The Marginal Propensity To Save: A Measure Of Human Prudence And Economic Impact

The arrival of unexpected capital is rarely a neutral event; it presents an immediate, almost ethical dilemma. The Marginal Propensity to Save (MPS) is not merely an arithmetic quotient, but a measure of human prudence—the precise share of a sudden income elevation that is deliberately sequestered, withheld from the urgent cycle of consumption.

It is the numerical fingerprint of foresight. This quantification is indispensable for economists attempting to gauge the expansive—or constrained—reach of monetary intervention, forcing the complex theatre of financial restraint into a manageable, necessary fraction.

This ratio captures the quiet battle between immediate gratification and future certainty.

When, for instance, a consumer receives an unforeseen $1,000 increase in earnings, the destiny of that sum reveals itself swiftly. Should $200 be allotted to the savings apparatus, the MPS settles at 0.2. This is the simple, profound calculation: the change in savings divided by the change in income. This seemingly cold metric reflects the variation of choices across different economic strata, observing that those with lower cumulative incomes often exhibit a markedly different propensity than those in affluent bands; marginal decisions are not uniform, but reflect prevailing realities.

Isolating the Propensity: Calculation and Example

Consider the unique predicament of an individual who receives a $500 unexpected supplement with their regular remuneration.

The impulse might be the acquisition of a specific, tangible object—say, an exquisitely tailored business suit, absorbing $400 of the windfall in immediate utility. The remaining $100, the silent portion, is the true subject of this analysis. When we divide that $100 increment in savings by the $500 change in income, we isolate an MPS of 0.2. This ratio, seemingly pedestrian, is the mathematical reflection of an individual’s immediate disposition toward caution.

If this MPS were 0.8, the vast majority of that marginal income would have been placed beyond the immediate reach of the marketplace, signifying a robust preference for future leverage.

The Keynesian Dampener and the Multiplier

The MPS carries a significant weight far beyond the individual’s balance sheet; it dictates the velocity and extent of economic ripple effects.

In Keynesian terms, a high MPS acts as a deliberate brake on the perpetual motion machine of expenditure. The more rigidly individuals cling to new income, the less kinetic energy is imparted to the broader economy. This characteristic dampening effect is precisely why an elevated MPS shrinks the expenditures multiplier. If the MPS is high, any injection of government spending or investment—meant to multiply throughout the system—will quickly leak out into savings accounts, preventing the anticipated cascade of transaction and growth.

Economists must determine the prevailing MPS before accurately modeling how governmental fiscal policies will circulate through the entire infrastructure of consumption and production.

• Core Definition MPS is the change in savings divided by the change in income ($\Delta S / \Delta Y$).
• Keynesian Impact An increase in the Marginal Propensity to Save actively reduces the magnitude of the Keynesian multiplier, limiting subsequent rounds of spending.
• Income Variation The value of MPS is rarely static across a population; it frequently increases as overall income levels rise.

The Complementary Truth: MPC

The marginal propensity to consume (MPC) serves as the necessary, indivisible complement to the MPS. These two factors—consumption and saving—must necessarily exhaust the whole of any marginal increase in income.

Thus, the sum of MPC and MPS must always equal one. Where the MPS identifies the portion reserved for the future, the MPC explicitly shows the immediate impact on purchasing levels. Understanding this duality allows economists a complete view of behavioral responses to external financial shifts. It is an acknowledgment that every dollar earned, every unexpected gain, must find its resting place either in the pursuit of present needs or the foundation of future certainty.

The propensity to save is not merely a matter of thriftiness, but a complex interplay of psychological, social, and economic factors." As John Maynard Keynes once astutely observed, the relationship between income and saving is far more nuanced than it initially appears. In the realm of economics, the concept of Marginal Propensity to Save (MPS) plays a crucial role in understanding this dynamic.

The Marginal Propensity to Save refers to the change in saving that occurs in response to a change in income.

It is a measure of how much of an additional dollar earned is saved, rather than spent. This concept is essential in macroeconomic theory, as it helps economists understand how changes in aggregate income affect overall saving and spending patterns.

A higher MPS indicates that individuals are more likely to save a larger portion of their income, whereas a lower MPS suggests that they are more inclined to spend.

