Canadian Education Minister Says Parents Have No Rights Over Their Children

Canada is losing its collective mind.  During a recent debate in the Nova Scotia House of Assembly, Education Minister Brendan Maguire (Progressive Conservative MLA for Halifax Atlantic) responded angrily to concerns about school policies on gender transitioning (without parental notification in many cases) and provincial funding for gender-related medical interventions for minors. 

His argument?  Parental rights are not a factor and, essentially, do not exist in the eyes of the Canadian government.

The debate was sparked by concerns raised by another MLA about provincial funding for gender-reassignment surgeries for minors, school policies on social transitioning without parental notification, and reporting by groups like the Citizens’ Alliance of Nova Scotia (CANS).  Since 2014, Canada has instituted an ever expanding far-left initiative to encourage gender ideology in public schools and prevent parents from knowing about or interfering with this indoctrination.  

Parents "absolutely don't" deserve to have rights over their children, Nova Scotia Education Minister Brandan Maguire says, as he voices support for secret gender transitions at schools and taxpayer-funded gender reassignment surgeries. pic.twitter.com/qs5yxjqCyJ

— Rebel News (@RebelNewsOnline) April 27, 2026

“I’ll be damned if I’m going to stand here and listen to someone say that the parents deserve rights over a child. No, they don’t. They absolutely don’t..."

The assertion is a common one among woke political adherents who believe that children have the ability to "consent" to life changing psychological and chemical transitioning as well as sexualized LGBT propaganda programs.  These are, of course, the same kinds of people who ran rampant in the US during the Biden Administration, promoting gender reassignment for minors and exposing elementary school kids to drag queens. 

Maguire goes off the rails, asserting that because his parents abandoned him at a young age, this is a rationale for why parents in general do not deserve the right to dictate the decisions of their vulnerable kids.  But his logic is incredibly flawed.  The mistakes of deadbeat parents do not negate the overall need for good parents to protect their children from malicious indoctrination. 

Child consent concepts are so central to the woke left's ideology because they normalize state control of children and remove the greatest obstacle to progressive control:  The nuclear family. Leftists often appeal to "empathy" and "human rights", but what they are really doing is promoting moral relativism and destructive degeneracy in the name of "civil liberties".  At bottom it should be common sense - Children are not mentally mature enough to consent.    

Nova Scotia has used the "Guidelines for Supporting Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming Students" as policy since 2014, and like most Canadian provinces, has resisted any efforts by parents or conservatives to change the rules. 

For grades 7–12, if a student "has the capacity to consent" for using preferred pronouns and gender identity, parental consent is not required. Schools must get the student’s permission before disclosing their transgender/gender-nonconforming identity to their parents. 

Canadian authorities claim this prioritizes student self-identification and confidentiality "to protect the child" from potential harm at home. A planned update was abandoned in late 2025, with the province instead incorporating related expectations into a broader school code of conduct.  Citizens do not get a vote on these policies, they are implemented unilaterally by the education bureaucracy.  

Nova Scotia’s policies against parental rights also extend to gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors. These are publicly funded treatments with no hard age minimums. Eligibility starts after the onset of puberty (typically around ages 8–14).  Parents do not have to be told that these treatments are taking place, and schools can hide the information.   

Canada is what happens when leftists are allowed free rein to do as they please.  The kinds of horrific social and political revisions that take place can disrupt or destroy a nation for generations to come.  In such an environment, something as fundamental as parental rights can be flipped on its head and turned into a crime.  

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 21:20

Iran War Cost $25 Billion in First 2 Months, Pentagon Says

Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times,

Combat operations against Iran have cost the U.S. military about $25 billion in two months, a top Pentagon accounting official told House Armed Services Committee members on April 29.

The Wednesday hearing marked the first time Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine have testified publicly to Congress since U.S. and Israeli forces commenced attacks on Iran on Feb. 28. U.S. and Iranian forces exchanged fire for about five and a half weeks before the parties entered into a ceasefire agreement on April 8.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the ranking member on the committee, asked the Pentagon to account for the costs of U.S. munitions expended as well as for equipment destroyed in the course of the fighting.

Jules Hurst, the acting War Department comptroller, estimated those costs at about $25 billion.

Hurst said munitions accounted for most of it, but said he also factored in operations and maintenance and equipment replacement costs. Hurst joined Hegseth and Caine at the hearing, as Congress weighs military funding requests for fiscal year 2027.

The Trump administration has been working on submitting a supplemental funding request to Congress to cover the war’s costs, but has yet to finalize it or settle on an exact figure.

“We will formulate a supplemental through the White House that will come to Congress once we have a full assessment of the cost of the conflict,” Hurst said.

The Pentagon is already seeking a $1.5 trillion military and defense spending budget for fiscal year 2027. The request amounts to a 42 percent increase over fiscal year 2026 military spending, which totaled approximately $1.03 trillion.

Among other items, the Trump administration’s 2027 military budget request seeks $52.9 billion to boost procurement for 12 weapons systems that the Pentagon has classified as critical munitions.

In March, President Donald Trump announced he had met with the CEOs of BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon parent RTX Corp., Boeing, Honeywell, and L3Harris Technologies to discuss boosting their munitions production levels. Weapons produced by the companies—including the Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missile defense systems and offensive weapons like the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile—have featured heavily in the Iran war.

Beyond the immediate material costs to replace weapons and equipment, the Iran war has also disrupted global oil and gas flows out of the Middle East, leading to rising prices for consumers.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 20:55

"We Can't Move Forward": Brookfield-Backed Compass Abandons Virginia Data Center Project

Compass Datacenters is abandoning a massive data center project in Northern Virginia after what Bloomberg described as "intense pushback from local residents."

The retreat comes as local opposition to data center buildouts accelerates nationwide, with residents increasingly furious over surging power demand, soaring electricity bills, land-use battles, and transmission lines cutting through neighborhoods and farmland.

We were the first to describe the epicenter of the data center buildout revolt in the Mid-Atlantic area, all the way back in the summer of 2024. This is happening as the AI infrastructure boom collides with local resistance.

Many Marylanders were upset about transmission lines and rising power bills, some of which were not necessarily due to data centers, but rather failed "green" policies by the far-left regime in Annapolis.

The Brookfield-backed data center company told Bloomberg, "Compass has reached the unfortunate conclusion that we cannot move forward. While we still believe this project offered significant benefits for the region and our neighbors, recent legal actions and compounding regulatory hurdles have effectively closed a viable path forward."

Compass Datacenters was planning to develop more than 800 acres in Prince William County as part of the proposed 2,100-acre Digital Gateway corridor.

The project, along with a neighboring QTS development backed by Blackstone, would have created one of the world’s largest data center hubs to expand Northern Virginia’s global data dominance.

Earlier this month, Chamath Palihapitiya, founder of Social Capital and co-host of the All-In Podcast, warned on X that polling data shows data centers are more disliked than ICE by the American people.

Palihapitiya posted the polling data:

He warned that local opposition is growing against data centers:

Meanwhile, our most recent report shows that nearly half of U.S. data centers scheduled to break ground this year are at risk of being canceled or delayed.

The great data center land rush is no longer a story about chip stacks and power. It is becoming a localized fight over power bills against tech bros.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 20:30

China Loses Monopoly Over The Rarest Of Rare Earths

With less than three weeks to go the Trump-Xi summit in China, the scramble for leverage and superiority - whether in terms of the Iran war or the just as important supply chain of rare earths - is on. That explains why the Pentagon’s push to get its hands on the rarest of the rare-earth elements leads all the way to this small port city in Malaysia.

As the WSJ reports, Australia's Lynas Rare Earths has begun pumping out heavy rare earths, the elusive kind that China dominates. 

“No one had made a separated heavy rare earth outside of China in 20 years,” said Amanda Lacaze, Lynas’s chief executive. The company’s chief operating officer, Pol Le Roux, said it had actually been 30 years.

When China cut off exports of heavy rare-earth elements during trade tensions last year, automobile factories in the US and Europe were forced to stop production. Now, Lynas is at the vanguard of an effort by the US and allies to prevent Beijing from using its monopoly power to squeeze the rest of the world.

To minimize China's monopoly on rare earth supply, the Pentagon has been opening its wallet in unusual ways to ensure supplies. In March 2026, Lynas announced a preliminary $96 million deal in which the Pentagon would purchase Lynas’s rare earths.

Others are in hot pursuit of the Pentagon's money: Las Vegas-headquartered MP Materials, backed by billions of dollars in U.S. government support, is planning its own refinery for heavy rare earths that is set to come online later this year. And last week, USA Rare Earth announced a "transformative" $2.8 billion acquisition of Brazil's Serra Verde Group, owner of the Pela Ema rare earth mine and processing plant in Goiás, Brazil, which is a "one-of-a-kind asset and the only producer outside Asia capable of supplying all four magnetic rare earths at scale, together with other vital REEs, such as Yttrium."

Last month, Lynas began producing samarium oxide, a difficult-to-source rare earth in high military demand that is used in heat-resistant magnets for jet fighters and missiles.

