Feed aggregator

As concerns mount over the future of charitable giving to yeshivos, Keren Olam HaTorah is quietly advancing a new strategy designed to preserve financial support for Torah institutions despite the growing controversy surrounding Section 46 tax benefits.

The fund, which has played a key role in helping yeshivos and kollelim offset severe budget cuts resulting from the ongoing battle over the draft law, is now working to ensure that support for Torah institutions continues even as legal and regulatory challenges threaten a major source of donations.

Tax Benefit Freeze Sparks Concern

The current crisis began at the end of May, when Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara ordered an immediate halt to tax credits for donations made to chareidi institutions that include students classified as eligible for military service.

The decision sent shockwaves through the yeshiva world, where many institutions feared a substantial decline in donations tied to the tax incentives provided under Section 46 of Israeli law.

A New Framework Emerges

Now, for the first time, details are emerging about a framework being developed by Keren Olam HaTorah to help prevent disruptions to the flow of charitable contributions.

According to a letter sent to roshei yeshiva and institutional leaders, and obtained by Kikar HaShabbos, the fund consulted extensively with accountants and professionals specializing in nonprofit organizations and tax law before formulating its approach.

The letter explains that institutions which, based on individualized legal advice, choose not to include certain students on reports submitted to government authorities will not lose their eligibility for support from the fund.

Funding Will Continue

According to the letter, even an institution that elects to continue omitting such students from its official enrollment reports will remain eligible for assistance from Keren Olam HaTorah.

The fund indicated that it would explore alternative mechanisms for transferring support to those institutions, ensuring that funding can continue despite the evolving legal landscape.

At the same time, the organization stressed that it is not instructing institutions to adopt any specific course of action.

Providing Options, Not Directives

Fund officials emphasized that the initiative should not be viewed as a recommendation or directive. Rather, they described it as an effort to provide institutions with practical tools to navigate the complex legal realities that have emerged following the attorney general’s decision.

The move comes amid significant disagreement among legal advisers and accountants serving chareidi institutions, many of whom have offered differing opinions regarding how best to respond to the new restrictions.

As uncertainty continues to surround the future of donation-related tax benefits, Keren Olam HaTorah’s proposal represents the first major attempt to establish a broad-based solution aimed at protecting financial support for the yeshiva world.

{Matzav.com}

A fragile agreement aimed at ending the war between the United States and Iran has encountered a major new obstacle after Tehran insisted that any final settlement must include an Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon — a demand Israel has already rejected and one that threatens to unravel the entire accord.

Although the proposed U.S.-Iran agreement has not been officially released, portions of what is believed to be a draft surfaced in media reports Tuesday. At the same time, conflicting statements from various officials have fueled uncertainty about the deal’s actual terms.

While Israel is not a signatory to the agreement, it remains deeply involved in the broader conflict after joining the United States in strikes against Iran on Feb. 28. Israel has also been engaged in combat against Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed terror organization in Lebanon, and currently controls significant territory there.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi declared Tuesday that Israel’s continued military presence in southern Lebanon is incompatible with the proposed agreement.

“Without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories they occupied during this war, the war has not fully come to an end,” Araghchi said.

That position directly contradicts statements from both Washington and Jerusalem. A U.S. official familiar with the framework of the agreement, speaking anonymously, said the deal contains no provision requiring Israeli forces to leave Lebanon. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated Monday that Israeli troops would remain there “as long as necessary.”

Efforts to negotiate an end to the conflict have repeatedly run into disputes of this kind. Previous disagreements resulted in an extended but fragile ceasefire that never evolved into a lasting peace agreement. The uncertainty has also left the Strait of Hormuz — one of the world’s most important energy corridors — effectively closed.

Meanwhile, Switzerland announced that a formal signing ceremony is expected to take place Friday at the Bürgenstock resort near Luzern. Swiss officials said the venue was jointly proposed by mediators from Pakistan and Qatar, along with representatives from the United States and Iran.

Pakistani officials have maintained that the framework agreement requires a halt to military operations across the region, including in Lebanon, a longstanding Iranian demand. Araghchi’s latest remarks, however, suggest that the issue remains unresolved.

The dispute places Israel in a difficult position as it seeks to continue weakening Hezbollah while avoiding a clash with a diplomatic initiative strongly backed by the United States. Israel entered southern Lebanon after Hezbollah launched missile attacks across the border during the opening days of the war. Since then, Israeli forces have expanded their operations dramatically and carried out strikes deep within Beirut.

