• President Trump fired the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Friday night.
• His public removal coincided with the defense secretary's firing of five other top officers.
• Several lawmakers, including military veterans, expressed alarm.

The White House ousted the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., which was followed by a string of firings in the Pentagon's most senior ranks that alarmed lawmakers.

In a press release posted Friday night, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also removed the chief of naval operations and the Air Force vice chief of staff, Adm. Lisa Franchetti and Gen. James Slife, respectively, as well as the top military lawyers for the Army, Navy, and Air Force.

The removals of confirmed leaders deepen the turmoil at the Pentagon, which faces deep cuts to its civilian workforce and budget shifts that Trump officials say are to align with the new administration's priorities. Nearly 5,400 probationary employees within the DoD may face job termination next week, part of a larger slew of cuts that could total around 55,000 civilian military employees.

Friday night firings

In his Truth Social announcement, President Donald Trump did not provide a reason for the removal of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who serves as the president's top military advisor, nor did he explain the move to replace Brown with a retired general.

Brown is a fighter pilot, and only the second African American to hold the chairman position. After the police killing of George Floyd in 2020, Brown spoke out publicly about his personal experiences facing racial discrimination as an airman. Before his most recent role, Brown was Chief of Staff of the US Air Force, making him the first African-American service chief.

Trump said that he would nominate retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Dan Caine to take on the role of chairman of the joint chiefs. This is a position that would need to be confirmed by the GOP-led Senate.

Brown wasn't the only trailblazing military officer among the leaders terminated Friday. Franchetti was the first woman to lead the Navy and the first-ever female military leader to be part of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Prior to his confirmation, Hegseth had called for the removal of both Brown and Franchetti.

She is the most recent female leader to be sacked as the new administration shakes up the government. Shortly after taking office, Trump officials relieved Coast Guard leader Adm. Linda F. Fagan, the first woman to lead a branch of the US armed forces.

Lawmakers sound the alarm

Hegseth's press release on the DoD leadership changes also asked for nominations for the Judge Advocates General for the Army, Navy and Air Force, positions responsible for advising military commanders on whether orders are lawful.

These moves alarmed some lawmakers like Colorado Democrat Rep. Jason Crow, a former Army Ranger, who noted their crucial role in applying the law to orders.

"Under President Trump, we are putting in place new leadership that will focus our military on its core mission of deterring, fighting and winning wars," the press release read.

Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Democratic Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island said in a statement Friday night that the dismissals appear to be "part of a broader, premeditated campaign" by Trump and Hegseth to "purge talented officers for politically charged reasons, which would undermine the professionalism of our military."

Other veterans in Congress criticized the unprecedented mass firings of top military officers.

"What Trump and Hegseth are doing is un-American, unpatriotic," wrote Rep. Seth Moulton, a Democrat from Massachusetts and a former Marine officer. "It's [the] definition of politicizing our military, and we should expect to see loyalty oaths (not to the Constitution) and worse coming soon."

"In case anyone is wondering ... this isn't normal," Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth, a former Army National Guard soldier, said. "No, this is the work of a wanna-be dictator. By firing our top military leaders and installing his own personal yes-men, Trump is making America less safe."

• In a Friday ruling Judge Carl Nichols allowed President Donald Trump to resume putting USAID employees on leave.
• Nichols reversed a prior order halting the plans, saying the plaintiffs "overstated" the need for intervention.
• USAID workers may still prevail as the case progresses, but the agency is left gutted for now.

After being targeted in the DOGE office's efforts to cut federal spending and root out waste, USAID on Friday lost a major court battle, leaving the international aid agency gutted while legal challenges play out.

US District Judge Carl Nichols, in his Friday ruling, allowed President Donald Trump's staff reductions at USAID to proceed, reversing his prior order to halt them pending a request for a temporary injunction brought by the American Federation of Government Employees, a union that represents about 800,000 federal workers, and the American Foreign Service Association.

Nichols had previously issued a temporary restraining order in the case, forcing the staff reductions to stop while he considered the plaintiffs' argument that an agency shutdown and the immediate recall of international employees back to the US would cause irreparable harm to the employees and their families, who are stationed abroad in service of the agency's humanitarian missions.

"The Court was concerned by this alleged harm when issuing the TRO: it observed that recalling employees on such short notice could subject them to non-financial injuries—like harms to the continuity of their healthcare and their children's education—that no future lawsuit could redress," Nichols wrote in his Friday ruling. "But again, the government's subsequent submissions have convinced the Court that plaintiffs' initial assertions of harm were overstated."

While the USAID workers may still prevail as the case progresses through court — some legal scholars have argued Trump's cuts to federal agencies are "flatly illegal" — the rescinded temporary restraining order leaves the aid agency with the bulk of its US employees on administrative leave.

"We are disappointed in today's decision and believe the harms faced by USAID workers are real," Skye Perryman, CEO of Democracy Forward, the legal services firm representing the USAID workers, said in a statement. "We remain confident that the court will find the administration's efforts to decimate USAID contrary to law. We will continue to pursue all legal options in this case in order to ensure the safety of Americans at home and abroad."

Representatives for the White House and the plaintiffs' legal team did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.

• I'm the mom of five kids, including teenagers.
• If my kids have no obligations, I let them sleep in as much as they want.
• People have said I'm letting be lazy, but I'm doing it for their health.

Last week, here in Michigan, my children had three "cold days" in a row — with temperatures falling below -20 degrees Fahrenheit, our school district canceled school.

And on those days, as any day that they don't have school or other obligations, I let my teenagers sleep in as long as they wanted.

They have to wake up so early on school days

One teen roused fairly early, around 9 a.m., while the other didn't wake until nearly noon. I wasn't fazed in the slightest. On normal school days, my kids have to get up before 6 a.m., which they do all on their own, but on weekends, off-days, and during the summer months, I do not control my teens' bedtimes or waketimes.

I always encourage them to sleep as much as possible because I believe that sleep is one of the most important things they need, especially at their age.

Some parents might disagree with me and encourage strict wake-ups, even over the summer, but in our family, my teenagers can't possibly get anywhere near the recommended hours of sleep on a regular basis. Between school, sports, work, and family commitments, most nights they are lucky to get six to seven hours, and if I'm being honest, some nights it's even less than that.

I'm aware of the science that says that teens' brains are wired to stay up later and sleep in, but unfortunately, our school district — like many — just can't accommodate a schedule that supports their sleep. We live in a rural area where a lot of kids depend on busing, so the bus schedule dictates the school schedule, which means very early wake-up times.

They are not lazy

There's not a lot I can do to create more hours of sleep for them at night during the school year, but what I do is always encourage them to sleep as much as they want all other days of the year. I've heard people call teens lazy for sleeping in so much, but to me, it's about supporting their health in a very basic way. I want my teens to understand and emphasize the importance of sleep, especially as they grow into adults.

Part of my motivation is also selfish. I am personally someone who has always needed a lot of sleep to function, so just in case they turn out like me, I want them to know it's okay to be someone who needs a lot of sleep. Years of sleep deprivation as a mother severely impacted my physical and mental health, yet I've always felt guilty anytime I needed more sleep or "let" my husband help me at night.

So far, my strategy is working. My teens are responsible, do well in school, work side jobs when they want spending money, and have no problem regulating their own sleep. I do set some boundaries that I also use to support a healthy sleep environment: their phones have auto bedtimes that I control (weekdays have earlier times than weekends), their bedrooms are kept screen-free, and I instituted white noise habits from the time they were babies.

I'm not naive enough to think it's all my strategic parenting or merit that has granted me children who can sleep in or regulate their sleep schedules.

Everyone and every family is different, of course. My goal is not to shame any family whose teens aren't able to sleep in on a whim; my goal is simply to make sure my teens never feel shamed for sleeping in.

• The US Space Force's secret space plane, the X-37B, shared an image from orbit for the first time.
• The reusable orbital test vehicle captured the image of Earth last year during its seventh mission.
• In orbit since 2023, the test shuttle has practiced maneuvers to change orbit.

The US Space Force released an image Thursday that was taken by its top-secret space plane for the first time since launching on its seventh mission in late 2023.

While conducting experiments in a "highly elliptical orbit," the X-37B orbital test vehicle captured a rare image of Earth from high above the African continent.