“There is no doubt that 2025 was the wake-up call the United States needed to undertake bold industrial policy,” said Gracelin Baskaran, who leads the critical minerals program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

Rare-earth minerals are actually not that rare when it comes to mining: it is the refining - usually a very toxic process - that is the bottleneck, which is why China which has zero environmental regulation, has become a global leader in their producftion. As the WSJ notes, rare earth minerals are already mined outside of China, including Lynas’s, which come from Western Australia. But to gain independence from Chinese supplies, "the hard part is building refining capacity. It often requires hundreds of stages to separate the rare earths using industrial acids."

It often requires hundreds of stages to separate rare earths using industrial acids. Suzanne Lee for WSJ

For more than a decade, Lynas has had a refinery here in Kuantan, a Malaysian chemical-industry center. But it only produced light rare earths, which tend to be more common, while it sold heavy rare earths to China for processing. Last year, as the U.S.-China trade war was at its peak, Lynas finished a new heavy rare-earths processor in Kuantan.

Eliminating China from the supply chain looks as follows: machinery whirs loudly as a rare-earth mixture is bathed in hydrochloric acid and gradually separated into pure oxides that can be shipped to customers. Terbium, used in powerful magnets, comes out a deep, rich brown. Dysprosium appears as a whitish powder.

Because of their small quantities, the heavy rare earths are fitted into knee-high 55-pound cans that could be worth tens of thousands of dollars, while less-valuable rare earths such as cerium are stuffed into 1800 pound sacks. 

Heavy rare-earth elements are sprinkled in magnets so they can function at higher temperatures. That is important in cars and planes whose engines run hot.

Lynas and MP Materials are two of the leading Western rare-earths producers, and Washington wants more suppliers. In February, the U.S. International Development Finance Corp. extended $565 million in loans to Serra Verde, which operates a mine in Brazil with significant reserves of heavy rare earths. Then, as noted above, last week USA Rare Earth, the Stillwater, Okla., company that has recently commissioned equipment to make rare-earth magnets, said it would acquire Serra Verde in a deal valued at about $2.8 billion, part of an arrangement that will ensure a steady supply of heavy rare earths to the U.S.

Not everything has gone smoothly with U.S. efforts. Lynas has said there is “significant uncertainty” on whether it will go ahead with an effort to build a rare earth processing facility in Texas, which was allocated $258 million in Pentagon grant funding in 2023. The estimated project costs ballooned because of challenges in handling wastewater. Instead, Lynas is building out a second, larger heavy rare-earth processing facility in Kuantan, expected to be completed in 2028. Needless to say, environmental regulations are more "lax" in Malaysia.

The big break hit last month, when Lynas achieved commercial production of samarium. The mineral had been refined almost exclusively in China, causing a scramble among defense suppliers last year when China cut off exports in April. A report from the U.S. Geological Survey last year found samarium was the highest-risk mineral for disruption, with shortages potentially costing U.S. industry billions of dollars.

As the clock counts down to the Trump-Xi summit, where China still retains sole supplier monopoly across most rare earths, another clock is also counting down: American defense companies face a 2027 government deadline to ensure that no rare earths in their supply chain for magnets come from China. Lacaze said Lynas were supplying its non-Chinese rare earths to Japanese magnet makers that in turn supply the U.S. defense industry.

Still, Lacaze expressed concern that Western nations weren’t doing enough to ensure adequate demand. Military demand for rare earths is relatively small, so she advocated tax credits to induce larger commercial buyers—such as makers of cars and electronics—to choose non-Chinese rare-earth magnets.  

Baskaran, the critical-minerals specialist, told the WSJ that the effort to achieve rare-earth independence was still in its early stages. “While momentum is real, translating these announcements into production takes years,” she said.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 19:40

Billionaire Tim Draper: You Should Be Scared If You Don't Own Bitcoin

Authored by Micah Zimmerman via Bitcoin Magazine,

Speaking on the Nakamoto Stage, Tim Draper told attendees that bitcoin has entered the financial mainstream and that governments now roll out “the red carpet” for the industry. He said the community is “starting to feel like something is happening” as adoption grows, and he cast that shift as the early phase of a larger transition in the money system.

In his view, people will move in stages: first from dollars to stablecoins, then from stablecoins to bitcoin as the final store of value and unit of account.

Draper praised Satoshi Nakamoto’s design of BTC as a system with no government control, no middleman banks, and no traditional account records. He described his own early journey with the asset, including buying large amounts of BTC, then losing those holdings amid front-running and failures at Mt. Gox. That episode led him to question whether the experiment was worth the risk until he watched crypto usage spread in markets around the world and decided to buy again.

To illustrate the fragility of fiat money, Draper told a personal story about a “one–million–dollar bill” that his father gave him when he was young. The bill turned out to be a Confederate note with no value, which he held up as a warning that government currencies can fail, leaving savers with worthless paper.

He connected that story to his decision to purchase bitcoin from the U.S. government in an auction of seized coins, where he paid above market because he viewed bitcoin as a superior long-term asset.

Draper: You should be scared if you don’t own bitcoin

Draper outlined a scenario in which retailers begin by accepting bitcoin alongside other payment methods and then transition to accepting only bitcoin.

In that world, he said, consumers would rush to banks to pull out their money and convert into BTC as trust in national currencies declines. He told the audience that anyone who manages a family “ought to have about six months’ worth of bitcoin” as protection against such a breakdown.

He extended that warning to sovereigns facing inflation or fiscal stress. If a government encounters hyperinflation and holds no BTC on its balance sheet, Draper argued, its currency and the wealth of its officials could become worthless in real terms.

“You should be scared if you don’t own bitcoin,” Draper said he is telling people these days, adding that those without exposure “should be very, very worried.”

Draper closed with a call to action aimed at the entire BTC ecosystem around him. He said that “those of us who have bitcoin are gonna help steer the world” as legacy currencies lose value, and he told attendees to go home and tell their families to buy bitcoin, their governments to buy bitcoin, and their friends to buy BTC.

Addressing founders and builders, he urged entrepreneurs to “push it as hard as you can,” saying that broad BTC ownership is both a hedge against currency risk and a path to a new monetary standard.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 19:15

KPMG Ends U.S. Gov't Audit Business After Losing Army Contract

KPMG, one of the Big Four accounting firms, is winding down its federal government audit business after losing a $64 million-a-year U.S. Army audit contract, a major setback as the Department of War under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth moves to bring in another accounting firm.

According to the Financial Times, the Army's shift to a new auditor comes as pressure intensifies on Hegseth to gain control of the DoW's finances after nearly a decade of failed independent audits.

The DoW, which oversees an annual budget of roughly $840 billion, has not passed an independent audit in eight years, and Washington lawmakers have set a deadline for the department to do so by 2028.

"We're ending the wasteful process of agency-by-agency opinions and slashing the number of disjointed separate audits by two-thirds," Hegseth said. "The mission is simple: break down bureaucratic barriers to get you, the taxpayer, concrete results."

FT sources said the Army was KPMG's largest federal audit client, and 450 U.S. staff who oversaw the federal audit work will be transitioning to other roles.

"Over the past few years, KPMG has prioritized advisory services for the federal government," KPMG said, adding, "We are transitioning out of federal audit roles through an orderly, multiyear process, meeting all client and regulatory obligations. As demand continues to grow across both audit and advisory, we will be redeploying our talented federal audit professionals across the firm to meet client needs."

Meanwhile, EY remains the prime auditor for the Air Force, Navy, and Marines. The Marines are the only military branch to have received an unqualified audit opinion.

The DoW says the new consolidated audit strategy will streamline the process toward full audit compliance by 2028.

Last month, Platte Moring, the Pentagon's inspector general, stated, "This new composite approach to auditing and its implementation reflect meaningful progress toward compliance with the statutory mandate for the department to achieve a clean audit opinion by 2028."

We have previously reported that DOGE has placed more than 400,000 DoW contracts under scrutiny, while Goldman has been bearish on government IT services for the same reason: the Trump administration is trying to clean up the financial mess inside the DoW.

The problem is that entrenched bureaucracy and swamp-like career DoW personnel appear more focused on preserving the status quo than fixing the department.

Whether Hegseth can fix the DoW remains an open question.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 18:50

Japan's Largest Airport Deploys Humanoid Robots For Baggage, Cargo

Authored by Jijo Malayil via Interesting Engineering,

Humanoid robots will soon assist ground crews in Tokyo as Japan Airlines launches a trial to address growing labor shortages.

Starting in May, the Chinese-made machines will assist with moving baggage and cargo on the tarmac at Tokyo’s Haneda Airport, working alongside human handlers.

The initiative, run with GMO Internet Group, comes as Japan faces rising tourism and a shrinking workforce. The trial will continue through 2028, with hopes of easing workloads and paving the way for permanent deployment.

Last month, researchers in Tokyo developed a 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi chip resisting extreme radiation, enabling untethered robot operations in hazardous sites like Fukushima.

Smart baggage handling

During a recent media demonstration, a compact humanoid robot carefully pushed cargo onto a conveyor belt beside a Japan Airlines aircraft and gestured toward a nearby worker, highlighting early-stage coordination in real airport conditions, reports the Guardian.

Japan Airlines officials said deploying robots for physically demanding tasks could significantly reduce strain on workers and improve overall working conditions. However, the airline emphasized that critical responsibilities such as safety management will remain under human control.

As seen in the footage, the humanoid model, known as G1, stands about 1.32 meters tall and weighs 77 pounds (35 kilograms), with a foldable design for compact storage. It features 23 degrees of freedom, enabling stable and coordinated movement. Equipped with 3D LiDAR, a depth camera, and voice input systems, the robot can navigate and interact effectively. Powered by a 9,000 mAh battery, it operates for up to two hours and can move at speeds of up to 4.5 mph (7.2 km/h).

The Unitree G1 demonstrates an expanded range of motion, highlighting significant gains in flexibility, coordination, and adaptability in humanoid robotics. According to Unitree, its development begins in a virtual setting using Nvidia Isaac Simulator, where the robot is trained to perform complex behaviors.

Engineers create a digital twin of the G1 using motion capture and video data to replicate human actions. These movements are refined through reinforcement learning, allowing the system to improve through repeated simulation. The learned skills are then transferred to the real robot using the Sim2Real approach, enabling smooth execution in physical environments.

“By combining cutting-edge AI technology with the unique flexibility of humanoid forms, the project aims to realize a sustainable operational structure through labor savings and workload reduction,” said Japan Airlines in a statement.

Ground crew augmentation

Airport ground operations still rely heavily on manual labor, with workers managing baggage, cargo, and equipment in tight, high-pressure environments. The physically demanding nature of the job, combined with Japan’s shrinking working-age population, has created a growing labor gap across the aviation sector.

The challenge is intensifying as inbound tourism continues to rise. More than 7 million visitors arrived in the first two months of 2026, following a record 42.7 million the previous year, according to the Japan National Tourism Organization. At the same time, demographic trends suggest Japan may require over 6.5 million foreign workers by 2040 to sustain economic growth, even as political pressure mounts to limit immigration, reports The Guardian.

Attempts to automate airport tasks have so far been constrained by the limitations of conventional robots, which struggle in dynamic, unpredictable environments. Humanoid robots are now being considered as a more adaptable solution, as their human-like design allows them to function within existing airport infrastructure without extensive modifications.

The rollout will proceed in stages, starting with detailed observation of operations to identify suitable use cases, followed by testing in simulated real-world conditions. The long-term objective is to integrate robots alongside human workers, assigning them repetitive and physically intensive tasks to reduce strain and improve efficiency. Continuous evaluation will guide development, focusing on safety, performance, and practical deployment, reports Aero Time.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 18:25

Barclays Maintains Bullish Stance On Nuclear

Barclays is out with a report on nuclear and how the industry is progressing from conviction to construction. The report highlights year-to-date regulatory developments, demand and execution signals and market pricing across the industry. 

Last year, Barclays argued three core points regarding nuclear energy:

• A nuclear renaissance is underway driven by energy security, decarbonization, and AI power demand
• The nuclear fuel cycle is likely to be an upstream bottleneck that requires reshoring
• As the theme matures, practical hurdles will take center stage, such as speed to power, labor, permitting, and unit economics

Given the run up in their broad global nuclear ecosystem index (BCGLNUCL +19%) this year, there is undoubtedly a continued interest in the nuclear theme. This also correlates with “a broad rotation from capital-light to capital-heavy (HALO) sectors”.

The market seems to be distinguishing between the themes within the nuclear renaissance, with companies in the nuclear fuel chain (BCNUCLUR +30%) providing higher returns YTD than the broader nuclear ecosystem…

The bar is being set higher by investors lately, though, with money being “less willing to fund nuclear on narrative alone, instead increasingly rewarding delivery of existing megawatts, visible permitting progress or at least a credible bridge from concept to contracted project”. 

As we detailed long before most others started realizing it, Barclays also notes how the Iran war has accentuated national energy security concerns. It has not gone unnoticed how countries like France have had little to care about with the dramatic energy market price swings, while countries like Germany and other Asian nations have suffered. 

The Iran war has also led to a plus for nuclear energy adoption in Europe based on the broader concept of the strategic autonomy agenda at the EU.

As it should be well understood by our readers at this point, the underwriting of nuclear development by hyperscalers has given significant confidence to the adoption of nuclear energy in the US. Massive energy deals from Meta, Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have all highlighted the significant role to be played by a power source that's actually clean and reliable. 

While Barclays notes there are plenty of bottlenecks that remain throughout the nuclear industry, “progress has become more visible in areas that matter most for build out”. Issues are being worked on in concrete ways throughout the fuel cycle, licensing, and component supply areas. 

The report emphasizes that the clearest evidence of progress is in the fuel cycle. Progress is turning into production at US uranium mines and major projects are progressing through development in Canada. 

Other award programs from the U.S Department of Energy are also boosting the front end of the fuel chain, specifically the $2.7 billion for enrichment capacity. 

Significant progress has also been made on the regulation front with improvements to new licensing pathways and high speed programs for iteration and demonstration of new reactor technology. 

With site-specific planning ongoing, along with early component ordering, “the industry is beginning to bridge the gap between design ambition and concrete delivery”. 

Calling back to their previous point of the labor bottleneck, this challenge is starting to work its way to be the leading issue. Unlike a lot of the supply chain issues, which are mostly solved with more money, “workforce constraints remain deeply structural and are likely to take longer to ease”. 

And then there is the issue of where the US gets 300,000 engineers to build all this missing power supply by 2030 https://t.co/a18crhqZ4v pic.twitter.com/tinW8SHDwM

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 14, 2025

At Barclay's recent NextGen Energy Conference in New York, the participants reportedly highlighted labor as a critical and growing execution constraint on both the data center construction and power generation construction areas. Data centers and reactor plants will find themselves competing for the same limited pool of electricians, engineers, and experienced construction labor. 

This leads to Barclays making the closing statement that “labour is now emerging as perhaps the most important residual hurdle to the pace of the nuclear renaissance, with progress in this area likely to play a key role in determining whether improving policy support and hyperscaler demand can translate into build-out at scale”.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 18:00

Putin Presents Victory Day Truce In Ukraine During 90-Minute Trump Call

With things in the Persian Gulf and the Iran War 'stuck'... it's apparently time to pivot back to that other 'stuck' war, in Ukraine. President Trump on Wednesday spoke over the phone with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, with the call reportedly lasting an impressive 1.5+ hours, and the talk centered on finding ways forward both with the Iran and Ukraine conflicts.

The most important item to emerge was that Putin reportedly proposed declaring a ceasefire in Ukraine on May 9, which is Russia's 'Victory Day' in World War II, and Trump endorsed the idea.

Pool via Reuters

Russian Presidential Aide for Foreign Affairs Yury Ushakov told reporters that the call was initiated by the Moscow side - and according to him, "Vladimir Putin informed his American counterpart of his readiness to declare a truce for the period of Victory Day celebrations."

Here is some of the readout and Ushakov's remarks to the press in Moscow:

"At Trump's request, Vladimir Putin described the current situation along the line of contact, where our troops are holding the strategic initiative and pushing back the enemy’s positions," Ushakov told reporters.

"Both Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump expressed essentially similar assessments of the behavior of the Kyiv regime led by [Volodymyr] Zelensky, which, incited and with the support of the Europeans, is pursuing a policy of prolonging the conflict."

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has devastated swathes of Ukrainian territory, killed thousands of civilians and forced millions to flee their homes.

Putin said he was ready "to declare a ceasefire for the duration of Victory Day celebrations. Trump actively supported this initiative, noting that the holiday marks our shared victory," Ushakov said.

The timing is interesting, given that the White House is clearly consumed with the Iran war, the Hormuz Strait crisis, and the expanding economic fallout globally and at home. Putin it seems is seeking the opportunity to soften Washington's stance toward Moscow's perspective of the Ukraine war.

But they did also heavily discuss Trump's Operation Epic Fury. Ideas for resolving the conflict were discussed - though few details on this have emerged. Putin as expected called for peace, and said that extending the ceasefire was the right move by Trump. According to some of the published statements:

"Vladimir Putin considers Donald Trump's decision to extend the ceasefire with Iran to be the right one, as this should give negotiations a chance and, overall, help to stabilize the situation."

But Putin also "highlighted the inevitable and extremely damaging consequences not only for Iran and its neighbors, but also for the entire international community, should the U.S. and Israel resort to military action once again," Ushakov said.

He added Russia was "firmly committed to providing every possible assistance to diplomatic efforts" on the Middle East war, and said the call was held at Moscow's initiative.

Despite that Iran remains a key regional ally of Russia's, it remains that Moscow has benefited from both the easing of sanctions on its oil exports at sea, and rising global oil prices - both the result of the Iran war.

