While the U.S. gave Huawei a 90-day reprieve, allowing American businesses to keep selling specific products to the Chinese firm, it also added more affiliates of the...Technologyread more
The attacks come after state and local ransomware attacks in New York, Louisiana, Maryland and Florida resulted in the loss of significant sums.Technologyread more
China's pursuit of the Middle East may spur growth in the Islamic finance sector.World Economyread more
Twitter and Facebook have suspended accounts believed to be tied to a state-backed disinformation campaign originating from inside China.Technologyread more
United States Steel Corp will temporarily lay off hundreds of workers at its Great Lakes facility in Michigan in coming weeks, according to a filing the steelmaker made with...US Marketsread more
The report comes as Trump in recent days has lashed out over media reports about growing recession fears.Politicsread more
Beijing will lower borrowing costs for companies, but that may not boost the economy as much as some hope.China Economyread more
Stocks are bouncing higher but could be trapped in a range longer term, until there's a resolution of the trade wars.Market Insiderread more
Stocks in Asia mostly traded higher Tuesday morning as minutes from the Reserve Bank of Australia's July meeting were released. The People's Bank of China also published its...Asia Marketsread more
Powell will have the opportunity if not to walk back the "midcycle" assessment then to at least provide some further explanation about what it means.Economyread more
Apple has spent more than $6 billion on original TV shows and movies for its forthcoming Apple TV+ service, according to a Financial Times report on Monday.Technologyread more
The Trump administration on Tuesday will propose a rule to tighten food stamp restrictions that would cut about 3.1 million people from the program, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) officials said.
Currently, 43 U.S. states allow residents to automatically become eligible for food stamps through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, if they receive benefits from another federal program known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, according to the USDA.
But the agency wants to require people who receive TANF benefits to pass a review of their income and assets to determine whether they are eligible for free food from SNAP, officials said.
If enacted, the rule would save the federal government about $2.5 billion a year by removing people from SNAP, according to the USDA.
U.S. President Donald Trump has argued that many Americans now using SNAP do not need it given the strong economy and low unemployment, and should be removed as a way to save taxpayers as much as $15 billion.
"Some states are taking advantage of loopholes that allow people to receive the SNAP benefits who would otherwise not qualify and for which they are not entitled," USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue told reporters on a conference call on Monday.
SNAP provides free food to some 40 million Americans, or about 12% of the total U.S. population.
A Trump-backed effort to pass new restrictions through the Farm Bill was blocked by Congress last year, following a months-long, partisan debate.
The USDA does not need congressional approval, however, to stop states from automatically allowing recipients of TANF benefits to become eligible for SNAP, said Brandon Lipps, a USDA acting deputy undersecretary.
Current rules allow people to access SNAP benefits worth thousands of dollars for two years without going through robust eligibility reviews, he told reporters on the call.
"Unfortunately, automatic eligibility has expanded to allow even millionaires and others who simply receive a TANF-funded brochure to become eligible for SNAP when they clearly don't need it," Lipps said.
The USDA will accept public comment on the proposed rule change.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in December estimated the rule could save the federal government $8.1 billion from 2019 to 2028, lower than the USDA's estimate.
In 2016, the CBO said arguments against the change included concerns that it would eliminate benefits for households in difficult financial situations and increase the complexity and time involved in verifying information on SNAP applications.