• Top US law firms shelled out six-figure bonuses to associates in 2025.
• The generous end-of-year payouts come as top firms face increasing competition for talent.
• These are the bonuses five top law firms handed out last year.

Every year, elite US law firms hand out bonuses to associates, their hardworking rank-and-file attorneys.

Bonuses are typically ranked based on the number of years of experience associates hold. Many top US law firms match the “Cravath Scale” for associate bonuses, which is based on the salaries and bonuses awarded by the legacy law firm Cravath, Swaine & Moore.

However, as competition for junior talent has intensified, some firms are deviating from the industry standard as they battle to attract and retain top talent.

Here’s how five top US law firms awarded their associates in 2025.

Paul Weiss

Associates at Paul Weiss, a leading Big Law firm headquartered in New York, received annual bonuses of up to $140,000 for 2025.

In addition to the regular year-end bonus, associates would receive “a special 2025 bonus,” said Brad Karp, the chairman of Paul Weiss, in a memo sent to associates on November 20, 2025, seen by Business Insider.

“On behalf of my partners, please accept our sincere gratitude for all you do to make our firm so exceptional,” Karp told associates.

Paul Weiss’ associate bonuses categorized by class year were:

• Class year 2025: bonus $15,000 (prorated), special bonus $6,000 (prorated)
• Class year 2024: bonus $20,000, special bonus $6,000
• Class year 2023: bonus $30,000, special bonus $10,000
• Class year 2022: bonus $57,500, special bonus $15,000
• Class year 2021: bonus $75,000, special bonus $20,000
• Class year 2020: bonus $90,000, special bonus $25,000
• Class year 2019: bonus $105,000, special bonus $25,000
• Class year 2018 and senior: bonus $115,000, special bonus $25,000

In addition to the 2025 bonuses, Karp said some staff could expect “discretionary bonuses” in early 2026 for “outsized contributions to the firm over the past year.”

Pallas Partners

Senior associates and counsel at Pallas Partners received bonuses of up to $232,000 this year, exceeding the amounts set by the Cravath Scale, the firm told Business Insider.

Pallas, a leading boutique global litigation firm, said the bonuses recognize “the extraordinary commitment that the associates and counsel bring to the firm.”

“Pallas’s lawyers receive much more hands-on trial experience than their Big Law counterparts, and as such, their compensation reflects that high-level work and commitment,” Pallas said.

Davis Polk & Wardwell

The Big Law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell paid bonuses of up to $140,000 to its junior attorneys, a company rep told Business Insider.

Davis Polk, headquartered in New York, ranks among the top ten Big Law firms in the US. The bonuses awarded by the firm are in line with the industry standard Cravath scale.

Elsberg, Baker & Maruri

Elsberg, Baker & Mauri, an elite commercial trial, litigation, and arbitration firm headquartered in New York, told Business Insider that it paid its associates bonuses of up to $226,250 in 2025.

“We are pleased to have paid bonuses that were 175% of the big law market to our stellar associates, who helped achieve great results for our clients in 2025,” Rollo Baker, a founding partner of the firm, told Business Insider.

Katten Muchin Rosenman

Katten Muchin Rosenman, a large, full-service law firm, has offered year-end bonuses of up to $172,500 to its top associates, contingent on the number of bonus hours they worked, the firm confirmed to Business Insider.

The firm, headquartered in Chicago, also offers additional discretionary “superstar bonuses” to select associates.

• Governments worldwide are moving to restrict children’s access to social media in 2026.
• Australia, France, Denmark, Malaysia, and Norway are advancing or planning social media bans.
• In the US, there’s a patchwork of state efforts advancing, but they face legal challenges.

After years of discussion, 2026 is shaping up to be the year when governments around the world take action on kids using social media.

Australia, France, Denmark, and Norway are advancing or planning social-media bans for young people under a certain age. In the US, a patchwork of state-based efforts is likely to face tougher prospects.

