained because of what they learned from the illegal search.”

The couple is seeking $25 million in damages, claiming that because their team didn’t have the documents suppressed, they were convicted on every count.

“They served time in federal prison,” reads the suit. “They were separated from each other and from their children. They lost their television show and endorsement deals, costing them more than $25 million in income. Their reputations were destroyed. They have spent millions more in appeals and post-conviction proceedings, all of it an attempt to undo harm that a single timely motion would have prevented.”

In 2022, an Atlanta court found the “Chrisley Knows Best” couple guilty on charges of conspiracy to commit bank fraud, bank fraud, conspiracy to defraud the United States and tax fraud. Julie Chrisley was also charged with wire fraud and obstruction of justice.

Todd Chrisley received a 12-year sentence, along with 16 months’ probation, while his wife was sentenced to seven years in prison and 16 months’ probation.

In 2024, the Chrisleys’ daughter, Savannah, appealed to President Trump to free her mom and dad. During the Republican National Convention, she gave a speech about the “rogue prosecutors” who locked up her parents.

Last year, Trump granted the reality stars a full pardon.

Jay V. Surgent, an attorney who represents Todd and Julie Chrisley, said in a statement to The Times that the reality stars “have correctly been pardoned by President Trump.” He alleged that Georgia officials violated the “Chrisley Knows Best” stars’ constitutional rights due to their notoriety and criticized local authorities’ “improper seizure of evidence.”

Times staff writer Alexandra Del Rosario contributed to this report.

Californians couldn’t escape billionaire Tom Steyer’s political ads — during newscasts, sitcoms, or sporting events; on streaming services, YouTube, influencers’ social media feeds, or their mailboxes. Even the Puppy Bowl.

Yet despite spending a record-shattering $216 million of his wealth on his run for governor, the Democrat failed to win enough votes in last week’s primary to advance to the November general election to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom.

“Money isn’t everything, even though it obviously helps,” said Andrea Godfrey Flynn, a marketing professor at the University of San Diego. “It boosted Steyer way up. … But there are so many other factors at play that it may not have been enough.”

Steyer, a hedge fund co-founder turned environmental warrior, polled at 1% shortly before he entered the governor’s race in November, according to a survey by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies that was co-sponsored by the Los Angeles Times.

He climbed in subsequent polls, hitting 19% in the same poll shortly before the June 2 primary, putting Steyer in contention for winning one of the top two spots in the contest that would allow him to advance to the November election. But then he hit a ceiling, and on Tuesday, it became official that he failed to advance.

Steyer emailed supporters Tuesday expressing gratitude for their efforts backing his campaign, endorsements and votes.

“Together, we fought for a California that belongs to the people who keep it running every day, and we insisted that they do not have to settle for a system that protects corporate profits at the expense of working people,” he wrote. “I’m proud of how we never compromised our values or lowered our sights for what California can and should be.”

He pointed with pride at major corporations such as Chevron and Meta spending heavily to oppose his bid, and said their tens of millions of dollars spent attacking him shows the flaws in the electoral system. And he acknowledged that may be part of the reason some voters were skeptical of voting for a billionaire.

“I’m proud of the enemies we made,” Steyer said. “This campaign proved that business-as-usual depends on politics-as-usual, and there is no going back. We must continue to fight for a system where democracy serves Californians, not corporations — and where you do not have to be a billionaire to run on single-payer, or on breaking up monopolies, or on calling out a corrupt system when you see it. Because people are fed up with a system rigged to benefit billionaires and leave them behind.”

As of Tuesday evening, Steyer had received more than 1.9 million votes of the more than 9 million cast, lagging behind the two candidates who will appear on the November ballot: Republican Steve Hilton, a former Fox News commentator, and Democrat Xavier Becerra, a longtime elected official who most recently served in President Biden’s cabinet. Steyer was trailing Hilton, the second-place finisher, by just over 200,000 votes.

Steyer immediately endorsed Becerra, whom he had relentlessly attacked in the closing weeks of the campaign as beholden to corporations with business in front of the governor.

California has a history of unsuccessful self-funders. Former Northwest Airlines co-chairman Al Checchi spent more than $40 million of his money on an unsuccessful gubernatorial primary campaign in 1998, which broke records at the time.

More than a decade later, former EBay chief Meg Whitman spent $144 million of her wealth on her bid to become California’s governor, setting a new national record for spending on a state election. She won the GOP nomination but lost in the general election.

This year’s gubernatorial contest is not the first time Steyer has spent an inordinate sum seeking office. In 2020, he spent $342 million on a brief, unsuccessful presidential campaign.

Sheri Sadler, a veteran Los Angeles-based Democratic media buyer, said Steyer’s 2026 gubernatorial deluge was notable.

“I literally saw his spots ad nauseam,” she said. “They left almost no stone unturned.”

Sadler worked for Steyer in the final weeks of his presidential bid and scheduled $50 million of billionaire Rick Caruso’s money on ads during his unsuccessful 2022 Los Angeles mayoral campaign.

She believes that Steyer hit a ceiling because voters who are bombarded by ads eventually feel that the candidate is trying to purchase their affection.

“It’s one thing to give me a message I can resonate with. If they’re just trying to buy my vote, that feels different to me,” she said, adding that Steyer’s wealth undermined his platform, which included support for raising taxes on billionaires. “That’s my gut. And I feel like that’s what happened to us on Caruso and possibly why he didn’t run” for governor this year.

Steyer, 68, made his fortune founding a hedge fund that included investments in fossil fuels, private prisons and other businesses that are controversial among Democrats. He told voters that he walked away from the firm 14 years ago, leaving an enormous amount of money on the table, because it did not align with his morals. Steyer adds that he and his wife have pledged to give away most of their wealth before they die.

And unlike many wealthy self-funders, Steyer did not leap into a campaign as a political neophyte who assumed their business skills would translate into being an effective elected official.

Steyer and his wife, Kat Taylor, are longtime donors to Democratic candidates, but for well over a decade, they have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on liberal causes such as fighting climate change, mobilizing young voters, urging the impeachment of President Trump, opposing an effort by oil companies to suspend California environmental standards, increasing the state cigarette tax and supporting last year’s redrawing of the state’s congressional districts to counter Trump.

Darry Sragow, a veteran Democratic strategist who advised Checchi, said that Steyer’s focus on such causes had the potential to be meaningful to voters who are often skeptical about the sincerity and motives of rich candidates.

“Tom Steyer has done a good job in that respect, because if you’re going to overcome that skepticism, it’s very helpful for the candidate to show that he or she has actually been involved in the world of public policy and politics for an extended period,” and Steyer has, Sragow said.

