Mia Taylor | (TNS) Bankrate.com

Before putting your home on the market, it’s important to make it look its best for prospective buyers. Getting a home in show-ready shape might involve decluttering the interiors, sprucing up the curb appeal and investing in key repairs around the residence.

But don’t get carried away. Pouring too much money into the home can be a losing investment: It won’t substantially improve your sale price, leaving you out-of-pocket for unnecessary expenses. So it’s important to know where to draw the line. Here are some of the things homeowners need not fix when listing a home for sale.

Why you don’t need to fix everything

As a general rule, it’s a good idea to focus on fixing items that may impact your home’s sale price. Beyond that, money spent on repairs and replacements may be wasted, as prospective buyers may not find the improvements necessary or even notice the work was done at all.

In addition, most major renovation projects do not recoup the money you spend on them at resale. “Many times a major kitchen renovation or room addition won’t give you the return on investment that you might expect,” says Jade Lee Duffy, a Realtor with Epique in San Diego, California. For example, spending thousands of dollars on fancy new kitchen tiles can backfire: Buyers have their own taste and don’t want to end up paying for new tile that they don’t like. Projects like extensive landscaping, high-end fixtures and new pools typically do not offer a dollar-for-dollar return either, she says.

Buyers do usually expect the house to be in “good working order,” though, says Duffy. Before embarking on repairs, consult with a local real estate agent for advice and input about projects that make the most sense — and might translate into better offers.

What you should fix when you sell

Julie Upton, a Realtor with Compass in the San Francisco Bay Area, suggests concentrating on things buyers typically notice most. “Buyers see flooring, walls, kitchens and baths,” she says. “They focus on beautiful main living spaces. That is where you should start.”

You should address basic wear-and-tear in these areas. For example, fresh paint is a must, says Upton — in fact, she advises against even listing a home without repainting the interiors first. Refinishing hardwood floors can also be a good idea. According to the National Association of Realtors’ most recent “Remodeling Impact Report,” refinished hardwoods are one of the few renovation projects that actually recoup more than their cost.

Although it’s a less sexy fix, updating an aging or faulty heating, venting and air conditioning (HVAC) system might also be worth considering, especially if you live in a warm-weather locale. “The number one repair is HVAC during any summer home sale,” says Dustin Fox, a Realtor with Pearson Smith Realty in Ashburn, Virginia. “If your air conditioning is toward the end of its life and the thermostat can’t keep up with the set temperature, buyers — and buyer’s agents — will notice.”

Beyond repairs

You only have one chance to make a first impression with buyers, so investing in your home’s front entrance and the immediate area is usually money well spent. “When the exterior of a home has good curb appeal, it means it is attractive to look at and inspires confidence,” says Dino DiNenna, a broker-Realtor with Southern Lifestyle Properties in Hilton Head, South Carolina. “Good curb appeal can help to sell a home faster and at a much better price.”

Staging can also make a home more desirable and appealing to buyers. Well-staged homes sell faster than unstaged ones, says DiNenna. “Plus, it can increase the selling price of a home by 20% or more,” he says.

What not to fix when selling a house

Just as important as knowing what to fix is knowing what you don’t need to bother with. There’s typically no need to address relatively small issues, including:

—Minor electrical or plumbing issues: Often buyers will not worry about small, isolated electrical and plumbing problems — the light switch attached to nothing, the faucet that drips a bit before stopping. “Just disclose these issues and let the buyer deal with it,” says Upton.

—Older appliances: Real estate listings love to name-drop snazzy brands or tout a “newly outfitted” kitchen/bathroom/laundry room — and certainly, state-of-the-art appliances can be appealing. But not having them is rarely a deal-breaker, especially in a hot market, says Keri Rizzi, a Realtor with HomeSmart in White Plains, New York. Only “if feedback repeatedly comes in stating that the old appliances are keeping buyers from making offers” should sellers take that into consideration and adjust their price accordingly, or replace the appliances, she says.

—Aging windows: You want your windows to be sparkling clean, but don’t bother to actually replace them. New windows are a costly endeavor that typically will not prove valuable when listing your home on the market. “We never recommend replacing windows,” says Fox. “We’ve rarely had a client not move forward with an offer because the windows are old.”

