tax

Shakira’s long tax-fraud nightmare has ended with the government of Spain on the hook to refund nearly $70 million to the Colombian-born singer after prosecutors failed to prove she spent enough time in that country to owe it a chunk of her earnings.

Since 2018, the singer has been accused of defrauding the Spanish government in three cases, for the tax years 2011, 2012-2014 and 2018. Over the years, deals were offered, rejected and accepted; charges were dropped, other charges were filed; and an eight-year prison sentence was threatened.

Shakira maintained her innocence, saying in 2022 that “Spanish tax authorities saw that I was dating a Spanish citizen and started to salivate,” referring to her relationship with Barcelona-born footballer Gerard Piqué, the father of their sons Milan and Sasha. Piqué and the singer, who met in 2010 when she did “Waka Waka,” the official song of that year’s FIFA World Cup, separated in 2022.

A representative for the singer, whose full name is Shakira Isabel Mebarak Ripoll, did not respond immediately to The Times’ request for comment on the court decision.

However, despite there being no fraud, Shakira told People on Monday in a statement that “for nearly a decade, I was treated as guilty. Every step of the process was leaked, distorted, and amplified, using my name and public image to send a threatening message to the rest of the taxpayers.”

She added, “Today, that narrative crumbles, and it does so with the full force of a court ruling.”

Everything revolved around how many days Shakira spent in Spain in the years in question. With her legal residence in the Bahamas before she declared Spain her fiscal home in 2014, she had to spend more than half the year outside of her beau’s home country to avoid paying taxes there.

“They knew I wasn’t in Spain the required time, that Spain wasn’t my place of work or my source of income, but they still came after me, with their eyes on the prize,” Shakira told Elle in 2022, adding that she was confident that justice would prevail in her favor at trial. “I have enough proof.”

The amount the Spanish government owes her includes fines and interest in addition to the money she handed over, despite having no legal obligation to pay it.

In other Shakira news, she and Burna Boy just released the 2026 FIFA World Cup song, titled “Dai Dai.”

Democratic lawmakers blast move, which follows the establishment of a controversial ‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’.

United States President Donald Trump, his family, and his businesses have been granted immunity from any ongoing audits into their tax affairs, according to a directive by the Department of Justice.

The move on Tuesday came as an addendum to Trump’s agreement a day earlier to settle a $10bn lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) over the leak of his tax information to media outlets between 2018 and 2020.

In a one-page document, signed by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, the Justice Department said authorities would be “FOREVER BARRED and PRECLUDED” from “prosecuting or pursuing” tax claims against Trump, members of his family, and his businesses.

The document, which was posted on the Justice Department’s website without any official announcement or press release, stipulates that the waiver applies to inquiries that are “currently pending or that could be pending,” including any related to tax returns filed by Trump before Monday’s settlement.

Democratic lawmakers immediately blasted the move.

Senator Adam Schiff of California accused the Trump administration of engaging in corruption and “self-dealing”.

“The tax-dodging President gets himself and his whole family a tax break, thanks to Todd Blanche,” Schiff said in a statement on social media.

Richard Painter, the chief White House ethics lawyer under former President George W Bush, said that exempting Trump from any tax obligations would be unconstitutional.

“If the president or his family owe the IRS money, this is a violation of the domestic emoluments clause of the US Constitution, which specifically says that the president cannot receive any profits or advantages from the US government other than his salary appropriated by Congress,” Painter told Al Jazeera.

The Justice Department and the Trump Organisation did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The Justice Department’s directive marks a dramatic expansion in Trump’s settlement, which established a so-called “Anti-Weaponization Fund” to compensate people who claim to have been victims of politically-motivated “lawfare”.

Critics have likened the initiative to a “slush fund”, warning that it is likely to be used to reward Trump’s allies.

Decisions on distributing money from the $1.776bn fund will be made by a five-member commission, four of whom will be directly appointed by Blanche, a Trump appointee who formerly acted as his personal lawyer.

In heated exchanges with Democratic senators on Tuesday, Blanche denied that Trump had directed him to establish the fund or that it would be used in a partisan manner.

“Anybody in this country is eligible to apply if they believe they were a victim of weaponisation,” Blanche said.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. government will permanently drop tax claims against President Trump, according to a settlement document that is part of a deal to resolve Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns.

As part of the settlement agreement, the U.S. is “forever barred and precluded” from examining or prosecuting Trump, his sons and the Trump organization’s current tax issues, according to a one-page document posted to the Justice Department’s website on Tuesday.

The settlement, which marks an extraordinary use of executive power, goes beyond resolving litigation and effectively helps shield the president from further examination of his finances and legal conduct.

The move comes after the Trump administration announced Monday the creation of a nearly $1.8 billion fund to compensate allies of the Republican president who believe they have been unjustly investigated and prosecuted, an arrangement that Democrats and government watchdogs derided as “corrupt” and unconstitutional.

The “Anti-Weaponization Fund” of $1.776 billion will allow people who believe they were targeted for prosecution for political purposes, including by the Biden administration Justice Department, to apply for payouts, creating what acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche called “a lawful process for victims of lawfare and weaponization to be heard and seek redress.”

Blanche, who was grilled by lawmakers on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, would not rule out the possibility that people who carried out violence during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol will be considered for payouts from the new fund.

Democratic lawmakers and ethics watchdogs slammed the creation of the fund, saying it was corrupt, opaque and had the potential to become a “slush fund” for the president and his allies.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said Democrats intend to “fight every element of this self-dealing settlement.”

“Not only is this another heinously corrupt act by the most corrupt administration in history, it’s clearly a violation of the law that prohibits interference by executive branch officials in IRS audits.”

The fund was announced after Trump, his sons Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., and the Trump Organization agreed to drop their lawsuit against the IRS and the Treasury Department. The lawsuit alleged that a leak of confidential tax records caused them reputational and financial harm and negatively affected their public standing, among other allegations.

According to a separate settlement agreement posted to the Justice Department website Monday, Trump will receive a formal apology from the U.S. government but “will not receive any monetary payment or damages of any kind,” from the settlement.

Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday that the fund is dedicated to “reimbursing people who were horribly treated.”

Hussein writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Monday moved to withdraw his $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns after reports that his administration was poised to create a fund to compensate some of his allies.

The disclosure was made in a filing in federal court in Florida, where the lawsuit was filed last year.

ABC News first reported last week that Trump was prepared to drop his lawsuit as part of a deal that would create a $1.7 billion fund to pay allies of the president who believe they were wrongly investigated and prosecuted.

The court filing did not mention terms of any potential deal.

News that the Trump administration was contemplating a fund to pay Trump allies drew an immediate backlash from Democrats, including Rep. Jamie Raskin, who called the idea “unconstitutional.”

“This, of course, is a political grievance fund that Donald Trump can use to pay off his friends,” Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said in an interview Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

“If these people have a valid cause of action, they should bring it to the court like every other American does, and use the system of due process, and proving things by clear and convincing evidence, or a preponderance of evidence, go and prove it. But the idea that Donald Trump can just pass it out like a pardon is absurd,” he added.

It was not immediately clear who precisely will stand to benefit from the fund but its creation reflects Trump’s long-running claims that the Biden administration Justice Department was weaponized against him.

He has cited as proof the since-dismissed criminal charges he faced between his first and second terms of conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election he lost and of retaining classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Several aides of his were also prosecuted, as were hundreds of Trump supporters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Merrick Garland, who served as attorney general during the Biden administration, has repeatedly denied allegations of politicization and has said his decisions followed facts, the evidence and the law. His Justice Department also investigated Biden for his handling of classified information and brought separate tax and gun prosecutions against Biden’s son Hunter.

Nonetheless, Trump’s current Justice Department has actively pursued the president’s retribution campaign and grievances, bringing criminal charges against some of his perceived adversaries and initiating a wide-ranging investigation that aims to establish a years-long conspiracy between law enforcement and intelligence officials to destroy Trump’s political prospects and keep him power.

No charges have been brought in that investigation and it is not clear that any ever will be.

Trump filed a lawsuit earlier this year in a Florida federal court, alleging that a previous leak of his and the Trump Organization’s confidential tax records caused “reputational and financial harm, public embarrassment, unfairly tarnished their business reputations, portrayed them in a false light, and negatively affected President Trump, and the other Plaintiffs’ public standing.”

The president’s sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, are also named plaintiffs in the suit.

