• Popular iPhone apps are recording their users' every tap and swipe, according to a TechCrunch report. 
• According to the report, customer analytics firm Glass box allows its customers to record user activity without disclosing that they are doing so. 
• Glassbox customers reportedly include major companies like Abercrombie & Fitch, Expedia, and Air Canada. 
• Screen recording is so sensitive that historically, Apple does give third-party developers the ability to carry out the practice. 

Some popular iPhone apps may be violating Apple's rules by secretly recording every single tap and swipe consumers make while using the apps.

The revelation comes via a TechCrunch report on Wednesday which describes how the customer analytics firm Glassbox allows its customers — which include major companies like Abercrombie & Fitch, Expedia, and Air Canada — to record user activity and use those recording to make product improvements. 

Essentially, every time a user taps on the screen, pushes a button, or types on a keyboard within a specific app, that activity is screenshotted and sent to the app's developer. 

Other Glassbox customers include Hollister, Hotels.com, and Singapore Airlines, according to its website. 

The recordings are apparently only activated when a consumer is inside an app that's using the Glassbox technology, and not when the consumer is going about other business on their phones. But the practice poses problems because, as TechCrunch found, none of Glassbox's customers make mention of screen recording in their privacy policies or iOS terms and conditions. And according to TechCrunch, Glassbox said it does not require customers to mention its usage in their terms. 

TechCrunch also raised the issue of what happens when a user enters sensitive information into an app, like credit card or passport numbers. As the report discovered, Glassbox is supposed to obfuscate this information, but that doesn't happen all the time. As a result, sensitive customer data can potentially be broadly exposed to employees responsible for a company's app development, and vulnerable to data breaches.  

The practice of screen recording is so sensitive that historically, Apple has not given third-party developers the ability to do so. That's why users were shocked to learn in 2017 that Uber had been provided special permissions by Apple to record their screen and access other personal information without their knowledge. 

Read more:  Apple gave Uber's app 'unprecedented' access to sensitive Apple features that can record iPhone screens

"Granting such a sensitive entitlement to a third party is unprecedented, as far as I can tell,"Will Strafach, a security researcher who discovered the Uber situation, told Business Insider at the time of the Uber situation. "No other app developers have been able to convince Apple to grant them entitlements they've needed to let their apps utilize certain privileged system functionality." 

Apparently, Glassbox has figured out a way around Apple, allowing its customers to embed its technology into their apps without any special permissions. 

Glassbox and Apple did not immediately respond to Business Insider's requests for comment. 

SEE ALSO: Snap's stock jumped 22% Wednesday — here's why investors are way too excited about its latest results

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I quit texting for a week and it was harder than I expected

Warning: Spoilers ahead for season three, episode 12 of "Riverdale," titled "Bizarrodale." 

• A new Gargoyle King appeared on Wednesday's episode of "Riverdale."
• The episode featured references to the comics, including Moose's real name. 
• INSIDER worked with Archie Comics to find details you may have missed.

Some romances went to new heights on the latest "Riverdale" episode. 

On Wednesday's episode of The CW show, Tom Keller and Sierra McCoy finally married, Moose and Kevin finally slept together after Moose came out to his dad, and Archie and Josie kissed. But with the love came some terror as another Gargoyle King threatened Tom and Sierra and then kidnapped Moose and Kevin. 

As always, the episode makes some comic and pop culture references. We worked with Archie Comics to find five details you may have missed. 

Cheryl wants to get into Highsmith College, which is most likely named for Patricia Highsmith.

Patricia Highsmith was an author known for her psychological thrillers. She wrote "The  Talented Mr. Ripley," which Cheryl mentions when talking to Kevin. She also wrote the "Price of Salt," which Penelope says when talking to Cheryl about the university.

Kevin is eating candy that may sound familiar.

When Kevin is eating candy, he has Senior Mints, instead of Junior Mints, and Swizzlers, instead of Twizzlers. 

Veronica is reading "The Girls in 3-B."

"The Girls in 3-B" by Valerie Taylor is about three friends from Iowa who move to Chicago in the 1950s and explore independence, as well their sexuality. 

Warning: Spoilers ahead for Veronica and Archie's relationship through "Riverdale's" third season.

• Veronica and Archie, played by Camila Mendes and KJ Apa, were a couple on "Riverdale."
• They have survived various ups and downs on The CW series.
• But for now, they are over. 

Archie and Veronica meet for the first time.

Betty is going to tell Archie that she has feelings for him while they are eating dinner in Pop's at the start of season one, but Veronica, who's new to town, arrives at the diner and distracts Archie. He then invites Veronica to eat with them, but she leaves. 

Archie goes to the semi-formal dance with Betty and Veronica.

Veronica urges Betty to ask Archie to the semi-formal, but she chickens out and asks Archie to join her and Veronica as a friend date. Betty confesses her feelings for Archie, but he doesn't return them.  

Archie and Veronica kiss for the first time.

At the after-party held at Cheryl's house, Archie and Veronica go into a closet to play Seven Minutes in Heaven where they wind up kissing. 

This is a preview of a research report from Business Insider Intelligence, Business Insider's premium research service. To learn more about Business Insider Intelligence, click here. Current subscribers can read the report here.

The consumerization of healthcare — a fundamental shift in patients’ preferences, behaviors, and demands around healthcare services — is threatening hospitals' bottom lines. For the first time, patients are transforming from passive recipients of healthcare services to active participants in their own health. They're flocking to online review sites to choose which doctor to see, skipping hospital visits in favor of a health clinic in their local CVS, and aren't afraid to ditch providers that don't offer them an engaging experience.

The superior customer service expectations of millennials, declines in hospital profitability, and threats from startup providers and retail pharmacies intensify the need for providers to revamp the patient experience. Providers' current engagement capabilities are weak, and deficiencies around scheduling, appointment wait times, and billing are dragging on patient satisfaction, driving patients elsewhere and draining provider revenue.

In this report, Business Insider Intelligence explores the trends that are driving providers to revamp their care services. We then outline how patients' expectations for transparency, convenience, and access are transforming the way they interact with providers across each stage of care. Finally, we detail strategies health systems and hospitals can implement to create a consumer-centric patient experience that fosters satisfaction, loyalty, and patient volume. 

The companies mentioned in this report are: 98point6, BayCare, Cleveland Clinic, CVS, Integris, Kaiser Permanente, Luma Health, New York-Presbyterian, One Medical, Publix, Target, Walgreens, Walmart, Yelp, and Zocdoc.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the report:

SEE ALSO: Top 5 Healthcare Startups & Digital Health Tech Disruptors in 2018

Join the conversation about this story »

• Brand safety continues to be a hot topic for marketers, though there's mounting evidence that YouTube thinks it can control those issues on its own.
• For more than a year, YouTube has paid some of the fees that web video players OpenSlate and Pixability charge agency holding companies to make sure their clients' ads only run next to specific content, according to sources.
• In December, YouTube notified agencies that it would stop covering the costs, to agencies' frustration.
• YouTube has made progress on controlling brand safety on its platform, but agencies still want to have independent third parties to vet their campaigns.

