wealth

Nov. 3 (UPI) — The United States’ 10 richest billionaires saw their wealth grow last year by nearly $700 billion, according to a new report published Monday by Oxfam, which warns the Trump administration is worsening U.S. inequality.

The report states that in the past year, the wealth of U.S. billionaires grew by $698 billion.

Oxfam, the British-founded confederation of nearly two dozen non-governmental organizations, citing Federal Reserve data, found that between 1989 and 2022, a household in the top 0.1% gained $39.5 million, while a household in the top 1% gained about $8.3 million. Meanwhile, a bottom 20% household saw its wealth only grow by $8,465.

This equals to the poorest household in the top 1% having gained 987 times more wealth than the richest household in the bottom 20%, according to the report.

It continues by stating that while the wealth of working- and middle-class families have barely grown in more than three decades, America’s richest have seen their purses overflow.

As evidence, Oxfam said the share of national income going to the top 1% doubled from 1980 to 2022, while the share going to the bottom 50% decreased by one-third.

It also pointed to the top 1% owning half of the entire stock market, while the bottom half of Americans only hold 1.1%.

“The data confirms what people across our nation already know instinctively: the new American oligarchy is here,” Abby Maxman, Oxfam America’s president and CEO, said in a statement accompanying the publication of the report.

“Billionaires and mega-corporations are booming while working families struggle to afford housing, healthcare and groceries.”

The report warns that the Trump administration is taking actions that threaten to worsen inequality in the United States.

According to Oxfam, the Trump administration, backed by a Republican-controlled Congress, “has moved with staggering speed and scale to carry out a relentless attack on working class families, and use the power of the office to enrich the wealthy and well-connected.”

Maxman said the Trump administration and congressional Republicans “risk turbocharging” this inequality, while adding that what they are doing isn’t new, but what is different “is how much undemocratic power they’ve now amassed.”

The American dream is something like owning your own home, living comfortably, and seeing your children live happy and productive lives. That dream is even better if you can pass on your wealth to your children, which is basically what’s called generational wealth.

What if you don’t just pass on some money but instead pass on a reliable income stream? That’s what Realty Income (O 1.13%) could let you do. Here’s what you need to know about this unstoppable dividend stock.

The big number is, currently, 30

What does an unstoppable dividend stock look like? That’s pretty easy. It’s a company that manages to increase its dividend every year for decades on end. Real estate investment trust (REIT) Realty Income’s dividend streak is up to 30 years and counting at this point.

Image source: Getty Images.

What’s notable about that streak is that it includes some of the worst economic periods of recent history. And some of the worst bear markets. Realty Income’s dividend grew through the Dot.com crash, the Great Recession (and associated bear market) between 2007 and 2009, and the COVID-19 pandemic. What’s notable is that the Great Recession was particularly difficult for the real estate sector, and the pandemic was devastating to retailers, which make up over 70% of Realty Income’s tenants.

Basically, Realty Income has proven that it has what it takes to survive over the long term while continuing to reward investors with a progressive dividend. But that’s not all. It also happens to have an investment-grade-rated balance sheet, so it is financially strong. And it is geographically diversified, with properties in both the U.S. market and across Europe. While the portfolio is tilted toward retail properties, they tend to be easy to buy, sell, and release if needed. The rest of the portfolio, meanwhile, adds some diversification. All in all, it is a well structured REIT.

Plenty of generational opportunity ahead

The big draw for Realty Income is going to be the dividend yield, which sits at 5.4% or so. That’s well above the 1.2% the S&P 500 index is offering today and the 3.8% or so yield of the average REIT. But, as highlighted above, this isn’t exactly a high-risk investment. Why is the yield so high?

The answer is that Realty Income is a boring, slow-growth business. Over the three decades of dividend growth, the dividend has increased at a compound annual rate of 4.2%. That’s above the historical growth rate of inflation, so the buying power of the dividend has increased over time. But all in all, this is not an exciting stock to own and, frankly, isn’t meant to be. The company trademarked the nickname “The Monthly Dividend Company” for a reason: The REIT’s goal is specifically to be a reliable dividend stock.

There’s no reason to believe it will be anything but reliable in the future. Notably, it is the largest net-lease REIT, giving it an edge on its competitors when it comes to costs and deal making. Management has also been diversifying the business with the goal of increasing the number of levers it has to pull to support its slow and steady growth. None of its efforts involve undue risk, either. Slow and steady is the goal, but so far that’s worked out very well for dividend investors.

A simple and generational proposition

What you are getting when you buy Realty Income is a boring dividend stock that will pay you well to own it. And when the time comes, you can pass that income stream on to the next generation. Building generational wealth is a great thing, but just handing on a pile of money isn’t the only way to do it.

Imagine living a comfortable retirement with the monthly dividends you collect from Realty Income. And while you do that, you can think about how much easier the lives of your children will be when they collect that income instead of you.

The former Stolper Co is a financial management company that merged with another financial services business to form Wealth Oklahoma in 2025. It initiated a new position in Allison Transmission Holdings (ALSN -2.01%), acquiring 75,606 shares in the third quarter, an estimated $6.4 million trade based on the average price for Q3 2025, according to its October 10, 2025, SEC filing.

What happened

Wealth Oklahoma disclosed the purchase of 75,606 shares of Allison Transmission Holdings in its quarterly report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on October 10, 2025 (SEC filing). The new holding was valued at $6.4 million as of Q3 2025, with the transaction representing 1.9% of Stolper’s $330 million in reportable U.S. equity assets.

What else to know

This is a new position; the stake now accounts for 1.9% of Wealth Oklahoma’s 13F reportable assets as of September 30, 2025.

Top holdings after the filing are as follows:

• BRK-B: $18.96 million (5.75% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
• JPM: $17.74 million (5.37% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
• AAPL: $14.90 million (4.52% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
• GOOGL: $11.92 million (3.6% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
• COF: $10.73 million (3.25% of AUM as of Q3 2025)

As of October 9, 2025, Allison Transmission shares were priced at $81.02, down 18.4% over the prior year ending October 9, 2025 and underperforming the S&P 500 by 33.9 percentage points over the past year.

The company reported trailing 12-month revenue of $3.2 billion for the period ended June 30, 2025 and net income of $762 million for the period ended June 30, 2025.

Allison Transmission’s dividend yield stood at 1.3% as of October 10, 2025. Shares were 35% below their 52-week high as of October 9, 2025.