Hussein, Tucker and Richer write for the Associated Press.

Popular budget airline is to cancel routes in 2026 after a row with officials

Ryanair has given bad news for passengers going to 12 destinations. The airline regularly keeps customers with bookings in the loop regarding travel updates and on its website has explained that the routes are being chopped.

It said that 12 routes are being cut – with the result that 700,000 seats are effectively being lost to air gtravel. The issue has arisen around its Thessaloniki base – meaning it’s closing for the three aircraft based there. It said: “This devastating loss in off-peak winter connectivity is the direct result of the hopelessly uncompetitive costs charged at the German-run Fraport Greece monopoly and Athens Airport.

“The Greek Govt. made the wise decision to reduce the Airport Development Fee (ADF) by 75% (from €12 to €3 per passenger) from November’24, which should have directly stimulated year-round connectivity and tourism across Greece. However, most Greek airports, particularly those run by Fraport Greece, refused to pass the tax cut onto passengers and instead have pocketed the tax cut for themselves. Since then, Fraport Greece have continued to increase charges, which are now +66% above their pre-Covid levels. Likewise, Athens Airport will hike charges this Winter.

“Consequently, Greek airports are no longer competitive in the off-peak shoulder and Winter months, when the tourism industry’s reliance on low-fare connectivity is most acute. Ryanair has therefore been left with no choice but to reallocate capacity to more competitive countries like Albania, regional Italy, and Sweden where airports have passed on the savings from Govt. tax reductions. “

READ MORE: Latest paper boarding pass rules for all major UK airlines in 2026READ MORE: BBC expert says easyJet Jet2 Ryanair TUI travellers need to make key booking change ‘for protection’

Ryanair said it presented an ambitious growth plan to the Greek government in what it said would grow traffic to 12m passengers per annum, base 10 additional aircraft and launch 50 new routes over the next 5 years. It said it would carry out the plan if airport charges were frozen and the 75% Airport Development Fee reduction is passed on to passengers at all airports.

Ryanair Chief Commercial Officer, Jason McGuinness said: “Ryanair regrets to announce the closure of our Thessaloniki base and reductions in Athens for Winter ‘26, resulting in the loss of 700,000 seats and 12 routes across Greece, as well as the suspension of operations at Chania and Heraklion during the off-peak months. These preventable traffic reductions are a direct result of the airports’ failure to pass through the ADF reduction, particularly in Thessaloniki where the Fraport Greece monopoly have hiked airport charges +66% since 2019.

“The removal of 3 based aircraft, 500,000 seats (-60% vs. Winter ‘25) and 10 routes from Thessaloniki for Winter ‘26 will be devastating for the city and region, as Ryanair provided 90% of international capacity to Thessaloniki last Winter. Unfortunately, there will now be less low-cost air fares for Thessaloniki’s citizens and visitors, and year-round tourism will be harmed as a result. These aircraft will be reallocated to Albania, regional Italy and Sweden, where airports have passed on their Govt’s aviation tax savings – resulting in more connectivity, tourism and jobs this Winter in those regions.

“There is an opportunity for Greece to secure significant year-round traffic growth however, this investment can only be realised once the German-run Fraport Greece monopoly fully passes through the Greek Govt.’s sensible tax cut from November’24 – allowing airlines such as Ryanair, to deliver the connectivity required to reduce Greece’s chronic seasonality.”

The cancelled routes:

• Thessaloniki to Berlin
• Thessaloniki to Chania
• Thessaloniki to Frankfurt-H
• Thessaloniki to Gothenburg
• Thessaloniki to Heraklion
• Thessaloniki to Niederrhein
• Thessaloniki to Poznan
• Thessaloniki to Stockholm
• Thessaloniki to Venice-T
• Thessaloniki to Zagreb
• Athens to Milan-M
• Chania to Paphos

Ryanair has also pulled its aircraft from Chania and Heraklion.

Fraport, which runs 14 airports in Greece said Ryanair’s decision is “exclusively related” to the airline’s commercial strategy and profitability considerations. “Any claims linking this decision to airport charges or the airport development fee imposed by the Greek state are entirely unfounded,” it adds. Fraport Greece has invested over €100 million (£86 million) to upgrade Thessaloniki, the statement added.

Meanwhile, Ryanair has announced the closure of its Berlin operating base and a 50% reduction in its winter schedule to the German capital, citing escalating aviation taxes in the country. The Irish budget airline confirmed that relocating seven aircraft to alternative hubs would see its Berlin passenger numbers drop from 4.5 million to 2.2 million annually.

THE GREAT British break might not be so great very soon after it was announced that the overnight ‘holiday tax’ is set to be pushed forward.

Included in the King’s Speech was the dreaded new levy on staycations and one Butlin’s boss has hit back saying it will have big ‘consequences’ for families.

Follow The Sun’s award-winning travel team on Instagram and Tiktok for top holiday tips and inspiration @thesuntravel.

Plans to introduce the ‘Overnight Visitor Levy‘ for staycations in England was first announced late last year, and was spelled out again in the King’s Speech two days ago.

Essentially, the government’s plan is introduce levy overnight accommodation like hotels, B&Bs, campsites or holiday homes.

It would allow local authorities in England to charge visitors an additional fee on overnight stays which is similar to systems already used in parts of Europe.

GRUBS UP

Best pubs, fish and chip shops and cafes in Sussex – by Sun readers & locals

GO SEA IT

£9.50 holiday spot with shipwrecks, seals offshore & horseshoe-shaped waterfalls

According to UK Hospitality, the new tax could add £100 to a two-week family stay based on £2 per person per night.  

Unsurprisingly, the plans have not been met with positivity.

Matt Rake who is a resort director at Butlin’s in Bognor Regis – said the tax would have “consequences”, especially for working families.

He said: “It’s disappointing that the government is pressing ahead with the holiday tax despite how clear businesses, consumers and the hospitality sector have been about the potential consequences.

“In the Spring, the government said families being able to pay for a holiday should never be too much to ask, yet today they’ve confirmed the introduction of a measure that will hurt working families hard.

“We know how important domestic tourism is for Bognor Regis and the local businesses here. Holidays and short breaks support jobs and investment across our community throughout the year.”

He added that in a recent poll, 73 per cent of people would reduce or cut back on holidays in England if extra costs were introduced.

The ‘holiday tax’ was formally announced in the Autumn Budget in November 2025.

And two hundred bosses from firms including Butlin’s, Haven and Parkdean Resorts have written to the Chancellor hitting out at the plans.

SACRAMENTO — Severely disabled veterans in California could be getting an expanded tax break.

State lawmakers are considering legislation that would exempt from taxation 50% of the residential property owned by a fully disabled veteran, or 100% if their household income does not exceed $40,000.

“I’ve seen firsthand the financial challenges many disabled veterans face just trying to stay in their homes,” Assemblyman Jeff Gonzalez (R-Indio) said Thursday. “We always say we support our veterans, but support has to mean taking meaningful action to make life more affordable for them.”

Gonzalez, who introduced Assembly Bill 2022, is a Marine Corps veteran and vice chair of the Assembly Committee on Military and Veterans Affairs.

The legislation would apply only to veterans who became disabled as a result of their military service. It defines a fully disabled veteran as one who is blind in both eyes, has lost the use of at least two limbs, or is otherwise incapacitated due to an injury or disease. Surviving spouses would be eligible for the same exemptions, provided they do not remarry.

The exemptions would sunset in 2032 so legislators could review the bill’s effect before deciding whether to enact the policy permanently.

California is home to more than 1.8 million former service members, which is the largest veteran population of any state in the nation, according to the most recent census. The California Department of Veterans Affairs estimates there are 184, 283 veterans this year residing in Los Angeles County.

During a legislative hearing earlier this year, Gonzalez told lawmakers that about 380,000 veterans in the state live with service-related disabilities. He explained the rising cost of living in California is especially challenging for those on fixed incomes, and said reducing property tax burdens could help prevent the most vulnerable veterans from ending up on the streets.

“For a veteran who has already sacrificed so much, losing their home is not just a financial hardship, it is a failure of our commitment to them,” Gonzalez said.

The bill has passed two committees with unanimous support and was most recently referred to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations.

There are currently two property tax exemptions offered for fully disabled veterans in California, according to the State Board of Equalization.