The MPS is influenced by various factors, including income level, interest rates, and consumer confidence. For instance, during periods of economic uncertainty, individuals may be more likely to save a larger portion of their income, thereby increasing the MPS. Conversely, when interest rates are low, people may be more inclined to borrow and spend, reducing the MPS.

○○○ ○ ○○○

In Keynesian economics , the marginal propensity to save (MPS) is the share of an income increase that gets saved rather than spent, calculated as:

Looking to read more like this: Check here

Navigating Numerical Destiny: The Accounting Sector's High-Stakes Approach To 2026

The new year, for those keepers of the ledger and interpreters of profit, is not merely a rotational shift of the earth but an immediate, demanding appointment with numerical destiny. While the wider world celebrates the turning of the calendar page, the accounting sector engages in a meticulous, high-stakes divination, attempting to calibrate the precise chaos of the coming twelve months.

The *Accounting Today* annual survey, compiled in the fading light of the late fall, functions as a kind of bureaucratic augury, capturing the collective aspirations—the deeply felt, often contradictory ledger-book dreaming—that will define 2026. The major themes emerging are less simple statistical projections and more philosophical statements about the nature of modern enterprise: the aggressive, almost ravenous pursuit of growth, the perplexing human equation of hiring plans, and the annual, inevitable choreography of the tax season.

This hunger for expansion is the most compelling numerical phantasm of all.

Firms are not merely hoping to maintain; they are sketching blueprints for exponential uplift, seeing market complexity not as a hindrance but as an expansive new territory demanding cartography. Yet, the paradox remains the most brilliant, confusing aspect of this planned trajectory: why, in the promised era of frictionless automation, does aggressive growth necessitate an equally aggressive surge in hiring?

The numbers confirm a unique empathy for the human capacity: the digital machine, it seems, can only be fueled by an ever-increasing number of skilled hands—those who possess the capacity for critical, nuanced judgment that algorithms still fumble. We find ourselves in a moment where the very efficiency promised by technology demands a vast increase in the *personnel* required to verify, implement, and ultimately, account for that efficiency; the chronometer of commerce demands not fewer watchmakers, but more.

The anticipation surrounding the 2026 tax season—the ultimate reckoning—reflects a quiet, determined optimism, tempered by the absolute certainty of legislative surprise.

Firms approach this monumental, annual compression of activity not with dread, but with a sharpened focus, recognizing that this period is the purest demonstration of their value. It is the moment when all the theoretical growth plans and ambitious hiring strategies converge into tangible, certifiable reality. To successfully navigate the labyrinthine compliance demands and emerging state-level complexities means ▩▧▦ filing papers; it means successfully underwriting the financial narratives of countless endeavors.

This collective confidence, built upon disciplined realism, underscores a fundamental truth: even in a world obsessed with instantaneous data streams, the reliable certification of economic truth remains a profoundly hopeful, human endeavor, guiding us forward through the fog of fiscal uncertainty.

As we embark on the precipice of a new era, the accounting industry stands at the threshold of transformation, poised to redefine its very essence. The clarion call of change resonates through the hallowed halls of finance, beckoning professionals to adapt, to evolve, and to thrive in a world where the rules of engagement are being rewritten.

It is in this crucible of change that we find the seeds of opportunity, waiting to be nurtured by visionary leaders who dare to reimagine the future.

The ascendancy of automation and artificial intelligence will continue to reshape the accounting landscape, liberating professionals from the drudgery of routine tasks and empowering them to focus on high-value services that require human ingenuity and creativity.

The early adopters of these technologies will be the ones who reap the greatest rewards, as they harness the power of data analytics to drive business growth, mitigate risk, and deliver unparalleled client experiences.

For instance, the integration of machine learning algorithms into accounting software will enable firms to identify patterns and anomalies in financial data, providing valuable insights that inform strategic decision-making. As the global economy continues to navigate the complexities of a post-pandemic world, the accounting industry will be called upon to play a pivotal role in shaping the future of business.

◌◌◌ ◌ ◌◌◌

With the new year upon us, it's worth thinking about what 2026 will bring, and what accounting firms expect their next 12 months to look like.

Here's one of the sources related to this article: Visit website

The Devastating Consequences Of Corporate Accounting Scandals: Lessons Learned From Enron's Collapse

The 2000-2001 California energy crisis exposed Enron's corrupt practices, including an energy trader's callous remark about a wildfire driving up prices through market manipulation.