The changes come as concerns mount over the toll that platforms like TikTok, YouTube, and Snapchat can take on young people’s mental health.

French President Emmanuel Macron, in a New Year’s Eve speech, reiterated his support for banning social media for children and young teens — setting the tone for what could be a landmark year for such efforts worldwide.

“We will protect our children and teenagers from social media and screens,” he said.

Social media ban talk becomes action

World leaders have talked for years about restricting children’s access to social media. Now, that talk is crystallizing into action. Australia became the first major nation to impose a social-media ban for children under 16. Its law took effect in December.

Macron wants France to follow Australia’s example. Bills in the works would restrict access for children under 15 starting next fall, timed to coincide with the start of the new academic year.

The Malaysian government has said it intends to implement a similar ban this year. Denmark is also planning a ban for children under 15, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen announced in October, warning that “never before have so many children and young people suffered from anxiety and depression.” Norway, too, is considering similar measures, though its prime minister acknowledged it would be a challenge to enforce.

In India, high court judges suggested in December that the country consider legislation modeled on Australia’s approach.

Social media companies say the measures are too extreme

Social media executives have criticized bans on their products, touting their own safeguards, questioning the feasibility of such measures, and warning of unintended consequences.

As for the Australian law, Google and Meta had both called for a delay in its implementation. They said the government should rely on an age-verification system, which had been under trial before the new law took effect.

“We want young people to have safe, age-appropriate experiences online and have spent a decade developing more than 50 tools and policies designed to protect them,” a Meta spokesperson told Business Insider last year in response to EU discussion on young people and social media.

Elon Musk, owner of X, criticized Australia’s legislation, calling it “a backdoor way to control access to the Internet by all Australians.” TikTok expressed “significant concerns” with the legislation.

A complicated patchwork in the US

Meanwhile, a nationwide effort in the US — the birthplace of the world’s largest social media companies — faces an uphill battle.

While lawmakers in Congress have floated proposals to restrict young people’s access, none have passed. Instead, the push has largely shifted to the states, where a patchwork of age-verification rules, parental-consent laws, and time limits is advancing, often amid legal challenges.

Virginia is set to impose a one-hour daily limit on social-media use for children under 16 unless parents opt out, a law that is scheduled to take effect this year but is already facing legal challenges. Nebraska recently passed legislation requiring parental consent for minors to open social-media accounts. Other states, including Utah and Florida, have advanced age-verification or parental-consent laws that have been delayed or blocked in court.

Some states are targeting smartphones, rather than just social media, imposing “bell-to-bell” bans on cellphones at public schools.

Attorneys general from 14 states sued TikTok in October, saying the app is addictive and profits from damaging the mental health of children. TikTok has disputed that its products harm kids, defending its own internal safeguards.

While momentum is gathering for efforts to protect children from social media, some industry watchers have cautioned that such efforts aren’t a magic fix and could have unexpected knock-on effects.

“While UNICEF welcomes the growing commitment to children’s online safety, social media bans come with their own risks, and they may even backfire,” UNICEF, the United Nations agency focused on children, said in a December statement, noting that some marginalized children rely on social media and that others may find workarounds or flock to darker corners of the internet.

• Business Insider asked interior designers which living-room trends are in and out for 2026.
• They said antique-style pieces and color capping will become more popular.
• However, single overhead lights and sterile layouts are going out of style.

Living rooms are often considered the heart of the home, serving as a versatile space for hosting guests, spending quality time with loved ones, and relaxing after a long day.

So, if there’s any room in your house that should feel warm, inviting, and full of personal touches, it should be this one.

With that in mind, Business Insider asked five interior designers to share insight on what will be popular in living rooms this coming year, and which fads are on their way out.

Here’s what they predict will be in and out for living rooms in 2026.

Color capping will begin to take over spaces.

According to Candace Griffin, principal designer and founder of Candace Mary Interiors, color capping will be a popular living-room trend this year.