Assemblyman Isaac G. Bryan (D-Los Angeles), who endorsed Steyer, argued that he promoted proposals that were against his personal interests, such as the proposed billionaire’s tax that is expected to appear on the November ballot.

“Interestingly enough, Tom Steyer is also the only candidate who’s talked about campaign finance reform and wanting to get money out of politics, including his money, to return power to the people and have publicly financed elections,” Bryan said after a Steyer rally near downtown L.A. on May 31.

Former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter and state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond also campaigned on limiting the influence of corporate PAC money in elections, or implementing publicly financed elections in California. Porter often criticized Steyer for running as a “change agent” while spending millions he earned from investments in oil and gas.

“You paid the lowest tax rate on this stage and yet you made the billions that you’re using to fund your campaign off fossil fuels,” she said to Steyer during an April 28 debate in Claremont.

Political experts argue that messages that seem contradictory to a candidate’s background, as well as drowning voters with incessant ads, can be jarring and off-putting to the electorate.

“It can be an overload to voters where they hit that tipping point where they’re no longer interested,” Flynn said.

Despite Steyer’s foundational argument that his wealth meant he was not beholden to anyone, she said voters may be unable to reconcile a billionaire’s ability to understand or empathize about an average Californian’s needs.

“The messaging still is a giant factor,” Flynn said. “I’m curious [about] how believable it came across to voters — can you trust a billionaire to really care about affordability, someone who made money working with business or in business not to care about special interests?”

While Steyer campaigned as a hard-left liberal, he failed to be the top pick for progressives. Steyer had the support of 35% of likely voters who identified as strongly liberal while Becerra was backed by 37%, according to Berkeley’s May poll.

After talking to college Democrats at UCLA on the eve of the primary, Steyer said regardless of what happens in the primary, he will remain politically involved, though he would not run for president in 2028.

“I’m going to keep working on these issues, because I’ve been working full-time on these issues for 14 years,” Steyer said. “There’s no question what I’m going to do. How I do it is a little bit up in the air.”

Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

MoneySavingExpert has shared important safety advice for holidaymakers

MoneySavingExpert (MSE) has issued a travel warning to millions of people. Founded by journalist and broadcaster Martin Lewis, MSE regularly posts consumer advice for Brits. In the latest Money Tips Email, the experts offered advice for anyone booking holidays.

In the email, the team told readers: “Summer is coming, and if you’re booked to go away and haven’t got your insurance yet, you need to do it NOW, today, straight away!” As the experts pointed out, booking travel insurance as soon as you book your holiday offers the maximum protection, including cover if something happens that prevents you from travelling.

Before setting off, it’s also advised to get a Global Health Insurance Card if you’re travelling to Europe. In the alert, MSE revealed that over two million cards are expected to expire this year. As a result, millions could miss out on the benefits if they don’t renew ahead of upcoming holidays.

The UK Global Health Insurance Card enables holidaymakers to access healthcare without paying more than a local resident would while travelling in the European Economic Area.

The NHS explains: “The UK Global Health Insurance Card (GHIC) lets you get necessary state healthcare in the European Economic Area (EEA), and some other countries, on the same basis as a resident of that country. This may be free or it may require a payment equivalent to that which a local resident would pay.

“The UK GHIC has replaced the existing European Health Insurance Card (EHIC). If you have an existing EHIC you can continue to use it until the expiry date on the card. Once it expires, you’ll need to apply for a UK GHIC to replace it.”

While people are advised they should also take out travel insurance, it could help you avoid paying the excess if you need medical treatment during your trip. MSE said: “Going to the EU? Ensure you’ve a valid (free) GHIC/EHIC – over 2m expire this year.

“The ‘Global Health Insurance Card’ (GHIC) and its predecessor, the EHIC, give access to state-run hospitals or GPs, mainly in European countries, for the same price as a local. So if they don’t pay, you don’t either. Over two million expire this year, check yours.”

A UK GHIC is free, and you can apply through the NHS website. The NHS advises avoiding unofficial websites, which may charge an application fee. People can apply for a new card up to nine months before their current card expires.

The NHS says: “You can apply for a UK GHIC if you’re a resident in the UK. You can also add your family members to your application when you apply.”

His 7-6 record at USC in 2024 would go down as the worst mark of Lincoln Riley’s career as a head football coach. But in his third and rockiest year at the helm of the Trojans, Riley was still compensated like one of the kings of the sport.

Riley was paid more than $11.8 million in total compensation during the fiscal year 2024, according to USC’s latest federal tax returns, which were obtained by The Times. That total includes a $100,000 bonus and $10.4 million in base pay, believed to be more than all but three college football coaches that season: Georgia’s Kirby Smart, Clemson’s Dabo Swinney and Ohio State’s Ryan Day. All three have won a national title.

For Riley, his pay in 2024 marks just a slight increase from the 2023 season, when USC paid Riley more than $11.5 million in total compensation. The coach’s base pay increased by $145,143 between fiscal years 2023 and 2024, slightly less than it rose following his debut season in 2022 ($168,000).

At least in 2024, USC only had to pay one football coach, after paying Clay Helton a combined $9 million not to coach over the two previous years.

The school would, however, have to pay up a bit to bring in a new men’s basketball coach.

After Andy Enfield left to coach Southern Methodist after the 2023-24 season, USC shelled out more than $6.1 million total in 2024 to lure coach Eric Musselman from Arkansas, according to the university’s latest federal tax records. One million of that was paid to Arkansas to buy out Musselman’s contract.

That puts Musselman at a reported $5.1 million in total pay and benefits from the school in 2024, according to the school’s tax records. That total likely includes additional costs unique to a coaching change. But altogether, it would have ranked Musselman among the highest-paid coaches in the Big Ten for the 2024-25 season.

Musselman didn’t exactly deliver on that investment during the 2024-25 season, as USC bottomed out during its first Big Ten men’s basketball slate. The Trojans finished 17-18 and 7-13 in the Big Ten.

After including her information in tax forms from the previous year, the university did not disclose compensation figures from 2024 for USC athletic director Jennifer Cohen. Federal tax returns filed last May had credited Cohen with more than $3 million in reportable compensation in her first year on the job, $1 million of which was used to buy out Cohen from her Washington contract.

WASHINGTON — Mismanagement at a massive Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Texas created unsafe conditions that contributed to detainee deaths and suffering even as millions of wasted tax dollars enriched contractors, according to a federal report released Tuesday.