Despite suffering significant setbacks, Hezbollah retains substantial military capabilities, raising ongoing questions about whether Israel’s campaign has achieved its long-term objectives.

As of Tuesday evening, Netanyahu had not yet reviewed the memorandum of understanding negotiated between Washington and Tehran, according to an individual familiar with the matter who spoke anonymously. A second source said Israeli officials had not requested a copy of the document from American negotiators.

Netanyahu’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The White House likewise declined to say whether Israeli leaders had examined the agreement.

Israeli Ambassador to the United States Yechiel Leiter told NPR that Israel remains unaware of the deal’s full contents but argued that any linkage to Lebanon is “unnecessary and unhelpful.”

The situation has at times exposed tensions between Israeli leadership and President Trump. Speaking to reporters Tuesday, Trump criticized Israel’s conduct in Lebanon and expressed frustration with the ongoing campaign.

“not happy with the way Israel has handled themselves with Lebanon and with Hezbollah.”

“It just goes on forever,” he said of Israel’s strategy.

The fighting has taken a heavy toll. Israeli operations in Lebanon have reportedly killed nearly 4,000 people, including hundreds of civilians, and forced more than one million residents from their homes.

“Israel’s fighting Hezbollah too long, and too many people are being killed,” Trump said.

Separately, Israel and the Lebanese government have held direct talks under American mediation. Hezbollah has not participated in those discussions. Although several ceasefires have been announced through those channels, none have been fully implemented.

At the outset of negotiations, Lebanese officials sought to distance themselves from the broader U.S.-Iran talks, hoping to avoid the perception that Beirut was acting under Tehran’s influence. More recently, however, they have welcomed indications that any regional settlement could include a ceasefire on Lebanese territory.

Araghchi’s comments appear consistent with the understanding of two regional officials who have direct knowledge of the negotiations. According to those sources, the agreement would require Israel to withdraw from nearly all territory captured during the conflict, while allowing it to retain several strategic hilltop positions near the border.

Those officials also said Iran made Lebanon a central issue during the final phase of negotiations and insisted that it be incorporated into the accord.

The United Nations peacekeeping force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, reported that hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah continue, though at a far lower intensity than earlier in the conflict. U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said Tuesday that exchanges of fire remain ongoing but at a “significantly reduced level.”

Lebanon remains just one of several unresolved issues hanging over the proposed agreement before its anticipated signing ceremony.

The accord is intended to halt a months-long conflict that has claimed thousands of lives throughout the Middle East, including senior figures within Iran’s ruling establishment, while also driving up the cost of fuel, food, and other essential goods around the world.

According to a senior U.S. official who briefed reporters Monday, the agreement calls for the “immediate” reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the removal of the American naval blockade surrounding Iranian ports.

Pakistani officials involved in the negotiations similarly described a coordinated reopening of the strait and an end to U.S. maritime restrictions.

Following that step, the United States and Iran are expected to enter a 60-day negotiating period focused on Tehran’s nuclear program and the possible easing of sanctions, according to Pakistani officials familiar with the unpublished text.

The agreement also reportedly includes provisions that could unlock frozen Iranian assets and establish a $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran if the regime satisfies specific requirements. Senior U.S. officials discussed those possibilities Monday, though Trump later emphasized that the United States would not “invest” funds in Iran.

Regional officials said the release of frozen assets would be tied directly to Iran’s compliance with the agreement. They added that Gulf Arab nations have committed to investing billions of dollars in Iran’s economy if the accord moves forward.

Questions surrounding Iran’s nuclear activities remain among the most contentious aspects of the deal. U.S. officials have yet to explain how compliance would be verified, who would oversee inspections, or how highly enriched uranium stored beneath damaged nuclear facilities would be removed or destroyed.

According to regional sources, Iran has signaled a willingness to discuss options to “dilute or remove” the uranium. Whether Tehran ultimately agrees to such measures remains uncertain, particularly given resistance from hard-line factions within the country. Vice President JD Vance said Monday that international nuclear inspectors would return to Iran as the agreement advances.

Trump also indicated he would be willing to submit the developing agreement to Congress for review.

Speaking during the Group of Seven summit in the French Alps, Trump said, “I like the idea, send it to Congress please.”

He added, “I mean who wouldn’t approve it.”

