I recently opened Netflix and was prompted to watch an episode of "Saturday Night Live." When I clicked, I was told I actually wouldn't be tuning in for the cold open — because I pay Netflix the least amount of money possible for its ad-supported tier, the show wasn't available to me. I could upgrade, though, by paying an extra $10 or more indefinitely for an ad-free plan, which would come with better quality video, the ability to add my account to more devices, and the privilege of watching a show that has aired on basic cable for 50 years.

Increasingly, streaming content is subject to tiers and the trend of "premiumization." For years, companies like Netflix, Max, and Disney+ fought the so-called streaming wars — losing money because of pricey content, fierce competition, and high churn rates among users who hopped from platform to platform. But 2024 was the year things turned around. Spotify, Netflix, and Disney+ were all posting profits, finally making investors happy.

To keep investors happy, the subscriptions that appear as second thoughts on your credit card statement are still creeping up. Premiumization has long been a driver of tiered spending in the physical world — from airplane seats to airport lounges to Disney World — and now digital streamers are harnessing its power. The price hikes are working because they've got us hooked: Most people who quit Netflix come back, lured by a new cast on "Love Is Blind" or some other viral original premiere. Netflix prices went up again in January, Spotify is reportedly considering a new plan that will give users who pay extra more premium content, and Amazon Music has price hikes and more exclusive content in the works, too. Even YouTube TV went up by $10 a month last year, coming to a total of $82.99.

As streaming finally matures, our wallets may be the ultimate losers of the streaming wars.

Almost any service you try to buy today will offer add-ons. Even discount gyms like Planet Fitness offer tiered plans. What's different about these streaming companies is they were born in an era where they promised us more for less — you could listen to the entire library of Spotify rather than buying each track or album, and say goodbye to those viruses hidden in LimeWire downloads. In 2012, Spotify CEO Daniel Ek said he sought to create something "better than piracy," and that the company wanted "to bring music to every single person and bring it to every moment of their life." Netflix gave us not just ways to ditch DVDs and snail mail, but access to its own hit content anywhere, anytime, without any annoying ads (goodbye forever, Geico caveman). They reinvented the way we watched TV and listened to music — streaming was so cheap and flexible that it easily hooked millennials.

That's when the streaming wars took off in earnest. Companies scrambled to gobble up existing shows and new talent for their content. Prices were low, and it felt like cinephiles and TV buffs had more control and choice than ever. Streamers advertised themselves as if they cared if we, the watchers, had a good time. On a 2020 call, Netflix's former CEO Reed Hastings said: "We want to be the safe respite where you can explore, you can get stimulated, have fun and enjoy — and have none of the controversy around exploiting users with advertising." Now, that safe haven is only offered to those who shell out more money, as Hastings ate his words and launched a cheaper ad-supported tier for Netflix in 2022. When I was blocked from watching "SNL," the Netflix app blamed licensing agreements, which make a small portion of the content it offers unavailable on the ad-supported tier. As of 2023, Peacock no longer offers the free, ad-supported tier it launched with, and now charges $7.99 a month for its cheapest plan. Max announced in February that it would remove access to Bleacher Report and CNN Max from its basic tier.

"This idea of the good stuff costing a little bit more isn't exactly new," says Max Signorelli, the consumer research lead for media and entertainment at the consultancy firm Omdia. "But certainly, long gone are the times where these relatively new streaming offerings were marketing themselves as the cheap, viable alternative to traditional media sources."

Today, streamers aren't alternatives to cable; they're the mainstream. Combining subscription and ad revenue was the model that made companies like Verizon and Comcast cable giants. "A lot of the newer media companies came out of the gate with a tech mindset of: scale first, we'll worry about profits and revenue later," Nii Addy, the chief marketing officer at the streaming company Philo, tells me. "We're at that inflection point where they're having to turn that scale into profits." Ironically, they're following in the footsteps of the companies they sought to disrupt. "A lot of these new media companies are with one hand killing the legacy cash cows, but then they're also nursing their own, and it's based on the exact same model," Addy says.

Netflix had an exceptional 2024, making $39 billion in revenue, an increase of 16% from 2023. It celebrated the news and simultaneously announced a price hike: "We continue to invest in programming and deliver more value for our members, we will occasionally ask our members to pay a little more so that we can re-invest to further improve Netflix," the company said in its January earnings letter. Warner Bros. Discovery, which includes Max, saw its streaming business make $677 million in profit in 2024, up from $103 million the year before. Peacock revenue grew by 46% from 2023 to 2024, coming to $4.9 billion, although it still did not post a profit. Paramount+ says it is on track to reach full-year profitability in 2025.

The music streamers have stumbled for even longer, trying to disrupt an industry that was wildly profitable before Napster and LimeWire decimated it. Spotify, which rarely made a profit through 2023, turned itself around 2024 and had its first profitable year. Now, Bloomberg reports the company is considering charging an additional $5.99 for a Music Pro plan on top of premium subscription prices that hit $11.99 a month (which is up from the $9.99 it charged from 2011 until 2023), in hopes of drawing music superfans with perks like higher-quality audio, remixing tools, and access to concert tickets. In the not-so-distant future, premium versions of Taylor Swift songs may be available only to those who can afford it. Spotify declined to confirm the rumored details for this story.

The rumors come as the music streaming game is changing; Spotify signed a deal in January with the world's largest music company, Universal Music Group, to advance what is seen as a new streaming 2.0 era in music, driven by more exclusive content and personalization. Amazon Music, too, has expanded its relationship with UMG, announced vague plans to develop exclusive content, and has raised its subscription prices by $1 a month. Amazon did not respond to a request for comment. But replacing one price for nearly all the world's music, tiers will separate the superfans from the casual listeners — and some superfans may even subscribe to more than one music streamer if the exclusive offerings start to further differentiate the catalogs of Spotify and Amazon.

Ultimately, entertainment tiers might not be such a bad deal for consumers. Z. John Zhang, a professor of marketing at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton Business School, says tiered pricing actually does democratize these services. Different pricing levels allow people who want to pay less to do so and still get decent access to content, subsidized by those willing to pay for premiumization. "What's good about tiered pricing is they give you the choice. It's not like it forces you to be in business class," he says. "For the people who pay the higher price, it's voluntary, they want to. The customers all become better off; they all have their own choice."

For now, streamers are taking divergent approaches: Some are charging more for add-on content, and others are starting to take perks away from those who pay the least. All of this will likely result in the bottom-tier price being a worse experience across the board. On airplanes, I'll take the smallest seat and forgo water if it's not free. I'll watch ads with my Netflix and Hulu if it means I can justify subscribing to both. If it wants me to pay more each month, Spotify will have to come up with something particularly exclusive and enticing, like a jump on concert tickets, to beat out the bots that plague Ticketmaster. But if more good content goes behind the steeper paywall, it'll be a test to see how long the cheap subscribers like me can hold out.

Amanda Hoover is a senior correspondent at Business Insider covering the tech industry. She writes about the biggest tech companies and trends.

• Backlash against Elon Musk and DOGE has hit Tesla, with the brand becoming a target for protests and vandalism.
• Business Insider spoke to four Tesla owners about why they decided to sell their EVs.
• They said Musk's work with DOGE and fear of being harassed were the main reasons for selling.

Things might be tricky for Tesla, but at least it has one new customer — President Donald Trump, who said Tuesday he'd buy a Tesla in a show of support for CEO Elon Musk.

Away from the White House, some longtime Tesla owners have had enough.

Business Insider spoke to four people who recently sold their vehicles in response to Musk's work gutting the federal government with DOGE.

It comes as backlash against Tesla mounts, with showrooms and vehicles becoming targets for protests.

"I sold my Tesla because I found it no longer reflects my values. I was embarrassed to be seen driving it," Scott Oran, a real estate developer who lives near Boston, told Business Insider.

Oran said he was initially drawn to his 2018 Model 3 because of the company's environmental credentials and promise to address the climate crisis "in a constructive manner."

Despite his Model 3 being a "very good car," Musk's work directing government layoffs with DOGE was too much for Oran.

"I saw its sale as a protest against Elon Musk and his work at DOGE. Musk was not elected. He's gutting our American government," he said.

"He's illegally firing federal workers. He's illegally dismantling federal agencies. He's spreading conspiracy theories, and he's empowering extremists. In short, he's sowing chaos and confusion. And I felt that we need to send a message to him and others like him that that is not American democracy," Oran added.

While the majority of car buyers tend to be swayed more by price and performance than politics, Tesla and other EV brands have traditionally appealed to customers who care about environmentalism — the demographic likely to object to Musk's newfound interest in far-right politics.

The second former Tesla owner, who did not want to be named to avoid potential retaliation, said: "What attracted me the most initially was trying to get away from fossil fuels."

While his 2021 Model 3 performance variant had issues including battery and computer problems, he said he was "blown away" by its performance.

The former owner described the controversial gesture Musk made at a Trump inauguration rally as "the straw that broke the camel's back," prompting him to trade in the Tesla late last month at a valuation of $22,000, according to a purchase contract viewed by BI.

