The Internal Revenue Service and the Department of the Treasury proposed regulations on Friday regarding the new excise tax, established under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, on certain remittances made abroad.
“Beginning Jan. 1, 2026, a 1 percent remittance transfer tax applies to remittances sent from the United States to recipients in foreign countries when the sender provides cash, a money order, a cashier’s check, or other similar physical instrument to the remittance transfer provider,” the IRS said in an April 10 statement.
“The sender is liable for the tax, and remittance transfer providers are required to collect the remittance transfer tax from certain senders, make semimonthly deposits, and file quarterly returns with the IRS. If the remittance transfer provider does not collect the tax from the sender, the tax becomes a liability of the remittance transfer provider.”
The proposed regulations clarify how the remittance transfer tax would be applied.
According to the notice of the proposed rule, the remittance tax is applicable to all eligible transfers irrespective of whether the amount is actually disbursed to the designated recipient.
In case a remittance transfer expires or is canceled and the remittance transfer provider refunds the amount to the sender, the sender can recoup the tax by filing a claim for refund with the IRS.
The tax does not apply to any remittance transfer in which the funds come from a credit or debit card issued in the United States. It is also inapplicable if the funds being sent are withdrawn from an account held in a financial institution.
Any amount that is ultimately transferred to a designated recipient will be taxed, the notice clarified.
The rules affect remittance transfer providers, such as credit unions, banks, and money services businesses, as well as their agents.
There are roughly 600 money services businesses licensed as money transmitters in the United States, out of which more than 200 operate through around 500,000 authorized agents, the IRS said, citing data from the Nationwide Multistate Licensing System.
Between 2019 and 2024, money transfers to domestic and foreign destinations via money services businesses increased from $1.3 to $4 trillion.
“Money transmitted to foreign destinations (remittance transfers) accounted for 9 to 25 percent of the total money transmissions, equaling $236 billion in 2019, growing to almost $1 trillion in 2021 and 2022, but decreasing to $365 billion in 2024,” the notice said.
“Over 2019–2024, annual remittance transfers to foreign destinations through [money service businesses] averaged $520 billion. The average individual money transfer size ranged from $290 to $740 over the same time period.”
The IRS said in its statement that remittance transfer providers must report the new remittance transfer tax via Form 720.
In an Oct. 7 statement, the IRS said that limited penalty relief will be available for remittance transfer providers who fail to deposit the collected remittance taxes in the first three quarters of this year.
“Treasury and the IRS understand there might be challenges implementing the new law and have determined it is in the interest of sound tax administration to provide limited penalty relief related to remittance transfer tax deposits,” the agency said.
Tax Impacts
In a July 1 report, the Center for Global Development said that even at 1 percent, the remittance tax would hit poor countries “hard.” The new tax not only raises costs by 1 percent but can also lead to a dip in remittances.
Mexico stands to lose the most due to the tax imposition, with the loss being more than $1.5 billion per year, the report said. Other nations majorly affected by the tax include India, China, Vietnam, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, and El Salvador.
“Central American countries are projected to suffer the greatest loss relative to their gross national income (GNI), with El Salvador—a close ally of the Trump administration—projected to lose the equivalent of 0.6 percent of GNI,” the report said.
“Where the effects of the tax are significant relative to GNI, countries could experience lower household incomes, weaker consumer demand, and increased exchange rate pressures.”
The Federation for American Immigration Reform blamed remittances for causing the United States’ economy to lose at least $200 billion per year, according to a July 22 report.
This amount is more than enough to run the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department combined. It is also four times the amount spent on the Department of Justice.
“Remittances represent a substantial loss to the U.S. economy. The money that is sent out of the United States is money that is not spent on goods and services in the United States,” the report said.
“The loss of money remitted also means no benefits from the sales, excise, and restaurant taxes, etc. attached to those goods and services. Indeed, remittances carry a significant opportunity cost.”
CENTCOM confirms blockade to begin at 1000ET Monday morning and will only impact Iran-related vessels
President Trump begins blockading the Strait of Hormuz, warns US military will “finish up the little that is left of Iran”
Door for diplomacy remains open, WSJ reports: Regional countries are racing to bring the U.S. and Iran back to the negotiating table after marathon peace talks in Islamabad ended without a deal
The US delegation in Islamabad delivered the following six “red lines” to Iran: 1) End all uranium enrichment; 2) Dismantle all major nuclear enrichment facilities; 3) Retrieve highly enriched uranium; 4) Accept a broader peace, security and de-escalation framework that includes regional allies; 5) End funding for terrorist proxies Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis; 6) Fully open the Strait of Hormuz, charging no tolls for passage
2 Supertankers U-turn after peace deal talks fail
UAE Oil Chief warns Iran blocking Hormuz is “a direct threat to the energy, food and health security of every nation”
The odds of a peace deal by the end of the ceasefire period have improved modestly today but remain down significantly from pre-talks…
Trump Weighs Limited Strikes On Iran
Brent crude futures are up 7.5% to around $102 per barrel, while S&P 500 futures traded down about 1% after President Trump ordered the U.S. military to impose a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, beginning Monday morning.
A Wall Street Journal report indicates that President Trump is weighing limited strikes on high-value Iranian assets to break the stalemate in peace talks.
The report continued:
That is among the options that Trump was considering Sunday, hours after negotiations collapsed in Pakistan, the officials said.
Trump could also resume a full-fledged bombing campaign, though officials said that was less likely given the prospect of further destabilizing the region and the president’s aversion to prolonged military conflicts.
He could also seek a more temporary blockade while he pressures allies to take responsibility for a prolonged military escort mission through the strait in the future.
U.S.-Iran ceasefire talks in Pakistan ended late Saturday without an agreement. These periods generally allow both sides to restock weapons and prepare for the next phase of fighting.
OSINT (Open Source Intelligence) accounts on X are reporting a steady stream of U.S. Air Force cargo jets heading to the Middle East late Sunday.
The amount of US airforce transports heading to the Middle East tonight is insane.
“My advice to the White House folks I’ve spoken to is secure the strait at any cost and immediately as a matter of economic and national and global security,” said Steve Moore, a former economic adviser to Trump, who was quoted by the WSJ.
Moore noted, “We have the power to protect the flow of international trade and must use it. Or the whole world economy could tumble into a global recession.”
Fred Fleitz, a senior National Security Council official during Trump’s first term, told the outlet that Iran’s large delegation to Islamabad showed that a diplomatic solution is possible.
“I think Trump’s right, Iran is out of cards,” Fleitz said. “This conflict has only been going on for a few weeks. It’s too early to know how this will come out, but I think it looks promising.”
CENTCOM Says Blockade Will Begin Monday Morning at 1000ET
U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces will begin implementing a blockade of all maritime traffic entering and exiting Iranian ports on April 13 at 10 a.m. ET, according to a statement on X.
CENTCOM provided some further clarification regarding who will be blocked, in accordance with President Trump’s earlier proclamation.
Specifically, they are only (and impartially) blocking any vessel leaving or entering an Iranian port…
The blockade will be enforced impartially against vessels of all nations entering or departing Iranian ports and coastal areas, including all Iranian ports on the Arabian Gulf and Gulf of Oman.
But, vessels from non-Iranian ports are free to transit the Strait
CENTCOM forces will not impede freedom of navigation for vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz to and from non-Iranian ports.
Now the fun begins.
Iran Says It Won’t Allow Blockade Of Hormuz Strait, But Room For Diplomacy Remains
As the US failed to open the Strait of Hormuz, it is also “doomed to fail in a naval blockade,” Iran’s military adviser to the supreme leader, Mohsen Rezaee, said in a post on X.
Iran’s armed forces “will not allow America to do so and have great untapped leverage to counter it,” he adds.
“Iran is not a place to be surrounded by tweets and imaginary plans.”
However, despite defiant statements from the U.S. and Iran, The Wall Street Journal reports that, according to regional officials familiar with the matter said, the door remains open for further diplomacy and a second round of talks could be held within days. Regional countries were also in consultation with the U.S. to secure an extension of the fragile two-week ceasefire period announced late Tuesday, they said.
The Islamabad talks were the highest-level face-to-face meeting between American and Iranian leaders since 1979. The main sticking points, said the officials, were reopening the Strait of Hormuz without collecting fees, the fate of Iran’s highly enriched uranium, and Iran’s demand that about $27 billion in frozen revenues held abroad be released. Iranian officials have presented counterproposals to continue to enrich token amounts or curtail its stockpile of enriched uranium, but the two sides were unable to reach a compromise, the officials said.
Trump’s 6 Red Lines
Fox News reports that Vice President Vance’s final offer delivered to the Iranian delegation in Islamabad includes the following “red lines.”
End all uranium enrichment
Dismantle all major nuclear enrichment facilities
Retrieve highly enriched uranium
Accept a broader peace, security and de-escalation framework that includes regional allies
End funding for terrorist proxies Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis
Fully open the Strait of Hormuz, charging no tolls for passage
Needless to say, Iran refused to agree.
President Trump Begins Blockading Strait Of Hormuz
President Trump said the US would blockade the Strait of Hormuz following the collapse of peace talks with Iran in Islamabad this weekend.
“Effective immediately, the United States Navy, the Finest in the World, will begin the process of BLOCKADING any and all Ships trying to enter, or leave, the Strait of Hormuz,” Trump said in a social media post.
In a pair of lengthy social media posts, Trump first explained the situation in the Strait…
Iran promised to open the Strait of Hormuz, and they knowingly failed to do so.
This caused anxiety, dislocation, and pain to many people and Countries throughout the World.
They say they put mines in the water, even though all of their Navy, and most of their “mine droppers,” have been completely blown up.
They may have done so, but what ship owner would want to take the chance?
There is great dishonor and permanent harm to the reputation of Iran, and what’s left of their “Leaders,” but we are beyond all of that.
As they promised, they better begin the process of getting this INTERNATIONAL WATERWAY OPEN AND FAST! Every Law in the book is being violated by them.
I have been fully debriefed by Vice President JD Vance, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner, on the meeting that took place in Islamabad through the kind and very competent leadership of Field Marshal Asim Munir, and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, of Pakistan. They are very extraordinary men, and continuously thank me for saving 30 to 50 million lives in what would have been a horrendous War with India. I always appreciate hearing that — The amount of Humanity spoken of is incomprehensible.
Before discussing the outcome of the talks:
The meeting with Iran began early in the morning, and lasted throughout the night — Close to 20 hours. I could go into great detail, and talk about much that has been gotten but, there is only one thing that matters — IRAN IS UNWILLING TO GIVE UP ITS NUCLEAR AMBITIONS!
In many ways, the points that were agreed to are better than us continuing our Military Operations to conclusion, but all of those points don’t matter compared to allowing Nuclear Power to be in the hands of such volatile, difficult, unpredictable people.
My three Representatives, as all of this time went by, became, not surprisingly, very friendly and respectful of Iran’s Representatives, Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, Abbas Araghchi, and Ali Bagheri, but that doesn’t matter because they were very unyielding as to the single most important issue and, as I have always said, right from the beginning, and many years ago, IRAN WILL NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!
Trump noted that talks went well… until they didn’t…
“So, there you have it, the meeting went well, most points were agreed to, but the only point that really mattered, NUCLEAR, was not.“
The US president is hopeful…
At some point, we will reach an “ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO IN, ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO OUT” basis, but Iran has not allowed that to happen by merely saying, “There may be a mine out there somewhere,” that nobody knows about but them.
But then came the threats, with Trump apparently widening his purview to international waters:
THIS IS WORLD EXTORTION, and Leaders of Countries, especially the United States of America, will never be extorted.
I have also instructed our Navy to seek and interdict every vessel in International Waters that has paid a toll to Iran.
No one who pays an illegal toll will have safe passage on the high seas.
We will also begin destroying the mines the Iranians laid in the Straits.
Any Iranian who fires at us, or at peaceful vessels, will be BLOWN TO HELL!
And the art of the deal… Escalate to De-Escalate… how long can Iran last with no oil revenues at all?
Iran knows, better than anyone, how to END this situation which has already devastated their Country.
Their Navy is gone, their Air Force is gone, their Anti Aircraft and Radar are useless, Khomeini, and most of their “Leaders,” are dead, all because of their Nuclear ambition.
The Blockade will begin shortly. Other Countries will be involved with this Blockade. Iran will not be allowed to profit off this Illegal Act of EXTORTION.
They want money and, more importantly, they want Nuclear.
Additionally and, at an appropriate moment, we are fully “LOCKED AND LOADED,” and our Military will finish up the little that is left of Iran!
Trump’s decision follows his re-tweeting of this story from JustTheNews.com, suggesting that he could reprise his successful Venezuela blockade strategy to choke an already teetering Iranian economy and ratchet up diplomatic pressure on China and India by cutting them off one of their key sources of oil.
Ironically, the massive USS Gerald Ford carrier that led the Venezuelan blockade is now in the Persian Gulf after a brief hiatus for repairs and crew rest after a deadly fire. And now it joins the USS Abraham Lincoln and other major naval assets.
In short, Trump simply could out-blockade Iran’s hold over the Strait of Hormuz, experts said.
On Sunday, the president confirmed that he is proceeding with a blockade.
“It would be very easy for the US Navy to exert complete control over what does and does not go up and down the Strait now,” the Lexington Institute’s national security expert Rebecca Grant told Just the News.
“I’ve heard about 10 ships have moved in the last 24 hours. One of them was a reflagged Russian tanker, and we know that cargos have gone out to China, to India, and we’ve seen some inbound traffic.
“If Iran gets intransigent, then absolutely, the US Navy can set up with great overwater surveillance … and watch everything that goes in and out of that Strait and you’ll have to ask the US Navy if you want to move past Kharg Island or past that narrow part by Oman,” she added.
Iran’s semi-official media cited “excessive” US demands, while the foreign ministry said it was natural that differences wouldn’t be resolved in a single round of talks, leaving the door open for more discussions.
A month ago we wondered…
If Iran is blocking and attacking US ships, why is the US allowing sanctioned Iranian tankers to cross the strait with Chinese oil?
The question is – how will the UAE oil chief deal with a US closure versus an Iranian closure?
China will certainly be pissed off as their tankers were flowing relatively freely until now.
Is the US endgame to take control of another chokepoint too…
Attempted Boarding of Commercial Ship in Bab el-Mandeb Strait
United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations reported that a “sailing vessel” was approached by a small boat carrying 10 to 12 people, several of them heavily armed with automatic weapons, in what appeared to be an attempted boarding.
“The Master deployed a flare and the skiff turned away and departed to the southeast,” UKMTO wrote in an advisory posted on X about the maritime incident near the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, another critical chokepoint that Iran-aligned Houthi rebels have threatened to close in recent weeks.
2 Supertankers U-Turn In Strait After Peace Talks End Without A Deal
The marathon peace talks this weekend in Islamabad between Iranian negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Vice President JD Vance, and other officials ended without a deal. Still, the top Iranian negotiator signaled that the door remains open for future talks. Polymarket odds of a peace deal being signed this month collapsed late Saturday.
Ahead of the weekend peace talks, three fully loaded supertankers carrying Iraqi and Saudi crude safely transited the Strait of Hormuz. But after U.S.-Iran negotiations ended without a deal late Saturday, two separate empty supertankers abruptly turned around at the mouth of the chokepoint rather than enter the Persian Gulf.
The exact reason for the U-turns of the two supertankers remains unclear, especially since Iraq and Pakistan had reportedly received Iranian transit approvals. However, the reversals clearly coincide with the breakdown in negotiations, highlighting just how quickly conditions on the strait can change.
UAE Oil Chief Warns “Illegal, Dangerous, & Unacceptable” For Iran To Close Strait
On Sunday morning, as vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz remained muted, Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, ADNOC’s managing director and group CEO and one of the most influential people in global energy markets, wrote on X: “The Strait of Hormuz has never been Iran’s to close or restrict.”
Al Jaber continued, “Any attempt to do so is not a regional issue; it is the disruption of a global economic lifeline and a direct threat to the energy, food and health security of every nation.”
“Setting such a precedent is illegal, dangerous, and unacceptable. The world simply cannot afford it and must not allow it,” he concluded in the X post.
Since February 28:
* At least 22 ships have been attacked
* 10 crew members have been killed
* Around 20,000 seafarers are unable to transit safely
* An estimated 800 commercial vessels are stranded, including almost 400 tankers
On Saturday, the U.S. Department of War confirmed that two U.S. warships transited the waterway to begin marine mine-clearing operations. Only a handful of ships have transited the strait this weekend.
Polymarket odds for vessel traffic returning to “normal” by the end of April plunged this weekend from 30% to 17%.
Disruptions at Gulf energy facilities and the continued paralysis across the Hormuz chokepoint led us early in the U.S.-Iran conflict to conclude that global energy flows were being rewired, whether temporarily or over the medium term, with energy exporters in the Gulf of America emerging as a potential net beneficiary.
In fact, the latest vessel-tracking data transmitted via the Automatic Identification System, supplied by Bloomberg, show that it is quite possible that America has become the world’s emergency gas station.
What appears increasingly clear after this weekend’s Islamabad talks is that Tehran refused to surrender any leverage around the Hormuz chokepoint. That posture only suggests to us that Tehran understands the chokepoint remains one of the last leverage points.
If done the right way, a mega backdoor Roth can allow investors to save in a workplace retirement plan such as a 401(k) beyond the typical contribution limits.
It also can allow investors to save in a Roth account when they otherwise would not have been able to do so because of certain restrictions.
So let’s take a closer look at this complex, but potentially beneficial strategy for high earners.
What Is a Mega Backdoor Roth?
The mega backdoor Roth is a strategy that involves making after-tax contributions to a 401(k) and then making a conversion of those contributions into either a Roth IRA or Roth 401(k).
Many people take the mega backdoor Roth approach because they can’t contribute to a Roth IRA due to income limits, or they’ve already maxed out their traditional 401(k) via salary deferrals and want to make additional contributions.
In 2026, you can’t contribute to a Roth IRA at all if your modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) is $168,000 as a single filer or $252,000 if married and filing jointly.
How Does a Mega Backdoor Roth Work?
If your plan administrator allows it, you can make after-tax contributions to your traditional 401(k) and then convert those contributions to a Roth IRA via an in-service distribution. Or, if the plan allows it, you can convert those after-tax contributions into a Roth 401(k) portion of the plan.
The key here is after-tax contributions.
After-tax 401(k) contributions are different from Roth 401(k) contributions and pretax contributions, which are associated with traditional 401(k)s.
But after-tax contributions may allow you to contribute to a workplace retirement plan like a 401(k) beyond the annual contribution limits for pretax and Roth contributions.
So let’s take a close look at these contribution limits for 2026.
You can contribute up to $24,500 in pretax and/or Roth contributions to your 401(k) if you’re under the age of 50.
Because of catch-up contributions, those aged 50 or older can contribute up to $32,500.
If your plan allows for super catch-up contributions, those between the ages of 60 and 63 can contribute up to $35,750.
But by factoring in after-tax contributions, those below age 50 may be able to save up to $72,000. Those between the ages of 50 to 59 or 64-plus can save up to $80,000. And those between the ages of 60 to 63 can save up to $83,250 if the plan allows super catch-up contributions.
But any employer contributions would count toward these limits.
Drawbacks to the Mega Backdoor Roth
Taking the mega backdoor Roth route can leave you with a hefty tax bill. This is because when you make qualified withdrawals in retirement, any investment earnings would be taxed as ordinary income.
And the earnings portion of the conversion into a Roth IRA would be subject to taxation at the time of the conversion.
In addition, your capacity to make after-tax contributions could be restricted by IRS nondiscrimination rules that affect highly compensated employees. These rules may limit how much highly compensated employees can contribute compared to non-highly compensated employees.
For 2026, you’re a highly-compensated employee if you made $160,000 or more in 2025 compensation, or if you owned more than 5 percent of the company at any time during the current or previous year.
And some plans don’t allow after-tax contributions to be eligible for employer matches.
And that brings us to one of the biggest downsides. Your plan administrator simply may not allow you to engage in the mega backdoor Roth strategy. Some employers won’t let you move money from the 401(k) and into a Roth IRA while you’re still employed by them. Or they may not allow you to transfer money from the after-tax portion of your plan into a Roth 401(k) part of the plan.
So you need to contact your plan administrator or human resources department to learn what their rules are.
The Bottom Line
Many high earners face some barriers when it comes to contributing to a Roth account. But this is when the mega backdoor Roth can come into play. This is a strategy involving making after-tax contributions to a traditional 401(k) and converting those contributions into a Roth IRA or a Roth 401(k) within the plan. But there are a few obstacles; not all companies let you take these steps within their 401(k) or other type of workplace retirement plan. There also may be some important tax implications, and the overall process could be highly complex. That’s why you need to be interested enough to brush up on your plan’s rules and take the backdoor route approach the right way. So it’s highly recommended you engage in this strategy with the guidance of a qualified tax professional.
Before the ‘official’ futures markets opened, the risk-off tone (due to the failed peace talks and Trump’s threat to blockade Iranian vessels) was very evident in FX and crypto markets.
Even given the usual caveats about thin liquidity, AUD/USD is down around 1%, a classic growth-sensitive barometer flashing warning signs, while EUR/USD is weaker by roughly 0.5%.
The moves point to a softer tone for risk assets and sure enough bitcoin is down notably, but still up from pre-ceasefire levels…
All eyes are of course on the oil markets where hyperliquid perps were signaling a major jump higher as traders react to peace talks falling apart over the weekend, and the US moving to blockade the Strait of Hormuz in response.
WTI opened up over 8% surging back above $100 (topping $105)…
European gas futures also surged more than 10% as the trading day for the product expanded to 21 hours, from 10 hours, on Monday.
The timeline for the start of efforts to unwind the extreme supply shocks created by the war looks to be getting longer and longer.
And of course, as goes oil, so goes stocks etc…
Since the war started, markets have increasingly taken their cues from crude prices given their far-reaching consequences. Surging energy costs have driven both the pullback in risk appetite as an immediate reaction to the conflict, as well as investors’ longer-term anticipation for a pickup in inflation and slowdown in consumption.
The extent of the divergence (between oil and stocks) has now surpassed levels seen in 2022.
But, even as the bond-stock-oil correlations started to creak on Friday…
…they are back in sync on this thin Sunday evening with S&P futures down over 1% for now…
Treasury futures prices are down notably (implying around a 5bps jump in 10Y Yields)…
The stronger dollar has pushed gold back down below $4700…
Obviously, investors will continue to monitor Middle East tensions in the coming week, while monthly reports from OPEC and the IEA will add some insight into how the Iran war is affecting the oil market.
Several major US banks are due to report earnings, where any commentary on the impact from the conflict will also be closely watched.
US data releases include producer prices, industrial production and existing home sales, while the Fed’s Beige Book will offer additional color on the health of the economy.
China is also due to report first-quarter GDP plus retail sales and industrial production data for March.
As Morgan Stanley’ Michael Wilson warned: The final phase of a correction is rarely easy and could require another re-test for markets, particularly if rates or bond volatility push higher again.
That call is made in a new campaign sponsored by the American Association of University Professors to force “colleges to drop their contracts with ICE’s key corporate enablers.”
Despite years of criticism over the purging of faculty ranks of conservatives and libertarians, university professors continue to double down on far-left ideology that is now an orthodoxy in higher education.
Given that history, it was little surprise to see the AAUP’s sponsorship of this campaign, as reported by the College Fix.
The campaign is also funded by Coefficient Giving, associated with liberal billionaire Dustin Moskovitz and his wife Cari Tuna. They have been criticized for reportedly funding groups pushing defund police and other radical agendas.
AAUP joined this campaign with Young Democratic Socialists of America, Sunrise Movement, and the Workplace Justice Lab at Rutgers University. It includes a toolkit instructing students to “create a crisis for university admin through an escalating campaign.”
The campaign seeks to organize to combat the “Trump regime” and its “terrorism”: “When students and workers join together in action, we can force our schools to stop funding and normalizing ICE collaborators and take down the whole regime.”
They are targeting companies such as Enterprise, Flock, ICE Air Carriers, Hilton, and Target.
The campaign states further that “ICE, and the Trump regime generally, cannot function without the consent and collaboration of the business world. Breaking companies from ICE is the central axis for generating enough leverage to stop the regime’s terrorization campaign.”
So university professors are funding a campaign that actively seeks to create a crisis on campuses. It takes a position as an organization that immigration enforcement is a form of terrorism. The silence among faculty is deafening. Rather than objecting that the AAUP should focus on issues related to academic freedom and protections for its members, there have been virtually no objections to the organization’s ideological agenda.
It is evidence of the new orthodoxy in higher education and the refusal of administrators and faculty to make any meaningful change in their intolerance for opposing views.
A Georgetown study found that only 9% of law school professors at the top 50 law schools identify as conservative — almost identical to the percentage of Trump voters in the new poll.
There is little evidence that faculty members are interested in changing this culture or creating greater diversity at schools. In places like North Carolina State University, a study found that Democrats outnumbered Republicans 20 to 1.
Yale University has finally achieved the academic version of Nirvana, a state of perfect peace and enlightenment. A recent study found that the faculty had finally purged every Republican donor from its ranks.
According to a recent report from the Buckley Institute, there is now not a single Republican found across 27 of 43 departments at Yale University. In a nation roughly evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats (with a slight advantage to the GOP), only 3 percent are Republicans across all Yale departments.
The hostility to opposing views is impacting our students. A new study offers additional data on this problem, showing that almost 90% of students misrepresent their views in class and on assignments to satisfy faculty by adopting more liberal views.
In the meantime, the small number of dissenting faculty have no real voice, particularly among legal academics. I have previously written about the similar liberal agenda of the American Bar Association despite plunging membership among lawyers. The ABA now represents just 17 percent of the bar.
The AAUP currently has only 44,000 to 45,00 members. There are an estimated 1.5 million university and college professors in the United States. Both the ABA and AAUP have become captive to the most ideological elements of their membership. That agenda has overwhelmed the original apolitical mission of these groups.
This orthodoxy will continue until donors refuse to support universities that do not take meaningful action to restore diversity in the faculty ranks. The AAUP’s radical agenda is only the latest example of how higher education remains a hardened ideological silo. These faculty members have shown again and again that they are unwilling to change this culture.
Only donors can force reform by cutting off their contributions or directing them to schools with a proven commitment to intellectual diversity.
Orbán Concedes: 16-Year Fidesz Rule Collapses In Historic Hungarian Landslide
In a stunning collapse that ends 16 years of uninterrupted rule, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has conceded defeat in Sunday’s parliamentary elections, according to statements from opposition leader Péter Magyar.
With early results showing the Tisza Party on track for 128 seats in the 199-seat National Assembly and Fidesz collapsing to just 62 seats (based on more than 21% of votes counted), Orbán’s long-dominant alliance has suffered a decisive repudiation. Four years after securing a supermajority of 135 seats, Fidesz is projected to fall well short of even a simple majority.
Hungary Election Update (21:12 CET)
Official NVI count (21.54% processed):
🔹 Tisza (Magyar): 56.4% (128 seats)
🔸 Fidesz (Orbán): 37.8% (62 seats)
📈 Turnout: Record 77.8%
The concession, delivered as vote tallies continued to roll in with record 77.8% turnout, marks the first time in the post-communist era that Orbán’s Fidesz has lost control of parliament. It validates the dire warning Orbán himself issued just days ago in his final campaign rally: “We could now lose everything.”
Péter Magyar, the 43-year-old former Fidesz insider who rocketed Tisza from fringe movement to projected governing force in under two years, hailed the moment as a turning point for Hungary.
“Today the Hungarian people have chosen change,” Magyar told supporters in Budapest. “Orbán has conceded. A new era begins.”
The scale of the upset is seismic. Tisza appears headed not only for a simple majority (requiring 100 seats) but potentially the two-thirds supermajority (133 seats) needed to rewrite cardinal laws and amend the constitution — the very tools Orbán used to entrench his “illiberal democracy” model.
What the Numbers Mean
Tisza: ~128 seats (and climbing as more precincts report)
Fidesz: ~62 seats
Previous election (2022): Fidesz 135 seats
Urban centers, younger voters, and economically frustrated middle-class families drove the surge, while Fidesz held rural strongholds. The opposition’s consolidation under Magyar — a center-right, pro-EU, anti-corruption platform — proved decisive after years of fragmented resistance.
Immediate Geopolitical Shockwaves
The result upends the European political landscape:
Brussels truce: Frozen EU funds (over €20 billion) are now expected to flow again. Hungary’s systematic vetoes on Ukraine aid, migration policy, and rule-of-law mechanisms are likely to end.
Ukraine/Russia pivot: Orbán’s pro-peace, Russia-friendly stance – including delays on sanctions and energy deals – will almost certainly be reversed.
Populist right in freefall: The defeat delivers a body blow to Europe’s nationalist movements. Marine Le Pen, Matteo Salvini, and Germany’s AfD lose their strongest Central European anchor. Donald Trump’s recent endorsement of Orbán as a “strong leader” and JD Vance’s pre-election Budapest visit now look like backing the wrong horse.
Markets react: Early trading signals suggest a stronger forint and narrowing sovereign spreads as investors price in EU reconciliation and policy normalization.
Orbán, 62, has not yet issued a personal statement, but sources close to Fidesz say he will address the nation later today. The party retains pockets of deep loyalty, particularly among older voters and in the countryside, but the scale of the urban and youth revolt proved overwhelming.
Official final results are still days away (including overseas and mail-in ballots), but with Orbán’s concession the political reality is already set: Hungary’s voters have delivered a verdict that will reverberate across Europe and the global populist movement for years.
This is a breaking story. ZeroHedge will update as Orbán speaks and final tallies come in.
One of the most common talking points from the left is that if you don’t rush confused kids into the gender reassignment pipeline, they will kill themselves. The left tells us that “transgenderism” is not a mental health problem, while at the same time telling us that people, especially minors, will kill themselves at greater rates if steps aren’t quickly taken to get those kids on puberty blockers, and on track to have their bodies permanently mutilated to change their sex.
More to the point, the narrative goes like this: “Trans kids” are at higher risk of suicide if they don’t receive greater acceptance, supportive environments, and “access” to “gender-affirming care.”
Did it ever occur to the left that the suicide in these cases may be connected to the increased likelihood that gender-confused children have severe mental health instability? Did it ever occur to the left that a pre-existing mental health issue, not the gender issue, is what may contribute to the risk of suicide?
I’ve looked at a bunch of studies the left uses to justify this narrative, and one thing goes overlooked, which is the difference between correlation and causation. In other words, if someone doesn’t call a teenager by her trans name, is that the cause of her later suicide? Or was it something else, and the “misgendering” was just a convenient scapegoat?
And so, when researchers studied the relationship “between chosen name use, as a proxy for youths’ gender affirmation in various contexts, and mental health among transgender youth,” did they just assume that the trigger for later “health risks” was due to how they were addressed by name, or were all possible causes considered?
Kids who are confused about their gender are likely confused about a lot of things, and it could be that it’s this state of confusion and a general struggle with reality that is the more fundamental problem. But if researchers only key in on how those boys and girls are addressed, they can come to any conclusions that suit them.
Destroying a common myth
Don’t take my word for it. Researchers in Finland published a groundbreaking study in the peer-reviewed pediatric journal Acta Paediatrica, which pretty much destroyed the notion that “gender reassignment” surgeries and treatments help gender-confused kids.
According to the study, the surgeries and treatments may, in fact, be making things worse.
“In some individuals, medical GR [gender reassignment] appears to be linked to deterioration in mental health,” the study found. “Subsequent to medical GR, psychiatric treatment needs appear to increase.”
In other words, the surgeries and puberty blockers may be hurting the children they purport to help, and even then, the kids’ needs for psychiatric treatment for mental health problems only increase.
Let’s dig deeper: “Among adolescents who underwent medical gender reassignment, psychiatric morbidity increased markedly during follow-up,” the study found. If that euphemism is sufficiently confusing to you, “psychiatric morbidity” in this context is suicide, eating disorders, depression, and other serious mental health problems.
The title of the study is “Psychiatric Morbidity Among Adolescents and Young Adults Who Contacted Specialised Gender Identity Services in Finland in 1996–2019,” which itself emphasizes that this is an analysis of real-world data, not just some carefully constructed sample to study. And the time period for the study spanned 25 years. You would think that if you take a deep dive into 25 years of real-world data, you might get a clear picture of the issues at play and what’s really happening.
During that period, the percentage of males wanting to become female jumped from 9.8% in 1996 to 60.7% in 2019. This stat alone kills the “born this way” assumption. As Finland’s culture has shifted aggressively leftward, more boys want to be girls. This suggests that the “trans kids” dynamic is a social contagion.
On the female side, the number of girls wanting to become boys from 1996 to 2019 jumped from 21.6% to 54.5%.
Here’s a look under the hood of the data. The study authors analyzed data from “a total of 2,083 individuals under the age of 23, who received ‘specialized gender identity services’” at hospitals over time.
Finland has a nationalized, centralized health care system, which means that this data is pretty comprehensive and a reflection of what is actually happening in that country.
The big news coming out of this research is that adolescents who were referred to specialist transgender services “showed significantly higher psychiatric morbidity than controls,” with 45.7% having mental health issues before referral, compared to 15.0% among the control population. This means the mental health problems were a pre-existing condition.
Two years or more after referral to the system for “gender affirmation,” 61.7% of the gender dysphoric population had mental health issues, compared to only 14.6% of the control population.
At the same time, the data revealed that the proportion of teenagers with mental health problems also rose by 35% after receiving a referral to specialist transgender services. If I’m reading this right, it would seem that any kid in Finland who turned to the healthcare community for help with gender dysphoria issues likely found that his or her mental health problems got worse as a result.
Here’s the kicker. Because not every kid who entered the system went through with the whole program, the researchers were able to measure how many kids who opted out of puberty blockers and sex change surgeries fared psychologically as a result.
The study found that teens who decided not to receive hormonal or surgical treatments enjoyed better mental health outcomes. The rate of mental health challenges increased by a much lesser amount. That puts the kibosh on the whole rationale for transing the kids.
If a kid is confused over his or her gender, and you don’t give them puberty blockers, and you don’t push surgeries on them, you’re more likely to have a kid with better mental health in the end.
But if you do put them on the hormonal treatment track and the surgery track, the chances of the child having compounded mental health problems increase.
Common sense wins
The bottom line is that common sense wins every time. Tragically, there are still hospitals, mental health professionals, school counselors, and parents who want to irreversibly change a child’s mental and physical make-up to solve what amounts to a very treatable mental health problem at a key stage of their adolescent growth and maturation process.
The left likes to lecture the right to “follow the science,” but this science will be buried if the left has anything to do with it. The left wants gender-confused children. The left wants to “trans kids.”
Speaking of “trans kids,” how did that even become a thing? How does a child know he or she is, in fact, the opposite sex in the wrong body? That can only come as part of a very sophisticated, manipulative process that certain segments of society are foisting on the kids to corrupt them.
It’s time to put an end to this. The more irrefutable data we have that cannot be suppressed, the more likely we’ll be able to look after the most vulnerable among us and protect them from “gender affirming” destruction.
United States President Donald Trump is facing renewed scrutiny as crypto tokens and projects touted by the US president crash to all-time lows or sit near record low levels.
The Official Trump token (TRUMP), a memecoin pushed by Trump, hit an all-time low of about $2.73 in March 2026 and is currently trading at about $2.86, according to data from CoinGecko.
The TRUMP memecoin has plummeted in price since launching in January 2025. Source: CoinGecko
The governance token issued by World Liberty Financial (WLFI), a decentralized finance (DeFi) platform co-founded by Trump’s sons, sunked to an all-time low of just $0.07 on Saturday.
WLFI is down by nearly 75% from its all-time high of about $0.31 reached in September 2025, while the TRUMP memecoin is down by about 90% since its all-time high of over $73 reached in January 2025.
The WLFI token has crashed by nearly 75% since the all-time high reached in September 2025. Source: CoinMarketCap
“We thought Sam Bankman-Fried or Gary Gensler were the worst things to happen to the crypto industry, and they were horrible,” Professor Tonya Evans said in response to the plummeting token prices. Evans, a board member at Grayscale parent DCG, added:
“But, turns out, it was the guy who surrounds himself with sycophants, siphons every bit of value he can for himself, and then expeditiously bankrupts companies and casinos without consequence.”
President Trump also announced another gala for token holders, scheduled to take place on April 25, fueling renewed scrutiny from US Democratic lawmakers, who have accused Trump of influence peddling by giving token holders access to him.
US lawmakers send letter to Trump memecoin creator
Senators Elizabeth Warren, Richard Blumenthal and Adam Schiff have asked Bill Zanker, the individual who launched the Trump memecoin, for details on the purpose of the planned Trump memecoin gala in April.
The organizers of the event are “dangling access” to Trump, the lawmakers said, according to Politico, which obtained a copy of the letter.
Trump and his family members stand to benefit from increased sales of the Trump memecoin; attendees are required to hold TRUMP tokens to gain access to the event, the Senators said.
FAA Greenlights Laser Sentry Guns To Combat Attack Drones In U.S. Airspace
The Federal Aviation Administration has given the green light for the U.S. military to deploy high-energy counter-drone laser weapons in U.S. airspace, adding a new, low-cost layer of protection against the rising threat from kamikaze drones. The decision follows a two-month interagency standoff over whether the systems posed a risk to general aviation and commercial aircraft, as well as incidents in Texas earlier this year that briefly led to an airspace closure.
FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford was quoted by The New York Times as saying the new laser weapon systems had completed a safety assessment that “determined that these systems do not present an increased risk to the flying public.”
The decision paves the way for broader use of these 20- to 35+-kilowatt-class laser weapon systems along the southern border to combat drug cartel drones and one-way attack drones. These threats have caused alarm at the highest levels in Washington, especially following the use of drones by Iran in the Gulf area to target data centers, civilian infrastructure, and U.S. military bases.
The NYTimes provided more color on the FAA’s decision:
The statement did not address whether the agency had determined that the high-energy lasers posed no physical risk to aircraft, or whether the safety determination was based on how the lasers were being deployed. But the F.A.A. determined that the risk would be minimal even if the laser came into contact with an airplane, according to an agency official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter.
The controversy surrounding these laser weapons stems from the February 10 incident when the FAA briefly closed airspace over El Paso after Border Patrol fired the weapon at an object that turned out to be a metallic balloon. With the interagency standoff over, the U.S. military has considered deploying these lasers in Washington, D.C., to combat low-cost, one-way attack drones.
The core vulnerability across U.S. airspace is that a cheap, layered counter-drone system still does not exist, nor is one widely deployed around critical civilian infrastructure such as data centers, power plants, transmission substations, and other critical nodes across the modern economy, where even limited disruption could trigger localized or regional turmoil. The race to close that gap with low-cost systems is underway. We laid out this threat assessment one month before the US-Iran conflict. Now it’s time for solutions.