Enron's collapse led to significant consequences, including the ___ of employee pensions and the downfall of Arthur Andersen, one of America's most respected accounting firms.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was passed in response to Enron's failure, establishing the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) to oversee auditing practices.

The PCAOB was created to prevent similar corporate accounting scandals, but Congress is now considering legislation to dissolve it and transfer its powers to the SEC.

Supporters of the legislation argue it will increase efficiency, while critics claim it is a case of amnesia, forgetting the lessons learned from Enron's collapse.

In the early 2000s, many iconic American corporations appeared to be thriving, but beneath the surface, they were engaging in questionable accounting practices.

Companies like Enron, WorldCom, and Tyco manipulated accounting rules to hide debt, inflate earnings, and loot company funds.

The largest audit firms were earning more from consulting fees than from auditing, creating a conflict of interest that compromised their independence

The world of corporate accounting is often shrouded in complexity, making it a fertile ground for scandals to emerge. One of the most significant factors contributing to these scandals is the inherent conflict of interest that exists between a company's management and its auditors. When auditors are beholden to their clients for lucrative consulting fees, their independence is inevitably compromised.

This can lead to a lack of scrutiny over a company's financial statements, allowing dubious accounting practices to go unchecked.

According to a report in The CPA Journal, such conflicts of interest can have far-reaching consequences, including the manipulation of financial statements and the concealment of debt.

The consequences of corporate accounting scandals can be devastating, as witnessed in the case of Enron. The company's collapse in 2001 led to a --- of billions of dollars for investors and employees, as well as a crisis of confidence in the financial markets.

The repercussions were felt far beyond the company's own stakeholders, with the entire economy suffering as a result.

In the aftermath of Enron's collapse, regulators were forced to re-examine the existing regulatory framework and introduce new measures to prevent similar scandals from occurring in the future.

• • • •

These words came from an Enron energy trader, caught on tape during the 2000–2001 California energy crisis celebrating a wildfire that disrupted ...

You might also find this interesting: See here

Navigating Constructive Receipt: Tax Planning Opportunities And Challenges

The scent of cinnamon and betrayal, often indistinguishable in December air, does not change the ticking of the fiscal clock. We often treat money as a tangible thing, a stack of bills or a bank transfer waiting patiently in the future, yet the Internal Revenue Service views income recognition through a lens far more abstract, demanding consideration of availability over physical possession.

This creates an extraordinary tension for taxpayers approaching the close of a calendar year, especially when substantial funds are pending. Reporting a payment slated for January 2026 on a 2025 return appears, on its surface, to violate the bedrock principle of prudent tax planning: always defer income when possible.

This defiance is exactly where the strategic, often counterintuitive, planning opportunity lies.

The Fiscal Shadow of Constructive Receipt

Constructive receipt is a deliberate mechanism designed to prevent opportunistic income manipulation by taxpayers who attempt to arbitrarily push taxable events into a later year.

Income is recognized the moment the taxpayer possesses an unqualified, vested right to the funds, irrespective of when they choose to physically collect the money. It doesn't matter if you decline the check, or politely request the payor hold the deposit; if the funds are ready, they are income. This strict timing principle establishes a high hurdle for those who prefer to simply delay tax liability.

Yet, the question is not always *how* to defer, but occasionally, *why* one might choose to accelerate the recognition of funds that technically belong to the next tax cycle.

The motivation driving this calculated maneuver is often tied directly to anticipated rate fluctuations. If an individual experienced a year of unusually low earnings in 2025, or if they anticipate being vaulted into a dramatically higher tax bracket in 2026 due to future scheduled income increases or expected legislative changes, recognizing the income now becomes financially advantageous.

Paying taxes on the 2026 funds at a relatively low 2025 marginal rate is a palpable relief, a moment of fiscal triumph over the relentless march of increasing tax burdens.

When Timing Becomes Contradictory

The application of constructive receipt becomes notoriously confusing when dissecting legal settlements, an area where timing is fiercely negotiated.

Imagine a plaintiff agrees orally to a settlement in December 2025, but the terms explicitly dictate the transfer of funds will occur on January 5, 2026. Does the taxpayer have constructive receipt in 2025 merely because they *could have* demanded immediate payment? The IRS typically holds that unless the taxpayer had an actual, unqualified right to collect the funds in December—meaning the money was set aside and available without restriction—constructive receipt is not triggered.

