Monday, September 29, 2014

Why You Should Book Your Holiday Travel Now

If you think holding off on buying airline tickets for the holidays will help you score a last-minute deal, think again. Flights for Thanksgiving travel already are about 49% more expensive than the rest of the year, says CheapAir.com CEO Jeff Klee. And fares will almost certainly rise from this point until Thanksgiving and Christmas. So how do avoid paying an outrageous amount to get home for the holidays? Follow these strategies.

SEE ALSO: When to Book Flights to Get the Lowest Fares

Book flights by October 1. Airfare for holiday travel has been edging up slightly since Labor Day, says Anne Banas, executive editor of SmarterTravel.com. But prices will likely jump by as much as 20% in October. So buy your tickets by September 30 to save money. Because you have a few more days until the end of the month, set up a fare alert with a site such as Airfarewatchdog.com or Kayak.com to be notified if the price drops on a flight you want to take. Typically airlines have sales on Tuesdays, so you might see a slight drop the last day of September, which falls on a Tuesday, she says. Be ready to buy if you see any drop in price. But be prepared to purchase tickets by September 30 even if a deal doesn't surface because prices in all likelihood will only increase.

Consider alternate travel dates. The busiest travel day of the year is the Sunday after Thanksgiving, Banas and Klee say. The next busiest is the Wednesday before Thanksgiving. Because demand for airplane seats is so high on those days, the prices are much higher than on other days. So you can save a lot by flying the Monday or Tuesday before Thanksgiving and returning Friday or Saturday. For both Thanksgiving and Christmas, you can save hundreds of dollars by flying on the actual holidays, Banas says. Another option is to plan your gathering during the first two weeks of December or the first week of January, which are the slowest weeks of the year for air travel, Banas says. See the CheapAir.com calendar for the best days to fly for the holidays. And you can use a flexible search option on travel booking sites, such as the one at Bing Travel, to see which days have the best fares.

Consider alternate airports. Check fares on flights to all the airports near your destination because you might find it's significantly cheaper to fly to one than another, Klee says. A search on Kayak.com showed that the average price of a roundtrip flight from New York's LaGuardia Airport to Los Angeles International Airport was $512 leaving November 25 and returning November 29 versus $560, on average, for the same route departing from New Jersey's Newark Liberty International Airport.

Buy tickets for family members separately. Unlike other industries that give you a discount for buying in bulk, airlines don't cut you a deal if you buy several tickets for the same flight at one time. In fact, you might pay more if you're traveling with several family members or friends and purchase all of your tickets during one transaction, Klee says. Airlines typically quote prices based on the lowest fare available for your entire party. So if you're a party of five, for example, and there are only three seats available at a $200 price level but five seats are available for $300, you'll be quoted the $300 fare for all five tickets, he says. Book each ticket separately to take advantage of the seats that might be available at a lower price.

Don't rush to book a hotel room. Although flights fill up quickly around the holidays, hotels do not because travelers tend to stay with family over Thanksgiving and Christmas, Banas says. As a result, hotels are more likely to offer last-minute discounts to fill rooms around the holidays. You can use a mobile app, such as Last Minute Travel, to get a deal on a room. Or if you don't like the idea of waiting until the last minute, book your room using Tingo, which will automatically re-book your room at a lower rate if the hotel drops its price. Then you'll get a refund for the difference.



Sunday, September 28, 2014

The Finer Points Of Hedging… Or Not

Barry Ritholtz asks the right question—Why hedge?–in the wake of last week's announcement that California Public Employees' Retirement System (Calpers), the elephant in the room in the world of pension funds, is ending its decade-long experiment with hedge funds. The allure of these products in the wider world has been driven primarily by the hope that the funds will deliver outsized returns relative to the usual suspects. But smart investors like Calpers have also been drawn to the risk-management aspects of these hedge funds—i.e., low correlations with conventional portfolios of stocks and bonds. After the financial crisis of 2008, the focus on owning stuff that acted differently in times of elevated market stress while offering relatively high expected returns through time required no explanation. But a funny thing happened on the way to nirvana—the results fell short of the sales literature.

