Dunkin’ Donuts recently dropped the “Donuts” from one of its California stores, and now it’s dropping a lot of donuts from its menus at stores around the country.
Nation’s Restaurant News reports that by the end of the month about 1,000 Dunkin’ restaurants — there were 8,828 locations in 2016 — will cut their donut offerings from about 30 to 18.
Not all hope is lost if your favorite donut doesn’t make the cut: Dunkin’ President David Hoffman said that some of the affected locations might eventually go back up to 24 donut options, depending on customer demand.
The change comes as the chain tries to “reset” its business, while boosting efficiency and improve customer service.
Hoffman tells Nation’s Restaurant News that the menu revamp is “one of the most aggressive simplification efforts” he’d been apart of.
The company, however, isn’t giving up on innovative and new donuts. Instead, Hoffman says the chain will focus on ensure these new offerings have intriguing flavors and combinations that can be successful.
While the company has previously noted that would be turning its focus toward beverages rather than food, Hoffman tells Nation’s Restraint News that isn’t entirely the case.
“Simplification isn’t about saving your way to prosperity,” Hoffmann said. “It’s about creating room for growth to position yourself as a beverage-led, on-the-go brand.”
As we learned last week based on information from people in the banking industry, payment cards used at Sonic Drive-In locations have been linked to suspicious transactions. Sonic confirmed today that its payment systems were indeed breached in a malware attack, potentially by crooks seeking payment card numbers.
What Sonic isn’t doing is specifying the locations where this happened. In a chain with thousands of restaurants, that information would be helpful.
Instead, the milkshake-centric drive-in chain has simply confirmed that there was a malware breach and that credit and debit cards may have been taken. There were five million payment card numbers in the batch potentially linked to Sonic, but those numbers may have come from different sources.
The breach happened at “certain Sonic Drive-In locations,” Sonic said in a statement, and it is offering any customer who used a credit or debit card at any of its restaurants in 2017 two years of free credit monitoring from Experian.
This is the standard gesture that companies make after a credit card breach. Even credit bureau Equifax offered its own credit monitoring to victims of its own massive breach of personal data on most American adults.
Read more: Don’t Take Equifax Up On Its Credit Monitoring Offer
However, by the time a credit monitoring service lets you know that there’s a new account opened in your name, it’s already happened. If you are concerned about someone opening accounts in your name, be sure to check your credit report from the annualcreditreport.com site, which lets you check each bureau’s report once per year.
And, just like the free TrustedID service that Equifax offered in the wake of its recent data breach, the Experian monitoring service includes a forced arbitration clause in its Terms of Service, meaning you wouldn’t be able to sue Experian if you had a legal dispute regarding this service.
If you’re really concerned about someone opening accounts in your name, contact each credit bureau to place a freeze on your file, which keeps anyone from opening any accounts unless you contact the bureau to un-freeze it.
To take Sonic up on its monitoring offer, if that still interests you, go to http://ift.tt/2xZEd3D.
It may look like an ordinary package of salmon, but according to a new investigative report, that fish you bought for dinner may actually be funneling money into the pockets of the North Korean government, and possibly supporting less than ideal working conditions for factory in the process.
The Associated Press says a recent investigation it conducted found that the North Korean government has been sending tens of thousands of workers into factories worldwide, including seafood processing plants in China that then export those products to the U.S. and other countries.
Although it’s illegal for U.S. companies to sell anything from North Korea anywhere in the world, the fish at your local supermarket may still have been handled by a North Korean factory worker: As the AP explains, China and North Korea have an agreement that allows factories to contract for groups of North Korean workers. Dozens of fish processing companies in Hunchun, China — as well as other manufacturers — now employ workers from that country.
Although the workers are reportedly paid salaries similar to what Chinese workers make, anywhere from 50-70% of the money they earn is reportedly sent to the North Korean government, with workers receiving as little as $90 per month.
While the AP did not get access to factories in the area to assess conditions, its reporters found that workers often have contracts for two or three years, and they can’t leave early. And while Chinese workers have workplace protections that let them take time off, North Korean workers rarely take sick days or quit, the sales manager at one seafood processor told the AP.
It’s not easy work, either, the AP reports, with shifts up to 12 hours and usually only one day off each week.
After conducting dozens of interviews and researching trade records and other confidential documents, the AP says it has identified three seafood processors that employ North Koreans and export products to the U.S.
And according to shipping records the AP viewed, those companies sent more than 100 cargo containers of seafood, with more than 2,000 tons of fish, to the U.S. and Canada this year.
American distributors like Sea-Trek Enterprises and The Fishin’ Company both reportedly imported seafood from factories employing North Koreans. The Fishin’ Company told the AP it has cut ties with Hunchun processors, although food may remain in the supply chain for more than a year. Both companies expressed concerns about North Korean laborers to the AP, and pledged to investigate.
Some seafood arriving from China was branded with names like Walmart or Aldi’s Sea Queen line.
A Walmart spokesperson told the AP that the company learned in an audit a year ago that there could be labor problems at a Hunchun factor, and that Walmart has banned their suppliers — including The Fishin’ Company — from getting their seafood processed there.
We’ve reached out to Aldi for comment on the AP’s story, and will update this post if we hear back.
In the meantime, the president of the largest seafood trade association in the U.S. said his group is now urging all its companies to take another look at their supply chains “to ensure that wages go to the workers, and are not siphoned off to support a dangerous dictator.”
“While we understand that hiring North Korean workers may be legal in China,” John Connelly of the National Fisheries Institute told the AP, “we are deeply concerned that any seafood companies could be inadvertently propping up the despotic regime.”
Wouldn’t it be useful to have a three-dimensional avatar that’s shaped like you that you could use for online clothes shopping or for video games? We don’t know what Amazon had in mind when it acquired a company that creates 3D models of human bodies for a variety of applications, but it probably involves the mega-retailer’s fashion ambitions.
Body Labs has taken down its website since the acquisition was announced, but the company creates 3D models of people based on measurements, full body scans, or two-dimensional photographs. It’s that last one that will be the easiest to deploy on millions of customers: Imagine a digital mannequin of you that can try on clothes while you sit around in your ill-fitting pajamas.
It’s the project for creating images of bodies from photos, a project called Soma, that might be the most useful for Amazon, especially if it’s able to sell its Echo Look closet camera to a meaningful number of customers. The software could combine everyday outfit pictures with information about how products from the Amazon Wardrobe try-on program fit to find items of clothing that fit customers eve better.
Amazon also has its own clothing lines, and analyzing customer photos could let the retailer learn the actual sizes of its customers and adjust its patterns and size selections accordingly.
TechCrunch also observes that another possible use is in the games that Amazon produces, since Amazon owns video game studios now, too. 3D models of customers would mean very accurate avatars for games. Maybe too accurate.
While they say you should try, try again if at first you don’t succeed, that familiar maxim should not apply when what you’re trying to do is open the exterior door of a commercial jet flying several thousand feet above the ground.
To wit: A passenger now stands accused of trying to let some fresh air into the cabin — not once, but three times — during a United Airlines flight from Paris to Washington, D.C.
According to an arrest affidavit [PDF] filed in support of a criminal complaint [PDF], the Federal Bureau of Investigation says a man on a Sept. 30 flight from Paris to Washington Dulles International Airport ordered a glass of red wine from a flight attendant during the first round of beverages.
Soon after, the flight attendant claims, the man’s eyes appeared “medicated,” and he was “slow to comprehend information.”
The attendant then instructed other crew members not to serve the passenger any more alcoholic beverages.
Later, the attendant allegedly saw the man standing in the galley with a bottle of wine, and was unsure where he had obtained it. The crew member took the bottle away from him, and he returned to his seat.
Another attendant interviewed by the FBI reported seeing the passenger look out the window on the left of the emergency exit, before allegedly stating, “I need to get off this plane.”
The crew member then allegedly saw him attempt to open the emergency exit, and told him to go back to his seat.
About five minutes later, the attendant says the passenger came to the rear of the aircraft, ran to the same emergency exit door, and tried to open it. The crew member had to “physically remove” the man from the area of the exit.
A Federal Air Marshal on the flight — identified as “DD” in the arrest affidavit — told the FBI that after going to the back of the aircraft to witness the commotion, a flight attendant explained what had happened. “DD” didn’t identify himself as an air marshal at that point, but remained by the emergency exit door in the back of the plane.
Around 45 minutes before landing, the passenger allegedly once more approached the exit door and died to open it. At that point, “DD” grabbed him, identified himself as a Federal Air Marshal, and restrained the passenger. He was then restrained for the rest of the flight, and arrested upon arrival.
The passenger has been charged with interference with flight crew members or flight attendants, and will also be joining a long list of unruly flyers — and airline employees — who have gone for the exit door at the wrong time:
Aug. 2017 — A 17-year-old on a Copa Airlines flight opened an over-wing emergency door after the plane landed, slid down the wing of the plane, and jumped to the tarmac.
June 2017 — A Southwest Airlines flight was diverted after a passenger tried to open the exit door in mid-air.
Nov. 2016 — United Airlines passenger in Houston opened the plane’s door and hopped out while the plane taxied.
Sept. 2016 — A Kentucky man was banned from flying on commercial airlines last year after he got into an altercation that ended with him trying to exit from an open door that wasn’t connected to the jet bridge.
April 2016 — A United Airlines flight attendant deployed a plane’s slide after it had landed at the same airport, rode it down, and walked away from her job.
Nov. 2015 — An intoxicated British Airways passenger tried to pry open the door mid-flight.
Sept. 2015 — A KLM Airlines passenger apparently thought the airplane’s door was the bathroom and tried to open it at 30,000 feet.
Sept. 2014 — A Virgin America passenger reportedly masturbated in flight and then went for the exit door.
Aug. 2010 — JetBlue flight attendant Steven Slater became infamous after he cursed out a passenger and then used the plane’s emergency slide to exit the plane and run away.
The Trump administration is moving forward with its plan to slash taxes on businesses, which means the government will have to get at least some of that money from elsewhere. Now comes news that taxpayers may have to choose between two common tax deductions that millions of Americans have long benefited from.
Currently, U.S. taxpayers are allowed to make deductions based on what they pay in interest on their mortgage and on the taxes paid to state and local governments. Both of these deductions have, at various times, been targeted as part of tax reform but they have survived thus far.
The current $6 trillion Trump tax plan, which doesn’t say much about how the government intends to balance out its proposed reductions to corporate and pass-through business taxes, currently intends to get rid of the state/local tax deduction while retaining the mortgage deduction. In fact, the only personal deductions that are explicitly mentioned in the proposal are the mortgage interest deduction and the deduction for charitable donations.
While eliminating the state/local tax deduction could reportedly save the government more than $1 trillion over ten years,
it has its detractors who say that their states would be unfairly affected by the loss of this deduction. Still others argue that a better target for removal or restructuring is the mortgage interest deduction.
Now, the AP reports that Republicans in Congress may (nothing is definite until it’s actually on paper) suggest a compromise: Let taxpayers pick the deduction they want to take.
At the same time, selecting which deduction to take may be a moot question for some taxpayers, as the administration is currently proposing to double the standard deduction, meaning that amount may save you more than either the mortgage or local tax deductions would.
The size of this deduction going to be directly related to how much you pay in local and state taxes (which is also related to how much you earn and — for local property takes — how much your home is worth), so folks who live in places with both high levels of income and high income and property tax rates are currently reaping the largest benefit and are most likely to want this deduction protected.
As the AP notes, many of the states with both high income levels and high tax rates are traditionally “blue” or Democratic-leaning states. At the same time, these states also have their fair share of Republican congressional representatives. For example, 14 of California’s 53 representatives (about 1-in-4) are Republican, while a full one-third of New York’s 27 representatives are from the GOP, as are nearly half of New Jersey’s 12 House seats.
Those lawmakers may have trouble selling their more well-heeled constituents on getting rid of this particular tax deduction. At the same time, the GOP can’t afford to lose too many votes on a reform that the party has been promising for years. There are currently 20 Republican lawmakers who have joined a bipartisan coalition opposing the removal of the state/local tax deduction. That’s too large a group for party leadership to brush off.
There are currently around 30 million American homeowners who take this deduction their federal income tax return, and most of them would probably not be happy seeing it go away.
Cutting the mortgage interest deduction has the most effect on recent homebuyers. Not only are the first few years of many mortgage repayment plans arranged so that much of what the homeowner pays goes toward interest, but these are also people who likely had to make significant cash outlays for the mortgage down-payment, moving, new furnishings, and possibly remodeling.
The various lobbying groups, particularly construction and real estate, whose members rely on a steady demand for new housing have helped to defeat previous efforts to get rid of the mortgage interest deduction. They argue that taking away this deduction, which can be worth several thousands of dollars for some homeowners, would remove some of the incentive to purchase a home.
It’s possible, notes the AP, that the mortgage interest deduction might remain, but that it would be capped to reduce the size of the deduction. Currently, homeowners are allowed to deduct mortgage interest that applies on up to $1 million of their home’s value. By lowering that cap, homeowners with low-to-moderately priced homes would still likely enjoy the full benefit of the deduction while cutting down on deductions for those with more expensive property.
The current tax proposal would nearly double the current standard deductions, raising them to $12,000 for individuals (up from the most recent level of $6,350) and $24,000 (up from $12,700) for married couples filing jointly.
Homeowners whose mortgage interest and other itemized deductions don’t reach those new standard thresholds would likely just end up taking the standard deduction.
But as the Washington Post points out, a study backed by the National Association of Realtors found that lowering the number of people who claim the mortgage interest deduction (even if they’re effectively getting the same size deduction elsewhere on their taxes) could have a negative effect on the investment value of real estate and cause home prices to drop by as much as 10%. Other studies, not paid for by the realty industry, have reached similar conclusions, says the Post.
Gasoline may make your engine go, but if there’s a fuel leak, it can also make your engine go up in flames. That’s why Volkswagen and its Porsche brand are recalling more than 124,000 vehicles.
Volkswagen recently announced the recall of 73,941 model year 2004 to 2007 Touareg vehicles, while Porsche recalled 50,145 model year 2003 to 2006 Cayenne, Cayenne S, and Cayenne Turbo, and 2006 Cayenne S “Titanium” Edition vehicles.
According to notices — VW [PDF]/Porsche [PDF] — posted with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the vehicles may contain a fuel filter flange that could crack, allowing fuel to leak.
The carmakers note that hairline cracks can appear in the flange after extended use and age. Customers may be able to identify the issue via a noticeable fuel odor.
If the crack occurs and a fuel leak is present in the area of an ignition source, it could increase the risk of fire.
The carmakers tell NHTSA that they first discovered the issue in Feb. 2017 after receiving complaints from owners. VW and Porsche initiated a data review and identified a number of similar complaints. In June, the carmakers began a 90-day field investigation, collecting 100 parts for analysis.
In September, VW’s product safety committee viewed the results and determined that a defect was present.
Dealers will inspect the affected vehicles’ fuel filter flange for cracks, and replace as needed. If no cracks are found, the dealer will install a protective cover onto the filter flange.
For now, the carmakers say that parts are not available, but owners will be notified of the recall starting Nov. 19.
Eleven years after a federal court ordered the country’s biggest cigarette producers to produce a series of warning ads informing people about the dangers of their products, Big Tobacco is finally preparing to publish those “corrective statements” in TV ads, newspapers, online, and in cigarette packaging.
Philip Morris USA parent company Altria Group Inc. and British American Tobacco — the only remaining tobacco companies in the U.S. at this point — have agreed to start airing ads on broadcast TV networks, in newspapers, on their corporate sites, and on pamphlets tucked into packages of cigarettes, acknowledging that these products were intentionally designed to be more addictive, and that they’re really bad for you.
In documents [PDF] filed this week in D.C federal court, the companies say they’ve reached an agreement to start spreading the word about the ill-effects of cigarette smoking as early as next month, in both English and Spanish.
These won’t be splashy, catchy advertising campaigns, and they won’t contain graphic images illustrating the ill-effects of smoking.
Instead, each of five statements — displayed in black and white — will include a preamble noting that a federal court has ordered cigarette companies to make certain statements about things like the health effects of smoking, the addictiveness of smoking and nicotine, and that low tar and light cigarettes are just as bad as regular cigarettes.
For example, one ad will acknowledge that “smoking kills, on average, 1,200 Americans. Every day.”
“More people die every year from smoking than from murder, AIDS, suicide, drugs, car crashes, and alcohol, combined,” the disclosure notes.
Another statement notes that cigarettes were intentionally designed by companies “with enough nicotine to create and sustain addiction.”
A third ad admits that although many smokers switch to “low tar” and “light” cigarattes instead of quitting because they think they’re less harmful, “They are not. ‘Lowtar’ and ‘light’ cigarette smokers inhale essentially the same amount of tar and nicotine as they would from regular cigarettes,” the disclosures reads.
“All cigarettes cause cancer, lung disease, heart attacks, and premature death – lights, low tar, ultra lights, and naturals,” the ad says. “There is no safe cigarette.”
Altria tells The Wall Street Journal that it’s expecting to spend about $31 million on these ads.
“We remain committed to aligning our business practices with society’s expectations of a responsible company,” Murray Garnick, Altria’s Executive Vice President and General Counsel said in a statement. “This includes communicating openly about the health effects of our products, continuing to support cessation efforts, helping reduce underage tobacco use and developing potentially reduced-risk products.”
We’ve reached out to BAT for further comment and will update this post if we hear back.
For those unfamiliar with how we got to this point, here’s a (somewhat) quick rundown:
In 1999, the Justice Department accused the tobacco industry of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization [RICO] Act by conspiring to deny the health hazards of smoking.
A federal court ruled finally sided with the DOJ in 2006. As part of that ruling, the industry defendants were ordered to produce “corrective statements” that would be used in national TV, radio, and print ads warning people about the dangers of their products.
Big Tobacco appealed this matter at least a half-dozen times, arguing that it violates their First Amendment rights, that the wording of the proposed statements was not compliant RICO, and so on.
Confusing matters, some of the original defendants sold their business to competitors or other companies who were not part of the DOJ lawsuit.
After yet another appeal, in May, a federal appeals panel granted some minor tweaks to the wording of these warnings but again shot down the industry’s claims that they violate Big Tobacco’s First Amendment rights. The court also said it saw no reason for further delays on implementing the warnings.