The explicit contractual delay overrides the general availability.

• The Critical Differentiation An oral agreement establishing intent is insufficient; the taxpayer must possess the immediate, unrestricted power to demand the principal.
• Agent Status Paradox A common and confusing point revolves around the taxpayer's attorney. If the attorney receives the settlement funds in December 2025, they are often considered the client's agent. Income recognition sometimes occurs when the agent receives the funds, regardless of when the client physically accepts them.
• Strategic Reversal If that agency argument works for the Internal Revenue Service against the client (forcing early recognition), it also works *for* the client against the Internal Revenue Service. If the taxpayer seeks to report the income in 2025 because of a beneficial lower rate, they must assert that their lawyer's December receipt of the funds constituted their own constructive receipt that year.

This strategic acceleration hinges on the stark difference between the financial landscape of the two years. If 2025 was a quiet period, a year defined by lower tax rates or strategic losses, pulling income forward from 2026 provides immediate tax savings, locking in the lower rate before the anticipated higher rate of the new year takes hold.

It is a precise strike against future liability, turning the rule meant to prevent income manipulation into a powerful tool for careful tax reduction. The opportunity demands detailed analysis of both current and future financial status; fortune, in tax matters, favors the prepared mind.

Effective tax planning is a crucial aspect of financial management, allowing individuals and businesses to minimize their tax liability and maximize their savings. A well-crafted tax strategy can help reduce the amount of taxes owed, increase cash flow, and improve overall financial health. By understanding the intricacies of tax laws and regulations, individuals and businesses can make informed decisions about their financial affairs.

One key component of tax planning is taking advantage of available deductions and credits.

These can include things like charitable donations, mortgage interest, and education expenses. By keeping accurate records and staying organized, individuals can ensure they are claiming all the deductions and credits they are eligible for.

Businesses can benefit from tax credits for things like research and development, and hiring certain types of employees.

Another important aspect of tax planning is understanding the impact of taxes on investments. Different types of investments, such as stocks, bonds, and real estate, are taxed differently. By understanding these tax implications, individuals can make informed decisions about their investment portfolios and minimize their tax liability.

For example, long-term capital gains on investments are typically taxed at a lower rate than short-term gains. Tax planning is not a one-time task, but rather an ongoing process.

As tax laws and regulations change, individuals and businesses must adapt their strategies to stay ahead ← →

●●● ●●●

Reporting a payment that you received in 2026 on your 2025 tax return sounds like poor tax planning.

Here's one of the sources related to this article: See here

The Strategic Imperative Of Outsourcing In Modern Business

The old wisdom insists on control: keep the treasury key within your own fortress walls, let no stranger count your gold. Yet, Loran Armstrong, the Chief Operating Officer at Rockwell Capital Group, witnessing the relentless, volatile churn of small and mid-sized ventures, knows better. Strategic partnership is the grim necessity of the modern age.

Cost-cutting remains the easy shadow, the common explanation for strategic withdrawal from internal duties. But the real leverage—the unique power—lies not in saving coins, but in securing the foundations for growth. Successful business leaders understand this cold, strategic calculus. They know when to seek external alliances, when to deploy specialized expertise against the unforgiving competition.

To treat the delegation of essential financial stewardship merely as a means to shave expenses misses the terrifying, wonderful truth of market dynamics. It is a deliberate application of force, a mechanism to propel expansion where internal efforts inevitably stall.

The burden placed upon the solitary in-house accountant is a doomed effort.

Expecting one soul to master the complex, shifting matrix of tax codes, manage immediate cash flow, and simultaneously act as a predictive, strategic advisor—a jester and a general all in one—is unfeasible. Outsourcing delivers not just manpower, but a council of dedicated experts, a bench of seasoned veterans whose specialties cover every treacherous financial landscape.

The need for expertise on demand is immediate, often unanticipated. Consider the plight of the Software-as-a-Service firm whose expansion had utterly outpaced its administrative structure. They needed investor-ready financials, sharp enough to withstand intense due diligence, yet they lacked the time or immediate capital to install a full-time, high-level CFO. Fractional CFO services provided the necessary strategic heft.