[Related -The Sixty Percent Alibaba Play No One Is Talking About]

The news that Calpers has pulled the plug on its small hedge fund allocation inspires a fresh look at the rising popularity of managing short-term market risks. The key issue for many investors is deciding how to integrate tactical aspects of risk management with the long-term needs of earning a respectable risk premium. Ritholtz zeroes in on the issue, asking the burning question that Calpers seems to have asked and answered with last week's announcement:

[Related -Bulls Leverage Hopeful News to Launch a Tepid Breakout Attempt]

Why does a group with investment horizons of two, three and even four decades, need to worry about hedging short-term investment risk? Consider the investor pool for the typical pension fund: Police, government workers, teachers, firefighters, school personnel, many of whom are in their 20s, 30s and 40s. The investment horizon is a key issue in deciding what sort of risks you are willing to take. The overriding question for this group of investors is how much volatility their portfolio can withstand.

The answer was found in Calpers's decision. When all was said and done, these beneficiaries simply didn't need a hedge.

Every investor with an investment horizon measured in years rather than days should be thinking about such topics. The critical decision boils down to this: How much short-term tactical risk management is appropriate so that it enhances rather degrades the capacity to generate positive long-term returns? Going to extremes is almost never a good idea, but that's what some folks may end up doing in the rush to fight the last war and develop hedges for 2008-type events.

In the pre-2008 era of buy-and-hold strategies, the notion that short-term tactical risk management could be valuable was too often dismissed as market-timing voodoo. It certainly could be, but not always. On the other side of 2008, the focus has swung to the opposite extreme. You can't swing a stick these days without someone promoting a new risk-hedging process and promising a smoother experience in the next crisis. But a simple principle applies for thinking about this subject: short-term risk management techniques aren't appropriate as a core holding. That doesn't mean you shouldn't have a short-term risk management overlay, but the tail shouldn't be wagging the dog.

The solution, of course, is to develop a healthy mix of the tactical and strategic. Easier said than done, but thinking about this nexus is essential. You might start by recognizing that in the long run it's really, really hard to add value over Mr. Market's asset allocation. Owning the major asset classes in something approximating market-value weights will likely outperform most strategies that try to deliver superior risk-adjusted results over, say, a decade or more. The problem is that most of us don't have the discipline to sit tight and suffer short-term drawdowns of 25% to 50%.

Adding a risk-management overlay to a portfolio of risky assets makes sense, and it could be something as simple as routine rebalancing. In any case, there are no one-size-fits-all solutions. As always, cost is a factor too. And depending on how you proceed, don't overlook the possibility that the solution that looks good in the short run could create trouble in the long run in terms of falling short of required results. The devil is very much in the details in the delicate art of hedging risk.

The good news is that there's no shortage of productive techniques for identifying and managing short-term risks—monitoring volatility or looking for so-called regime shifts that alert us that bull markets may be sliding over to the dark side, for instance. Meantime, there's a strong case for keeping an eye on the mother of all known risk factors—the business cycle.

Ultimately, the sky's the limit for hedging risk. Accordingly, the decision about whether to add a tactical risk-management process (or not), and how to proceed falls under the heading of customizing the portfolio design to match the investor's objectives, risk tolerance, etc. What you define as prudent and necessary may strike me as absurd. Nonetheless, the question must be asked and answered in a thoughtful way: Why hedge?

The answers will vary, and widely so, which is part of the reason why portfolio results are all over the map in the grand scheme of investing. Where to start? With the default solution, if only as a reference point. The average investor with an infinite time horizon should hold Mr. Market's asset allocation. For the rest of us, we need to develop a customized risk-management process that tweaks Mr. Market's strategy for our own purposes.

Yes, that's old news, but one that's forever new. As last week's decision by Calpers reminds, wisdom in matters of enlightened risk management has a tendency to be cyclical rather than cumulative.

Saturday, September 27, 2014

Will Juniper Networks Improve in the Future?

