Category: News

Understanding the EV/2P Ratio

3 min read

What are the EV/2P RatioWhen it comes to raw materials, especially for fossil fuels, it’s essential to evaluate existing and potential production capabilities for such companies. Using the EV/2P Ratio is a powerful tool when evaluating fossil fuel-related companies.

Defining the Ratio

This ratio is calculated by dividing a business’ enterprise value into the company’s reserves. It provides financial analysts, investors and internal business stakeholders with a snapshot of a company’s reserves and the business’ likelihood of preserving operation growth. This standardizes valuations, thereby allowing analysts to compare company-to-company financials.

How to Calculate EV/2P

Enterprise Value (EV) / Total 2P Reserves

Defined as: Enterprise Value = Equity (open market price) + Debt (open market price) – Cash and Cash Equivalents

2P = Proven and Probable Reserves

Illustrating the Calculation

If a company’s capitalization is $300 million and debt consisting of $225 million, along with $30 million for proven reserve value, $20 million in probable reserves, and $25 million in possible reserves, the company’s resulting enterprise value becomes:

$300 million + $225 million = $525 million

The 2P reserves is:

$30 million + $20 million = $50 million

Plugging the numbers into the original formula, it’s: $525 million / $50 million = 10.5x (multiple)

Based on the resulting 10.5 multiple, this ratio provides a current valuation that translates to for every $1 in 2P reserves equals $10.50 of a market valuation.

Reserves are how internal/external stakeholders value the production/growth potential of oil/gas companies. It’s broken down into two categories:

1.) P1 are proven reserves, which are the highest caliber reserves. There’s at least a 9 in 10 percent likelihood (or more) of recoverable reserves. It’s also known as P90.

2.) Probable reserve (also known as P50) has an even chance of either non-recoverability or realized recoverability. This is the next best, but a lesser grade than P1.

These two resource categories are referred to as 2P.

Putting it in Perspective

Depending on the company’s calculated EV/2P Ratio, the business owner or investor can determine a course of action to take.

If it’s higher, it’s more highly valued than its competitors based on the same level of 2P reserves; therefore, the company’s shares are more expensive against its peers. This can give investors pause because other undervalued stocks are more attractive due to a higher likelihood they’ll appreciate.

However, if a company is valued higher, but the company is more efficient or a higher performer, investors also may be interested because its production and earnings justify the higher valuation. That’s why looking at the metric in a silo is not effective.

Debt Concerns

When it comes to debt and analyzing this ratio, fossil fuel businesses are often highly levered since they use massive sums of debt for research and development and continued operations.

Since the EV value looks at debt and equity concurrently, analyzing a company’s capital structure is essential when comparing companies’ valuations. Essentially, if a company has too much debt and if interest rates suddenly increase or it can’t service debt if the price of crude plummets, it may run into debt servicing issues.

While this ratio is effective in providing a level playing field for analytical uses, it’s important to remember that it needs to be used in conjunction with comprehensive financial analysis.

Version 6

Tax Considerations for Data Center Projects in the Age of AI

4 min read

Tax Considerations for Data Center ProjectsArtificial intelligence is driving an unprecedented surge in data center construction. Developers, private equity sponsors and their tax advisors are navigating a complicated web of questions that touch everything from ownership structure to site selection to power sourcing. Get the early decisions wrong and the tax consequences can follow a project for years.

Why REITs Have Become the Structure of Choice

Private equity has increasingly turned to real estate investment trusts when backing data center projects. Structure a REIT correctly, and you sidestep corporate-level taxation entirely. Foreign investors get an even better deal. Sovereign wealth funds and foreign pension funds can participate without any obligation to file U.S. tax returns. Data centers, with their heavy real estate footprint, slot into the REIT framework more naturally than many other asset classes.

That said, the fit is not seamless. Related party rent rules create traps for the unwary. Public pension funds and sovereign wealth funds need to confirm they do not hold stakes in both a data center REIT and its tenant. Another wrinkle involves equipment. Data centers demand significant upfront investment in personal property that may not count as qualifying REIT assets. The tax code requires that 75 percent of a REIT’s total asset value consist of real estate, cash, and government securities at each quarter’s close. Developers often must segregate personal property until the REIT builds up enough good assets to clear that hurdle.

