Connect with us

Economics

Winning North Carolina, Donald Trump seizes the early advantage

Published

on

DONALD TRUMP won the swing state of North Carolina as he took an early advantage in his race for the White House against Kamala Harris. The vice-president’s path to victory narrowed as early results showed her underperforming Joe Biden’s showing of four years ago. At 11pm Eastern time, early vote counts in America’s presidential race showed an early advantage in the electoral college for Mr Trump. There were warning signs for the Harris campaign as the first results poured in.

Several hours after the first polls closed, the other six of the seven swing states seen as vital to the two candidates’ chances for winning the electoral college—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin—were too close to call. Yet Mr Trump enjoyed a lead of three percentage points in Georgia, with 93% of the state’s vote counted. In North Carolina, Mr Trump’s lead was similar with just over 88% of the vote counted.

If Mr Trump’s lead holds up there, the pathway to an electoral-college victory for Ms Harris would narrow considerably, requiring her to sweep the “blue wall” states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, where the vote count was proceeding more slowly.

Outside the key battlegrounds, the early picture was no more encouraging for the Harris campaign. In Virginia, which Mr Biden won comfortably in 2020, Ms Harris led narrowly with 82% of votes counted. She seemed likely to win Virginia eventually but was lagging behind Mr Biden’s performance in suburban counties such as Loudoun, outside Washington, DC. There, similarly to other suburban jurisdictions in Virginia, Ms Harris’s share of a near-complete vote trailed Mr Biden’s performance four years ago by more than six percentage points. That is a concerning trend if it extends to Pennsylvania and Michigan, where suburban voters are crucial to Ms Harris’s prospects.

In Florida, a former battleground that Mr Biden lost by just over three percentage points last time, Ms Harris was doing even worse, underperforming Mr Biden’s margin by ten percentage points with almost all of the state vote counted. Across all early reporting states, Ms Harris’s performance in counties posting near-complete votes to Mr Biden’s numbers in 2020 showed the vice-president underperforming.

Ms Harris and her allies will have to hope that the picture unfolds differently in Pennsylvania, the most important of the three blue-wall states, which always looked like a crucial state for both her and Mr Trump. Here there were at least a few encouraging signs. With just over a third of the expected vote posted in Montgomery County, a populous suburb of Philadelphia that leans Democratic, Ms Harris led with 68% of the vote, more than five percentage points better than Mr Biden’s performance four years ago. That is the sort of result she will probably need in all of Philadelphia’s blue-tinted-collar counties if she is to hold off Mr Trump’s strength in less populated rural areas.

Michigan’s vote was too incomplete to judge even several hours after its polls closed, and Wisconsin, which Mr Biden won by just 20,000 votes four years ago, Mr Trump led narrowly with 61% of the vote counted. A similar early picture prevailed in Arizona, a state where pre-election polls had shown Mr Trump held his most significant advantage.

Because the trio of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin remained in play at 11pm EST—and no other state pegged for Ms Harris had fallen to Mr Trump—the election remained in the balance. What seemed clear is that if Ms Harris were to defy the early run of results and squeeze out a victory, it would emerge from the key Rust Belt states and would probably be as close as the razor-thin margins Mr Biden won there in 2020.

Economics

BOI Reporting and the impact of the recent Federal Injunction

Published

on

The Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) is a legislative measure designed to enhance financial transparency

The Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) is a legislative measure designed to enhance financial transparency and mitigate risks such as money laundering, terrorist financing, and other illicit financial activities. The CTA aims to close loopholes and create a fairer business environment by requiring certain entities to disclose their beneficial ownership information. However, recent legal developments have temporarily impacted compliance requirements, bringing attention to the act’s ongoing litigation and implementation.

Federal Court Decision and Its Implications

On December 3, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction in the case of Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc., et al. v. Garland, et al. (No. 4:24-cv-00478). This injunction temporarily halts the enforcement of the CTA, specifically its beneficial ownership reporting requirements. Additionally, the court order stays all deadlines for compliance.

As a result, reporting companies are currently not obligated to submit beneficial ownership information (BOI) reports to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). During the injunction, these entities are also shielded from liability for non-compliance with CTA mandates.

Despite this pause, FinCEN has clarified that companies may still voluntarily submit their BOI reports. This voluntary reporting option remains available for businesses that wish to align with the CTA’s transparency goals.

Overview of the Corporate Transparency Act

The CTA mandates that certain entities provide information about their beneficial owners—individuals who own or control a business. The act is intended to increase transparency, enhance national security, and reduce the anonymity that can facilitate financial crimes.

While the CTA has garnered support for its objectives, it has also faced legal challenges questioning its constitutionality. Courts in different jurisdictions have issued varying rulings, with some upholding the law and others granting temporary injunctions. For example, district courts in Virginia and Oregon have ruled in favor of the Department of the Treasury, asserting the CTA’s alignment with constitutional principles.

Compliance During the Injunction

Currently, the federal injunction exempts businesses from mandatory BOI filing requirements nationwide. This temporary halt will remain in place until further developments, such as a decision by an appellate court or a reversal of the injunction.

In response to the ruling, the Department of Justice, representing the Department of the Treasury, has filed an appeal. While the case proceeds through the legal system, FinCEN has confirmed its compliance with the court order.

Looking Ahead

The legal proceedings surrounding the CTA highlight the evolving nature of financial regulation. As courts continue to deliberate, businesses should monitor updates to remain informed about their obligations. By staying informed and prepared, businesses can effectively manage their compliance responsibilities and contribute to efforts that promote financial integrity and transparency.

Continue Reading

Economics

After a chaotic scramble, Congress strikes a budget deal

Published

on

Donald Trump is the most powerful Republican politician in a generation, but the president-elect is still no match for the most nihilistic members of his own party. The budget chaos that unfolded on Capitol Hill as the Christmas break approached is only a preview of the difficult realities Mr Trump will face when he starts to govern next month.

Continue Reading

Economics

Why Congress is so dysfunctional

Published

on

Budgetary chaos is a sign that governing will be harder than Donald Trump might assume

Continue Reading

Trending