"Every tweet that he's written since then has just added more nails to the coffin in my mind," they said.

Protests and harassment

As the backlash to Musk and the widespread government layoffs enacted by DOGE has grown, Tesla has increasingly borne the brunt of public ire.

High-profile owners including singer Sheryl Crow have sold their cars in response to Musk's actions, and a nationwide protest movement, "Tesla Takedown," has staged protests at Tesla showrooms across the country.

Cybertrucks and other Tesla vehicles have also been vandalized, and police in Oregon are investigating after shots were fired at a Tesla showroom.

For some Tesla owners, fear of being harassed has played a part in the decision to sell.

"I've been having instances where drivers would brake-check me or do rolling roadblocks, and I've had a few people flip me off for no apparent reason," said the former Model 3 performance owner.

"This made my decision all more clear — I have a newborn baby and even though I know I could be defensive in my driving, I'm not comfortable having my son in the car and having to deal with the harassment."

Oran said he hadn't experienced any backlash, but had seen Tesla drivers being heckled while attending a peaceful Tesla Takedown protest at a Boston dealership. "I imagined myself being in that situation, and I just wouldn't want to have that happen."

Rivals look to overtake

Tesla's waning fortunes appear to be benefiting its EV rivals.

Two former owners who spoke to BI said they've swapped their Teslas for a Polestar. The Swedish EV brand has been aggressively targeting Tesla customers in recent weeks.

The third former owner, who had a Model Y, said they were initially skeptical about rival vehicles, but were won over by the Polestar 3. "The build quality is fantastic, it drives much better than a Tesla and the interior feels like a real car and not a cheap toy."

Oran, who now drives a Hyundai Ioniq 5 EV, said: "Although Tesla did create the market for electric vehicles, there are now a number of really good alternatives."

Tesla owners who do decide to sell will find the used car market saturated with pre-owned Model 3s and Ys, with resale values plunging in recent years.

The fourth former owner, who had a Model 3, said his decision to sell was partly motivated by fear that resale values could drop even further due to Musk's conduct.

"I wasn't offended enough by his political behavior to sell the car, but I didn't want the value of my car to be tied to his political behavior," said the owner, who traded in his 2018 Model 3 for about $17,000.

"Elon Musk is getting a lot of flack for his behavior around the government, but this isn't necessarily the bottom. His behavior could get far worse … who's going to buy his car then?" the person, who now owns a Genesis EV, added.

Tesla did not respond to a request for comment.

• Pearl Whamond is among the Canadians boycotting US products in protest of President Donald Trump.
• The Montreal resident said Trump's positions on tariffs and annexation have fueled Canadian pride.
• She also used to travel often to the States for shopping or weekend getaways, but not anymore.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Pearl Whamond, a 55-year-old nurse and mother of three who lives in Montreal. She's among the Canadians boycotting American products due to President Donald Trump's policies and comments relating to Canada, including tariffs and interest in making the country a US state. This story has been edited for length and clarity.

I've always been very proud to be Canadian. I also have really enjoyed visiting the States.

But there seems to be a change in some of the US population. I'm feeling hatred toward Canada as if we're just piggybacking off the States or taking the US for granted. Americans used to feel like our cousins, nationality-wise, but I'm not feeling that anymore.

Now I'm noticing a bunch of national pride that we didn't see before, especially in Quebec, because Quebec is infamous in Canada for being the black sheep. We're the ones who have the French-speaking majority, so if Quebec is pissed off enough to fly the Canadian flag, something's really wrong.

I wouldn't go over the border these days, and I'm trying to avoid buying American products.

I don't feel safe traveling to the US

I'm half Filipino and half Irish. I don't look white. My husband is Mexican. My three kids, 25, 20, and 15, are Black. I'm afraid to go to the States. I would be concerned about going down due to what I'm hearing about ICE and deportations.

My husband has permanent residency in Canada, but if he got separated from me in the US, and I couldn't speak on his behalf, I don't know if he could explain himself well enough to get out of a scenario. If there's any question of anything like that happening, I'll just stay on my side of the border.

We're right up over Vermont, about an hour and a half drive away, and we used to go down just to grocery shop. I drove down regularly to see my friends in New Jersey and Boston. Just last summer, I took my girls to New York to see "Six" on Broadway because my daughter's a theater kid.

We used to do weekends like that, and my kids loved it there. Our dollar has not been strong for a long while, but it was worth it to me to spend the extra in exchange for that experience. Not anymore.

I'm boycotting American brands

Many people across Canada are trying to buy products made in Canada. There are all these online groups promoting that. Some people are very, very strict, and they're not getting anything from the US. Other people are doing what they can.

My husband used to call me the Amazon queen. I haven't ordered anything from Amazon since February 5. I've cancelled my Prime membership. I'm not shopping at Walmart or McDonald's.

Food-wise, it's pretty easy to get home-grown produce. I had a hard time finding broccoli not from the US for a while. We still have the US strawberries at $1.99, which are being left on the shelf. In my neighborhood, we're paying $4.99 to $6.99 for Quebec strawberries. People are willing to pay more to buy from home.

Even my 15-year-old, who is very politically active, and her friends are boycotting American products.

There's also an awful lot of supportive Americans saying, "We're on your side. We're trying to buy Canadian. We understand how you feel about our government. What they're doing is not right. We shouldn't threaten anyone with annexation, let alone Canada, which has always been our ally."

But those who have the opposing opinion are a lot more aggressive and a lot more hate-filled, actually. It may be nine out of 10 people will be friendly and wonderful like they've always been, but it just takes that one, and that's what scares me.

I don't want to lose the close relationship between Canada and the US

I don't know anyone here who wants to be a 51st state. We like our healthcare. We like our education. We like Canada. We grew up here. We're Canadians. Nothing against the US, but we don't want to be absorbed.

We respect Americans. We respect your anthem. We fight by your side in every single war. We love your country like we always have. We're just really sad to see how some Americans are thinking of us now, and we're angry with the way your president is treating us.

Even if the tariffs issue ends or if there's another president in four years, some Canadians are saying, "Once bitten, twice shy." There have been too many threats and too much back-and-forth. It feels like bullying, it feels threatening, and as a country, we're not appreciating it.

And even if the other party gets elected in four years, in eight years it could be more of the same. It's been done once, so it feels like we're fair game now.

I grew up feeling like the US and Canada were great allies and great friends, and I don't want to let go of that. I don't want to let go of that warm, fuzzy feeling that you've got our back and we've got yours. So, I guess we're just waiting to see how far this will go.

Do you have a story to share about the relationship between the US and Canada? Contact this reporter at [email protected].

From the moment Donald Trump was reelected, Harvard University has been scrambling to confront what it views as an existential threat posed by the new administration.

Trump is targeting elite universities on a host of fronts, from their diversity initiatives and handling of pro-Palestinian protests to billions of dollars in student aid and government support. Last year, federal grants accounted for 11% of Harvard's operating revenue and paid for two-thirds of its sponsored research. In addition, Trump has proposed taxing the university's massive endowment of $53 billion by as much as 35% — a threat that Harvard's president, Alan Garber, has said "keeps me up at night." On Monday, due to "rapidly shifting federal policies," the university announced it was instituting a hiring freeze, reducing admissions to some of its graduate programs, and issuing a university-wide directive to limit spending.

"This is a crisis," says Todd Wolfson, the president of the American Association of University Professors, which represents 44,000 members at more than 500 campuses nationwide. "It's the greatest mortal threat that the higher education sector has ever faced, without a doubt."

In response, Harvard has been quietly formulating a new lobbying strategy — one unlike anything the university has ever undertaken. According to interviews with more than two dozen lobbyists, funders, professors, and alumni, Harvard's plan is threefold. First, the university has hired Ballard Partners, MAGAworld's leading lobbying firm, to represent its interests in Washington. Second, Harvard is exploring ways to ingratiate itself with Trump's inner circle by building alliances with conservatives he trusts. And third, the school has joined talks with colleges and universities in red states, looking to present a case that Trump's proposed cuts would hurt not just Ivy League intellectuals, but local economies in deep-red districts.

Such moves are out of character for Harvard, which has long considered itself in a league unto itself. "Harvard has a chance to minimize the damage of the Trump administration," says Jeff Hauser, a Harvard alum who serves as executive director of the Revolving Door Project, a government watchdog group. "But it's only going to be in solidarity with other institutions with different public profiles. They're more in it together than they might realize."

Harvard was ramping up its lobbying efforts even before Trump's victory last November. In 2024, the school spent more on lobbying than it had in the past 15 years. But those familiar with Harvard's new strategy say it began in earnest two weeks before Trump's inauguration, when Harvard hired Ballard Partners as one of its leading lobbyists. It was a shrewd move — Brian Ballard, the firm's founder, is a close Trump ally who maintains an office up the road from Mar-a-Lago. What's more, Susie Wiles and Pam Bondi — Trump's chief of staff and attorney general — are both alums of the firm.

Hiring Ballard signaled Harvard's willingness to "play by Trump's rules," says Hilary Braseth, a Harvard alum who serves as executive director of OpenSecrets, a nonpartisan group that tracks political influence. The lobbying firm, she adds, gives Harvard "a direct line to the Oval Office."

