Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

New Delhi: The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword> on Wednesday said it will hear on September 17 the appeal of US-based creditor Glas Trust Company LLC against a judgment of the <keyword id="19916400" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="nclat" source="keywords">NCLAT</keyword>, which had stayed insolvency proceedings against ed-tech firm BYJU's and approved its Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the <keyword id="19901245" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="bcci" source="keywords">BCCI</keyword>. A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was urged by a battery of lawyers that the plea be heard urgently keeping in mind the subsequent developments in the case. The plea was mentioned by senior advocate NK Kaul, appearing for the ed-tech major, that the case needed to be heard at the earliest. The submission was supported by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the BCCI, and senior lawyer Abhishek Singhvi, also appearing for the ed-tech firm. Kaul said another plea in the case has also been filed and that is listed for hearing on September 17 and hence, the present plea be either heard on that day or the hearings in both the cases be advanced to this Friday. "We will hear both the pleas on September 17," the CJI said. Senior advocate Shayam Divan, appearing for the US-based creditor, said let the matters be heard together on September 17. Earlier on August 22, the bench had refused to pass an interim order to ensure that the committee of creditors (CoC) does not hold any meeting in pursuance of the insolvency proceedings against the embattled ed-tech firm. It had listed the plea for a final hearing on August 27. The bench had said the developments, which may take place in the meantime, can be negated if it finds there was no merit in the appeal of the US-based creditor against the judgment of appellate insolvency tribunal NCLAT. The plea was mentioned earlier also on August 20 by Byju's and the BCCI and the top court had then also refused to pass an interim order to restrain the Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP) from constituting a committee of creditors (CoC) in the insolvency proceedings against the ed-tech firm. In a major setback to Byju's, the top court had on August 14 stayed the verdict of NCLAT, setting aside the insolvency proceedings against the ed-tech major and approving its Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the Indian cricket board. The August 2 verdict of the NCLAT had come as a huge relief for Byju's as it had effectively put its founder Byju Raveendran back in control. The top court, however, had prima facie termed the NCLAT verdict as "unconscionable" and stayed its operation while issuing notices to Byju's and others on the appeal of the ed-tech firm's US-based creditor against the judgment of the insolvency appellate tribunal. The case stemmed from Byju's default on a Rs 158.9 crore payment related to a sponsorship deal with the BCCI. The top court had directed the BCCI to keep a sum of Rs 158 crore it had received from Byju's after a settlement in a separate escrow account till further orders. "Issue notice. Pending further orders there shall be a stay of the impugned order of August 2 of NCLAT. In the meantime, BCCI shall maintain the amount of Rs 158 crore, which shall be realised in pursuance of a settlement, in a separate escrow account until further orders," the bench had said. The NCLAT had approved the Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the BCCI and set aside the insolvency proceedings against Byju's. Byju's had entered into a "Team Sponsor Agreement" with the BCCI in 2019. Under the agreement, the ed-tech firm got exclusive rights to display its brand on the Indian cricket team's kit and some other benefits. Byju's had to pay a sponsorship fee. The company met its obligations till the middle of 2022 but defaulted on subsequent payments of Rs 158.9 crore. After insolvency proceedings were initiated, Byju's entered into a settlement with the BCCI. On July 16, the Bengaluru bench of the <keyword id="19902197" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="national-company-law-tribunal" source="keywords">National Company Law Tribunal</keyword> (NCLT) had admitted 'Think and Learn', Byju's parent company, to the insolvency resolution process on a plea filed by the BCCI over default in payment of outstanding dues of almost Rs 158.9 crore. While suspending the board of the ed-tech firm, the NCLT had appointed an interim resolution professional to run the operations of the company, suspended the company's board of directors, and brought it under moratorium by freezing its assets. The US-based lenders suspected that the settlement amount was being diverted from the credit they had extended to Byju's.

SC to hear plea related to insolvency proceedings against ed-tech firm Byju's on Sept 17

The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword> on Friday agreed to list for an early hearing the appeal of US-based creditor Glas Trust Company LLC against a judgment of the <keyword id="19916400" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="NCLAT" source="keywords">NCLAT</keyword>, which had stayed <keyword id="19965539" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="insolvency-proceedings" source="keywords">insolvency proceedings</keyword> against ed-tech firm <keyword id="19958178" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Byjus" source="keywords">BYJU's</keyword> and approving its Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the <keyword id="19901245" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="BCCI" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="BCCI" meta.hostid="153" meta.entityid="BCCI">BCCI</keyword>. A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was urged by senior advocate NK Kaul, appearing for the ed-tech major, that the case needed to be heard at the earliest. Kaul said, "The only funding was done by the promoters and today no one has brought any external borrowing. We have to show today how malafide the petition (of US firm) is." "I will get it listed as early as possible," the CJI, who was indisposed and in quarantine for the last few days, said. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the US-based creditor, said it also wanted an early hearing. Earlier on August 22, the bench had refused to pass an interim order to ensure that the committee of creditors (CoC) does not hold any meeting in pursuance of the insolvency proceedings against the embattled ed-tech firm. It had listed the plea for a final hearing on August 27. The bench had said the developments, which may take place in the meantime, can be negated if it finds there was no merit in the appeal of the US-based creditor against the judgment of appellate insolvency tribunal NCLAT. The plea was mentioned earlier also on August 20 by Byju's and the BCCI and the top court had then also refused to pass an interim order to restrain the Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP) from constituting a committee of creditors (CoC) in the insolvency proceedings against the ed-tech firm. In a major setback to Byju's, the top court had on August 14 stayed the verdict of NCLAT, setting aside the insolvency proceedings against the ed-tech major and approving its Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the Indian cricket board. The August 2 verdict of the NCLAT had come as a huge relief for Byju's as it had effectively put its founder Byju Raveendran back in control. The top court, however, had prima facie termed the NCLAT verdict as "unconscionable" and stayed its operation while issuing notices to Byju's and others on the appeal of the ed-tech firm's US-based creditor against the judgment of the insolvency appellate tribunal. The case stemmed from Byju's default on a Rs 158.9 crore payment related to a sponsorship deal with the BCCI. The top court had directed the BCCI to keep a sum of Rs 158 crore it had received from Byju's after a settlement in a separate escrow account till further orders. "Issue notice. Pending further orders there shall be a stay of the impugned order of August 2 of NCLAT. In the meantime, BCCI shall maintain the amount of Rs 158 crore, which shall be realised in pursuance of a settlement, in a separate escrow account until further orders," the bench had said. The NCLAT had approved the Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the BCCI and set aside the insolvency proceedings against Byju's. Byju's had entered into a "Team Sponsor Agreement" with the BCCI in 2019. Under the agreement, the ed-tech firm got exclusive rights to display its brand on the Indian cricket team's kit and some other benefits. Byju's had to pay a sponsorship fee. The company met its obligations till the middle of 2022 but defaulted on subsequent payments of Rs 158.9 crore. After insolvency proceedings were initiated, Byju's entered into a settlement with the BCCI. On July 16, the Bengaluru bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) had admitted 'Think and Learn', Byju's parent company, to the insolvency resolution process on a plea filed by the BCCI over default in payment of outstanding dues of almost Rs 158.9 crore. While suspending the board of the ed-tech firm, the NCLT had appointed an interim resolution professional to run the operations of the company, suspended the company's board of directors, and brought it under moratorium by freezing its assets. The US-based lenders suspected that the settlement amount was being diverted from the credit they had extended to Byju's. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/news/india-beats-the-us-to-emerge-as-the-second-biggest-market-for-5g-smartphones/articleshow/113095322.cms">India beats the US to emerge as the second-biggest market for 5G smartphones</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/news/apple-iphone-16-to-launch-on-september-9-design-specs-and-everything-we-know-so-far/articleshow/113091114.cms">Apple iPhone 16 to launch on September 9 – design, specs and everything we know so far</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/webstories/shree-tirupati-balajee-agro-trading-ipo-price-band-to-risk-factors-all-you-need-to-know/slidelist/113082663.cms">Shree Tirupati Balajee Agro Trading IPO – Price band to risk factors, all you need to know</a>

