Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Randy Feenstra (IA-04)
HULL, IOWA — Today, U.S. Rep. Randy Feenstra (R-Hull) released the following statement after finishing a three-day stint on his 36 County Tour that took him to 12 counties in Iowa’s 4th Congressional District:
“Since I was first elected to Congress, I pledged that I would travel to all 36 counties in our district at least twice each year. This week, I upheld that promise by meeting with Iowans in 12 different counties.
I toured Maintainer Corporation in Sheldon, held a roundtable discussion with local businesses impacted by last summer’s floods in Spencer, surveyed damage from last Thursday’s storms in Storm Lake, stopped by the Britt Area Food Bank, checked out new housing developments in Fonda, and visited the Iowa Veterans Home in Marshalltown. I also spoke at the Boone County Economic Development breakfast, toured Mid-States Millwright and Builders in Nevada, checked out Omnium Manufacturing in Hampton, visited Silgan Containers in Fort Dodge, met with a State Farm Insurance agent in Eagle Grove, and toured ARKO Labs in Jewell and Best Veterinary Solutions in Ellsworth.
Serving on the House Ways and Means Committee and the House Agriculture Committee, I will continue to be a strong voice for our families, farmers, businesses, and rural communities.”
ROCKY MOUNT, N.C. —Congressman Don Davis delivered the following remarks at his press conference on the first 100 days of the 119th Congress:
Hi, everybody! It is always great to be back home, in eastern North Carolina. I have worked to share the stories, concerns, and issues impacting eastern North Carolina families. Our district now spans 22 incredible counties, from the coastlines of Currituck and Camden counties through the farmland of Lenoir and Wayne counties to the heart of Oxford and everywhere between. My vision for NC-01 is: “We must meet our constituents where they are, ensuring they are seen and heard in Washington, D.C., to make life better for all families and provide hope and assurance they are not forgotten.” We work to achieve this daily.
We’ve opened three new offices: 1. Rocky Mount, 2. Goldsboro, and 3. Elizabeth City. We held listening sessions in Camden, Currituck, Granville, Wayne, and Lenoir counties. Due to an increased interest in town halls, we hosted a telephone town hall with nearly 13,000 participants. So far this year, we helped close more than 240 constituent cases and returned over $821,000 to eastern North Carolina families, cutting through bureaucracy to return money directly to our neighbors. Our District Outreach Team has made over 156 visits to meet with constituents across the district, showing up, listening, attending events and meetings, and responding to issues.
During the 119th Congress, 11,750 constituents have reached out to the office. In comparison, during the 118th Congress, 8,745 constituents reached out to the office through April 14. The top three campaigns during the 119th Congress have been: 1) Protect Social Security, 2) Oppose the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and Elon Musk, and 3) Support the Ensuring Pathways to Innovative Cures (EPIC) Act.
I have introduced 14 bills in the 119th Congress, including:
H.R. 1060, Modern Authentication of Pharmaceuticals (MAP) Act of 2025: The first bill we introduced was the Modern Authentication of Pharmaceuticals Act, legislation that seeks to secure the United States drug supply chain and close vulnerabilities that allow counterfeit controlled substances, including lethal fentanyl, into our communities;
H.R. 1244, Reducing Drug Prices for Seniors Act, legislation that reduces out-of-pocket expenses for Medicare patients by calculating the coinsurance cost at the pharmacy counter based on the drug’s net, or actual price, rather than its list price;
H.R. 1298,Veterans Jobs Opportunity Act, legislation that sets a new business-related tax credit for the start-up expenses of a veteran-owned small business in an underserved community;
H.R. 1363,Honor and Remember Flag Recognition Act of 2025, legislation that designates the Honor and Remember Flag, created by Honor and Remember, Inc., as a national symbol to honor service members who died in the line of duty;
H.R. 1377,Sarah Keys Evans Congressional Gold Medal Act in recognition of her achievements relating to the desegregation of passengers on interstate buses in the 1950s. Before there was Rosa Parks, there was Sara Keys Evans;
H.R. 1672,Maintaining New Investments in New Innovation (MINI) Act ensures lifesaving genetic treatments remain accessible;
H.R. 1858,Flooding Prevention, Assessment, and Restoration Act would strengthen flood prevention measures and provide support for rural communities facing flood risks;
H.R. 1985, Promoting Precision Agriculture Act, ensuring our growers have access to the cutting-edge precision agriculture technologies and broadband services necessary to do what they do best — feed, fuel, and clothe the American people;
H.R. 2043,Agricultural Commodities Price Enhancement Act, legislation that increases the reference price for seed cotton, peanuts, corn, soybeans, and wheat;
H.R. 2109,Cybersecurity for Rural Water Systems Act, ensures our water systems that rural communities and farmers rely on have the necessary protections to successfully guard against cyber-attacks;
H.R. 2541,Nuclear Medicine Clarification Act of 2025, legislation that would close a loophole that currently allows patients to be unintentionally exposed to high levels of radiation without reporting or disclosure. The legislation would improve care and ensure transparency for patients and simplify federal rules coming from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC);
H.R. 2542,Old Drugs, New Cures Act, legislation to improve access to innovative, affordable medication and tackle health disparities in rural and low-income communities across America;
H.R. 2625, Veterans Employment Readiness Yield (VERY) Act, which updates outdated language. The VERY Act makes changes to let our disabled vets know that they are receiving the respect and dignity they have rightfully earned; and
H.R. 2707, Protecting American Families and Servicemembers from Anthrax Act, ensuring the U.S. Department of Defense and Department of Health and Human Services develop a long-term stockpiling strategy that leverages the Strategic National Stockpile to enhance national preparedness.
I am committed to:
Fighting for our farmers by advocating for a temporary pause on the Adverse Effective Wage Rate and pushing for a comprehensive Farm Bill that enhances commodity pricing. We also need continued support for agricultural assistance for farmers hurt by difficult times;
Protecting Seymour Johnson Air Force Base. We are working to protect Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, including two visits and annual defense priorities focusing on F-15EX procurement, Child Development Center upgrades, maintenance dollars for F-15E aircraft, and $41 million in Combat Arms Training & Maintenance funds;
Building our local economy, by creating good-paying jobs in shipbuilding with Newport News Shipyard and the Global TransPark, a critical hub for jobs, logistics, and innovation, while addressing local government infrastructure needs.We are also working to address our Interstate, broadband, and housing needs;
Enhancing our healthcare outcomes is vital. I support Martin County’s efforts to enhance its healthcare system and advocate for a new Health Sciences facility at Barton College by advocating for $10 million through Barton’s application to the Golden LEAF Foundation;
On border security, I will continue supporting a secure border and meaningful immigration reform that respects our values. I have visited the ICE facility that services eastern North Carolina in Alamance County Detention Center and traveled as part of an Armed Services Committee CODEL to Naval Station Guantanamo Bay to gain firsthand insight into the role these facilities play in our border security strategy. Next week, I will travel to Lumpkin, Georgia to tour a regional ICE facility;
I will be filing key legislation that addresses federal recognition for the Haliwa Saponi Indian Tribe, support for the Southeast Crescent Regional Commission, and tax fairness for combat-injured Coast Guard veterans.
Together, these efforts will contribute to a brighter future for our region. We’re not sitting on the sidelines. We are working hard every day on healthcare, agriculture, defense, and working families.
An early victory during the Trump Administration includes the decision by the Food and Drug Administration to formally withdraw and end the effort by the agency to consider a ban on menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars. As the Ranking Member of the Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development Subcommittee of the House Agriculture Committee, I am working on regulatory framework legislation for the crypto and digital assets industry that is a priority of the Administration.
I also know that people are currently nervous about the state of the country and the world.
Specific concerns include: 1. Helene and agriculture assistance, 2. education funding reductions, and 3. tariffs.
I voted in support of disaster assistance for Helene in the West and drought in the East. I am glad that economic assistance was included. But we are way short. We are a billion short for agricultural assistance alone.
I visited North Lenoir High School in Lenoir County just this morning, one of the four public school districts in North Carolina that no longer has access to COVID-19-related funding that they had been promised because the U.S. Department of Education terminated their ability to liquidate those federal dollars.
On Friday, I visited Halifax County Schools to discuss the same issue.
We are:
Sending a letter to the U.S. Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon;
Seeking to schedule a meeting with the Secretary;
Reaching out to other North Carolina delegation members to consider a joint letter; and
Communicating our findings to the White House.
For tariffs, eastern North Carolina cannot afford to be collateral damage in a trade war. We need tough and targeted trade policies, but our policies must also protect jobs, lower input costs, and keep our communities strong.
Previously, I voted in support of the SAVE ACT. After speaking with North Carolina State Board of Election officials, I voted against it based on the concern that the bill cannot be implemented as drafted. While I support the intent of the SAVE Act that makes crystal clear only U.S. citizens should vote in elections, N.C. election officials have shared serious concerns about its implementation. The limited time for modernizing our information systems, uncertain taxpayer costs, and the need for clear standards to verify U.S. citizenship pose risks to administering federal elections. I remain committed to improving this bill and ensuring free and fair elections.
We are meeting residents where they are. We read “Pete the Cat and His Magic Sunglasses” at St. Stephens Daycare. Federal funds for early childhood education remain important. I visited International Paper at Manson, spoke with quilters in Warrenton, and held a meeting with the Global TransPark. This morning, I traveled to N. Lenoir High School to look at their roof.
I plan to visit Pine Gates Renewables, Freedom Industries, and the Boys and Girls Club of the Tar River Region later today. Over the course of the next week, I will attend the 60th Annual Haliwa Saponi Blooming of the Dogwood Powwow, visit Airbus and Collins Aerospace, Barton College, Davita Kidney Care in Wilson, and Wilson Community College.
I plan to meet with the Albemarle Area United Way, break ground at Elizabeth City State University for an aviation building, visit U.S. Coast Guard Elizabeth City, visit the Food Bank of Albemarle, and meet with the Perquimans County EMS director to discuss recovery efforts.
As this is Holy Week, I wish everyone a wonderful Easter. Meanwhile, we will keep looking for opportunities to work with the Administration. Tax filing deadline was extended to May 1 for federal and state for all NC residents due to Helene. I encourage residents to file their taxes or an extension. We will keep advocating for our families, our farmers, our veterans, our students, and the future we believe in. May God bless eastern North Carolina, and our nation.
Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
Canada is Washington’s largest overall trading partner, accounting for nearly $20 billion in imports and $10 billion in exports
***AUDIO of full roundtable discussion HERE***
***PHOTOS and B-ROLL HERE***
Blaine, WA — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, held a roundtable discussion on how Trump’s chaotic trade war and senseless tariffs are affecting Washington state’s border communities and local businesses. In the City of Blaine, which is located along the United States-Canada border, retail and service revenue has fallen 40 percent, and the City of Bellingham and other communities near the border are reporting a roughly 20 percent decrease in revenue due to Trump’s trade war and increasing anti-American sentiment from Canadian neighbors.
Canada is Washington’s largest overall trading partner, accounting for nearly $20 billion in imports and $10 billion in exports. Senator Murray was joined for the discussion by Blaine Mayor Mary Lou Steward; Surrey (Canada) Mayor Brenda Locke; Blaine City Manager Mike Harmon; Dr. Laurie Trautman, Director of the Border Policy Research Institute; and Ali Hayton, Owner of Point Roberts Marketplace.
On April 2nd, President Trump announced sweeping new tariffs on nearly every country, including a 10 percent baseline tariff on all imported goods, and country-specific so-called reciprocal tariffs. Just hours after the reciprocal tariff rates took effect last Wednesday, Trump abruptly changed his mind and put a 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs. But Trump is still taxing goods from every country, across the board, at 10 percent at least. Even with his “pause,” Trump’s new tariff rates are still the highest in decades, and are estimated to cost American families more than $4,000 per year—the largest tax increase since 1968.
“As everyone here knows, the folks just across the border in Canada are not just our neighbors—they are our friends, and some families even span the border. It’s not just personal connections that are strong here, but economic connections. Trade with Canada, and visitors and customers are a crucial part of the local economy,” said Senator Murray. “Yet, every week Trump seems to find a new way to drive a wedge between us and our Canadian allies, and a new way to drive business away from our communities. He’s whipping up a fact-free frenzy about drugs at the Canadian border. The fact is: less than 1 percent of fentanyl intercepted at the U.S. border is from Canada. He has created complete chaos and fear for every day travelers crossing our border. People coming here for work, or just for visits, have been detained. His border theatrics are scaring away tourists and scaring off business. And the pointless, painful trade war is in reality an enormous tax paid by our families.”
“Trump is pushing away some of our most important trade partners, raising prices for families at the grocery store, and pushing small businesses to the brink—some may even shutter. All of this is incredibly harmful to our communities—it’s not the way we should treat our neighbors, and it’s catastrophic for business too,” Senator Murray continued. “I’m glad to be here to shine a spotlight the real damage Trump is doing with his tariffs, his chaos, and his attempts to bully one of our closest allies for no reason—and to listen to your stories and take them back with me to the other Washington.”
Washington state has one of the most trade-dependent economies of any state in the country, with 40 percent of jobs tied to international commerce. Washington state is the top U.S. producer of apples, blueberries, hops, pears, spearmint oil, and sweet cherries—all of which risk losing vital export markets due to retaliatory tariffs from key trading partners including Canada. Additionally, more than 12,000 small and medium-sized companies in Washington state export goods and will struggle to absorb the impact of retaliatory tariffs. Trump’s tariffs during his first term were extremely costly for Washington state—for example, India imposed a 20 percent retaliatory tariff on U.S. apples, causing Washington apple shipments to India to fall by 99 percent and growers to lose hundreds of millions of dollars in exports.
“We really, really depend upon Canadians coming to shop in Blaine. And part of this just is our history… We do have small businesses in town that we like to support, and over the years, the Canadians have come down and supported these immensely, in particular the gas, dairy, and shopping—Amazon parcels that are mail orders. These are all suffering. People are being laid off, and this is hurting us because the Canadian southbound traffic has dropped off to 50 percent of a decrease in the amount of traffic, so this does affect our businesses,” said Mary Lou Steward, Mayor of Blaine. “Sales tax receipts eclipse property tax receipts nearly by two to one, so sales tax is really, really important. And it takes all of Blaine’s property tax plus sales tax receipts to fund our police department… Blaine and Bellingham receive nearly the same number of Canadian visitors, however, those going to Bellingham shop and spend four to one times as much money in Bellingham as they do coming to Blaine to buy gas and eat locally.”
“Much like during the pandemic, our border communities are being impacted disproportionately, only this time by the antagonistic approach of the Trump Administration towards Canada. These impacts are far reaching and go well beyond the immediate economic damage our communities face, affecting our social connections, and our ability to respond to natural disasters that know no borders,” said Dr. Laurie Trautman, Director of the Border Policy Research Institute. “Cross-border connections with our Canadian neighbors provide immeasurable benefits to our community- supporting our economy and our security. Travel by Canadians has dropped by over 50%, largely due to the antagonism of the Trump Administration, leaving our businesses more vulnerable and our community less secure.”
“Senator Murray has long stood with Point Roberts, championing our unique needs during the COVID-19 pandemic, when border closures devastated our local economy and isolated our community. Her tireless efforts helped bring much-needed attention to our situation during that crisis, and her commitment remains strong today as we face new challenges brought on by international tariff disputes. Businesses in Point Roberts are struggling to navigate the uncertainty created by these trade tensions. When I reached out to Senator Murray’s office for help, their response was immediate. While it’s unclear exactly what relief might come for Point Roberts and other border towns, today’s meeting — bringing together community leaders from both sides of the border — is a hopeful step forward in rebuilding the longstanding relationships we’ve shared with our Canadian neighbors,” said Ali Hayton, Owner of Point Roberts Marketplace. “We may not yet know what the future holds, but having Senator Murray in our corner makes all the difference. Her leadership, compassion, and steadfast commitment to the people of Point Roberts are deeply appreciated.”
Senator Murray has been a vocal opponent of Trump’s chaotic trade war and has been lifting up the voices of people in Washington state harmed by this administration’s approach to trade. Senator Murray continues to call on Republicans to end Trump’s trade war—which Congress has the power to do—and take back Congress’ Constitutionally-granted power to impose tariffs. Earlier this month, Senator Murray brought together leaders across Washington state who highlighted how Trump’s ongoing trade war is already a devastating hit to Washington state’s economy, businesses, and our agriculture sector. Senator Murray also took to the Senate floor to lay out how Trump’s chaotic trade war is seriously threatening our economy, American businesses, families’ retirement savings, and so much else. Earlier this week, Senator Murray joined her colleagues in pressing U.S. Trade Representative Ambassador Jamieson Greer on how the Trump administration’s tariffs are affecting farmers across the country. Last week, Senator Murray also held a roundtable discussion in Tacoma with local businesses and ports, toured local businesses in downtown Vancouver, and held a roundtable discussion in Vancouver with local businesses and ports, to highlight how Trump’s chaotic trade war and senseless tariffs are harming the overall economy in Washington state. Earlier this week, Senator Murray met with small business owners in Seattle’s University District to hear how Trump’s tariffs and trade war are harming them.
Agricultural societies play a crucial role in the province’s rural communities. They bring people together, organize and run events and improve the overall quality of life for residents in their communities.
Alberta has more agriculture societies than any other province with 292 organizations. Alberta’s government is helping regional agricultural societies weather increasing costs and plan ahead with a one-time cash injection of more than $7.4 million.
“It’s hard to overstate the impact regional agricultural societies have on rural Alberta. From event organizing to infrastructure upkeep, they energize folks and bring communities together. This funding will ensure our regional agriculture societies are able to keep up their good work and continue to be pillars of their communities.”
New funding includes $4.03 million in one-time supports distributed among the seven regional ag societies to help them manage cost pressures and allow them to plan for the future, including achieving more sustainable operational models. It also includes a one-time investment of $2.87 million to support business transformation projects and funding set aside for a third-party consultant to help with those efforts.
This is on top of the continued annual total funding of $2.8 million for regional agricultural societies through the Agricultural Societies Grant Program.
In 2024, Alberta’s government hired Deloitte to conduct a sustainability assessment of the societies and provide recommendations to address their financial struggles. Those recommendations helped inform this funding and the next steps.
“On behalf of the Medicine Hat Exhibition and Stampede, I would like to extend our heartfelt gratitude to the province for the generous funding provided to us. This support is instrumental in helping each regional fair achieve its goals and make a positive impact in its community. Thank you for your commitment to fostering growth and development.”
“Thank you to the Government of Alberta for its continued support of Regional Agricultural Societies and Lethbridge & District Exhibition (LDE). Ag Societies benefit the communities they serve, enhancing the quality of life for Albertans, while supporting the critical role agriculture plays in our economy. This strong support from our provincial government allows LDE to improve and evolve, while supporting the programming needed to cultivate the agriculture community. It’s this partnership that will help to make us successful and sustainable for another 100 years”.
Quick facts
Agricultural societies are volunteer-driven and collectively host more than 39,000 events and activities each year.
Alberta’s seven regional agricultural societies are in Camrose, Grande Prairie, Lethbridge, Lloydminster, Olds, Medicine Hat and Red Deer.
Regional is a long-standing historic designation for these seven agricultural societies.
Each regional agricultural society currently receives total annual funding of $398,853, including a base grant of $298,853 and an operating grant of $100,000 to support agricultural event days.
Related information
Alberta Agricultural Societies Program
Related news
Charting a path for regional ag societies (July 31, 2024)
It is a privilege to join you today to kick-off the Africa Fintech Summit of 2025. Twice a year this convening serves as one of the largest gatherings of Africa’s Fintech Community—connecting entrepreneurs, investors, and regulators during the International Monetary Fund/World Bank spring meeting week in Washington, DC. and in the fall in Africa. My tremendous thanks to the organizers and hosts. As you arrived this morning, I am sure you were able to appreciate the perfect spring weather and blooming cherry blossoms that we ordered for you this week. There are few places in DC that are lovelier this time of year than where we sit, here in Georgetown. In my career, I have learned about entrepreneurship from mentors and clients at the world’s largest investment banks, small start-ups, and family-founded businesses. My family’s history as entrepreneurs and informal investors in community small businesses dates to the mid-1800s here in the United States. Perhaps one day, I will have the opportunity to continue this tradition and help fund the businesses of innovative founders. Today, I am a Commissioner at the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, nominated by former President Biden and unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate.[1] At the CFTC, we oversee U.S. markets and market participants for derivatives contracts that reference commodities. According to a Bank for International Settlements report, the notional value of the global derivatives market is over $730 trillion.[2] In recent years, courts and Congress have indicated intentions to expand the CFTC’s mandate to include oversight of emerging technologies, including distributed digital ledger technologies commonly referred to as blockchain technologies, digital assets, including cryptocurrencies, and certain platforms within the assemblage of technologies referred to as artificial intelligence. African Fintech Firms Inspire a World of Innovation African fintech firms demonstrate curiosity, creativity, and driven commitment to deliver first-rate fintech products and services to consumers and businesses on the continent and around the world. During my time as a CFTC Commissioner, I have traveled to South Africa, Kenya, Zambia, and Ghana to meet with fintech entrepreneurs. I have witnessed first-hand the exceptional creativity and curiosity that drives African fintech entrepreneurs. As you well know from CNBC’s announcement last year, six African fintech firms are among the world’s top fintech companies PalmPay, Flutterwave, Kuda, MTN, Piggvest, and Yoco.[3] African fintech firms have emerged from every corner of the continent. In various stages of development—from incubators to early stages (pre-seed) capital raising to joint ventures with Google, Microsoft, and AWS—African fintech firms enhance financial accessibility, inclusivity, and consumer empowerment. These businesses integrate the most advanced technologies available, reflect global thought leadership in the potential for emerging technologies to reshape access and opportunities for both consumer and commercial finance, and create pathways for inclusion that have inspired creative consumer finance solutions around the globe. As you know well, the recipe for entrepreneurial success begins with a great idea. Yet, building opportunities in fast-moving, high-tech markets requires a number of critical inputs as well as conditions to facilitate growth and development. Entrepreneurs or innovators, funders or sources of capital, and, yes, regulators all have an important role to play in promoting responsible innovation and growth. It has been my pleasure to collaborate with regulators around the continent as they consider ways to spur innovation and growth. Last year, during my keynote remarks at the South African Reserve Bank Fintech Summit in Johannesburg[4] and at the beginning of this year in Ghana, I emphasized the opportunities for African fintech firms to innovate using AI in consumer finance. The Rise of AI in Fintech As I noted in my opening remarks at The South African Reserve Bank Fintech Summit last year, While our markets have long relied upon AI for a variety of risk management and predictive pricing functions, we are witnessing rapid developments beyond reinforcement learning and neural networks in generative AI. Increasingly, diverse industries and sectors of our economy identify opportunities to integrate aspects of the assemblage of technologies that we commonly describe as AI or AI technologies. AI enables doctors to diagnose and map diseases earlier, faster, and with greater accuracy than ever before in the history of medicine. Farmers who cultivate crops that feed [] nation[s] may integrate AI to better manage access to vital resources such as freshwater, enabling more efficient irrigation, fertilization, and crop rotation leading to more sustainable farming. In our markets, AI offers similar efficiencies for faster trade execution and settlement, more accurate pricing prediction, and more precise risk management oversight. Markets have witnessed increasing adoption of AI including AI-driven investment advising, trade execution, risk management, and market surveillance.[5] Financial services firms are fully embracing the powers of AI, making increasingly large investments in infrastructure to support AI and expanding the roster of use cases. One economist estimates that investments in AI may reach $97 billion by 2027.[6] Notable Challenges for Inclusion As AI adoption expands across markets, however, there are a number of notable challenges. For many, the costs of relying on large language models or agentic AI will place these technologies beyond the resources of their businesses. Accessibility and Inclusivity Challenges for Global Competitors The high cost of developing advanced AI technologies and the infrastructure to support their use poses significant accessibility and inclusivity barriers, particularly disadvantaging smaller competitors and institutions in emerging markets. These barriers limit the widespread adoption of AI-driven financial solutions, which can disproportionately affect underserved and economically disadvantaged populations who could most benefit from improved financial services. This can make it exceptionally hard for emerging companies to incorporate AI into their services if the infrastructure does not already exist. To that end, we are seeing private companies form partnerships to make necessary investments to scale up AI capabilities in Africa, like Cassava Technologies, a global technology leader, and their partnership with Nvidia to develop Africa’s first AI factory in South Africa.[7] At the Commission, we have also explored regulatory frameworks addressing AI’s role in financial markets through an ongoing conversation with market participants.[8] The Commission has acknowledged the potential for AI-driven systems to impact consumer protection indirectly through enhanced market integrity and risk management protocols, but it has also acknowledged the dangers that consumers can face.[9] I have repeatedly emphasized the need to establish robust principles-based regulatory frameworks at the Commission to combat consumer-facing issues like AI-enabled market manipulation and fraud, through my repeated emphasis on the need to promote the explainability of AI models, the implementation of data controls and measures to address bias, clear governance frameworks for accountability and testing, and the establishment of an interagency task force and an AI Fraud Task Force to tackle fraud full force.[10] In particular, firms implementing this technology in consumer-facing ways must adhere to existing laws on fairness, transparency, and privacy. The Financial Stability Board (FSB) has highlighted the importance of international collaboration in setting standards for responsible AI use, advocating for coordinated frameworks that ensure consumer protection, fairness, and transparency in AI-powered financial services globally.[11] International collaboration amongst regulators can aid in streamlining the growing body of international standards which can be difficult to navigate and present a significant barrier to emerging companies. Meanwhile, countries like Singapore have also made significant strides in regulating and supporting consumer-facing AI applications through initiatives like the Monetary Authority of Singapore’s regulatory sandbox framework, allowing fintech startups to test AI-driven solutions in controlled environments, balancing innovation with consumer protection.[12] Africa’s Embrace of AI to Promote Accessibility, Consumer Interaction, and Further Innovation Through strategic partnerships between AI startups, larger corporations, and governmental agencies, increased access to advanced AI technologies and traditional financial services have been more readily obtainable. Sitoyo Lopokoiyit, CEO and founder of M-Pesa, and others demonstrate how strategic partnerships, cost-effective approaches, and mobile-first innovations can significantly reduce barriers, enabling broader AI adoption and the growth of consumer inclusive financial services. M-Pesa, a mobile money services platform, which hosts millions of customers and facilitates billions in transactions per year, may be used to deposit money into an account, “store it on … cell phones, send balances using PINs secured by SMS text messages, and enable buyers and sellers of goods to redeem and access purchases as well as deposits for regular money…. M-Pesa represents the potential to develop platforms that give customers access to banking services, reduce transaction costs, and otherwise overcome the endemic frictions that have challenged access to financial services for millions.”[13] M-Pesa’s business model is particularly interesting because of how effectively it has created access for individuals who have historically lacked access to basic financial services. I previously traveled to Kenya to meet with the CEO and President of M-Pesa, as well as central bankers, the governor of the Central Bank of Kenya, and deputy governors and market regulators, to discuss the uptick in retail market participation and the considerations for consumer protection that come with the increased accessibility to financial markets. Conclusion Continued partnerships between African fintech innovators, African regulators, and U.S. regulators and institutions can help foster shared growth and technological advancement for both parties. Such collaborations offer significant opportunities, combining African innovation in financial inclusion and mobile technologies with U.S. strengths in regulatory frameworks, research, and infrastructure. These synergistic relationships can enhance global fintech capabilities, drive inclusive economic growth, and promote greater financial stability and consumer protection worldwide. Conferences like the one we are participating in today are of vital importance to the notion of collaboration. The issues discussed, the connections made, and the lessons shared here today can help propel markets forward in a way that not only protects the consumer but also empowers the consumer. Thank you again for allowing me to join you today. I look forward to hearing from each of the panels and speakers and continuing to develop great relationships with the leading voices in fintech in Africa.
[1] The thoughts and perspectives that I share with you today are my own; they are not the views and perspectives of my fellow Commissioners, the Commission, or the staff of the CFTC.
IOWA CITY, Iowa, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — MidWestOne Financial Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: MOFG) (“we,” “our,” or the “Company”) today reported results for the first quarter of 2025.
FirstQuarter 2025Summary1
Net income of $15.1 million, or $0.73 per diluted common share.
Net interest margin (tax equivalent) was 3.44%;2 core net interest margin expanded 10 basis points (“bps”) to 3.36%.2
Noninterest expenses were $36.3 million; efficiency ratio was 59.38%.2
Return on average assets of 1.00%.
Criticized loans ratio improved 54 bps to 5.47%; nonperforming assets ratio improved 7 bps to 0.33%.
Tangible book value per share of $23.36,2 an increase of 4.4%.
Common equity tier 1 (“CET1”) capital ratio improved 24 bps to 10.97%.
CEO Commentary
Charles (Chip) Reeves, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, commented, “We are pleased with the continued execution of our strategic plan initiatives despite a more uncertain economic environment. Our return on average assets eclipsed 1% for the second straight quarter driven by disciplined balance sheet management, core net interest margin expansion of 10 bps2 and solid expense control. Loan growth was flat in the quarter, somewhat softer than anticipated, due to pay-offs and latter quarter market volatility. The majority of our asset quality metrics improved significantly, led by reductions in nonperforming assets and criticized loans. Net charge-offs increased to 29 basis points, with the majority of the increase due to a partial charge-off on a previously reserved CRE loan as we prepare for resolution. Driven by earnings and lower accumulated other comprehensive loss, tangible book value per share increased 4.4% to $23.362 and the CET1 ratio grew to 10.97%, edging closer to our target range of 11.0%-11.50%.
Thank you to our team members who continued to execute well and serve our customers amidst market volatility. We are pleased with the transformation of our company and our solid foundation of increased capital, earnings power, asset quality, and a premium core deposit franchise position us well for uncertain economic times and the remainder of 2025.”
1 First Quarter Summary compares to the fourth quarter of 2024 (the “linked quarter”) unless noted. 2 Non-GAAP measure. See the separate Non-GAAPMeasures section for a reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP measure.
As of or for the quarter ended
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts and as noted)
March 31,
December 31,
March 31,
2025
2024
2024
Financial Results
Revenue
$
57,575
$
59,775
$
44,481
Credit loss expense
1,687
1,291
4,689
Noninterest expense
36,293
37,372
35,565
Net income
15,138
16,330
3,269
Adjusted earnings(3)
15,301
16,112
4,504
Per Common Share
Diluted earnings per share
$
0.73
$
0.78
$
0.21
Adjusted earnings per share(3)
0.73
0.77
0.29
Book value
27.85
26.94
33.53
Tangible book value(3)
23.36
22.37
27.14
Balance Sheet & Credit Quality
Loans In millions
$
4,304.2
$
4,315.6
$
4,414.6
Investment securities In millions
1,305.5
1,328.4
1,862.2
Deposits In millions
5,489.1
5,478.0
5,585.2
Net loan charge-offs In millions
3.1
0.7
0.2
Allowance for credit losses ratio
1.25
%
1.28
%
1.27
%
Selected Ratios
Return on average assets
1.00
%
1.03
%
0.20
%
Net interest margin, tax equivalent(3)
3.44
%
3.43
%
2.33
%
Return on average equity
10.74
%
11.53
%
2.49
%
Return on average tangible equity(3)
13.75
%
14.80
%
4.18
%
Efficiency ratio(3)
59.38
%
59.06
%
71.28
%
REVENUE REVIEW
Revenue
Change
Change
1Q25 vs
1Q25 vs
(Dollars in thousands)
1Q25
4Q24
1Q24
4Q24
1Q24
Net interest income
$
47,439
$
48,938
$
34,731
(3)%
37
%
Noninterest income
10,136
10,837
9,750
(6)%
4
%
Total revenue, net of interest expense
$
57,575
$
59,775
$
44,481
(4)%
29
%
Total revenue for the first quarter of 2025 decreased $2.2 million from the fourth quarter of 2024 due to lower net interest income and noninterest income during the quarter. When compared to the first quarter of 2024, total revenue increased $13.1 million, due to higher net interest income and higher noninterest income.
Net interest income of $47.4 million for the first quarter of 2025 decreased $1.5 million from the fourth quarter of 2024, due to lower earning asset volumes and yields, partially offset by lower funding volumes and costs. When compared to the first quarter of 2024, net interest income increased $12.7 million, due to higher earning asset yields and lower funding volumes and costs, partially offset by lower earning asset volumes.