//--> //--> //--> Russia x Ukraine ceasefire by end of 2026?
Yes 26% · No 75%
View full market & trade on Polymarket

Previously, Kremlin leaders have offered a deal where Iran could keep its enriched uranium but hold it on Russian territory, to ensure the continuation of its nuclear energy. This, Moscow has reasoned, could serve as a basis for a grand deal with the US.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 17:20

Meta Plunges After Boosting Capex Outlook Again On "Higher Component Pricing"

The last of the giga-caps to report today, the increasingly more misnamed Meta Platforms, had some good news to report for the just completed Q1. It also had bad news, and judging by the plunge in the stock price, the market is focusing on the latter. 

First, the good news: the company reported revenue and EPS both of which beat estimates, and guided Q2 revenues which came in roughly in line with estimates. Here is the breakdown. 

• EPS $10.44 vs. $6.43 y/y, and beating estimates of $6.66; one note: the EPS print included a $8.03BN income tax benefit recognized in the first quarter of 2026. Excluding this benefit, EPS would have been $3.13 lower or $7.31 (at a 37 effective tax rate)

Revenue was also solid across the board

• Revenue $56.31 billion, +33% y/y, beating estimate $55.51 billion
  • Advertising rev. $55.02 billion, +33% y/y, beating estimate $54.16 billion
  • Family of Apps revenue $55.91 billion, +33% y/y, beating estimate $55 billion
  • Reality Labs revenue $402 million, -2.4% y/y, missing estimate $508 million
  • Other revenue $885 million, +74% y/y, beating estimate $741.4 million

Going down the line:

• Operating income $22.87 billion, +30% y/y
• Operating margin 41% vs. 41% y/y

Broken down by segment: 

• Family of Apps operating income $26.90 billion, +24% y/y, beating estimate $24.26 billion
• Reality Labs operating loss $4.03 billion vs. loss $4.21 billion y/y, vs estimate loss $4.77 billion

Ad impressions were more mixed with ad impressions beating, Avg price per ad in line, and Avg family service users per day missing

• Ad impressions +19% vs. +5% y/y, beating estimate +16.2%
• Average price per ad +12% vs. +10% y/y, in line estimate +12%
• Average Family service users per day 3.56 billion, +3.8% y/y, missing estimate 3.61 billion

The last one is a problem because as shown below, this is the first drop in the company's DAP in years.

Looking ahead, the guidance was also solid with a modest increase in Q2 revenue:

• Meta sees revenue $58 billion to $61 billion, in line with the estimate $59.56 billion
• Meta still sees total expenses $162 billion to $169 billion, also in line with  estimate $164.6 billion

That was the good news. The bad news, as a quarter ago when the company was slammed for its massive increase in forecast capex spending, had everything to do with - what else - capex.

Just like last quarter, Meta raised its capex outlook for the year, again, extending its streak of plowing historic levels of investment into the race to build ever-advancing artificial intelligence systems. 

The social-media giant projected full-year capital expenditures between $125 billion and $145 billion, far exceeding analysts’ estimates and marking a roughly 7.4% increase from the $115-$135 billion range the company had previously projected. The company is dealing with “higher component pricing” and additional data center costs", CFO Susan Li said in a statement. At this rate, which has seen the company raise its capex by $10BN every 3 months, the company's Free Cash Flow will be deeply negative soon. 

And as capex soars without a corresponding increase in revenue/EBITDA, the company's Free Cash Flow is now set to turn negative in 2026.

To offset its AI spending, Meta has recently imposed a number of cost-cutting measures. Last week, it alerted staff in an internal memo that it would be cutting roughly 8,000 jobs and wouldn’t be filling 6,000 open roles. The company had already carried out other, more limited cuts earlier this year that hit its hardware division Reality Labs, among other teams.

Evercore ISI estimated the May layoffs will save the company about $3 billion annually, and that companies will rely more on AI agents to help do tasks that once required human employees. “We believe the industry is just beginning to realize the growth opportunities coming out of agentic deployments – and the stepped-up level of investments required to support them,” Evercore analyst Mark Mahaney said in a note to investors.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg had already signaled that his company will spend hundreds of billions of dollars on AI infrastructure before the end of the decade. And that was before a memory chip shortage triggered a surge in prices. The firm has announced billion-dollar deals with Nvidia Corp., Advanced Micro Devices Inc. and Broadcom Inc. for chips and other hardware and is building several massive data centers to power its efforts. 

The silver lining is that there are some early signs that Meta’s investments in AI are beginning to pay off. Earlier in April, Meta debuted its latest artificial intelligence model, Muse Spark — the first released since Zuckerberg embarked on a multibillion-dollar overhaul of the company’s AI organization last year. Additional large language models are expected to roll out later this year.

The company is also facing its various legacy risks: Meta faces a threat from mounting child safety litigation. In a landmark ruling in March, a jury found Meta liable for a 20-year-old woman’s mental health struggles, which she said were caused by her addiction to social media. While Meta must pay millions to the plaintiff, the ruling could expose the company to billions of dollars in risk from additional lawsuits. Two other bellwether cases are scheduled to go to trial in California state court later this year. Meta acknowledged on Wednesday that it continues to “see scrutiny on youth-related issues and have additional trials scheduled for this year in the U.S., which may ultimately result in a material loss.”

While Meta’s stock rallied following Muse Spark’s unveiling, wiping out prior losses, it tumbled after the market was less than happy with the yet another capex increase which has yet to show tangible returns on the top line. META plunged as much as 6%, sending its stock back to red for the year.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 17:14

Is This A Sign That The Schumer Era Is Coming To An End?

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer spent months cultivating what appeared to be a solid roster of Democratic recruits for 2026. He cleared the field in Ohio, North Carolina, and Alaska — all states where flipping the seats would be a major victory for the Democrats and potentially hand them a majority in the upper chamber in a year with an otherwise brutal map for their party.

But in the races that may ultimately define Democratic fortunes this November, Schumer's preferred candidates are losing — badly — and the people doing the damage are members of his own party.

That inconvenient reality is crystallizing across three of the most competitive Senate battlegrounds in the country, prompting an uncomfortable question for the longtime Democrat leader: Is Schumer's grip on the Democratic caucus slipping?

The most dramatic evidence comes from Maine, where Schumer made no secret of his support for Gov. Janet Mills — a two-term incumbent whose statewide track record, he argued, made her the most electable Democrat in a race against incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins. 

Despite all the advantages, Mills’ campaign lacks momentum. Progressive challenger Graham Platner, a 41-year-old Marine veteran and harbormaster, has built a staggering lead in the polls despite multiple scandals plaguing his candidacy, including revelations of old internet postings by Platner that were racist, demeaned victims of sexual assault, and minimized rape. Platner has also survived revelations that he has a Nazi tattoo on his chest, which he has since covered up. These are revelations that would have ended most campaigns before they started, and all signs indicate that the Collins campaign sees Platner as the candidate they want to face in November.

Michigan isn't any better for Schumer. Though he hasn't publicly endorsed Rep. Haley Stevens, his allies believe she's the strongest candidate to take on former GOP Rep. Mike Rogers in the fall. The theory rests partly on her manufacturing-focused message and partly on the expectation that she'll run well with black voters. The problem: she's stuck in a statistical three-way tie with state Sen. Mallory McMorrow and former health official Abdul El-Sayed, and the progressive wing of the party has made its objections to her candidacy unmistakably clear.

In Iowa, Schumer's allies are backing state Rep. Josh Turek against state Sen. Zach Wahls, who has Sen. Elizabeth Warren's endorsement, a larger national fundraising footprint, and a message that leans explicitly on his criticism of Schumer's leadership. 

What ties these contests together is the emergence of the Senate's progressive flank as an active counterforce. Warren, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and others aren't merely offering endorsements — they're campaigning in these states against candidates their own caucus leader recruited. That kind of internal insurgency would rattle any leader, and it carries additional weight in a cycle where Schumer's hold on the minority leader's gavel faces quiet but serious scrutiny.

The math of primaries, though, is only part of Schumer’s problems.

He was once a formidable fundraiser, but now, Democratic donors are increasingly routing money directly to candidates, bypassing the party committees that leadership controls.

“Schumer is not anybody's favorite. It's been a great run, but it's run its course,” one major donor told Puck News. 

Frustrated donors haven't fully closed their wallets — one Democratic fundraising operative acknowledged the checks still get written, accompanied by complaints. "People are really pissed at Schumer," the operative said. 

Democratic voters in the swing states Schumer needs to win are rejecting his hand-picked recruits, turning these primaries into a clear referendum on who actually leads Senate Democrats—and the answer is increasingly looking like it isn’t Chuck Schumer.

Notypist Wed, 04/29/2026 - 16:40

Amazon Drops After AWS Growth Misses Whisper Estimates As Capex Soars

In our preview of Amazon's earnings, we summarized sentiment as "Bullish, But Concerns Remain" with JPM noting that client "conversations were heavily AWS-skewed with investor focus on degree of acceleration and cloud $ re-capture driven by core workloads, AI, & new partnerships. Still, some concerns remain on broader AI positioning/strategy, Trainium traction, & gap to Azure/Google Cloud growth. Strong Stores execution expected, with N. America margin expansion. But higher fuel costs raise questions on consumer demand & operating margins." They also warned that if everyone expects big AWS growth and has the same thesis, what breaks it out? And then let's not forget what broke AMZN a quarter ago when the stock slumped after the company guided a whopping 50% increase in full year capex to $200BN (vs est of $146.1BN). Would it do a similar capex boost this time?

With that in mind, here is what the company reported for Q1 moments ago:

• EPS $2.82, beating exp. 2.63, a solid beat after missing last quarter:

Revenue was stronger across the board (except a modest miss in the small physical store sales category):

• Net sales $181.52 billion, beating estimates of $177.23 billion 
  • Online stores net sales $64.25 billion, beating estimate $62.65 billion
  • Physical Stores net sales $5.79 billion, missing estimate $5.81 billion
  • Third-Party Seller Services net sales $41.58 billion, beating estimate $40.78 billion, ex F/X +12%, estimate +10.9%
  • Subscription Services net sales $13.43 billion, beating estimate $13.07 billion, ex F/X +12%, estimate +11%
  • Advertising services net sales $17.24 billion, beating estimate $16.9 billion

The somewhat mixed news is that the most important revenue item, AWS, beat the sellside estimate...

• AWS net sales $37.59 billion, beating estimate $36.68 billion

... even though the YoY increase came in shy of the 30% buyside whisper bogey:

• Amazon Web Services net sales excluding F/X +28%, the fastest growth rate since the second quarter of 2022.

Geographically the results were also strong, with North America beating by more than $2 billion:

• North America net sales $104.14 billion, beating estimate $102.08 billion
• International net sales $39.79 billion, beating estimate $38.59 billion

Going down the line: 

• Operating income $23.85 billion, beating estimate $20.75 billion
• Operating margin 13.1%, beating estimate 11.7%
• North America operating margin +7.9%, beating estimate +6.85%
• International operating margin 3.6%, beating estimate 2.58%

While AWS sales growth was solid (if below the whisper), just as impressive was the the margin for the segment also increased from 35.03% to 37.68%, just beating the median Wall Street estimate. Elsewhere, North American profit unexpectedly jumped to $14.161 billion, resulting in a profit margin of 7.94%, down from 9.03% a quarter ago, while international margins rose to 3.58% from 2.05%, the highest since Q2 2025.

As a result of the rise in AWS profits, and generally solid sales margins, Amazon's consolidated operating margin posted a notable jump and in Q1 increased 9.7% to 11.7%, just shy of an all time high. 

Commenting on the quarter, CEO Andy Jassy said that “we’re making customers’ lives easier and better every day across all our businesses, and their response is driving significant growth.... AWS is growing 28% (our fastest growth in 15 quarters) on a very large base, our chips business topped a $20 billion revenue run rate growing triple digits year-over-year , Advertising grew to over $70 billion in TTM revenue, and unit growth in our Stores reached 15% (the highest since the tail end of covid lockdowns)."

Looking ahead, the company's guidance  was also very solid: 

• Net sales for Q2 are expected to be between $194 billion and $199 billion; the midpoint of $196.5 billion was a big beat compared to the median estimate of $189.15 billion.
• Operating income for Q2 is expected between $20.0 billion to $24.0 billion, also above the estimate of $22.86

The projected 17.2% revenue growth was the highest since June 2021.

And while we wait to get some sense of what happened to AMZNs capex guidance, and whether it was revised higher again, here is a less than flattering view of the company's free cash flow: the company's LTM free cash flow plunged to $1.2 billion for the trailing twelve months, vs $25.9 billion for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2025

AMZN's free cash flow decreased, driven primarily by a year-over-year increase of $59.3 billion in purchases of property and equipment, net of proceeds from sales and incentives. This increase primarily reflects investments in artificial intelligence

And indeed, capex for the quarter soared to $44.2 billion in the first quarter, exceeded analysts’ expectations, a sign that Amazon is seeing higher expenses for the build-out than anticipated. 

This means that going forward, AMZN will need to burn through its cash or issue new debt to fund further capex growth. Indicatively, AMZN's debt soared to $119 billion in Q1, nearly doubling from $65.6 billion at the end of 2025.

Amazon Chief Executive Officer Andy Jassy has said that the company aims to spend about $200 billion this year — a 56% increase from 2025 — mostly on data centers, including those customized for AI services.

After all that, AMZN shares were slightly lower, largely erasing an earlier kneejerk slide lower as we wait for the company's earnings call 

 

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 16:39

Alphabet Surges After-Hours On Record Search Queries, Backlog Builds

Google shares are rallying after hours as parent Alphabet's first-quarter earnings report showed strong revenue growth in cloud computing and internet search ads, helping investors look past slowing profits amid huge AI spend.

• Earnings per share were $5.11, well ahead of Wall Street's consensus estimate of $2.63, and up from $2.81 last year.

• Revenue for the quarter reached $110 billion, more than expectations of $107 billion, and up 22% on the year.

The most closely watched line in Google's reporting is its cloud unit which will spend up to $185 billion on AI data centers this year to support its customers that rent AI servers over the internet. Quarterly cloud sales hit $20 billion, up 63% with a 33% operating profit margin.

Despite mounting depreciation expenses, Google Cloud's margin is rising quickly.

In Q1, Google's cloud computing backlog boomed to $460 billion from $240 billion in the December quarter.

The backlog is converted into realized revenue as new data centers come online and crunch artificial intelligence-related workloads - training AI models and processing AI apps.

Perhaps most notably, CapEx came in slightly below expectations ($35.674BN vs $35.97BN exp), but expectations continue to rise...

• *ALPHABET SEES FY CAPEX $180B TO $190B, SAW $175B TO $185B

• *ALPHABET CFO: 2027 CAPEX TO SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE FROM 2026

And, for now, this is what the market wants to hear with GOOGL up around 4% after-hours...

Google Search queries hit an “all time high” in the first quarter of 2026, according to a statement from CEO Sundar Pichai.

Also, Google's Q3 internet search-advertising revenue came in at $60.40 billion, topping estimates of $59 billion.

However, Google dis not disclose how many monthly users its Gemini chatbot app had at the end of Q1. The Gemini app had 750 million monthly users at the end of Q4.

“This was our strongest quarter ever for our consumer AI plans, driven by the Gemini App. Overall the number of paid subscriptions has now reached 350 million, with YouTube and Google One being the key drivers,” Pichai said.

“Gemini Enterprise has great momentum with 40% quarter on quarter growth in paid monthly active users. And, finally, I’m pleased to see Waymo surpass 500,000 fully autonomous rides a week,” Pichai added.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 16:36

MSFT Dumps As CapEx Disappoints, Despite Top- & Bottom-Line Beat

Heading into the "biggest earnings day ever", MSFT was near the bottom of the Mag7 group, down 22% from its 52-week high, with capacity constraints hampering growth and CapEx concerns weighing down the stock.

Microsoft has guided to roughly $80 billion in AI data center spending this fiscal year, and the Street wants to know if that money is actually getting deployed.

The headline results were solid and prompted initial gains in MSFT after hours as it beat top- and bottom-line:

• *MICROSOFT 3Q REV. $82.89B, EST. $81.46B

• *MICROSOFT 3Q EPS $4.27, EST $4.07

Breaking down the revenue saw beats across the board:

• Microsoft Cloud revenue $54.5 billion, estimate $53.78 billion

• Intelligent Cloud revenue $34.68 billion, estimate $34.32 billion

• Productivity and Business Processes revenue $35.01 billion, estimate $34.48 billion

• More Personal Computing revenue $13.19 billion, estimate $12.65 billion

But Azure and other cloud services revenue barely beat expectations Ex-FX +39%, estimate +38.2%

But those gains were quickly erased as it appears MSFT is not deploying capital as fast as expected:

• *MICROSOFT 3Q CAPEX INCLUDING LEASES $31.9B, EST. $35.29B

The result of all that is MSFT shares are down around 3% after hours, after breaking above recent highs...

Satya Nadella (CEO) was, of course, optimistic: "We are focused on delivering cloud and AI infrastructure and solutions that empower every business to eval-max their outcomes in the agentic computing era. Our AI business surpassed an annual revenue run rate of $37 billion, up 123% year-over-year."

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 16:23

California's Climate Overreach

Authored by Edward Ring via American Greatness,

Even if the most dire climate scenarios are accurate, and humanity must transition away from fossil fuel, it can’t happen overnight. The rational approach is to first develop alternative sources of energy without precipitously destroying the industries that reliably produce oil and natural gas. Once alternatives are available at a competitive price and in sufficient quantities, demand naturally migrates to the alternatives. Meanwhile, the oil and gas industry, recognizing that their core business is to provide energy, actually stays healthy by also investing in the transition.

