Connect with us

Personal Finance

How abortion access can impact personal finance: Turnaway Study author

Published

on

Arizona residents rally for abortion rights on April 16, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona.

Gina Ferazzi | Los Angeles Times | Getty Images

Abortion is an important issue for many voters, especially young women, heading into the November election.

Abortion access is about more than politics, or health care: It’s also a personal finance issue, said Diana Greene Foster, a demographer who studies the effects of unwanted pregnancies on people’s lives.

Foster, a professor at the University of California San Francisco, led The Turnaway Study, a landmark research study on the socioeconomic outcomes for Americans who are “turned away” from abortion. The study tracked 1,000 women over a five-year period ending January 2016. The women in the study had all sought abortions at some point before the study commenced; not all received one.

More from Personal Finance:
How to lower healthcare costs during open enrollment
Ozempic is driving up the cost of your health care
Working moms are still more likely to handle child care

In November, voters in 10 states — Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New York and South Dakota — will choose whether to adopt state ballot measures about abortion access.

Such ballot measures follow a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2022 that struck down Roe v. Wade, the ruling that had established a constitutional right to abortion five decades earlier.

Nationally, women under age 30 rank abortion as the most important issue to their vote on Election Day, according to the KFF Survey of Women Voters, which polled 649 women from Sept. 12 to Oct. 1. It ranked as the third-most-important issue among women voters of all ages, behind inflation and threats to democracy, according to the KFF poll.

Vice President Harris and Former President Trump spar over abortion

Abortion is among the least-important issues for registered Republicans, according to a Pew Research Center poll of 9,720 U.S. adults conducted Aug. 26 to Sept. 2.

CNBC spoke to Foster about the economics of abortion access and the financial impacts of the end of Roe v. Wade.

The conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Low earners most likely to seek an abortion

Greg Iacurci: Can you describe the population of women that typically seek abortions in the U.S.?

Diana Greene Foster: One good thing about The Turnaway Study is that our demographics closely resemble national demographics on who gets abortions.

More than half are already parenting a child. More than half are in their 20s. A small minority are teenagers, even though lots of people think teenagers are the main recipients.

It’s predominantly people who are low-income. That’s been increasingly the case over time. It’s become disproportionately concentrated among people with the least economic resources.

GI: Why is that?

DGF: I think wealthier people have better access to contraceptives, even after the Obamacare-mandated coverage. Not everyone benefits from that. Not all states participate in that.

[Medical providers] still give contraceptives out. There are 20 states that have laws that say you should be able to get a year’s supply at a time, but almost nowhere is that actually available. The law says you should be able to get it, but you don’t. I led the studies that showed that if you make people go back for resupply every month or three months, as is very commonly done, you’re much more likely to have an unintended pregnancy. The laws have changed, but practice hasn’t changed. Access is not perfect yet.

Also, some people have abortions who have intended pregnancies because something went wrong with their health, with the fetus’ health, with their life circumstances. So even contraceptives aren’t the ultimate solution.

Greater likelihood of poverty and evictions

GI: What are the economic findings of your research?

DGF: When we follow people over time, we see that people who are denied an abortion are more likely to say that their household income is below the federal poverty line. They’re more likely to say that they don’t have enough money to meet basic living needs like food, housing and transportation.

Diana Greene Foster

Courtesy: Diana Greene Foster

Wanting to provide for the kids you already have is a common reason for abortion. We see that the existing children are more likely to be in poverty and in households where there aren’t enough resources if their mom couldn’t get an abortion.

[They’re also] more likely to have evictions, have a larger amount of debt if they’re denied an abortion.

GI: Can we quantify those impacts?

DGF: For example, six months after seeking an abortion, 61% of those denied an abortion were below the poverty line compared to just under half — 45% — of those who received an abortion. The higher odds of being below the [federal poverty line] persisted through four years.

And based on credit reports, we find that women denied abortions experienced significant increases in the amount of debt 30 days or more past due of $1,749.70, a 78% increase relative to their pre-pregnancy [average]. The number of public records, such as bankruptcies, evictions and court judgements, significantly increased for those denied abortions, by 81%.

