Federal Executive Branch
Here's a look at documents from the U.S. Executive Branch
Federal Agencies
Featured Stories
Justice Department Expands Tribal Access Program to Improve the Exchange of Critical Data With Federally Recognized Tribes
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release:
* * *
Justice Department Expands Tribal Access Program to Improve the Exchange of Critical Data with Federally Recognized Tribes
September 18, 2026
With this expansion, TAP now supports 159 Tribes and more than 500 Tribal government agencies.
-
The Justice Department has selected seven additional federally recognized Tribes to participate in the continued expansion of the Tribal Access Program for National Crime Information (TAP), a program that provides Tribal governments with means to access, enter, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Justice Department Expands Tribal Access Program to Improve the Exchange of Critical Data with Federally Recognized Tribes September 18, 2026 With this expansion, TAP now supports 159 Tribes and more than 500 Tribal government agencies. - The Justice Department has selected seven additional federally recognized Tribes to participate in the continued expansion of the Tribal Access Program for National Crime Information (TAP), a program that provides Tribal governments with means to access, enter,and exchange data with national crime information systems, including those maintained by the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division.
"The Justice Department is pleased to continue its expansion of the Tribal Access Program, which equips Tribal governments with federal crime data to solve crimes, conduct background checks, and identify wanted predators," said Acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter. "These are the tools Tribal governments need to protect and serve their communities, which in turn strengthens the rule of law and public safety for families and children in Indian Country."
TAP provides training as well as software and biometric/biographic workstations to process fingerprints, take mugshots, and submit information to FBI CJIS systems.
The Justice Department began TAP in 2015 in response to concerns raised by Tribal leaders about the need to have direct access to federal systems. Using TAP, Tribes have shared information about missing persons; registered convicted sex offenders; entered domestic violence orders of protection for nationwide enforcement; entered orders that prevent dangerous prohibited persons from obtaining firearms; run criminal histories; identified and arrested fugitives; entered bookings and convictions; and completed fingerprint-based record checks for non-criminal justice purposes such as screening employees or volunteers who work with children.
"The Tribal Access Program has been an immense support to our work serving the members of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community," said Adrienne Haines, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, Social Services Program Manager. "It has allowed us to efficiently process fingerprints and obtain important background information regarding potential caregivers in a timely manner, which helps us provide safe and responsive services to our families. The system is easy to use, reliable, and fits well into our daily work processes. Having minimal delays in receiving background information has greatly improved our department's efficiency and ability to make informed decisions quickly. Overall, the Tribal Access Program has been a valuable resource for our team and has positively impacted the work we do for our community."
The following additional Tribes have been selected for participation in TAP:
1. Cahuilla Band of Indians (California)
2. Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians (Maine)
3. Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma (Oklahoma)
4. Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe (Minnesota)
5. Pechanga Band of Indians (California)
6. Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Reservation (Nevada & Idaho)
7. Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians of California (California)
TAP is managed by the Justice Department's Office of the Chief Information Officer and the Office of Tribal Justice. It is funded by the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART), the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), and the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW).
For more information on TAP, visit www.justice.gov/tribal/tribal-access-program-tap.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-expands-tribal-access-program-improve-exchange-critical-data-federally-0
* * *
Justice Department Expands Tribal Access Program to Improve the Exchange of Critical Data with Federally Recognized Tribes
September 18, 2026
With this expansion, TAP now supports 159 Tribes and more than 500 Tribal government agencies.
-
The Justice Department has selected seven additional federally recognized Tribes to participate in the continued expansion of the Tribal Access Program for National Crime Information (TAP), a program that provides Tribal governments with means to access, enter, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Justice Department Expands Tribal Access Program to Improve the Exchange of Critical Data with Federally Recognized Tribes September 18, 2026 With this expansion, TAP now supports 159 Tribes and more than 500 Tribal government agencies. - The Justice Department has selected seven additional federally recognized Tribes to participate in the continued expansion of the Tribal Access Program for National Crime Information (TAP), a program that provides Tribal governments with means to access, enter,and exchange data with national crime information systems, including those maintained by the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division.
"The Justice Department is pleased to continue its expansion of the Tribal Access Program, which equips Tribal governments with federal crime data to solve crimes, conduct background checks, and identify wanted predators," said Acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter. "These are the tools Tribal governments need to protect and serve their communities, which in turn strengthens the rule of law and public safety for families and children in Indian Country."
TAP provides training as well as software and biometric/biographic workstations to process fingerprints, take mugshots, and submit information to FBI CJIS systems.
The Justice Department began TAP in 2015 in response to concerns raised by Tribal leaders about the need to have direct access to federal systems. Using TAP, Tribes have shared information about missing persons; registered convicted sex offenders; entered domestic violence orders of protection for nationwide enforcement; entered orders that prevent dangerous prohibited persons from obtaining firearms; run criminal histories; identified and arrested fugitives; entered bookings and convictions; and completed fingerprint-based record checks for non-criminal justice purposes such as screening employees or volunteers who work with children.
"The Tribal Access Program has been an immense support to our work serving the members of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community," said Adrienne Haines, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, Social Services Program Manager. "It has allowed us to efficiently process fingerprints and obtain important background information regarding potential caregivers in a timely manner, which helps us provide safe and responsive services to our families. The system is easy to use, reliable, and fits well into our daily work processes. Having minimal delays in receiving background information has greatly improved our department's efficiency and ability to make informed decisions quickly. Overall, the Tribal Access Program has been a valuable resource for our team and has positively impacted the work we do for our community."
The following additional Tribes have been selected for participation in TAP:
1. Cahuilla Band of Indians (California)
2. Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians (Maine)
3. Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma (Oklahoma)
4. Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe (Minnesota)
5. Pechanga Band of Indians (California)
6. Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Reservation (Nevada & Idaho)
7. Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians of California (California)
TAP is managed by the Justice Department's Office of the Chief Information Officer and the Office of Tribal Justice. It is funded by the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART), the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), and the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW).
For more information on TAP, visit www.justice.gov/tribal/tribal-access-program-tap.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-expands-tribal-access-program-improve-exchange-critical-data-federally-0
Justice Department Concludes Federal Ban on Handgun Sales to 18 to 20-Year-Olds is Unconstitutional and Cannot Be Criminally Enforced
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release:
* * *
Justice Department Concludes Federal Ban on Handgun Sales to 18 to 20-Year-Olds is Unconstitutional and Cannot Be Criminally Enforced
September 18, 2026
Today, the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel released a legal opinion concluding that the federal prohibition may not be enforced against licensed dealers selling handguns to otherwise law-abiding adults ages 18 to 20 consistent with the Second Amendment.
The Office of Legal Counsel's new opinion explains that federal statutes 18 U.S.C. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Justice Department Concludes Federal Ban on Handgun Sales to 18 to 20-Year-Olds is Unconstitutional and Cannot Be Criminally Enforced September 18, 2026 Today, the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel released a legal opinion concluding that the federal prohibition may not be enforced against licensed dealers selling handguns to otherwise law-abiding adults ages 18 to 20 consistent with the Second Amendment. The Office of Legal Counsel's new opinion explains that federal statutes 18 U.S.C.Sec. 922(b)(1) and (c)(1) are inconsistent with the Second Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen, and subsequent decisions including Wolford v. Lopez. These statutes generally prohibit federally licensed dealers from selling handguns or handgun ammunition to individuals under 21.
The Office of Legal Counsel determined that 18 to 20-year-olds are among "the people" protected by the Second Amendment. "Eighteen-year-olds may vote, serve on juries, be drafted, and face adult criminal penalties, including capital punishment," said Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser for the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel. "The Constitution protects the people's right to keep and bear arms. The Department of Justice may not constitutionally seek to impose criminal penalties on dealers who sell handguns to law-abiding adults who, in nearly every other relevant respect, are members of the political community."
Because the restrictions burden the ability of members of "the people" to acquire commonly used arms, they fall within the Amendment's plain text and are presumptively unconstitutional. The Office of Legal Counsel found no Founding era history or tradition of precluding legal adults from purchasing firearms to protect public safety. To the contrary, at the Founding, militia statutes overwhelmingly required service beginning at 18 and required enrollees to furnish their own arms.
The Office of Legal Counsel concludes that Section 922(b)(1) and (c)(1) may not be enforced to impose criminal penalties on dealers who sell handguns to a class of law-abiding adults who, in nearly every other relevant respect, are members of the political community.
Read the full opinion here (https://www.justice.gov/olc/media/1461811/dl).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-concludes-federal-ban-handgun-sales-18-20-year-olds-unconstitutional-and
* * *
Justice Department Concludes Federal Ban on Handgun Sales to 18 to 20-Year-Olds is Unconstitutional and Cannot Be Criminally Enforced
September 18, 2026
Today, the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel released a legal opinion concluding that the federal prohibition may not be enforced against licensed dealers selling handguns to otherwise law-abiding adults ages 18 to 20 consistent with the Second Amendment.
The Office of Legal Counsel's new opinion explains that federal statutes 18 U.S.C. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Justice Department Concludes Federal Ban on Handgun Sales to 18 to 20-Year-Olds is Unconstitutional and Cannot Be Criminally Enforced September 18, 2026 Today, the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel released a legal opinion concluding that the federal prohibition may not be enforced against licensed dealers selling handguns to otherwise law-abiding adults ages 18 to 20 consistent with the Second Amendment. The Office of Legal Counsel's new opinion explains that federal statutes 18 U.S.C.Sec. 922(b)(1) and (c)(1) are inconsistent with the Second Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen, and subsequent decisions including Wolford v. Lopez. These statutes generally prohibit federally licensed dealers from selling handguns or handgun ammunition to individuals under 21.
The Office of Legal Counsel determined that 18 to 20-year-olds are among "the people" protected by the Second Amendment. "Eighteen-year-olds may vote, serve on juries, be drafted, and face adult criminal penalties, including capital punishment," said Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser for the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel. "The Constitution protects the people's right to keep and bear arms. The Department of Justice may not constitutionally seek to impose criminal penalties on dealers who sell handguns to law-abiding adults who, in nearly every other relevant respect, are members of the political community."