They built financial models for the immediate crisis. A confusing, costly, but utterly necessary compromise to secure survival.

Business does not advance in the straight line favored by naive cartographers. It swerves, brutally. Sudden winter can follow a decade of bountiful harvest. One month, the coffers overflow with new clients; the next, austerity must reign supreme.

Adaptability, that forgotten virtue, becomes the absolute price of life itself. Outsourcing offers this elasticity; the ability to scale specialized services up or down without the agonizing process of mass hiring, extended training, or the cruel necessity of dismissal. We saw this reality starkly etched during the pandemic’s terrifying dawn.

Companies pivoting—launching new wares, shifting operations online, restructuring entire teams—a terrifying transformation demanded within days. Cash runways recalculated within forty-eight hours. Emergency funding managed in the space of a single, breathless weekend. This is not mere bookkeeping. This is financial battlefield logistics.

Survival demands ruthless speed.

The realm of accounting and finance, once a bastion of in-house expertise, has witnessed a significant shift recently. Many organizations have come to realize that outsourcing these critical functions can be a shrewd business move, allowing them to tap into specialized knowledge and expertise while reducing costs.

According to Forbes, this trend is on the rise, with an increasing number of companies opting to outsource their accounting and finance operations.

One of the primary drivers behind this trend is the scarcity of skilled accounting and finance professionals. As the global economy continues to evolve, the demand for expertise in areas such as financial planning, tax compliance, and risk management has never been higher.

By outsourcing these functions, companies can access a pool of experienced professionals who possess the necessary skills and knowledge to navigate complex financial landscapes.

This, in turn, enables businesses to focus on their core competencies, driving growth and innovation. Forbes notes that outsourcing accounting and finance functions can also provide companies with a significant cost advantage.

By partnering with a third-party provider, organizations can avoid the expenses associated with recruiting, training, and retaining in-house staff. Outsourcing allows companies to benefit from economies of scale, as providers can spread their costs across multiple clients.

◌◌◌ ◌ ◌◌◌

Loran Armstrong is the chief operating officer at Rockwell Capital Group , which provides expert accounting and tax services.

Related perspectives: See here

The Key To Effective Education Budgeting And Planning

Forty-six percent. Almost half of the nation's K-12 administrators identified a singular, critical failing point in resource allocation: the absence of early, strategic consensus. This figure, unearthed by the EdWeek Research Center, is a direct signal—a flashing red light in the complex architecture of academic finance.

Education cannot afford impulse buys. Annual budgeting often becomes a desperate, reactive sprint, driven by immediate gaps and expiring funds rather than sustained pedagogical vision. District leaders, those entrusted with the long arc of learning, recognize the profound danger of this myopia. They demand a systematic shift in timing, a necessary deceleration of the decision-making velocity. The future of teaching and learning, they assert, hinges not merely on *what* they spend, but *when* the foundational discussions ignite among department leaders.

The remedy, surprisingly, is temporal.

Nearly as many, 45% of the surveyed cohort—90 district and 133 school leaders analyzed in the June assessment—identified an almost identical precursor to success: simply beginning the overall budget dialogue, even the nascent, preliminary exchange, at an earlier calendar juncture. The results were conclusive: time is the non-monetary resource needed to protect all other resources.

This endeavor is not about tweaking minor line items. This is about establishing a necessary five-year trajectory, mapping a decade of potential academic growth long before the fiscal pressure mounts. A project of this magnitude demands rigorous scrutiny, which is precisely why the research stems from an ongoing, strategic research endeavor, backed by the formidable goals of the Gates Foundation, focused entirely on strategic resourcing for teaching and learning goals.

The administrators are seeking clarity in the chaos of resource distribution.

They understand that premature spending often freezes innovation, stifling the unique, long-term investments that truly transform student outcomes. Imagine the potential: curriculum development aligned not just for next fall, but for the graduating class of 2030, a long-range vision finally executable. Investment in specialized professional learning modules designed to address highly unique student needs, finalized months before necessity dictates panic purchasing.

The insight is empathetic—leaders are not seeking more revenue; they are seeking more *opportunity* to allocate existing funds wisely and strategically. Synchronization among department heads—the academic dean, the technology coordinator, the special education director—early, honest discussion is the crucial mechanism.

The cryptic financial equation solved. Progress awaits.