Supreme Court agrees to list plea related to insolvency proceedings against ed-tech firm Byju's

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Trump's arguments for overturning his $454M civil fraud verdict received a warm reception Thursday.</li><li>Appellate judges questioned the New York AG's 'mission creep' and lack of 'guardrails' in the case.</li></ul>Lawyers for Donald Trump enjoyed a warm reception in a Manhattan appellate courtroom on Thursday as they argued for the overturning of a <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-massive-ny-fraud-fine-has-ballooned-during-appeal-2024-9">massive $454 million civil fraud verdict</a> won this year by the New York Attorney General's Office.During a brief but rapid-fire dialogue, four of the five justices on the panel expressed support of Trump's arguments for overturning, or at least modifying, the costly verdict against the former president and his New York-based real-estate and golf-resort empire.One justice went so far as to wonder aloud if the Trump fraud case represents "mission creep," calling into question the AG's use of one of the country's toughest anti-fraud laws."The immense penalty in this case is troubling," that judge, Justice Peter H. Moulton, also said, speaking toward the end of Thursday's hearing in an intermediate-level state appellate court.A second justice suggested the state's present and future attorneys general need firmer "guardrails" in pursuing fraud cases.The AG herself, <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/letitia-james-takes-verdict-victory-lap-calls-trumps-ego-staggering-2024-2">Letitia James,</a> was not mentioned by name during a tense 45 minutes of arguments. But the tone of much of the judges' questioning suggested most could be open to at least trimming the scope of James' landmark case.The justices also suggested the fraud case's underlying law — New York's AG-empowering <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="c-link" href="https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/EXC/63">Executive Law 63(12)</a> — needed an overhaul.The law, approved by state lawmakers in 1956, lets attorneys general sue anyone who "shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal acts " and recover the proceeds of that fraud to "protect honesty and integrity" in the marketplace.In Trump's case, the law empowered James to successfully sue for what a trial-level Manhattan judge eventually agreed was Trump's decade of billion-dollar exaggerations in the <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-has-stopped-issuing-net-worth-statements-2024-7">annual financial statements</a> used to pocket more than $400 million in loans and profits."You hear, underneath all these questions, the question of mission creep," Moulton said at one point, as he wondered aloud if there needs to be "some limitation on what the attorney general can do in interfering in these private transactions.""Has 63(12) morphed into something that it was not meant to do?" he asked."You know the history of this statute," Justice John Higgitt said at another point, breaking into arguments by an attorney for James, Judith Vale, a deputy solicitor general."The common thread was the AG needs greater powers, as the people's lawyer, to protect consumers, civil rights, and the environment," Higgitt continued."And so, again, with that sort of historical backdrop to this law, how do we draw a line, or at least put up some guardrails, to know when the AG is operating well within her admittedly broad sphere of 63(12), and when she is going into an area that wasn't intended for her jurisdiction?" he added.Vale responded that the law was designed to protect New Yorkers from the kind of fraud and deceptions that <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/financial-crisis-scariest-moments-2015-9">brought down Lehman Brothers</a> in the financial crisis of 2008."In an ideal world," Vale answered, "the attorney general or somebody else would have gone in and stopped that fraud and illegality" before the public suffered.But where do you draw the line, a fourth justice, Dianne T. Renwick, asked, if there is no imminent risk to the public?Trump attorney D. John Sauer has made this line drawing a central point of his appeal.The appeal argues that James' fraud case wrongly interfered in the decisions of "sophisticated" banks that had been happy to loan Trump money regardless of any exaggerations. <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/deutsche-bank-trump-haircut-trial-2023-10">Deutsche Bank relied on Trump's financial statements</a> in loaning him $400 million to develop his Chicago skyscraper, his Washington, DC hotel, and his Miami golf resort."We have a situation where there were no victims," said Sauer, who has been Trump's go-to appellate lawyer.Earlier this month, Sauer argued for the overturning of Trump's 2023 sexual-assault and defamation <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-mimics-harvey-weinstein-arguments-e-jean-carroll-appeal-2024-9">loss to writer E. Jean Carroll</a>, an appeal that has yet to be decided.In April, he successfully argued before the US Supreme Court that former presidents <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-trump-immunity-case-january-6-2024-4">deserve sweeping immunity</a> from prosecution for their official acts. In November, in the Washington, DC, election-interference prosecution, Sauer argued<a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/judges-skeptical-trump-effort-revoke-jan-6-case-gag-order-2023-11"> Trump's failed appeal</a> of a gag order barring attacks on potential witnesses.Vale, arguing for the AG, noted the financial institutions were, in fact, victimized. She mentioned <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trumps-accountants-quit-while-preparing-his-and-melanias-taxes-2022-2">Trump's accountants at Mazars USA</a>, and Deutsche Bank, which <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trumps-secret-ugly-breakup-with-deutsche-bank-revealed-2022-10">forced Trump into a "managed exit"</a> from his debts in the aftermath of the AG's initial 2021 fraud revelations."When deceptively hidden risks are injected into the market, that does hurt the counterparties," Vale told the judges."And I will stress, your honor, that this does have harm to the public and the markets," she said of <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-fraud-continued-despite-attorney-general-probe-2024-2">Trump's persistent financial frauds</a>.It is unclear when the panel will release a decision; a majority of three justices is needed to reverse or revise the verdict of the trial judge, New York Supreme Court <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trumps-fraud-judge-declines-to-recuse-himself-over-nothingburger-2024-7">Justice Arthur Engoron</a>.