The Government Accountability Office report documents serious problems at Camp East Montana, a sprawling tent facility at Ft. Bliss in El Paso where three detainees have died in a little more than six months. Evidence in one of those deaths, of a 55-year-old Cuban migrant who died in January after being held down by guards, was “missing or destroyed,” the report found.

ICE rushed to open the camp in August before construction was complete and failed to conduct required oversight to ensure detainees were held in sanitary conditions and receiving adequate medical care, according to the report.

The Department of Homeland Security noted that ICE has replaced the contractor running the facility. “This new contractor will allow Camp East Montana to continue abiding by the highest detention standards with the ability to provide more medical care on-site,” said Homeland Security spokesperson Lauren Bis.

The GAO’s findings echo past reporting by the Associated Press and other news outlets about dangerous conditions at Camp East Montana, which quickly became the nation’s largest immigration detention facility.

But the government report also details previously undisclosed incidents, including a detainee escape in October due to what ICE called the contractor’s oversight failure. In January, a security guard lost a loaded firearm inside the facility that was never recovered.

The contractor failed to administer skin tests to screen detainees for tuberculosis, relying on a questionnaire instead, the report said. The inadequate screening allowed a detainee with tuberculosis to be housed with the general population, which later suffered an outbreak.

GAO is an independent, nonpartisan agency in Congress that investigates how federal funds are spent and evaluates whether programs and policies are operating effectively. The office opened its review into Camp East Montana at the request of Democrats in the House and Senate.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois called the report’s findings “damning.”

“We now know even more details of how dangerous and irresponsible the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign truly is,” said Durbin, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, adding that “those detained are experiencing conditions that shock the conscience.”

A rush to build led to an inexperienced contractor

Facing pressure to increase its detention capacity, the Trump administration routed the contract to build Camp East Montana through the Army to speed construction after ICE twice failed to successfully award one. That resulted in the selection of a small, little-known contractor, Acquisition Logistics, for the $1.3-billion deal despite it having no prior experience operating detention facilities and facing what ICE called a “significant learning curve.”

The Army — and later ICE after the camp was transferred to the agency — wasted millions of dollars paying for services it did not need because the contract did not account for fluctuations in the detainee population, the report said.

The Army blew as much as $11.5 million paying for guards, medical services, transportation and meals in the weeks before the camp held detainees. Millions more were wasted because the government was contracted to pay the cost of meals for the camp’s maximum population of 5,000, even when the number of detainees there dropped to around 1,600, the report said.

Facility didn’t initially meet detention standards

The facility did not meet ICE detention standards or the contract’s requirements in several ways when it opened, in part because it had not been inspected as required by ICE policy, the report said. The camp lacked security cameras on the perimeter and had other surveillance blind spots that raised the risk of sexual assaults or escapes.

The camp could not accommodate detainees using wheelchairs and had no showers compliant with the Americans With Disabilities Act, resulting in the disabled being held in medical care rooms.

The recreation area wasn’t available for several days, and after one yard was opened, it wasn’t enough space to provide required time for detainees. The law library, space to meet with attorneys and a visitation area did not open for weeks, resulting in detainees being deprived of legal resources and contact with family and friends, the report found.

The problems persisted as ICE began transporting more detainees there from across the country, the GAO found. While built to house up to 5,000 immigrants for short-term stays, its population has averaged about half of that from October until April, according to ICE’s most recent data.

Missing evidence and other problems

Detainees held at the facility didn’t receive comprehensive health assessments, which meant that those with chronic conditions received substandard care, the report said.

The contractor cleaned the dormitories weekly rather than daily as required, resulting in unsanitary conditions. Some guards offered detainees cookies if they would clean their own rooms. Acquisition Logistics didn’t reply to messages seeking comment.

The GAO report says investigations into the January death of Geraldo Lunas Campos were undermined after “evidence associated with the incident was missing or destroyed.” It did not elaborate. Campos died after he was restrained by guards and an outside autopsy report ruled the death a homicide due to asphyxia. The contractor at the facility did not provide use-of-force and death reports to ICE as required, according to the new report.

An investigation by ICE’s Office of Professional Responsibility into the death is on hold pending a criminal investigation by the FBI.

On Jan. 14, Nicaraguan detainee Victor Manuel Diaz, 36, died of suicide after staff put him in a medical holding room instead of suicide-resistant cell and left him unattended for intervals longer than 15 minutes, the report said. Staff could not see into the room because the contractor had failed to install vision panels that had been requested months earlier, it found.

“These are huge discrepancies in their failure to prevent suicides,” said Diaz family attorney Randall Kallinen, noting that the report strengthens a potential wrongful death claim he’s considering. “They are part of an entire laundry list of problems at Camp East Montana.”

Biesecker and Foley write for the Associated Press. Foley reported from Iowa City, Iowa.

Residents were thrown into despair after a terrorist leader, Jammo Smally, abducted 39 community leaders who had gone to discuss a peace deal with him. The dramatic incident occurred on Sunday, June 7, in the Maradun Local Government Area (LGA) of Zamfara State, North West Nigeria.

Jammo had been sending messages to the leaders in the Magamin Diddi community for over two months, calling for a meeting to discuss the terms of the peace deal as the rainy season approached. The terrorist leader, whose parents live in a hamlet not far from Magamin Diddi, had claimed he was tired of the hostility between his terror group and the community.

Following another invitation a few days after the Islamic Eid al-Kabir celebrations, the traditional and religious leaders decided to meet Jammo and his gang members in the forest. The two parties agreed to meet on Sunday to reach what the community leaders thought would be a peaceful solution to the recurrent attacks on their farms and homes.

“The first thing he asked when we reached there was the whereabouts of the three rifles the Askarawa took away from his boys two months ago,” Malam Aliyu, one of those who went to strike the deal, told HumAngle over the phone on  Monday. He had joined 46 other community leaders to strike the deal. “We were confused at first, because we were told that we would be discussing only a peace deal. We thought that he would ask us to give him money, but the first thing he asked was for his rifles.” 

“Askawara” is a local term for security volunteers of the state-backed Community Protection Guards (CPG) in Zamfara State. Local sources told HumAngle that towards the end of March, terrorists from the Jammo group had a gunfight with the CPG fighters and other vigilante group members, leading to the killing of two terrorists. Three rifles belonging to the terrorists were taken away by the CPG fighters. 

“We didn’t take his guns, but it’s obvious he has made up his mind,” Aliyu said. The terrorist leader released seven community leaders, instructing them to report back to the district head with his demands. He has one condition for the release of the 39 elders: either the rifles are returned, or an equivalent amount of money must be paid to him.

The terrorist leader also set ₦50 million for the peace deal. “He said if we’re still interested in negotiating with him, we should add ₦50 million to the rifles we’re returning. The money is for us to be able to live in peace, go to local markets, and go to our farms,” the community leader said.

Negotiations between terrorists and local communities aiming to establish peace are not uncommon in the ongoing crisis plaguing the northwestern region for over a decade. Typically, these discussions involve communities paying substantial sums to the terrorists under the guise of a peace agreement. However, such negotiations often yield little result, as terrorist attacks continue unabated even after agreements are reached, as seen in various regions of the state.

The Zamfara State government has consistently maintained its stance against negotiating with terrorists. Yazid Abubakar, the Zamfara State Police spokesperson, stated that they have initiated a rescue operation to free the captured individuals. 

“Upon receipt of the report, the Zamfara State Police Command immediately initiated efforts to trace the victims’ whereabouts and secure their safe rescue. Operational assets have been deployed, and security operatives are working on available intelligence to locate the abducted persons,” Yazid Abubakar said in a statement on Monday.

Netflix have updated their viewing figures and it makes for a compelling list of what you should binge next

If you’re looking for the next binge watch to see you through the weekend, Netflix already has you covered.

The streamer has updated its latest viewing figures and it pretty much reads as the new list of recommendations you need. So rather than scrolling through for hours on end, you can make your way through at least one of these titles and it will most likely only take you one sitting.

Not only that but there is something for everyone, including a sci-fi hit, a tense crime thriller and also a heart warming laugh out loud comedy.

The Boroughs

Website Collider call the series a ‘sci-fi masterpiece’ and compare it to a Steven Spielberg movie. They also report that the title managed to accumulate 15 million views in its first 10 days of being available.

It is the most watched Netflix series globally over the last couple of weeks and remains in the UK top 10 at the time of writing. It is set in the sun-drenched expanse of the New Mexico desert and a picturesque retirement community which promises its residents the time of their lives.

But for new arrival Sam Cooper, paradise feels more like a prison. Everything changes when a terrifying night time encounter reveals that something monstrous is stalking the manicured cul-de-sacs.

One review said it is “Stranger Things Meets Thursday Murder Club”. Meanwhile many viewers say they watch it in one sitting. A fan added it “has everything that your next binge-watch needs.”

Nemesis

Coming from the creator of Power, the eight-part series follows two rivals from opposite sides of the law who are at each other’s throats when a daring heist in Los Angeles opens up old wounds. What follows is an exhilarating game of cat-and-mouse as an LAPD cop desperately tries to hunt down a criminal mastermind behind a string of robberies.

One viewer claimed: “Kept me engaged and not sure whose side I was on. Binge watched twice. I need season 2.” Another said: ““Binged in one sitting- very authentic catchy story line. I hope there is a season two.”

While someone else contributed: “This was a masterpiece! The rollercoaster, amount of cliffhangers, and overall writing was top notch!” It has spent three weeks in the global top 10 charts also claiming more than 15 million views on the streamer.

The Four Seasons

One of the more recent additions, the series has just returned for its second season. Co-created by 30 Rock’s Tina Fey and based on the 1980s movie of the same name.

A group of married couples who regularly vacation together throughout the year reunite once again after one of the most difficult times in their relationships. They have new members of the group to contend with as well as some old problems.

It has immediately become the third most watched series across the world among Netflix users. Many fans admit to becoming ‘obsessed’ with it.

One person simply shared on social media: “The Four Seasons” is a must-watch series on Netflix.” Someone else added: “I binged it the day it came out with my man. We’re obsessed!” Another admitted: “I literally started it last night and I’m already on season two. I love it.”

The Witness

This is Netflix’s latest true crime thriller. While the platform have yet to release the official viewing figures, it has immediately surged to the number one spot among UK subscribers.

As a result, it’s expected to compete with the numbers of all the titles already mentioned. Consisting of only three episodes and based on a gripping but horrifying true story, it is bound to keep viewers captivated and watching all the way through in one go.

It follows the experiences of Alex and André Hanscombe as they deal with the devastating impact of a brutal act of violence. When Rachel Nickell was killed on Wimbledon Common in 1992, André became a single parent overnight. Putting his own grief to one side, he made his son Alex – the only eyewitness to the attack – the centre of his world.

This is the story of how a father and son moved through the aftermath of unimaginable tragedy, from darkness into light. Fans sharing their thoughts on the series include one who posted: “15 mins into The Witness on Netflix and I’m already broken.” Someone else said: “The Witness on Netflix will give you the chills.”

ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A former senior CIA official accused of stashing more than $40 million worth of gold bars from the federal government at his Virginia home was ordered to remain jailed until his trial after a hearing Friday where a defense attorney accused prosecutors of smearing the official with “sensational,” irrelevant allegations.

The defendant, David J. Rush, has both the means and motive to flee while the case against him is pending, U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick ruled, citing Rush’s professional experience.

“He’s in a different position than most people to flee and avoid detection by law enforcement,” Fitzpatrick said.

Rush is charged with fraudulently claiming tens of thousands of dollars in compensation for military leave after he was honorably discharged from the U.S. Navy in 2015. He was arrested last month after investigators searched his home and seized more than 300 gold bars, roughly $2 million in U.S. currency and about 35 luxury watches, according to an FBI agent’s affidavit.

Rush’s attorney, Jessica Carmichael, noted that Rush isn’t charged with any crimes related to the discovery of the gold bars, which she referred to as “basically a non-issue” and “nothing more than a sensational tidbit.” She said Rush properly obtained the gold bars and kept them locked in a safe in his basement.

“Mr. Rush never claimed they were his,” she said.

Between last November and March, Rush requested and received a “significant quantity” of foreign currency and tens of millions of dollars in gold bars for “work-related expenses,” according to the FBI affidavit. Justice Department prosecutor Gavin Tisdale said Rush wasn’t supposed to have the gold bars at his home.

“That’s the issue — his skirting of rules and regulations,” he said.

Tisdale briefly summarized the case against Rush in open court after a portion of the hearing was sealed from the public. The evidence against Rush “grows stronger by the day,” Tisdale told the magistrate judge.

“Mr. Rush simply cannot be trusted to abide by this court’s conditions,” he said.

Rush enlisted in the Navy in 1997 and was honorably discharged from the U.S. Navy Reserves as a lieutenant in 2015, according to the affidavit.

Authorities claim Rush lied about his education and military background on job applications, falsely claiming to be a former Navy pilot who graduated with a bachelor’s degree from Clemson University in South Carolina and a master’s degree from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in New York.