None of that is happening in California. The approach the state’s politicians have chosen is irrational and predatory. For more than twenty years, they have legislated and litigated the state’s oil and gas companies down to a fraction of their former size, making up most of the resulting energy shortage not with alternative energy, but with imports.

A recent and particularly brazen case of this ongoing harassment comes in the form of Senate Bill 982, something that only last week came perilously close to moving to a floor vote. Under the moral masquerade of requiring restitution for allegedly causing climate change, which in turn allegedly caused wildfires, what this bill really amounted to was a state-sponsored shakedown. SB 982 is a vivid example of how California’s legislature is determined to cannibalize and ultimately destroy entire industries in order to pay for disasters of their own making.

SB 982 would impose liability on fossil fuel companies for “climate-attributable damages,” expected to be assessed in billions of dollars. It would empower California’s attorney general to sue the state’s oil companies without even needing to prove fault, negligence, or specific causation by an individual company.

This bill is not only legalized extortion, but also a total disregard for economic reality. Combustible fuels remain the primary engine of civilization, and they’re not going anywhere for at least the next several decades. Despite this unavoidable fact, California’s in-state oil industry is already on the verge of implosion. The results are easily quantifiable.

Well production in the oil rich state has fallen from over 400 million barrels per year in the 1980s to barely more than 100 million barrels per year in 2024. A major distribution pipeline from fields in Kern County to Northern California refineries was shut down in late 2025 because there wasn’t enough oil left to permit the pipeline to physically move oil through it, nor enough to make it possible for the operators to break even. Additional regulatory harassment has driven two of California’s major refineries to cease operations, leaving existing refinery capacity insufficient to meet demand. Californians now import 75 percent of their crude oil and, by some reports, now have to import 20 percent of their gasoline from refineries in Asia.

Against this backdrop, SB 982 wouldn’t even permit oil companies to recoup the billions that this predatory legislation will empower the state of California to extort from them. Where they could find the billions (trillions?) to pay for “climate attributable damages” if they can’t raise prices to consumers is unclear.

A similar disregard for economic reality is what motivated the introduction of SB 922 to begin with. For years, California’s semi-numerate insurance commissioners, driven by ideology, have made it difficult, if not impossible, for the state’s insurance companies to pass through to rate payers the increases to their own reinsurance payments or to increase rates to reflect updated risk assessments. Then, when wildfires immolated more than 13,000 homes in the Los Angeles area in early 2025, many insurance companies had already canceled coverage and left the state. The remaining insurers offering coverage, including California’s state-funded FAIR insurance plan, were overwhelmed. Without a bailout, these insurers cannot cover the claims.

But the entire premise of SB 982 is flawed. Culpability for the wildfires doesn’t rest with California’s oil companies. The California State Legislature created these disasters because, for decades, they have waged a regulatory assault on California’s timber industry, along with property owners and ranchers who used to engage in grazing, thinning, and controlled burns. In the Santa Monica Mountains surrounding the burned neighborhoods in Los Angeles, herds of sheep, goats, and cattle used to roam the hillsides, and property owners were able to thin overgrown vegetation on their own land as well as adjacent public land.

All of this became nearly impossible, thanks to interference in the form of hyper-regulatory oversight that effectively eliminated nearly all of the practices that had prevented California’s forests and wildlands from turning into tinderboxes. Trees and scrublands became overgrown, with the vegetation dried out and stressed not because of “climate change” but because natural and prescribed fires were suppressed at the same time any other form of thinning was all but banned. More than any other single factor, environmentalist extremism has caused California’s catastrophic wildfires.

Rather than admitting their culpability for the entire disaster, the wiped out homes, lost lives, and ensuing economic cataclysm, California’s state legislature blames oil companies. This entire charade is a prime exhibit of why climate change alarm in California has become, more than anything else, a scam designed to deflect responsibility for bad policies and to redistribute wealth and power to bureaucrats who haven’t shown the slightest evidence of learning from their decades of negligent opportunism.

Thanks to what capacity remains for rational climate policy in California, the targets of SB 982’s predatory scheme were able to stall its progress in the legislature this year. But the state’s appetite for seizing billions from disfavored industries isn’t going to go away. A “compromise” that almost had SB 982 sailing into law was to “permit” oil companies to earn “credits” against eventual judgments if they could prove they invested in wind, solar, and carbon capture schemes, all of which are deemed to lower emissions. Notwithstanding the subjective and economically draining morass of “carbon accounting,” this supposed compromise will only intensify; it is yet another way to further impose on oil companies the responsibility for funding projects that, in many cases, are patently ridiculous, such as direct air capture of CO₂, or blatantly destructive to the environment, such as floating offshore wind.

The example California is setting with its war on fossil fuel is not anything for residents in other states to take lightly. The state’s particularly virulent strain of climate overreach is a national disease, stronger in some states than in others, but spreading its contagion everywhere. In 2007, despite having an allegedly conservative majority, the US Supreme Court actually found CO₂ to be a pollutant that could be subject to regulation by the US EPA. The Trump administration has directed the EPA to reverse the regulations that followed the decision, but an incoming Democratic administration will bring it all back.

Anyone still believing that extreme climate shakedowns will be confined to blue states should read a brilliant national overview of the problem. Published in the Spring 2026 edition of City Journal, “The Climate Litigation Swindle” is written by Heather Mac Donald, a researcher noted for uncommon diligence and impeccable logic. In a nearly 6,000 word essay, Mac Donald describes several avenues of litigation being pursued by climate activists throughout the United States. The audacity of these lawsuits is only matched by their vapidity. But that won’t stop lower courts, or a US Supreme Court, should it end up packed and flipped by a new Democratic administration, from granting credence to every absurdity these creative litigants can possibly conjure.

Climate extremists are part of a larger sickness infecting America. They are part of a movement that seeks to undermine our economy, discredit capitalism, disparage Western civilization and Western traditions, spread fear, resentment, despair and self loathing among our youth, and, through their ignorance and fanaticism, deny Americans the opportunities that preceding generations have taken for granted. They are a menace. They must be stopped.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 16:20

 

 

At The Money: How to Max Out Your Small Business Retirement Plan with Dan Larosa (April 29, 2026)

Are you running a small business or “side hustle” that generates real income? You may not be taking full advantage of the many retirement savings plans available.

Full transcript below.

~~~

About this week’s guest:

Dan LaRosa is Director of Corporate Retirement Plans at Ritholtz Wealth Management, overseeing more than $400 million in various plans. He is a Qualified Plan Financial Consultant (QPFC) and Accredited Investment Fiduciary (AIF) and partner at the firm.

For more info, see:

Professional Bio

LinkedIn

~~~

 

Find all of the previous At the Money episodes here, and in the MiB feed on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, and Bloomberg. And find the entire musical playlist of all the songs I have used on At the Money on Spotify

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT: At the Money: Retirement Plans for Small Business Owners and Solo Practitioners
with Barry Ritholtz and Dan LaRosa

 

Intro:  If you ever get annoyed
Look at me I’m self-employed
I love to work at nothing all day
And I’ll be…Taking care of business every day
Taking care of business every way

Barry Ritholtz: Saving for retirement is challenging, especially if you’re a small business owner or solo practitioner. Various retirement plans like SEPs, solo Ks, and Mega Backdoor Roths can really be confusing. There are so many choices, the options have increased, and the rules have become even more complex. To help us unpack all of this and what it means for your retirement portfolio, let’s bring in Dan LaRosa. He’s an expert in corporate qualified retirement accounts, working with clients all over the country. Full disclosure: Dan runs the corporate retirement planning group at Ritholtz Wealth Management, my firm, and he’s one of my partners. So Dan, let’s start basic. What options exist for either solo or small business owners if they want to save more money for retirement on a tax-deferred basis?

Dan LaRosa: Sure, Barry. The main options, at least the options that you’ll more likely than not start with, are a SEP IRA or a solo 401(k). A lot of people default to a SEP, even if they’re in a situation where the solo K might actually be a better option. The SEP is just simpler, and it’s often the first thing that your CPA is going to mention to you or recommend. Solo 401(k)s with a Mega Backdoor Roth feature have also gotten more popular in recent years. And once you have one of those in place, if you’re still looking for more tax deferral opportunities, a defined benefit cash balance plan might be a good fit.

Barry Ritholtz: Really interesting. Last time when we talked about Mega Backdoor Roth, the total you can contribute if you’re working for a firm is $72,000. But these days, so many people have side hustles. They set up an LLC or a little company to do something, and maybe they’re a solo practitioner, maybe it’s a husband and wife, and this is income beyond what their regular paycheck is. If you maxed out your Mega Backdoor Roth at your regular employer and you have this side gig, how much can you add above that $72,000?

Dan LaRosa: A lot of people don’t realize this, but each plan has its own $72,000 limit. The only thing that aggregates across all plans is the $24,500 employee deferral limit. That’s the amount of money that each of us can contribute to our 401(k) plan. But each plan has a $72,000 limit. So if you have a side hustle or a solo gig, you can set up a solo 401(k) with a Mega Backdoor Roth, or even just a regular solo K or SEP. As long as your income is high enough, you can make additional contributions into that retirement plan of up to $72,000.