The basic property tax exemption, or the $100,000 exemption, is available to all fully disabled veterans. The low-income exemption, or the $150,000 exemption, is available to fully disabled veterans whose annual household income does not exceed a specified amount — currently $81,131 — that is adjusted periodically for inflation. The exemption amount reduces the assessed value of the property, resulting in less property taxes due.

Patrick Murphy, an urban affairs professor at the University of San Francisco who focuses on tax policy, doubts the legislation would have a significant effect on homelessness.

“Homelessness among veterans is a big problem; that is pretty well-documented,” he said. “But I think if we were to list the reasons why veterans end up homeless, the burden of their property taxes would be pretty far down.”

Murphy also cautioned that Assembly Bill 2022 could face potential legal challenges if signed into law.

“Since Prop. 13 is written into the California Constitution, I would almost think there would need to actually be a proposed ballot initiative to change this,” Murphy said.

Proposition 13 mandates that property should be assessed and taxed uniformly based on purchase price. It caps property tax rates at 1% of a property’s value at the time of purchase, and limits annual assessment increases to a maximum of 2%.

Scott Kaufman, legislative director for the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., believes the legislation is on solid footing.

“I don’t see a problem,” he said. “The disabled veterans exemption already exists in the constitution, so I don’t think Prop. 13 trumps it because they both exist together.”

The California Teacher’s Assn. has raised other concerns with the legislation.

“We oppose tax exemptions that cut into the state’s ability to fully fund public schools by putting Prop. 98 funding at risk,” spokesperson Maggie Sisco wrote in an email.

Proposition 98 guarantees a minimum annual funding amount for K-12 schools and community colleges. The money comes from state funding and local property taxes.

According to the State Board of Equalization, the state does not reimburse local governments for the property tax revenue losses from the Disabled Veterans’ Exemption.

The bill is backed by several veterans organizations, including the American Legion, California State Commanders Veterans Council and Vietnam Veterans of America California State Council.

It also has support from the California Assn. of Realtors. Sanjay Wagle, the association’s senior vice president of government affairs, said property taxes are a concern for many disabled veterans looking to purchase a home.

“A lot of our members have seen them struggling, frankly, to make ends meet,” Wagle said. “This kind of property tax relief could be vital.”

A similar bill, SB 296, is being sponsored in the state Senate by Sens. Bob Archuleta (D-Pico Rivera) and Suzette Martinez Valladares (R-Acton).

Another measure, Senate Bill 888, is also seeking to reduce property tax burdens for disabled veterans.
The legislation, whose author is Sen. Kelly Seyarto (R-Murrieta), would exclude service-related disability payments from being included in the household income used to determine eligibility for exemptions.

Counting unhoused populations is difficult due to the transient nature of homelessness, but the most recent analyzed data from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development indicate veteran homelessness is on the decline nationwide. In 2024, the department’s annual count found 32,882 homeless veterans, the lowest figure since the count began in 2009.

It’s been years since Los Angeles County voters met a sales tax they didn’t like.

They agreed to pay half a cent more at the cash register to fund buses, trains and pothole fillings in 2016. The next year, they gave a quarter-cent more to fund homeless services. In 2024, voters bumped it up to a half–cent.

But with the electorate in a dour mood and reeling from rocketing gas prices, some speculate voters’ willingness to tax themselves may be dwindling as ballots arrive for the June 2 primary election.

“This is going to be a tougher year for taxes than prior years,” said former supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who pushed through a property tax ballot measure in 2002 to fund the county’s trauma care network. “There’s a limit to the tolerance people have for increasing their own taxes.”

Los Angeles County voters will soon decide whether they want to pay a temporary half-cent sales tax to shore up the region’s public healthcare system, which is facing dramatic federal funding cuts. Officials estimate the county will lose more than $2 billion in healthcare funding over the next three years.

The county currently has a base sales tax rate of 9.75%, and cities impose additional local taxes on top of that. If approved, the tax would take effect Oct. 1 and last for five years. The exact tax rate would vary depending on the city.

Voters haven’t said no to a sales tax hike since 2012, when a transportation measure fell just short with 66.1% support. It needed 66.7% to pass.

The healthcare sales tax has a lower bar to clear. The supervisors voted to put the measure on the ballot as a general tax, which gives them more leeway with how the money is spent and only requires a simple majority to pass.

But even that threshold may prove difficult. Polling from March suggested the measure was losing among L.A. city voters, who are often more generous than county voters at large. Angelenos will also find their ballot crowded with other tax hike proposals, which may leave some voters feeling picky.

“People have a very discerning instinct,” said Yaroslavsky. “They will pick and choose what they think is important.”

Despite no organized opposition, a flurry of cities, as well as the editorial board of the Los Angeles Daily News, have loudly spurned the idea, arguing it will make the region even less affordable.

“It’s just terrible timing,” said Paul Little, the head of the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce. “Costs are going through the roof for everything.”

With weeks to go until election day, healthcare workers and advocates supporting the measure have gone full steam ahead with mailers, marches and a social media campaign depicting a wallowing penny finding its lost sense of purpose with the measure. The campaign’s top funders are St. John’s Community Health and SEIU, who frame the measure as life or death for thousands of uninsured residents.

“Think about that person you know in your family who is asthmatic and relies on that inhaler, who has rheumatoid arthritis, who is diabetic,” said Supervisor Holly Mitchell at a recent town hall held in support of the measure. “And think about whether or not you’re willing to spend a half a penny — 50 cents on every hundred dollars — to make sure that that family, friend or neighbor gets what they need to be healthy.”

The supervisors voted 4-1 to put the sales tax on the ballot. Supervisor Kathryn Barger was the lone no vote.

Supporters say the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed by President Trump last July, is an existential threat to the public health system, leaving the county without reimbursement for the medical care of many Californians who are losing Medi-Cal coverage. The looming multibillion-dollar hole in the budget raises the prospect of hospital cutbacks, staff layoffs and possible emergency room closures, they say.

PORTLAND, Ore. — Appealing to voters’ anxieties about the soaring cost of living is central to Democrats’ messaging in their hopes of big wins in this year’s midterm elections. In Oregon, a question on the primary ballot is complicating that strategy.

The Democratic-controlled Legislature raised the state gas tax and a range of fees last fall as a way to pay for road improvements and plug a hole in the state’s transportation budget. Republicans responded with a petition to repeal the increases, leading to a referendum that will land before voters just as the Iran war is causing the price of gas to skyrocket around the United States.

“It is a hell of a time to be raising gas taxes on people,” said Jeanine Holly, filling up her tank on a recent morning in Portland.

The gas tax repeal on the state’s May 19 primary ballot comes amid widespread disruptions in the oil industry from the war with Iran started by Israel and President Trump. Discontent is high among U.S. consumers across the political spectrum, with the price of gas topping $4.50 a gallon nationally on Friday and averaging about 80 cents more per gallon in Oregon.

The referendum will give voters a chance to weigh in on a hot-button issue hitting them directly in the pocketbook at a time when prices remain elevated for everything from housing to groceries. Nationally, Democrats have focused on the affordability concerns similar to those that helped propel Trump to victory in 2024. Some of their candidates have even proposed ways to cut taxes as a way to promote their agenda and counter a traditional GOP strategy.

“It’s difficult to imagine a worse situation for … a gas tax increase than right now in American politics,” said Chris Koski, professor of political science and environmental studies at Portland’s Reed College.

Republicans sense an opportunity

Republicans wasted no time in appealing to voters after the Legislature and Democratic governor signed off on the tax increase, which also included a higher payroll tax for transit projects and a boost in vehicle registration and title fees.

They needed 78,000 voter signatures to qualify the referendum for the ballot. They quickly got 250,000.

“That is a remarkable number,” Republican strategist Rebecca Tweed said.

Republicans in Oregon have countered Democrats’ affordability messaging by portraying the tax and fee increases as further fueling the high cost of living.

“Do Oregonians want to pay more? The answer is no,” said GOP state Sen. Bruce Starr, who helped lead the referendum campaign. “Everything they’re looking at is expensive.”

Under the legislation, Oregon’s gas tax would rise from 40 cents to 46 cents a gallon. That would make it tied with Maryland for the eighth-highest gas tax of any state when factoring in other state taxes and fees, according to figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

At the Portland gas station, Michael Burch said he used to spend $70 to fill three-quarters of his pickup truck’s tank, but now pays $80 for just over half a tank.

