Shares of United Parcel Service plunged more than 15% Thursday after the company issued weak revenue guidance for the year and said it planned to cut deliveries for Amazon, its largest customer, by more than half.

The shipping giant said in its fourth-quarter earnings report that it “reached an agreement in principle with its largest customer to lower its volume by more than 50% by the second half of 2026.”

At the same time, UPS said it is reconfiguring its U.S. network and launching multiyear efficiency initiatives that it expects will result in savings of approximately $1 billion.

UPS CEO Carol Tome said on a call with investors that Amazon is UPS’ largest customer, but it is not the company’s most profitable customer. “Its margin is very dilutive to the U.S. domestic business,” she added.

“We are making business and operational changes that, along with the foundational changes we’ve already made, will put us further down the path to become a more profitable, agile and differentiated UPS that is growing in the best parts of the market,” Tome said in a statement.

Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel told CNBC in a statement that UPS had requested a reduction in volume “due to their operational needs.”

“We certainly respect their decision,” Nantel said in a statement. “We’ll continue to partner with them and many other carriers to serve our customers.”

Amazon said before the UPS announcement that it had offered to increase UPS’ volumes.

UPS forecast 2025 revenue of $89 billion, down from revenue of $91.1 billion in 2024. That is well below consensus estimates for 2025 revenue of $94.88 billion, according to analysts polled by LSEG.

For the fourth quarter, UPS missed on revenue, reporting $25.30 billion versus $25.42 billion analysts anticipated in a survey by LSEG.

Amazon has long relied on a mix of major carriers for deliveries, including UPS, FedEx and the U.S. Postal Service. But it has decreased the number of packages sent through UPS and other carriers in recent years as it looks to have more control over deliveries.

Amazon has rapidly built up its own logistics empire since a 2013 holiday fiasco left its packages stranded in the hands of outside carriers. The company now oversees thousands of last-mile delivery companies that deliver packages exclusively for Amazon, as well as a budding in-house network of planes, trucks and ships. By some estimates, Amazon’s in-house logistics operations have grown to rival or exceed the size of major carriers.

UPS has, for its part, taken more aggressive cost-control measures, including catering to more profitable delivery customers. On the investor call, Tome highlighted health care; small business; international; and business-to-business, or B2B, as “the best parts of the market” that it has leaned into more heavily. In recent quarters, UPS has benefited from an influx of volume from bargain retailers Temu and Shein, which have rapidly gained popularity in the U.S.

Last January, UPS laid off 12,000 employees as part of a bid to realize $1 billion in cost savings.

Sports bar chain Twin Peaks starts trading Thursday on the Nasdaq using the ticker “TWNP,” making it the first restaurant initial public offering of the new year and a potential litmus test for others looking to go public.

The IPO market has been tepid for several years, particularly for consumer companies. Soaring inflation, higher interest rates, cautious consumers and the risk of lower valuations scared many companies away from going public. Market conditions meant that some companies chose to seek a sale rather than trying their luck with the public markets. Even the rare success, like Cava’s IPO, didn’t convince others to follow its path.

But many are hopeful that the IPO market will thaw this year.

“Last year was a stronger year than 2023, and we’re expecting 2025 to have more IPOs than 2024,” said Nick Einhorn, vice president of research for Renaissance Capital, a provider of pre-IPO research and IPO-focused ETFs. “That could certainly include more consumer IPOs.”

Twin Peaks won’t be the first consumer company to make the leap this year — and that debut may not inspire confidence.

Pork producer Smithfield Foods, a subsidiary of Hong Kong-based WH Group, began trading on Tuesday. Shares fell 7% from its IPO price of $20 during its market debut. The company had already downsized its offering by 8.1 million shares and priced below its marketed range. Smithfield’s challenges include its ties to China, U.S. trade tensions with Mexico and proposed immigration policies that would raise its labor costs.

For its part, Twin Peaks, a Hooters rival known for its revealing uniform, is relatively small, with an estimated equity value of $1.04 billion to $1.28 billion and 115 restaurants, according to an investor presentation published by owner Fat Brands. (Fat Brands and its chair Andy Wiederhorn were criminally indicted last year for an alleged $47 million bogus loan scheme; both have denied the charges.)

Fat Brands is spinning off Twin Peaks and plans to use the cash to pay off the debt on its balance sheet.

Here are three other restaurant companies that are watching the IPO market for their chance to go public:

JAB Holding, the investment arm of the Reimann family, has been looking to offload Panera Brands, the parent company of Panera Bread and Einstein Bros. Bagels, from its portfolio for several years. JAB originally took Panera Bread private in 2017 for $7.5 billion.

In 2021, Panera announced an investment from Danny Meyer’s special purpose acquisition company that would help the company go public. But the two parties called off the deal by mid-2022, citing market conditions.

A year and half later, in December 2023, Panera Brands confidentially filed to go public. Six months after the confidential filing, the company announced a CEO transition and tied the shakeup to “preparation for its eventual IPO.”

However, a public filing never followed. The restaurant industry began to see a pullback in spending, as many consumers opted to cook at home instead of dining out at eateries.

Plus, Panera’s Charged Lemonade went viral for all of the wrong reasons; the company removed the highly caffeinated drink from its menu after multiple wrongful death lawsuits tied to it. Panera settled with the first plaintiff in October.

Earlier this month, Panera’s CEO resigned, and the company tapped its chief financial officer to step in as interim chief. With its leadership in flux, it looks unlikely that Panera will try to go public again this year.

A year and a half ago, Bain Capital announced that it is buying Fogo de Chao, a fast-growing Brazilian steakhouse chain. Like Krispy Kreme, Sweetgreen and Dutch Bros., the chain had filed to go public in 2021 — but it missed the window. 

Fogo de Chao has over 100 locations globally and 76 in the U.S. alone. The company plans to open another 15 restaurants this year.

Whenever the IPO market is ready, so will Fogo de Chao.

“If the optionality is there, then we’ll launch,” Fogo de Chao CEO Barry McGowan told CNBC at the ICR Conference in Orlando earlier in January. “My hope is, this year, we’ll see what happens to the consumer markets. I think it’s going to get started this year or in the next year.”

McGowan joked that Fogo de Chao’s longtime CFO Tony Laday has filed more S-1 filings than any other chief financial officer; the company filed three the first time it went public, and seven before Bain bought it.

Thanks to Bain’s investment, Fogo de Chao isn’t in a rush to go public.

“We’re not in a hurry to go. We don’t want to file seven more times. We want to be more certain before we file,” McGowan said.

Roark Capital assembled Inspire Brands by cobbling together a slew of acquisitions into a restaurant conglomerate.

Inspire’s portfolio includes Arby’s, Jimmy John’s, Sonic, Buffalo Wild Wings, Dunkin’ and Baskin Robbins. Across all of its brands, it has more than 32,600 restaurants globally and totals $30 billion in system sales.

Nearly a year ago, Bloomberg reported that Roark was in early-stage IPO discussions with potential advisers and seeking a valuation of $20 billion for Inspire. But it’s been crickets since then.

Still, Pitchbook identified Inspire Brands as one of 50 private equity-backed names that could go public in 2025.

“Obviously, private equity backers will want to exit their position eventually, and IPOs are often a way to do that,” Einhorn said.

And unlike Panera, Inspire has a stable leadership team. CEO Paul Brown co-founded the company and has held his role since 2018. CFO Kate Jaspon joined Inspire in 2021 after it acquired her employer Dunkin’. More than a decade ago, she was a vice president at Dunkin’ during its own IPO.

Starbucks announced several changes, including its plan to cut some items from the food and drink menu.

‘We’ve taken steps to refocus the business, our mission and our marketing to better align with our identity as a coffee company,’ Starbucks chairman and CEO Brian Niccol said Tuesday. ‘We’re relying less on discounts to drive customer traffic and doing more to demonstrate our value.’

Niccol did not say which food and drink items would be leaving.

Among other changes, the coffeehouse chain is no longer charging extra for nondairy milk, will reintroduce the coffee condiment bar and will provide ceramic mugs to customers who dine in-store.

These changes are in an effort ‘to re-establish Starbucks as the community coffeehouse and improve the café experience,’ he said.

A Starbucks spokesperson said customers who want to enjoy their beverage at the establishment will receive the drink in a ceramic mug, glass or in their clean personal cup. They can also receive free refills of hot brewed or iced coffee, or hot or iced tea during their visit.

Fox Corp. is scoring big this Super Bowl.

The broadcaster has sold out of ad spots for Super Bowl 59 on Feb. 9, and more than 10 of those commercials sold for $8 million apiece, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Fox reported during its November earnings call with investors that it sold out of ad spots for the Super Bowl in the fall of 2024. At the time, media reports pegged average prices at more than $7 million per ad.

“We’re sold out for the Super Bowl at record — what we believe [is] a record pricing,” Fox CEO Lachlan Murdoch said on November’s call.

Much of the ad inventory for the Super Bowl was sold during Fox’s Upfront presentation to investors last spring, and when it became clear that open spots were dwindling, the price of each unit stepped up, said the person familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss nonpublic matters.

Typically, pricing for Super Bowl ads can escalate by about $100,000 as remaining inventory lessens and game day approaches. This year, the jump in price was closer to $500,000 per spot, the person said.

The voracious appetite for commercial time during the country’s biggest live sports event is no surprise, even if the pricing is eye-popping. Live sports continue to beckon the biggest audiences as the cable TV bundle shrinks, making the matches some of the most coveted programming on live TV for advertisers.

Last year, an estimated 123.7 million people watched the Super Bowl, which was aired on Paramount’s CBS broadcast network, streaming service Paramount+ and Spanish-language telecaster Univision, among other platforms, according to Nielsen.

In 2023, the last time the Super Bowl aired on Fox, more than 115 million viewers tuned in. These audience sizes are a key reason why media giants have shelled out hefty sums for the rights to NFL games.

“If I learned anything, it’s that we’re in a period now where the live sporting event, where people and families come together to watch, is that much more coveted,” said Mark Evans, executive vice president of ad sales for Fox Sports. “There’s an escalation in price and interest in the demand for live sports, but we’re not at its peak. We’ve still got runway for growth.”

The advertising market has been improving since its slump during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. Traditional media companies with sports rights and tentpole live programming are benefiting the most, while advertising for general entertainment programming still lags in comparison.

This year’s Super Bowl, which will see the reigning champion Kansas City Chiefs once again take on the Philadelphia Eagles, will have plenty of commercials from the typical players, including automakers, restaurants and food and beverage companies, with lots of familiar celebrity faces, said Evans.

Viewers will notice an increase in ads from companies in the artificial intelligence and pharmaceutical industries, while there will be fewer commercials from streaming services and movie studios, he said.

Evans noted that “multiple advertisers have fallen in love with the creative,” adding there will be more 60-second ads in addition to the usually popular 15- and 30-second spots.

Advertisers will also get a little more bang for their buck this year. In addition to broadcasting on Fox, the company is also offering the Super Bowl on its free, ad-supported streaming service Tubi for the first time. Tubi will air the same ad load as the broadcast network.

Fox Corp. is scoring big this Super Bowl.

The broadcaster has sold out of ad spots for Super Bowl 59 on Feb. 9, and more than 10 of those commercials sold for $8 million apiece, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Fox reported during its November earnings call with investors that it sold out of ad spots for the Super Bowl in the fall of 2024. At the time, media reports pegged average prices at more than $7 million per ad.

“We’re sold out for the Super Bowl at record — what we believe [is] a record pricing,” Fox CEO Lachlan Murdoch said on November’s call.

Much of the ad inventory for the Super Bowl was sold during Fox’s Upfront presentation to investors last spring, and when it became clear that open spots were dwindling, the price of each unit stepped up, said the person familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss nonpublic matters.

Typically, pricing for Super Bowl ads can escalate by about $100,000 as remaining inventory lessens and game day approaches. This year, the jump in price was closer to $500,000 per spot, the person said.

The voracious appetite for commercial time during the country’s biggest live sports event is no surprise, even if the pricing is eye-popping. Live sports continue to beckon the biggest audiences as the cable TV bundle shrinks, making the matches some of the most coveted programming on live TV for advertisers.

Last year, an estimated 123.7 million people watched the Super Bowl, which was aired on Paramount’s CBS broadcast network, streaming service Paramount+ and Spanish-language telecaster Univision, among other platforms, according to Nielsen.

In 2023, the last time the Super Bowl aired on Fox, more than 115 million viewers tuned in. These audience sizes are a key reason why media giants have shelled out hefty sums for the rights to NFL games.

“If I learned anything, it’s that we’re in a period now where the live sporting event, where people and families come together to watch, is that much more coveted,” said Mark Evans, executive vice president of ad sales for Fox Sports. “There’s an escalation in price and interest in the demand for live sports, but we’re not at its peak. We’ve still got runway for growth.”

The advertising market has been improving since its slump during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. Traditional media companies with sports rights and tentpole live programming are benefiting the most, while advertising for general entertainment programming still lags in comparison.

This year’s Super Bowl, which will see the reigning champion Kansas City Chiefs once again take on the Philadelphia Eagles, will have plenty of commercials from the typical players, including automakers, restaurants and food and beverage companies, with lots of familiar celebrity faces, said Evans.

Viewers will notice an increase in ads from companies in the artificial intelligence and pharmaceutical industries, while there will be fewer commercials from streaming services and movie studios, he said.

Evans noted that “multiple advertisers have fallen in love with the creative,” adding there will be more 60-second ads in addition to the usually popular 15- and 30-second spots.

Advertisers will also get a little more bang for their buck this year. In addition to broadcasting on Fox, the company is also offering the Super Bowl on its free, ad-supported streaming service Tubi for the first time. Tubi will air the same ad load as the broadcast network.

Tesla’s fourth-quarter earnings report lands just over a week after President Donald Trump began his second term in the White House, with Elon Musk right by his side.

Now that the Tesla CEO is firmly planted in Washington, D.C., in a high-profile advisory role, shareholders in the electric vehicle maker have some questions.

On the forum Tesla uses to solicit investor inquiries in advance of its earnings calls, more than 100 poured in from shareholders about Musk’s politics, including his official role at Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and his endorsement of far-right candidates.

“How much time does Elon Musk devote to growing Tesla, solving product issues, and driving shareholder value vs. his public engagements with Trump, DOGE, and political activities?” one retail investor asked, adding, “Do you believe he’s providing Tesla the focus it needs?”

In addition to contributing $270 million to help Trump and other Republican candidates and causes, Musk spent weeks on the campaign trail during the fourth quarter working to propel Trump back into the White House. After Trump’s election victory, Musk then spent considerable time far away from Tesla’s factory floor at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

One of the top-voted questions about Musk asked how much time he intends to spend “at the White House and on government activities vs time and effort dedicated to Tesla.”

Musk and Tesla didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Musk has also involved himself in German politics, giving a full-throated endorsement of the country’s far-right, anti-immigrant party AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) in December ahead of the February election.

According to research and consulting firm Brand Finance, the value of Tesla’s brand fell by 26% last year, with factors including Musk’s “antagonism,” Tesla’s aging lineup of EVs and more. The researchers found that fewer consumers would recommend or consider buying a Tesla now than in previous years.

During public remarks following last week’s inauguration, Musk repeatedly used a gesture that was viewed by many historians and politicians as a Nazi salute. Ruth Ben-Ghiat, whose scholarship has focused on fascism, described it as “a Nazi salute and a very belligerent one,” while neo-Nazis praised Musk for his antics.

A shareholder on Say asked, “Will you apologize for the misunderstanding that occurred when you made the hand gesture thanking folks for their support. It would go a long way with your investors and the American public at large. Thanking you in advance Elon!”

In response to the criticism, Musk said anyone calling the salute a hateful gesture was pushing a “hoax.” But after that, he engaged in Nazi-themed word play on X, prompting the Anti-Defamation League to rebuke him, writing it is “inappropriate and offensive to make light” of the “singularly evil” Holocaust. And Musk later appeared via video at a rally for the AfD in Halle, Germany.

Some investors asked whether Tesla had “sales lost due to political activities of Elon,” how the company plans “to respond to Musk’s now infamous Nazi salute,” and how Tesla “is addressing the negative impacts of Elon’s public views and activities.”

But Tesla is under no obligation to bring any of these topics up on the earnings call. Ahead of the third-quarter call in October, investors had a lot of questions and concerns about similar issues regarding Musk’s involvement in politics, though that was before Trump’s election victory.

Trump was never mentioned on that call.

Frontier Airlines said Wednesday it has again proposed merging with struggling rival Spirit Airlines, which is in bankruptcy.

Frontier and Spirit first announced a deal to merge in 2022, but a JetBlue Airways offer derailed that plan. JetBlue’s proposed acquisition of Spirit was blocked by a federal judge last year, and Spirit filed for bankruptcy protection in November.

Frontier said in a release that it has met with Spirit’s board and executives since it made its proposal this month. Frontier executives said in a email to counterparts at Spirit this week that their plan is better than Spirit’s own plan to emerge from bankruptcy.

“We continue to believe that under the current standalone plan, Spirit will emerge highly levered, losing money at the operating level, and this would not be a transaction we would pursue,” wrote Frontier Chairman Bill Franke and CEO Barry Biffle in a Tuesday email to Spirit Chairman Mac Gardner and CEO Ted Christie. “As a result, time is of the essence.”

Christie and Gardner told their Frontier counterparts that they were rejecting the deal, calling the terms “inadequate and unactionable,” according to a letter shared in a securities filing on Wednesday.

Spirit said it expects to exit Chapter 11 bankruptcy this quarter. It has cut costs recently, including by slashing some 200 jobs and selling some of its Airbus planes. The airline had also been particularly challenged by a Pratt & Whitney engine recall that grounded dozens of its jets.

Budget carriers like Frontier and Spirit have struggled post-pandemic, as costs like salaries have risen and consumers have opted for trips abroad on carriers with options for roomier and more expensive seats.

Both Frontier and Spirit have been working to upend their business models that were marked by low fares and fees for add-ons from seat assignments to cabin baggage.

The airlines last year did away with cancellation and change fees for some of their tickets and started bundling perks along with tickets. Frontier last year said it would start offering a premium section at the front of the plane.

Starbucks is expected to report its quarterly earnings on Tuesday, kicking off several weeks of reports from restaurant companies as investors anticipate improving demand for dining out.

A handful of restaurants released preliminary results earlier in January ahead of presentations at the annual ICR Conference in Orlando. For many, like Red Robin and Noodles & Company, their early report showed sales trends improved during the fourth quarter, giving investors more confidence and pushing their shares higher. Only Shake Shack saw its stock fall; its outlook disappointed shareholders, who were hoping for higher targets.

But the largest restaurant companies have yet to announce any results. Starbucks paves the way with its announcement on Tuesday after the bell. Yum Brands and Chipotle won’t share their earnings until next week. McDonald’s, often considered a consumer bellwether, isn’t on deck until Feb. 10.

However, a rollercoaster 2024 for restaurants might have ended on a high note — and that could bode well for the industry in the year ahead.

Industry data suggests that the fourth quarter was better for restaurants overall than the rest of the year. Same-store sales grew in both October and November, according to data from market research firm Black Box Intelligence. December was the only month same-store sales fell during the quarter, but Black Box attributed the swing to the calendar shift caused by a late Thanksgiving.

“We came out of [the fourth quarter] with a lot of momentum and started off really strong … That gives me a feeling that the consumer is still very resilient,” Shake Shack CEO Rob Lynch said. “Consumers are still out there spending money. There’s still a lot of jobs for people who want to go out and get great jobs. We’re kind of bullish on ’25.”

Most casual-dining chains have been in turnaround mode, hoping that revamped menus and new marketing plans will reinvigorate sales. For most of last year, only Chili’s, owned by Brinker International, won over customers with its strategy, helping the chain report double-digit same-store sales growth.

But some of Chili’s rivals saw an improvement in the fourth quarter.

For example, Red Robin said it expects to report a 3.4% increase in its fourth-quarter comparable restaurant revenue, excluding a change in deferred loyalty revenue.

“We’ve been doing a ton of work behind the scenes, and I believe that these stories take time, and you can’t skip the process,” Red Robin CEO G.J. Hart told CNBC earlier in January.

For two and a half years, the chain has implemented a broad comeback strategy, which included bringing back bussers and bartenders and overhauling its signature burgers. More recently, Red Robin has launched a loyalty program and unveiled promotions for certain days of the week, reintroducing customers to its revamped restaurant experience and helping it compete with Chili’s.

California Pizza Kitchen also had a strong fourth quarter, and the momentum hasn’t slowed, according to the chain’s President Michael Beacham.

“We had a great [fourth quarter], and we’re already starting out in 2025 with some really strong numbers, and that’s just with our in-dining guests,” Beacham said. CPK is privately owned and doesn’t publicly report its quarterly results, but its sales trends can offer clues about how other casual restaurants are performing.

It helps, too, that diners aren’t feeling as strapped for cash as they were earlier in 2024.

“It looks like the consumer is starting to feel a little bit better than they were in prior quarters,” Darden Restaurants CEO Rick Cardenas said on the company’s earnings conference call in December.

Before the holidays, Darden, which operates on a different fiscal calendar than most of its peers, reported stronger-than-expected demand for its food during the quarter ended Nov. 24. In particular, same-store sales at LongHorn Steakhouse and Olive Garden beat Wall Street’s estimates. Executives credited more frequent visits from diners with annual incomes of $50,000 to $100,000.

Some of the biggest restaurant names might have the most disappointing quarters.

Starbucks is still in turnaround mode. Now under the leadership of former Chipotle CEO Brian Niccol, the coffee giant is in the early innings of a turnaround.

″[Fiscal quarter one] is expected to be another challenging quarter as SBUX implements a host of operational changes. Margin pressure is expected to be similar to Q4, but we believe investors likely look through [near-term] headwinds while focusing on evidence of [long-term] turnaround potential,” Wells Fargo analyst Zachary Fadem wrote in a research note on Thursday.

While Niccol has already tweaked the company’s advertising and promotional strategy, it will take more time for Starbucks to implement larger changes, like a menu overhaul and faster service. The company also recently said it will lay off some of its corporate workforce, although it hasn’t shared how many jobs will be affected.

Wall Street is expecting the Starbucks to report quarterly same-store sales declines of 5.5%, according to StreetAccount estimates.

And then there’s McDonald’s, which spent much of its fourth quarter handling a foodborne illness crisis.

In October, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention connected a fatal E. coli outbreak to McDonald’s Quarter Pounder burgers. The chain reacted by temporarily pulling the menu item in affected areas and eventually switched suppliers for the slivered onions targeted as the likely culprit.

Traffic to McDonald’s restaurants across the U.S. fell as consumers reacted to the headlines, although analysts expect the company to report that trend reversed later in the quarter.

“We expect headwinds related to the E. coli outbreak likely weighed on 4Q US [same-store sales], with data indicating pressured trends in November, but our franchisee discussions and traffic trends highlighting recovering guest counts in December,” UBS analyst Dennis Geiger wrote in a note to clients on Wednesday.

Though some chains are lagging behind, restaurant executives generally seem more positive about 2025, citing improving consumer sentiment and wage growth.

“I’m cautiously optimistic about where we’re headed, and it feels good — it really does,” Red Robin’s Hart said.

Restaurants will also be facing easier comparisons to last year’s sales slump, making their growth this year look more impressive.

But industry optimism doesn’t ensure smooth sailing for the year ahead. Investors will be listening carefully for executive commentary about how traffic and sales are faring so far in the first quarter.

For example, restaurants have had to contend with the wildfires that ravaged Los Angeles, displacing residents and temporarily shuttering some eateries, in addition to the usual seasonal snowstorms and frigid temperatures that keep diners at home.

“I think overall, if you take out weather, this tragic thing that’s happening in California, we see green shoots already for restaurants that aren’t impacted,” Fogo de Chao CEO Barry McGowan said. “We’re hopeful this year.”

More than 3.2 million people will see increased Social Security benefits, under a new law.

However, individuals who are affected may have to wait more than a year before they see the extra money that’s due to them from the Social Security Fairness Act, the Social Security Administration said in an update on its website.

“Though SSA is helping some affected beneficiaries now, under SSA’s current budget, SSA expects that it could take more than one year to adjust benefits and pay all retroactive benefits,” the agency states.

The Social Security Fairness Act eliminates two provisions — known as the Windfall Elimination Provision and Government Pension Offset — that previously reduced Social Security benefits for certain beneficiaries who also had pension income provided from employment where they did not contribute Social Security payroll taxes.

Those provisions reduced benefits for certain workers including state teachers, firefighters and police officers; federal employees who are covered by the Civil Service Retirement System; and individuals who worked under a foreign social security system.

The law affects benefits paid after December 2023. Consequently, affected beneficiaries will receive increases to their monthly benefit checks, as well as retroactive lump sum payments for benefits payable for January 2024 and after.

The benefit increases “may vary greatly,” depending on an individual’s type of Social Security benefits and the amount of pension income they receive, according to the Social Security Administration.

“Some people’s benefits will increase very little while others may be eligible for over $1,000 more each month,” the agency states.

The Social Security Administration said it cannot yet provide an estimated timeline for when the benefit adjustments will happen.

In the meantime, the agency is advising beneficiaries to update their mailing address and bank direct deposit information, if necessary. In addition, non-covered pension recipients may now want to apply for benefits, if they are newly eligible following the enacted changes.

The Department of Education said Tuesday that the pause on federal grants and loans will not affect student loans or financial aid for college.

The freeze, which could affect billions of dollars in aid, noted an exception for Social Security and Medicare. The pause “does not include assistance provided directly to individuals,” according to the White House memo that announced the pause on Monday.

The pause gives the White House time to review government funding for causes that don’t fit with President Donald Trump’s policy agenda, according to Matthew J. Vaeth, acting director of the White House Office of Management and Budget.

The memo specifically cited “financial assistance for foreign aid, non-governmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal.”

The Department of Education said the freeze also has no bearing on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid for the upcoming year.

“The temporary pause does not impact Title I, IDEA, or other formula grants, nor does it apply to Federal Pell Grants and Direct Loans under Title IV [of the Higher Education Act],” Education Department spokesperson Madi Biedermann said in a statement.

In addition to the federal financial aid programs that fall under Title IV, Title I provides financial assistance to school districts with children from low-income families. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, provides funding for students with disabilities.

The funding pause “only applies to discretionary grants at the Department of Education,” Biedermann said. “These will be reviewed by Department leadership for alignment with Trump Administration priorities.”

The pause could affect federal work-study programs and the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant, which are provided in bulk to colleges to provide to students, according to higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz.

However, many colleges have already drawn down their funds for the spring term, so this might not affect even that aid, he said. It may still affect grants to researchers, which often include funding for graduate research assistantships, he added.

“While the memo says the funding pause does not include assistance ‘provided directly to individuals,’ it does not clarify whether that includes money sent first to institutions, states or organizations and then provided to students,” said Karen McCarthy, vice president of public policy and federal relations at the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators.

Most federal financial aid programs are considered Title IV funds “labeled for individual students” and so would not be affected by the pause, McCarthy said, but all other aid outside Title IV is unclear. “We are also researching the impact on campus-based aid programs since they are funded differently,” she said.

“When you have programs that are serving 20 million students, there are a lot of questions, understandably,” said Jonathan Riskind, a vice president at the American Council on Education. “It is really, really damaging for students and institutions to have this level of uncertainty.”

Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, called on the Trump administration to rescind the memo.

“This is bad public policy, and it will have a direct impact on the funds that support students and research,” he said. “The longer this goes on, the greater the damage will be.”