It's been two years since YouTube started getting publicly criticized by advertisers like McDonald's and L'Oreal after incidents of campaigns running next to offensive content like ISIS or racist videos were documented.

YouTube has pumped money and resources into catching questionable uploaded content before it surfaces on the platform. When AT&T — one of YouTube's longest boycotting advertisers — announced last month that it would return to YouTube, the move signaled to advertisers that YouTube took advertisers' concerns seriously and that it was now safe for even its biggest critics.

But just a month before, YouTube stopped paying the tab for advertisers who want to use third parties that ensure their ads run within safe videos.

Over the past couple of years, a cottage industry of ad-tech firms including OpenSlate, Zefr, and Pixability have grown to help advertisers ensure their ads only run on a certain set of videos. Within just months of brand-safety issues popping up, OpenSlate inked deals with all the major media-buying firms to handle their brand safety concerns.

According to six advertising execs who asked not to be identified because they were sharing private information, Google-owned YouTube quietly reimbursed holding companies who used OpenSlate and Pixability for more than a year after brand-safety issues starting popping up. In some cases, the funds came in the form of refunds or credit returned to brands after a campaign ran.

Then in December, YouTube notified agency execs that it would stop picking up the tab, saying they would be responsible for picking and paying for their own company to work with in 2019, according to three sources.

YouTube declined to comment on its deals with advertisers or third parties, saying its agreements are advertiser-specific.

"We're committed to offering advertisers choice in how they manage and measure their campaigns on YouTube, and we work closely with a number of third-party partners who specialize in these areas," YouTube said in a statement.

Privately, agency execs expressed frustration that YouTube decided to stop covering for brand-safety. Part of their hunch is that YouTube thinks it's made significant progress cleaning up its platform, reducing the need for third parties.

While brand-safety fees are not huge, YouTube's decision exposes a rift between the video giant and agencies over fees. Agencies have long asked for "walled gardens" to open up their platforms to third parties for independent measurement and targeting.

"They've come a long way, but at the same time, there is still a significant amount of content that our clients would prefer not to appear next to," said Joe Barone, a GroupM managing partner of brand safety in the Americas.

Fees for third parties vary depending on the advertiser but are based on a percentage of media spend. For example, one exec said that a brand running a $100,000 YouTube campaign might pay another $10,000 (or 10%) to make sure that its ads run only on specific videos or channels.

"It's pennies on the dollar," said one source about the cost of brand-safety services.

There's more competition to ensure brand safety — including YouTube's own efforts

There are a few possible explanations for YouTube's change in approach.

With more ad-tech companies offering brand-safety services, sources speculated that YouTube stopped paying fees to avoid appearing to favor a particular vendor. Up until recently, only a few third parties were plugged into YouTube to manage brand safety, but as the number of new companies grows, YouTube may have decided to stay agnostic and not pay for any added fees.

Around the time YouTube notified agencies of the reimbursement change, two ad-tech companies, Integral Ad Science and DoubleVerify, expanded their beta programs and became fully accredited by YouTube to cover brand safety and verification, which ensures that ads were seen by humans. According to YouTube, beta tests with Integral Ad Science and DoubleVerify are seeing more than 99% success rates on brand-safety issues across YouTube's reserved and auctioned inventory.

YouTube fully integrated DoubleVerify and Integral Ad Science's software because advertisers asked for more third-party tools to prove that Google isn't grading its own homework, said another agency exec.

"Google never wants to look like they're endorsing things," said one agency exec.

YouTube also has made progress in stamping out brand-safety issues on its own. It hired 10,000 people just to vet videos, rolled out tools that catch questionable content through artificial intelligence, and significantly upped the requirements for creators to make money from their videos.

After dealing with a slew of PR headaches, YouTube "feels that they've made a lot of progress" with brand safety, said one tech firm executive.

Another agency exec suggested that YouTube has been trying to nudge third parties out of its platform altogether, saying that the company "begrudgingly" allowed third parties into its platform a couple years ago to smooth over advertisers' concerns.

"They didn't like the fact that we wanted to use a third party, but we never gave them the choice," the exec said.

Still, agencies want to work with third parties to vet its campaigns, and agency sources noted that there will always be brand-safety risks with advertising on YouTube because of the video platform's scale with user-generated content.

"The industry has moved past trusting a monetization engine to decide which videos and which creators get media dollars," said Mike Henry, OpenSlate's CEO. "There are more than 4 billion minutes of ad-supported content on YouTube and a lot of bad actors. Advertisers see the need for an independent third party to bridge the chasm between what they deem suitable and what Google deems monetizable."

Brand-safety vendors are moving beyond YouTube

Companies like Pixability and OpenSlate have begun diversifying away from YouTube.

Pixability CEO David George said that his company has intentionally kept the brand-safety portion of its business small, anticipating that YouTube would eventually offer its own tools that compete with companies like his.

Beyond brand-safety tools, Pixability helps marketers decide how to spend their video ad dollars across platforms and match content categories to brands. Brand safety isn't a black-and-white issue, and while topics like pornography and violence may be obvious no-nos, topics like hard news are less clear, George said.

"As YouTube has introduced significant improvements to ensure brand-safe advertising, Pixability has returned to primarily focusing on helping brands better optimize their video investment on YouTube for maximum efficiency and effectiveness across content that is most resonant, as well as appropriate for those brands," George said.

OpenSlate's technology recently plugged into Facebook to let advertisers create block lists of videos where they don't want to serve ads.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We compared Apple's $159 AirPods to Xiaomi's $30 AirDots and the winner was clear

This is a preview of a research report from Business Insider Intelligence,  Business Insider's premium research service. To learn more about Business Insider Intelligence, click here.

In recent years, we've seen a ballooning of activity in fintech — an expansive term applied to technology-driven disruptions in financial services. And 2018 has been no different, with fintechs' staggering influence on the market evidenced by record funding levels for the industry — by Q3 2018, overall funding was already up 82% from 2017’s total figure, according to CB Insights.

Additionally, this year marked a watershed moment for the industry, with the once clear distinction between fintechs and financial services proper now blurred significantly. Virtually every incumbent financial institution (FI) is now looking inward and engaging in an innovation drive, spurred on by competition from fintechs. As such, incumbents are now actively investing in, acquiring, and collaborating with their fintech rivals.

In this report, Business Insider Intelligence details recent developments in fintech funding and regulation that are defining the environment these startups operate in. We also examine the business model changes being employed among different categories of fintechs as they strive to embed themselves further in mainstream finance and prove sustainability. Finally, we consider which elements of the fintech industry are rapidly rubbing off on incumbent financial services providers, and what the future of fintech will look like.