GI: Why does this happen?

DGF: Having a kid is a massive investment. Deciding to parent a child relies on an amount of social support and housing security and access to health care, and our country isn’t at all set up to provide those things for low-income people.

Why costs are both rising and falling for women

GI: Your study took place at a time when Roe v. Wade was still the law. That’s no longer the case. How do you expect these economic consequences might be impacted?

DGF: In The Turnaway Study, people were denied abortions because they were too far along in pregnancy, but now you can be denied an abortion at any point in pregnancy in something like 13 states. So, it potentially affects a much larger group of people.

But there have been other changes which have to do with resources to help people travel and information about how to order medication abortion pills online. So, it isn’t the case that everyone who wants an abortion is now carrying a pregnancy to term.

There has been a lot of effort to circumvent state laws, and I think The Turnaway Study really reveals why. People understand their circumstances, and they are very motivated to get care, even when their state tries to ban it.

GI: What are the financial impacts some women in those states might encounter?

DGF: I’m actually studying the economic costs of the end of Roe and travel [expense]. Costs went up by $200 for people traveling out of state. People were delayed more than a week.

Under Roe, people could drive to an abortion clinic or get a ride; [after,] they were much more likely to be flying, having to take more modes of transportation. Over half stayed overnight. They traveled an average of 10 hours. That means taking time off work too. So, it dramatically increased the cost for those who traveled to get an abortion.

There are people who ordered pills online who are not [included] in the study. For those people, the cost may have gone down because it’s possible to order pills online for less than $30.

But you have to know about it, and you have to have an address, and you have to have internet, and it takes a level of knowledge to be able to pull that off. There can be a need for follow up medical care, so you have to be able to get that.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Disability advocates sue Social Security and DOGE to stop service cuts

Published

on

A Social Security Administration (SSA) office in Washington, DC, March 26, 2025. 

Saul Loeb | Afp | Getty Images

A group of disability advocates filed a federal lawsuit against the Social Security Administration and the so-called Department of Government Efficiency on Wednesday aimed at stopping cuts to the agency’s services.

Recent changes at the Social Security Administration under DOGE — including staff reductions, the elimination of certain offices and new requirements to seek in-person services — have made it more difficult for individuals with disabilities and older adults to access benefits, the lawsuit argues.

The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The plaintiffs include the National Federation of the Blind, the American Association of People with Disabilities, Deaf Equality, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, the Massachusetts Senior Action Council and individual beneficiaries.

“The defendants’ actions are an unprecedented and unconstitutional assault on Social Security benefits, concealed beneath the hollow pretense of bureaucratic ‘reform,'” the complaint states.

In nine weeks, the new administration has “upended” the agency with “sweeping and destabilizing policy changes,” the plaintiffs claim, that have shifted agency functions to local offices while slashing telephone services.

More from Personal Finance:
Trump administration loses appeal of DOGE Social Security restraining order
Social Security changes may impact service, benefit payments
Trump pick to lead Social Security faces questions on DOGE

“The result is a systematic dismantling of SSA’s core functions, leaving millions of beneficiaries without the essential benefits they are legally entitled to,” the lawsuit complaint states.

The “mass restructuring” of the agency is unlawful and violates the Rehabilitation Act and the Administrative Procedure Act, the lawsuit argues. The changes also violate multiple constitutional provisions, including the First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances, according to the plaintiffs.

With 1.1 million disability claims pending, the recent actions could also be life threatening to individuals who are dying or going bankrupt while waiting for decisions, they allege.

The Social Security Administration did not respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

“President Trump has made it clear he is committed to making the federal government more efficient,” White House spokesperson Liz Huston said in an email statement. “He has the authority to manage agency restructuring and workforce reductions, and the administration’s actions are fully compliant with the law.”

Lawsuit alleges reform is ‘administrative vandalism’

People hold signs during a protest against cuts made by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to the Social Security Administration, in White Plains, New York, U.S., March 22, 2025. 

Nathan Layne | Reuters

The Social Security Administration sends monthly checks to around 73 million Social Security and Supplemental Security Income beneficiaries.