Since launching on its seventh mission in late 2023, the orbital test vehicle has been experimenting with future space domain technologies and practicing "first-of-its-kind" maneuvers to adjust its position in orbit with minimal fuel, according to the US Space Force.

Little is known about the X-37B's missions, which have taken place as concerns grow that the US military's satellite network is under increasing threat.

'Most advanced re-entry spacecraft'

In 1999, NASA selected Boeing to design a reusable orbital test vehicle to monitor and repair satellites closely.

Over the next four years, the X-37 underwent several design iterations to achieve a more aerodynamic design than the Space Shuttle orbiter. It was initially intended to launch from the cargo bay of a space shuttle. But after the Space Shuttle Columbia crashed and killed all seven astronauts on board in 2003, it was redesigned to launch from a different rocket, making it smaller and more autonomous.

The project cost nearly $192 million, and Boeing was awarded another $301 million contract in 2002 through the Space Launch Initiative, a joint research effort led by NASA and the Defense Department. The X-37 project was transferred to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in 2004 and became classified because of its military applications.

In 2006, the Air Force announced the development of its own variant of the space plane, known as the X-37B, designed to operate with an orbital speed of nearly 17,500 mph for up to 270 days.

The uncrewed test vehicle was nearly 30 feet long and had a wingspan of about 15 feet. Its max takeoff weight was 11,000 pounds, and it could accommodate payloads of up to 500 pounds.

Dubbed the "most advanced re-entry spacecraft," the X-37B program would focus on "risk reduction, experimentation, and operational concept development for reusable space vehicle technologies, in support of long-term developmental space objectives," then-Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne said in 2006.

Experimenting in space

The X-37B was tasked with multiple orbital missions, ranging from testing materials under the conditions of space to releasing a small satellite with its own experimental payloads.

The first X-37B vehicle was launched into orbit from Cape Canaveral in April 2010. The test vehicle spent 225 days in space and returned in December 2010 after conducting several orbit changes, though the data it collected during its maiden mission was classified.

In 2020, the X-37B's sixth mission involved toting a small service module into space for the first time. The FalconSat-8 was a small satellite developed by the US Air Force Academy carrying five experimental payloads. After a record-breaking 908 days in space, the X-37B completed its mission and landed at the Kennedy Space Center in November 2022.

Because much of the X-37B program is classified, the secrecy fueled speculation about the purpose of its mission sets, with some speculating that the space plane could be a weapons platform or used for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance from space.

Launched from a SpaceX rocket

The X-37B embarked on its seventh and current mission in December 2023, launching from the Falcon Heavy rocket, manufactured and launched by Elon Musk's SpaceX.

The Falcon Heavy is capable of launching payloads over 22,000 feet above Earth, so the X-37B was launched higher than any other spaceplane and flew in a highly elliptical orbit.

The purpose of its seventh mission was to experiment with "future space domain awareness technologies" and analyze the radiation effects on plant seeds during spaceflight, according to the Space Force.

Another key objective of the X-37B's current mission is to refine and execute novel maneuvers called aerobraking, using the drag of Earth's atmosphere to quickly shift into low orbit and safely dispose of service module components using minimal fuel. Changing orbit is a crucial capability should the spaceplane be used to upgrade US satellites or disable those of its adversaries.

Shrouded in secrecy

Though the image taken by its onboard camera shows just a small portion of the X-37B, few photos of the vehicle itself are available to the public.

A video montage posted on X in 2023 included a blink-and-you'll-miss-it moment of the X-37B separating from its service module during its sixth mission in 2020. The US military and Boeing also released the first photos from the same mission after it was completed in 2022.

Watch Falcon Heavy launch the USSF-52 mission to orbit https://t.co/zrk4JcZ9Pt

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) December 29, 2023

The US' X-37B vs. China's Shenlong

The X-37B is known for conducting tests and scientific experiments in space, but details about its military applications remain highly classified.

Operating space-based technology for decades, including the X-37B, has given the US an edge on the new frontier of orbital warfare. China follows closely behind the US with its own spacecraft known as the Shenlong, named after a dragon god in Chinese mythology.

Like the X-37B, much about the aircraft is still shrouded in mystery. The Shenlong was first announced in 2007, but China has publicly disclosed few details about the top-secret space plane program. There are no known images of the Shenlong, and among the few capabilities that are known about the unmanned vehicle is that it can deploy via a rocket, quickly maneuver in space, and deploy payloads into space, much like the X-37B.

During its first orbital flight in September 2020, the Shenlong remained in space for two days to release an object into orbit before returning to Earth.

Its second launch in August 2022 lasted considerably longer, operating in orbit for nine months. The Chinese spaceplane was reportedly practicing maneuvers to deploy and recover a subsatellite, operations that require similar techniques to capture an enemy satellite.

In December 2023, the Shenlong's third mission, which began just seven months after the second, reportedly had a similar objective, releasing an object from its cargo hold to test proximity operations. It completed its mission after nine months in space, returning to China this past September.

• A top shipbuilding executive said industry can build warships but isn't getting clear signals.
• Many big US Navy shipbuilding programs are delayed and over budget.
• Navy officials and shipbuilders have attributed the US' shipbuilding issues to both long-term and short-term problems.

A senior Huntington Ingalls Industries executive said the US Navy's mounting shipbuilding problems aren't because shipbuilders don't know what they're doing.

Instead, he pointed toward inconsistent demand and workforce issues that have drastically affected industry's capacity. Navy officials and analysts have raised some of these concerns as well.

Earlier this week, Tom Moore, senior vice president of government relations for major shipbuilder HII, addressed the widespread challenges facing the US Navy's top warship programs. HII builds Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, amphibious warships, and Ford-class aircraft carriers, among other vessels. Moore outlined how, historically, shipbuilders had delivered high numbers of vessels to the Navy and why that capability has decreased.

"Industry knows how to build ships at scale," he said, but when the demand went down after the Cold War, "we turned the spigot off, and we stopped demanding ships." The workforce shrank, and US industrial capacity dropped as the industry was hollowed out.

Experienced shipbuilders left for other work, backfilled by newer employees. Moore pointed to data showing that in the mid-1990s, the average electrical supervisor at Newport News and Ingalls Shipbuilding had been in the job for over 20 years. "Today, the average electronic supervisor has been there four-and-a-half years," he said. That's a lot of lost experience.

When looking into US shipbuilding challenges, industry insiders and analysts have also pointed to the Navy's inconsistent demand signals, which can involve ordering ships and then changing the order or scrapping planned programs altogether.

This is seen as a major problem for contractors, leaving industry partners in uncertain positions.

Broader economic issues, such as inflation, the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and competition for talent have exacerbated the problems affecting the industry.

The US Navy spends roughly $40 billion annually on shipbuilding projects, yet these projects are regularly behind schedule and battling rising costs.

Last year, a Department of the Navy review found that top programs, such as Block IV Virginia-class attack submarines, the Pentagon's priority Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine, the Constellation-class guided-missile frigate, and the next Ford-class carrier, were all severely delayed and over budget due to COVID's impact on the workforce and supply chain, "with industry reticent to invest."

The US Government Accountability Office said previously it had observed consistent issues, too, with the Navy's cost estimates, which "are often lacking and the assumptions unrealistic."

The Navy did not have new comments to share on shipbuilding problems at the time of publishing, pointing Business Insider instead to past remarks by service leaders. Previously, the Navy has often put the burden on industry, but it's a complex process.

Coming budget shifts within the Department of Defense amid changing priorities for a new administration may further impact the industry, though the plans remain unclear for the time being.

At a Hudson Institute event on Tuesday, HII's Moore highlighted potential solutions to the US shipbuilding problems, including a near-term reconditioning of the wide-ranging technical expertise and capabilities across the US military's industrial partners, recruiting employees with competitive pay, a long-term and consistent demand signal from the Navy about the warships it needs, and greater cost realism in contracting.

These ideas are not necessarily new when it comes to how to start addressing the US Navy's shipbuilding woes. Shipbuilders have noted the challenges of adjusting schedules to the Navy's demands.

The Navy has previously caused delays by overloading new projects with increasingly advanced technologies, putting strains on shipbuilding, such as when a host of new technologies bogged down the delivery and raised the cost of the first-in-class aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford. President Donald Trump recently criticized this aircraft carrier in a discussion of government waste.