—Outdated floor coverings: As long as it’s in decent shape, it’s probably not worth replacing wall-to-wall carpeting or dated-looking floor tiles. Buyers might not adore them, but they can be easily replaced with something more to the new owner’s personal taste.

—Any project you can’t finish: Avoid starting any work that may not be able to be completed prior to listing. Works-in-progress can negatively impact a prospective buyer’s impression of your home: ”A half-finished anything looks worse than just leaving it as is,” says Upton. “It also sends a signal that the seller ran out of money, so a buyer may think they can offer less because the seller may be in financial distress.”

Bottom line

You’ll incur plenty of costs when selling a home, so it’s important to keep a lid on the ones you can control. While it’s important to ensure your home makes a good first impression, some repairs can be skipped — and some may even be a turn-off to prospective buyers. Before spending a great deal of money on repairs and renovations, talk with an experienced real estate professional about the projects to prioritize. You want your dollars to go where they’ll have the most impact, garnering you the best return on your investment when it comes to sale price.

©2024 Bankrate.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

By Tommy Tindall, NerdWallet

The holiday season can add up. On average, shoppers are expected to spend a record $902 per person on holiday purchases this year, according to the National Retail Federation. Holiday expenses include gifts, food, decorations and other seasonal items.

It’s important to set a reasonable budget for holiday spending. If you’re worried extra expenses will exceed your income, it might be time to cut back. Alternatively, you can try to find a side gig that’ll net you an extra 500 bucks.

Here are some ways to make extra money.

1. Work as a seasonal sales associate

An influx of consumer spending means retail stores need help this time of year. If you have the time, energy and interest, you can seek a gig as a seasonal sales associate. It’s a part-time job, but you can still call it a side hustle, especially if your main hustle is going to school, taking care of the family or working a full-time job.

At the time of this writing, we found lots of openings nationwide. One example is a seasonal sales associate with Burlington Stores in Brooklyn, New York. It’s posted as part-time, seasonal work that pays $16 per hour. We also spotted an opportunity to work at a Levi Strauss & Co store in Seattle, Washington for up to $21 per hour.

At $16 an hour, you’ll need to put in 32 hours of work to hit the $500 mark — before taxes. But hey, you may like the customer interaction.

2. Become a gig delivery driver

Delivery gigs aren’t known for high pay, but driving for a service like DoorDash or Instacart is an accessible way to earn extra money. If you meet basic qualifications and have access to a vehicle, you could be delivering and earning before Christmas.

According to Glassdoor, the average pay range is between $22 and $33 per hour for a DoorDash Driver and between $19 and $27 per hour for an Instacart delivery driver. That sounds pretty good until you ask someone who’s given these gigs a shot.

I, your Nerdy writer, signed up and tried driving for both services as part of NerdWallet’s Side Hustle Stress Test series and didn’t quite hit the Glassdoor averages. I averaged just over $13 per hour driving for DoorDash and just under $11.50 per hour as an Instacart full-service shopper. In my defense, I didn’t do either gig long enough to master the method.

Let’s say you’re more efficient than me and can pull in $20 per hour doing delivery gig work this holiday season. You could hit $500 in 25 hours. But don’t forget about gas, wear and tear on your car, and the taxes you’ll pay as an independent contractor.

3. Start your freelance business

Go a big step further and start the online freelance business you’ve always wanted.

Julexy Lopez jumped into her side business back in 2016. She’s a graphic designer by trade and leverages the skills she uses daily to offer design work and email campaign management on the freelance marketplace Fiverr. While it took time to build her client base, it’s turned into a steady stream of side money.

Related Articles

What’s new for Medicare in 2025?

Homeownership is getting unaffordable for the middle class

Home sellers and buyers: What you must know for 2025

A top Fed official leans toward December rate cut but says it depends on economic data

How to start investing in cryptocurrency: A guide for beginners

“On average, I can count on at least $500 a month,” she says. “It’s money that I can use for savings or to splurge on that extra thing here and there.”

Soraya Ivette, a content marketing strategist who offers services on Fiverr, started freelancing part-time when she was home with her young children.

“It allowed me to have extra spending money and contribute to the household income,” she said in an email interview.

Ivette said she earned $20,000 in her first year and that her income has only increased in the time since.

“I believe it’s absolutely possible to earn between $500 and $1,000 monthly. With an optimized profile and skill you can start making $500 within your first month or two,” she said.

Keep in mind that freelance marketplaces like Fiverr, Upwork and Freelancer.com take a cut of each transaction. You can also find clients on your own. For example, Ivette uses her public-facing business website as another avenue to connect with clients.

Other ways to earn extra money this holiday season

Other ways to earn extra bucks are less prescriptive, but readily available.

Sell unwanted items from around the house: Apps like OfferUp and Facebook (for Facebook Marketplace) make it easy to post and sell stuff in your local community. Popular items to offload include furniture, video game consoles, computers and headphones. If you find the right items and put some effort into your listing, you might be able to put $100 in your pocket with one or two sales.

Take family portraits for holiday cards: Do you have a DSLR or mirrorless camera, a good lens and an eye for design? You could take family portraits for pay. Start with your own friends and family for less pressure on your first couple gigs. According to online task and service platform Airtasker, photographers can charge between $75 and $600 for family photo shoots. You may want to offer the friends and family discount for the first couple shoots.

Do odd jobs in your community: Online platforms like Airtasker and Taskrabbit can connect you to paying gigs for all sorts of local jobs. One seasonal example is raking leaves. According to Taskrabbit’s website, taskers on the platform provide yardwork services starting at $30 per hour. Other odd jobs can include cleaning houses, decorating for parties and assembling furniture.

While the idea of starting a side hustle is alluring, making it happen can be elusive. Don’t feel bad if things don’t pan out this season. Finding ways to save money can be as effective as earning a little more.

Also, the $902 holiday spending estimate is just that. Win the season by spending less.

Tommy Tindall writes for NerdWallet. Email: ttindall@nerdwallet.com.

The article 3 Ways to Earn an Extra $500 for the Holidays originally appeared on NerdWallet.

Donald Trump’s Saturday night announcement that he’s going to nominate a new director of the FBI, the woefully unqualified and completely unfit Kash Patel, is premature by a few years because the director’s position is not open. Director Chris Wray was nominated by Trump in his first Oval Office stint and confirmed 92–5 by the Senate, starting his 10-year term on Aug. 2, 2017. Unless Wray leaves before the summer of 2027, there is no vacancy to fill.

Wray has not done anything as head of the FBI to warrant his removal for cause, which should be the only way for a president to get rid of a director.

In the 50 years since Congress created the modern FBI leadership following the unaccountable 48-year reign of J. Edgar Hoover, presidents have largely respected the independence directors have in their non-renewable decade in office.

Yes, President Bill Clinton did remove FBI boss Bill Sessions soon after Clinton took office in 1993, but that was only after a damning Department of Justice by the departing Bush administration report found that Sessions had improperly billed the government for private expenses.

The other instance, with far less justification, was in 2017 when Trump dumped FBI Director Jim Comey. The cover story was that Comey had badly botched the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation in the days before the 2016 election, which Comey did badly botch, upsetting everyone. The real reason was that Trump didn’t want the Kremlin’s efforts to help his campaign to be probed.

Related Articles

States poised to end coverage for millions if Trump cuts Medicaid funding

Trump nominates cryptocurrency advocate Paul Atkins as SEC chair

OpenAI Sam Altman ‘not that worried’ about rival Elon Musk’s influence in the Trump administration

US senators grill officials from 5 airlines over fees for seats and checked bags

US military takes pride in religious diversity. Would things change if Pete Hegseth takes charge?

As to any reason to dismiss Wray, there are none. Expect the bogeyman of the deep state, which is where Patel comes in. Patel, a former Trump aide who has no business being atop of the FBI, or the CIA (as has been floated by Trump in the past) wrote a 2023 book called: “Government Gangsters: The Deep State, the Truth, and the Battle for Our Democracy.”

The book’s Appendix B, called “Members of the Executive Branch Deep State,” is a list of 60 names in alphabetical order. The second name is Lloyd Austin, the current secretary of defense. Bill Barr, Trump’s attorney general, is the fifth name. Near the end of Trump’s first term when Trump mused with making Patel the FBI’s deputy director, Barr told the White House chief of staff: “Over my dead body.”

Trump’s National Security Advisor John Bolton is sixth on Patel’s list, while Joe Biden is No. 8. And that’s just the first page. The names on the other three pages include Trump’s White House Chief Counsel Pat Cipollone, Hillary Clinton, Jim Comey, Mark Esper, who Trump fired as defense secretary, current Attorney General Merrick Garland and Trump’s CIA Director Gina Haspel, who threatened to resign when Trump suggested making Patel the spy agency’s deputy director.

Other names are Kamala Harris, Special Counsel Robert Hur, who probed Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents, and former chairman of the joint chiefs Mark Milley. Chris Wray is No. 59 on the roster. Patel’s enemies list is anyone who didn’t lie down for Trump.

And that’s just the executive branch, not including enemies in Congress or the press, but they exist also. Last December, on Steve Bannon’s podcast, Patel said: “We will go out and find the conspirators, not just in government but in the media. Yes, we’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections — we’re going to come after you.”

Forget running the FBI, this guy Patel isn’t suited for any job in government.

— The New York Daily News

By BARBARA ORTUTAY, AP Technology Writer

It is an ambitious social experiment of our moment in history — one that experts say could accomplish something that parents, schools and other governments have attempted with varying degrees of success: keeping kids off social media until they turn 16.

Australia’s new law, approved by its Parliament last week, is an attempt to swim against many tides of modern life — formidable forces like technology, marketing, globalization and, of course, the iron will of a teenager. And like efforts of the past to protect kids from things that parents believe they’re not ready for, the nation’s move is both ambitious and not exactly simple, particularly in a world where young people are often shaped, defined and judged by the online company they keep.

The ban won’t go into effect for another year. But how will Australia be able to enforce it? That’s not clear, nor will it be easy. TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram have become so ingrained in young people’s lives that going cold turkey will be difficult.

Other questions loom. Does the ban limit kids’ free expression and — especially for those in vulnerable groups — isolate them and curtail their opportunity to connect with members of their community? And how will social sites verify people’s ages, anyway? Can’t kids just get around such technicalities, as they so often do?

This is, after all, the 21st century — an era when social media is the primary communications tool for most of those born in the past 25 years who, in a fragmented world, seek the common cultures of trends, music and memes. What happens when big swaths of that fall away?

Is Australia’s initiative a good, long-time-coming development that will protect the vulnerable, or could it become a well-meaning experiment with unintended consequences?

Platforms will be held liable

The law will make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent children younger than 16 from holding accounts. “It’s clear that social media companies have to be held accountable, which is what Australia is trying to do,” said Jim Steyer, president and CEO of the nonprofit Common Sense Media.

Related Articles

FACT FOCUS: Vermont ruling does not say schools can vaccinate children without parental consent

How to get started with Bluesky

Supreme Court allows multibillion-dollar class action to proceed against Meta

About 20% of Americans regularly get their news from influencers on social media, report says

Bluesky has added 1 million users since the US election as people seek alternatives to X

Leaders and parents in countries around the world are watching Australia’s policy closely as many seek to protect young kids from the internet’s dangerous corners — and, not incidentally, from each other. Most nations have taken different routes, from parental consent requirements to minimum age limits.

Many child safety experts, parents and even teens who have waited to get on social media consider Australia’s move a positive step. They say there’s ample reason to ensure that children wait.

“What’s most important for kids, just like adults, is real human connection. Less time alone on the screen means more time to connect, not less,” said Julie Scelfo, the founder of Mothers Against Media Addiction, or MAMA, a grassroots group of parents aimed at combatting the harms of social media to children. “I’m confident we can support our kids in interacting in any number of ways aside from sharing the latest meme.”

The harms to children from social media have been well documented in the two decades since Facebook’s launch ushered in a new era in how the world communicates. Kids who spend more time on social media, especially when they are tweens or young teenagers, are more likely to experience depression and anxiety, according to multiple studies — though it is not yet clear if there is a causal relationship.

What’s more, many are exposed to content that is not appropriate for their age, including pornography and violence, as well as social pressures about body image and makeup. They also face bullying, sexual harassment and unwanted advances from their peers as well as adult strangers. Because their brains are not fully developed, teenagers, especially younger ones the law is focused on, are also more affected by social comparisons than adults, so even happy posts from friends can send them into a negative spiral.

What unintended harms could be caused?

Many major initiatives, particularly those aimed at social engineering, can produce side effects — often unintended. Could that happen here? What, if anything, do kids stand to lose by separating kids and the networks in which they participate?

Paul Taske, associate director of litigation at the tech lobbying group NetChoice, says he considers the ban “one of the most extreme violations of free speech on the world stage today” even as he expressed relief that the First Amendment prevents such law in the United States

“These restrictions would create a massive cultural shift,” Taske said.

“Not only is the Australian government preventing young people from engaging with issues they’re passionate about, but they’re also doing so even if their parents are ok with them using digital services,” he said. “Parents know their children and their needs the best, and they should be making these decisions for their families — not big government. That kind of forcible control over families inevitably will have downstream cultural impacts.”

David Inserra, a fellow for Free Expression and Technology, Cato Institute, called the bill “about as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike” in a recent blog post. While Australia’s law doesn’t require “hard verification” such as an uploaded ID, he said, it calls for effective “age-assurance” that includes an array of ways companies can estimate someone’s age. He said no verification system can ensure accuracy while also protecting privacy and not impacting adults in the process.

Privacy advocates have also raised concerns about the law’s effect on online anonymity, a cornerstone of online communications — and something that can protect teens on social platforms.

“Whether it be religious minorities and dissidents, LGBTQ youth, those in abusive situations, whistleblowers, or countless other speakers in tricky situations, anonymous speech is a critical tool to safely challenge authority and express controversial opinions,” Inserra said. “But if every user of online platforms must first identify themselves, then their anonymity is at risk.”

Other countries are trying to figure it out, too

Parents in Britain and across Europe earlier this year organized on platforms such as WhatsApp and Telegram to promise not to buy smartphones for children younger than 12 or 13. This approach costs almost no money and requires no government enforcement. In the United States, some parents are keeping kids off social media either informally or as part of an organized campaign such as Wait Until 8th, a group that helps parents delay kids’ access to social media and phones.

This fall, Norway announced plans to ban kids under 15 from using social media, while France is testing a smartphone ban for kids under 15 in a limited number of schools — a policy that could be rolled out nationwide if successful.

U.S. lawmakers have held multiple congressional hearings — most recently in January — on child online safety. Still, the last federal law aimed at protecting children online was enacted in 1998, six years before Facebook’s founding. In July, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly passed legislation designed to protect children from dangerous online content, pushing forward with what would be the first major effort by Congress in decades to hold tech companies more accountable. But the Kids Online Safety Act has since stalled in the House.

While several states have passed laws requiring age verification, those are stuck in court. Utah became the first state to pass laws regulating children’s social media use in 2023. In September, a judge issued the preliminary injunction against the law, which would have required social media companies to verify the ages of users, apply privacy settings and limit some features. NetChoice has also obtained injunctions temporarily halting similar laws in several other states.

And last May, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy said there is insufficient evidence to show social media is safe for kids. He urged policymakers to address the harms of social media the same way they regulate things like car seats, baby formula, medication and other products children use.

Said Scelfo: “Why should social media products be any different? Kids may try to get around the restrictions — just like they do for alcohol, tobacco or drugs — but nobody is saying that because they try, we should give them unfettered access to them. Parents cannot possibly bear the entire responsibility of keeping children safe online, because the problems are baked into the design of the products. And so we need policies that hold Big Tech accountable for ensuring their products are safe.”

Associated Press Writer Laurie Kellman contributed to this story.