Network equipment-maker Juniper Networks (JNPR) posted higher-than-expected results in the first quarter of 2014 on the back of healthy demand. Its results were driven by various strategic initiatives such as cost cutting and restructuring efforts that are driving its operational efficiency, leading to an increase of 150 basis points in its margins during the quarter. Juniper also managed to reduce its expenses by $160 million.

Juniper's revenue came in to $1.17 billion, an increase of about 10% year over year, outpacing the consensus estimates of $1.15 billion for the quarter. Its non-GAAP net income rose nearly 22% year over year to $142.6 million, or earnings of $0.29 per diluted share.

Superior outlook

Juniper Networks also provided a fine outlook for the second quarter as it expects its revenue to be in the range of $1.2 billion to $1.23 billion, while its earnings are expected to fall in between $0.36 and $0.39 per share, similar to the market forecasts of $0.36 per share.

Furthermore, the maker of computer-networking equipment plans to return at least $3 billion to its shareholders through stock repurchases and dividend over three years. The company has already bought back shares worth $900 million in the first quarter.

Opportunities ahead

Juniper Networks' revenue gaining products such as EX and QFabric are driving its growth in the enterprise market. Its enterprise revenue grew an amazing 46% in the reported quarter. Juniper has also witnessed strong momentum with its newly launched MX line of edge routers that has received positive response in the market and continues to grow. The company expects these products to drive its sales going forward and offset weakness in the core due to unevenness in order bookings.

The Integrated Operating Plan has added tremendous value to its restructuring plan that promises to streamline research and development costs, as the company focuses on the new consolidated R&D structure that should optimize its engineering resources. The IOP is estimated to eliminate about $160 million in annualized structural cost from its operations.

The company has experienced solid demand from its service providers across web 2.0, cable, and carriers worldwide, as well as from the Americas Enterprise customers, all of which indicate incredible opportunity to penetrate further in the markets and lock up shares in the meaningful, high-growth segments like Cloud-Builder and High IQ networking.

According to a Cisco report released in February, U.S customers will download more data on their smartphones and tablets in 2018 than they did on their laptops in 2013. Hence, it should certainly help Juniper to increase its share in the telecom market. The telecom services business c

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Millennials Eye Alternative Paths to the Dream of Homeownership