Many of the concerns surrounding the building of more vessels and maintaining and repairing the existing fleet have been aggravated by the rise of China's shipbuilding empire. With a clear national investment in its naval forces and blurred lines between its commercial and military shipbuilding, China has become the largest navy in the world and the largest shipbuilder by capacity.

The possibility of a conflict with China, such as a possible Taiwan contingency, has increased anxiety that the US Navy doesn't have enough ships or ways to repair them after battle damage. The US has a more capable fighting force, but these issues are critical in naval warfare.

Although the shipbuilding process faces deep-seated issues, "the Navy builds the most powerful and capable warships on the planet in the US with American workers," a GAO official said last fall.

• ESPN and MLB are opting out of their TV deal early. The partnership will end with the 2025 season.
• ESPN's sports rights are of particular interest ahead of the fall launch of its flagship streamer.
• Analysts say the sports broadcaster is in a "position of strength" when it comes to negotiations.

ESPN and Major League Baseball are ending their TV deal. ESPN isn't sweating the divorce.

The companies announced on Thursday that they opted out of their contract early. The decision to end the deal with the 2025 season came after ESPN felt it was paying more for the rights to its Sunday slot than streamers Apple and Roku were for their games, a source close to ESPN told Business Insider.

Like other sports broadcasters and streamers, Disney's ESPN has been snapping up sports rights, from renewing its deal with the NBA last year to re-upping its college sports contract with the ACC. As it nears the fall launch of its flagship streamer, its decisions are publicly under the microscope. The company appears to be picking and choosing its battles carefully.

"Sports rights have gone up so much, at some point, there has to be some financial discipline," Jessica Reif Ehrlich, managing director at Bank of America Securities, told BI.

MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred wrote in a letter first published by The Athletic that he didn't think the league should reduce its fees for ESPN, which has exclusive games, unlike Apple and Roku's packages. He also wrote that the league was displeased with the lack of coverage ESPN provided outside game-time broadcasts. The MLB declined to comment on this story.

As the two prepare to part ways, some analysts told BI that the Disney property won't miss out on too much. ESPN has the rights to many sports and events outside baseball. In the next few months alone, the NBA and NHL playoffs, the Masters tournament in golf, and many college sports are coming.

"ESPN, generally, is in a position of strength," Reif Ehrlich said. She pointed to ESPN's distribution footprint, which includes traditional pay TV, sports-focused streaming bundles, and its own streaming services. "ESPN is a highly desirable platform for any sport."

ESPN is making power plays ahead of its streaming launch

MLB isn't the only league ESPN is playing hardball with.

The company recently walked away from its exclusive negotiation window with Formula 1 without a contract, Puck News reported. It is also in negotiations with the UFC, though no deal has yet been announced.

The source close to ESPN told BI that baseball has a long season, and its ratings haven't been as strong as some other sports.

Last year, the MLB said ESPN's Sunday Night Baseball program had an average viewership of about 1.5 million, the most the MLB had on the platform in over five years.

Under the MLB deal, ESPN could show baseball games on Sunday and some other events, as well as mostly regular season highlights on SportsCenter. It didn't have the rights to the World Series. With the restrictions on what ESPN could cover, the move to split was not shocking, said Rief Ehrlich.

As Disney works to launch ESPN's flagship, it is arguably more important that it picks and chooses the content it wants and becomes more selective, the analysts said.

ESPN is saving $600 million in programming expenses by cutting the MLB, according to a MoffettNathanson report published on February 21.

Of course, walking away from MLB could undermine ESPN's long-term ambition of being the streaming home for sports in the US.

"Considering the totality of Disney and ESPN's streaming ambitions, we believe an opt-out would likely be a mistake," Lightshed Partners wrote in a report earlier in February.

Still, the decision likely came down to whether Disney thought the MLB rights could meaningfully draw subscribers for its streaming services.

"Disney didn't value [the MLB] as a prime mover of acquisition," Joe Bonner, an analyst at Argus Research, told BI.

• Pentagon leadership plans to pull 8%, or $50 billion, from various projects to fund Trump's priorities.
• Exempt programs include nuclear modernization, missile defense, and Virginia-class submarines.
• The memo has triggered confusion about its implications for the Navy's crucial shipbuilding effort.

A $50 billion funding shift ordered by President Donald Trump's new defense secretary makes attack submarines a priority but raises questions for the rest of the Navy.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth intends to pull roughly 8% of the Biden administration's fiscal year 2026 budget from existing programs and shift them to Trump's recently designated priorities. The plan has led to confusion about what this could mean for a critical area needed to confront China: Navy shipbuilding.

Only 17 Pentagon program areas would be exempted, per a memo by Hegseth, including "Southwest Border Activities," Virginia-class attack submarines, and "executable" surface ships.

Building Navy warships takes years and requires consistent funding to private shipbuilders who employ the skilled technicians and industrial processes needed to build advanced warships. The directive leaves it unclear if the new administration wants to continue building aircraft carriers, ballistic missile submarines, frigates, amphibious assault ships, and other vessels.

"The Secretary of Defense is injecting a colossal amount of confusion and churn and uncertainty into the budgeting process," Bryan McGrath, a defense and national security consultant and retired Navy commander, told Business Insider in an interview on Thursday.

Details of the plans were reported this week, and Hegseth said publicly that the budget shifts are "refocusing" on "top line stuff" and eliminating "woke" projects.

For Navy shipbuilding — a roughly $40 billion industrial effort every year — Virginia-class attack subs are the only bright spot. But Virginia-class submarines are facing yearslong construction delays along with many other warship classes that are essential to building a larger and more modern fleet.

Attack subs and budget questions

Virginia-class submarines were the only Navy vessels specifically identified as a priority in the memo.

The Virginia-class attack subs Trump's Pentagon is shielding have long been seen as a critical capability for countering China, a US rival with a substantial surface fleet and long-range missiles that can threaten US ships.

US submarines are difficult to track and are less threatened by Chinese ballistic missiles, Tom Shugart, an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and retired Navy submarine officer, said in a call with BI on Thursday.

The memo did not mention plans for the new Columbia-class subs, an important part of the already underway nuclear modernization process.

The ballistic missile subs, known as SSBNs or "boomers," will carry Trident II missiles armed with nuclear warheads. These subs are harder to target and destroy compared to silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles or bombers, helping to preserve US second-strike capabilities.

The Columbia-class submarines are likely to be included within the "nuclear modernization" category, Shugart said, as they are perhaps the most important part of nuclear modernization.

For surface vessels, only ships identified as "executable surface ships" are free from budget cuts — raising questions about what "executable" means. Multiple Navy shipbuilding programs are plagued by production delays, such as new Constellation-class frigates and the Ford-class aircraft carriers Trump recently called out in a discussion of waste and fraud. Uncertain budgets are a factor that has driven ship delays and rising costs.

Shipbuilding is measured in years. Shipyard workers began construction on the second Ford-class carrier in 2015. It's finally slated to join the fleet later this year.

Shugart and McGrath expressed confusion about what could qualify as an "executable surface ship." The term could include ships like the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, which shipyards are actively manufacturing with firm designs and timelines.

It likely "means surface ships that are buildable with the industrial base as we have it today," said Shugart. Warships like the new class of frigate that aren't on hot production lines could be in trouble.

It does not say "surface combatants;" it says "surface ships," Shugart noted. "I'm not sure what that means with respect to aircraft carriers," he said. "It may also apply to surface auxiliaries, like oilers and tankers."

The Navy declined to comment on the priorities memo released by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which didn't respond to BI's request on Friday for clarity on what an "executable" ship means or the confusion the memo has caused.

Dramatic financial "refocusing" risks difficult battles with Congress, suggesting the money may come from elsewhere.

McGrath said that the Pentagon leadership's planned reallocations appear poised to reduce readiness in more mundane yet critical areas of military funding, including money for spare parts, equipment maintenance, and servicemember quality of life; the Navy spends $14.5 billion annually to maintain its ships.

That approach could include things like barracks renovations, improved food, and the availability of decent childcare for parents in uniform, all factors that can affect troop morale and retention rates. Readiness woes could be exacerbated by cuts to the Navy's workforce of civilian experts who repair ships.

