Brian Dake

President Trump on March 4 brought AI companies and hyperscalers together to sign the Ratepayer Protection Pledge, “ensuring they protect Americans from electricity price hikes due to data center energy requirements now and in the long run, take action to further strengthen the grid, and ensure that all Americans benefit from the oncoming technological boom,” the White House said.

Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle, and xAI signed the Ratepayer Protection Pledge.

The hyperscalers promised three specific things that will help protect other electric ratepayers:
•    Paying for New Power Supply: Companies will build, bring, or buy “new or otherwise additive” generation resources to satisfy—or more than satisfy—their energy needs.
•    Paying for Infrastructure Upgrades: Companies will pay for all new infrastructure upgrades, including adequate network upgrade costs, required to serve their data centers.
•    Paying Whether or Not They Use the Power: Companies will voluntarily negotiate new, separate rate structures for data centers, and pay those rates for power and related infrastructure “whether they use the electricity or not.”

The hyperscalers also promised to invest in local job creation and workforce development and to coordinate with grid operators to contribute to a more reliable grid (including by making backup generation available, if possible, during scarcity).

Oil prices held steady Wednesday, after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the Trump administration will provide support to oil tankers transiting the Persian Gulf and announce more measures in the coming days.

WTI crude nearly topped $78 a barrel at its high this week since the U.S. and Israel launched a massive wave of airstrikes against OPEC member Iran over the weekend. Iran has responded with volleys of missile and drone strikes against targets across the Middle East, including energy infrastructure.

U.S. crude jumped 6% on Monday and 5% on Tuesday.

The oil market has calmed after President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the U.S. would insure tankers through the International Development Finance Corporation. Trump also promised naval escorts for oil traffic in the Persian Gulf if necessary.

Oil turned lower as Bessent told CNBC Wednesday that the White House would make a series of announcements to support the oil trade in the Gulf.

“We have a series of announcements that we’re going to be making,” Bessent said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “We began yesterday with the announcement that DFC will provide the insurance for both the crude carriers and the cargo ships operating in around the Gulf over the weekend.”

The IRS published Schedule 1-A (Form 1040), Additional Deductions, along with updated instructions for Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, that explain how taxpayers can claim the new deductions for tips, overtime, and car loan interest, and the enhanced deduction for seniors.

Schedule 1-A does not differ from the draft version issued last year for calculating the four deductions enacted by H.R. 1, P.L. 119-21, commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, on a single form. The instructions do provide details on how all four apply, however.

Taxpayers calculate the amount of the deductions that apply to them, add the amounts together, and include the total on line 13b of their Form 1040 or Form 1040-SR, U.S. Income Tax Return for Seniors, or on line 13c of Form 1040-NR, U.S. Nonresident Alien Income Tax Return.

The form also includes a section for calculating the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income, which is used in calculating phaseouts for the four deductions.

All four deductions expire after 2028.

Gov. Tony Evers says he’s optimistic that he and Republican legislative leaders will strike a deal to lower property taxes and increase school funding.

At a Madison luncheon event hosted by WisPolitics Thursday, Evers said that he will meet again with Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, in the coming weeks.

“We’re still talking, we’re hopeful that we get some solutions soon,” he said. “When you do things in a bipartisan way, you give things up, get something in return, same with the other side. And so we’re continuing to do that.”

He and GOP leaders have gone back and forth for months over how to reduce Wisconsin’s high property tax rates. While Republican leaders blamed his “400-year veto” for increasing school revenue limits, Evers said investing in schools would reduce the need for communities to go to referendum.

Republicans eventually backed off their demand that Evers repeal his veto, and Evers suggested Thursday that he’s holding fast to his preferred funding mechanism for schools, which would be increased school aids.

“I believe that if we want to take make a huge effort around equalized aid for the state of Wisconsin schools, we should be putting more money into that, and that will help property taxes be relieved,” he said.

In their last public counter to the governor, Republicans proposed a different type of tax relief, calling for $1.48 billion in direct tax rebates to residents. On Thursday, Evers called the effort to mail out rebate checks “maximum politics.”