DOGE, which is not an official government entity, has been tasked with cutting “waste, fraud and abuse” within the federal government. President Donald Trump issued an executive order creating DOGE on Jan. 20, the same day he was inaugurated.

Since then, the Social Security Administration has cut 7,000 employee positions and closed the Office of Civil Rights and Equal Opportunity and the Office of Transformation. The Office of Civil Rights and Equal Opportunity handled the agency’s equal employment opportunity and civil rights programs. The Office of Transformation was responsible for coordinating customer service-related initiatives like adding the ability to use digital signatures and electronic documents.

The Social Security Administration has also changed its identity proofing policies for claiming benefits and changing direct deposit information that is expected to require more individuals to visit the agency’s offices in person.

The agency has updated its policy, allowing individuals applying for Social Security Disability Insurance, Medicare, or Supplemental Security Income who cannot use a personal my Social Security account to complete their claim entirely over the telephone, starting April 14. 

The reforms amount to the dismantling of “core functions of SSA, abandoning millions of Americans to poverty and indignity,” according to the plaintiffs’ complaint.

“What the defendants frame as ‘reform’ is, in truth, administrative vandalism,” the lawsuit states.

Beneficiaries face long waits, overpayment issues

The plaintiffs include seven individuals whose experiences, including long customer service waits and, in some cases, demands to repay large sums to the Social Security Administration, are detailed in the complaint.

One plaintiff, Treva Olivero, who has been legally blind since birth, was informed in March 2024 that she had been overpaid Social Security disability insurance benefits for five or six years, prompting the agency to demand she repay more than $100,000, according to the complaint.

Olivero’s Medicaid coverage was also terminated soon after, which left her without income and health coverage. She has since been in an “ongoing struggle” to have her disability benefits reinstated, while also facing almost $80,000 in medical debt, according to the complaint.

Fiserv CEO on the nomination to Social Security Commisioner role

Another plaintiff, Merry Schoch, who received Social Security disability insurance for many years, returned to work to help pay for large medical bills after she was hit by a waste management truck in 2022. She reported her income to the Social Security Administration, and the agency made no changes to her benefit payments, according to the complaint.

Two years later, Schoch stopped working and reported her unemployment to the Social Security Administration. In August 2024, the agency then terminated her benefits and informed Schoch that she owed $30,000 for the disability benefit payments she received while working full time, according to the complaint.

Last September, Schoch was informed she could reapply for benefits. However, she has since struggled to get in touch with the agency over the phone, online and in person. 

Both Olivero and Schoch are members of the National Federation of the Blind, which is also a plaintiff.

The plaintiffs want the court to reverse the Social Security Administration’s recent reforms, including staff reductions, closures of certain offices and policies requiring in-person appointments.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Amid trade turmoil, ‘you do not want to time the market’

Published

on

Pres. Trump unveils sweeping tariffs: Here's what to know

As President Donald Trump rolls out sweeping new tariffs on goods imported into the United States, Americans are growing increasingly pessimistic about their financial fate.

Consumers worry that the duties will cause inflation to flare up again, while investors fear that higher prices will mean lower profits and more pain for the battered stock market

As of Thursday morning, futures tied to the Dow Jones Industrial Average were down 1,200 points, or 2.8%. S&P 500 futures sank 3.4%, and Nasdaq-100 futures lost 4%.

But sharp drops — or sudden spikes — in the market are to be expected, according to Jean Chatzky, CEO of HerMoney.com and host of the podcast HerMoney with Jean Chatzky.

“With these volatile markets, you do not want to time the market,” she said of the old adage. “Timing the market doesn’t work — it’s time in the market.”

More from Personal Finance:
Tariffs are ‘lose-lose’ for U.S. jobs and industry
Why uncertainty makes the stock market go haywire
Americans are suffering from ‘sticker shock’ — how to adjust

Trade tensions, inflation and concerns about a possible recession have undermined consumer confidence across the board, several studies show.

Still, it’s normal for most Americans to feel unnerved during heightened volatility, Chatzky said.

“There’s very little doubt that consumers are feeling nervous, maybe more nervous than we’ve felt in quite some time,” she said.