"That money is almost certainly going to be offered up for some portion of it," said McGrath. "Because when you take core readiness, shipbuilding, submarines and weapons, munitions, and you say 'You can't cut from those things,' there's just not a lot of fat there to go after."

Proposed budget moves are likely to be reviewed by the secretary of defense's office first, McGrath noted, and in some cases may be reallocated back to where they came from in the first place, making cut identification a crushing drill for the hard-working staff officers in the Pentagon.

Generally speaking, "it's a terrible way to run a railroad," he said.

• "Love Is Blind" season eight features singles from the Twin Cities area.
• Mason and Meg shared a connection in the pods but didn't get engaged on the show.
• A new teaser for the rest of the season shows they may have gotten back together.

Warning: Major spoilers ahead for the first nine episodes of "Love Is Blind" season eight.

"Love Is Blind" is a Netflix series that has resulted in at least a few marriages — but not everyone meets their beloved.

The show's eighth season features singles from the Twin Cities area, bringing the franchise back to the heartland of the United States. Since it first launched in 2020, Netflix has spun off "Love Is Blind" into multiple international franchises and a key part of its unscripted series business.

This season, five couples make it out of the pods and on to their engagement trip. In a twist, a few couples from the pods — including 33-year-old cinematographer Mason and 31-year-old oncology nurse Meg — decide not to get engaged. At the beginning of episode six, the two seemingly split up.

Because they didn't get engaged, Meg and Mason don't feature in the three new episodes that aired this week, which focused on the couples' getaway and meeting each others' families back home. However, the new teaser at the end of episode nine shows that they'll be back this season, and heavily hints that their relationship may not have ended for good.

Mason's multiple connections affect his relationship with Meg

Mason and Meg hit it off on their first date in the pods. Mason, however, has another connection with 28-year-old artist Madison, who in turn is also dating 29-year-old commercial real estate broker Alex in the pods.

In episode two, Mason continues to bond with both Meg and Madison. In that episode, Meg learns about Mason's connection with Madison and starts to worry about their connection. Meanwhile, in episode three, Madison continues to bond with Alex — and without naming names, Mason essentially tells Alex that Madison is his top pick, not Meg.

Things start to come to a head later in that episode when Madison and Mason talk about the fact that they're both dating other people. During that date, Madison tells him that Meg is focused solely on Mason.

On their following date in episode four, Mason tells Madison that he's committed to her. She asks if he feels like she put an ultimatum on him, which he denies, and then thanks him for telling her. Later, outside the pods, Madison says that Mason is her number two. On a date with Alex later in the episode, Madison says that she intends to pursue a relationship with him. In episode five, she breaks up with Mason.

Later, in episode five, Mason tells Meg that he "validated Madison," but it ultimately "did not feel right."

"I clearly said it to the wrong person," he says.

Meg, however, is skeptical and asks Mason if he's now choosing her by default because Madison dumped him for Alex. In response, he tells her that she was always his first choice.

Their date continues in episode six. Mason reiterates his feelings, but Meg says that she won't be able to shake the doubt that he chose her because Madison became unavailable. She ends her relationship with Mason amicably, wishing him well.

"I feel a lot of regret," Mason says in a confessional. "I should never have validated Madison over Meg, and that's something that I'm gonna have to live with."

Ultimately, Madison and Alex don't get engaged in the pods either, after having a disagreement over Madison's breakup with Mason.

Meg and Mason don't appear to follow each other on Instagram

As of the season eight premiere, Meg and Mason don't seem to follow each other on Instagram. Mason also doesn't appear to follow Madison or Alex. Meg doesn't appear to follow Madison, nor vice versa.

Both Meg and Mason have posted about the new season on social media. Mason even poked fun at getting dumped by Madison over a plate of pancakes.

Despite not getting engaged, Mason and Meg's time on the show doesn't appear to be over. In a teaser for the next batch of episodes shown at the end of episode nine, Meg and Mason reunite with other participants in a pod squad meet-up — and crucially, they seem to arrive together.

"The second I got my phone, I was like, 'How's Mason?'" Meg recounts.

"He's a huge liar," Madison, now with bright pink hair, emotionally says. It's unclear if she's replying directly to Meg in the context of that conversation, or referring to someone else since she doesn't say Mason's name.

They're also not divulging anything about their current relationship status in interviews with press, though what they have said doesn't rule out a reunion.

When reflecting on the love triangle and her "Love Is Blind" experience, Meg told Glamour that she's "very happy with how life has transpired since the show ended."

Mason, for his part, told Vulture that Meg was "the clear person" for him and that he knew all along the two were "super, super compatible." He even compared their romance to the movie "Moulin Rouge," calling their relationship "the perfect love story that should have been, but ends in tragedy."

Dramatic? A bit. But it's also very much the kind of thing a guy who was still trying to make amends to his current girlfriend for his treatment of her might say.

Meg also seems to be (maybe inadvertently) dropping some unsubtle hints on social media. Most tellingly, she liked (and then unliked) a comment on one of her posts where someone said they wanted Meg and Mason to be the "Zack and Bliss" of this season.

Zack and Bliss are the fan-favorite season four couple who got engaged post-pods after Zach initially proposed to another contestant instead of her. They ultimately married in the season finale, and went on to have a child together.

At this point, it's impossible to tell for certain whether Meg and Mason got back together outside the pods. We'll just need to tune into the next batch of episodes and hear them explain what happened during the pod meetup.

The first nine episodes of "Love Is Blind" season eight are now streaming on Netflix.

• Lawyers for Charlie Javice on Friday moved for a mistrial in her fraud case.
• Defense argued her right to a fair trial was "compromised" after opening statements were shortened.
• Prosecutors allege Javice defrauded JPMorgan Chase before it bought her student aid startup, Frank.

Lawyers for Charlie Javice on Friday moved for a mistrial in the fraud case against her, arguing her right to a fair trial had been "irreparably compromised."

Her lawyers argued that Javice's right to a fair trial was compromised when the judge unexpectedly ordered her defense counsel's opening statement to be shortened, which they called a violation of her Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.

"Our motion for a mistrial was based on the fundamental principle that Ms. Javice has a constitutional right to a fair trial, which includes adequate time for her counsel to present a full and complete opening statement," a representative for Javice's legal team told Business Insider. "The abrupt and unexplained reduction in our time significantly hindered our ability to provide the jury with a clear and comprehensive presentation of the facts and legal arguments central to this case."

In addition to having the defense's opening statement cut short, Javice's lawyers argue that the court misstated jury instructions regarding the elements of wire fraud, which prejudiced them against the defendant.

The court told the jury that, in order to convict on the wire and bank fraud charges facing Javice, the government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Javice made intentional false and misleading statements with the intention to deceive, her lawyers say.

However, her lawyers argued in their motion for a mistrial that the court did not adequately inform the jury panel about a key element of the law, which requires the government to prove any false statements amounted to material misrepresentations — a higher legal standard requiring the prosecutors to prove a reasonable person would have been convinced to act due to the false claims and that the false claims were relied on when deciding to enter the deal.

"To guarantee Ms. Javice's Fifth Amendment rights, a mistrial is the only appropriate remedy," the motion from Javice's attorneys says.

The mistrial motion stems from the trial's opening statements, which began Thursday in the fraud case against Javice and her Olivier Amar, who prosecutors say defrauded JPMorgan Chase before it bought the student aid startup.

Javice and Amar are charged with bank fraud, securities fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud after prosecutors say they exaggerated the customer base of their student loan-focused fintech startup in an effort to trick the bank into buying it.

JPMorgan Chase bought Frank in 2021 for $175 million after Javice and Amar said the company had more than 4 million users — a number that prosecutors now argue had been artificially inflated.

Representatives for the US Attorney's Office Southern District of New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

• Paloma Partners told investors this past fall it would take time to meet $1.2 billion in redemptions.
• It's pulling $600 million from hedge funds it's backed, including the quant firm Aquatic Capital.
• The $1.7 billion hedge fund has struggled with performance, gaining just 2.5% in 2024.

The multistrategy hedge fund Paloma Partners is drumming up cash to repay its departing investors — but it's going to take some time, and not everyone is coming along for the ride.