“I’m sick and tired of taxes,” the 76-year-old retiree said. “Gas is certainly dampening the spirits and the coffers of folks that aren’t as well off.”

Hannah Coe, a 30-year-old student, said she was not sure how she would vote on the primary ballot referendum.

“I think I would be in favor of it if it was going to go to the things that it was saying it was going to go to, such as fixing our roads,” she said. “I also kind of feel like that’s just a grab at trying to get more money from the people who live here.”

Democrats blame the Iran war

Oregon Democrats spent much of last year fighting to pass a transportation funding bill to help raise money for services such as road paving and snow plowing. The debate came amid projections of declining gas tax revenue as more people adopt electric, hybrid and fuel-efficient cars.

They finally passed a narrower version of their plan during a special session called by Gov. Tina Kotek.

She recently acknowledged the challenging timing of the referendum.

“Certainly, the conversation at the ballot this year … is a tough sell right now, because I think everyone is feeling a pinch on their household budgets,” she told reporters.

But she and other Democrats said the root cause of the jump in gas prices is Trump’s decision to go to war with Iran. She suggested the federal government consider reducing the federal 18-cent-a-gallon gas tax if it wants to provide relief at the pump for Americans.

Some Oregonians are receptive to the Democrats’ reason for passing the legislation last year. Kurt Borneman, 68, said he would support the gas tax increase, even though he’s now paying at least $10 more to fill up his tank.

“I realize that money’s tight and roads need to be improved,” he said at the Portland gas station. “I want less government, but I also want nice roads.”

Democratic state Rep. Paul Evans said his party lost the battle over how to frame the gas tax increase to the public. So far, there has been no organized effort from Democrats and their allies to oppose the ballot referendum.

“When anything is reduced to, ‘Do you want a tax or not?’ Most people are going to say no,” he said. “The messaging got away from us, and it became focused upon the price instead of the value.”

Rush writes for the Associated Press.

Senator Hawley plans legislative action supporting President Trump’s bid to waive the petrol tax amid rising consumer costs.

United States President Donald Trump said he will cut the 18-cent federal tax on petrol to offset surging prices that have continued to soar after his comments that the US ceasefire with Iran is on “life support”.

On Monday, Trump said he would suspend the petrol tax, but did not specify an end date.

“Yup, we’re going to take off the gas tax for a period of time, and when gas goes down, we’ll let it phase back in,” Trump told CBS News.

Trump later told reporters that he would waive the tax, which generates $2.5bn in funds used for US roadway infrastructure, “till it’s appropriate”.

The US administration hinted at the idea on Sunday, when US Energy Secretary Chris Wright told the NBC News programme Meet the Press that the White House was considering suspending the tax.

While the Republican president claimed he would waive the tax, that is not within the White House’s authority. Suspending a federal tax requires an act of the US Congress.

However, key Trump ally Senator Josh Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, said on the social media platform X that he would introduce legislation on Monday to do that.

In March, Senator Mark Kelly, a Democrat from Arizona, proposed suspending the tax until October.

“I anticipate it would pass, but there could be a procedural delay. It also suggests that President Trump doesn’t see a quick end to the reduced volumes and is trying to cushion the American consumer,” Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, told Al Jazeera.

“The impact could be greater in states that have also reduced their own petrol taxes and could reinforce differentiation between petrol prices by region.”

US states also tax petrol, with Indiana, Kentucky and Georgia moving to make cuts to give consumers some relief at the pump.

Petrol prices have continued to climb since the initial strikes of the US-Israel war on Iran on February 28. The average price for a gallon (3.78 litres) of regular petrol is $4.52, according to the American Automobile Association, which tracks daily petrol prices, compared with $2.98 when the strikes first began.

However, news of the stumbling ceasefire has sent oil prices surging. Brent crude futures were up $3.17, or 3.13 percent, at $104.46 a barrel, while US West Texas Intermediate crude was at $98.32 a barrel, up $2.90, or 3.04 percent. Brent reached a session high of $105.99 and WTI hit a peak of $100.37.

On Wall Street, stocks for oil and gas giants are trending upward. Shell was up 1.6 percent in midday trading, Exxon rose 3.1 percent, BP gained 2 percent, and Chevron climbed 1.7 percent.

Airline bailout?

Trump was also asked by CBS on Monday whether a bailout was planned for the airline industry, which has taken a hit since the war on Iran began.

The president told the outlet that a bailout had not “really been presented” and that “the airlines are doing not badly”.

However, earlier this month, budget carrier Spirit Airlines ceased operations after 34 years. Court documents said the airline shut down because of “recent geopolitical events resulting in a massive and sustained increase in fuel prices”.

That comes as other major US carriers raise prices. In April, United Airlines said it would raise fares by 20 percent amid a surge in jet fuel costs.

May 10 (UPI) — Energy Secretary Chris Wright said Sunday the Trump administration is “open” to the possibility of suspending the federal tax on gasoline sales as prices spike amid the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran.

Wright said during an appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press he and Trump are “open to all ideas” to lower energy prices, including following the lead of some U.S. states in temporarily shelving taxes on gas at the pump amid the price surge.

“All measures that can be taken to lower the price at the pump and lower the prices for Americans, this administration is in support of,” he said. “We are constantly looking for different ideas.”

Citing previous measures such as releasing oil from the U.S. strategic petroleum reserves and “revising federal regulations on summer gasoline blends to make it easier for American refineries to produce more gasoline,” Wright said the suspension of the 18-cents-per-gallon federal tax on gas is also on the table.

“We are working every day to offset this rise in prices because of a critical conflict in Iran to drive prices down, and we’re open to all such ideas,” he said.

Wright’s comments came as the average national price of a gallon of unleaded gasoline stood at $4.52 per gallon as of Sunday, according to the Automobile Association of America.

U.S. drivers have seen sharp increases in pump prices in recent weeks after Iran blocked the vital Strait of Hormuz waterway connecting Persian Gulf oil and natural gas producers with world markets.

The move came in retaliation to a wave U.S.-Israeli bombing attacks on Iran beginning Feb. 28, which Washington and Tel Aviv claim were necessary to prevent the imminent development of a nuclear weapon by Iran’s rulers.

The price of regular gas last week surged 25 cents for the second consecutive week to $4.55 — $1.40 higher than they were a year ago and marking their highest level since 2022, the AAA reported.

Crude oil prices have dipped below $100 per barrel while a fragile cease-fire between the United States and Iran has been in place and negotiations to reopen the Strait have been ongoing. But with global oil supplies tightening, upwards pressure on pump prices continues.

In a separate appearance on CBS News’ Face the Nation on Sunday, Wright refused to predict were gas prices were heading.

“I don’t know the future of gas prices,” he said while admitting that “gasoline and diesel prices are up, and they will remain up while this conflict’s in place, and then they will come back down.

“And, ultimately, they’ll come back down lower than they were before.”

San Francisco, United States – Greer Dove’s days are packed with studying business and finance, as well as doing administrative work at college, along with caring for her eight-year-old daughter with special needs. But once a week, Dove, a single mother, makes sure to drop in at the food bank in California’s Marin County to pick up vegetables, fruit and other food. Along with the federal government’s food benefits, they keep her housing running.

“We need this so we can keep functioning at a high level,” she says. “She loves fruit, so I make sure to get it,” she says of her daughter.

Dove, who is also looking for a full-time job, has worked in restaurants, event management, retail, television shows, office administration and payroll over the years. But she has been on the federal government’s Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) for six years, and with the food bank, for more than three years. Before she got food benefits, Dove fed her daughter all she had and skipped meals or looked around for snacks in the offices she worked at to get her through the day.

United States President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), passed in June, cut SNAP benefits by more than $186bn over the next 10 years to make up for extending cuts to income tax. This could lead to more than 3 million people nationwide, and 665,000 recipients in California, losing such food benefits, according to estimates.

“This will bring a series of cuts that collectively present an existential threat to food benefits,” says Andrew Cheyne, managing director of government relations and public affairs at the County Welfare Directors Association of California.

California’s proposed billionaire tax, which seeks to impose a one-time 5 percent tax on the assets of the state’s more than 200 billionaires to make up for the funding gap created by the OBBBA, got more than 1.5 million signatures in April. It is likely to be on the ballot for the November midterm election.

