rule – Our Story Insight

Rival Retailers Rule the Week in Book News

admin — Sat, 25 Oct 2025 16:27:47 +0000

This content contains affiliate links. When you buy through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.

Welcome to Today in Books. Here’s our the bookish news stories readers were most interested in this week.

Barnes & Noble’s Best Books of 2025

You’re not imagining it; Best Books of the Year season is getting earlier and earlier. PW has been first out of the gate the last few years, dropping their list in the final days of October. Barnes & Noble beat them to the punch on Friday with not one, not two, not seven, but 19 lists. Both the number of lists and the way they’re arranged are reminders that Best Books season isn’t just about highlighting great work. It’s also—maybe even primarily—about holiday shopping. While I still have a knee-jerk “are you kidding me?” to seeing a best-of list before Halloween (and tbh, I probably always will), I want bookstores and publishers to succeed. If releasing best-of lists early helps them prepare for the season and compete with the Big A, I can’t be mad at it.

Amazon Revisits 25 Years of Best Books Picks

Amazon was early on the internet-based Best Books of the Year trend. As we close out the first quarter of the 21st century, they’ve rounded up all of their #1 picks and other highlights from 25 years of best-of lists. Amazon editors’ approach to Best Of is unique among online publications and retailers. The #1 book is often a marquee work of fiction, yes, but sometimes it’s a nod to major political events, as when they crowned The 9/11 Commission Report in 2004 or an under-recognized memoir about race and criminal justice reform in 2020. Margaret Atwood’s The Testaments, a Handmaid’s Tale sequel, was hardly the best or most-loved novel of 2019, but it was especially resonant during the first Trump administration’s assault on reproductive freedom. Some of the #1 picks haven’t aged well for a variety of reasons. That’s a feature, not a bug. A Best Of list is a snapshot of a moment in time, and it’s interesting to see the last 25 years captured this way.

Today In Books

Barnes & Noble’s 2025 Book of the Year Finalists

Hot on the heels of their Best Books of 2025, announced last week, Barnes & Noble has revealed the finalists for the 2025 Book of the Year, which is indeed a different thing. The Book of the Year award, introduced in 2019, is selected by booksellers and tends to go to widely recommendable titles that are as close as the book world comes to four-quadrant hits. This year’s list of 14 finalists ranges from Sunrise on the Reaping to a book of New York Times puzzles to the year’s biggest self-help book (which, I must point out, was actually published in December 2024), kids’ books, cookbooks, and Katabasis.

I’m going to go ahead and place my bet on Mona’s Eyes by Thomas Schlesser, which was basically until it appeared at the top of B & N’s best fiction of 2025 list week. “A heartfelt tale that stirs the soul and ignites the imagination” about a young girl’s adventures at the art museum with her grandfather sounds like it was factory made to ring all the Barnes & Noble Book of the Year bells.

To Read, or Not to Read

It’s Shakespeare week on Zero to Well-Read. If it’s been a while since you hung out with the Bard—or if you’ve never read him—I think you’ll find a lot to enjoy in our conversation about Hamlet.

Making this podcast is the most fun I’ve had at work in a long time (and my job is usually pretty great). Spending time with truly great works has turned out to be exactly the antidote I needed to dopamine-fueled algorithms. I’m on track to read significantly more books this year than I have in the last several years, and it’s because the more time I spend with really good books, the more time I want to spend reading (and the less I’m willing to spend scrolling).

The post Rival Retailers Rule the Week in Book News appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Temu halts shipments direct from China as de minimis tariff rule ends

admin — Fri, 02 May 2025 18:52:11 +0000

A package from Temu is seen in front of a screen with the Temu logo. (Photo by Nikos Pekiaridis/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Nurphoto | Nurphoto | Getty Images

Bargain Chinese retailer Temu changed its business model in the U.S. as the Trump administration’s new rules on low-value shipments took effect on Friday.

In recent days, Temu has abruptly shifted its website and app to only display listings for products shipped from U.S.-based warehouses. Items shipped directly from China, which previously blanketed the site, are now labeled as out of stock.

Temu made a name for itself in the U.S. as a destination for ultra-discounted items shipped direct from China, such as $5 sneakers and $1.50 garlic presses. It’s been able to keep prices low because of the so-called de minimis rule, which has allowed items worth $800 or less to enter the country duty-free since 2016.

The loophole expired Friday at 12:01 a.m. EDT as a result of an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in April. Trump briefly suspended the de minimis rule in February before reinstating the provision days later as customs officials struggled to process and collect tariffs on a mountain of low-value packages.

The end of de minimis, as well as Trump’s new 145% tariffs on China, has forced Temu to raise prices, suspend its aggressive online advertising push and now alter the selection of goods available to American shoppers to circumvent higher levies.

A Temu spokesperson confirmed to CNBC that all sales in the U.S. are now handled by local sellers and fulfilled “from within the country” as part of the company’s efforts to improve service levels.

“Temu has been actively recruiting U.S. sellers to join the platform,” the spokesperson said. “The move is designed to help local merchants reach more customers and grow their businesses.”

Before the change, shoppers that attempted to purchase Temu products shipped from China were confronted with “import charges” between 130% and 150%. The fees often cost more than the individual item and more than doubled the price of many orders.

Temu advertises that local products have “no import charges” and “no extra charges upon delivery.”

The company, which is owned by Chinese e-commerce giant PDD Holdings, has gradually built up its inventory in the U.S. over the past year in anticipation of escalating trade tensions and the removal of de minimis.

Shein, which has also benefited from the loophole, moved to raise prices last week. The fast-fashion retailer added a banner at checkout that states, “Tariffs are included in the price you pay. You’ll never have to pay extra at delivery.”

Many third-party sellers on Amazon rely on Chinese manufacturers to source or assemble their products. The company’s Temu competitor, called Amazon Haul, has relied on de minimis to ship products priced at $20 or less directly from China to the U.S.

Amazon said this week following a dustup with the White House that it considered showing tariff-related costs on Haul products ahead of the de minimis cutoff. It’s since scrapped those plans.

Prior to Trump’s second term in office, the Biden administration had also looked to curtail the provision. Critics of the de minimis provision argue that it harms American businesses and facilitates shipments of fentanyl and other illicit substances on the claims that the packages are less likely to be inspected by customs agents.

— CNBC’s Gabrielle Fonrouge contributed to this report.

WATCH: Trump tariffs mean higher prices, big losses for Amazon sellers

The post Temu halts shipments direct from China as de minimis tariff rule ends appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Judge scraps CFPB rule capping credit card late fees at $8

admin — Tue, 15 Apr 2025 20:44:55 +0000

A federal judge on Tuesday threw out a US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rule capping credit card late fees at $8, after the agency agreed with opponents that the rule adopted during President Joe Biden’s administration was illegal.

US District Judge Mark Pittman in Fort Worth, Texas granted a joint request by the CFPB and a coalition of six business and banking groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Bankers Association to scrap the rule.

Pittman, an appointee of President Trump, ruled that the regulation violated the Credit Card Accountability and Disclosure Act of 2009 because it prohibited card issuers from charging fees “reasonable and proportional to violations.”

U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman ruled the $8 cap on credit card late fees violated the Credit Card Accountability and Disclosure Act of 2009. REUTERS

The rule capped late fees for issuers with more than 1 million open accounts unless they could prove higher fees were necessary to cover their costs.

It had been part of Biden’s crackdown on “junk fees,” and was intended to reduce the typical late fee from about $32.

The Trump administration is reversing many Biden-era rules and policies that it considers unfriendly to business.

In a March 2024 lawsuit against the rule, the business and banking groups accused the CFPB of overstepping its authority and ignoring Congress’ intent that fees be high enough to deter late payments and compensate card issuers for their costs.

The cap had been part of the Biden administration’s crackdown on “junk fees” and was intended to reduce the typical late fee from about $32. volff – stock.adobe.com

They also said the rule was unfair to many consumers, because it would force issuers to pass costs to cardholders who pay their bills on time.

In a joint statement on Tuesday, the groups called Pittman’s order “a win for consumers and common sense.”

Pittman in Fort Worth, Texas granted a joint request by the CFPB and other businesses. United States District Court Northern District of Texas

The Trump administration has also sought to dismantle the CFPB.

On April 11, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. said the administration can shrink the CFPB, but not so much that it cannot carry out its statutory duties.

The post Judge scraps CFPB rule capping credit card late fees at $8 appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Tesla reports $600 million profit boon from digital assets rule change

admin — Thu, 30 Jan 2025 04:58:33 +0000

Musk had previously said in June he was leaning towards supporting DeSantis for president in 2024.

Joe Skipper | Reuters

Tesla‘s bitcoin holdings led to a big pop in reported net income for the fourth quarter because of a new rule change in how companies account for digital assets.

After showing a carrying value of $184 million in digital assets for the prior four quarters, the number suddenly jumped to $1.08 billion in the December period, Tesla reported in its earnings release on Wednesday.