Committing to setting money aside in a high-yield savings account, whether by scaling back on dining out or rideshare expenses, will help regain some financial control, Chatzky said.

Top-yielding online savings accounts currently pay 4.4%, on average, well beyond the savings account rates at some of the largest retail banks, which average just 0.41%.

“Taking action is the best way to feel more resilient,” she said.

It’s understandable why some may be hesitant to continue investing, however, when you are investing for the long term, a down market is an opportunity for dollar-cost averaging, which helps smooth out price fluctuations in the market, Chatzky said.

This is also a good time to check your investments to make sure you are still allocated properly and rebalance as needed, so you are not taking on more risk that you are comfortable with, she added.

Timing the market is a losing bet

Talk yourself down from making any sudden financial moves, Chatzky advised.

Trying to time the market is almost always a bad idea, other financial experts also say. That’s because it’s impossible to know when good and bad days will happen.

For example, the 10 best trading days by percentage gain for the S&P 500 over the past three decades all occurred during recessions, often in close proximity to the worst days, according to a Wells Fargo analysis published last year.

And, although stocks go up and down, the S&P 500 index has an average annualized return of around 10% over the past few decades.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

How to file for a free tax extension if you can’t make April 15 deadline

Published

on

Galina Zhigalova | Moment | Getty Images

If you can’t file your taxes by the April 15 deadline, there’s a free, easy way to submit a federal tax extension online, experts say.  

Nearly 1 in 3 American admit that they procrastinate when it comes filing their taxes, according to a January survey of more than 1,000 U.S. filers from IPX1031, an investment property exchange service. In addition, about 25% do not feel prepared to file their taxes, the survey found.

As of March 21, the IRS received roughly 80 million individual returns of the 140 million expected this filing season, the agency’s latest reporting shows.

More from Personal Finance:
How to spring-clean your finances. It can ‘make you feel more secure,’ advisor says
Tariffs will likely raise much less money than White House projects: economists
The federal government is phasing out paper checks. Here’s who will be affected

Many natural disaster victims have an automatic tax extension, which varies by jurisdiction. Military members serving in a combat zone also have more time to file. 

However, the federal tax deadline for the majority of taxpayers is April 15. It’s possible to push that due date to Oct. 15 by filing for an extension.

But “it’s an extension to file, not an extension to pay,” said Jo Anna Fellon, managing director at financial services firm CBIZ.

“It’s an extension to file, not an extension to pay.”

After the tax deadline, you will start incurring the failure-to-pay penalty of 0.5% of your unpaid taxes for each month or partial month that your taxes remain unpaid. The failure-to-pay penalty has a maximum charge of 25% of your unpaid taxes.

That’s cheaper than the failure-to-file penalty, which applies when you don’t submit your return by the deadline. The failure-to-file penalty is 5% of unpaid taxes monthly, also limited to 25%.

But you’ll also owe interest on your unpaid balance, which is currently 7% and accrues daily after April 15.

You can estimate your taxes owed by creating a “pro forma return” — or mock version of your filing — using as many tax forms as possible, Fellon said.

The ‘easiest way’ to file an extension

There are a few free options to file a tax extension.

For federal taxes, you can complete Form 4868 and mail it to the IRS. But it’s better to file digitally to avoid processing delays amid the agency’s shrinking workforce, experts say. Paper filing can also increase fraud risk, they say.

The “easiest way” is by choosing “extension” when making a payment for 2024, which automatically submits Form 4868, according to Tommy Lucas, a certified financial planner and enrolled agent at Moisand Fitzgerald Tamayo in Orlando, Florida.

“It takes all of five minutes,” and you can double-check the transaction via your IRS online account, he said.

IRS Direct Pay

Internal Revenue Service

Alternatively, you can file your extension for free online via IRS Free File, a public-private partnership between the IRS and several tax software companies.   

For the 2025 season, you can use IRS Free File for returns if your adjusted gross income, or AGI, was $84,000 or less in 2024. But there’s no income limit to file an extension, Lucas said.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Tax season is a prime time for scams: Here’s how to protect yourself

Continue Reading

Trending