Republican lawmakers have urged the administration to provide additional details about the agreement, with some expressing doubts that the proposed framework will be sufficient to prevent Iran from eventually obtaining a nuclear weapon.

A major coalition crisis erupted Tuesday after Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu informed chareidi lawmakers that the Daycare Law will not advance during the current Knesset term, prompting immediate retaliation from United Torah Judaism and accelerating political speculation about early elections.

The announcement sparked outrage among chareidi parties, which had viewed the legislation as a key coalition commitment. In response, senior lawmakers unveiled a series of protest measures that could further destabilize the government and hasten the collapse of the coalition.

According to information obtained by Kikar HaShabbos, Netanyahu told chareidi Knesset members during conversations held Tuesday morning that the Daycare Law—which was intended to restore daycare subsidies for young kollel families affected by military draft notices—cannot be passed in the current political climate.

The prime minister reportedly explained that there is no viable majority for the legislation, with lawmakers from both Likud and other coalition factions expected to vote against it. Chareidi representatives viewed the announcement as a breach of coalition understandings and reacted furiously.

Gafni Launches Budget Rebellion

In an immediate response, Degel HaTorah chairman Moshe Gafni notified coalition leaders that the party’s two representatives on the Knesset Finance Committee would oppose every budgetary transfer brought before the committee for approval.

The move was widely interpreted as a direct challenge to the government’s ability to function effectively and manage its financial agenda.

Although committee discussions on budget transfers had already begun, the proceedings were reportedly suspended just minutes later following Degel HaTorah’s announcement.

Chareidi Parties Suspend Coalition Cooperation

At the same time, both Shas and United Torah Judaism informed coalition chairman Ofir Katz that they would no longer support coalition legislation on the Knesset floor as long as the Daycare Law remains stalled.

In a joint statement, the parties declared: “We have now informed the coalition chairman that due to the failure to place the Daycare Law on the agenda, we will not vote today in favor of coalition legislation in the Knesset plenum.”

Degel HaTorah Begins Preparing for Elections

In what may be the clearest sign yet that chareidi leaders are bracing for a political showdown, Degel HaTorah is reportedly preparing to launch election preparations as early as this week.

According to information obtained by Kikar HaShabbos, the party will convene a nationwide gathering of local faction leaders together with Degel HaTorah Knesset members on Thursday to begin organizing for a potential election campaign.

The decision reflects growing concern within the party that the current crisis could quickly lead to the dissolution of the Knesset and new elections. The unusually broad meeting is intended to ensure that party infrastructure is ready should a campaign become necessary.

The Background: The Fight Over Daycare Subsidies

The Daycare Law, sponsored by Gafni, sought to ensure that a parent’s employment status would not be considered when determining eligibility for daycare placement and government tuition assistance if that parent was studying in a yeshiva or institution of higher education.

The legislation was designed to address the fallout from government policies affecting support for chareidi families and became a central demand of the chareidi parties during coalition negotiations.

In recent weeks, chareidi lawmakers mounted an aggressive campaign to accelerate the bill’s passage, hoping to complete the legislative process before the end of the Knesset session. Netanyahu’s latest announcement appears to have effectively ended those efforts.

Political and legal observers have long argued that even if the law were enacted, Israel’s High Court of Justice would likely block implementation unless broader legislation addressing the legal status of full-time Torah students is first adopted.

The latest confrontation comes amid broader tensions between the government and the chareidi community over the arrest of yeshiva students and the ongoing dispute surrounding military service and the status of Torah learners.

{Matzav.com}

A sharp social media confrontation erupted between Israeli journalist Amit Segal and chareidi De Marker reporter Simi Spolter after Spolter criticized the way Segal presented comments made by President Donald Trump regarding Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu.

The dispute began when Spolter compared reports posted on the Telegram channels of journalists Michael Shemesh and Amit Segal. Shemesh quoted Trump as saying, “I had good relations with Bibi, but he needs to be more responsible in Lebanon,” while Segal’s channel highlighted only the portion stating, “Netanyahu needs to be more responsible in Lebanon.”

Referring to the differing presentations of the same remarks, Spolter wrote: “The same quote from the same person is being echoed on two Telegram channels. One is a journalist, the other is a mouthpiece.”

Segal responded with a personal attack, mocking Spolter and questioning his grasp of English.

“And I continue to wonder, what is wrong with core studies, especially English? Where do you find the strength to go out and make a fool of yourself entirely on your own initiative?” Segal wrote.

He then escalated the criticism further.