While most of the nearly $100bn expected to be raised through the tax will go towards filling the gap in health insurance created by the OBBBA, 10 percent will be used to make up for the retrenchment in food benefits.

In California, where more than 5.3 million people, more than any other state, receive food benefits, the impacts of the cuts began to be felt in April when 72,000 immigrants started losing benefits. June onwards, nearly 600,000 recipients will be screened for work eligibility. Recipients, including those who are homeless, seniors, foster youth and veterans, will have to work, study or volunteer to receive food benefits. Failing the screening to meet work requirements for three months will lead to their food benefits being cut.

Brian Galle, professor of law at the University of California at Berkeley and one of the tax measure’s authors, says that in California, the state that introduced gig work, “jobs are increasingly precarious. You may find enough work or not. You may get tips or not. But nutrition needs are steady.”

Making impossible choices

On a recent Friday morning, new members lined up to enrol at a whitewashed, bunting-festooned La Ofrenda food bank in San Francisco’s Mission district. The food bank doles out fresh vegetables, fruit and bread that have been donated by large grocery stores once those products neared expiration date.

Gladys Lee had taken a 45-minute train ride after a friend told her about it. Lee worked at downtown San Francisco’s Hyatt hotel as a room cleaner for three decades until a back injury meant she could not push the heavy cleaning carts any more and had to leave. After seven years of struggling to find work, food was getting scarce, and Lee found her way to La Ofrenda. She packed what she could into a carton and held it in her arms for the train ride back.

Food benefit rolls have shrunk by more than 3.3 million nationally in the six months from July 2025, when the OBBBA was enacted, to January 2026.

In California, the rolls of Calfresh, as food benefits are known in the state, shrank by 288,000 or 6 percent from July 2025 to February 2026, according to analysis by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington, DC-based think tank. This reduction in rolls happened even before the OBBBA cuts began.

Brooke Rollins, the agriculture secretary, wrote in a recent essay that the shrinking of SNAP rolls reflected an ebullient economy and buoyant job growth.

“The drop in SNAP recipients affirms that many Americans are moving from welfare to work,” she wrote. “It is no secret that Trump’s massive tax cuts and deregulation efforts are unleashing robust, private sector-led economic growth, which are fueling trillions in investments, booming wage growth”.

But unemployment remained stable at about 4.4 percent since July 2025, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics data, while SNAP rolls shrank.

“This last time we saw such a steep, quick decline, other than during natural disasters, is three decades ago when welfare reform was enacted,” says Dottie Rosenbaum, senior fellow and director of  Federal SNAP Policy at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

Nationally, SNAP rolls shrank by 8 percent, while in California, they shrank by 5.5 percent, in part because the work eligibility requirements were delayed until June, while some other states have already implemented them.

At La Ofrenda, Roberto Alfaro, executive director of the nonprofit Homey, says he started the food bank when food costs went up during the pandemic. They have stayed high, he says. Now he sees people doing day jobs and night jobs and coming for food when they have paid rent.

“People are making impossible choices,” says Keely O’Brien, a policy advocate at the Western Center for Law and Poverty.

While California is the world’s fourth-largest economy, growth has come with a soaring cost-of-living crisis.

“With rising housing and utility costs, few households can dedicate that much of their income towards food,” O’Brien says.

The OBBA has also shifted the administrative cost of meeting work eligibility requirements to states, and beginning next year, part of the cost of SNAP will also fall on states.

“To make requirements more stringent, you are creating more government, more bureaucratic logjam,” says Jaren Sorkow, state director for the Children’s Defence Fund.

This has already led to a 51 percent drop in SNAP rolls in Arizona, which has begun implementing the OBBBA cuts, according to data by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

Making something from nothing

Several measures to counter the $100bn gap in funding for health insurance and food benefits created by the OBBBA have been floated in California. The biggest of these is the one-time 5 percent tax on those with assets of more than a billion dollars. The tax will raise $100bn, its authors estimate.

As it seems set to be voted on in the November election, it faces mounting opposition from the state’s tech entrepreneurs who have funded measures to undercut the tax.

Tech entrepreneurs have called it an economic 9/11, saying taxing their assets, including shareholding in startups, will lead to a flight of capital and innovation from the state. Sergey Brin, a cofounder of Google Inc, now spends a week in Nevada and a week in his Bay Area offices and has spent more than $57m on opposing the billionaire tax. He has backed two measures that undercut the billion tax, which have also received 1.4 million and 1.5 million signatures and are also set to be on the ballot for the November election.

One of these measures prohibits future taxes on personal property, including financial assets, savings and retirement accounts, as well as intellectual property. The other would increase audits of taxpayer-funded programmes, and includes language that would essentially invalidate the billionaire tax.

In a recent statement to The New York Times, Brin said, “I fled socialism with my family in 1979 and know the devastating, oppressive society it created in the Soviet Union. I don’t want California to end up in the same place.”

The coalition of unions backing the billionaire tax is bracing for the fight ahead. “We expect to be outspent,” says Kris Cuaresma-Primm, director of partnerships for the coalition that is backing the billionaire tax. “We will keep communicating to people that there is a tidal wave of pain coming from the cuts, and we want to reclaim the losses from the OBBBA.”

Giulia Varaschin, senior tax policy adviser at the International Tax Observatory, who recently coauthored a study on wealth taxes, says there is little academic evidence that such taxes cause the wealthy to leave at a notable scale. “There is only a marginal flight with very little, if any, economic impact,” she says.

The study, coauthored with the economist Gabriel Zucman, who supports the California billionaire tax, did find that wealth taxes had not raised as much revenue as estimated in several European countries and became less popular as a result.

Varaschin says this was because these taxes were levied on a larger set of the wealthy, which included homeowners or small businesses, rather than the ultra-rich or billionaires. The taxpayers could hardly afford to pay it, and the government made exemptions instead. These taxes also did not touch assets, where much of the wealth of the ultra-rich lies, Varaschin says.

The California tax remedies this by taxing only billionaires and taxing assets, including shares in companies.

Daniel Shaviro, Wayne Perry professor of taxation at New York University, says, “Traditionally, these taxes can be hard to enforce because tax administration don’t want to go after these people.”

Even if it passes, “The governor could just say this is not a high priority for him and not enforce it,” Shaviro says, referring to Governor Gavin Newsom, who has opposed the tax.

But Primm says, “The governor is out of touch with Californians on this”.

Newsom is in the last year of his last term as governor. However, nearly all the candidates running for the June 2 primary for governor, except billionaire Tom Steyer, who is running as a progressive Democrat, also oppose this measure. While some have said this will lead to a flight of capital, others say the spending plan does not include expenses for education, which was not cut in the OBBBA.

Greer Dove, who gets food through Calfresh and the San Francisco Marin Food Bank for herself and her daughter, says the looming food benefit cuts are worrying. “The anxiety of it all is adding up. I could be next.”

easyJet, TUI and Jet2holidays are some of the UK’s biggest package holiday providers

Travellers planning to book holidays with easyJet, Jet2, and TUI are being cautioned by the travel firms that they could face additional charges they may not have previously been aware of.

With summer now just around the corner, millions of Brits are eagerly looking forward to a well-deserved break in the sun. easyJet, TUI, and Jet2holidays rank among the UK’s biggest package holiday providers, with countless travellers turning to them to arrange all manner of trips overseas – and 2026 is set to be a busy one.

When browsing the respective websites, customers can explore a vast range of holidays and will be presented with a price for their chosen trip. Each of these operators helpfully outlines why these holidays may carry extra costs, and how much travellers might be expected to fork out.

It all comes down to tourism taxes. The amount you’ll pay depends on your destination, the length of your stay, and whether you’re travelling during peak season.

Alongside the quoted price for your holiday, whether booked through TUI, easyJet, or Jet2holidays, you’ll also find an estimated tourism tax figure for the full duration of your trip. This is typically payable directly at your accommodation upon arrival.

In any destination where a tourism tax applies, all holidaymakers will be required to pay a standard rate – regardless of which airline or travel operator they have chosen to book with.

These fees are legally required, and few people are exempt from paying up

Holidaymakers planning a trip abroad in 2026 should ensure they set aside funds for an additional levy that visitors are anticipated to pay when travelling to parts of Europe. Certain popular cities could hit travellers with an extra €16 per night during their stay.

Dozens of destinations across the globe already impose a ‘tourist tax’ to help maintain the areas that both residents and visitors enjoy. These charges are typically applied on a nightly per-person basis, or as a percentage of the overall accommodation costs.