Facing $1.2 billion in redemption requests, Paloma told its investors this past fall it would need more time to liquidate harder-to-sell assets and repay them in full. Now, more details are emerging about what Paloma is putting into the special-purpose vehicle created to house those assets.

As part of the payoff plan, Paloma is set to exit its investment in Aquatic Capital, one of the buzziest quant fund launches in recent years, said four people familiar with the matter who asked to remain anonymous to discuss private information. Paloma seeded Aquatic, which was founded by the Citadel alum Jonathan Graham in 2019. It has $360 million invested with Aquatic, which is subject to lock-up terms and can be redeemed in tranches over the next couple of years, the people said.

Paloma has also put into the special-purpose vehicle — called Dove — a portfolio of commercial-mortgage-backed securities valued at $240 million, which are set to be sold off over time, people familiar with the matter said. The portfolio was previously managed as a separate account by Cannae Portfolio Advisors, a credit fund that has managed Paloma money since 2009.

A Paloma representative declined to comment.

Paloma is one of the oldest and most venerated hedge funds. Founded by Donald Sussman in the 1980s, it is best known for seeding the quant giant D. E. Shaw, as well as its bets on LMR Partners, Squarepoint Capital, and Sona Asset Management.

While Paloma is off to a strong start this year — it's up 2.5% through mid-February, a person familiar with the performance said — the firm has struggled with performance in recent years and has overhauled its C-suite.

The fund brought in the hedge fund veteran Neil Chriss, formerly of Millennium and Hutchin Hill Capital, in 2023 to lead the firm. But he lasted less than a year. He was replaced by Ravi Singh, an alum of Credit Suisse's asset management division and Goldman Sachs, where he held leadership positions in prime brokerage, equity derivatives, and equities risk.

Paloma gained just 2.5% in 2024, which was generally a bumper year for hedge fund managers, and it has averaged 3.6% over the past three full years, according to performance figures seen by Business Insider. A composite hedge fund index returned 6.6% over the past three years, the industry research firm PivotalPath found.

Paloma's assets under management have fallen to $1.7 billion, down from about $4 billion when Chriss took the helm in 2023.

Assets in Dove to be sold over time

With redemption requests piling up, Paloma told its limited partners in November it would be able to pay them only 30% in up-front cash and the rest over time as it liquidated holdings, The Wall Street Journal reported. Ultimately, Paloma paid half the $1.2 billion balance in cash, with the remaining $600 million to be distributed as it winds down assets in Dove, the people familiar with the matter said. Paloma will not charge fees on the vehicle, which is being administered by PwC.

Systematic trading outfits, reliant on technology and data, typically require years of patience to yield results, but Aquatic has nonetheless gotten off to a slow start. It launched in 2019 with $500 million in commitments from Paloma, Bloomberg reported, and its assets later hit $1.5 billion with capital from investors including the Teacher Retirement System of Texas.

Aquatic lost 3.3% between September 2023 and September 2024, according to returns from the Teacher Retirement System of Texas, a public pension. Quant hedge funds were among the industry's best performers in 2024, gaining 14.2% on average, according to PivotalPath's equity quant index.

Aquatic did not respond to requests for comment.

Cannae, which specializes in structured products, was spun out of Paloma in 2020 and raised external capital. It continued to manage a structured-credit portfolio for Paloma through a separate account, composed primarily of commercial-mortgage-backed securities. Commercial real estate has taken a beating in recent years, and with many bonds trading below par, liquidating holdings would in many cases mean locking in losses.

While assets have fallen and Paloma has had to pull capital from external managers, the fund isn't finished allocating. Geoffrey Lauprete, the ex-chief investment officer of WorldQuant, is expected to launch his own fund later this year with backing from Paloma.

Paloma has also revamped its C-suite. Apart from Singh, it has recently hired new executives to manage finance, risk, operations, and marketing. Michael DeAddio, the president and chief operating officer of WorldQuant until 2020, joined in December, and Louis Molinari, the global head of capital introduction and hedge fund consulting at Barclays until 2024, joined as the firm's chief marketing officer this month.

Correction: February 21, 2025 — An earlier version of this story misstated that Blackstone was an investor in Aquatic. Blackstone is not an Aquatic investor.

• My friends and I spent a spring break in college an hour north of the madness of Miami Beach.
• We embraced a "coastal grandmother" aesthetic and hung out with retirees.
• Although untraditional for college students, we had fun relaxing and avoiding the Miami party scene

Bright and early on a Saturday morning in March two years ago, I boarded a flight southbound to Florida with hundreds of other college students.

As a group, we screamed "spring break" — wearing various cuts and colors of college gear and the joyous expressions that can only be attributed to a week away from school stress.

But when we reached the Sunshine State and most of my fellow passengers headed to Miami Beach for drinking and debauchery, my friends and I didn't go with them.

Instead, we headed about an hour north of Miami toward the quiet oceanside community of Hillsboro Beach for our own relaxing spring break.

We'd chosen to skip the ragers and bad behavior associated with spring break, especially spring break in Miami. In the past, Miami Beach has even launched a campaign "breaking up" with spring-break tourists and enforcing new restrictions to crack down on destructive partying.

We went to a party school and saw plenty of that back home. Now, we were ready to relax with retirees on our last spring break before college graduation.

We leaned into the laid-back vibes for our whole trip and made friends with retirees

The small beach town we stayed in seemed mostly populated by retirees in their 60s. Even fellow tourists we saw visiting the local businesses rarely seemed to be under 50 years old.

So, when my friends and I showed up to check into our hotel, we received more than a few confused glances.

We got "Are you sure you're in the right place?" and "Are you heading to Miami?" more than once, but when we explained our plan for a relaxing getaway, we were often met with understanding.

We embraced the "coastal grandmother" aesthetic with our white linen shirts and floppy beach hats and spent hours reading on the beach.

When we weren't soaking up the sun, we played card games and Bananagrams and ventured into the (very tame) downtown area for dinner.

Since we slept steps away from a quiet beach, we traded in late, hungover mornings for early alarms to watch the sunrise.

On many of these mornings, we were joined by a new friend: a retired woman who was traveling alone and missing her grandkids back home.

We enjoyed the sunrises together and watched local conservation workers on ATVs protecting hatching sea turtles as they migrated to the water.

If we were hungover on a crowded Miami Beach, we would've missed out on forming this unlikely friendship that crossed generational divides.

Throughout our trip, we spent time with many kind, older tourists and hospitality workers. Once they realized we weren't obnoxious, havoc-wreaking spring breakers, they were more than willing to share their time and stories with us.

By the time I headed home, I knew we'd made the right choice

After a week in our little slice of heaven, it was time to head back.

In our Uber to the airport at 5 a.m., our driver told us he'd come straight from a night of driving around Miami partygoers — and he had horror stories.

He told us he was surprised we'd opted for an alternative spring break, but he understood. He'd seen many arrests, sick students, and lost young people on spring break throughout his driving career.

When we boarded our plane north, we were reunited with our peers, who had the clammy, tired looks only a hangover can bring.

Reinvigorated from our week of R&R, my friends and I listened to their wild tales from Miami while exchanging knowing glances: We'd made the right choice.

Our spring break perhaps wasn't traditional for college kids, but it was just what we needed.

This story was originally published on March 11, 2024, and most recently updated on February 21, 2025.

• The value of Amazon's investments in Anthropic have soared.
• Amazon has agreed to invest $8 billion in Anthropic so far.
• Anthropic and Amazon have a close partnership that includes an arrangement to use AWS's AI chips.

Amazon is seeing massive gains from its investment in Anthropic.

The cloud giant estimated the fair value of its stake in Anthropic at $14 billion at the end of December, according to a recent regulatory filing. That's up from $8 billion, the filing shows.

That means Amazon's investments have soared roughly 75% since it started backing the AI startup in 2023, for a cool $6 billion gain on paper.

Amazon first invested $1.25 billion in Anthropic in September 2023 and another $2.75 billion in the first quarter of 2024. Late last year, Amazon put in another $1.3 billion, and also agreed to invest an additional $2.7 billion by the end of 2025, the filing stated.

Amazon's spokesperson declined to comment.

In the filing, Amazon said it used convertible notes to invest in Anthropic. These are classified as "available-for-sale," an accounting term generally denoting securities expected to be held for more than a year. Convertible notes can be exchanged for equity in the future, depending on how they are structured and certain thresholds.