The companies mentioned in this report are: Funding Circle, GreenSky, Transferwise, Ant Financial, Nubank, Cellulant, Oscar Health, Stripe, One97, UiPath, LianLian Pay, Wacai.com, Gusto, Toast, PingPong, Flywire, Deposit Solutions, Root, Robinhood, Atom, N26, Revolut, OneConnect, PolicyBazaar, WeCash, Zurich, OneDegree, Dinghy, Vouch Insurance, Laka, Cleo, Ernit, Monzo, Moneybox, Bud, Tandem, Starling, Varo Money, Square, ING, Chase, AmEx, Amazon, Monese, Betterment, Tiller Investments, West Hill Capital, Square, Ameritrade, JPMorgan, eToro, Lendy, OnDeck, Ripple, Quorom, Chain, Coinbase, Fidelity, Samsung Pay, Google Pay, Apple Pay, Bank of America, TransferGo, Klarna, Western Union, Veriff, Royal Bank of Scotland, Royal Bank of Canada, Facebook, ThreatMetrix, Relx, Entersekt, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank, Gemalto, Lloyd's of London, Kingdom Trust, Aviva, Symbility LINK, eTrade, Allianz, AXA, Broadridge, TD Bank, First Republic Bank, BBVA Compass, Capital One, Silicon Valley Bank, Credit Suisse, Ally, Goldman Sachs.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the report:

• Fintech funding has already reached new highs globally in 2018, with overall funding hitting $32.6 billion at the end of Q3.
• Some new regions, including South America and Africa, are emerging on the fintech scene.
• We've seen considerable scaling in older corners of the fintech ecosystem, including among neobanks and alt lenders.
• Some fintechs, including a number of insurtechs, have dipped into new markets to escape heightened competition.
• Emergent areas like blockchain and distributed ledger technology (DLT), as well as digital identity, are gaining traction.
• Many incumbents are undertaking business transformations that aim to reimagine everything from products and services to front-end systems and back-end processes.

 In full, the report:

• Details the funding and regulatory landscape in the US, Europe, and Asia.
• Gives an overview into a number of fintech segments and how they've changed over the past year.
• Discusses how incumbents are reacting to fintechs in order to stay relevant in the changing financial services sector.
• Evaluates what the future of fintech will look like and what trends to look out for in the coming year.
  

Subscribe to a Premium pass to Business Insider Intelligence and gain immediate access to:

	This report and more than 250 other expertly researched reports
	Access to all future reports and daily newsletters
	Forecasts of new and emerging technologies in your industry
	And more!

Learn More

Purchase & download the full report from our research store

SEE ALSO: How the largest US financial institutions rank on offering the mobile banking features customers value most

Join the conversation about this story »

• Investing startup Pagaya says it's the first company to use artificial intelligence to source consumer asset-backed securities, a $244 billion market.
• In Pagaya's first push, the company raised money from Israeli and US institutional investors to fund $100 million of consumer ABS, focusing first on personal loans for borrowers with high credit scores.  
• The company, whose chief investment officer left BlackRock last year, plans to move into other types of lending, including auto loans and corporate credit, and eventually a real estate fund – all managed through artificial intelligence. 

Artificial intelligence has been the topic du jour on Wall Street. 

JPMorgan is cleaning up its database to do artificial intelligence better. Other managers are using it to augment their sustainable investing strategies. 

Enter Pagaya, a New York- and Israel-based startup using artificial intelligence to evaluate loans. The company, which landed $75 million in debt financing from Citigroup last year, is betting that active management and technology can reshape the consumer asset-backed securities market, which includes credit cards, auto loans, and student loans. Last year, total issuance was $244 billion, slightly up from 2017's $239 billion, according to asset manager TCW. 

Pagaya announced on Wednesday it had raised money from American and Israeli institutional investors for its first effort, a $100 million round of consumer ABS structured by Cantor Fitzgerald. The company uses artificial intelligence to evaluate and buy individual loans in the US, a departure from the traditional process of pooling debt and then selling it. 

Pagaya currently manages $450 million overall and is close to hitting $500 million, co-founder Gal Krubiner told Business Insider.

Read more: Credit Suisse's CTO says that AI could create huge opportunities on Wall Street and that banks haven't even scratched the surface

In this first round, the company is buying short-duration personal loans made to borrowers with high credit scores, Krubiner said. For future efforts, they'll buy credit card loans and near-prime and subprime auto loans, a much larger market than personal loans.

Five years ago, Krubiner said technology was not advanced enough for Pagaya's current strategy, but the explosion of data and the ability to process it via cloud computing now facilitates the artificial intelligence-led process. 

"The ability to unwrap the securities and to look at the single level of loans becomes very powerful and meaningful," he said. "That’s why an active ABS with artificial intelligence makes so much sense today, when a few years ago, it didn’t make sense ... That's going to change the full way that the total ABS market is going to get funded." 

He compared the coming evolution of consumer ABS to collateralized loan obligations. Banks previously issued static pools of loans, evaluating groups of loans by risk, before investors like Blackstone's GSO took a more active role in cherry-picking individual loans to better evaluate risk and return. 

Sign up here for our weekly newsletter "Wall Street Insider," a behind-the-scenes look at the stories dominating banking, business, and big deals.

Pagaya is investing on behalf of pension funds, insurance companies, and banks. The institutional investors are typically allocating money from their fixed income portfolios for the strategy, though some think of it as private credit or an alternative, the company's chief investment officer Ed Mallon said. Mallon joined last year from BlackRock, where he last was a managing director overseeing opportunistic investments. 

"We’re trying to underwrite people in a consistent, scalable, and repeatable process," Mallon said. "There’s a lot of value that you can capture for institutional investors by unwrapping these assets and building them from the bottom up with an investor’s perspective in mind, where you’re creating a balance of returns for the investor." 

Krubiner said his ultimate goal is a quantitative real estate fund, built on the same principles of active artificial intelligence management. Because the real estate market generates "endless amounts of data" available online, from rental prices to consumer demographics, Krubiner said the industry is ripe for a new type of fund. 

"It’s crazy!" he said. "No one is doing it yet." 

Join the conversation about this story »

• Companies spent $70 billion on cloud computing infrastructure services in 2018 with Amazon gobbling up the lion's share.
• Amazon remains as big as its next four competitors combined, although Microsoft is growing faster, market research firm Synergy Research Group finds.

The cloud computing market went bonkers in 2018, with businesses spending $70 billion on cloud services, says John Dinsdale, chief analyst at Synergy Research Group. 

Cloud computing is where companies rent the tech they need, served up to them over a network connection, and pay only for what they use. This is opposed to the traditional method of buying hardware and software, installing it and maintaining it themselves.

There are a lot of services called "cloud" these days but Synergy's most recent market share report focused on two types: infrastructure-as-a-service and platform-as-a-service. IaaS is when companies rent things like computer servers and storage.

PaaS is where they write apps that live in the cloud, renting everything necessary to support their apps. There's another type of cloud called software-as-a-service, where companies rent the apps themselves, accessed over the internet. This includes things like Microsoft Office 365 or Salesforce. All of those are known collectively as "public" cloud.

This report did not include the SaaS market. However, in a head-bow to the traditional tech companies like IBM, Synergy did include what's called "private" cloud. That's jargon that refers to selling hardware and software for use in a company's private data center. Even though this is a traditional market, its called private "cloud" because this tech must work well with public cloud services, allowing companies to use both. 

Only one big cloud provider actually reports cloud revenues — Amazon. The others lump their cloud revenue in with other products and services, making it a bit of a guessing game to determine market share by publicly released numbers alone.

However, Synergy has been tracking cloud computing for years and by its calculations:

• Amazon owns 35% of the market
• Microsoft: 15%
• Google: 7%
• IBM: 7% 
• Alibaba: 5%

That means that Amazon's cloud is bigger than its next four competitors, combined.

Dinsdale says that Amazon has even managed to grow its share of the cloud as the market boomed.

That said, Microsoft Azure wins the prize for fastest growth. While Amazon still looks unbeatable, Microsoft is a serious challenger. And if Microsoft comes from behind to win a coveted $10 billion deal from the Department of Defense, as some sources are now saying may happen, 2019 could be the year that Amazon's dominion starts to fade. That, however, is a big if.

SEE ALSO: 57 startups that will boom in 2019, according to VCs

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How Apple went from a $1 trillion company to losing over 20% of its share price

The smartphone is an essential part of our everyday lives.

But as with all technology, things change. So the question becomes: What will be the next smartphone?

Will it be the connected car? Or the smart speaker? What about the smartwatch?

Find out which device, if any, will take over the smartphone's role with this brand new slide deck from Business Insider Intelligence called The Next Smartphone.

Here are some of the key takeaways:

• Smartphones are the fastest adopted tech in the U.S.
• Whichever device becomes the next smartphone needs to go everywhere
• Consumer expectations around the smartphone are changing
• And much more

To get your copy of this FREE slide deck, simply click here.

Join the conversation about this story »

In an increasingly digitized world, brick-and-mortar retailers are facing immense pressure to understand and accommodate their customers’ changing needs, including at the point of sale (POS). 

More than two years after the EMV liability shift in October 2015, most large merchants globally have upgraded their payment systems. And beyond upgrading to meet new standards, many major retailers are adopting full-feature, “smart” devices — and supplementing them with valuable tools and services — to help them better engage customers and build loyalty.

But POS solutions aren’t “one size fits all.” Small- and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) don't usually have the same capabilities as larger merchants, which often have the resources and funds to adopt robust solutions or develop them in-house. That's where app marketplaces come in: POS app marketplaces are platforms, typically deployed by POS providers, where developers can host third-party business apps that offer back-office services, like accounting and inventory, and customer-retention tools, like loyalty programs and coupons.

SMBs' growing needs present a huge opportunity for POS terminal providers, software providers, and resellers. The US counts roughly 8 million SMBs, or 99.7% of all businesses. Until now, constraints such as time and budget have made it difficult for SMBs to implement value-added services that meet their unique needs. But app marketplaces enable providers to cater to SMBs with specialized solutions. 

App marketplaces also alleviate some of the issues associated with the overcrowded payments space. Relatively new players that have effectively leveraged the rise of the digital economy, like mPOS firm Square, are increasingly encroaching on the payments industry, putting pricing pressure on payment hardware and service giants. This has diminished client loyalty as merchants seek out the most affordable solution, and it's resulted in lost revenue for providers. However, app marketplaces can be used as tools not only to build client loyalty, but also as a revenue booster — Verifone, for instance, charges developers 30% of net revenue for each installed app and a distribution fee for each free app.

In this report, Business Insider Intelligence looks at the drivers of POS app marketplaces and the legacy and challenger firms that are supplying them. The report also highlights the strategies these providers are employing, and the ways that they can capitalize on the emergence of this new market. Finally, it looks to the future of POS app marketplaces, and how they may evolve moving forward.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the report:

• SMBs are a massive force in the US, which makes understanding their needs a necessity for POS terminal providers, software providers, and resellers — the US counts roughly 8 million SMBs, or 99.7% of all businesses.
• The entrance of new challengers into the payment space has put pricing pressure on the entire industry, forcing all of the players in the industry to find new solutions to keep customers loyal while also gaining a new revenue source.
• Major firms in the industry, like Verifone and Ingenico, have turned to value-added services, specifically app marketplaces, to not only build loyalty but also giving them a new revenue source — Verifone charges developers 30% of net revenue for each installed app and a distribution fee for each free app.
• According to a recent survey by Intuit, 68% of SMBs stated that they use an average of four apps to run their businesses. As developers flock to the space to grab a piece of the pie, it's likely that increased competition will lead to robust, revenue-generating marketplaces.
• And there are plenty of opportunities to build out app marketplace capabilities, such as in-person training, to further engage with users — 66% of app users would hire someone to train and educate them on which apps are right for their businesses. 

In full, the report:

• Identifies the factors that have changed how SMBs are choosing payment providers.  
• Discusses why firms in the payments industry have started to introduce app marketplaces over the last four years.
• Analyzes some of the most popular app marketplaces in the industry and identifies the strengths of each.
• Breaks down the concerns merchants have relating to app marketplaces, and discusses how providers can solve these issues.
• Explores what app marketplace providers will have to do going forward in order to avoid being outperformed in an industry that's becoming increasingly saturated. 

Subscribe to an All-Access pass to Business Insider Intelligence and gain immediate access to:

	This report and more than 250 other expertly researched reports
	Access to all future reports and daily newsletters
	Forecasts of new and emerging technologies in your industry
	And more!

Learn More

Purchase & download the full report from our research store

Join the conversation about this story »

• Former New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson is facing a string of accusations related to her new book, "Merchants of Truth," which was released this week.
• According to the publisher, the book follows "The New York Times, The Washington Post, BuzzFeed, and VICE Media over a decade of disruption and radical adjustment."
• But the book is already facing controversy.
• In a Twitter thread posted Wednesday night, VICE New Tonight correspondent, Michael Moynihan, alleged that Abramson's book contains factual errors and plagiarism — of which he shares several examples.

Jill Abramson, the former executive editor of The New York Times, is facing a string of accusations related to her new book, "Merchants of Truth," which was released this week.

According to the publisher, Simon & Schuster, the book follows "The New York Times, The Washington Post, BuzzFeed, and VICE Media over a decade of disruption and radical adjustment," and it focuses on the current state of media through the lens of two legacy newspapers and two major digital journalism outlets.

But the book is already facing controversy.

In a Twitter thread posted Wednesday night, VICE New Tonight correspondent, Michael Moynihan, alleged that Abramson's book contains factual errors and plagiarism — of which he shares several examples.

INSIDER has not independently verified these claims.

Brooklyn-based writer Ian Frisch also noted instances where the book reportedly uses his reporting from a profile he wrote in 2014, some of which he says was not properly credited.

Frisch told INSIDER that he first became aware of potential issues after Moynihan's Twitter thread; he was aware that a previous profile subject, VICE's Thomas Morton, was featured in Abramson's book and after checking Google books found that while some of his 2014 reporting was credited in endnotes. Other passages were not.

Frisch says he has not been contacted by Simon & Schuster or Abramson, and he has not reached out to them. He doesn't want to be the focal point of this story, but hopes there will be a "larger conversation" about journalism and "the processes of journalism, verification, and attribution."

Abramson, who appeared on Fox News on Wednesday, responded to the charges.

"All I can tell you is, I certainly did not plagiarize in my book," Abramson said.

"And you know there are 70 pages of footnotes showing where I got the information."

She also responded to the claims via Twitter, hinting that the "attacks" from VICE were due to unhappiness with the organization's portrayal. She also addressed the claims of misrepresentation.

"I endeavored to accurately and properly give attribution to the hundreds of sources that were part of my research," Abramson wrote.

"I take seriously the issues raised and will review the passages in question," she continued.

This week, Abramson was also scrutinized over her practice of not using a tape recorder, which she explained in an interview with The Cut's Anna Silman.

"I do not record. I’ve never recorded," she said. "I’m a very fast note-taker. When someone kind of says the 'it' thing that I have really wanted, I don’t start scribbling right away. I have an almost photographic memory and so I wait a beat or two while they’re onto something else, and then I write down the previous thing they said. Because you don’t want your subject to get nervous about what they just said."

In a statement, Simon & Schuster said the book is "an important, exhaustively researched and meticulously sourced book about the media business in a critical moment of transition." The publisher said all news organizations were given time to comment.

"If upon further examination changes or attributions are deemed necessary we stand ready to work with the author to make those revisions," the publisher said.

Simon & Schuster did not immediately respond to INSIDER's request for comment.

SEE ALSO: Vice Media was once flying high with buzzy branded content and a lucrative millennial audience. Now it's planning to cut 10% of employees.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Roger Stone explains what Trump has in common with Richard Nixon

• Some have claimed that drinking coconut water can fight heart disease, lower blood pressure, and have antioxidant properties, but our experts say that's mostly hype.
• All you need to hydrate is a glass of water. It will give you the same benefits without the calories or the price tag.
• Coconut water is a good source of potassium, but strive to eat more fruit instead. You'll get the potassium plus fiber and other nutrients coconut water is lacking.

Some have claimed that coconut water has antioxidant properties, can fight heart disease, and lower blood pressure. And while the fruit juice does have some nutrients, our experts say these claims are mostly hype and adding coconut water to your diet will mostly just add calories.

Coconut water does provide potassium

"There are some health benefits to drinking coconut water," Pamela Peeke, MD, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Maryland told INSIDER. "It's an all-natural way to hydrate and add potassium to diets."

Most Americans don't eat enough fruits, vegetables or dairy and as a result, aren't getting enough potassium.

"So coconut water can help fill in the nutritional gaps," said Dr. Peeke. "Beyond that, the scientific literature does not support the hype that it will help with a laundry list of diseases."

Joan Salge Blake, RDN, EdD, clinical associate professor of nutrition at Boston University and host of "Spot On!" health and wellness podcast agreed, but would rather see people get those nutrients from fruits.

"It's not like we have to go out and get coconut water for our health or hydration because we have foods and water that will do that for us," Dr. Blake told INSIDER.

Coconut water can provide potassium but for the same amount of calories, Dr. Blake said you could eat a small banana and get even more potassium plus other nutrients not found in coconut water.

"You don't want coconut water displacing real fruit because you'll do better by eating whole pieces of fruit for the fiber, another deficit among Americans," said Dr. Blake. "There are other ways besides drinking coconut water that are cheaper and more efficient per gulp or bite to get potassium in your diet."

And if you're looking to hydrate, for most, water will do the trick better than coconut water

"If you're working out for under an hour and not sweating profusely you don't have to have a sweetened beverage to hydrate, just have plain water," said Dr. Blake. "[Approximately] 70% of Americans are overweight so there's not a lot of room for people to be gulping excess calories."

On the other hand, Dr. Blake said if you are very active and can afford the calories, coconut water can be added as part of a healthy well-balanced diet.

Read the nutritional label before you treat yourself because some coconut water has added sugars

"Make sure it says pure coconut water," said Dr. Blake. Many coconut water brands add sugar to their drinks making them an unhealthy addition to your diet. 

While studies have shown diets rich in plant polyphenols can protect against the development of cancers, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, osteoporosis, and neurodegenerative diseases, Dr. Blake recommends getting those polyphenols from fruits like grapes, apples, pears, cherries, and berries, so you're not consuming extra calories and added sugars. 

Just like potassium, it's better to get this antioxidant from fruits to also get the fiber and other nutrients coconut water is lacking.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: There are serious health reasons why you shouldn't eat your boogers

• Sears' chairman, Eddie Lampert, has won court approval to buy Sears out of bankruptcy and keep it from liquidating. The deal will save up to 45,000 jobs and keep more than 400 stores open. 

• Sears had been facing a possible liquidation since filing for bankruptcy in October. 
• The department store has been losing money and closing stores for years. Many employees and analysts blame Lampert for the retailer's decline.

Sears has been given its second chance.

On Thursday, a bankruptcy judge approved the sale of Sears to its chairman, Eddie Lampert, after a court battle that lasted several days, a representative for Eddie Lampert's hedge fund, ESL Investments, has confirmed.  

Lampert and ESL previously won an auction to buy the 126-year old department store chain out of bankruptcy for more than $5.2 billion, but last month, Sears' unsecured creditors objected to the bid. Each side was given a chance to make their case in bankruptcy court. 

Sears has been battling with a possible liquidation since October, when it filed for bankruptcy and Lampert stepped down as CEO.

"Over the last several years, we have worked hard to transform our business and unlock the value of our assets," Lampert said in a statement to the press at the time. "While we have made progress, the plan has yet to deliver the results we have desired, and addressing the Company's immediate liquidity needs has impacted our efforts to become a profitable and more competitive retailer."

Since then, American consumers have been lamenting the loss of what was at one point the world's largest store and considered to be an early innovator of the shopping landscape.

Keep scrolling to see the story of its downfall in photos:

SEE ALSO: Decaying stores, plunging sales, and a remote CEO: How Sears was driven to the edge of bankruptcy

Sears started off as a mail-order catalog company selling watches and jewelry in 1888. It became the largest catalog company in the United States after expanding its assortment.

In the 1920s, as catalog shopping started to fade out, Sears adapted to the changing times and opened stores. According to Investopedia, sales at its stores outpaced catalog sales by 1931.

Source: Investopedia

The company grew from being only a retailer to offering financial services, including setting up an insurance arm with Allstate and acquiring various financial brokerage firms.

It also began rolling out its own brands such as Craftsman, DieHard, and Kenmore.

• The world's largest video game publisher, Tencent, is finally allowed to release new games in its home country after a 10-month government freeze on approvals.
• China formed a new regulatory body, the Online Games Ethics Committee, to oversee the approval of new games, and just 352 new games have been approved since the committee started their review process.
• The South China Morning Post reports that Chinese regulators hope to return to approving between 2,000 and 3,000 new games annually.

China's Online Games Ethics Committee has approved a pair of mobile games published by Tencent, meaning the  the world's largest video game publisher will finally be able to release new games in its home country for the first time since March of last year.

China spent much of 2018 reorganizing its approval process for new media coming into the country, leading to an extended freeze on new releases. China established a new regulatory body, the Online Games Ethics Committee, in response to concerns from Chinese officials who feared that video games were sparking addiction and impacting the productivity of the country's youth.

Chinese regulators maintain strict standards when judging whether games, films, and other media are too violent or offensive for release within the country. The Online Games Ethics Committe approved 80 games in its first round of reviews in late December 2018, and after four rounds of approvals, a total of 352 games have been cleared for release. The South China Morning Post reports that Chinese regulators hope to get back to their standard rate of between 2,000 and 3,000 annual approvals.

Some of Tencent's most successful games released worldwide during 2018 still remain barred from release in China. Regulators have also prevented Tencent from monetizing popular games that were already tested in the Chinese market, including "Fortnite: Battle Royale" and "PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds," both of which have millions of players on a monthly basis. The freeze on popular new releases has hit Tencent's bottom line hard too; the company's share price dropped nearly 30% during the freeze.

Read more:Video game addiction has sparked a culture war in China — and it's having huge repercussions for the world's biggest video game maker

In a proactive response to criticism in China, Tencent began using facial recognition software to verify player identities in September 2018. Tencent's age-verification process uses an official government database to confirm player identities with their photo and personal information. Players under the age of 18 are limited to playing just two hours a day, while those under the age of 12 are limited to one hour a day.

Despite restrictions from the government, China remains the largest video game market on the planet. Chinese gamers spent more than $34 billion on video games in the past year, according to New Zoo.

SEE ALSO: Kids in China are trying every trick in the book to beat the facial recognition software that puts a mandatory time limit on popular video games

SEE ALSO: China approves 80 new video games, ending the freeze on new releases that dominated 2018 — but the country's largest game publisher still isn't happy

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The history behind duct tape and what makes it a handy solution for just about anything

Tech companies and auto companies are all racing to be the first to roll out self-driving cars onto the road.

The stakes are high for everyone involved. The self-driving revolution and the prevalence of ride-hailing services such as Uber and Lyft threatens to reduce individual car ownership, which would eat into a sizable piece of automakers' core business.

Meanwhile, tech companies are jockeying for a piece of the self-driving-car market, which Apple CEO Tim Cook dubbed"the mother of all AI projects." These companies are all looking to deploy self-driving cars as part of a commercial ride-hailing service that would operate similarly to how Uber and Lyft do now.

In a new free report, Business Insider Intelligence — Business Insider's premium research service — takes an in-depth look at the most expansive self-driving-car tests taking place in the US, and offers insights on the leaders in the self-driving-car race.

To get your copy of this free report, click here.

Join the conversation about this story »

• Ariana Grande was scheduled to perform at the Grammys on Sunday, but recently dropped out of the show.
• Grammys producer Ken Ehrlich told the AP on Thursday that Grande "felt it was too late for her to pull something together."
• Grande then refuted this report on Twitter, writing that Ehrlich is "lying" and she can "pull together a performance over night."
• "It was when my creativity & self expression was stifled by you, that i decided not to attend," she wrote. "it's just a game y'all.. and i'm sorry but that's not what music is to me."

Ariana Grande accused a Grammys producer of "lying" about why she decided to cancel her performance at the awards show on Sunday.

Grammys producer Ken Ehrlich told the Associated Press on Thursday that Grande, who was nominated for two awards this year, ultimately "felt it was too late for her to pull something together."

"As it turned out when we finally got the point where we thought maybe it would work, she felt it was too late for her to pull something together for sure," Ehrlich said. "And it's too bad. She's a great artist. And I'd love to get her in the show this year."

Apparently upon seeing this interview, Grande took to Twitter to refute this claim.

"i've kept my mouth shut but now you're lying about me," she wrote. "i can pull together a performance over night and you know that, Ken. it was when my creativity & self expression was stifled by you, that i decided not to attend."

Variety had reported on Wednesday that Grande felt "insulted" by producers when they refused to allow her to perform her newest single "7 Rings."According to Variety's sources, the producers eventually offered a compromise and would allow Grande to perform the controversial single as part of a medley, but then insisted they choose the second song she would play.

Grande appeared to confirm Variety's report, writing that she "offered three different songs" to perform.

"it's about collaboration. it's about feeling supported. it's about art and honesty. not politics," she wrote. "not doing favors or playing games. it's just a game y'all.. and i'm sorry but that's not what music is to me."

She also appeared to imply that the Grammys are unfairly using her for promotion whilst apparently disrespecting her creative process.

Grande still noted, however, that she is "still grateful for the acknowledgement this year."

Grande's fourth studio album "Sweetener" was nominated for best pop vocal album, but shut out of most major categories, including album of the year. Grande's hit single "God Is a Woman" received a nod for best pop solo performance.

Read more: The 14 biggest snubs of the 2019 Grammy nominations

The 25-year-old star is set to drop her fifth studio album on Friday. It will feature her first-ever No. 1 single, the titular "Thank U, Next," as well as her second-ever No. 1 single, "7 Rings."

Representatives for the Grammys didn't immediately respond to our request for comment.

Visit INSIDER's homepage for more.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We compared Apple's $159 AirPods to Xiaomi's $30 AirDots and the winner was clear

• Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos accused American Media Inc. (AMI), the publisher of the National Enquirer, of "extortion and blackmail."
• The billionaire owner of The Washington Post said AMI is threatening to release naked photos of him.
• The National Enquirer previously published an exposé on Bezos' affair, and the 55-year-old CEO is now investigating the piece.
• AMI threatened to release the photos if Bezos doesn't halt his investigation into the leaks and if he doesn't make a public statement disavowing the idea that the investigation was politically motivated, Bezos said. Bezos said making such a statement would be a "lie." 
• David Pecker, the owner of the National Enquirer, has long been an ally of President Donald Trump, who is a critic of Bezos, Amazon, and The Washington Post. 