Company Overview

Company Snapshot

Allison Transmission designs and manufactures fully automatic transmissions and related parts for commercial, defense, and specialty vehicles. It also offers remanufactured transmissions and aftermarket support.

The company generates revenue primarily through product sales to original equipment manufacturers and aftermarket services, including replacement parts and extended coverage.

Allison Transmission serves a global customer base of OEMs, distributors, dealers, and government agencies, with a focus on commercial vehicle and defense markets.

Image source: Getty Images.

Allison Transmission is a leading provider of fully automatic transmissions for medium- and heavy-duty commercial and defense vehicles worldwide. The company leverages a broad distribution network and long-standing OEM relationships to maintain a strong position in the auto parts sector.

Foolish take

Founded in 1915, Allison Transmission is a veteran of propulsion systems technology. It’s the world’s largest manufacturer of medium and heavy-duty fully automatic transmissions, according to the company.

Allison Transmission’s sales are down slightly year over year. Through the first half of 2025, revenue stood at $1.58 billion compared to $1.61 billion in 2024.

This lack of sales growth is a contributor to the company’s share price decline, adding to its dismal 2025 outlook, which it slashed due to softness in demand in some of its end markets, such as for medium-duty trucks. Allison Transmission now expects 2025 revenue to come in between $3.1 billion to $3.2 billion, down from $3.2 billion to $3.3 billion.

With Allison Transmission shares hovering around a 52-week low, Wealth Oklahoma took advantage to initiate a position in the stock. This speaks to Wealth Oklahoma’s belief that Allison Transmission can bounce back. This might be the case, given Allison’s recent acquisition of Dana Incorporated, which provides drivetrain and propulsion systems in over 25 countries.

With a price-to-earnings ratio of 9, Allison Transmission’s valuation looks attractive, which also explains Wealth Oklahoma’s purchase. The stock certainly looks like it’s in buy territory.

Glossary

13F reportable assets: U.S. equity holdings that institutional investment managers must disclose quarterly to the SEC on Form 13F.
AUM (Assets Under Management): The total market value of investments managed on behalf of clients by a financial institution or fund manager.
Dividend yield: Annual dividend payments divided by the share price, expressed as a percentage, showing income return on investment.
Trailing twelve months (TTM): The 12-month period ending with the most recent quarterly report.
Original equipment manufacturer (OEM): A company that produces parts or equipment that may be marketed by another manufacturer.
Aftermarket services: Products and support provided after the original sale, such as replacement parts, maintenance, or extended warranties.
Stake: The amount or percentage of ownership an investor or institution holds in a company.
Quarterly report: A financial statement filed every three months, detailing a company’s performance and financial position.
Distribution network: The system of intermediaries, such as dealers and distributors, through which a company sells its products.
Defense market: The sector focused on supplying products and services to military and government defense agencies.

On October 7, 2025, Moulton Wealth Management, Inc disclosed a new position in VanEck Semiconductor ETF(SMH 2.68%), acquiring 8,932 shares valued at approximately $2.92 million.

What happened

According to a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing dated October 7, 2025, Moulton Wealth Management, Inc disclosed a new position in VanEck Semiconductor ETF, adding 8,932 shares. The estimated transaction value was approximately $2.92 million. The fund reported 45 total positions and $137.49 million in reportable U.S. equity assets.

What else to know

This is a new position; SMH now accounts for 2.1% of the fund’s 13F assets under management.

Top holdings after the filing:

• SPLG: $12.93 million (9.4% of AUM)
• USFR: $10.40 million (7.6% of AUM)
• TFLO: $10.37 million (7.5% of AUM)
• SJNK: $9.82 million (7.1% of AUM)
• FLOT: $9.73 million (7.1% of AUM)

As of October 7, 2025, shares were priced at $337.05, up 35.79% over the past year.

Company overview

Company snapshot

The investment strategy seeks to replicate the performance of the fund’s benchmark index by investing at least 80% of assets in U.S. exchange-listed semiconductor companies.

The portfolio is concentrated in common stocks and depositary receipts of semiconductor companies, including both domestic and foreign issuers.

Fund structure is non-diversified with a passively managed approach.

VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) provides targeted exposure to the semiconductor sector by tracking a benchmark index of leading U.S.-listed semiconductor companies. The fund’s substantial asset base and focused portfolio offer investors a liquid and efficient vehicle for accessing this critical technology industry.

Foolish take

I’m a longtime bull on the VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) for one very simple reason: Semiconductors are a critical component within the artificial intelligence (AI) ecosystem, and AI is the most important technological innovation of this decade.

Therefore, this fund’s core holdings read like a who’s who of top-performing stocks. There’s Nvidia, Advanced Micro Devices, Broadcom, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, Intel, and many more.

Obviously, many of these stocks have soared to new heights as the AI revolution has picked up steam. Nvidia is now the world’s largest company by market cap; Broadcom is now the 7th-largest American company with a market cap north of $1.6 trillion.

What’s more, organizations are still spending tens of billions on new AI infrastructure investments — much of it coming in the form of purchases of semiconductors.

For example, according to estimates compiled by Yahoo Finance, Nvidia’s annual sales should rise to over $200 billion this year, up from $26 billion in 2022.

All that said, semiconductors have historically been a cyclical industry, and have endured many boom-bust cycles. So investors should remain cautious about how much exposure they may have to the semiconductor industry, given its volatile history.

However, for most growth-oriented investors, semiconductors are now a must-own sector. So for those investors, the Van Eck Semiconductor ETF is one fund to consider for the long term.

Glossary

ETF (Exchange-Traded Fund): An investment fund traded on stock exchanges, holding assets like stocks or bonds.

13F assets under management: The value of U.S. equity securities reported by institutional managers in quarterly SEC filings.

New position: The initial purchase of a security or asset not previously held in a portfolio.

Benchmark index: A standard index used to measure the performance of an investment fund or portfolio.

Depositary receipts: Negotiable certificates representing shares in a foreign company, traded on local stock exchanges.

Non-diversified fund: A fund that invests a large portion of assets in a small number of issuers or sectors.

Passively managed: An investment approach that aims to replicate the performance of a benchmark index, not outperform it.

Expense ratio: The annual fee expressed as a percentage of assets, covering a fund’s operating costs.

Asset base: The total value of assets held by a fund or investment vehicle.

Reportable position: A holding that must be disclosed in regulatory filings due to its size or regulatory requirements.