NY appellate judges voice serious doubts about Trump's $454M civil fraud verdict

The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> Tuesday deferred to November 5 the hearing on a batch of pleas relating to charging of interest on interest by banks on EMIs which were not paid by the borrowers who availed of the RBI <keyword id="6840678" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="loan-moratorium">loan moratorium</keyword> scheme in view of the COVID-19 pandemic. The <keyword id="6354335" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="reserve-bank-of-india">Reserve Bank of India</keyword> and the Finance Ministry have already filed separate additional affidavits in the apex court saying that the banks, financial and non-banking financial institutions will credit into the accounts of eligible borrowers by November 5 the difference between compound and simple interest collected on loans of up to Rs 2 crore during the <keyword id="117489" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="moratorium">moratorium</keyword> scheme period. A bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy and M R Shah was requested by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that the hearing in the loan moratorium case be deferred as he would be busy arguing on behalf of the Centre in other matter relating to the Central Vista project. "These moratorium matters were listed yesterday but they came up today. I am requesting for an adjournment considering I have a case (Central Vista) where I will be arguing" the law officer said. A letter seeking deferment of the hearing in the case was also circulated by advocate-on-record Anil Katiyar for the Centre to the parties and the bench. The top court acceded to the request and adjourned the hearing on pleas including the one filed by Gajendra Sharma on November 5. The pleas pertained to charging of interest on interest by banks on EMIs which have not been paid by borrowers after availing the loan moratorium scheme of RBI during March 1 to August 31. Earlier, the RBI had filed the affidavit saying that it has asked all banks, financial and non-banking financial institutions to take "necessary actions" to credit into the accounts of eligible borrowers the difference between compound and simple interest collected on loans of up to Rs 2 crore during the moratorium scheme. Prior to this, the central government had told the apex court that lenders have been asked to credit into the accounts of eligible borrowers the difference between compound and simple interest collected on loans of up to Rs 2 crore during the RBI's loan moratorium scheme by November 5. The government had said that the ministry has issued a scheme as per which lending institutions would credit this amount in the accounts of borrowers for the 6-month loan moratorium period which was announced following the COVID-19 pandemic situation. On October 14, the apex court had observed that the Centre should implement "as soon as possible" the interest waiver on loans of up to Rs 2 crore under the RBI's moratorium scheme and had said that the common man's Diwali is in the government's hands. The RBI had on March 27 issued the circular which allowed lending institutions to grant a moratorium on payment of instalments of term loans falling due between March 1, 2020, and May 31,2020, due to the pandemic. Later, the moratorium was extended till August 31 this year. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/thelife/personalities/news/prajakta-koli-aka-mostlysane-advice-for-content-creators-on-the-fine-line-between-brand-collaborations-and-staying-honest-on-social-media/articleshow/79013162.cms">Prajakta Koli aka MostlySane’s advice for content creators on the fine line between brand collaborations and staying honest on social media</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/ecommerce/news/flipkart-acquires-gaming-startup-mech-mocha-as-it-looks-to-tap-the-social-gaming-space-for-more-consumers/articleshow/79014466.cms">Flipkart acquires gaming startup Mech Mocha as it looks to tap the social gaming space for more consumers</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/covid-19-vaccine-updates-pfizer-moderna-to-roll-out-covid-19-vaccine-by-december/articleshow/78924143.cms">COVID-19 vaccine tracker: German CureVac shows an immune response, Aspen Pharmacare and J&amp;J sign pact to make vaccine in South Africa</a>