Such taxes are generally settled at check-in or checkout directly with the accommodation provider. The majority of tourists are legally required to pay these charges (children and those with disabilities are ordinarily exempt) or risk having their hotel reservations cancelled.

Consumer group Which? has recently published a summary of sought-after holiday destinations that people commonly flock to throughout the summer months. Some opt for short city breaks, while others may spend longer periods at holiday resorts, but most will need to factor in an arrival tax when budgeting.

READ MORE: ‘I was sick of paying rent every week – so I sold everything and live out of a van’READ MORE: Ryanair passengers with flights booked to Portugal issued EES update

Spain and Portugal have charges ranging from €2 to €25, while certain locations in France could levy up to €16 per night at some accommodation providers. Italy remains a firm favourite for those seeking a quick city break, yet hotels in some areas could charge as much as €10 per night, reports the Mirror.

Popular EU cities and what they charge in tourist taxes: From July 2026, tourists visiting Edinburgh, Scotland, will be required to pay a levy of “5% of the cost of the accommodation of [the] first five nights’ stay”. Wales is set to follow in 2027 with a charge of £1.30 “per night” in areas where local councils opt to bring it in.

While it’s not officially classed as a ‘tourist tax’, UK visitors will need to fork out a £17 visa fee from late 2026 to enter 30 European countries. This would come on top of any local tourist levies.

The European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) is a compulsory digital travel authorisation launching in late 2026 for visa-exempt nationals (including UK, US, Canada, Australia) visiting 30 European countries. The ETIAS is a one-off, separate payment needed to enter the Schengen Area of Europe. Once purchased, it remains valid for three years. The countries that will require this ‘e-visa’ include:

“Tracker,” one of TV’s most-watched shows, is uprooting its Canadian production and moving to Los Angeles.

The action drama, produced by Disney’s 20th Television, is among a slate of new and recurring series benefiting from California’s improved $750 million tax incentive program. The show’s fourth season, set to begin shooting this summer, will receive the state’s largest tax credit , at $48 million, according to the California Film Commission.

The production will film for 176 days in California, with 250 crew members and 275 actors on board. The tax credit is based on the show’s projected spending of over $129 million. Deadline first reported the news of the show’s relocation.

The show stars actor Justin Hartley and follows his character as he tracks down people for reward money. Ever since its 2024 premiere, the show has resonated with audiences. Its third season is currently airing and was the fourth most-watched program on linear TV as of late April, according to Nielsen.

“Tracker” is primarily set in the wilderness, making the move to California a fresh opportunity for the production to explore diverse landscapes as its backdrop. Due to the rural setting, the show is also eligible to earn an extra 5% tax credit bonus, in addition to the 35% base credit, on qualified expenditures incurred outside the designated 30-mile zone of the Greater Los Angeles area.

Before “Tracker” secured the highest TV show tax credit, season 3 of Amazon’s “Fallout,” which relocated from New York to Los Angeles, received a $42M incentive. Dan Fogelman’s new NFL drama “The Land” received $42.8M. Other productions that have benefited from the tax program include medical drama “The Pitt,” Disney’s new animated movie “Phineas and Ferb” and Netflix’s upcoming reboot of “13 Going on 30.”

More than 100 productions have received tax credits since the program was expanded last year in response to the continued migration of productions to other countries like Ireland, U.K. and Canada.

But film industry advocates say these efforts aren’t enough to fully revitalize U.S.-based productions and local film economies.

To that end, , U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) announced in March he is working on a bipartisan federal film incentive proposal that would be globally competitive.

“State programs cannot simply substitute for the kind of global, federal and competitive tax incentives that are needed to bring production back to American soil and stop its offshoring,” Schiff said.

Supervisor Kathryn Barger was the only supervisor against it. She pointed to the fact that the tax was a “general” tax, meaning the money won’t be earmarked for healthcare costs. That means politicians have final say over how the money gets spent rather than voters, she said.

Some cities within L.A. County say they’re also rattled over the tax, unleashing a stream of opposition letters against the tax. The California Contract Cities Assn. argues a sales tax hike would “disproportionately burden the very residents the County seeks to protect.” Shoppers near the county line, they warn, likely would start crossing it to shop.

Some of these cities say they have the trust issues when it comes to county ballot measures. When voters approved Measure B in 2002 to fund the county’s trauma center network, an audit years later found the county couldn’t account for whether the money actually had been spent on emergency medical services. And some cities feel they never got their fair share of funds from Measure H, the homelessness services tax measure passed in 2017.

The top candidates for California governor clashed over the high costs of gas, housing and homeowner’s insurance in a testy debate Tuesday evening, a fiery exchange that may finally draw voter attention as the June 2 primary election fast approaches.

Former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, whose campaign blossomed after former Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out amid sexual assault and misconduct allegations, came under persistent attack during the 90-minute debate but also went on the offensive.

Former Fox News host Steve Hilton, a Republican who leads all candidates in the most recent opinion polls, ripped Becerra for promising to declare a state of emergency to address rising homeowner’s insurance rates, saying the governor lacks that constitutional authority.

“We can’t have a governor who doesn’t understand how the government works,” Hilton said.

Becerra, who served as California attorney general before joining the Biden administration, quickly defended himself, saying he knows the law better than Hilton does.

“We don’t need a talking head from Fox News to tell us how the government works,” he said.

And that was after Becerra got in an early dig at Hilton, who has been endorsed by President Trump, by referring to Trump as “Hilton’s daddy.”

The debate was broadcast and livestreamed by CBS stations around the state. Hundreds of people watched from Pomona College’s historic Bridges Auditorium, a Renaissance Revival-style landmark with Art Deco flourishes that was once among the premier performance venues in Southern California.

With eight major candidates from both parties participating, CBS moderators billed it as “the largest and most inclusive debate of the election.” Becerra and Hilton were joined by Republican candidate Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and Democratic candidates San José Mayor Matt Mahan, former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, billionaire Tom Steyer, state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Some takeaways from the debate:

Candidates didn’t shy away from the top issues

Moderators set the theme for the first half-hour of the debate as “affordability,” a top concern among California voters, and almost immediately the candidates began sniping and talking over one another.

Almost all of them vowed to accelerate home construction in California, pivotal to reducing the state’s high cost of housing.

There was no shortage of ideas for other ways to ease the financial burdens facing Californians, but few specifics on how they would deliver on those promises given the state’s complex and arduous legislative process.

Hilton promised to cap the price of gas at $3 per gallon, and Mahan vowed to suspend the state gas tax. Bianco said Democrats have long overregulated and overtaxed Californians, and the state’s supermajority Democratic Legislature would have to get in line with him and end those things if he’s elected.

Becerra said he would reduce prescription drug prices. Thurmond said he would provide down-payment assistance grants to those trying to own their first home.

Barbs traded over climate-caused emergencies

Anchors and reporters from local CBS stations moderated the debate, including Los Angeles anchor Pat Harvey, Sacramento anchor Tony Lopez, Bay Area anchor Ryan Yamamoto and national investigative correspondent Julie Watts. They were joined by Sara Sadhwani, an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College and a member of California’s independent redistricting commission.

Moderators pointed to the surge in catastrophic wildfires across the state in recent years due to climate change, as well as the threat of earthquakes, and asked the candidates how they would respond to future emergencies.

As he did throughout most of the debate, Bianco responded by bashing California’s Democratic leadership, which he said created most of the ills facing the state.

Bianco said the root causes of fire disasters in the state are “not because of climate change” but due to “failed environmental activist policies” that prevented fire departments from clearing highly flammable brush around communities for years.

Mahan, after touting his actions as a Silicon Valley mayor during emergencies, quickly pivoted to take shots at Becerra and his role as U.S. Health and Human Services secretary during the pandemic.

He said Becerra had “never met a crisis that he couldn’t ignore” and accused Becerra of failing to deal with COVID-19, monkeypox and the surge of unaccompanied minors at the U.S.-Mexico border during the Biden administration.

Becerra responded by saying that his agency dealt with the crises by working with all 50 states and the federal government to quickly roll out vaccines and other resources.

“You’re not wearing a mask, are you, Matt? You’re not worried about catching monkeypox, right?” Becerra said.