On October 07, 2025, Carolina Wealth Advisors, LLC disclosed a buy of Novo Nordisk A/S (NYSE: NVO) shares, an estimated $6.01 million trade based on the average price for Q3 2025.

What happened

According to a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing dated October 07, 2025, Carolina Wealth Advisors, LLC increased its stake in Novo Nordisk, adding 102,629 shares during the third quarter. The estimated trade size was $6.01 million, calculated using the average closing price for the period from July 1 through September 30, 2025. The updated holding stands at 116,973 shares.

What else to know

This transaction was a buy, raising Novo Nordisk A/S to 2.8% of the fund’s 13F reportable AUM as of Q3 2025.

Top holdings after the filing:

• NYSEMKT:SCHQ: $18.93 million (8.2% of AUM) as of September 30, 2025.
• NYSEMKT:BKAG: $13.22 million (5.7% of AUM) as of September 30, 2025.
• NYSEMKT:SCHP: $13.10 million (5.6589% of AUM) as of September 30, 2025.
• NYSE:DELL: $10.14 million (4.3781% of AUM) as of September 30, 2025.
• NYSEMKT:SPHY: $10.09 million (4.3568% of AUM) as of Q3 2025.

As of October 6, 2025, Novo Nordisk A/S shares were priced at $59.65. This price reflects an underperformance of 65.4 percentage points relative to the S&P 500 over the past year.

Company Overview

Company Snapshot

Novo Nordisk:

• Offers pharmaceutical products focused on diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular, rare blood disorders, and hormone replacement therapies, as well as medical devices such as insulin pens and smart diabetes solutions.
• Generates revenue primarily through the development, manufacturing, and global distribution of branded prescription medicines and medical devices, with a strong focus on chronic disease management.
• Serves healthcare providers, hospitals, and patients in Europe, North America, Asia, and other international markets, targeting individuals with diabetes, obesity, and rare diseases.

Novo Nordisk is a global healthcare leader specializing in diabetes and obesity care, with a robust presence in rare disease therapeutics. The company leverages extensive research and development capabilities to deliver innovative pharmaceutical products and smart medical devices. Its scale, diversified product portfolio, and global reach provide a strong competitive position in chronic disease management.

Foolish take

Carolina Wealth Advisors’ $6 million addition to its Novo Nordisk holdings is noteworthy as it grows the holding from a 0.5% position to a 2.8% stake in the firm’s overall portfolio.

This purchase makes the Ozempic and Wegovy maker the 11th-largest holding overall in the firm’s portfolio, and its sixth-largest stock holding.

With five bond and treasury ETFs making up 28% of Carolina Wealth’s holdings, this ballooning Novo Nordisk stake stands out.

Novo Nordisk’s shares have dropped nearly 60% from their highs in the last two years, so this could be a well-timed acquisition.

After receiving immense fanfare for its obesity and diabetic drug breakthroughs, the company’s price-earnings (P/E) ratio soared to 50 as the stock hit new all-time highs in 2024.

However, with revolutionary breakthroughs like these — paired with the subsequent fanfare — comes competition. Now the market has Novo Nordisk trading at a much more reasonable 19 times earnings as it tries to gauge just how much of its leading market share the company will be able to hold on to.

Ultimately, if investors believe in Novo Nordisk’s ability to maintain its leadership advantage and build upon its pipeline of promising treatments, today’s valuation could be a bargain — and Carolina Wealth is piling in.

Glossary

13F AUM: Assets under management reported in quarterly SEC Form 13F filings, covering U.S. equity holdings by institutional investors.
Reportable AUM: The portion of a fund’s assets under management that must be disclosed in regulatory filings, such as Form 13F.
Quarter (Q3 2025): The third three-month period of the 2025 calendar year, covering July 1 to September 30.
Stake: The ownership interest or position held in a company, typically measured by the number of shares owned.
Top holdings: The largest investments in a fund’s portfolio, usually ranked by market value or percentage of total assets.
Filing: An official document submitted to a regulatory authority, such as the SEC, disclosing financial or investment information.
Underperformance: When an investment’s returns are lower than a benchmark or comparable index over a specific period.
Chronic disease management: Ongoing medical care and treatment strategies for long-term health conditions, such as diabetes or obesity.
Pharmaceutical products: Medications developed and manufactured for diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of diseases.
Medical devices: Instruments or apparatuses used in the diagnosis, treatment, or management of medical conditions.
Smart diabetes solutions: Technology-enabled tools, such as connected insulin pens, designed to help manage diabetes more effectively.
TTM: The 12-month period ending with the most recent quarterly report.

Destiny Wealth Partners reported in an SEC filing on Monday that it sold 59,354 shares of the iShares Biotechnology ETF (IBB) in the third quarter—an estimated $8.1 million transaction based on average pricing for the quarter.

What happened

According to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Monday, Destiny Wealth Partners reduced its holding in the iShares Biotechnology ETF (IBB) by 59,354 shares during the quarter. The estimated value of the shares sold was $8.1 million. The fund now holds 16,430 IBB shares valued at $2.4 million as of September 30.

What else to know

This sale left IBB representing 0.3% of Destiny Wealth Partners’ 13F reportable assets.

Top holdings after the filing:

• JAAA: $46.41 million (5.7% of AUM)
• VUG: $40.11 million (4.9% of AUM)
• DFLV: $32.03 million (3.9% of AUM)
• JCPB: $28.13 million (3.45% of AUM)
• AMZN: $27.70 million (3.4% of AUM)

As of Tuesday afternoon, IBB shares were priced at $149.73. The fund is up about 5% over the year.

Company overview

Company snapshot

• IBB seeks to track the investment results of a biotechnology-focused equity index, investing at least 80% of assets in component securities and economically similar investments.
• It operates as a non-diversified ETF, with periodic rebalancing to maintain index alignment.

The iShares Biotechnology ETF (IBB) offers investors access to the U.S. biotechnology sector through a passively managed fund. With over $6 billion in market capitalization, the ETF provides exposure to biotechnology companies.

Foolish take

Destiny Wealth Partners’ decision to unload roughly $8.1 million in iShares Biotechnology ETF (IBB) shares adds to a broader theme in markets this year: Institutional investors have been cooling on biotech. The sector has struggled to regain its pandemic-era momentum as investors favor AI, energy, and industrial plays. IBB is up about 5% over the past year, trailing the S&P 500’s 18% gain.