Because the restrictions burden the ability of members of "the people" to acquire commonly used arms, they fall within the Amendment's plain text and are presumptively unconstitutional. The Office of Legal Counsel found no Founding era history or tradition of precluding legal adults from purchasing firearms to protect public safety. To the contrary, at the Founding, militia statutes overwhelmingly required service beginning at 18 and required enrollees to furnish their own arms.
The Office of Legal Counsel concludes that Section 922(b)(1) and (c)(1) may not be enforced to impose criminal penalties on dealers who sell handguns to a class of law-abiding adults who, in nearly every other relevant respect, are members of the political community.
Read the full opinion here (https://www.justice.gov/olc/media/1461811/dl).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-concludes-federal-ban-handgun-sales-18-20-year-olds-unconstitutional-and
Former AFSOC Command Chief Found Guilty, Sentenced
HURLBURT FIELD, Florida, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command issued the following news:
* * *
Former AFSOC command chief found guilty, sentenced
Sept. 17, 2026
HURLBURT FIELD, Fla. -- U.S. Air Force Chief Master Sgt. Anthony Green, former command chief of Air Force Special Operations Command, was found guilty of committing four offenses in violation of two articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to include indecent recording in violation of Article 120c; and possessing, viewing and producing child pornography in violation of Article 134 today.
He was sentenced ... Show Full Article HURLBURT FIELD, Florida, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command issued the following news: * * * Former AFSOC command chief found guilty, sentenced Sept. 17, 2026 HURLBURT FIELD, Fla. -- U.S. Air Force Chief Master Sgt. Anthony Green, former command chief of Air Force Special Operations Command, was found guilty of committing four offenses in violation of two articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to include indecent recording in violation of Article 120c; and possessing, viewing and producing child pornography in violation of Article 134 today. He was sentencedto a reduction in rank to the grade of E-1; a dishonorable discharge; 10 years of confinement for producing child pornography; and two years of confinement each for the offenses of indecent recording, possessing child pornography, and viewing child pornography. Those sentences will run concurrently. The sentencing followed a general court-martial trial by a judge at Hurlburt Field, Florida, Sept. 14 - 17, 2026.
The offenses were committed on or near Hurlburt Field, against one victim. The Department of the Air Force Office of Special Trial Counsel preferred and referred these charges to a general court-martial and served as lead counsel for the United States during trial.
Green was acquitted of obstructing justice.
AFSOC is committed to the welfare of our Airmen and maintaining good order and discipline to preserve the trust placed in us to execute our critical global missions.
Media may direct queries to Air Force Special Operations Command Public Affairs at 850-884-5515, 850-461-5659, or via e-mail at afsoc.pa.org@us.af.mil.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.afsoc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/4604625/former-afsoc-command-chief-found-guilty-sentenced/
* * *
Former AFSOC command chief found guilty, sentenced
Sept. 17, 2026
HURLBURT FIELD, Fla. -- U.S. Air Force Chief Master Sgt. Anthony Green, former command chief of Air Force Special Operations Command, was found guilty of committing four offenses in violation of two articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to include indecent recording in violation of Article 120c; and possessing, viewing and producing child pornography in violation of Article 134 today.
He was sentenced ... Show Full Article HURLBURT FIELD, Florida, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command issued the following news: * * * Former AFSOC command chief found guilty, sentenced Sept. 17, 2026 HURLBURT FIELD, Fla. -- U.S. Air Force Chief Master Sgt. Anthony Green, former command chief of Air Force Special Operations Command, was found guilty of committing four offenses in violation of two articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to include indecent recording in violation of Article 120c; and possessing, viewing and producing child pornography in violation of Article 134 today. He was sentencedto a reduction in rank to the grade of E-1; a dishonorable discharge; 10 years of confinement for producing child pornography; and two years of confinement each for the offenses of indecent recording, possessing child pornography, and viewing child pornography. Those sentences will run concurrently. The sentencing followed a general court-martial trial by a judge at Hurlburt Field, Florida, Sept. 14 - 17, 2026.
The offenses were committed on or near Hurlburt Field, against one victim. The Department of the Air Force Office of Special Trial Counsel preferred and referred these charges to a general court-martial and served as lead counsel for the United States during trial.
Green was acquitted of obstructing justice.
AFSOC is committed to the welfare of our Airmen and maintaining good order and discipline to preserve the trust placed in us to execute our critical global missions.
Media may direct queries to Air Force Special Operations Command Public Affairs at 850-884-5515, 850-461-5659, or via e-mail at afsoc.pa.org@us.af.mil.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.afsoc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/4604625/former-afsoc-command-chief-found-guilty-sentenced/
Department of Justice Returns Approximately $2.5 Million in Corruption Proceeds for Victims of the Ex-President of The Gambia
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release:
* * *
Department of Justice Returns Approximately $2.5 Million in Corruption Proceeds for Victims of the Ex-President of The Gambia
September 18, 2026
The Department of Justice is returning approximately $2.5 million in corruption proceeds to the Republic of The Gambia to be used to compensate victims of the Jammeh regime. Yahya Jammeh, the former President of The Gambia, and his wife, Zineb Jammeh, used criminal proceeds and misappropriated Gambian public funds to purchase a mansion in Potomac, Maryland, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Department of Justice Returns Approximately $2.5 Million in Corruption Proceeds for Victims of the Ex-President of The Gambia September 18, 2026 The Department of Justice is returning approximately $2.5 million in corruption proceeds to the Republic of The Gambia to be used to compensate victims of the Jammeh regime. Yahya Jammeh, the former President of The Gambia, and his wife, Zineb Jammeh, used criminal proceeds and misappropriated Gambian public funds to purchase a mansion in Potomac, Maryland,for their personal use. The Department of Justice forfeited and liquidated that property in United States v. Real Property Located in Potomac, MD, Commonly Known as 9908 Bentcross Drive, 8:20-cv-2071 (D. Md.). As alleged in the complaint, Yahya Jammeh corruptly obtained millions of dollars through the embezzlement of public funds and the solicitation of bribes from businesses seeking to obtain monopoly rights over various sectors of the Gambian economy. Jammeh conspired with his family members and close associates to utilize a host of shell companies and overseas trusts to launder his corrupt proceeds throughout the world.
"This case is an important example of international cooperation to hold accountable those who use our financial system to attempt to hide illicit criminal proceeds," said Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva of the Justice Department's Criminal Division. "Returning these funds forfeited from the former leader to compensate his victims demonstrates our commitment to recover funds taken in violation of the rule of law and to return them for the benefit of victims in a lawful process."
"Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) remains committed to protecting the integrity of the U.S. financial system by ensuring that corrupt foreign officials cannot use the United States to hide, move, or enjoy the proceeds of bribery, embezzlement, and abuse of office," said Acting Executive Associate Director John A. Condon of HSI. "This return of approximately $2.5 million to The Gambia demonstrates the impact of HSI's illicit finance investigations and our enduring partnerships to identify, seize, and return stolen assets for the benefit of victims harmed by corruption."
The recovered funds from the sale of the mansion in Potomac, Maryland, resulted in the return of $2,507,911.73 in net proceeds to The Gambia based on the valuable assistance of officials of The Gambia in cooperation with the United States, which facilitated the successful forfeiture. The agreement entered into with The Gambia provides that it will use these funds to compensate eligible victims of the Jammeh regime, as defined under the Gambian Victims Reparations Act of 2023, which was established to benefit the people harmed by former President Jammeh's acts of corruption and abuse of office.
The investigation was conducted by HSI's Illicit Proceeds and Foreign Corruption Group in Miami, with the assistance of HSI Baltimore and the HSI Attache Office in Dakar. HSI established this group in 2003 to conduct investigations into the laundering of proceeds emanating from foreign public corruption, bribery, and embezzlement. HSI's goal is to prevent foreign-derived, ill-gotten gains from entering the U.S. financial infrastructure.
The case was handled by Trial Attorneys Steven Parker and Kaycee Sullivan of the Criminal Division's Money Laundering, Narcotics and Forfeiture Section. Substantial assistance was provided by the government of The Gambia, the Justice Department's Office of International Affairs, the U.S. Department of State, and the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
The Money Laundering, Narcotics and Forfeiture Section's (MNF) mission is to take the profit out of crime, eliminate drug cartels, and protect the U.S. financial system. MNF pursues criminal prosecutions and criminal and civil asset recovery actions involving: financial facilitators who launder profits for criminals; financial institutions and their officers and employees whose actions threaten the U.S. financial system and financial institutions; international money launderers who support transnational organized crime; and the top command and control of international drug trafficking organizations.
MNF's International Unit investigates and prosecutes cross-border money laundering schemes involving transnational criminal organizations, cartels, foreign official corruption and related money laundering affecting the U.S. financial system and prosecutes criminal cases and civil forfeiture matters to recover the proceeds of those crimes.
HSI Miami Illicit Proceeds and Foreign Corruption Investigations Group was established in 2003 to target corrupt foreign officials around the world that attempt to utilize U.S. financial institutions to launder illicit funds. Since inception, the group has seized over $500 million in ill-gotten gains traced to foreign corruption. To report suspicious activity, reach out to your local HSI office or call 1-866-347-2423.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-returns-approximately-25-million-corruption-proceeds-victims-ex-president
* * *
Department of Justice Returns Approximately $2.5 Million in Corruption Proceeds for Victims of the Ex-President of The Gambia
September 18, 2026
The Department of Justice is returning approximately $2.5 million in corruption proceeds to the Republic of The Gambia to be used to compensate victims of the Jammeh regime. Yahya Jammeh, the former President of The Gambia, and his wife, Zineb Jammeh, used criminal proceeds and misappropriated Gambian public funds to purchase a mansion in Potomac, Maryland, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Department of Justice Returns Approximately $2.5 Million in Corruption Proceeds for Victims of the Ex-President of The Gambia September 18, 2026 The Department of Justice is returning approximately $2.5 million in corruption proceeds to the Republic of The Gambia to be used to compensate victims of the Jammeh regime. Yahya Jammeh, the former President of The Gambia, and his wife, Zineb Jammeh, used criminal proceeds and misappropriated Gambian public funds to purchase a mansion in Potomac, Maryland,for their personal use. The Department of Justice forfeited and liquidated that property in United States v. Real Property Located in Potomac, MD, Commonly Known as 9908 Bentcross Drive, 8:20-cv-2071 (D. Md.). As alleged in the complaint, Yahya Jammeh corruptly obtained millions of dollars through the embezzlement of public funds and the solicitation of bribes from businesses seeking to obtain monopoly rights over various sectors of the Gambian economy. Jammeh conspired with his family members and close associates to utilize a host of shell companies and overseas trusts to launder his corrupt proceeds throughout the world.
"This case is an important example of international cooperation to hold accountable those who use our financial system to attempt to hide illicit criminal proceeds," said Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva of the Justice Department's Criminal Division. "Returning these funds forfeited from the former leader to compensate his victims demonstrates our commitment to recover funds taken in violation of the rule of law and to return them for the benefit of victims in a lawful process."
"Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) remains committed to protecting the integrity of the U.S. financial system by ensuring that corrupt foreign officials cannot use the United States to hide, move, or enjoy the proceeds of bribery, embezzlement, and abuse of office," said Acting Executive Associate Director John A. Condon of HSI. "This return of approximately $2.5 million to The Gambia demonstrates the impact of HSI's illicit finance investigations and our enduring partnerships to identify, seize, and return stolen assets for the benefit of victims harmed by corruption."
The recovered funds from the sale of the mansion in Potomac, Maryland, resulted in the return of $2,507,911.73 in net proceeds to The Gambia based on the valuable assistance of officials of The Gambia in cooperation with the United States, which facilitated the successful forfeiture. The agreement entered into with The Gambia provides that it will use these funds to compensate eligible victims of the Jammeh regime, as defined under the Gambian Victims Reparations Act of 2023, which was established to benefit the people harmed by former President Jammeh's acts of corruption and abuse of office.
The investigation was conducted by HSI's Illicit Proceeds and Foreign Corruption Group in Miami, with the assistance of HSI Baltimore and the HSI Attache Office in Dakar. HSI established this group in 2003 to conduct investigations into the laundering of proceeds emanating from foreign public corruption, bribery, and embezzlement. HSI's goal is to prevent foreign-derived, ill-gotten gains from entering the U.S. financial infrastructure.
The case was handled by Trial Attorneys Steven Parker and Kaycee Sullivan of the Criminal Division's Money Laundering, Narcotics and Forfeiture Section. Substantial assistance was provided by the government of The Gambia, the Justice Department's Office of International Affairs, the U.S. Department of State, and the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
The Money Laundering, Narcotics and Forfeiture Section's (MNF) mission is to take the profit out of crime, eliminate drug cartels, and protect the U.S. financial system. MNF pursues criminal prosecutions and criminal and civil asset recovery actions involving: financial facilitators who launder profits for criminals; financial institutions and their officers and employees whose actions threaten the U.S. financial system and financial institutions; international money launderers who support transnational organized crime; and the top command and control of international drug trafficking organizations.
MNF's International Unit investigates and prosecutes cross-border money laundering schemes involving transnational criminal organizations, cartels, foreign official corruption and related money laundering affecting the U.S. financial system and prosecutes criminal cases and civil forfeiture matters to recover the proceeds of those crimes.
HSI Miami Illicit Proceeds and Foreign Corruption Investigations Group was established in 2003 to target corrupt foreign officials around the world that attempt to utilize U.S. financial institutions to launder illicit funds. Since inception, the group has seized over $500 million in ill-gotten gains traced to foreign corruption. To report suspicious activity, reach out to your local HSI office or call 1-866-347-2423.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-returns-approximately-25-million-corruption-proceeds-victims-ex-president
DOE Seeks Industry Input on Surplus Critical Minerals and Materials at Cleanup Sites
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management issued the following news release:
* * *
DOE Seeks Industry Input on Surplus Critical Minerals and Materials at Cleanup Sites
September 18, 2026
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) today released an expression of interest (EOI) seeking input from American industry on the potential transfer of surplus critical minerals, rare earth elements and other materials located at five EM cleanup sites across the country.
The materials identified in the EOI ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management issued the following news release: * * * DOE Seeks Industry Input on Surplus Critical Minerals and Materials at Cleanup Sites September 18, 2026 WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) today released an expression of interest (EOI) seeking input from American industry on the potential transfer of surplus critical minerals, rare earth elements and other materials located at five EM cleanup sites across the country. The materials identified in the EOIare the result of past nuclear weapons production and government-sponsored energy research. No longer needed for planned DOE activities, they may be valuable to private industry, including advanced technology and manufacturing, alternative energy and national defense. The critical minerals and rare earth materials subject to this EOI are aluminum, cesium-137, chloride, copper, fluorine, lead, lithium hydride, platinum, selenium, silver, tungsten and vanadium.
"EM is transforming the legacy of America's nuclear mission into opportunity," EM Infrastructure, Disposition and Regulatory Policy Director Rob Seifert said. "The surplus materials at our sites could help put American resources to work for American industry by supporting jobs, strengthening our industrial base and advancing the administration's energy and national security priorities. This EOI is the first step in that conversation with the private sector."
Five geographically diverse EM cleanup sites -- Paducah in Kentucky, Portsmouth in Ohio, Oak Ridge in Tennessee, the Nevada National Security Site, and Moab in Utah -- are participating in the initiative. The EOI includes site-specific information about the valuable materials, including their type, quantities and locations. Interested parties are encouraged to review the EOI for further details.
EM will host a virtual Industry Day on Sept. 30 to explain the EOI process, answer questions and learn more about market demand and the industrial capabilities available to process, recover or otherwise use the materials. The event reflects EM's commitment to early and transparent engagement with the private sector as it works to maximize the value of federal assets for American taxpayers.
The initiative supports the Trump administration's priorities of strengthening domestic supply chains, advancing American energy independence and maintaining the nation's competitive edge in critical minerals and advanced manufacturing. Interested parties must provide their own equipment and expertise for any material relocation or extraction. DOE will evaluate responses based on demonstrated technical knowledge and the quality of proposed use plans.
EM has led the nation's nuclear cleanup mission for more than 37 years, safely addressing the environmental legacy of Cold War-era nuclear weapons production at sites across the country. This initiative represents the next chapter in that mission, one focused not only on cleaning up the past but on creating lasting value for the communities and the nation.
The EOI and additional information are available here (https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/61b18d7ed0474a53bcbd81abb5327d1a/vie. Interested parties may direct questions to Robert.Seifert@em.doe.gov.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.energy.gov/em/articles/doe-seeks-industry-input-surplus-critical-minerals-and-materials-cleanup-sites
* * *
DOE Seeks Industry Input on Surplus Critical Minerals and Materials at Cleanup Sites
September 18, 2026
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) today released an expression of interest (EOI) seeking input from American industry on the potential transfer of surplus critical minerals, rare earth elements and other materials located at five EM cleanup sites across the country.
The materials identified in the EOI ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management issued the following news release: * * * DOE Seeks Industry Input on Surplus Critical Minerals and Materials at Cleanup Sites September 18, 2026 WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) today released an expression of interest (EOI) seeking input from American industry on the potential transfer of surplus critical minerals, rare earth elements and other materials located at five EM cleanup sites across the country. The materials identified in the EOIare the result of past nuclear weapons production and government-sponsored energy research. No longer needed for planned DOE activities, they may be valuable to private industry, including advanced technology and manufacturing, alternative energy and national defense. The critical minerals and rare earth materials subject to this EOI are aluminum, cesium-137, chloride, copper, fluorine, lead, lithium hydride, platinum, selenium, silver, tungsten and vanadium.
"EM is transforming the legacy of America's nuclear mission into opportunity," EM Infrastructure, Disposition and Regulatory Policy Director Rob Seifert said. "The surplus materials at our sites could help put American resources to work for American industry by supporting jobs, strengthening our industrial base and advancing the administration's energy and national security priorities. This EOI is the first step in that conversation with the private sector."
Five geographically diverse EM cleanup sites -- Paducah in Kentucky, Portsmouth in Ohio, Oak Ridge in Tennessee, the Nevada National Security Site, and Moab in Utah -- are participating in the initiative. The EOI includes site-specific information about the valuable materials, including their type, quantities and locations. Interested parties are encouraged to review the EOI for further details.
EM will host a virtual Industry Day on Sept. 30 to explain the EOI process, answer questions and learn more about market demand and the industrial capabilities available to process, recover or otherwise use the materials. The event reflects EM's commitment to early and transparent engagement with the private sector as it works to maximize the value of federal assets for American taxpayers.
The initiative supports the Trump administration's priorities of strengthening domestic supply chains, advancing American energy independence and maintaining the nation's competitive edge in critical minerals and advanced manufacturing. Interested parties must provide their own equipment and expertise for any material relocation or extraction. DOE will evaluate responses based on demonstrated technical knowledge and the quality of proposed use plans.
EM has led the nation's nuclear cleanup mission for more than 37 years, safely addressing the environmental legacy of Cold War-era nuclear weapons production at sites across the country. This initiative represents the next chapter in that mission, one focused not only on cleaning up the past but on creating lasting value for the communities and the nation.
The EOI and additional information are available here (https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/61b18d7ed0474a53bcbd81abb5327d1a/vie. Interested parties may direct questions to Robert.Seifert@em.doe.gov.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.energy.gov/em/articles/doe-seeks-industry-input-surplus-critical-minerals-and-materials-cleanup-sites
Census Bureau: 'Poverty in U.S. - 2025'
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 (TNSLrpt) -- The U.S. Census Bureau issued the following report (No. P60-290) by Christina Bijou and Emily A. Shrider entitled "Poverty in the U.S.: 2025."
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Contents
INTRODUCTION ... 1
Highlights ... 1
Background ... 1
OFFICIAL POVERTY BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS ... 3
THE SUPPLEMENTAL POVERTY MEASURE BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS ... 3
COMPARING OFFICIAL+ AND SPM ESTIMATES ... 6
THE EFFECT OF CASH AND NONCASH TRANSFERS, TAXES, AND OTHER NONDISCRETIONARY EXPENSES ON THE SPM ... 8
SUMMARY ... 9
ENDNOTES ... 10
FIGURES
Figure 1. Number ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 (TNSLrpt) -- The U.S. Census Bureau issued the following report (No. P60-290) by Christina Bijou and Emily A. Shrider entitled "Poverty in the U.S.: 2025." Here are excerpts: * * * Contents INTRODUCTION ... 1 Highlights ... 1 Background ... 1 OFFICIAL POVERTY BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS ... 3 THE SUPPLEMENTAL POVERTY MEASURE BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS ... 3 COMPARING OFFICIAL+ AND SPM ESTIMATES ... 6 THE EFFECT OF CASH AND NONCASH TRANSFERS, TAXES, AND OTHER NONDISCRETIONARY EXPENSES ON THE SPM ... 8 SUMMARY ... 9 ENDNOTES ... 10 FIGURES Figure 1. Numberin Poverty and Poverty Rate Using the Official Poverty Measure: 1959 to 2025 ... 3
Figure 2. People in Poverty Using the Official Poverty Measure: 2024 to 2025 ... 4
Figure 3. Change in Percentage of People in Poverty Using the Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2024 to 2025 ... 5
Figure 4. Poverty Rates Using the Official+ and Supplemental Poverty Measures: 2009 to 2025 ... 6
Figure 5. Poverty Rates Using the Official+ and Supplemental Poverty Measures by Age Group: 2009 to 2025 ... 7
Figure 6. Change in Number of People in Supplemental Poverty After Including Each Element: 2025 ... 8
Figure 7. Change in Supplemental Poverty Measure Rates After Including Specific Elements: 2025 ... 9
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX A. ESTIMATES OF OFFICIAL POVERTY ... 11
How Official Poverty Is Calculated ... 11
How Income Is Measured ... 12
APPENDIX B. THE SUPPLEMENTAL POVERTY MEASURE ... 14
Updates for 2025 ... 14
APPENDIX C. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ... 16
Source and Accuracy of the Estimates ... 16
CPS ASEC Modernization ... 17
National Experimental Well-Being Statistics (NEWS) Project ... 17
Business Cycles - Recessions ... 17
Accessing Poverty Data ... 18
Other Sources of Poverty Data ... 18
Questions and Comments ... 19
* * *
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Census Bureau produces annual poverty estimates to measure the economic wellbeing of households, families, and individuals in the United States. This report provides estimates of two measures of poverty: the official poverty measure and the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM). The official poverty measure, produced since the 1960s, defines poverty by comparing pretax money income to a national poverty threshold adjusted by family composition./1
The official poverty measure is used as an input to determine eligibility for several government programs and has been used as a benchmark of economic well-being since its adoption.
The SPM, produced in collaboration with the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), extends the official poverty measure by accounting for several government programs that are designed to assist low-income families but are not included in official poverty measure calculations. The SPM also accounts for geographic variation in housing expenses when calculating poverty thresholds and includes federal and state taxes, work expenses, and medical expenses. The SPM has been released annually since 2011, with estimates going back to 2009. It does not replace the official poverty measure but rather provides a different metric of economic wellbeing that includes resources from government programs and tax credits to low-income families.
The estimates in this report are based on data collected in the 2026 and earlier Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplements (CPS ASEC) conducted by the Census Bureau./*
Estimates for 2024 in this report may not match those published last year due to the implementation of Vintage 2025 population controls./2
All SPM estimates for 2019-2024 are based on revised thresholds released by BLS on July 17, 2026./3
This report is released alongside two other reports focused on household income and health insurance coverage in the United States: "Income in the United States: 2025" and "Health Insurance in the United States: 2025."/4
Highlights
Official Poverty Measure
- In 2025, the official poverty rate fell 0.5 percentage points to 10.2 percent. There were 34.5 million people in poverty in 2025 (Figure 2)./5
- The official poverty rate for children fell to a historic low of 13.4 percent in 2025 (Figure 2).
- Between 2024 and 2025, the official poverty rate for Hispanic individuals decreased to a historic low of 13.9 percent (Figure 2)./6,7
The Supplemental Poverty Measure
- The SPM rate in 2025 was 13.1 percent, not statistically different from 2024 (Figure 3)./8
- Between 2024 and 2025, SPM rates increased for those without a high school diploma but did not change significantly for the other groups discussed in this report (Figure 3).
- Social Security continues to be the largest antipoverty program, moving 28.8 million individuals out of SPM poverty in 2025 (Figure 6).
* * *
* The U.S. Census Bureau has reviewed this data product to ensure appropriate access, use, and disclosure avoidance protection of the confidential source data used to produce this product (Data Management System [DMS] number: P-7534374 and Disclosure Review Board [DRB] approval number: CBDRB-FY26-0280). To further protect respondent privacy, all estimates in this report have undergone additional rounding. As a result, details may not sum to totals. All comparative statements have undergone statistical testing and are statistically significant at the 90 percent confidence level unless otherwise noted.
* * *
Background
The Census Bureau has produced poverty estimates since the 1960s. Following the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Statistical Policy Directive 14, the official poverty measure classifies families and individuals as in poverty if their pretax money income falls below a threshold adjusted by family composition. Poverty thresholds are adjusted annually for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). The official poverty measure can be used to evaluate economic well-being back to 1959. Appendix A provides more information on the official poverty measure, including the 2025 thresholds.
The SPM was developed after years of research and analysis. It is based on the recommendations of the Interagency Technical Working Group (ITWG) on Developing a Supplemental Poverty Measure and the 1995 report of the National Academy of Sciences Panel on Poverty and Family Assistance.
[View table in the link at bottom.]
The SPM complements the official poverty measure by expanding the definition of resources to include noncash benefits while deducting key expenses. The SPM also uses poverty thresholds that account for a wider set of needs and geographic variation than the official poverty thresholds./9
Additionally, it accounts for housing tenure by using different thresholds for renters, owners with a mortgage, and those who have substantially lower housing costs, either because they do not pay rent or are owners without a mortgage.
In addition to the differences in resources and thresholds, the official poverty measure and the SPM use different measurement units and universes. The official poverty measure assumes that only individuals related by birth, marriage, and adoption (i.e., Census Bureau-defined families) share resources./10
This resource-sharing unit is used to sum resources and determine the appropriate poverty threshold. In comparison, the SPM expands the resource-sharing unit to also include unmarried partners and their relatives, coresident unrelated children under the age of 15, and foster children under the age of 22. Because of these differences, official poverty measure estimates are reported for families, while SPM estimates are reported for resource units. Both measures also provide estimates for unrelated individuals./11
The difference in measurement unit also leads to a difference in universe: the SPM includes unrelated children under the age of 15, while the official poverty measure does not./12
To account for this difference, this report uses the designation "official+" when directly comparing the official and SPM poverty measures./13
Estimates of official+ poverty add unrelated individuals under the age of 15 to the official poverty universe. These individuals are given the official poverty status of the household reference person.
The SPM does not replace the official poverty measure, nor is it designed to be used for program eligibility or funding distribution. The main differences in the two measures are summarized in the "Differences in Poverty Measures" table. Updates to the SPM for 2025 can be found in Appendix B. Comparisons over time should be made with caution due to changes in survey design, sampling, and instrument changes, as well as data processing and methodological improvements./14
OFFICIAL POVERTY BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS
In 2025, the official poverty rate fell 0.5 percentage points to 10.2 percent, the third consecutive annual decline and one of the lowest rates on record (Figure 1)./15,16
There were 34.5 million people in poverty in 2025.
Poverty rates for Hispanic individuals and children under age 18 both fell to historic lows in 2025 (Figure 2)./17
Between 2024 and 2025, the poverty rate for Hispanic individuals fell 1.2 percentage points to 13.9 percent. The child poverty rate fell 1.0 percentage points to 13.4 percent.
Poverty rates also declined for men, women, adults ages 18 to 64, individuals living in primary families and female householder families, and full-time, year-round workers. None of the remaining demographic groups presented in Figure 2 were statistically different between 2024 and 2025./18
THE SUPPLEMENTAL POVERTY MEASURE BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS
The official poverty measure provides a consistent definition of poverty over long periods by considering pretax money income alone and using thresholds that are only inflation-adjusted. It does not capture tax policy, noncash assistance, geographic cost-of-living differences, necessary expenses, or changes over time in any of these components.
These factors can have a substantial effect on poverty rates. The rest of this report explores poverty using the SPM, which provides an additional perspective on economic well-being by using an expanded definition of poverty. The SPM includes noncash benefits, accounts for income and payroll taxes, subtracts other necessary expenses, uses a more inclusive resource sharing unit, and accounts for geographic differences in housing costs.
Figure 3 presents annual SPM rates for 2024 and 2025 across a set of demographic characteristics. In 2025, the overall SPM rate was 13.1 percent, not statistically different from 2024./19
Between 2024 and 2025, the SPM rate for those without a high school diploma increased by 2.0 percentage points to 32.4 percent. SPM rates did not change significantly for the other groups in Figure 3.
* * *
Figure 1. Number in Poverty and Poverty Rate Using the Official Poverty Measure: 1959 to 2025
* * *
Figure 2. People in Poverty Using the Ocial Poverty Measure: 2024 to 2025 1
* * *
Figure 3. Change in Percentage of People in Poverty Using the Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2024 to 2025
* * *
The remainder of this report uses official+ when drawing comparisons between the SPM and the official poverty measure. Official+ denotes the official poverty measure using the same universe as the SPM, which includes unrelated individuals under the age of 15.
COMPARING OFFICIAL+ AND SPM ESTIMATES
Figure 4 presents SPM and official+ estimates from 2009 to 2025. The overall SPM rate (13.1 percent) was 2.9 percentage points higher than the official+ rate (10.2 percent) in 2025./20
In recent years, differences in how the poverty thresholds are adjusted explain part of this gap. While the official poverty thresholds are annually adjusted using the CPI-U, which includes a wide range of consumer expenditures, the SPM thresholds are based on a 5-year moving average of expenditures for a smaller bundle of goods, lagged by 1 year./21 When the cost of one or more of the components of the SPM bundle, such as food, outpaces overall inflation, it causes the SPM thresholds to increase more than if they were simply adjusted by the CPI-U or another inflation factor.
Figure 5 shows official+ and SPM rates from 2009 to 2025 by age./22 While official+ poverty rates decreased for children and 18- to 64-year-olds between 2024 and 2025, SPM rates did not change significantly for any age group.
The SPM rate was higher than the official+ rate for both adult age groups in 2025, but the rates for children were not statistically different. Though the official+ rate for children has typically run higher than the SPM rate, the marked decline in the official+ rate between 2024 and 2025 brought the rates together, with both at 13.4 percent.
In 2025, the SPM rate for 18- to 64-year-olds was 12.3 percent, while the official+ rate was 9.2 percent. Those 65 years and older had the largest gap between measures (5.6 percentage points), with an SPM rate of 15.4 percent and an official+ rate of 9.8 percent. The larger gap among those 65 years and older was primarily due to differences in the treatment of medical expenses between the two measures - medical expenses are subtracted from resources in the SPM but are not accounted for in the official poverty measure.
* * *
Figure 4. Poverty Rates Using the Ocial+ and Supplemental Poverty Measures: 2009 to 2025
* * *
Figure 5. Poverty Rates Using the Ocial+ and Supplemental Poverty Measures by Age Group: 2009 to 2025
* * *
Figure 6. Change in Number of People in Supplemental Poverty After Including Each Element: 2025
* * *
THE EFFECT OF CASH AND NONCASH TRANSFERS, TAXES, AND NONDISCRETIONARY EXPENSES ON THE SPM
The SPM allows us to estimate how including different resources and expenses affects the number of people in poverty and the poverty rate. Figure 6 shows how adding or subtracting different factors from the resource calculation would affect the number of people in poverty in 2025. Some of the programs in the figure - cash programs such as Social Security and unemployment insurance benefits - are included in both the official poverty measure and the SPM./23 Others - such as refundable tax credits, SNAP, and housing subsidies - are only included in the SPM. Necessary expenses - such as taxes, medical expenses, and work-related expenses - are also deducted from SPM resources but are not considered in the official poverty measure./24
To evaluate the effect of programs that add to resources (e.g., Social Security and cash and noncash transfers), we subtract the value of each component from a unit's resources and recalculate poverty status. In contrast, to evaluate the effect of expenses, we add back the value of each component to a unit's resources. Poverty status changes if subtracting a program benefit decreases individuals' resources below their poverty threshold or if adding an expense takes them above their poverty threshold. These additions and subtractions are done independently and assume no behavioral changes such as shifts in employment status or expenses.
Removing one item from the calculation of SPM resources and recalculating poverty rates shows, for example, that Social Security benefits decreased the SPM rate by 8.5 percentage points, lifting 28.8 million people above the poverty line (Figures 6 and 7)./25 Social Security was the largest antipoverty program in 2025, especially for those 65 years and older. Over 70 percent of the people pulled out of poverty by Social Security (20.9 million individuals) fell into that age group.
Of the additions to the SPM resources calculation, refundable tax credits, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and the refundable portion of the Child Tax Credit, had the second-largest effect, reducing the SPM rate by 1.8 percentage points and lifting 6.1 million people above the poverty line in 2025, including 3.3 million children. The SPM subtracts amounts paid for child support, income and payroll taxes, work-related expenses, and medical expenses from resources, which increases the number and percentage of individuals in poverty. Of the subtractions, medical expenses had the largest effect in 2025, pushing 7.7 million individuals into poverty and raising the poverty rate by 2.3 percentage points. This effect varied by age. For those 65 years and older, subtracting medical expenses raised the poverty rate by 3.8 percentage points. The effect was smaller among 18- to 64-year-olds (1.9 percentage points) and children (2.0 percentage points)./26
SUMMARY
This report provides estimates of poverty in the United States using both the official poverty measure and the SPM. While official poverty declined to a near all-time low of 10.2 percent in 2025, the SPM remained flat at 13.1 percent, not statistically different from 2024.
The results illustrate how using different measures affects who counts as being in poverty. The official poverty measure only considers pretax income and uses national thresholds that are inflation-adjusted, allowing for consistent measurement of poverty back to the 1960s. The downside of this approach is that it does not capture changes to tax and transfer programs that can affect family and household resources, nor does it account for geographic differences in cost of living.
In contrast, the SPM accounts for income and payroll taxes, tax credits, noncash benefits, and nondiscretionary expenses. It uses geographically adjusted poverty thresholds that are updated by BLS with recent information on food, clothing, shelter, utility, telephone, and internet expenditures. This results in a poverty measure that accounts for current standards of living as well as policy changes that operate primarily as noncash benefits or through the tax system.
Together, the two measures provide useful information on historic and current economic well-being.
* * *
Figure 7. Change in Supplemental Poverty Measure Rates After Including Specific Elements: 2025
* * *
ENDNOTES
1 The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) determined the official definition of poverty in Statistical Poverty Directive 14. The official poverty measure uses pretax money income, which is gross income received from a variety of sources like earnings, Social Security, pensions, and disability benefits. It does not include tax credits, like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) or the Child Tax Credit, nor does it include noncash benefits, such as subsidized housing or nutritional assistance programs. Appendix A provides more details on how the Census Bureau calculates official poverty and on the definition of money income.
2 Additional details on the effect of population controls are available at.
3 Additional details on the effect of the revised thresholds on historical SPM estimates are available at.
4 Melissa Kollar and Zachary Scherer, "Income in the United States: 2025," Current Population Reports, P60-289, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, September 2026, available at, and Lisa N. Bunch and Halelujha Ketema, "Health Insurance in the United States: 2025," Current Population Reports, P60-291, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, September 2026, available at .
5 The margin of error for the official poverty rate in 2025 was 0.3.
6 Federal surveys give respondents the option of reporting more than one race. Therefore, two basic ways of defining a race group are possible. A group, such as Asian, may be defined as those who reported Asian and no other race (the race-alone or single-race concept) or as those who reported Asian regardless of whether they also reported another race (the race-alone-or-in-combination concept). The body of this report (text and figures) shows data using the first approach (race alone), along with estimates for Two or More Races. The online tables show data using both approaches. Primary use of the single-race population does not imply that it is the preferred method of presenting or analyzing data. The Census Bureau uses a variety of approaches. In this report, the terms "White, not Hispanic" and "non-Hispanic White" are used interchangeably and refer to people who are not Hispanic and who reported White and no other race. This report uses nonHispanic White as the comparison group for other race and Hispanic origin groups. Since Hispanic individuals may be any race, data in this report for the Hispanic population overlap with data for race groups. Data users should be aware that the different race and Hispanic origin populations consist of many distinct groups that differ in socioeconomic characteristics, culture, and nativity, which may affect the interpretation of aggregate results. Data identifying Hispanic individuals were first collected in 1972 and for Asian and Pacific Islander individuals in 1987. Estimates for the Asian, American Indian and Alaska Native, and Two or More Races populations have large variances. This is a result of small sample sizes and the fact that the CPS ASEC does not use separate population controls for weighting these groups to national totals. The American Community Survey (ACS), based on a much larger sample of the population, is a better source for estimating and identifying changes for small subgroups of the population. More information is available at.
7 Historical official poverty measure estimates by race and ethnicity and age are available in Table 3 at.
8 The margin of error for the SPM rate in 2025 was 0.3.
9 Thresholds for the SPM are produced by the BLS Division of Price and Index Number Research. The 2024 and 2025 thresholds for two-adult, two-children units are in Appendix B.
10 A family is a group of two or more people (not necessarily including the householder) related by birth, marriage, or adoption and residing together. A primary family includes the householder and members related by the same categories. All such people (including related subfamily members) are considered as members of one family. To assign thresholds and produce poverty estimates, unrelated individuals are treated as single-person units.
11 Unrelated individuals are people of any age who are not living with any other family members. When calculating family poverty, these individuals are treated as single-person units.
12 Because unrelated individuals under the age of 15 are excluded from the official poverty universe, there were 423,800 fewer children in the official poverty universe than in the total civilian noninstitutionalized population and the SPM universe in 2025. More information on this difference is provided later in the report and in the SPM technical documentation, available at.
13 More information on the universe differences can be found in the SPM technical documentation, available at, and in Liana Fox, "Revising Poverty Assignments of Unrelated Children Under Age 15 in the Supplemental Poverty Measure," SEHSD Working Paper #2017-15, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, available at .
14 The CPS ASEC is updated periodically to improve data quality. These improvements include changes to survey design, such as sampling and survey instrument changes; changes to data processing, such as weighting and data imputation methods; and changes to how the SPM is constructed. When feasible, the Census Bureau provides data users with resources that allow them to evaluate the effect of these survey changes across years. As a result, two estimates are provided for reference years 2013, 2017, and 2019, which reflect years in which there were major changes to the survey and poverty measure methodology. Given these changes, historical comparisons should be made with caution. In this report, estimates are compared to published estimates for earlier years when the questionnaire and processing system changes did not result in statistically significant differences. When survey changes did have statistically significant effects on income or poverty estimates, comparisons are made by adjusting historical published estimates to approximate the magnitude of these effects. More details on the adjustment used for these comparisons are available at.
15 Historical official poverty measure estimates by race and ethnicity and age are available in Table 3 at.
16 The 2025 poverty rate of 10.2 percent was not statistically different from the 2019 poverty rate of 10.5 percent.
17 The CPS ASEC has estimates on Hispanic individuals back to 1973 and for children back to 1959.
18 Official poverty measure estimates for select demographic characteristics and family types for 2024 and 2025 are available in Tables 1 and 2 at.
19 SPM estimates for select demographic characteristics and family types for 2024 and 2025 are available in Table 4 at.
20 SPM and official+ estimates for select demographic characteristics and family types for 2024 and 2025 are available in Table 7 at.
21 The CPI-U includes expenditures on food and beverages, housing, apparel, transportation, medical care, recreation, education and communications, and other goods and services. The SPM bundle of goods includes food, clothing, shelter, utilities, telephone, and internet. More information on the CPI-U is available at.
22 Historical estimates by race and ethnicity and age are available in Table 8 (SPM) and Table 9 (official+) at.
23 Child support payments received are counted as income in both the official poverty measure and the SPM. Child support paid is only deducted in the SPM.
24 Median weekly work expenses were estimated using the 2025 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP). In 2025, they were $42.00. Medical expenses include contributions toward the cost of medical care and health insurance premiums.
25 Estimates for the effect of individual elements of the SPM resources and expenses calculations on the SPM rate and number of people in SPM poverty are available in Tables 5 and 6 at.
26 The percentage of people pushed into poverty by medical expenses was not statistically different between 18- to 64-year-olds and children.
* * *
The report is posted at: https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2026/demo/p60-290.pdf
Here are excerpts:
* * *
Contents
INTRODUCTION ... 1
Highlights ... 1
Background ... 1
OFFICIAL POVERTY BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS ... 3
THE SUPPLEMENTAL POVERTY MEASURE BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS ... 3
COMPARING OFFICIAL+ AND SPM ESTIMATES ... 6
THE EFFECT OF CASH AND NONCASH TRANSFERS, TAXES, AND OTHER NONDISCRETIONARY EXPENSES ON THE SPM ... 8
SUMMARY ... 9
ENDNOTES ... 10
FIGURES
Figure 1. Number ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 (TNSLrpt) -- The U.S. Census Bureau issued the following report (No. P60-290) by Christina Bijou and Emily A. Shrider entitled "Poverty in the U.S.: 2025." Here are excerpts: * * * Contents INTRODUCTION ... 1 Highlights ... 1 Background ... 1 OFFICIAL POVERTY BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS ... 3 THE SUPPLEMENTAL POVERTY MEASURE BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS ... 3 COMPARING OFFICIAL+ AND SPM ESTIMATES ... 6 THE EFFECT OF CASH AND NONCASH TRANSFERS, TAXES, AND OTHER NONDISCRETIONARY EXPENSES ON THE SPM ... 8 SUMMARY ... 9 ENDNOTES ... 10 FIGURES Figure 1. Numberin Poverty and Poverty Rate Using the Official Poverty Measure: 1959 to 2025 ... 3
Figure 2. People in Poverty Using the Official Poverty Measure: 2024 to 2025 ... 4
Figure 3. Change in Percentage of People in Poverty Using the Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2024 to 2025 ... 5
Figure 4. Poverty Rates Using the Official+ and Supplemental Poverty Measures: 2009 to 2025 ... 6
Figure 5. Poverty Rates Using the Official+ and Supplemental Poverty Measures by Age Group: 2009 to 2025 ... 7
Figure 6. Change in Number of People in Supplemental Poverty After Including Each Element: 2025 ... 8
Figure 7. Change in Supplemental Poverty Measure Rates After Including Specific Elements: 2025 ... 9
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX A. ESTIMATES OF OFFICIAL POVERTY ... 11
How Official Poverty Is Calculated ... 11
How Income Is Measured ... 12
APPENDIX B. THE SUPPLEMENTAL POVERTY MEASURE ... 14
Updates for 2025 ... 14
APPENDIX C. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ... 16
Source and Accuracy of the Estimates ... 16
CPS ASEC Modernization ... 17
National Experimental Well-Being Statistics (NEWS) Project ... 17
Business Cycles - Recessions ... 17
Accessing Poverty Data ... 18
Other Sources of Poverty Data ... 18
Questions and Comments ... 19
* * *
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Census Bureau produces annual poverty estimates to measure the economic wellbeing of households, families, and individuals in the United States. This report provides estimates of two measures of poverty: the official poverty measure and the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM). The official poverty measure, produced since the 1960s, defines poverty by comparing pretax money income to a national poverty threshold adjusted by family composition./1
The official poverty measure is used as an input to determine eligibility for several government programs and has been used as a benchmark of economic well-being since its adoption.
The SPM, produced in collaboration with the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), extends the official poverty measure by accounting for several government programs that are designed to assist low-income families but are not included in official poverty measure calculations. The SPM also accounts for geographic variation in housing expenses when calculating poverty thresholds and includes federal and state taxes, work expenses, and medical expenses. The SPM has been released annually since 2011, with estimates going back to 2009. It does not replace the official poverty measure but rather provides a different metric of economic wellbeing that includes resources from government programs and tax credits to low-income families.
The estimates in this report are based on data collected in the 2026 and earlier Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplements (CPS ASEC) conducted by the Census Bureau./*
Estimates for 2024 in this report may not match those published last year due to the implementation of Vintage 2025 population controls./2
All SPM estimates for 2019-2024 are based on revised thresholds released by BLS on July 17, 2026./3
This report is released alongside two other reports focused on household income and health insurance coverage in the United States: "Income in the United States: 2025" and "Health Insurance in the United States: 2025."/4
Highlights
Official Poverty Measure
- In 2025, the official poverty rate fell 0.5 percentage points to 10.2 percent. There were 34.5 million people in poverty in 2025 (Figure 2)./5
- The official poverty rate for children fell to a historic low of 13.4 percent in 2025 (Figure 2).
- Between 2024 and 2025, the official poverty rate for Hispanic individuals decreased to a historic low of 13.9 percent (Figure 2)./6,7
The Supplemental Poverty Measure
- The SPM rate in 2025 was 13.1 percent, not statistically different from 2024 (Figure 3)./8
- Between 2024 and 2025, SPM rates increased for those without a high school diploma but did not change significantly for the other groups discussed in this report (Figure 3).
- Social Security continues to be the largest antipoverty program, moving 28.8 million individuals out of SPM poverty in 2025 (Figure 6).
* * *
* The U.S. Census Bureau has reviewed this data product to ensure appropriate access, use, and disclosure avoidance protection of the confidential source data used to produce this product (Data Management System [DMS] number: P-7534374 and Disclosure Review Board [DRB] approval number: CBDRB-FY26-0280). To further protect respondent privacy, all estimates in this report have undergone additional rounding. As a result, details may not sum to totals. All comparative statements have undergone statistical testing and are statistically significant at the 90 percent confidence level unless otherwise noted.
* * *
Background
The Census Bureau has produced poverty estimates since the 1960s. Following the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Statistical Policy Directive 14, the official poverty measure classifies families and individuals as in poverty if their pretax money income falls below a threshold adjusted by family composition. Poverty thresholds are adjusted annually for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). The official poverty measure can be used to evaluate economic well-being back to 1959. Appendix A provides more information on the official poverty measure, including the 2025 thresholds.
The SPM was developed after years of research and analysis. It is based on the recommendations of the Interagency Technical Working Group (ITWG) on Developing a Supplemental Poverty Measure and the 1995 report of the National Academy of Sciences Panel on Poverty and Family Assistance.
[View table in the link at bottom.]
The SPM complements the official poverty measure by expanding the definition of resources to include noncash benefits while deducting key expenses. The SPM also uses poverty thresholds that account for a wider set of needs and geographic variation than the official poverty thresholds./9
Additionally, it accounts for housing tenure by using different thresholds for renters, owners with a mortgage, and those who have substantially lower housing costs, either because they do not pay rent or are owners without a mortgage.
In addition to the differences in resources and thresholds, the official poverty measure and the SPM use different measurement units and universes. The official poverty measure assumes that only individuals related by birth, marriage, and adoption (i.e., Census Bureau-defined families) share resources./10
This resource-sharing unit is used to sum resources and determine the appropriate poverty threshold. In comparison, the SPM expands the resource-sharing unit to also include unmarried partners and their relatives, coresident unrelated children under the age of 15, and foster children under the age of 22. Because of these differences, official poverty measure estimates are reported for families, while SPM estimates are reported for resource units. Both measures also provide estimates for unrelated individuals./11
The difference in measurement unit also leads to a difference in universe: the SPM includes unrelated children under the age of 15, while the official poverty measure does not./12
To account for this difference, this report uses the designation "official+" when directly comparing the official and SPM poverty measures./13
Estimates of official+ poverty add unrelated individuals under the age of 15 to the official poverty universe. These individuals are given the official poverty status of the household reference person.
The SPM does not replace the official poverty measure, nor is it designed to be used for program eligibility or funding distribution. The main differences in the two measures are summarized in the "Differences in Poverty Measures" table. Updates to the SPM for 2025 can be found in Appendix B. Comparisons over time should be made with caution due to changes in survey design, sampling, and instrument changes, as well as data processing and methodological improvements./14
OFFICIAL POVERTY BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS
In 2025, the official poverty rate fell 0.5 percentage points to 10.2 percent, the third consecutive annual decline and one of the lowest rates on record (Figure 1)./15,16
There were 34.5 million people in poverty in 2025.
Poverty rates for Hispanic individuals and children under age 18 both fell to historic lows in 2025 (Figure 2)./17
Between 2024 and 2025, the poverty rate for Hispanic individuals fell 1.2 percentage points to 13.9 percent. The child poverty rate fell 1.0 percentage points to 13.4 percent.
Poverty rates also declined for men, women, adults ages 18 to 64, individuals living in primary families and female householder families, and full-time, year-round workers. None of the remaining demographic groups presented in Figure 2 were statistically different between 2024 and 2025./18
THE SUPPLEMENTAL POVERTY MEASURE BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS
The official poverty measure provides a consistent definition of poverty over long periods by considering pretax money income alone and using thresholds that are only inflation-adjusted. It does not capture tax policy, noncash assistance, geographic cost-of-living differences, necessary expenses, or changes over time in any of these components.
These factors can have a substantial effect on poverty rates. The rest of this report explores poverty using the SPM, which provides an additional perspective on economic well-being by using an expanded definition of poverty. The SPM includes noncash benefits, accounts for income and payroll taxes, subtracts other necessary expenses, uses a more inclusive resource sharing unit, and accounts for geographic differences in housing costs.
Figure 3 presents annual SPM rates for 2024 and 2025 across a set of demographic characteristics. In 2025, the overall SPM rate was 13.1 percent, not statistically different from 2024./19
Between 2024 and 2025, the SPM rate for those without a high school diploma increased by 2.0 percentage points to 32.4 percent. SPM rates did not change significantly for the other groups in Figure 3.
* * *
Figure 1. Number in Poverty and Poverty Rate Using the Official Poverty Measure: 1959 to 2025
* * *
Figure 2. People in Poverty Using the Ocial Poverty Measure: 2024 to 2025 1
* * *
Figure 3. Change in Percentage of People in Poverty Using the Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2024 to 2025
* * *
The remainder of this report uses official+ when drawing comparisons between the SPM and the official poverty measure. Official+ denotes the official poverty measure using the same universe as the SPM, which includes unrelated individuals under the age of 15.
COMPARING OFFICIAL+ AND SPM ESTIMATES
Figure 4 presents SPM and official+ estimates from 2009 to 2025. The overall SPM rate (13.1 percent) was 2.9 percentage points higher than the official+ rate (10.2 percent) in 2025./20
In recent years, differences in how the poverty thresholds are adjusted explain part of this gap. While the official poverty thresholds are annually adjusted using the CPI-U, which includes a wide range of consumer expenditures, the SPM thresholds are based on a 5-year moving average of expenditures for a smaller bundle of goods, lagged by 1 year./21 When the cost of one or more of the components of the SPM bundle, such as food, outpaces overall inflation, it causes the SPM thresholds to increase more than if they were simply adjusted by the CPI-U or another inflation factor.
Figure 5 shows official+ and SPM rates from 2009 to 2025 by age./22 While official+ poverty rates decreased for children and 18- to 64-year-olds between 2024 and 2025, SPM rates did not change significantly for any age group.
The SPM rate was higher than the official+ rate for both adult age groups in 2025, but the rates for children were not statistically different. Though the official+ rate for children has typically run higher than the SPM rate, the marked decline in the official+ rate between 2024 and 2025 brought the rates together, with both at 13.4 percent.
In 2025, the SPM rate for 18- to 64-year-olds was 12.3 percent, while the official+ rate was 9.2 percent. Those 65 years and older had the largest gap between measures (5.6 percentage points), with an SPM rate of 15.4 percent and an official+ rate of 9.8 percent. The larger gap among those 65 years and older was primarily due to differences in the treatment of medical expenses between the two measures - medical expenses are subtracted from resources in the SPM but are not accounted for in the official poverty measure.
* * *
Figure 4. Poverty Rates Using the Ocial+ and Supplemental Poverty Measures: 2009 to 2025
* * *
Figure 5. Poverty Rates Using the Ocial+ and Supplemental Poverty Measures by Age Group: 2009 to 2025
* * *
Figure 6. Change in Number of People in Supplemental Poverty After Including Each Element: 2025
* * *
THE EFFECT OF CASH AND NONCASH TRANSFERS, TAXES, AND NONDISCRETIONARY EXPENSES ON THE SPM
The SPM allows us to estimate how including different resources and expenses affects the number of people in poverty and the poverty rate. Figure 6 shows how adding or subtracting different factors from the resource calculation would affect the number of people in poverty in 2025. Some of the programs in the figure - cash programs such as Social Security and unemployment insurance benefits - are included in both the official poverty measure and the SPM./23 Others - such as refundable tax credits, SNAP, and housing subsidies - are only included in the SPM. Necessary expenses - such as taxes, medical expenses, and work-related expenses - are also deducted from SPM resources but are not considered in the official poverty measure./24
To evaluate the effect of programs that add to resources (e.g., Social Security and cash and noncash transfers), we subtract the value of each component from a unit's resources and recalculate poverty status. In contrast, to evaluate the effect of expenses, we add back the value of each component to a unit's resources. Poverty status changes if subtracting a program benefit decreases individuals' resources below their poverty threshold or if adding an expense takes them above their poverty threshold. These additions and subtractions are done independently and assume no behavioral changes such as shifts in employment status or expenses.
Removing one item from the calculation of SPM resources and recalculating poverty rates shows, for example, that Social Security benefits decreased the SPM rate by 8.5 percentage points, lifting 28.8 million people above the poverty line (Figures 6 and 7)./25 Social Security was the largest antipoverty program in 2025, especially for those 65 years and older. Over 70 percent of the people pulled out of poverty by Social Security (20.9 million individuals) fell into that age group.
Of the additions to the SPM resources calculation, refundable tax credits, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and the refundable portion of the Child Tax Credit, had the second-largest effect, reducing the SPM rate by 1.8 percentage points and lifting 6.1 million people above the poverty line in 2025, including 3.3 million children. The SPM subtracts amounts paid for child support, income and payroll taxes, work-related expenses, and medical expenses from resources, which increases the number and percentage of individuals in poverty. Of the subtractions, medical expenses had the largest effect in 2025, pushing 7.7 million individuals into poverty and raising the poverty rate by 2.3 percentage points. This effect varied by age. For those 65 years and older, subtracting medical expenses raised the poverty rate by 3.8 percentage points. The effect was smaller among 18- to 64-year-olds (1.9 percentage points) and children (2.0 percentage points)./26
SUMMARY
This report provides estimates of poverty in the United States using both the official poverty measure and the SPM. While official poverty declined to a near all-time low of 10.2 percent in 2025, the SPM remained flat at 13.1 percent, not statistically different from 2024.
The results illustrate how using different measures affects who counts as being in poverty. The official poverty measure only considers pretax income and uses national thresholds that are inflation-adjusted, allowing for consistent measurement of poverty back to the 1960s. The downside of this approach is that it does not capture changes to tax and transfer programs that can affect family and household resources, nor does it account for geographic differences in cost of living.
In contrast, the SPM accounts for income and payroll taxes, tax credits, noncash benefits, and nondiscretionary expenses. It uses geographically adjusted poverty thresholds that are updated by BLS with recent information on food, clothing, shelter, utility, telephone, and internet expenditures. This results in a poverty measure that accounts for current standards of living as well as policy changes that operate primarily as noncash benefits or through the tax system.
Together, the two measures provide useful information on historic and current economic well-being.
* * *
Figure 7. Change in Supplemental Poverty Measure Rates After Including Specific Elements: 2025
* * *
ENDNOTES
1 The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) determined the official definition of poverty in Statistical Poverty Directive 14. The official poverty measure uses pretax money income, which is gross income received from a variety of sources like earnings, Social Security, pensions, and disability benefits. It does not include tax credits, like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) or the Child Tax Credit, nor does it include noncash benefits, such as subsidized housing or nutritional assistance programs. Appendix A provides more details on how the Census Bureau calculates official poverty and on the definition of money income.
2 Additional details on the effect of population controls are available at
3 Additional details on the effect of the revised thresholds on historical SPM estimates are available at
4 Melissa Kollar and Zachary Scherer, "Income in the United States: 2025," Current Population Reports, P60-289, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, September 2026, available at
5 The margin of error for the official poverty rate in 2025 was 0.3.
6 Federal surveys give respondents the option of reporting more than one race. Therefore, two basic ways of defining a race group are possible. A group, such as Asian, may be defined as those who reported Asian and no other race (the race-alone or single-race concept) or as those who reported Asian regardless of whether they also reported another race (the race-alone-or-in-combination concept). The body of this report (text and figures) shows data using the first approach (race alone), along with estimates for Two or More Races. The online tables show data using both approaches. Primary use of the single-race population does not imply that it is the preferred method of presenting or analyzing data. The Census Bureau uses a variety of approaches. In this report, the terms "White, not Hispanic" and "non-Hispanic White" are used interchangeably and refer to people who are not Hispanic and who reported White and no other race. This report uses nonHispanic White as the comparison group for other race and Hispanic origin groups. Since Hispanic individuals may be any race, data in this report for the Hispanic population overlap with data for race groups. Data users should be aware that the different race and Hispanic origin populations consist of many distinct groups that differ in socioeconomic characteristics, culture, and nativity, which may affect the interpretation of aggregate results. Data identifying Hispanic individuals were first collected in 1972 and for Asian and Pacific Islander individuals in 1987. Estimates for the Asian, American Indian and Alaska Native, and Two or More Races populations have large variances. This is a result of small sample sizes and the fact that the CPS ASEC does not use separate population controls for weighting these groups to national totals. The American Community Survey (ACS), based on a much larger sample of the population, is a better source for estimating and identifying changes for small subgroups of the population. More information is available at
7 Historical official poverty measure estimates by race and ethnicity and age are available in Table 3 at
8 The margin of error for the SPM rate in 2025 was 0.3.
9 Thresholds for the SPM are produced by the BLS Division of Price and Index Number Research. The 2024 and 2025 thresholds for two-adult, two-children units are in Appendix B.
10 A family is a group of two or more people (not necessarily including the householder) related by birth, marriage, or adoption and residing together. A primary family includes the householder and members related by the same categories. All such people (including related subfamily members) are considered as members of one family. To assign thresholds and produce poverty estimates, unrelated individuals are treated as single-person units.
11 Unrelated individuals are people of any age who are not living with any other family members. When calculating family poverty, these individuals are treated as single-person units.
12 Because unrelated individuals under the age of 15 are excluded from the official poverty universe, there were 423,800 fewer children in the official poverty universe than in the total civilian noninstitutionalized population and the SPM universe in 2025. More information on this difference is provided later in the report and in the SPM technical documentation, available at
13 More information on the universe differences can be found in the SPM technical documentation, available at
14 The CPS ASEC is updated periodically to improve data quality. These improvements include changes to survey design, such as sampling and survey instrument changes; changes to data processing, such as weighting and data imputation methods; and changes to how the SPM is constructed. When feasible, the Census Bureau provides data users with resources that allow them to evaluate the effect of these survey changes across years. As a result, two estimates are provided for reference years 2013, 2017, and 2019, which reflect years in which there were major changes to the survey and poverty measure methodology. Given these changes, historical comparisons should be made with caution. In this report, estimates are compared to published estimates for earlier years when the questionnaire and processing system changes did not result in statistically significant differences. When survey changes did have statistically significant effects on income or poverty estimates, comparisons are made by adjusting historical published estimates to approximate the magnitude of these effects. More details on the adjustment used for these comparisons are available at
15 Historical official poverty measure estimates by race and ethnicity and age are available in Table 3 at
16 The 2025 poverty rate of 10.2 percent was not statistically different from the 2019 poverty rate of 10.5 percent.
17 The CPS ASEC has estimates on Hispanic individuals back to 1973 and for children back to 1959.
18 Official poverty measure estimates for select demographic characteristics and family types for 2024 and 2025 are available in Tables 1 and 2 at
19 SPM estimates for select demographic characteristics and family types for 2024 and 2025 are available in Table 4 at
20 SPM and official+ estimates for select demographic characteristics and family types for 2024 and 2025 are available in Table 7 at
21 The CPI-U includes expenditures on food and beverages, housing, apparel, transportation, medical care, recreation, education and communications, and other goods and services. The SPM bundle of goods includes food, clothing, shelter, utilities, telephone, and internet. More information on the CPI-U is available at
22 Historical estimates by race and ethnicity and age are available in Table 8 (SPM) and Table 9 (official+) at
23 Child support payments received are counted as income in both the official poverty measure and the SPM. Child support paid is only deducted in the SPM.
24 Median weekly work expenses were estimated using the 2025 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP). In 2025, they were $42.00. Medical expenses include contributions toward the cost of medical care and health insurance premiums.
25 Estimates for the effect of individual elements of the SPM resources and expenses calculations on the SPM rate and number of people in SPM poverty are available in Tables 5 and 6 at
26 The percentage of people pushed into poverty by medical expenses was not statistically different between 18- to 64-year-olds and children.
* * *
The report is posted at: https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2026/demo/p60-290.pdf
ATF, Law Enforcement Partner Investigation Results in 90 Months Sentence for Four Deuce Oakland Crip Gang Member
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives issued the following news release:
* * *
September 17, 2026
ATF, law enforcement partner investigation results in 90 months sentence for Four Deuce Oakland Crip gang member
Texas man guilty of armed carjacking and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence in Deep Ellum
-
DALLAS -- A Four Deuce Oakland Crip gang member was sentenced Sept. 16 to 90 months in federal prison for his role in an armed carjacking committed in Dallas's Deep Ellum entertainment district, following ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives issued the following news release: * * * September 17, 2026 ATF, law enforcement partner investigation results in 90 months sentence for Four Deuce Oakland Crip gang member Texas man guilty of armed carjacking and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence in Deep Ellum - DALLAS -- A Four Deuce Oakland Crip gang member was sentenced Sept. 16 to 90 months in federal prison for his role in an armed carjacking committed in Dallas's Deep Ellum entertainment district, followinga Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Dallas Police Department investigation,
Travion Williams, 23, pleaded guilty to carjacking and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence on June 3, 2025.
"This sentence sends a clear message to violent gang members: if you choose to use firearms to terrorize our communities and commit violent crimes, the ATF, and our law enforcement partners will come after you," said ATF Dallas Special Agent in Charge Brian Garner. "Through Operation Blue Laces, ATF and our partners will continue dismantling violent gang activity and holding those who threaten our communities accountable."
According to court documents, Williams, an identified member of the Four Deuce Oakland Crips, participated in an armed carjacking on Dec. 6, 2023. The victim and a companion were returning to their 2020 Chevrolet Corvette parked near Elm Street in Dallas when Williams and two co conspirators approached. All three gang members were masked, and Williams brandished a Glock 19 pistol. They forcibly stole the victim's keys, wallet, phone and other belongings before fleeing in the Corvette.
"Armed gang members who hijack public spaces and terrorize citizens in North Texas will face federal consequences--period," said U.S. Attorney Ryan Raybould. This defendant chose violence and fear and today, he is facing the consequences of that decision. We will not allow criminal organizations like the Four Deuce Oakland Crips to operate with impunity in this District."
Dallas police attempted to stop the stolen vehicle, but Williams evaded officers at high speed before abandoning the Corvette under a bridge. Williams fled on foot into an industrial area but, he was ultimately apprehended by Dallas Police Officers.
Williams' sentencing is part of Operation Blue Laces, an ATF-led initiative launched in January 2024 to identify and disrupt gang members operating along the Malcolm X Boulevard corridor in South Dallas. Residents had reported that Four Deuce Oakland Crip members created an atmosphere of fear and lawlessness, using storefronts to stash firearms and distribute drugs, while also maintaining an open-air drug market on the 2800 block of Casey Street--known to the community as "the Dead End."
U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr imposed the 90-month sentence yesterday morning.
To date, twelve defendants associated with the Four Deuce Oakland Crips have been convicted of federal offenses including drug conspiracy, firearms violations and carjacking.
ATF Dallas and the Dallas Police Department conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney Rick Calvert, Major Crimes Section Chief, prosecuted the case.
* * *
ATF protects American communities from violent crime driven by the illegal use of firearms, explosives, and acts of arson. Through crime gun intelligence, forensic analysis, and relentless investigation, we identify and arrest violent offenders and gang members, dismantle trafficking networks, and sever the supply chains arming cartels, prohibited persons, and terrorist organizations. We defend the rights of law-abiding citizens by safeguarding lawful commerce and upholding the Constitution of the United States. Learn more about what ATF is doing to reduce violent crime in your community by following us on X @ATFHQ, Instagram @ATFHQ, LinkedIn @ATF, and Facebook @HQATF, or on the web at www.atf.gov.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.atf.gov/news/press-releases/atf-law-enforcement-partner-investigation-results-90-months-sentence-four-deuce-oakland-crip-gang-member
* * *
September 17, 2026
ATF, law enforcement partner investigation results in 90 months sentence for Four Deuce Oakland Crip gang member
Texas man guilty of armed carjacking and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence in Deep Ellum
-
DALLAS -- A Four Deuce Oakland Crip gang member was sentenced Sept. 16 to 90 months in federal prison for his role in an armed carjacking committed in Dallas's Deep Ellum entertainment district, following ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 -- The U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives issued the following news release: * * * September 17, 2026 ATF, law enforcement partner investigation results in 90 months sentence for Four Deuce Oakland Crip gang member Texas man guilty of armed carjacking and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence in Deep Ellum - DALLAS -- A Four Deuce Oakland Crip gang member was sentenced Sept. 16 to 90 months in federal prison for his role in an armed carjacking committed in Dallas's Deep Ellum entertainment district, followinga Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Dallas Police Department investigation,
Travion Williams, 23, pleaded guilty to carjacking and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence on June 3, 2025.
"This sentence sends a clear message to violent gang members: if you choose to use firearms to terrorize our communities and commit violent crimes, the ATF, and our law enforcement partners will come after you," said ATF Dallas Special Agent in Charge Brian Garner. "Through Operation Blue Laces, ATF and our partners will continue dismantling violent gang activity and holding those who threaten our communities accountable."
According to court documents, Williams, an identified member of the Four Deuce Oakland Crips, participated in an armed carjacking on Dec. 6, 2023. The victim and a companion were returning to their 2020 Chevrolet Corvette parked near Elm Street in Dallas when Williams and two co conspirators approached. All three gang members were masked, and Williams brandished a Glock 19 pistol. They forcibly stole the victim's keys, wallet, phone and other belongings before fleeing in the Corvette.
"Armed gang members who hijack public spaces and terrorize citizens in North Texas will face federal consequences--period," said U.S. Attorney Ryan Raybould. This defendant chose violence and fear and today, he is facing the consequences of that decision. We will not allow criminal organizations like the Four Deuce Oakland Crips to operate with impunity in this District."
Dallas police attempted to stop the stolen vehicle, but Williams evaded officers at high speed before abandoning the Corvette under a bridge. Williams fled on foot into an industrial area but, he was ultimately apprehended by Dallas Police Officers.
Williams' sentencing is part of Operation Blue Laces, an ATF-led initiative launched in January 2024 to identify and disrupt gang members operating along the Malcolm X Boulevard corridor in South Dallas. Residents had reported that Four Deuce Oakland Crip members created an atmosphere of fear and lawlessness, using storefronts to stash firearms and distribute drugs, while also maintaining an open-air drug market on the 2800 block of Casey Street--known to the community as "the Dead End."
U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr imposed the 90-month sentence yesterday morning.
To date, twelve defendants associated with the Four Deuce Oakland Crips have been convicted of federal offenses including drug conspiracy, firearms violations and carjacking.
ATF Dallas and the Dallas Police Department conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney Rick Calvert, Major Crimes Section Chief, prosecuted the case.
* * *
ATF protects American communities from violent crime driven by the illegal use of firearms, explosives, and acts of arson. Through crime gun intelligence, forensic analysis, and relentless investigation, we identify and arrest violent offenders and gang members, dismantle trafficking networks, and sever the supply chains arming cartels, prohibited persons, and terrorist organizations. We defend the rights of law-abiding citizens by safeguarding lawful commerce and upholding the Constitution of the United States. Learn more about what ATF is doing to reduce violent crime in your community by following us on X @ATFHQ, Instagram @ATFHQ, LinkedIn @ATF, and Facebook @HQATF, or on the web at www.atf.gov.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.atf.gov/news/press-releases/atf-law-enforcement-partner-investigation-results-90-months-sentence-four-deuce-oakland-crip-gang-member