Supreme Court verdict on loan moratorium case deferred to November 5

It's an incredible feeling to finally become free of student debt, to feel the financial weight lifted off your shoulders after years of worrying about making payments.I've gotten to see this joy over the past year by helping people apply for debt cancellation through the government's Public Service Loan Forgiveness temporary waiver. The PSLF program cancels federal student loans for people who work in public-service jobs for 10 years, and the impact of relief is profound. I've seen school principals <a href="https://twitter.com/SecCardona/status/1616147253248270338" target="_blank" rel="noopener">finally be able to afford groceries</a> and teachers <a href="https://twitter.com/ontheBalledu/status/1480996772373843969?s=20&amp;t=jLbyADZQUB3nwd7-sG8Pcg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">weep in disbelief</a>. Some, like my sister who is a social worker for the Department of Veterans Affairs, even get a refund check for overpayments in addition to full cancellation.For the most part, my work has helped trigger <a href="https://twitter.com/bethbourdon/status/1493675662854561799" target="_blank" rel="noopener">celebrations</a>, but not always. After several of her coworkers were already on track to get their loans canceled, Rosey Olivero wrote to me with troubling news. She got a letter from her loan servicer saying she didn't qualify for cancellation. Rosey is a pediatric infectious-disease specialist who specializes in treating children with HIV. She's exactly the kind of public servant that PSLF was intended for. After investigating, we discovered the problem: She had refinanced her federal student loans in 2017 with a private lender.The vast majority of student loans, <a href="https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/interactives/householdcredit/data/pdf/HHDC_2022Q4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">about $1.6 trillion</a> worth, is owed directly to the federal government. But there are many private lenders that try to persuade borrowers to refinance with them. According to <a href="https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_education-loan-ombudsman_report_2022-10.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau</a>, private lenders hold $128 billion in student-loan debt. These lenders lure people in with a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-student-loan-forgiveness-stripped-away-refinance-private-loan-debt-2022-8">barrage of marketing</a> that promises thousands of dollars of savings through lower interest rates. Once someone agrees to refinance, the companies pay off their federal student loans in full and issue a brand-new private loan in the same amount but with different terms. In the process, borrowers forfeit many protections that come with federal student loans, including the chance to get their loans canceled.According to the lender's sales pitch, Rosey would save more than $100,000 over the long run by refinancing. At the time, that seemed like a good deal. But if she hadn't refinanced, she would have gotten the entire loan canceled. Today, she still has $90,000 to pay off. The devastating news was a gut punch.Most federal student-loan payments are still paused until <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/student-loan-forgiveness-blocked-supreme-court-strikes-down-debt-cancellation-2023-5">later this summer</a>. But once payments resume, millions of people will be bombarded with letters, emails, and phone calls from private companies trying to persuade them to refinance their student loans. One private lender is even <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/end-student-loan-payment-pause-sofi-files-lawsuit-block-relief-2023-3" rel="nofollow sponsored">suing the Department of Education</a> to resume payments sooner since they can't compete with a moratorium on student-loan payments. But reader, be forewarned: There are many reasons to avoid falling for their ploy.<h2>Rise of refinancers</h2>The student-loan-refinancing industry exploded in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/magazine/09fob-wwln-t.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Many suddenly unemployed workers went back to school</a> in hopes that more education would make them more competitive in a recession. At the same time, <a href="https://www.demos.org/research/great-cost-shift-continues" target="_blank" rel="noopener">states were drastically cutting funding for universities</a> in an attempt to deal with their own fiscal problems, and universities <a href="https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/state-higher-education-funding-cuts-have-pushed-costs-to-students" target="_blank" rel="noopener">raised tuition</a> to make up for the shortfall. Total student debt <a href="https://www.democracynow.org/2012/4/25/1_t_day_as_us_student" target="_blank" rel="noopener">surpassed $1 trillion for the first time in 2012</a>. Sensing an untapped opportunity, a flurry of fintech startups cashed in with "innovations" that were little more than traditional predatory practices dressed up with new, internet-driven packaging.Before 2010, federal student loans were created by private institutions like Sallie Mae but guaranteed by the federal government — so if a borrower couldn't end up paying, the government would step in. Student debt was a moneymaking machine: Lenders would even package these guaranteed loans and sell them to investors. But it was a raw deal for the government, and in 2010, President Barack Obama <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/us/politics/31obama.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">cut out the intermediaries</a> and had the government start issuing federal student loans directly. Private lenders refused to stand by and let their cash cow dry up, so they pivoted to refinancing student loans. Startups like SoFi, LendKey, and CommonBond were soon joined by more-traditional lenders like Discover. And Navient, which spun off from Sallie Mae, quickly became a major refinancer.These private lenders have spent millions of dollars chasing down customers and lobbying against loan-assistance programs. In the first 1 ½ years of the pandemic, they collectively spent <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/08/student-loan-companies-spend-millions-lobbying-amid-extended-moratorium/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">$6 million</a> lobbying lawmakers to resume student-loan payments. And now, SoFi is <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/end-student-loan-payment-pause-sofi-files-lawsuit-block-relief-2023-3" rel="nofollow sponsored">suing the Department of Education</a> to end the COVID payment pause. While data is sparse, SoFi spent $170 million in marketing in 2017, according to <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/40539348/sofi-pays-premium-prices-to-acquire-its-prime-customers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Fast Company</a>, and planned to spend $200 million in 2018.<div type="image" title="Supreme Court" height="2784" width="5568" msid="98306190" hostid="261"></div>Refinancing companies are able to grab customers for one reason: interest rates. The <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elizabeth-warren-student-loans_n_3240407" target="_blank" rel="noopener">high interest rates Congress</a> has set on federal student loans have allowed refinancing companies to turn a quick profit by offering some borrowers much-lower interest rates and promising smaller monthly payments. While this offer may seem like a godsend for cash-strapped graduates, it comes with a slew of downsides.<h2>If you refinance your student loans, you could pay more</h2>Many people who refinance actually end up paying <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/162_3197_sofi_draft_admin_compl_10-26-18_rc_not_rec.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">thousands of dollars more in interest</a> over the long run. For example, someone with $100,000 in federal graduate student loans at the current 6.54% interest rate would make monthly payments of $1,138 on the standard 10-year plan and end up paying $36,502 in interest over the lifetime of the loan. But if they refinanced for a lower monthly payment of $660 at a lower interest rate of 5% over a 20-year repayment plan, it would cost them $58,390 in interest over the long term. People can also get enticed into a variable interest rate: Unlike federal loans, which have a locked-in interest rate from start to finish, privately refinanced loans might start out with a low rate, only to skyrocket years down the line because of changing market rates. In 2018, the Federal Trade Commission sued SoFi, alleging its marketing misled people about how much <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/31/a-popular-student-debt-lender-is-accused-of-misleading-borrowers.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">money they would save if they refinanced</a>. In a comment given to CNBC at the time, a spokesperson for SoFi disputed the FTC's characterization: "We have always been committed to giving our current and prospective members clear and complete information with which to make smart financial choices, and are pleased to have this matter resolved."But for many borrowers, the complicated and confusing terms of refinancing offers turn into a boondoggle. Nikki Giraffo is a teacher who felt like she was entering a hall of mirrors anytime she tried to explore her options. Every time she called Navient, her federal-loan servicer, she seemed to get a different answer. On one of those calls to Navient, the representative suggested refinancing her loans privately. Nikki ended up refinancing twice, first with Citizens Bank and then with NaviRefi, but did not end up saving any money. Nikki told me that she felt "lied to and pushed around" by the various loan companies. When I asked her whether she regretted refinancing, she told me "1,000%." Nikki is not alone. In one survey, more than one-third of respondents who refinanced their federal student loans said they <a href="https://money.usnews.com/loans/student-loans/articles/student-loan-refinancing-survey" target="_blank" rel="noopener">eventually came to regret it</a>.