Steyer also came under attack when he starting discussing his plans to “make polluters pay” for the effects of climate change. Porter criticized the former San Francisco hedge-fund founder for making millions off the oil and gas industry, and using those profits to fund his campaign for governor. Steyer has spent more than $143 million of his own money on his campaign, according to fundraising disclosures filed with the California secretary of state’s office.

“How about profiteers pay? You pay the lowest tax rate on this stage, and yet you made the billions that you’re using to fund your campaign off fossil fuels,” Porter said to Steyer.

Steyer responded that he is a “change agent” candidate opposed by special interests and pointed to campaign committees funded by utility and other industry groups opposing his bid. PG&E, the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Assn. of Realtors have put more than $29 million into a pair of committees to fund attack ads against the billionaire.

Republicans focus on blaming Democrats

Just weeks before the June 2 primary, the race to replace term-limited Newsom remains wide open, with many voters still undecided.

Republicans Hilton and Bianco have led numerous public opinion polls while the large field of Democrats have split the vote, leading to fears among Democrats that the party could get shut out of the general election, despite outnumbering Republicans nearly two-to-one among the state’s registered voters. In California’s open primary, the top two finishers advance to the general election, regardless of party affiliation.

The two Republicans avoided overtly attacking each other at the debate but were regularly the targets of other candidates on the stage.

Becerra, speaking about federal healthcare funding cuts approved by President Trump and congressional Republicans last year, referred to the president’s endorsement of Hilton. “The first thing we have to do is stop Steve Hilton’s daddy,” Becerra said.

Hilton responded jokingly that his father, who was the goalie for the Hungarian national ice hockey team, hadn’t weighed in on the race. And he said Becerra’s comment pointed to what is wrong with California politics — a fixation on Trump despite Democrats controlling the state for more than a decade.

“We’ve had the same people in charge for 16 years now, and it’s such a disaster and such a high cost of living for everyone, and the highest poverty rate in the country and the highest unemployment rate in the country, and the worst business plan,” Hilton said. “All these things going wrong, they can’t do anything except blame Trump. Let’s see how many times you hear that tonight.”

Bianco grew visibly frustrated several times over the debate’s format and his opponents’ answers. At different points, he compared the event to “The Twilight Zone” and called it “the hour and a half that [viewers] are never going to get back.”

Pressed on what he would do differently if elected, the Riverside sheriff also focused on criticizing Democrats and accusing them of lying.

“We have a group of of 20-ish-year-old kids and we’re just sitting here lying to them about broken Democrat policies in California for the last 20 years, and we’re going to sit here and blame a president who’s been president for a year. This is absolutely ridiculous,” he said.

Hilton has seen a bump in his polling numbers since he was endorsed by President Trump earlier this month. A CBS News/YouGov poll of more than 1,400 registered voters released Monday showed Hilton leading with 16%, followed by Steyer with 15%, Becerra with 13%, Bianco with 10%, Porter with 9%, Mahan and Villaraigosa with 4% and Thurmond with 1%. The largest group of voters — 26% — was undecided.

Nixon reported from Sacramento and Mehta reported from Claremont. Times staff writers Kevin Rector, Dakota Smith and Blanca Begert contributed to this report.

Last year, studios and Hollywood labor unions lobbied hard to ensure animated movies and shows could compete for California’s expanded film and television tax credit program.

The payoff came last week, when three animated movies were among the nearly 40 film projects that received a production incentive in the latest round of awards, the California Film Commission announced Thursday.

Walt Disney Co.-owned 20th Century Studios received $21.9 million for “The Simpsons Movie 2,” Disney Entertainment Television got $3.5 million for “Phineas and Ferb” and DreamWorks Animation was awarded $24.7 million in credit allocation for a yet-untitled animated film.

The three are the first animated feature films to receive tax credits from the state of California. (Last month, two animated shows — a spin-off of “Rick and Morty” and “Stewie,” which branches off from the “Family Guy” cartoon — also received tax credits.)

I spoke with DreamWorks Animation Chief Operating Officer Randy Lake about the award, which he called a “potential game changer” for the Glendale-based studio known for the “Shrek” and “Kung Fu Panda” franchises.

“Unlike live-action, our projects are years long,” he said. “You’re talking about not just a job for six or nine months on set. It’s literally three or four years that these projects can take. It’s long-term employment.”

Like most of Hollywood, the animation industry has suffered from the effects of the 2023 dual writers’ and actors’ strikes, as well as the retrenchment in studio spending after the initial rush to invest in content for streaming services.

And like much of U.S. film and TV work — particularly in California — the animation business has been deeply affected by the increasingly rich tax credits offered by other countries.

Over the last 15 years, countries including Canada and Ireland have slowly built up animation hubs, aided by their local talent and lucrative production incentives specific to animation and visual effects.

For instance, visual effects and computer animation unit Sony Pictures Imageworks, which Lake ran for years, relocated its Culver City headquarters to Vancouver more than a decade ago.

DreamWorks, too, has outsourced work to partner studios, particularly in Vancouver and Montreal, as costs in the U.S. have increased and studios face pressure to rein in their production expenses while theatrical box-office revenue has become less reliable.

Just three years ago, DreamWorks cut about 70 jobs across its corporate functions, feature films, TV and technology departments. In 2024, Disney-owned computer animation studio Pixar laid off about 175 employees as it pulled back on its production of streaming series.

But with the recent tax credit allocation, DreamWorks will hire about 100 people in California for its upcoming untitled film. Those jobs would probably would have been outsourced to a third-party studio, Lake said. Keeping all of the jobs on that film in California helps improve collaboration among the teams and foster more creativity, he said. Today, DreamWorks has about 1,000 employees.

To understand why the new incentives are meaningful, consider that a DreamWorks Animation movie similar to the one that received the credit will typically have a crew of about 400 to 500 people.

That film is a big feature, though Lake declined to share details since the project hasn’t been announced.

Both the Animation Guild and studios have pointed to the incentive as a way to bring back animation jobs to the Golden State.

“Studios have been chasing animation tax credits in other states and countries for years, so it’s incredibly rewarding to see them use California’s for the very first time,” Marissa Bernstel, a trustee on the union’s executive board and member of the task force that helped lobby for the expanded production incentives, said in a statement last week. “The results feel very real, and I’m excited to see what future employment opportunities the incentive inspires.”

Lake said DreamWorks hopes to take advantage of the state incentives for all of its full-budget films.

“We’ll be applying for the next window,” he said, adding that he hoped they will be successful so “we’ll be able to have more and more of our films be fully produced in state. That’s the goal.”

Stuff We Wrote

Film shoots

Number of the week

Lionsgate’s “Michael” had a massive opening weekend with just over $217 million in global box-office revenue. In the U.S. and Canada, the Michael Jackson biopic hauled in about $97 million, far surpassing studio expectations.

The film, which stars Jackson’s nephew, Jaafar Jackson, as the late singer, chronicles the pop star’s rise from his early days in the Jackson 5 through the growth of his solo career. The movie ends in 1988 while Jackson is on tour for his hit album “Bad.”

The premiere for “Michael” marks the biggest domestic opening for any biopic, musical or otherwise. The 2015 movie “Straight Outta Compton” previously held the record for highest opening weekend total for a musical biopic, with $60 million in the U.S. and Canada, followed by the Queen biopic “Bohemian Rhapsody” in 2018, which had a $51.1-million domestic opening.

Critics’ reviews of “Michael,” however, were largely negative. Many noted the plot sidesteps the child sexual abuse allegations against Jackson and said the film presents a more one-dimensional view of the singer.

An earlier cut of the film did end in 1993 and addressed the allegations, but that ending had to be scrapped due to a clause in a legal settlement with an accuser that stipulated he could never be pictured or mentioned in a dramatization of Jackson’s life. Jackson and his estate have denied that the pop star abused children.

What I’m watching

I finally finished the Hulu series “Paradise” this last week, which kept me guessing about literally everything all the way until the end. I’m interested in seeing where this genre-morphing show goes next season.

Hold everything. Hollywood’s Lexington Park will not be getting a new playground after all, and that’s both good news and bad news.

To explain, let me take you back to April 15, when I tagged along with Sabine Phillips on her weekly three-hour inspection of the neighborhood’s chronic trash problem. Phillips, a housekeeper by trade, was hired by one of her clients a few years ago to help clean up their streets.

