Pizza Hut plans to close 250 U.S. restaurants in the first half of this year as its parent company considers a sale of the chain.

Yum Brands said Wednesday it’s targeting underperforming Pizza Hut restaurants in its system. Pizza Hut has more than 6,000 locations in the U.S.

Louisville, Kentucky-based Yum Brands said in November it was conducting a formal review of options for Pizza Hut, which has struggled with outdated stores and growing competition. The chain’s U.S. same-store sales, or sales at locations open at least a year, fell 5% last year, Yum said.

Rival Domino’s, the world’s largest pizza company, hasn’t yet released its full-year earnings, but its U.S. same-store sales were up 2.7% in the first nine months of last year.

Internationally, Pizza Hut’s results have been stronger. International same-store sales were up 1% last year, with growth in Asia, the Middle East and Latin America, Yum said. China is Pizza Hut’s second-largest market outside the U.S., accounting for 19% of sales.

Yum CEO Chris Turner said Wednesday that the company plans to complete its review of options for Pizza Hut this year. He declined to share further updates on the process.

Pizza Hut ended 2025 with 19,974 stores globally, which was 251 fewer than it had the previous year. Pizza Hut opened nearly 1,200 stores across 65 countries last year, but closures outpaced that. Yum said Wednesday that Pizza Hut plans more global openings in 2026 but it didn’t give details.

Pizza Hut was founded in 1958 in Wichita, Kansas. PepsiCo acquired the chain in 1977 but spun off its restaurant division — which became Yum Brands — in 1997. Yum Brands also owns KFC, Taco Bell and Habit Burger & Grill.

SAN DIEGO — The San Diego city attorney’s office has agreed to pay $30 million to the family of a 16-year-old youth who was fatally shot by police last January in what would be one of the largest settlements of a police-involved killing case in U.S. history.

A resolution authorizing the proposed settlement with the family of Konoa Wilson has been added to the city council’s agenda for Tuesday morning.

“What happened to Konoa was a catastrophic failure of policing,” family attorney Nick Rowley said in a statement to City News Service. “A 16-year-old boy was running for his life. He was not a threat and not a suspect, yet he was shot in the back by a police officer who only saw him for one second before deciding to pull the trigger.”

If approved, the settlement would exceed the $27 million the city of Minneapolis agreed to pay the family of George Floyd, whose May 2020 murder by a police officer who kneeled on his neck sparked a nationwide racial reckoning.

Surveillance and body-worn camera footage from Jan. 28 showed Wilson running away from someone who pulled a gun and fired at him in a downtown train station. As he exited the station, Wilson encountered San Diego Police Officer Daniel Gold.

In a lawsuit against the city and Gold, the family alleged the officer “instantly, without any warning,” fired two shots at Wilson, who was Black, as he ran by, striking him in the upper body.

“Only after shooting DECEDENT and watching him fall to the ground did Defendant GOLD finally announce ‘San Diego Police,’” said the suit, which was filed in June. “Defendants committed acts of racial violence against DECEDENT, a teenager, by shooting him in his back as he ran past Defendant GOLD, in an attempt to get to a place of safety.”

Wilson was pronounced dead at UC San Diego Health Medical Center less than an hour later.

An agenda item posted Friday said the settlement would be paid from the Public Liability Fund.

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — Each day, PBS programming fills the airwaves of Alabama Public Television with shows such as “Sesame Street,” “Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood,” “Antiques Roadshow” and “PBS Newshour.” Alabamians could lose access to those programs on state airwaves if the Alabama Educational Television Commission opts to become the first state network to sever ties with PBS.

The Alabama commission last month discussed the possibility of dropping PBS and is expected to discuss the matter again its Nov. 18 meeting.

The possibility comes after President Donald Trump and Congress in July withdrew funding for the nonprofit The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides grants to public radio and television, and as some state commissioners accused PBS of being an unneeded expense or politically biased.

“We have to figure out what our options are,” said Ferris W. Stephens, the chairman of the commission. “Before we decide those things, I just think we need a lot more information.” Stephens said he does not expect a vote at the November meeting.

Alabama Public Television Executive Director Wayne Reid said some commissioners asked him to research the possibility and ramifications of ending the contract with PBS. Ending the affiliation would cause APT to lose access to popular programs such as “Sesame Street” and “PBS NewsHour”, as well as its ability to distribute content on streaming platforms. Reid said the state network would have to buy other programming to replace it.

“If we cut ties, all of that would be gone. Right now, we’re doing a ton of research. Everybody here is working on what it would take to replace the things that are affected by PBS,” Reid said.

Reid said he was also asked to research if they could keep PBS but drop the news programs “PBS NewsHour” and “Washington Week.” Reid said the decision ultimately belongs to the commission.

No other statewide network has cut ties with PBS to date, a spokesperson for PBS confirmed.

The possibility prompted a backlash from Alabama public television viewers and donors.

Jennifer Greer, a retired writer and educator, is one of the volunteers helping to mount a postcard campaign to urge the state to keep the PBS affiliation. Preschoolers, students and adults across the state benefit each day from PBS programs, she said.

“When you take one of the most effective tools in the public education toolkit, and you defund it and you make it so only the wealthy can afford it, that’s just responsible. That’s a step backward,” Greer said.

Petitions and posts were shared across social media urging people to “Save PBS for Alabama Children” urging people to attend the upcoming meeting.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting provided about $2.8 million for Alabama Public Television although the money is not directly used to purchase PBS programming. Alabama Public Television pays about $2.2 million to purchase PBS programming. The amount was discounted after the federal funding cut.

Greer and others said they are concerned that dropping PBS would put Alabama Public Television in a downward financial spiral. Public media gets a substantial part of its funding from memberships and donations. “If we separate from PBS, our contributions are going to plummet, and that could jeopardize the stability of the whole operation,” she said.

Commissioners were divided at an Oct. 28 meeting, according to the Alabama Reflector and al.com.

“I just, I don’t want to fund it, PBS has made themselves the enemy of what I stand with, and so I do not like them, and I don’t follow the philosophy of feeding the beast,” commission member Les Barnett said during the meeting according to the Alabama Reflector. Barnett did not return an email from The Associated Press.

J. Holland, another commission member, said he is interested in exploring if the state can begin buying PBS programming on an a la carte basis, picking some shows but not others. The current PBS contract does not allow that.

Pete Conroy, another commission member, said they should keep PBS. He said he is concerned that some commissioners are “acting politically.”

“I know how much PBS programming is used in our public schools, private schools and churches. It’s always about the kids. These children need to be lifted up with this kind of programming,” Conroy said.

As USC weighs its options, MIT has become the first of nine universities to forcefully reject a White House proposal that asks them to adopt President Trump’s conservative political agenda in exchange for favorable access to federal funding.

In a letter to Trump administration officials, MIT President Sally Kornbluth said Friday the campus disagrees with provisions of the proposal, including some that would limit free speech and the university’s independence. She said that Trump’s “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education” is inconsistent with MIT’s belief that scientific funding should be based on merit alone.

“Therefore, with respect, we cannot support the proposed approach to addressing the issues facing higher education,” Kornbluth said in a letter to Education Secretary Linda McMahon and White House officials.

The MIT rejection comes as University of Southern California has been roiled by the proposed compact since receiving it earlier this month. The school’s faculty members strongly denounced the offering at a meeting this week, calling it “egregiously invalid,” “probably unconstitutional” and “antithetical to principles of academic freedom.”

But interim President Beong-Soo Kim told the roughly 500 attendees the university “has not made any kind of final decision.”

At the same time, Gov. Gavin Newsom has aggressively weighed in, challenging USC “to do the right thing” and reject the offer. He threatened to withhold state funding to any California university that agrees to it.

White House spokesperson Liz Huston said that “the Trump Administration’s only request is for universities to end discrimination. Any university that refuses this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to transform higher education isn’t serving its students or their parents — they’re bowing to radical, left-wing bureaucrats.”

“The truth is, the best science can’t thrive in institutions that have abandoned merit, free inquiry, and the pursuit of truth,” Huston said. “President Trump encourages universities to join us in restoring academic excellence and commonsense policies.”

What’s in the compact

The higher-education compact circulated this month requires universities to make a wide range of commitments in line with Trump’s political agenda. In exchange, universities that agree to the terms would get more favorable access to federal research grants and additional funding, as well as other benefits.

They would have to accept the government’s definition of gender — two sexes, male and female — and would not be allowed to recognize transgender people’s gender identities. Foreign student enrollment would be restricted. The compact also calls for a five-year tuition freeze for U.S. students.

It asks colleges to require the SAT or ACT for all undergraduate applicants and to eliminate race, sex and other characteristics from admissions decisions. As for free speech, schools would have to commit to promoting a wide range of views on campus — and change or abolish “institutional units that purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas,” according to the compact.

The universities were invited to provide “limited, targeted feedback” by Oct. 20 and make a decision no later than Nov. 21.

Other institutions that received the 10-page proposal are: Vanderbilt, the University of Pennsylvania, Dartmouth College, the University of Arizona, Brown University, the University of Texas and the University of Virginia. It was not clear how the schools were selected or why.

Leaders of the Texas system were “honored” that the Austin campus was chosen to be a part of the compact and its “potential funding advantages,” according to a statement from Kevin Eltife, chair of the board of regents.

University leaders face immense pressure to reject the compact amid opposition from students, faculty, free speech advocates and higher education groups. Leaders of some other universities have called it extortion. The mayor and City Council in Tucson, home of the University of Arizona, formally opposed the compact, calling it an “unacceptable act of federal interference.”

Some conservatives have criticized it. Frederick Hess, director of education policy at the American Enterprise Institute, called it “profoundly problematic” and said the government’s requests are “ungrounded in law.”

“I am deeply sympathetic to the Trump critique of higher education,” he told The Times on Friday. “I support just about every point in the compact, but even I have real concerns about the way it has been framed and proffered.”

But Hess noted that the compact has become something of a “Rorschach test.”

“If you look at it one way, you see a bullying attempt by the administration to impose its will,” he said. “If you look at it another way, it is the Trump administration offering a positive, constructive vision of the federal-university partnership.”

The view from Los Angeles

The USC faculty’s vociferous disapproval of the compact during a meeting of the university’s academic senate on Oct. 6 was in line with the reactions of similar bodies at other affected campuses.

In stark terms, USC department heads, professors and others condemned the compact, with several saying there should be no negotiations with the Trump administration.

Kim, the interim president, attended the meeting, but did not share his opinion of the compact. He noted that USC did not solicit the offer from Trump. “I wanted to make sure that I heard from the community and received your input,” he said.

Asked for comment Friday, a USC spokesperson referred The Times to comments Kim made Oct. 3, when he said that he would consult with the school’s board of trustees and other stakeholders to “hear their wide-ranging perspectives” on the proposal.

Trump’s proposal comes at a fraught time for USC, which is in the midst of widespread layoffs as it faces down a $200-million budget deficit.

Across town, UCLA has also been grappling with dire financial issues of its own, albeit ones that directly relate to the president’s forceful attempt to remake higher education.

UCLA has been negotiating with the Trump administration over a $1.2-billion settlement proposal that would resolve a federal investigation into alleged civil rights violations on campus. The claims stem from UCLA’s handling of alleged antisemitism during spring 2024 pro-Palestinian protests. UC leaders say the fine would be “devastating” to the 10-campus system and have broadly indicated that other proposals violate the university’s mission and values.

Speaking at a UC-wide academic senate meeting Thursday, UC President James B. Milliken said the “landscape changed” after the Trump administration offered the compact last week to non-UC campuses.

He did not indicate whether the proposal affected UC negotiations but said that there was a “shift from a bespoke pursuit of universities to a wholesale” targeting of higher education, which he suggested put UC in a safer position. He said he did not know the impact of the compact on UCLA.

In some ways, the compact presented to USC matches the settlement proposed to UCLA. Both, for example, make stipulations about binary definitions of gender that exclude transgender people.

But the compact differs in proposing strict limits on foreign student enrollment and the tuition freeze for U.S. citizens.

Although the compact has not been offered to UC, university officials are studying its contents to better understand Trump’s positions on higher education and formulate a negotiation strategy.

Colleges nationwide debate compact

Besides USC and MIT, the compact has been the subject of fierce debate at several other campuses that received it.

At an Oct. 3 convening of the University of Virginia senate attended by interim President Paul G. Mahoney and hundreds of faculty, senate representatives voted down the compact.

According to notes on the meeting provided to The Times, faculty expressed concern over academic freedom, discrimination against transgender individuals — and said they feared complying with it would have a “chilling” effect on free speech.

Three days later, at a meeting of the University of Arizona faculty senate, 81% of voting members rejected the government’s proposal.

At Dartmouth, President Sian Leah Beilock has also expressed hesitation over signing.

“I am deeply committed to Dartmouth’s academic mission and values and will always defend our fierce independence,” Beilock said in a statement. “You have often heard me say that higher education is not perfect and that we can do better. At the same time, we will never compromise our academic freedom and our ability to govern ourselves.”

Some university faculty, including at USC, have voiced skepticism over Trump’s willingness to adhere to the terms of the compact should an institution accept it. That, Hess said, is “a valid concern.”

“If you look at the deal that have been struck [by the Trump administration] around tariffs and tech, there is certainly a sense that deals … are not written in stone,” he said. “Normally, in these conversations, I am usually very skeptical of faculty concerns, but from what we’ve seen … a lot of these practical concerns are very legitimate.”

Binkley writes for the Associated Press.

President Donald Trump’s nominee to oversee the U.S. Forest Service has a history of clashing with the very agency that he soon could be leading.

On Tuesday afternoon, the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry began the confirmation hearing for Michael Boren, an investment consultant, Idaho ranch owner and founder of a billion-dollar tech company. A bipartisan committee will assess Boren’s qualifications and vote on his nomination.

Boren, 62, has had disagreements with the U.S. Forest Service in recent years. One recent conflict involves building a cabin and clearing land within the Sawtooth National Forest near Stanley, Idaho, E&E News reported, citing agency correspondence and individuals familiar with the situation.

He co-founded Boise-based tech company Clearwater Analytics and owns a 480-acre ranch, some of it within the Sawtooth National Recreation Area, according to the Idaho Mountain Express. The work on the property began before Boren was nominated, but the matter has not yet been resolved, according to the publication.

The dispute over the cabin is with Galena Mines, an LLC associated with Boren. He was a listed as manager until February of this year, before he was removed.

Other disputes include diverting a stream, disputes over how Boren manages land within and around the national forest and disagreements about the precise locations of mining claims made by Boren’s corporation, according to E&E News.

A small airstrip on Boren’s ranch also stirred uproar among neighbors who claim he was using it to land small planes before he was granted a conditional-use permit from the Forest Service, according to the report.

Attorney Thomas Balducci, who represented Boren for the 2023 lawsuit regarding the airstrip, declined to provide a comment to ABC News.

Boren’s brother, David Boren, has also clashed with the Forest Service over a trail the agency built near his ranch.

If confirmed as the undersecretary of Natural Resources and Environment, Boren would be responsible for day-to-day operations at the U.S. Forest Service, which manages more than 200 million acres of public land. Boren would report to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins.

The Senate Agriculture Committee reviews presidential appointments to the Department of Agriculture’s cabinet positions. After Tuesday’s hearing, a full Senate confirmation will be required to complete Boren’s appointment.

Current members of the committee include John Boozman (R-AR), Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).

Boren was a donor to Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign.

On Jan. 16, Trump announced Boren’s nomination on his social media platform Truth Social, describing him as “a successful businessman, who has founded six companies.”

“Michael will work to reinvigorate Forest Management at a time when it is desperately needed,” Trump wrote.

The nomination comes at a time of turmoil within the agency. On April 3, Rollins issued an ordered to remove environmental protections from about 112 million acres of national forests, and thousands of Forest Service employees have been fired in recent months.

The Forest Service did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment. In a statement to the New York Times, the Forest Service wrote that Boren would “implement President Trump’s America First agenda and ensure our forest system is properly managed, productive, and resilient. We look forward to his swift confirmation by the Senate.”

ABC News could not immediately reach a representative for Boren for comment.

Dozens of U.N. food trucks were blocked and offloaded by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip as desperation mounts following Israel’s monthslong blockade, while talks of a ceasefire inch forward.

The U.N. Food Program said Saturday that 77 trucks carrying aid, mostly flour, were stopped by hungry people who took the food before the trucks were able to reach their destination.

“After nearly 80 days of total blockade, communities are starving – and they are no longer willing to watch food pass them by,” the WFP said in a statement. “This delivery is a start, but it’s not nearly enough.”

A nearly three-month Israeli blockade on Gaza has pushed the population of nearly 2.3 million people to the brink of famine. While the pressure slightly eased in recent days as Israel allowed some aid to enter, organizations say there still isn’t nearly enough food getting in.

The United Nations has called Gaza the “hungriest place on Earth.”

“To restore home, ease fear, and prevent further chaos, we must flood communities with food – now,” the WFP said. “Only consistent, large-scale aid can rebuild trust.”

A witness in the southern city of Khan Younis told The Associated Press the U.N. convoy was stopped at a makeshift roadblock and offloaded by desperate civilians in their thousands. Most people carried bags of flour on their backs or heads. He said at one point a forklift was used to offload pallets from the stranded trucks. The witness spoke on condition of anonymity because of fear of reprisal.

Hamas on Friday said it was reviewing a U.S.-led proposal for a temporary ceasefire that Israel has already accepted. President Trump said that negotiators were nearing a deal.

During the proposed 60-day ceasefire, a draft of the deal obtained by CBS News indicated that Hamas would release 10 living hostages and the remains of 18 dead hostages in exchange for more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners, including some serving life sentences, and much-needed food aid and other assistance.

The United Nations said earlier this month that Israeli authorities have forced them to use unsecured routes within areas controlled by the Israeli military in the eastern areas of Rafah and Khan Younis, where armed gangs are active and trucks were stopped.

Israel’s military didn’t immediately respond for comment.

An internal document shared with aid groups about security incidents, seen by the Associated Press, said there were four incidents of facilities being looted in three days at the end of May, not including the convoy on Saturday.

The U.N. says it’s been unable to get enough aid in because of fighting. On Friday, U.N. spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said it only picked up five truckloads of cargo from the Palestinian side of the Kareem Shalom crossing, and the other 60 trucks had to return due to intense hostilities in the area.

An Israeli official said his country has offered the U.N. logistical and operational support but “the U.N. is not doing their job.” Instead, a new U.S- and Israeli-backed foundation started operations in Gaza this week, distributing food at several sites in a chaotic rollout. Israel says the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation will replace the massive aid operation that the U.N. and others have carried out throughout the war.

It says the new mechanism is necessary, accusing Hamas of siphoning off large amounts of aid. The U.N. denies that a significant diversion takes place.

Cindy McCain, the WFP’s executive director, told “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” last Sunday that there is no evidence to support Israel’s claims that Hamas is responsible for the looting of their aid trucks.

“These people are desperate, and they see a World Food Programme truck coming in, and they run for it,” she said. “This doesn’t have anything to do with Hamas or any kind of organized crime, or anything. It has simply to do with the fact these people are starving to death.”

Meanwhile, Israel is continuing its military campaign across Gaza.

The Gaza Health Ministry said that at least 60 people were killed by Israeli strikes in the last 24 hours. It said three people were shot by Israeli gunfire early Saturday morning in the southern city of Rafah. Three other people were killed, parents and a child, when their car was struck in Gaza City.

The war began when Hamas terrorists attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing around 1,200 people, most of them civilians, and taking 250 hostages. Of those taken captive, 58 remain in Gaza, but Israel believes 35 are dead, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said there are “doubts” about the fate of several others.

Israeli strikes have killed more than 54,000 Gaza residents, mostly women and children, according to the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its tally.

Trump’s tariffs on cars take effect

President Trump on Monday suggested he might temporarily exempt the auto industry from tariffs he previously imposed on the sector to give carmakers time to overhaul their complex supply chains.

Mr. Trump on Monday told reporters gathered in the Oval Office that automakers “need a little bit of time” to relocate production from Canada, Mexico and other places to the U.S.  

Car manufacturers’ supply chains are tightly interwoven with other nations, making it almost impossible to make vehicles entirely in the United States. 

Because U.S. automakers source many of their car parts from key trade partners, including Canada, Mexico and China, a fully American-made car doesn’t exist, according to experts. 

Mr. Trump has previously reversed course on tariffs, causing upheaval in financial markets and leading economists to raise the odds of the U.S. economy entering a recession this year. 

The 25% tariffs on foreign-made cars, which Mr. Trump designed with the intention of reshoring auto manufacturing to the U.S., is likely to boost car prices by thousands of dollars, experts say.

The price of a typical car could rise by between $5,000 to $10,000 “out of the gates” due to the new tariffs, according to a March 31 estimate from Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives.

Dear Liz: I was married for 33 years and divorced 4 years ago. We have reconciled and are now back living together as a couple, but have not remarried. I’m 68, and my former spouse is 63. Neither of us is drawing Social Security, but we are now considering applying. Will she be able to draw more if we were to get remarried? It seems as if half of my payment will be more than what she’d get on her own. Also, when should I start drawing my benefit to maximize the payment?

Answer: Let’s start with the simpler of the two answers. Your benefit maxes out at age 70, so waiting until then to apply is usually the right strategy.

The amount your partner would get as a spouse or a divorced spouse would be the same: up to 50% of your benefit at your full retirement age, assuming that amount is greater than her own benefit. To qualify for a divorced spousal benefit, the marriage must have lasted at least 10 years and two years must have passed since the divorce.

There’s one crucial difference between spousal and divorced spousal benefits, however. If you remarry one another, she will have to wait for you to apply for Social Security before she can qualify for a spousal benefit. If you don’t remarry, she doesn’t have to wait. A divorced spousal benefit can start as early as age 62, as long as the ex-spouse is also at least 62.

That doesn’t mean your partner should rush out to apply. Applying early — before her full retirement age of 67 — means settling for a smaller check. Also, there’s a bigger issue: the survivor benefit. If you two don’t remarry and you die first, she wouldn’t be eligible for a survivor benefit that can be up to 100% of the check you were getting or had earned. Maximizing that benefit could be critical in giving her more financial stability after you’re gone.

Does insurance cover a home in a living trust?

Dear Liz: All of our insurance policies list my name and that of my husband. After the recent devastating Los Angeles fires, I heard from friends that we should add the name of our living trust to our home insurance policy because our house is in the trust. Otherwise, they say, some insurance companies may not cover loss or damages to it due to the discrepancy in the names, even if the trust has both of our names as trustees. Would you please confirm this?

Answer: Yes. If your home is in a trust, your insurance policies should list your trust as an “additional insured.” Insurance companies vary in their contract language, but you don’t want to find out after the fact that you aren’t covered because you don’t technically own your home — the trust does.

Benefits of Medicare Advantage HMOs

Dear Liz: You mentioned that Medicare Advantage Plans have networks that can change from year to year, as well as other disadvantages. This is not true for our Medicare Advantage HMO, according to my experience. The HMO has its own doctors and hospitals, but I have not noticed them pulling any surprises. And they do look after your health much better than the traditional Medicare that some of my friends are on. My friends’ care is entirely in their own hands, and some are getting very old and would benefit from the care that my HMO provides.

Answer: You’ve highlighted one of the key advantages of a Medicare Advantage HMO, which is coordinated care.

There are two main types of Medicare Advantage plans, the all-in-one private insurance alternative to original Medicare. With PPOs — preferred provider organizations — people are generally allowed to see medical providers outside their networks, although those visits will cost more. With HMOs — health maintenance organizations — you’re expected to stay in the network for most care, and you often need a referral to see a specialist. You could pay up to 100% of the cost if you use a doctor or hospital not in the HMO.

In exchange for those restrictions, people get a primary care provider who coordinates all of their care. That’s in contrast to PPOs or original Medicare, where a patient may have many providers who never talk to each other.

Liz Weston, Certified Financial Planner®, is a personal finance columnist. Questions may be sent to her at 3940 Laurel Canyon, No. 238, Studio City, CA 91604, or by using the “Contact” form at asklizweston.com.

Dear Liz: I’m 80 years old and my wife is 76. Our only retirement income is Social Security, and we have less than $50,000 in savings. We have about $600,000 equity in our house, which we bought in 1971. We presently have property taxes deferred, at 6% interest. The house is in disrepair.

We have two neighbors who are willing to buy the house after one or both of us die. The neighbors are willing to postpone occupancy and contribute to mutually agreed-upon home repair costs, which will be deducted from the selling price. Details will all be in the contract. These payments will greatly improve our lives. What could go wrong?

Answer: Well, a lot, which is why you need an experienced real estate attorney to represent you if you go ahead.

It’s not clear from your letter if your neighbors are locking in a sale price now, which would mean you and your wife (or your estates) would give up future price appreciation. Are the payments simply contributions toward the repairs or are they purchase payments? Also, what happens if you need to tap your equity to pay for long-term care? If you or your neighbors want out of the deal, would that be possible? Those and many more details need to be thought through.

But your situation, and your proposed solution, are not that unusual, says Los Angeles estate planning attorney Burton Mitchell. Many older people with highly appreciated properties don’t want to sell their homes and trigger taxable gains in excess of the $250,000-per-owner home sale exclusion.

Another alternative to consider is a reverse mortgage, which could allow you to tap your equity while you remain in the home. You wouldn’t have to make payments on this loan, and the balance would not be due until you and your wife die, sell the home or move out.

That Social Security check is in the mail. Or will be someday.

Dear Liz: I was previously denied a portion of my husband’s Social Security because I received a government pension, and the offset rule made me ineligible. Now that the law is being changed, I’m wondering if I would be eligible to receive survivor benefits from Social Security, as my husband is now deceased.

Answer: The Social Security Fairness Act, which did away with the windfall elimination provision and the government pension offset, was signed into law Jan. 5. These two provisions affected people who earned pensions from government jobs that didn’t pay into Social Security.

Social Security says that no action is needed if you have previously filed for benefits that were partially or completely offset, but that you should make sure the agency has your current address and direct deposit information. You can do that by creating or updating a mySocialSecurity account at www.ssa.gov/myaccount. People receiving government pensions who haven’t applied for Social Security can do so at www.ssa.gov/apply.

Social Security is still working on implementing this major change, but you can look for updates at www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/social-security-fairness-act.html.

More on those lost home improvement receipts

Dear Liz: You recently answered a question from a home seller who had lost documentation about improvements. The improvements most likely required building permits, which would have indicated the scope of improvements and, possibly, the cost as well. The local building department will have copies of those permits on file, and they can be obtained at a modest cost.

Answer: Thank you. The original letter writer had lost their documents in a house fire, a circumstance now shared by far too many in the Los Angeles area, thanks to the recent wildfires.

To recap, the value of qualifying home improvements can reduce the taxable gain when a house is sold. But if audited, sellers probably would need some kind of proof the work was done.

Mark Luscombe, principal analyst for Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting, suggested asking any contractors that were hired to provide verification of the projects and to check with the property tax assessor to see if the improvements were reflected in the home’s assessment. Photos of the home reflecting the improvements could also help in an audit, Luscombe says.

Liz Weston, Certified Financial Planner®, is a personal finance columnist. Questions may be sent to her at 3940 Laurel Canyon, No. 238, Studio City, CA 91604, or by using the “Contact” form at asklizweston.com.

The U.S. Department of Justice is considering asking a federal judge to force Google to sell parts of its business in order to eliminate its online search monopoly.

In a late court filing on Tuesday, federal prosecutors also said the judge could ask the court to open the underlying data Google uses to power its ubiquitous search engine and artificial intelligence products to competitors.

“For more than a decade, Google has controlled the most popular distribution channels, leaving rivals with little-to-no incentive to compete for users,” the antitrust enforcers wrote in the filing. “Fully remedying these harms requires not only ending Google’s control of distribution today, but also ensuring Google cannot control the distribution of tomorrow.”

To that end, the department said it is considering asking for structural changes to stop Google from leveraging products such as its Chrome browser, Android operating system, AI products or app store to benefit its search business. Prosecutors also seem to center on Google’s default search agreements in the filing and said any remedy proposals would seek to limit or ban these deals.

Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, said in response to the filing that the Department of Justice was “already signaling requests that go far beyond the specific legal issues” in this case. “Government overreach in a fast-moving industry may have negative unintended consequences for American innovation and America’s consumers.”

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled in August that Google’s search engine has been illegally exploiting its dominance to squash competition and stifle innovation. He has outlined a timeline for a trial on the proposed remedies next spring and plans to issue a decision by August 2025.

Google has already said it plans to appeal Mehta’s ruling, but the tech giant must wait until he finalizes a remedy before doing so. The appeals process could take as long as five years, predicts George Hay, a law professor at Cornell University who was the chief economist for the Justice Department’s antitrust division for most of the 1970s.

ROME — Seemingly every tourist in Rome knows the key to returning to the Eternal City is to toss a coin into the Trevi Fountain and make a wish. The result: Hoards of visitors packing the Baroque monument any given day, taking selfies and betting on a return trip.

Officials are now considering a plan to manage tourism to one of Rome’s most-visited sites: A 2-euro ($2.25) ticket to access an open-air fountain that has always been free of charge.

The proposal by city’s top tourism official, Alessandro Onorato, comes after the Italian lagoon city of Venice tested a controversial 5-euro daytripper access fee to the city this summer. It must be deliberated by the City Council before it takes effect, but the city’s mayor, Roberto Gualtieri, has already voiced support.

“Two euros is more or less the same amount that people toss into the fountain to make a wish,’’ Onorato told The Associated Press Friday.

Cities across the globe are grappling with how to manage the ever-growing number of tourists, who fuel the economy but can create inconveniences to residents by converging on the same top sites.

“We have to avoid, especially in a fragile art city like Rome, that too many tourists damage the tourist experience, and damage the city,’’ Onorato said. “We need to safeguard two things, that tourists don’t experience chaos and that citizens can continue to live in the center.”

Onorato said he hopes to test the entrance fee, which would be managed through a reservation system and a QR code, in time for the 2025 Jubilee Holy Year, and have the system operational by spring.

Passersby in the piazza overlooking the fountain will not have to pay. The fee would be charged only to those entering the nine stone steps leading up to the fountain’s edge. It would be free to Romans.

Onorato said the system would also help discourage people from eating on the steps overlooking the fountain and feeding pigeons or, worse, from reenacting Anita Ekberg’s plunge into the fountain in Fellini’s “La Dolce Vita,” a frequently repeated offense that carries a fine.

“It would happen less, or maybe it wouldn’t happen at all, because whoever would enter, we would know their names and where they live. It becomes more complicated,’’ he said.