Without a doubt, trading at the start of the week will hinge on developments in the ongoing ceasefire negotiations.
As Spider, Bret, and I discussed on Friday’s podcast the range of possible outcomes has not narrowed significantly. Anything from a serious deal, to walking away and restarting the attacks seems plausible. Spider “guffawed” at the comparison of Regime Change to Welcome Back Kotter – well, the names have all changed…
You know we live in a weird world, where in less than a week, the President posting on Truth Social that a “civilization will die tonight” barely registers as something to talk about.
Academy will continue to stay in front of you this weekend and next week as the situation develops, but the podcast (and much of our writing from this week) remains relevant until we get a clear direction on the talks. So far it has been compared to two sides repeating their list of demands to each other, but at least they are communicating.
More Than an Easter Ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine?
With all the attention focused on Iran, there are stories circulating that Russia and Ukraine could be heading towards something more lasting (while at the same time, there are concerns that even the limited Easter ceasefire won’t hold). Easter (for those following the Julian calendar) is this weekend, while for those following the Gregorian calendar, it was last weekend.
Why could this war finally be headed towards a deal?
Ukraine.
Depending on the U.S. for big support has already seemed like a weak strategy. With the U.S. un-sanctioning Russian oil, it seems even more dangerous to tie your hopes to U.S. aid (also, the U.S. has been using up missiles in the fight in Iran, so will be less likely to want to ship military equipment elsewhere, until our stockpiles are replenished).
Relying on Europe has always been difficult at best. The EU has not been prepared for war, and the framework of the EU makes it difficult to do anything major, quickly. For me, when Brussels vetoed the taking of Russia’s frozen reserves, I largely gave up on the EU.
Russia. Given the two previous paragraphs, it would seem that Russia should be foaming at the mouth to increase attacks and not even be thinking about peace. But…
From a “carrot” perspective, this might be the easiest time for Russia to “ease back” into the global economy. With sanctions already lifted, it might make sense to do a deal now and have those sanctions permanently lifted (politicians have an easier time maintaining the status quo, than changing it).
Ukraine has a factory in the UK. Ukraine is working with some countries in the Gulf. We have already seen what asymmetric warfare can do against even the biggest, best, most well-prepared military in the world – and that is not what the Russian military is. If you are Russia, you may have to worry that Ukraine is getting better at drones. Also, while Russia and Ukraine largely kept away from infrastructure targets, those seem more likely to be on the table as attacks (and threats of attacks) on those targets moved the needle
It would be a pleasant surprise to see some progress on this front. While it still seems unlikely, maybe we have finally reached the point where conditions on both sides warrant some sort of a deal.
On Any Other Weekend This Would Be the Main Focus
Stocks averages did so well this week that weakness in an important sector has been largely ignored.
This ETF is comprised of some of the biggest, best “software” brands in the world. Yet, while everything else was rallying this week, this ETF had its lowest close since 2023. The recent selling, at least in part, coincided with a new AI model, which also triggered an “emergency” banking meeting in D.C.
What was interesting, and in direct contrast to the Barron’s article linked above, is that the CIBR (a cybersecurity-focused ETF) also did poorly (ending the week barely above its post Liberation Day lows).
SOXX, a semiconductor ETF, had a great week.
I continue to believe that as we near an end to the conflict in Iran, ProSec will once again take center stage, with domestic energy, electricity, and chip manufacturing as the focus.
Having said that, the carnage in software seems like it should have broader implications for the market. Maybe it will once we have fewer “headlines” about the Middle East.
CONsumer CONfidence
If the CON CON didn’t give it away (again), I am not a big fan of this data series. But two things struck me as interesting.
Inflation expectations for 5 to 10 years out remained “anchored” coming in at 3.4%. Up a bit from recent prints of 3.2%, and well above the Fed’s target, but well below readings throughout most of 2025. If the Fed was willing to cut rates with much higher long-run expectations (and they did), then this should help rate cut probabilities inch higher. It isn’t great data, but could have been worse, which is all that a Fed run by Warsh is likely to need.
On the flip side, while I’m not a huge fan of the number, “all-time” records deserve at least some attention
The deterioration has been dramatic and cannot be “just” linked to Iran. Does that mean affordability (and the “working poor”) thesis is about to get some attention again?
The caveat to this is that CONsumer CONfidence is very “political.” Not sure why it is that political, but it is – just look at the chart, and how confidence switched after the election. Long before the President was even sworn into office, the sentiment of Republicans and Democrats did a 180 (the same thing happened, but in reverse, when Biden beat Trump).
I will ignore the Democrats for now, and focus on Republicans and Independents. Both were slightly better than their lowest levels since the election. That mitigates some of the sting of the headline number but it is something to keep a close eye on.
I do hate that I dedicated so much space to a data series that I don’t put a lot of faith in, but this was too big to ignore.
Bottom Line
Sunday night and Monday morning will be heavily dependent on the messaging out of Pakistan (I did a double take as I wrote that, but it seems to be the case).
There is nothing bigger for the global economy than how this conflict is resolved or proceeds. Given the trading over the last two days (where every “negative” headline was met with minimal selling, and every “positive” headline was met with robust buying) a lot of good news is priced in. We will still rally on positive outcomes, but some form of a “deal” seems to be increasingly priced into markets.
Let’s hope that markets are right and we are near the end.
Then for better or worse, we can return to our “normal” programming and figure out what to make of the AI story, the software story, the K-shaped (or working poor) story, the affordability problem (which will be alleviated with a good outcome in the Middle East, but not solved), the jobs story, etc.