So each Wednesday, Phillips went out on her yellow Huffy cruiser and routinely logged 50 or more illegally dumped items and reported them to the city’s 311 system for pickup. And each Saturday, she filled up to four or five big bags with smaller bits and scraps of debris.

Near the end of my three hours with Phillips, who got help that day from volunteer Keith Johnson, we visited the Lexington pocket park. There were no kids there, and there never are, Phillips said. That’s because of the glass and needles in the sand, drug activity, sporadic violence, gang tags on the slide and homeless camps.

A guy from the Recreation and Parks Department showed up and said the park was in line for a possible upgrade that could cost as much as $300,000. In my April 18 column, I questioned the wisdom of investing in a playground that would remain unsafe unless there was a plan to address all the aforementioned issues.

Nick Barnes-Batista, communications director for L.A. City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez, wrote to tell me his office was unaware of any playground projects planned for that park.

A spokesperson for Recreation and Parks told me that despite what was said by the employee I met in the park, there is no “immediate playground replacement project on the books.” But the department is “working closely” with the councilman’s office “to identify funding sources and to work with the community on broader park improvements and/or uses.”

OK, so it’s good news that taxpayer funds won’t be plowed into a park that could well be lost to the neighborhood almost immediately, due to all the aforementioned problems.

But it’s bad news and sad commentary that a park in the densely populated heart of the city will remain unusable for the foreseeable future.

The more important consideration, though, is the question of what’s being done to prevent the illegal dumping of furniture, mattresses and other items that sit curbside and often end up as the building blocks of new homeless encampments.

There’s a concentration of social service agencies in the neighborhood, said Stefanie Keenan, a longtime neighborhood volunteer and activist. She’s the one who hired her housekeeper to help look after the neighborhood, and she insists there is not enough enforcement of existing laws to address problems that are both a nuisance and a public safety threat, given the crime and all-too-frequent fires.

A woman pushes her walker past debris in Council District 13 in Los Angeles on Friday.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Soto-Martínez agreed to talk to me about all of this on Friday morning, when he dropped by the Bresee Foundation, a nonprofit with a range of enrichment activities for youngsters and families in the largely low-income immigrant community, as well as homelessness prevention programs. Staff and volunteers, recruited with support from the council office, were about to head into nearby streets with shovels, brooms and trash bags.

Soto-Martínez acknowledged his district’s many challenges, told the gathering that the strength of a community is its people, and thanked them for their service.

The councilman, a former labor leader who joined the growing progressive wing of the L.A. City Council in 2022 with support from the local chapter of Democratic Socialists of America, has three challengers in the June 2 primary (Colter Carlisle, Dylan Kendall and Rich Sarian). He told me the city has to do a better job of educating people about illegal dumping and how to report it. A related challenge, he said, “is how quickly can we get to it. And that is a budget issue because we’ve cut so many positions on trash pickup.”

Soto-Martínez said his office used discretionary funds to hire two crews from the L.A. Conservation Corps for trash pickup. On homelessness, he said, he has a team strategizing to address the needs, and a medical team that works the streets, and a tiny home village is in the works.

But the housing shortage is a major challenge, he said, and when it comes to entrenched homelessness, “we’re now starting to deal with much more difficult cases.” Namely severe mental illness and serious addiction, both of which generally come under county jurisdiction.

“We created another team that goes out every single day. We door-knock, email and phone-bank people who are at risk of eviction,” Soto-Martínez said, adding that homelessness has declined by 25% during his three years in office.

So what is his message to constituents who say they don’t see enough progress?

“We ask them to give us patience and grace,” he said. “There’s a lot of examples like this, where we’re not just dealing with one thing. We’re dealing with four or five things.”

All of that is true, but the patience he asks for is wearing thin among some constituents.

“We need to find common ground and work together,” Soto-Martínez said. “You know, they see trash as an issue, and they’re doing it their way and we’re doing it our way. But how can we team up and do it together? You know, we’re happy to build those networks out, and under many of the issues they describe, I’m not disagreeing. … We all have the same goal.”

L.A. City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez gives a pep talk to volunteers before they leave to clean their neighborhood streets of garbage and debris.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

When Soto-Martínez departed for another appointment, the volunteers took to the streets, filling trash bags. They worked their way up Vermont, and a Bresee employee told me he works the same streets every day, trying to clear a path for “safe passage” as students walk to and from school.

As I said in the earlier column, it’s an inspiration to see people step up for their communities, whether out of pride or frustration. And it’s also reasonable to expect more from City Hall.

I drove over to Western and Sierra Vista, met up with Keenan, and told her about my conversation with Soto-Martínez. She said lax city policies and frequent non-response to citizen pleas for help have created the unsolved problems residents deal with daily. She said city officials have to do a better job of helping homeless people off the streets and preventing further deterioration of neighborhoods.

She was encouraged by a message she got from a representative of Mayor Karen Bass’ office who wants to tour the neighborhood with her.

We walked west on Sierra Vista and came upon a dumped sofa, some cabinets, mattresses, and a man who has been living in a curbside encampment for months. He sat near his belongings, which spilled into the street.

Why hasn’t this been addressed? Keenan wondered aloud. She has decided to stop paying her housekeeper to help address the neighborhood’s needs, and she predicted things will only get worse because of it.

I drove over to the Lexington pocket park, which Soto-Martínez called a priority, among many other priorities. Friday was a holiday — Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day. With schools closed, the park would have been a great little neighborhood asset.

But the entrance was closed, with a lock on the gate, and two tarped dwellings were set up against the iron fencing of the empty park.

steve.lopez@latimes.com

When travelling, it’s important to know what won’t get you in trouble at customs

Travellers could face fines or worse if they overlook an airport ‘rule’ that puts a limit on certain items. It could catch Brits off guard if they end their latest getaway with a last-minute spending spree on various common products or high-end items.

When going to or from the European Union (EU), it is important to understand the regulations regarding the duty-free allowance passengers are permitted. Failing to comply with these restrictions could result in goods being seized, along with potential fines or legal proceedings.

The duty-free allowance applies to both EU and non-EU nationals, including holidaymakers and business travellers. Following Brexit, the UK has been adhering to the regulations for non-EU nationals.

Why is there a duty-free allowance?

Duty-free allowance is the authorised quantity of goods, such as alcohol, tobacco, and gifts, that travellers can bring into a country without incurring customs duty, value-added tax (VAT), or other levies. As a result, people face a strict limit on how much they can observe, or risk being perceived as exploiting the system, reports the Express.

What are the duty-free limits?

Duty-free allowances are split into two categories – restricted and unrestricted goods. Unrestricted goods are those without any special regulations or caps, such as clothing, electronics, or personal belongings, while restricted items are subject to specific limitations, including alcohol, tobacco, and perfume.

The restrictions in place also vary depending on how you’re returning to the UK. Shoppers are often caught out by the deals on offer in airports – but identical rules apply to those travelling by sea.

You’re also unable to pool your allowance with fellow passengers, which means people need to be mindful of their own spending habits. According to ETIAS Visa Europe, Brits returning to the UK via air or sea travel have the following allowances on ‘restricted’ items:

• 200 cigarettes (or 100 cigarillos or 50 cigars or 250g of tobacco)
• Four litres of still wine and 16 litres of beer and one litre of spirits or two litres of fortified or sparkling wine
• Other goods up to a value of €430 per person

The thresholds are reduced for non-EU citizens travelling by rail or road. The website explains that travellers should bring no more than:

• 40 cigarettes (or 20 cigarillos or 10 cigars or 50g of tobacco)
• One litre of spirits or two litres of fortified or sparkling wine and four litres of still wine and 16 litres of beer
• Other goods up to a value of €300 per person

ETIAS warned that, when goods go beyond the duty-free allowance, customs duty, value-added tax (VAT), and other taxes may be applied on the excess amount. The total of duties and taxes owed depends on various factors, such as the type of goods, their value, and the country of origin.

A spokesperson said: “To avoid overpaying taxes and duties, travellers should be aware of the duty-free allowances for the type of goods they are bringing into the EU. They should accurately declare all goods they are bringing in and their value.

“If unsure about the value of an item, travellers can check online or with customs officials. Additionally, travellers should keep all receipts and documentation to show the value of their goods.”

In other news, holidaymakers could face fines of up to £5,000 for bringing certain goods into England, even if those items were purchased at a duty-free price. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) released an update at the end of March, calling on travellers to take this “simple step” to protect against diseases.