The increase followed a recent policy change from the Financial Accounting Standards Board, which mandates that corporate digital asset holdings be marked to market each quarter starting at the beginning of 2025. Before the FASB rule change, companies owning bitcoin had to report their holdings at the lowest value recorded during their ownership, regardless of any subsequent price gain.

Tesla said in its earnings deck that the change resulted in an earnings per share boost of 68 cents in the quarter, and CFO Vaibhav Taneja noted on the earnings call that the net income increase was $600 million.

“It’s important to point out that the net income in Q4 was impacted by a $600 million mark-to-market benefit from bitcoin due to the adoption of a new accounting standard for digital assets,” Taneja said.

At the end of the third quarter, Tesla’s bitcoin holdings were recorded at a carrying value of $184 million, though their fair market value was significantly higher at $729 million. That means the actual increase in the value of its holdings in the period was about $347 million, reflecting bitcoin’s fourth-quarter rally.

Much of the recent gain in bitcoin is tied to optimism surrounding the second Trump administration, which was heavily backed by the crypto industry. Tesla CEO Elon Musk was Trump’s biggest financial supporter and is now a top adviser in the White House. Longtime Musk ally David Sacks was tapped by Trump to the be the White House AI and crypto czar.

Bitcoin tracking website Bitcoin Treasuries ranks Tesla as the sixth-biggest holder of bitcoin among public companies.

Tesla’s fourth-quarter earnings and revenue fell short of analysts’ expectations on Wednesday as auto revenue dropped 8% from a year earlier, yet the stock climbed in after-hours trading.

— CNBC’S Lora Kolodny contributed to this report.

WATCH: Trump Media expands into financial services

The post Tesla reports $600 million profit boon from digital assets rule change appeared first on Our Story Insight.

CFPB announces rule limiting bank overdraft fees; trade group sues

admin — Mon, 16 Dec 2024 15:09:22 +0000

Rohit Chopra, director of the CFPB, testifies during a House Financial Services Committee hearing on June 14, 2023.

Tom Williams | Cq-roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Thursday announced the final version of a rule limiting banks’ ability to charge overdraft fees. It says the rule will save American consumers $5 billion annually.

The regulator said that banks could opt to charge $5 for overdrafts — a steep drop from the average fee of around $35 per transaction — or limit the fee to an amount that covers the lenders’ costs, or charge any fee while disclosing the interest rate of the loan.

“For far too long, the largest banks have exploited a legal loophole that has drained billions of dollars from Americans’ deposit accounts,” CFPB Director Rohit Chopra said in a statement. “The CFPB is cracking down on these excessive junk fees and requiring big banks to come clean about the interest rate they’re charging on overdraft loans.”

While overdraft fees have been a lucrative line item for the industry, generating $280 billion in revenue since 2000 according to the CFPB, banks’ revenue from the service has been on the decline. That’s because lenders including JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America have either reduced the fees or limited the types of transactions that trigger them, while some banks dropped the fee altogether.

The CFPB rule applies to banks and credit unions with at least $10 billion in assets.

The effort, part of a flurry of activity from the CFPB in the waning days of the Biden administration, faces stiff opposition from U.S. banking groups that have successfully stymied other efforts from the regulator. For instance, a rule capping credit card late fees at $8 per incident that was set to take effect in May has been held up in federal court.

The CFPB said its overdraft rule will take effect Oct. 1, 2025, though the rule’s ultimate fate is unclear.

Even before the presidential election victory of Donald Trump in November, the fate of the overdraft rule would have been murky, thanks to industry pushback. But Trump is expected to install a new CFPB head in January who is unlikely to support Biden-era efforts to rein in banking activity.

Bank lobbying groups have argued that the overdraft rule, first proposed in January as part of Biden’s war on junk fees, would reduce access to overdraft services and could send customers to worse alternatives, such as payday loans.

Later Thursday, the Consumer Bankers Association filed a lawsuit against the CFPB in Mississippi, claiming that the agency exceeded its authority and didn’t consider how its actions would impact consumers. The group chose a venue known as friendly to suits challenging federal regulators.

“While it is unfortunate, CBA had no choice but to pursue legal action to counter the CFPB’s blatant statutory overreach with its misguided rule to ensure consumers continue to have access to liquidity through overdraft services,” CBA President Lindsey Johnson said in a statement.

The post CFPB announces rule limiting bank overdraft fees; trade group sues appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Banks raise costs in response to CFPB rule

admin — Wed, 04 Dec 2024 20:19:32 +0000

Banks that issue credit cards used by millions of consumers raised interest rates and introduced new fees over the past year in response to an impending regulation that most experts now believe will never take effect.