The Company’s tax equivalent net interest margin was 3.44%3 in the first quarter of 2025, compared to 3.43%3 in the fourth quarter of 2024, driven by lower funding costs, partially offset by a decline in earning asset yields. Interest bearing liability costs during the first quarter of 2025 decreased 11 bps to 2.41%, due to reductions of short-term borrowings, interest bearing deposits, and long-term debt costs of 78 bps, 10 bps, and 7 bps, to 3.75%, 2.31%, and 6.41%, respectively, from the fourth quarter of 2024.
The Company’s tax equivalent net interest margin was 3.44%3 in the first quarter of 2025, compared to 2.33%3 in the first quarter of 2024, driven by higher earning asset yields and lower interest-bearing liability costs. Total earning assets yield increased 79 bps from the first quarter of 2024, primarily due to increases of 192 bps and 20 bps in total investment securities and loan yields, respectively. Interest bearing liability costs decreased 34 bps to 2.41%, due to short-term borrowing costs of 3.75%, long-term debt costs of 6.41%, and interest-bearing deposit costs of 2.31%, which decreased 107 bps, 45 bps, and 14 bps, respectively, from the first quarter of 2024.
3 Non-GAAP measure. See the separate Non-GAAPMeasures section for a reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP measure.
Noninterest Income
Change
Change
1Q25 vs
1Q25 vs
(In thousands)
1Q25
4Q24
1Q24
4Q24
1Q24
Investment services and trust activities
$
3,544
$
3,779
$
3,503
(6)%
1
%
Service charges and fees
2,131
2,159
2,144
(1)%
(1)%
Card revenue
1,744
1,833
1,943
(5)%
(10)%
Loan revenue
1,194
1,841
856
(35)%
39
%
Bank-owned life insurance
1,057
719
660
47
%
60
%
Investment securities gains, net
33
161
36
(80)%
(8)%
Other
433
345
608
26
%
(29)%
Total noninterest income
$
10,136
$
10,837
$
9,750
(6)%
4
%
MSR adjustment (included above in Loan revenue)
$
(213
)
$
164
$
(368
)
(230)%
(42)%
Noninterest income for the first quarter of 2025 decreased $0.7 million from the linked quarter, primarily due to declines of $0.6 million and $0.2 million in loan revenue and investment services and trust activities revenue, respectively. The decrease in loan revenue was reflective of an unfavorable change in the fair value of our mortgage servicing rights of $0.4 million, coupled with a decrease in Small Business Administration (“SBA”) gain on sale revenue of $0.3 million. The decrease in investment services and trust activities revenue was driven by a decline in assets under administration due to market volatility. Partially offsetting these decreases was an increase of $0.3 million in bank-owned life insurance revenue, due primarily to $0.4 million of death benefit recognized in the first quarter of 2025.
Noninterest income for the first quarter of 2025 increased $0.4 million from the first quarter of 2024 due primarily to increases of $0.4 million and $0.3 million in bank-owned life insurance and loan revenue, respectively. The bank-owned life insurance increase was due primarily to the death benefit noted above. The increase in loan revenue was due primarily to the mortgage servicing right valuation adjustment, coupled with higher SBA gain on sale revenue and other loan income. Partially offsetting these increases were decreases of $0.2 million in each of card revenue and other revenue.
EXPENSE REVIEW
Noninterest Expense
Change
Change
1Q25 vs
1Q25 vs
(In thousands)
1Q25
4Q24
1Q24
4Q24
1Q24
Compensation and employee benefits
$
21,212
$
20,684
$
20,930
3
%
1
%
Occupancy expense of premises, net
2,588
2,772
2,813
(7)%
(8)%
Equipment
2,426
2,688
2,600
(10)%
(7)%
Legal and professional
2,226
2,534
2,059
(12)%
8
%
Data processing
1,698
1,719
1,360
(1)%
25
%
Marketing
552
793
598
(30)%
(8)%
Amortization of intangibles
1,408
1,449
1,637
(3)%
(14)%
FDIC insurance
917
980
942
(6)%
(3)%
Communications
159
154
196
3
%
(19)%
Foreclosed assets, net
74
56
358
32
%
(79)%
Other
3,033
3,543
2,072
(14)%
46
%
Total noninterest expense
$
36,293
$
37,372
$
35,565
(3)%
2
%
Merger-related Expenses
(In thousands)
1Q25
4Q24
1Q24
Compensation and employee benefits
$
—
$
—
$
241
Occupancy expense of premises, net
—
—
152
Equipment
—
21
149
Legal and professional
40
—
573
Data processing
—
10
61
Marketing
—
—
32
Communications
—
—
1
Other
—
—
105
Total merger-related expenses
$
40
$
31
$
1,314
Noninterest expense for the first quarter of 2025 decreased $1.1 million from the linked quarter, primarily due to decreases in other noninterest expense, legal and professional, equipment, and occupancy expense of premises, net, of $0.5 million, $0.3 million, $0.3 million, and $0.2 million, respectively. The primary drivers of the decrease in other noninterest expense were declines in fraud loss expense of $0.3 million and customer deposit costs of $0.1 million. The $0.3 million decrease in legal and professional expense was primarily driven by lower litigation-related legal costs. The decrease in equipment of $0.3 million was primarily driven by fewer small equipment purchases, while the decrease in occupancy expense of premises, net was due primarily to lower property tax expense. Partially offsetting these decreases was an increase of $0.5 million in compensation and employee benefits which reflected an increase in equity compensation and payroll tax expenses.
Noninterest expense for the first quarter of 2025 increased $0.7 million from the first quarter of 2024 primarily due to increases in other noninterest expense, data processing, and compensation and employee benefits of $1.0 million, $0.3 million and $0.3 million, respectively. The increase in other noninterest expense was due primarily to customer deposit costs while the increase in data processing was driven core banking system costs. The increase in compensation and employee benefits was primarily driven by medical benefits expenses, wages expense, and incentive expense due to improved performance. Partially offsetting these identified increases was a decline of $1.3 million in merger-related expenses.
The Company’s effective tax rate was 22.7% in the first quarter of 2025 and the linked quarter. The effective income tax rate for the full year 2025 is expected to be 22-23%.
BALANCE SHEET REVIEW
Total assets were $6.25 billion at March 31, 2025, compared to $6.24 billion at December 31, 2024 and $6.75 billion at March 31, 2024. The increase from December 31, 2024 was primarily due to higher cash balances, partially offset by lower securities balances. Compared to March 31, 2024, the decrease was primarily driven by the sale of assets associated with our Florida banking operations in the second quarter of 2024 coupled with the pay-off of Bank Term Funding Program (“BTFP”) borrowings with proceeds received from securities sales transactions in the fourth quarter of 2024.
Loans Held for Investment
March 31, 2025
December 31, 2024
March 31, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Balance
% of Total
Balance
% of Total
Balance
% of Total
Commercial and industrial
$1,140,138
26.5
%
$1,126,813
26.1
%
$1,105,718
25.0
%
Agricultural
131,409
3.1
119,051
2.8
113,029
2.6
Commercial real estate
Construction and development
293,280
6.8
324,896
7.5
403,571
9.1
Farmland
180,633
4.2
182,460
4.2
184,109
4.2
Multifamily
421,204
9.8
423,157
9.8
409,504
9.3
Other
1,425,062
33.0
1,414,168
32.7
1,440,645
32.7
Total commercial real estate
2,320,179
53.8
2,344,681
54.2
2,437,829
55.3
Residential real estate
One-to-four family first liens
471,688
11.0
477,150
11.1
495,408
11.2
One-to-four family junior liens
182,346
4.2
179,232
4.2
182,001
4.1
Total residential real estate
654,034
15.2
656,382
15.3
677,409
15.3
Consumer
58,424
1.4
68,700
1.6
80,661
1.8
Loans held for investment, net of unearned income
$4,304,184
100.0
%
$4,315,627
100.0
%
$4,414,646
100.0
%
Total commitments to extend credit
$1,080,300
$1,080,737
$1,230,612
Loans held for investment, net of unearned income, decreased $11.4 million, or 0.3%, to $4.30 billion from $4.32 billion at December 31, 2024, primarily due to the reclassification of $11.0 million of credit card receivables to loans held for sale in the first quarter of 2025. Management expects the credit card portfolio sale to close in the fourth quarter of 2025.
Loans held for investment, net of unearned income, decreased $110.5 million, or 2.5%, to $4.30 billion from $4.41 billion at March 31, 2024. The decrease from the first quarter of 2024 was driven primarily by the sale of loans associated with our Florida banking operations in the second quarter of 2024, partially offset by organic loan growth and higher line of credit usage.
Investment Securities
March 31, 2025
December 31, 2024
March 31, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Balance
% of Total
Balance
% of Total
Balance
% of Total
Available for sale
$1,305,530
100.0
%
$1,328,433
100.0
%
$797,230
42.8
%
Held to maturity
—
—
%
—
—
%
1,064,939
57.2
%
Total investment securities
$1,305,530
$1,328,433
$1,862,169
Investment securities at March 31, 2025 were $1.31 billion, decreasing $22.9 million from December 31, 2024 and decreasing $556.6 million from March 31, 2024. The decrease from the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily due to principal cash flows received from scheduled payments, calls, and maturities. The decrease from the first quarter of 2024 stemmed primarily from the sale of debt securities in connection with a balance sheet repositioning, as well as principal cash flows received from scheduled payments, calls, and maturities.
Deposits
March 31, 2025
December 31, 2024
March 31, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Balance
% of Total
Balance
% of Total
Balance
% of Total
Noninterest bearing deposits
$903,714
16.5
%
$951,423
17.4
%
$920,764
16.5
%
Interest checking deposits
1,283,328
23.3
1,258,191
22.9
1,349,823
24.2
Money market deposits
1,002,066
18.3
1,053,988
19.2
1,122,717
20.1
Savings deposits
877,348
16.0
820,549
15.0
728,276
13.0
Time deposits of $250 and under
818,012
14.9
826,793
15.1
787,851
14.1
Total core deposits
4,884,468
89.0
4,910,944
89.6
4,909,431
87.9
Brokered time deposits
200,000
3.6
200,000
3.7
205,000
3.7
Time deposits over $250
404,674
7.4
367,038
6.7
470,805
8.4
Total deposits
$5,489,142
100.0
%
$5,477,982
100.0
%
$5,585,236
100.0
%
Total deposits increased $11.2 million, or 0.2%, to $5.49 billion, from $5.48 billion at December 31, 2024. Total deposits decreased $96.1 million, or 1.7%, from $5.59 billion at March 31, 2024, primarily due to the deposits transferred in the sale of our Florida banking operations, partially offset by organic deposit growth in our targeted metropolitan markets.
Borrowed Funds
March 31, 2025
December 31, 2024
March 31, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Balance
% of Total
Balance
% of Total
Balance
% of Total
Short-term borrowings
$1,482
1.3
%
$3,186
2.7
%
$422,988
77.6
%
Long-term debt
111,398
98.7
%
113,376
97.3
%
122,066
22.4
%
Total borrowed funds
$112,880
$116,562
$545,054
Borrowed funds were $112.9 million at March 31, 2025, a decrease of $3.7 million from December 31, 2024 and a decrease of $432.2 million from March 31, 2024. The decrease compared to the linked quarter was due to lower customer repurchase agreement volumes and scheduled payments on long-term debt. The decrease compared to March 31, 2024 was primarily due to the pay-off of $405.0 million of BTFP borrowings and $13.0 million of a revolving credit facility, as well as scheduled payments on long-term debt.
Capital
March 31,
December 31,
March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)
2025 (1)
2024
2024
Total shareholders’ equity
$
579,625
$
559,696
$
528,040
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(63,098
)
(72,762
)
(60,804
)
MidWestOneFinancial Group, Inc. Consolidated
Tier 1 leverage to average assets ratio
9.50
%
9.15
%
8.16
%
Common equity tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio
10.97
%
10.73
%
8.98
%
Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio
11.84
%
11.59
%
9.75
%
Total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio
14.34
%
14.07
%
11.97
%
MidWestOneBank
Tier 1 leverage to average assets ratio
10.42
%
10.12
%
9.36
%
Common equity tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio
13.02
%
12.86
%
11.20
%
Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio
13.02
%
12.86
%
11.20
%
Total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio
14.21
%
14.02
%
12.25
%
(1) Regulatory capital ratios for March 31, 2025 are preliminary
Total shareholders’ equity at March 31, 2025 increased $19.9 million from December 31, 2024, driven primarily by an increase in retained earnings and a decrease in accumulated other comprehensive loss. Total shareholders’ equity at March 31, 2025 increased $51.6 million from March 31, 2024, primarily due to increases in common stock and additional pain-in-capital stemming from the common equity capital raise in the third quarter of 2024, partially offset by a decrease in retained earnings.
On April 22, 2025, the Board of Directors of the Company declared a cash dividend of $0.2425 per common share. The dividend is payable June 16, 2025, to shareholders of record at the close of business on June 2, 2025.
No common shares were repurchased by the Company during the period December 31, 2024 through March 31, 2025 or for the subsequent period through April 24, 2025. The current share repurchase program allows for the repurchase of up to $15.0 million of the Company’s common shares. As of March 31, 2025, $15.0 million remained available under this program.
CREDIT QUALITY REVIEW
Credit Quality
As of or For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
December 31,
March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)
2025
2024
2024
Credit loss expense related to loans
$
1,787
$
1,891
$
4,589
Net charge-offs
3,087
691
189
Allowance for credit losses
53,900
55,200
55,900
Pass
$
4,068,707
$
4,056,361
$
4,098,102
Special Mention
121,494
148,462
152,604
Classified
113,983
110,804
163,940
Criticized
235,477
259,266
316,544
Loans greater than 30 days past due and accruing
$
6,119
$
9,378
$
8,772
Nonperforming loans
$
17,470
$
21,847
$
29,267
Nonperforming assets
20,889
25,184
33,164
Net charge-off ratio(1)
0.29
%
0.06
%
0.02
%
Classified loans ratio(2)
2.65
%
2.57
%
3.71
%
Criticized loans ratio(3)
5.47
%
6.01
%
7.17
%
Nonperforming loans ratio(4)
0.41
%
0.51
%
0.66
%
Nonperforming assets ratio(5)
0.33
%
0.40
%
0.49
%
Allowance for credit losses ratio(6)
1.25
%
1.28
%
1.27
%
Allowance for credit losses to nonaccrual loans ratio(7)
309.47
%
254.32
%
197.53
%
(1) Net charge-off ratio is calculated as annualized net charge-offs divided by the sum of average loans held for investment, net of unearned income and average loans held for sale, during the period.
(2) Classified loans ratio is calculated as classified loans divided by loans held for investment, net of unearned income, at the end of the period.
(3) Criticized loans ratio is calculated as criticized loans divided by loans held for investment, net of unearned income, at the end of the period.
(4) Nonperforming loans ratio is calculated as nonperforming loans divided by loans held for investment, net of unearned income, at the end of the period.
(5) Nonperforming assets ratio is calculated as nonperforming assets divided by total assets at the end of the period.
(6) Allowance for credit losses ratio is calculated as allowance for credit losses divided by loans held for investment, net of unearned income, at the end of the period.
(7) Allowance for credit losses to nonaccrual loans ratio is calculated as allowance for credit losses divided by nonaccrual loans at the end of the period.
Nonperforming loans and nonperforming assets ratios improved 10 bps and 7 bps, to 0.41% and 0.33%, respectively, compared to the linked quarter. In addition, special mention loan balances decreased $27.0 million, or 18%, while classified loan balances remained relatively stable with an increase of $3.2 million, or 3%. When compared to the same period of the prior year, the nonperforming loans and nonperforming asset ratios improved 25 bps and 16 bps, respectively, while the classified loan ratio improved 106 bps. Special mention loan balances decreased $31.1 million, or 20%. The net charge-off ratio increased 23 bps from the linked quarter and 27 bps from the same period in the prior year.
As of March 31, 2025, the allowance for credit losses was $53.9 million and the allowance for credit losses ratio was 1.25%, compared with $55.2 million and 1.28%, respectively, at December 31, 2024. Credit loss expense of $1.7 million in the first quarter of 2025 primarily reflected additional reserve on pooled loans, offset by a reduction of $0.1 million in the reserve for unfunded loan commitments.
Nonperforming Loans Roll Forward
Nonaccrual
90+ Days Past Due & Still Accruing
Total
(Dollars in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2024
$21,705
$142
$21,847
Loans placed on nonaccrual or 90+ days past due & still accruing
3,121
225
3,346
Proceeds related to repayment or sale
(4,158)
—
(4,158)
Loans returned to accrual status or no longer past due
(336)
(49)
(385)
Charge-offs
(2,774)
(259)
(3,033)
Transfers to foreclosed assets
(141)
—
(141)
Transfer to nonaccrual
—
(6)
(6)
Balance at March 31, 2025
$17,417
$53
$17,470
CONFERENCE CALL DETAILS
The Company will host a conference call for investors at 11:00 a.m. CT on Friday, April 25, 2025. To participate, you may pre-register for this call utilizing the following link: https://www.netroadshow.com/events/login?show=29396e9f&confId=80376. After pre-registering for this event you will receive your access details via email. On the day of the call, you are also able to dial 1-833-470-1428 using an access code of 527448 at least fifteen minutes before the call start time. If you are unable to participate on the call, a replay will be available until July 24, 2025 by calling 1-866-813-9403 and using the replay access code of 162684. A transcript of the call will also be available on the Company’s web site (www.midwestonefinancial.com) within three business days of the call.
ABOUT MIDWESTONE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.
MidWestOne Financial Group, Inc. is a financial holding company headquartered in Iowa City, Iowa. MidWestOne is the parent company of MidWestOne Bank, which operates banking offices in Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Colorado. MidWestOne provides electronic delivery of financial services through its website, MidWestOne.bank. MidWestOne Financial Group, Inc. trades on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “MOFG”.
This release contains certain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of such term in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We and our representatives may, from time to time, make written or oral statements that are “forward-looking” and provide information other than historical information. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to be materially different from any results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by any forward-looking statement. These factors include, among other things, the factors listed below. Forward-looking statements, which may be based upon beliefs, expectations and assumptions of our management and on information currently available to management, are generally identifiable by the use of words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “could,” “would,” “plans,” “goals,” “intend,” “project,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “may” or similar expressions. These forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, these statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. Additionally, we undertake no obligation to update any statement in light of new information or future events, except as required under federal securities law.
Our ability to predict results or the actual effect of future plans or strategies is inherently uncertain. Factors that could have an impact on our ability to achieve operating results, growth plan goals and future prospects include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) the effects of changes in interest rates, including on our net income and the value of our securities portfolio; (2) fluctuations in the value of our investment securities; (3) effects on the U.S. economy resulting from the implementation of proposed policies and executive orders, including the imposition of tariffs, changes in immigration policy, changes to regulatory or other governmental agencies, changes in foreign policy and tax regulations; (4) volatility of rate-sensitive deposits; (5) asset/liability matching risks and liquidity risks; (6) the ability to successfully manage liquidity risk, which may increase dependence on non-core funding sources such as brokered deposits, and may negatively impact the Company’s cost of funds; (7) the concentration of large deposits from certain clients, including those who have balances above current FDIC insurance limits; (8) credit quality deterioration, pronounced and sustained reduction in real estate market values, or other uncertainties, including the impact of inflationary pressures and future monetary policies of the Federal Reserve in response thereto on economic conditions and our business, resulting in an increase in the allowance for credit losses, an increase in the credit loss expense, and a reduction in net earnings; (9) the sufficiency of the allowance for credit losses to absorb the amount of expected losses inherent in our existing loan portfolio; (10) the failure of assumptions underlying the establishment of allowances for credit losses and estimation of values of collateral and various financial assets and liabilities; (11) credit risks and risks from concentrations (by type of borrower, collateral, geographic area and by industry) within our loan portfolio; (12) changes in the economic environment, competition, or other factors that may affect our ability to acquire loans or influence the anticipated growth rate of loans and deposits and the quality of the loan portfolio and loan and deposit pricing; (13) governmental monetary and fiscal policies; (14) new or revised general economic, political, or industry conditions, nationally, internationally or in the communities in which we conduct business, including the risk of a recession; (15) the imposition of domestic or foreign tariffs or other governmental policies impacting the global supply chain and value of the agricultural or other products of our borrowers; (16) war or terrorist activities, including ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, widespread disease or pandemic, or other adverse external events, which may cause deterioration in the economy or cause instability in credit markets; (17) legislative and regulatory changes, including changes in banking, securities, trade, and tax laws and regulations and their application by our regulators, and including changes in interpretation or prioritization of such laws and regulations; (18) changes in accounting policies and practices, as may be adopted by state and federal regulatory agencies and the Financial Accounting Standards Board; (19) the effects of competition from other commercial banks, thrifts, mortgage banking firms, consumer finance companies, credit unions, securities brokerage firms, insurance companies, money market and other mutual funds, financial technology companies, and other financial institutions operating in our markets or elsewhere or providing similar services; (20) changes in the business and economic conditions generally and in the financial services industry, and the effects of recent developments and events in the financial services industry, including the large-scale deposit withdrawals over a short period of time that resulted in prior bank failures; (21) the occurrence of fraudulent activity, breaches, or failures of our or our third party vendors’ information security controls or cyber-security related incidents, including as a result of sophisticated attacks using artificial intelligence and similar tools or as a result of insider fraud; (22) the ability to attract and retain key executives and employees experienced in banking and financial services; (23) our ability to adapt successfully to technological changes to compete effectively in the marketplace; (24) operational risks, including data processing system failures and fraud; (25) the costs, effects and outcomes of existing or future litigation or other legal proceedings and regulatory actions; (26) the risks of mergers or branch sales (including the sale of our Florida banking operations and the acquisition of Denver Bankshares, Inc.), including, without limitation, the related time and costs of implementing such transactions, integrating operations as part of these transactions and possible failures to achieve expected gains, revenue growth and/or expense savings from such transactions; (27) the economic impacts on the Company and its customers of climate change, natural disasters and exceptional weather occurrences, such as: tornadoes, floods and blizzards; and (28) other risk factors detailed from time to time in Securities and Exchange Commission filings made by the Company.
MIDWESTONE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. FIVE QUARTER CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
March 31,
December 31,
September 30,
June 30,
March 31,
(In thousands)
2025
2024
2024
2024
2024
ASSETS
Cash and due from banks
$
68,545
$
71,803
$
72,173
$
66,228
$
68,430
Interest earning deposits in banks
182,360
133,092
129,695
35,340
29,328
Federal funds sold
—
—
—
—
4
Total cash and cash equivalents
250,905
204,895
201,868
101,568
97,762
Debt securities available for sale at fair value
1,305,530
1,328,433
1,623,104
771,034
797,230
Held to maturity securities at amortized cost
—
—
—
1,053,080
1,064,939
Total securities
1,305,530
1,328,433
1,623,104
1,824,114
1,862,169
Loans held for sale
13,836
749
3,283
2,850
2,329
Gross loans held for investment
4,315,546
4,328,413
4,344,559
4,304,619
4,433,258
Unearned income, net
(11,362
)
(12,786
)
(15,803
)
(17,387
)
(18,612
)
Loans held for investment, net of unearned income
4,304,184
4,315,627
4,328,756
4,287,232
4,414,646
Allowance for credit losses
(53,900
)
(55,200
)
(54,000
)
(53,900
)
(55,900
)
Total loans held for investment, net
4,250,284
4,260,427
4,274,756
4,233,332
4,358,746
Premises and equipment, net
90,031
90,851
90,750
91,793
95,986
Goodwill
69,788
69,788
69,788
69,388
71,118
Other intangible assets, net
23,611
25,019
26,469
27,939
29,531
Foreclosed assets, net
3,419
3,337
3,583
6,053
3,897
Other assets
246,990
252,830
258,881
224,621
226,477
Total assets
$
6,254,394
$
6,236,329
$
6,552,482
$
6,581,658
$
6,748,015
LIABILITIES
Noninterest bearing deposits
$
903,714
$
951,423
$
917,715
$
882,472
$
920,764
Interest bearing deposits
4,585,428
4,526,559
4,451,012
4,529,947
4,664,472
Total deposits
5,489,142
5,477,982
5,368,727
5,412,419
5,585,236
Short-term borrowings
1,482
3,186
410,630
414,684
422,988
Long-term debt
111,398
113,376
115,051
114,839
122,066
Other liabilities
72,747
82,089
95,836
96,430
89,685
Total liabilities
5,674,769
5,676,633
5,990,244
6,038,372
6,219,975
SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Common stock
21,580
21,580
21,580
16,581
16,581
Additional paid-in capital
414,258
414,987
414,965
300,831
300,845
Retained earnings
227,790
217,776
206,490
306,030
294,066
Treasury stock
(20,905
)
(21,885
)
(21,955
)
(22,021
)
(22,648
)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(63,098
)
(72,762
)
(58,842
)
(58,135
)
(60,804
)
Total shareholders’ equity
579,625
559,696
562,238
543,286
528,040
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity
$
6,254,394
$
6,236,329
$
6,552,482
$
6,581,658
$
6,748,015
MIDWESTONE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. FIVE QUARTER CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
Three Months Ended
March 31,
December 31,
September 30,
June 30,
March 31,
(In thousands, except per share data)
2025
2024
2024
2024
2024
Interest income
Loans, including fees
$
59,462
$
62,458
$
62,521
$
61,643
$
57,947
Taxable investment securities
13,327
11,320
8,779
9,228
9,460
Tax-exempt investment securities
703
728
1,611
1,663
1,710
Other
1,247
3,761
785
242
418
Total interest income
74,739
78,267
73,696
72,776
69,535
Interest expense
Deposits
25,484
27,324
29,117
28,942
27,726
Short-term borrowings
25
115
5,043
5,409
4,975
Long-term debt
1,791
1,890
2,015
2,078
2,103
Total interest expense
27,300
29,329
36,175
36,429
34,804
Net interest income
47,439
48,938
37,521
36,347
34,731
Credit loss expense
1,687
1,291
1,535
1,267
4,689
Net interest income after credit loss expense
45,752
47,647
35,986
35,080
30,042
Noninterest income
Investment services and trust activities
3,544
3,779
3,410
3,504
3,503
Service charges and fees
2,131
2,159
2,170
2,156
2,144
Card revenue
1,744
1,833
1,935
1,907
1,943
Loan revenue
1,194
1,841
760
1,525
856
Bank-owned life insurance
1,057
719
879
668
660
Investment securities gains (losses), net
33
161
(140,182
)
33
36
Other
433
345
640
11,761
608
Total noninterest income (loss)
10,136
10,837
(130,388
)
21,554
9,750
Noninterest expense
Compensation and employee benefits
21,212
20,684
19,943
20,985
20,930
Occupancy expense of premises, net
2,588
2,772
2,443
2,435
2,813
Equipment
2,426
2,688
2,486
2,530
2,600
Legal and professional
2,226
2,534
2,261
2,253
2,059
Data processing
1,698
1,719
1,580
1,645
1,360
Marketing
552
793
619
636
598
Amortization of intangibles
1,408
1,449
1,470
1,593
1,637
FDIC insurance
917
980
923
1,051
942
Communications
159
154
159
191
196
Foreclosed assets, net
74
56
330
138
358
Other
3,033
3,543
3,584
2,304
2,072
Total noninterest expense
36,293
37,372
35,798
35,761
35,565
Income (loss) before income tax expense
19,595
21,112
(130,200
)
20,873
4,227
Income tax expense (benefit)
4,457
4,782
(34,493
)
5,054
958
Net income (loss)
$
15,138
$
16,330
$
(95,707
)
$
15,819
$
3,269
Earnings (loss) per common share
Basic
$
0.73
$
0.79
$
(6.05
)
$
1.00
$
0.21
Diluted
$
0.73
$
0.78
$
(6.05
)
$
1.00
$
0.21
Weighted average basic common shares outstanding
20,797
20,776
15,829
15,763
15,723
Weighted average diluted common shares outstanding
20,849
20,851
15,829
15,781
15,774
Dividends paid per common share
$
0.2425
$
0.2425
$
0.2425
$
0.2425
$
0.2425
MIDWESTONE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. FINANCIAL STATISTICS
As of or for the Three Months Ended
March 31,
December 31,
March 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
2025
2024
2024
Earnings:
Net interest income
$
47,439
$
48,938
$
34,731
Noninterest income
10,136
10,837
9,750
Total revenue, net of interest expense
57,575
59,775
44,481
Credit loss expense
1,687
1,291
4,689
Noninterest expense
36,293
37,372
35,565
Income before income tax expense
19,595
21,112
4,227
Income tax expense
4,457
4,782
958
Net income
$
15,138
$
16,330
$
3,269
Adjusted earnings(1)
$
15,301
$
16,112
$
4,504
Per Share Data:
Diluted earnings
$
0.73
$
0.78
$
0.21
Adjusted earnings(1)
0.73
0.77
0.29
Book value
27.85
26.94
33.53
Tangible book value(1)
23.36
22.37
27.14
Ending Balance Sheet:
Total assets
$
6,254,394
$
6,236,329
$
6,748,015
Loans held for investment, net of unearned income
4,304,184
4,315,627
4,414,646
Total securities
1,305,530
1,328,433
1,862,169
Total deposits
5,489,142
5,477,982
5,585,236
Short-term borrowings
1,482
3,186
422,988
Long-term debt
111,398
113,376
122,066
Total shareholders’ equity
579,625
559,696
528,040
Average Balance Sheet:
Average total assets
$
6,168,546
$
6,279,975
$
6,635,379
Average total loans
4,290,710
4,307,583
4,298,216
Average total deposits
5,398,819
5,464,900
5,481,114
Financial Ratios:
Return on average assets
1.00
%
1.03
%
0.20
%
Return on average equity
10.74
%
11.53
%
2.49
%
Return on average tangible equity(1)
13.75
%
14.80
%
4.18
%
Efficiency ratio(1)
59.38
%
59.06
%
71.28
%
Net interest margin, tax equivalent(1)
3.44
%
3.43
%
2.33
%
Loans to deposits ratio
78.41
%
78.78
%
79.04
%
CET1 Ratio
10.97
%
10.73
%
8.98
%
Common equity ratio
9.27
%
8.97
%
7.83
%
Tangible common equity ratio(1)
7.89
%
7.57
%
6.43
%
Credit Risk Profile:
Total nonperforming loans
$
17,470
$
21,847
$
29,267
Nonperforming loans ratio
0.41
%
0.51
%
0.66
%
Total nonperforming assets
$
20,889
$
25,184
$
33,164
Nonperforming assets ratio
0.33
%
0.40
%
0.49
%
Net charge-offs
$
3,087
$
691
$
189
Net charge-off ratio
0.29
%
0.06
%
0.02
%
Allowance for credit losses
$
53,900
$
55,200
$
55,900
Allowance for credit losses ratio
1.25
%
1.28
%
1.27
%
Allowance for credit losses to nonaccrual ratio
309.47
%
254.32
%
197.53
%
(1) Non-GAAP measure. See the Non-GAAP Measures section for a reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP measure.
MIDWESTONE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. AVERAGE BALANCE SHEET AND YIELD ANALYSIS
Three Months Ended
March 31, 2025
December 31, 2024
March 31, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Average Balance
Interest Income/ Expense
Average Yield/ Cost
Average Balance
Interest Income/ Expense
Average Yield/ Cost
Average Balance
Interest Income/ Expense
Average Yield/ Cost
ASSETS
Loans, including fees (1)(2)(3)
$4,290,710
$60,443
5.71%
$4,307,583
$63,443
5.86%
$4,298,216
$58,867
5.51%
Taxable investment securities
1,207,844
13,327
4.47%
1,080,716
11,320
4.17%
1,557,603
9,460
2.44%
Tax-exempt investment securities (2)(4)
105,563
865
3.32%
109,183
896
3.26%
328,736
2,097
2.57%
Total securities held for investment(2)
1,313,407
14,192
4.38%
1,189,899
12,216
4.08%
1,886,339
11,557
2.46%
Other
124,133
1,247
4.07%
309,904
3,761
4.83%
30,605
418
5.49%
Total interest earning assets(2)
$5,728,250
$75,882
5.37%
$5,807,386
$79,420
5.44%
$6,215,160
$70,842
4.58%
Other assets
440,296
472,589
420,219
Total assets
$6,168,546
$6,279,975
$6,635,379
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Interest checking deposits
$1,240,586
$2,127
0.70%
$1,252,481
$2,205
0.70%
$1,301,470
$2,890
0.89%
Money market deposits
1,002,743
6,333
2.56%
1,046,571
7,197
2.74%
1,102,543
8,065
2.94%
Savings deposits
835,731
3,057
1.48%
799,931
3,158
1.57%
694,143
2,047
1.19%
Time deposits
1,397,595
13,967
4.05%
1,410,542
14,764
4.16%
1,446,981
14,724
4.09%
Total interest bearing deposits
4,476,655
25,484
2.31%
4,509,525
27,324
2.41%
4,545,137
27,726
2.45%
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
2,705
5
0.75%
3,640
8
0.87%
5,330
11
0.83%
Other short-term borrowings
—
20
—%
6,465
107
6.58%
409,525
4,964
4.88%
Total short-term borrowings
2,705
25
3.75%
10,105
115
4.53%
414,855
4,975
4.82%
Long-term debt
113,364
1,791
6.41%
116,018
1,890
6.48%
123,266
2,103
6.86%
Total borrowed funds
116,069
1,816
6.35%
126,123
2,005
6.32%
538,121
7,078
5.29%
Total interest bearing liabilities
$4,592,724
$27,300
2.41%
$4,635,648
$29,329
2.52%
$5,083,258
$34,804
2.75%
Noninterest bearing deposits
922,164
955,375
935,977
Other liabilities
82,280
125,536
88,611
Shareholders’ equity
571,378
563,416
527,533
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity
$6,168,546
$6,279,975
$6,635,379
Net interest income(2)
$48,582
$50,091
$36,038
Net interest spread(2)
2.96%
2.92%
1.83%
Net interest margin(2)
3.44%
3.43%
2.33%
Total deposits(5)
$5,398,819
$25,484
1.91%
$5,464,900
$27,324
1.99%
$5,481,114
$27,726
2.03%
Cost of funds(6)
2.01%
2.09%
2.33%
(1)
Average balance includes nonaccrual loans.