“The chareidi ignorance, the hubris courtesy of De Marker, and so he has no hesitation in demonstrating that he has no idea what the present perfect is while also explaining to others how to translate,” Segal wrote.

Spolter fired back, accusing Segal of blocking him before publicly responding.

“As usual, Amit Segal blocks and then runs to tweet,” he wrote.

He also rejected Segal’s criticism regarding his English abilities and insisted that his original complaint was not about translation but about editorial choices.

“So let’s keep it short: 1. I’m American, a native English speaker; try your condescension toward chareidim on someone else. 2. My criticism has nothing to do with how it was translated, but with why he chose to translate it that way.”

Spolter further argued that Segal’s Telegram channel displays a clear political bias.

“As I have shown in the past, Amit has a fairly transparent bias on his Telegram channel,” he wrote, adding that it was “interesting” that Segal had not responded to similar allegations he had raised previously.

The Trump administration has filed a sweeping lawsuit against New York state officials, accusing them of steering an $11 billion Medicaid home care contract to a favored company and enabling it to improperly collect millions of taxpayer dollars.

The lawsuit, brought Tuesday by the Department of Justice, alleges that senior state health officials manipulated the bidding process for a major overhaul of New York’s Consumer Directed Personal Assistance Program (CDPAP), which serves nearly 250,000 home care recipients.

At the center of the case is Public Partnerships LLC (PPL), the company selected to become the program’s sole payroll administrator. State officials had argued that consolidating the system under a single contractor would reduce costs and improve efficiency, but the transition instead became mired in widespread problems and confusion.

“New York’s failure to police a favored vendor that unlawfully siphoned millions of dollars of Medicaid funding is egregious and betrays the public trust,” Brett A. Shumate, assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice’s Civil Division, said in a statement.

“The Justice Department is acting to ensure that federal laws regarding truthful statements and fair dealing in federal health care programs are upheld and to prevent additional harm from being exacted against the public by PPL and New York,” Shumate added.

According to federal prosecutors, state leaders brushed aside repeated indications that the transition would be deeply problematic as PPL assumed control of CDPAP, a program that allows relatives and friends to provide care for disabled or chronically ill individuals instead of traditional home health aides.

The complaint names state Health Commissioner James McDonald and Medicaid Director Amir Bassiri as defendants. While Gov. Kathy Hochul is not personally accused of wrongdoing, the 60-page filing includes communications suggesting her office played a significant role in both the contract award process and the rollout of the program.

Federal attorneys point to internal correspondence showing state officials telling counterparts in other states that they faced “pressure from the Governor’s Office” while evaluating competing bidders.

After ultimately winning the contract, PPL sought additional time to transition patients and caregivers into the new system. The company requested that the enrollment period be expanded from three months to nine months as it worked to build staffing capacity.

According to the lawsuit, Hochul’s office rejected those requests.

One email from a senior Health Department official cited in the complaint stated: “I wanted to give you a heads up that Chamber is coming in hard on the [Statewide Fiscal Intermediary] launch, they really aren’t entertaining options to move off of a path that gets this done by 4/1. We will not be advancing statutory or regulatory changes [to extend the CDPAP transition timeframe] at this time.”

Federal investigators also contend that the governor’s office later worked to minimize concerns about the troubled rollout, even as thousands of disabled New Yorkers struggled with long wait times, administrative problems, and disruptions in caregiver payments.

Internal PPL records cited in the lawsuit show that by Jan. 13, 2025 — one week after the transition process officially began — only 43 of the 214,000 individuals in the company’s system had completed enrollment.

Nevertheless, three days later, McDonald publicly maintained that “the facts and data show that the transition is proceeding efficiently and effectively.”

The complaint further alleges that PPL violated federal healthcare fraud laws by overstating costs billed to Medicaid and improperly inflating the administrative payments it received from New York, actions prosecutors say breached the terms of its contract.

Federal officials claim PPL knowingly submitted what it internally described as a “recklessly low bid,” calculating that a below-market proposal would secure the contract even if it was initially unprofitable.

The company allegedly expected the Hochul administration to help it obtain higher reimbursement levels from health plans by classifying certain expenses under enhanced “direct care” rates rather than limiting those payments to caregiver wages and benefits.

The state’s request for proposals specifically warned bidders that this type of reimbursement “spread” would not be permitted.

When PPL later moved forward with increased direct-care rates, health insurers objected sharply.