<h2>If you refinance your student loans, you risk losing out on government assistance</h2>The Education Department offers various payment plans to ease the debt burden for borrowers. Income-driven plans allow borrowers to pay a percentage of their income toward the loans with no penalty — giving people the ability to pay little or nothing on their student loans when they can't afford to. And the Biden administration has <a href="https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/new-proposed-regulations-would-transform-income-driven-repayment-cutting-undergraduate-loan-payments-half-and-preventing-unpaid-interest-accumulation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">proposed changes</a> that will allow millions more people to make $0 monthly payments while not accruing interest. This summer, the Education Department will also conduct a massive <a href="https://studentaid.gov/announcements-events/idr-account-adjustment" target="_blank" rel="noopener">account adjustment</a> that will cancel debt for millions of people and put millions more much closer to cancellation.<div type="image" title="George Washington University student Kai Nilsen and other student loan debt activists rally outside the White House a day after President Biden announced a plan that would cancel $10,000 in student loan debt for those making less than $125,000 a year in Washington, DC, on August 25, 2022." height="1992" width="2657" msid="98306192" hostid="261"></div>The most headline-grabbing piece of student-debt news over the past few years was Biden's <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-student-loan-forgiveness-one-time-no-more-broad-relief-2022-8">plan to cancel up to $10,000 in federal student loans</a> ($20,000 for those with Pell Grants) for anyone making less than $125,000 a year. While the plan was struck down by the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/student-loan-forgiveness-blocked-supreme-court-strikes-down-debt-cancellation-2023-5">Supreme Court</a>, it would have only helped those who had not previously refinanced their loans with a private company.Refinancing companies had told people to leave $10,000 or $20,000 of federal student loans un-refinanced to stay eligible for Biden's cancellation plan. But even if you did that, you are still locking yourself into a long-term private loan that will prevent you from being eligible for any future cancellation. <h2>If you refinance your student loans, you can put your family at risk</h2>To get approved and the lowest rates, most people who refinance their student loans are required to have a cosigner — someone who agrees to pay if you can't. This is most often a spouse, parents, or children. If a borrower loses their job or isn't able to work, the cosigner is still on the hook for the debt. If the cosigner can't make the payments, either, it can destroy their credit and the lender can sue to garnish their wages. It's also not uncommon for the terms of the loan <a href="https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201404_cfpb_midyear-report_private-student-loans-2014.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">to require a lump-sum payment</a> if the cosigner dies or files for bankruptcy. Imagine being forced to come up with $400,000 with 30 days' notice after the death of a close family member — when things go bad, they go very bad.Federal student loans, by contrast, do not require a cosigner. If you get laid off or fall on hard times and can't make a payment, none of your loved ones will be saddled with this debt. You can file paperwork that will lower or eliminate your payments. People undergoing <a href="https://studentaid.gov/sites/default/files/CancerTreatmentDeferment.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">cancer treatment</a>, for example, can get their federal loans deferred. And if you die, your loans get discharged.<div type="image" title="Doctor Ali Jamehdor, Chief Director of the Emergency Room of the Dignity Health - St. Mary Medical Center, stands in front of a Covid-19 triage tent for patients with symptoms in Long Beach, California, on December 17, 2020. - Over the last two weeks, the number of new Covid-19 cases in 24 hours has climbed above 200,000 for 11 out of 14 days. Experts now fear the situation will become even more dire following end of year celebrations, including the Christmas holiday. (Photo by Apu GOMES / AFP) (Photo by APU GOMES/AFP via Getty Images)" height="4320" width="5760" msid="98306194" hostid="261"></div>In my years of helping people buried in debt, the most painful conversations have surrounded cosigners. It's bad enough to find your own life in financial ruin, but to be the cause of financial stress to those you love the most is heart-wrenching. Recent changes to the law require <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/2155" target="_blank" rel="noopener">private student loans to be discharged if you die</a>, but that isn't the case with older loans. Since refinancing companies love to target doctors loaded up with medical-school debt, this became an additional source of stress during the worst of the COVID-19 crisis. As Andrew Tisser, an emergency-room doctor who refinanced with a private company, <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/medical-workers-tackling-coronavirus-theyre-185600436.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">put it</a>, "If I were to die from COVID right now, my family would be stuck with $433,000." Most private student loans allow for some kind of "cosigner release" so no one else is on the hook for your loans. But in my experience, it's <a href="https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201404_cfpb_midyear-report_private-student-loans-2014.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hard to get these private lenders to honor their own policies</a>.<h2>Refinancing companies make the system worse for everyone</h2>Private refinancing companies don't just hand out their loans to anyone. The ideal targets for these companies are people who have a solid credit score, high income, and a large student-loan balance — in the hundreds of thousands. They typically target doctors, lawyers, and people with graduate degrees in STEM fields since they represent the lowest risk. While refinancing companies use "colorblind" metrics like income, the school you graduated from, and your major, it just so happens that the kind of people whom refinance companies approve turn out to be mostly well-off <a href="https://www.americanbanker.com/news/upstart-says-its-improving-ai-models-after-report-finds-race-approval-disparities" target="_blank" rel="noopener">white men</a>. A 2020 study by the Student Borrower Protection Center found students who attended historically Black colleges and universities <a href="https://protectborrowers.org/new-report-finds-educational-redlining-penalizes-borrowers-who-attended-community-colleges-and-minority-serving-institutions-perpetuates-systemic-disparities/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">got rejected more often and had higher rates when approved</a>.And by siphoning off the people most likely to pay off their whole loan balance, refinancing companies leave the government with the borrowers who are most likely to end up not being able to pay, which drives up the cost of higher education for everyone.<h2>So who should consider refinancing their student loans?</h2>There is one situation where it might make sense to refinance: if your student loans are already private. This is especially true for people with private loans from before <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/2155" target="_blank" rel="noopener">legal protections were added in 2018</a>. If refinancing a loan that is already private can get you a lower interest rate or release your cosigner, then it's absolutely in your best interest to refinance. But since interest rates are rising, you're unlikely to find a better deal anytime soon.For everyone else, the risks of refinancing are almost always too high. Many of the well-paid student debtors targeted by refinancing companies might think that they have more financial security and can afford to take that risk. But as the recent wave of mass layoffs at Silicon Valley giants like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook show, a sudden job loss can happen to anyone. Most Americans are <a href="https://khn.org/news/article/diagnosis-debt-investigation-faces-of-medical-debt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one slip on a banana peel</a> away from <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/11/this-is-the-real-reason-most-americans-file-for-bankruptcy.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bankruptcy</a>. Millions of people are <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/new-data-shows-long-covid-is-keeping-as-many-as-4-million-people-out-of-work/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">unable to work because of long COVID</a>. You are much better off having the protections that come with federal student loans if you get laid off or have a sudden medical emergency. Private lenders are quick to swarm borrowers with tantalizing offers of large savings and may seem like a godsend for hardworking people living with the constant pressure of student loans. But if you fall for the pitch, you risk losing out on a whole lot of protections.When I asked Nikki what advice she would give, she told me, "Trust no one. Hang up the phone. They are preying on literal desperation."<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/author/thomas-gokey">Thomas Gokey</a> is a co-founder of the Debt Collective, a union for debtors where he currently serves as a case worker and policy director.