Barry Ritholtz: And how do they figure out the $72,000? Is that based on over $145,000 or $150,000 a year, or is there a percentage calculation? Where does that $72,000 number come from?

Dan LaRosa: The $72,000 number is just the overall 401(k) limit, or retirement plan limit. The SEP actually has the same, but how to get there is a bit of a loaded question, and it’s different for each of those plans. The SEP IRA is technically all employer contributions, so your contribution amounts are directly tied to your earnings. You can contribute up to 20% of your net income to get to that $72,000 number. So you do the math: you need an income of $360,000 to max out and get to that $72,000. The solo K — only a portion of your contribution is tied to your income, so you can contribute a lot more on a lower income. An income of about $235,000 to $240,000 will get you to that $72,000 max. The Mega Backdoor Roth is a bit of a cheat code. As long as your net income is $72,000, you can contribute all of that into the solo 401(k).

Barry Ritholtz: What are the trade-offs between the SEP IRA, the solo 401(k), and the solo Mega Backdoor Roth? It sounds like this is really complex. Are there any advantages or disadvantages to each of these?

Dan LaRosa: It is complex, and that’s why a lot of people just default to a SEP because it’s easier, but it really depends on your income and your objectives. If your income is on the lower side, or maybe it varies from year to year, the solo K is going to certainly allow the most flexibility and let you maximize your contribution even in those lower income years. If Roth contributions are the objective, you just can’t beat the solo K with the Mega Backdoor Roth. It’s going to allow you to contribute up to $72,000 in Roth contributions. You can’t find that anywhere else. But if your income is consistently high and Roth is not a priority — you just want to maximize your tax deferrals — then a SEP is going to get the job done.

Barry Ritholtz: So if you’re making $100,000 or less, or $250,000 or more, or a million or more, that may affect which of these you choose.

Dan LaRosa: Yeah, for sure. And again, assuming you want to maximize your contributions, you want to contribute as much as you can — the lower your income is, the more powerful the solo 401(k) is. You’re just going to have a lot more flexibility with your contributions. And the higher your income goes, you’re fine with a SEP, because that 20% of your net income, if your income is high enough — again, over $353,000 to $360,000 — you’re going to be putting $70,000-plus away a year.

Barry Ritholtz: Really intriguing. How do you count an employee if you’re a solo 401(k)? Does it matter if you’re 1099 or W-2 or part-time or spouse? A husband and wife own a small business — who counts as an employee for these?

Dan LaRosa: The solo 401(k) is easy. Once you have a W-2 employee that becomes eligible, it’s no longer a solo K, and it’s going to be hard for the owner to max out without contributions to that employee. The SEP is a little bit different. The eligibility requirement is referred to as the three-of-five rule. Once you have an employee that’s worked three out of any five years earning more than something nominal — I think $700 or $750 — they’re eligible, and that means they would receive the same percentage of compensation that you’re giving yourself. So that could get expensive in a hurry. As far as a spouse being classified as an employee, you can have your spouse in the solo K and still run the solo K — you’re not going to be disqualified. Your spouse counts as another owner. Also, a lot of people don’t realize that a solo K can have multiple partners in it. In other words, if a company has four different partners, you can have all four partners and each of the spouses in the solo K, as long as there are no non-owner employees. You’re good to go.

Barry Ritholtz: And that’s $72,000 per person, husband and wife?

Dan LaRosa: Per person. Again, assuming the income allows for it, but yes.

Barry Ritholtz: Really intriguing. Let’s talk about the administration and compliance burdens of these various options. I know you need plan documents, and then there’s the infamous Form 5500, and there are all sorts of recordkeeping rules. What do small businesses have to know? How do they avoid getting tripped up by all of this?

Dan LaRosa: SEPs are the easiest for sure. It’s just a few forms to set up, and there’s no annual maintenance, no filings. The owner just needs to track their contributions. With the solo 401(k), there is a little more, and the biggest thing is: once the plan reaches a total of $250,000 in total plan assets on December 31st of any plan year, a Form 5500-EZ must be filed. That’s basically the tax return for the plan. It’s a really simple form, but the penalties are insane. It’s $250 a day, up to $150,000. For a very long time, this really wasn’t regulated, but in recent years we’ve actually really seen an uptick in enforcement of these penalties. It shouldn’t prevent you from setting up a solo K, but it’s very important to be aware of this when you set the plan up.

Barry Ritholtz: Let’s talk setup and funding. When do these plans need to be set up and funded by? We’re recording this in February of 2026. Is it too late to set something up and fund it for 2025? What does the timing look like?

Dan LaRosa: No, you still have plenty of time. The SEP is an IRA, so just like any other IRA, it’s always been able to be established and funded for a prior year. You have until tax filing plus extension to get that plan funded. Effective, I believe, last year, the solo K got a lot more lenient and kind of follows that same path as the SEP. So you can establish a solo K and fund it for the prior year, with some caveats. If the plan is set up by April 15th — say for this year, the plan is set up by April 15th, 2026 — you can make employee and employer profit-sharing contributions. So you can get to that full $72,000, as long as you fund by the extended filing deadline of October 15th of this year. If you set up the plan after April 15th of this year, you can only make your employer contributions — your profit-sharing contributions — to it. So you’re going to be a little more limited as to how much you can fund.

Barry Ritholtz: Let’s talk about succession planning or exit planning, or with a husband and wife, the death of a spouse. Is any one structure superior to others? If the owner expects to sell the business or retire, or maybe even bring in partners, which is the most flexible here?

Dan LaRosa: The solo K is always going to give you more flexibility than the SEP. If there are multiple partners in the solo K, they can each contribute different amounts, or some not at all. SEP contributions are pro rata, so everyone has to get the same percentage of comp. So obviously not ideal if there are going to be multiple partners or people with different goals involved. On the other hand, SEPs are just structurally a lot simpler, easier to unwind if necessary. So really, one isn’t always going to be better than the other. It really depends on the situation.

Barry Ritholtz: One of the advantages of 401(k)s is the creditor and ERISA protections. Even if you lose litigation, nobody can take your retirement money away. Do the same things apply to the SEP or solo 401(k)? Is it really the same set of rules?

Dan LaRosa: What you’re talking about with 401(k)s is that additional ERISA protection. ERISA plans — which are your employer 401(k)s and defined benefit plans — have the most creditor protection of all qualified plans. It is a common misconception that solo Ks, because they’re 401(k)s, also have this enhanced creditor protection. They do not, because they don’t cover any non-owner employees. They don’t qualify for that extra ERISA protection. So SEPs and solo Ks are on the same level in terms of creditor protection — the same as a regular IRA. If you are in a litigious profession and that protection is important, it might be a good idea to roll some of those IRA or solo K balances into your employer 401(k) or defined benefit plan, if you have one available.

Barry Ritholtz: That is really interesting. I would imagine doctors — I remember back in the day, brokers used to get sued on a regular basis — so that seems to be worthwhile. Last question: if you have a business owner that’s married, whether or not the spouse works for them in the business, can that spouse also open either a solo 401(k) or SEP or Mega Backdoor Roth 401(k) and legitimately increase the household contribution, assuming the revenue allows for it?

Dan LaRosa: Yeah, as long as your spouse is a legitimate employee of your solo practice, you can do that, and it has tremendous benefits. But they have to be an employee on payroll, receiving wages. The solo K allows you to contribute a lot even on a low income. A spouse would be able to actually contribute 100% of their compensation up to that $24,500 — or if you’re over 50, $32,500. That adds up quickly. It’s an easy way to supercharge your household savings — adding your spouse to your solo practice retirement plan.