IBB’s two largest holdings—Vertex Pharmaceuticals and Amgen—have each slumped, down about 8% and 7%, respectively, over the past year. That drag has offset strength from smaller, high-growth biotech names focused on oncology and gene therapy. Meanwhile, the fund’s expense ratio of 0.44% sits slightly above broad-market ETF averages, reflecting the niche exposure investors are paying for.

For long-term investors, IBB still offers diversified exposure to the innovation pipeline driving future drug breakthroughs—but near-term returns will depend on FDA approvals, pricing clarity, and investor appetite for higher-risk growth sectors.

Glossary

ETF (Exchange-Traded Fund): An investment fund traded on stock exchanges, holding a basket of assets like stocks or bonds.

Biotechnology ETF: An ETF focused on companies in the biotechnology industry, such as drug development and medical research.

AUM (Assets Under Management): The total market value of assets that an investment manager or fund controls on behalf of clients.

13F reportable AUM: The portion of a fund’s assets that must be disclosed in quarterly SEC Form 13F filings, typically U.S. equity holdings.

Non-diversified ETF: A fund that invests in fewer securities or sectors, increasing exposure to specific industries or companies.

Index-based selection: An investment strategy where holdings are chosen to match a specific market index, rather than by active management.

Component securities: The individual stocks or assets that make up an index or ETF portfolio.

Dividend yield: The annual dividend income expressed as a percentage of the investment’s current price.

Total return: The investment’s price change plus all dividends and distributions, assuming those payouts are reinvested.

Rebalancing: Adjusting a fund’s holdings periodically to maintain alignment with its target index or asset allocation.

Identifying growing companies with ample room for expansion is how you spot tomorrow’s winners. The key is to maintain a long-term perspective because the whims of market sentiment in the short term will always try to trick you into selling your shares too early.

As long as the business continues to execute and grow, you’ll be on the path to building wealth. Let’s look at two companies that are still in the early stages of their long-term growth and can help you build wealth for retirement.

Image source: Getty Images.

1. Dutch Bros

One way to identify promising wealth builders is to look at emerging brands that are resonating with a new generation of consumers. Dutch Bros (BROS -1.59%) has tailored its marketing strategy around winning over Gen Z, and it’s driving impressive growth for this specialty beverage chain.

Dutch Bros was founded in 1992, so it’s not an unproven business concept. In fact, it’s outperforming industry leader Starbucks. Dutch Bros’ same-shop sales grew 6% year over year in the most recent quarter, while Starbucks continues to struggle with declining comparable sales.

Dutch Bros’ menu is centered around coffee, but also includes a flavorful range of soda, smoothies, and other drinks. It uses clever marketing tactics to build a loyal following. For example, the company ran a limited-time promotion in May where customers received matching friendship bracelets for purchasing at least two drinks.

Giving away free items has resonated with a younger crowd and made this brand stand out in a competitive market. Its success building a loyal customer base can be seen through its loyalty program, which drove 72% of systemwide transactions in the second quarter.

Dutch Bros ended the last quarter with 1,043 shops across 19 states, but management believes it can reach 7,000 over the long term. Investors should be rewarded as it continues to expand, since the company is already turning a profit of $89 million on $1.4 billion of revenue on a trailing-12-month basis. This margin will continue to grow as the business scales, driving robust earnings growth to support market-beating shareholder returns.

2. Shopify

Starting a business has never been easier than it is today thanks to Shopify (SHOP 1.66%). With a relatively affordable subscription, business owners can quickly set up an online storefront to connect with shoppers worldwide. The affordability, ease of use, and powerful suite of tools have built a solid competitive moat around Shopify that should ensure many years of growth for shareholders.

Subscription revenue grew 16% year over year in the second quarter, reaching $656 million. However, its merchant solutions business grew 36% year over year, and this is where Shopify’s business model shines. Merchant solutions revenue includes payment processing, capital lending, and shipping services. This comprised 75% of Shopify’s total revenue.

This means that Shopify has built its business model around the success of its customers. If merchants are not successful growing their business, Shopify won’t grow either. This incentivizes management to innovate not just to boost its own bottom line, but the bottom line of the businesses that pay for a Shopify subscription.

Shopify is also expanding beyond e-commerce with its point-of-sale offering. Shopify Point of Sale saw its gross merchandise volume increase by 29% year over year in Q2. It was recently recognized as a leader in point-of-sale software by IDC. This ultimately positions Shopify to compete in the $28 trillion global retail market, according to Statista.

Shopify can grow for a long time. Investors expect the company to capitalize on this massive addressable market, as the stock currently trades at 100 times this year’s consensus earnings estimate. The stock is closing in on a new all-time high and should deliver superior compounding returns for years to come.

President Trump signed a proclamation that imposes a $100,000 fee on H-1B visa applications, the immigration allocation set aside for highly skilled workers the U.S. economy needs. The new rules threaten the availability and deployment of human capital in the United States. This is misguided and will hurt U.S. growth and innovation, at a time when the global arms race for AI creates a vital need for the sharpest human talent and innovators.

We are professors who study and teach innovation-related topics at U.S. research universities. As immigrants to the United States from India and Panama respectively, we understand firsthand the sometimes painful discussions around H-1B immigration. Tensions around immigration routinely affect our academic institutions, our current students and former students now in industry. But there should be a lot of common ground on this polarizing topic.

STEM immigrants are creating substantial value in the United States. Immigrants play a significant role in entrepreneurial ventures in the United States and particularly startup innovation. Further, such immigrants are responsible for 23% of innovation output in the United States. This effect is in part based on policies that allow for foreign students to study and stay in the United States to work in startups.

H-1B immigration is like a natural selection process that benefits the U.S. immensely. Highly skilled immigrants in areas such as technology and medicine come hungry for hard work and full of ideas to better the world — to create new products, services and even markets as well as to cater to existing needs through more incremental improvement and optimization. Many of our best students are immigrants who are looking to stay in the United States and create work opportunities that would not be possible anywhere else in the world. In the United States, we recognize entrepreneurial success perhaps more than any other country. It is one of our greatest attributes as a society.

Nevertheless, we do have an immigration problem in the United States. The problem is that the distribution of benefits across the United States is highly skewed. Much of the wealth generated in terms of company creation and jobs has redounded to innovative clusters. But the idea to reduce the total number of H-1B immigrants by increasing the cost is exactly the wrong way to “solve” this problem — by dragging down the thriving parts of the economy rather than lifting up the rest.