(2)
Tax equivalent. The federal statutory tax rate utilized was 21%.
(3)
Interest income includes net loan fees, loan purchase discount accretion and tax equivalent adjustments. Net loan fees were $256 thousand, $456 thousand, and $237 thousand for the three months ended March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively. Loan purchase discount accretion was $1.2 million, $2.5 million, and $1.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively. Tax equivalent adjustments were $981 thousand, $985 thousand, and $920 thousand for the three months ended March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively. The federal statutory tax rate utilized was 21%.
(4)
Interest income includes tax equivalent adjustments of $162 thousand, $168 thousand, and $387 thousand for the three months ended March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively. The federal statutory tax rate utilized was 21%.
(5)
Total deposits is the sum of total interest-bearing deposits and noninterest bearing deposits. The cost of total deposits is calculated as annualized interest expense on deposits divided by average total deposits.
(6)
Cost of funds is calculated as annualized total interest expense divided by the sum of average total deposits and borrowed funds.
Non-GAAP Measures
This earnings release contains non-GAAP measures for tangible common equity, tangible book value per share, tangible common equity ratio, return on average tangible equity, net interest margin (tax equivalent), core net interest margin, loan yield (tax equivalent), core yield on loans, efficiency ratio, adjusted earnings and adjusted earnings per share. Management believes these measures provide investors with useful information regarding the Company’s profitability, financial condition and capital adequacy, consistent with how management evaluates the Company’s financial performance. The following tables provide a reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure to the most comparable GAAP measure.
Tangible Common Equity/Tangible Book Value
per Share/Tangible Common Equity Ratio
March 31,
December 31,
September 30,
June 30,
March 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
2025
2024
2024
2024
2024
Total shareholders’ equity
$
579,625
$
559,696
$
562,238
$
543,286
$
528,040
Intangible assets, net
(93,399
)
(94,807
)
(96,257
)
(97,327
)
(100,649
)
Tangible common equity
$
486,226
$
464,889
$
465,981
$
445,959
$
427,391
Total assets
$
6,254,394
$
6,236,329
$
6,552,482
$
6,581,658
$
6,748,015
Intangible assets, net
(93,399
)
(94,807
)
(96,257
)
(97,327
)
(100,649
)
Tangible assets
$
6,160,995
$
6,141,522
$
6,456,225
$
6,484,331
$
6,647,366
Book value per share
$
27.85
$
26.94
$
27.06
$
34.44
$
33.53
Tangible book value per share(1)
$
23.36
$
22.37
$
22.43
$
28.27
$
27.14
Shares outstanding
20,815,715
20,777,485
20,774,919
15,773,468
15,750,471
Common equity ratio
9.27
%
8.97
%
8.58
%
8.25
%
7.83
%
Tangible common equity ratio(2)
7.89
%
7.57
%
7.22
%
6.88
%
6.43
%
(1) Tangible common equity divided by shares outstanding. (2) Tangible common equity divided by tangible assets.
Three Months Ended
Return on Average Tangible Equity
March 31,
December 31,
March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)
2025
2024
2024
Net income
$
15,138
$
16,330
$
3,269
Intangible amortization, net of tax(1)
1,047
1,075
1,228
Tangible net income
$
16,185
$
17,405
$
4,497
Average shareholders’ equity
$
571,378
$
563,416
$
527,533
Average intangible assets, net
(94,169
)
(95,498
)
(95,296
)
Average tangible equity
$
477,209
$
467,918
$
432,237
Return on average equity
10.74
%
11.53
%
2.49
%
Return on average tangible equity(2)
13.75
%
14.80
%
4.18
%
(1) The income tax rate utilized was the blended marginal tax rate. (2) Annualized tangible net income divided by average tangible equity.
Net Interest Margin, Tax Equivalent/ Core Net Interest Margin
Three Months Ended
March 31,
December 31,
March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)
2025
2024
2024
Net interest income
$
47,439
$
48,938
$
34,731
Tax equivalent adjustments:
Loans(1)
981
985
920
Securities(1)
162
168
387
Net interest income, tax equivalent
$
48,582
$
50,091
$
36,038
Loan purchase discount accretion
(1,166
)
(2,496
)
(1,152
)
Core net interest income
$
47,416
$
47,595
$
34,886
Net interest margin
3.36
%
3.35
%
2.25
%
Net interest margin, tax equivalent(2)
3.44
%
3.43
%
2.33
%
Core net interest margin(3)
3.36
%
3.26
%
2.26
%
Average interest earning assets
$
5,728,250
$
5,807,386
$
6,215,160
(1) The federal statutory tax rate utilized was 21%. (2) Annualized tax equivalent net interest income divided by average interest earning assets. (3) Annualized core net interest income divided by average interest earning assets.
Three Months Ended
Loan Yield, Tax Equivalent / Core Yield on Loans
March 31,
December 31,
March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)
2025
2024
2024
Loan interest income, including fees
$
59,462
$
62,458
$
57,947
Tax equivalent adjustment(1)
981
985
920
Tax equivalent loan interest income
$
60,443
$
63,443
$
58,867
Loan purchase discount accretion
(1,166
)
(2,496
)
(1,152
)
Core loan interest income
$
59,277
$
60,947
$
57,715
Yield on loans
5.62
%
5.77
%
5.42
%
Yield on loans, tax equivalent(2)
5.71
%
5.86
%
5.51
%
Core yield on loans(3)
5.60
%
5.63
%
5.40
%
Average loans
$
4,290,710
$
4,307,583
$
4,298,216
(1) The federal statutory tax rate utilized was 21%. (2) Annualized tax equivalent loan interest income divided by average loans. (3) Annualized core loan interest income divided by average loans.
Three Months Ended
Efficiency Ratio
March 31,
December 31,
March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)
2025
2024
2024
Total noninterest expense
$
36,293
$
37,372
$
35,565
Amortization of intangibles
(1,408
)
(1,449
)
(1,637
)
Merger-related expenses
(40
)
(31
)
(1,314
)
Noninterest expense used for efficiency ratio
$
34,845
$
35,892
$
32,614
Net interest income, tax equivalent(1)
$
48,582
$
50,091
$
36,038
Plus: Noninterest income
10,136
10,837
9,750
Less: Investment securities gains, net
33
161
36
Net revenues used for efficiency ratio
$
58,685
$
60,767
$
45,752
Efficiency ratio (2)
59.38
%
59.06
%
71.28
%
(1) The federal statutory tax rate utilized was 21%. (2) Noninterest expense adjusted for amortization of intangibles and merger-related expenses divided by the sum of tax equivalent net interest income, noninterest income and net investment securities gains.
Three Months Ended
Adjusted Earnings
March 31,
December 31,
March 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
2025
2024
2024
Net income
$
15,138
$
16,330
$
3,269
Less: Investment securities gains, net of tax(1)
25
119
27
Less: Mortgage servicing rights (loss) gain, net of tax(1)
(158
)
122
(276
)
Plus: Merger-related expenses, net of tax(1)
30
23
986
Adjusted earnings
$
15,301
$
16,112
$
4,504
Weighted average diluted common shares outstanding
20,849
20,851
15,774
Earnings per common share – diluted
$
0.73
$
0.78
$
0.21
Adjusted earnings per common share(2)
$
0.73
$
0.77
$
0.29
(1) The income tax rate utilized was the blended marginal tax rate. (2) Adjusted earnings divided by weighted average diluted common shares outstanding.
MIDDLEFIELD, Ohio, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Middlefield Banc Corp. (NASDAQ: MBCN) today reported financial results for the three months ended March 31, 2025.
2025 Three-MonthFinancial Highlights (on a year-over-year basis):
●
Earnings per share increased 17.6% year-over-year to $0.60 per diluted share
●
Net interest margin expanded 15 basis points to 3.69%
●
Return on average assets (annualized) increased 12 basis points year-over-year to 1.04%
●
Asset quality improved from the 2024 fourth quarter with nonperforming assets to total assets decreasing by 6 basis points to 1.56%
●
First quarter dividend payment increased 5% to $0.21 per share
“The first quarter of 2025 was a strong period of growth, profitability and value creation for Middlefield,” stated Ronald L. Zimmerly, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer. “Total loans increased by 4% year-over-year to a record $1.55 billion, driven by stable economic trends within our Ohio markets, the strength of our balance sheet, and the continued execution of our strategic initiatives. The 15-basis point expansion in our net interest margin is encouraging, reflecting our disciplined approach to pricing and ongoing efforts to reduce our cost of funds. As a result, net income expanded by 15.9% year-over-year to $4.8 million, delivering a strong return on average assets of 1.04% and supporting a 5.5% increase in tangible book value per share(1), which reached $21.29 as of March 31, 2025.” (1) See non-GAAP reconciliation under the section “GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliations”.
“During the quarter, we made significant upgrades to our infrastructure to support our multi-year technology road map. Additional investments in our physical footprint and back-office capabilities are planned throughout the year as we continue to strengthen Middlefield’s platform and support our long-term growth. We believe 2025 will be another good year of profitable expansion, reflecting our commitment to disciplined underwriting, community banking values, and ongoing reinvestment in the business,” concluded Mr. Zimmerly.
Income Statement Net interest income for the three months ended March 31, 2025, increased $1.1 million to $16.1 million, compared to $15.0 million for the same period last year. The increase was driven by strong loan growth and the impact of rate cuts on our short-term borrowings. The net interest margin for the three months ended March 31, 2025, was 3.69%, compared to 3.54% last year.
For the three months ended March 31, 2025, noninterest income increased $148,000 to $1.9 million, compared to $1.8 million for the same period in 2024.
Noninterest expense for the three months ended March 31, 2025, was $12.2 million, compared to $12.0 million for the same period in 2024.
Net income for the three months ended March 31, 2025, was $4.8 million, or $0.60 per diluted share, compared to $4.2 million, or $0.51 per diluted share, for the same period last year.
For the three months ended March 31, 2025, pre-tax, pre-provision net income was $5.8 million, compared to $4.8 million for the same period last year. (See non-GAAP reconciliation under the section “GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliations”.)
Balance Sheet Total assets at March 31, 2025, increased 3.9% to $1.89 billion, compared to $1.82 billion at March 31, 2024. Total loans at March 31, 2025, were $1.55 billion, compared to $1.49 billion at March 31, 2024. The 4.0% year-over-year increase in total loans was primarily due to higher residential real estate loans, home equity lines of credit, and non-owner occupied loans, partially offset by a reduction in construction and other loans.
The investment securities available-for-sale portfolio was $165.0 million at March 31, 2025, compared with $167.9 million at March 31, 2024.
Total liabilities at March 31, 2025, increased 3.9% to $1.67 billion, compared to $1.61 billion at March 31, 2024. Total deposits at March 31, 2025, were $1.54 billion, compared to $1.45 billion at March 31, 2024. The 6.4% year-over-year increase in deposits was primarily due to growth in money market and interest-bearing demand deposits, partially offset by declines in time and noninterest-bearing demand deposit accounts. Noninterest-bearing demand deposits were 24.0% of total deposits at March 31, 2025, compared to 27.0% at March 31, 2024. At March 31, 2025, the Company had brokered deposits of $92.4 million, compared to $90.4 million at March 31, 2024.
Michael C. Ranttila, Chief Financial Officer, stated, “We remain focused on proactively managing our funding sources to support loan growth, while optimizing our cost of funds. At March 31, 2025, we reduced our balance of Federal Home Loan Bank advances by $62.4 million from December 31, 2024, and ended the first quarter with $346.9 million in additional borrowing capacity. The combination of high levels of potentially liquid assets, cash flows from operations, and additional borrowing capacity continues to provide us with excellent liquidity levels to support our long-term growth strategies and our legacy of returning excess capital to shareholders.”
Middlefield’s CRE portfolio included the following categories at March 31, 2025:
Percent of
Percent of
Weighted Average
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
Balance
CRE Portfolio
Loan Portfolio
Loan-to-Value
Multi-Family
$
88,737
12.9
%
5.7
%
61.3
%
Owner Occupied
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
61,835
9.0
%
4.0
%
55.7
%
Other Services (except Public Administration)
32,815
4.8
%
2.1
%
54.1
%
Manufacturing
18,397
2.7
%
1.2
%
44.7
%
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting
12,628
1.8
%
0.8
%
36.4
%
Other
59,737
8.6
%
3.9
%
54.0
%
Total Owner Occupied
$
185,412
26.9
%
12.0
%
Non-Owner Occupied
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
343,169
49.9
%
22.1
%
55.5
%
Accommodation and Food Services
40,039
5.8
%
2.6
%
55.9
%
Health Care and Social Assistance
19,328
2.8
%
1.2
%
65.5
%
Manufacturing
7,428
1.1
%
0.5
%
49.5
%
Other
3,657
0.6
%
0.2
%
85.4
%
Total Non-Owner Occupied
$
413,621
60.2
%
26.6
%
Total CRE
$
687,770
100.0
%
44.3
%
Stockholders’ Equity and Dividends At March 31, 2025, stockholders’ equity was $213.8 million, compared to $205.6 million at March 31, 2024. The 4.0% year-over-year increase in stockholders’ equity was primarily from higher retained earnings, partially offset by an increase in the unrealized losses on the available-for-sale investment portfolio. On a per-share basis, shareholders’ equity at March 31, 2025, was $26.46, compared to $25.48 at March 31, 2024.
At March 31, 2025, tangible stockholders’ equity(1) was $172.1 million, compared to $162.8 million at March 31, 2024. On a per-share basis, tangible stockholders’ equity(1) was $21.29 at March 31, 2025, compared to $20.18 at March 31, 2024. (1)See non-GAAP reconciliation under the section “GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliations”.
For the three months ended March 31, 2025, the Company declared cash dividends of $0.21 per share, totaling $1.7 million. Beginning in the first quarter of 2025, the Company increased the quarterly cash dividend by $0.01 or 5% from the previous quarter’s $0.20 per share cash dividend.
For the three months ended March 31, 2025, the Company did not repurchase any shares of its common stock. The Company repurchased 43,858 shares of its common stock, at an average price of $24.00 per share during the same period in 2024.
At March 31, 2025, the Company’s equity-to-assets ratio was 11.32%, compared to 11.32% at March 31, 2024.
Asset Quality
For the 2025 first quarter, the Company recorded a provision for credit losses of $95,000, compared to a recovery of credit losses of $136,000 for the same period of 2024.
Net recoveries were $209,000, or (0.06%) of average loans, annualized, for the 2025 first quarter, compared to net recoveries of $68,000, or (0.02%) of average loans, annualized, for the same period of 2024.
Nonperforming loans at March 31, 2025, were $29.6 million, compared to $10.8 million at March 31, 2024. The increase in nonperforming assets is primarily the result of a $12.4 million loan moved to nonaccrual in the 2024 third quarter. The allowance for credit losses at March 31, 2025, stood at $22.4 million, or 1.44% of total loans, compared to $21.1 million, or 1.41% of total loans at March 31, 2024. The increase in the allowance for credit losses was mainly from changes in projected loss drivers, prepayment assumptions, curtailment expectations over the reasonable and supportable forecast period, and geographic footprint of unemployment data, as well as an overall increase in total loans.
Mr. Ranttila continued, “Asset quality remains stable, with nonperforming assets to total assets of 1.56% at March 31, 2025, compared to 1.62% at December 31, 2024. Nonperforming assets at March 31, 2025, included two relationships that moved into nonaccrual status in the second quarter of 2024 and one that moved into nonaccrual status in the third quarter of 2024. We remain well reserved for potential credit losses with an allowance for credit losses to total loans of 1.44% at March 31, 2025, compared to 1.48% at December 31, 2024, and 1.41% at March 31, 2024. We continue to expect stable economic activity across our Central, Western, and Northeast Ohio markets that will support loan demand and asset quality throughout 2025.”
About Middlefield Banc Corp.
Middlefield Banc Corp., headquartered in Middlefield, Ohio, is the Bank holding Company of The Middlefield Banking Company, with total assets of $1.89 billion at March 31, 2025. The Bank operates 21 full-service banking centers and an LPL Financial® brokerage office serving Ada, Beachwood, Bellefontaine, Chardon, Cortland, Dublin, Garrettsville, Kenton, Mantua, Marysville, Middlefield, Newbury, Orwell, Plain City, Powell, Solon, Sunbury, Twinsburg, and Westerville. The Bank also operates a Loan Production Office in Mentor, Ohio.
This press release includes disclosure of Middlefield Banc Corp.’s tangible book value per share, return on average tangible equity, and pre-tax, pre-provision for loan losses income, which are financial measures not prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (GAAP). A non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts required to be disclosed by GAAP. Middlefield Banc Corp. believes that these non-GAAP financial measures provide both management and investors a more complete understanding of the underlying operational results and trends and Middlefield Banc Corp.’s marketplace performance. The presentation of this additional information is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the numbers prepared in accordance with GAAP. The reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures are included in the following Consolidated Financial Highlights tables below.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS This press release of Middlefield Banc Corp. and the reports Middlefield Banc Corp. files with the Securities and Exchange Commission often contain “forward-looking statements” relating to present or future trends or factors affecting the banking industry and, specifically, the financial operations, markets and products of Middlefield Banc Corp. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties. There are several important factors that could cause Middlefield Banc Corp.’s future results to differ materially from historical performance or projected performance. These factors include, but are not limited to: (1) a significant increase in competitive pressures among financial institutions; (2) changes in the interest rate environment that may reduce interest margins; (3) changes in prepayment speeds, charge-offs and loan loss provisions; (4) less favorable than expected general economic conditions; (5) legislative or regulatory changes that may adversely affect businesses in which Middlefield Banc Corp. is engaged; (6) technological issues which may adversely affect Middlefield Banc Corp.’s financial operations or customers; (7) changes in the securities markets; or (8) risk factors mentioned in the reports and registration statements Middlefield Banc Corp. files with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Middlefield Banc Corp. undertakes no obligation to release revisions to these forward-looking statements or to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this press release.
Company Contact:
Investor and Media Contact:
Ronald L. Zimmerly, Jr. President and Chief Executive Officer Middlefield Banc Corp. (419) 673-1217 rzimmerly@middlefieldbank.com
Andrew M. Berger Managing Director SM Berger & Company, Inc. (216) 464-6400 andrew@smberger.com
(1) See section “GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliations” for the reconciliation of GAAP performance measures to non-GAAP measures.
MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP. Consolidated Selected Financial Highlights (Dollar amounts in thousands, except per share and share amounts, unaudited)
For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
December 31,
September 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2024
2024
2024
Per common share data
Net income per common share – basic
$
0.60
$
0.60
$
0.29
$
0.52
$
0.52
Net income per common share – diluted
$
0.60
$
0.60
$
0.29
$
0.52
$
0.51
Dividends declared per share
$
0.21
$
0.20
$
0.20
$
0.20
$
0.20
Book value per share (period end)
$
26.46
$
26.08
$
26.11
$
25.63
$
25.48
Tangible book value per share (period end) (1) (2)
$
21.29
$
20.88
$
20.87
$
20.37
$
20.18
Dividends declared
$
1,697
$
1,616
$
1,615
$
1,613
$
1,613
Dividend yield
3.05
%
2.84
%
2.76
%
3.34
%
3.37
%
Dividend payout ratio
35.13
%
33.33
%
69.02
%
38.74
%
38.71
%
Average shares outstanding – basic
8,078,805
8,071,905
8,071,032
8,067,144
8,091,203
Average shares outstanding – diluted
8,097,545
8,092,357
8,086,872
8,072,499
8,096,317
Period ending shares outstanding
8,081,193
8,073,708
8,071,032
8,067,144
8,067,144
Selected ratios
Return on average assets (Annualized)
1.04
%
1.04
%
0.50
%
0.91
%
0.92
%
Return on average equity (Annualized)
9.22
%
9.19
%
4.45
%
8.15
%
8.16
%
Return on average tangible common equity (1) (3)
11.48
%
11.50
%
5.58
%
10.29
%
10.30
%
Efficiency (4)
65.22
%
65.05
%
67.93
%
67.97
%
68.68
%
Equity to assets at period end
11.32
%
11.36
%
11.34
%
11.31
%
11.32
%
Noninterest expense to average assets
0.65
%
0.63
%
0.66
%
0.64
%
0.66
%
(1) See section “GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliations” for the reconciliation of GAAP performance measures to non-GAAP measures.
(2) Calculated by dividing tangible common equity by shares outstanding.
(3) Calculated by dividing annualized net income for each period by average tangible common equity.
(4) The efficiency ratio is calculated by dividing noninterest expense less amortization of intangibles by the sum of net interest income on a fully taxable equivalent basis plus noninterest income.
For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
December 31,
September 30,
June 30,
March 31,
Yields
2025
2024
2024
2024
2024
Interest-earning assets:
Loans receivable (1)
6.17
%
6.12
%
6.19
%
6.27
%
6.11
%
Investment securities (1) (2)
3.69
%
3.63
%
3.62
%
3.59
%
3.52
%
Interest-earning deposits with other banks
3.57
%
4.23
%
4.27
%
4.59
%
4.88
%
Total interest-earning assets
5.81
%
5.78
%
5.84
%
5.92
%
5.77
%
Deposits:
Interest-bearing demand deposits
2.13
%
2.07
%
2.16
%
1.93
%
1.86
%
Money market deposits
3.38
%
3.81
%
3.93
%
3.95
%
3.81
%
Savings deposits
0.82
%
0.75
%
0.71
%
0.64
%
0.58
%
Certificates of deposit
3.93
%
4.21
%
4.49
%
4.57
%
4.06
%
Total interest-bearing deposits
2.82
%
3.05
%
3.17
%
3.15
%
2.88
%
Non-Deposit Funding:
Borrowings
4.58
%
4.93
%
5.54
%
5.60
%
5.61
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
3.01
%
3.21
%
3.41
%
3.45
%
3.23
%
Cost of deposits
2.10
%
2.24
%
2.33
%
2.30
%
2.08
%
Cost of funds
2.30
%
2.41
%
2.58
%
2.61
%
2.42
%
Net interest margin (3)
3.69
%
3.56
%
3.46
%
3.51
%
3.54
%
(1) Tax-equivalent adjustments to calculate the yield on tax-exempt securities and loans were determined using an effective tax rate of 21%.
(2) Yield is calculated on the basis of amortized cost.
(3) Net interest margin represents net interest income as a percentage of average interest-earning assets.
Net charge-offs (recoveries) to average loans, annualized:
Quarter-to-date
(0.06
%)
0.04
%
0.36
%
(0.01
%)
(0.02
%)
Year-to-date
(0.06
%)
0.10
%
0.11
%
(0.01
%)
(0.02
%)
Nonperforming loans/total loans
1.91
%
1.97
%
2.00
%
1.07
%
0.73
%
Allowance for credit losses/nonperforming loans
75.81
%
74.86
%
74.89
%
136.55
%
194.52
%
Nonperforming assets/total assets
1.56
%
1.62
%
1.62
%
0.87
%
0.60
%
(1) Nonperforming assets consist of nonperforming loans.
MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP. GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliations
Reconciliation of Common Stockholders’ Equity to Tangible Common Equity
For the Three Months Ended
(Dollar amounts in thousands, unaudited)
March 31,
December 31,
September 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2024
2024
2024
Stockholders’ equity
$
213,793
$
210,562
$
210,705
$
206,788
$
205,575
Less goodwill and other intangibles
41,717
41,967
42,225
42,482
42,740
Tangible common equity
$
172,076
$
168,595
$
168,480
$
164,306
$
162,835
Shares outstanding
8,081,193
8,073,708
8,071,032
8,067,144
8,067,144
Tangible book value per share
$
21.29
$
20.88
$
20.87
$
20.37
$
20.18
Reconciliation of Average Equity to Return on Average Tangible Common Equity
For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
December 31,
September 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2024
2024
2024
Average stockholders’ equity
$
212,465
$
209,864
$
209,096
$
205,379
$
205,342
Less average goodwill and other intangibles
41,839
42,092
42,350
42,607
42,654
Average tangible common equity
$
170,626
$
167,772
$
166,746
$
162,772
$
162,688
Net income
$
4,830
$
4,848
$
2,340
$
4,164
$
4,167
Return on average tangible common equity (annualized)
11.48
%
11.50
%
5.58
%
10.29
%
10.30
%
Reconciliation of Pre-Tax Pre-Provision Income (PTPP)
For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
December 31,
September 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2024
2024
2024
Net income
$
4,830
$
4,848
$
2,340
$
4,164
$
4,167
Add income taxes
924
995
371
690
769
Add provision for (recovery of) credit losses
95
(177
)
2,234
87
(136
)
PTPP
$
5,849
$
5,666
$
4,945
$
4,941
$
4,800
MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP. Average Balance Sheets (Dollar amounts in thousands, unaudited)
For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
March 31,
2025
2024
Average
Average
Average
Average
Balance
Interest
Yield/Cost
Balance
Interest
Yield/Cost
Interest-earning assets:
Loans receivable (1)
$
1,537,337
$
23,387
6.17
%
$
1,476,543
$
22,395
6.11
%
Investment securities (1) (2)
191,996
1,490
3.69
%
191,851
1,439
3.56
%
Interest-earning deposits with other banks (3)
67,661
596
3.57
%
64,139
778
4.88
%
Total interest-earning assets
1,796,994
25,473
5.81
%
1,732,533
24,612
5.78
%
Noninterest-earning assets
84,542
90,151
Total assets
$
1,881,536
$
1,822,684
Interest-bearing liabilities:
Interest-bearing demand deposits
$
220,192
$
1,154
2.13
%
$
211,009
$
978
1.86
%
Money market deposits
458,446
3,816
3.38
%
298,479
2,827
3.81
%
Savings deposits
192,931
388
0.82
%
201,080
290
0.58
%
Certificates of deposit
261,006
2,527
3.93
%
333,871
3,371
4.06
%
Short-term borrowings
120,238
1,347
4.54
%
144,357
1,993
5.55
%
Other borrowings
11,639
143
4.98
%
11,840
184
6.25
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
1,264,452
9,375
3.01
%
1,200,636
9,643
3.23
%
Noninterest-bearing liabilities:
Noninterest-bearing demand deposits
390,354
400,209
Other liabilities
14,265
16,497
Stockholders’ equity
212,465
205,342
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
1,881,536
$
1,822,684
Net interest income
$
16,098
$
14,969
Interest rate spread (4)
2.80
%
2.55
%
Net interest margin (5)
3.69
%
3.54
%
Ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities
142.12
%
144.30
%
(1) Tax-equivalent adjustments to calculate the yield on tax-exempt securities and loans were $272 and $281 for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
(2) Yield is calculated on the basis of amortized cost.
(3) Includes dividends received on restricted stock.
(4) Interest rate spread represents the difference between the average yield on interest-earning assets and the average cost of interest-bearing liabilities.
(5) Net interest margin represents net interest income as a percentage of average interest-earning assets.
For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
December 31,
2025
2024
Average
Average
Average
Average
Balance
Interest
Yield/Cost
Balance
Interest
Yield/Cost
Interest-earning assets:
Loans receivable (1)
$
1,537,337
$
23,387
6.17
%
$
1,517,051
$
23,308
6.12
%
Investment securities (1) (2)
191,996
1,490
3.69
%
191,390
1,489
3.63
%
Interest-earning deposits with other banks (3)
67,661
596
3.57
%
60,241
641
4.23
%
Total interest-earning assets
1,796,994
25,473
5.81
%
1,768,682
25,438
5.78
%
Noninterest-earning assets
84,542
88,205
Total assets
$
1,881,536
$
1,856,887
Interest-bearing liabilities:
Interest-bearing demand deposits
$
220,192
$
1,154
2.13
%
$
216,492
$
1,126
2.07
%
Money market deposits
458,446
3,816
3.38
%
393,298
3,768
3.81
%
Savings deposits
192,931
388
0.82
%
197,257
373
0.75
%
Certificates of deposit
261,006
2,527
3.93
%
313,582
3,315
4.21
%
Short-term borrowings
120,238
1,347
4.54
%
93,200
1,128
4.81
%
Other borrowings
11,639
143
4.98
%
11,690
173
5.89
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
1,264,452
9,375
3.01
%
1,225,519
9,883
3.21
%
Noninterest-bearing liabilities:
Noninterest-bearing demand deposits
390,354
404,428
Other liabilities
14,265
17,076
Stockholders’ equity
212,465
209,864
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
1,881,536
$
1,856,887
Net interest income
$
16,098
$
15,555
Interest rate spread (4)
2.80
%
2.57
%
Net interest margin (5)
3.69
%
3.56
%
Ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities
142.12
%
144.32
%
(1) Tax-equivalent adjustments to calculate the yield on tax-exempt securities and loans were $272 and $280 for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively.
(2) Yield is calculated on the basis of amortized cost.
(3) Includes dividends received on restricted stock.
(4) Interest rate spread represents the difference between the average yield on interest-earning assets and the average cost of interest-bearing liabilities.
(5) Net interest margin represents net interest income as a percentage of average interest-earning assets.
Diluted earnings per share for the current quarter was $0.48 per share, a decrease of 11 percent from the prior quarter diluted earnings per share of $0.54 per share and an increase of 66 percent from the prior year first quarter diluted earnings per share of $0.29 per share.
Net income was $54.6 million for the current quarter, a decrease of $7.2 million, or 12 percent, from the prior quarter net income of $61.8 million and an increase of $21.9 million, or 67 percent, from the prior year first quarter net income of $32.6 million.
The net interest margin as a percentage of earning assets, on a tax-equivalent basis, for the current quarter was 3.04 percent, an increase of 7 basis points from the prior quarter net interest margin of 2.97 percent and an increase of 45 basis points from the prior year first quarter net interest margin of 2.59 percent.
Total deposits of $20.634 billion increased $87.1 million, or 2 percent annualized, during the current quarter.
The loan yield of 5.77 percent in the current quarter increased 5 basis points from the prior quarter loan yield of 5.72 percent and increased 31 basis points from the prior year first quarter loan yield of 5.46 percent.
The total earning asset yield of 4.61 percent in the current quarter increased 4 basis points from the prior quarter earning asset yield of 4.57 percent and increased 30 basis points from the prior year first quarter earning asset yield of 4.31 percent.
The total core deposit cost (including non-interest bearing deposits) of 1.25 percent in the current quarter decreased 4 basis point from the prior quarter total core deposit cost of 1.29 percent.
The total cost of funding (including non-interest bearing deposits) of 1.68 percent in the current quarter decreased 3 basis point from the prior quarter total cost of funding of 1.71 percent.
The Company declared a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share. The Company has declared 160 consecutive quarterly dividends and has increased the dividend 49 times.
The Company announced the signing of a definitive agreement to acquire Bank of Idaho Holding Co., the bank holding company for Bank of Idaho (collectively, “BOID”) which had total assets of $1.3 billion as of March 31, 2025. This will be the Company’s 26th bank acquisition since 2000 and its 12th announced transaction in the past 10 years.