Ballard's first priority for Harvard is to find out where cuts are most likely to come, and which programs might be targeted. "There's a big learning curve that comes with a new administration, particularly a Trump administration," says Dan McFaul, a Ballard lobbyist who's working on the Harvard account alongside the firm's founder. "Information seems to be the most valuable thing. What's the next shoe to drop? How do we address this? How do we respond to the next grant cancellation?"

While the price of Harvard's contract with Ballard won't be public until April, it's not cheap. According to three people familiar with the deal, the university is on track to pay the lobbying firm well into the six figures this year. Justin Sayfie, a partner at Ballard, characterized its agreement with Harvard as "a monthly retainer that is customary for firms of our caliber on K Street in Washington."

Other universities are following Harvard's lead. Public records show that institutions of higher learning are hiring lobbyists at more than twice the pace they did after Joe Biden won the presidency in 2020, or when Trump won his first term in 2016. Among those who have brought on new lobbyists in recent weeks are Columbia, MIT, New York University, Oklahoma State University, and Arizona State.

Beyond the hiring of Ballard, Harvard is exploring ways to make inroads into Trump's inner circle. According to two people with knowledge of the discussions, the school is considering inviting Trump loyalists to speak on campus, as a way to blunt charges of liberal bias and to curry favor with the administration. In interviews with BI, some lobbyists and experts in government relations suggested inviting Trump or Vice President JD Vance to deliver the commencement address at Harvard, or hosting MAGA figures at Harvard's Kennedy School. "You make yourself a smaller target if you do this," says one lobbyist based in Washington.

Finally, Harvard is seeking to build alliances with red-state colleges and universities, to present a united front in Washington. The message, according to several people familiar with the talks, is that cuts to federal research grants and student aid will kill jobs and short-circuit opportunities for innovation in all 50 states. "A great way to hurt a local economy is to kick a university in the teeth," one education lobbyist says.

The hope is that the red-state institutions can make the case for supporting higher education to the Republicans who represent them in Congress. Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama, for instance, has already spoken out against proposed cuts to the National Institutes of Health that would profoundly affect the University of Alabama.

Such alliances, insiders say, are the new norm for universities and colleges. "Strange bedfellows," observes one lobbyist with years of experience in higher education. "Get used to it."

Still, the new strategy is fraught with peril for Harvard. Forging alliances with Trump supporters could anger some of the school's most prominent donors, and provoke unrest among students and faculty. Allison P. Farrell, an opinion writer at the Harvard Crimson, recently called on the university to "not be complicit" with the new administration. "If Harvard survives by acceding to Trump," she wrote, "it has forfeited its raison d'être — it can no longer claim to be an institution dedicated to seeking and defending truth." One education lobbyist — who, like many, spoke with Business Insider on the condition of anonymity to maintain their professional relationships — called Harvard's new strategy "a pact with the devil."

While that might be a popular view on campus, at least a few professors support Harvard's efforts to make its case in Trumpian terms. Avi Loeb, a noted theoretical physicist who was critical of the university's handling of pro-Palestinian protests last year, sees an opportunity to remind Trump that research institutions like Harvard play a crucial role in driving scientific discoveries and American innovation. "Make Science Great Again!" he says. "Science is not the occupation of the elites. The Trump administration should understand that."

Unless Harvard can find a way to maintain the flow of federal support that helps underwrite its operations and research, students and faculty will be the ones who pay the price. Less federal aid could mean tighter budgets, fewer jobs, and less student aid. "It's icky, but Trump can hurt you," says one lobbyist who's based in Washington. "You're trying to mitigate risk."

Beyond traditional lobbying, universities and colleges are attempting to reach out to Trump's core constituencies. Ideas that have been floated include running commercials during the NCAA basketball tournament as well as booking school administrators on conservative outlets like Fox News and on Joe Rogan's podcast. Syracuse University, for instance, is running advertisements on subway trains in the nation's capital, touting its status as "higher education's only national veterans resource center." After the president of Yeshiva University, Rabbi Ari Berman, delivered the benediction at Trump's inauguration, the school took out ads on Facebook and Instagram to highlight the event.

And while some universities are eager to work with Harvard, others see a value in distancing themselves from Ivy League institutions that have drawn Trump's ire as bastions of "wokeness." Isaac Kamola, a political science professor at Trinity College who leads the Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom, says schools should remind government officials to "not conflate higher education in America with Harvard."

Still, Harvard's deep pockets and its affiliation with Ballard mean that red-state universities are unlikely to reject an invitation to work together. "There's strength in collective action, and that goes both ways for Harvard," says one education lobbyist.

The threat to elite schools is likely to mount in the coming months. The Trump administration is investigating 60 schools, including Harvard, for their handling of "antisemitic harassment and discrimination" during campus protests against the war in Gaza. Last week, the administration announced it was canceling $400 million in federal grants and contracts to Columbia — another school on the list — and warned that more cuts are likely. In a statement to Business Insider, the White House decried what it calls "a lot of waste, fraud, and abuse" of taxpayer money in higher education. (Harvard declined requests for comment.)

In the meantime, the university remains a favorite punching bag for the right. Last month, Steve Bannon — a Harvard alum — came to a conference held near Harvard Square to bash the university. "We need to go into these elite institutions and cut out all the money," Bannon told an assembly of conservative students. "Once you cut that money off, that's a bitch slap. They'll start paying attention."

The conference was sponsored in part by the hedge funder and billionaire alumnus Ken Griffin, a megadonor both to Harvard and to Republican causes. Griffin, whose name appears on Harvard's Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, has announced he is withholding new contributions until Harvard decides to "embrace Western values," ignore "whiny snowflakes," and end what he calls a "DEI agenda that seems to have no real endgame."

Given the current political climate, Harvard and other elite schools have no illusions that they can fully fend off the tsunami of cuts being proposed by the White House. For now, Harvard is focused on ways to limit the damage. And for that, the more of Trump's allies it can enlist, the better. "This will be a delicate dance," says a prominent Harvard donor who supports Trump, "and Harvard can't afford to stumble."

Dave Levinthal is an investigative journalist in Washington, DC. He was a reporter and editor at Business Insider until 2022.

• Klarna is restructuring teams and placing staff in a "talent pool" as it prepares for its US IPO.
• The company is pushing AI adoption while streamlining positions and cutting costs to become leaner.
• Employees tell BI that some changes haven't been without their challenges.

When John was told he'd been placed in Klarna's "talent pool" last year, he thought it meant a new opportunity within the company. Instead, it felt like a slow march toward the exit. For months, he waited, hoping to be matched with another position — an offer that never came. Eventually, Klarna offered him an exit package.

The talent pool seems like "a sneaky way of carrying out quiet layoffs," John, who asked BI to use a pseudonym to remain anonymous in order to protect his future job prospects, told Business Insider.

John was one of hundreds of employees who have found themselves in the precarious position of being placed in the talent pool ahead of a possible IPO by Klarna. The talent pool is a group of employees whose positions were eliminated but are kept on the payroll while they search for new positions within Klarna that match their skills. If they don't find a fit, they may be offered an exit package or choose to resign.

The Swedish fintech giant, once Europe's most valuable startup, confidentially submitted its draft registration to the Securities and Exchange Commission in November, though it's unclear if these plans will change with the current market volatility.

Klarna offers short-term financing to customers online and in stores at checkout in the form of split payment terms. It says it has more than 85 million customers and partnerships with over 600,000 retailers, including Apple, Adidas, and Airbnb.

As it readies itself for a potential public offering, Klarna has been shedding its startup skin and adopting the discipline of a public company — a transformation that, according to insiders, has come with growing pains.

The company has been restructuring teams, consolidating roles, and cutting costs in a bid to become leaner ahead of its public debut, according to Klarna employees past and present. Eleven current and former Klarna employees spoke to BI on the condition of anonymity to protect their future job propects.

The "talent pool"

Insiders suggest that the impending IPO and desire to be more efficient might be driving a more deliberate shift in staffing — what some people internally have described as "Klarnageddon" and a process entailing what they believe are "quiet layoffs."

CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski has rejected the notion that the company is conducting layoffs. In an October episode of the "Grit" podcast, he said Klarna is not laying anyone off, "it's natural for people to leave, and that the company simply "stopped hiring due to AI," which, combined with a natural attrition rate of 20%, was leading to a smaller workforce.

In a January X post about Klarna's working practices, Siemiatkowski likened the way employees are given positions to a "consultant being staffed to a project." He added, "The closing of a team or position normally leads to a quick reassignment within weeks. and is NOT a job loss."

Employees say the reality is different, and Siemiatkowski's narrative of natural attrition and gains from AI doesn't fully align with their experiences.

Ten of the people BI spoke to said they believed the "talent pool" is part of a strategy to reduce headcount. Four people who were placed in the talent pool after their positions were eliminated describe this approach as being placed in limbo, waiting for a reassignment that might not materialize.

An internal document seen by BI, last updated in August, indicated that around 260 employees — roughly 7% of the workforce — were in the talent pool at the time.