dv595002 Digital Vision (Royalty-free) Couple Holding Blueprints to New Home This image may also be referenced as: 595002 This i Getty Images By Juliette Fairley In the pursuit of the Hollywood dream at age 25, Shequeta Smith moved from North Carolina to Los Angeles in 2004. She rented a room from a friend and began visualizing a place to call her own. "I wrote down exactly what I wanted on a piece of paper, and I still have that paper," Smith told MainStreet. The screenwriter and director imagined paying only $600 for a rental with a parking spot in Sherman Oaks, one of the wealthier enclaves in the sprawling city. But now a decade later she is looking to relocate to become a homeowner. Smith is one of the 48 percent of millennials who plan to move so they can own in the next five years, according to a study by The Demand Institute. "Most millennials want to own a home," said Louise Keely, president of TDI and senior vice president with Nielsen (NLSN). "But those who are currently renting may have trouble saving money for a down payment, because apartment rents have increased more quickly than their income." "It's hard to save money for a down payment, because of the cost of living," Smith said. "But once I make it in the film industry, I will buy a house outright in Charlotte and travel back and forth to Los Angeles for filmmaking." The Dream of Homeownership with a Twist TDI's "Millennials and Their Homes: Still Seeking the American Dream" found that the average millennial has $5,000 in debt and only $3,000 in savings outside of retirement. "Their net debt doesn't look like they are in a position to put a sizable down payment on a house, so saving money is an issue for millennials," Keely told MainStreet. As a result, more millennials are looking to alternative approaches to home ownership, with 69 percent saying they'd consider lease-to-own as one way. "Many are open to alternative approaches to housing finance, including single-family rentals and hybrid contracts such as lease-to-own," said Jeremy Burbank, vice president with TDI and Nielsen. A Different Job Market That's partly because the job market that millennials face differs from that of young adults in previous decades. "Unemployment is higher for millennials than older adults, which has slowed their household formation and their movement into homeownership," said Keely. Although the study further found that 44 percent of millennials think it's hard to qualify for a mortgage, most millennials are undeterred about long-term aspirations to own a home. About 51 percent of college grads aged 30 to 34 with debt own homes, compared to 67 percent of college graduates with no debt. The national average of homeownership is 65 percent. "The homeownership rate is lower for those who have student loan debt, but it's still higher than those who didn't go to college at all," said Keely. "Our findings indicate that student loan debt delays homeownership but does not cripple it." Multiple Alternatives One alternative to traditional home-buying is leasing-to-own, which locks a tenant in to the right to buy a home at a later date at a set price after putting down a non-refundable deposit. In some cases, part of the monthly rent goes toward the downpayment. Other alternatives to a mortgage include single family rentals, shared equity and long-term leases. Types of shared equity include cooperatives, private sector subsidies and land trusts. "An example of shared equity homeownership is when a municipality owns the land and builds the house while the homeowner owns the structure but not the land," Keely said. Long-term leases are another alternative to one- or two-year rentals by extending leases to 30 years, for example. "In the U.K., a leasehold is when you have a long-term lease as opposed to a freehold, where you own the property outright," said Keely. "With a long-term lease, the resident has the comfort of staying in the home a long time." Gen Y Housing Boost Despite their financial circumstances, the study found that millennials will spend $1.6 trillion on home purchases and $600 billion on rent in the next five years. "Millennials are an important factor in housing market activity," Keely said. "Their aspirations to own homes, move to the suburbs and drive a car are similar to [those of] older adults." Because many are still single with no children, millennials also contribute to the economy in a unique way. "They move more often than older adults, which creates turnover," said Keely. "Moving contributes to the economy quite a bit. It's a trigger for other types of consumption, creating income and revenue for various industries."

Saturday, September 20, 2014

Earnings Scheduled For September 4, 2014

Related CIEN Stocks To Watch For September 4, 2014 Earnings Previews: Ciena Corporation And Finisar Corporation Related HOV S&P 500 Struggles To Hold 2,000 As Commodities Rebound Toll Brothers Inc 6% Decline In Q3 Contracts Drags Down Sector

Ciena (NYSE: CIEN) is estimated to report its Q3 earnings at $0.29 per share on revenue of $600.81 million.

Hovnanian Enterprises (NYSE: HOV) is projected to report its Q3 earnings at $0.09 per share on revenue of $559.47 million.

VeriFone Systems (NYSE: PAY) is expected to report its Q3 earnings at $0.35 per share on revenue of $458.93 million.

Joy Global (NYSE: JOY) is estimated to report its Q3 earnings at $0.84 per share on revenue of $934.25 million.

Finisar (NASDAQ: FNSR) is expected to post its Q1 earnings at $0.32 per share on revenue of $328.66 million.

Verint Systems (NASDAQ: VRNT) is estimated to post its Q2 earnings at $0.60 per share on revenue of $270.88 million.

Mattress Firm Holding (NASDAQ: MFRM) is projected to report its Q2 earnings at $0.60 per share on revenue of $409.99 million.

Bebe Stores (NASDAQ: BEBE) is estimated to post a Q4 loss at $0.17 per share on revenue of $104.79 million.

UTi Worldwide (NASDAQ: UTIW) is expected to report its Q2 earnings at $0.01 per share on revenue of $1.14 billion.

Zumiez (NASDAQ: ZUMZ) is projected to post its Q2 earnings at $0.23 per share on revenue of $176.89 million.

Methode Electronics (NYSE: MEI) is estimated to report its Q1 earnings at $0.40 per share on revenue of $193.69 million.

The Cooper Companies (NYSE: COO) is expected to post its Q3 earnings at $1.90 per share on revenue of $443.65 million.

Infoblox (NYSE: BLOX) is projected to post its Q4 earnings at $0.01 per share on revenue of $60.49 million.

Culp (NYSE: CFI) is estimated to post its Q1 earnings at $0.35 per share on revenue of $74.39 million.

Esterline Technologies (NYSE: ESL) is expected to post its Q3 earnings at $1.40 per share on revenue of $516.57 million.

Aceto (NASDAQ: ACET) is projected to post its Q4 earnings at $0.17 per share on revenue of $134.23 million.

SeaChange International (NASDAQ: SEAC) is estimated to post a Q2 loss at $0.18 per share on revenue of $26.80 million.

China Gerui Advanced Materials Group (NASDAQ: CHOP) is expected to report its Q2 earnings.

Ambarella (NASDAQ: AMBA) is estimated to post its Q2 earnings at $0.28 per share on revenue of $44.67 million.

Shiloh Industries (NASDAQ: SHLO) is projected to report its Q3 earnings.

Quiksilver (NYSE: ZQK) is expected to post its Q3 earnings at $0.03 per share on revenue of $440.64 million.

Posted-In: Earnings scheduleEarnings News Pre-Market Outlook Markets

© 2014 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

  Related Articles (ACET + AMBA) Earnings Scheduled For September 4, 2014

Friday, September 19, 2014

What Price Love? Remarrying Can Cost You Social Security Benefits

Vertical|Color Image|Photography|Outdoors|Day|Wedding|Retirement|Life Events|Transportation|Wedding|Facial Expression|Smiling|Ad Getty Images Many retirees rely heavily on Social Security: The Social Security Administration reports that more than half of married couples and almost three-quarters of single retirees get at least half of their income from the program in retirement. For those who've been married previously, Social Security commonly pays two types of benefits: spousal benefits (for divorced spouses who qualify) and survivors benefits (for those whose spouses have passed away). But of course, being divorced or widowed doesn't mean you're destined to stay alone. New love may surprise you. But if that relationship grows, it could lead to a much less pleasant surprise: discontinued Social Security benefits. What Divorced Spouses Must Consider Social Security recognizes the potential financial damage a divorce can do, and so it provides many divorced spouses with the same benefits they'd be entitled to receive if they remained married. Specifically, if you were married for at least 10 years, then you can claim spousal benefits based on your ex-spouse's work history. Even if your ex-spouse remarries, you don't lose your Social Security benefits. That also doesn't reduce anyone's benefits; both you and your ex's new spouse both can claim spousal benefits if the necessary conditions are met. But once you remarry, you become entitled to take spousal benefits based on your new spouse's work history after a short waiting period. But you lose the ability to claim benefits based on your ex-spouse's work record. If your ex had a higher income than your new spouse, then you could see your benefit shrink as a result. For Surviving Spouses, Social Security Is More Complicated If your spouse dies, then you'll be entitled to receive survivors benefits. Those benefits typically equal your spouse's retirement benefit, which is usually substantially higher than spousal benefits. Like those who've divorced and whose ex-spouse is still living, widows and widowers face some potential pitfalls if they remarry. But with surviving spouses, Social Security's rules are more complex and seem almost arbitrary. For most surviving spouses, if you haven't yet reached age 60 and get remarried, then you won't be entitled to survivors benefits based on your deceased former spouse's work history. Instead, you'll have to claim spousal benefits from your new spouse and potentially get survivors benefits on your new spouse's work history in the future. Rules Change for Older People But if you're 60 or older, Social Security treats you differently. Even if you remarry, you're still entitled to survivors benefits on your deceased former spouse's work record. Again, you're not allowed to double-dip, as you'll only be entitled to additional benefits if they exceed what you're getting as a surviving spouse. Nevertheless, the rationale for putting people younger than 60 in jeopardy of losing benefits while those 60 or older face no such worries isn't entirely clear. As if that weren't enough, you can sometimes get back benefits even if you initially lost them. If a second marriage also ends in death or divorce, then you may be able to claim benefits based on your first spouse's work history. Understanding the intricacies of Social Security as a spouse can be tough. But given the potential for problems if you don't consider the financial implications of marital decisions, it's important to get a handle on the rules so you can make an informed choice. More from Dan Caplinger
•The Must-Know Tactic to Boost Your Social Security Benefits •How the Death of Cash Could Hammer Small Businesses •3 Things Every Spouse Must Know About Social Security

Sunday, September 14, 2014

Can You Guess the 5 States That Rake in the Most From Tobacco Taxes?


Image source: Philip Morris.

Tobacco is big business in the U.S. and around the world, and the companies that produce tobacco earn strong profits. Over time, federal and state governments have increasingly shared in the revenue from cigarettes and other tobacco products. In the two decades between 1992 and 2012, total federal tax collections on tobacco tripled to $15.6 billion, while net state tax collections have risen at almost the same pace to more than $18.2 billion in 2012. For producers, taxes have risen in concert, with Altria Group (NYSE: MO  ) having paid $6.8 billion in excise taxes on tobacco products in 2013, while Reynolds American (NYSE: RAI  ) paid $3.7 billion and Lorillard (NYSE: LO  ) added almost $2 billion more.

The most recent version of the compilation The Tax Burden on Tobacco  -- for which subsidiaries of Altria, Reynolds American, and Lorillard provided financial support -- goes into much greater detail about how tobacco gets taxed across the nation, shedding some light on which governments reap the most from tobacco taxes. Let's take a look at the five states that bring in the most tax revenue from tobacco.


Coin images courtesy U.S. Mint.

5. Michigan
Michigan collected $972 million in net tobacco taxes in 2012, with the vast majority of those revenues coming from cigarette sales. According to figures from the Tax Foundation, Michigan ranks just outside the top 10 in terms of cigarette excise taxes per pack at $2, and while that's less than half of New York's per-pack amount, Michigan residents smoke more than two and a half times as many packs of cigarettes, helping bolster tax revenue. With other sources of taxation facing challenging times within the state, Michigan's tobacco taxes represented more than 1.5% of overall state revenue three years ago -- the second largest proportion in the nation.

4. Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania collected $1.12 billion from taxes related to tobacco in 2012. The Keystone State is the only one of the top five states not to impose taxes on tobacco products other than cigarettes. But on a per-person basis, cigarette smoking is more prevalent in Pennsylvania than in any of the other states on this top five list, with the typical Pennsylvanian smoking 55 packs of cigarettes over the course of a year. Recently, lawmakers looked to impose an additional $2 per pack excise tax in Philadelphia in order to help close a budget gap for the local school district, but delays in the vote forced schools to open without a resolution to the financial issues.

Image Source: Nikita2706, Wikimedia Commons.

3. Florida
The state of Florida pulled in almost $1.24 billion from taxes on tobacco products, with cigarette taxes making up 92.5% of that total and taxes on loose tobacco, chewing tobacco, and snuff making up the difference. Florida doesn't have a state income tax, so the importance of other revenue sources is magnified in order to keep the state's budget flush with cash. Interestingly, though, Florida consumers pay less than the national average for cigarettes, with total taxes adding less than $2.70 per pack to the cost smokers pay. That helped Florida sell 875 million taxable packs of cigarettes in 2012. A proposal to boost cigarette taxes further sparked debate earlier this year, but with the state looking to roll back taxes in other areas, tobacco users probably can breathe easy, at least for now.

2. Texas
The largest state in the lower 48 by size raised $1.48 billion in tobacco taxes in 2012, but what makes Texas stand out is its success in getting tax revenue from forms of tobacco other than cigarettes. The $185 million in taxes on cigars, snuff, chewing tobacco, and loose tobacco that Texas imposed was nearly double what the next highest state collected. Texas also gets a big portion of its overall tobacco taxes in the form of general sales tax, ranking second only to California on that front. Modest prices help contribute to Texas selling 943.5 million packs -- the second-most in the nation -- and only 7.5 million packs behind California despite having a smaller population.

1. New York
New York tops the list of tobacco-taxing states, pulling in $1.63 billion and being responsible for close to 10% of the entire state-level taxes imposed on tobacco products across the nation. Interestingly, New York has been able to sustain those receipts despite having the highest average price per pack of cigarettes in the U.S., topping out at nearly $10. Of that amount, state and federal taxes make up more than $5.75, ranking New York No. 3 behind Rhode Island and Connecticut in the percentage of the total consumer price paid in tobacco taxes. In addition to state-level taxes, New York City collects more in local tobacco taxes than any other city in the U.S., with revenue of $126 million in 2012. Put together, those factors give New York the lowest volume of packs sold, at just 18 packs per person annually.

New York has also been the biggest beneficiary of settlement payments from Altria, Reynolds American, Lorillard, and other tobacco companies. Payments of almost $738 million even inched out California despite New York's smaller population.

Take advantage of this little-known tax "loophole"
Tobacco taxes aren't the only way that the government has hit Americans in the wallet lately. But with the right planning, you can take steps to take control of your taxes and potentially even lower your tax bill. In our brand-new special report "The IRS Is Daring You to Make This Investment Now!," you'll learn about the simple strategy to take advantage of a little-known IRS rule. Don't miss out on advice that could help you cut taxes for decades to come. Click here to learn more.

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Local police get billions in military equipment

ferguson militarized police The militarization of local police in the U.S. came into focus this week as heavily armed police faced off against protesters in Ferguson, Missouri. NEW YORK (CNNMoney) Local police departments are looking more and more like small armies, stocked with billions of dollars worth of military-grade equipment.

The Department of Homeland Security pumped $1 billion into local law enforcement last year, according to a report from the ACLU, while the Department of Defense kicked in another $449 million worth of equipment for police forces.

The extent to which local police in the U.S. have become militarized came into focus this week as heavily armed police faced off against protesters in Ferguson, Missouri, which itself received two Humvees from the Pentagon last fall.

The scene "resembles war more than traditional police action," wrote Sen. Rand Paul, a potential Republican presidential candidate, in an opinion piece for Time.

Attorney General Eric Holder also expressed concern. "We must seek to rebuild trust between law enforcement and the local community," he said. "I am deeply concerned that the deployment of military equipment and vehicles sends a conflicting message."

Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson denied his department has become militarized.

"It's not military, it's tactical operations," he said on Thursday. "That's who's out there, police. We're doing this in blue."

The Defense Department began arming local police with surplus equipment in 1997 as the Cold War wound down. Since then, the DoD has distributed more than $5 billion worth of vehicles, weapons and other supplies. Separately, after 9/11, a Homeland Security program launched providing cash grants to help small towns and big cities alike prepare for terrorist attacks and other disasters.

Critics say that local police don't need much of the equipment. For instance, twenty mine-resistant, ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles were distributed to police departments all over Missouri in the last eight years, although none went to Ferguson.

Gun, ammo sales spike around St. Louis   Gun, ammo sales spike around St. Louis

"An MRAP is built to withstand armor-piercing bombs. This is not something that we need in American communities," said Kara Dansky, who authored th! e ACLU report on militarization. "Increasingly the police are trained to view the people in the communities that they're supposed to be protecting and serving as enemies."

Some experts worry all this heavy equipment could lead to the use of more deadly force than might otherwise occur.

"You bring out the equipment, you add to the likelihood that you might be shot at," said Tom Fuentes a former FBI assistant director and a CNN Law Enforcement Analyst.

Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin said in a written statement Friday that Congress established the program out of concern that local law enforcement agencies were literally outgunned by drug criminals. But he said his committee will review the program to determine "if equipment provided by the Defense Department is being used as intended."

But others say there can be a legitimate need for the supplies, and that anticipating who will need it is impossible in advance.

"When it comes to equipment like this, it's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it," said Mike Brooks, a CNN law enforcement analyst.

-- CNN's Evan Perez, Brian Todd and Dugan McConnell contributed to this report.