Financial Summary
At or for the Three Months ended
(Dollars in thousands, except per share and market data)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Operating results
Net income
$
54,568
61,754
32,627
Basic earnings per share
$
0.48
0.54
0.29
Diluted earnings per share
$
0.48
0.54
0.29
Dividends declared per share
$
0.33
0.33
0.33
Market value per share
Closing
$
44.22
50.22
40.28
High
$
52.81
60.67
42.75
Low
$
43.18
43.70
34.74
Selected ratios and other data
Number of common stock shares outstanding
113,517,944
113,401,955
113,388,590
Average outstanding shares – basic
113,451,199
113,398,213
112,492,142
Average outstanding shares – diluted
113,546,365
113,541,026
112,554,402
Return on average assets (annualized)
0.80
%
0.87
%
0.47
%
Return on average equity (annualized)
6.77
%
7.62
%
4.25
%
Efficiency ratio
65.49
%
60.50
%
74.41
%
Loan to deposit ratio
83.64
%
84.17
%
82.04
%
Number of full time equivalent employees
3,457
3,441
3,438
Number of locations
227
227
232
Number of ATMs
286
284
285
KALISPELL, Mont., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Glacier Bancorp, Inc. (NYSE: GBCI) reported net income of $54.6 million for the current quarter, a decrease of $7.2 million, or 12 percent from the prior quarter net income of $61.8 million and an increase of $21.9 million, or 67 percent, from the $32.6 million of net income for the prior year first quarter. Diluted earnings per share for the current quarter was $0.48 per share, a decrease of 11 percent from the prior quarter diluted earnings per share of $0.54 per share and an increase of 65 percent from the prior year first quarter diluted earnings per share of $0.29. “We are very pleased with the long-term positive trends we see in our Company. Deposit costs are decreasing, loan yields are increasing, and margin continues to grow,” said Randy Chesler, President and Chief Executive Officer. “While uncertainty about the economy persists, we remain optimistic about our customers’ ability to quickly adapt to a changing environment.”
On January 13, 2025, the Company announced the signing of a definitive agreement to acquire BOID with 15 branches across eastern Idaho, Boise and eastern Washington. As of March 31, 2025, BOID had total assets of $1.3 billion, total loans of $1.1 billion and total deposits of $1.1 billion. Upon closing of the transaction, the BOID operations will join three existing Glacier Bank divisions. The Eastern Idaho operations of Bank of Idaho will join Citizens Community Bank, the Boise operations will join Mountain West Bank and the Eastern Washington operations will join Wheatland Bank. The acquisition has received all required regulatory approvals and is scheduled to close on April 30, 2025, subject to satisfaction of the remaining conditions set forth in the merger agreement and the approval by the BOID shareholders.
Asset Summary
$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Cash and cash equivalents
$
981,485
848,408
788,660
133,077
192,825
Debt securities, available-for-sale
4,172,312
4,245,205
4,629,073
(72,893
)
(456,761
)
Debt securities, held-to-maturity
3,261,575
3,294,847
3,451,583
(33,272
)
(190,008
)
Total debt securities
7,433,887
7,540,052
8,080,656
(106,165
)
(646,769
)
Loans receivable
Residential real estate
1,850,079
1,858,929
1,752,514
(8,850
)
97,565
Commercial real estate
10,952,809
10,963,713
10,672,269
(10,904
)
280,540
Other commercial
3,121,477
3,119,535
3,030,608
1,942
90,869
Home equity
920,132
930,994
883,062
(10,862
)
37,070
Other consumer
374,021
388,678
394,049
(14,657
)
(20,028
)
Loans receivable
17,218,518
17,261,849
16,732,502
(43,331
)
486,016
Allowance for credit losses
(210,400
)
(206,041
)
(198,779
)
(4,359
)
(11,621
)
Loans receivable, net
17,008,118
17,055,808
16,533,723
(47,690
)
474,395
Other assets
2,435,389
2,458,719
2,419,131
(23,330
)
16,258
Total assets
$
27,858,879
27,902,987
27,822,170
(44,108
)
36,709
The Company continues to maintain a strong cash position of $981 million at March 31, 2025 which was an increase of $133 million over the prior quarter and an increase of $193 million over the prior year first quarter. Total debt securities of $7.434 billion at March 31, 2025 decreased $106 million, or 1 percent, during the current quarter and decreased $647 million, or 8 percent, from the prior year first quarter. Debt securities represented 27 percent of total assets at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 compared to 29 percent at March 31, 2024.
The loan portfolio of $17.219 billion at March 31, 2025 decreased $43 million, or 25 basis points, during the current quarter and increased $486 million, or 3 percent, from the prior year first quarter. Excluding the Rocky Mountain Bank (“RMB”) acquisition on July 19, 2024, the loan portfolio organically increased $214 million, or 1 percent, since the prior year first quarter. Excluding the RMB acquisition, the loan category with the largest dollar increase in the last twelve months was commercial real estate which increased $159 million, or 1 percent.
Credit Quality Summary
At or for the Three Months ended
At or for the Year ended
At or for the Three Months ended
(Dollars in thousands)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Allowance for credit losses
Balance at beginning of period
$
206,041
192,757
192,757
Acquisitions
—
3
3
Provision for credit losses
6,154
27,179
9,091
Charge-offs
(3,897
)
(18,626
)
(4,295
)
Recoveries
2,102
4,728
1,223
Balance at end of period
$
210,400
206,041
198,779
Provision for credit losses
Loan portfolio
$
6,154
27,179
9,091
Unfunded loan commitments
1,660
1,127
(842
)
Total provision for credit losses
$
7,814
28,306
8,249
Other real estate owned
$
1,085
1,085
432
Other foreclosed assets
68
79
459
Accruing loans 90 days or more past due
5,289
6,177
3,796
Non-accrual loans
32,896
20,445
20,738
Total non-performing assets
$
39,338
27,786
25,425
Non-performing assets as a percentage of subsidiary assets
0.14
%
0.10
%
0.09
%
Allowance for credit losses as a percentage of non-performing loans
551
%
774
%
810
%
Allowance for credit losses as a percentage of total loans
1.22
%
1.19
%
1.19
%
Net charge-offs as a percentage of total loans
0.01
%
0.08
%
0.02
%
Accruing loans 30-89 days past due
$
46,458
32,228
62,423
U.S. government guarantees included in non-performing assets
$
685
748
1,490
Non-performing assets as a percentage of subsidiary assets at March 31, 2025 was 0.14 percent compared to 0.10 percent in the prior quarter and 0.09 percent in the prior year first quarter. Non-performing assets of $39.3 million at March 31, 2025 increased $11.6 million, or 42 percent, over the prior quarter and increased $13.9 million, or 55 percent, over the prior year first quarter. The increase in the non-performing loans in the current quarter was primarily attributable to a single credit relationship.
Early stage delinquencies (accruing loans 30-89 days past due) as a percentage of loans at March 31, 2025 were 0.27 percent compared to 0.19 percent for the prior quarter end and 0.37 percent for the prior year first quarter. Early stage delinquencies of $46.5 million at March 31, 2025 increased $14.2 million from the prior quarter and decreased $16.0 million from prior year first quarter.
The current quarter credit loss expense of $7.8 million included $6.2 million of provision for credit losses on loans and $1.7 million of provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments.
The allowance for credit losses (“ACL”) on loans as a percentage of total loans outstanding at March 31, 2025 was 1.22 percent compared to 1.19 percent at year end and the prior year first quarter. Loan portfolio growth, composition, average loan size, credit quality considerations, economic forecasts, actual results, and other environmental factors will continue to determine the level of the provision for credit losses for loans.
Credit Quality Trends and Provision for Credit Losses on the Loan Portfolio
(Dollars in thousands)
Provision for Credit Losses Loans
Net Charge-Offs
ACL as a Percent of Loans
Accruing Loans 30-89 Days Past Due as a Percent of Loans
Non-Performing Assets to Total Subsidiary Assets
First quarter 2025
$
6,154
$
1,795
1.22
%
0.27
%
0.14
%
Fourth quarter 2024
6,041
5,170
1.19
%
0.19
%
0.10
%
Third quarter 2024
6,981
2,766
1.19
%
0.33
%
0.10
%
Second quarter 2024
5,066
2,890
1.19
%
0.29
%
0.06
%
First quarter 2024
9,091
3,072
1.19
%
0.37
%
0.09
%
Fourth quarter 2023
4,181
3,695
1.19
%
0.31
%
0.09
%
Third quarter 2023
5,095
2,209
1.19
%
0.09
%
0.15
%
Second quarter 2023
5,254
2,473
1.19
%
0.16
%
0.12
%
Net charge-offs for the current quarter were $1.8 million compared to $5.2 million in the prior quarter and $3.1 million for the prior year first quarter. The current quarter net charge-offs included $1.9 million in deposit overdraft net charge-offs and $78 thousand of net loan recoveries.
Supplemental information regarding credit quality and identification of the Company’s loan portfolio based on the regulatory classification of loans is provided in the exhibits at the end of this press release. The regulatory classification of loans is based primarily on collateral type while the Company’s loan segments presented herein are based on the purpose of the loan.
Liability Summary
$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Deposits
Non-interest bearing deposits
$
6,100,548
6,136,709
6,055,069
(36,161
)
45,479
NOW and DDA accounts
5,676,177
5,543,512
5,376,605
132,665
299,572
Savings accounts
2,896,378
2,845,124
2,949,908
51,254
(53,530
)
Money market deposit accounts
2,816,874
2,878,213
3,002,942
(61,339
)
(186,068
)
Certificate accounts
3,140,333
3,139,821
3,039,190
512
101,143
Core deposits, total
20,630,310
20,543,379
20,423,714
86,931
206,596
Wholesale deposits
3,740
3,615
3,809
125
(69
)
Deposits, total
20,634,050
20,546,994
20,427,523
87,056
206,527
Repurchase agreements
1,849,070
1,777,475
1,540,008
71,595
309,062
Deposits and repurchase agreements, total
22,483,120
22,324,469
21,967,531
158,651
515,589
Federal Home Loan Bank advances
1,520,000
1,800,000
2,140,157
(280,000
)
(620,157
)
Other borrowed funds
82,443
83,341
88,814
(898
)
(6,371
)
Subordinated debentures
133,145
133,105
132,984
40
161
Other liabilities
352,563
338,218
381,977
14,345
(29,414
)
Total liabilities
$
24,571,271
24,679,133
24,711,463
(107,862
)
(140,192
)
Total deposits of $20.634 billion at March 31, 2025 increased $87.1 million, or 2 percent annualized, from the prior quarter and increased $207 million, or 1 percent, from the prior year first quarter. Total repurchase agreements of $1.849 billion at March 31, 2025 increased $71.6 million, or 4 percent, from the prior quarter and increased $309 million, or 20 percent, from the prior year first quarter. Total deposits organically decreased $190 million, or 1 percent, from the prior year first quarter and total deposits and repurchase agreements organically increased $115 million, or 52 basis points, from the prior year first quarter. Non-interest bearing deposits represented 30 percent of total deposits at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2024. Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances of $1.520 billion decreased $280 million, or 16 percent, from the prior quarter and decreased $620 million, or 29 percent, from the prior year first quarter.
Stockholders’ Equity Summary
$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Common equity
$
3,550,719
3,533,150
3,483,012
17,569
67,707
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(263,111
)
(309,296
)
(372,305
)
46,185
109,194
Total stockholders’ equity
3,287,608
3,223,854
3,110,707
63,754
176,901
Goodwill and intangibles, net
(1,099,229
)
(1,102,500
)
(1,069,808
)
3,271
(29,421
)
Tangible stockholders’ equity
$
2,188,379
2,121,354
2,040,899
67,025
147,480
Stockholders’ equity to total assets
11.80
%
11.55
%
11.18
%
Tangible stockholders’ equity to total tangible assets
8.18
%
7.92
%
7.63
%
Book value per common share
$
28.96
28.43
27.43
0.53
1.53
Tangible book value per common share
$
19.28
18.71
18.00
0.57
1.28
Tangible stockholders’ equity of $2.188 billion at March 31, 2025 increased $67.0 million, or 3 percent, compared to the prior quarter and was primarily the result of a decrease in unrealized loss on the available-for-sale debt securities and earnings retention. Tangible stockholders’ equity at March 31, 2025 increased $147 million, or 7 percent, compared to the prior year first quarter and was primarily due to the decrease in unrealized loss on the available-for-sale debt securities and earnings retention. The increase was partially offset by the increase in goodwill and core deposits associated with the RMB acquisition. Tangible book value per common share of $19.28 at the current quarter end increased $0.57 per share, or 3 percent, from the prior quarter and increased $1.28 per share, or 7 percent, from the prior year first quarter.
Cash Dividends On March 26, 2025, the Company’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.33 per share. The dividend was payable April 17, 2025 to shareholders of record on April 8, 2025. The dividend was the Company’s 160th consecutive regular dividend. Future cash dividends will depend on a variety of factors, including net income, capital, asset quality, general economic conditions and regulatory considerations.
Operating Results for Three Months EndedMarch 31, 2025 Compared toDecember 31, 2024, andMarch 31, 2024
Income Summary
Three Months ended
$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Net interest income
Interest income
$
289,925
297,036
279,402
(7,111
)
10,523
Interest expense
99,946
105,593
112,922
(5,647
)
(12,976
)
Total net interest income
189,979
191,443
166,480
(1,464
)
23,499
Non-interest income
Service charges and other fees
18,818
20,322
18,563
(1,504
)
255
Miscellaneous loan fees and charges
4,664
4,541
4,362
123
302
Gain on sale of loans
4,311
3,926
3,362
385
949
Gain on sale of securities
—
—
16
—
(16
)
Other income
4,849
2,760
3,686
2,089
1,163
Total non-interest income
32,642
31,549
29,989
1,093
2,653
Total income
$
222,621
222,992
196,469
(371
)
26,152
Net interest margin (tax-equivalent)
3.04
%
2.97
%
2.59
%
Net Interest Income Net interest income of $190 million for the current quarter decreased $1.5 million, or 1 percent, from the prior quarter net interest income of $191 million and increased $23.5 million, or 14 percent, from the prior year first quarter net interest income of $166 million. The current quarter interest income of $290 million decreased $7.1 million, or 2 percent, over the prior quarter and was primarily driven by fewer days in the current quarter coupled with decreased average interest-bearing cash balances. The current quarter interest income increased $10.5 million, or 4 percent, over the prior year first quarter primarily due to the increase in the loan yields and the increase in average balances of the loan portfolio. The loan yield of 5.77 percent in the current quarter increased 5 basis points from the prior quarter loan yield of 5.72 percent and increased 31 basis points from the prior year first quarter loan yield of 5.46 percent.
The current quarter interest expense of $99.9 million decreased $5.6 million, or 5 percent, over the prior quarter and was primarily attributable to a decrease in deposit costs. The current quarter interest expense decreased $13.0 million, or 11 percent, over the prior year first quarter and was primarily the result of lower average wholesale borrowings and a decrease in deposit costs. Core deposit cost (including non-interest bearing deposits) was 1.25 percent for the current quarter compared to 1.29 percent in the prior quarter and 1.34 percent for the prior year first quarter. The total cost of funding (including non-interest bearing deposits) of 1.68 percent in the current quarter decreased 3 basis points from the prior quarter and decreased 16 basis point from the prior year first quarter.
The net interest margin as a percentage of earning assets, on a tax-equivalent basis, for the current quarter was 3.04 percent, an increase of 7 basis points from the prior quarter net interest margin of 2.97 percent and was primarily driven by an increase in loan yields and a decrease in total cost of funding. The net interest margin as a percentage of earning assets, on a tax-equivalent basis, for the current quarter was an increase of 45 basis points from the prior year first quarter net interest margin of 2.59 percent and was primarily driven by the increase in loan yields and the decrease in core deposit cost. Core net interest margin excludes the impact from discount accretion and non-accrual interest. Excluding the 5 basis points from discount accretion, the core net interest margin was 2.99 percent in the current quarter compared to 2.97 percent in the prior quarter and 2.59 in the prior year first quarter. “The Company’s net interest margin increased for the fifth consecutive quarter,” said Ron Copher, Chief Financial Officer. “The continued increase in loan yields and decrease in the deposit costs contributed to the 7 basis points increase in the net interest margin as it expanded to 3.04 percent in the current quarter.”
Non-interest Income Non-interest income for the current quarter totaled $32.6 million, which was an increase of $1.1 million, or 3 percent, over the prior quarter and an increase of $2.7 million, or 9 percent, over the prior year first quarter. Service charges and other fees of $18.8 million for the current quarter decreased $1.5 million, or 7 percent, compared to the prior quarter and increased $255 thousand, or 1 percent, compared to the prior year first quarter. Gain on the sale of residential loans of $4.3 million for the current quarter increased $385 thousand, or 10 percent, compared to the prior quarter and increased $949 thousand, or 28 percent, from the prior year first quarter. Other income of $4.8 million increased $2.1 million, or 75 percent, over the prior quarter primarily due to other income of $1.1 million related to bank owned life insurance proceeds coupled with an increase in income from equity investments and other one-time adjustments. Other income increased $1.2 million, or 32 percent, over the prior year first quarter primarily due to the current quarter proceeds from bank owned life insurance.
Non-interest Expense Summary
Three Months ended
$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Compensation and employee benefits
$
91,443
81,600
85,789
9,843
5,654
Occupancy and equipment
12,294
11,589
11,883
705
411
Advertising and promotions
4,144
3,725
3,983
419
161
Data processing
9,138
9,145
9,159
(7
)
(21
)
Other real estate owned and foreclosed assets
63
30
25
33
38
Regulatory assessments and insurance
5,534
5,890
7,761
(356
)
(2,227
)
Intangibles amortization
3,270
3,613
2,760
(343
)
510
Other expenses
25,432
25,373
30,483
59
(5,051
)
Total non-interest expense
$
151,318
140,965
151,843
10,353
(525
)
Total non-interest expense of $151 million for the current quarter increased $10.4 million, or 7 percent, over the prior quarter and decreased $525 thousand, or 35 basis points, over the prior year first quarter. Compensation and employee benefits of $91.4 million increased by $9.8 million, or 12 percent, over the prior quarter and was primarily attributable to increased performance-related compensation. Compensation and employee benefits increased $5.6 million, or 7 percent, from the prior year first quarter and was primarily driven by annual salary increases and increases in staffing levels from prior year acquisitions. Regulatory assessment and insurance expense of $5.5 million decreased $2.2 million from the prior year first quarter as a result of adjustments to the FDIC special assessment.
Other expenses of $25.4 million increased $59 thousand, or 23 basis points, from the prior quarter. Other expenses decreased $5.1 million, or 17 percent, from the prior year first quarter and was primarily driven by a decrease in acquisition-related expense. Acquisition-related expense was $587 thousand in the current quarter compared to $491 thousand in the prior quarter and $5.7 million in the prior year first quarter. The current quarter other expenses included $1.2 million of gain from the sale of a former branch facility compared to a $2.1 million gain in the prior quarter and a $989 thousand gain in the prior year first quarter.
Federal and State Income Tax Expense
Tax expense during the first quarter of 2025 was $8.9 million, a decrease of $2.8 million, or 24 percent, compared to the prior quarter and an increase of $5.2 million, or 138 percent, from the prior year first quarter. The effective tax rate in the current quarter was 14.1 percent compared to 16.0 percent in the prior quarter. The lower tax expense and lower effective tax rate in the current quarter compared to the prior quarter was the result of a combination of higher federal income tax credits and a decrease in income before income tax expense.
Efficiency Ratio The efficiency ratio was 65.49 percent in the current quarter compared to 60.50 percent in the prior quarter and 74.41 percent in the prior year first quarter. The increase from the prior quarter was principally driven by the decrease in net interest income combined with an increase in non-interest expense. The decrease from the prior year first quarter was principally due to the increase in net interest income.
Forward-Looking Statements This news release may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about the Company’s plans, objectives, expectations and intentions that are not historical facts, and other statements identified by words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “will,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “should,” “projects,” “seeks,” “estimates” or other comparable words or phrases of a future or forward-looking nature. These forward-looking statements are based on current beliefs and expectations of management and are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are beyond the Company’s control. In addition, these forward-looking statements are based on assumptions that are subject to change. The following factors, among others, could cause actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results (express or implied) or other expectations in the forward-looking statements, including those made in this news release:
risks associated with lending and potential adverse changes in the credit quality of the Company’s loan portfolio;
changes in monetary and fiscal policies, including interest rate policies of the Federal Reserve Board, which could adversely affect the Company’s net interest income and margin, the fair value of its financial instruments, profitability, and stockholders’ equity;
legislative or regulatory changes, including increased FDIC insurance rates and assessments, changes in the review and regulation of bank mergers, or increased banking and consumer protection regulations, that may adversely affect the Company’s business and strategies;
risks related to overall economic conditions, including the impact on the economy of an uncertain interest rate environment, inflationary pressures and the potential for significant changes in economic and trade policies in the new administration;
risks to the Company’s business and the business of the Company’s customers arising from current or future tariffs or other trade restrictions, labor or supply chain issues, change in labor force, or geopolitical instability, including the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East;
risks associated with the Company’s ability to negotiate, complete, and successfully integrate any pending or future acquisitions;
costs or difficulties related to the completion and integration of pending or future acquisitions;
impairment of the goodwill recorded by the Company in connection with acquisitions, which may have an adverse impact on earnings and capital;
reduction in demand for banking products and services, whether as a result of changes in customer behavior, economic conditions, banking environment, or competition;
deterioration of the reputation of banks and the financial services industry, which could adversely affect the Company’s ability to obtain and maintain customers;
changes in the competitive landscape, including as may result from new market entrants or further consolidation in the financial services industry, resulting in the creation of larger competitors with greater financial resources;
risks presented by public stock market volatility, which could adversely affect the market price of the Company’s common stock and the ability to raise additional capital or grow through acquisitions;
risks associated with dependence on the Chief Executive Officer, the senior management team and the Presidents of Glacier Bank’s divisions;
material failure, potential interruption or breach in security of the Company’s systems or changes in technology which could expose the Company to cybersecurity risks, fraud, system failures, or direct liabilities;
risks related to natural disasters, including droughts, fires, floods, earthquakes, pandemics, and other unexpected events;
success in managing risks involved in any of the foregoing; and
effects of any reputational damage to the Company resulting from any of the foregoing.
The Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly correct or update any forward-looking statement if it later becomes aware that actual results are likely to differ materially from those expressed in such forward-looking statement.
About Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Glacier Bancorp, Inc. (NYSE: GBCI), a member of the Russell 2000® and the S&P MidCap 400® indices, is the parent company for Glacier Bank and its Bank divisions located across its eight state Western U.S. footprint: Altabank (American Fork, UT), Bank of the San Juans (Durango, CO), Citizens Community Bank (Pocatello, ID), Collegiate Peaks Bank (Buena Vista, CO), First Bank of Montana (Lewistown, MT), First Bank of Wyoming (Powell, WY), First Community Bank Utah (Layton, UT), First Security Bank (Bozeman, MT), First Security Bank of Missoula (Missoula, MT), First State Bank (Wheatland, WY), Glacier Bank (Kalispell, MT), Heritage Bank of Nevada (Reno, NV), Mountain West Bank (Coeur d’Alene, ID), The Foothills Bank (Yuma, AZ), Valley Bank (Helena, MT), Western Security Bank (Billings, MT), and Wheatland Bank (Spokane, WA).
CONTACT: Randall M. Chesler, CEO
(406) 751-4722
Ron J. Copher, CFO
(406) 751-7706
Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Assets
Cash on hand and in banks
$
322,253
268,746
232,064
Interest bearing cash deposits
659,232
579,662
556,596
Cash and cash equivalents
981,485
848,408
788,660
Debt securities, available-for-sale
4,172,312
4,245,205
4,629,073
Debt securities, held-to-maturity
3,261,575
3,294,847
3,451,583
Total debt securities
7,433,887
7,540,052
8,080,656
Loans held for sale, at fair value
40,523
33,060
27,035
Loans receivable
17,218,518
17,261,849
16,732,502
Allowance for credit losses
(210,400
)
(206,041
)
(198,779
)
Loans receivable, net
17,008,118
17,055,808
16,533,723
Premises and equipment, net
411,095
411,968
379,826
Right-of-use assets, net
54,441
56,252
63,447
Other real estate owned and foreclosed assets
1,153
1,164
891
Accrued interest receivable
103,992
99,262
106,063
Deferred tax asset
122,942
138,955
161,327
Intangibles, net
47,911
51,182
46,046
Goodwill
1,051,318
1,051,318
1,023,762
Non-marketable equity securities
88,134
99,669
111,129
Bank-owned life insurance
191,044
189,849
186,625
Other assets
322,836
326,040
312,980
Total assets
$
27,858,879
27,902,987
27,822,170
Liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits
$
6,100,548
6,136,709
6,055,069
Interest bearing deposits
14,533,502
14,410,285
14,372,454
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
1,849,070
1,777,475
1,540,008
FHLB advances
1,520,000
1,800,000
2,140,157
Other borrowed funds
82,443
83,341
88,814
Subordinated debentures
133,145
133,105
132,984
Accrued interest payable
30,231
33,626
32,584
Other liabilities
322,332
304,592
349,393
Total liabilities
24,571,271
24,679,133
24,711,463
Commitments and Contingent Liabilities
—
—
—
Stockholders’ Equity
Preferred shares, $0.01 par value per share, 1,000,000 shares authorized, none issued or outstanding
—
—
—
Common stock, $0.01 par value per share, 234,000,000 shares authorized
1,135
1,134
1,134
Paid-in capital
2,449,311
2,448,758
2,443,584
Retained earnings – substantially restricted
1,100,273
1,083,258
1,038,294
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(263,111
)
(309,296
)
(372,305
)
Total stockholders’ equity
3,287,608
3,223,854
3,110,707
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
27,858,879
27,902,987
27,822,170
Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
Three Months ended
(Dollars in thousands)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Interest Income
Investment securities
$
45,646
50,381
56,218
Residential real estate loans
24,275
23,960
20,764
Commercial loans
197,388
199,260
181,472
Consumer and other loans
22,616
23,435
20,948
Total interest income
289,925
297,036
279,402
Interest Expense
Deposits
62,865
67,079
67,196
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
13,733
14,822
12,598
Federal Home Loan Bank advances
20,719
21,848
4,249
FRB Bank Term Funding
—
—
27,097
Other borrowed funds
402
348
344
Subordinated debentures
2,227
1,496
1,438
Total interest expense
99,946
105,593
112,922
Net Interest Income
189,979
191,443
166,480
Provision for credit losses
7,814
8,534
8,249
Net interest income after provision for credit losses
182,165
182,909
158,231
Non-Interest Income
Service charges and other fees
18,818
20,322
18,563
Miscellaneous loan fees and charges
4,664
4,541
4,362
Gain on sale of loans
4,311
3,926
3,362
Gain on sale of securities
—
—
16
Other income
4,849
2,760
3,686
Total non-interest income
32,642
31,549
29,989
Non-Interest Expense
Compensation and employee benefits
91,443
81,600
85,789
Occupancy and equipment
12,294
11,589
11,883
Advertising and promotions
4,144
3,725
3,983
Data processing
9,138
9,145
9,159
Other real estate owned and foreclosed assets
63
30
25
Regulatory assessments and insurance
5,534
5,890
7,761
Intangibles amortization
3,270
3,613
2,760
Other expenses
25,432
25,373
30,483
Total non-interest expense
151,318
140,965
151,843
Income Before Income Taxes
63,489
73,493
36,377
Federal and state income tax expense
8,921
11,739
3,750
Net Income
$
54,568
61,754
32,627
Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Average Balance Sheets
Three Months ended
March 31, 2025
December 31, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Average Balance
Interest & Dividends
Average Yield/ Rate
Average Balance
Interest & Dividends
Average Yield/ Rate
Assets
Residential real estate loans
$
1,885,497
$
24,275
5.15
%
$
1,885,146
$
23,960
5.08
%
Commercial loans 1
14,091,210
198,921
5.73
%
14,059,864
200,956
5.69
%
Consumer and other loans
1,302,687
22,616
7.04
%
1,324,341
23,435
7.04
%
Total loans 2
17,279,394
245,812
5.77
%
17,269,351
248,351
5.72
%
Tax-exempt debt securities 3
1,604,851
13,936
3.47
%
1,615,474
14,501
3.59
%
Taxable debt securities 4, 5
6,946,562
33,598
1.93
%
7,314,265
38,189
2.09
%
Total earning assets
25,830,807
293,346
4.61
%
26,199,090
301,041
4.57
%
Goodwill and intangibles
1,100,801
1,104,362
Non-earning assets
847,855
888,404
Total assets
$
27,779,463
$
28,191,856
Liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits
$
5,989,490
$
—
—
%
$
6,343,443
$
—
—
%
NOW and DDA accounts
5,525,976
15,065
1.11
%
5,491,451
15,768
1.14
%
Savings accounts
2,861,675
5,159
0.73
%
2,824,126
5,316
0.75
%
Money market deposit accounts
2,849,470
13,526
1.93
%
2,878,415
14,232
1.97
%
Certificate accounts
3,152,198
29,075
3.74
%
3,174,923
31,716
3.97
%
Total core deposits
20,378,809
62,825
1.25
%
20,712,358
67,032
1.29
%
Wholesale deposits 6
3,600
40
4.53
%
3,654
47
4.95
%
Repurchase agreements
1,842,773
13,733
3.02
%
1,866,705
14,821
3.16
%
FHLB advances
1,744,000
20,719
4.75
%
1,800,000
21,848
4.75
%
Subordinated debentures and other borrowed funds
216,073
2,629
4.94
%
216,874
1,845
3.38
%
Total funding liabilities
24,185,255
99,946
1.68
%
24,599,591
105,593
1.71
%
Other liabilities
326,764
369,700
Total liabilities
24,512,019
24,969,291
Stockholders’ Equity
Stockholders’ equity
3,267,444
3,222,565
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
27,779,463
$
28,191,856
Net interest income (tax-equivalent)
$
193,400
$
195,448
Net interest spread (tax-equivalent)
2.93
%
2.86
%
Net interest margin (tax-equivalent)
3.04
%
2.97
%
______________________________
1
Includes tax effect of $1.5 million and $1.7 million on tax-exempt municipal loan and lease income for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively.
2
Total loans are gross of the allowance for credit losses, net of unearned income and include loans held for sale. Non-accrual loans were included in the average volume for the entire period.
3
Includes tax effect of $1.7 million and $2.1 million on tax-exempt debt securities income for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively.
4
Includes interest income of $6.1 million and $9.2 million on average interest-bearing cash balances of $559.5 million and $759.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively.
5
Includes tax effect of $150 thousand and $203 thousand on federal income tax credits for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively.
6
Wholesale deposits include brokered deposits classified as NOW, DDA, money market deposit and certificate accounts with contractual maturities.
Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Average Balance Sheets (continued)
Three Months ended
March 31, 2025
March 31, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Average Balance
Interest & Dividends
Average Yield/ Rate
Average Balance
Interest & Dividends
Average Yield/ Rate
Assets
Residential real estate loans
$
1,885,497
$
24,275
5.15
%
$
1,747,184
$
20,764
4.75
%
Commercial loans 1
14,091,210
198,921
5.73
%
13,513,426
183,045
5.45
%
Consumer and other loans
1,302,687
22,616
7.04
%
1,283,388
20,948
6.56
%
Total loans 2
17,279,394
245,812
5.77
%
16,543,998
224,757
5.46
%
Tax-exempt debt securities 3
1,604,851
13,936
3.47
%
1,720,370
15,157
3.52
%
Taxable debt securities 4, 5
6,946,562
33,598
1.93
%
8,176,974
43,477
2.13
%
Total earning assets
25,830,807
293,346
4.61
%
26,441,342
283,391
4.31
%
Goodwill and intangibles
1,100,801
1,051,954
Non-earning assets
847,855
611,550
Total assets
$
27,779,463
$
28,104,846
Liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits
$
5,989,490
$
—
—
%
$
5,966,546
$
—
—
%
NOW and DDA accounts
5,525,976
15,065
1.11
%
5,275,703
15,918
1.21
%
Savings accounts
2,861,675
5,159
0.73
%
2,900,649
5,655
0.78
%
Money market deposit accounts
2,849,470
13,526
1.93
%
2,948,294
14,393
1.96
%
Certificate accounts
3,152,198
29,075
3.74
%
3,000,713
31,175
4.18
%
Total core deposits
20,378,809
62,825
1.25
%
20,091,905
67,141
1.34
%
Wholesale deposits 6
3,600
40
4.53
%
3,965
55
5.50
%
Repurchase agreements
1,842,773
13,733
3.02
%
1,513,397
12,598
3.35
%
FHLB advances
1,744,000
20,719
4.75
%
350,754
4,249
4.79
%
FRB Bank Term Funding
—
—
—
%
2,483,077
27,097
4.39
%
Subordinated debentures and other borrowed funds
216,073
2,629
4.94
%
218,271
1,782
3.28
%
Total funding liabilities
24,185,255
99,946
1.68
%
24,661,369
112,922
1.84
%
Other liabilities
326,764
356,554
Total liabilities
24,512,019
25,017,923
Stockholders’ Equity
Stockholders’ equity
3,267,444
3,086,923
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
27,779,463
$
28,104,846
Net interest income (tax-equivalent)
$
193,400
$
170,469
Net interest spread (tax-equivalent)
2.93
%
2.47
%
Net interest margin (tax-equivalent)
3.04
%
2.59
%
______________________________
1
Includes tax effect of $1.5 million and $1.6 million on tax-exempt municipal loan and lease income for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
2
Total loans are gross of the allowance for credit losses, net of unearned income and include loans held for sale. Non-accrual loans were included in the average volume for the entire period.
3
Includes tax effect of $1.7 million and $2.2 million on tax-exempt debt securities income for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
4
Includes interest income of $6.1 million and $15.3 million on average interest-bearing cash balances of $559.5 million and $1.12 billion for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
5
Includes tax effect of $150 thousand and $215 thousand on federal income tax credits for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively.
6
Wholesale deposits include brokered deposits classified as NOW, DDA, money market deposit and certificate accounts with contractual maturities.
Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Loan Portfolio by Regulatory Classification
Loans Receivable, by Loan Type
% Change from
(Dollars in thousands)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Custom and owner occupied construction
$
233,584
$
242,844
$
273,835
(4)%
(15)%
Pre-sold and spec construction
200,921
191,926
223,294
5
%
(10)%
Total residential construction
434,505
434,770
497,129
—
%
(13)%
Land development
177,448
197,369
215,828
(10)%
(18)%
Consumer land or lots
197,553
187,024
188,635
6
%
5
%
Unimproved land
115,528
113,532
103,032
2
%
12
%
Developed lots for operative builders
64,782
61,661
47,591
5
%
36
%
Commercial lots
95,574
99,243
92,748
(4)%
3
%
Other construction
714,151
693,461
915,782
3
%
(22)%
Total land, lot, and other construction
1,365,036
1,352,290
1,563,616
1
%
(13)%
Owner occupied
3,182,589
3,197,138
3,057,348
—
%
4
%
Non-owner occupied
4,054,107
4,053,996
3,920,696
—
%
3
%
Total commercial real estate
7,236,696
7,251,134
6,978,044
—
%
4
%
Commercial and industrial
1,392,365
1,395,997
1,371,201
—
%
2
%
Agriculture
1,016,081
1,024,520
929,420
(1)%
9
%
First lien
2,499,494
2,481,918
2,276,638
1
%
10
%
Junior lien
85,343
76,303
51,579
12
%
65
%
Total 1-4 family
2,584,837
2,558,221
2,328,217
1
%
11
%
Multifamily residential
874,071
895,242
881,117
(2)%
(1)%
Home equity lines of credit
989,043
1,005,783
947,652
(2)%
4
%
Other consumer
188,388
209,457
223,566
(10)%
(16)%
Total consumer
1,177,431
1,215,240
1,171,218
(3)%
1
%
States and political subdivisions
1,001,058
983,601
848,454
2
%
18
%
Other
176,961
183,894
191,121
(4)%
(7)%
Total loans receivable, including loans held for sale
17,259,041
17,294,909
16,759,537
—
%
3
%
Less loans held for sale1
(40,523
)
(33,060
)
(27,035
)
23
%
50
%
Total loans receivable
$
17,218,518
$
17,261,849
$
16,732,502
—
%
3
%
______________________________
1
Loans held for sale are primarily first lien 1-4 family loans.
Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Credit Quality Summary by Regulatory Classification
Non-performing Assets, by Loan Type
Non- Accrual Loans
Accruing Loans 90 Days or More Past Due
Other real estate owned and foreclosed assets
(Dollars in thousands)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2025
Mar 31, 2025
Mar 31, 2025
Custom and owner occupied construction
$
194
198
210
194
—
—
Pre-sold and spec construction
2,896
2,132
1,049
2,133
763
—
Total residential construction
3,090
2,330
1,259
2,327
763
—
Land development
935
966
28
935
—
—
Consumer land or lots
173
78
144
173
—
—
Developed lots for operative builders
531
531
608
—
531
—
Commercial lots
47
47
2,205
—
47
—
Total land, lot and other construction
1,686
1,622
2,985
1,108
578
—
Owner occupied
3,601
2,979
1,501
3,073
96
432
Non-owner occupied
2,235
2,235
8,853
1,582
—
653
Total commercial real estate
5,836
5,214
10,354
4,655
96
1,085
Commercial and Industrial
12,367
2,069
1,698
11,640
727
—
Agriculture
2,382
2,335
2,855
2,090
292
—
First lien
8,752
9,053
2,930
6,796
1,956
—
Junior lien
296
315
69
296
—
—
Total 1-4 family
9,048
9,368
2,999
7,092
1,956
—
Multifamily residential
400
389
395
400
—
—
Home equity lines of credit
3,479
3,465
1,892
2,726
753
—
Other consumer
1,003
955
927
858
77
68
Total consumer
4,482
4,420
2,819
3,584
830
68
Other
47
39
61
—
47
—
Total
$
39,338
27,786
25,425
32,896
5,289
1,153
Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Credit Quality Summary by Regulatory Classification (continued)
Accruing 30-89 Days Delinquent Loans, by Loan Type
% Change from
(Dollars in thousands)
Mar 31, 2025
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Dec 31, 2024
Mar 31, 2024
Custom and owner occupied construction
$
786
$
969
$
4,784
(19)%
(84)%
Pre-sold and spec construction
—
564
1,181
(100)%
(100)%
Total residential construction
786
1,533
5,965
(49)%
(87)%
Land development
—
1,450
59
(100)%
(100)%
Consumer land or lots
1,026
402
332
155
%
209
%
Unimproved land
32
36
575
(11)%
(94)%
Developed lots for operative builders
—
214
—
(100)%
n/m
Commercial lots
189
—
1,225
n/m
(85)%
Other construction
—
—
1,248
n/m
(100)%
Total land, lot and other construction
1,247
2,102
3,439
(41)%
(64)%
Owner occupied
3,786
2,867
2,991
32
%
27
%
Non-owner occupied
346
5,037
18,118
(93)%
(98)%
Total commercial real estate
4,132
7,904
21,109
(48)%
(80)%
Commercial and industrial
5,358
6,194
14,806
(13)%
(64)%
Agriculture
5,731
744
3,922
670
%
46
%
First lien
14,826
6,326
5,626
134
%
164
%
Junior lien
1,023
214
145
378
%
606
%
Total 1-4 family
15,849
6,540
5,771
142
%
175
%
Home equity lines of credit
6,993
3,731
3,668
87
%
91
%
Other consumer
1,824
1,775
1,948
3
%
(6)%
Total consumer
8,817
5,506
5,616
60
%
57
%
States and political subdivisions
3,220
—
—
n/m
n/m
Other
1,318
1,705
1,795
(23)%
(27)%
Total
$
46,458
$
32,228
$
62,423
44
%
(26)%
______________________________
n/m – not measurable
Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Credit Quality Summary by Regulatory Classification (continued)
Net Charge-Offs (Recoveries), Year-to-Date Period Ending, By Loan Type
Question for written answer E-001501/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Paolo Inselvini (ECR), Carlo Fidanza (ECR), Francesco Ventola (ECR), Nicola Procaccini (ECR), Sergio Berlato (ECR)
The spread of foot-and-mouth disease in Slovakia and Hungary, with some cases even being reported on the border with Austria, constitutes a real risk for Italy. Although the disease is not dangerous to humans, it is highly contagious among farm animals and can cause serious economic damage.
In 2024, Italy imported tens of thousands of live animals from countries now affected by the outbreaks. With the arrival of Easter, which is a key period for sheep and goat imports, there is a heightened risk of the virus spreading.
Given the alarm among farmers, and bearing in mind their legitimate concerns, can the Commission answer the following questions:
1.What preventive measures will it take, in this and other similar cases, to limit the spread of these diseases and the ensuing economic damage?
2.Is it envisaging a tightening-up of border controls and a review of the European rules on animal biosafety and traceability in the light of the increasing frequency of these health emergencies?
3.Has financial support been envisaged for livestock farms which suffer direct or indirect damage linked with the spread of the virus?
A nine member delegation held the Joint Working Group on Trade and Investment meeting with the South African side in Pretoria, South Africa on 22nd – 23rd April, 2025. The discussions were held in a cordial and friendly atmosphere and were fruitful. There was enthusiastic response towards greater cooperation, addressing pending issues, boosting trade and investment, greater people to people contacts.
The JTC was co-chaired by Mr. Malose Letsoalo, Chief Director, Bilateral Trade Relations, The Department of Trade, Industry and Competition, Republic of South Africa; and Ms. Priya Nair, Economic Adviser Department of Commerce. Official delegation from India consisted of officials from High Commission of India in South Africa, Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) and Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare. The officials of both India and South Africa actively engaged in the proceedings of the India-South Africa JWGTI.
Both sides explored potential areas of collaboration such as Pharmaceuticals, Healthcare, Agriculture, MSME, Jewelry manufacturing among others. Major points for discussion in JWGTI included revival of CEO Forum, investment cooperation, Market access issues with regard to agricultural products, Recognition of Indian Pharmacopoeia, Local Currency Settlement System, Fast payment systems/Unified Payment Linkage system, Discussion on India-SACU PTA etc. to further expand trade and economic ties between both the countries.
In a comprehensive dialogue, both sides undertook a detailed review of recent developments in bilateral trade and investment ties and acknowledged the vast untapped potential for further expansion. To this effect, both sides identified several areas of focus for enhancing both bilateral trade as well as mutually beneficial investments.
South Africa is the largest trading partner of India in the Africa region. Bilateral trade between India and South Africa stood at USD 19.25 billion in 2023-24. Indian businesses have invested over US$ 1.3 billion in South Africa from April 2000 to September 2024. These investments traverse diverse sectors, encompassing pharmaceuticals, IT, automotive, banking, and mining.
The deliberations of the 2nd Session of India-South Africa Joint Working Group on Trade and Investment on 22nd April, 2025 were cordial and forward-looking, indicative of the amicable and special relations between the two countries.
Secretary, Ministry of Cooperation Dr Ashish Kumar Bhutani inaugurates the state-of-the-art packaging facility of National Cooperative Organics Limited (NCOL) in Noida, Uttar Pradesh The facility is dedicated to packaging pulses and organic products while maintaining the highest standards of hygiene and quality
Cooperation Secretary termed it as a major milestone in NCOL’s journey to promote and distribute high quality, organic products under the brand ‘Bharat Organics’
Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has envisioned a greater role for cooperatives in making India the largest organic producer in the world
Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and guidance of Union Home and Cooperation Minister Shri Amit Shah, the Ministry is taking several initiatives to increase market access for organic produce of farmers
NCOL is passing on the benefits of its venture to its member farmers, thereby encouraging them to adopt organic farming in greater numbers
NCOL aims to ensure premium prices to farmers for their hard work towards organic farming and make organic food affordable and accessible to Indian consumers
Mother Dairy is committed to make ‘Bharat Organics’ available across its channels to benefit accessibility to the customer and it stands for purity & trust
Posted On: 24 APR 2025 7:29PM by PIB Delhi
Secretary, Ministry of Cooperation Dr Ashish Kumar Bhutani today addressed the inauguration of the state-of-the-art packaging facility of National Cooperative Organics Limited (NCOL) in Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Equipped with cutting-edge technology, the facility is designed to optimize efficiency while maintaining the highest standards of hygiene and quality. It is dedicated to the packaging of pulses and a wide range of organic food products.
Speaking at the occasion, Secretary, Ministry of Cooperation, Dr Ashish Kumar Bhutani said that the inauguration marks a major milestone in NCOL’s journey to promote and deliver high-quality, sustainable organic products under the ‘Bharat Organics’ brand. He said that the NCOL has a huge role to play in empowering farmers and expanding access of market to genuine organic produce across India. He said Bharat Organics is making healthy food accessible to all for a healthier India.
Dr Bhutani said that under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and guidance of Union Home and Cooperation Minister Shri Amit Shah, the Ministry is taking several initiatives to increase market access for organic produce of farmers. Cooperation Secretary said that the inauguration of the packaging facility of NCOL marks a critical step in the organisation’s efforts to scale operations and expand the reach of certified organic produce, while delivering fair value to primary producers.
Dr Bhutani said that Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has envisioned a greater role for cooperatives in making India the largest organic producer in the world. Being in the cooperative sector, NCOL is passing on the benefits of its venture to its member farmers, thereby encouraging them to adopt organic farming in greater numbers.
With 21 organic products, including pulses, cereals, spices and sweetners, already launched, Bharat Organics is available through 200+ SAFAL outlets in Delhi NCR, It is also being launched across major e-commerce & Q-Com platforms like Swiggy, Blinkit, BigBasket, Amazon, Flipkart, etc. It is also available at all NCCF and NAFED, outlets, who also happen to be our promoter members. Bharat Organics shall soon be available across all Reliance outlets.
Speaking on the occasion, Chairman of NCOL Shri Meenesh Shah said that NCOL aims to ensure premium prices to farmers for their hard work towards organic farming and make organic food affordable and accessible to Indian consumers. He said NCOL lays extra emphasis on the authenticity of certified organic products under the Bharat Brand name, by mandatorily testing each batch for 245+ pesticide residues.
Speaking on the occasion, Managing Director of NCOL, Shri Vipul Mittal said that it is our proud privilege to launch this range of ‘Bharat Organics’ pulses, while celebrating the international year of cooperation, chaired by India in 2025. The packaging carries this logo along with a QR code to test authenticity of the product. The consumer can scan this code and check the PR test report of the said batch.
Addressing the event, the Managing Director of Mother Dairy Shri Manish Bandlish, emphasized that Mother Dairy is committed to make ‘Bharat Organics’ available across its channels to benefit accessibility to the customer. Mother Dairy stands for purity & trust for the last 50 years for the customers of Delhi.
NCOL was established by the Ministry of Cooperation, Government of India, in 2023 as an umbrella organization for the aggregation, procurement, certification, testing, branding, and marketing of organic products produced by the cooperative sector. NCOL operates with the support of relevant government ministries, following a “Whole of Government” approach, and is aligned with the national vision of “Sahkar se Samriddhi”.
India Achieves Breakthrough in Gene Therapy for Haemophilia, Dr. Jitendra Singh Reviews BRIC-inStem Trials “Not Just Science, It’s Nation-Building”: Minister Hails Biotech’s Role in Future Economy
From Lab to Life: Bengaluru’s BRIC-inStem Leads India’s Bio-Revolution with Gene Therapy, Regenerative Science
Posted On: 24 APR 2025 4:30PM by PIB Delhi
Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Science and Technology; Earth Sciences and Minister of State for PMO, Department of Atomic Energy, Department of Space, Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Dr. Jitendra Singh inspected the various facilities at BRIC-inStem and reviewed ongoing clinical trials in collaboration with premier medical institutes and hospitals, including the landmark first-in-human gene therapy trial for Haemophilia conducted with CMC Vellore. Calling it a “milestone in India’s scientific journey,” the Minister hailed the institute’s contributions to preventive and regenerative healthcare.
During his visit, Dr. Jitendra Singh underscored the strategic importance of biotechnology in shaping India’s future economy and public health infrastructure. “This is not just about science—it’s about nation-building,” he said, commending the Department of Biotechnology’s (DBT) recent successes and its emergence from relative obscurity into national relevance.
India’s biotechnology sector has seen an extraordinary leap, growing 16-fold in the past decade to reach $165.7 billion in 2024, with a vision to touch $300 billion by 2030. The Minister credited this growth to enabling policy reforms, including the recently approved BIO-E3 Policy that aims to boost economy, employment, and environment through biotechnology. “We now have over 10,000 biotech startups compared to just 50 a decade ago,” he pointed out.
Dr. Jitendra Singh praised the creation of the Biotechnology Research and Innovation Council (BRIC) that unified 14 autonomous institutions under one umbrella. “BRIC-inStem is at the cutting edge of fundamental and translational science,” he said, highlighting innovations like the germicidal anti-viral mask during the COVID-19 pandemic and the ‘Kisan Kavach’ that protects farmers from neurotoxic pesticides.
A highlight of the visit was BRIC-inStem’s Biosafety Level III laboratory, a key national facility for studying high-risk pathogens under India’s One Health Mission. “The recent pandemic taught us that we must always be prepared. Facilities like this will help us stay a step ahead,” Dr. Jitendra Singh stated.
The Minister also praised the newly launched Centre for Research Application and Training in Embryology (CReATE), which addresses birth defects and infertility by advancing developmental biology research. “With about 3 to 4 percent of babies born with some form of defect, this centre is vital for improving maternal and neonatal health outcomes,” he said.
Calling for greater collaboration between scientific and medical institutions, he suggested that BRIC-inStem explore MD-PhD programs, integrate more with clinical research, and enhance visibility through coordinated communication strategies. “What’s being done here should echo across the country—not for publicity, but because the nation needs it,” he said.
Dr. Jitendra Singh concluded by noting that India’s economy of the future would be bio-driven, with institutions like BRIC-inStem serving as torchbearers of this transformation. “As Mark Twain said, the economy is too serious a subject to be left to economists alone. Biotechnology is not just a science anymore—it is a pillar of our national strategy.”
The safeguard provision in the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement is an effective tool to protect any EU sector affected by the Agreement in case it suffers serious injury due to increased imports. Under this provision, the Parties can suspend preferences for up to two years.
A request for a safeguard investigation could be made by one or several Member States on behalf of the EU sector or at the request of the domestic industry.
The Commission will make proposals for the signature and conclusion of the agreement in accordance with the Treaties. In that context, the Commission will present its proposal for the legal basis and architecture of the deal.
Any food product placed on the EU market, being domestically produced or imported from Mercosur countries, must comply with EU’s sanitary requirements. These requirements are not negotiable and apply regardless of trade agreements concluded with third countries.
Official controls at EU borders are intended to verify whether EU food safety rules are respected. These controls are performed by the competent authorities of the Member States.
The Commission carries out audits in third countries to ensure that their control systems provide enough guarantees as to ensure that exports to the EU take place in conformity with EU safety standards. In case of non-compliances, trade-restrictive measures may be imposed, both by the trade partner or the EU.
In the framework of the communication on ‘A Vision for Agriculture and Food Shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations’[1], the Commission announced a dedicated task force to be established, which will pull expertise and forces from the Commission and Member States together to further strengthen the control on imports.
Seattle – A 33-year-old former Tacoma resident was indicted by a federal grand jury earlier this month for conspiracy to destroy energy facilities and six counts of destruction or attempted destruction of an energy facility, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller. Zachary Rosenthal, who is currently incarcerated in the Washington State Department of Corrections for vehicular assault, was indicted in Oregon last July for damaging two energy facilities in Portland. The Oregon case is scheduled for trial on November 3, 2025.
According to the Western Washington indictment, between June and December 2022, Rosenthal conspired with others to damage six different power substations in western Washington: the Toledo substation in Lewis County on August 5, 2022; the Woodland 1 substation in Cowlitz County on November 17, 2022; the Woodland 2 substation on November 18, 2022; the Puyallup substation in Pierce County on November 20, 2022; and the Tumwater substation in Thurston County on November 22, 2022; and the attempted destruction to the Oakville substation in Grays Harbor County on December 5, 2022. The indictment charges five counts of destruction of an energy facility, and one count of attempted destruction of an energy facility for the Oakville substation attack.
The indictment calls for forfeiture of proceeds of the criminal scheme which appears to have been an attempt to burglarize businesses and ATMs when the power was out, and alarm systems might be down.
The attacks on the power stations resulted in power outages ranging from about 1,000 customers to 6,000 customers per substation.
Rosenthal and his coconspirators damaged the substations through a variety of means including gunshots, smashing equipment, or using heavy chains to cause short circuits.
The Oregon substation attacks occurred in the same timeframe as the Washington attacks, on November 24 and 28, 2022.
Damaging an energy facility with intent to cause a significant interruption and impairment of the function of the facility is punishable by up to 20 years in federal prison and three years’ supervised release.
The charges contained in the indictment are only allegations. A person is presumed innocent unless and until he or she is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
The case is being investigated by the FBI. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Todd Greenberg.
Innovate BC’s new IP Hub is a one-stop-shop for innovators to access tailored education and resources that will help them protect and leverage their intellectual property
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Launched today, Innovate BC’s new IP Hub digital platform supports B.C. entrepreneurs in developing their understanding of intellectual property (IP) to support the building and implementing of an effective IP strategy to help grow their business.
Developed as part of the Province of British Columbia’s Intellectual Property Strategy, the free-to-use IP Hub offers a tailored experience that will connect users with information and resources based on an assessment of their current IP competency.
“B.C.’s Intellectual Property Strategy is about supporting our local businesses by giving them the tools they need to protect, grow and profit from what they create,” said Diana Gibson, Minister of Jobs, Economic Development and Innovation. “The launch of the IP Hub is a key part of that—helping entrepreneurs, researchers, startups and our high potential businesses fully understand their IP, scale their businesses, and keep their talent right here at home in British Columbia.”
The strategic management of IP is essential for companies developing innovative products or solutions, playing a crucial role in commercialization, increasing revenue, and competitiveness. The IP Hub offers relevant and timely resources that meet the user’s current level of IP comprehension and will provide them with ongoing support to build, implement and expand their own IP strategy.
Once assessed, users will have access to a wide range of supports that are available within B.C. and across Canada, aligned to their business stage, sector, size, and other characteristics that inform IP strategy. Resources include access to localized IP programming, a calendar of relevant and upcoming IP-focussed events, education materials, and more.
“Having a clear and proactive intellectual property strategy isn’t just a competitive advantage — it’s a necessity,” said Peter Cowan, President and CEO of Innovate BC. “For innovators and tech companies, IP is often their most valuable asset, protecting innovation, attracting investment, and enabling growth. By bolstering IP capacities here in British Columbia, we’re empowering our startups and scale-ups to thrive, strengthening our innovation ecosystem, and unlocking long-term economic prosperity for communities and industries across the province.”
The IP Hub is a part of Innovate BC’s suite of IP programs and resources for B.C. companies, which includes AccelerateIP, a program delivered by New Ventures BC that provides innovators with IP-related education, funding, and strategy development.
To learn more about the IP Hub and to access the platform, visit https://bcip.ca/
Additional Quotes
Faisal Khan, Founder + CEO, FMRK Diagnostic Technologies
“A dynamic IP strategy is the life blood of any 21st century business. It allows you to secure investment capital, protect yourself in the market, recoup your R&D investments and so much more. Companies can never reach their full potential without one.”
Annie Dahan, Founder at Seacork Studio
“Developing a robust and actionable IP strategy has been essential to our growth, credibility and our ability to navigate the market.”
About Innovate BC
A Crown Agency of British Columbia, Innovate BC works to foster innovation across the province and bolster the growth of the local economy through delivering a wide range of programs that help companies start and scale, access talent and encourage technology development, commercialization, and adoption. Innovate BC also harnesses crucial data collection and research, and works to forge strategic industry and community partnerships that create more opportunities for B.C. innovators.
In the sweltering summer of AD18, a desperate chant echoed across China’s sun-scorched plains: “Heaven has gone blind!” Thousands of starving farmers, their faces smeared with ox blood, marched toward the opulent vaults held by the Han dynasty’s elite rulers.
As recorded in the ancient text Han Shu (the book of Han), these farmers’ calloused hands held bamboo scrolls – ancient “tweets” accusing the bureaucrats of hoarding grain while the farmers’ children gnawed tree bark. The rebellion’s firebrand warlord leader, Chong Fan, roared: “Drain the paddies!”
Within weeks, the Red Eyebrows, as the protesters became known, had toppled local regimes, raided granaries and – for a fleeting moment – shattered the empire’s rigid hierarchy.
The Han dynasty of China (202BC-AD220) was one of the most developed civilisations of its time, alongside the Roman empire. Its development of cheaper and sharper iron ploughs enabled the gathering of unprecedented harvests of grain.
But instead of uplifting the farmers, this technological revolution gave rise to agrarian oligarchs who hired ever-more officials to govern their expanding empire. Soon, bureaucrats earned 30 times more than those tilling the soil.
And when droughts struck, the farmers and their families starved while the empire’s elites maintained their opulence. As a famous poem from the subsequent Tang dynasty put it: “While meat and wine go to waste behind vermilion gates, the bones of the frozen dead lie by the roadside.”
Two millennia later, the role of technology in increasing inequality around the world remains a major political and societal issue. AI-driven “technology panic” – exacerbated by the disruptive efforts of Donald Trump’s new administration in the US – gives the feeling that everything has been upended. New tech is destroying old certainties; populist revolt is shredding the political consensus.
And yet, as we stand at the edge of this technological cliff, seemingly peering into a future of AI-induced job apocalypses, history whispers: “Calm down. You’ve been here before.”
The link between technology and inequality
Technology is humanity’s cheat code to break free from scarcity. The Han dynasty’s iron plough didn’t just till soil; it doubled crop yields, enriching landlords and swelling tax coffers for emperors while – initially, at least – leaving peasants further behind. Similarly, Britain’s steam engine didn’t just spin cotton; it built coal barons and factory slums. Today, AI isn’t just automating tasks; it’s creating trillion-dollar tech fiefdoms while destroying myriads of routine jobs.
Technology amplifies productivity by doing more with less. Over centuries, these gains compound, raising economic output and increasing incomes and lifespans. But each innovation reshapes who holds power, who gets rich – and who gets left behind.
As the Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter warned during the second world war, technological progress is never a benign rising tide that lifts all boats. It’s more like a tsunami that drowns some and deposits others on golden shores, amid a process he called “creative destruction”.
A decade later, Russian-born US economist Simon Kuznets proposed his “inverted-U of inequality”, the Kuznets curve. For decades, this offered a reassuring narrative for citizens of democratic nations seeking greater fairness: inequality was an inevitable – but temporary – price of technological progress and the economic growth that comes with it.
In recent years, however, this analysis has been sharply questioned. Most notably, French economist Thomas Piketty, in a reappraisal of more than three centuries of data, argued in 2013 that Kuznets had been misled by historical fluke. The postwar fall in inequality he had observed was not a general law of capitalism, but a product of exceptional events: two world wars, economic depression, and massive political reforms.
In normal times, Piketty warned, the forces of capitalism will always tend to make the rich richer, pushing inequality ever higher unless checked by aggressive redistribution.
So, who’s correct? And where does this leave us as we ponder the future in this latest, AI-driven industrial revolution? In fact, both Kuznets and Piketty were working off quite narrow timeframes in modern human history. Another country, China, offers the chance to chart patterns of growth and inequality over a much longer period – due to its historical continuity, cultural stability, and ethnic uniformity.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
Unlike other ancient civilisations such as the Egyptians and Mayans, China has maintained a unified identity and unique language for more than 5,000 years, allowing modern scholars to trace thousand-year-old economic records. So, with colleagues Qiang Wu and Guangyu Tong, I set out to reconcile the ideas of Kuznets and Piketty by studying technological growth and wage inequality in imperial China over 2,000 years – back beyond the birth of Jesus.
To do this, we scoured China’s extraordinarily detailed dynastic archives, including the Book of Han (AD111) and Tang Huiyao (AD961), in which meticulous scribes recorded the salaries of different ranking officials. And here is what we learned about the forces – good and bad, corrupt and selfless – that most influenced the rise and fall of inequality in China over the past two millennia.
Chinese dynasties and their most influential technologies:
Black text denotes historical events in the west; grey text denotes important interactions between China and the west. Peng Zhou, CC BY-NC-SA
China’s cycles of growth and inequality
One of the challenges of assessing wage inequality over thousands of years is that people were paid different things at different times – such as grain, silk, silver and even labourers.
The Book of Han records that “a governor’s annual grain salary could fill 20 oxcarts”. Another entry describes how a mid-ranking Han official’s salary included ten servants tasked solely with polishing his ceremonial armour. Ming dynasty officials had their meagre wages supplemented with gifts of silver, while Qing elites hid their wealth in land deals.
To enable comparison over two millennia, we invented a “rice standard” – akin to the gold standard that was the basis of the international monetary system for a century from the 1870s. Rice is not just a staple of Chinese diets, it has been a stable measure of economic life for thousands of years.
While rice’s dominion began around 7,000BC in the Yangtze river’s fertile marshes, it was not until the Han dynasty that it became the soul of Chinese life. Farmers prayed to the “Divine Farmer” for bountiful harvests, and emperors performed elaborate ploughing rituals to ensure cosmic harmony. A Tang dynasty proverb warned: “No rice in the bowl, bones in the soil.”
Using price records, we converted every recorded salary – whether paid in silk, silver, rent or servants – into its rice equivalent. We could then compare the “real rice wages” of two categories of people we called either “officials” or “peasants” (including farmers), as a way of tracking levels of inequality over the two millennia since the start of the Han dynasty in 202BC. This chart shows how real-wage inequality in China rose and fell over the past 2,000 years, according to our rice-based analysis.
Official-peasant wage ratio in imperial China over 2,000 years:
The ratio describes the multiple by which the ‘real rice wage’ of the average ‘official’ exceeds that of the average ‘peasant’, giving an indication of changing inequality levels over two millennia. Peng Zhou, CC BY-SA
The chart’s black line describes a tug-of-war between growth and inequality over the past two millennia. We found that, across each major dynasty, there were four key factors driving levels of inequality in China: technology (T), institutions (I), politics (P), and social norms (S). These followed the following cycle with remarkable regularity.
1. Technology triggers an explosion of growth and inequality
During the Han dynasty, new iron-working techniques led to better ploughs and irrigation tools. Harvests boomed, enabling the Chinese empire to balloon in both territory and population. But this bounty mostly went to those at the top of society. Landlords grabbed fields, bureaucrats gained privileges, while ordinary farmers saw precious little reward. The empire grew richer – but so did the gap between high officials and the peasant majority.
Even when the Han fell around AD220, the rise of wage inequality was barely interrupted. By the time of the Tang dynasty (AD618–907), China was enjoying a golden age. Silk Road trade flourished as two more technological leaps had a profound impact on the country’s fortunes: block printing and refined steelmaking.
Block printing enabled the mass production of books – Buddhist texts, imperial exam guides, poetry anthologies – at unprecedented speed and scale. This helped spread literacy and standardise administration, as well as sparking a bustling market in bookselling.
Meanwhile, refined steelmaking boosted everything from agricultural tools to weaponry and architectural hardware, lowering costs and raising productivity. With a more literate populace and an abundance of stronger metal goods, China’s economy hit new heights. Chang’an, then China’s cosmopolitan capital, boasted exotic markets, lavish temples, and a swirl of foreign merchants enjoying the Tang dynasty’s prosperity.
While the Tang dynasty marked the high-water mark for levels of inequality in Chinese history, subsequent dynasties would continue to wrestle with the same core dilemma: how do you reap the benefits of growth without allowing an overly privileged – and increasingly corrupt – bureaucratic class to push everyone else into peril?
2. Institutions slow the rise of inequality
Throughout the two millennia, some institutions played an important role in stabilising the empire after each burst of growth. For example, to alleviate tensions between emperors, officials and peasants, imperial exams known as “Ke Ju” were introduced during the Sui dynasty (AD581-618). And by the time of the Song dynasty (AD960-1279) that followed the demise of the Tang, these exams played a dominant role in society.
They addressed high levels of inequality by promoting social mobility: ordinary civilians were granted greater opportunities to ascend the income ladder by achieving top marks. This induced greater competition among officials – and strengthened emperors’ authority over them in the later dynasties. As a result, both the wages of officials and wage inequality went down as their bargaining power gradually diminished.
However, the rise of each new dynasty was also marked by a growth of bureaucracy that led to inefficiencies, favouritism and bribery. Over time, corrupt practices took root, eroding trust in officialdom and heightening wage inequality as many officials commanded informal fees or outright bribes to sustain their lifestyles.
As a result, while the emergence of certain institutions was able to put a break on rising inequality, it typically took another powerful – and sometimes highly destructive – factor to start reducing it.
3. Political infighting and external wars reduce inequality
Eventually, the rampant rise in inequality seen in almost every major Chinese dynasty bred deep tensions – not only between the upper and lower classes, but even between the emperor and their officials.
These pressures were heightened by the pressures of external conflict, as each dynasty waged wars in pursuit of further growth. The Tang’s three century-rule featured conflicts such as the Eastern Turkic-Tang war (AD626), the Baekje-Goguryeo-Silla war (666), and the Arab-Tang battle of Talas (751).
The resulting demand for more military spending drained imperial coffers, forcing salary cuts for soldiers and tax hikes on the peasants – breeding resentment among both that sometimes led to popular uprisings. In a desperate bid for survival, the imperial court then slashed officials’ pay and stripped away their bureaucratic perks.
The result? Inequality plummeted during these times of war and rebellion – but so did stability. Famine was rife, frontier garrisons mutinied, and for decades, warlords carved out territories while the imperial centre floundered.
So, this shrinking wage gap cannot be said to have resulted in a happier, more stable society. Rather, it reflected the fact that everyone – rich and poor – was worse off in the chaos. During the final imperial dynasty, the Qing (from the end of the 17th century), real-terms GDP per person was dropping to levels that had last been seen at the start of the Han dynasty, 2,000 years earlier.
4. Social norms emphasise harmony, preserve privilege
One other common factor influencing the rise and fall of inequality across China’s dynasties was the shared rules and expectations that developed within each society.
A striking example is the social norms rooted in the philosophy of Neo-Confucianism, which emerged in the Song dynasty at the end of the first millennium – a period sometimes described as China’s version of the Renaissance. It blended the moral philosophy of classical Confucianism – created by the philosopher and political theorist Confucius during the Zhou dynasty (1046-256BC) – with metaphysical elements drawn from both Buddhism and Daoism.
Neo-Confucianism emphasised social harmony, hierarchical order and personal virtue – values that reinforced imperial authority and bureaucratic discipline. Unsurprisingly, it quickly gained the support of emperors keen to ensure control of their people, and became the mainstream school of thought in the Ming and Qing dynasties.
However, Neo-Confucianist thinking proved a double-edged sword. Local gentry hijacked this moral authority to fortify their own power. Clan leaders set up Confucian schools and performed elaborate ancestral rites, projecting themselves as guardians of tradition.
Over time, these social norms became rigid. What had once fostered order and legitimacy became brittle dogma, more useful for preserving privilege than guiding reform. Neo-Confucian ideals evolved into a protective veil for entrenched elites. When the weight of crisis eventually came, they offered little resilience.
The last dynasty
China’s final imperial dynasty, the Qing, collapsed under the weight of multiple uprisings both from within and without. Despite achieving impressive economic growth during the 18th century – fuelled by agricultural innovation, a population boom, and the roaring global trade in tea and porcelain – levels of inequality exploded, in part due to widespread corruption.
The infamous government official Heshen, widely regarded as the most corrupt figure in the Qing dynasty, amassed a personal fortune reckoned to exceed the empire’s entire annual revenue (one estimate suggests he amassed 1.1 billion taels of silver, equivalent to around US$270 billion (£200bn), during his lucrative career).
Imperial institutions failed to restrain the inequality and moral decay that the Qing’s growth had initially masked. The mechanisms that once spurred prosperity – technological advances, centralised bureaucracy and Confucian moral authority – eventually ossified, serving entrenched power rather than adaptive reform.
When shocks like natural disasters and foreign invasions struck, the system could no longer respond. The collapse of the empire became inevitable – and this time there was no groundbreaking technology to enable a new dynasty to take the Qing’s place. Nor were there fresh social ideals or revitalised institutions capable of rebooting the imperial model. As foreign powers surged ahead with their own technological breakthroughs, China’s imperial system collapsed under its own weight. The age of emperors was over.
The world had turned. As China embarked on two centuries of technological and economic stagnation – and political humiliation at the hands of Great Britain and Japan – other nations, led first by Britain and then the US, would step up to build global empires on the back of new technological leaps.
In these modern empires, we see the same four key influences on their cycles of growth and inequality – technology, institutions, politics and social norms – but playing out at an ever-faster rate. As the saying goes: history does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.
Rule Britannia
If imperial China’s inequality saga was written in rice and rebellions, Britain’s industrial revolution featured steam and strikes. In Lancashire’s “satanic mills”, steam engines and mechanised looms created industrialists so rich that their fortunes dwarfed small nations.
In 1835, social observer Andrew Ure enthused: “Machinery is the grand agent of civilisation.” Yet for many decades, the steam engines, spinning jennies and railways disproportionately enriched the new industrial class, just as in the Han dynasty of China 2,000 years earlier. The workers? They inhaled soot, lived in slums – and staged Europe’s first symbolic protest when the Luddites began smashing their looms in 1811.
During the 19th century, Britain’s richest 1% hoarded as much as 70% of the nation’s wealth, while labourers toiled 16-hour days in mills. In cities like Manchester, child workers earned pennies while industrialists built palaces.
But as inequality peaked in Britain, the backlash brewed. Trade unions formed (and became legal in 1824) to demand fair wages. Reforms such as the Factory Acts (1833–1878) banned child labour and capped working hours.
Although government forces intervened to suppress the uprisings, unrest such as the 1830 Swing Riots and 1842 General Strike exposed deep social and economic inequalities. By 1900, child labour was banned and pensions had been introduced. The 1900 Labour Representation Committee (later the Labour Party) vowed to “promote legislation in the direct interests of labour” – a striking echo of how China’s imperial exams had attempted to open paths to power.
Slowly, the working class saw some improvement: real wages for Britain’s poorest workers gradually increased over the latter half of the 19th century, as mass production lowered the cost of goods and expanding factory employment provided a more stable livelihood than subsistence farming.
And then, two world wars flattened Britain’s elite – the Blitz didn’t discriminate between rich and poor neighbourhoods. When peace finally returned, the Beveridge Report gave rise to the welfare state: the NHS, social housing, and pensions.
Income inequality plummeted as a result. The top 1%’s share fell from 70% to 15% by 1979. While China’s inequality fell via dynastic collapse, Britain’s decline resulted from war-driven destruction, progressive taxation, and expansive social reforms.
Wealth share of top 1% in the UK
Evidence for UK inequality before 1895 is not well documented; dotted curve is conjectured based on Kuznets curve. Sources: Alvaredo et al (2018), World Inequality Database. Peng Zhou, CC BY-SA
However, from the 1980s onwards, inequality in Britain has begun to rise again. This new cycle of inequality has coincided with another technological revolution: the emergence of personal computers and information technology — innovations that fundamentally transformed how wealth was created and distributed.
The era was accelerated by deregulation, deindustrialisation and privatisation — policies associated with former prime minister Margaret Thatcher, that favoured capital over labour. Trade unions were weakened, income taxes on the highest earners were slashed, and financial markets were unleashed. Today, the richest 1% of UK adults own more 20% of the country’s total wealth.
The UK now appears to be in the worst of both worlds – wrestling with low growth and rising inequality. Yet renewal is still within reach. The current UK government’s pledge to streamline regulation and harness AI could spark fresh growth – provided it is coupled with serious investment in skills, modern infrastructure, and inclusive institutions geared to benefit all workers.
At the same time, history reminds us that technology is a lever, not a panacea. Sustained prosperity comes only when institutional reform and social attitudes evolve in step with innovation.
The American century
While China’s growth-and-inequality cycles unfolded over millennia and Britain’s over centuries, America’s story is a fast-forward drama of cycles lasting mere decades. In the early 20th century, several waves of new technology widened the gap between rich and poor dramatically.
By 1929, as the world teetered on the edge of the Great Depression, John D. Rockefeller had amassed such a vast fortune – valued at roughly 1.5% of America’s entire GDP – that newspapers hailed him the world’s first billionaire. His wealth stemmed largely from pioneering petroleum and petrochemical ventures including Standard Oil, which dominated oil refining in an age when cars and mechanised transport were exploding in popularity.
Yet this period of unprecedented riches for a handful of magnates coincided with severe imbalances in the broader US economy. The “roaring Twenties” had boosted consumerism and stock speculation, but wage growth for many workers lagged behind skyrocketing corporate profits. By 1929, the top 1% of Americans owned more than a third of the nation’s income, creating a precariously narrow base of prosperity.
When the US stock market crashed in October 1929, it laid bare how vulnerable the system was to the fortunes of a tiny elite. Millions of everyday Americans – living without adequate savings or safeguards – faced immediate hardship, ushering in the Great Depression. Breadlines snaked through city streets, and banks collapsed under waves of withdrawals they could not meet.
In response, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal reshaped American institutions. It introduced unemployment insurance, minimum wages, and public works programmes to support struggling workers, while progressive taxation – with top rates exceeding 90% during the second world war. Roosevelt declared: “The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much – it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”
In a different way to the UK, the second world war proved a great leveller for the US – generating millions of jobs and drawing women and minorities into industries they’d long been excluded from. After 1945, the GI Bill expanded education and home ownership for veterans, helping to build a robust middle class. Although access remained unequal, especially along racial lines, the era marked a shift toward the norm that prosperity should be shared.
Meanwhile, grassroots movements led by figures like Martin Luther King Jr. reshaped social norms about justice. In his lesser-quoted speeches, King warned that “a dream deferred is a dream denied” and launched the Poor People’s Campaign, which demanded jobs, healthcare and housing for all Americans. This narrowing of income distribution during the post-war era was dubbed the “Great Compression” – but it did not last.
As oil crises of the 1970s marked the end of the preceding cycle of inequality, another cycle began with the full-scale emergence of the third industrial revolution, powered by computers, digital networks and information technology.
As digitalisation transformed business models and labour markets, wealth flowed to those who owned the algorithms, patents and platforms – not those operating the machines. Hi-tech entrepreneurs and Wall Street financiers became the new oligarchs. Stock options replaced salaries as the true measure of success, and companies increasingly rewarded capital over labour.
By the 2000s, the wealth share of the richest 1% climbed to 30% in the US. The gap between the elite minority and working majority widened with every company stock market launch, hedge fund bonus and quarterly report tailored to shareholder returns.
But this wasn’t just a market phenomenon – it was institutionally engineered. The 1980s ushered in the age of (Ronald) Reaganomics, driven by the conviction that “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem”. Following this neoliberalist philosophy, taxes on high incomes were slashed, capital gains were shielded, and labour unions were weakened.
Deregulation gave Wall Street free rein to innovate and speculate, while public investment in housing, healthcare and education was curtailed. The consequences came to a head in 2008 when the US housing market collapsed and the financial system imploded.
The Global Financial Crisis that followed exposed the fragility of a deregulated economy built on credit bubbles and concentrated risk. Millions of people lost their homes and jobs, while banks were rescued with public money. It marked an economic rupture and a moral reckoning – proof that decades of pro-market policies had produced a system that privatised gain and socialised loss.
Inequality, long growing in the background, now became a glaring, undeniable fault line in American life – and it has remained that way ever since.
Fig 5. Wealth share and income share of top 1% in the US
Sources: wealth inequality: World Inequality Database; income share: Picketty & Saez (2003). Dotted curves are conjectured based on Kuznets curve. Peng Zhou, CC BY-SA
So is the US proof that the Kuznets model of inequality is indeed wrong? While the chart above shows inequality has flattened in the US since the 2008 financial crisis, there is little evidence of it actually declining. And in the short term, while Donald Trump’s tariffs are unlikely to do much for growth in the US, his low-tax policies won’t do anything to raise working-class incomes either.
The story of “the American century” is a dizzying sequence of technological revolutions – from transport and manufacturing to the internet and now AI – crashing one atop the other before institutions, politics or social norms could catch up. In my view, the result is not a broken cycle but an interrupted one. Like a wheel that never completes its turn, inequality rises, reform stutters – and a new wave of disruption begins.
Our unequal AI future?
Like any technological explosion, AI’s potential is dual-edged. Like the Tang dynasty’s bureaucrats hoarding grain, today’s tech giants monopolise data, algorithms and computing power. Management consultant firm McKinsey has predicted that algorithms could automate 30% of jobs by 2030, from lorry drivers to radiologists.
The rise of AI isn’t just a technological revolution – it’s a political battleground. History’s empires collapsed when elites hoarded power; today’s fight over AI mirrors the same stakes. Will it become a tool for collective uplift like Britain’s post-war welfare state? Or a weapon of control akin to Han China’s grain-hoarding bureaucrats?
The answer hinges on who wins these political battles. In 19th-century Britain, factory owners bribed MPs to block child labour laws. Today, Big Tech spends billions lobbying to neuter AI regulation.
Meanwhile, grassroots movements like the Algorithmic Justice League demand bans on facial recognition in policing, echoing the Luddites who smashed looms not out of technophobia but to protest exploitation. The question is not if AI will be regulated but who will write the rules: corporate lobbyists or citizen coalitions.
The real threat has never been the technology itself, but the concentration of its spoils. When elites hoard tech-driven wealth, social fault-lines crack wide open – as happened more than 2,000 years ago when the Red Eyebrows marched against Han China’s agricultural monopolies.
To be human is to grow – and to innovate. Technological progress raises inequality faster than incomes, but the response depends on how people band together. Initiatives like “Responsible AI” and “Data for All” reframe digital ethics as a civil right, much like Occupy Wall Street exposed wealth gaps. Even memes – like TikTok skits mocking ChatGPT’s biases – shape public sentiment.
There is no simple path between growth and inequality. But history shows our AI future isn’t preordained in code: it’s written, as always, by us.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Peng Zhou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Monica De La Cruz (TX-15)
PHOTOS: De La Cruz Tours Rio Grande Valley Food Bank, Hosts Roundtable for South Texas Farmers
Washington, April 16, 2025
PHOTOS: De La Cruz Tours Rio Grande Valley Food Bank, Hosts Roundtable for South Texas Farmers
WASHINGTON –This week,Congresswoman Monica De La Cruz (TX-15) toured the Rio Grande Valley Food Bank and hosted a roundtable with South Texas farmers to discuss the impacts and challenges of the H-2A visa program.
Congresswoman De La Cruz toured the Rio Grande Valley Food Bank – the 7th largest food bank in Texas – and met with their team to discuss their work to help South Texans through food assistance, nutrition education, and access to community services.
De La Cruz hosted a roundtable for South Texas farmers and producers to discuss the H-2A visa program which allowsU.S. employers to bring foreign nationals to the United States to fill temporary agricultural jobs.On the House Agriculture Committee, De La Cruz is committed to supportingpolicies that are critical to supporting farmers, farmworkers, ranchers, and South Texas communities.
n celebration of Earth Week, Governor Kathy Hochul today announced that, since 2020, New York has dedicated nearly $125 million to on-farm projects that conserve natural resources, combat climate change, and protect soil and water quality. The projects have been awarded to more than 6,500 farms in every corner of New York through the Department of Agriculture and Markets’ Climate Resilient Farming Grant Program, Agricultural NonPoint Source Abatement and Control (Ag NonPoint) program, and Agricultural Environmental Management (AEM) program. Together, through the implementation of the best practices that these projects support, they have reduced 661,633 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions, equivalent to removing more than 154,000 cars off the road for one year.
“New York State has long been a trailblazer in combating climate change, and we continue to lead the nation in environmental protection,” Governor Hochul said. “Protecting our state’s farms and ensuring our farmers have the resources they need to mitigate the effects of climate change is critical to not only protecting our environment, but also maintaining the economic viability of the state’s agricultural industry for generations to come. This milestone is a terrific testament to the progress we’ve made to create a cleaner, greener, more resilient New York.”
New York State Agriculture Commissioner Richard A. Ball said, “New York State continues to lead the nation in the work that we as a state are doing to protect our natural resources and combat climate change. Agriculture is proud to be at the table in these discussions and implementing critical best management practices on the farm that are helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, capture and sequester carbon, and protect our soil and water quality. It is amazing all that can be accomplished when we work together, and under the leadership of our governor and in partnership with our SWCD, our farmers have made tangible progress in our fight against climate change.”
New York Department of Environmental Conservation Acting Commissioner Amanda Lefton said, “Supporting New York’s farmers helps improve water and air quality for the benefit of all. We applaud the farmers who implement these important projects and thank the Department of Agriculture and Markets for funding these environmentally sustainable programs. This milestone investment signifies Governor Hochul’s continued commitment to the agriculture industry and our environment to advance a greener future for all New Yorkers.”
New York State Soil and Water Conservation Committee Chair Matt Brower said, “These numbers are really impressive. We are fortunate that the State is able to provide the financial resources to help fund these practices and we are also fortunate to have the valuable staff at the local Soil and Water Conservation Districts to help the landowners install these practices. It is amazing what this partnership has accomplished over the years in terms of environmental protection and improvement.”
Over the last five years, this investment in on-farm best management practices, such as nutrient management through manure storage, vegetative buffers along streams, conservation cover crops, water management, and more, through the State’s programs, has resulted in the following accomplishments statewide:
445 acres of wetland restoration to protect wildlife habitat, floodplains, and ecosystem services that directly benefit downstream water quality.
169 waste storage facilities to support manure management and implement sustainable nutrient application plans to farm fields.
380 acres of riparian herbaceous and forest buffer established to protect waterways from erosion, filter water quality pollutants, and lower temperatures of surface water bodies.
10,000 acres of residue and tillage management via mulch till, no till, strip till or direct seeding to control soil erosion, reduce run-off, and enhance soil health
87,930 acres of cover crop planted to improve soil health, reduce erosion, and sequester carbon.
9,734 feet of streambank and shoreline protection and 80 stream crossings to stabilize and revegetate areas prone to flood damage and reduce livestock access to water resources.
29,080 feet of irrigation pipeline to support irrigation water management systems that control the rate, amount, placement, and timing of irrigation water to ensure efficient use of water and control runoff.
These projects were completed by the State’s County SWCD (SWCD) with participating farmers and landowners. County SWCD will use the AEM framework to assist farmers through planning and implementation to make science-based and cost-effective decisions and to apply for funding through the State’s agricultural environmental programming. As a result, farmers can meet business goals while conserving the State’s natural resources.
New York Association of Conservation Districts Executive Director Blanche Hurlbutt said, “Earth Day is an important reminder to us all to take care of our Mother Earth. SWCD through-out New York hosts tree sales and will encourage folks to plant a tree during this time of year. It is also important to protect New York’s soil and water by learning about ways to keep and protect them. This is another way of education that is provided by the SWCD.”
New York Association of Conservation Districts President Sam Casella said, “As we celebrate Earth Week, it is an excellent opportunity to thank the Governor for her steadfast and continuing support of New York State’s Soil and Water Districts in so many ways; both financially and legislatively. Both are crucial for our States Districts and our dedicated District employees to continue their vitally important work to protect and preserve the New York State’s invaluable natural resources, now and for future generations. As I travel the country on behalf of New York Association of Conservation Districts, I have seen firsthand the collective efforts under the leadership of the Governor, NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets and other key agencies that have made New York State a true leader in Conservation work. Now more than ever, New York’s residents are fortunate to have that commitment, dedication and vision. We should thank them all as we celebrate Earth Week.”
Conservation District Employees Association President Caitlin Stewart said, “New York State’s SWCD are the boots on the ground for natural resource management. From projects that protect farmland, forests, and watersheds to place-based education, and from climate resiliency to invasive species prevention, SWCD programs and services benefit students, producers, landowners, and municipalities. Our expert employees truly make Earth Day every day!”
State Senator Michelle Hinchey said, “New York farmers are an example for the country, showing how vital good environmental stewardship is to growing our food, keeping our land and water healthy, and making measurable progress in fighting the climate crisis through agriculture. Despite federal rollbacks in farmer support, we will continue to fight for New York’s small family farmers by investing in the support they need to make their operations resilient and protect our food supply for future generations.”
State Senator Pete Harckham said, “New York’s agricultural sector and family farms have withstood countless climate crisis related challenges over the years, but to maintain the vitality and capacity of this crucial part of the state’s economy we must continue to offer as much support as possible. The success of the climate resilient farming grants program has benefited the statewide farm community and our environment significantly while decreasing greenhouse gas emissions—a real win-win. In this time of reduced federal support across the board, it makes sense for the governor and state legislature to remain committed to this grant program.”
Assemblymember Donna Lupardo said, “Earth Week is the perfect time to highlight New York’s efforts to address climate change through our many agricultural initiatives. 6,500 New York farms have already received support for soil health practices, climate resiliency, nutrient management, and other vital conservation measures. This work is more important now than ever due to changing attitudes about climate coming from the nation’s capital. I’d like to thank the Governor, the Department, and my colleagues from across the state, for their ongoing commitment to these critically important investments.”
Throughout the year, SWCD will also host and participate in public education and outreach events to celebrate the environment, bring awareness to important natural resource issues and highlight the techniques and technologies used to implement conservation practices. To find a County District and learn more about their unique programs, visit the Soil and Water Conservation District Office page on the Department of Agriculture website.
Administered by the Department and the New York State Soil and Water Conservation Committee, the Agricultural Nonpoint Source Abatement and Control Program is a cost-share grant program that provides funding to address and prevent potential water quality issues that stem from farming activities. Financial and technical assistance supports the planning and implementation of on-farm projects with the goal of improving water quality in New York’s waterways. The program seeks to support New York’s diverse agricultural businesses in their efforts to implement best management practice systems that improve water quality and environmental stewardship.
The goal of the CRF Program is to reduce the impact of agriculture on climate change (mitigation) and to increase the resiliency of New York State farms in the face of a changing climate (adaptation). Program grant funds are available for projects that reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon sequestration in soils and vegetation, in addition to enhancing the on-farm adaptation and resilience to projected climate conditions due to heavy storm events, rainfall, and drought.
To learn more about the State’s funding opportunities in this area, visit the Soil and Water Conservation Committee page on the Department of Agriculture website.
CUPERTINO, Calif., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Aemetis, Inc. (NASDAQ: AMTX), a diversified global renewable natural gas and biofuels company, announced the Company’s subsidiary in India, Universal Biofuels, today began shipments to fulfill multiple orders for more than 33,000 kiloliters of biodiesel from the government-owned Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) for an aggregate of $31 million for delivery during May, June, and July.
Additional OMC orders are expected throughout the year to continue shipments to fuel blending terminals on an ongoing basis to support the India government goal of increasing from a 1% to 5% biodiesel blend. A 5% biodiesel blend is approximately 1.2 billion gallons, a significant increase from less than a 1% blend of biodiesel that is currently used in India.
“We are pleased with the expanded commitment to biofuels that is being shown by the India government, including the achievement of a 20% blend of ethanol and new goals including a 30% ethanol blend,” stated Eric McAfee, Chairman and CEO of Aemetis. “We began our biodiesel shipments today from inventory to quickly ramp up to $10 million per month of shipments and fulfill the $31 million of new orders from OMCs for biodiesel over the next three months. We have already made the capital investments that allow us to quickly increase production volumes as new orders are issued by the OMCs.”
Recently, India has stated plans for further growth in the use of biofuels, expanding revenues for farmers while reducing the importation of petroleum gasoline into India. India’s strong commitment to expanding biofuels markets supports the Aemetis India business plan for further expansion and a planned Initial Public Offering (IPO), subject to continued favorable stock market conditions.
Universal Biofuels completed $112 million of biodiesel and glycerin shipments in the twelve months ended September 2024, including deliveries to the three government-owned oil marketing companies under a cost-plus contract. During a recent plant upgrade and maintenance period, Universal Biofuels expanded the production capacity of its proprietary process that produces biodiesel from waste and byproducts that Universal utilizes to produce biofuels that are lower carbon intensity at a significantly reduced cost.
Aemetis’ Universal Biofuels subsidiary is one of the largest biodiesel producers in India, having been in operation for more than 17 years. Universal Biofuels increased its annual biodiesel production capacity from 60 million gallons to 80 million gallons in the past year, with further biodiesel expansion to other locations and diversification into biogas production planned during the next twelve months.
About Aemetis
Headquartered in Cupertino, California, Aemetis is a renewable natural gas and biofuels company focused on the operation, acquisition, development, and commercialization of innovative technologies that support energy independence and security. Founded in 2006, Aemetis operates and is expanding a California biogas digester network and pipeline system to convert dairy waste into renewable natural gas. Aemetis owns and operates a 65 million gallon per year ethanol production facility in California’s Central Valley near Modesto that also supplies about 80 dairies with animal feed. Aemetis owns and operates an 80 million gallon per year biofuels facility on the East Coast of India producing high quality distilled biodiesel and refined glycerin. Aemetis is developing a sustainable aviation fuel and renewable diesel biorefinery and a carbon sequestration project in California. For additional information about Aemetis, please visit www.aemetis.com.
Safe Harbor Statement
This news release contains forward-looking statements, including statements regarding assumptions, projections, expectations, targets, intentions or beliefs about future events or other statements that are not historical facts. Forward-looking statements include, without limitation, projections of financial results; IPO plans; statements related to the development, engineering, financing, construction, timing, and operation of biodiesel, biogas, sustainable aviation fuel, CO2 sequestration, and other facilities; our ability to promote, develop, finance, and construct such facilities; and statements about future market prices and results of government actions. Words or phrases such as “anticipates,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “believes,” “estimates,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “predicts,” “projects,” “targets,” “view,” “will likely result,” “will continue” or similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on current assumptions and predictions and are subject to many risks and uncertainties. Actual results or events could differ materially from those set forth or implied by such forward-looking statements and related assumptions due to certain factors, including, without limitation, competition in the ethanol, biodiesel and other industries in which we operate, commodity market risks including those that may result from current weather conditions, financial market risks, customer adoption, counter-party risks, risks associated with changes to government policy or regulation, and other risks detailed in our reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, and in our other filings with the SEC. We are not obligated, and do not intend, to update any of these forward-looking statements at any time unless an update is required by applicable securities laws.
Company Investor Relations Media Contact: Todd Waltz (408) 213-0940 investors@aemetis.com
External Investor Relations Contact: Kirin Smith PCG Advisory Group (646) 863-6519 ksmith@pcgadvisory.com
Source: US National Agricultural Statistics Service
WASHINGTON, April 24, 2025 – The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) released the 2023 Census of Agriculture data for American Samoa and Guam today.
The most widely used statistics in the agriculture industry, the Census of Agriculture, is conducted every five years and provides the most comprehensive and impartial agriculture data at the island level. “We thank the producers who gave their time to complete the questionnaire. The Census of Agriculture data tells their agriculture story,” said NASS Administrator Joseph Parsons. “The agricultural census data provides vital data that helps shape policies, allocate resources, and support the growth and sustainability of agriculture in American Samoa and Guam.”
Federal and local governments, agribusinesses, organizations, and many more use Census of Agriculture data to support funding research and programs to improve farming techniques and equipment, building infrastructure for high-speed internet, providing effective production and distribution systems as well as natural disaster preparation, response, and recovery assistance.
Highlights from the 2023 Census of Agriculture:
American Samoa:
There were 7,157 farms, up 13% or 828 farms from 2018. Land in farms totaled 9,253 acres, with an average farm size of 1.3 acres.
The total value of sales was $ 35.3 million, with an average value of $ 4,932 per farm.
Taro represented the largest category of production, with sales of $ 1,245,378.
Guam:
There were 583 farms, an increase of 319 farms since the last census in 2018. Land in farms totaled 2,848 acres, with an average farm size of 4.9 acres.
The total value of sales was $ 6,162,085 million, with an average value of $ 10,570 per farm.
Vegetables and melons represented the largest category of production, with sales of $2,636,157.
For American Samoa, the Census of Agriculture defined a farm as any place that raised or produced agricultural products for sale or home consumption, in 2023. For Guam, the Census of Agriculture defined a farm as any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, in 2023.
The full Census of Agriculture report as well as publication dates for additional data products from the census can be found at nass.usda.gov/AgCensus
The early morning light spills over the raised beds of a thriving community garden in Harlem, New York. It’s a Saturday, and people of all ages move among the plants – harvesting collard greens, making compost and packing bags of fresh vegetables.
A community initiative called Harlem Grown began in 2011 as a single urban farm on an abandoned neighbourhood lot. It has since become a lifeline for the people who live there.
The project combats food insecurity, provides fresh produce to local families – 150,000 servings of food in 2023 alone – and teaches the next generation how to nourish themselves and their communities. As one long-term female volunteer told me: “Healthy habits start young.” That’s why their programmes involve schoolchildren as young as five.
Across the boroughs of New York City, a lively ecosystem of urban farmers, non-profit leaders, dietitians and chefs work together to localise food systems. This helps communities to become more self-sufficient and less reliant on ultra-processed foods, all while ensuring support reaches the most vulnerable.
While healthy food options are readily available in affluent areas such as in upper east side Manhattan, lower-income neighbourhoods – dominated by fast-food establishments – face a far greater need. In the Bronx, residents are establishing community gardens to encourage access to fresh, organic produce that people would otherwise require to travel outside the borough to find.
Some young, female urban farmers from minority communities in New York believe that “like fashion, farming is political too”. Some have built their capacity through courses at the Farm School NYC, which provides them with the tools needed to become effective leaders in the food justice movement.
Localising food systems involves growing and foraging for food in urban settings to reduce food miles and reclaim diverse, locally rooted food traditions long-displaced by industrial systems. This is one of the key lines of work explored by women in my book, What if Women Designed the City?
I’ve been investigating how women as experts of their neighbourhoods engage with local food movements – organising community gardens, coordinating cooperatives and managing farmers markets – viewed through a transatlantic lens that connects efforts in North America with those alive in the UK.
My research adopts a regenerative perspective on urban development, viewed through the eyes of women from diverse backgrounds who uncover untapped potential rooted in the uniqueness of their neighbourhoods. For instance, I conducted walking interviews with 274 women from both affluent and hard-to-reach areas in three Scottish cities: Glasgow, Edinburgh and Perth.
A participant from the modernist housing estate of Wester Hailes in Edinburgh observed that locals often favour convenience foods: “People in this area like hamburgers, pizzas, mashed potatoes and stuff like that.” In her view, encouraging more community gardens could provide healthier alternatives while also reconnecting residents with fresh, seasonal produce.
Another resident recognised the social benefits such spaces could bring, helping to counter isolation. Regular meals at the Murrayburn and Hailes Neighbourhood Garden, for instance, attract people who live alone, providing a welcoming space – even for those who don’t feel like talking. As one participant put it, these meals are especially “good for people who are slightly depressed”.
Research suggests that getting our hands into the soil stimulates the release of serotonin, a natural antidepressant, triggered by the soil bacterium Mycobacterium vaccae, which can help people to feel more relaxed and happier. This aligns with compelling evidence on the benefits of “green care” – including social and therapeutic horticulture, care farming and environmental conservation – which has been shown to reduce anxiety, stress, and depression.
Growing native
At the heart of this community-led food justice movement is the belief that both herbalists and everyday gardeners should prioritise cultivating native plants that naturally thrive in their surroundings, rather than relying on plants from distant regions, that require harvesting, processing and transportation over long distances using fossil fuel energy.
This ethos underpins the work of a growing network of women from the Grass Roots Remedies workers cooperative, who meet regularly at the community-led Calders Garden in Edinburgh to exchange experiences while growing, foraging and making their own herbal medicines.
The vital role of communities as growers and foragers in urban resilience has largely been overlooked by city officials, urban planners and developers. Yet, these community-led efforts are bringing more life and vitality to urban spaces, fostering biodiversity, regenerating soil health and reducing the carbon footprint embedded in industrial food systems.
Several of the women I interviewed believe that being thoughtful consumers involves also taking part in producing what they eat, while reducing food waste at all stages of production. Women are also leading the way by repurposing vacant lots and development sites for community gardening and herbal medicine kitchens while integrating local food production into urban planning and building codes.
Regulatory measures that tie planning approval of new developments to the provision of open space for garden cultivation – either on-site or within the neighbouring area – can ensure that urban agriculture becomes an integral part of city planning. In cities, growing and foraging together deepens social links, encourages more diversified diets, reduces food miles and fosters a regenerative approach to community healthcare.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
May East does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The White House
class=”has-text-align-center”>Rajasthan International CenterJaipur, India
3:17 P.M. IST
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Hello. Good to see everybody. How we doing?
AUDIENCE: Good.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Good. Good.
Well, it’s an amazing privilege to be here in Jaipur. I’m thrilled to address the Ananta Centre’s India-U.S. Forum, and I’m thrilled to have you all here with me. Thanks to all of you, the business leaders, decision-makers, and, of course, the students for being here. And thanks to our great team at the U.S. embassy for everything that you guys do for our country.
In the United States, we’re proud of the deep connection between our nations — between India and the United States. Prime Minister Modi, as most of you probably know, was one of the first visitors welcomed into the Oval Office during President Trump’s second term. And like President Trump, the prime minister inspires remarkable loyalty because of the strength of his belief in his people and in his country.
Now, we’re so grateful for Prime Minister Modi’s hospitality, as well as the reception that he and everyone else in this country have given us on this first trip for me to India. This is my first time visiting the birthplace of my wife’s parents, and she’s, of course, in the front row there. There you are, Usha. (Applause.)
You — she’s a bit of a celebrity, it turns out, in India. I think more so than her husband. But I haven’t been here long, but already I’ve been fortunate enough to visit the Akshardham Temple — did I pronounce that right, honey? — I did okay? — all right — with my family this morning, as a matter of fact. And last night, Prime Minister Modi welcomed me, Usha, and our three small children at his beautiful home.
I’ve been amazed by the ancient beauty of the architecture of India, by the richness of India’s history and traditions, but also by India’s laser-like focus on the future. And those things, I think — this appreciation for history and tradition, and this focus on the future — is very much something that I think animates this country in 2025.
Now, in other countries I visited, it sometimes feels like there’s a flatness, a sameness, a desire to just be like everyone else in the world. But it’s different here. There’s a vitality to India, a sense of infinite possibility, of new homes to be built, new skylines to be raised, and lives to be enriched. And there’s a pride in being Indian, a feeling of excitement about the days that lie ahead.
Now, it’s a striking contrast with too many in the West, where some in our leadership class seem stricken by self-doubt and even fear of the future. To them, humanity is always one bad decision away from catastrophe. The world will soon end, they tell us, because we’re burning too much fuel or making too many things or having too many children. And so, rather than invest in the future, they too often retreat from it.
Some of them pass laws that force their nations to use less power. They cancel nuclear and other energy generation facilities, even as their choices — the choices of these leaders — lead to more dependence on foreign adversaries. Meanwhile, their message to their friends, to countries like India, is to tell them that they are not allowed to grow.
Well, President Trump rejects these failed ideas. He wants America to grow. He wants India to grow, and he wants to build the future with our partners all over the globe. (Applause.)
And when I look at this audience or when I visit this incredible country over these last couple of days, I see a people that will not be held back.
Now, the most profound responsibility I believe that all of us have is not to ourselves but to the next generation, to make sure we leave them with a better society than the one that our parents and our grandparents gave us. And this is the world that America seeks to create with you.
We want to build a bright new world, one that’s constantly innovating, one that’s helping people to form families, making it easier to build, invest, and trade together in pursuit of common goals.
Now, I believe that our nations have much to offer one another, and that’s why we come to you as partners looking to strengthen our relationship.
Now, we’re not here to preach that you do things any one particular way. Too often, in the past, Washington approached Prime Minister Modi with an attitude of preachiness or even one of condescension. Prior administrations saw India as a source of low-cost labor on the one hand, even as they criticized the prime minister’s government — arguably the most popular in the democratic world. And as I told Prime Minister Modi last night, he’s got approval ratings that would make me jealous. (Laughter and applause.)
But it wasn’t just India. This attitude captured too much of our economic relationship with the rest of the world, so we shipped countless jobs overseas and, with them, our capacity to make things — from furniture, appliances, and even weapons of war. We traded hard power for soft power, because with economic integration, we were told, would also come peace through sameness. Over time, we’d all assume the same sort of bland, secular, universal values no matter where you lived. The world was flat after all. That was the thesis, and that was what they told us.
And when that thesis proved false or at least incomplete, leaders in the West took it upon themselves to flatten it by any means necessary. But many people across the world — and I think your country counts among them — they did not want to be flattened. Many were proud of where they came from: their way of life, the kind of jobs they worked, and the kind of jobs their parents worked before them. And that very much includes people in my own country, the United States of America.
Now, some of you are aware of my own background. I actually didn’t plan to talk about my background at all until last night at dinner, while my children mostly behaved — we gave them A-minus for behavior with the prime minister — the prime minister said, “I have one request. I want you to talk a little bit about your background.” And so, I wanted to do that — for those of you who don’t know anything about me, I wanted to talk about it.
I come from — and I’m biased — the greatest state in the Union, the state of Ohio: a longtime manufacturing powerhouse in the United States of America. My home, specifically, is a place called Middletown. Now, it’s not a massive city by any means — it’s not Jaipur — but it’s a decent-sized town and a place where people make things, which has been a point of pride in Middletown for generations.
It’s filled with families like my own, some of whom called us “hillbillies” — Americans who came down from the surrounding hills and mountains of West Virginia, Tennessee, and Kentucky to cities like Middletown in pursuit of the manufacturing jobs that were creating widespread prosperity for families all across America. They came to Middletown in search of what we call back home “the American dream.”
In Middletown, my parents raised me, my grandparents raised me. They taught us to work hard. They taught me to study hard, and they taught me to love God and my country and always be good to your own.
My granddad, who I called “Papaw” growing up, he typified that. Late into life, he worked as a steelmaker at the local mill, and I know India has a lot of those. Papaw’s job gave him a good wage, stable hours, and a generous pension. All that allowed him to support not just him and my grandmother but his own daughter and grandkids with him. Now, by the time I came around, money was awfully tight, but he worked hard to make a good living for all of us.
Now, I know Papaw and Mamaw were grateful for the way of life their country made possible. Their generation bore witness to the formation of America’s great middle class, and by creating an economy centered around production, around workers who build things, and around the value of their labor, our nation’s leaders then transformed their country and made thousands of little Middletowns possible.
The government supported its labor force. We created incentives for productive industries to take root and struck good deals with international partners to sell the goods made in the United States of America.
But as America settled in to world historic prosperity it generated, our leaders began to take that very prosperity and what created it for granted. They forgot the importance of building, of supporting productive industry, of striking fair deals, and of supporting our workers and their families.
And as time went on, we saw the consequences. In my hometown, factories left, jobs evaporated. America’s Middletowns ceased to be the lifeblood of our nation’s economy. And the United States — as it became transformed, those very people — the working class, the background of the United States of America — were dismissed as backwards for holding on to the values their people had held dear for generations.
Now, Middletown’s story is my story, but it’s hardly unusual in the United States of America. There are tens of millions of Americans who, over the last 20 or so years, have woken up to what’s happening in our nation. But I believe they woke up well before it’s too late.
Now, like you, we want to appreciate our history, our culture, our religion. We want to do commerce and strike good deals with our friends. We want to found our vision of the future upon the proud recognition of our heritage, rather than self-loathing and fear.
I work for a president who has long understood all of this. Whether through fighting those who seek to erase American history or in support of fairer trade deals abroad, he has been consistent on these issues for decades. And as a result, under the Trump Administration, America now has a government that has learned from the mistakes of the past.
It’s why President Trump cares so deeply about protecting the manufacturing economy that is the lifeblood of American prosperity and making sure America’s workers have opportunities for good jobs.
As we saw earlier this month, he will go to extraordinary lengths to protect and expand those opportunities for all Americans.
And so, today, I come here with a simple message: Our administration seeks trade partners on the basis of fairness and of shared national interests.
We want to build relationships with our foreign partners who respect their workers, who don’t suppress their wages to boost exports but respect the value of their labor.
We want partners that are committed to working with America to build things, not just allowing themselves to become a conduit for transshipping others goods.
And finally, we want to partner with people and countries who recognize the historic nature of the moment we’re in, of the need to come together and build something truly new — a system of global trade that is balanced, one that is open, and one that is stable and fair.
Now, I want to be clear: America’s partners need not look exactly like America, nor must our governments do everything exactly the same way, but we should have some common goals. And I believe, here in India, we do in both o- — economics and in national security.
And that’s why we’re so excited. That’s why I’m so excited to be here today. In India, America has a friend, and we seek to strengthen the warm bonds our great nations already share.
Now, critics have attacked my president, President Trump, for starting a trade war in an effort to bring back the jobs of the past, but nothing could be further from the truth. He seeks to rebalance global trade so that America, with friends like India, can build a future worth having for all of our people together.
And when President Trump and Prime Minister Modi announced in February that our countries aim to more than double our bilateral trade to $500 billion by the end of the decade, I know that both of them meant it, and I’m encouraged by everything our nations are doing to get us there.
As many of you are aware, both of our governments are hard at work on a trade agreement built on shared priorities, like creating new jobs, building durable supply chains, and achieving prosperity for our workers.
In our meeting yesterday, Prime Minister Modi and I made very good progress on all of those points, and we are especially excited to formally announce that America and India have officially finalized the terms of reference for the trade negotiation. I think this is a vital step. (Applause.) Thank you. I believe this is a vital step toward realizing President Trump’s and Prime Minister Modi’s vision because it sets a roadmap toward a final deal between our nations.
I believe there is much that America and India can accomplish together. And on that note, I want to talk about a few areas of collaboration today, how India and the United States can work together: first, perhaps most importantly, to protect our nations; second, to build great things; and finally, to innovate the cutting-edge technologies both our countries will need in the years to come.
Now, on defense, our countries already enjoy a close relationship — one of the closest relationships in the world. America does more military exercises with India than we do with any other nation on Earth.
The U.S.-India COMPACT that President Trump and Prime Minister Modi announced in February will lay the foundation for even closer collaboration between our countries. From Javelins to Stryker combat vehicles, our nations will coproduce many of the munitions and equipment that we’ll need to deter foreign aggressors — not because we seek war, but because we seek peace, and we believe the best path to peace is through mutual strength. And the — launching the joint Autonomous Systems Industry Alliance will enable America and India to develop the most state-of-the-art maritime systems needed for victory.
It’s fitting that India, this year, is hosting the Quad Leaders’ Summit this fall. Our interests in a free, open, peaceful, and prosperous Indo-Pacific are in full alignment. Both of us know that the region must remain safe from any hostile powers that seek to dominate it.
Growing relations between our countries over the last decade are part of what led America to designate India a Major Defense Partner — the first of that class. This designation means that India now shares, with the UAE, a defense and technology infrastructure and partnership with the United States on par with America’s closest allies and friends.
But we actually feel that Indir- — India has much more to gain from its continued defense partnership with the United States, and let me sketch that out a little bit.
We, of course, want to collaborate more. We want to work together more. And we want your nation to buy more of our military equipment, which, of course, we believe is the best in class.
American fifth-generation F-35s, for example, would give the Indian Air Force the ability to defend your air space and protect your people like never before. And I’ve met a lot of great people from the Indian Air Force just in the last couple of days.
India, like America, wants to build, and that will mean that we have to produce more energy. That’s more energy production and more energy consumption. And it’s one of the many reasons why I think our nations have so much to gain by strengthening our energy ties.
As President Trump is fond of saying, America has once again begun to “drill, baby drill.” And we think that will inure to the benefit of Americans but it will also benefit India as well.
Past administrations in the United States of America, I — I think motifated [motivated] by a fear of the future, have tied our hands and restricted American investments in oil and natural gas production. This administration recognizes that cheap, dependable energy en- — is an essential part of making things and is an essential part of economic independence for both of our nations.
Of course, America is blessed with vast natural resources and an unusual capacity to generate energy, so much that we want to be able to sell it to our friends, like India. Well, we believe your nation will benefit from American energy exports and expanding those exports. You’ll be able to build more, make more, and grow more, but at much lower energy costs.
We also want to help India explore its own considerable natural resources, including its offshore natural gas reserves and critical mineral supplies. We have the capacity and we have the desire to help. Moreover, we think energy coproduction will help beat unfair competitors in other foreign markets.
But India, we believe, can go a long way to enhance energy ties between our nations. And one suggestion I have is maybe consider dropping some of the nontariff barriers for American access to the Indian market.
Now, I’ve talked about this, of course, with Prime Minister Modi. And, look, President Trump and I know that Prime Minister Modi is a tough negotiator. He drives a hard bargain. It’s one of the reasons why we respect him. (Applause.)
And — and we don’t blame Prime Minister Modi for fighting for India’s industry, but we do blame American leaders of the past for failing to do the same for our workers, and we believe that we can fix that to the mutual benefit of both the United States and India.
Let me give an example. American ethanol, we believe, made from the finest corn in the world, can play a tremendous role in enhancing our partnership. And I know our farmers would be delighted to support India’s energy security ambitions.
We welcome the Modi government’s budget announcement to amend India’s civil nuclear liability laws, which currently prevent U.S. producers from exporting small modular reactors and building larger U.S.-designed reactors in India.
There’s much that we can create, much that we can do together.
We believe that American energy can help realize India’s nuclear power production goals — and this is very important — as well as its AI ambitions. Because, as the United States knows well and I know that India knows well, there is no AI future without energy security and energy dominance.
And that brings me to my final point of collaboration. I believe that the technological collaboration between our countries is going to extend well beyond defense and energy.
The U.S.-India TRUST initiative that President Trump and Prime Minister Modi have launched will be a cornerstone of the partnership in the future. It’ll build on billions of dollars of planned investments that American companies have already announced across India.
In the years to come, we’re going to see data centers, pharmaceuticals, undersea cables, and countless other critical goods being developed and being built because of the American and Indian economic partnership.
And I’ll say it again, I think that our nations have so much to gain by investing in one another: America investing in India and, of course, India investing in the United States of America.
And I know that Americans, our people are excited about that prospect and that President Trump and I are looking forward to stronger ties.
Americans want further access to Indian markets. This is a great place to do business, and we want to give our people more access to this country. And Indians, we believe, will thrive from greater commerce from the United States. This is very much a win-win partnership and certainly will be far into the future.
And as I know this audience knows better than most, neither Americans nor Indians are alone in looking to scale up their manufacturing capacity. The competition extends well beyond cheap consumer goods and into munitions, energy infrastructure, and all sorts of other cutting-edge technologies. I believe that if our nations fail to keep pace, the consequences for the Indo-Pacific, but really the consequences for the entire world, will be quite dire.
And this, again, is where India and the United States have so much to offer one another. We’ve got great hardware — the leading artificial intelligence hardware in the world. You have one of the most exciting start-up technology infrastructures anywhere in the world.
There’s a lot to be gained by working together, and this is why President Trump and I both welcome India’s leadership in a number of diplomatic organizations, but, of course, in the Quad.
We believe a stronger India means greater economic prosperity but also greater stability across the Indo-Pacific, which is, of course, a shared goal for all of us in this room and is a shared goal for both of our countries.
I want to close with — with one last story, or maybe a couple of stories. So, you know, my — my son Ewan is seven years old. He’s our firstborn son. And yesterday, after we — we had dinner at the prime minister’s house, the food was so good and the prime minister was so kind to our three children that Ewan came up to me afterwards, and he said, “Dad, you know, I think maybe I could live in India.” (Laughter and applause.)
And — but I think after about 90 minutes in the Jaipur sun today at the great palace — (laughter) — he suggested that maybe we should move to England. (Laughter.) So, you take the — the good with the bad here.
But I — I want to talk about Prime Minister Modi because I think he’s a special person. I first met Prime Minister Modi at the AI Action Summit in February, and we had a lot of important discussions on AI and other policies to prepare for.
The prime minister also managed to figure out that my son Vivek was actually turning five years old on the trip. This was in Paris just a couple of months ago.
So, think about this. Amid a huge international policy conference, he took the time to stop by where I was staying; wish our second son, Vivek, a happy birthday; and even bring him a gift. Usha and I were both genuinely touched by his graciousness, and we have been even more impressed by his warmth since we arrived in India.
Now, it’s interesting. Some of you may know that when you’re a politician, your kids spend almost as much time in the limelight as you do. And the — the great things about kids is they are brutally honest. They’re brutally honest with everybody, whether you want them to be or not.
And our seven-year-old, our five-year-old, and then our — our three-year-old baby girl, Mirabel — it’s interesting. They have only really been — they’ve only really attached themselves to; they’ve only really liked, I should say; they’ve only really built a rapport with — with two world leaders.
The fors- — first, of course, is President Trump. He just has a certain energy about them — about him. But Prime Minister Modi, it’s the exact same thing. Our kids just like him. And I think that because kids are such good strong [judge] of characters, I just like Prime Minister Modi too, and I think it’s a great foundation for the future of our relationship. (Applause.)
I could tell then — I could tell when Prime Minister Modi came over a couple of months ago and I believe today that he is a serious leader who has thought deeply about India’s future prosperity and security, not just for the rest of his time in office but over the next century.
And I want to end by making a simple overarching point. We are now officially one quarter into the 21st century — 25 years in, 75 years to go. And I really believe that the future of the 21st century is going to be determined by the strength of the United States-India partnership. I believe — (applause) — thank you.
I believe that if India and the United States work together successfully, we are going to see a 21st century that is prosperous and peaceful. But I also believe that if we fail to work together successfully, the 21st century could be a very dark time for all of humanity.
So, I want to say, it’s — it’s clear to me, as it is to most observers, that President Trump, of course, intends to rebalance America’s economic relationship with the rest of the world. That’s going to cause — fundamentally will cause profound changes within our borders in the United States, but, of course, with other countries as well.
But I believe that this rebalancing is going to produce great benefits for American workers, it’s going to produce great benefits for the people of India, and because our partnership is so important to the future of the world, I believe President Trump’s efforts, joined, of course, by the whole country of India and Prime Minister Modi, will make the 21st century the best century in human history. Let’s do it together.
God bless you. And thank you for having me. (Applause.)
END 3:42 P.M. IST
B.C.’s tree-fruit growers are working on new projects to help protect their harvests from extreme weather and ensure there is a sustainable supply of local cherries, peaches, apples and other tree fruits this year and in future years.
“Earlier this spring, I visited the Okanagan to meet with growers. Many of them spoke about the challenge of a changing climate that has impacted their livelihoods and affected local food security,” said Lana Popham, Minister of Agriculture and Food. “Extreme weather events are a major concern, and this investment will help farmers install much-needed equipment to protect their orchards and the delicious, quality fruit British Columbians rely on and enjoy.”
The $5-million Tree Fruit Climate Resiliency program is supporting 67 projects in the Okanagan and the Kootenay regions. Tree-fruit growers are using the funding to buy equipment such as wind machines, energy-efficient heaters and cooling systems to protect orchards from extreme cold and heat. One grower is purchasing hail netting to keep fruit trees and crops safe from damage.
“Working together with the B.C. Fruit Growers’ Association and the B.C. Cherry Association has been crucial in developing a robust response to support our province’s dedicated tree-fruit growers. They have faced numerous challenges over the past few years,” said Harwinder Sandhu, parliamentary secretary for agriculture and MLA for Vernon-Lumby. “I know from my visits to orchards and meetings with growers how much these projects can help, and I am excited to see growers using this technology to protect their crops and increase production of the renowned Okanagan fruit that B.C. takes pride in.”
These projects will protect nearly 360 hectares (887 acres) of orchards in B.C., helping mitigate extreme weather effects on the tree-fruit sector. The projects will be complete by March 2027.
“The B.C. Cherry Association was very pleased to see the high uptake by industry in this program. After five consecutive years of extreme climate events, we needed to take a proactive approach,” said Sukhpaul Bal, president, B.C. Cherry Association. “The Tree Fruit Climate Resiliency program allows growers to make investments in their farms to better protect against future events, and we look forward to building on the success of the program to ensure the long-term sustainability of the cherry sector.”
The Tree Fruit Climate Resiliency program was developed with input from the B.C. Fruit Growers’ Association and the B.C. Cherry Association as part of government’s efforts to help tree-fruit growers through challenges.
“We are grateful to the government for their support through this program. The overwhelming response, with the program being oversubscribed within just 20 hours, clearly demonstrates the significant need within our industry,” said Deep Brar, vice-president, B.C. Fruit Growers’ Association, and a tree-fruit grower. “We sincerely appreciate the efforts in supporting the tree-fruit industry, and as we move forward, we hope for even more support to continue addressing the challenges we face and to ensure the sustainability and growth of our sector.”
Learn More:
To learn more about the opening of the Tree Fruit Climate Resiliency program, visit: https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2025AF0002-000049
BOSTON, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Richard Scannell, CEO at occupancy analytics software company Lambent, will be a featured speaker at University Facilities 2025 taking place April 28-29 at the Renaissance Boston Seaport Hotel. Scannell will co-present with Sara Walsh, Executive Dean of Finance and Administration at the Brown University School of Public Health. Their session will highlight the university’s experience using advanced analytics and data modeling to gain a better understanding of space usage and how they used that data to optimize usage and deliver tangible financial, operational and user results.
As the future of higher education evolves, campus space utilization is becoming mission-critical. The University Facilities 2025 conference looks at how new academic facility planning and space management initiatives are being shaped by changing academic priorities and funding streams. The event provides capital project teams, project managers, facility managers, space planners, construction managers, architects, engineers, financial officers, capital planners, and university administrative staff with the data, metrics, and decision-making rationales they need for:
New space plans for better utilization and cost-efficient growth
Greater facility flexibility for shared and different uses
Capital project investments that attract faculty and students
Improved planning processes and tools
Scannell and Walsh will present their session twice at the event:
Session Details:
Space use visualization tools to overcome skepticism and bureaucracy
Dates/Times:
Mon. April 28
2:20 – 3:15 p.m.
Tues. April 29
8:35 – 9:30 a.m.
All the data in the world is useless if it can’t be turned into relevant insights and communicated clearly. This presentation illustrates the leveraging of sophisticated data modeling tools and the influence of academic partners to advance projects through the administrative approval process and overcome significant hurdles. Scannell and Walsh will illustrate how to harness data to demonstrate space utilization problems and opportunities in ways that build enthusiasm at every level through the approval process. They will examine tangible financial impacts, project story telling models, and the tailoring of communication strategies for productive ad-hoc meetings, budgeting, and IT department engagement.
Speakers:
Sara Walsh Executive Dean of Finance and Administration Brown University School of Public Health
Richard Scannell CEO Lambent
Walsh will also lead another session at the conference titled: Growth in a landlocked campus: Brown University’s space utilization and repurposing solutions. In that session, she will profile Brown’s strategy to answer the call for more space amid rapid growth, while maintaining fiscal responsibility. Walsh will detail Brown’s multi-faceted model for campus expansion which reconciles academic priorities and financial constraints with community considerations. She’ll examine decisions on strategic property acquisition and development, the repurposing of existing structures, opportunities identified to improve space utilization, and balancing expansion with financial prudence by measuring capital expenditures. The session takes place Monday, April 28th, 10:25 – 10:50 a.m.
About Lambent Lambent is an occupancy analytics software company helping corporate and higher ed campuses optimize space utilization, facilities operations and real estate investments. Its SaaS platform, Lambent Spaces, leverages existing data sources such as Wi-Fi and sensors to provide anonymous and predictive analytics to inform decisions related to utilization, workplace experiences, planning, scheduling, and maintenance. The software delivers actionable intelligence so facilities professionals and space planners can make better use of the spaces they have. For more information, visit https://lambentspaces.com/.
Governor Pillen Declares Emergency, Mobilizes Nebraska National Guard and Issues Statewide Burn Ban Following Fire in Brown County
LINCOLN, NE – Governor Jim Pillen has authorized the Nebraska National Guard to mobilize 29 soldiers and airmen to assist local volunteer fire departments, which are currently battling the Plum Creek Fire near Johnstown, Nebraska, in Brown County. Nebraska Army National Guard aerial resources have also been authorized to support the firefighting mission.
The assignment of state resources is in response to a request received Tuesday evening through the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) to assist local volunteer firefighters who have been fighting the fire since Monday. The Plum Creek Fire is now estimated to have burned 6,600 acres. Forty-five cattle have died, and a cabin has been destroyed. Other structures have been threatened and were boxed in with heavy equipment to provide protection. The cause of the fire has been attributed to a permitted burn that got out of control.
Gov. Pillen issued a statewide burn ban during a news conference at the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency today, alongside other state officials. He emphasized the persistent dry conditions that have continued to plague the state. In February, the Governor issued an emergency declaration for wildfires in Custer and Dawes counties that were also fueled by dry conditions, high winds and a lake of humidity.
“It’s way too dry in Nebraska right now, and it only takes one burn, one mistake and then you have a situation like we have in Plum Creek. The risks are too significant,” said Gov. Pillen.
Department of Agriculture Director Sherry Vinton touched on the rough and dangerous terrain where the fire is burning, and the extreme difficulty that it posed for fire crews and others who were trying to control flames.
“As the director of agriculture, and a rancher myself, I support the statewide burn ban. While fire is a tool that we use in our agricultural operations and for conservation, right now our current conditions make it just too dangerous,” stressed Dir. Vinton. “Protecting our land, our livestock, wildlife, and most importantly, people in our neighborhoods and our communities from the potential of wildfire damage, is of the utmost importance right now.”
Currently, more than 60 local, state and federal partners are responding to the Plum Creek Fire.
“I applaud the governor for taking this action to save lives and protect property,” NEMA Assistant Director Erv Portis said. “Safety is our number one priority.”
The Nebraska Army National Guard is providing two UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters and a ground crew of 16 to assist with fire suppression. The helicopters departed on their mission this morning and made 70 water drops throughout the day.
“We appreciate the willingness of our soldiers and airmen, as well as their families and employers, to support these local volunteer firefighters as they work tirelessly to control this wildfire,” said Col. Shane Varejcka, Nebraska National Guard chief of the joint staff.
The Governor signed three documents – a proclamation providing state assistance to the Plum Creek Fire, a proclamation providing for state resources to be utilized in response to drought conditions and an executive order establishing the statewide burning ban in all areas of the state through April 30.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks’ (IA-02)
DAVENPORT– Today, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Quad Cities Chamber of Commerce hosted Congresswoman Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA) for a roundtable discussion in Davenport, Iowa with local business leaders on the need to extend pro-growth business tax provisions before portions of President Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) expire at the end of the year. Doing so will create new opportunities for American workers and businesses to thrive.
Absent Congressional action, the country will see the largest automatic tax increase in American history. Miller-Meeks is on the frontlines, working to ensure that the constituents of the 1st District of Iowa will not face this massive tax increase at the end of 2025.
“I was delighted to be with local business owners as we advocate together for an extension of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” said Miller-Meeks. “Starting in 2026, failure to extend these tax cuts would be a devastating 25% average tax hike on Iowa families, farmers, and small businesses, the backbone of our economy and community. Thank you to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for being an advocate for our small businesses. Together, we will continue to champion policies that foster growth, and help southeast Iowa thrive!”
“With congress passing budget language earlier this month, the hard work of developing a tax package that avoids a historic tax hike on small business is underway”,said Peter Tokar III, President and CEO of the Quad Cities Chamber of Commerce. “We are proud to work with Congresswoman Miller-Meeks and are thankful for her support of common-sense pro-growth, pro-business tax policy that ensures small businesses can do what they do best, run their business and invest in their employees.”
The U.S. Chamber’s tax roundtables and business tour are the latest effort in its Growing America’s Future campaign, an education and advocacy blitz in support of maintaining a pro-growth tax code to foster a robust U.S. economy that benefits all Americans. These events will continue over the coming months in communities across the country.
NEW YORK, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — E.F. Hutton & Co., the recently relaunched investment firm, has named Aaron Gadouas as the firm’s newest Senior Managing Director. Gadouas will be working alongside Chief Executive Officer Joseph T. Rallo and President Duncan B. Swanston as the firm continues its focus on delivering for clients across equity and debt markets.
Gadouas brings over three decades of experience in investment banking and capital markets to the firm, including expertise across a wide range of industries and financing structures. Over the course of his career, he has provided capital solutions and strategic advice for clients in industries including renewable energy and sustainable infrastructure, controlled environment agriculture, residential and commercial real estate, equipment leasing and specialty finance and insurance.
“I’m thrilled to join E.F. Hutton during this exciting period of growth,” said Senior Managing Director Aaron Z. Gadouas. “I’m eager to collaborate with this outstanding executive team to broaden our global reach in private credit and offer valuable solutions to clients across structured finance.”
Aaron has a history of developing and identifying creative financing solutions. He pioneered the first securitization of church mortgage loans in the United States. He has also formulated ways to monetize and leverage insurance products and other credit enhancements.
“We are thrilled to announce Aaron Gadouas is joining our firm as a Senior Managing Director. He brings a wealth of knowledge to the company, decades of experience in investment banking and a deep knowledge of debt markets. I am looking forward to working with him to expand our offerings to deliver the best solutions to our clients,” said E.F. Hutton Chief Executive Officer Joseph T. Rallo.
Before joining E.F. Hutton, Gadouas was a Managing Director at B.C. Ziegler and Company and Co-head of the firm’s project and structured finance practice. He has also held positions at ABN AMRO Global Capital Markets, where he was responsible for the origination and execution of tax-advantaged structured products, and Drexel Burnham Lambert, where he focused on municipal finance.
Gadouas graduated from Cornell University with a Bachelor’s in Economics. He received an MBA from Kellogg Graduate School of Management at Northwestern University and holds General Securities Registered Representative Series 7, 52 and 63 licenses.
ABOUT E.F. HUTTON E.F. Hutton & Co. is a broker-dealer that provides advisory and financing solutions to a variety of clients including corporates, sponsors, and public-private partnerships. The Executive Team at E.F. Hutton & Co. has a proven track record of providing unwavering strategic advice to clients across the globe, including the US, Asia, Europe, UAE, and Latin America.
PALM BEACH, Fla., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — FN Media GroupNews Commentary – Drones are being utilized in many markets and one of the ones that is expected to continue to rise is the agriculture drones market. The need to boost agricultural productivity and the labor shortage drive the agriculture drones market growth. Traditional farming faces labor shortages, increasing the demand for advanced agriculture technologies that enhance productivity and minimize manual labor. For instance, the USDA’s 2022 Census of Agriculture revealed a loss of 141,733 farms in the US from 2017 to 2022, highlighting the urgent need for solutions to improve efficiency and promote sustainable farming practices. According to a report from MarketsAndMarkets the global agriculture drones market which grew to from USD 2.01 billion in 2024 is expected to reach a CAGR of 32.0% during the forecast period (2029). The report said: “Partnerships and the introduction of new products will present profitable prospects for industry participants in the coming five years. Favorable government policies, subsidies, and regulations coupled with increasing investments by market players drive the usage of digital agriculture tools like drones. The US FAA’s exemptions for the use of agriculture drones are anticipated to hold several opportunities for the market. Favorable government policies, subsidies, and regulations coupled with increasing investments by market players to drive the usage of digital agriculture tools like drones are acting as drivers for the agriculture drone market. Public-private partnerships create innovation in developing tailored solutions to known problems, especially in agriculture, which receives research and development funding from government initiatives. Extension education and training are also brought about, which educates the farmer concerning the capabilities of the drones thus making the farmer able to utilize the tools appropriately.” Active Companies in the drone industry today include ZenaTech, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZENA), Corteva, Inc. (NYSE: CTVA), Red Cat Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: RCAT), Safe Pro Group Inc. (NASDAQ: SPAI), AgEagle Aerial Systems Inc. (NYSE: UAVS).
MarketsAndMarkets concluded: “Furthermore, governments’ propensity for sustainability in environmental matters helps the cause of drones meant to stretch resources applied in terms of water and fertilizers… Simplified regulatory frameworks facilitate easier adoption, enabling farmers to implement drone technology into their operations without extensive bureaucratic hurdles. Monetary benefits, such as subsidies and tax exemptions, greatly help reduce the input costs of drones, hence enabling more farmers to adopt the technology.”
ZenaTech (NASDAQ:ZENA) ZenaDrone Granted FAA Part 137 Approval for Agricultural Drone Operations Addressing a $6 Billion Global Agricultural Drone Market Growing to $24 Billion by 2032 – ZenaTech, Inc. (FSE: 49Q) (BMV: ZENA) (“ZenaTech”), a technology company specializing in AI (Artificial Intelligence) drones, Drone as a Service (DaaS), enterprise SaaS and Quantum Computing solutions, announces its subsidiary ZenaDrone has received approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to conduct commercial agricultural operations under the rules and regulations of 14 CFR Part 137 for crop spraying and precision agriculture. This approval allows ZenaDrone to commence final testing and deployment of the ZenaDrone 1000 drone for aerial spraying of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, fertilizers, and seeds for agricultural, environmental and government customers. The company plans to sell these solutions through its Drone as a Service, or DaaS, business model as well as selling the drone hardware and solution directly to larger commercial farms, agribusinesses, and cooperatives.
“FAA part 137 approval now enables our team to finish final testing and commence sales of our agriculture solutions. Drones offer a more precise, efficient, cost effective and safer alternative to traditional methods while reducing chemical use, crop damage, and manual work, as well as being able to reach hard-to-access areas. We plan, test, then deploy our solutions through our DaaS model in the US first, followed by Ireland where we have a history of pioneering development work in agricultural drones,” said CEO Shaun Passley, Ph.D.
According to Fortune Business Insights the global agriculture drone market is projected to grow from USD 6.10 billion in 2024 to USD 23.78 billion by 2032, at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18.5%. This growth reflects a growing demand for precision agriculture, advances in drone technology, cost-effectiveness, government support and incentive programs, and growing awareness and education.
The ZenaDrone 1000 is an autonomous drone, in a VTOL (Vertical Takeoff and Landing) quadcopter design with a total of eight rotors on its two fixed wings; it is considered a medium-sized drone measuring 12X7 feet in size. It is designed for stable flight, maneuverability, heavy lift capabilities up to 40 kilos, incorporating innovative software technology, AI, sensors, and purpose-built attachments like crop spraying, along with rugged and compact hardware featuring foldable wings enabling the drone to fit into the back of a truck.
ZenaTech’s DaaS business will incorporate the ZenaDrone 1000 and the IQ series of multifunction autonomous drones to provide a variety of service solutions from land surveys to power line inspections or power washing, made accessible and cost effective through an Uber-like business model on a regular subscription or pay-per-use basis. Customers can conveniently access drones for eliminating manual or time-consuming tasks achieving superior results, such as for surveying, inspections, security and law enforcement, or precision farming applications, without having to buy, operate, or maintain the drones themselves. Continued…Read this full release by visiting:https://www.financialnewsmedia.com/news-zena/
Other recent developments in the markets include:
Puna Bio recently announced that it had closed a new round of founding led by Corteva, Inc., Corteva, Inc. (NYSE: CTVA) through its Corteva Catalyst platform. The investment from one of the world´s leading agricultural technology companies, and other investors, will support the further development of Puna Bio’s product portfolio based on extremophile organisms.
Unlike traditional pesticides and fertilizers, Puna Bio’s innovative products are based on natural solutions that enhance nutrient uptake, tolerance to stress and crop quality. Their biological (non-GMO) seed treatments are based on the unique capabilities of extremophiles isolated from the highest and driest desert on Earth, La Puna of Argentina.
“Our solution, based on ancient bacteria dating back 3.5 billion years, maximizes productivity by 10 to 15 percent in fertile soils and revitalizes degraded soils that would normally be too acidic or salinized to be productive,” explains Franco Martínez Levis, Puna Bio’s CEO and co-founder. “With so much of the world’s agricultural land on the path to degradation and weather patterns becoming more extreme worldwide, our discovery platform ensures that we can continue feeding the global population in a sustainable way.”
Red Cat Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: RCAT), a drone technology company integrating robotic hardware and software for military, government, and commercial operations, recently announced that the Company has entered into securities purchase agreements with certain institutional investors for the purchase and sale of 4,724,412 shares of common stock, pursuant to a registered direct offering, expected to result in gross proceeds of approximately $30 million, before deducting placement agent fees and other offering expenses. The offering is expected to close on or about April 11, 2025, subject to the satisfaction of customary closing conditions.
The Company intends to use net proceeds from the offering for general corporate purposes, including working capital. Northland Capital Markets is acting as the exclusive placement agent for the transaction.
The offering is being made pursuant to an effective shelf registration statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-283242), which was declared effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on December 11, 2024. A final prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus relating to the registered direct offering will be filed with the SEC and will be available on the SEC’s website located at http://www.sec.gov. Additionally, when available, electronic copies of the final prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus may be obtained, when available, from Northland Securities, Inc., 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 3300, Minneapolis, MN.
Safe Pro Group Inc. (NASDAQ: SPAI) recently announced that its SpotlightAITM OnSite (OnSite) real-time, edge-based, small object threat detection technology, has successfully completed operations in active minefields in Ukraine. This successful deployment highlights the Company’s patented capability to rapidly identify and instantly map live explosive threats including small anti-personnel cluster munitions and landmines scattered over large areas. Building on over two years of real-world battlefield testing, this milestone in the Company’s development roadmap demonstrates the ability to deliver edge-based small object threat detection reducing a soldier’s cognitive load and representing the next generation of force protection. To view a video of SpotlightAITM Onsite please click here.
“Evolving threats like remote mining where everyday drones are strategically delivering small mines is a new critical threat profile that our edge-based system is uniquely designed to address. Our recent operational success confirmed that our AI models can reduce the cognitive load on soldiers who are already heavily tasked and may not have the time to recognize explosive threats in their path. This a significant step forward on the Edge where drone-based small object threat detection for force protection is responding to the rapidly changing modern battlefield. Building upon our unmatched real-world experience in detecting, identifying and locating small explosive threats in Ukraine, we believe OnSite can deliver a new level of enhanced situational awareness that will allow military, government and humanitarian personnel to safely conduct their critical missions with greatly enhanced safety,” said Dan Erdberg, Chairman and CEO of Safe Pro Group Inc. “The increasing number of countries exiting the Ottawa Convention on anti-personnel landmines will likely lead to an increased proliferation of deadly anti-personnel mines and that is why we are committed to the further development and deployment of our patented technology so that we can help protect our soldiers and our allies.”
AgEagle Aerial Systems Inc. (NYSE: UAVS) recently announced the launch of its eBee VISION next generation application software featuring a variety of critical updates. Of particular note, is the capability for manual position updates with map referencing to provide precise navigation even in GNSS-denied areas where satellite signals are unavailable or unreliable due to various factors.
AgEagle CEO Bill Irby commented, “Of the many new features provided in our latest software update, overcoming GNSS-denied shortfalls marks a significant leap forward in drone operations especially for defense personnel, public safety agencies and industrial teams working in high-stakes, GNSS-denied environments. Whether operating in dense urban centers, near critical installations, or in contested zones with active signal interference, our global eBee VISION customers can now maintain full navigational command of their drone using only the camera and map-based interface. This feature directly addresses a core challenge faced by tactical and industrial drone operators in today’s complex mission environments. Our technical team will continue to work relentlessly on refinements and ongoing advancements to ensure AgEagle remains at the forefront of UAV innovation.”
About FN Media Group:
At FN Media Group, via our top-rated online news portal at www.financialnewsmedia.com, we are one of the very few select firms providing top tier one syndicated news distribution, targeted ticker tag press releases and stock market news coverage for today’s emerging companies. #tickertagpressreleases #pressreleases
DISCLAIMER: FN Media Group LLC (FNM), which owns and operates FinancialNewsMedia.com and MarketNewsUpdates.com, is a third party publisher and news dissemination service provider, which disseminates electronic information through multiple online media channels. FNM is NOT affiliated in any manner with any company mentioned herein. FNM and its affiliated companies are a news dissemination solutions provider and are NOT a registered broker/dealer/analyst/adviser, holds no investment licenses and may NOT sell, offer to sell or offer to buy any security. FNM’s market updates, news alerts and corporate profiles are NOT a solicitation or recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities. The material in this release is intended to be strictly informational and is NEVER to be construed or interpreted as research material. All readers are strongly urged to perform research and due diligence on their own and consult a licensed financial professional before considering any level of investing in stocks. All material included herein is republished content and details which were previously disseminated by the companies mentioned in this release. FNM is not liable for any investment decisions by its readers or subscribers. Investors are cautioned that they may lose all or a portion of their investment when investing in stocks. For current services performed FNM has been compensated fifty one hundred dollars for news coverage of the current press releases issued by ZenaTech, Inc. by the Company. FNM HOLDS NO SHARES OF ANY COMPANY NAMED IN THIS RELEASE.
This release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and such forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. “Forward-looking statements” describe future expectations, plans, results, or strategies and are generally preceded by words such as “may”, “future”, “plan” or “planned”, “will” or “should”, “expected,” “anticipates”, “draft”, “eventually” or “projected”. You are cautioned that such statements are subject to a multitude of risks and uncertainties that could cause future circumstances, events, or results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements, including the risks that actual results may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, and other risks identified in a company’s annual report on Form 10-K or 10-KSB and other filings made by such company with the Securities and Exchange Commission. You should consider these factors in evaluating the forward-looking statements included herein, and not place undue reliance on such statements. The forward-looking statements in this release are made as of the date hereof and FNM undertakes no obligation to update such statements.
Contact Information:
Media Contact email: editor@financialnewsmedia.com – +1(561)325-8757
PALM BEACH, Fla., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — FN Media GroupNews Commentary – Many experts see the global agriculture drones market to continue its substantial growth through this decade and maybe beyond. One such industry watcher, MarketsANDMarkets reported that: “The global agriculture drones market was projected to grow to $2.01 Billion in 2024 and reach $8.03 Billion by 2029. High adoption of aerial data collection tools in agriculture holds immense opportunity for the agriculture drones market. As farmers want to boost yields and their uses in resource optimization, precision agricultural tools are in increased demand; drones offer sensors and timely data for crop health and soil conditions. Efficiencies and accuracies increase the appealability of aerial data collection, and more farmers are adopting drone technology. Drones combined with emerging technologies in the form of machine learning and AI make them robust for position and to improve broadband agricultural data systems. Moreover, many industries use drones, and the adoption rate of tools required to collect aerial data is high in the construction, agriculture, and mining industries. Moreover, as farmers emphasize yield optimization and resource utilization more, the use of precision agriculture tools and drones increases. Drones have advanced sensors and real-time data for monitoring crop health and soil conditions. Their efficiency and accuracy appeal to more farmers who have become open to drone technology.” Active Companies in the drone industry today include ZenaTech, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZENA), Draganfly Inc. (NASDAQ: DPRO), Unusual Machines, Inc. (NYSE American: UMAC), Sidus Space (NASDAQ: SIDU), AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. (NASDAQ: AGRI).
MarketsANDMarkets continued: “The cereals & grains segment is growing substantially in the agriculture drones market. Cereals like wheat, corn, and rice are staple crops that require precise management to optimize yields, which makes drones more important. Drones can perform aerial surveys, crop health monitoring, and soil condition assessment, thus supporting farmers in informed decisions that may yield maximum productivity and resource utilization. Moreover, precision agriculture development is quite useful for producing cereals and grains. Agriculture drones conduct aerial surveys; thorough data acquisition and actionable insight generation will assist farmers in undertaking focused interventions such as precise irrigation and fertilization. This is resource efficient, cost-reducing, and productivity-enhancing in absolute terms. Moreover, with environmental objectives driving this agenda, increasing the importance of sustainability works well for the cereals & grains segment, with drones monitoring inputs more efficiently for management. The rising trend of digital agriculture, whereby decisions are made based on data, also builds a case for drones in the segment. Thus, considering the above parameters, based on farm produce, the cereals & grains segment is estimated to grow at the highest CAGR during the studied period.”
ZenaTech (NASDAQ:ZENA) ZenaDrone Granted FAA Part 137 Approval for Agricultural Drone Operations Addressing a $6 Billion Global Agricultural Drone Market Growing to $24 Billion by 2032 – ZenaTech, Inc. (FSE: 49Q) (BMV: ZENA) (“ZenaTech”), a technology company specializing in AI (Artificial Intelligence) drones, Drone as a Service (DaaS), enterprise SaaS and Quantum Computing solutions, announces its subsidiary ZenaDrone has received approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to conduct commercial agricultural operations under the rules and regulations of 14 CFR Part 137 for crop spraying and precision agriculture. This approval allows ZenaDrone to commence final testing and deployment of the ZenaDrone 1000 drone for aerial spraying of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, fertilizers, and seeds for agricultural, environmental and government customers. The company plans to sell these solutions through its Drone as a Service, or DaaS, business model as well as selling the drone hardware and solution directly to larger commercial farms, agribusinesses, and cooperatives.
“FAA part 137 approval now enables our team to finish final testing and commence sales of our agriculture solutions. Drones offer a more precise, efficient, cost effective and safer alternative to traditional methods while reducing chemical use, crop damage, and manual work, as well as being able to reach hard-to-access areas. We plan, test, then deploy our solutions through our DaaS model in the US first, followed by Ireland where we have a history of pioneering development work in agricultural drones,” said CEO Shaun Passley, Ph.D.
According to Fortune Business Insights the global agriculture drone market is projected to grow from USD 6.10 billion in 2024 to USD 23.78 billion by 2032, at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18.5%. This growth reflects a growing demand for precision agriculture, advances in drone technology, cost-effectiveness, government support and incentive programs, and growing awareness and education.
The ZenaDrone 1000 is an autonomous drone, in a VTOL (Vertical Takeoff and Landing) quadcopter design with a total of eight rotors on its two fixed wings; it is considered a medium-sized drone measuring 12X7 feet in size. It is designed for stable flight, maneuverability, heavy lift capabilities up to 40 kilos, incorporating innovative software technology, AI, sensors, and purpose-built attachments like crop spraying, along with rugged and compact hardware featuring foldable wings enabling the drone to fit into the back of a truck.
ZenaTech’s DaaS business will incorporate the ZenaDrone 1000 and the IQ series of multifunction autonomous drones to provide a variety of service solutions from land surveys to power line inspections or power washing, made accessible and cost effective through an Uber-like business model on a regular subscription or pay-per-use basis. Customers can conveniently access drones for eliminating manual or time-consuming tasks achieving superior results, such as for surveying, inspections, security and law enforcement, or precision farming applications, without having to buy, operate, or maintain the drones themselves. Continued…Read this full release by visiting:https://www.financialnewsmedia.com/news-zena/
Other recent developments in the markets include:
Draganfly Inc. (NASDAQ: DPRO), an industry-leading developer of drone solutions and systems, recently announced the formation of its Public Safety Advisory Board. This new initiative reinforces Draganfly’s commitment to delivering cutting-edge, mission-critical technologies that support enforcement and public safety agencies worldwide. Renowned global public safety expert and Homeland Security advisor Paul Goldenberg will serve as the inaugural Chair of the Board.
With more than 30 years of experience in law enforcement, global security, and national intelligence, Goldenberg brings unparalleled expertise to the role. Recently named America’s Most Influential Person in Homeland Security, he has advised U.S. Presidents, members of Congress, and international security bodies on counterterrorism, cybercrime, and public safety. As a former senior member of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC), Goldenberg led pivotal initiatives, including the DHS Cybersecurity Task Force and the Countering Foreign Influence Task Force. He currently serves as Chief Advisor for Policy and International Policing at the Rutgers University Miller Center on Policing, a Distinguished Visiting Fellow for Transnational Security at the University of Ottawa, and a member of the National Sheriffs’ Association Southern Border Security Committee.
Unusual Machines, Inc. (NYSE American: UMAC), a drone and drone components manufacturer, recently announced it filed its Form 10-K with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024 and provided the following letter to its shareholders from CEO Allan Evans.
Dear Shareholders, This shareholder letter follows the completion of our fiscal year 2024. This is our first year being public. It has been an excellent fourth quarter and an incredible year. We continue to see great interest in the company and receive questions from shareholders. We would like to take this opportunity to provide context and deeper insights into our operations and what these represent for Unusual Machines’ future.
Unusual Machines revenue for the fourth quarter revenue was over $2.0 million which represents a sequentially quarter over quarter increase of approximately 31%. This is our best revenue quarter of all time (again) and was done while improving gross margins slightly to 28%. With the launch of our Blue Framework products, approximately 15% of our Q4 revenue was from enterprise sales. Our total revenue of $5.65M for FY2024 exceeded our target of $5M for 2024 by 13%. This growth was achieved without customer concentration as no single customer represented more than 5% of our total revenue for 2024.
Sidus Space (NASDAQ: SIDU) recently announced the unveiling of near real-time vessel detection and classification capability to be enabled by its hybrid 3D printed LizzieSat® satellite platform. Processing data directly onboard LizzieSat® through Sidus Orlaith™ AI Ecosystem, which includes FeatherEdge™ edge computing hardware, and the OrbitfyEdge software from Little Place Labs, represents a significant advancement in space-based maritime intelligence.
In January 2025, Sidus and Little Place Labs (LPL) formed a strategic partnership and signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to develop integrated satellite solutions based on edge computing and AI applications. This collaboration aims to meet the growing needs of a global customer base and is expected to provide accurate vessel detection and classification within one hour of satellite observation.
AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. (NASDAQ: AGRI) recently announced significant progress in its Radical Clean Solutions (RCS) division, acquired in August 2024. The RCS division has been awarded a U.S. patent (Patent No. 17/713,959), dated today, for its design of agricultural integrated systems for Radicals Hydroxyl generation units. This innovative technology provides growers of fruits, vegetables, and other plants with a chemical-free solution for reducing mold, viruses, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). It can be integrated into existing heating and ventilation systems or used as a standalone unit. Additionally, the system helps lower levels of gases such as ethylene, thereby slowing the ripening process and extending the shelf life of produce.
Roger M. Slotkin, founder of RCS and on behalf of our RCS division, stated: “We have applied for multiple patents related to the application of our technologies across various sectors, including agriculture. Our solutions provide businesses with a chemical-free, safe, and effective method for mitigating viruses, mold, and other pathogens—without harm to people, pets, or plants. Over the coming months, we anticipate the approval of several additional patents.”
About FN Media Group:
At FN Media Group, via our top-rated online news portal at www.financialnewsmedia.com, we are one of the very few select firms providing top tier one syndicated news distribution, targeted ticker tag press releases and stock market news coverage for today’s emerging companies. #tickertagpressreleases #pressreleases
DISCLAIMER: FN Media Group LLC (FNM), which owns and operates FinancialNewsMedia.com and MarketNewsUpdates.com, is a third party publisher and news dissemination service provider, which disseminates electronic information through multiple online media channels. FNM is NOT affiliated in any manner with any company mentioned herein. FNM and its affiliated companies are a news dissemination solutions provider and are NOT a registered broker/dealer/analyst/adviser, holds no investment licenses and may NOT sell, offer to sell or offer to buy any security. FNM’s market updates, news alerts and corporate profiles are NOT a solicitation or recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities. The material in this release is intended to be strictly informational and is NEVER to be construed or interpreted as research material. All readers are strongly urged to perform research and due diligence on their own and consult a licensed financial professional before considering any level of investing in stocks. All material included herein is republished content and details which were previously disseminated by the companies mentioned in this release. FNM is not liable for any investment decisions by its readers or subscribers. Investors are cautioned that they may lose all or a portion of their investment when investing in stocks. For current services performed FNM has been compensated fifty one hundred dollars for news coverage of the current press releases issued by ZenaTech, Inc. by the Company. FNM HOLDS NO SHARES OF ANY COMPANY NAMED IN THIS RELEASE.
This release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and such forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. “Forward-looking statements” describe future expectations, plans, results, or strategies and are generally preceded by words such as “may”, “future”, “plan” or “planned”, “will” or “should”, “expected,” “anticipates”, “draft”, “eventually” or “projected”. You are cautioned that such statements are subject to a multitude of risks and uncertainties that could cause future circumstances, events, or results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements, including the risks that actual results may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, and other risks identified in a company’s annual report on Form 10-K or 10-KSB and other filings made by such company with the Securities and Exchange Commission. You should consider these factors in evaluating the forward-looking statements included herein, and not place undue reliance on such statements. The forward-looking statements in this release are made as of the date hereof and FNM undertakes no obligation to update such statements.
Contact Information:
Media Contact email: editor@financialnewsmedia.com – +1(561)325-8757
WAUSAU, Wis., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — PSB Holdings, Inc. (“PSB”) (OTCQX: PSBQ), the holding company for Peoples State Bank (“Peoples”) serving Northcentral and Southeastern Wisconsin reported first quarter earnings ending March 31, 2025 of $0.60 per common share on net income of $2.4 million, compared to $0.73 per common share on net income of $3.0 million during the fourth quarter ending December 31, 2024, and $0.39 per common share on net income of $1.6 million during the first quarter ending March 31, 2024.
PSB’s first quarter 2025 operating results reflected the following changes from the fourth quarter of 2024: (1) a stronger net interest margin as asset yields rose and funding costs declined; (2) the addition of a provision for loan losses due to loan growth; (3) higher non-interest income due to lower losses on the sale of securities and an increase in investment and insurance sale commissions; (4) higher non-interest expenses due to higher salaries and employee benefit expenses associated with commercial loan growth incentives and the addition of wealth management personnel; and (5) loan growth of 2% during the quarter.
“We are encouraged with the steady improvements in our net interest margin while also continuing solid loan growth as customers are seeing value in our relationship. We expect operating expenses to decline in the coming quarter and are cautiously optimistic for earnings growth for the remainder of 2025,” stated Scott Cattanach, President and CEO.
March 31, 2025, Highlights:
Net interest income decreased $121,000 to $10.3 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, from $10.4 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, due in part to two fewer days during the quarter. Meanwhile, asset and loan yields increased while funding costs declined slightly.
Noninterest income increased $589,000 to $1.9 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $1.3 million the prior quarter due to a smaller loss on the sale of securities and an increase in investment and insurance sales commissions.
Noninterest expenses increased to $967,000 to $9.0 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2025 from $8.0 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, reflecting higher salary and benefit expenses associated with growth incentive payments and the addition of wealth management personnel in the purchase of the Larson Financial Group, LLC.
Loans increased $18.2 million, or 2% in the first quarter ended March 31, 2025, to $1.10 billion largely due to new commercial & industrial, commercial real estate and construction and development loans. Allowance for credit losses was 1.12% of gross loans.
Non-performing assets increased $2.6 million to $13.0 million, or 0.89% of total assets at March 31, 2025 compared to the previous quarter, from addition of commercial rental real estate units undergoing a sale process.
Total deposits decreased $17.3 million to $1.13 billion at March 31, 2025 from $1.15 billion at December 31, 2024, with the decrease largely consisting of normal commercial money market deposit outflows and seasonal municipal deposit outflows.
Return on average tangible common equity was 9.21% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to 11.07% the prior quarter and 6.57% in the year ago quarter.
Tangible book value per common share was up 11.3% over the past year to $26.94 at March 31, 2025, compared to $24.21 at March 31, 2024. Additionally, PSB paid dividends totaling $0.64 per share during the past year.
On January 21, 2025, the Bank acquired Larson Financial Group, LLC, a financial advisory company based in Wausau, WI.
Balance Sheet and Asset Quality Review
Total assets decreased $6.2 million during the first quarter to $1.46 billion at March 31, 2025, compared to $1.47 billion at December 31, 2024. Cash and cash equivalents decreased $17.8 million to $22.7 million at March 31, 2025 from $40.5 million at December 31, 2024 as funds were used to originate new loans and fund the outflow of seasonal municipal deposits and normal commercial customer treasury management operations. Cash and cash equivalents increased $6.8 million from one year earlier. Investment securities available for sale decreased $6.5 million to $182.6 million at March 31, 2025, from $189.1 million one quarter earlier. Total collateralized liquidity available to meet cash demands was approximately $323 million at March 31, 2025, with an additional $323 million that could be raised in a short time frame from the brokered CDs market.
Gross loans receivable increased $19.3 million to $1.14 billion at March 31, 2025, compared to one quarter earlier, due primarily to increased commercial real estate, construction & development and commercial & industrial lending. Commercial real estate loans increased $11.3 million to $562.9 million at March 31, 2025 and gross construction and development lending increased $7.7 million to $87.1 million at March 31, 2025, compared to one quarter earlier. Commercial & industrial loans increased $7.2 million to $124.1 million at March 31, 2025. Offsetting gross loan growth, residential real estate loans decreased $3.7 million from the prior quarter to $333.7 million, municipal loans decreased $2.8 million to $12.9 million and consumer installment loans decreased $0.4 million to $4.7 million. The loan portfolio remains well diversified with commercial real estate and construction loans totaling 57.2% of gross loans, followed by residential real estate loans at 29.3% of gross loans, commercial non-real estate loans at 13.1% and consumer loans at 0.4%.
The allowance for credit losses decreased slightly to 1.12% of gross loans at March 31, 2025, from 1.13% the prior quarter. Annualized net charge-offs to average loans were 0.02% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. Non-performing assets increased $2.6 million to $13.0 million, or 0.89% of total assets at March 31, 2025 from 0.71% at December 31, 2024. The increase reflects a loan relationship we expect to have $1.5 million in repayment in the next 6 months as collateral undergoes a sales process. No specific reserves have been established on the loan as ample collateral currently appears available. Approximately 80% of the non-performing assets consisted of four loan relationships.
Goodwill and other intangibles increased slightly during the quarter ended March 31, 2025 to $3.8 million from $2.7 million one quarter earlier. The increase in intangibles relates to the acquisition of Larson Financial Group, LLC in January 2025.
Total deposits decreased $17.3 million to $1.13 billion at March 31, 2025, from $1.15 billion at December 31, 2024. The decrease in deposits reflects a $22.9 million decrease in uninsured deposits during the first quarter composed primarily of money market deposits, consisting of normal commercial customer operation outflows, particularly with one customer accounting for $18 million of the decline who reinvested following the sale of their business in 2024. Meanwhile, brokered deposits increased $22.9 million and insured and collateralized deposits increased $5.6 million in the quarter ended March 31, 2025.
At March 31, 2025, non-interest bearing demand deposits decreased to 21.8% of total deposits from 22.6% the prior quarter, while interest-bearing demand and savings deposits remained at 29.4% of deposits.
FHLB advances increased $8.0 million to $170.3 million at March 31, 2025, compared to $162.3 million at December 31, 2024.
Tangible stockholder equity as a percentage of total tangible assets increased to 8.05% at March 31, 2025, compared to 7.76% at December 31, 2024, and 7.60% at March 31, 2024.
Tangible net book value per common share increased $2.73 to $26.94, at March 31, 2025, compared to $24.21 one year earlier, an increase of 11.3% after dividends of $0.64 were paid to shareholders. Relative to the prior quarter’s tangible book value per common share of $25.98, tangible net book value per common share increased primarily due to earnings and an increase in the fair market value in the investment portfolios. The accumulated other comprehensive loss on the investment portfolio was $16.7 million at March 31, 2025, compared to $19.3 million one quarter earlier.
Operations Review
Net interest income decreased to $10.3 million (on a net margin of 3.03%) for the first quarter of 2025, from $10.4 million (on a net margin of 2.96%) for the fourth quarter of 2024, and increased from $9.3 million (on a net margin of 2.80%) for the first quarter of 2024. The lower net interest income in the current period while net margin also increased primarily relates to a lower level of earnings assets during the quarter. Meanwhile, earning asset yields increased to 5.35% during the first quarter of 2025 from 5.29% the prior period and interest bearing deposit and borrowing costs decreased four basis points to 3.02% compared to 3.06% during the fourth quarter of 2024. Relative to one year earlier, earning asset yields were up 23 basis points while interest bearing deposit and borrowing costs increased two basis points.
The increase in earning asset yields was due to higher yields on loan originations, loan renewals, security purchases and security repricing. Loan yields increased during the first quarter of 2025 to 5.82% from 5.80% for the fourth quarter of 2024. Taxable security yields were 3.35% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to 3.16% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, while tax-exempt security yields increased to 3.35% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 from 3.31% the previous quarter. The increase in taxable security yields reflects some security restructuring activity from security sales in the prior quarter more fully realized in the current quarter.
The cost of all deposits increased slightly to 2.09% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to 2.08% the prior quarter, while the overall cost of funds decreased four basis points to 3.02% from 3.06% during the same time period. Deposit costs for time deposits decreased during the first quarter with time deposits decreasing five basis points to 3.97% and money market deposits decreasing 12 basis points to 2.44%. Savings and demand deposits increased three basis points to 1.87%. FHLB advances increased one basis point to 4.41% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.
Total noninterest income increased $589,000 during the first quarter of 2025 to $1.9 million, from $1.3 million for the fourth quarter of 2024 due primarily to a lower net loss on sale of securities and increased investment and insurance sales commissions of $100,000. Mortgage banking income decreased to $250,000 in the first quarter from $414,000 the prior quarter while various increases in nominal revenue sources accounted for the remaining increase in noninterest income. At March 31, 2025, the Bank serviced $373.4 million in secondary market residential mortgage loans for others which provide fee income.
Noninterest expenses increased $967,000 to $9.0 million for the first quarter of 2025, compared to $8.0 million for the fourth quarter of 2024, and increased $644,000 from $8.3 million for the first quarter of 2024. On a linked quarter basis, December 2024 quarter salary and benefits expense was reduced from year-end final adjustments to incentive estimates, while March 2025 quarterly salary and benefits increased as commercial growth, and related incentives, were greater than budgeted. The LFG acquisition also increased wage and benefit expense. Intangible amortization increased slightly during the first quarter related to the acquisition. Occupancy and facilities costs increased $95,000, data processing and other office operation expenses increased $90,000 and various other noninterest expenses increased $177,000 during the first quarter ended March 31, 2025.
Taxes decreased $51,000 during the first quarter to $473,000, from $524,000 one quarter earlier. The effective tax rate for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, was 15.6% compared to 14.4% for the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2024.
About PSB Holdings, Inc.
PSB Holdings, Inc. is the parent company of Peoples State Bank. Peoples is a community bank headquartered in Wausau, Wisconsin, serving northcentral and southeastern Wisconsin from twelve full-service banking locations in Marathon, Oneida, Vilas, Portage, Milwaukee and Waukesha counties and a loan production office in Dane County. Peoples also provides investment and insurance products, along with retirement planning services, through Peoples Wealth Management, a division of Peoples. PSB Holdings, Inc. is traded under the stock symbol PSBQ on the OTCQX Market. More information about PSB, its management, and its financial performance may be found at www.psbholdingsinc.com.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about PSB’s business based, in part, on assumptions made by management and include, without limitation, statements with respect to the potential growth of PSB, its future profits, expected stock repurchase levels, future dividend rates, future interest rates, and the adequacy of its capital position. Forward-looking statements can be affected by known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors, including, but not limited to, strength of the economy, the effects of government policies, including interest rate policies, risks associated with the execution of PSB’s vision and growth strategy, including with respect to current and future M&A activity, and risks associated with global economic instability. The forward-looking statements in this press release speak only as of the date on which they are made and PSB does not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this release.
PSB Holdings, Inc.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
March 31, 2025, September 30, June 30, and March 31, 2024, unaudited, December 31, 2024 derived from audited financial statements
Mar. 31,
Dec. 31,
Sep. 30,
Jun. 30,
Mar. 31,
(dollars in thousands, except per share data)
2025
2024
2024
2024
2024
Assets
Cash and due from banks
$
19,628
$
21,414
$
23,554
$
16,475
$
13,340
Interest-bearing deposits
702
3,724
5,126
251
105
Federal funds sold
2,351
15,360
58,434
69,249
2,439
Cash and cash equivalents
22,681
40,498
87,114
85,975
15,884
Securities available for sale (at fair value)
182,594
189,086
174,911
165,177
165,566
Securities held to maturity (fair values of $77,375, $79,654, $82,389, $79,993 and $81,234 respectively)
85,373
86,748
86,847
86,825
87,104
Equity securities
2,847
2,782
1,752
1,661
1,474
Loans held for sale
734
217
–
2,268
865
Loans receivable, net (allowance for credit losses of $12,392, $12,342, $12,598, $12,597 and $12,494 respectively)
1,096,422
1,078,204
1,057,974
1,074,844
1,081,394
Accrued interest receivable
5,184
5,042
4,837
5,046
5,467
Foreclosed assets
300
–
–
–
–
Premises and equipment, net
13,522
13,805
14,065
14,048
13,427
Mortgage servicing rights, net
1,717
1,742
1,727
1,688
1,657
Federal Home Loan Bank stock (at cost)
8,825
8,825
8,825
8,825
7,006
Cash surrender value of bank-owned life insurance
24,897
24,732
24,565
24,401
24,242
Other intangibles
353
195
212
229
249
Goodwill
3,495
2,541
2,541
2,541
2,541
Other assets
10,828
11,539
10,598
12,111
11,682
TOTAL ASSETS
$
1,459,772
$
1,465,956
$
1,475,968
$
1,485,639
$
1,418,558
Liabilities
Non-interest-bearing deposits
$
245,672
$
259,515
$
265,078
$
250,435
$
247,608
Interest-bearing deposits
884,364
887,834
874,035
901,886
865,744
Total deposits
1,130,036
1,147,349
1,139,113
1,152,321
1,113,352
Federal Home Loan Bank advances
170,250
162,250
181,250
184,900
158,250
Other borrowings
6,343
6,872
6,128
5,775
8,096
Senior subordinated notes
4,783
4,781
4,779
4,778
4,776
Junior subordinated debentures
13,049
13,023
12,998
12,972
12,947
Allowance for credit losses on unfunded commitments
672
672
477
477
477
Accrued expenses and other liabilities
13,554
14,723
12,850
13,069
10,247
Total liabilities
1,338,687
1,349,670
1,357,595
1,374,292
1,308,145
Stockholders’ equity
Preferred stock – no par value:
Authorized – 30,000 shares; Issued – 7,200 shares
Outstanding – 7,200 shares, respectively
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
Common stock – no par value with a stated value of $1.00 per share:
