A certificate of deposit (CD) account has historically been one of the safest ways to protect your money. Deposit a certain amount of money in the account for a predetermined term and you’ll earn a fixed rate of interest upon maturity. This predictability was especially helpful in 2022 through much of 2024. With inflation problematic and borrowing costs high, elevated returns on CDs allowed savers to offset some of the economic burden felt elsewhere.

Recent months, however, have reduced what savers can earn with these accounts. While still much higher than the average savings account (which is now 0.43% compared to CDs with interest rates approaching 5%), returns on these accounts are expected to continue to decline as the Federal Reserve continues its rate-cut campaign. Against this backdrop, then, savers considering a CD should know which steps to take – and which mistakes to avoid – going into 2025. 

Considering a CD now? See how much more you could be earning with an account here.

4 big CD account mistakes to avoid going into 2025

To improve your chances of CD success in the new year, you should avoid making the following mistakes:

Delaying an account opening

Today’s CD rates are still attractive but not what they were prior to the Fed’s two rate cuts issued earlier this year – and they’re unlikely to be as beneficial after the expected December rate reduction. Delaying an account opening, then, would be a major mistake. By acting aggressively prospective account holders can lock in one of today’s high rates and keep it even as the wider rate climate continues to cool.

Get started with a CD online today.

Letting your current CD automatically rollover

Do you already have a CD account? Then be sure to avoid having it automatically rollover upon its maturity. That could cause your funds to get locked into a new, lower-interest-earning account. Instead, utilize the grace period time between your account maturity date and the new rollover date to look for alternative, potentially better places for your funds.

Opting for the higher short-term CD rate over the lower long-term one

It’s understandable for savers to simply look for the highest interest rate possible. But that would be a big mistake when it comes to CDs, especially right now. What value will a high CD rate truly offer if it expires in three or six months, especially if rates drop again in the interim? Instead, opt for the slightly lower rate that is now available with many long-term CDs. Not only will you earn more interest with this approach but you’ll lock in extended protection for your funds while the economy recalibrates.

Using your current lender without first shopping around

In 2022 or 2023, high CD rates were ubiquitous and easy to secure. This meant that using your local bank with its physical branch locations was often suitable. But with rates dropping a bit and attractive offers less prevalent, it would be a mistake to automatically use your current bank or lender without first shopping around. If you use an online bank, instead, you may be able to lock in a significantly higher interest rate. You won’t know about the alternatives, however, until you first start shopping around.

The bottom line

You should always take a strategic approach to where you put your money, particularly if you’re working with CD accounts in today’s unique economic climate. By avoiding these mistakes, you’ll better be able to set yourself up for financial success both now and, depending on the CD term, multiple years ahead.

Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday said it will wade into a case over whether California can set its own vehicle emissions standards under a scheme laid out in the Clean Air Act.

The case involves a section of the law that preempts states from setting their own emissions standards for new vehicles. But the act exempts any state that had rules in place before March 1966, just after the law was amended to regulate automobile emissions, that are “at least as protective of public health and welfare” as the federal requirements.

California was the only state that regulated vehicle emissions before 1966, and therefore is the only state eligible for a waiver. In order to obtain a waiver, California must show that it needs its own emission standards “to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions.” The Clean Air Act also allows other states to adopt California’s vehicle emissions standards.

Since the Clean Air Act was enacted, the EPA has granted California more than 75 waivers for its vehicle emissions program. In 1993, the agency granted a waiver for the state’s zero emission vehicle standards. It did so again in 2019 for California’s first set of greenhouse-gas emissions standards.

In 2012, California put in place the Advanced Clean Car standards, which aimed to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and other pollutants by increasing requirements for zero- and low-emission vehicle sales in the state for model years 2015 through 2025. The standards govern all new passenger cars, light-duty trucks and medium-duty vehicles.

The EPA issued a waiver to California for those regulations in 2013, and car manufacturers started working to comply with the new emissions standards. But the agency revoked the waiver as to the zero-emissions and greenhouse gas requirements during the Trump administration in 2019. In 2022, under President Biden, it was reinstated again.

The EPA said at the time that California is “particularly impacted” by climate change, citing  wildfires, heat waves, floods and droughts. These climate change impacts are “compelling and extraordinary conditions,” the standard for a waiver under the Clean Air Act, the agency said.

Several big automakers, including Volvo, Stellantis, Ford, Volkswagen, BMW and Honda, have all agreed to comply with California’s more stringent vehicle standards. 

A group of 17 states, led by Ohio, and fuel companies asked the federal appeals court in Washington to review the EPA’s reinstatement of the 2013 waiver. The states argued the waiver provision in the Clean Air Act violates the Constitution by treating California differently from the other states, while the fuel producers said they are harmed by California’s requirements because they depress the demand for their product by requiring vehicle manufacturers to sell automobiles that use less or no liquid gas.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit sided with the EPA in April. As to the states, the court found that Congress has been granted the authority to regulate interstate commerce, including vehicle emissions, and it was the legislative body that laid out the Clean Air Act’s preemption and waiver scheme. The three-judge panel also said the fuel producers did not have the legal right to sue.

“The nature and extent of equality between the states has been a central debate throughout our country’s history, from the founding to the admission of new states and beyond,” D.C. Circuit said in an unsigned opinion. “But state petitioners point us to no meaningful support for their novel request to apply the equal sovereignty principle as a categorical limit on Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.”

Both the companies and the states appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing the D.C. Circuit’s decision is incompatible with the Constitution because Congress doesn’t have the power to elevate a single state above the other 49.

The Supreme Court said Friday it would review only whether fuel producers can point to the waiver’s effect on automakers to show they have standing to sue. The justices declined to review whether the EPA’s waiver for California is unlawful.

California and the Biden administration urged the Supreme Court to turn down the case and uphold the Clean Air Act’s waiver provision.

The dispute is one of several to land before the Supreme Court in recent years involving the Clean Air Act and efforts to tackle air pollution.

In June, the Supreme Court blocked the agency’s so-called “good neighbor” plan, which aims to curb air pollution and address harmful smog. Two years earlier, in the summer of 2022, the high court found Congress didn’t grant the EPA the authority under the Clean Air Act to set emissions caps based on the generation-shifting approach taken through the Clean Power Plan rule.

But in cases that have arrived before the Supreme Court in an emergency posture, the justices have declined to intervene. In a trio of disputes, the high court temporarily allowed the EPA to continue enforcing more stringent standards on emissions from coal-fired power plants and new and existing oil and gas facilities.

An Oklahoma panel on Friday rejected a plea for clemency for a man convicted of torturing and killing a 10-year-old girl as part of a cannibalistic fantasy, paving the way for him to become the 25th and final person executed in the U.S. this year.

Three members of Oklahoma’s Pardon and Parole Board voted unanimously against clemency for Kevin Ray Underwood, who is scheduled to receive a lethal injection on Thursday, his 45th birthday. An Indiana man, Joseph Corcoran, is set to die Wednesday for killing four men in 1997 in what would be the Hoosier State’s first execution in 15 years.

Underwood was convicted of killing 10-year-old Jamie Rose Bolin in 2006. The girl was a neighbor at his Purcell apartment complex who Underwood admitted to luring into his apartment and beating her over the head with a cutting board before suffocating her to death.

Underwood admitted to investigators in a videotaped confession played to the board on Friday that the killing was part of a cannibalistic fantasy and that he nearly beheaded the girl in his bathtub before abandoning his plans to eat her.

“I would like to apologize to the victim’s family, to my own family and to everyone in that room today that had to hear the horrible details of what I did,” Underwood said to the board via a video feed from the Oklahoma State Penitentiary. “I can’t believe I did those things. The person I was in the weeks leading up to that event is not who I am now.”

Underwood’s attorneys argued that he deserved to be spared from death because of his long history of abuse and serious mental health issues that included autism, obsessive-compulsive disorder, bipolar and panic disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, schizotypal personality disorder and various deviant sexual paraphilias.

His mother, Connie Underwood, tearfully asked the board to grant her son mercy.

“I can’t imagine the heartache the family of that precious girl is living with every single day,” Connie Underwood said. “I wish we understood his pain before it led to this tragedy.”

Assistant Attorney General Aspen Layman urged the board to reject clemency, calling Underwood’s crime “one of the most notorious and depraved murders in Oklahoma history.”

“Mr. Underwood chose Jamie because he thought that she was small and defenseless and easy prey,” Layman said. “And while we, as an enlightened society, can give grace to those struggling with mental illness, we can still expect them to refrain from planning the murder, rape, torture and cannibalism of 10-year-old little girls.”

Several members of Bolin’s family asked the board to reject Underwood’s clemency bid. The girl’s father, Curtis Bolin, was scheduled to testify to the board but became choked up as he held his head in his hand.

“I’m sorry, I can’t,” he said.

Underwood is scheduled to receive a three-drug lethal injection Thursday inside the death chamber at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester. It would be Oklahoma’s fourth execution of the year and the 25th nationally if both his and Corcoran’s are carried out next week.