Klarna said the number of employees between assignments in August was significantly lower than 260 and has remained so since. It added that the majority of employees in the talent pool are on long-term leave, such as parental leave or between assignments.

Klarna also said last year more than 800 people were matched to a new position from the pool and that individuals in the talent pool are matched with open positions every week. However, the company did not respond to BI's questions about how many employees in total were in the talent pool throughout 2024 and how many of them were not offered another position within the company.

From hypergrowth to leaner operations

Klarna's road to a possible IPO is a stark contrast to its pandemic-era boom. In 2021, the company reached a $45.6 billion valuation, went on a hiring spree, and expanded aggressively in the US. Klarna's headcount steadily grew between 2019 to 2022, when it hit a peak of 5,441 employees, according to its 2022 annual report. However, a broader market downturn in 2022 slashed Klarna's valuation to $6.7 billion, leading to 800 layoffs.

Now, Klarna is recalibrating. In the past six months or so, it has reorganized divisions, including the engineering team, and more recently restructured its analytics division and formed a new "Product Insights" team. An internal document from October seen by BI revealed that for the 120 employees seeking roles in this new team, only 70 positions were available, leaving a surplus of 50 workers likely to be placed in the talent pool.

Some Klarna employees have voiced their frustration over the changes. In an October internal meeting with CFO Niclas Neglen, a recording of which was obtained by BI, one worker asked if leadership had considered the toll of "constant" restructuring on mental health. Another person asked in the comments section of the virtual meeting if the reorganization could "have been done more humanely and fairly." Neglen acknowledged the concern about the impact on employees' mental health but responded, "change is healthy."

The company also scrapped its annual "Smoooth Week" event for 2024, which used to bring all employees to its Stockholm headquarters. It's unclear whether this decision was related to cost-cutting. Klarna said it communicated internally that Smoooth Week will happen within an interval of two to three years.

Bullish on AI and cost-cutting measures

Throughout 2024, Siemiatkowski made bullish statements about how Klarna is using AI. In February of that year , the company made headlines after announcing that its AI customer service agents had been doing the equivalent work of 700 full-time human employees.

Initially, Klarna's AI efforts began with an in-house chatbot "Kiki" to summarize and answer questions based on internal documents, four people said. It has since expanded to other departments, such as using AI-generated imagery for marketing campaigns. In May, Klarna attributed some cost savings in the first quarter to AI. It said it cut its sales and marketing expenditure by 11% in that period and that "AI is responsible for 37% of the cost savings, or about $10 million on an annualized basis."

The company has an agreement with OpenAI to use its AI models and Siemiatkowski has actively encouraged staff to use AI in their daily work. In September, Siemiatkowski posted on Slack instructing employees to use OpenAI's o1 model. In the post, seen by BI, he said, "Dear AI nerds!!!! PLEASE Go and checkout the new OpenAI o1 model immediately!! Make sure you try it on at least one task and idea during your Friday work time!!!"

Engineers are using Microsoft's AI-powered coding tool, GitHub Copilot. Four engineers told BI it is mostly a support tool for troubleshooting and that it can be frustrating to use for coding because it can remove or add random brackets or commas, so they have to review the code base manually.

One former employee described Klarna's internal use of AI as "nice and sexy to show in the press," and another current employee said he uses it to draft text and brainstorm ideas, which he believes has made him a more efficient worker.

Klarna has also cut costs by reducing its reliance on external software. A specialized cost-cutting team — known internally as "The Terminator" — has been eliminating SaaS tools. In a November all-hands meeting, which BI obtained a recording of, Siemiatkowski celebrated the removal of more than 30 SaaS systems and set his sights on the next target: "Fuck Jira, fuck Confluence," he said, referring to Australian software firm Atlassian's products.

In an X post earlier this month, Siemiatkowski said Klarna estimates that it has "shut down" about 1,200 software as a service providers to help consolidate how it stores knowledge.

New compliance and communication measures

Klarna has also been tightening its internal controls, a common step before going public. Klarna's director of people and HR, Mikaela Mijatovic, told employees in a Slack post in December that it would begin testing employees in Sweden for alcohol and drugs, starting in January. Mijatovic said the move was "part of a larger effort to strengthen security across Klarna."

In a September all-hands meeting, a recording of which was obtained by BI, Siemiatkowski told employees the company would likely need to introduce new compliance measures, including tracking employee locations. He said for senior staffers, it could mean seeing their financial statements to "assess if someone is in trouble or could be compromised."

The company has also made changes to the way it wants employees to communicate internally. In May, Klarna's communications director, Johanna Nyman, instructed employees via Slack to avoid using direct messages for important discussions, instead favoring public team channels and internal wikis. The post was met with some resistance — 56 employees reacted with a thumbs-down emoji, according to screenshots viewed by BI.

The company's approach to internal meetings has also shifted. Recurring one-on-one meetings between managers and employees were scrapped in September, a move that some workers say has deprived them of a crucial space to discuss challenges.

Klarna has also been exploring ways of expanding beyond its core payments business. It recently internally advertised four jobs to help build a product that lets customers buy and sell stocks through its app. Siemiatkowski said in an X post last month that Klarna "will embrace crypto" going forward.

Have a tip? Contact this reporter via email at [email protected] or Signal at jyotimann.11. Use a personal email address and a nonwork device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.

• Ukraine is on the verge of losing its final town in Kursk, the Russian region it invaded in August.
• Moscow has pushed hard into Kursk in recent weeks, and Putin just visited the region himself.
• Kyiv's loss of its northern pocket comes as the US seeks to get Russia to accept a temporary cease-fire.

Eight months after launching its surprise attack on Russian soil, Ukraine's foothold in Kursk appears to be on its last legs.

As of Wednesday, the town of Sudzha — about five miles from Ukraine's border — remains Kyiv's final significant position in the Russian region.

Ukrainian officials have been painting a bleak picture of its defense.

Roman Kostenko, the secretary of the defense committee in Ukraine's parliament, told local reporters in a Wednesday briefing that Russian troops have entered the town and are trying to cut off Ukrainian supply lines.

"There is information that the Russians have entered a certain part. Fighting continues. The Russians control a certain area there, which is across the river," Kostenko said.

Still, he added that he hadn't received word of a full withdrawal, a decision that Kyiv has also not confirmed.

But the language used by Ukraine's top officials indicates that at least a partial pullback is already underway.

Ukraine's chief commander, Oleksandr Syrskyi, said on Wednesday evening that he had ordered Ukrainian troops to move to "more advantageous lines" if necessary.

Sudzha has been "almost completely destroyed" by Russian air strikes, Syrski added.

Both he and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have said Kyiv's priority in Kursk now is to "preserve the lives" of Ukrainian troops.

"The Russians are applying maximum pressure on our soldiers," Zelenskyy told reporters on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, Russian military bloggers have been posting footage of the fighting in Sudzha, appearing to show Moscow's advance reaching the town's administrative buildings.

The Kremlin's push comes as Russian leader Vladimir Putin visited Kursk for the first time since Ukraine breached the region.

Dressed in military fatigues, he told his troops on Wednesday to clear out the remnants of Ukraine's troops in Kursk, according to state media.

With Ukraine's position in Kursk now dire, it's ousted Dmytro Krasylnykov, the commander of its northern operations.

National broadcaster Suspilne reported that Krasylnikov said an order for his replacement was signed on March 7. Oleksiy Shandar, who was deputy commander of Ukraine's airborne assault forces, is set to take over.

An advantage held for months, now on the verge of collapse

Ukraine launched its surprise Kursk offensive in early August, widely interpreted as a bold effort to both draw Russian resources away from the hard-hit eastern front and to create a bargaining chip for cease-fire negotiations.

Within days, Kyiv's forces seized some 500 square miles of Russian territory and threatened to encroach upon Kursk city itself.

But Moscow's troops rushed to contain the advance, eventually cutting down Ukraine's pocket there to just the land around Sudzha.

If the Kremlin fully retakes Kursk, it would come as President Donald Trump's administration tries to get Russia to accept a temporary cease-fire, which Ukraine has already agreed to.

"We'll take this offer now to the Russians, and we hope that they'll say yes, that they'll say yes to peace," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Tuesday. "The ball is now in their court."

Earlier this month, tensions with Washington also prompted the US to roll back some of its intel and weapons support for Ukraine. Shortly after the decision was made, officials in Kyiv told Business Insider's Jake Epstein that the loss of intel hampered Ukraine's ability to defend against Russian missile attacks.

The Washington Post also reported that the move had prevented Ukraine from precisely targeting Russian positions with advanced American artillery systems.

After Kyiv accepted the cease-fire terms, the US said on Monday that it had resumed sharing intel with Ukraine.

• Michelle Obama says her husband Barack Obama's punctuality used to get on her nerves.
• "Barack, you know, he had to adjust to what 'on time' was for me," Obama said on her "IMO" podcast.
• The former first lady previously said she had a bad impression of him when he was late for their first meeting.

Marriage isn't easy — even Michelle Obama used to have a major pet peeve with her husband Barack Obama.