The Supreme Court shut down Biden's student loan forgiveness &mdash; and refinancing startups are waiting to pounce

<ul class="summary-list"><li>In three years of litigation, Donald Trump has never opposed NY's civil fraud case on constitutional grounds.</li><li>But in spirited closing arguments Thursday, Trump's lawyer raised multiple constitutional issues.</li></ul>In spirited closing arguments Thursday, a defense lawyer told a Manhattan judge that the extraordinary penalties New York seeks in <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/ny-ag-now-wants-trump-to-pay-back-370m-2024-1">the state's $370 million fraud lawsuit</a> against former President Donald Trump and his real-estate empire violate the US Constitution.That word — Constitution — hasn't cropped up often, if at all, in <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/letitia-james-vs-donald-trump-questions-answered-2022-8">the long history of New York Attorney General Letitia James's pursuit of Trump.</a><a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gets-to-speak-in-ny-fraud-closings-calling-himself-a-victim-2024-1#:~:text=Trump%20was%20allowed%20to%20make,greatest%20assets%20in%20the%20world.%22">Thursday's closings</a> were, in fact, the first time in three years of litigation that Trump has opposed the attorney general on constitutional grounds, one trial insider noted, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were unauthorized to comment on the case.But the newly-debuted constitutional focus now suggests that when a verdict comes down in the next two weeks, Trump wants to be ready to fight it all the way to the US Supreme Court, the insider and other experts who've monitored the case said Friday.<div type="image" title="Donald Trump addresses reporters after closing arguments in his civil fraud trial in New York." height="1761" width="2500" msid="106816219" hostid="261" sizebytes="91576"></div>Laying the groundwork for a SCOTUS challenge is a smart move, according to attorney Marc Frazier Scholl.After <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/ny-trump-sons-lawyers-10k-each-for-repeating-losing-arguments-2023-9">a three-year history of futile defenses</a> — including Trump's repeatedly rejected claim that <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gets-to-speak-in-ny-fraud-closings-calling-himself-a-victim-2024-1">he's the victim of a political attack </a>— a constitutional challenge is one of the most reasonable and promising legal moves Trump has tried, Scholl said."This type of claim is the way the case should have been defended all along," said Scholl, a former financial crimes prosecutor for the Manhattan District Attorney's Office who also worked as a public corruption investigator for the New York Inspector General. "They should have focused all along on actual arguments, as opposed to what Trump wanted them to say about unfairness and witch hunts," said Scholl, who is now <a target="_blank" href="https://www.lbkmlaw.com/attorneys-Marc-Frazier-Scholl.html">of counsel at Lewis Baach Kaufmann Middlemiss.</a><div type="image" title="An artist's sketch of Donald Trump listening to closing arguments in his civil fraud trial in New York." height="1875" width="2500" msid="106816220" hostid="261" sizebytes="386350"></div><h2>The path to SCOTUS</h2>An appeal of the judge's final setting of penalties — complaining it's too high or that the judge made mistakes in presiding over the investigation and trial — is all well and proper on the state level but would never reach the US Supreme Court.Instead, his lawyers must challenge the constitutionality of <a target="_blank" rel="" href="https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/EXC/63">Executive Law 63(12)</a>, the two-paragraph New York statute that has empowered James over the course of six years to develop her fraud case against Trump and bring it to trial.This law lets a judge shut down a business and banish its executives from the state if an attorney general proves persistent fraud and criminality, as<a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/what-we-all-forget-about-the-upcoming-trump-fraud-verdict-2023-12"> James has alleged of Trump.</a>On their way to the US Supreme Court, Trump's lawyers would first need to exhaust their New York state appellate options.If the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals, ultimately upholds Executive Law 63(12) as constitutional, at least as it applies to Trump, the defense can ask the US Supreme Court to hear the case next.<div type="image" title="New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron presided over closing arguments in the Trump civil fraud trial." height="1667" width="2500" msid="106816223" hostid="261" sizebytes="108510"></div>Throwing the case to the US Supreme Court could, at the least, delay the imposition of penalties, Scholl said.It would transfer the case into what Trump sees as friendlier hands, given the high court's six-three conservative supermajority, including three justices he nominated himself.A constitutional challenge could also have a fighting chance, Scholl said.It's unlikely the US Supreme Court would throw out New York's executive law in its entirety, he predicted. But the court could quite possibly pare back, at least in Trump's case, its most severe penalties.<div type="image" title="New York Attorney General Letitia James attended closing arguments in the Trump civil fraud trial." height="1667" width="2500" msid="106816224" hostid="261" sizebytes="165322"></div><h2>And those severe penalties are?</h2><a target="_blank" href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24254337-nyag-v-trump-ag-closing-briefs-20240105">James has demanded</a> that Trump, his business, his two eldest sons, and two other long-standing Trump Organization executives give back $370 million — plus interest — that she says they pocketed through fraud.The AG additionally wants to permanently ban Trump from running a New York business and to ban him for five years from selling or buying commercial property in New York or borrowing from a New York-registered bank.And in a bombshell pre-trial fraud ruling from September, the judge presiding over the non-jury case, state Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, has already set the most damaging penalty allowed under 63(12), ordering<a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-the-ny-fraud-verdict-could-kill-the-trump-organization-2023-12"> the "dissolution" of all Trump properties licensed to do business in New York.</a>The properties are to be be placed in receivership and sold, with Trump keeping the cash proceeds. These looming dissolutions remain on hold pending appeal. It remains to be seen if Engoron will preserve that draconian penalty in his final verdict, expected by the end of January."My guess would be that they would say that a penalty that amounts to a financial death sentence, or <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-fraud-ruling-corporate-death-penalty-for-his-empire-experts-2023-9">a corporate death sentence,</a> is unconstitutional," Scholl said of the US Supreme Court."It's a massive thing to lock him and his company out of the state, basically, and say you are no longer allowed to do business here."<div type="image" title="A court sketch artist's depiction of defense lawyer Christopher Kise speaking on Donald Trump's behalf at the New York civil fraud trial in Manhattan." height="1875" width="2500" msid="106816226" hostid="261" sizebytes="722498"></div><h2>Trump's lawyer debuts a constitutional strategy</h2>"What they're asking you to do implicates the Constitution," Trump's lead lawyer, Christopher Kise, told the judge in Thursday's closing arguments, broaching the topic as Trump watched from the defense table.Kise devoted a page of his summation slide show to the sections of the Constitution that he believes the attorney general wants the judge to violate.One was the Fifth Amendment, which, in addition to offering protection against self-incrimination, also protects against excessive punishments, including high fines."A number in the sky" and "absurdly disproportionate," Kise called the AG's $370 million demand.This may not be Trump's strongest Constitutional argument, experts said, given that <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/ny-ag-now-wants-trump-to-pay-back-370m-2024-1">James has painstakingly justified that number.</a>The bulk of the proposed penalty is $169 million in loan-interest savings that James says Trump enjoyed over the course of a decade through fraudulently exaggerating his wealth in annual net-worth statements sent to banks.<div type="image" title="Donald Trump sitting in a courtroom with his lawyers." height="1668" width="2500" msid="106816227" hostid="261" sizebytes="286672"></div><h2>The 'Takings Clause'</h2>Kise also cited the Fifth Amendment's protection against the seizure of property without due process, known as the "Takings Clause.""A prohibition on President Trump engaging in any commercial real-estate transactions!" Kise argued, outrage rising in his voice."I mean, that interferes with his power over the disposition of his own property," he argued."It impacts hundreds of nondefendant companies, employees, properties. This is a taking. It's a confiscatory taking without compensation."The Takings Clause is Trump's strongest constitutional argument, Scholl said, calling it "the argument with the best chance."<h2>Due process</h2>Kise made the very briefest of mention on Thursday of Trump being denied "due process.""The court has to consider the harm or potential harm actually suffered" by Trump's alleged misdeeds, and then weigh whether that would be "an excessive punitive award," Kise said vaguely before moving on to another topic.Due process is something that shows up in both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. It protects against a state enforcing a judgment against someone without giving them an opportunity to be heard.Trump arguing that his due-process rights were violated would seem a stretch, experts said."States have the power to take away licenses and the ability to do business in cases of fraud and deception," noted Adam S. Kaufmann, <a target="_blank" href="https://www.lbkmlaw.com/attorneys-Adam-Kaufmann.html">also of Lewis Baach Kaufmann Middlemiss,</a> where he is an executive partner.And Trump has had three years of litigation in which to be heard, culminating Thursday, when <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gets-to-speak-in-ny-fraud-closings-calling-himself-a-victim-2024-1#:~:text=Trump%20gets%20his%20way%20in,a%20'victim'%20in%20surprise%20remarks&amp;text=Trump%20was%20allowed%20to%20make,'they%20should%20pay%20me.%22">the judge let him make a five-minute statement on his own behalf.</a>But there are two kinds of due process, Scholl explained."It can be argued that he had plenty of opportunity to be heard in the case, but that's only what's called "procedural due process," Scholl said of Trump.There's also what's called "substantive due process."A substantive due process challenge would go beyond questioning whether Trump had an opportunity to be heard. It would question the process itself.Is it due process for New York state to have the power to take someone's property in this circumstance, in a case where no bank or individual has complained they were defrauded?"For somebody who just lied about how much they're worth, can you really take all their property away?" Scholl asked, describing what a substantive due process challenge would question.<h2>The Commerce Clause</h2>In his closings Thursday, Kise also mentioned the Commerce Clause from Article I of the Constitution, which empowers Congress to regulate commerce among the states."The AG wants you to rule that a Florida resident, President Trump, cannot transact any lawful business with any New York financial institution," he told the judge.James wants to deny "New York financial institutions the right to transact commerce with him," Kise said. "This is an exceptional unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce."Invoking this Article would be a stretch, Scholl noted, calling it Trump's weakest constitutional argument."I think that his argument that he is a Florida resident is a waste of time," he said. "That's just part of a shotgun approach."Kise did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