To grow economic prosperity throughout the country, we need to offer more opportunities for more H-1B visa applicants. There are simply not enough trained U.S. nationals to take on the sort of labor required for the next wave of a tech-enabled industrial revolution.

Distributing the fruits of H-1B visa holders’ work more broadly requires a different approach than the U.S. has taken before. We should increase the total number of new H-1B visa recipients each year to 350,000 from around 85,000, with the additional visas apportioned across states so that locations like college towns — places like Lawrence, Kan., Gainesville, Fla., and Clemson, S.C., as well as cities such as Birmingham, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Salt Lake City and Boise receive sufficient numbers of H-1B workers. Visas could be allocated through a process akin to the resident-matching system for medical doctors, thereby sending workers to states where they would create greater value by filling economic and technological gaps. This infusion of labor would improve technological innovation in local economies and create local spillover effects in job creation and additional innovation.

Such immigration is necessary particularly now given a global push toward increased industrial policy, as China and others invest in AI and broader digital transformation. At a time when our national security is linked to technological innovation, it is shortsighted not to open ourselves to more immigration. If we do not, we will lose some of the best and brightest minds to Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, Singapore and other countries.

Immigration is currently a volatile political issue in the U.S., as it has been at some other moments in the nation’s history. Although this is a country of immigrants, for people who feel insecure about pocketbook and cultural issues, continued immigration can feel threatening. As a percentage of people living in the United States, it has been more than 100 years since there were as many immigrants here as there are now. But as with past waves of immigration, productivity and transformation have followed.

This is particularly clear for H-1B visa holders, who create opportunities for people born in the U.S. and ensure the vitality of American innovation, security and democratic values. Increasing the costs of such visas would chill their use and reduce U.S. prosperity and innovation exactly at a time of great need.

Hemant Bhargava is a professor of business at UC Davis Graduate School of Management and director of the Center for Analytics and Technology in Society. D. Daniel Sokol is a professor of law and business at USC.

A flood of wealth is anticipated to sweep from baby boomers to younger generations over the next couple of decades. Cerulli Associates estimates $106 trillion will pass to younger generations. Of that, a large chunk is destined to be passed on to the companies that manage their finances.

Robinhood (HOOD 1.90%) and Lemonade (LMND 2.67%) are two fintechs laser-focused on providing financial services to Great Wealth Transfer winners. Robinhood offers the next generation of investing, banking, and credit products. Lemonade does the same for insurance.

Here’s a look at each.

Image source: Getty Images.

1. Robinhood

Robinhood is widely seen as the face of fintech by young, tech-savvy investors. It pioneered zero-commission stock trading, a win that continues to pay reputational dividends. It continues to attract interest by beefing up its premium Gold subscription. Perks include 3% IRA match, a credit card with 3% rewards, and $1,000 of interest-free margin trading. The subscription is cheap, at $5 a month as of this writing.

Robinhood has promising user base demographics. In a May 2025 Investor Day presentation, the company discloses the median age for Robinhood customers is 35. Robinhood is popular with millennials and Gen X, the two generations primed to inherit the most over the next 10 years. But what really sets it apart from competitors is how it’s sprinting to meet these users where they’ll be not next year, but a decade from now.

The company has diversified from trading into wealth management and banking, a huge profit driver. The recent unveiling of Banking and Strategies products is evidence of a company executing on an ambitious long-term vision. Both product lines are key to convincing young and maturing customers that Robinhood is a “serious” wealth manager.

The stock is far from undervalued. As of this writing, it trades at a forward price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of over 50x, a valuation typically attributed to tech stocks — much higher than the 29x S&P 500 (^GSPC 0.48%) average. There might be better-valued opportunities among competitors like Block.

Strong fundamentals justify its high multiples. The company is profitable and has been so for over a year. It’s grown total platform assets at a staggering 99% in a single year, and it has over $4 billion on the balance sheet — plenty to invest in growth, or lean upon during tough times.

Robinhood’s young user base, ambitious vision, and strong fundamentals position it perfectly to win the Great Wealth Transfer. Its quickly growing suite of products is proof the company is moving to meet the next generation where it’s at: online, via an award-winning interface that does investing, banking, and wealth management.

2. Lemonade

Lemonade is very well positioned to serve as a major insurer of young and maturing users. It offers insurance via the Lemonade app, an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered interface that can pay out claims in as little as 3 seconds. It typically attracts customers with the promise of cheap rental insurance. As customers mature, they purchase higher-margin insurance from Lemonade, like Car and Pet.

Powerful machine learning models put Lemonade in a league of its own. From Car to Life, these models gobble up data that the company uses to improve predictions. Combined with AI models that manage customers and employees, it can scale premiums from $609 million to $1,083 million while shrinking operating expenses, excluding growth spend.

To scale quickly, Lemonade is leaning into the expansion of its car insurance product. Car insurance is a huge unlock for users who want to stick with a single insurer across all products, snagging discounts. Lemonade knows this. In the Q1 2025 Shareholder letter, the company reveals it sees a 60% boost to conversion rates in states where it offers car insurance.

Lemonade has yet to prove it’s a sustainable business. The company is unprofitable, a red flag in a volatile market that places a premium on stability.

Critics point to the Car product in particular. Car insurance is a loss leader, with an 82% loss ratio, well above the 40% to 60% industry ideal. That needs to improve. An ideal gross loss ratio is typically between 40% to 60%, according to data by Relativity6.

All signs point to Lemonade reaching profitability on a reasonable timeline. Gross loss ratios, a key insurance metric, are trending in the right direction: down. Loss ratios dropped from 79% in Q2 2024 to 69% in Q2 2025. Lemonade expects to reach adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) profitability in 2026, meaning the core business generates more profits than it spends. Investors would love to see it.

Great Wealth Transfer winners to buy and hold

Robinhood and Lemonade may be the real winners of the Great Wealth Transfer. Both are innovative fintech companies with strong and improving fundamentals. I plan on holding both in my portfolio for five years or more.

Investors can find success in the stock market by sticking with companies that consistently report strong growth in revenues. This is a simple strategy that, when applied across a diversified portfolio of growth stocks, can lead to outstanding returns over a decade or more.

The important thing is to follow the growth of the business, not the short-term volatility in the share price. There’s a high correlation between a company’s growth and stock performance over many years.

With that in mind, let’s look at two stocks that could be easy wealth builders for a long-term investor.

Image source: Getty Images.

1. MercadoLibre

The Latin American e-commerce market is booming. It is a large population surpassing 650 million people, which is fueling strong growth for MercadoLibre (MELI 0.00%). The company offers an online marketplace where merchants can sell goods to millions of buyers, but it also generates revenue from mobile payments, advertising, and other fintech services.

Over the last 10 years, the company’s revenue has grown at a compound annual rate of more than 40%, sending the stock up 2,000%. MercadoLibre continues to report high rates of growth as it continues to invest in improving the customer experience, such as lowering prices, increasing shipping speeds, and rolling out new products like credit cards. Revenue reached nearly $6.8 billion in its second quarter 2025, representing a year-over-year increase of 34%.

MercadoLibre has multiple levers to pull to sustain high rates of growth. It recently reduced shipping and seller fees, incentivizing sellers to also reduce their selling prices. This move shows how it is leveraging its massive scale as the dominant e-commerce company in Latin America to gain share and grow its customer base.

Lower fees for sellers are expected to increase the selection of goods offered on the marketplace, which, in turn, will drive higher customer satisfaction and more frequent shopping.

Additionally, the Mercado Pago credit business has been a fast-growing source of revenue in recent years and an attractive long-term opportunity to win more customers. The company’s credit portfolio roughly doubled in Q2 over the year-ago quarter, indicating strong adoption of its credit card product.

The integration of financial services like credit cards, paired with its commerce business, helps create a tighter ecosystem of services that drives customer loyalty. With just 68 million monthly active users, MercadoLibre has an enormous runway to grow its fintech business.

MercadoLibre is tapping into a huge opportunity, helping millions of people in the region get access to basic financial services. The compounding growth of this business makes it an excellent buy-and-hold stock to build wealth for retirement.

2. Coupang

Coupang (CPNG 0.63%) has a lot of similarities to Amazon. It is revolutionizing e-commerce in South Korea and Taiwan, where it’s showing strong growth potential outside its home market in Korea. It might seem challenging for another e-commerce juggernaut to rise under Amazon’s shadow, but Coupang has advantages.

Coupang’s trailing-12-month revenue has increased 62% over the three years to $32 billion. Quarterly revenue increased by 19% year over year in Q2 on a constant-currency basis. The company’s profitability also continues to trend in a positive direction, with gross profit, operating income, and earnings per share increasing over the year-ago quarter. Strong financial results pushed the stock up 30% year to date.

This growth reflects execution at expanding product selection, and investing in automation to improve delivery speed. It offers same-day delivery across a massive selection of products to millions of customers living in densely populated cities, which is the basis of its competitive advantage.

One area of the business that indicates a lot of growth potential is its Developing Offerings. This includes grocery delivery and streaming entertainment. Revenue from these items grew 33% year over year — significantly faster than its product commerce. This reflects more customers continuing to spend more with Coupang after initially purchasing products through its e-commerce business.

Moreover, management indicated in the last earnings report that its Developing Offerings in Taiwan are growing faster than anticipated. This is a great sign that its business model could find more markets outside of South Korea, where it can be successful and deliver returns for shareholders.

Coupang is essentially becoming the default app that 24 million active customers rely on for buying goods, food, and digital entertainment. Its record of consistently reporting high-double-digit growth, with promising international expansion potential, could make this a huge winner for investors over the long term.

As much as some people dread the idea of growing older, there can be benefits. For example, when I was younger, I grew anxious every time there was a shake-up in the stock market, positive that we were about to lose everything.

With time, I realized that investing in the market is like riding a Tilt-a-Whirl operated by a distracted carnival worker. Like a Tilt-a-Whirl, the market tends to be up and down, then up again (followed by another drop).

Image source: Getty Images.

Historically, it’s worked out for investors over the long term, but that doesn’t mean it’s not scary. It’s tempting to read a deeper meaning into every move the market makes.

Rather than stressing out over each economic hiccup that impacts our investments, time has taught me to focus on the things I can control: frequently rebalancing our portfolio to ensure our asset allocation includes both high- and low-risk investments, and building buffer assets we won’t touch until retirement.

What are buffer assets?

Buffer assets are very low-risk assets we can draw from when and if our portfolio goes into the toilet following retirement. While high-quality corporate bonds, Treasury securities, and municipal bonds are all considered lower risk, I can purchase those through my solo 401(k), so I don’t include them in my buffer basket.

I’m putting our buffer assets into a high-yield savings account. It won’t make us rich, but my objective is not to live like a 19th-century Rockefeller. The buffer assets exist solely to get us through the bear markets and recessions we experience following retirement. The goal is to avoid pillaging our retirement accounts.

However, other places to access money when you need a buffer include the cash you’ve built in a cash-value life insurance policy, multiyear guaranteed annuities, fixed indexed annuities, and CD ladders.

While it’s easy to confuse the two, buffer assets and an emergency savings account are two different things. An emergency account is specifically designed to pay for emergency situations, so you don’t end up having to charge new tires or a water heater to a credit card. Your buffer account is meant to prevent you from taking money from your retirement account when those dollars could be better spent beefing up your portfolio.

How buffer assets can preserve wealth

As Dan Egan, director of behavioral finance at investing platform Betterment, told the AARP, “Negative news sells, because people are looking for things to worry about.” Egan says that people tend to pay attention when the market is tumbling but pay far less attention when things are going well. As humans, it’s natural to look out for scary things.

It’s that very human reaction to bad news that causes so many people to sell off investments, even if doing so costs them hundreds of thousands of dollars over time. I hope to zig when every instinct tells me to zag. When others are panic-selling, I want to stay the course.

Let’s say our post-retirement budget requires us to withdraw $12,000 annually from our retirement account. Because those stocks and other assets are less valuable during a bear market or recession, we would have to sell more to come up with the $12,000 we’re counting on. The more assets we sell, the less money we’ll have left to take advantage of the bargains available on high-quality assets during each market downturn.

Even though we’ll trim our budget for the duration of the downturn (which is a good idea during bear markets and recessions), we’ll need another reserve of money to draw from. And that’s where our buffer account comes in. It’s money we can dip into so the funds in our retirement account can be used to invest in well-priced assets.

Here’s my rationale: On average, stocks lose 35% in a bear market (helping to explain the bargain-basement prices). However, as the market regains steam and moves into bull territory, stocks gain an average of 111%. Long-term investors who stay the course are in the best position to profit from the ups and downs of the market.

How large should a buffer be?

There’s no one-size-fits-all formula for how large a buffer a retiree might need. It depends on how much you count on withdrawing from a retirement account. The average bear market lasts 289 days, or just shy of 10 months. The average recession in the 20th and 21st centuries has lasted 14 months. Ideally, your buffer account would be large enough to cover you throughout those events.

Realistically, how can anyone know how many bear markets or recessions they will experience throughout retirement? Some experts suggest building a buffer account with one to three years’ worth of essential living expenses, minus your guaranteed income.

For example, suppose your total monthly living expenses in retirement are $3,000 and you have $2,000 coming in from Social Security, a pension, or some other source of guaranteed income. In that case, you’ll need an extra $1,000 per month. If you were to follow the experts’ advice, you would want to build a buffer account totaling $12,000 to $36,000.

Believe me, I understand how difficult it can be to save even more money, especially when you’re still building a retirement account and paying ever-higher everyday living expenses. If you can’t meet the goal of one to three years’ worth of essential living expenses, chip away at it the best you can.

Any amount you tuck into a buffer account is money you won’t have to take from your retirement account when the market is in the dumps.

The rich, to paraphrase F. Scott Fitzgerald, are different. In California, they lose a lot of very expensive, very high-profile political races.

Over the past 50-plus years, a half-dozen fabulously wealthy men and women — William Matson Roth, Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina among them — have clambered atop their hefty cash piles and, despite any significant political experience, tried to launch themselves into the office of governor or U.S. senator.

Every last one of them failed.

Others with at least some background in elected office — Michael Huffington, Jane Harman, Richard Riordan to name a few — sunk a goodly chunk of their fortunes and came up similarly short in their efforts to win one of California’s top two political posts.

That history is worth noting as the very-well-to-do Rick Caruso eyes a possible entry into the wide-open race to succeed Gavin Newsom. Caruso recently told my colleague Julia Wick he was “very seriously considering” both a gubernatorial run and a second try for Los Angeles mayor.

“I’m running down two parallel paths,” the billionaire developer said. “As we speak, there are teams very busy working on both of those paths.”

(Wealthy businessman Stephen J. Cloobeck, another political first-timer, has been campaigning for governor for months, spending liberally to little avail.)

There’s a common disclaimer in the field of investment — “past performance is no guarantee of future returns” — which certainly applies here.

Still, as waiting-for-Caruso replaces waiting-for-Kamala among political gossips, it’s worth asking whether there’s something — floating in the air, mixed in the water or soil — that has made California such an inhospitable place for so many lavishly monied candidates. Unlike, say, Illinois or New Jersey, which elected billionaire neophyte JB Pritzker and multimillionaire Frank Lautenberg, as, respectively, governor and U.S. senator.

Part of the reason could be the particular political climate.

“If you’re the rich outsider, you have to show up in an election cycle where people want the outsider,” said Rob Stutzman, a Republican strategist who worked for Meg Whitman’s failed 2010 gubernatorial campaign, which cost a cool $180 million.

(Yes, $180 million. The former tech CEO coughed up most of that sum at a time California’s median household income was about $61,000.)

All that lucre couldn’t override the prevailing sentiment among discontented voters who were ready, after nearly eight years of the uber-outsider Arnold Schwarzenegger, to embrace the tried-and-true experience of the reemergent Jerry Brown.

That said, there’s a lengthy enough record of futility to suggest more is at work than the changeable mood of a fickle electorate.

Garry South believes California voters are of two minds when it comes to super-rich candidates. In 1998, the Democratic strategist helped Lt. Gov. Gray Davis maneuver past two moneybags, billionaire former airline executive Al Checchi and Rep. Harman, to win the governor’s race. Four years later, South led Davis’ successful reelection campaign against another multimillionaire newcomer, William Simon Jr.

“Part of them kind of admires someone who went out and made a killing in our capitalistic society … and walked away filthy rich,” South said of voters’ dueling impulses. “But they also have a suspicion that, because of their wealth and because of the benefits that it confers on that person, they don’t really know how the average person lives.”

Call it an empathy gap.

Or, perhaps more aptly, an empathy canyon.

“If somebody has $150 million sitting around they can dump into a campaign for public office,” South said, channeling the skeptical sentiment, “what understanding do they have of my day-to-day life?”

Bill Carrick, a consultant for Harman’s 1998 campaign, agreed it’s incumbent on a rich candidate to “have something substantive to say and be able to articulate why you’re going to make people’s lives better.”

That’s no different than any other office-seeker. But unlike less affluent, more relatable candidates, a billionaire or multimillionaire has a much heavier burden convincing voters they know what they’re talking about and genuinely mean it.

Don Sipple, who helped elect Schwarzenegger governor in California’s 2003 recall election, said wealth often comes with a whiff of privilege and, even more off-putting, an air of entitlement. (To be clear, Schwarzenegger won and replaced Davis because he was Arnold Schwarzenegger, not because of his personal fortune.)

A lot of California’s failed rich candidates, Sipple said, appeared viable — especially to political insiders — “because of their money. And they really didn’t have anything to offer beyond that.”

“It’s the same as somebody who goes out and tries to earn a job,” he went on. “You never deserve it. You’ve got to out and work for it. And I think voters make the distinction.”

Of course, wealth confers certain advantages. Not least is easy access to the extraordinary sum it takes to become well-known in a place with more eligible voters — nearly 27 million, at last count — than the population of all but a handful of states.

California is physically immense, too, stretching approximately 800 miles from north to south, which makes costly advertising the only realistic way to communicate in a statewide top-of-the-ticket contest.

There’s another old aphorism about wealth, credited to the burlesque star and actress, Sophie Tucker. “I’ve been rich,” she famously said, “and I’ve been poor. Rich is better.”

That’s undeniably true, so far as it goes.

The singer and comedian never tried to be governor or a U.S. senator from California.

The Norwegian government on Tuesday said it would review its sovereign wealth fund’s investment in Israel after the Scandinavian country’s leading newspaper revealed that the nearly $2 trillion fund had a stake in an Israeli company aiding Israel’s war in Gaza.

The newspaper, Aftenposten, identified the company as the Bet Shemesh Engines Ltd (BSEL) group, which provides parts to Israeli fighter jets that are being deployed in its devastating war on Gaza.

In recent weeks, Israeli-induced starvation deaths have caused a global outcry, with Western countries ramping up pressure on Israel to end the war that has killed more than 60,000 Palestinians and ravaged Gaza – home to 2.3 million people.