The Power and Water Challenge

Reliable power and water access have become one of the toughest operational problems in the industry. Demand is so intense that many developers are generating their own electricity on-site. The tax treatment of these co-located power facilities depends heavily on the energy source and delivery method. Get it wrong, and the generation asset may not qualify for REIT treatment.

Solar photovoltaic systems sit on relatively solid ground under existing guidance. Nuclear and natural gas, which many see as the next wave of data center power, do not. Current rules leave significant uncertainty around whether these sources can work within a REIT structure.

Legislative and Executive Developments

The IRS priority guidance plan for 2025 and 2026 contains no projects aimed squarely at data centers. Regulation section 1.856-10(g), finalized in 2016, includes an example analyzing customized electrical and telecommunications systems in a data center context, but practitioners continue pushing for clearer rules on alternative energy.

Congress may offer relief on the waterfront. In April 2025, Representative Darin LaHood of Illinois proposed a new section 48F that would provide a 30 percent credit for qualifying water reuse projects, including on-site recycling systems at data centers. With U.S. data centers projected to consume 33 billion gallons of water by 2028, the bill attracted 21 cosponsors and bipartisan support.

The White House has made its priorities clear as well. The Trump administration’s July 2025 AI action plan established a goal of achieving global dominance in artificial intelligence, with infrastructure as one of three pillars. An executive order, issued July 23, 2025, focused specifically on reducing federal regulatory obstacles to data center construction.

Conclusion and OBBBA Incentives Worth Watching

Several provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act benefit data center projects, even though lawmakers did not design them with that sector in mind. The return of 100 percent bonus depreciation under section 168(k) matters enormously for an industry requiring massive capital outlays.

Rural Opportunity Zones sweeten the economics further. Investments in qualified rural opportunity funds now qualify for a 30 percent basis step-up after five years, triple the 10 percent available in standard zones. A special rule targeting improvements to existing structures in rural areas cuts the substantial improvement threshold to 50 percent of adjusted basis, compared to more than 100 percent for non-rural funds.

Developers and investors evaluating new projects will find that entity structure, site selection, and the shifting regulatory environment all interact in ways that directly affect the bottom line. Getting the tax picture right from the start remains essential.

Understanding the Customer Acquisition Cost

3 min read

Understanding the Customer Acquisition Cost, What is CACThe Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC) measures how much a company spends to obtain new, additional customers. Oftentimes, it’s used with the customer lifetime value (LTV) metric, which also projects the customer’s profitability to calculate the newly acquired customer’s value.

It’s primarily used to measure a business’ sales and marketing departments to figure out their profitability, profit margin and return on investment figures.

How to Calculate

CAC = Sales and Marketing Expense/Number of New Customers

Where: Examples of the expenses include product and service promotion expenditures, special compensation and commissions, regular wage payments, and operating expenses.

The tally of newly acquired customers is simply how many new, unique contracts the business acquired. It’s important to keep the expenses and customer acquisition numbers consistent over the same periods.

Why It’s Important

Business owners and their managers, along with investors, can look at sales and marketing efforts from a return on investment on their expenditures and outcomes. For example, there could be multiple channels that sales and marketing utilize to obtain new customers over a quarter, half-year, or 12-month period (such as email marketing, social media marketing, conferences, etc.). Based upon each channel, the customer acquisition cost is determined by dividing the financial outlay per customer acquired.

From there, each channel can be analyzed to see which one works well and, equally important, which ones don’t work well and either need to be discontinued or modified. Internal stakeholders and external investors (both existing and potential) can look at trends to see if existing management is productive or needs to be replaced with more competent individuals.      

Accounting Considerations

Based on FASB’s Accounting Standards Codification 340-40, businesses are required to document and capitalize incremental costs of securing new customer business if the related expenses are projected to be recouped.

An incremental cost in the scope of obtaining a contract is a cost an entity incurs to obtain a contract that wouldn’t have been incurred if the contract hadn’t been obtained.

While a sales commission (be it fixed or a percentage of a new contract) may be considered an eligible incremental cost to one of its employees, it’s not necessarily always the case. Rather, the true test of whether an incremental cost is capitalizable depends on the subjective interpretation of whether a mandated financial expenditure for an incremental cost is attributed to signing a contract with a new customer.

The following sample situations often require more investigation to determine whether the capitalization of costs is applicable:

  • Equity issuances based upon meeting production and essential function goals
  • Employee compensation according to previous years’ executed contracts
  • Sales commissions allocated over multiple time frames and/or to more than one employee for a single contract.

ASC 340-40 also stipulates the amortization schedule of capitalization costs of obtaining a customer contract on a scheduled timeline that follows the delivery to the customer of the contracted goods or services.

Conclusion

While the customer acquisition cost may be straightforward, when it comes to subjective cases, businesses that have experience with murkier situations are able to make the most of their subjective sales and marketing expenses when navigating the tax and accounting landscape. 

Stalemates in Voting Rights and ICE Legislation; Small Business Funding Expanded

4 min read

Stalemates in Voting Rights and ICE Legislation; Small Business Funding ExpandedSafeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (S 1383) – Also known as the SAVE America Act, this bill passed in the House on Feb. 11 but stalled in the Senate due to the Democrat filibuster. The bill would require states to verify documentary proof of citizenship and current residential address when Americans apply for federal voter registration. The easiest documentation would be a birth certificate or passport that confirms their current legal name (most women change their last name after marriage, so they require additional documentation, such as a marriage certificate). However, research from the Bipartisan Policy Center found that nearly 1 in 10 registered voters do not have access to their birth certificate, and 52 percent do not have an unexpired passport with their current legal name. Note that these registration requirements kick in any time current voters update their registration, such as for an address change or to switch political party affiliation. The bill also requires a specific type of photo ID to cast a ballot. A driver’s license is acceptable, but not student IDs or a tribal ID that lacks an expiration date (which tribal IDs do not contain). The president is also insistent that the legislation include unrelated restrictions for transgender Americans. The debate over this bill continues in the Senate.

Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026 (HR 7744) – This is the bill that has held up appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2026. The bill was introduced by Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) on March 2 and passed in the House on March 5. However, it triggered a partial government shutdown and is under heated debate in the Senate. Republicans insist on passing the complete bill with increased funding for national security and border protection. The legislation also includes provisions prohibiting funds for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and Critical Theory programs, as well as abortions and gender-affirming care for ICE detainees. Senate Democrats are seeking to include guardrails that would prohibit ICE agents from wearing masks or entering homes, schools, hospitals, etc., without a judicial warrant. Currently at a stalemate, Republicans will likely try to pass funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), more money for ICE, and components of the Save America Act through a budget reconciliation bill.

Small Business Innovation and Economic Security Act (S 3971) – On March 3, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) introduced this bipartisan bill to reauthorize the Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) programs. These programs, also known as America’s Seed Fund, expired last September. The new bill enables certain agencies to award a portion of their funds to larger projects focused on technology transition, rather than incremental R&D. These agencies, which include the Departments of Defense, Energy and Homeland Security, the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, may award up to $30 million to small business projects that prioritize national security, customer demand and undercapitalized technology areas. The bill passed in the Senate on March 3, the House on March 17, and was signed into law by the president on April 13.

Tyler’s Law (S 921) – The purpose of this bill is to issue guidance for hospital emergency departments to implement fentanyl testing as a routine procedure for patients experiencing an overdose. The current standard procedure tests for marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, PCP, and natural and semisynthetic opioids, but not synthetic opioids like fentanyl – something many ER practitioners are unaware of. The bill is named for Tyler Shamash, a California teenager who died of an overdose after he passed a drug test in an emergency room that did not include fentanyl. The bipartisan bill was introduced by Sen. Jim Banks (R-IN) on March 10, 2025. It passed in the Senate on March 23, 2026, and is currently awaiting a vote in the House.

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to designate Haiti for Temporary Protected Status (HR 1689) – This bill was introduced on Feb. 27, 2025, and passed in the House on April 16, 2026. Amid rampant immigration enforcement, this bill is designed to extend temporary protected status for Haitian migrants through 2029. TPS is intended to provide a safe haven for foreign nationals whose home countries are experiencing temporary unsafe conditions, such as from a natural disaster or civil unrest, for which Haitians continue to qualify. This largely partisan legislation faces an uphill battle in the Senate, as well as a likely veto by the president. In February, the president revoked TPS status for approximately 330,000 Haitians in the United States. However, enforcement of that order is currently halted, and its constitutionality is under consideration by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Burying Time Capsules, Ending Payments to Dead People, and Safeguarding Voting Rights for U.S. Citizens

3 min read

Burying Time Capsules, Ending Payments to Dead People, and Safeguarding Voting Rights for U.S. Citizens

Disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in approving the DC Income and Franchise Tax Conformity and Revision Temporary Amendment Act of 2025 (HJRes 142) – After passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the Council of the District of Columbia (DC) opted out of the tax code from the Act, amending several provisions and restoring the DC child tax credit. This resolution nullifies DC’s amended legislation. It was introduced on Jan. 22 by Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX). It passed in the House on Feb. 4, the Senate on Feb. 12, and was enacted on Feb. 18.

Semiquincentennial Congressional Time Capsule Act (S 3705) – This bill instructs the Architect of the Capitol to bury a time capsule in the Capitol Visitor Center (on or before July 4, 2026) as part of this year’s 250th anniversary celebration of the nation’s founding. The purpose of the capsule is to represent legislative milestones to date via a joint letter to the future Congress by the majority and minority leaders of the Senate and the House. The time capsule is meant to remain there until July 4, 2276, the nation’s 500th anniversary. The legislation was introduced by Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) on Jan. 27. It passed the Senate on Jan. 27, the House on Feb. 9, and was signed into law by the president on Feb. 18.

Bankruptcy Administration Improvement Act of 2025 (S 3424) – This Act was introduced by Rep. Christopher Coons (D-DE) on Dec. 10, 2025, and passed in the Senate on the same day. It cleared the House on Jan. 12 and was signed into law on Feb. 6. The bill makes alterations to the administration of bankruptcy cases by increasing fees paid to trustees in Chapter 7 (liquidation) cases, and extends by five years the fees paid to trustees in Chapter 11 (reorganization) cases. It also extends the term of bankruptcy judgeships in various districts, as well as other provisions.

Ending Improper Payments to Deceased People Act (S 269) – This legislation requires the Social Security Administration (SSA) to share its death records with the Treasury Department in order to prevent improper payments to deceased individuals. In the past, this bill had to be extended every three years, but the new bill makes the requirement permanent. The bill was introduced by Sen. John Kennedy (R-TN) on Jan. 28, 2025. It passed unanimously in the Senate on Sept. 19, 2025, cleared the House on Jan. 13, and was enacted on Feb. 10.

Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (S 1383) – This controversial voting bill passed in the House on Feb. 11. The Republicans in the Senate have secured 50 votes for passage, but the bill requires 60. The provisions in the current bill include requiring:

  • Each state is to submit full voter rolls to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for verification of citizenship via its SAVE system, which has historically had a high error rate of flagging citizens as non-citizens.
  • Voter roll purges every 30 days and end the 90-day quiet period that allows voters mistakenly purged time to re-register before Election Day.
  • New or changing voter registrants to show proof of U.S. citizenship (birth certificate or passport; five states already meet this requirement for a Real ID driver’s license).
  • Voters to show photo ID at polls in order to vote (38 states already require this)
  • A ban on automatically mailing ballots to all voters (currently used by eight states and DC); voters would have to send individual requests to receive a mail ballot.

Democrats in the Senate have vowed to block passage via filibuster.

 

Cloud Sovereignty vs. Big Tech: How Businesses Are Avoiding the ‘AI Lock-in’ Trap in 2026

4 min read

Cloud SovereigntyArtificial intelligence (AI) is no longer a competitive advantage; it has become a necessary infrastructure. Businesses now heavily rely on AI-powered systems, from automated customer service to predictive analytics and decision-making tools. These platforms are cloud-based, and their reliance comes with growing concern of AI lock-in. This dependence on major cloud providers and the convenience of Big Tech ecosystems can turn into long-term dependency. In response, cloud sovereignty is gaining momentum.

What Is Cloud Sovereignty?

Cloud sovereignty refers to the ability of an organization to maintain full control over its data, infrastructure, and digital assets. This includes where data is stored, how it is processed, and which legal jurisdiction governs it.

Unlike traditional cloud hosting, where companies rely on a single global provider, cloud sovereignty emphasizes:

  • Data ownership and portability
  • Compliance with local laws and regulations
  • Reduced dependence on foreign-controlled infrastructure
  • Strategic control over AI models and workflows

The Rise of Big Tech and the AI Lock-in Problem

Over the past decade, companies like AWS, Google Cloud, and Microsoft Azure have built highly integrated AI ecosystems, especially since the surge of generative AI. These platforms offer powerful tools, including proprietary machine learning services, exclusive Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), pre-trained AI models, and seamless infrastructure scaling.

However, when businesses build their AI systems entirely on one provider’s proprietary tools, switching becomes difficult. Platform dependency can also create serious risks when a vendor fails. A good example is the collapse of Builder.ai, an AI app builder backed by giants like Microsoft and the Qatar Investment Authority. Its collapse was an indicator that companies do not have complete control over the software and data on which their operations depend. This is what is known as AI Lock-in, where:

  • AI models rely on proprietary APIs
  • Data pipelines are optimized for a specific cloud architecture
  • Workflows depend on unique vendor tools
  • Migration costs become prohibitively high

As a result, businesses suffer:

  • Escalating operational costs
  • Limited negotiating power
  • Reduced flexibility
  • Strategic vulnerability

In 2026, with AI deeply embedded into operations, being locked-in can threaten long-term agility and innovation.

Regulatory Pressure is Accelerating the Shift

Governments worldwide are tightening digital sovereignty and data protection rules. From stricter data residency laws to AI governance frameworks, compliance is no longer optional. Industries such as finance, healthcare, and telecommunications face heightened scrutiny. They must prove where data is stored, who can access it, and how AI models are trained and governed. Additionally, businesses can’t afford regulatory risks. Regulations such as the CLOUD Act demand data access transparency, while different states are pushing for data localization policies.

Relying entirely on a foreign-controlled AI ecosystem can raise compliance risks. In some regions, businesses are now required to use local or sovereign cloud providers for sensitive workloads. Gartner predicts 35 percent of countries will adopt region-specific AI platforms by 2027 as countries increase investment in domestic AI stacks to meet sovereignty goals.

Regulation, once seen as a burden, is now a strategic driver pushing companies toward sovereign-first strategies.

How Businesses Are Avoiding AI Lock-in Trap

Businesses are not abandoning cloud AI. Instead, they are becoming more strategic about how they implement it.

  1. Embracing open-source and interoperable AI
    Many businesses are adopting open-source AI frameworks and models to reduce dependency on proprietary systems. By building on interoperable standards, they maintain flexibility to deploy workloads across different environments. This approach allows businesses to experiment freely without being tied to a single vendor’s ecosystem.
  2. Adopting multi-cloud and hybrid strategies
    Rather than relying on one provider, a business can distribute workloads across multiple clouds. This reduces operational risk, strengthens negotiation leverage, enhances flexibility and improves resilience. Hybrid models, where on-premise infrastructure is combined with cloud services, are also growing in popularity. They ensure sensitive data remains locally controlled while still leveraging AI scalability.
  3. Partnering with sovereign or regional cloud providers
    Regional cloud providers are gaining traction as they offer local data hosting, compliance with national regulations, and greater transparency.
  4. Strengthening contract and governance frameworks
    Procurement and legal teams are now playing a more active role in cloud decisions. They negotiate stronger data portability clauses, clear exit strategies, transparent pricing structures, and model ownership rights.

Final Thoughts

In 2026, the real risk is not using AI, but losing control over it.

Cloud sovereignty represents a strategic shift while not rejecting Big Tech. It must be viewed as the ability to act strategically, as no business can dominate every layer of the AI stack due to constraints like the high cost of training advanced AI models.

Businesses that prioritize sovereignty today are building resilient, flexible, and future-ready AI ecosystems. Those who ignore it may find themselves powerful – but trapped.

Completing FY2026 Budget Appropriations, Protecting Trafficked Victims, and Vetoing Special Interest Projects

3 min read

HR 6938Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act, 2026 (HR 6938) – This Act is one of the remaining budget bills to fund the government through Sept. 30, 2026. It includes funding for several agencies, including the Department of Commerce, the Department of Justice, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Energy, and the Environmental Protection Agency. The bill was introduced by Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) on Jan. 6. It passed in the House on Jan. 8, the Senate on Jan. 15, and was signed into law on Jan. 23.

Financial Services and General Government and National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2026 (HR 7006) – This Act was introduced by Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) on Jan. 12. Yet another fiscal year 2026 budget bill, it authorizes investments to support economic growth and entrepreneurship, safeguard American security and authorize funding for the Executive and Judicial branches. The bill passed in the House on Jan. 14 and is awaiting passage in the Senate.

Trafficking Survivors Relief Act (HR 4323) – The purpose of this bipartisan bill is to help stop a vicious cycle that makes human trafficking victims vulnerable to further exploitation. The Act enables survivors to file motions to vacate non-violent convictions and purge arrest records for certain criminal offenses committed as a direct result of being trafficked. The current iteration of the bill was introduced by Rep. Russell Fry (R-SC) on July 19, 2025. It cleared the House on Dec. 1, the Senate on Dec. 18, and was signed into law on Jan. 23.

Finish the Arkansas Valley Conduit Act (HR 131) – Introduced by Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) on January 3, 2025, this bill is related to a Colorado water infrastructure pipeline currently under construction, designed to port clean water from the Pueblo Reservoir to 50,000 Coloradans in the local area. The bill would have extended the repayment period for local municipalities and removed interest payments. The bill passed in the House on July 21 and in the Senate on Dec. 16; it was vetoed by the President on Dec. 31, 2025.

Miccosukee Reserved Area Amendments Act (HR 504) – This bill would have authorized the expansion of the Miccosukee Reserved Area to include a portion of Everglades National Park in Florida. In recent years, the area, known as Osceola Camp, has been prone to flooding, and this bill would have authorized safeguard measures to protect structures within the camp. The bill was introduced on Jan. 16, 2025, by Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-FL). It passed in the House on July 14 and in the Senate on Dec. 11, 2025. The bill was vetoed by the President on Dec. 30 and failed an override vote in the House on Jan. 8.

Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2025 (S 222) – This Act amends the existing National School Lunch Act to allow schools participating in the federal school lunch program to serve whole milk. It was introduced by Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) on Jan. 23, 2025, passed the Senate on Nov. 20, the House on Dec. 15 and was signed into law by the President on Jan. 14.

Reclaiming the Rent: Why 2026 is the Year Businesses Switch from SaaS to Sovereign Ownership

4 min read

Businesses Switch from SaaS to Sovereign OwnershipEvery modern business is paying rent. Not for office space or equipment, but for the digital infrastructure that runs the company. This might include the cost of CRMs, email platforms, project management tools, automation tools, analytical dashboards, and countless other tools designed to solve a specific business need. Individually, these tools seem affordable; collectively, they form a permanent tax on business growth.

For several years now, software-as-a-service (SaaS) has been sold as a form of freedom. Businesses were promised low upfront cost, instant deployment, and minimal complexity. For a long time, SaaS delivered on this promise. It helped companies move faster, scale quickl,y and compete globally regardless of size.

But this is shifting. Now, business leaders are beginning to question whether renting critical systems is still a worthy strategy.

The SaaS Era

The rise of SaaS was a necessary evolution. It lowered the entry barrier for tools that once required large IT teams and a huge capital investment.

However, this convenience turned into dependency. Businesses not only adapted SaaS tools, but they also built operations around them. Third-party platforms now hold business workflows, customer data, analytics, automations, and even institutional knowledge. This means that a business has dozens of subscriptions they don’t fully control, can’t meaningfully customize, and must keep paying for to keep operating.

What Sovereign Ownership Means

Sovereign ownership doesn’t mean abandoning the cloud or rejecting modern technology; it means owning the core logic of your business systems. The sovereign models emphasize self-management, control and long-term resilience.

When a business practices sovereign ownership, it controls:

  • Where data resides (e.g., virtual private clouds or sovereign clouds)
  • Access permissions and encryption keys
  • Workflows and automations
  • Internal knowledge systems
  • AI models and training data
  • The ability to move, adapt, or rebuild without needing vendor permission

Self-sovereign identity has been a great support for this shift. SSI protocols allow businesses, employees, and customers to control their digital identities and credentials without relying on centralized identity providers. This means that identity is not locked inside the SaaS platform, as it is portable, verifiable, and owned by the entity itself.

The Real Cost of SaaS Goes Beyond the Invoice

SaaS costs more than renting the service. Aside from monthly or annual subscriptions that compound into a huge expense over time, vendor lock-in makes switching platforms painful and risky. The pricing models also keep changing. Features may be removed or placed under higher payment tiers. Other issues include broken integrations and limited or messy data exports.

More critically, companies adapt their workflows to match the SaaS tools, rather than the tool serving the business. Therefore, innovation is constrained by what the platform allows and not what the business needs.

The biggest risk is when a SaaS provider is acquired, suffers downtime, or shuts down entirely. When this happens, your business absorbs the impact without control or leverage.

Why 2026 Is the Turning Point

Why now? Because the alternatives have finally matured. Decentralized physical infrastructure (DePIN), the maturity of enterprise-grade, open-source software, and modular cloud architecture have made system ownership accessible without deep technical teams. AI has transformed how businesses build, automate, and maintain internal tools. Modular infrastructure allows companies to own their core while selectively renting specialized services.

At the same time, external pressure is increasing as data privacy regulations tighten. Regulatory frameworks like the U.S. Cloud Act, the GDRP and the EU’s Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) demand operational independence that SaaS cannot fully deliver. Gartner predicts that by 2030, 75 percent of enterprises outside of the United States will implement data sovereignty strategies due to regulatory scrutiny and geopolitical tensions.

Major players are already responding. IBM is one example of the shift, as they already announced IBM Sovereign Core, software that helps businesses take back control of their data and systems.

Customers are also more aware. They want to know how their data is stored, processed, and protected. AI models trained on proprietary information raise new questions of ownership and risk. In an uncertain global economy, businesses want cost predictability and not endless variable subscriptions.

The mindset is shifting from speed at any cost to resilience by design.

From Renters to Owners

SaaS helped businesses grow. But growth built on dependency has limits.

2026 represents a strategic window where ownership is finally accessible, affordable, and necessary. The shift toward sovereign systems is not about rebellion against technology that has previously helped businesses. It’s about leverage, resilience, and long-term value.

The future belongs to businesses that stop renting their foundations and start owning their future.

Scam-Proof Guidelines for Wiring Money

6 min read

Scam-Proof Guidelines for Wiring MoneyWiring money is like sending cash: Once you’ve sent it, it’s gone. It is very difficult to retrieve – in fact, more difficult than recovering physical dollar bills.

For businesses, always call the recipient to verify ACH details before sending; this is required by law in 50 states. This law does not require calling, but if the sender’s or recipient’s email is hacked, calling will help prevent the hacker from changing ACH details in a hacked email account.

If wire fraud takes place due to a security breach, such as a hacker infiltrating your account and initiating a wire transfer, you may have protection. Reputable financial institutions will generally cover your losses in the case of a cyber attack. Recoverability is dependent, however, on whether the wire was properly authorized or unauthorized and the payment type (wire vs. ACH).  However, if you fall for a scam and initiate the wire transfer yourself, you’re probably out of luck.

Another scenario is having an incorrect address or account number in your wire transfer instructions. For example, say you want to send a large sum of money to your lender to pay off your mortgage. It’s a good idea to contact the institution directly (by phone or in person) and ask them to tell you where to send your wire transfer to match it with the printed instructions you may have received. Always proofread the wire transfer instructions carefully.

Should you accidentally transpose the numbers in a wire transfer, you could lose that money. If you contact your bank immediately to report the error, they may be able to recall the funds. However, if the recipient has already accepted the transfer, particularly if they have transferred the money elsewhere, it is almost impossible to recover.

Remember, wire transfers settle quickly and are typically irreversible once accepted. That is why they are one of the prime targets for cybercriminals. If you are unfamiliar with the person or institution where you are wiring money, research them first to confirm their identity and see if there are any complaints or red flags associated with the entity. If you had no reason to initiate the wire transfer before being contacted, you should be especially suspicious.  Be extremely skeptical of unsolicited urgent requests, especially when instructions change, or you can’t verify independently

The following are some common scams perpetuated today.

Bank Fraud

Your bank or investment firm calls you directly to alert you to a possible scam; someone is attempting to hack into your account and steal your money. They may even verify your account with details they have obtained – such as your name, address, and perhaps even your Social Security and account numbers. Rather than an affirmation of their legitimacy, this should be a red flag. First of all, no legitimate financial institution or government agency would relay this information over the phone. Second, a fraudster may tell you the best way to block the potential hack is to open a new account and transfer your money there. This is a red flag. Third, the scammer may insist that time is of the essence – you must act immediately before your money is stolen.

If you get a call like this, hang up and either call (the number on your statement or debit/credit card) or visit your local bank branch to inquire about the call. Chances are good that the bank will confirm there is no breach and that your account is safe.

Dating Apps

Dating apps are the 21st-century version of blind dates. According to Statista, more than 60 million Americans used dating apps in 2024. Instead of meeting organically in a bar or at a party, users peruse dating profiles to find a prospective mate. Unfortunately, these platforms are rife with money-seeking predators – and they can be very patient.

Many online relationship predators interact for months before the scammer mentions that he or she is having money trouble. They may even wait for their paramour to offer money to help them out. Remember that the red flags apply – you didn’t initiate the need. The need for funds should never be immediate. You should research and verify the legitimacy of any person who would agree to accept money from someone they met online. Remember, once you send money, you may never hear from that person again. Or they may continue to interact, but you could get another request for funds a little further down the road.

One way to detect a dating app fraudster is by noticing clues that they are not who they claim to be. For example, many scammers live in other countries. They may not be familiar with common local interests in the town or city where they say they are from. Or, you may notice unusual grammar or phrasing in their communications, indicating English is not their native language.

The Friend or Relative Scam

One of the most heart-rending scams is when a person – often a senior citizen – is asked by a struggling friend or family member to send money. For example, a grandchild away at college who says she doesn’t want her parents to know she needs money. Pulling at the heartstrings, paired with aging cognitive decline, is a recipe for wire transfer fraud. It’s a good idea to establish a “family password” with which to verify proof of identity for suspicious scenarios. Also, call the family member or friend back at a known number for verification before sending money.

Investment Scam

The too-good-to-be-true investment opportunity is an old scam still used today, often to entice the purchase of cryptocurrency with cash. As with all these potential scams, do your due diligence and confirm the legitimacy of the receiver and their details.

The best way to prevent money wire fraud is to stay up to date with the latest scams and trust your gut: Do not act until you have thoroughly researched the details.

Improving Military Benefits, Relaxing Energy Regulations and Increasing Aviation Regulations

3 min read

Improving Military BenefitsVeterans’ Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2025 (S 2392) – This Act was introduced by Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS) on July 23. It passed in the Senate on Nov. 9, the House on Nov. 17, and was signed into law on Nov. 25. The purpose of this bill is to increase rates of compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities, as well as the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled veterans. The rate hikes became effective on Dec. 1.

Fairness for Servicemembers and their Families Act of 2025 (HR 970) – This bipartisan Act was introduced on Feb. 4 by Rep. Marilyn Strickland (D-WA). It authorizes increases to servicemember and veteran life insurance packages in order to account for inflation and higher costs of living. It passed in the House on April 7, in the Senate on Nov. 20, and was enacted by the President on Dec. 12.

Veteran Fraud Reimbursement Act of 2025 (HR 1912) – The Veterans Benefits Administration has experienced negligence and fraud that have prevented many veterans from receiving benefits. In the past, the case-by-case system of investigation into misuse led to further delays; in some cases, veterans passed away before ever receiving remuneration. The purpose of this bill is to allow the Veterans Benefits Administration to reimburse victims of fraud via a streamlined process, so that the investigation occurs after the affected veterans have been reimbursed. The bill, which was introduced by Rep. Gerald Connolly (D-VA) on March 6, passed in the House on May 5, in the Senate on Nov. 20, and was signed into law on Dec. 12.

SPEED Act (HR 4776) – The purpose of this bipartisan legislation is to streamline the existing environmental analysis requirements for energy projects (e.g., offshore drilling, mining, pipeline development). Provisions include reducing litigation challenges to a 150-day challenge window, developing standardized federal action criteria, and defining procedural deadlines. The Act was introduced by Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-AR) on July 25 and passed in the House on Dec. 18. Its fate currently rests with the Senate.

ROTOR Act (S 2503) – Prompted by multiple incidents this year, including military aircraft such as the Washington, D.C., helicopter collision, this bipartisan bill seeks to improve aviation safety and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) oversight. The legislation would specifically require all aircraft to incorporate ADS-B technology, which displays nearby planes and weather data on cockpit screens. The legislation was introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on July 29. It passed in the Senate on Dec. 17 and awaits consideration by the House.

Lower Health Care Premiums for All Americans Act (HR 6703) – Sponsored by Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA), this healthcare bill proposes expanding association health plans, increasing transparency requirements for pharmacy benefit managers, and funding some cost-sharing reductions for qualifying Health Insurance Marketplace enrollees. It does not include extending the enhanced premium tax credits that expired on Dec. 31, 2025. The bill was introduced on Dec. 15 and passed in the House on Dec. 17. Its fate now lies with the Senate.