Trump has laid the groundwork for a US Supreme Court challenge in his NY civil fraud case: experts

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Interest has been accruing daily while Trump appeals his $454M state fraud judgment in Manhattan.</li><li>Since the judgment was finalized February 23, what he owes has risen by $1 million every 9 days.</li></ul>The small fortune Donald Trump owes the state of New York has grown at breakneck speed, rising <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-now-owes-1m-more-in-interest-on-ny-fraud-judgment-2024-3">by another $1 million in interest every nine days</a> as the former president appeals the $454 million civil fraud judgment set by a Manhattan judge back in February.On Thursday, as his lawyers challenge <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-civil-fraud-verdict-whats-in-judge-engorons-decision-2024-2">the judgment</a> in an appellate courtroom 40 blocks north of where it was handed down, the amount Trump owes the Empire state will have risen by $24 million.That's $24 million just in post-judgment interest.It's a massive added penalty. (For perspective, Trump's 2016 settlements in three <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-reached-a-settlement-in-a-trump-university-case-2016-11">Trump University fraud cases</a> totaled $25 million.)When his appellate lawyers, led by D. John Sauer, walk into court at noon on Thursday, Trump's debt to the New York attorney general's office — the total on his owed-ometer — will have reached $478 million.And that's $478 million and counting. For the duration of his appeal efforts, what Trump owes the state of New York will continue to balloon by another $111,984 in interest every day.It's all part of the penalty for what the judge and state officials found was <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-net-worth-math-even-fuzzier-than-ny-last-alleged-2023-9">a decade of billion-dollar exaggerations</a> in Trump's annual financial statements."The frauds found here leap off the page and shock the conscience," New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, who has presided over <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-fraud-continued-despite-attorney-general-probe-2024-2">the AG's fraud case for more than five years</a>, wrote in his verdict against Trump, his business, and his top executives.Trump has denied any fraud, and his lawyers argue in their appeal that the judgment is unjustified, legally flawed, and excessive.<div type="image" title="An excerpt from the opening argument of Donald Trump's appeal of his New York civil fraud judgment." height="1064" width="1750" msid="113678474" hostid="261" sizebytes="87938"></div>Winning on the state appellate level or, if that fails, <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-lays-groundwork-for-scotus-challenge-ny-civil-fraud-case-2024-1">in federal court </a>would mean the judgment is reversed, and Trump's massive accumulated debt to <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trumps-biggest-worry-is-still-letitia-james-2023-7">Attorney General Letitia James</a> is erased.(After the bench trial, Engoron hit Trump with an initial cash judgment <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-civil-fraud-verdict-whats-in-judge-engorons-decision-2024-2">of $355 million</a>. That rose to $454 million on February 23, when retroactive interest was factored in, and a 9% annual interest rate was applied going forward.)By winning his appeal, Trump would also dodge <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-civil-fraud-verdict-whats-in-judge-engorons-decision-2024-2">the judgment's non-monetary punishments</a>, which are many.Trump would escape the constant gaze of the court-appointed fiscal watchdog <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-organization-judge-orders-watchdog-ny-attorney-general-case-2022-11">monitoring the Trump Organization,</a> Trump's Manhattan-based real-estate and golf-resort empire, since November of 2022.He'd no longer face having a yet-named compliance director preside over all major fiscal decisions.Winning would mean Trump, Donald Trump, Jr., and Eric Trump would no longer face being banned for two years from running Trump Org or any other business in New York state. Gone, too, would be the judgment's three-year ban on Trump and his companies applying for loans from any bank that operates in New York.Trump would also get back<a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-loses-access-to-175m-in-civil-fraud-bond-cash-2024-4"> the $175 million bond</a> — plus more than a million dollars in interest — he had to post in order to hold the AG's office at bay.Losing, though, would deal a significant blow.By appealing, Trump has kept all of these fraud punishments on ice, with the exception of the Trump Org monitoring, which is ongoing. If he exhausts his appeals and loses, those punishments would begin.Losing would also mean the total amount he owes New York — an amount that would reach half a billion dollars if the appeal drags out into the Spring of 2025 — comes due immediately.Read Trump's 116-page appeal <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24955615-2022_452564_people-v-trump_trump_appbrief-stamped">here</a>.