During Wednesday's premiere episode of her podcast "IMO," which she cohosts with her brother Craig Robinson, the former first lady spoke about one of her husband's habits that used to get on her nerves.

"Barack, you know, he had to adjust to what 'on time' was for me," Obama told Robinson.

"Because he was on that island time," Robinson interjected, referring to the former president's Hawaiian roots.

Obama said it bothered her that her husband would often only start getting ready when it was time to leave for their appointments.

"You know, I've got this husband who's like, when it's time to leave, it's 3, he's getting up and going to the bathroom. And I was like, dude, dude, a 3 o'clock departure means you've done all that, you know? It's like, don't start looking for your glasses, you know, at the 3 o'clock departure," she said.

However, he tries to keep himself in check these days, she said.

"But he's improved over 30 years of marriage," she said. She added that her daughters, Malia and Sasha, know to be early if they are doing anything with her.

In 2014, using public data posted on the White House website, The Washington Post reported that the former president was over 35 hours late to his scheduled engagements that year.

In a 2018 interview, Obama shared that she had a bad impression of Barack Obama when they met at a Chicago law firm in 1989 because he was late for their first meeting.

"I was like, is he trifling? The black man's going to be late on the first day? I was like, 'Um,'" Obama told ABC News' Robin Roberts.

Punctuality is often touted as a key to success.

One such business leader who believes in punctuality is Richard Branson, the founder of Virgin Group.

"If you want to be more productive, then start at the start: get there on time," Branson wrote on LinkedIn in 2015. Not only is it a show of respect to others, it is also a way to effectively manage his day, he said.

"Of course, everything doesn't always go to plan. It isn't always possible to be on time, but it is always possible to try. When I find myself running late, I will often quite literally resort to running," Branson wrote.

Representatives for the Obamas did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent outside regular hours.

• A federal judge ordered Elon Musk and DOGE to produce records and answer questions about their work.
• Musk and DOGE have been given three weeks to comply with the order.
• Musk's government efficiency commission has been hit with nearly two dozen lawsuits.

A federal judge ordered Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to hand over documents and answer questions about their plans to trim federal agencies.

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan said in her order on Wednesday that Musk and DOGE have to comply with the discovery request in three weeks.

Under the order, Musk and DOGE must turn over records relating to their plans to cull federal agencies, terminate federal employees, and cancel federal contracts. The discovery requests do not apply to President Donald Trump, who signed an executive order establishing DOGE on January 20, the day he took office.

Last month, 14 Democratic state attorneys general filed a federal lawsuit against Trump, Musk, and DOGE. In their lawsuit, the attorneys general asked the court to "restore constitutional order" and stop Musk "from issuing orders to any person in the Executive Branch outside of DOGE."

"Mr. Musk does not occupy an office of the United States and has not had his nomination for an office confirmed by the Senate. His officer-level actions are thus unconstitutional," the lawsuit argued.

Chutkan denied that request in a ruling issued on February 18, writing that she could not issue a temporary restraining order against Musk and DOGE "without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm" to the states.

Nonetheless, Chutkan acknowledged in her ruling that the attorneys general did "legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight."

Musk and DOGE have been hit with nearly two dozen lawsuits since the start of Trump's second term. DOGE's attempts to slash spending by laying off thousands of federal workers and shuttering foreign aid programs have sparked fear and confusion across the government.

This isn't the first time Musk and DOGE have been ordered to turn over records of their work.

On Monday, District Judge Christopher Cooper ordered Musk and DOGE to release some of its records to comply with three Freedom of Information Act requests from a watchdog nonprofit.

In his ruling, Cooper wrote that DOGE was operating with "unusual secrecy" and the "public would be irreparably harmed by an indefinite delay" in responding to the FOIA requests.

When asked about Cooper's ruling, a spokesperson for the Department of Justice told Business Insider on Tuesday that Musk and DOGE "are saving historic amounts of taxpayer money from being spent on unserious bureaucratic pet projects."

"This Department has already been fighting in court to vigorously defend President Trump's agenda and will continue to do so, especially when it comes to waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars," the spokesperson added.

Representatives for DOGE and the DOJ did not respond to requests for comment from BI.

• About 48% of Tesla's market capitalization was wiped out in a matter of months.
• The decline comes amid sagging sales and concerns around leadership, namely its CEO Elon Musk.
• JPMorgan analysts said they couldn't find "anything analogous in the history of the automotive industry."

Tesla has lost so much value in such a short period of time that JPMorgan analysts said they couldn't think of another comparable moment in automotive history.

"We struggle to think of anything analogous in the history of the automotive industry, in which a brand has lost so much value so quickly," they wrote, adding that the closest example was when Japanese and Korean car brands lost sales amid "diplomatic disputes" with China in 2012 and 2017, respectively.

The JPMorgan analysts wrote in a note on Wednesday that those historical cases were "confined to a single market, whereas the decline in Tesla sales in 2025 is not specific to any one nation or geography."

JPMorgan analysts cut their price target on Tesla by about 41% from $230.58 to $135, lowering guidance on vehicle deliveries for the first quarter of 2025 to about 355,000 — an 8% year-over-year decrease from the first quarter of 2024.

Between December and Wednesday after trading hours, Tesla lost nearly 49% of its market cap, seeing its peak value of $1.54 trillion from the end of last year fall to about $777 billion.

This steep drop comes as Tesla experiences a global decline in sales and branding issues stemming from its chief executive's politics.

For a moment, Elon Musk's big bet on Donald Trump seemed to pay off. Tesla was the only EV company to see its stock surge after the president's electoral victory in November. The underlying assumption appeared to be that Musk's company could benefit if the Tesla CEO had the ear of the new administration and guided the White House's efforts to slash government spending. 

Now, that assumption is being challenged in some analysts' latest guidance, which notes a possible headwind in demand due to Musk's work with the Trump administration.

"Mr. Musk's work with the Department of Government Efficiency has proven controversial domestically, and while as many members of the political right may be pleased as those on the left are displeased, the effect on Tesla sales seems nevertheless negative," JPMorgan analysts wrote.

In recent weeks, Tesla showrooms across the US have seen protests and a string of vandalism incidents. President Trump has rushed to Tesla's defense and said he'd consider labeling the perpetrators domestic terrorists.

Outside brand reputation, some analysts are also concerned that Musk's focus on political affairs is again distracting the CEO from his core businesses.

"After all, the simultaneous decline in both Tesla pricing and unit volume expectations did coincide with his takeover of X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter," JPMorgan analysts noted.

Morgan Stanley analysts wrote in a note on Monday that Tesla shares have fallen due to "sales data, negative brand sentiment, and market de-grossing" but still see a buying opportunity for the company.

"Today, with the stock down 50%, our investor conversations are focused on management distraction, brand degradation, and lost auto sales," analysts said.

A spokesperson for Tesla did not respond to a request for comment.

Despite the company's losses, Tesla remains the most valuable car company in the world.

Second to Tesla is legacy automaker Toyota, which has a $292 billion market cap.

Morgan Stanley analysts noted several "catalysts" in the company's pipeline, including Tesla's robotaxi, expected to hit Austin roads later this summer, and another demonstration of Optimus, the humanoid robot anticipated before the end of the year.

However, expectations for Tesla's delivery timelines may have to be tempered, given that the CEO has a history of missing his own. deadlines.

• D-Wave on Wednesday announced it had achieved quantum supremacy with its annealing chip.
• Quantum stocks spiked after the news, which suggests quantum machines can outperform classical tech.
• Wednesday's gains helped the industry rebound from a dip spurred by skepticism from Jensen Huang.

Quantum stocks spiked on Wednesday after Canadian company D-Wave said it had achieved the elusive industry benchmark of "quantum supremacy," suggesting its specialized annealing chip can outperform classical computers in certain tasks.

"It's the holy grail for quantum computing. It's what everybody aspires to and is the reason there's so much confusion around quantum supremacy versus quantum advantage versus quantum utility because supremacy — true supremacy — hadn't been achieved yet," Alan Barrett, D-Wave's CEO, told Business Insider. "And so the industry was coming up with terms that were easier to achieve, but this is that demonstration of true supremacy, and we're very excited."

The corresponding market surge — which saw D-Wave's stock spike over 8% by market close and sent other quantum companies like IonQ up over 16% — helped the industry recover from a dip following recent skepticism from Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang.

In January, Huang suggested the industry is at least 20 years away from quantum computing being "very useful," sending quantum stocks tumbling.

While D-Wave's announcement didn't fully claw back the losses that followed Huang's remarks, it sent a jolt through the market and made waves in the industry surrounding the burgeoning technology.

Quantum computing is rapidly evolving, with Big Tech players like IBM and Google racing to scale up the devices enough to be commercially useful. While advancement has long been slowed by deeply technical problems involving error correction and scalability, researchers say cracking the code to unlock quantum computing's potential could help discover new drugs, develop new chemical compounds, or break encryption methods, among other outcomes.

That is why D-Wave's announcement, which follows new quantum chip debuts from Amazon Web Services and Microsoft, is such a big deal. The Canadian company says its annealing quantum computer outperformed one of the world's most powerful classical supercomputers when solving complex simulation calculations related to magnetic materials discovery.

The company says its quantum computer performed a magnetic materials simulation in just minutes — one that would take a classical supercomputer built with GPU clusters nearly one million years and more than the world's annual electricity consumption to solve.

Quantum annealing vs. gate-based approaches

D-Wave's approach is not without its skeptics. The research paper published by the company's researchers in the journal Science stopped short of describing its findings as "quantum supremacy," instead using the milder term "quantum advantage" to outline its findings.

Eric Chitambar, a researcher of quantum information science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said D-Wave's annealing approach has drawbacks — like narrower practical applications and reduced fault tolerance, meaning it's not likely to produce a full-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer.

The narrow scope of the annealing method's potential applications is why the other major players in the quantum space have invested heavily in a gate-based approach. This approach relies on quantum logic gates as the foundation of quantum circuits, similar to how classical logic gates operate for conventional circuits. It has the potential for broader applications despite slower progress in development than the annealing approach.

"But even if they don't have something that is going to be a universal, scalable quantum computer, that doesn't mean there isn't value there," Chitambar said of D-Wave's announcement.

Harley Johnson, the chief executive for Illinois Quantum and Microelectronics Park, told Business Insider that certain types of computers are better at solving specific problems. D-Wave's announcement is a prime example of a narrowly tailored machine proving its utility.

But now that quantum computing is moving beyond proving its commercial value, Johnson said, it's time to focus on maximizing the return on the massive investment that has brought the quantum industry this far.

"The thinking about quantum advantage, or quantum supremacy, needs to take into account the additional information about economic advantage," Johnson said. "What does it cost me to get to a solution on a conventional computer versus on a quantum computer? Can I solve it more cheaply than I could solve it on a conventional computer? I think that's the next really important way to think about quantum advantage."

• Meta won an emergency arbitration decision regarding the book "Careless People."
• The decision, in part, bars Sarah Wynn-Williams from promoting the book.
• A Meta spokesperson said the "false and defamatory book should never have been published."

Meta just scored a win against a new memoir written by a former Facebook executive.

"Careless People," which was published Tuesday, was written by Sarah Wynn-Williams, who worked at Facebook from 2011 to 2017.

Meta on Wednesday shared an emergency arbitrator's decision that bars the author from promoting the book. Her memoir has already generated headlines, including a positive review in The New York Times.

The ruling was issued by the International Centre for Dispute Resolution, which is the international division of the American Arbitration Association.

The arbitrator wrote that the decision bars Wynn-Williams from making disparaging comments about Meta or from further publishing the book to the extent she has control over it.

"This ruling affirms that Sarah Wynn Williams' false and defamatory book should never have been published," a Meta spokesperson said in a statement to Business Insider.

At the time of writing, the book was still available for purchase from retailers like Amazon and Barnes and Noble.

Wynn-Williams and the publisher, Macmillan, did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider outside regular business hours.

The book includes vivid descriptions of the leadership styles and behaviors of Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, then-chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg, and other top leaders.

Wynn-Williams, a former New Zealand diplomat and international lawyer, was a global public policy director at Meta and detailed having close contact with Meta's top brass.

In one part of the book, the writer described how 200 Meta women employees formed a secret Facebook group in 2017 called "Feminist Fight Club." She also included several descriptions of being personally harassed by her superiors.

The writer also detailed Zuckerberg's awkward interactions with world leaders including former US president Barack Obama and China's leader, Xi Jinping.

The author recalled Xi using a 'a human Chinese wall' of soldiers at the 2016 APEC summit in Lima, Peru, to avoid interacting with Zuckerberg. Another section explains an incident when Zuckerberg said he didn't want to talk to then-New Zealand Prime Minister John Key in front of Key.

Meta spokesman Andy Stone called the book "a mix of old claims and false accusations about our executives" and said Wynn-Williams was fired for poor performance and behavior.

• Steven Mnuchin says he doesn't think there will be a recession amid fears and market volatility.
• Consumer confidence is on the decline while stock prices grew more volatile over Trump's tariffs.
• People may be nostalgic for Mnuchin as a force of reassurance during the first Trump administration.

Former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Wednesday that the market may be "overreacting a bit" to policies rolled out by the new Trump administration — and that he doesn't think there will be a recession.

"I don't think the outlook looks like we're going to have a recession," said Mnuchin on CNBC's "Squawk Box" when addressing recession fears and the recent stock market decline. "I don't think anybody should look at what's a natural, healthy correction of these indexes as indicating that the economy's in trouble."

"The president has always believed in adding tariffs, so I think that's what we're seeing in the market today," he added.

His comments come amid growing concerns over trade tensions and economic uncertainty brought on by President Donald Trump's shifting tariff policy.

Over the past two months, confidence has declined among consumers and small business owners, while the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta's GDPNow tracker predicts a contraction in the first quarter. Stock markets have also seen more volatility as the S&P 500 fell 9.4% from its peak in mid-February, and the Nasdaq Composite erased all postelection gains and tumbled below November 2024 levels.

Mnuchin is now running Liberty Strategic Capital and said he won't be joining Trump's cabinet again, but the current recession scare over Trump 2.0 may be making people nostalgic for him.

Business Insider's Emily Stewart points out that Mnuchin was the Wall Street whisperer and a force of reassurance during the first Trump administration, who was credited for keeping people calm about the debt ceiling and for striking a deal with Congress to deliver much-needed economic relief during COVID.

Stewart wrote:

With the markets currently in meltdown mode, largely thanks to Trump, Mnuchin (or a Mnuchin type) is someone many on Wall Street would very much like to have back. They'd like a Mnuchin-esque Money Dad to come tuck them in at night and tell them not to worry about big bad tariffs or a potential recession hiding underneath the bed. In the absence of such a figure, investors are facing a Trump 2.0 who isn't as concerned about their feelings — or, more importantly, holdings — as they'd hoped.

Trump addressed tariffs on Tuesday at a regular meeting of the Business Roundtable, a nonpartisan Washington-based economic advocacy group comprising more than 200 CEOs, like Apple's Tim Cook and JPMorgan Chase boss Jamie Dimon. He said that "hundred of billions of dollars are being invested" because factories are moving back to the US, and warned that tariffs "may go up."

• Critical Role, the nerdworld business giant, started streaming their show in March 2015.
• On March 12, the crew celebrated their 10th anniversary.
• Four of CR's eight cofounders shared what they think has helped the team stay together.

Critical Role started as a birthday present for Liam O'Brien, who wanted to find a friend group to play "Dungeons & Dragons."

More than a decade on, the team of eight runs a sprawling nerdworld business. CR has investments in everything from its main streaming platform to game publishing and animation production.

During a conversation with Business Insider, the crew credited four tips that have kept them from falling out over the years.

1. 'Share your thinking in advance'

Travis Willingham, CR's CEO, said that talking to each other is his top tip to stay in business with one's best friends.

"It is so important not just to communicate how things are moving within a very complicated business but also to share your thinking in advance," Willingham said.

He said that one of the CR team's "biggest advantages" is having eight cofounders.

"We have so many different perspectives. We come from incredibly different walks of life. We have different interests," Willingham said.

"There also has to be a ton of grace in just recognizing that some people have strengths in some areas, there are weaknesses in others, which the team works to support," Willingham said.

2. Someone who's the 'beating heart of the group'

Sam Riegel, a multiple Emmy-award-winning director who helms CR's animation push, said the crew is "stronger than ever."

The group's "secret weapon " is Matthew Mercer, the company's chief creative officer, who Riegel said functions as the team's "beating heart."

"He keeps reminding us over and over to spend time together as friends," Riegel said.

Mercer also often tells the group they need to have fun with what they're doing together while streaming their "Dungeons & Dragons" game live. If the audience likes it, it's a bonus.

"He keeps reminding us of that — and it's a wonderful check-in, and it keeps us grounded," Riegel said.

3. Keep your ego in check

O'Brien, who helms CR's literary production drive, said all eight cofounders are "very hard workers," and "level-headed" decision-makers.

"We manage, for the most part, to keep our egos in check," O'Brien said.

O'Brien said that when there are differences of opinion, the team remembers they have a common goal.

"Those disagreements — when they do come up — they're inconsequential in comparison to the dream that we're building together," O'Brien said.

"We are dangerously close to too many Emmys, though," he joked, referring to Riegel's win record at the annual awards show. "I think we could maybe win one more, but then beyond that, things might start to get dicey."

4. Enjoy each other's company — even during crunch time

Marisha Ray, CR's creative director, said it isn't uncommon for the cofounders to work 80-hour weeks. But they have a "strong foundation" now — and help, from a broader team they've hired over the years.

"A lot of it has been building the building blocks so that we can also take a little bit of time to just enjoy each other's company," Ray said.

She added that the little things matter — like taking time to "enjoy each other's company" — and ensuring they stay friends outside work.

Riegel said what keeps him going is that one thing hasn't changed over 10 years: The crew really likes spending time with each other.

"I just want to hang around my friends and get margaritas with them and be around to experience these events with them and tell stories together," Riegel said. "That's it. Everything else is all extra."

• Ayo Edebiri called Elon Musk an "idiot" on her Instagram story for spreading a fake casting rumor.
• The rumor claimed Edebiri was being eyed for a new "Pirates of the Caribbean" movie.
• Musk shared the fake info on X, writing, "Disney sucks." Edebiri said it triggered online attacks.

"The Bear" star Ayo Edebiri has some choice words for DOGE overseer Elon Musk after he helped spread a fake casting rumor last year that she said triggered a slew of attacks against her.

"Just remembering when I got some of the most insane death threats and racial slurs of my life (idk if it's the #1 moment, but for sure top 3) for a fake reboot of a movie I had never even heard of because of this man LMAO," Edebiri wrote on her Instagram story Tuesday night.

"So not only is he double s**g h**l-ing fascist, he's an idiot," she added, alluding to gestures that Musk performed at President Donald Trump's inauguration rally that many interpreted as Nazi salutes; "seig heil," meaning "hail victory" in German, was a rallying cry adopted and popularized by the Nazi party. (After his gesture sparked backlash, Musk told Joe Rogan he is "not a Nazi.")

Edebiri also shared a screenshot of the rumor in question, which was circulated last February by the X account @unlimited_ls, which is dedicated to sharing political news and "social injustice" from a conservative angle.

The rumor claimed that Edebiri was being eyed as a "replacement" for Johnny Depp in a new "Pirates of the Caribbean" movie.

Depp last starred as Captain Jack Sparrow in the fifth installment of the franchise, "Dead Men Tell No Tales," released in 2017. He was set to appear in a sixth film, but according to court testimony, plans for "Pirates of the Caribbean 6" were scrapped after Depp's ex-wife, Amber Heard, wrote an op-ed about domestic abuse.

Musk reshared the rumor on his own X account, writing, "Disney sucks." The original post has since been deleted, but Musk's is still live.

The person who runs @unlimited_ls shared a reaction to Edebiri's criticism on Wednesday morning, calling the Emmy and Golden Globe-winning actor "unhinged."

"Ayo Edebiri waited over a year to address rumors and credible reports circulating in Hollywood from trustworthy sources. And, of course, she attacks Elon Musk," the post reads.

The @unlimited_ls user also clarified that their original post with the unverified rumor was deleted by mistake.

"I never made any claims; I clearly stated 'reportedly' because it was the latest information coming from credible Hollywood sources," they wrote in a follow-up post. "And yes, I am a HUGE fan and supporter of Mr. Musk. He has my loyalty for LIFE, and I don't say that lightly."

The casting rumor about Edebiri was not reported by any reputable trade publications; it seems to have originated with Daniel Richtman, a self-styled Hollywood insider who shared unverified details on his Patreon.

Richtman's blog post was picked up by Comic Book Resources, but the rumor gained more traction in the wake of Musk's repost, finding its way onto film blogs like JoBlo and ComingSoon.net.

After the post by @unlimited_ls went viral, Richtman chimed in to say its framing was disingenuous. "There's no 'Replacing Depp' or anything like that. She's only the 'Type' they're looking at for the lead in one of the planned spinoffs," he wrote.

Outrage over the claim that Edebiri, a Black woman, would be "replacing" Depp, a white man, seemed fueled by the ongoing right-wing backlash to diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts, also known as "DEI," which are designed to prevent discrimination on the grounds of race, gender, sexuality, or other protected classes.

Many opponents of DEI have conflated antidiscrimination efforts in the workplace and government with Hollywood's recent push for more inclusive casting. Female actors who've joined major movie franchises in the last decade, including Kelly Marie Tran ("The Last Jedi") and Brie Larson ("Captain Marvel"), have recounted similar experiences with sexist and often racist abuse on social media.

Musk has long been a vocal opponent of diversity initiatives in the corporate world, even before the second Trump administration officially launched its anti-DEI campaign.

As Business Insider reported, Musk's DOGE office has recently been working to pause and, in some cases, entirely cut government programs by flagging keywords like "equity," "gender," and "gay."

Representatives for Edebiri and Musk did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

• Billionaire Leon Black gave more money to Jeffrey Epstein than known, Senate committee says.
• According to the US Senate Finance Committee, he transferred $170 million to Epstein's accounts.
• Black has said he paid the accused sex trafficker for tax advice. Sen. Ron Wyden is skeptical.

Billionaire Leon Black was more responsible for Jeffrey Epstein's vast fortune than previously known, according to a Senate committee investigation.

Black, the billionaire financier and former CEO of Apollo Global Management, transferred $170 million to the Epstien's coffers over the course of five years, US Sen. Ron Wyden said in a letter to the US Justice and Treasury departments this week — not $158 million, as previously reported.

An investigation commissioned by Apollo's board appears to have missed $12 million in transfers, which were discovered by investigators working on the US Senate Finance Committee.

The Apollo investigation, conducted by the law firm Dechert LLP, led to Black's resignation in 2021 from the investment firm he cofounded.

It also wasn't clear why the bank handling the $170 million in transfers didn't raise any flags until months after Epstein's arrest on sex trafficking charges in 2019, Wyden wrote.

"The Bank did not make filings related to the Black and Epstein transactions until seven years after the transactions began in 2013," Wyden wrote. "In fact, the Bank first reported the payments from Black to Epstein more than eight months after Epstein was arrested on charges of sex trafficking involving underage girls."

Wyden, a Democratic lawmaker representing Oregon, asked US Attorney General Pamela Bondi and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to hand over documents related to the transfers by March 27, including from the trove of "Epstein documents" that Bondi promised to make public.

Black's relationship with Epstein came under scrutiny amid the accused sex trafficker's 2019 arrest and jail suicide. Epstein left an estate worth around $630 million around the time of his death, some of which has since been paid to compensate his victims.

According to the investigation commissioned by Apollo, Black paid Epstein for financial advice, including strategies that saved him around $600 million in estate and family trust tax payments. Epstein also helped manage issues related to Black's vast artwork collection, his yacht, and private jet, according to the Dechert report. The report also said Epstein and Black had a falling out in 2016 when Epstein believed he deserved more money.

In his letter, Wyden expressed skepticism that the advice from Epstein — who dropped out from college — would be worth anything close to $170 million Black paid over five years.

"For his services Epstein was paid amounts that far exceeded what Black paid other professional advisors involved in his tax and estate planning, which includes some of the most high-priced legal counsel in the nation," Wyden wrote. "At an annualized rate of $23 to $26 million per year, Epstein's compensation was higher than the median CEO pay for Fortune 500 companies."

One of Epstein's accounts that received money from Black, Financial Trust Company Inc., was previously used for Epstein's sex-trafficking operation, according to evidence filed in Ghislaine Maxwell's sex-trafficking trial.

Bank records made public in the trial of Maxwell — who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for trafficking girls to Epstein for sex — show that Epstein used the business to pay Maxwell. He transferred $30.7 million to Maxwell in the years they were together. Over $7 million of those funds were spent on a helicopter that accusers said Maxwell used to ferry girls to Epstein's private residence in the US Virgin Islands.

In 2023, Black later paid $62.5 million to settle claims from the US Virgin Islands Attorney General's office related to "how Jeffrey Epstein used the money Black paid him to partially fund his operations in the US Virgin Islands," according to a copy of the settlement Wyden made public.

Representatives for Black, Apollo Global Management, and Dechert LLP didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.

Wyden's scrutiny of Black could complicate the Senate confirmation process of the Trump administration's nominees.

President Donald Trump, who was friends with Epstein, selected Black's son, Benjamin Black, to lead the US International Development Finance Corp, also known as the DFC.

According to Reuters, Trump has considered converting the DFC into a sovereign wealth fund, which he said could buy TikTok.

The younger Black has also proposed repurposing funds from USAID, which was gutted by Elon Musk's DOGE initiative, to fund the DFC. Under Black's plan, the DFC would invest in developing nations to advance foreign policy goals rather than spend the money on aid.

• The FCC is seeking advice from the public on what rules it should axe.
• The agency in charge of communications law says it wants to remove "unnecessary regulatory burdens."
• FCC Chair Brendan Carr has previously promised to go after big media companies.

President Donald Trump's FCC chair wants you to weigh in on what rules the agency should "delete, delete, delete."

FCC Chair Brendan Carr on Wednesday announced a notice titled "In re: Delete, Delete, Delete," which asks the public to submit recommendations for what "unnecessary" regulations the agency should eliminate to fulfill Trump's agenda.

The notice references one of Trump's recent executive orders, called "Unleashing prosperity through deregulation," which directs federal agencies to identify 10 regulations that should be phased out for every one new regulation it proposes.

The FCC notice asks for comments on regulations that, for example, have greater costs than benefits, create barriers to entry, impose unequal costs on large and small businesses, are outdated, or "unfairly disadvantage" American businesses.

"We also invite more general comment on rules that should be considered for elimination on other grounds," the notice reads. "Submissions should identify with as much detail and specificity as possible the rule or rules that the commenting party believes should be repealed (or modified) and the rationale for their recommended action."