Investigators determined that he didn’t serve as a Navy pilot and didn’t attend either school.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

June 3 (Asia Today) — Harim Group’s domestic transactions among affiliates exceeded 1.4 trillion won, or about $914 million, last year, raising concerns that some unlisted units remain heavily dependent on business from within the group.

An analysis of Financial Supervisory Service filings and affiliate transaction data showed Harim Group’s domestic internal transactions totaled 1.44 trillion won, or about $938 million, in 2025.

That accounted for about 11.5% of the group’s total revenue of 12.41 trillion won, or about $8.11 billion.

Harim Group has a vertically integrated business structure spanning feed production, livestock, food processing, distribution and logistics. The structure has drawn attention because several unlisted affiliates reported high levels of sales from transactions with other group companies.

Sunjin Hanmaeul, an agricultural company involved in pig farming, generated 229.2 billion won, or about $150 million, of its 256.6 billion won, or about $168 million, in total revenue last year through transactions with affiliates including Harim Holdings and Sunjin. That means 89.3% of its sales came from internal group transactions. Sunjin Hanmaeul is a sub-subsidiary of Harim Holdings.

Korea Thumb Vet, an animal pharmaceutical affiliate, also generated 94.8 billion won, or about $62 million, of its 130.1 billion won, or about $85 million, in total revenue from affiliate transactions. The company is also a sub-subsidiary of Harim Holdings.

Charm Trading, a Harim Holdings subsidiary responsible for grain procurement and trading, posted 323.9 billion won, or about $212 million, in internal transactions out of 534.5 billion won, or about $349 million, in total revenue last year. That was the largest amount among the group’s affiliate transactions.

Sunjin, a core affiliate in the feed and processed meat businesses, recorded 118.138 billion won, or about $77 million, in sales through affiliate transactions. Sunjin also owns an 89.4% stake in Sunjin Hanmaeul, whose internal transaction dependence reached 89.3%.

Other unlisted affiliates also showed high dependence on internal transactions. Sunjin Ham, a processed meat manufacturer, posted an internal transaction ratio of 99.9%. Farmsco Bio Inti, a livestock production affiliate, recorded 85.8%, while ship management company POS SM reported 85.4% and manufacturing and services affiliate Donglim posted 80.2%.

Harim Group was sanctioned by the Fair Trade Commission in 2021 over allegations that affiliates steered business to Orpum, a private company wholly owned by Kim Jun-young, the eldest son of Harim Chairman Kim Hong-kuk and an assistant managing director at Pan Ocean.

At the time, the commission said affiliate support provided unfair economic benefits to the owner family and imposed corrective orders and fines. Harim challenged the decision and the case is currently in administrative litigation.

The continued transaction structure involving major affiliates such as Charm Trading, Sunjin Hanmaeul and Korea Thumb Vet has drawn attention because it appears to have changed little since the commission’s sanctions.

Harim Group’s succession structure is widely seen as centered on Kim Jun-young. Through Orpum and Korea Investment, Kim has secured influence within the ownership structure of Harim Holdings, and key affiliates are also included under that structure.

Some level of internal transactions may be inevitable in a vertically integrated industry. But critics say it is a separate issue when some unlisted affiliates continue to depend on internal group transactions for 60% to nearly 100% of their revenue, especially as regulators strengthen oversight of tunneling and unfair support involving owner families.

The Fair Trade Commission says it does not determine illegality based only on the share of internal transactions.

“Internal transactions become a problem when illegal conduct such as unfair business steering or private benefit-taking is involved,” a commission official said. “If unfair support or private benefit-taking is found, the transaction can be subject to sanctions under relevant laws.”

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260604010001065

June 3 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s major commercial banks are facing growing pressure from a sharp rise in long-overdue loans, with the amount of loans unpaid for more than one year exceeding 1 trillion won, or about $716 million, in the first quarter.

Loans overdue for less than one year, which could later worsen into long-term delinquencies, also approached 6 trillion won, or about $3.84 billion. The increase suggests that borrower distress is deepening, especially among corporate borrowers, despite banks’ efforts to dispose of nonperforming loans.

The sequential expiration of COVID-19 loan maturity extensions also appears to be adding pressure on delinquent borrowers.

Banks, which have continued to post strong earnings, are concerned that rising long-term delinquencies could increase loan-loss provision burdens. The longer a loan remains overdue and the lower its chance of recovery becomes, the more banks must set aside in provisions.

If the Bank of Korea raises its base rate in the second half, borrowers’ repayment burdens could grow further, increasing the risk of additional long-term delinquencies. Analysts say asset quality management could become a key factor determining banks’ earnings performance.

According to financial industry data released Wednesday, the combined balance of loans overdue for at least one year at KB Kookmin Bank, Shinhan Bank, Hana Bank, Woori Bank and NH NongHyup Bank reached 1.0972 trillion won, or about $716 million, in the first quarter.

That was up 49.3% from 734.9 billion won, or about $480 million, a year earlier. Compared with 261 billion won, or about $170 million, in 2024, the figure has more than quadrupled. It was also more than double the 508 billion won, or about $332 million, recorded in 2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The increase appeared across all five banks. By bank, NH NongHyup had the largest balance of long-term overdue loans at 474.8 billion won, or about $310 million, followed by KB Kookmin at 166.9 billion won, or about $109 million, Hana at 155.2 billion won, or about $101 million, Shinhan at 151.5 billion won, or about $99 million, and Woori at 148.8 billion won, or about $97 million.

Loans overdue for at least one month but less than one year totaled 5.8851 trillion won, or about $3.84 billion, approaching the 6 trillion won mark. The figure was slightly lower than 6.1002 trillion won, or about $3.98 billion, a year earlier, but remained high by historical standards.

By category, loans overdue for at least one month but less than three months rose from a year earlier to 2.8225 trillion won, or about $1.84 billion. Loans overdue for at least six months but less than one year, which are considered more likely to become long-term delinquencies, reached 1.1111 trillion won, or about $726 million. Both were record highs since the banks began disclosing the relevant data.

The surge in long-term delinquencies is widely attributed to a sharp increase in new overdue loans in 2024 and 2025. Higher interest rates and weak domestic demand weakened borrowers’ repayment capacity, with some distressed borrowers slipping into long-term delinquency.

The increase appears particularly concentrated among corporate borrowers, whose loans are relatively large and harder to recover. At the end of March, the banking sector’s corporate loan delinquency rate stood at 0.68%, up 0.06 percentage point from 0.62% a year earlier.