More than 200 people have died of starvation as Israel has obstructed the entry of humanitarian aid despite its so-called “tactical pause” in its nearly two years of war.

So, what did Norway say, and are Israeli atrocities in Gaza and the rest of occupied Palestinian territory turning the tide of public opinion against it?

What did Norwegian leaders say?

Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere said that the investment in the Israeli firm was “worrying”. “We must get clarification on this because reading about it makes me uneasy,” Stoere told public broadcaster NRK.

Finance Minister Jens Stoltenberg, who manages the world’s largest fund, ordered the central bank to conduct a review of the fund portfolio to make sure Israeli companies aiding the occupation of the West Bank or the war in Gaza are barred from investments.

“The war in Gaza is contrary to international law and is causing terrible suffering, so it is understandable that questions are being raised about the fund’s investments in Bet Shemesh Engines,” Stoltenberg, a former NATO chief, said, referring to the growing public and political pressure.

The decision came weeks after Norway’s parliament rejected a proposal for the fund to divest from all companies with activities in the occupied Palestinian territory.

“In light of … the deteriorating situation in Gaza and the West Bank, I will today ask Norges Bank and the Council on Ethics to conduct a renewed review of the fund’s investments in Israeli companies and Norges Bank’s work on responsible management,” Stoltenberg said. Norges Bank is Norway’s central bank.

The independent ethics council, which provides recommendations on which companies should be banned from the oil fund’s portfolio, has since 2009 suggested excluding nine Israeli groups.

How much investment is at stake?

Norges Bank, which manages the $1.9 trillion wealth fund, took a 1.3 percent stake in BSEL in 2023 and raised this to 2 percent by the end of 2024, holding shares worth $15m, the latest available NBIM records show.

The fund held shares in 65 Israeli companies at the end of 2024, valued at $1.95bn, its records show.

The value of its stake was more than four times higher than it was at the end of 2023, shortly after the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, attack that triggered the war. At least 1,139 people were killed in that attack.

The sovereign fund, which owns stakes in 8,700 companies worldwide, has sold its stakes in an Israeli energy company and a telecom group in the last year, and its ethics council has said it is reviewing whether to recommend divesting holdings in five banks.

In May, the sovereign fund decided to divest from Israel’s Paz Retail and Energy for its involvement in supplying infrastructure and fuel to illegal Israeli settlements.

In December 2024, the fund sold all its shares in the Israeli company, Bezeq, for its services provided to the illegal settlements, which are considered the biggest impediments in the realisation of a sovereign Palestinian state as part of the so-called two-state solution.

Moreover, Norway’s largest pension fund has decided to sever its ties with companies doing business with Israel.

KLP, which manages a fund worth about $114bn, said in June that it will no longer do business with two companies – the US Oshkosh Corporation and ThyssenKrupp from Germany, which sell equipment to the Israeli military that is possibly being used in the war in Gaza.

According to the pension fund, it had investments worth $1.8m in Oshkosh and almost $1m in ThyssenKrupp until June 2025.

Last year, KLP also divested from US-based Caterpillar, which makes bulldozers.

Which other funds and companies have severed ties with Israel?

French insurance giant AXA last August reportedly divested from its remaining investments in Israeli banks for funding illegal settlements, according to a report by advocacy group Eko.

Norwegian asset manager Storebrand has also sold shares in some Israeli firms.

The move came after sustained campaigning by human rights groups, who highlighted Israeli rights violations against Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

Another major pension fund from Denmark, its largest, divested from several Israeli banks and companies last February over fears that the investment could be used to fund the illegal Israeli settlements.

The fund has sold its stocks and shares to the tune of 75 million krone ($7.4m) in value.

Last month, Ireland’s sovereign wealth fund divested shareholdings worth more than 1 million euros ($1.2m) from two accommodation companies linked to Israeli settlements. The two companies have been identified as Expedia Group and TripAdvisor, according to media reports.

The Irish government, which has been vocal against Israel’s war on Gaza, divested 2.95 million euros ($3.43m) worth of shares from six other Israeli companies.

Amid pressure from campaigners and activists from Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS), several corporations have been forced to sever ties with Israel. Shipping giant Maersk was forced to cut ties with companies linked to illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank in June.

The BDS, a grassroots organisation inspired by the anti-apartheid South Africa movement, calls for economic pressure on the Israeli government to end its occupation of Palestinian lands.

Several of Europe’s biggest financial firms have cut back their links to Israeli companies or those with ties to the country, a Reuters analysis of filings shows, as pressure mounts from activists and governments to end the war in Gaza.

Which countries have taken action against Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza?

Colombian President Gustavo Petro, in July, banned exports of coal to Israel until the genocide stops. “We cannot allow Colombian coal to be turned into bombs that help Israel kill children,” the left-wing president said.

He has also pledged to cease all arms trade with Israel. Under Petro, Colombia has helped set up the Hague Group of 12 countries aimed at pressuring Israel to end its war on Gaza and the occupation of the Palestinian territory.

Spain’s left-wing coalition government in June cancelled a contract for antitank missiles from Israeli company Rafael over the war atrocities in Gaza. The decision will affect a deal worth an estimated 285 million euros ($325m).

Few months earlier, Spain halted a controversial $7.5m deal to buy ammunition from an Israeli company, following criticism from far-left allies within the coalition government.

Madrid has also called for sanctions and an arms embargo on Israel over its Gaza war.

Several Western countries have sanctioned Israeli settlers in the West Bank amid record violence against Palestinians.

In July 2024, Australia sanctioned Israeli settlers, joining France, the UK.

The sanction came after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a nonbinding opinion that all Israeli settlement activity on Palestinian land is illegal and must stop as soon as possible.

In June, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom formally sanctioned far-right Israeli ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, for “incitement of violence” against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza.

In the same month, Spain, Ireland and Slovenia called for the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement. Sweden has also asked the European Council to adopt sanctions “against Israeli ministers who promote illegal settlement activities and actively work against a negotiated two-state solution”.

The EU provides millions of dollars in funds to Israel as part of its Horizon Europe research projects, while Western leaders have defended Israel for its war atrocities in Gaza and also shielded it from the United Nations resolutions critical of its abuses.

Western countries have also been criticised for failing to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, who face warrants from the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Gaza.

Last month, the United Nations special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory, Francesca Albanese, released a new report mapping the corporations aiding Israel in the displacement of Palestinians and its genocidal war on Gaza, in breach of international law.