Unlike color drenching, which covers an entire room’s walls in a single hue, color capping uses multiple shades from the same tone to create movement, depth, and a more polished look.

“Color capping can sometimes be used to draw your eye up, to make your ceilings feel taller,” Griffin said. “… It serves a functional purpose, but also just gives you another opportunity to have some fun in the space.”

We may see more people sourcing antique pieces.

Ultra-glam light fixtures will also lose popularity to soft, antique-style lamps in 2026, said Kara Thomas, interior designer and founder of Studio KT.

That said, the trend toward unique antiques will extend beyond lamps and sconces.

“I think the desire to fill a home with antiques and thoughtfully sourced items stems from a desire to be more unique, especially with the internet flooded with a lot of rinse-and-repeat ideas,” Thomas said.

For that reason, she believes we will see more rustic decor, mixed metals, and vintage artwork and frames in living rooms this year.

Cozy nooks and conversation areas are in style.

Interior designer Molly Torres Portnof of DATE Interiors said she predicts a shift toward more distinctive, intimate, and creative layouts.

This could look like incorporating a cozy reading nook or a small playroom for the kids into your living room.

“If you have the space to create separate conversation areas, you can get creative with those corners and niches,” Griffin added. “[It’s] really just maximizing every inch of the space and not feeling like you have to be in a box, per se.”

People are paying more attention to craftsmanship in their furniture and decor.

Handmade, wooden furniture and handwoven textiles will be everywhere in 2026, according to Molly Miller, principal designer and founder of Molly Miller Interiors.

“These elements add depth and authenticity that mass-produced items simply can’t match,” she said.

These particular elements are also becoming increasingly important as people gravitate toward home spaces that feel inviting, timeless, and emotionally calming, Miller added.

Mirror TVs might become a popular trend this year.

Oftentimes, people want to put a mirror on the wall or above their fireplace, but feel like they don’t have the room to fit it next to a TV.

With that in mind, Torres Portnof said she’s excited about the possibility of mirror TVs taking over living-room spaces.

As the name suggests, a mirror TV looks like a sleek, framed mirror when turned off and appears like a high-definition television when turned on.

“I love the fact that it’s dual-purpose, and I think others will as well,” she said.

Earthy hues are becoming foundation colors.

As more people turn toward designs that evoke warmth and comfort, designers expect soothing, earthy palettes to become everyone’s go-to choice for living-room colors.

“Everything is leaning more toward earthy tones,” said Thomas. In particular, she sees burgundy, deep browns, olive greens, and darker blues taking over living rooms this year and beyond.

On the flip side, single overhead lights are starting to lose favor.

Miller expects a shift from bright overhead lighting to warm, layered light sources in 2026.

“Layered, ambient lighting is becoming a priority, with clients asking for a mix of floor lamps, sconces, and table lamps that create warmth and flexibility, instead of relying on a single overhead source or recessed LEDs,” she said.

People are moving away from sterile designs and creating more personal spaces.

Danielle Chiprut, interior designer and founder of Danielle Rose Design Co., believes that bland, cold-feeling spaces are becoming outdated.

Instead, she predicts a growing shift toward heavily textured living-room designs with warmer colors, patterned sofas, and personalized elements.

“We’re moving away from that minimalist, modern design and into a more layered, cozy [layout],” Chiprut said.

Furthermore, as living rooms become less sterile and showroom-like, Griffin is also seeing a general pull toward spaces that feel truly “lived in.”

“The real way to achieve that is by taking your time and incorporating the things that you like and that are important to you,” she added.

For example, when it comes to artwork, she recommends building a collection over time and avoiding mass-produced pieces.

• I visited Amsterdam for the first time with my family, and a few things surprised me.
• I knew the city had a big bike culture, but I didn’t realize how intense it could be.
• The public transit options pleasantly surprised me, and I was blown away by the Indonesian cuisine.

I’d long imagined Amsterdam as a picturesque city of canals, tulips, and windmills.

However, visiting for the first time with my husband and 11-year-old twins quickly showed me a few surprising realities that coexist alongside those postcard-worthy views.

From its frenetic bike culture to its unexpected culinary influences, the city challenged some of my assumptions even as it reinforced others.

Here’s what surprised me most about my first time in Amsterdam.

The bikes are absolutely everywhere … and they’re not stopping for you

I was already aware of Amsterdam’s reputation as a cycling city — thanks to its flat, compact geography.

But until you’re standing at a crosswalk with hundreds of bikes whizzing by in every direction, it’s hard to really internalize just how central cycling is to daily life.

There are more bikes than residents here, and riders of all ages commute with precision and speed.

I spotted the littlest kids perching on handlebars (or even riding their own bikes in the street), people texting while biking, and lots of cyclists running red lights … all while tourists like us scrambled to get out of the way.

Locals aren’t aggressive so much as efficient per se; bikes are treated like vehicles, with their own rules and right-of-way. We learned quickly to look both ways — twice — before stepping into a lane.

It didn’t take me long to realize that my idea of renting bikes for a leisurely family ride through town was not going to be the casual thing I’d thought we might be up for.

Public transit makes cars feel not just unnecessary but actually a bit like a liability

To get around, we mostly relied on Amsterdam’s trams and buses. They ran on time, were comfortable, and took us pretty much everywhere we wanted to go.

But we had a major issue on our way out of town: Since our family of four had lots of luggage for a two-week jaunt through multiple European cities, we called an Uber to get us to the train station when it was time to leave.

This turned out to be a disaster. We left with what we thought should have been plenty of time, but we got stuck in gridlock traffic for far longer than anticipated.

Finally, we ended up jumping out of the unmoving car mid-ride and into a bus (with all our luggage), which we hoped would get us to the train station faster, since they have dedicated lanes.

But by then, it was too late; we ultimately missed our train. At least now I understand why so many locals skip cars entirely.

Indonesian food is one of Amsterdam’s signature dining experiences

At our hotel, I asked the concierge for local recommendations for a celebratory dinner on the evening of my twins’ birthday.

She explained that many traditional Dutch foods are prepared in people’s homes, so there isn’t as huge of a dining-out culture for this cuisine as I’d expected. So she recommended we get a traditional meal of “rijsttafel,” or “rice table,” at an Indonesian restaurant.

Rijsttafel is a Dutch-Indonesian feast born of the country’s colonial ties to Indonesia — the Netherlands colonized Indonesia for roughly 350 years.

It’s presented family-style, with tons of small dishes in the middle of the table for sampling, and served with rice — think satay, rendang, sambal (chili pastes), and vegetables.

The variety lets us sample a wide range of flavors, textures, and spices. It was incredible.

All in all, it felt like a super family-friendly city

Amsterdam has a strong reputation for its permissive sex and drug culture, which we didn’t seek out on a family trip. However, this vibe did seep into things like naughty souvenirs and street art, which slightly raised a couple of tween eyebrows.

That said, we generally found Amsterdam to be incredibly family-friendly. The walkable, compact city is filled with cultural attractions and parks, so even with kids in tow, it didn’t feel overwhelming.

My twins were able to navigate on foot, hop easily on trams, explore the sprawling Vondelpark greenspace, and sample kid-friendly treats, such as warm stroopwafels, from street vendors.

Aside from obvious venues for adults, we didn’t come across many spots where visitors had to be a certain age to step inside, which helped our whole family feel included. Kids seemed to be welcome all over, even in restaurants and pubs where we might not expect to see them back home in the US.

By the time we left, I definitely got why so many people fall hard for Amsterdam — it’s a visually beautiful city that throws some surprises and challenges at visitors, but it still made us feel right at home.

• I set out to cook chicken breasts four different ways to see which method yielded the best results.
• Pan-frying and baking produced the most flavor, but they also required ample time and attention.
• To my complete surprise, microwaving the chicken gave me faster, better results than poaching it.

As an omnivore who cares deeply about my protein intake, chicken breasts have always been a staple in my diet.

Prepared well, a lightly seasoned chicken breast can be absolutely delicious. Overdone, it can be rubbery and unpleasant.

So, I wanted to experiment with different appliances to find the easiest, most reliable way to cook chicken breasts. During this testing period, I poached a chicken breast in a pan of boiling water, baked it in the oven, fried it on the stovetop, and steamed it in the microwave.

Here’s how the four methods compared.

Roasting a chicken breast in the oven was simple.

I often cook chicken breasts in the oven after stuffing them with mozzarella and chorizo or ricotta and spinach, so I was intrigued to see how a plain chicken breast would taste.

I preheated my oven to 390 degrees Fahrenheit and added a little cooking spray to the bottom of a small baking tray.

Then, I placed the chicken breast in the pan and rubbed the top with some olive oil. To add flavor and spice, I sprinkled it with salt, pepper, and a little smoked paprika.

It came out juicy and flavorful.

After 20 minutes, I checked the thickest part of the chicken and found the juices were running clear, so I took it out of the oven. I let it rest for a few minutes before cutting to keep it juicy.

The oven-roasted chicken turned out lovely, with excellent texture and flavor. All things considered, it was a complete winner.

Pan-fried chicken required a bit more attention.

Next, it was time to try pan-frying. I heated some olive oil over relatively high heat and seasoned my chicken breast with salt, pepper, and smoked paprika.

When the oil was hot, I placed the chicken breast in the pan and cooked each side for two to three minutes before lowering the heat and placing a lid on the pan to help it cook through.

I turned and moved the chicken breast regularly in an attempt to cook it evenly.

Each side of the chicken breast turned a nice brown color, but it took 15 minutes to cook through completely — more time than I expected (although I’d rather overcook it and make sure the chicken is safe to eat).

Once it was done, I let it rest for a few minutes again.

The edges of the chicken turned out delicious.

Searing the meat at a high temperature created a tasty flavor. I loved how the top and bottom of the chicken had an almost charred taste after coming off the pan.

This perfectly cooked chicken breast was also juicy.

The stovetop chicken wasn’t hugely dissimilar to the oven version, but it had a more brown, flavorful exterior.

I was skeptical about cooking chicken in the microwave.

Before this experiment, I’d never microwaved chicken. I didn’t have high hopes.

I placed my chicken breast in a glass dish, seasoned it with salt, pepper, and smoked paprika, and poured water into the dish until it covered ⅓ of the chicken breast.

I covered the dish with a sheet of parchment paper and microwaved it for five minutes. When I opened the microwave door, I realized the baking paper had rotated and flopped onto the chicken.

Small logistical blip aside, it was completely cooked.

I was pleasantly surprised by how well (and quickly) the microwave cooked my chicken.

I took the chicken out of the microwave, let it sit for a minute or two, and then cut into it.

It didn’t have quite the same flavor as the baked and pan-fried chicken, but it was still moist and easy to shred. And it was so quick! I was pleasantly surprised.

Poaching chicken on the stovetop didn’t require much skill.

Poaching was the final cooking method I wanted to test.

I brought a pot of salted water to a boil, plopped in the chicken breast, covered it, and lowered the heat to a simmer.

Aside from putting salt in the water, I didn’t add any seasoning to the chicken. However, I’ve seen people poach chicken breasts in stock, so I might try that next time to see how it affects the flavor.

After about 15 minutes, the chicken was fully cooked.

I found it hard to overcook chicken with this method, but it was comparatively tasteless.

The poached chicken breast didn’t look particularly appealing, but it was cooked through.

Although I don’t love plain poached chicken on its own and find it quite bland, it works well for shredding and adding to fajitas, curries, or pasta.

After this test, I’ll start using the microwave for my chicken breasts.

I regularly poach chicken, but honestly, the microwave did the same thing as the stove. Actually, it did an even better job in less time.

I’d never considered using the appliance to cook chicken before this test, but I wish I’d tried it sooner. My husband was surprised by how nicely the microwave version turned out, too.

For some dishes, I’ll stick to frying and roasting chicken breasts, but the next time I want shredded chicken, I’ll use the microwave.

• Tate Stock, with his wife Hannah, founded Chirp, a wellness company.
• He started the business with $450, consisting of PVC pipe and yoga mats.
• He’s turned down multiple investors, including one from “Shark Tank.”

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Tate Stock, founder of Chirp. It has been edited for length and clarity.

Back in 2015, I was doing laundry at my aunt’s house when I noticed this interesting-looking wheel. My aunt explained it was a yoga wheel. I had never done yoga in my life, but I was intrigued. I’d grown up on a farm, and to me it looked like the wheel was made from sewer pipe with a grippy mat on top.

I typed “yoga wheel” into my Amazon account, and the suggested text finished my phrase. That told me there was demand that the algorithm was recognizing, but there weren’t too many sellers.

I went to the store and bought $400 worth of pipe and $50 in yoga mats. I set up shop in my buddy’s mom’s barn and created 110 wheels. I listed them on Amazon and made thousands of dollars in the first two weeks.

That was the start of Chirp — my company, which has generated more than $250 million in sales over the past 10 years.

We lived on about $22,000 a year and reinvested in the company

I was 23 when I started making the wheels, and my now-wife Hannah was 21. At the time, we were living off love and potatoes, and pouring all our profits back into the business.

We were able to do that thanks to some savings I had. After high school, I did a Mormon mission in Fiji for two years. When I returned, my older brother was working in pest control sales, going door-to-door. I just needed to make a buck, so I joined him and managed to make $100,000 that summer.

That’s what Hannah and I lived off as we launched Chirp. We budgeted $22,000 a year, most of which went to rent. Although Chirp was bringing in big margins, we were reinvesting them back into the company. That was OK with us, because we were willing to live the lifestyle that fit our age, not our wealth.

Pivoting from yoga to pain relief helped sales flourish

Around 2018, I noticed something: Chirp wheels were designed for yogis — mostly women. But their husbands were using the wheels to roll out their muscles and crack their backs, and it felt really good.

I attended a convention, and on the first day, I sold Chirp as a yoga tool. I made a few sales, but not many. The next day, I sold the products as a form of pain relief. We sold out. When we pivoted our marketing, sales skyrocketed. We did $4 million in just six months that year.

Another significant breakthrough occurred in 2020, when we appeared on Shark Tank. We secured a deal with Lori Greiner, who offered $900,000 for a 2.5% equity stake. Ultimately, we didn’t close that deal — we mutually decided that Chirp had already accomplished many of the things Lori could help us with, such as appearing on QVC.

We’ve turned down private equity offers

After the show, a private equity firm reached out, willing to buy full or partial ownership in Chirp. Hannah and I turned that down. Accepting it just didn’t feel right. We still wanted to do more with Chirp, and we were only 26 and 28 years old. We started investing more in research and development, creating new methods for personalized pain relief.

Most founders are burned out after 10 years, but I’m more excited than ever to show up for work. I love that Chirp is founder-led, and we have no investors. Recently, I bought a pet chameleon for the office. It symbolizes the company culture — keeping Chirp wild.

I indulge in travel to help my kids gain perspective

Hannah and I have four kids, who range in age from 8 months to 8 years. We’re no longer just living on love and potatoes, but we stay fairly modest. One indulgence we have is travel. We enjoy taking the family on a cultural experience for a month each year. We’ve taken them to Japan, Fiji, Switzerland, and England.

It’s humbling to understand how other people live. I want my kids to know the world is bigger than themselves. Life isn’t just about you, and travel can help them see the world through other perspectives. That’s really healthy.