“Distress pressure has continued for a long period in sectors such as construction and real estate leasing because of the weak housing market,” an official at a commercial bank said.

A renewed period of rate increases could add to the problem. The Bank of Korea left open the possibility of at least one base rate increase in the second half during last month’s monetary policy meeting, raising concerns that banks could face greater asset quality pressure.

Higher base rates can push up market rates, including bank bond yields, increasing borrowers’ interest burdens. That could deepen distress among loans already in arrears and increase new delinquencies, potentially expanding the volume of long-term overdue loans later.

That would likely translate into higher loan-loss provisions for banks. Banks classify loans into five asset-quality categories: normal, precautionary, substandard, doubtful and estimated loss.

When a loan is classified as substandard, banks must set aside provisions equal to 20% of the loan amount. As the overdue period grows longer and repayment capacity worsens, the required provision ratio rises. Doubtful loans, which are overdue for more than three months and have low recovery prospects, require 50% provisioning. Loans classified as estimated losses after more than one year overdue require 100% provisioning.

That means if a doubtful loan deteriorates into an estimated loss, the provisioning burden doubles.

A rise in provision expenses would directly weigh on bank earnings. In 2022, the five major banks set aside 3.5422 trillion won, or about $2.31 billion, in annual loan-loss provisions, while their combined net profit rose 18.6% from a year earlier to 13.7472 trillion won, or about $8.98 billion.

But in 2023, when banks set aside more than 6 trillion won, or about $3.92 billion, in provisions because of real estate project financing distress and other factors, their net profit growth slowed to 2.6%.

Provision expenses fell sharply the following year, but as delinquencies continue to rise, the possibility of renewed growth in provisions has increased. Analysts say careful risk management has become more important.

“As the delinquency period lengthens, the sale price of nonperforming loans tends to fall, so if long-term delinquencies increase, banks disposing of bad loans will also face greater loss burdens,” a financial industry official said.

“The key will be whether banks can prevent new distress from expanding while effectively clearing existing bad loans,” the official said.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260604010001073

Elections in the city of Los Angeles include mayor, City Council, three ballot measures and Los Angeles Unified School District board seats and, if you live in the city, you’ve maybe seen an ad about them.

The high-profile competition between incumbent Mayor Karen Bass, City Councilmember Nithya Raman and conservative reality star Spencer Pratt has been tumultuous. And that is to say nothing of Rae Huang, Adam Miller and the nine others contenders.

With leaked files, millions in campaign fundraising donated by a candidate’s mother, and a multi-campaign effort by L.A.’s chapter of Democratic Socialists of America, the race for mayor isn’t the only one making headlines this primary.

A candidate can win by getting a majority of the vote. If no one receives 50% + 1 vote, the top two advance to the November election.

Mayor

The Associated Press, which surveys the numbers posted by local election officials and projects the winner using vote returns and other data, will call a winner (or a runoff) for L.A. mayor.

City Council

Back to top

Officers

Back to top

Ballot measures

Back to top

Los Angeles Unified School District

Back to top

With California facing increasingly destructive wildfires, experts and officials have long urged the strategic removal of dense, flammable vegetation that can erupt into particularly destructive flames from a lightning bolt or the spark of a power line.

But after years of record investment by the state in such wildfire risk mitigation, two key money sources are drying up, potentially reducing the state’s annual budget for vegetation removal by hundreds of millions of dollars.

Wildfire resiliency advocates are warning that the loss of these funds will leave the state vulnerable to devastation, and are calling on California’s next governor to take that threat seriously.

Currently, California relies heavily on two funding sources for wildfire mitigation work: A state program that charges polluters for their emissions and a climate bond approved by voters in 2024.

Late Friday, however, state officials adopted a new structure for the emissions program, called cap-and-invest, that analysts say will likely reduce wildfire mitigation funding by $200 million per year. At the same time, the governor’s latest budget proposal puts the state on track to allocate the majority of the climate bond’s $1.5 billion in wildfire prevention money within just three years.

As a result, California could go from routinely pulling more than $600 million a year from these sources, to just $150 million, according to an estimate from the Wildfire Solutions Coalition — a group of more than 80 organizations representing conservationists, business owners, fire officials and tribal leaders.

The coalition is urging the state to find new sources of funding for the work.

“We have the scientists, we have the technicians, we have the advocates,” said Michelle Decker, who is on the coalition’s executive committee and serves as president and CEO of the Inland Empire Community Foundation. “We see this problem. We can get ahead of this problem. It is a revenue issue.”

California wildfires have become increasingly costly. The 2025 L.A. fires alone caused an estimated $250 billion in damage and economic loss. Insurance companies have already paid out $22.4 billion.

In attempt to reduce the risk of damage to communities and ecosystems, the state has employed a wide range of tactics. These includes fortifying homes against wildfires, replanting fire-ravaged forests and thinning out vegetation with prescribed burns, goat grazing and manual thinning with heavy machinery to reduce the intensity of potential fires.

Research suggests wildfire mitigation work pays off. A recent analysis of 285 fires in the western U.S. found that every dollar spent on landscape projects saved about $3.75 in wildfire damage.

But as funding from cap-and-invest and the climate bond dwindle, the state must increasingly turn to Cal Fire, which devotes only a small portion of its budget to mitigation work.

“This is not an issue that can be pushed off to a timeline based solely on politics,” said Steve Frisch, a founding member of the coalition and president of the Sierra Business Council. “Fire happens whether we want it to or not.”

After a series of destructive wildfires in Northern California and the 2017 Thomas fire in Southern California, the state legislature began to explicitly focus on funding wildfire mitigation.

In 2018, lawmakers directed $200 million per year of cap-and-invest funds to wildfire mitigation projects.

As the Woolsey fire in Southern California and the Camp fire in Paradise raged later that fall, Trump accused the state of “gross mismanagement” of forest lands and threatened to cut off federal funds unless it was corrected.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and the legislature, with a significant budget surplus, began earmarking even more funds, leading to a peak of $1.1 billion in wildfire mitigation investments during the 2021-2022 fiscal year.

After the surplus dwindled, the legislature opted in 2024 to put a $10-billion climate bond in front of voters — $1.5 billion of which was dedicated specifically for wildfire mitigation work.

Newsom has since pointed to this high state funding to call on the federal government to step up its own investments into forest management work.

The federal government manages 57% of all forests in the state. While the U.S. Forest Service spent $3.1 billion mitigating wildfire conditions in the state over the last few years, California spent $4.3 billion, according to the California Forest Resilience and Wildfire Task Force.

