 |
Smart Investing with Brent & Chase WilseyAuthor: Brent & Chase Wilsey
Smart Investing is the radio show where Brent and Chase try to make investing easier to understand. They demonstrate long-term investment strategies to help you find good value investments. Language: en Contact email: Get it Feed URL: Get it iTunes ID: Get it |
Listen Now...
February 27th, 2026 | Concerning AI Deals, A Misleading 2025 Trade Deficit, Why Automobile Insurance Is So High, The Goal of Tax Planning & More
Episode 394
Friday, 27 February, 2026
These massive AI deals look concerning The numbers are exciting when companies like Meta or OpenAI announce they'll be purchasing billions of dollars in chips or computing power from companies like Nvidia or AMD, but there always seems to be a catch. Most recently, Meta announced that it entered a multiyear deal with AMD to deploy up to 6 gigawatts of the company’s graphics processing units for artificial intelligence data centers and includes use of AI-optimized central processing units, or CPUs. This deal comes a week after Meta committed to using millions of Nvidia's processors to power its AI expansion. While I have my concerns with all the money Meta is spending, my bigger concern with this new AMD deal is the use of stock warrants. Full details for the deal weren't announced, but we did see the deal includes a performance-based warrant for Meta to acquire 160 million AMD shares, about 10% of the company. The first tranche vests when the first 1GW of Instinct GPUs are shipped. Other tranches vest as Meta, makes purchases to 6GW. Vesting is also tied to stock price thresholds for AMD and technical and commercial milestones for Meta. AMD also struck a similar deal with OpenAI where they received warrants to acquire 160 million shares of AMD and it was tied to deployment and stock price benchmarks. The reason this is concerning is because of the potential dilution and again the circular nature of these deals. Essentially these companies are saying they will spend $30 B buying our products and we will give you $30 B in stock warrants back. Stock warrants give holders the right but not the obligation to buy or sell shares at specific strike price before an expiration date. If they are exercised, it creates new stock, which would dilute current shareholders. Based on what I have seen, the exercise price for these warrants is $0.01. Ultimately, I just don't believe this will end well for all players in this space, and I think there is a lot of money that will be lost by investors. 2025 trade deficit looks deceiving Some people are saying that the tariffs didn't work because the trade deficit in 2025 only fell to about $901.5 B from just over $903 B in 2024. However, if you break down the numbers quarter by a quarter, it tells a different story. The first three months of the year, there was a $400 billion trade deficit, but each quarter after that it began to decline. In the second quarter, it fell drastically to $180 billion. There wasn't much of a change in the third quarter with a slight drop to $175 billion and then in the fourth quarter there was a drop to $145 billion. We try to explain to people that the US economy at $31.5 trillion is like a big ship in the ocean; it cannot turn quickly. If people would be patient, I think they would see by the end of 2026 there would be further progress and I believe it's possible the trade deficit could see a decline to somewhere around $600-$700 billion based on the fourth quarter of 2025. I know there’s a snafu with the Supreme Court ruling that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which was used in the first quarter last year to implement many of the tariffs, was ruled illegal. But there are other ways to impose tariffs such as section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 or section 301 of the Trade Act that the president used in his first term. Also available is section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. I don't believe the Supreme Court ruling will lead to an end of tariffs as the Administration will look at these other avenues. One major positive from these tariffs has been the announcements of various trade deals that have resulted in trillions of dollars promised by other countries to build manufacturing and other things in our economy. Why is automobile insurance so high? Your first thought may be the insurance companies are gouging their customers just to make big profits. First off, insurance companies are generally public companies that have shareholders who would not be investing in their company if it was losing money and not paying dividends. The high cost of premiums is not the insurance companies' fault as in recent years things have really changed. Over the past five years, physical damage costs have increased by 47%. This is because of the higher price of cars and all the extra bells and whistles that add up when there’s damage to a vehicle. Bodily injury claims are up 52% over the last five years because of the vast amount of new personal injury lawyers who have come on the scene and are pushing for higher settlements, even on small fender benders. Around 95% of these cases are settled and do not go to court. Many of your less reputable attorneys know this and hold the insurance companies’ hostage. Either settle up with us now or go to court and spend a lot more money and time. Unfortunately, if you’re a responsible driver that makes your premium payments, you are helping absorb the cost of uninsured and underinsured motorists which is up 72%. I’m not a big person for government regulation, but I do believe governments need to step in and verify that all people on the road have auto insurance and a reasonable amount. There’s a trend starting in Florida, which is tort reform that has reduced litigation, and the top five insurance companies in the state have requested rate reductions of 5.9%. There is something in the auto insurance industry called fender bender litigation and this tort reform would help states like New York, California and other states to prevent insurance companies from having to pay ridiculous settlements for little dings and dents and fake injuries. Wouldn’t it be nice if the state of California passed laws to help consumers to pay less for auto insurance? Financial Planning: What Is the Goal of Tax Planning? Most people would assume the goal of tax planning is simply to reduce taxes, or even to reduce lifetime taxes, but that should not be the focus. The true purpose of tax planning is to increase the level of after-tax income by intentionally managing assets and income sources. If the objective were merely to pay less in taxes, the solution would be simple: stop earning money. But earning less would also leave you with fewer resources and less freedom. What people ultimately want is more net income, more access to money, because that provides flexibility, security, and the ability to live life on their terms. Effective tax planning achieves this by building assets and income streams and structuring them in a way that allows you to access them efficiently. This means investing in the right types of assets, placing them in the right types of accounts, adjusting the strategy over time as income and tax laws change, and withdrawing funds at the right time and in the right manner. When you understand that the true purpose of tax planning is to maximize after-tax access to wealth, not merely minimize taxes, you make better decisions that improve your financial life. Companies Discussed: Vulcan Materials Company (VMC), Leidos Holdings, Inc. (LDOS), Packaging Corporation of America (PKG) & Caesars Entertainment, Inc. (CZR)