Barry Ritholtz: All this stuff is so intriguing, and it’s just another tool in the toolbox. To wrap up: if you’re a small business owner or solo practitioner and you haven’t taken advantage of the various tax-deferred retirement savings plans — whether it’s a SEP, a solo 401(k), or a Mega Backdoor Roth 401(k) — speak to your fill-in-the-blank financial advisor, accountant, or tax professional, and get hopping on this. This is an enormous way to accumulate wealth over the next 10 or 20 years and have various options of whether this goes in pre-tax or post-tax, which allows you to maximize your long-term returns. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Bloomberg’s At the Money.

~~~

Find our entire music playlist for At the Money on Spotify.

 

The post At The Money: How to Max Out Your Small Business Retirement Plan appeared first on The Big Picture.

United Pilot Reports 737 Struck By "Red, Shiny" Drone On San Diego Approach

OSINT accounts on X are circulating ATC audio from theATCapp that allegedly captures a United Airlines pilot reporting a drone strike while the Boeing 737 was on base leg for landing at San Diego International Airport.

The pilot of United 1980 told SAN Ground that, at around 3,000 feet, the 737 struck a drone during the base leg, which is right before final approach.

Ground asked the United 1980 pilot, "Do you have an approximate size, or how many engines?"

The pilot responded, "It was so small I couldn't tell. It was red, shiny. I couldn't tell."

United Airlines flight 1980 (Boeing 737) hit a drone over San Diego this morning around 3000 feet.

Audio via @theATCapp pic.twitter.com/EFclpROOlL

— Thenewarea51 (@thenewarea51) April 29, 2026

"No off-the-shelf consumer drone can get to 3000 feet. I'll be very interested to see how this investigation plays out," one X user stated.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 15:50

Powell's Final FOMC Sees Most Dissents In 34 Years As Fed Keeps Rate Unch (As Expected)

Since the last FOMC meeting (on March 18), gold has been clubbed like a baby seal ("EM piggy bank") while stocks and oil have surged (with the former ignoring the peril of the latter)...

During that time, Fed rate-change expectations have swung violently from a full rate-cut to a full rate-hike and fallen back to no change at all in 2026, notably (hawkishly) rising in the last few days as oil prices surged back to war highs...

On the macro front, The Fed's dual mandate is in play as (surprisingly) inflation has surprised to the downside while growth has surprised to the upside...

Notably, The Fed doesn't need to cut rates today for monetary policy to get easier as inflation expectations are rising so much that ex-ante real rates have fallen to the lowest since November and are close to turning negative...

As we detailed earlier, recent labor data (March jobs, ADP, claims) has shown resilience and potentially some green shoots. To Bank of America, this should reduce the sense of urgency to shore up the labor market among the doves.

But, as a result of latent inflation threats, some of the most prominent doves on the committee have changed their tone of late. In a speech last week, Waller emphasized not only upside risks to inflation from the Iran war.

Nevertheless, with all that behind us, the market is expecting a big fat nothingburger from Fed Chair Powell's last (maybe) FOMC meeting, but is expecting an indication of 'two-sided risks' with a single dissent (from Miran calling for a 25bps cut).

What The Fed Did and Said...

Most divided (8-4) Fed in 34 years votes to hold rates unchanged as expected BUT... With 4 No Votes, Powell's Final Meeting Garners Most Dissents in 34 Years

• *FED: HAMMACK, KASHKARI, LOGAN VOTED AGAINST EASING BIAS, BACKED

• *FED SAYS GOVERNOR STEPHEN MIRAN DISSENTS IN FAVOR OF RATE CUT

Fed officials also changed slightly their characterization of the uncertainty around the conflict in Iran: 

“Developments in the Middle East are contributing to a high level of uncertainty about the economic outlook.”

Back in March they said the implications for the US economy were “uncertain.”

In the spirit of Fed transparency, Powell leaves on a confusing note.

So, three of the dissenters opposed “inclusion of an easing bias.”

And yet the actual language of the statement arguably doesn’t specify such a bias.

It says that the committee would be prepared “to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate.”

That doesn’t specify cutting interest rates.

It’s interesting that the trio of dissenters on the bias basically labeled this language as a bias to ease. Because arguably it’s neutral:

The Committee would be prepared to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate if risks emerge that could impede the attainment of the Committee’s goals.

The “goals” of course are price stability and maximum employment.

But it appears that the trio views this language as mainly attaching to the jobs mandate, it seems to us.

Fed officials said the economy is expanding “at a solid pace” with “low” job gains and the unemployment rate “little changed”. That’s all the same as in March.
 
Their characterization of inflation changed slightly:

“Inflation is elevated, in part reflecting the recent increase in global energy prices.”

However, as Bloomberg notes, in central bank world every word matters, and there has been extensive debate around the characterization of “additional adjustments.” Some Fed watchers deem the wording as signaling most policymakers still see a rate cut as their next likely step, in what’s known as an easing bias. That bias stayed unchanged today:

“In considering the extent and timing of additional adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, the Committee will carefully assess incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks.”

Read the full red-line of The Fed statement below:

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 15:45

Chinese Nationals Among 51 Indicted Over Marijuana Grow Operations In Oklahoma

Authored by Michael Clements via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A Department of Homeland Security investigation has resulted in the indictment of 51 defendants—including 29 Chinese nationals—on 67 counts of conspiracy to manufacture black-market marijuana in Oklahoma for distribution in Texas, Mississippi, Kansas, and North Carolina, among other locales.

Oklahoma drug enforcement agent Mike Garcia looks over rows of marijuana plants at an illegal grow facility in Ponca City, Okla, on Dec. 22, 2025. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times

The defendants are from California, Florida, Kansas, Michigan, Mississippi, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Texas. Of the 51 indicted, 23 are fugitives, and 11 of the Chinese defendants have obtained permanent legal residence in the United States.

The April 21 indictment alleges that between March 2025 and April 2026, a network of growers, brokers, transporters, and distributors sent marijuana into the black market in Oklahoma and across the United States.

Mike Garcia, agent in charge of the 8th District Attorney’s Drug Task Force and Major Crime Unit, told The Epoch Times that illicit operators often buy old houses or undeveloped property and add buildings to grow marijuana.

Garcia said it was difficult to stay on top of the operations.

“You have to keep countering the illegal [operations] to balance it out. It’s a hard thing to do,” Garcia said.

According to a Department of Justice news release on April 27, marijuana was allegedly transported from grow operations to stash houses, and then to customers for further distribution.

Defendants reportedly split the proceeds and also concealed those proceeds by transporting large amounts of cash and using businesses to disguise the nature of the funds.

The conspiracy was carried out, in large part, with cell phones, and, as alleged in the indictment, law enforcement intercepted calls of two of the main conspirators, Li Shun Chen, 53, and Ying Wang, 45, both of Oklahoma City, according to the press release.

A federal grand jury handed down the indictment on April 21. The indictment also calls for the forfeiture of properties and assets used to generate or mask proceeds of the black-market transactions, including properties throughout Oklahoma.

A vernal pool polluted with chemicals used for growing illegal marijuana border an agricultural form in Ponca City, Okla., on Dec. 22, 2025. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times

“Since 2021, when our agency created Marijuana Enforcement Teams (MET), we’ve proudly worked alongside our federal and state partners to target criminal organizations operating in Oklahoma,” Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Control Director Donnie Anderson said in the release. “These partnerships have resulted in a dramatic drop in illegal marijuana farms within our state.”

Oklahoma legalized medical marijuana on June 26, 2018, in hopes that a 7 percent excise tax and state and local property taxes would finance education and infrastructure while creating new jobs.

Mark Woodward, public information officer for the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics, said organized criminals used this as an opportunity to get involved. He told The Epoch Times that up to 85 percent of the illegal grow facilities in Oklahoma have ties to Chinese organized crime.

“They used straw owners because so many of them came here during the COVID-19 pandemic,” he said. “The first thing they wanted to do was try to look legitimate.”

The investigation was led by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Control along with multiple federal, state, and local agencies.

The case is being prosecuted in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma.

Allan Stein contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 15:30

StarCloud CEO Says Starship Gives SpaceX Launch Monopoly For Near Decade

The CEO of the startup building data centers for eventual low Earth orbit deployment told Molly O'Shea of the Sourcery podcast that he expects Elon Musk's SpaceX to hold a "near monopoly on launches" over the next five to ten years, driven by Starship's scale, launch cadence, and cost advantage.

Starcloud CEO Philip Johnston told O'Shea:

I'm very hopeful that other launch vehicles will be able to compete with SpaceX, but my general hot take is that SpaceX is going to have a near-monopoly on launch for at least the next five years, maybe ten.

I think Starship is way ahead of any other program, and even like Stokes Space—if their rocket works—their payloads are three tonnes versus 150-tonne payload for Starship. Especially with Gigafactory, so yeah, that's it.

O'Shea asked Johnston about Jeff Bezos' rocket company, Blue Origin, and whether it could challenge SpaceX's launch dominance in the years ahead: 

The problem with Blue Origin's rocket is they don't have a reusable upper stage at the moment, and as I understand, they're not even really trying to build a reusable upper stage.

So if they can get it flying, you're talking about launch costs comparable maybe with Falcon 9, although their quotes we've had are way higher than that.

.@Starcloud_ CEO @PhilipJohnston expects SpaceX to have a "near monopoly on launch" for the next 5–10 years:

"Starship is way ahead of any other program."

"The manufacturing that they're ramping up is insane—like building three Starships per day potentially with their… pic.twitter.com/qGCWPJ3cIh

— sourcery (@sourceryy) April 28, 2026

Musk's SpaceX is gearing up for the largest IPO ever, which could value the rocket company at up to $2 trillion. At this valuation, Musk would likely become the first trillionaire.

The latest data from Bloomberg shows Musk's net worth is around $646 billion. Larry Page of Google trails in the No. 2 spot at $297 billion, with Bezos at No. 3 at $278 billion.

In December, we outlined for readers how to profit from space-based data centers, given that ground-based data centers are being delayed or canceled, alarming the tech bros. This suggests that, with limited to no restrictions on space, space-based data centers will be the next big push - all hinging on the commercialization of Starship.

Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2026 - 15:10