There are a lot of assumptions baked into Amazon's fair value estimates. This is common for investments in startups, which are often young businesses that could either succeed or fail over the long term. Amazon's filing classified the convertible notes as "Level 3" assets, which use "valuations based on unobservable inputs reflecting our own assumptions, consistent with reasonably available assumptions made by other market participants."

"These valuations require significant judgment," the company added.

Anthropic is one of the leading AI startups, best known for its Claude family of models and related services. The OpenAI rival is currently raising money at a $60 billion valuation, a significant jump from the $18 billion value it saw last year, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Amazon has built a close relationship with Anthropic in recent years. In addition to the funding, Anthropic agreed to use Amazon's cloud computing services and AI chips. Last year, Anthropic said it plans to use a new AI supercomputer made up of Amazon-made chip clusters.

Amazon's total investment value in public and private companies was $22.1 billion as of the end of December, the filing said. Publicly traded companies, such as Rivian, accounted for just $4.6 billion. Among the private companies Amazon invested in are Scale AI, Hugging Face, and X-energy, according to Pitchbook.

Do you work at Amazon? Got a tip?

Contact the reporter Eugene Kim via the encrypted messaging apps Signal or Telegram (+1-650-942-3061) or email ([email protected]). Reach out using a nonwork device. Check out Insider's source guide for other tips on sharing information securely.

• BI obtained internal documents showing some of the teams and roles that were hardest hit by Meta's cuts.
• The data shows teams under Tom Alison, Facebook's head, had 335 job cuts.
• Meta began cutting thousands of jobs last week, which has affected roughly 5% of its workforce.

Newly obtained internal documents show some of the teams that were hit the hardest in Meta's recent job cuts.

The tech giant began cutting thousands of jobs last week, which has affected roughly 5% of its workforce.

Business Insider obtained 30 records sent to impacted workers along with their separation agreements, which offered a picture of how Meta is reshaping its workforce.

The materials include the number of employees affected, broken down by Meta's business groups, their teams, and their job titles. They also list the vice president or senior manager to whom each group reports. Additional records may exist, but BI has not been able to verify any.

Meta said in the documents that it provided this information under federal law to help affected employees decide whether to sign their separation agreements.

The records list 3,115 employees hit by the cuts, a figure that appears to represent a significant majority of the 5% of employees — equivalent to about 3,600 workers — who were laid off.

Among the 30 group documents reviewed by BI, the teams reporting to Tom Alison, the head of Facebook, saw the highest impact, with 335 employees affected.

The next-largest cuts came from Meta's Horizon team, which works on its virtual reality platform. A total of 244 employees were affected in the group, reporting to Vishal Shah, the vice president of Metaverse under the Reality Labs division — the unit overseeing Meta's VR and augmented reality efforts.

Other heavily impacted teams included those under Carmine Arabia, the vice president of devices at Reality Labs, where 195 roles in business analytics, engineering, technical sourcing, and technical program management were eliminated.

The group previously led by Lori Goler, Meta's former head of people, saw 189 administrative roles cut.

Additionally, 186 roles tied to Meta's data center strategy, design, engineering, and construction teams were eliminated. The group reported to Rachel Peterson, Meta's vice president for data center strategy.

Meanwhile, the organization under Peng Fan, its vice president of engineering for monetization, saw 180 cuts, primarily software engineers.

Fan recently said in an internal memo that Meta planned to expedite the hiring process for machine learning engineers through February and March. The move came as Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the company would backfill roles cut in its effort to target "low performers."

The group reporting to Alex Himel, the vice president of augmented reality, had 141 employees cut; they mostly worked on wearables.

Meta declined to comment.

Two of the seven groups most affected by the cuts are tied to Meta's Reality Labs unit, which was recently reorganized and positioned as a core part of the business.

In a November memo obtained by BI, Meta's chief technology officer, Andrew Bosworth, called 2025 a make-or-break year for the company's metaverse ambitions.

Bosworth said this year was critical for proving whether the metaverse would be a visionary feat or a "legendary misadventure."

Editor's note: We've updated this story to further clarify that the data referenced in the 30 documents is a portion of all the data that may be available.

Are you a Meta employee? Got insight to share? Contact the reporter Jyoti Mann via email at [email protected] or via Signal at jyotimann.11. Reach out from a nonwork device.

• I spent about $7,700 taking my family of five to Disneyland for three nights this past winter.
• Although they get expensive, Disneyland trips have become a family tradition for us.
• For us, staying on the property and booking three nights instead of two was worth the added cost.

Disneyland has always held a special place in my heart.

I grew up in Orange County, California, and every summer night, my family watched the Disneyland fireworks from our back patio.

I visited the parks as a teen, then with my wife when we first got married. Once our son arrived, visiting the Disney parks became our family tradition.

Eventually, he got "too old" to hang out with mom and dad. For many years, my wife and I continued to visit Disney parks just the two of us, but we missed sharing the experience with loved ones.

Now that our son has his a wife and child, though, we've brought back the tradition of visiting the parks as a family — and Disneyland has become one of my favorite places once more.

Winter trips to Disney have become a new family tradition

For us, December Disney visits have become a fairly new holiday tradition.

For the second year in a row, we had our son, his wife, and their kid fly from Washington state to California so we could treat them to a Disney trip. It's a treat for us, too, because we get to spend time with them and our 3-year-old granddaughter.

My wife and I are snowbirds, so the trip is also a chance to see our family in the winter without having to face the colder temperatures and snow in Washington.

We always try to learn from our past trips

Last time, we did a two-night Disney trip but it felt too short. This time, I booked four days and three nights instead.

The extra night allowed us to check into the hotel and enjoy its amenities without taking too much time away from the parks. It was worth the added cost.

On our last trip, we booked a Costco Travel package to save money. This time, I chose to book directly through Disney so I could better customize our longer trip.

Although staying on Disney property can be more expensive than staying at nearby hotels, it comes with several benefits, like getting early access to the parks (and a short walk to get to them).

So, we stayed on the property again this year. I wanted to book a two-room suite at Disneyland Hotel, but none were available when I made my reservation in August.

Instead, I reserved two connecting rooms for $4,456. However, just three weeks before our trip I checked the Disney website and saw a suite was available.

First, I'm glad I kept regularly checking the Disney site — you never know when someone else could cancel and the room you want will open up. This could work for hard-to-get meal reservations, too.

Second, I'm grateful I called guest services to change my reservation. The staff member even helped find me a promotion that would save me over $1,300 on the listed suite rate.

In the end, our stay cost $4,571 — so I paid just $115 more to upgrade to the suite.

The trip is never cheap, but it's worth it for us

After booking the hotel, we also paid for parking for two cars ($240), two-day tickets with admission for one park a day for four adults and one child ($1,630), food, drinks, and souvenirs.

All totaled, our trip was about $7,700. This time, I was also able to cover about $1,100 of the charges using rewards dollars I'd earned with my Disney Visa card.

Throughout the trip, we were able to just enjoy time as a family whether we were going on rides, watching a parade, or swimming at our hotel.

It was a lot of money, but the memories we made once again made the cost worth it. I'm confident we'll be back as we continue to cement this as our family tradition.

• The IRS fired probationary workers this week, claiming they weren't critical to tax filing season.
• The agency had already been struggling in recent years to keep up with tax return processing.
• One expert said there's no way to cut a large number of workers without affecting filing season.

Your tax return may languish on an empty desk at the Internal Revenue Service this season after the agency began firing workers this week.

An internal IRS email viewed by Business Insider said the agency would terminate probationary workers — typically employees who have been at the agency for less than a year — who were not "critical" to tax filing season.

Tax experts and IRS employees told BI they expected the terminations to result in delayed tax refunds, slower customer service, and a backlog in paperwork processing. Some spoke with BI under the condition of anonymity.

Natasha Sarin, a professor at Yale Law School, said there's "no way, in the middle of filing season, to cut a substantial number of IRS employees without having an impact on filing season," adding that it's an "all hands on deck" time at the agency.

Many Americans still file paper tax returns, a human resources worker at the IRS said, adding: "If there's not anyone there to process them, it's just going to be sitting."

A former Treasury official likened the situation to a business "eliminating your entire accounts receivable department," adding: "No business would say we have no interest in collecting the revenue that's due to us."