Trump's already massive New York civil fraud penalty has grown by $24M in interest ahead of a Thursday court showdown 

<ul><li>State Bank of India (SBI), Axis Bank, HDFC Bank and other banking stocks are treading on the side of caution ahead of the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword>’s hearing on moratoriums loans today. </li><li>ICICI Bank is the worst hit with its share price dipping by more than 2%.</li><li>The Supreme Court is yet to pass a verdict on whether the moratorium should be extended and if interest on interest should be charged. </li></ul>The Supreme Court is set to resume its hearing on waiving interest on loans that availed moratorium during the coronavirus pandemic today. The last time around, the bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan indicated that it was <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/banks/news/supreme-court-inclined-to-excuse-moratorium-interest-on-interest-as-it-gives-the-government-another-two-weeks-to-file-detailed-affidavit/articleshow/78033878.cms">‘inclined’ to excuse the ‘interest on interest.’</a> However, since then, the hearing has been postponed twice to give the government, <keyword id="6354335" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="reserve-bank-of-india">Reserve Bank of India</keyword> (RBI) and other stakeholders more time to file their response. Banking stocks are cautious in trade ahead of the hearing, most of them in the red. <keyword id="4774972" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="icici-bank-share-price">ICICI Bank share price</keyword> is down by as much as 2%, while others remain largely unchanged. <table style="border-width: initial; border-style: none; width: 468pt; table-layout: fixed;"></colgroup><tbody><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">Bank </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">% change in share price </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">ICICI Bank </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">-2.33% </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">State Bank of India (SBI) </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">-1.06% </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">IndusInd Bank </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">-1.03% </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">Axis Bank </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">-0.42% </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">HDFC Bank </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">-4.0% </td></tr></tbody></table>Source: Share price as of 10:10am on BSE According to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, a committee had been formed at the ‘highest levels’ to decide on moratorium extension, interest during the moratorium, interest on interest, and other issues related to the moratorium period. The RBI’s stance on loan moratorium In its affidavit, the RBI told the Supreme Court that extending the moratorium beyond six months will impact overall credit discipline and have a ‘debilitating impact’ on the credit creation process. On the issue of compound interest, the RBI asserted that waiver of the same would result in ‘significant economic costs’ for banks to absorb. The larger ripple effect may lead to implications for borrowers and undermine broader financial stability. Central government’s take on loan moratorium The central government asserted that it would waive compound interest (interest on interest) during the moratorium period for MSMEs and personal loans up to ₹2 crore in its affidavit filed ahead of the last hearing. However, Senior Advocate C. Aryama Sundaram argued that the real estate sector is completely left out of the scope. The bench was also not pleased, highlighting that the central government’s affidavit did not provide the necessary details regarding the questions asked by the court earlier. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/defense/news/india-china-disengagement-looks-unlikely-with-more-chinese-troops-reportedly-being-deployed-at-the-border/articleshow/78632960.cms">Chinese PLA is reportedly rotating troops despite India's insistence on disengagement from friction points along the border</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/corporates/news/wipros-second-quarter-will-be-telling-of-how-its-new-ceo-is-steering-the-ship/articleshow/78623027.cms">Wipro's second-quarter will be telling of how its new CEO is steering the ship</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/policy/economy/news/sitharaman-offers-states-12000-crore-interest-free-for-the-next-50-years-if-they-can-spend-it-on-capital-projects-by-march-2021/articleshow/78616741.cms">Sitharaman offers states ₹12,000 crore interest-free for the next 50 years if they can spend it on capital projects by March 2021</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/space/news/mars-will-appear-bigger-redder-and-brighter-on-october-13-and-wont-get-this-close-to-earth-again-until-2035/articleshow/78556539.cms">Mars will appear bigger, redder, and brighter on October 13 — and won’t get this close to Earth again until 2035</a>

You Searched For "supreme court verdict on loan moratorium" and got 8 results

SC to hear plea related to insolvency proceedings against ed-tech firm Byju's on Sept 17

PTI

Supreme Court agrees to list plea related to insolvency proceedings against ed-tech firm Byju's

PTI

NY appellate judges voice serious doubts about Trump's $454M civil fraud verdict

Laura Italiano

Supreme Court verdict on loan moratorium case deferred to November 5

PTI

The Supreme Court shut down Biden's student loan forgiveness and refinancing startups are waiting to pounce

Thomas Gokey

Trump has laid the groundwork for a US Supreme Court challenge in his NY civil fraud case: experts

Laura Italiano

Trump's already massive New York civil fraud penalty has grown by $24M in interest ahead of a Thursday court showdown

Laura Italiano

SBI, HDFC Bank, Axis Bank and other bank stocks tread caution as they wait with bated breath for Supreme Court verdict on moratorium

Prabhjote Gill

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides