Financial Academy

Maroon 5's "Girls Like You," featuring Cardi B, spends a sixth week at No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart (dated Nov. 3), fending off a challenge from Travis Scott's "Sicko Mode," which charges from No. 7 to No. 2 following the arrival of its official video.

Plus, Post Malone and Swae Lee debut at No. 9 with "Sunflower (Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse)."

Let's run down the top 10 on the newest Hot 100, which blends all-genre U.S. streaming, radio airplay and digital sales data. All charts will update on Billboard.com tomorrow (Oct. 30).

MAGIC!-al run: With a sixth week at No. 1 on the Hot 100, "Girls" boasts the longest reign by a group (of at least three members) in over four years, since MAGIC!'s "Rude" also led for six weeks, beginning July 26, 2014.

The last such longer run at No. 1? By, guess who: Maroon 5's own "One More Night" led for nine weeks beginning Sept. 29, 2012.

Ties for longest-leading radio hit since 2005: "Girls" leads the Radio Songs chart for a 14th week, with 116.1 million in audience, down 3 percent, in the week ending Oct. 28, according to Nielsen Music.

"Girls" ties Alicia Keys' "No One," in 2007-08, for the second-longest Radio Songs command this century (and continues as the longest-leading No. 1 by a group this century), after Mariah Carey's "We Belong Together" in 2005. Since the chart launched in December 1990, "Girls" moves into a fourth-place tie for the most time on top:

Longest-Leading Radio Songs No. 1s
Weeks at No. 1, Title, Artist, Date Reached No. 1
18, "Iris," Goo Goo Dolls, Aug. 1, 1998
16, "We Belong Together," Mariah Carey, May 28, 2005
16, "Don't Speak," No Doubt, Dec. 7, 1996
14, "Girls Like You," Maroon 5 feat. Cardi B, Aug. 4, 2018
14, "No One," Alicia Keys, Nov. 3, 2007
14, "Because You Loved Me," Celine Dion, April 13, 1996
13, "No Scrubs," TLC, March 20, 1999
13, "I Love You Always Forever," Donna Lewis, Aug. 24, 1996
13, "One Sweet Day," Mariah Carey & Boyz II Men, Dec.  9, 1995
13, "The Sign," Ace of Base, Feb. 26, 1994
13, "End of the Road," Boyz II Men, Aug. 22, 1992

"Girls" holds at No. 9 on Digital Song Sales, with 17,000 downloads sold, down 18 percent, in the week ending Oct. 25, after leading the list for six weeks, and dips 11-12 on Streaming Songs (24.5 million U.S. streams, down 3 percent, in the week ending Oct. 25), where it reached No. 5.

"Sicko" move: Travis Scott's "Sicko Mode" surges 7-2 on the Hot 100, following the Oct. 19 premiere of its official video, besting its prior No. 4 peak set upon its Aug. 18 debut. Scott matches his best Hot 100 rank, after his featured turn, with Offset, on Kodak Black's "Zeze," which debuted at No. 2 a week ago and this week falls to No. 6 (while holding at No. 1 on Streaming Songs; 42.2 million, down 11 percent).

"Sicko" (which features Drake's vocals, although he's not credited as an artist on the song; he's also in the new video) jumps 5-2, returning to its highpoint, on Steaming Songs, up 41 percent to 38.5 million, good for top Steaming Gainer honors on the Hot 100. The track pushes 13-11 on Radio Songs (58.2 million, up 16 percent) and 22-14 on Digital Song Sales (14,000, up 37 percent).

Maroon 5's "Girls" narrowly defends its Hot 100 crown, despite declining by 5 percent, while  "Sicko" gains by 30 percent.

Meanwhile, "Sicko" hits No. 1 for the first time on both the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs and Hot Rap Songs charts.

Juice WRLD's "Lucid Dreams" holds at No. 3 on the Hot 100 after reaching No. 2. As previously reported, the rapper's collaborative album with Future, Future & Juice WRLD Present... Wrld On Drugs, launches at No. 2 on the Billboard 200 (as Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper's A Star Is Born soundtrack leads the list for a third week).

Rock on: Marshmello and Bastille's "Happier" hits the Hot 100's top five, lifting 6-4, as it pushes 5-4 on Digital Song Sales (26,000, up 11 percent); 9-5 on Radio Songs (74.6 million, up 21 percent), adding the Hot 100's top Airplay Gainer award for a fifth straight week; and 14-13 on Streaming Songs (21.7 million, up 5 percent).

As pointed out by insightful chart watcher Tim Briody, "Happier" holds at its No. 3 high on Alternative Songs and becomes the first hit that has charted on Alternative Songs to make its first appearance in the Hot 100's top five this year. It's the first song to achieve the feat since Imagine Dragons' "Thunder," which peaked at No. 4 on the Hot 100 last December (becoming the fourth such hit of 2017).

"Happier" spends a fifth week at No. 1 on the Hot Dance/Electronic Songs chart.

Post Malone's "Better Now" slips 4-5 on the Hot 100, after hitting No. 3; as noted above, "Zeze" descends 2-6; 5 Seconds of Summer's "Youngblood" rebounds to its No. 7 high from No. 9; and, Lil Baby and Gunna's "Drip Too Hard" keeps at No. 8 following its No. 4 peak.

Web gem: Post Malone and Swae Lee spin their way to a No. 9 Hot 100 debut with "Sunflower (Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse)." Following its first full week of tracking, it enters Digital Song Sales at No. 6 (24,000) and Streaming Songs at No. 8 (24.2 million), while sporting 13.2 million in airplay audience.

Post Malone adds his fifth Hot 100 top 10 (and fourth to debut in the region) and Swae Lee scores his second, following French Montana's "Unforgettable," on which he's featured (No. 3, August 2017). (Rae Sremmurd, of which Swae Lee is half, with brother Slim Jxmmi, has also charted in the tier, with the seven-week No. 1 "Black Beatles," featuring Gucci Mane, in 2016-17.)

"Sunflower" is the first single from the animated Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse soundtrack, due Dec. 14, the day that the film (featuring the voices of Shameik Moore, Hailee Steinfeld and Mahershala Ali, among others) opens nationwide. The song is the second Hot 100 top 10 from a Spider-Man soundtrack, and the first in 16 years; Chad Kroeger's "Hero," featuring Josey Scott, from Music from and Inspired by Spider-Man, hit No. 3 in July 2002.

Rounding out the Hot 100's top 10, Khalid and Normani's "Love Lies" returns to the bracket (14-10), after reaching No. 9 (Sept. 8).

Just beyond the Hot 100's top 10, DJ Snake's "Taki Taki," featuring Selena Gomez, Ozuna and Cardi B, jumps 16-11, as it returns for a third week atop Hot Latin Songs; Halsey's "Without Me" bounds 23-12 on the Hot 100, as the chart's top Sales Gainer (27,000 sold, up 27 percent); and, Sheck Wes' "Mo Bamba" hits the top 20 (21-16).

Find out more Hot 100 news on Billboard.com this week and, for all chart news, you can listen (and subscribe) to Billboard's Chart Beat Podcast and Pop Shop Podcast and follow @billboard and @billboardcharts. And again, be sure to visit Billboard.com tomorrow (Oct. 30), when all charts, including the Hot 100 in its entirety, will refresh. The next issue of Billboard magazine is on sale Friday (Nov. 2).

© Copyright 2019 PTI. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of PTI content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent.

By choosing “I agree” below, you agree that NPR’s sites use cookies, similar tracking and storage technologies, and information about the device you use to access our sites to enhance your viewing, listening and user experience, personalize content, personalize messages from NPR’s sponsors, provide social media features, and analyze NPR’s traffic. This information is shared with social media services, sponsorship, analytics and other third-party service providers. See details.

© Rebecca Headings

Rebecca Headings’s husband, U.S. Navy Senior Chief Petty Officer Gary Headings, died of a heart attack at age 39 in 2017.

After Mr. Headings’s death, his son began getting an annual survivor’s benefit paid to many families who have lost active-duty service members—often called Gold Star families. Last year, that benefit was about $29,300.

But his son, age 6, owed nearly $7,000 in federal taxes on it.

“At first I was stunned, and then angry. My child’s tax rate is higher than mine,” says Ms. Headings, a social worker in Virginia Beach.

Ms. Headings’s top rate on her 2018 income of less than $55,000 was 12%. Her son’s top rate is 37%.

Get news and analysis on politics, policy, national security and more, delivered right to your inbox

In past years, her son’s tax bill would have been far lower. But a 2017 change to the so-called Kiddie Tax often boosts rates on “unearned” income received by children of middle- and low-income families—including her son.

Ms. Headings is now scrambling to spend $500 less per month due to the tax on her son’s benefit. And her family isn’t alone.

The Kiddie Tax is a decades-old law meant to prevent the wealthy from shifting assets to children in order to take advantage of their lower income-tax rates.

But a revision to the tax in the big overhaul passed by Congress in 2017 is raising taxes on as many as 10,000 children of deceased service members who earn an average annual benefit of about $13,000, according to Department of Defense data provided by the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, or TAPS. It’s a nonprofit group for families who have lost service members that’s working to change the law.

And the new rules reach well beyond military families. They can also raise taxes on children from lower-income families who receive income after a tragedy and pose a threat to millions of students receiving college financial aid.

Congress passed the Kiddie Tax in 1986. Until then a parent could, say, give a child appreciated stock and the child could sell it, pay tax at lower rates, and use the proceeds to pay for college tuition or a Corvette.

The 1986 provision levied the Kiddie Tax on a broad range of children’s “unearned” income above an exemption, which currently is $2,200. Above that amount, the children owed tax at the parents’ rate. The levy has never applied to a youngster’s earnings from being a camp counselor or designing websites.

Many features of the 1986 Kiddie Tax were complex, however. To simplify, the 2017 overhaul switched the Kiddie Tax rate from the parents’ rate to trust tax rates. These kick in at a very low level of taxable income: For 2019, the top rate of 37% takes effect at just $12,750.

The revision reduces complexity, and often the switch in rates makes little difference to high-earning families. But it can be disastrous for lower-earning families.

Without the 2017 change, Ms. Headings’s son would have owed tax on his $29,300 benefit at her rate, which was 12% for 2018. But with the switch to trust tax rates, his top rate rose to 37% and his total tax due was much higher.

James Conniff, an accountant in Boston, says he has a 16-year-old client whose mother died of cancer in her forties, leaving him real-estate income of about $36,000 a year. With it he pays rent on an apartment for himself and his father, who earns about $41,000 annually as a retail worker.

For 2018, the father’s top rate was 12% while the child’s rate was 37%, due to the new Kiddie Tax.

“This change is outrageous, and I can’t believe Congress intended it,” says Mr. Conniff.

The Kiddie Tax revision also threatens college students from lower-income families who receive financial aid for expenses other than tuition and supplies. By law such income is taxable, says Tim Steffen, a tax specialist with Robert W. Baird & Co.

If a family is in a low tax bracket, then a child receiving taxable aid could wind up in a much higher bracket—with no money to pay the tax. Mark Kantrowitz, the publisher of Savingforcollege.com, estimates that more than three million students could be affected.

The Kiddie Tax revision isn’t yet a disaster for some of these students for two reasons. Colleges aren’t currently required to report taxable aid to the Internal Revenue Service, and many don’t. Also, the IRS doesn’t seem to be enforcing the law in this area, tax specialists say.

Still, the law is on the books. Financial-aid providers are alarmed and are pushing to make scholarships tax-free.

Robert Ballard heads Scholarship America, a nonprofit that distributed $264 million to 104,000 students last year. He says, “College scholarships are to help students get higher education, but the 2017 Kiddie Tax change is pulling the opposite direction.”

Related video: Will Your 2019 Tax Refund Be Sweeter Than Usual?

Click to expand

UP NEXT

Source: http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/the-surprising-tax-bill-for-sons-and-daughters-of-gold-star-families/ar-AABb9t9?srcref=rss

President Donald Trump’s escalating trade war against China has drawn plenty of historical parallels. The Chinese like to invoke the 19th-century Opium Wars and the national humiliation that followed. In the U.S. the comparison is increasingly to the Cold War against the Soviet Union, or the 1980s trade wars against Japan.

Ask Douglas Irwin, author of “Clashing Over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy,” however, and he argues the most accurate comparison from an American perspective is the War of 1812.

That conflict was born out of a trade war (a British embargo of France) and fought at least partly as a trade war (a British blockade of America). It also yielded another trade war.

Once the war was won, it prompted calls for a decoupling from a British economy with which America’s was deeply integrated, Irwin said. And like the current calls related to China, that was based on a bigger existential question for the U.S.

“We wanted to reduce our dependence on Britain, which was viewed as an enemy power,’’ said Irwin, a professor at Dartmouth.

Related video: Deeper Trade War Won't Leave Markets Untouched

Click to expand

UP NEXT

Higher Stakes

In response, Washington began imposing higher tariffs on British goods to protect what it declared to be strategic U.S. industries. That action grew into manufacturers’ calls for protection from cheap British imports that would become a feature of political debate through the 19th century.

You can argue today’s economic stakes are undoubtedly much higher in value terms. But the War of 1812 and the dependence on British industry at the time presented a legitimate existential question. The British got all the way to Washington and set fire to the White House in 1814, after all.

Irwin is not hopeful about the future of Trump’s China trade war. He believes a resolution in the short term is unlikely. “If you are really asking for economic regime change that’s something no country, particularly one that is as nationalistic and proud as China, is going to deliver on,’’ he said.

Irwin fears it could all end in a new technology Cold War. His problem with the comparison with the conflict with the Soviet Union is that Moscow never posed a real economic challenge to the U.S. And with Japan the inverse was true.

“That is where China is really different,’’ he said.

© Bloomberg Global trade was hit more severely in the last recession

The 1980s trade wars against Japan were also fought in a very different way, Irwin argues.

The Trump administration’s emphasis so far has been on tariffs and other defensive economic tools, he said. In the Reagan administration the focus was as much on offensive measures such as boosting research and development and American competitiveness. Reagan was also a vocal defender of free trade.

Complicated as it seemed at the time, the friction with Japan over everything from cars to televisions and semiconductors was simpler to deal with. Yet it still took time to sort out. That bodes badly for anyone hoping for a quick resolution with China.

“There were years of discussions and they were a much more market-oriented economy than China,’’ Irwin said. “And here the stakes are bigger.’’

How will the UK manage its public finances in the decades ahead? With great difficulty, is the answer. Its public sector balance sheet and long-term fiscal outlook are in poor shape. The implications are also clear: in addition to managing the public sector balance sheet as wisely as possible, the country will have to increase taxes. But that will be impossible to do without courage, both intellectual and political. Will this happen? I fear not.

According to the International Monetary Fund’s latest Fiscal Monitor, the UK’s public sector net worth is minus 125 per cent of gross domestic product, second-worst (after Portugal) of the 31 countries analysed. French public sector net worth was minus 42 per cent, Germany’s minus 20 per cent and that of the US minus 17 per cent. The Office for Budget Responsibility’s Fiscal Sustainability Report of July 2018 predicts that the picture will get worse. On current policies, the primary fiscal deficit (before interest payments) and debt would be 8.6 per cent and 283 per cent of GDP, respectively, 50 years hence.

Huge uncertainties exist around such forecasts. Nonetheless, the underlying reality is clear. The UK is an ageing country with politically compelling commitments to spending on health, education and social welfare. These commitments were cut to the bone after 2010. Gavin Kelly of the Resolution Trust makes this point powerfully in a recent article. Even Theresa May recognised this reality in the case of the National Health Service, making a huge unfunded commitment last June.

The prime minister also claimed that this would be funded by a “Brexit dividend”. Those without her sense of humour know that either some other spending must be cut or taxes must rise. The politics and long-term forecasts, together, make clear it must mainly be the latter. This challenge would exist whatever happens over Brexit. That merely makes the fiscal challenge bigger, because Brexit seems sure to have a sizeable negative effect on the economy and tax revenue over the long term.

Can the additional revenue be raised and, if so, how? That ought to be a focal point of serious political debate.

The answer to the first question is a clear “yes”. A large number of countries are both substantially richer than the UK, while also raising significantly greater revenue as a share of GDP. According to the IMF, Germany’s real GDP per head, for example, is 16 per cent higher than the UK’s, while revenue is 45 per cent of GDP against the UK’s 37 per cent. So raising revenue, without destroying the economy, is quite possible in principle. At the same time, it is obviously difficult to do so: the UK’s ratio of revenue to GDP has not been above 42 per cent since the early 1950s and has not risen above 40 per cent in the past 35 years.

The evidence of history suggests, therefore, that there is great resistance to turning the UK into a country with taxes comparable to those of successful northern European welfare states. The important question, then, is whether it would be possible to raise revenue in a way that does little, if any, economic damage (or even brings benefits), while also being politically sustainable.

The preliminary answer is an encouraging one. The UK tax system is such an incoherent mess that it would not be at all difficult in theory to raise taxes while improving economic efficiency and the distribution of income. Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, made this point in the Financial Times last year. He focused on the unreasonably light taxation of capital and wealth and the way in which this benefits the prosperous elderly. I would stress the need to focus on the taxation of rents, not just from land, as Henry George recommended, but elsewhere, as Paul Collier argues in his recent book, The Future of Capitalism. Taxation of rents and “bads”, such as pollution, must be the start.

Unfortunately, the victims of new taxes are always far louder in opposition than beneficiaries are in support. Moreover, a new tax often seems offensive. That makes reform difficult in almost all circumstances, but even more so when the aim is to raise, rather than lower, the overall tax burden. This creates a form of Catch-22 in current politics. A big reason for reforming the tax system is to make it less costly to fund higher spending over the decades ahead. But the fact that the reforms will be designed to raise revenue will make them more politically unpalatable than they would otherwise be.

Is there a way out? No easy one exists. But the starting point must be with a debate on what the country wants and how to fund it. The pressures will not vanish. Politics has to find an answer.

[email protected]

AirAsia, a low-cost air carrier, is linking Visakhapatnam and Bangkok and the flights would begin from Dec 8.

Making the announcement at a media conference here on Monday, Rajkumar Paranthaman, the head of marketing, said there would be flights on four weekdays from here to Bangkok (Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday) and the return flights from Bangkok to Vizag would be on Monday, Wednesday. Friday and Sunday.

He said the travel to Bangkok would be hassle-free and visa on arrival would be given to tourists at Bangkok. Further, the airlines has air-connection from Bangkok to 21 destinations within that country. It is also a major hub with international flights to different destinations in the country.

He said the promotional fare to Bangkok would be Rs 2,999 one way and the tourists and visitors to Thailand could book the tickets up to Oct. 21 to avail themselves of the promotional offer. Visa on arrival would be arranged for Indians, for a fee of roughly Rs 4,000 or so.

He said, "AirAsia is operating flights to Bangkok from five Indian cities - Chennai, Bengaluru, Kolkata, Jaipur and Kochi - and Vizag would be added to the list in December.

Cholada Siddhivarn, the Director of the Tourism Authority of Thailand, said India was very important for Thailand. "Last year, 1.2 tourists from India visited Thailand and the number is likely to go up to 1.4 million this year," she said and added that Indians should go to different parts of Thailand and not merely confine themselves to Bangkok. "Thailand is a friendly country to tourists, specially Indians," she added.

If you’ve listened to the show before, you’ve probably heard me talk about affiliate marketing. But what about the other side? What if you have a product—like a course or a new book—that you own and you want other people to promote it? How do you find those people? What should their commission be? Learn the answer to these questions and more with today’s special guest Matt McWilliams.

Every time I’ve done a joint affiliate promotion over the last few years, Matt’s been there. In fact, he’s been behind some of the largest collaborative affiliate promotions I’ve ever been a part of. He’s helped promote Michael Hyatt’s products and a few others too, helping them make millions of dollars in the process. He’s here today to tell you how to find people to become affiliates for your products, even if you’re just getting started. (And if you are just getting started, Matt has a special challenge for you, so make sure you listen to the end!) He’s also delving into a whole array of strategies and nitty-gritty tactics for starting your affiliate program and making the most of the affiliate relationships you create.

Even if you don’t have any products to sell yet, this episode will have you primed to take advantage of that process in the future. Working with affiliates is one of the best strategies for growing your online business, and it can be as fun as it is rewarding. Let’s dive in!

Check out Matt’s free report for finding affiliates for your business at MattMcWilliams.com/spi.

If you haven’t subscribed yet, please do, and be sure to check out the archives for more great episodes. You can subscribe via iTunes right here.

A lot of listeners have been asking me about how to start a podcast. If you’re wondering too then you’re in luck, because I have a free, three-day mini course that will get you up and running! Podcasting is an amazing way to share a message and connect with more people—it’s been life changing for me. Just go to HowtoStartaPodcast.com to get started!

To share your thoughts:

To help out the show:

• Leave an honest review on iTunes. Your ratings and reviews really help and I read each one.
• Subscribe on iTunes or download our mobile app.

Special thanks to Matt McWilliams for joining me this week. Until next time!

‘If (by the end of the deal) the talent that owns the customer relationships is not there, will L&T still get the value it is looking for?’

While Mindtree and Larsen & Toubro continue to battle it out in what is being described as a hostile takeover attempt, different stakeholders seem to be divided on what the deal would mean for the two companies.

The old guard of company executives sees this as an emotional issue, largely agreeing with the Mindtree promoters’ line, but roots for an agreeable solution.

“There is a difference between being a founder and an employee. Founders have a right to be able to have a say in which way the company goes. We don’t know the situation in which the founders are being forced to sell. The intention of L&T is good. There is value in Mindtree. They should be talking and arriving at an amicable solution,” said Raman Roy, considered the father of Business Process Outsourcing in India, and chairman of Quattro.

Engineering major L&T on Monday made a hostile bid to take controlling stake in Mindtree. It has entered into an agreement with Mindtree’s single-largest investor, V G Siddhartha, to purchase his entire 20.32 per cent stake for Rs 3,269 crore. It is also eyeing an additional 46 per cent through market purchase and an open offer.

Mindtree on Tuesday appealed to the larger Indian tech community, with co-founder Subroto Bagchi saying that L&T’s move will be taken as a bad precedent for the whole information technology (IT) sector and also for start-up entrepreneurs who aspire to build large institutions.

Start-up founders, however, are looking at the subject with a more practical lens.

“This is being looked at as an insider (Mindtree) versus outside (L&T) issue,” said a Bengaluru-based technology start-up co-founder.

In their quest for expansion, getting funds for the next big project, bringing in a bigger player to make their product a success, younger companies seem more amenable to the idea of a takeover. Unlike the older tech players, they are more used to the idea of change.

“It seems everybody is looking for a better deal,” the start-up co-founder added.

The tussle is expected to stretch out as Mindtree looks unwilling to cede control. Mindtree employees even tweeted #MindtreeMatters over the last two days, making emotional appeals to not dilute the culture of themed sized IT firm.

Experts are looking at it as a financial deal and question if Mindtree will be worth the value that L&T wants to pay for it.

“I don’t see it as a hostile takeover,” said Sanjoy Sen, senior research fellow in strategy and governance, Loughborough University, UK. “It was initiated by a Mindtree shareholder (Siddhartha) making an offer to L&T, so the entire chain was triggered by a key stakeholder.”

He added though that the entire tussle shows the value of smaller IT firms, and the key will be to see if it impacts employee morale at Mindtree. “If (by the end of the deal) the talent that owns the customer relationships is not there, will L&T still get the value it is looking for?”

US Marines during a 10-mile hike on the west side of Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia, June 28, 2013.U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Cuong Le/Released

• The Defense Department published a list of hundreds of military projects that may lose funding to pay for President Trump's border barrier. It added that "no military housing, barracks or dormitory projects will be impacted" by the diverted funding.
• The list includes a $65 million water treatment plant at Hadnot Point in Camp Lejeune.
• Camp Lejeune has been embroiled in controversy for the revelations that as many as 900,000 troops and family members stationed at the base were exposed to contaminated water between 1953 and 1987.

President Donald Trump's plans for the US-Mexico border barrier may tap into unawarded funds that could have gone towards a water treatment plant at Camp Lejeune, a base near North Carolina's coast that struggled with contaminated water for decades, according to a government analysis.

Over $65 million was tentatively allocated for the water treatment plant at Hadnot Point, a section of the military base that includes a medical clinic and various third-party stores, the Defense Department said in its proposal.

The project is expected to replace a water treatment plant with a 8-million-gallon-per-day water treatment facility that complies with safety regulations, according to US Navy budget estimates sent to Congress in 2017.

"This facility is required to provide an adequate and environmentally compliant supply of potable water to meet the domestic, industrial, and fire protection requirements of Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune," the Navy said.

The plan was proposed after the Hadnot Point community was found to have increased its water usage, which comes from the same water system used for Camp Lejeune. The increased water usage contributed towards a contamination comprised of salt water that "cannot be reversed," according to the Navy.

"The Marine Corps will face certain high risk liabilities with continued use of antiquated water treatment plant technology," the Navy warned.

The Navy did propose other alternatives to a new water treatment plant, including repairs to its older system and individual upgrades, but deemed it was more cost-effective to construct a new facility.

"Camp Lejeune will continue to face rising maintenance and operational costs necessary to run the antiquated water treatment plants," the Navy said in its proposal.

"Environmental compliance will be compromised as it becomes more difficult to maintain the water quality required to comply with present and future Safe Drinking Water Act regulations."

AP

It is unclear why, despite the initial request from the Navy, that funding for the project was shelved. Camp Lejeune was one of the military installations hit by Hurricane Florence in 2018, and the cost to replace some of its buildings was estimated to be around $3.6 billion.

The base was previously embroiled in controversy when up to 900,000 service members and families stationed at the base were found to have been exposed to contaminated water between 1953 and 1987, the Associated Press reported.

"If you served at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune ..., you may have had contact with contaminants in the drinking water there," the Department of Veterans Affairs says on its website. "Scientific and medical evidence has shown an association between exposure to these contaminants during military service and development of certain diseases later on."

Former Camp Lejeune service members who are later diagnosed with various diseases — including leukemia, Parkinson's disease, and multiple myeloma — may be eligible for disability benefits.

In January, the Navy denied over 4,400 claims worth an estimated $963 billion. Defense officials cited several legal statutes for their decision, including a 10-year statute of limitations and a Supreme Court ruling that relieves the US of liability if service members are injured on duty.

The water contamination scandal has since been engrained in the military's culture, which may raise the project's necessity in light of potential budget cuts.

"The optics of deferring this project could likely be a public relations disaster not just for the Marine Corps, but the Defense Department in general because of the past history at Camp Lejeune and water contamination," Dan Grazier, a military fellow at Project on Government Oversight, said to INSIDER.

President Donald Trump and the US Military Academy football team in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, May 1, 2018.REUTERS/Leah Millis

In declaring his national emergency, Trump would divert $3.6 billion from unused military projects towards funding for the controversial border barrier. Trump justified the decision by claiming the US was being flooded "with drugs, with human traffickers, with all types of criminals and gangs" across the southern border.

After Democrats and 12 Republicans passed a resolution opposing him in the Senate, Trump used his first presidential veto to force the proposal forward last week. The House and the Senate are likely to fall short of the required two-thirds majorities to override his veto.

The Defense Department made clear that its list of project affected was not final. It added that "no military housing, barracks, or dormitory projects will be impacted" by the diverted funding.

But Democratic lawmakers voiced concerns over the possibility and railed against what some view as a "medieval vanity project."

"President Trump is putting his border wall ahead of the safety of our troops," Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia said in a statement to INSIDER. "The projects that could lose funding include military training centers in Virginia, a plant to prevent water contamination at Camp Lejeune, and a cybersecurity facility in Georgia."

"I hope my colleagues in Congress will take a serious look at the projects that support our military in their own states and then vote to override the President’s veto," Kaine said.

"What President Trump is doing is a slap in the face to our military that makes our border and the country less secure," Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, added in a statement.