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos has accused American Media Inc. (AMI), the publisher of the National Enquirer, of attempting to extort him over leaked naked photos.

In January 2019, the National Enquirer published an exposé into an affair between the billionaire tech exec and the former news anchor and helicopter pilot Lauren Sanchez, and said that it had seen explicit photos of him.

In an extraordinary blog post published on Medium on Thursday, Bezos said AMI subsequently attempted to extort him over these photos. He said the publisher threatened to publish the photos unless he stopped an investigation into the leaks. And it also demanded that he disavow the idea that AMI's investigation into his personal life might have been politically motivated, Bezos said.

"Rather than capitulate to extortion and blackmail, I've decided to publish exactly what they sent me, despite the personal cost and embarrassment they threaten," Bezos wrote.

Spokespeople for AMI and Amazon did not immediately respond to Business Insider's requests for comment.

See also: Read all the emails Jeff Bezos says the National Enquirer sent to 'blackmail' him

Bezos insinuates the National Enquirer may have been politically motivated

AMI has long been accused of having political motives for its news coverage.

Its owner, David Pecker, is an ally of President Donald Trump and has previously engaged in buying negative stories about Trump in order to bury them (a process called "catch and kill"). As such, there has been some speculation that the National Enquirer exposé on Bezos was at least partially motivated by the long-running feud between Trump and Bezos, who owns The Washington Post.

Gavin de Becker, Bezos' security boss who is leading the investigation into the exposé, had previously said"strong leads point to political motives." De Becker has "whatever budget he needed" to carry out this investigation, Bezos wrote.

Bezos doesn't outright say he believes the National Enquirer exposé was politically motivated. But he hints at it, beginning his blog post by recapping AMI's "catch and kill" practices and saying his ownership of The Washington Post means "powerful people who experience ... news coverage will wrongly conclude I am their enemy."

He also hints at a potential Saudi Arabian connection to his investigation into AMI, writing: "Several days ago, an AMI leader advised us that Mr. Pecker is 'apoplectic' about our investigation. For reasons still to be better understood, the Saudi angle seems to hit a particularly sensitive nerve."

"A few days after hearing about Mr. Pecker’s apoplexy, we were approached, verbally at first, with an offer. They said they had more of my text messages and photos that they would publish if we didn't stop our investigation," he added.

AMI's alleged emails have been published 

Bezos' comments represent an extraordinary intervention from the 55-year-old CEO into the tabloid scandal. Bezos had so far refrained from commenting, even as de Becker gave media interviews, and he rarely talks to the press.

Bezos' post also includes what he said are copies of the emails sent by AMI, which include explicit descriptions of the alleged contents of the intimate photos. 

"In the AMI letters I'm making public, you will see the precise details of their extortionate proposal: They will publish the personal photos unless Gavin de Becker and I make the specific false public statement to the press that we 'have no knowledge or basis for suggesting that AMI's coverage was politically motivated or influenced by political forces,'" Bezos wrote.

"If we do not agree to affirmatively publicize that specific lie, they say they’ll publish the photos, and quickly. And there's an associated threat: They’ll keep the photos on hand and publish them in the future if we ever deviate from that lie."

These are, Bezos said, some of the terms AMI tried to get him to agree to in return for not publishing the photos:

"1. A full and complete mutual release of all claims that American Media, on the one hand, and Jeff Bezos and Gavin de Becker (the "Bezos Parties"), on the other, may have against each other.

"2. A public, mutually-agreed upon acknowledgment from the Bezos Parties, released through a mutually-agreeable news outlet, affirming that they have no knowledge or basis for suggesting that AM's coverage was politically motivated or influenced by political forces, and an agreement that they will cease referring to such a possibility.

"3. AM agrees not to publish, distribute, share, or describe unpublished texts and photos (the "Unpublished Materials")."

Bezos added that his lawyers believe AMI has no right to publish the photos in any case because he took the original photos in question, giving him the claim to ownership.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The history behind duct tape and what makes it a handy solution for just about anything

• Lauren Cohan departed "The Walking Dead's" ninth season in November, but the show left her exit open-ended to hopefully bring her back at some point.
• Cohan played Maggie Rhee on AMC's zombie drama since season two.
• Showrunner Angela Kang tells INSIDER there are still conversations about bringing the character back either onto the show or somewhere in the larger "Walking Dead" universe.

Last November not only saw the exit of Andrew Lincoln from "The Walking Dead," but also the departure of lead star Lauren Cohan on the same episode as she heads to a new series on ABC this February.

Cohan may not be gone for good, though. Showrunner Angela Kang has been hoping to get her to return as she's working on "The Walking Dead's" 10th season. 

"We've been talking about it," she told INSIDER about seeing Cohan in "The Walking Dead" universe again. "I don't have much of an update I can share."

If and when Cohan does return, Kang hinted we could either see Maggie once again on the AMC flagship "TWD" series or maybe somewhere else in the ever-expanding universe. 

"I can just reiterate that we adore Maggie, we left the door open for her to come back into the show or the universe," Kang continued. "So I'm hopeful we'll see more of Maggie. We certainly have more stories planned for her."

Kang previously expressed interest in continuing Maggie's storyline on season 10 to ComicBook.com's Brandon Davis, noting she and Cohan were in contact. Chief content officer of AMC's "Walking Dead" universe, Scott M. Gimple, announced a larger world of shows and films last November. In addition to three "Walking Dead" movies, Gimple said the network has plans for a mix or longer and shorter series along with digital content on AMC's "Talking Dead." That means Cohan could potentially appear on any of those.

Read more: "The Walking Dead" is going to continue Rick Grimes' story in 3 movies

Tuesday, at the Television Critics Association press tour in Los Angeles, The Hollywood Reporter asked Cohan whether or not we may see a spinoff for her "Walking Dead" character. 

"There may have been some conversations, but everything is so early-days ambiguous. Me, as much as anybody, we'll have to see what happens," Cohan answered. 

When INSIDER previously spoke with executive producer and director Greg Nicotero last fall, he seemed hopeful of Cohan's return to the show at some point.

"Me personally, I feel we'll probably be seeing Maggie a little more than people think," Nicotero said.

Cohan has played Maggie Rhee on "TWD" since season two and was among the last "Walking Dead" cast members signed on to return for season nine. TV Guide reported her decision to leave the zombie drama after eight seasons was due to money.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, the actress was "not happy with the offers" she was receiving from AMC around this time last year. Currently, its lead star Danai Gurira is negotiating a new contract to return for the show's 10th season. 