“That’s (an) election year issue,” he said. “I just don’t think it’s wise.”

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division today announced a proposed rule designed to help workers and employers better understand how to determine when a worker is an employee and when the worker may be classified as an independent contractor under the Fair Labor Standards Act and related federal laws.

The proposed rule would rescind the department’s 2024 final rule addressing the classification of independent contractors and replace it with an analysis for employee classification similar to the one adopted by the department in 2021. Consistent with Supreme Court and federal circuit court precedent, the proposed rule would make it easier to properly differentiate between employees with the protections under the Fair Labor Standards Act and those workers who work as independent contractors.

The proposed rule would also apply the department’s streamlined analysis to the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, both of which use the FLSA’s statutory definition of “employ.”

“The rule we are proposing today is not only based on long-standing legal principles used in federal courts across the country but also is aimed at ensuring that workers and employers know how to apply those principles predictably,” said Wage and Hour Division Administrator Andrew Rogers. “The department believes that streamlined regulations in line with Congress’s intent when it passed the Fair Labor Standards Act would improve compliance, reduce misclassification, and reduce costly litigation in an economic environment that needs flexibility and innovation.”

The analysis in the department’s proposed rule would:

• Apply an “economic reality” test to determine whether a worker is in business for himself or herself as an independent contractor or is an employee economically dependent on an employer for work.
• Identify and explain two “core factors” to help determine if a worker is economically dependent on an employer for work or in business for him- or herself:
  • The nature and degree of control over the work.
  • The worker’s opportunity for profit or loss based on initiative and/or investment.
• Identify other factors to help determine a worker’s status as an employee or independent contractor, including the amount of skill required for the work, degree of permanence of the working relationship, and whether the work is part of an integrated unit of production.
• Advise that the actual practice of the worker and the potential employer is more relevant than what may be contractually or theoretically possible.
• Provide eight fact-specific examples applying the factors to real-life circumstances.

The department encourages all interested parties to submit comments on the proposed rule, which has a 60-day comment period that closes at 11:59 p.m. ET on April 28, 2026.

Two Democratic state legislators announced a bill Tuesday, backed by a coalition of labor unions and political organizations, that would raise the minimum wage in Wisconsin from $7.25 to $20.

State Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) and Rep. Angelina Cruz (D-Racine) have drafted a bill to raise the minimum wage to $15 immediately, followed by regular increases until it hits $20 in 2030. From then on, the state wage floor would be pegged to inflation.

“About 800,000 workers in Wisconsin earn less than $20 an hour. They are home health care providers, early childhood educators, grocery workers, nursing assistants, the backbone of our communities,” Cruz said. “This bill is about dignity, it’s about fairness and it’s about building an economy where, if you work hard in Wisconsin, you can afford to live in Wisconsin.”

The bill provides small business owners, who employ 50 or fewer workers, more time to transition to the new wage floor. It also raises the tipped wage from $2.33 an hour to $7.50.

The legislation has backing from a coalition of unions and political organizations, including the Milwaukee Area Service and Hospitality Union (MASH), United Auto Workers (UAW), United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), Citizen Action of Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Working Families Party and Our Wisconsin Revolution.

“Even if it doesn’t pass this session, we know that elected officials will become accountable this fall,” Roys said. “Maybe it’s the last bill of 2026 and maybe it’s the first law of 2027.”

Wisconsin companies exported $27.12 billion in goods during 2025, a decrease of $687.6 million or roughly 2.5% for the year, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau. The total was the state’s lowest since 2021 and marked the second consecutive year of decline.

Exports started the year on a good trend with year-over-year gains in January and March leading to a 2.1% increase for the first quarter. Starting in April, Wisconsin exports declined year-over-year for six straight months, including a 9.2% drop in April and a 7.4% drop in May. For the second quarter, exports were down 7.2% and they declined 3.4% in the third quarter. October did show a 2.6% year-over-year increase and December was up 1.8%, but a 7.6% decline in November left the state down 1% for the quarter.

Geographically, the declines were driven by some of Wisconsin’s largest trading partners.

Exports to Canada, the top destination for Wisconsin products, fell 8.6% or $706 million to $7.52 billion. It was the lowest level of exports to Canada since 2020. Exports to Mexico, the second largest destination for Wisconsin products, were down 7.1% to $4.04 billion, a decline of $309 million. Exports to China, the third largest destination for Wisconsin in 2024, declined 34.5% or $535 million to $1.02 billion. It marked the lowest level of exports to China since 2006.

Exports to the rest of Asia, on the other hand, increased 9.2% to $4.93 billion, a gain of $415 million.

Europe also saw an increase, importing 6.6% from Wisconsin to reach $6.19 billion. The Netherlands in particular drove the increase with a 29.8% increase to reach $1.04 billion. It was enough of an increase to propel the country to be the top European destination for Wisconsin products.

Exports to Germany, the top destination in 2024, decreased more than 17% or $195 million to $942 million.

Other top European destinations in 2025 included the United Kingdom, up almost 14% to $872 million, Belgium, down 5.3% to $760 million and France, down 7.6% to $384 million.

Exports to South America increased 6.4% to $1.7 billion and exports to Africa were up $132 million or 41.2% to $454 million.

Wisconsin’s exports to Australia, the fifth largest destination for the state’s products in 2024, dropped nearly 17% to $671 million for 2025. The decrease was enough to push the country down to 11^th as a destination for Wisconsin products.

President Donald Trump’s reworked global tariffs began Tuesday at a rate of 10%, even though he said over the weekend that they would start at 15%.

Under the trade law the administration is now turning to, called Section 122, tariffs of up to 15% can be quickly applied, but only for up to 150 days.

As a result of the renewed uncertainty, the E.U. earlier Monday froze implementation of a massive trade deal with Trump last summer.

Other trading partners, such as India, China, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, are also considering what to do. Most of the trade framework deals the Trump administration and foreign trading partners reached since early last year have been under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the 1977 law the Supreme Court said Trump improperly used when he imposed sweeping tariffs last year

The powerful speaker of the state Assembly, who shaped the GOP’s agenda in Wisconsin for the better part of two decades, announced Thursday he won’t seek reelection, marking the end of an era in state government and Republican politics.

Robin Vos, 57, is the longest-serving speaker in Wisconsin history, having served in that job for 13 years. In that position, he’s dealt with two governors — one Republican and one Democrat — and several legislative leaders. Depending on the circumstances, they each got to know Vos as a partner, adversary, dealmaker or general thorn in the side.

There had been widespread speculation about the powerful speaker’s plans since the current legislative session began. He told his colleagues Thursday he reached his decision last November when he had a mild heart attack.

“Luckily, my doctors say I am perfectly fine, but I do need to reduce my stress,” Vos said. “And let me tell you, this job is stressful.”

There were audible gasps in the chamber when Vos shared his news, and many of his GOP colleagues were wiping away tears. Vos himself became choked up as he talked about what the job had meant to him, and how he’d miss it.

“I am struck by how much this work has shaped me, how honored I am to have played a small part in democracy, and how proud I am that the state of our Legislature is strong,” Vos said, his voice wavering.

The speaker said he would serve out the remainder of his term until a new class of legislators is sworn in next January.

The Supreme Court dealt a blow to President Trump’s trade agenda on Friday, siding against him in a case challenging the legality of tariffs that have shaped global markets and U.S. supply chains.

By a 6–3 vote, the majority concluded that the law cited to justify the import duties “does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.” Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the court. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

The two cases, which Trump has described as “life or death” for the United States, have forced the Supreme Court to confront how far a president can go in reshaping U.S. trade policy.

The challenges — Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections Inc. — were brought by an educational toy manufacturer and a family-owned wine and spirits importer challenging the legality of Trump’s tariffs.

Both cases turn on a central question: whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) gave the president authority to impose the tariffs, or whether that move crossed constitutional lines. The disputes followed Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs in April, a sweeping package of import duties he said would address trade imbalance and reduce reliance on foreign goods.

The two cases, which Trump has described as “life or death” for the United States, have forced the Supreme Court to confront how far a president can go in reshaping U.S. trade policy.