The IRS did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House National Economic Council, told reporters on Thursday that the estimated 3,500 firings "is a small number and probably you can get bigger, especially as we improve the IT at the IRS." He added that not all IRS employees working on taxes were "fully occupied."

In the wake of the pandemic, the IRS struggled with a backlog of millions of returns, taking months to process them, which caused economic hardship for some taxpayers.

Sarin, who served as a counselor to Janet Yellen when Yellen was the Treasury secretary, said that the terminations could throw the IRS back into the "dark ages." Taxpayers should be concerned about whether they'll be able to get in touch with the IRS, whether refunds will be processed in a timely manner, and whether the IRS website will malfunction during tax season.

A fired IRS worker said: "The long-term ramifications of this will be felt for decades."

They added: "There will continue to be processing delays due to incredibly outdated systems, and there will not be supported free filing for Americans due to budget cuts and lobbying by major tax software players."

"It's just going to slow the IRS down," one IRS worker who still has a job at the agency said, adding: "It's a shame that all the progress is going to reverse."

They were referencing increased funding from the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act, which was meant to mitigate staffing issues. Bolstered by the funding, hiring at the IRS in recent months focused on tax-evasion and fraud-detection staff.

Vanessa Williamson, a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution and the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, said during a press call on Thursday that the expected terminations could "disproportionately affect enforcement."

"When you underpay and understaff the IRS, the agency doesn't have the power or the resources it needs to go after wealthy tax evaders with their high-priced lawyers," Williamson said.

"It's going to be incredibly harmful to efficiency at the IRS," the former Treasury official told BI. If the agency can't keep up with existing efficiency programs — like using artificial intelligence to target audits better — compliance will be less effective, they said.

Over the past couple of weeks, various federal agencies have fired their probationary employees as part of President Donald Trump's efforts to slash government spending by reducing the federal workforce. BI previously spoke with over half a dozen fired workers at agencies, including the US Department of Agriculture and the Department of Energy, who said they're planning to fight their terminations.

"We're not going to take this lying down," Melanie Mattox Green, a fired US Forest Service worker, told BI. "We all love our work, and we're planning on fighting and getting our jobs back."

The IRS HR employee said that these terminations, coupled with the federal hiring freeze, could put the IRS behind on its functions into next year.

"If you have filed, or will file a tax return, you are going to feel an impact," they said.

Are you a federal worker with a story or information to share? Contact these reporters via Signal at madisonhoff.06, julianakaplan.33, and asheffey.97, or via email at [email protected], [email protected] and [email protected].

• Rivian CEO RJ Scaringe addressed weak guidance for 2025, citing uncertainty.
• Scaringe said tariffs and EV credit removal could impact pricing and the shift to electrification.
• President Donald Trump has threatened tariffs on Canada and Mexico.

Despite beating expectations with its fourth-quarter earnings release on Thursday, Rivian offered weak guidance for 2025 — and that's because of looming tariffs on automakers and eliminating EV credits.

"There's certainly a lot of uncertainty," Rivian CEO RJ Scaringe said in a CNBC interview published Thursday.

Scaringe said the company's 2025 outlook provides a "comprehensive view" of what could happen regarding tariffs and consumer incentives for purchasing EVs. He said tariffs and the removal of consumer incentives like the tax credit for new EVs "both ultimately have very similar effects."

The EV company released its fourth-quarter earnings report on Thursday, doubling Wall Street's expectations for gross profit with a reported $170 million. It also outperformed forecasts in earnings per share and revenue.

However, its 2025 guidance fell short with projections of vehicle deliveries between 46,000 and 51,000. The high end of that estimate falls below Rivian's 2024 total deliveries of 52,000 EVs, and the midpoint of the range also misses Wall Street's estimate of about 55,000 vehicles.

In a previous interview with Business Insider, Scaringe shrugged off President Donald Trump's planned rollback of EV incentives, including the $7,500 tax incentive for EV purchases. He said although the EV industry faced a "high degree of uncertainty" in the next few years, Trump's plans to eliminate parts of the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act were "less impactful than people believe."

"I don't think removing a $7,500 credit is going to change the end state," he told BI. "The end state's still clear. It's still going to be electric."

Scaringe reaffirmed in the Thursday interview that his view that "the entirety of the automotive world is going to convert to electric" hasn't changed. The rate of that is still a question mark, though, and depends on how quickly the industry can create options for consumers.

Tariffs might not help either.

Trump shared plans on Tuesday to impose auto tariffs of around 25%. He's also threatened tariffs on imported goods from Canada and Mexico, which some analysts said could add an average of $2,700 to new car prices in the US.

While Rivian assembles its vehicles in the US, Scaringe said a number of tier 2 and tier 3 suppliers exist outside the country, and higher costs due to tariffs will "translate into pricing." Removing tax credits, which help make vehicles more affordable, would have a similar effect on pricing, Scaringe said.

"In both cases, they ultimately are going to impact a man and they ultimately are going to impact the rate at which consumers, you know, shift towards electrification," Scaringe said.

Scaringe said that the company is focusing on factors in its control, like cost efficiency, software improvements, and production of R2, which is set to launch in the first half of next year.

"We're certainly building, you know, building the resilience to respond to whatever ultimately happens in terms of trade policy and consumer credits," Scaringe said in the interview.

Rivian did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

• "1923" and "Reacher" both returned for new seasons this week.
• Movies that came out in 2024, like "Sonic the Hedgehog 3" and "Nosferatu," are now streaming.
• True-crime fans can check out Netflix's new docuseries about Gabby Petito's death.

We're officially closing in on the end of awards season.

The Screen Actors Guild Awards are streaming on Netflix this week, and there are new streaming options for viewers prepping for the Oscars.

New to streaming is the 2024 Oscar-nominated "Nosferatu" remake, which got a nod for special effects makeup artist David White's stunning work on Count Orlok (plus three other nominations).

Another 2024 theatrical release, "Sonic the Hedgehog 3," has also made its way to streaming.

On the TV side, "Reacher" and "Yellowstone" prequel "1923" both returned for new seasons, while new series like "A Thousand Blows" and "Suits LA" made their debut.

Here's a complete rundown of all the best movies, shows, and documentaries to stream this weekend, broken down by what kind of entertainment you're looking for.

"Reacher" is back.

The popular action crime series, starring Alan Ritchson as a former US Army veteran turned vigilante, returned for its third season.

Streaming on: Prime Video

For more action thriller vibes, you can check out "Elevation."

The postapocalyptic tale takes place in a world where apex predators called Reapers have forced humanity to live in small communities 8,000 feet or higher above sea level to stay safe.

"Captain America: Brave New World" star Anthony Mackie plays a widowed dad trying to save his son's life.

Streaming on: Max

For something family-friendly, stream "Sonic the Hedgehog 3."

The third installment of the surprise hit film franchise based on the video-game series sees Jim Carrey play dual roles — the returning villain Ivo Robotnik and Robotnik's grandfather, Gerald.

Streaming on: Paramount+

Fans of true-crime can stream "American Murder: Gabby Petito."

The new docuseries explores the 2021 death of Gabby Petito, a 22-year-old aspiring influencer who vanished while on a road trip with her fiancé, Brian Laundrie.

Streaming on: Netflix

Try "Zero Day" if you want a show you can speed through.

The new drama, with headlining stars Robert de Niro, Lizzy Caplan, Angela Bassett, and Dan Stevens, is Netflix's latest entry into the prestige TV game.

The political thriller is a quick watch with only six episodes.

Streaming on: Netflix

The SAG Awards are on this weekend.

The 2025 awards season has been a messy one, and it'll finally end with the Academy Awards on March 2.

The SAG Awards, although less prestigious than the Oscars, are the last major awards show that might indicate who the frontrunners are before Hollywood's biggest night.

Streaming on: Netflix

"A Thousand Blows" is a drama inspired by a true story.

The new series from the creator of "Peaky Blinders" focuses on the gritty bare-knuckle boxing scene in London's East End in the 1880s. It's also inspired by a true story.

Streaming on: Hulu

Horror fans can finally stream "Nosferatu" at home.