Read more: 'The Walking Dead' showrunner and executive producer weigh in on Danai Gurira's possible return next season

Cohan will next appear on ABC's "Whiskey Cavalier" at the end of February. You can watch a trailer for it here.

"The Walking Dead" returns to AMC Sunday at 9 p.m. You can follow along with our coverage here. 

A representative for AMC declined to comment on the the actresses' contracts for this article.

• Read more:
• 'The Walking Dead's' Katelyn Nacon says Enid won't be happy Negan's free
• 'The Walking Dead' mid-season premiere is a slow, satisfying burn with a few stumbles
• 'The Walking Dead' star says another actor almost lost their arm on the show years ago
• 'The Walking Dead's' Katelyn Nacon hints we'll finally get to see Carl's letter to Enid
• 'The Walking Dead's' Katelyn Nacon says she didn't learn about Enid's new romance until she read it in the script

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Earth's north magnetic pole is on the move — here's what will happen when our poles flip

This is a preview of a research report from Business Insider Intelligence, Business Insider's premium research service. To learn more about Business Insider Intelligence, click here. Current subscribers can read the report here.

Blockchain is seemingly being explored by innovation teams in every corner of every industry. This includes the logistics industry, which, despite continuing on an impressive upward trajectory — the market is expected to reach $15.5 trillion by 2023, up from $8.1 trillion in 2015 — is filled with inefficiencies that the distributed ledger technology (DLT) is potentially well suited to fix.

As a result, the DLT has become one of the most attractive investment opportunities for companies in the logistics space; in fact, the market for blockchain technology in supply chain management is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 49% from $41 million in 2017 to $667 million in 2024, according to Zion Market Research.

This is leading some of the largest firms in the logistics industry to explore blockchain and its potential use cases. For example, in 2017, a group of technology, transportation, and supply chain executives formed the Blockchain in Transport Alliance (BiTA) to create a forum for the development of blockchain standards and education for the freight industry. BiTA now has over 450 members, including global heavyweights UPS, FedEx, SAP, Google, Cisco, and Daimler.

 However, there are still major hurdles to overcome before the technology can become commonplace. Many companies, especially small- to medium-sized businesses (SMBs), are still unaware of what blockchain is, how it works, or what the benefits of the technology are. 

In this report, Business Insider Intelligence explores how blockchain can provide value to the global logistics industry. We break down some of the inefficiencies in the logistics industry that are leading firms to explore blockchain and explain how the technology can be used to solve these issues. Additionally, we examine some specific use cases along the supply chain and identify some of the hurdles to adoption. And finally, we take a look at what needs to occur in the logistics industry for blockchain to be deployed widely. 

The companies mentioned in this report are: BiTA, FedEx, IBM, Maersk, Modum, SAP, Volt Technology, and Walmart.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the report:

Join the conversation about this story »

• The House Ways and Means Committee held its first hearing about obtaining President Trump's tax returns from the secretary of the Treasury.
• The meeting became tense at points, with Republicans accusing Democrats of "weaponizing" the law to go after a political foe.
• Democrats said they are interested in conflicts of interest in Trump's income and businesses.

WASHINGTON — Republicans and Democrats went back and forth on Thursday in the first congressional hearing to determine the path forward on obtaining President Donald Trump's tax returns.

The House Ways and Means oversight subcommittee, now controlled by Democrats, listened to tax experts about whether or not it would be prudent to pass legislation that would require all future presidential candidates and their running mates to disclose their tax returns. The subcommittee also probed the legitimacy of formally requesting Trump's tax information from the Department of the Treasury, as is the committee's legal right.

Read more: Democrats will be able to make Trump's tax returns public if they take back Congress. Here's how.

Democrats focused on Trump's potential conflicts of interest through the many businesses he maintained an ownership stake in after becoming president. Many past presidents have placed their assets in blind trusts once they assumed office, but Trump did not do so.

Rep. Bill Pascrell of New Jersey, who made several unsuccessful attempts to get Trump's tax returns over the past two years, questioned what the president could be hiding by keeping his tax information secret.

"Our tax system requires honesty from taxpayers and the IRS. The element of good faith is implicit to a functioning tax system," Pascrell said. "If a president is cheating the system, or evading taxes, or otherwise violating the tax laws of our country, why should any citizen feel compelled to comply? No one is above the law."

"We're not interested in getting someone. We're interested in following the law. Period," Pascrell said later in the hearing after Republicans accused Democrats of abusing their oversight authority. "Give us the chance to do that. What am I saying? Give us a chance to follow the law, and we will not stop."

Witnesses testifying before the committee made clear there is no law requiring presidents to release their tax returns to the public, but because the Ways and Means Committee has the authority to compel the Treasury Department to release them, they should handle it the way they see fit.

"It's not a law. It's an informal tradition — a long one — but as I say in my testimony, I think those sorts of traditions are not the way to handle these sorts of issues," said Joseph Thorndike, the director of the Tax History Project. "If we believe that this kind of disclosure is important enough that we want them to do it, then we should require it. If we don't think it's that important, then we don't need to require it. I don't think we should let a tradition handle it."

Republicans warned of setting 'dangerous' precedents

But Republicans maintained a steady theme: Obtaining Trump's tax returns is both unnecessary and sets a dangerous precedent.

Republican Rep. Jackie Walorski of Indiana said forcing the Treasury secretary to hand over Trump's returns was tantamount to "weaponizing our tax laws to target a political foe."

"Mr. Pascrell was talking about hypocrisy. I'll tell you the Democrats are anything but hypocritical," said Republican Rep. Tom Rice of South Carolina. "They love to weaponize the IRS, aka Lois Lerner, and now going after the president's tax returns."

Republican Rep. Darin LaHood of Illinois characterized Democrats' push as unnecessary. Ohio Rep. Brad Wenstrup reiterated that there is no law on the books requiring Trump to disclose his tax returns.

The Republicans echoed the letter sent to Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal by GOP Reps. Kevin Brady and Mike Kelly, which begged Neal to stop the effort to obtain the tax returns.

"When we start making exceptions for one taxpayer, it begins the process of eroding and threatening the privacy rights of all taxpayers," they wrote. "This is a risk we cannot and should not take."

Republicans also parroted Trump's own reason as to why he has never released his tax returns, suggesting it would be unwise to do so while the president is under audit. Rep. Jodey Arrington of Texas mused that any misdeeds or tax evasion would be discovered in an audit, making any request to view them from the committee unnecessary.

Whether the White House and Republicans resist when and if the committee decides to formally request the tax returns from Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin appears imminent remains to be seen.

But the request will likely take some time since Democrats are making sure they have an airtight legal case to request the president's elusive tax information.

SEE ALSO: How the 15 richest members of Congress made their money

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: ROGER STONE: Trump is 'never going to change'