“If PPL insists on its one-size-fits-all, non-negotiable rate, it will put at risk services to members and will undoubtedly undermine the very financial savings that the State projected,” the New York Health Plan Association wrote in a letter obtained by The Post.

Justice Department officials said the case demonstrates the federal government’s determination to combat fraud involving taxpayer-funded healthcare programs.

“New York’s backroom deal with PPL has cost taxpayers millions of dollars and cast countless Medicaid patients to the curb,” Colin McDonald, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s National Fraud Enforcement Division, said in the complaint.

Hochul’s office forcefully rejected the allegations, characterizing the lawsuit as politically motivated.

“This is just another sad attempt by the Trump administration to weaponize the justice system to attack political opponents in an election year,” Hochul spokesperson Kara Cumoletti said.

“As many courts have already held, the transition to a single fiscal intermediary was lawful and appropriate. We are confident the facts are on our side,” she continued.

Hochul is currently seeking a second full term as governor and is expected to face Republican challenger and Trump ally Bruce Blakeman in November.

The state Department of Health also condemned the lawsuit, calling it a politically driven attack and defending the CDPAP restructuring effort.

“We look forward to the day where these disingenuous attacks can stop and our partners in Washington can look to New York as a model for how to improve to control costs and root out abuses while preserving and improving quality of care,” a department spokesperson said.

{Matzav.com}

Vice President JD Vance, author of “Communion,” joined Megyn Kelly to talk about what’s really in the proposed new Iran deal, the economic benefits Iran could receive if it complies with the agreement, what happens if the regime refuses to cooperate, the backlash from neocons over the new Iran peace deal, what’s being misrepresented about the agreement, the truth about what happens next in Lebanon and the broader Middle East, the divide on the right over the Iran war, why some non-interventionists are frustrated with the administration, why VP Vance believes critics should remain engaged in the Trump coalition, his journey back to God and faith, why the goal for success and money left him searching for something more meaningful, how marriage and family helped strengthen his beliefs, and more.

WATCH:

Israeli Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu has formally informed senior chareidi lawmakers that the Daycare Law will not be passed during the current Knesset term, setting off a fierce backlash from the chareidi parties and deepening tensions within the coalition.

The announcement came after weeks of negotiations, pressure campaigns, and repeated assurances from coalition officials that the legislation would ultimately advance. Chareidi lawmakers, many of whom had publicly insisted the bill would pass, reacted angrily to the prime minister’s decision.

According to discussions held with senior representatives of the chareidi factions, Netanyahu explained that he simply lacks the votes necessary to secure the bill’s passage. He reportedly said that several members of both the Likud and the broader coalition intend to oppose the legislation, making its approval impossible.

The proposed law was designed to restore daycare subsidies for young kollel families whose eligibility had been affected after recipients received military draft orders.

Degel HaTorah responded with a sharply worded statement, accusing the government of retreating from a clear commitment.

“There was a commitment by the prime minister and the Likud to bring the Daycare Law for approval. We insist on this firmly and will not accept any delay or retreat from it.”

Agudath Israel quickly joined the criticism and declared that the entire faction stands behind Degel HaTorah’s position.

“The entire faction stands united together with Degel HaTorah in an unequivocal demand that the prime minister fulfill his promise to pass the Daycare Law.”

The party also warned that failure to advance the legislation would carry serious political consequences.

“Failure to pass the law means an admission by the prime minister that he is ultimately interested in dissolving the Knesset and heading to elections.”

Gafni Launches Budget Revolt

In an immediate response to Netanyahu’s announcement, Degel HaTorah chairman Moshe Gafni informed coalition leaders that the party’s two representatives on the Knesset Finance Committee would oppose all budgetary transfers brought before the committee.

Although discussions on budget allocations initially began as scheduled, the committee’s work was reportedly halted minutes later after Degel HaTorah clarified its position.

New Demand: Basic Law on Torah Study

As the battle over the Daycare Law intensifies, the chareidi parties are now demanding that the government move quickly to pass the proposed Basic Law: Torah Study through its second and third readings.

However, significant doubts remain regarding whether that legislation can secure the necessary support within the coalition, raising new questions about the government’s stability and its ability to satisfy the demands of its chareidi partners.

The latest confrontation marks one of the most serious clashes between Netanyahu and the chareidi parties in recent months and could have far-reaching consequences for both the coalition’s future and the broader debate over draft-related legislation.

{Matzav.com}