Synchrony and Bread Financial, which specialize in issuing branded cards for companies including Verizon and JCPenney, have said that the moves were necessary after the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announced a rule slashing what the industry can charge in late fees.

“They’re the two banks that have been most vocal about it, because they were going to be the most impacted by it,” said Sanjay Sakhrani, a KBW analyst who covers the card industry. “The consensus now, however, is that the rule isn’t going to happen.”

The effect is that regulation intended to save consumers money has instead resulted in higher costs for some.

On Nov. 22, CNBC reported that rates on a wide swath of retail cards have jumped in the past year, reaching as high as 35.99%. Synchrony and Bread raised the annual percentage rates, or APRs, on their portfolios by an average of 3 to 5 percentage points, according to Sakhrani.

On top of that, customers of the two banks have been given notice of new monthly fees of between $1.99 and $2.99 for receiving paper statements.

Zoom In IconArrows pointing outwards

Customers of Synchrony bank have received notices for new monthly fees for receiving paper statements, part of the industry’s response to a CFPB rule capping late fees.

Source: Synchrony

Bread, which issues cards for retailers including Big Lots and Victoria’s Secret, began boosting the rate on some of its cards in late 2023 “in anticipation” of the CFPB rule, Bread CFO Perry Beberman told analysts in October.

“We’ve implemented a number of changes that are in market, including the APR increases and paper statement fees,” Beberman said at the time.

Some pain, no gain

The CFPB says the credit card industry profits off borrowers with low credit scores by charging them onerous penalties.

In March, the agency introduced a rule to cap late fees at $8 per incident, down from an average of about $32. The rule would save consumers $10 billion annually, the regulator said.

But banks and their trade groups have argued that late fees are a necessary deterrent to default and that capping them at $8 per incident would shift costs to those who pay their bills on time.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which calls itself the world’s largest trade group, sued the CFPB in March to halt the rule, arguing that the agency exceeded its authority. In May, days before the rule was set to take effect, a federal judge granted the industry’s request to halt its implementation.

While the rule is currently held up in courts, card users are already dealing with the higher borrowing costs and fees attributed to the regulation.

The higher APRs kick in for new loans, not old debts, meaning the impact to consumers will rise in coming months as they accumulate fresh debts to fund holiday spending. Americans owe a record $1.17 trillion on their cards, 8.1% higher than a year ago, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

“Due to changes in regulatory conditions, we adjusted rates and fees to ensure that we can continue to provide safe and convenient credit to our customers,” said a spokeswoman for Stamford, Connecticut-based Synchrony.

Customers can avoid interest and fees by paying off balances in full and opting out of paper statements, the spokeswoman said.

Citigroup, Barclays

The surge in borrowing costs will have a bigger impact on consumers with lower credit scores who are more likely to have store cards issued by Synchrony and Bread.

Customers with poorer credit may be considered too risky to qualify for popular rewards cards from issuers including JPMorgan Chase and American Express, and are therefore more likely to turn to co-branded cards as alternatives.

That’s why Synchrony and Bread were eager to mitigate the hit to their operations by increasing rates and introducing fees, according to analysts. The concern was that more of their customers would simply default on loans if late penalties shrank to $8, and the profitability of their businesses would take a dive.

But other, larger banks have moved rates higher as well.

Cards from Banana Republic and Athleta issued by Barclays each saw an APR jump of 5 percentage points in the past year. The Home Depot card from Citigroup had a rise of 3 percentage points, while the bank raised the APR on its Meijer card by 4 percentage points.

Citigroup and Barclays representatives declined to comment.

Capital One, which had warned earlier in the year that it would take steps to offset the hit from the CFPB rule, said that instead of changing its customer pricing it opted to hold back on making certain unspecified investments. The bank is in the process of acquiring rival card issuer Discover Financial.

Even before it was set to take effect in May, the fate of the CFPB rule was considered murky, because litigation fighting it was filed in a venue widely seen as favorable to corporations seeking to beat back federal regulation.

But after the election victory of Donald Trump, who has broadly pushed for deregulation across industries, the expectation is that the next CFPB head isn’t likely to keep the effort alive, according to policy experts.

When asked if they would reverse the higher APRs and fees if the CFPB rule went away, Synchrony managers were noncommittal. The bank has to proceed as though it were happening, CFO Brian Wenzel told analysts in October.

“People use the term ‘rollback,'” Wenzel said. “As a company, we haven’t spent any real time thinking about that.”

— CNBC’s Gabrielle Fonrouge contributed to this report.

The post Banks raise costs in response to CFPB rule appeared first on Our Story Insight.