Though the independent agency — which is in charge of regulating and enforcing communications law — is supposed to be overseen by Congress and protected from direct White House control, Trump signed an executive order in February seeking to expand his power over it and other independent agencies.

"Under President Trump's leadership, the Administration is unleashing a new wave of economic opportunity by ending the regulatory onslaught from Washington," Carr said in a statement shared on X. "For too long, administrative agencies have added new regulatory requirements in excess of their authority or kept lawful regulations in place long after their shelf life had expired."

Carr, who previously served as an FCC commissioner before Trump appointed him as chairman in January, recently said he's investigating Comcast over its embrace of DEI, after promising last fall to go after big media companies.

Carr has also been a vocal defender of SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk and his companies.

• People all over the United States are receiving text messages from fake toll collectors.
• The FBI has warned about the phishing texts repeatedly over the last year.
• E-ZPass and most other toll agencies do not send texts to non-account holders.

If you are among the few who have so far been spared texts from a fake toll collection agency, just wait — they are almost certainly coming.

The FBI first warned about them in April last year. At the time, the agency said it had received thousands of complaints across at least three states about phishing texts claiming to be from toll road services.

Since then, the texts have only proliferated. Law enforcement agencies across the country have posted repeated warnings about the scam.

It's a relatively easy one to spot, however, because most toll agencies do not send text messages to collect fees. The Toll Roads, a payment service for toll fees in California, said in a December warning that it does not send text messages to non-account holders.

"The Toll Roads is advising drivers to disregard phishing texts being sent to their phones that detail a specific outstanding toll amount or Notice of Toll Evasion," the warning said.

One scam text sent on March 8 and reviewed by Business Insider claimed to be from the toll payment service E-ZPass, which is used in several states.

E-ZPass also does not send text messages to non-account holders, and would never send text messages asking for personal information, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said in a January consumer warning.

Other toll scam texts reviewed by BI showed phone numbers that originated in countries outside the United States — a telltale sign of fraud. Some of these text messages ask the recipient to respond with a "Y" to activate the link in the message.

In January, the FTC said that the best ways to avoid a fake toll collection text are to not click on any links in the message, check with the agency to ensure any received texts are real, or simply delete the message.

You can report suspected scam messages to the FTC's consumer fraud complaints division at reportfraud.ftc.gov.

• Google Cloud restructured its strategy team to "respond faster" to the market.
• One of the biggest changes has been made to boost sales productivity, per an internal memo.
• Cloud has become a crucial part of Google's business in the AI race.

Google has shaken up its Cloud group yet again, this time consolidating teams in its strategy unit.

Staff in Google Cloud's strategy and operations team were told in February that the reorganization would help the company "respond faster to market demands," according to a memo sent by Google Cloud's Go-To-Market COO Greta Krupetsky and seen by Business Insider. She described the new structure as a "network model" in the memo, which will better support Cloud's various sales teams.

Google has been streamlining many of its internal teams across the company over the past two years in an effort to move faster. Krupetsky said the latest reorg included consolidating its core Business Services into one team led by Google Cloud managing director Abhi Sharma to "help increase sales productivity." A new central "Deal Management" team has also been created under Google Cloud COO Francis deSouza, who joined the company earlier this year.

The unit will include a new "Business Functions - Customer Experience Organization" led by Erez Wohl, managing director at Google Cloud. Wohl's previous strategy and operations functions will now report to Krupetsky.

"We continue to evolve our business to meet our customers' needs and the significant opportunity ahead. We will continue to invest in areas that are critical to our business and ensure our long-term success," a spokesperson told BI in a statement.

The memo mentions a "small number" of roles being cut as part of the reorganization. Those cuts, which BI reported on last month, included some roles being moved to other regions including India and Mexico City, according to an internal employee-crowdsourced document. BI also reviewed several internal job postings for roles within Google Cloud's Go-To-Market Strategy and Operations team based in Mexico City.

Google's Cloud group has become a crucial part of the company's efforts to compete in artificial intelligence. Google Cloud sales hit $11.96 billion in the fourth quarter, up 30% from the previous year, though falling short of analyst expectations. Investors are closely watching Google's Cloud business, which is still smaller than those of rivals Amazon and Microsoft.

Google previously said it plans to spend $75 billion in capital expenditure this year.

Have a tip? Contact this reporter via email at [email protected] or Signal at 628-228-1836. Use a personal email address and a nonwork device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.

Former mobster Anthony Ruggiano Jr. rates Mafia scenes in movies and TV shows.

He discusses the portrayal of bust-out schemes in "Goodfellas," starring Ray Liotta, Robert De Niro, and Lorraine Bracco, and relates to his own time in witness protection. He explains how wars broke out between New York's Five Families in "The Godfather," starring Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, and James Caan. He separates fact from fiction about truck hijackings in "Donnie Brasco," starring Johnny Depp. He talks about the infamous murder of "Crazy" Joe Gallo in "The Irishman," starring Al Pacino and Joe Pesci. He breaks down how underworld gambling worked in "Killing Them Softly," starring Brad Pitt, Ben Mendelsohn, and Scoot McNairy. He lays out the structure and roles of a Mafia family in "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," starring Glenn Howerton, Rob McElhenney, and Kaitlin Olson. He looks at how mob boss John Gotti is portrayed in "Gotti," starring John Travolta. He details how gangsters turned into informants in "The Sopranos," starring James Gandolfini, Edie Falco, and Michael Imperioli. Finally, he analyzes how the Mafia once controlled New York City's construction business in "The Simpsons."

Anthony Ruggiano Jr. is a former proposed member of the Gambino crime family. He is now a counselor at a drug treatment center in Florida and host of the "Reformed Gangsters" podcast. You can find his podcast on YouTube.

• Repurpose is an eco-friendly brand that offers alternatives to plastics.
• The small business is using AI across the company, including for accounting and marketing.
• This article is part of "How AI Is Changing Everything: Small Business," a series exploring how small businesses are using AI for success.

Known for its plant-based, compostable home and kitchen products, Repurpose has spent the past 15 years building an eco-friendly brand that gives consumers a viable alternative to plastics.

Repurpose says it owns one-third of the compostable-tableware category and its products are sold at 20,000 retailers nationwide. Products include plates, cups, cutlery, and kitchen bags.

To better compete in the crowded consumer-goods market, Repurpose has turned to AI to automate its financial processes, optimize its marketing campaigns, and streamline its employee review process.

A sustainability-minded brand using an energy-intensive technology like artificial intelligence might seem counterintuitive, but in today's business environment, it's virtually unavoidable. AI is now embedded into most of the tools businesses use every day, so for a 21-person company like Repurpose, it's vital to embrace the technology.

"We're a small but mighty company, so we do rely on external partners, and we need to utilize tools and technology to be able to compete in the marketplace with these much larger conventional players," Lauren Gropper, Repurpose's CEO, said, adding that AI has "been really helpful for us to help scale where we don't necessarily have the same financial resources" and that "it's leveled the playing field."

Developing an AI-powered organization

Gropper said Repurpose began using AI last year. The company started experimenting with ChatGPT for marketing and copywriting support. It then incorporated a third-party financial platform to improve its billing processes and streamline external payments to vendors and contractors.

The tool prepopulates vendor information into different fields and autofills invoice data, so Repurpose's four-person finance team doesn't have to input this information manually. Before using AI, Repurpose largely relied on spreadsheets and paper-based processes for financial management. Automating its accounting has eliminated the need for physical signatures and paper checks and documents, which saves time, is better suited for Repurpose's entirely remote-work environment, and better aligns with the company's sustainability mission.

Overall, Repurpose estimates that AI saves its finance team two days a week on accounts payable tasks.

"It's been able to streamline their productivity and give them some time back to do other tasks," Gropper said.

Repurpose also leans on AI for employee reviews. The company uses an AI-enabled review platform with an AI assistant feature, which provides suggestions to help employees expand on the comments they've written in their reviews.

The small business has incorporated several embedded AI tools, but as its use of the technology has grown, so has its awareness of the downsides.

Balancing innovation and impact

"Being a company that is focused on sustainability, we are very conscious of the fact that AI is very resource-heavy, and it's something that we take very seriously," Gropper said.

AI drives automation, but it also requires lots of computing power. Data centers, which underpin AI operations, consume tons of electricity. The International Energy Agency estimates electricity consumption in data centers will double by 2026 from 2022 levels — which would be on par with Japan's current total consumption.

Gropper said Repurpose needs AI tools to function and scale its operations, but the company is educating itself on AI and carefully evaluating external tools to become better stewards of the technology.

"It's threading the needle between wanting to be as innovative as possible and utilizing these amazing tools, but at the same time being conscious of what is the impact and what are we contributing?" she said.

Small businesses that want to leverage AI likely will have to buy, rather than build, their tools. Gropper said her best advice for other small-business owners is to work with technology providers and experiment with generative-AI platforms like ChatGPT to accelerate their artificial intelligence implementation.

"There's just so much available online and so many resources to get started and test prompts," she said. "It's all there for the taking."