Robert Eggers' reimagining of the horror classic stars Lily-Rose Depp as the tormented Ellen Hutter, Nicholas Hoult as her devoted husband Thomas, and Bill Skarsgård as Count Orlok — the titular nosferatu who's obsessed with having her.

(Bonus: Tubi has the original "Nosferatu.")

Streaming on: Peacock

"1923" returns this weekend.

The "Yellowstone" prequel, starring Harrison Ford and Helen Mirren, returns for its second season on Sunday.

Streaming on: Paramount+

The "Suits" spinoff is also premiering.

Stephen Amell stars in "Suits LA," a show set within the same universe as the USA Network hit "Suits."

We'll keep tuning in, at least until Gabriel Macht's eventual appearance as fan-favorite Harvey Spector from the original series.

Streaming on: Peacock

• Apple is rolling back Advanced Data Protection from iPhones in the UK starting Friday.
• Without ADP, Apple and the UK government could decrypt iCloud data.
• The UK had issued a "secret order" for Apple to create a data backdoor, US congressmen warned.

Apple's highest level of security for iCloud data is set to be removed from iPhones in the UK in a rare move for the tech giant known for prioritizing privacy for its users.

Beginning Friday, new users in the UK won't have access to Advanced Data Protection (ADP), a tool that enables end-to-end encryption on devices. By removing it, they'll no longer have the option to make data only viewable by the account holder.

The data stored on iCloud could become accessible to Apple and the UK government. The decision comes after the UK government issued a "secret order" for Apple to create a backdoor to its users' data across the globe, US congressmen said in a letter to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, the Washington Post was first to report.

In a statement to Business Insider, Apple said it was "gravely disappointed" that it had to remove the protections for UK users.

Apple and the UK government could eventually be able to decrypt users' data, including photos, iCloud Drive, notes, and more. The iPhone maker made it clear, however, that the move is not creating a backdoor.

"As we have said many times before, we have never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products or services and we never will," Apple said.

In the letter from Ron Wyden, a Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and Andy Biggs, a Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, Gabbard was urged to stop the order from going through citing Americans' "right to privacy."

The British Home Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BI.

ADP isn't enabled on iPhones by default, and Apple can't help the account holder recover their data once it's turned on. Although this added layer of protection for nine iCloud data categories won't be available in the UK, there are 14 data categories that are encrypted automatically. British users will still have encryption for iCloud Keychain, Health, and FaceTime.

Boosting security with end-to-end encryption is "more urgent than ever before," Apple said. In the statement, the company said it hopes to offer the "highest level of security" to UK users in the future.

• An aid program for concert venues shuttered by COVID-19 paid over $200 million to successful musicians.
• Lil Wayne and other artists took millions for luxury clothes and private jets.
• New records reveal that the SBA has closed out reviews of $155 million in grants to celebrities.

The Small Business Administration doesn't plan to seek recovery for more than $155 million in COVID relief grants paid out to successful artists and entertainers, newly public records show.

Congress set aside more than $14 billion during the pandemic to bail out struggling arts groups as audiences stayed home. Business Insider previously reported Lil Wayne, Marshmello, Chris Brown, Alice in Chains and other artists received taxpayer funds for private jets, parties, luxury clothes, and multi-million dollar bonuses for themselves — leaving little for staff salaries or benefits.

The grants could legally be used for "ordinary and necessary" expenses, and the federal government hasn't claimed that the spending was illegal.

Some of the top recipients of Shuttered Venue Operators Grants were clients of NKSFB, a Los Angeles business management firm that says it helps "the world's leading entertainers succeed financially."

In a December 20 email released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, an SBA employee said more than $155 million out of $216.6 million in grants paid out to NKSFB clients — or more than 70% of them — were "closed," meaning that they have been fully reviewed. That leaves about $61 million across 22 grants that could still be under review.

Many grant recipients won't hear from the SBA again after they complete the closeout process, but the agency's FAQ materials say an audit-like process called "monitoring" can take place even after a grant is closed. Sen. Joni Ernst, who leads the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, said in a statement that she'd be looking into abusive pandemic spending.

"Pandemic relief programs were designed to help small businesses keep their doors open and their employees afloat during an incredibly challenging time," Ernst said. "Unfortunately, the more we learn, the more it is clear that taxpayers footed the bill for the extravagant lifestyles of the rich and famous."

The grant data was gathered in the waning days of the Biden administration. Most of the grant staff have now been laid off or transferred, according to people familiar with the program. The SBA inspector-general was among several agency watchdogs fired by President Donald Trump.

It's not clear which specific NKSFB clients' grants had been closed out and which remained open. The firm has said that it cannot discuss its clients' finances. The firm's lawyer and managing partner didn't respond to comment requests for this story.

The SBA has said it followed the law and had "robust" checks in place to detect fraud. It said current and former employees who criticized its processes didn't have complete visibility into its processes. The agency didn't respond to a request for comment for this story.

But the agency was also bracing for criticism, the newly released records show. Top officials on the SVOG program were listed as attendees at a briefing for Congressional staff in response to Business Insider's reporting last December. The presentation the SBA gave to the staff was completely redacted.

SBA staff were also warned not to talk. One called an email from a BI reporter "phishing." The program's director referred to the outreach as "aggressive," the records show.

"The SBA has cloaked itself in secrecy and hid the full extent of its work from the American people for the last four years," Ernst said. "I will be working with Kelly Loeffler and the Trump administration to bring full transparency to the agency and investigate just what on earth happened with taxpayers' money."

• Facial recognition company Clearview AI cofounder and former CEO Hoan Ton-That has resigned.
• The company's new co-CEOs are early investor Hal Lambert and cofounder Richard Schwartz.
• The leadership shake-up comes as the Clearview eyes new contracts under the Trump administration.

The former CEO of Clearview AI, Hoan Ton-That, has resigned. Clearview is a facial recognition startup used by law enforcement or federal agencies to identify suspects. It's known for scraping billions of images from the internet without users or platforms' consent.

Clearview appointed early investor Hal Lambert and cofounder Richard Schwartz as co-CEOs in December after Ton-That shifted roles from CEO to president.

Ton-That, who has now left the company but will remain a board member, said in an email to Business Insider that he was "leaving on a high note." He added revenue and growth in 2024 were at their highest since the company was founded.

Ton-That's departure occurs as Clearview appears to be positioning itself to benefit from the Trump administration and its renewed focus on biometric surveillance, particularly at the border.

Lambert is an active Republican supporter who, according to the biography page on his investment firm Point Bridge Captial, served on President Donald Trump's inauguration committee. Schwartz was an advisor to Ruby Giuliani, the former Republican mayor of NYC who defended Trump's claims of election fraud in 2020.

A company spokesperson told Business Insider that Lambert and Schwartz will "lead the charge to capitalize on emerging opportunities to enhance national security and public safety under the new Administration."

In an interview with Forbes, Lambert said Clearview is already in discussions with the Pentagon, Homeland Security, and other federal agencies. "We want to keep America safe, and technology is a way to do it," he told the outlet.

Ton-That's departure follows years of controversy for Clearview

After Clearview's debut in 2020, the company faced lawsuits from civil rights groups, US state and federal courts, and overseas governments. Critics said it violated privacy rights by scraping facial images from platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn without the platforms or users' constent.

While Clearview settled some US cases, it was hit with significant fines across Europe, including a 30.5 million euro penalty from Dutch authorities last year. Clearview disputed the ruling, writing in an email sent to TechCrunch last year that the decision was "unlawful, devoid of due process and is unenforceable."

Despite legal hurdles, Clearview's technology is being used by law enforcement in the States. Last week, the El Cerrito Police Department in California confirmed that it is using the tool to identify suspects and solve crimes. "Ultimately, this technology will help us pursue justice for crime victims and improve the quality of life for our residents," the department said.

A Clearview spokesperson told BI the company has been "instrumental in solving innumerable cases involving terrorism, homicide, theft, financial fraud, human trafficking, and child predation," without providing more details about where these cases were being solved or processed.

Lambert told Forbes the company had generated $16 million in annual recurring revenue last year, largely from contracts with local law enforcement agencies.

Although Clearview is still unprofitable, Lambert told the outlet they are aiming to triple revenue in 2025, pointing to new federal partnerships as a key driver.

Clearview raised its last funding round in 2021, securing a $30 million Series B round that valued the company at $130 million.