The art of education budgeting and planning is a complex puzzle, with numerous pieces that must be carefully crafted to ensure a comprehensive and effective educational experience. According to a report by Education Week, a leading source of education news and analysis, the process of budgeting and planning is crucial in shaping the future of our schools and students.

It involves a delicate balance of allocating resources, prioritizing needs, and making tough decisions that impact the quality of education.

At the heart of education budgeting and planning lies the challenge of resource allocation. School administrators must navigate a maze of financial constraints, competing priorities, and shifting educational landscapes.

They must weigh the costs of hiring new teachers, investing in technology, and maintaining infrastructure against the need to provide a well-rounded education that prepares students for success.

A misstep in this process can have far-reaching consequences, from inadequate facilities to insufficient support for students with special needs.

Effective education budgeting and planning also require a deep understanding of the local community and its needs. School leaders must engage with parents, teachers, and local stakeholders to identify areas of concern and develop targeted solutions.

This collaborative approach can help build trust, foster a sense of ownership, and ensure that resources are being used efficiently.

○○○ ○ ○○○

The EdWeek Research Center recently asked K-12 administrators across the country what approaches would help them make strategically sound, long-term...

Find other details related to this topic: Check here

New Tax Deductions For Tipped Workers: Navigating The Complexities Of Qualified Tip Income And ...

The most difficult things to discard are single leather gloves and chipped porcelain bells, those small indicators of a forgotten trajectory. This sudden, precise focus on items often left behind is perhaps analogous to the recent scrutiny applied to the most transient element of a service worker's income: the cash tip, the extra shift of qualified overtime.

It is money that lives, often quite literally, in the palm of one's hand, historically tracked with hurried penmanship or simply internalized, now subject to the bureaucratic demands of a significant new tax benefit. Washington, D.C., through the Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, has issued Notice 2025-69, a document intended to clarify the path for those claiming deductions stemming from the monumental piece of legislation colloquially known as the One, Big, Beautiful Bill.

This measure represents a genuine lift for those whose earnings fluctuate based on the whims of public engagement and seasonal fervor.

For Tax Year 2025, workers may claim new deductions for qualified tips and overtime compensation, relief set to endure through 2028. The complexity arises not from the deduction itself—a clear fiscal advantage—but from the mechanics of claiming it. The standard information returns, such as Form W-2 and Form 1099, remain stubbornly static, offering no separate accounting mechanism for the deductions now permitted.

The worker must determine the amount of this valuable deduction without their employer providing the necessary, granular separation. This necessity forces a deep dive into personal record-keeping, transforming the ephemeral nature of a cash tip received at 11:30 p.m. on a Tuesday into a required entry in the ledger of one’s financial life.

The Labyrinth of Self-Assessment

The guidance issued today attempts to smooth the edges of this bureaucratic friction, offering specific examples to illustrate the situations tipped employees face.

Think of the specialized trades: the sommelier receiving cash for uncorking a particularly rare bottle, the shuttle driver accumulating small, daily amounts, or the delivery courier whose tips often arrive through third-party platforms that may or may not delineate "qualified" status precisely. These individuals, navigating specified service trades or businesses, are specifically offered transition relief.

Their challenge is unique because the system requires them to perform a kind of retroactive audit of their own cash flows, reconciling what was merely counted for immediate use against the newly imposed definitions of tax-eligible compensation.

The Phasing Threshold

For the individual who relies heavily on qualified tip income, the benefits are substantial, yet they disappear with a suddenness typical of federal mandates.

A worker may claim a maximum annual deduction of $25,000 for tips. However, this full benefit begins its steep descent—a kind of fiscal cliff edge—once the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income exceeds $150,000. For married individuals filing jointly, the phase-out initiates at $300,000. This design ensures that the benefit is targeted, focusing relief where the income structure relies most heavily on hourly wages supplemented by volatile tipping practices.

The IRS is currently engaged in the necessary, meticulous work of updating income tax forms and instructions; this preparation signals a positive intent to simplify the claiming process, ensuring that the benefits of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill are accessible to the millions who keep the service economy running, often while standing on their feet for ten hours straight.

It is a moment where the invisible efforts of daily labor are, for a brief window, made visible and financially acknowledged.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service issued guidance for workers eligible to claim the deduction for ...

Other related sources and context: Visit website