However, the state has already allocated about $600 million of the climate bond’s wildfire mitigation pot for the 2024-2025 and current fiscal years. The latest budget proposal would allocate more than $300 million for this upcoming fiscal year. While many advocates support allocating the money quickly, it leaves little for future years.

Once that money is spent, California has to pay off the $10 billion bond with interest. The result is an estimated price tag of $16 billion, paid in roughly $400 million increments every year, for 40 years, according to the state’s Legislative Analyst’s Office.

As for the cap-and-invest funds, a fraught months-long debate at the California Air Resources Board on how to extend the program beyond 2030 resulted in a compromise that will cut the revenue it generates in half, the Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates.

Since other projects get priority — including $1 billion every year for California’s high-speed rail project — the new proposal would “likely leave no funding” for the wildfire and forest resilience line item, the Legislative Analyst’s Office found.

Cal Fire still holds a modest annual budget for wildfire mitigation work. In the 2024-2025 fiscal year, the agency had $500 million for forest management and fire prevention that was not directly tied to cap-and-invest or the bond — up from about $65 million two decades prior.

As for the federal government, independent analyses by Grassroots Wildland Firefighters and NPR found that Forest Service wildfire mitigation work is on the decline amid federal staffing cuts. The Forest Service claims the decrease in work was primarily due to poor weather conditions for activities like prescribed burns and staff being occupied with firefighting.

Both the state and federal government’s investments pale in comparison to the spending of California’s investor-owned utilities. In 2025 alone, the utilities planned to spend more than $9.2 billion on preventing their equipment from sparking the next devastating wildfire, primarily funded by Californians’ electricity bills.

Times staff writer Hayley Smith contributed to this report.

Victor Wembanyama is making news these days as a third-year player who has led the San Antonio Spurs to a 2-2 series tie with the defending NBA champion Oklahoma City Thunder in the Western Conference finals.

A sports card from the 7-foot-4 French star’s rookie season has also made headlines. Wembanyama’s 2023-24 Panini Prizm one-of-one Black parallel card recently sold for $5.11 million in a private deal brokered by Fanatics Collect.

It’s the highest known price paid for a non-autographed NBA card and the fourth-highest for any NBA card, according to price guide website Card Ladder. The buyer told the Athletic that he believes it will remain the best card for a player whose superstar potential is practically unlimited.

“There’s a sort of obvious ceiling for him, just as an athlete, that I think is higher than most people that are like the ordained superstars, like the next guy that we anticipate them being pantheon people,” said the buyer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “… If you take all these players and you say, ‘What’s their ceiling?’
I think Victor Wembanyama’s [ceiling] is substantially higher.”

Professional Sports Authenticator graded the card a Gem Mint 10, which the PSA site says is reserved for “virtually perfect” cards.

The previous record amount spent on a Wembanyama card was $860,100 paid for his rookie Panini Prism Nebula Choice one-of-one card in early 2025, according to Fanatics Collect. That card had a PSA 9 grade.

The grade for the recently purchased card came with controversy. Collector Cavelle McDonald pulled the card from a pack he purchased at NorCal Sports Cards in Roseville, Calif. A video posted to the store’s YouTube account in 2024 shows McDonald and NorCal Sports Cards owner Thomas Lindenthal getting the card graded.

After learning the card’s grade, Lindenthal gave “a huge shout-out” to Kurt’s Card Care. “Your product is phenomenal,” he said.

According to its website, Kurt’s Card Care makes “100% handmade Cleaning sprays and polishes free of artificial colors and scents. Perfect for cleaning and restoring your card collection.” PSA says on its website that it “will not grade cards that bear evidence of trimming, re-coloring, restoration, or any other forms of tampering” and lists “evidence of cleaning” as a factor in the company returning a card without a numeric grade.

Some people in the video’s comment section speculated that Lindenthal’s shout-out may have indicated that the Wemby card had been tampered with in a way that should have disqualified it from being graded. NorCal Sports Cards did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Times.

McDonald told the Athletic that “Kurt’s Card Care has nothing to do with me or the card.” The new buyer told the publication that he was unaware of the situation before purchasing the card, but said it wouldn’t have made any difference if he had known.

The largest amount known to be spent on any sports card is the $12.932 million paid last year for the 2007-08 Upper Deck Exquisite Collection Dual Logoman Autographs card featuring Kobe Bryant and Michael Jordan.

Wembanyama had 41 points and 24 rebounds in the Spurs’ double-overtime victory against the Thunder in Game 1 of the conference finals and 33 points, eight rebounds, five assists and three blocked shots in San Antonio’s Game 4 victory on Sunday. Game 5 is Tuesday in Oklahoma City, with the winner of the best-of-seven series advancing to play the New York Knicks in the NBA Finals.

A mile from the Manhattan jail where convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in 2019, an unassuming Tribeca gallery at 101 Reade Street has been transformed into a physical archive of the disgraced financier’s many cases.

More than 3.5 million pages of law enforcement documents published by the United States Department of Justice have been printed, bound and stacked across 3,437 volumes to line the walls of a room from floor to ceiling.

The exhibition, titled “The Donald J Trump and Jeffrey Epstein Memorial Reading Room”, was organised by the Institute for Primary Facts, a nonprofit that says it focuses on transparency and anti-corruption initiatives.

Epstein was arrested on sex trafficking charges in July 2017 before hanging himself in his New York jail cell a month later, denying victims a chance at justice. The “reading room” is an attempt to shed light on the many cases connected to Epstein that never went to trial.

The shelves hold documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, alongside timelines, handwritten visitor notes, and a memorial space dedicated to survivors and victims.

Since opening two weeks ago, the gallery has drawn a steady stream of visitors, including survivors of a string of offences linked to Epstein.

Lara Blume McGee, who was only 17 when she was abused by Epstein, visited the reading room last week.

“I found something brutally human in the Trump-Epstein reading room,” Blume McGee told Al Jazeera. “Proof that our lives mattered enough to be gathered, cataloged, and finally seen.”

She described entering the room as walking into a “paper city”, with three and a half million pages on display, a sight that hit her “like a physical blow”. What she remembers most vividly is the silence.

“The silence was thick with memory,” she said. “Row after row, each bound volume a life, a name, a day that should never have happened if the US government had acted when he was reported to the FBI in 1996.”

The overwhelming scale of the archive is intentional. Organisers say the physicality of the documents forces visitors to confront not only the extent of Epstein’s crimes, but also the number of lives affected by them.

Thousands of victims have been identified in connection with Epstein’s abuse network. One of the most prominent survivors, Virginia Giuffre, died by suicide in April 2025.

David Garrett, a co-founder of the exhibition, said the project was built around survivors from the outset.

“We are centred around the victims and survivors more than anything,” Garrett said. “The biggest thing is transparency and accountability.”

Garrett described the exhibition as part of a broader effort to create “real-life pop-up museums” aimed at generating public pressure around corruption and institutional failure.

“Our goal is how can we drive public outrage in order to put pressure on Congress and the Department of Justice to get full and real transparency and hopefully eventually accountability,” he said.

The process of assembling the archive was itself chaotic. Garrett said organisers downloaded the files from the Department of Justice in March, believing they had received properly redacted documents. Only after printing the collection did they discover that many survivors’ names remained visible in the files.

“What seems to have happened is the Department of Justice modified its search function instead of actually redacting the names,” Garrett said. “The names of survivors were left unredacted while the names of witnesses and co-conspirators were hidden. They brazenly broke the law.”

Finding a venue also proved difficult. Garrett said several locations backed out after initially agreeing to host the exhibit, fearing controversy or retaliation. The Tribeca gallery ultimately became the fifth venue that organisers approached.

Despite these challenges, survivors and advocates quickly embraced the project.

On Tuesday, the gallery became the site of a 24-hour livestream reading of the files led by survivors, advocates and supporters.

Dani Bensky, an Epstein survivor, opened the broadcast Monday afternoon, standing at a podium inside the dimly lit gallery with one of the thick white volumes in her hands.

Her reading marked the beginning of a continuous public recitation of excerpts from the files – an attempt, organisers said, to ensure the documents are not quietly buried again.

Throughout the gallery, visitors have left flowers, handwritten notes, and messages of grief and anger.

Garrett recalled one woman who spent hours walking silently through the space before telling organisers she was herself a survivor of sexual abuse.

“She said this helped her realise that she felt seen,” Garrett said. “That meant a lot to us.”

For Blume McGee, that feeling of visibility carries both relief and frustration.

“For years we were told to be quiet, to accept settlements, to move on,” she told Al Jazeera. “Seeing our truths preserved in a public archive felt like a long-overdue acknowledgment of our pain, our abuse and our reality.”

But she warned that documentation alone is not justice.

“This exhibition gives real hope because the record is now undeniable,” Blume McGee said. “Finally, there is action: documentation, visibility, proof. But those same files map systemic failure — how many doors stayed shut, how many people escaped scrutiny.”

“Visibility without consequence only prolongs the wound,” she added. “We need both: the files on the table and the government to act — investigate, prosecute, reform — so that being ‘finally seen’ becomes finally safe.”

Rapper Rob Base, one-half of the hip-hop duo Rob Base & DJ E-Z Rock, died on Friday after a battle with cancer. He was 59.

“Rob’s music, energy, and legacy helped shape a generation and brought joy to millions around the world. Beyond the stage, he was a loving father, family man, friend and creative force whose impact will never be forgotten,” a statement on Base’s Instagram read.

The statement also expressed gratitude to Base, who was surrounded by family as he died, for “the music, the memories and the moments that became the soundtrack to our lives.”

Rob Base was born Robert Ginyard in May 1967. He was best known for his collaborations with DJ E-Z Rock. The two were lifelong friends, meeting in fifth grade while living in Harlem. Their song “It Takes Two” was released in 1988 by Profile Records. The song became a breakout single for the duo and peaked at No. 3 on the Billboard U.S. dance club songs chart, with The Times calling “It Takes Two” “the rage of the rap underground.”

The duo followed up the hit with the release of the singles “Joy and Pain” and “Get On the Dance Floor.” Base released his solo album, “The Incredible Base,” in 1989.

Base was an ardent supporter of the rap genre, explaining to The Times in 1989 the nuance of the music.

“People outside rap don’t understand it. There’s all sorts of subtle things — key things — happening over and above the beat in rap songs. The fans want new stuff all the time,” Base said.

Base had two children, De’Jené Ginyard and Robert Ginyard Jr. His wife, April, died in 2013.

More than 1.6 million Muslim pilgrims have arrived in Saudi Arabia for the annual Hajj pilgrimage, as authorities stepped up crowd-control measures across Mecca. Pilgrims from war-affected Sudan and Yemen spoke about overcoming challenges to reach Islam’s holiest site.

Pop crooner and “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” star Erika Girardi quietly put an end to a long and splashy legal battle over her ex-husband’s now-defunct law firm on Thursday, settling a $25-million bankruptcy lawsuit in Los Angeles federal court.

The suit alleged the singer should have known she was profiting off embezzled funds linked to the sprawling case against her ex-husband, former L.A. legal heavyweight Tom Girardi, and his firm Girardi Keese. The couple was accused of funneling millions from the law firm to prop up Erika’s music career.

Performing as Erika Jayne, she topped the charts in the 2010s with a series of raunchy dance club hits. But court records show she spent millions more than she made as a musician.

Larry W. Gabriel, an attorney for the plaintiffs in the case, wrote in a pretrial filing Monday that Erika and a company associated with her “received the benefit of [Tom] Girardi’s massive fraudulent scheme.”

Tom Girardi is currently serving a seven-year sentence in federal prison after he was convicted of wire fraud for bilking his personal-injury clients in 2024. The disgraced former attorney was found to have stolen tens of millions from his firm.

His wife’s pop hits mixed boasts about luxury brands and explicit sex acts with pulsing dance beats and a bratty falsetto, a tone actress Lake Bell famously dubbed “sexy baby voice.”

In depositions taken as part of the suit, Erika said she had no knowledge of her husband’s crimes. She claimed to be ignorant about where the millions she spent on recording, merchandise, tours and “fun, playful, and sparkly outfits” were drawn from.

“I did not know how much I spent per month or per year,” she said in one exchange. “Girardi Keese paid my Amex credit card bill every month.”

Monday’s filings show Girardi Keese paid at least $14 million in charges to her American Express account between 2008 and 2020.

The payouts began in the late 2000s when Erika, then a stay-at-home mom, sought to relaunch herself as a performer. In 2016, near the height of her pop fame, her husband began to complain she was charging too much on the credit card account. After repeated entreaties to tamp down her spending, Girardi tried for the first time to look at her balance.

Soon after, Girardi grew suspicious of charges being made to her card by a Hollywood costumer — worries she reported to one of Girardi Keese’s clients, an agent in the Secret Service, records show.

On the advice of the agent’s Secret Service colleagues, she said she disputed the AMEX charges and was ultimately refunded more than half a million dollars to her personal account, despite the original payments having come from the law firm.

Erika Girardi’s attorney did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday.