Ryanair has introduced restrictive new baggage rules that risk upsetting passengers.

The budget airline said that customers will be allowed to bring only one small piece of luggage into the cabin starting in November. The bag must be small enough to fit under a seat.

Passengers will be required to pay to bring additional luggage into the cabin, or have it stowed.

Up to 95 customers per flight can pay £6 ($7.70) when they book for priority boarding and the ability to bring a 10 kilogram (22 pound) bag into the cabin. Another option is paying £8 pounds ($10.30) to have a 10 kilogram bag checked.

Ryanair (RYAAY) said the policy was changed to cut down on delays, and it does not expect to make any additional money. It previously allowed passengers to bring one small personal bag into the cabin, and stow a 10 kilogram bag without charge.

Ryanair is known for low fares and a no-frills ethos. It operates over 2,000 flights a day and carries about 130 million passengers a year.

It has been slammed by higher costs and a series of strikes in recent months as pilot unions try to negotiate collective labor agreements with the airline.

David Bentley, chief airports analyst at CAPA — Centre for Aviation, warned the new baggage policy could annoy passengers.

“The entire procedure is far too ‘messy’ with more and more regulations and that is not going to sit happily with leisure travelers in particular,” he said.

Analysts said the new baggage policy is among the most restrictive in the industry.

“This a potential game changer for passengers and the industry, if Ryanair can make the fee structure stick,” said Rob Byde, an aviation analyst at investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald.

“The airline is clearly trying to curtail overloading of the cabin but it also has its eye on a lucrative new revenue stream,” he said.

Unions that represent Ryanair pilots say they’re looking for better working conditions. The airline’s pilots and crew are not, for example, provided with free food or drinks.

“Ryanair expects all its people to pay for their drinks and snacks whether in the staff canteen or on board the aircraft. This is a ‘low cost’, not a ‘free food,’ airline,” the company said in an email to CNN.

CNNMoney (London) First published August 24, 2018: 9:55 AM ET

While annuities can make sense in certain circumstances, it’s important to be aware of the drawbacks before purchasing any type of investment.

And with annuities, the main drawback is the cost. They tend to have higher fees than many other investments, and in some cases, the difference can be huge.

If you think an annuity could be right for you, here’s a rundown of the fees and other costs you can expect to pay.

One major point you need to know is that many annuity fees either aren’t disclosed or are difficult to determine. So, just because a certain type of fee isn’t listed in your annuity contract or mentioned to you by an annuity salesperson, don’t assume you aren’t paying it.

With that in mind, here’s a list of some of the major annuity expenses you might pay, either directly or indirectly:

Commission: The salesperson who sells you an annuity gets a cut, and this can be substantial, as you’ll see in the next section. However, you can save yourself money by looking at direct-sold annuities, rather than going through salespeople (who may refer to themselves as “investment advisers”).

Management fees: Variable annuities are especially notorious for high management fees. These annuities invest your money in mutual funds, and the fees (known as expense ratios) charged by the underlying mutual funds are passed on to you.

Insurance charges: These are also known as mortality and expense (M&E) fees and administrative fees. These cover certain guarantees that come with an annuity, as well as administrative expenses.

Surrender charges: Annuities often have penalties known as “surrender charges” that discourage people from pulling their money out early.

Other fees: In addition to these common fees, other potential annuity fees include underwriting fees, IRS penalties for early withdrawals in certain cases, fees associated with riders (added features), and more.

Here’s the part to pay close attention to: Annuity fees can be astronomically high.

For one thing, annuity commissions often run in the 6% range, and commissions as high as 10% aren’t unheard of. As I mentioned earlier, you can avoid paying a high commission by looking at annuities sold directly by companies. Vanguard is an excellent example: Their annuity specialists don’t work for commissions and, instead simply charge a one-time 2% fee for income annuities.

You can also end up paying high fees on an ongoing basis if you buy a variable annuity. In addition to the costs of the underlying mutual funds, variable annuities come with insurance charges and other fees that can total 2%-3% per year in many cases. As with commissions, not all variable annuity fees are in the same ballpark. For example, Vanguard’s mutual funds are notoriously cheap, so this can save you money on an ongoing basis. And it’s not just Vanguard; other companies, such as Fidelity and TIAA-CREF, also direct-sell annuities that could be worth a look.

In addition, a surrender charge can cost you a lot of money if you decide you want to cash out. A typical surrender charge is 7% of the annuity’s value after one year, and it declines by 1% per year until it’s gone, although much higher surrender charges are possible.

Related links:

• Motley Fool Issues Rare Triple-Buy Alert

• This Stock Could Be Like Buying Amazon in 1997

• 7 of 8 People Are Clueless About This Trillion-Dollar Market

And finally, if you add any riders to your annuity, you can expect to pay an additional charge — or accept a lower ongoing benefit.

CNNMoney (New York) First published May 28, 2018: 2:41 PM ET

The tax bill unveiled by Republicans in the House on Thursday would not, as had been rumored, eliminate the tax penalty for failure to have health insurance. But it would eliminate a decades-old deduction for people with very high medical costs.

The controversial bill is an effort by Republicans to revamp the nation’s tax code and provide dramatic tax cuts for business and individuals. However, its future is not yet clear because Republicans, who control both the House and Senate, appear divided on key measures.

The medical deduction, originally created in World War II, is available only to taxpayers whose expenses are above 10% of their adjusted gross income.

Because of that threshold, and because it is available only to people who itemize their deductions, the medical expense deduction is not used by many people — an estimated 8.8 million claimed it on their 2015 taxes, according to the IRS.

Related: What’s in the House tax bill for people

But those 8.8 million tax filers claimed an estimated $87 billion in deductions; meaning that those who do qualify for the deduction have very high out-of-pocket health costs.

“For many people, this is a big deduction,” said David Certner, legislative counsel for AARP, which opposes the change.

AARP has calculated that about three-quarters of those who claim the medical expense deduction are 50 or older, and more than 70% have annual incomes of $75,000 or below.

Many of those expenses are for long-term care, which is typically not covered by health insurance. Long-term care can cost thousands or tens of thousands of dollars a year.

Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon who is a ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, called the bill’s elimination of the medical expense deduction “anti-senior.”

But defenders of the bill say the elimination of the deduction should not be seen in isolation.

The House tax bill also proposes eliminating billions of dollars in corporate tax credits that have played a key role in the booming “orphan drug” industry.

In an FAQ posted on the House Ways and Means Committee website, the bill’s sponsors denied that the change would “be a financial burden.”

“Our bill lowers the tax rates and increases the standard deduction so people can immediately keep more of their paychecks — instead of having to rely on a myriad of provisions that many will never use and others may use only once in their lifetime,” the sponsors said.

Getting rid of many current deductions “is being done to finance rate cuts and increase the standard deduction and child tax credit,” said Nicole Kaeding, an economist with the business-backed Tax Foundation. So, for many tax filers, she said, “there will likely be offsetting tax cuts.”

On the other hand, those offsetting cuts almost by definition will not make up the difference for people with very large medical expenses, who are the only ones who qualify for the medical deduction.

“That’s why tax reform is hard,” Kaeding said.

Related: These powerful groups hate the GOP tax plan

Strikingly absent from the bill — for now — is any reference to the elimination of the tax penalty for failure to have health insurance. The so-called individual mandate is one of the most unpopular provisions of the Affordable Care Act, which Republicans failed to change or repeal earlier this year.

Sen. Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, is continuing to push language to add to the bill that would eliminate the penalty. President Donald Trump has added his endorsement via Twitter: “Wouldn’t it be great to Repeal the very unfair and unpopular Individual Mandate in ObamaCare and use those savings for further Tax Cuts,” he wrote Wednesday.

But while the president is correct that there would be savings from eliminating the mandate, the Congressional Budget Office has also estimated that millions more Americans would become uninsured as a result.

Kaiser Health News, a nonprofit health newsroom whose stories appear in news outlets nationwide, is an editorially independent part of the Kaiser Family Foundation.

CNNMoney (New York) First published November 4, 2017: 11:00 AM ET

If you’re co-signing big student loans for your child, you may want to buy a life insurance policy while you’re at it.

While no one wants to imagine the death of their child, taking out insurance on your son or daughter — or asking them to purchase their own plan — will protect you from being hit with mountains of debt should tragedy strike.

And the policies are pretty cheap. A basic plan with up to $250,000 in coverage can cost as little as $15 a month for a young, healthy college student or recent graduate. That’s a whole lot less than the loan payments you could be stuck with — which average more than $200 a month.

Related: Parents hit with $200,000 student loan bill

Such a move would have been life altering to Steve and Darnelle Mason, who lost their daughter Lisa five years ago.

Trying to pay back the $100,000 in private student loans they co-signed for their daughter has been a financial nightmare.

“I absolutely wish we had [a life insurance] policy,” said Steve Mason. “We would not have struggled financially for the past four years with these private student loans, and our credit would not have been ruined.”

Federal student loans are forgiven by the lender when a borrower dies, but private lenders aren’t required to provide any such relief.

That’s one reason it’s important to get as much federal aid as possible before turning to private lenders. And for parents, it means not co-signing on a loan unless you have the means to repay it.

Another reason for caution: student loans can rarely be discharged in bankruptcy.

Related: Grieving parents receive student loan relief

But for many parents, getting their child a good college education is non-negotiable — and that’s when life insurance can provide a little peace of mind, says Eleanor Blayney, a certified financial planner and consumer advocate for CFP Board.

Jennifer Boughan, 47, purchased life insurance policies for her three daughters as soon as they enrolled in college. Each policy costs around $150 per year and provides $100,000 in coverage, enough to cover each girl’s $50,000 to $60,000 in private and federal student loans should something happen.

“These policies are in case — and God forbid — the worst that could happen, does,” said Boughan. “Seems to me that is a far better expense than to have to face the devastation of what comes after the tragedy of a lost child.”

Related: 3 things that drive life insurance premiums through the roof

After hearing about the financial blow some grieving families have faced, Joseph Barbano took out an insurance policy for his college-bound son.

Barbano hasn’t had to take out loans yet, but he thinks he may need to down the road and wants to protect himself just in case. The 20-year term policy he took out for his son costs less than $20 per month and provides $250,000 in coverage.

Shopping for life insurance

Before purchasing a life insurance policy for your child, check with your lender. Some private lenders have recently started providing relief when a primary borrower dies — including lending giants Sallie Mae, Wells Fargo and Discover. In these cases, insurance is generally unnecessary, says Mark Kantrowitz, senior vice president at Edvisors.

If your lender doesn’t offer any protections, then compare insurance quotes online to find the best life insurance plan. Websites like InsuranceQuotes.com, which aggregates information from hundreds of top-rated insurers, can help you comparison shop.

You’ll want to look for a term life insurance policy, which is a temporary policy where you can choose the length of coverage — say 10 or 20 years.

The coverage you get should be equal to the loan balance — $100,000 in coverage for $100,000 in loans, for example — and the loan term should be equal to the estimated repayment term of the loan, Kantrowitz recommends.

CNNMoney (New York) First published August 5, 2014: 6:41 PM ET

If you’ve been paying off student loans, don’t make the mistake of filing your taxes without getting a deduction on the interest you’ve paid on your loans.

“If you’re paying 4% [interest] on your loans and not getting the deduction,” says Michael Chen a CPA and founder of Henry.tax, “it is expensive and you’re not getting the full benefit.”

Who is eligible for the deduction and how do you claim a loan interest deduction?

Anyone paying student loans may be able to deduct up to $2,500 of the interest paid in the past year on a qualified student loan, according to the IRS. And that deduction will be claimed as an adjustment to your income.

The deduction is available to anyone earning less than $80,000 (or $165,000 if you file a joint return), but it’s gradually phased out if your modified adjusted gross income is between $65,000 and $80,000.

To find out if you can claim the deduction you can use this IRS Tool. You’ll need to know your filing stats, income, adjusted gross income and any expenses you’ve paid for education loans.

The deduction can reduce the amount of your taxable income by up to $2,500.

There are some other qualifications, too. The loan has to have been for a student enrolled, at least half time, in a program leading to a degree, certificate, or other recognized educational credential. If you took out a loan from a relative or through an employer plan, you’re out of luck.

You’ll want to talk this through with your parents if they’ve recently claimed you as a dependent or plan to. If you are obligated to pay the loan and they claim you as a dependent, neither you or they will be able to claim the loan interest deduction.

But, here’s an upside: If you’re obligated to make the interest payments and someone else pays for you — your parents, maybe — the IRS’s view is that you’re receiving the payments from the other person and, in turn, paying the interest. Consequently, you get to take the deduction.

Any borrower who pays more than $600 in interest should receive a Form 1098-E — a student loan interest statement from the lender.

On your 1040 form you’ll enter the amount of loan interest you’ve paid, up to $2,500.

The student loan interest deduction is claimed as an adjustment to income, which means you can still claim it even if you don’t itemize deductions.

CNNMoney (New York) First published April 6, 2018: 10:12 AM ET

Editor’s Note: This story originally published on September 6, 2018.

Sometimes a new job turns out not to be the dream job you thought it was. But you can’t always afford to walk away from a paycheck.

Unless the company pays you to leave.

Some companies are making it easier to part ways, paying unhappy workers to bow out gracefully.

At online retailer Zappos, new hires are offered a month’s salary to leave within three months of starting their position. Amazon offers some workers up to $5,000 once a year to leave.

Why would a company pay somebody to quit? Because it can be in the employer’s best interest, too.

“We want you here because you believe in the vision and the goals of the company and can make a difference,” said Megan Petrini, the director of Zappos’ new hire program.

Zappos isn’t your typical office.

“We often have parades,” she said. “If a parade comes down and you are on the phone and you can’t hear … and if that ruins your day, you aren’t going to be happy here.”

Zappo’s policy is officially called the Graceful Leave Policy, but is more commonly referred to as “The Offer.” It’s extended about halfway through the company’s four week training program. It’s good for three months from an employee’s start date.

“That way they can see what it’s like in training and get a feel for their position and really make sure it is the right fit for them to be happy,” she said.

Some years, no one takes The Offer. Other years, it’s more popular. So far this year, three people have taken the company up on it.

“It’s been higher than normal,” said Petrini. “But the cool thing is we know that the people who work here have been chosen to work here and that they have been offered money to quit.”

Amazon, piggybacking off the idea from Zappos (which it bought in 2009), offers a similar program called Pay to Quit. Once a year, workers at its fulfillment centers are offered a chance to leave the company. The offer is $2,000 the first year and goes up by $1,000 each year to a maximum of $5,000.

“We want people working at Amazon who want to be here. In the long term, staying somewhere you don’t want to be isn’t healthy for our employees or for the company,” an Amazon spokesperson told CNN.

The program has been around since 2013. “We tell them up front that we hope they don’t take the offer. In fact, we want them to stay.”

While offering employees cash to leave can help with productivity and morale, high acceptance rates might mean it’s time to reassess how a company recruits.

“Check with your recruiting process, who are we hiring, how are we developing them and are we matching jobs to skills,” said John Baldoni, an executive coach and author of “Moxie: The Secret to Bold and Gutsy Leadership.”

But the programs can also backfire and might not be effective at weeding out the bad apples.

“Very often, the people who might take advantage of it, might be your good performers who have options,” he said. “The people who have no options, who are the deadwood and clinging to a job, have no other place to go.”

Social Security may seem like a relatively easy program to navigate, and in many ways, it is. The application process for retirement benefits is quick and straightforward, and there’s little you need to do after you’ve applied, aside from keeping your bank account and address information current.

Having said that, there’s more to Social Security strategy than you may think. The wrong moves could cost you tens of thousands of dollars in potential benefits, and here are three missteps to avoid.

Americans who qualify can claim Social Security anytime between the ages of 62 and 70, and the vast majority of Americans claim at their full retirement age or sooner. In fact, 62 is the most common claiming age, by a significant margin. And to be fair, Social Security is designed so that the average person will get roughly the same amount of benefits (inflation-adjusted) regardless of when they claim.

It’s also true that once you’ve reached full retirement age, you are entitled to claim your entire Social Security benefit, no matter how much you earn from work.

However, if you’ve reached your full Social Security retirement age and are still working, it’s also important to remember that your earnings can still boost your Social Security benefit. Specifically, the Social Security formula takes your highest 35 years of inflation-indexed earnings into account. And, the later years of many American’s careers are also some of their highest-earning years.

Here’s the key point: A year of relatively high earnings will replace the lowest of the 35 years of earnings used in the Social Security benefit formula.

If you’re past full retirement age and are earning significantly more now than you were toward the beginning of your career, or if you have some gaps in your work record, holding off on claiming your Social Security retirement benefit could help boost your income in two ways. Not only will your benefit rise by 8% per year for waiting, but your 35-year average could also substantially improve, raising the base benefit amount to which those 8% delayed retirement credits are applied.

Thanks to Social Security spousal benefits, spouses who didn’t work or earned comparatively little throughout their working life are entitled to much-needed retirement income.

If your calculated Social Security retirement benefit is less than half of your spouse’s, or if you don’t qualify at all, a spousal benefit will kick in to make up the difference. In other words, if your spouse is entitled to $1,600 per month at full retirement age, a spousal benefit would ensure that you received $800 per month at your full retirement age.

However, there are two very important points you need to know. First, unlike standard Social Security retirement benefits, spousal benefits don’t get any bigger after full retirement age. If your spouse’s full retirement age is 67, and they wait until 68 to claim a spousal benefit, their monthly check won’t get any bigger.

Second, the key requirement to be eligible for a spousal benefit is that the higher-earning spouse must have claimed their own benefit already.

The bottom line: If your spouse is entitled to a benefit on your work record, think twice before you delay retirement beyond their full retirement age.

The Social Security Administration, or SSA, keeps track of your Social Security taxable earnings every year, and you can take a look at your earnings record on your latest Social Security statement. (Note: Your Social Security statement is available on www.ssa.gov by creating a “my Social Security” account, if you haven’t already.)

Because your benefit will be based on the earnings data on your Social Security statement, it’s extremely important to make sure the information on the statement is accurate.

Errors in Social Security earnings records aren’t widespread, but they are more common than you may think. For example, in the 2012 tax year, the SSA said that $71 billion in wages couldn’t be matched to any earnings records, and that only about half of these mismatches were eventually corrected.

Related links:

• Motley Fool Issues Rare Triple-Buy Alert

• This Stock Could Be Like Buying Amazon in 1997

• 7 of 8 People Are Clueless About This Trillion-Dollar Market

Since your Social Security benefit is primarily derived from the amount of money you earn throughout your career, wouldn’t it make sense that you want credit for all of the money you’ve earned? A single missed earnings error could potentially cause you to miss out on $30,000 in lifetime benefits, according to Social Security Intelligence, so it’s certainly worth your time to make sure your earnings record is correct.

CNNMoney (New York) First published May 29, 2018: 10:26 AM ET

Britain plans to cut its corporate tax rate to 17% over the next three years. But many businesses say they’re happy with the current 19%, thank you very much.

Make no mistake: Business leaders want to reduce their total tax burden.

But they’re asking U.K. Treasury chief Philip Hammond to take another look at how that’s best achieved when he presents his budget on Wednesday.

The British Chamber of Commerce (BCC) has called on the government to maintain its current 19% rate, but instead cut property taxes and other lump-sum payments demanded of business.

“In trying to create a competitive business environment, the focus should be on reducing the burden of upfront business costs and taxes,” said Suren Thiru, head of economics and business finance at the BCC.

That would help startups and companies struggling to make a profit more than a cut in tax on their income.

Consulting firms EY and Deloitte agree.

The head of U.K. tax policy at Deloitte, Bill Dodwell, said there is “broad agreement” in the business community that providing targeted relief would be more beneficial than a lower corporate tax rate.

Questions about the U.K. policy reflect a broader debate within developed economies about the virtues of a lower headline corporate tax rate.

The average corporate tax rate across more than 30 countries monitored by the OECD has dropped by 7.5 percentage points since 2000 to below 25%. The rate in Ireland is now just 12.5%.

But the devil is often in the details.

In the United States, for example, Republicans are pushing to reduce the corporate rate to 20% from 35%. President Trump says the new rate should be “no higher” than that.

Supporters argue that 35% is one of the highest headline rates in the world, but many companies pay far less once deductions and special tax breaks are included.

Related: How would the U.S. middle class fare under the Senate tax bill?

Large, profitable U.S. corporations paid an average effective federal tax rate of 14% between 2008 and 2012, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

Critics say that the Republican plan doesn’t go far enough in eliminating deductions and other tax credits that have been awarded to businesses over the decades.

“This is not tax reform. This is a tax cut. This is fool’s gold,” Starbucks (SBUX) executive chairman Howard Schultz said earlier this month.

In Britain, there have been calls for dramatic cuts to the corporate tax rate following Brexit in order to keep businesses from moving abroad. Critics say doing so would only accelerate a race to the bottom.

CNNMoney (London) First published November 21, 2017: 12:03 PM ET

Even though 90% of the earthquakes that strike the United States are located in California, only about 10% of homeowners there have earthquake insurance. What gives?

Here are three reasons why many quake-prone Californians shun insurance:

1) Quake damage rarely exceeds deductibles.

Some argue the insurance is not worth the money for homeowners. Earthquake insurance generally comes with a deductible of 15% of the home’s value, according to John Rundle, a professor of physics at the University of California, Davis.

“Most homeowners will never exceed the deductible even if they do get damage,” he said.

Related: Natural disaster — the riskiest spots in the USA

Most policies are purchased from the California Earthquake Authority, a privately funded, publicly managed organization that was created by the state legislature after severe losses in the Northridge quake threatened to send private insurers packing.

Glenn Pomeroy, CEO of CEA, said he would love to have a zero deductible, but that would make the premiums unaffordable for homeowners. Check out what you would pay on the CEA calculator.

The big deductibles mean money that would have gone to paying insurance premiums might be better spent being invested in temblor resistant home retrofits, according to Rundle. Homeowners could get their houses bolted to bedrock, for example, or braced and reinforced to prevent them from shaking apart.

Related: The 10 most expensive U.S. earthquakes

2) Californians were slammed by the housing bust.

Many Californians were hurt by the real estate crisis and have little or no home equity — or are underwater on their mortgages.

Jason Simpson, a computer programmer in Sherman Oaks, Calif., outside Los Angeles, bought his $690,000 home with a 3% down mortgage in 2008. The housing bust pushed him underwater — he soon owed more on his loan than his home was worth.

Related: Mansion that measures earthquakes

“With no equity, there was no reason to drop $1,200 a year,” he said.

If the big one had hit, he would have simply walked away from his mortgage. Now, however, as home prices have rebounded and he has added on to the house, he’s preparing to buy insurance.

3) Mistrust of the California Earthquake Authority’s support.

Another factor discouraging homeowners from buying coverage is that the CEA would stop paying claims if catastrophic earthquake losses exceed the the Authority’s reserves.

Pomeroy said that homeowners shouldn’t worry. Even though, just like any insurer, CEA would stop paying claims once its ability to pay was exceeded, it won’t happen. CEA is very well capitalized, he said.

“We could handle two Northridges,” he said, about the costliest earthquake in U.S. history.

“I don’t lose sleep worrying whether we have enough money to pay claims, I worry because so many people don’t have coverage.”

CNNMoney (New York) First published August 25, 2014: 5:30 PM ET